Blog

#smart

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

Jump to: navigation,
search

“PISA” redirects here. For other uses, see Pisa (disambiguation).

 
SciencesReading

Programme for International Student Assessment (2009)[1] (Top 10; OECD members as of the time of the study in boldface)
Maths	Shanghai, China 600  Singapore562  Hong Kong, China555  South Korea546  Taiwan543  Finland541  Liechtenstein536  Switzerland534  Japan529  Canada527 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.

 

Shanghai, China

575

 Finland554
 Hong Kong, China549
 Singapore542
 Japan539
 South Korea538
 New Zealand532
 Canada529
 Estonia528
 Australia527

1.
2.	3.	4.	5.	6.	7.	8.	9.	10.

 

 

Shanghai, China

556

 South Korea539
 Finland536
 Hong Kong, China533
 Singapore526
 Canada524
 New Zealand521
 Japan520
 Australia515
 Netherlands508

1.
2.	3.	4.	5.	6.	7.	8.	9.	10.

 

The Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) is a worldwide evaluation of 15-year-old school pupils’ scholastic performance, performed first in 2000 and repeated every three years. It is coordinated by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), with a view to improving educational policies and outcomes. Another similar study is the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study, which focuses on math and science but not reading, and residency personal statement writing service.

 

Contents [hide] 1 Framework 2 Development and implementation 3 Method of testing 3.1 Sampling   3.2 The test 3.3 National add-ons 3.4 Data Scaling 4 Results 4.1 Historical league tables 4.1.1 2003–2006   4.1.2 2006 4.1.3 2009   4.2 Comparison with other studies 4.3 Topical studies 5 Reception 6 Research on causes of country differences 7 Criticism 7.1 Luxembourg   7.2 Portugal 7.3 United States 8 See also 9 References 10 Further reading 10.1 Official websites and reports   10.2 About reception and political consequences 10.3 Criticism

 

[edit] Framework

PISA stands in a tradition of international school studies, undertaken 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 turn was much influenced by the U.S. National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). The reading component of PISA is inspired by the IEA’s Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS).

PISA aims at testing literacy in three competence fields: reading, mathematics, science.

The PISA mathematics literacy test asks students to apply their mathematical knowledge to solve problems set in various real-world contexts. To solve the problems students must activate a number of mathematical competencies as well as a broad range of mathematical content knowledge. TIMSS, on the other hand, measures more traditional classroom content such as an understanding of fractions and decimals and the relationship between them (curriculum attainment). PISA claims to measure education’s application to real-life problems and life-long learning (workforce knowledge).

In the reading test, “OECD/PISA does not measure the extent to which 15-year-old students are fluent readers or how competent they are at word recognition tasks or spelling”. Instead, they should be able to “construct, extend and reflect on the meaning of what they have read across a wide range of continuous and non-continuous texts”^[2]

 

[edit] Development and implementation

Developed from 1997, the first PISA assessment was carried out in 2000. The results of each period of assessment take about one year and half to be analysed. First results were published in November 2001. The release of raw data and the publication of technical report and data handbook took only place in spring 2002. The triennial repeats follow a similar schedule; the process of seeing through a single PISA cycle, start-to-finish, always takes over four years.

Every period of assessment focusses on one of the three competence fields reading, math, science; but the two others are tested as well. After nine years, a full cycle is completed: after 2000, reading is again the main domain in 2009.

 

Main focus# OECD countries# other countries# studentsNotes
Reading284265,000The Netherlands disqualified from data analysis. 11 additional non-OECD countries took the test in 2002
Mathematics3011275,000UK disqualified from data analysis. Also included test in problem solving.
Science3027
Reading3033? Results made available on 7 December 2010 ^[3]

Period
2000	2003	2006	2009

PISA is sponsored, governed, and coordinated by the OECD. The test design, implementation, and data analysis is delegated to an international consortium of research and educational institutions led by the Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER). ACER leads in developing and implementing sampling procedures and assisting with monitoring sampling outcomes across these countries. The assessment instruments fundamental to PISA’s Reading, Mathematics, Science, Problem-solving, Computer-based testing, background and contextual questionnaires are similarly constructed and refined by ACER. ACER also develops purpose-built software to assist in sampling and data capture, and analyses all data. The source code of the data analysis software is not made public.

 

[edit] Method of testing

 

[edit] Sampling

The students tested by PISA are aged between 15 years and 3 months and 16 years and 2 months at the beginning of the assessment period. The school year pupils are in is not taken into consideration. Only students at school are tested, not home-schoolers. In PISA 2006 , however, several countries also used a grade-based sample of students. This made it possible also to study how age and school year interact.

To fulfill OECD requirements, each country must draw a sample of at least 5,000 students. In small countries like Iceland and Luxembourg, where there are less than 5,000 students per year, an entire age cohort is tested. Some countries used much larger samples than required to allow comparisons between regions.

