http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/dec/08/pisa-education-test-scores-meaning
The PISA 2012 scores show the failure of 'market based' education reform
A truly successful education system has students of all socio-economic
backgrounds scoring highly on PISA tests
When PISA results were first presented 12 years ago, the participating
countries were excited to see how their school systems perform compared
to one another. Now the launch of the fifth PISA results is accompanied
by more criticism than before due to the issues with cross-country
comparisons and the dominant role that PISA plays in determining
priorities for national education policies. Whatever its limitations
are, the data from more than half a million 15-year-olds around the
world is now here, and we should try to make the best out of them.
An appropriate use of PISA data is not to create global league tables
that praise or shame countries for their performances in standardized
mathematics, reading literacy and science tests. But this is still the
most common way to report PISA results. In Finland, media bluntly
concluded that Finnish school system has collapsed pointing to country's
drop from 6th best in the world in mathematics in 2009 to 12th three
years later. Swedish newsagents went even further stating that Sweden's
all-time-low PISA scores are a "national disaster" that puts the future
of the nation at risk. It was a similar story of concern in Canada. In
the US, authorities were concerned about widening learning gap between
American and Asian youth and how it is harmful to America's economic
competitiveness. Many others seem to draw their conclusions of PISA by a
glance at the league tables.
Another handicap of using PISA to inform national policies is to admire
the highest scoring school systems and thereby fail to see the common
patterns from the data. PISA consumers should note that not every
high-scoring school system is successful. A school system is
"successful" if it performs above the OECD average in mathematics,
reading literacy and science, and if students' socio-economic status has
a weaker-than-average impact on students' learning outcomes. The most
successful education systems in the OECD are Korea, Japan, Finland,
Canada and Estonia.
My personal takeaway from the PISA 2012 study is how it proves that
fashionable Global Educational Reform Movement (GERM) is built on wrong
premises. GERM, that emerged from England's Education Reform Act 1988
and was further accelerated by the No Child Left Behind and the Race to
the Top reforms in the US, assumes that market mechanisms are the best
vehicles for whole system improvements. GERM has acted like a virus that
"infects" education systems as it travels around the world. The
infection can be diagnosed by checking the state of the following five
symptoms.
First is increased competition between schools that is boosted by school
choice and related league tables offering parents information that helps
them make the right "consumer" decisions. Second is standardization of
teaching and learning that sets detailed prescriptions how to teach and
what students must achieve so that schools' performance can be compared
to one another. Third is systematic collection of information on
schools' performance by employing standardized tests. These data are
then used to hold teachers accountable for students' achievement. Fourth
is devaluing teacher professionalism and making teaching accessible to
anyone through fast-track teacher preparation. Fifth is privatizing
public schools by turning them to privately governed schools through
charter schools, free schools and virtual schools.
In 2012 when the OECD collected the latest PISA data from 65 education
systems, GERM had already spread to become a global pandemic. The most
notable victims of GERM are schools and communities in the US, England,
New Zealand, Australia, Sweden and Chile. The wealth of fresh data
available now begs an interesting question: do PISA findings reinforce
the premises of GERM being right? Well, let's take a look at three key
findings of PISA 2012 to see how GERM contradicts with that evidence.
Countries that give schools autonomy over curricula and student
assessments often perform better. This finding is orthogonal to the
basic premise of GERM that assumes that externally set teaching
standards and aligned standardized testing are preconditions for
success. PISA shows how success is often associated with balanced
professional autonomy with a collaborative culture in schools. Evidence
also shows how high performing education systems engage teachers to set
their own teaching and learning targets, to craft productive learning
environments, and to design multiple forms student assessments to best
support student learning and school improvement.
High average learning outcomes and system-wide equity are often
interrelated. Equity in education means that students' socio-economic
status has little impact on how well they learn in school. Equity is
high in the agenda in all successful school systems. Focus on equity
means to give high priority to universal early childhood programs,
comprehensive health and special education services in schools, and
balanced curriculum that has equal weight in arts, music, and sports,
and academic studies. Fairness in resource allocation is important for
equity, too. PISA 2012 shows that fair resourcing is related to the
success of the entire school system: High student performance tends to
be linked to more equitably resource allocation between advantaged and
disadvantaged schools.
School choice does not improve the performance of education system.
School choice and competition between schools are related to greater
levels of segregation in the education system. That, in turn, may have
adverse consequences for equity in learning opportunities and outcomes.
Indeed, successful education systems do better than those that have
expanded school choice. All successful school systems have a strong
commitment to maintain their public schools and local school control.
PISA 2012 data show that the prevalence of charter and free schools with
related competition for students have no discernible relationship with
student learning.
PISA 2012 also reaffirms the appeal by millions of teachers worldwide:
pay us better. While paying teachers well is only part of the story,
higher salaries can help countries to attract more young people to
choose teaching as their lifelong career. PISA results show that more
successful countries pay more to their teachers and give them higher
status in society.
Countries that want to be higher on the PISA tables should understand
what it truly takes to get there.
