Programme for International Student Assessment – Wikipedia

PISA average Mathematics scores ( 2018 ) PISA average Science scores ( 2018 ) scholastic performance cogitation by the OECD
“ pisa ” redirects here. For early uses, see Pisa ( disambiguation )

PISA average Reading scores ( 2018 ) The Programme for International Student Assessment ( PISA ) is a cosmopolitan report by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development ( OECD ) in penis and non-member nations intended to evaluate educational systems by measuring 15-year-old school pupils ‘ scholastic performance on mathematics, skill, and understand. [ 1 ] It was foremost performed in 2000 and then repeated every three years. Its aim is to provide comparable data with a opinion to enabling countries to improve their education policies and outcomes. It measures trouble resolve and cognition. [ 2 ] The results of the 2018 data collection were released on 3 December 2019. [ 3 ]

influence and impact [edit ]

PISA, and similar international standardized assessments of educational attainment are increasingly used in the procedure of education policymaking at both national and external levels. [ 4 ] PISA was conceived to set in a across-the-board context the data provided by national monitor of education organization performance through unconstipated assessments within a common, internationally agreed framework ; by investigating relationships between student eruditeness and early factors they can “ offer insights into sources of pas seul in performances within and between countries ”. [ 5 ] Until the 1990s, few european countries used national tests. In the 1990s, ten countries / regions introduced standardized assessment, and since the early on 2000s, ten-spot more follow suit. By 2009, only five european department of education systems had no national student assessments. [ 4 ] The impact of these international standardised assessments in the field of educational policy has been significant, in terms of the universe of new knowledge, changes in assessment policy, and external influence over national educational policy more broadly .

creation of newly cognition [edit ]

Data from international standardize assessments can be useful in inquiry on causal factors within or across education systems. [ 4 ] Mons notes that the databases generated by large-scale external assessments have made it possible to carry out inventories and comparisons of education systems on an unprecedented scale* on themes ranging from the conditions for learning mathematics and recitation, to institutional autonomy and admissions policies. [ 6 ] They allow typologies to be developed that can be used for relative statistical analyses of education performance indicators, thereby identifying the consequences of different policy choices. They have generated new cognition about department of education : PISA findings have challenged deeply embedded educational practices, such as the early chase of students into vocational or academic pathways. [ 7 ]

  • 79 countries and economies participated in the 2018 data collection.

Barroso and de Carvalho find that PISA provides a common address connecting academic research in education and the political kingdom of populace policy, operating as a mediator between different strands of cognition from the kingdom of education and public policy. [ 8 ] however, although the key findings from relative assessments are widely shared in the research community [ 4 ] the cognition they create does not necessarily fit with politics reform agenda ; this leads to some inappropriate uses of assessment data .

Changes in national judgment policy [edit ]

Emerging research suggests that international standardize assessments are having an shock on national assessment policy and practice. PISA is being integrated into national policies and practices on judgment, evaluation, course of study standards and performance targets ; its assessment frameworks and instruments are being used as best-practice models for improving national assessments ; many countries have explicitly incorporated and emphasise PISA-like competencies in revised national standards and course of study ; others use PISA data to complement national data and validate national results against an international benchmark. [ 7 ]

external charm over national educational policy [edit ]

