Transcript Document

PISA 2012
What makes schools and
school systems
successful
OECD
EMPLOYER
BRAND
Playbook
Tue Halgreen
OECD
Poitiers, 8 July 2014
1
2
The structure of the PISA assessment
2000
2003
2006
2009
2012
Reading
Reading
Reading
Reading
Reading
Mathematics
Mathematics
Mathematics
Mathematics
Mathematics
Science
Science
Science
Science
Science
Digital
Reading
Problem Solving,
Financial literacy,
Digital Math, Digital
reading
Problem Solving
PISA 2012 Sample Question
Helen the Cyclist
Helen has just got a new bike. It has a speedometer which
sits on the handlebar. The speedometer can tell Helen the
distance she travels and her average speed for a trip.
Helen rode 6 km to her aunt’s house. Her speedometer
showed that she had averaged 18 km/h for the whole trip.
Which one of the following statements is correct?
A. It took Helen 20 minutes to get to her aunt’s house.
B. It took Helen 30 minutes to get to her aunt’s house.
C. It took Helen 3 hours to get to her aunt’s house.
D. It is not possible to tell how long it took Helen
to get to her aunt’s house.
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Shanghai-China
Singapore
Hong Kong-China
Korea
Chinese Taipei
Macao-China
Japan
Liechtenstein
Switzerland
Estonia
Netherlands
Finland
Canada
Poland
Vietnam
Germany
Belgium
Austria
Ireland
Denmark
Australia
Czech Republic
Slovenia
New Zealand
France
United Kingdom
Iceland
OECD average
Latvia
Norway
Luxembourg
Portugal
Spain
Italy
Russian Federation
Slovak Republic
Sweden
Lithuania
United States
Hungary
Israel
Croatia
Greece
Serbia
Turkey
Bulgaria
Romania
United Arab Emirates
Kazakhstan
Chile
Thailand
Malaysia
Uruguay
Montenegro
Mexico
Albania
Qatar
Costa Rica
Brazil
Argentina
Tunisia
Jordan
Peru
Colombia
Indonesia
PISA 2012 Sample Question
Percent of 15-year-olds who scored Level 3 or Above
100
90
3
Mean performance in mathematics – PISA 2012
Fig I.2.13
High mathematics performance
Mean score
… Shanghai-China is above this level (613)
580
Singapore
570
560
Chinese Taipei
Korea
550
540
Macao-China
Japan
Liechtenstein
Switzerland
530
520
510
500
490
480
470
Hong Kong-China
Poland
Belgium
Germany
Austria
Slovenia
Denmark
New Zealand
France
Czech Republic
Latvia
Luxembourg
Portugal
Spain
Slovak Republic
United States
Hungary
Netherlands
Estonia Finland
Canada
Viet Nam
Australia
Ireland
United Kingdom
Iceland
Norway
Italy
Russian Fed.
Lithuania
Sweden
Croatia
Israel
460
450
Greece
Serbia Turkey
Romania
440
Bulgaria
U.A.E.
Kazakhstan
Thailand
430
420
410
Chile
Malaysia
Mexico
…12 countries perform below this line
Low mathematics performance
4
Performance and equity: a tradeoff ?
Fig I.2.13
High mathematics performance
Korea
Japan
Switzerland
Estonia
Netherlands
Poland
High impact of
socio-economic
condition on student
outcomes
Slovak Rep.
Belgium
Canada
Finland
Germany
Austria
Australia
New ZealandDenmark Slovenia
Ireland
Iceland
Czech Rep.
France
UK
Luxembourg
Norway
Portugal
Italy
US
Spain
Sweden
Hungary
Israel
Greece
Turkey
Chile
Mexico
Low mathematics performance
Low impact of
socio-economic
contion on
outcomes
-60
Jordan
Qatar
Bulgaria
Montenegro
Finland
Slovenia
U.A.E.
Lithuania
Thailand
Latvia
Sweden
Iceland
Greece
Croatia
Norway
Serbia
Turkey
Germany
Israel
France
Estonia
Poland
Romania
Malaysia
Russian Fed.
