PISA Official Presentation

11
OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA)

PISA Science Competencies
for Tomorrow’s World
Science competencies
for tomorrow’s world
Seeing school systems through the prism of PISA
International Student Assessment
OECD Programme for
New York, 5 December 2007
Andreas Schleicher
Head, Indicators and Analysis Division
OECD Directorate for Education
OECD Programme for
International Student Assessment for Tomorrow’s World 22
[Links to filmclips]
PISA 2006
Science Competencies for Tomorrow’s World
33 Today
1. OECD’s Programme for
International Student Assessment (PISA)

 What PISA measures – and why
2. Where we are – and where we can be
 Where the US and other countries stand in terms
of quality, equity and efficiency in education
What the best performing countries show
OECD Programme for
can be achieved
3. How we can get there

Some policy levers that emerge from
international comparisons
44 14 November 2007
PISA Briefing of Council
OECD’s Programme for International

Student Assessment (PISA)
OECD Programme for
What PISA measures and why

How PISA works
OECD Programme for
International Student Assessment for Tomorrow’s World
In the dark…55
…all students, schools and education systems look the same…
But a little light….

66 In the dark…
…all students, schools and education systems look the same…
OECD Programme for
But a little light….

…can show important differences….
77 School completion
A world of change in the global skill supply
Approximated by percentage of persons with high school or equivalent qualfications
in the age groups 55-64, 45-55, 45-44 und 25-34 years

%
1
1
3
OECD Programme for
2
1
7
1. Excluding ISCED 3C short programmes 2. Year of reference 2004

3. Including some ISCED 3C short programmes 3. Year of reference 2003.
OECD Programme for
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
0
100
%
c
re
G
y
n
a
rm
e
G
1
d
la
in
F
n
p
a
J
a
re
o
K
y
a
rw
o
N
2005
d
n
la
re
I
1. Year of reference 2004.

li4
b
u
p
R
h
c
e
z
C
d
n
rla
e
itz
w
S
1995
d
n
la
o
P
rk
a
m
n
e
D
m
o
g
K
d
ite
n
U
rg
ve
a
9
1
U
E
ry
a
g
n
u
H
ic
b
u
p
e
R
k
va
lo
S
rg
ve
a
D
C
E
O
ly
ta
I
d
n
la
e
c
I
n
d
e
w
S
rg
o
b
m
e
x
u
L
s
a
S
d
ite
n
U
High school completion rates
in
a
p
S
d
ln
a
Z
w
e
N
l
a
g
rtu
o
P
y
e
rk
u
T
o
ic
x
e
M
Percentage of graduates to the population at the typical age of graduation
99 College-level graduation rates
Percentage of tertiary type A graduates to the population at the typical age of graduation
Decline of the relative

1 position of the US from
5 1995 to 2005
2
OECD Programme for
A3.1
10
10 Moving targets
Future supply of high school graduates
14,000,000
12,000,000
10,000,000
8,000,000
2003
OECD Programme for
6,000,000 2010
2015
4,000,000
2,000,000
China EU India US
Future supply of high school graduates
11
11 14 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0
12 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0
10 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0
8,000,000 2003
6,000,000 2010
4,000,000 2015
2,000,000
C hina EU India US
Future supply of college graduates

5,000,000
4,500,000
4,000,000
3,500,000
OECD Programme for
3,000,000
2003
2,500,000
2010
2,000,000
1,500,000
2015
1,000,000
500,000
China EU India US
12
12 PISA
A three-yearly global assessment that…
… examines the performance of 15-year-olds

in key subject areas as well as a wider
range of educational outcomes
• Including students attitudes to learning
and their learning behaviour
… collects contextual data from…
OECD Programme for
… students, parents, schools and systems…

… in order to identify policy levers
Coverage

Representative samples of between 3,500 and
50,000 15-year-old students drawn in each country

Most federal countries also draw regional samples

PISA covers roughly 90% of the world economy .
OECD Programme for
13
81%
Coverage of world economy 77%
87%
86%
85%
83%
PISA countries in 2001
1998
2009
2006
2003
2000
14
14
How PISA works
❒ A strong international network of expertise

among the participating countries…
 From establishing the assessment frameworks…
– The PISA assessments include tasks from more than 40 countries
… developing the instruments…
– Cross-national and cross-cultural validity
… to analysing and interpreting the results
– National, regional and international analyses and reports
OECD Programme for
– In-depths country peer reviews
… supported by a consortium of
leading research institutions…