More authoritative than its determine on countries ‘ policy of student assessment, is the range of ways in which PISA is influencing countries education policy choices. Policy-makers in most participate countries see PISA as an important indicator of system performance ; PISA reports can define policy problems and set the agenda for national policy debate ; policymakers seem to accept PISA as a valid and authentic instrument for internationally benchmarking system operation and changes over fourth dimension ; most countries—irrespective of whether they performed above, at, or below the average PISA score—have begun policy reforms in reception to PISA reports. [ 7 ] Against this, shock on national education systems varies markedly. For example, in Germany, the results of the inaugural PISA appraisal caused the alleged ‘PISA electric shock ‘ : a inquisitive of previously accepted educational policies ; in a express marked by enviously guarded regional policy differences, it led ultimately to an agreement by all Länder to introduce park national standards and even an commit structure to ensure that they were observed. [ 9 ] In Hungary, by comparison, which shared similar conditions to Germany, PISA results have not led to meaning changes in educational policy. [ 10 ] Because many countries have set national performance targets based on their relative rank and file or absolute PISA score, PISA assessments have increased the influence of their ( non-elected ) commissioning torso, the OECD, as an international education monitor and policy actor, which implies an crucial degree of ‘policy transfer ‘ from the external to the national grade ; PISA in finical is having “ an influential normative effect on the focus of national education policies ”. [ 7 ] Thus, it is argued that the use of external standardized assessments has led to a stir towards international, external accountability for national system operation ; Rey contends that PISA surveys, portrayed as objective, third-party diagnoses of education systems, actually serve to promote particular orientations on educational issues. [ 4 ] National policy actors refer to high-performing PISA countries to “ help legitimise and justify their intended reform agenda within contest national policy debates ”. [ 11 ] PISA data can be “ used to fuel long-standing debates around preexistent conflicts or rivalries between different policy options, such as in the french Community of Belgium ”. [ 12 ] In such instances, PISA appraisal data are used selectively : in public sermon governments often only use superficial features of PISA surveys such as state rankings and not the more detail analyses. Rey ( 2010:145, citing Greger, 2008 ) notes that much the substantial results of PISA assessments are ignored as policymakers selectively refer to data in order to legitimise policies introduced for early reasons. [ 13 ] In addition, PISA ‘s international comparisons can be used to justify reforms with which the datum themselves have no connection ; in Portugal, for case, PISA data were used to justify new arrangements for teacher assessment ( based on inferences that were not justified by the assessments and data themselves ) ; they besides fed the government ‘s converse about the issue of pupils repeating a year, ( which, according to inquiry, fails to improve student results ). [ 14 ] In Finland, the country ‘s PISA results ( that are in early countries deemed to be excellent ) were used by Ministers to promote fresh policies for ‘gifted ‘ students. [ 15 ] such uses and interpretations often assume causal relationships that can not legitimately be based upon PISA data which would normally require fuller probe through qualitative in-depth studies and longitudinal surveys based on shuffle quantitative and qualitative methods, [ 16 ] which politicians are often reluctant to fund. holocene decades have witnessed an expansion in the uses of PISA and similar assessments, from assessing students ‘ memorize, to connecting “ the educational kingdom ( their traditional remit ) with the political region ”. [ 17 ] This raises the interview of whether PISA data are sufficiently robust to bear the system of weights of the major policy decisions that are being based upon them, for, according to Breakspear, PISA data have “ come to increasingly shape, define and evaluate the key goals of the national / federal education system ”. [ 7 ] This implies that those who set the PISA tests – e.g. in choosing the capacity to be assessed and not assessed – are in a stead of considerable power to set the terms of the education debate, and to orient educational reform in many countries around the ball. [ 7 ]

framework [edit ]

PISA stands in a custom of international school studies, undertake since the late 1950s by the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement ( IEA ). much of PISA ‘s methodology follows the example of the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study ( TIMSS, started in 1995 ), which in twist was much influenced by the U.S. National Assessment of Educational Progress ( NAEP ). The recitation component of PISA is inspired by the IEA ‘s Progress in International Reading Literacy Study ( PIRLS ). PISA aims to test literacy the competence of students in three fields : read, mathematics, science on an indefinite scale. [ 18 ] The PISA mathematics literacy examination asks students to apply their mathematical cognition to solve problems set in real-world context. To solve the problems students must activate a number of mathematical competencies vitamin a well as a broad image of mathematical content cognition. TIMSS, on the other hand, measures more traditional classroom content such as an agreement of fractions and decimals and the relationship between them ( curriculum attainment ). PISA claims to measure education ‘s application to real-life problems and lifelong teach ( work force cognition ). In the read test, “ OECD/PISA does not measure the extent to which 15-year-old students are eloquent readers or how competent they are at news recognition tasks or spelling. ” alternatively, they should be able to “ construct, extend and reflect on the think of of what they have read across a wide stove of continuous and non-continuous text. ” [ 19 ] PISA besides assesses students in advanced domains. In 2012 and 2015 in summation to read, mathematics and science, they were tested in collaborative problem solving. In 2018 the extra advanced domain was global competence .

implementation [edit ]

PISA is sponsored, governed, and coordinated by the OECD, but paid for by participating countries. [ citation needed ]

Method of testing [edit ]

Sampling [edit ]