 

[edit] The test

 

 

PISA test documents on a school table (Neues Gymnasium, Oldenburg, Germany, 2006)

 

 

Each student takes a two-hour handwritten test. Part of the test is multiple-choice and part involves fuller answers. In total there are six and a half hours of assessment material, but each student is not tested on all the parts. Following the cognitive test, participating students spend nearly one more hour answering a questionnaire on their background including learning habits, motivation and family. School directors also fill in a questionnaire describing school demographics, funding etc.

In selected countries, PISA started also experimentation with computer adaptive testing.

 

[edit] National add-ons

Countries are allowed to combine PISA with complementary national tests.

Germany does this in a very extensive way: on the 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 only about 5,000 German students participate in both the international and the national test, another 45,000 take only the latter. This large sample is needed to allow an analysis by federal states. Following a clash about the interpretation of 2006 results, the OECD warned Germany that it might withdraw the right to use the “PISA” label for national tests.^[4]

 

[edit] Data Scaling

From the beginning, PISA has been designed with one particular method of data analysis in mind. Since students work on different test booklets, raw scores must be scaled to allow meaningful comparisons. This scaling is done using the Rasch model of item response theory (IRT). According to IRT, it is not possible to assess the competence of students who solved none or all of the test items. This problem is circumvented by imposing a Gaussian prior probability distribution of competences.^[5]

One and the same scale is used to express item difficulties and student competences. The scaling procedure is tuned such that the a posteriori distribution of student competences, with equal weight given to all OECD countries, has mean 500 and standard deviation 100.

 

[edit] Results

 

[edit] Historical league tables

All PISA results are broken down by countries. Public attention concentrates on just one outcome: achievement mean values by countries. These data are regularly published in form of “league tables”.

The following table gives the mean achievements of OECD member countries in the principal testing domain of each period:^[6]

In the official reports, country rankings are communicated in a more elaborate form: not as lists, but as cross tables, indicating for each pair of countries whether or not mean score differences are statistically significant (unlikely to be due to random fluctuations in student sampling or in item functioning). In favorable cases, a difference of 9 points is sufficient to be considered significant.

In some popular media, test results from all three literacy domains have been consolidated in an overall country ranking. Such meta-analysis is not endorsed by the OECD. The official reports only contain domain-specific country scores. In part of the official reports, however, scores from a period’s principal testing domain are used as proxy for overall student ability.^[7]

 

[edit] 2003–2006

Top results for the main areas of investigation of PISA, in 2000, 2003 and 2006.

 

20032006
MathematicsScience

2000

Reading literacy

Finland546  Canada534  New Zealand529  Australia528  Ireland527  South Korea525  United Kingdom523  Japan522  Sweden516  Austria507  Belgium507  Iceland507  Norway505  France505  United States504  Denmark497  Switzerland494  Spain493  Czech Republic492  Italy487  Germany484  Hungary480  Poland479  Greece474  Portugal470  Luxembourg441  Mexico422 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27.

 Finland544
 South Korea542
 Netherlands538
 Japan534
 Canada532
 Belgium529
 Switzerland527
 Australia524
 New Zealand523
 Czech Republic516
 Iceland515
 Denmark514
 France511
 Sweden503
 Austria506
 Germany503
 Ireland503
 Slovakia498
 Norway495
 Luxembourg493
 Poland490
 Hungary490
 Spain485
 United States483
 Italy466
 Portugal466
 Greece445
 Turkey423
 Mexico385

1.
2.	3.	4.	5.	6.	7.	8.	9.	10.	11.	12.	13.	14.	15.	16.	17.	18.	19.	20.	21.	22.	23.	24.	25.	26.	27.	28.	29.

 

 Finland563
 Canada534
 Japan531
 New Zealand530
 Australia527
 Netherlands525
 South Korea522
 Germany516
 United Kingdom515
 Czech Republic513
 Switzerland512
 Austria511
 Belgium510
 Ireland508
 Hungary504
 Sweden503
 Poland498
 Denmark496
 France495
 Iceland491
 United States489
 Slovakia488
 Spain488
 Norway487
 Luxembourg486
 Italy475
 Portugal474
 Greece473
 Turkey424
 Mexico410

1.
2.	3.	4.	5.	6.	7.	8.	9.	10.	11.	12.	13.	14.	15.	16.	17.	18.	19.	20.	21.	22.	23.	24.	25.	26.	27.	28.	29.	30.

 

 

 

[edit] 2006

 
SciencesReading

Programme for International Student Assessment (2006) (OECD member countries in boldface)
Maths	Taiwan549  Finland548  Hong Kong547  South Korea547  Netherlands531  Switzerland530  Canada527  Macau525  Liechtenstein525  Japan523 1. 2. 3. 3. 5. 6. 7. 8. 8. 10.

 Finland563
 Hong Kong542
 Canada534
 Taiwan532
 Estonia531
 Japan531
 New Zealand530
 Australia527
 Netherlands525
 Liechtenstein522

1.
2.	3.	4.	5.	5.	7.	8.	9.	10.

 

 South Korea556
 Finland547
 Hong Kong536
 Canada527
 New Zealand521
 Ireland517
 Australia513
 Liechtenstein510
 Poland508
 Sweden507

1.
2.	3.	4.	5.	6.	7.	8.	9.	10.