Hungary
Slovak Republic
Portugal
Italy
Czech Republic
Argentina
OECD average
Austria
Kazakhstan
Switzerland
Macao-China
Uruguay
Canada
Australia
New Zealand
Chinese Taipei
Singapore
Belgium
Viet Nam
United States
Denmark
Tunisia
Brazil
Luxembourg
Spain
Ireland
Indonesia
Netherlands
Hong Kong-China
Costa Rica
United Kingdom
Liechtenstein
Japan
Shanghai-China
Mexico
Korea
Chile
Peru
Colombia
Albania
Score-point difference (boys-girls)
7
Gender differences in reading performance
Fig I.4.12
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
In all countries and
economies girls perform
better in reading than boys
-70
-80
%
Hong Kong-China
Korea +
Liechtenstein
Macao-China +
Japan
Switzerland
Belgium Netherlands Germany
Poland +
Canada Finland New Zealand Australia Austria
OECD average 2003 France
Czech Republic Luxembourg
Iceland Slovak Republic
Ireland
Portugal +
Denmark Italy +
Norway Hungary
United States
Sweden Spain
Latvia
Russian Federation
Turkey
Greece
Thailand
Uruguay Tunisia
Brazil
Mexico
Indonesia
8
Percentage of top performers in mathematics
in 2003 and 2012
2012
Fig I.2.23
2003
40
30
20
10
0
9
What makes schools and
school systems
successful?
Variation in mathematics performance between
systems, schools and students
Fig IV.1.2
Variation in mathematics performance attributable to differences:
Between systems
Between schools
Between students
10%
54%
36%
OECD countries
School performance and socio-economic background:
Canada
11
School performance and schools’ socio-economic background
700
Student performance
Private school
Public school in rural area
Public school in urban area
494
200
-3
Disadvantage
-2
-1
0
1
PISA Index of socio-economic background
2
3
Advantage
School performance and socio-economic background:
Germany
12
School performance and schools’ socio-economic background
700
Student performance
Private school
Public school in rural area
Public school in urban area
494
200
-3
Disadvantage
-2
-1
0
1
PISA Index of socio-economic background
2
3
Advantage
Cumulative expenditure per student (6 to 15) and
maths performance in PISA 2012
Fig IV.1.8
650
Cumulative expenditure per student below USD 50 000
Mathematics performance
Shanghai-China
Cumulative expenditure per student above USD 50 000
600
Singapore
Korea
550
Japan
Switzerland
PolandCanadaFinland Netherlands
Viet Nam
Estonia
Belgium
Germany
Czech Republic
Australia Austria
New ZealandSlovenia
Denmark
Ireland
Latvia
France
UK
Norway
Portugal
Iceland
Lithuania
Slovak Republic
Croatia
Italy Sweden United States
Israel
Hungary
Spain
Turkey
500
R² = 0.01
Luxembourg
450
Bulgaria
Thailand
Chile
Mexico
Montenegro
Uruguay
Malaysia
400
Tunisia Brazil
Jordan
Colombia
Peru
350
R² = 0.37
300
0
20 000
40 000
60 000
80 000
100 000
120 000
140 000
Cumulative expenditure per student (6 to 15) (USD, PPPs)
160 000
180 000
200 000
Countries with better performance in mathematics tend
to allocate educational resources more equitably
700
Adjusted by per capita GDP
650
Mathematics performance (score points)
Fig IV.1.11
Shanghai-China
600
550
500
450
Mexico
Costa Rica
400
Chinese Taipei
Korea
Viet Nam Singapore
Hong Kong-China
Estonia
Japan Poland
Slovenia
Switzerland
Latvia
Finland
Canada
Belgium
Germany
Macao-China
Slovak Rep.
New Zealand
IrelandIceland France
Austria UK
Spain
Denmark
Australia
Croatia
Israel
Romania
Sweden
Portugal Hungary
Bulgaria
Turkey
USA
Greece
Norway
Italy
Serbia
Thailand
Malaysia
Chile
Kazakhstan
Uruguay
Jordan
Brazil
Indonesia UAE
Montenegro
Colombia
Tunisia
Argentina
Luxembourg
Peru
350
Qatar
300
1.5
1
Less
equity
0.5
Equity in resource allocation
(index points)
0
-0.5
Greater
equity
Among high-income countries
high-performers pay teachers more
Fig IV.1.10
650
Per capita GDP less than USD 20 000
Shanghai-China
Per capita GDP over USD 20 000
Mathematics performance (score points)
600
Singapore
Hong Kong-China
Korea
550
Macao-China
Japan
Netherlands
Finland
Canada
Belgium
Austria Australia
Germany
Czech Rep.
Iceland
Ireland
Latvia
France
Denmark
New Zealand
Slovenia UK
Slovak Rep.