ACER, CITO, ETS, NIER, WESTAT
… co-ordinated through the OECD in collaboration with
other international organisations .
15
15 Who benefits from PISA and who pays?
A programme designed around the needs of
❒
OECD governments, but with…


A commitment to facilitate global implementation

Public access to all reports and
the complete micro-level database on the web

Training and workshops to assist multiple stakeholders
with national analysis and research
 In a growing number of countries PISA is embedded in
OECD Programme for
national assessment strategies…

… and used for monitoring performance within countries
– e.g. Australia, Belgium, Canada, Germany, Italy, Mexico, Spain, Switzerland
and the United Kingdom
❒ The programme is financed by education ministries of
participating countries
16
16 PISA framework
Domain 1 Domain 2 Domain 3
Outputs and Policy Levers Antecedents
14 November 2007
Outcomes shape educational contextualise or

impact of learning outcomes constrain ed policy
Quality and Individ attitudes, Socio-economic

Level Individual
distribution of engagement and background of
A learner knowledge & skills behaviour learners
Quality of Teaching, learning Student learning,

Level Instructional
instructional practices and teacher working
B settings
OECD Programme for
delivery classroom climate conditions
Output and The learning Community

Level Schools, other environment at and school
performance of
C institutions institutions school characteristics
Social & economic Structures, National educ,

Level Country or
outcomes of resource alloc social and
D system education and policies economic context
OECD Programme for
17
18
18 14 November 2007
Under embargo until
Key findings from PISA 2006

Where we are – how students perform across countries
OECD Programme for
Where we can be – the top performers

4 December 2007
How we can get 10:00
thereParis
– some
timeschool and system factors
19
19 14 November 2007
Key findings from PISA 2006

Where we are – how students perform across countries
OECD Programme for
Where we can be – the top performers

How we can get there – some school and system factors
20
20
PISA 2006
❒ The latest PISA assessment emphasizes science

competencies, defined in terms of an individual’s:

Scientific knowledge and use of that knowledge to…
… identify scientific issues,
… explain scientific phenomena, and
… draw evidence-based conclusions about science-related issues

Understanding of the characteristic features of science as a
OECD Programme for
form of human knowledge and enquiry


Awareness of how science and technology shape our material,
intellectual and cultural environments

Willingness to engage with science-related issues
❒ A large proportion of complex open-ended tasks .

21
21
Deciding what to assess...

looking back at what students were

expected to have learned
…or…
looking ahead to how well they can
OECD Programme for
extrapolate from what they have learned

and apply their knowledge and skills in
novel settings.
For PISA, the OECD countries chose the latter.
OECD Programme for
22
Mean task input as percentiles of the 1960 task distribution
(Levy and Murnane)

How the demand for skills has changed
Economy-wide measures of routine and non-routine task input (US)
OECD Programme for
International Student Assessment 14 November 2007 23
23
Science performance
Quality in learning outcomes
565 High science performance
24
565 565
Finland
24 Average performance
of 15-year-olds in
science – extrapolate
545 545 545

and apply
Hong Kong-China
Chinese Taipei Canada

Italy Estonia Japan Spain
New Zealand
Australia La Rioja
525 525
Netherlands 525
Liechtenstein Korea
Slovenia Castile and Leon
Autonoma of Bolzano United Kingdom Germany Navarre
Friuli Venezia Giulia Czech Republic Switzerland Aragon
Veneto Macao-China Austria
Trento Ireland Belgium
505 505
Hungary 505
Cantabria
Sweden Basque Country
Poland Asturias
Emilia Romagna France Denmark Galicia
Iceland Croatia
Piemonte
OECD Programme for
United States Latvia

Lombardia Slovak Republic, Spain, Lithuania Catalonia
Norway 485
485 Luxembourg 485
Russian Federation
Liguria Portugal Italy
Greece
465 465 465

Andalusia
Israel
445 445 445

16 16 … 18 countries perform
6 below
16 this line 6
Low science performance

High science performance
25
565
Finland
of 15-year-olds in
545
and apply
Hong Kong-China

