The Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) is a triennial international survey which aims to evaluate education systems worldwide by testing the skills and knowledge of 15-year-old students.
In 2015 over half a million students, representing 28 million 15-year-olds in 72 countries and economies, took the internationally agreed two-hour test. Students were assessed in science, mathematics, reading, collaborative problem solving and financial literacy.
The results of the 2015 assessment were published on 6th December 2016.
3. Trends in science performance (PISA)
450
470
490
510
530
550
570
2006 2009 2012 2015
OECD average
4. Poverty is not destiny - Science performance
by international deciles of the PISA index of economic, social and cultural status (ESCS)
280
330
380
430
480
530
580
630
DominicanRepublic40
Algeria52
Kosovo10
Qatar3
FYROM13
Tunisia39
Montenegro11
Jordan21
UnitedArabEmirates3
Georgia19
Lebanon27
Indonesia74
Mexico53
Peru50
CostaRica38
Brazil43
Turkey59
Moldova28
Thailand55
Colombia43
Iceland1
TrinidadandTobago14
Romania20
Israel6
Bulgaria13
Greece13
Russia5
Uruguay39
Chile27
Latvia25
Lithuania12
SlovakRepublic8
Italy15
Norway1
Spain31
Hungary16
Croatia10
Denmark3
OECDaverage12
Sweden3
Malta13
UnitedStates11
Macao(China)22
Ireland5
Austria5
Portugal28
Luxembourg14
HongKong(China)26
CzechRepublic9
Poland16
Australia4
UnitedKingdom5
Canada2
France9
Korea6
NewZealand5
Switzerland8
Netherlands4
Slovenia5
Belgium7
Finland2
Estonia5
VietNam76
Germany7
Japan8
ChineseTaipei12
B-S-J-G(China)52
Singapore11
Scorepoints
Bottom decile Second decile Middle decile Ninth decile Top decile
Figure I.6.7
% of students
in the bottom
international
deciles of
ESCS
OECD median student
5. Students expecting a career in science
Figure I.3.2
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
DominicanRep.12
CostaRica11
Jordan6
UnitedArabEm.11
Mexico6
Colombia8
Lebanon15
Brazil19
Peru7
Qatar19
UnitedStates13
Chile18
Tunisia19
Canada21
Slovenia16
Turkey6
Australia15
UnitedKingdom17
Malaysia4
Kazakhstan14
Spain11
Norway21
Uruguay17
Singapore14
TrinidadandT.13
Israel25
CABA(Arg.)19
Portugal18
Bulgaria25
Ireland13
Kosovo7
Algeria12
Malta11
Greece12
NewZealand24
Albania29
Estonia15
OECDaverage19
Belgium16
Croatia17
FYROM20
Lithuania21
Iceland22
Russia19
HKG(China)20
Romania20
Italy17
Austria23
Moldova7
Latvia19
Montenegro18
France21
Luxembourg18
Poland13
Macao(China)10
ChineseTaipei21
Sweden21
Thailand27
VietNam13
Switzerland22
Korea7
Hungary22
SlovakRepublic24
Japan18
Finland24
Georgia27
CzechRepublic22
B-S-J-G(China)31
Netherlands19
Germany33
Indonesia19
Denmark48
%
Percentage of students who expect to work in science-related professional and
technical occupations when they are 30
Science-related technicians and associate professionals
Information and communication technology professionals
Health professionals
Science and engineering professionals
%ofstudentswithvag
ueormissingexpectati
ons
6. 0
10
20
30
40
50
300 400 500 600 700
Percentageofstudentsexpectinga
careerinscience
Score points in science
Low enjoyment of science
High enjoyment of science
Students expecting a career in science
by performance and enjoyment of learning
Figure I.3.17
7. Singapore
Canada
Slovenia
Australia
United Kingdom
Ireland
Portugal
Chinese Taipei
Hong Kong (China)
New Zealand
Denmark
Japan
Estonia
Finland
Macao (China)
Viet Nam
B-S-J-G (China)
Korea
Germany
Netherlands
Switzerland
Belgium
Poland
Sweden
Lithuania
Croatia
Iceland
Georgia
Malta
United States
Spain
Israel
United Arab Emirates
Brazil
Bulgaria
Chile
Colombia
Costa Rica
Dominican Republic
Jordan
Kosovo
Lebanon
Mexico
Peru
Qatar
Trinidad and Tobago
Tunisia
Turkey
Uruguay
Above-average science
performance
Stronger than average
beliefs in science
Above-average percentage of students expecting
to work in a science-related occupation
Norway
Multipleoutcomes
8. 8 Looking forward to…
Better anticipate the evolution of
the demand for 21st century skills
and better integrate the world of
work and learning
Leverage the potential
of all learners
Find more innovative solutions to
what we learn, how we learn, when
we learn and where we learn
Advance from an industrial towards
a professional work organisation
Building learning
systems that…
9. The kind of things that
are easy to teach are
now easy to automate,
digitize or outsource
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2006 2009
Routine manual
Nonroutine manual
Routine cognitive
Nonroutine analytic
Nonroutine interpersonal
Mean task input in percentiles of 1960 task
16. What knowledge, skills
and character qualities do
successful teachers require?