 

Top 10 countries for Pisa 2006 results in Math, Sciences and Reading.

 

[edit] 2009

 
SciencesReading

Programme for International Student Assessment (2009)[8] (OECD members as of the time of the study in boldface)

Maths

Shanghai, China 600  Singapore562  Hong Kong, China555  South Korea546  Taiwan543  Finland541  Liechtenstein536  Switzerland534  Japan529  Canada527  Netherlands526  Macau, China525  New Zealand519  Belgium515  Australia514  Germany513  Estonia512  Iceland507  Denmark503  Slovenia501  Norway498  France497  Slovakia497  Austria496  Poland495  Sweden494  Czech Republic493  United Kingdom492  Hungary490  United States487  Kyrgyzstan331 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. : 65.

 

Shanghai, China

575

 Finland554
 Hong Kong, China549
 Singapore542
 Japan539
 South Korea538
 New Zealand532
 Canada529
 Estonia528
 Australia527
 Netherlands522
 Liechtenstein520
 Germany520
 Taiwan520
 Switzerland517
 United Kingdom514
 Slovenia512
 Macau, China511
 Poland508
 Ireland508
 Belgium507
 Hungary503
 United States502
 Norway500
 Czech Republic500
 Denmark499
 France498
 Iceland496
 Sweden495
 Latvia494

 Kyrgyzstan330

1.
2.	3.	4.	5.	6.	7.	8.	9.	10.	11.	12.	13.	14.	15.	16.	17.	18.	19.	20.	21.	22.	23.	24.	25.	26.	27.	28.	29.	30.	:	65.

 

 

Shanghai, China

556

 South Korea539
 Finland536
 Hong Kong, China533
 Singapore526
 Canada524
 New Zealand521
 Japan520
 Australia515
 Netherlands508
 Belgium506
 Norway503
 Estonia501
 Switzerland501
 Poland500
 Iceland500
 United States500
 Liechtenstein499
 Sweden497
 Germany497
 Ireland496
 France496
 Taiwan495
 Denmark495
 United Kingdom494
 Hungary494
 Portugal489
 Macau, China487
 Italy486
 Latvia484

 Kyrgyzstan314

1.
2.	3.	4.	5.	6.	7.	8.	9.	10.	11.	12.	13.	14.	15.	16.	17.	18.	19.	20.	21.	22.	23.	24.	25.	26.	27.	28.	29.	30.	:	65

 

Top 30 countries for Pisa 2009 results in Math, Sciences and Reading. For a complete list, see reference.

 

[edit] Comparison with other studies

The correlation between PISA 2003 and TIMSS 2003 grade 8 country means is 0.84 in mathematics, 0.95 in science. The values go down to 0.66 and 0.79 if the two worst performing developing countries are excluded. Correlations between different scales and studies are around 0.80. The high correlations between different scales and studies indicate common causes of country differences (e.g. educational quality, culture, wealth or genes) or a homogenous underlying factor of cognitive competence. Western countries perform slightly better in PISA; Eastern European and Asian countries in TIMSS. Content balance and years of schooling explain most of the variation.^[9]

 

[edit] Topical studies

An evaluation of the 2003 results showed that countries that spent more on education did not necessarily do better. Australia, Belgium, Canada, the Czech Republic, Finland, Japan, South Korea, New Zealand and the Netherlands spent less but did relatively well, whereas the United States spent much more but was below the OECD average. The Czech Republic, in the top ten, spent only one third as much per student as the United States did, for example, but the USA came 24th out of 29 countries compared.

Another point made in the evaluation was that students with higher-earning parents are better-educated and tend to achieve higher results. This was true in all the countries tested, although more obvious in certain countries, such as Germany.

It has been suggested that the Finnish language plays an important part in Finland’s PISA success.^[10]

International testing, including both PISA and TIMSS, has been a central part of many recent analyses of how cognitive skills relate to economic outcomes. These studies consider both individual earnings and aggregate growth differences of nations.^[11]

In 2010, the 2009 Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) results revealed that Shanghai students scored the highest in the world in every category (Math, Reading and Science), stunned educators. The OECD described Shanghai as a pioneer of educational reform, noting that “there has been a sea change in pedagogy”. OECD point out that they “abandoned their focus on educating a small elite, and instead worked to construct a more inclusive system. They also significantly increased teacher pay and training, reducing the emphasis on rote learning and focusing classroom activities on problem solving.”^[12]

 

[edit] Reception

For many countries, the first PISA results were surprising; in Germany and the United States, for example, the comparatively low scores brought on heated debate about how the school system should be changed.^{[citation needed]} Some headlines in national newspapers, for example, were:

• • “La France, élève moyen de la classe OCDE” (France, average student of the OECD class) Le Monde, December 5, 2001

 

• “Miserable Noten für deutsche Schüler” (Abysmal marks for German students) Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, December 4, 2001

 

 

• “Are we not such dunces after all?” The Times, United Kingdom, December 6, 2001

 

 

• “Economic Time Bomb: U.S. Teens Are Among Worst at Math” Wall Street Journal December 7, 2004

 

 