Estonia Japan
New Zealand
Australia
525
Netherlands
Liechtenstein Korea
Slovenia
United Kingdom Germany
Czech Republic Switzerland
Macao-China Austria
Ireland Belgium
505
Hungary
Sweden
Poland
France Denmark
Iceland Croatia
OECD Programme for

Slovak Republic, Spain, Lithuania
Norway 485
Luxembourg
Russian Federation
Portugal Italy
Greece
465
Israel
445
16 … 18 countries perform below this line 6

26
26
Strengths and weaknesses of countries in science
relative to their overall performance
France
Overall science score

France=495
Science Identifying scientific issues

competencies
Explaining phenomena scientifically
Using scientific evidence

OECD Programme for
Knowledge about science
Earth and space

Science
knowledge Living systems
Physical systems
-35 -25 -15 -5 5 15 25 35
OECD (2007), PISA 2006 – Science Competencies for Tomorrow’s World, Figure 2.13
27
27
Czech Republic

France=495 Czech Republic=512
Scientific Identifying scientific issues

competencies Explaining phenomena scientifically

OECD Programme for
Earth and space

Scientific
Physical systems
-35 -25 -15 -5 5 15 25 35
28
28
United States

United States=489
Science Identifying scientific issues

competencies

OECD Programme for
Earth and space

Science
Physical systems
-35 -25 -15 -5 5 15 25 35
29
29
Gender differences in science performance
United States OECD average
Overall Girls do better Boys do better
Identifying scientific issues

scale
Using scientific evidence scale

OECD Programme for
Knowledge about science scale
Earth and space systems scale
Living systems scale
Physical systems scale

0
5
-5
15
25
30
35
10
20
-35
-30
-25
-15
-20
-10
PISA score points
OECD (2007), PISA 2006 – Science Competencies for Tomorrow’s World, Tables 2.1c, 2.2c, 2.3c, 2.4c, 2.7, 2.8, 2.9, 2.10
OECD Programme for
30
Distribution of student performance

31
31 Top and bottom performers in science
These students can consistently identify,
explain and apply scientific knowledge, link
different information sources and

explanations and use evidence from these to
justify decisions, demonstrate advanced
scientific thinking in unfamiliar situations…
These students often confuse key

features of a scientific
investigation, apply incorrect
information, mix personal beliefs
with facts in support of a position…
OECD Programme for
Large proportion of top performers Large prop. of poor perf.

OECD Programme for
32
Top performers matter
Excellence in education and countries’ research intensity
OECD Programme for
33
Money matters - but other things do too
34
34
Investments and outcomes
❒ Since 2000, expenditure per primary and secondary

student increased across OECD countries by 39%
(in real terms) …
… while PISA outcomes generally remained flat…

OECD Programme for
… but there are notable exceptions…

35
35 Poland raised its reading
Between PISA 2000performance
and by 28 PISA points,
equivalentseparation
to ¾ of a school
2003 Poland delayed the
of students into year - What happened?
different school types
beyond the age of 15 years
In 2003, performance
Between 2000 and 2003
variation among schools
had fallen from 51% toshowed the second-
16% of the variation oflargest increase in
student performancereading (17 points) and a
further 11 point increase
But did this lead to since 2003
genuine improvements of
OECD Programme for
school performance?
Most of that increase

resulted from smaller
proportions at the bottom
level (23% in 2000, and
three-quarters in vocational
tracks, 17%in 2003)
Did this harm

the better performers?
OECD (2007), Learning for tomorrow’s world: First results from PISA 2006, Table 6.1a
36
36 14 November 2007
Students attitudes to science and

their awareness of the life
opportunities science may open
OECD Programme for
37
37
Student attitudes
US 15-year-olds generally value science

❒

Recognition of economic and social benefits
… but somewhat less so when it concerns
themselves…
… only a minority expresses interest in a
scientific career
OECD Programme for

Close relationships with performance and socio-
economic background
38
38 Students generally value science…
but report stronger belief in the technological potential of science
than in its capacity to make social improvements