The students tested by PISA are aged between 15 years and 3 months and 16 years and 2 months at the begin of the judgment period. The school class pupils are in is not taken into consideration. entirely students at school are tested, not home-schoolers. In PISA 2006, however, respective countries besides used a grade-based sample distribution of students. This made it potential to study how old age and school year interact. To fulfill OECD requirements, each country must draw a sample of at least 5,000 students. In humble countries like Iceland and Luxembourg, where there are fewer than 5,000 students per year, an stallion age age group is tested. Some countries used much larger samples than required to allow comparisons between regions .

test [edit ]

PISA test documents on a school table ( Neues Gymnasium, Oldenburg, Germany, 2006 ) Each scholar takes a two-hour computer based test. part of the test is multiple-choice and partially involves fuller answers. There are six and a half hours of assessment fabric, but each student is not tested on all the parts. Following the cognitive test, participating students spend about one more hour answering a questionnaire on their background including learning habits, motivation, and syndicate. School directors fill in a questionnaire describing school demographics, fund, etc. In 2012 the participants were, for the first clock time in the history of large-scale testing and assessments, offered a newly type of problem, i.e. interactional ( complex ) problems requiring exploration of a novel virtual device. [ 20 ] [ 21 ] In selected countries, PISA started experiment with calculator adaptive test .

National add-ons [edit ]

Countries are allowed to combine PISA with complemental national tests. Germany does this in a identical across-the-board way : On the sidereal day following the international test, students take a national test called PISA-E ( E=Ergänzung=complement ). Test items of PISA-E are closer to TIMSS than to PISA. While merely about 5,000 german students participate in the international and the national test, another 45,000 take the national test lone. This large sample is needed to allow an analysis by union states. Following a clash about the rendition of 2006 results, the OECD warned Germany that it might withdraw the right to use the “ PISA ” label for national tests. [ 22 ]

Data scaling [edit ]

From the begin, PISA has been designed with one finical method acting of data analysis in mind. Since students work on different test booklets, raw scores must be ‘scaled ‘ to allow meaningful comparisons. Scores are therefore scaled indeed that the OECD median in each knowledge domain ( mathematics, reading and science ) is 500 and the standard diversion is 100. [ 23 ] This is true only for the initial PISA hertz when the scale was first introduced, though, subsequent cycles are linked to the previous cycles through IRT scale linking methods. [ 24 ] This generation of proficiency estimates is done using a latent regression extension of the Rasch model, a model of detail reception hypothesis ( IRT ), besides known as conditioning mannequin or population model. The proficiency estimates are provided in the form of alleged plausible values, which allow unbiased estimates of differences between groups. The latent regression, together with the practice of a gaussian prior probability distribution of scholar competencies allows estimate of the proficiency distributions of groups of participating students. [ 25 ] The scale and conditioning procedures are described in closely identical terms in the Technical Reports of PISA 2000, 2003, 2006. NAEP and TIMSS use like scale methods .

Ranking results [edit ]

All PISA results are tabulated by country ; holocene PISA cycles have separate provincial or regional results for some countries. Most public attention concentrates on merely one consequence : the entail scores of countries and their rankings of countries against one another. In the official reports, however, country-by-country rankings are given not as simple league tables but as thwart tables indicating for each pair of countries whether or not mean score differences are statistically significant ( improbable to be due to random fluctuations in student sample or in detail officiate ). In favorable cases, a difference of 9 points is sufficient to be considered significant. [ citation needed ]

PISA never combines mathematics, science and learn knowledge domain scores into an overall score. however, commentators have sometimes combined test results from all three domains into an overall area ranking. such meta-analysis is not endorsed by the OECD, although official summaries sometimes use scores from a testing cycle ‘s star sphere as a proxy for overall scholar ability .

pisa 2018 rank drumhead [edit ]

The results of PISA 2018 were presented on 3 December 2019, which included data for around 600,000 participating students in 79 countries and economies, with China ‘s economic area of Beijing, Shanghai, Jiangsu and Zhejiang emerging as the peak performer in all categories. bill that this does not represent the entirety of mainland China. [ 26 ] Reading results for Spain were not released due to sensed anomalies. [ 27 ]

Rankings comparison 2003–2015 [edit ]

  1. a b cBeijing, Shanghai, Jiangsu, Zhejiang
  2. a b c Shanghai ( 2009, 2012 ) ; Beijing, Shanghai, Jiangsu, Guangdong ( 2015 )
  3. a b c Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires

previous years [edit ]

