Search

The Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) has garnered increasing attention since its inception in 2000. Correspondingly, there has been heightened interest in 'PISA poster countries' like Singapore and Shanghai-China. Yet to date, little is known about the processes and dynamics of the construction of PISA discourses within these 'poster countries'. This paper examines the Chinese print media's reception and interpretation of PISA. Using content analysis of media reportage in 2010, 2013 and 2016, the paper identifies core patterns and themes within the media-generated PISA discourses in China and traces changes in the media discourses over time. The findings shed light on a 'mediatisation' process where the Chinese media's interpretation of PISA gets shaped by culture-specific factors such as dominant political ideology, national aspirations, and histories. As such, PISA has acquired localised meanings in China and serves as an instrument to promote national development agenda and justify education reforms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the evaluation of any political strategy, it is essential to carry out the collection and analysis of the available data. The presentation of a complex phenomenon by means of synthetic measures can improve both the political actors' understanding of the situation and the design of new measures. In this paper, we deal with the problem of the construction of a multidimensional composite indicator for the evaluation of educational systems in OECD countries. In our proposal, not only are those indicators included that measure the academic outcomes, but also a group of indicators that measures the social dimension of the educational system. A variation of a methodology based on Data Envelopment Analysis is developed to construct a composite multiplicative indicator that enables inter-temporal comparison and the detection of the sources of the variation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, we attempt to explain the differences between reading and math scores of migrants’ children (8430 daughters and 8526 sons) in 17 OECD destination countries, coming from 45 origin countries or regions, using PISA 2009 data. In addition to the societal gender equality levels of the origin and destination countries (the gender empowerment measure), we use macro indicators of the origin countries’ educational systems, economic development and religions. We find that migrant daughters from countries with higher gender equality levels obtain higher reading scores than comparable migrant sons do (but this is not the case for math scores). In addition, the higher the gender equality levels in the destination countries, the lower the reading and math scores of both male and female migrants’ children in their destination countries. Further analyses suggest it is the difference between gender equality levels, rather than the levels themselves, that explains the educational performance of both female and male migrant pupils. Our results also show the low gender equality level in Islamic origin countries offers a possible explanation for the low educational performance of Islamic pupils, both male and female. Finally, migrants’ daughters seem to perform slightly better educationally, compared with migrants’ sons. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Due to the broad acceptance of the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) and other comparative studies as instruments of policymaking, its accuracy is essential. This article attempts to demonstrate omissions in the conceptualisation, and consequently in calculation and interpretation, of one of the central points of PISA 2006 and 2009. The authors point to the danger of such omissions for possible evidence-based education policymaking. With regard to the reproduction of social inequalities through education, we focus on variance in student performance between schools and within schools on the science scale (PISA 2006) and in the mother tongue (PISA 2009). The thesis of the PISA study is that there are countries (Finland, Iceland and Norway) where between only 14 and 29% of the average OECD variance (33%) is attributed to between-school variance – which is good – and there are countries (Germany, Bulgaria, Austria, Hungary, Belgium, Slovenia, the Netherlands, etc.), where the variance between schools is at least ‘one-and-a-half times that of the OECD’ – which is bad. For Slovenia, we demonstrate a significantly different share of variance explained by between-school variance of the same or similar cohort if we move the point of research by only nine months. Our main argument is that such a difference in the share of variance is not the result of a substantial change in the results (grooving difference in the performance) but the result of formal organisational change – the transition of the cohort to upper secondary education. The difference in calculations also radically changes policy implications, which is crucial. While PISA data suggest the necessity of policy measures to reduce between-school variance, our calculations suggest the need for reconsideration of policy measures aimed at the reduction of within-school variance, gender differences, and differences in performance between native and immigrant students. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article, we quantitatively assess education policy change in OECD countries. While research has frequently underlined the importance of international exchange for national policy development, it is yet unclear whether resulting policies are converging. By distinguishing different kinds of education policy goals, we hypothesise that indicators related to macro-level goals are more likely to converge than those related to implementation. We then analyse the development of several education policies since the 1990s. We find strong convergence of some indicators and among some groups of countries, but no clear pattern emerges. Convergence is only partially influenced by the abstractness of education policy goals, and in particular the Scandinavian countries seem to pursue their own approaches in important education policy options. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]