• “Preocupe-se. Seu filho é mal educado.” (Be worried. Your child is badly educated.) Veja November 7, 2007

 

 

• “La educación española retrocede” (Spanish education moving backwards) El País December 5, 2007

 

 

• “Finnish teens score high marks in latest PISA study” Helsingin Sanomat November 30, 2007

 

 

The results from PISA 2003 and PISA 2006 were featured in the 2010 documentary Waiting for “Superman”.^[13]

 

[edit] Research on causes of country differences

PISA, TIMSS and PIRLS, their organizers and researchers, are restrained in giving reasons for the large and stable country differences. Cautiously they leave this task to other researchers, especially from the economic sciences and psychology. Economic researchers studied single educational policy factors like central exams (John Bishop),^[14] private schools or streaming between schools at later age (Hanushek/Woessman).^[15] An extensive literature related to cross-countries difference in scores has developed since 2000.^[16]

The stably good results of Finland have attracted a lot of attention. According to Hannu Simola^[17] not attributes of the educational system are relevant for these remarkable results, but high discipline of students, high teacher status (attracting good students to the teaching profession), high quality of teachers due to professional teacher education, conservative direct instruction (“teaching ex cathedra”, “pedagogical conservatism”), low rates of immigrants, fast diagnosis of learning problems and treatment of them including special schools, and a culture of a small border country (as Singapore and Taiwan), knowing that the people could survive only with effort.

Systematic analyses across different paradigms (culture, genes, wealth, educational policies) for 78 countries were presented by Heiner Rindermann and Stephen Ceci^[18]: They report positive relationships between student ability and educational levels of adults, amount and rate of preschool education, discipline, quantity of institutionalized education, attendance at additional schools, early tracking and the use of central exams and tests. Rather negative relationships were found with high repetition rates, late school enrollment and large class sizes. In their opinion the results suggest that international differences in cognitive competence could be narrowed by reforms in educational policy.

 

[edit] Criticism

Results from the three domains are closely correlated. Performing a factor analysis or a principal components analysis, one could easily construct an overall achievement scale and deduce a domain-independent country ranking. Such analysis, however, is not undertaken in the official reports—most likely to avoid PISA being interpreted as an intelligence test, which some claim it actually is.^[19]

Lynn and Meisenberg (2010) found very high correlations (r>0.90) between mean student assessment results from PISA, TIMSS, PIRLS and others and IQ measurements at the country data level.^[20]

 

[edit] Luxembourg

Criticism has ensued in Luxembourg, which scored quite low, over the method used in its PISA test. Although being a trilingual country, the test was not allowed to be done in Luxembourgish, the mother tongue of a majority of students.

 

[edit] Portugal

According to the OECD‘s Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), the average Portuguese 15-years old student was for many years underrated and underachieving in terms of reading literacy, mathematics and science knowledge in the OECD, nearly tied with the Italian and just above those from countries like Greece, Turkey and Mexico. However, since 2010, PISA results for Portuguese students improved dramatically. The Portuguese Ministry of Education announced a 2010 report published by its office for educational evaluation GAVE (Gabinete de Avaliação do Ministério da Educação) which criticized the results of PISA 2009 report and claimed that the average Portuguese teenage student had profund handicaps in terms of expression, communication and logic, as well as a low performance when asked to solve problems. They also claimed that those fallacies are not exclusive of Portugal but indeed occur in other countries due to the way PISA was designed.^[21]

 

[edit] United States

Critics say that low performance in the United States is closely related to American poverty.^[22][23] It’s also shown that when adjusted for poverty, the richest areas in the US outperform every other country’s average scores, especially areas with less than 10% poverty (and even areas with 10% to 25% poverty outperform countries with similar rates).^[23] In essence, the criticism isn’t so much directly against the Programme for International Student Assessment itself, but against people who use PISA data uncritically to justify measures such as Charter schools.^[24]

It should be noted that the adjustment for poverty levels in the US done by “PISA: It’s Poverty Not Stupid”, was not similarly done for the other countries it was comparing. Therefore, this adjustment is comparing the averages of the other countries with the areas of 10% to 25% poverty levels in America.

 

[edit] See also

• • Teaching And Learning International Survey (TALIS)

 

• Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS)

 

 

 

[edit] References

1. 1. ^ Official PISA site data. For list See “Executive Summary”

 

• ^ Chapter 2 of the publication “PISA 2003 Assessment Framework”, pdf

 

 

• ^ http://www.oecd.org/document/34/0,3343,en_2649_35845621_44949730_1_1_1_1,00.html

 

 

• ^ C. Füller: Pisa hat einen kleinen, fröhlichen Bruder. taz, 5.12.2007 [1]

 

 

• ^ The scaling procedure is described in nearly identical terms in the Technical Reports of PISA 2000, 2003, 2006. It is similar to procedures employed in NAEP and TIMSS. According to J. Wuttke Die Insignifikanz signifikanter Unterschiede. (2007, in German), the description in the Technical Reports is incomplete and plagued by notational errors.

 

 

• ^ OECD (2001) p. 53; OECD (2004a) p. 92; OECD (2007) p. 56.