96% of teachers: My role as a teacher
is to facilitate students own inquiry
17. What knowledge, skills
and character qualities do
successful teachers require?
86%: Students learn best
by findings solutions on their own
18. What knowledge, skills
and character qualities do
successful teachers require?
74%: Thinking and reasoning is more
important than curriculum content
19. Prevalence of memorisation
rehearsal, routine exercises, drill and
practice and/or repetition
-2.00 -1.50 -1.00 -0.50 0.00 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00
Switzerland
Poland
Germany
Japan
Korea
France
Sweden
Shanghai-China
Canada
Singapore
United States
Norway
Spain
Netherlands
United Kingdom
Prevalence of elaboration
reasoning, deep learning, intrinsic
motivation, critical thinking,
creativity, non-routine problems
High Low Low High
20. Learning time and science performance
Figure II.6.23
Finland
Germany Switzerland
Japan Estonia
Sweden
Netherlands
New Zealand
Macao
(China)
Iceland
Hong Kong
(China) Chinese Taipei
Uruguay
Singapore
Poland
United States
Israel
Bulgaria
Korea
Russia Italy
Greece
B-S-J-G (China)
Colombia
Chile
Mexico
Brazil
Costa
Rica
Turkey
Montenegro
Peru
Qatar
Thailand
United
Arab
Emirates
Tunisia
Dominican
Republic
R² = 0.21
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
35 40 45 50 55 60
PISAsciencescore
Total learning time in and outside of school
OECD average
OECD average
OECDaverage
21. Learning time and science performance
Figure II.6.23
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Finland
Germany
Switzerland
Japan
Estonia
Sweden
Netherlands
NewZealand
Australia
CzechRepublic
Macao(China)
UnitedKingdom
Canada
Belgium
France
Norway
Slovenia
Iceland
Luxembourg
Ireland
Latvia
HongKong(China)
OECDaverage
ChineseTaipei
Austria
Portugal
Uruguay
Lithuania
Singapore
Denmark
Hungary
Poland
SlovakRepublic
Spain
Croatia
UnitedStates
Israel
Bulgaria
Korea
Russia
Italy
Greece
B-S-J-G(China)
Colombia
Chile
Mexico
Brazil
CostaRica
Turkey
Montenegro
Peru
Qatar
Thailand
UnitedArabEmirates
Tunisia
DominicanRepublic
Scorepointsinscienceperhouroftotallearningtime
Hours Intended learning time at school (hours) Study time after school (hours) Score points in science per hour of total learning time
22. 23 Teachers’ skills
Numeracy test scores of tertiary graduates and teachers
Numeracy score215 235 255 275 295 315 335 355 375
Spain
Poland
Estonia
United States
Canada
Ireland
Korea
England (UK)
England/N. Ireland (UK)
Denmark
Northern Ireland (UK)
France
Australia
Sweden
Czech Republic
Austria
Netherlands
Norway
Germany
Flanders (Belgium)
Finland
Japan
Numeracy score
Numeracy skills of
middle half of
college graduates
23. 24 Teachers’ skills
Numeracy test scores of tertiary graduates and teachers
Numeracy score215 235 255 275 295 315 335 355 375
Spain
Poland
Estonia
United States
Canada
Ireland
Korea
England (UK)
England/N. Ireland (UK)
Denmark
Northern Ireland (UK)
France
Australia
Sweden
Czech Republic
Austria
Netherlands
Norway
Germany
Flanders (Belgium)
Finland
Japan
Numeracy score
Numeracy skills of
teachers
24. 25 Professional knowledge and expertise in teaching
Behaviour
Cognition
Content
Character
• Effectiveness is evidenced by teacher
behaviour and student learning outcomes
• Teachers as thoughtful, sentient beings,
characterised by intentions, strategies,
decisions and reflections
• The nature and adequacy of teacher
knowledge of the substance of the
curriculum being taught
• The teachers serve as moral agents,
deploying a moral-pedagogical craft
Teacher knowledge of, and sensitivity to, cultural, social and
political contexts and the environments of their students.
