1 / 48

PISA 2012

PISA 2012. What is PISA?. I nternational large-scale assessment organized by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) NCES is U.S. coordinating and funding organization PISA Governing Board (PGB) determines policy Assessment of 15-year-old students

amcclinton
Download Presentation

PISA 2012

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. PISA 2012

  2. What is PISA? • International large-scale assessment organized by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) • NCES is U.S. coordinating and funding organization • PISA Governing Board (PGB) determines policy • Assessment of 15-year-old students • Administered every 3 years since 2000

  3. What is PISA? • In 2012, 68 participating education systems • Three U.S. states: Connecticut, Florida, and Massachusetts

  4. What is PISA? • Assessment subjects: • Mathematics, science, reading literacy • Mathematics was main subject assessed in 2012 • Computer-based mathematics and reading literacy • Optional assessment taken by 32 education systems • Content knowledge, not limited to school-based curricula • PISA assesses applied knowledge/literacy: • “How well can students nearing the end of compulsory schooling apply their knowledge to real-life situations?”

  5. What PISA Reports Average Scores: Scale of 0-1000 for all domains Proficiency Levels: Percentages of students scoring at 6 levels Trends: Change between average scores in 2012 and the scores in previous assessment years Subgroup scores: International (e.g., gender, language spoken in home) and U.S. specific variables (e.g., race/ethnicity)

  6. U.S PISA Findings

  7. General patterns of U.S. results • Ranked better in reading literacy than in mathematics and science literacy • Below OECD average score in mathematics only • Higher percentage at low proficiency levels than OECD average in mathematics only • Lower percentage of top performers than OECD average in mathematics only • No measurable change in average scores in mathematics, science, or reading literacy

  8. Mathematics Literacy

  9. PISA 2012 mathematics literacy content categories Uncertainty and Data (25%) Quantity (25%) Change and Relationships (25%) Can students model change and relationships with the appropriate functions and equations? • Can students use probability and statistics and other techniques of data representation and description to mathematically describe, model, and interpret uncertainty? • Are 15-year-olds able to comprehend multiple representations of numbers, engage in mental calculation, employ estimation, and assess the reasonableness of results? Space and Shape (25%) • Can students understand perspective, create and read maps, and manipulate 3D objects? Note: Percentages shown are the approximate percentage of scale score points.

  10. PISA 2012 mathematics literacy process categories Formulate (25%) • Can 15-year-olds recognize and identify opportunities to use mathematics and then provide mathematical structure to a problem presented in some contextualized form in order to formulate situations mathematically? Employ (50%) • Are students able to employ mathematical concepts, facts, procedures, and reasoning to solve mathematically-formulated problems and obtain mathematical conclusions? Interpret (25%) • Can students interpret, apply and evaluate mathematical outcomes in order to determine whether results are reasonable and make sense in the context of the problem? Note: Percentages shown are the approximate percentage of scale score points.

  11. PISA mathematics literacy proficiency levels Level 6 Level 5 Level 4 Level 3 Level 2 Level 1

  12. Mathematics literacy – Example item Proficiency level 1 Question: CHARTS

  13. Mathematics literacy – Example item Question: CHARTS - Continued Percentage of students answering correctly in 2012: OECD average: 80% U.S.: 77%

  14. Mathematics literacy – Example item Proficiency level 5 Question: DRIP RATE

  15. Mathematics literacy – Example item Question: DRIP RATE - Continued Percentage of students answering correctly in PISA 2012: OECD average: 26% U.S.: 30%

  16. Higher than U.S. average Not measurably different from U.S. average Lower than U.S. average Of 34 OECD Countries, U.S.A. Ranks 27th in Mathematics Literacy OECD U.S. National Center for Education Statistics, 2013, http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/pisa/pisa2012/pisa2012highlights_3a.asp. 16

  17. U.S. 15-year-olds OECD average in mathematics literacy FL 467 (*,**) MA 514 (*,**) CT 506 (*) * = State avg. different from U.S. ** = State avg. different from OECD Average not measurably different from U.S. average Average lower than U.S. average Average higher than U.S. average

  18. State results in mathematics literacy Note: Comparisons include 65 education systems.

  19. U.S. not measurably different from OECD average in two mathematics content subscales Not measurably different from U.S. average Significantly higher than U.S. average

  20. In mathematics literacy, 9 percent of U.S. 15-year-old students scored at proficiency level 5 or above FL 6% (*,**) MA 19% (*,**) CT 16% (*,**) * = State percentage different from U.S. ** = State percentage different from OECD Percentage not measurably different from U.S. Percentage lower than U.S. Percentage higher than U.S.