 

 

• ^ E.g. OECD (2001), chapters 7 and 8: Influence of school organization and socio-economic background upon performance in the reading test. Reading was the main domain of PISA 2000.

 

 

• ^ Official PISA site data. For list See “Executive Summary”

 

 

• ^ M. L. Wu: A Comparison of PISA and TIMSS 2003 achievement results in Mathematics. Paper presented at the AERA Annual Meeting, New York, March, 2008. [2].

 

 

• ^ Why does Finnish give better PISA results?

 

 

• ^ Eric A. Hanushek, and Ludger Woessmann. 2008. “The role of cognitive skills in economic development.” Journal of Economic Literature 46, no. 3 (September): 607-668.

 

 

• ^ Peter Gumbel (Paris). “China Beats Out Finland for Top Marks in Education”. TIME. http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2035586,00.html#ixzz17XACd2S2. 

 

 

• ^
  “Waiting for “Superman” trailer”

  .

  . Retrieved October 8, 2010

  . 

 

 

• ^ Bishop, J. H. (1997). The effect of national standards and curriculum-based exams on achievement. American Economic Review, 87, 260-264.

 

 

• ^ Hanushek, E. A. & Woessmann, L. (2006). Does educational tracking affect performance and inequality? Differences-in-differences evidence across countries. Economic Journal, 116, C63-C76.

 

 

• ^ Hanushek, Eric A., and Ludger Woessmann. 2011. “The economics of international differences in educational achievement.” In Handbook of the Economics of Education, Vol. 3, edited by Eric A. Hanushek, Stephen Machin, and Ludger Woessmann. Amsterdam: North Holland: 89-200.

 

 

• ^ Simola, H. (2005). The Finnish miracle of PISA: Historical and sociological remarks on teaching and teacher education. Comparative Education, 41, 455-470.

 

 

• ^ Rindermann, H. & Ceci, S. J. (2009). Educational policy and country outcomes in international cognitive competence studies. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4, 551-577.

 

 

• ^ H. Rindermann: The g-factor of international cognitive ability comparisons: The homogeneity of results in PISA, TIMSS, PIRLS and IQ-tests across nations. European Journal of Personality, 21, 667-706 (2007) [3].

 

 

• ^ Lynn, R. & Meisenberg, G. (2010). National IQs calculated and validated for 108 nations. Intelligence, 38, 353-360.

 

 

• ^ (Portuguese) Estudo do ministério aponta graves problemas aos alunos portugueses, GAVE (Gabinete de Avaliação do Ministério da Educação) 2010 report in RTP

 

 

• ^ “The Economics Behind International Education Rankings” National Educational Association

 

 

• ^ ^{a b} “PISA: It’s Poverty Not Stupid” National Association of Secondary School Principals

 

 

• ^ Joanne Barkan. “Got Dough? How Billionaires Rule Our Schools”. Dissent magazine (winter 2011). http://dissentmagazine.org/article/?article=3781. Retrieved January 28, 2011. 

 

 

 

[edit] Further reading

 

[edit] Official websites and reports

• • OECD/PISA website (Javascript required)
    • • OECD (1999): Measuring Student Knowledge and Skills. A New Framework for Assessment. Paris: OECD, ISBN 92-64-17053-7 [4]

     

  • OECD (2001): Knowledge and Skills for Life. First Results from the OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) 2000.
  • OECD (2003a): The PISA 2003 Assessment Framework. Mathematics, Reading, Science and Problem Solving Knowledge and Skills. Paris: OECD, ISBN 978-92-64-10172-2 [5]
  • OECD (2004a): Learning for Tomorrow’s World. First Results from PISA 2003. Paris: OECD, ISBN 978-92-64-00724-6 [6]
  • OECD (2004b): Problem Solving for Tomorrow’s World. First Measures of Cross-Curricular Competencies from PISA 2003. Paris: OECD, ISBN 978-92-64-00642-3
  • OECD (2005): PISA 2003 Technical Report. Paris: OECD, ISBN 978-92-64-01053-6
  • OECD (2007): Science Competencies for Tomorrow’s World: Results from PISA 2006 [7]

 

 

[edit] About reception and political consequences

• • General:
    • • A. P. Jakobi, K. Martens: Diffusion durch internationale Organisationen: Die Bildungspolitik der OECD. In: K. Holzinger, H. Jörgens, C. Knill: Transfer, Diffusion und Konvergenz von Politiken. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, 2007.

     

     

 

• • France:
    • • N. Mons, X. Pons: The reception and use of Pisa in France.

     

     

 

• Germany:
  • • E. Bulmahn [then federal secretary of education]: PISA: the consequences for Germany. OECD observer, no. 231/232, May 2002. pp. 33–34.

   

• H. Ertl: Educational Standards and the Changing Discourse on Education: The Reception and Consequences of the PISA Study in Germany. Oxford Review of Education, v32 n5 p619-634 Nov 2006.

