PISA 2012: How do results for the paper and computer tests compare?

The Programme for International Assessment (PISA) is an important cross-national study of 15-year olds academic achievement. Although it has traditionally been conducted using paper-and-pencil tests, the vast majority of countries will use computer-based assessment from 2015. In this paper, we consider how cross-country comparisons of children’s skills differ between paper and computer versions of the PISA mathematics test. Using data from PISA 2012, where more than 200,000 children from 32 economies completed both paper and computer versions of the mathematics assessment, we find important and interesting differences between the two sets of results. This includes a substantial drop of more than 50 PISA test points (half a standard deviation) in the average performance of children from Shanghai-China. Moreover, by considering children’s responses to particular test items, we show how differences are unlikely to be solely due to the interactive nature of certain computer test questions. The paper concludes with a discussion of what the findings imply for interpretation of PISA results in 2015 and beyond

Inequity and Excellence in Academic Performance: Evidence From 27 Countries

Research suggests that a country does not need inequity to have high performance. However, such research has potentially suffered from confounders present in between-country comparative research (e.g., latent cultural differences). Likewise, relatively little consideration has been given to whether the situation may be different for high- or low-performing students. Using five cycles of the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) database, the current research explores within-country trajectories in achievement and inequality measures to test the hypothesis of an excellence/equity tradeoff in academic performance. We found negative relations between performance and inequality that are robust and of statistical and practical significance. Follow-up analysis suggests a focus on low and average performers may be critical to successful policy interventions

The link between family background and later lifetime income: how does the UK compare to other countries?

The link between family background and labour market outcomes is an issue of great academic, social and political concern. It is frequently claimed that such intergenerational associations are stronger in Britain than in other countries. But is this really true? I investigate this issue by estimating the link between parental education and later lifetime income, using three cross-nationally comparable data sets covering more than 30 countries. My results suggest that the UK is broadly in the middle of the cross-country rankings, with intergenerational associations notably stronger than in Scandinavia but weaker than in eastern Europe. Overall, I find limited support for claims that family background is a greater barrier to economic success in Britain than in other parts of the developed world

Benchmarking London in the PISA rankings

The Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) is an important international study of 15-year-olds' academic achievement. Although PISA has traditionally been used to draw comparisons across countries, there is growing interest in the production of regional (i.e. city, state, or provincial level) results. In this paper we present the first attempt to benchmark London in the PISA rankings. Pooling data across the 2009 and 2012 survey waves, we estimated a 95 per cent confidence interval for London's mathematics, reading, and science PISA scores. These are compared not only to country-level averages, but also to the scores of other major world cities and states. The paper concludes by discussing how these results should be interpreted, and possible directions for future research

The link between East Asian ‘mastery’ teaching methods and English children’s mathematics skills

A small group of high-performing East Asian economies dominate the top of the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) rankings. Although there are many possible explanations for this, East Asian teaching methods and curriculum design are two factors to have particularly caught policymakers’ attention. Yet there is currently little evidence as to whether any particular East Asian teaching method actually represents an improvement over the status quo in England, and whether such methods can be successfully introduced into Western education systems. This paper provides new evidence on this issue by presenting results from two clustered Randomised Controlled Trials (RCT’s), where a Singaporean inspired ‘mastery’ approach to teaching mathematics was introduced into a selection of England’s primary and secondary schools. We find evidence of a modest, positive treatment effect that comes at a relatively low per-pupil cost

How much progress do children in Shanghai make over one academic year? Evidence from PISA

Since its entry into the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) in 2009, the Chinese province of Shanghai has been the top-performing economy within these international rankings. Many have interpreted this as demonstrating how Shanghai has a “world class” education system, the most effective teaching methods, and the best schools. This article questions such interpretations of the PISA results. Specifically, we argue that statements about school and school system quality require information on the progress that children make during their time at school, which the PISA rankings do not provide (at least not directly). Our empirical analysis then uses a “fuzzy” regression discontinuity design approach to demonstrate how a rather different perspective of Shanghai’s performance in PISA emerges once pupils’ academic progress over one particular school year is considered. Our key finding is that the first year of upper secondary school in Shanghai adds essentially no value (on average) to children’s PISA reading, science, and mathematics test scores

Private Schooling, Educational Transitions, and Early Labour Market Outcomes: Evidence from Three Anglophone Countries

This article considers the extent to which private-state school differences in post-secondary outcomes can be explained by family background, secondary school achievement, or neither of the above. We find that privately educated children’s more advantaged family backgrounds and higher levels of school achievement are the main reasons why this group is more likely to enter university and work in professional jobs. However, even after accounting for family background and high school achievement, non-trivial private-state school differences in later lifetime outcomes remain. Empirical evidence is presented for three industrialized nations (Australia, England, and the United States), with broadly similar patterns of association observed within each

Families’ roles in children’s literacy in the UK throughout the 20th century

This paper explores the changing roles of families in children’s developing literacy in the UK in the last century. It discusses how, during this time, understandings of reading and writing have evolved into the more nuanced notion of literacy. Further, in acknowledging changes in written communication practices, and shifting attitudes to reading and writ- ing, the paper sketches out how families have always played some part in the literacy of younger generations; though reading was frequently integral to the lives of many families throughout the past century, we consider in particular the more recent enhancement of children’s literacy through targeted family programmes. The paper considers policy implications for promoting young children’s literacy through work with families

Gender Differences in Early Reading Strategies: a Comparison of Synthetic Phonics Only with a Mixed Approach to Teaching Reading to 4-5 Year-Old Children

A survey of primary schools in England found that girls outperform boys in English across all phases (Ofsted in Moving English forward. Ofsted, Manchester, 2012). The gender gap remains an on-going issue in England, especially for reading attainment. This paper presents evidence of gender differences in learning to read that emerged during the development of a reading scheme for 4- and 5-year-old children in which 372 children from Reception classes in sixteen schools participated in 12-month trials. There were three arms per trial: Intervention non-PD (non-phonically decodable text with mixed methods teaching); Intervention PD (phonically decodable text with mixed methods teaching); and a ‘business as usual’ control condition SP (synthetic phonics and decodable text). Assignment to Intervention condition was randomised. Standardised measures of word reading and comprehension were used. The research provides statistically significant evidence suggesting that boys learn more easily using a mix of whole-word and synthetic phonics approaches. In addition, the evidence indicates that boys learn to read more easily using the natural-style language of ‘real’ books including vocabulary which goes beyond their assumed decoding ability. At post-test, boys using the nonphonically decodable text with mixed methods (Intervention A) were 8 months ahead in reading comprehension compared to boys using a wholly synthetic phonics approach