  21. No measurable change since 2009 in average mathematics literacy scores in more than half of PISA education systems, including U.S. • Of the 62 education systems in PISA 2009 and 2012: • In 33 (including the U.S.) no measurable change in average scores • In 18 average scores increased • Russian Federation was below U.S. and OECD averages in 2003; not measurably different in 2012 • Poland was lower than OECD and not measurably different from U.S. averages in 2003; higher than both in 2012 • In 11 average scores declined • Finland declined between 2006-2009 and again between 2009-2012; scored 548 in 2006 and 519 in 2012 • Norway was above U.S. average in 2003; not measurably different from U.S. average and below OECD average in 2012

  22. Science Literacy

  23. PISA science literacy proficiency levels Level 6 Level 5 Level 4 Level 3 Level 2 Level 1

  24. Science literacy – Example item Question: MARY MONTAGU Proficiency level 2

  25. Science literacy – Example item Question: MARY MONTAGU - Continued Percentage of students answering correctly in 2006: OECD average: 75% U.S.: 73%

  26. Science literacy – Example item Question: GREENHOUSE Proficiency level 6

  27. Science literacy – Example item Question: GREENHOUSE - Continued Percentage of students answering correctly in 2006: OECD average: 19% U.S.: 18%

  28. Higher than U.S. average Not measurably different from U.S. average Lower than U.S. average Of 34 OECD Countries, U.S.A. Ranks20th in Science Literacy U.S. National Center for Education Statistics, 2013, http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/pisa/pisa2012/pisa2012highlights_4a.asp. 28

  29. U.S. 15-year-old students not measurably different from OECD average in science literacy MA 527 (*,**) FL 485 (**) CT 521 (*,**) * = State avg. different from U.S. ** = State avg. different from OECD Average not measurably different from U.S. average Average lower than U.S. average Average higher than U.S. average

  30. State results in science literacy Note: Comparisons include 65 education systems.

  31. In science literacy, 7 percent of U.S. 15-year-old students scored at proficiency level 5 or above MA 14% (*,**) CT 13% (*,**) FL 5% (**) * = State percentage different from U.S. ** = State percentage different from OECD Percentage not measurably different from U.S. Percentage higher than U.S. Percentage lower than U.S.

  32. No measurable change since 2009 in average science literacy scores in more than half of PISA education systems, including the U.S. • Of the 62 education systems that participated in PISA 2009 and 2012: • In 43 (including the U.S.) there was no measurable change in average scores • In 13 average scores increased • Poland was not measurably different from U.S. and OECD averages in 2006; above U.S. and OECD averages in 2012 • In 6 average scores declined • Sweden was higher than U.S. and OECD averages in 2006; below U.S. and OECD averages in 2012

  33. Reading Literacy

  34. PISA reading literacy proficiency levels Level 6 Level 5 Level 4 Level 3 Level 2 Level 1a Level 1b

  35. Reading literacy – Example item Question: TELECOMMUTING Proficiency level 3

  36. Reading literacy – Example item Question: TELECOMMUTING-Continued Percentage of students answering correctly in 2009: OECD average: 52% U.S.: 55%

  37. Reading literacy – Example item Question: THE PLAY’S THE THING Proficiency level 6

  38. Reading literacy – Example item Question: THE PLAY’S THE THING- Continued What were the characters in the play doing just before the curtain went up? Percentage of students answering correctly in PISA 2009: OECD average: 13% U.S.: 13%

  39. Higher than U.S. average Not measurably different from U.S. average Lower than U.S. average Of 34 OECD Countries, U.S.A. Ranks 17th in Reading Literacy U.S. National Center for Education Statistics, 2013, http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/pisa/pisa2012/pisa2012highlights_5a.asp. 39

  40. U.S. 15-year-olds not measurably different from OECD average in reading literacy MA 527 (*,**) FL 492 CT 521 (*,**) * = State avg. different than U.S. ** = State avg. different than OECD Average is lower than U.S. average Average is higher than U.S. average Average not measurably different from U.S. average

  41. State results in reading literacy Note: Comparisons include 65 education systems.

  42. In reading literacy, 8 percent of U.S. 15-year-old students scored at proficiency level 5 or above, not measurably different from OECD average MA 16% (*,**) CT 15% (*,**) FL 6% (*,**) * = State percentage different from U.S. ** = State percentage different from OECD Percentage not measurably different from U.S. Percentage lower than U.S. Percentage higher than U.S.

  43. No measurable change since 2009 in average reading literacy scores in more than half of PISA education systems, including the U.S. • Of the 62 education systems that participated in PISA 2009 and 2012: • In 34 (including the U.S.) no measurable change in average scores • In 21 average scores increased • Germany was lower than U.S. and OECD averages in 2000; higher than U.S. and OECD averages in 2012 • In 7 average scores declined • Sweden was higher than OECD average and not different from U.S. in 2000; lower than both U.S. and OECD averages in 2012

  44. Among OECD Countries, U.S. has the 4th Largest Achievement Gap Between High-SES and Low-SES Students for2006 PISA – Science Literacy U.S. PISA 2006 Results, OECD, table 4.8b 44

  45. Among OECD Countries, U.S. has the 5th Largest Achievement Gap Between High-SES and Low-SES Students for2009 PISA – Reading Literacy U.S. OECD PISA 2009 Results, OECD, Table II.3.1 45

  46. The U.S. ranks 26th among 34 OECD Countries on the Percentage of Low-SES Students who are High-Performing PISA 2012 Mathematics Literacy OECD U.S. Note: High-performing, low-SES students are those who are in the bottom quarter of the ESCS in their country but perform in the top quarter across students from all countries after accounting for socioeconomic background. Source: PISA 2012 Results, OECD, Annex B1, Chapter 2, Table II.2.7a

  47. The U.S. Achievement Gap Between High-SES and Low-SES Students is Equivalent to Over Two Years of Schooling2012 PISA – Mathematics Literacy OECD U.S. PISA 2012 Results, OECD, Annex B1, Chapter 2, Table II.2.4a 47

  48. For more information PISA at NCES: http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/pisa/ Contact: Dana Kelly NCES 202-219-7101 Dana.Kelly@ed.gov

More Related