Science is important for helping us to
understand the natural world
Advances in science and technology

usually improve people's living
conditions
Science is valuable to society

OECD Programme for

usually help to improve the economy

usually bring social benefits
0 25 50 75 100 %
Change in science performance

per unit of the index
Turkey
0 20 Score points 40
39
39
Enjoyment of science
I enjoy acquiring new knowledge in

science
I generally have fun when I am

learning science topics
I am interested in learning about

science
OECD Programme for
I like reading about science
I am happy doing broad science

problems
0 25 50 75 100 %

Turkey
0 10 20 30 Score
40 points 50
40
40
Instrumental motivation to learn
science
I study school science because I know it is

useful for me
Making an effort in my school science

subject(s) is worth it because this will help me
in the work I want to do later on
Studying my school science subject(s) is
worthwhile for me because what I learn will
improve my career prospects
OECD Programme for
I will learn many things in my school science

subject(s) that will help me get a job
What I learn in my school science subject(s) is

important for me because I need this for what I
want to study later on
0
25
50
75
100
%

Turkey
Score points
-10
10
20
30
40
-20
41
41 …but somewhat less so
when it concerns themselves…
I find that science helps me to

understand things around me
I will use science in many ways when

I am an adult
Some concepts in science help me

see how I relate to other people
OECD Programme for
When I leave school there will be

many opportunities for me to use
science
Science is very relevant to me
0 25 50 75 100 %

Turkey
0 20 Score points 40
42
42 …and only a minority report interest
in a scientific career
I would like to work in a career

involving science
I would like to study science after

secondary school
I would like to work on science

projects as an adult
OECD Programme for
I would like to spend my life doing

advanced science
0 25 50 75 100 %

Turkey
-20 -10 0 10 20 Score

30 points 40
OECD Programme for
43
and their performance in science
Students expecting a science-related career
Figure 3.15. Performance in science and proportions of students
44
44 expecting a science-related career at age 30
Higher mean performance in
science, but smaller proportion of science and larger proportion of
students expecting a science- students expecting a science-

related career at age 30 related career at age 30
OECD mean
OECD Programme for
Lower mean performance in Lower mean performance in

science and smaller proportion of science, but larger proportion of
students expecting a science- students expecting a science-
related career at age 30 related career at age 30
Source: OECD PISA 2006 database, Tables 3.12 and 2.1c.

45
45
Concern for environmental issues
Air pollution
Extinction of plants and animals
Clearing of forests for other land use
Energy shortages
OECD Programme for
Nuclear waste
Water shortages
25
50
75
100
0
Change in science performance per

unit of the index
Turkey
Score points
-10
20
30
10
OECD (2007), PISA 2006 – Science Competencies for Tomorrow’s World, Figure 3. 19
Figure 3.18. Performance in science and awareness of
46
46 environmental issues
science, but students are less science and students are more
aware of environmental issues aware of environmental issues

OECD mean
OECD Programme for
Lower mean performance in Lower mean performance in

science and students are less science, and students are more
aware of environmental issues aware of environmental issues
Source: OECD PISA 2006 database, Tables 3.16 and 2.1c.

47
47
Science and the environment
53% of US 15-year-olds report familiarity and
❒
knowledge of the increase of greenhouse gases in the

atmosphere, 73% with consequences of clearing
forests for other land use, 54% with issues around
pollution and acid rain (large variation across countries)…

Awareness of environmental issues is closely linked with
students’ science performance…
… and with their social background
OECD Programme for
❒ US students also express concern for environmental

issues but a below-average sense of personal
responsibility for sustainable development
❒ Like in other countries, only a minority are optimistic
that the issues will be successfully addressed…
… and the more students know and the better they perform in
science, the less optimistic they are…
48
48
Some degree of pessimism among students about
the future of the natural environment
problems associated with the areas below will improve over the next 20 years
Energy shortages
Water shortages
Air pollution
Nuclear waste
OECD Programme for
Extinction of plants and animals
Clearing of forests for other land use
0 25 50 75 100 %
Change in science performance per

unit of the index
Turkey
-40 -30 -20 -10 Score points 0
49
49 Figure 3.11. Student‘s perceptions of the importance of doing
well in science, reading and mathematics
Average percentage of students still following science courses at school
reporting that doing well in the following subject is important or very important:
OECD Programme for
OECD Programme for
50
Equity in educational opportunities

51
565
Finland
High average performance Highof 15-year-olds
average performancein
Large socio-economic disparities
High social equity
545
and apply
Hong Kong-China