The PISA 2012 scores show the failure of 'market based' education reform
A truly successful education system has students of all socio-economic
backgrounds scoring highly on PISA tests
When PISA results were first presented 12 years ago, the participating
countries were excited to see how their school systems perform compared
to one another. Now the launch of the fifth PISA results is accompanied
by more criticism than before due to the issues with cross-country
comparisons and the dominant role that PISA plays in determining
priorities for national education policies. Whatever its limitations
are, the data from more than half a million 15-year-olds around the
world is now here, and we should try to make the best out of them.
An appropriate use of PISA data is not to create global league tables
that praise or shame countries for their performances in standardized
mathematics, reading literacy and science tests. But this is still the
most common way to report PISA results. In Finland, media bluntly
concluded that Finnish school system has collapsed pointing to country's
drop from 6th best in the world in mathematics in 2009 to 12th three
years later. Swedish newsagents went even further stating that Sweden's
all-time-low PISA scores are a "national disaster" that puts the future
of the nation at risk. It was a similar story of concern in Canada. In
the US, authorities were concerned about widening learning gap between
American and Asian youth and how it is harmful to America's economic
competitiveness. Many others seem to draw their conclusions of PISA by a
glance at the league tables.
Another handicap of using PISA to inform national policies is to admire
the highest scoring school systems and thereby fail to see the common
patterns from the data. PISA consumers should note that not every
high-scoring school system is successful. A school system is
"successful" if it performs above the OECD average in mathematics,
reading literacy and science, and if students' socio-economic status has
a weaker-than-average impact on students' learning outcomes. The most
successful education systems in the OECD are Korea, Japan, Finland,
Canada and Estonia.
My personal takeaway from the PISA 2012 study is how it proves that
fashionable Global Educational Reform Movement (GERM) is built on wrong
premises. GERM, that emerged from England's Education Reform Act 1988
and was further accelerated by the No Child Left Behind and the Race to
the Top reforms in the US, assumes that market mechanisms are the best
vehicles for whole system improvements. GERM has acted like a virus that
"infects" education systems as it travels around the world. The
infection can be diagnosed by checking the state of the following five
symptoms.
First is increased competition between schools that is boosted by school
choice and related league tables offering parents information that helps
them make the right "consumer" decisions. Second is standardization of
teaching and learning that sets detailed prescriptions how to teach and
what students must achieve so that schools' performance can be compared
to one another. Third is systematic collection of information on
schools' performance by employing standardized tests. These data are
then used to hold teachers accountable for students' achievement. Fourth
is devaluing teacher professionalism and making teaching accessible to
anyone through fast-track teacher preparation. Fifth is privatizing
public schools by turning them to privately governed schools through
charter schools, free schools and virtual schools.
In 2012 when the OECD collected the latest PISA data from 65 education
systems, GERM had already spread to become a global pandemic. The most
notable victims of GERM are schools and communities in the US, England,
New Zealand, Australia, Sweden and Chile. The wealth of fresh data
available now begs an interesting question: do PISA findings reinforce
the premises of GERM being right? Well, let's take a look at three key
findings of PISA 2012 to see how GERM contradicts with that evidence.
Countries that give schools autonomy over curricula and student
assessments often perform better. This finding is orthogonal to the
basic premise of GERM that assumes that externally set teaching
standards and aligned standardized testing are preconditions for
success. PISA shows how success is often associated with balanced
professional autonomy with a collaborative culture in schools. Evidence
also shows how high performing education systems engage teachers to set
their own teaching and learning targets, to craft productive learning
environments, and to design multiple forms student assessments to best
support student learning and school improvement.
High average learning outcomes and system-wide equity are often
interrelated. Equity in education means that students' socio-economic
status has little impact on how well they learn in school. Equity is
high in the agenda in all successful school systems. Focus on equity
means to give high priority to universal early childhood programs,
comprehensive health and special education services in schools, and
balanced curriculum that has equal weight in arts, music, and sports,
and academic studies. Fairness in resource allocation is important for
equity, too. PISA 2012 shows that fair resourcing is related to the
success of the entire school system: High student performance tends to
be linked to more equitably resource allocation between advantaged and
disadvantaged schools.
School choice does not improve the performance of education system.
School choice and competition between schools are related to greater
levels of segregation in the education system. That, in turn, may have
adverse consequences for equity in learning opportunities and outcomes.
Indeed, successful education systems do better than those that have
expanded school choice. All successful school systems have a strong
commitment to maintain their public schools and local school control.
PISA 2012 data show that the prevalence of charter and free schools with
related competition for students have no discernible relationship with
student learning.
PISA 2012 also reaffirms the appeal by millions of teachers worldwide:
pay us better. While paying teachers well is only part of the story,
higher salaries can help countries to attract more young people to
choose teaching as their lifelong career. PISA results show that more
successful countries pay more to their teachers and give them higher
status in society.
Countries that want to be higher on the PISA tables should understand
what it truly takes to get there.
Comments
Post a Comment