Correction to: Setting up the Scene: Lessons Learned from PISA 2018 Statistics and Other International Student Assessments

In the original version of this book, belated corrections has been incorporated in the chapter “Setting up the Scene: Lessons Learned from PISA 2018 Statistics and Other International Student Assessments” . The correction chapter and the book has been updated with the changes.

Assessment Background: What PISA Measures and How

This chapter provides a short description of what the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) measures and how it measures it. First, it details the concepts associated with the measurement of student performance and the concepts associated with capturing student and school characteristics and explains how they compare with some other International Large-Scale Assessments (ILSA). Second, it provides information on the assessment of reading, the main domain in PISA 2018. Third, it provides information on the technical aspects of the measurements in PISA. Lastly, it offers specific examples of PISA 2018 cognitive items, corresponding domains (mathematics, science, and reading), and related performance levels.

England: England and PISA—The Long View

This chapter does not drill down in the minutiae of the PISA results for England. For that, readers can go to the NFER’s excellent report (Sizmur in Achievement of 15-year-olds in England: PISA 2018 Results DFE-RR961 2019) which comprises the UK Government’s commentary on the PISA outcomes. Rather, it tries to do something unique—it places the PISA results in the context of policy changes which may be associated with PISA outcomes, and seeks to explain the factors which determine the trends present in the PISA data. It looks briefly at the other administrations of the UK (Scotland and Wales in particular), but highlights the vital differences between those administrations. I maintain that ‘The UK’ cannot be treated as a unitary system.

Chile: The Challenge of Providing Relevant Information from ILSA Studies for the Improvement of Educational Quality

Chile has a consolidated culture of evaluation in its educational system because, for more than three decades, first the Ministry of Education and currently the National Agency for Educational Quality have implemented national census tests every year to monitor the established curricula’ learning. International Large-scale Students Assessment (ILSA) studies have substantially contributed to this monitoring since the late 1990s. Both, the definition of the disciplines and domains evaluated and the results obtained, have motivated curricular reforms to adapt what is taught to children and young people to prepare them for a globalized world, with a strong presence of information and communication technology. The Chilean students’ results have impacted the system, especially by highlighting its weaknesses, related to little improvement over decades, differences in learning achieved by different groups of students, and performance below than expected in the most economically and culturally advantaged sectors. To accomplish these challenges, the system has changed its organization and developed diverse strategies. Data provided by ILSA studies have been used to promote policies and programs for the improvement and strengthening of the most vulnerable groups and a general approach that promotes gender equality in education, politics, and labor. ILSA studies have also been a reference for innovation in educational assessments, allowing the country to evaluate and explore innovative learning areas such as digital and financial competences.

Taiwan: Performance in the Programme for International Student Assessment

Taiwan has, from 2006, participated in five Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) surveys. This chapter discusses Taiwan’s performance in PISA and its implications. At first, the education system and the process of educational reform in Taiwan were described. Then Taiwan’s performances for reading, math, and science in PISA were delineated. Taiwanese students have had consistently excellent performance for math and science; its reading performance, although not as outstanding as those for math and science, has improved significantly from 2009 to 2018. The gender gap in reading, in favour of female students, has narrowed, and the gender gap in math and science has been small. Educational equity, especially between rural and urban students, has also improved from 2006 to 2018. The proportion of high performers in reading and the proportion of low performers in reading, math, and science has increased from 2006 to 2018, while the proportions of top performers in math and science have decreased. These findings are interpreted from the perspectives of cultural beliefs, changes in the education system and national assessment, government investment in the related domains, and the nature of the PISA assessment.

Finland: Success Through Equity—The Trajectories in PISA Performance

The Finnish education system has gone through an exciting developmental path from a follower into a role model. Also on the two-decade history of PISA studies, Finland’s performance has provided years of glory as of the world’s top-performing nation, but also a substantial decline. This chapter examines Finland’s educational outcomes in recent PISA-study and the trends across previous cycles. Boys’ more unsatisfactory performance and the increasing effect of students’ socio-economic background are clear predictors of the declining trend, but they can explain it only partly. Some of the other possible factors are discussed.

Poland: Polish Education Reforms and Evidence from International Assessments

Over the last two decades, the Polish education system has been reformed several times, with the comprehensive structural reform in 1999, curriculum and evaluation reform in 2007, and early education reform introduced gradually until 2014. Student outcomes, as documented by PISA, but also other international assessments, largely improved over the last 20 years. Poland moved from below the OECD average to a group of top-performing countries in Europe. This chapter describes the reforms and research on their effects. It also discusses how it was possible to find political support for the reversal of changes that seemed to be highly successful. It provides three lessons from the Polish experience. First, the evidence should be widely disseminated among all stakeholders to sustain reforms. Second, the sole reliance on international studies is not sufficient. Additional investment into secondary analyses and national studies is necessary to develop evidence for better-informed political discussions. Third, some positive changes are more difficult to reverse. In Poland, increased school autonomy, but also external examinations, broader access to preschool and higher education, are among the changes that the new government could not alter.

Spain: The Evidence Provided by International Large-Scale Assessments About the Spanish Education System: Why Nobody Listens Despite All the Noise

ILSAs show that student performance in Spain is lower than the OECD average and has shown no progress from 2000 until 2011/2012. One of the main features is the low proportion of top performers. During this long period of stagnation, the education system was characterized by having no national (or standardized regional) evaluations and no flexibility to adapt to the different needs of the student population. The fact that the system was blind and rigid, plus the lack of common standards at the national level, gave rise to three major deficiencies: a high rate of grade repetition, which led to high rates of early school leaving, and large differences between regions. These features of the Spanish education system represent major inequities. However, PISA findings were used to reinforce the misguided view that the Spanish education system prioritized equity over excellence. After the implementation of an education reform, some improvements in student performance took place in 2015 and 2016. Unfortunately, the results for PISA 2018 in reading were withdrawn for Spain, apparently due to changes in methodology which led to unreliable results. To this date, no explanation has been provided raising concerns about the reliability and accountability of PISA.

Estonia: A Positive PISA Experience

According to Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) run by Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), Estonian education system stands out as a high performing system where students from different socio-economic backgrounds achieve high results. In PISA 2018 Estonian students ranked first in reading and science and third in mathematics among the OECD countries. What has Estonia done to be at the top of the PISA league tables? There are many aspects that have contributed to the success of Estonian education. The following chapter will look at the historical background, describe the factors, policies and conditions that have contributed to the current educational landscape that has attracted considerable attention from all over the world.

Australia: PISA Australia—Excellence and Equity?

Australia’s education system reflects its history of federalism. State and territory governments are responsible for administering education within their jurisdiction and across the sector comprising government (public), Catholic systemic and other independent schooling systems. They collaborate on education policy with the federal government. Over the past two decades the federal government has taken a greater role in funding across the education sector, and as a result of this involvement and the priorities of federal governments of the day, Australia now has one of the highest rates of non-government schooling in the OECD. Funding equity across the sectors has become a prominent issue. Concerns have been compounded by evidence of declining student performance since Australia’s initial participation in PISA in 2000, and the increasing gap between our high achievers and low achievers. This chapter explores Australia’s PISA 2018 results and what they reveal about the impact of socioeconomic level on student achievement. It also considers the role of school funding and the need to direct support to those schools that are attempting to educate the greater proportion of an increasingly diverse student population including students facing multiple layers of disadvantage.