Estonia Japan
New Zealand
Australia
525
Netherlands
Liechtenstein Korea
Slovenia
United Kingdom Germany
Czech Republic Switzerland
Macao-China Austria
Ireland Belgium
Strong socio- 505
Hungary Socially equitable
economic impact on Sweden distribution of learning
Poland
student performance France Denmark opportunities
Iceland Croatia
OECD Programme for

Slovak Republic, Spain, Lithuania
Norway 485
Luxembourg
Russian Federation
Portugal Italy
Greece
465
Low average performance Israel Low average performance

Large socio-economic disparities 445 High social equity
16 6

52
52 560
Finland
Durchschnittliche
High average performance High average performance
Schülerleistungen im
Large socio-economic disparities High social equity
Bereich Mathematik
Hong Kong-China
540

New Zealand Estonai Japan
Australia
Netherlands
Liechtenstein Korea
Slovenia 520
Germany United Kingdom
Czech Republic Switzerland Macao-China
Belgium Austria
Strong socio- Ireland Socially equitable
Hungary
economic impact on Sweden distribution of learning
500
student performance Poland
Denmark opportunities
France
Croatia
OECD Programme for
United States Latvia Iceland

Slovak Republic Lithuania Spain Norway
Luxembourg
480
Russian Federation
Portugal Italy
Greece
460
Low average performance LowIsrael

average performance
440
22 Low science performance
12 2
53
53 School performance and socio-economic background
Germany
Student performance and students’ socio-economic background within schools

School performance and schools’ socio-economic background

Student performance and students’ socio-economic background
Schools
proportional to size
Student performance
OECD Programme for
Disadvantage PISA Index of socio-economic background Advantage

54
United States


Schools proportional
to size
Student performance
OECD Programme for

55
Finland


Schools
proportional to size
Student performance
OECD Programme for

56School performance and socio-economic background
56
United Kingdom


to size
Student performance
OECD Programme for

57
Norway


to size
Student performance
OECD Programme for

58
Mexico


to size
Student performance
OECD Programme for

59
Japan


to size
Student performance
OECD Programme for

60
Canada


to size
Student performance
OECD Programme for

61
Belgium


to size
Student performance
OECD Programme for

62
Austria


to size
Student performance
OECD Programme for

63
63 Figure 4.12. Effects of students’ and schools’ socio-economic background on
student performance in science
Differences in performance on the science scale associated with one-half of a student-level
standard deviation on the PISA index of economic, social and cultural status
OECD Programme for
Note: Data on the horizontal axis are values of the interquartile range of the school-level average PISA
index of economic, social and cultural status.
Source: OECD PISA 2006 database, Table 4.4b.
64
64
Immigrants and science performance
Among 15-year-olds, the proportion of students

❒
with an immigrant background…
… is 36% in Luxemburg and between 21 and 23% in Switzerland,
Australia, New Zealand and Canada
… is 15% in the United States
… still exceeds 10% in Germany, Belgium, Austria, France, the
Netherlands and Sweden
❒ Immigrant students tend perform less well…
… but in the OECD countries other than Luxembourg that have a
OECD Programme for
greater immigrant share, immigrant students perform better

❒ US second-generation immigrant students do not perform better
than first-generation students
❒ Immigrant students tend to face the double disadvantage of
being in schools with a more disadvantaged socio-economic intake
❒ Immigrant students tend to report stronger attitudes
towards science .
65
65 Immigrants and science performance
OECD average = 500

Native students
Second-generation students
OECD Programme for
First-generation students
PISA 2006: Science Competencies for Tomorrow’s World, Figure 4.2a.

66
66
Low performers in science by immigrant
background Second-
Native students
generation
students
% of
students
below
Level 1
OECD Programme for
% of
students
at Level
1
PISA 2006: Science

Competencies for
Tomorrow’s World,
Figure 4.2b
67
67
Comparing attitudes to science by immigrant
background
Personal value of science Enjoyment of science Future-oriented science motivation