 

 

• United Kingdom:
  • • S. Grek, M. Lawn, J. Ozga: Study on the Use and Circulation of PISA in Scotland. [8]

   

   

 

 

 

[edit] Criticism

• • Books:
    • • S. Hopmann, G. Brinek, M. Retzl (eds.): PISA zufolge PISA. PISA According to PISA. LIT-Verlag, Wien 2007, ISBN 3-8258-0946-3 (partly in German, partly in English)

     

  • T. Jahnke, W. Meyerhöfer (eds.): PISA & Co – Kritik eines Programms. Franzbecker, Hildesheim 2007 (2nd edn.), ISBN 978-3-88120-464-4 (in German)
  • R. Münch: Globale Eliten, lokale Autoritäten: Bildung und Wissenschaft unter dem Regime von PISA, McKinsey & Co. Frankfurt am Main : Suhrkamp, 2009. ISBN 9783518125601 (in German)

 

• Websites:
  • • J . Wuttke: Critical online bibliography

   

   

 

 

 

Population (density · graphical · growth · past and future · per unit area of arable land · urban) · Age at first marriage · Birth rate · Natural increase · Death rate · Divorce rate · Fertility · Immigrants · Life expectancy · Median age · Net migration · Sex ratio · Urbanization   Antivirals · HIV/AIDS · Health expenditure · Infant mortality · Suicides (OECD) · Undernourishment   Education Index · Innovation  · Literacy · Patents · Student performance   Billionaires · Millionaires · Charity · Employment · Gender Gap · Income equality · Labour force · Per capita income · Poverty · Human Poverty Index · Unemployment · Welfare   English speakers · Human Development Index (HDI)   [hide]v · d · eLists of countries by population statistics Demographics Health Intellect and education Economic Other Lists of countries · Lists by country · List of international rankings · List of top international rankings by country

Retrieved from “http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programme_for_International_Student_Assessment“

Categories: Educational organizations

Hidden categories: All articles with unsourced statements | Articles with unsourced statements from September 2009

 

My book Social Marketing to the Business Customer with co-author Eric Schwartzman was released last month and is now available through Amazon, Barnes & Noble, Borders and other booksellers.  It’s the first book devoted exclusively to B2B social media, and the most comprehensive collection of best practices and case studies currently available in print.

B2B is hot topic these days as marketers look for applied wisdom and operational frameworks to help them integrate social media into their existing organizational outreach efforts.  Everyone seems to be interested in the concept of using social media to reach a focused, select group of individuals. If social media for business is on your mind lately, consider picking up a copy of the book, or downloading one of our B2B social media podcasts which we’ve been releasing over the last couple of weeks through On the Record…Online.

If you’re looking for speakers to address the subject of social media for business at your next conference or event, both Eric and I are waiving our fees now through June 1, 2011 with bulk book purchases of 200 of more copies. So if you’d like to have Eric or me present on B2B social media at your company or conference, we’ll speak and autograph your 200 copies in person.

Some of the topics we can address include:

• Building the Business Case for B2B Social Marketing
• Generating Qualified B2B Leads with Social Media
• How the B2B/B2C Difference Applies to Social Media Strategy
• Current and Future B2B Social Marketing Trends
• Or challenge us with some aspect of social media specific to your interest

If you’re interested in having me present, please check my online calendar first. Note that I will be unavailable for personal reasons (expecting twins any day now!) through about the end of April, but any speaking engagements booked before June 1 qualify for this offer. Or if you’d like to have Eric speak your group, you can check his online calendar as well. We’d both be honored to talk your group about B2B social marketing specifically, or social media marketing in general. It’s a topic about which we are very passionate.

We look forward to hearing from you! Contact me at paul [at] gillin [dot] com.

ShareThis

This entry was posted on Tuesday, February 22nd, 2011 at 10:12 am and is filed under B-to-B, book, events. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Category

• Animals
• Arts & Culture
• Education
  

  • College and University
  • Elementary and Secondary
  • Libraries
  • Research Institutes
  • Service and Other
  • Vocational Technical and Adult

• Environment
• Health
• Human Services
• International
• Political Campaigns
• Public Advocacy
• Religion

Can’t find a cause?

Start one yourself!

Like puzzles? Solve this problem to catch our attention! Be sure to follow the instructions exactly.

Two words are friends if they have a Levenshtein distance
of 1. That is, you can add, remove, or substitute exactly one letter in word X to create word Y. A word’s social network 
consists of all of its friends, plus all of their friends, and all of their friends’ friends, and so on. Write a program
to tell us how big the social network for the word “causes” is, using this word list. Have fun!

Include your answer, along with your thought process,
notes, and any code along with your resume.

The Team

Dustin Moskovitz is the co-founder of Facebook and was a key leader within the technical staff, first in the position of CTO and then later as VP of Engineering. Dustin attended Harvard University as an Economics major for two years before moving to Palo Alto, California to work full-time at Facebook.

Justin Rosenstein last worked at Facebook as a tech lead and engineering manager on projects from presence solutions for businesses to back-end site-performance to front-end abstractions. Prior to that, he was a product manager at Google for three years, leading projects in Google’s communication and collaboration division. Before that, he majored in math and got part way through a master’s in computer science at Stanford.