Period Focus OECD countries Partner countries Participating students Notes
2000 Reading 28 4 + 11 265,000 The Netherlands disqualified from data analysis. 11 additional non-OECD countries took the test in 2002.
2003 Mathematics 30 11 275,000 UK disqualified from data analysis. Also included test in problem solving.
2006 Science 30 27 400,000 Reading scores for US disqualified from analysis due to misprint in testing materials.[28]
2009[29] Reading 34 41 + 10 470,000 10 additional non-OECD countries took the test in 2010.[30][31]
2012[32] Mathematics 34 31 510,000

reception [edit ]

( China ) China ‘s participation in the 2012 test was limited to Shanghai, Hong Kong, and Macau as disjoined entities. In 2012, Shanghai participated for the second gear fourth dimension, again topping the rankings in all three subjects, a well as improving scores in the subjects compared to the 2009 tests. Shanghai ‘s score of 613 in mathematics was 113 points above the average score, putting the performance of Shanghai pupils about 3 school years ahead of pupils in average countries. educational experts debated to what degree this leave reflected the quality of the general educational organization in China, pointing out that Shanghai has greater wealth and better-paid teachers than the rest of China. [ 33 ] Hong Kong placed moment in read and science and third in maths. Andreas Schleicher, PISA division head and co-ordinator, stated that PISA tests administered in rural China have produced some results approaching the OECD average. Citing far as-yet-unpublished OECD research, he said, “ We have actually done Pisa in 12 of the provinces in China. tied in some of the very inadequate areas you get performance conclude to the OECD average. ” [ 34 ] Schleicher believes that China has besides expanded school entree and has moved away from learning by rote, [ 35 ] performing good in both rote-based and broader assessments. [ 34 ] In 2018 the chinese provinces that participated were Beijing, Shanghai, Jiangsu and Zhejiang. In 2015, the participating provinces were Jiangsu, Guangdong, Beijing, and Shanghai. [ 36 ] The 2015 Beijing-Shanghai-Jiangsu-Guangdong cohort scored a median 518 in science in 2015, while the 2012 Shanghai cohort scored a median 580. Critics of PISA counterpunch that in Shanghai and other chinese cities, most children of migrant workers can entirely attend city schools up to the one-ninth grade, and must return to their parents ‘ hometowns for high school due to hukou restrictions, frankincense skewing the constitution of the city ‘s high school students in party favor of wealthier local anesthetic families. A population chart of Shanghai reproduced in The New York Times shows a steep sink off in the count of 15-year-olds occupy there. [ 37 ] According to Schleicher, 27 % of Shanghai ‘s 15-year-olds are excluded from its school system ( and hence from testing ). As a result, the share of Shanghai ‘s 15-year-olds tested by PISA was 73 %, lower than the 89 % tested in the US. [ 38 ] Following the 2015 testing, OECD published in depth studies on the education systems of a selected few countries including China. [ 39 ] In 2014, Liz Truss, the british Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at the Department for Education, led a fact-finding visit to schools and teacher-training centres in Shanghai. [ 40 ] Britain increased exchanges with chinese teachers and schools to find out how to improve quality. In 2014, 60 teachers from Shanghai were invited to the UK to help share their teach methods, support pupils who are struggling, and avail to train early teachers. [ 41 ] In 2016, Britain invited 120 chinese teachers, planning to adopt taiwanese styles of teaching in 8,000 help schools. [ 42 ] By 2019, approximately 5,000 of Britain ‘s 16,000 chief schools had adopted the Shanghai ‘s teaching methods. [ 43 ] The performance of british schools in PISA improved after adopting China ‘s teach styles. [ 44 ] [ 45 ]

finland [edit ]

Finland, which received several top positions in the first tests, fell in all three subjects in 2012, but remained the best perform nation overall in Europe, achieving their best leave in skill with 545 points ( 5th ) and worst in mathematics with 519 ( 12th ) in which the nation was outperformed by four early european countries. The drop in mathematics was 25 points since 2003, the last time mathematics was the focus of the tests. For the first meter finnish girls outperformed boys in mathematics, but only narrowly. It was besides the beginning time pupils in Finnish-speaking schools did not perform better than pupils in Swedish-speaking schools. Minister of Education and Science Krista Kiuru expressed concern for the overall cliff, vitamin a well as the fact that the number of low-performers had increased from 7 % to 12 %. [ 46 ]

India [edit ]