OECD Programme for
Higher for
native
students
68
68
Comparing schools attended by native students
and students with an immigrant background
OECD Programme for
Schools attended by
students with an immigrant
background are:
OECD Programme for
69
across schools
Coherence of educational standards
OECD Programme for
70
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Germany
Czech Republic
Austria
Hungary
Netherlands
Belgium
Japan
Italy
Greece
Slovak Republic
Turkey
Switzerland
Korea
Luxembourg
United States
Portugal
Mexico
United Kingdom
New Zealand
Australia
Canada
Ireland
Denmark
Spain
Poland
Variation in student performance
Sweden
Norway
Iceland
Finland
OECD Programme for
71
-80
-60
-40
-20
100
20
40
60
80
0
Germany
Czech Republic
Austria
Hungary
Netherlands
schools
Belgium
Variation of
Japan
performance within
Italy
Greece
Slovak Republic
Turkey
Switzerland
Korea
Luxembourg
United States
Portugal
Mexico
United Kingdom
New Zealand
schools
Australia
Variation of
Canada
performance between
Ireland
Denmark
Spain
Poland
Variation in student performance
Sweden
Norway
Iceland
Finland
OECD Programme for
72
from OECD’s comparisons

Some levers for policy that emerge
73
73
Some myths
No relationship between size of countries

❒
and average performance
❒ No relationship between proportion of
immigrants and average performance
❒ Few difference in students’ reported
test motivation
OECD Programme for
❒ Limited impact of national item preferences .

74
74
High ambitions
and universal standards

OECD Programme for
Access to best practice

and quality professional
development
75
75 School principals’ perceptions of parents’ expectations
Percentage of students in schools where the principal reported that regarding high academic
standards
OECD Programme for
76
76 Challenge and support
Strong support
Poor performance Strong performance

Improvements idiosyncratic Systemic improvement
Low High
OECD Programme for
challenge challenge
Poor performance Conflict

Stagnation Demoralisation
Weak support
77
77
High ambitions
Devolved
responsibility,
the school as the
centre of action
Accountability
and intervention in
OECD Programme for
inverse proportion to
success
development
78
78
Public and private schools
Government schools
Observed performance difference
Government dependent private
Government independent private Difference after accounting for socio-economic background of students and schools
% 0 20 40 60 80 -150
100 -100 -50 0 50 100
Score point difference
Luxembourg
Japan
Italy
Switzerland
Finland
Denmark
Czech Republic
Sweden
Hungary
Austria
Public schools
Private schools
OECD Programme for
Portugal perform better

perform better
United States
Netherlands
Slovak Republic
Korea
Ireland
Spain
Canada
Mexico
New Zealand
Germany
OECD
United Kingdom
Pooled international dataset, effects of selected
79
79 school/system factors on science performance after
accounting for all other factors in the model
School principal’s positive

evaluation of quality of
64% of US students in Schools with more
educational materials
schools that compete with competing schools
(gross only)
more than 2 schools in same (gross only)
Schools with greater
area, 11% with one school,
autonomy (resources)
26% with no school
(gross and net)
School activities to
One additional
promote sciencehour of
learning
self-study
(grossor homework
and net)
One additional hour of
(gross and net)
science learning at school
91% of US students in School results
(gross posted
and net)
OECD Programme for
schools posting achievement publicly (grossselective