Malcolm Handley worked at Google on Android, focusing on its support for syncing data with the Internet, after working on Google Earth and Mobile Maps. Prior to that he studied computer science in New Zealand and then worked at There.com.

Greg Slovacek worked at Google on vertical search experiences within Calendar and Maps, in addition to working on Flu Trends and the accounts system. He was previously an engineer at There.com and studied computer science at Brown University.

Jerry Phillips is Asana’s first non-technical hire; she wears many hats including office manager, user operations rep, and part-time muse. Jerry brings comfort, creativity, and efficiency to Asana’s physical and intellectual spaces, leveraging her long-standing passion for environment creation and degree in Psychology from Stanford University.

Jack Stahl worked on the Data Team at Yelp, where his favorite project was Review Highlights. He’s one of Asana’s many math majors and handful of Stanford alums. Jack’s ♥ for organizations extends beyond the Asana family to his Asana-powered co-op household and Burning Man camp.

Avital Oliver worked in a great variety of environments since he started coding as a child, including a large-scale re-implementation of the Israeli Air Force tactical information system. As a life-long lover of mathematics, he founded the School of Mathematics in Brooklyn, an environment where anyone can study, discuss, explore and experience mathematics. He holds a bachelor’s in computer science and a master’s in mathematics.

Kris Rasmussen most recently was the chief architect at Aptana where he led engineering and product efforts on a new set of developer services. He is also the co-founder of Rivalmap, an enterprise collaboration company, and has worked for a number of other software companies in leadership and engineering roles including Microsoft. Kris studied computer science and math at UCLA.

Stephanie Hornung has over 7 years experience
in User Experience Design in both freelance and startup
environments, with an expertise in user interface, graphic design
and illustration. She has a bachelor’s from University of Michigan
and a master’s of Information from UC Berkeley.

Theresa Singh joined Asana as the first in-house recruiter. As a talent strategist for early stage tech startups, she ran her own recruiting firm for several years before joining Asana. Previously, she worked for the Science & Innovation Network of the UK Government and Institute of International Education on programs ranging from climate change policy to computer literacy for women in the Middle East. She holds a BA in Post Colonial Literature from Mills College.

Donnie Thompson is Asana’s chef who has a passion for food and strives to use organic, local, and seasonal ingredients whenever cooking. He has spent time honing his culinary skills at luxury restaurants and resorts in San Diego, Alaska and most recently in Lake Tahoe. He is a classically trained chef earning his degree in culinary arts from the International Culinary Institute of California, San Diego.

S. Alex Smith came to Asana from Facebook. At Facebook, Alex was on the Data Science team and worked primarily on machine learning. Alex holds a Ph.D. in mathematics from UCLA.

Jackie Bavaro is Asana’s product manager. Most recently she worked to improve local searches on Google. Before that she was at Microsoft on the SharePoint team where she worked on collaboration features. Jackie double majored in computer science and economics at Cornell.

David Braginsky joins Asana from Facebook, where he worked on a variety of projects including newsfeed infrastructure, large scale machine learning, and mobile. Prior to Facebook, he worked as a software engineer and tech-lead at Google, as well as numerous startups. He studied computer science at UCLA and Stanford.

Kenny Van Zant was the SVP and Chief Product Strategist for SolarWinds (NYSE: SWI), where he helped pioneer the bottom-up model for selling software and SaaS into enterprises and SMBs. Previously, Kenny was EVP of Marketing and GM of Communications for Motive (NASD: MOTV), and the co-founder of BroadJump (acquired by Motive), which he led to $60M in revenue and 350 employees within 3 years. Kenny has a BS in Electrical and Computer Engineering from UT Austin.

Board and Advisors

Aditya Agarwal is a Director of Engineering at Facebook, where
he helps oversee the engineering team, new product design, and
architecture. As an early Facebook engineer, he wrote the initial
Facebook Search Engine and co-authored popular
open-source RPC framework Thrift. Prior to Facebook, Aditya worked on self-healing
databases at Oracle. Aditya holds master’s and bachelor’s degrees in Computer Science from
Carnegie Mellon University.

Marc Andreessen is
one of the few to pioneer a software category used by over a billion
people, and one of the few to co-found two billion-dollar companies.
Marc co-created the highly influential Mosaic Internet Browser,
co-founded Netscape, served as AOL’s Chief Technology Officer, and co-founded Opsware
(formerly Loudcloud). Marc currently co-chairs the board of Ning and sits on the boards of Facebook and eBay.

Matt Cohler is a General Partner at Benchmark. Matt was one of Facebook’s first five employees and served most recently as VP of Product Management, helping drive strategy, organizational growth and product direction. Before that, Matt served as VP, general manager, and founding-team member at LinkedIn; was a consultant at McKinsey; and worked in Beijing for AsiaInfo,the telecom provider that built China’s Internet infrastructure.

Ronald Conway was recently named #6 in the Forbes Magazine Midas List of top deal-makers. He founded the Angel Investors LP funds whose investments included: Google, Ask Jeeves, Paypal, Good Technology, and Opsware. Ron co-founded Altos Computer Systems and took it public in 1982. Ron has served/serves on Boards/Advisory Boards including: Plaxo, Photobucket, Digg, Ask Jeeves, Facebook, Zappos, and StumbleUpon.