India participated in the 2009 round of testing but pulled out of the 2012 PISA testing, with the amerind government attributing its action to the unfairness of PISA testing to indian students. [ 47 ] The Indian Express reported, “ The ministry ( of education ) has concluded that there was a socio-cultural gulf between the questions and amerind students. The ministry will write to the OECD and drive home the want to factor in India ‘s “ socio-cultural milieu ”. India ‘s engagement in the next PISA hertz will hinge on this ”. [ 48 ] The Indian Express besides noted that “ Considering that over 70 nations participate in PISA, it is uncertain whether an exception would be made for India ”. India did not participate in the 2012, 2015 and 2018 PISA rounds. [ 49 ] A Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan ( KVS ) committee angstrom well as a group of secretaries on department of education constituted by the Prime Minister of India Narendra Modi recommended that India should participate in PISA. consequently, in February 2017, the Ministry of Human Resource Development under Prakash Javadekar decided to end the boycott and participate in PISA from 2020. To address the socio-cultural disconnect between the test questions and students, it was reported that the OECD will update some questions. For example, the bible avocado in a interrogate may be replaced with a more popular indian fruit such as mango. [ 50 ]

malaysia [edit ]

In 2015, the results from Malaysia were found by the OECD to have not met the utmost reply rate. [ 51 ] Opposition politician Ong Kian Ming said the education ministry tried to oversample high-performing students in full-bodied schools. [ 52 ] [ 53 ]

sweden [edit ]

Sweden ‘s resultant role dropped in all three subjects in the 2012 test, which was a continuance of a tendency from 2006 and 2009. It saw the sharpest precipitate in mathematics performance with a flatten in grudge from 509 in 2003 to 478 in 2012. The score in understand showed a drop from 516 in 2000 to 483 in 2012. The area performed below the OECD average in all three subjects. [ 54 ] The leader of the opposition, Social Democrat Stefan Löfven, described the situation as a national crisis. [ 55 ] Along with the party ‘s spokesperson on education, Ibrahim Baylan, he pointed to the down vogue in reading as most severe. [ 55 ] In 2020, swedish newspaper Expressen revealed that Sweden had inflated their grudge in PISA 2018 by not conforming to OECD standards. According to professor Magnus Henrekson a big number of foreign-born students had not been tested. [ 56 ]

United Kingdom [edit ]

In the 2012 trial, as in 2009, the result was slightly above average for the United Kingdom, with the skill ranking being highest ( 20 ). [ 57 ] England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland besides participated as break entities, showing the worst solution for Wales which in mathematics was 43rd of the 65 countries and economies. Minister of Education in Wales Huw Lewis expressed disappointment in the results, said that there were no “ immediate pay back ”, but hoped that several educational reforms that have been implemented in the last few years would give better results in the following attack of tests. [ 58 ] The United Kingdom had a greater opening between high- and low-scoring students than the average. There was fiddling dispute between public and private schools when adjusted for socio-economic setting of students. The gender deviation in party favor of girls was less than in most other countries, as was the difference between natives and immigrants. [ 57 ] Writing in the Daily Telegraph, Ambrose Evans-Pritchard warned against putting excessively much emphasis on the UK ‘s external ranking, arguing that an overfocus on scholarly performances in East Asia might have contributed to the area ‘s low birthrate, which he argued could harm the economic performance in the future more than a effective PISA score would outweigh. [ 59 ] In 2013, the Times Educational Supplement ( TES ) published an article, “ Is PISA Fundamentally Flawed ? ” by William Stewart, detailing serious critiques of PISA ‘s conceptual foundations and methods advanced by statisticians at major universities. [ 60 ] In the article, Professor Harvey Goldstein of the University of Bristol was quoted as saying that when the OECD tries to rule out questions suspected of bias, it can have the effect of “ smoothing out ” key differences between countries. “ That is leaving out many of the crucial things, ” he warned. “ They plainly do n’t get commented on. What you are looking at is something that happens to be coarse. But ( is it ) worth looking at ? PISA results are taken at confront value as providing some sort of park standard across countries. But a soon as you begin to unpick it, I think that all falls apart. ” Queen ‘s University Belfast mathematician Dr. Hugh Morrison stated that he found the statistical model underlying PISA to contain a fundamental, insoluble mathematical error that renders Pisa rankings “ valueless ”. [ 61 ] Goldstein remarked that Dr. Morrison ‘s objection highlights “ an authoritative technical write out ” if not a “ profound conceptual error ”. however, Goldstein cautioned that PISA has been “ used inappropriately ”, contending that some of the incrimination for this “ lies with PISA itself. I think it tends to say besides much for what it can do and it tends not to publicise the negative or the weaker aspects. ” Professors Morrison and Goldstein expressed depress at the OECD ‘s response to criticism. Morrison said that when he inaugural published his criticism of PISA in 2004 and besides personally question respective of the OECD ‘s “ senior people ” about them, his points were met with “ absolute silence ” and have yet to be addressed. “ I was amazed at how unforthcoming they were, ” he told TES. “ That makes me leery. ” “ Pisa firm ignored many of these issues, ” he says. “ I am silent concerned. ” [ 62 ] Professor Svend Kreiner, of the University of Copenhagen, agreed : “ One of the problems that everybody has with PISA is that they do n’t want to discuss things with people criticising or asking questions concerning the results. They did n’t want to talk to me at all. I am certain it is because they ca n’t defend themselves. [ 62 ]