Academically and net)
data publicly (OECD 38%) schools (gross and net) but
no system-wide effect
26% of US students in Schools practicing ability
schools with no vacant One additional
grouping hour
(gross and of
net)
science teaching positions out-of-school
Each additionallessons
10% of
School
(grossprincipal’s
and net)
public funding
(OECD 38%), 71% where perception that lack of
all vacant positions had (gross only) Effect after accounting
qualified teachers
been filled (OECD 59%), for the socio-economic
BUT 20% where principals Measured effect hinders instructionbackground of students,
(gross only)
report that instruction is schools and countries
hindered by a lack of
qualified science teachers
OECD (2007), PISA 2006 – Science Competencies from Tomorrow’s World, Table 6.1a
80 School autonomy, standards-based
80
examinations and science performance
School autonomy in selecting teachers for hire
PISA score
in science
OECD Programme for
81
School autonomy in choosing which textbooks are used
PISA score
in science
OECD Programme for
82
School autonomy in dismissing teachers
PISA score
in science
OECD Programme for
83
School autonomy in establishing teachers ‘ starting salaries
PISA score
in science
OECD Programme for
84
School autonomy in determining teachers ‘ salaries increases
PISA score
in science
OECD Programme for
85
School autonomy in formulating the school budget
PISA score
in science
OECD Programme for
86
School autonomy in deciding on budget allocation within the school
PISA score
in science
OECD Programme for
87
School autonomy in establishing students’ disciplinary policies
PISA score
in science
OECD Programme for
88
School autonomy in establishing student assessment policies
PISA score
in science
OECD Programme for
89
School autonomy in approving students for admission to the school
PISA score
in science
OECD Programme for
90
School autonomy in determining course contents
PISA score
in science
OECD Programme for
91
School autonomy in deciding which courses are offered
PISA score
in science
OECD Programme for
92
92
Strong ambitions
Devolved
Integrated
responsibility,
educational
the school as the centre
opportunities
of action
From prescribed
Accountability forms of teaching and
OECD Programme for
assessment towards
personalised learning
development
93
93
560 Durchschnittliche
Finland
High average performance High average performance
Schülerleistungen im
Bereich Mathematik
540
Canada
New Zealand Japan
Netherlands Australia
520
Korea
Germany United Kingdom
Czech Republic
Belgium Austria Switzerland
Ireland
Strong socio- Hungary Socially equitable
Sweden
economic impact on 500
Poland distribution of learning
student performance France Denmark opportunities
United States Spain Iceland
Slovak Republic
OECD Programme for
Luxembourg Norway
480
Portugal Greece Italy
460
Early selection and
institutional differentiation
Low average performance Low average performance
High degree of stratification
440
Large socio-economic
Low degree disparities
of stratification High social equity

94
94 Figure 5.22. Relationship between student economic, social and
cultural status and student performance in science, by
tracking system
Schools with a disadvantaged average socio-economic background of

students (school average index of economic, social and cultural status is -1)
OECD Programme for
Note: Across the 55 countries, the average spent between the age of first selection in the education system and the age of 15 is 1.2 and
the standard deviation is 1.6. "Systems starting tracking at an average stage" corresponds to systems starting tracking at the age of 13.8
(subtracting 1.2 years from the age of 15). "Systems starting tracking at an early stage" corresponds to systems starting tracking at the
age of 12.2 (one standard deviation earlier than the average).
Source: OECD PISA 2006 database, Table 5.20g.
95
95 Figure 5.22. Relationship between student economic,
social and cultural status and student performance in
science, by tracking system
Schools with an average socio-economic background of students (school

average index of economic, social and cultural status is 0)
OECD Programme for
96
96 Figure 5.22. Relationship between student economic, social and
cultural status and student performance in science, by
tracking system
Schools with an advantaged socio-economic background of students (school

average index of economic, social and cultural status is 1)
OECD Programme for
97
97 Impact of the socio-economic background of students and schools on
student performance in science, by tracking systems
OECD Programme for
98
98
High ambitions
Devolved
Integrated
responsibility,
educational
the school as the centre
opportunities
of action
Accountability
Personalized
OECD Programme for
and intervention in
inverse proportion to learning
success
development
99
99 Relative standing of the US in PISA
(2000: 27 OECD countries, 2003: 29 OECD countries, 2006: 30 OECD countries)
Rank Upper bound Lower bound
10
12
14
16
OECD Programme for
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
2000 2003 2006 2000 2003 2006 2000 2003 2006
Science Mathematics Reading
OECD (2007), PISA 2006 – Science Competencies for Tomorrow’s World, Figures 2.11c, 2.14e, 6.8b, 6.20b
100
100 A second chance?
Expected hours in non-formal job-related training (2003)
This chart shows the expected number of hours in non-formal job-related education
and training, over a forty year period, for 25-to-64 year olds.
1400
All levels of education
Lower secondary education
%
1200 Upper secondary and post-secondary non-tertiary education
Tertiary education
1000
800
600
OECD Programme for
400
200
0
United States
United Kingdom
Netherlands
Greece
Sweden
Luxembourg
Belgium
Austria
Denmark
Portugal
Switzerland
Germany
Czech Republic
France
Spain
Ireland
Hungary
Canada
Finland
Poland
Italy
Slovak Republic
C5.1a
101
101 Why care?
❒ Progress
Concerns about skill barriers to economic growth,

productivity growth and rates of technological

innovation
– One additional year of education equals
to between 3 and 6% of GDP
– Rising college-level qualifications seem generally not to
have led to an “inflation” of the labour-market value of
qualifications (in all but three of the 20 countries with available data,
the earnings benefit increased between 1997 and 2003, in Germany, Italy
and Hungary by between 20% and 40%)
OECD Programme for
❒ Fairness
 Concerns about the role of skills in creating social
inequity in economic outcomes
– Both average and distribution of skill matter
to long-term growth
❒ Value for money
 Concerns about the demand for, and efficiency and
effectiveness of, investments in public goods
102
102
www.oecd.org; www.pisa.oecd.org
– All national and international publications