Norway
Italy Luxembourg
Portugal
Spain
USA
Hungary
Croatia
Israel Sweden Lithuania
Romania
Greece
Bulgaria Thailand
Estonia
500
450
Poland
Malaysia
Uruguay
Chile
Montenegro
Qatar
Colombia
400
Indonesia
Argentina Peru
Tunisia
Jordan
350
300
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Teachers' salaries relative to per capita GDP (%)
160
180
200
220
Mean mathematics performance, by school location,
16
16
Teachers'
perceptions
of the valuestatus
of teaching
after accounting
for socio-economic
Fig II.3.3
Percentage of lower secondary teachers who "agree" or "strongly agree" that teaching profession is a valued profession
in society
100
90
80
Percentage of teachers
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1.3
-0.1
-0.3
B
Korea
Estonia
Israel
Kazakhstan
Latvia
Malaysia
Slovenia
Italy
Poland
Singapore
Argentina
Costa Rica
Netherlands
Portugal
Colombia
Bulgaria
France
Finland
Tunisia
Lithuania
Qatar
Macao-China
Thailand
Spain
Greece
Switzerland
Romania
Norway
Russian Fed.
Japan
Austria
Montenegro
Croatia
Canada
U.A.E.
OECD average
Germany
Denmark
Hungary
United Kingdom
Luxembourg
Hong Kong-China
Belgium
Iceland
Jordan
Peru
Viet Nam
Ireland
United States
Chile
Czech Republic
Serbia
Turkey
Mexico
Indonesia
Uruguay
Shanghai-China
Slovak Republic
Sweden
Brazil
New Zealand
Australia
Chinese Taipei
Albania
Mean index difference
Teacher shortage is more of concern in disadvantaged schools
Fig IV.3.5
Difference between socio-economically disadvantaged and socio-economically advantaged schools
1.5
Disadvantaged and public schools
reported more teacher shortage
1.1
0.9
0.7
0.5
0.3
0.1
Advantaged and private schools
reported more teacher shortage
-0.5
Countries that grant schools autonomy over curricula and
assessments tend to perform better in mathematics
650
Fig IV.1.15
Shanghai-China
Mathematics performance (score points)
600
Chinese Taipei
Viet Nam
550
500
450
400
Korea
Estonia
Singapore
Hong Kong-China
Japan
Poland
Latvia
Slovenia Belgium
Czech Rep.
Switzerland Canada Germany
Finland
New
Zealand
Lithuania Netherlands
Portugal
Hungary
Austria
Croatia
Italy
Spain France Australia
Serbia
UK
Macao-China
Turkey
Norway
Iceland
Denmark
Slovak Rep.
Bulgaria
Thailand
Greece
Romania
Kazakhstan
Israel
Malaysia
Chile
Uruguay
USA Sweden
Jordan
Costa Rica
Indonesia
Brazil Albania
Luxembourg
Tunisia
Colombia
UAE Argentina
Peru
350
Qatar
300
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
Index of school responsibility for curriculum and assessment
(index points)
1
1.5
Schools with more autonomy perform better than schools with
less autonomy in systems with more accountability arrangements
Fig IV.1.16
School autonomy for curriculum and assessment
x system's level of posting achievement data publicly
Score points
478
476
474
472
470
468
466
School data public
464
School data not public
Less school autonomy
More school autonomy
Grade repetition is negatively related to equity
Fig IV.1.4
Adjusted by per capita GDP
Greater equity
2
Variation in mathematics performance explained by socioeconomic status (%)
4
Macao-China
6
Kazakhstan
Hong Kong-China
Estonia Jordan
Indonesia
Norway
Qatar
Thailand
Iceland
Mexico
Finland
Canada
Tunisia
Japan
Korea
Italy
UAE
Serbia
Croatia
Russian Fed. Sweden
Montenegro Lithuania
Viet Nam
Australia
Turkey
Argentina
Latvia
Switzerland
Netherlands
UK
Brazil
Greece
Colombia
Belgium
Slovenia
Ireland USA
Shanghai-China
Poland Czech Rep.
Spain
Singapore
Israel
Austria
Denmark
Costa Rica
Romania
Germany
New Zealand
Chinese Taipei
Portugal
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
Bulgaria
22
Chile Peru Luxembourg
Hungary
France
Slovak Rep.
24
Uruguay
26
-5
Less equity
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Percentage of students who have repeated at least one grade
35
40
45
Japan
Norway
Iceland
Russian Federation
Thailand +
Korea +
Finland +
Sweden
Poland
Greece Denmark
Czech Republic +
New Zealand
Australia Slovak Republic +
Canada Latvia
Ireland Hungary
Austria
United States
OECD average 2003 Turkey Mexico Indonesia
Hong Kong-China
Italy Liechtenstein
Switzerland
Germany
Netherlands
France Spain +
Portugal
Luxembourg Brazil
Belgium +
Uruguay
Tunisia Macao-China -
Percentage of repeaters in 2003 and 2012
2012
Tab IV.2.18
2003
70
60
50
40
%
30
20
10
0
Find out more about PISA at www.pisa.oecd.org
• All national and international publications
• The complete micro-level database
Thank you !
Email: [email protected]