Adam D’Angelo was previously VP Engineering & CTO at Facebook, and is now a founder of Quora. He has a BS in Computer Science from Caltech.

Joe Green is the co-founder and president of Causes, the largest online platform for activism, with over 70 million users on Facebook and MySpace. Previously, Joe founded Essembly, and served as a grassroots political organizer for federal, state, and local campaigns. Joe graduated from Harvard in 2006 with a degree in Social Studies.

Ben Horowitz is best known for co-founding and running, as its President and Chief Executive Officer, Opsware Inc. In 2007, he sold Opsware to Hewlett-Packard for $1.6 billion in cash. Following Opsware, Horowitz spent one year at Hewlett-Packard as Vice President and General Manager in HP Software. Prior to Opsware, he was one of Netscape’s first product managers and served as Vice President of AOL’s eCommerce Division.

David Jeske is formerly an Engineering Director at Google and co-founder of email support CRM startup Neotonic, acquired by Google in 2004. David has managed two top-100 websites, Yahoo Groups and orkut.com, focusing on Internet scalability, reliability, and performance. He has 15 years experience in software engineering, management, and technical direction.

Mitch Kapor is the founder of Lotus and
designer of Lotus 1-2-3, the “killer app” often credited with making the
personal computer ubiquitous in the business world.
Mitch has also been involved in the
EFF (co-founder), Real Networks (founding investor),
the Mozilla Foundation (founding Chair), Linden Research (founding
investor, Board Chair), and UUNET (founding investor),
the first successful independent commercial ISP.

Sean Parker is a partner at Founders Fund and an entrepreneur with a
record of launching genre-defining companies. At age 19, Sean
co-founded Napster and changed how people think about
and share music. In 2001, Sean co-founded Plaxo and served as president
until 2004. Sean helped Mark Zuckerberg launch Facebook and served as founding president from 2004-2005. Sean’s latest success is Causes.

Eric Ries is the creator of the Lean Startup methodology and the author of the popular entrepreneurship blog Startup Lessons Learned. He previously co-founded and served as Chief Technology Officer of IMVU. In 2007, BusinessWeek named Ries one of the Best Young Entrepreneurs of Tech and in 2009 he was honored with a TechFellow award in the category of Engineering Leadership. He serves on the advisory board of a number of technology startups, and has worked as a consultant to a number of startups, companies, and venture capital firms.

Jed Stremel was previously the Director of Mobile at Facebook, where he joined in 2005 as the founding member of the mobile team. Today, Facebook now approaches 100M active users on mobile. His ten years of operating experience also includes mobile roles at Yahoo and Tellme. He is now an investor in early stage companies.

Peter Thiel is a partner at Founders Fund, through which he helps launch many new ventures. He is also president of Clarium, a global macro hedge fund, the founder and chairman of Palantir Technologies, a national security software firm, and a founding investor and board member of Facebook, which serves more than 250 million active users. Previously, he was founder and CEO of PayPal, which manages more than 175 million financial accounts.

Owen Van Natta is the former CEO of MySpace, CEO of Project Playlist, a music sharing website, Chief Revenue Officer and VP of Operations at Facebook, Vice President of Worldwide Business and Corporate Development at Amazon.com, and was a founding member of the A9.com team. Owen holds a bachelor’s degree from the University of California at Santa Cruz.

About

Asana is an effort to reimagine the way people manage information, a new kind of
software product built for the Web from the ground up. With a focus on speed,
collaboration, and ease of use, it radically improves the way groups of people
work together.

Our team is comprised of engineering and thought leaders from Facebook and
Google. A key
strategy contributing to these companies’ success has been the development of
internal software solutions to increase the efficiency of the people who develop
the products. While working at these companies, we split our efforts between
building the products used by hundreds of millions of people and the internal
systems which enabled our teams to do so quickly, collaboratively, and
enjoyably.

We founded Asana to dedicate our attention full-time to developing a
beautifully intuitive collaborative information manager which can help any
company work more efficiently. Our system speeds up
knowledge work and communication by minimizing the time leaders
spend trying to keep everyone on the same page and the time that knowledge
workers sink into struggling with disparate tools to do their jobs.

We’re currently mobilizing a team of world-class peers. Our expansion is
sponsored by our recent $9 million round of funding led by Benchmark Capital and
Andreessen-Horowitz. We have already begun reaping the benefits of these two
firms, which have tremendous experience and wisdom in building companies and
helping entrepreneurs succeed.

Values

• Reason
• Action in the face of fear
• Mindfulness & balance
• Honesty & transparency (internally and externally)
• Leverage
• Pragmatism
• Craftsmanship
• Chill-ness
• Being a mensch
• Company as collective of peers (vs. command-and-control
  hierarchy)
• Investing in people
• Perseverance
• Admitting when you’re wrong
• Diving in and fixing problems, even if they’re not yours
• Intellectualism
• 
  Trust in wisdom over rules and incentives