– The complete micro-level database
 email: pisa@oecd.org

Thank you !
Andreas.Schleicher@OECD.org
OECD Programme for
… and remember:
Without data, you are just another person with an
opinion
OECD Programme for
103
Backup slides
104
104 School Choice
Percentage of students in schools where the principal reported the following number of schools
competing for the students in the same area
OECD Programme for
105
105 School principals’ reports on vacant science teaching positions and
their perceptions of the supply of qualified science teachers
OECD Programme for
OECD Programme for
106
Figure 5.16. Percentage of students following science courses at age 15
OECD Programme for
107
Figure 5.17. Student’s time spent on learning
OECD Programme for
108
Effort expended by students in PISA 2003
(Butler and Adams, 2007)

109
109 Effort expended by students in PISA 2003, relative
to an important school test
OECD Programme for
(Butler and Adams, 2007)

110
110 Ranks comparisons: Overall vs favourites
0
FIN
Rank on own most appropriate items
Rank on favourites higher CAN

than overall rank NZL
AUS
5
SWE JPN
AUT KOR
10 Norway 13th overall NOR BEL
10th on favourites FRA
ISL Korea 3rd overall
15 9th on favourites
DNK
ESP
ITA For all other countries, the

OECD Programme for
20
CZE ranks were not
HUN
GRC significantly different.
25
Rank on favourites lower
than overall rank
30
30 25 20 15 10 5 0
Rank on all items
OECD Programme for
111
Mean task input as percentiles of the 1960 task distribution
(Levy and Murnane)

How the demand for skills has changed
Economy-wide measures of routine and non-routine task input (US)
112
112 Increased likelihood of postsec. particip. at age 19
associated with reading proficiency at age 15 (Canada)
after accounting for school engagement, gender, mother tongue,
place of residence, parental, education and family income

(reference group Level 1)

20
18
16
14
12
OECD Programme for
10
8
6
4
2
0
Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5

PISA Official Presentation

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

PISA Official Presentation

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

11

OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA)

New York, 5 December 2007

International Student Assessment (PISA)

OECD’s Programme for International

What PISA measures and why

But a little light….

But a little light….

in the age groups 55-64, 45-55, 45-44 und 25-34 years

1. Excluding ISCED 3C short programmes 2. Year of reference 2004

1. Year of reference 2004.

Decline of the relative

Future supply of college graduates

… examines the performance of 15-year-olds

… students, parents, schools and systems…

❒ A strong international network of expertise

– In-depths country peer reviews

OECD governments, but with…

national assessment strategies…

Outcomes shape educational contextualise or

Quality and Individ attitudes, Socio-economic

Quality of Teaching, learning Student learning,

delivery classroom climate conditions

Output and The learning Community

Social & economic Structures, National educ,

Under embargo until

Key findings from PISA 2006

Where we can be – the top performers

Key findings from PISA 2006

Where we can be – the top performers

❒ The latest PISA assessment emphasizes science

form of human knowledge and enquiry

❒ A large proportion of complex open-ended tasks .

Deciding what to assess...

looking back at what students were

extrapolate from what they have learned

(Levy and Murnane)

545 545 545

Chinese Taipei Canada

United States Latvia

465 465 465

445 445 445

Low science performance

Chinese Taipei Canada

United States Latvia

Low science performance

Overall science score

Science Identifying scientific issues

Using scientific evidence

Knowledge about science

Earth and space

-35 -25 -15 -5 5 15 25 35

Overall science score

Scientific Identifying scientific issues

Using scientific evidence

Knowledge about science

Earth and space

-35 -25 -15 -5 5 15 25 35

Overall science score

Science Identifying scientific issues

Using scientific evidence

Knowledge about science

Earth and space