United States [edit ]

Since 2012 a few states have participated in the PISA tests as separate entities. only the 2012 and 2015 results are available on a state of matter basis. Puerto Rico participated in 2015 as a separate US entity ampere well .

2012 US State results
Mathematics Science Reading
 Massachusetts 514
 Connecticut 506
United States 481
 Florida 467
 Massachusetts 527
 Connecticut 521
United States 497
 Florida 485
 Massachusetts 527
 Connecticut 521
United States 498
 Florida 492

PISA results for the United States by slipstream and ethnicity .

Race 2018[63] 2015 2012 2009 2006 2003
Score Score Score Score Score Score
Asian 539 498 549 524 494 506
White 503 499 506 515 502 512
US Average 478 470 481 487 474 483
More than one race 474 475 492 487 482 502
Hispanic 452 446 455 453 436 443
Other 423 436 460 446 446
Black 419 419 421 423 404 417
Race 2018[63] 2015 2012 2009 2006
Score Score Score Score Score
Asian 551 525 546 536 499
White 529 531 528 532 523
US Average 502 496 497 502 489
More than one race 502 503 511 503 501
Hispanic 478 470 462 464 439
Other 462 439 465 453
Black 440 433 439 435 409
Race 2018[63] 2015 2012 2009 2006 2003 2000
Score Score Score Score Score Score Score
Asian 556 527 550 541 513 546
White 531 526 519 525 525 538
US Average 505 497 498 500 495 504
More than one race 501 498 517 502 515
Hispanic 481 478 478 466 453 449
Black 448 443 443 441 430 445
Other 440 438 462 456 455

inquiry on possible causes of PISA disparities in different countries [edit ]

Although PISA and TIMSS officials and researchers themselves broadly refrain from hypothesizing about the bombastic and stable differences in scholar accomplishment between countries, since 2000, literature on the differences in PISA and TIMSS results and their possible causes has emerged. [ 64 ] Data from PISA have furnished several researchers, notably Eric Hanushek, Ludger Wößmann, Heiner Rindermann, and Stephen J. Ceci, with material for books and articles about the relationship between student accomplishment and economic development, [ 65 ] democratization, and health ; [ 66 ] a well as the roles of such single educational factors as high-stakes exams, [ 67 ] the presence or absence of private schools and the effects and time of ability track. [ 68 ] David Spiegelhalter of Cambridge wrote : “ Pisa does present the doubt in the scores and ranks – for model the United Kingdom rank in the 65 countries is said to be between 23 and 31. It ‘s unwise for countries to base department of education policy on their Pisa results, as Germany, Norway and Denmark did after doing badly in 2001. ” [ 69 ] According to Forbes, in some countries PISA selects a sample distribution from only the best-educated areas or from their top-performing students, slanting the results. China, Hong Kong, Macau, Taiwan, Singapore and Argentina were only some of the examples. [ 70 ] According to an open letter to Andreas Schleicher, director of PISA, assorted academics and educators argued that “ OECD and Pisa tests are damaging department of education worldwide ”. [ 71 ] According to O Estado de São Paulo, Brazil shows a capital disparity when classifying the results between public and private schools, where public schools would rank worse than Peru, while individual schools would rank better than Finland. [ 72 ]

See besides [edit ]

explanatory notes [edit ]

References [edit ]

source :
Category : Education

Trả lời

Email của bạn sẽ không được hiển thị công khai.