25. External forces
exerting pressure and
influence inward on
an occupation
Internal motivation and
efforts of the members
of the profession itself
26 Professionalism
Professionalism is the level of autonomy and
internal regulation exercised by members of an
occupation in providing services to society
26. Policy levers to teacher professionalism
Knowledge base for teaching
(initial education and incentives for
professional development)
Autonomy: Teachers’ decision-
making power over their work
(teaching content, course offerings,
discipline practices)
Peer networks: Opportunities for
exchange and support needed
to maintain high standards of
teaching (participation in induction,
mentoring, networks, feedback from direct
observations)
Teacher
professionalism
27. Teacher professionalism
Knowledge base for teaching
(initial education and incentives for
professional development)
Autonomy: Teachers’ decision-
making power over their work
(teaching content, course offerings,
discipline practices)
Peer networks: Opportunities for
exchange and support needed
to maintain high standards of
teaching (participation in induction,
mentoring, networks, feedback from direct
observations)
28. High Peer Networks/
Low Autonomy
High Autonomy Knowledge Emphasis
Balanced Domains/
High Professionalism
Balanced Domains/
Low Professionalism
Teacher professionalism
31. Teachers Self-Efficacy and Professional Collaboration
11.40
11.60
11.80
12.00
12.20
12.40
12.60
12.80
13.00
13.20
13.40
Never
Onceayearorless
2-4timesayear
5-10timesayear
1-3timesamonth
Onceaweekormore
Teacherself-efficacy(level)
Teach jointly as a
team in the same class
Observe other
teachers’ classes and
provide feedback
Engage in joint
activities across
different classes
Take part in
collaborative
professional learning
Less
frequently
More
frequently
32. Technology can amplify innovative teaching
• As tools for inquiry-
based pedagogies
with learners as
active participants
• Make it faster
and more granular
• Collaborative platforms
for teachers to share and
enrich teaching materials
• Well beyond textbooks, in
multiple formats, with little
time and space constraints
Expand
access to
content
Collaboration
for
knowledge
creation
Support
new
pedagogies
Feedback
33. 450
460
470
480
490
500
510
520
-2 -1 0 1 2
Scorepoints Technology in schools and digital skills still don’t square
Source: Figure 6.5
Relationship between students’ skills in reading and computer use at school (average across OECD countries)
OECD
average
Digital reading
skills of 15-year-
olds
Intensive technology useNo technology use
34. Routine cognitive skills Conceptual understanding, complex ways
of thinking, ways of working
Some students learn at high levels All students need to learn at high levels
Student inclusion
Curriculum, instruction and assessment
Standardisation and compliance High-level professional knowledge workers
Teacher quality
‘Tayloristic’, hierarchical Flat, collegial
Work organisation
Primarily to authorities Primarily to peers and stakeholders
Accountability
What it all means
The old bureaucratic system The modern enabling system
35. 3838Lessonsfromhighperformers
38
38 Thank you
Find out more about our work at www.oecd.org/edu
– All publications
– The complete micro-level database
Email: Andreas.Schleicher@OECD.org
Twitter: SchleicherOECD
and remember: