# data[].attributes.body
The country I wish to cover is France. France is ranked the 20th and 26th average in the reading performance. They scored slightly above the OECD in math and science. They have strong gender stereotypes when it comes to the highest achieving students. One in three boys expect to work as engineers or in a science based profession while only one and six girls are. While only 1 and 4 girls who are high performing are expected to work in health care positions, while one in eight boys are. So there are extreme stereotypes when it comes to jobs in France. Students who are put at an advantage outperformed disadvantaged students by a long shot. They had a difference of about 88 points overall. Something I would like to find out that was not recorded. What is the difference between advantaged vs. disadvantaged students? Does it have to do with money and status or something else? Why are these students receiving a higher level of education than others? Do they have access to more resources?

# data[].attributes.body
For my project, I wish to cover Italy as my country. According to the overall snapshot performance of 15-year-olds in Italy for reading, mathematics, and science, they are all behind the average or barely meeting it for the most part. It seems that in reading and science they tend to be doing below average, whereas for mathematics they seem to meet the average. The most important thing to note is that Italy noticeably scored lower than the OECD average in reading and science.

It is definitely interesting that the schools and grouping/location supplemented separate results each. According to the document, “in reading, Trento and Bolzano scored close to the national average…and scored close to the top-performing European countries.” This segregation of educational success is definitely something I would like to look into further.

I would love to know why the drop in reading is happening despite the fact that “in Italy, 77% of students attained at least Level 2 proficiency in reading (OECD average: 77%).” Relating to this, though, it does seem that the number of high performers is almost half the percentage in Italy than it is in 15 other OECD countries. I see this same trend across all the subjects, noting that they do not have as high a percentage of high-performers as other countries. Relating to this, we can see this in “the 2006-18 period [where] science performance declined most markedly amongst the highest-achieving students.” I would be interested in researching this more and learning why the high performing students are not as high in Italy as they are in other countries.

In terms of what I would like to find out about that isn’t included in the report, I would like to learn more about how low and high performing students being clustered together more than the OECD average affects the learning of the students. Additionally, I would be interested in learning about how the percentage of “fully certified” teachers impacts the schools both in Italy and comparing to the United States.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Country:

-Japan

2. Trends:

-Gender:

-In Japan, boys outperform girls in science by an average of 14 points, above the OECD average difference of 4 points. This gender gap increased by 10 points since 2006.

-Girls outperform boys in reading by an average of 13 points, below the OECD average (27 points). This gender gap shrank by 26 points since 2009, a greater reduction than the OECD average of 12 points.

-Boys in Japan outperform girls in mathematics by an average of 14 points, above the OECD average (8 points)
-Content Focus:

-On average across OECD countries, just over 20% of students do not reach the baseline level of proficiency in science (Level 2). In Japan, only 10% of students are low-performers in science (this share shrank by 2% between 2006 and 2015.

-About 20% of students in OECD countries, on average, do not attain the baseline level of proficiency in reading (Level 2). In Japan, 13% of students perform below Level 2 in reading.

-Around one in ten students is a top performer in mathematics, on average across OECD countries. In Japan, one in five students is a top performer, as was the case in 2003.

3. Key Findings
-Japanese students continue to be strong performers in PISA. With an average score of 538 points in science in PISA 2015, students in Japan are outperformed only by students in Singapore (556), and they perform similarly to students in Estonia and Chinese Taipei. Japanese students’ average reading score (516) is comparable with that of students in Estonia, Germany, Ireland, Korea, New Zealand and Norway; but students in Canada, Finland, Hong Kong (China) and Singapore outperform Japanese students in reading by 10 points or more. Japanese students attain the same mathematics score (532) as students in Beijing-Shanghai-Jiangsu-Guangdong (China) and Korea, but they are outperformed by students in Hong Kong (China), Macao (China), Singapore and Chinese Taipei.

-Across current OECD countries the average science score in 2015 (493) is not significantly different from the score in 2006 (498 points), when science was the main domain assessed. During the same period, Japan’s mean science score remained unchanged (531 points in 2006 and 538 points in 2015)
-The Japanese school system ensures equity in education opportunities (i.e. the relationship between students’ socio-economic status and performance is weaker than the OECD average) and its level of equity has remained stable since 2006.

-Compared with 2006, fewer Japanese students in 2015 reported that they enjoy learning science, but more students reported that learning science is useful for their future plans. Students in Japan reported almost the same level of instrumental motivation to learn science as the OECD average. And while Japanese students in 2015 reported a greater sense of self-efficacy in science than their counterparts in 2006, they are still below the OECD average in this respect.

-Gender gaps in science performance and in students’ attitudes towards science are significant in Japan. Boys outperform girls in science and also have stronger epistemic beliefs and report greater self-efficacy than girls. Japan also shows one of the largest gender gaps favoring boys in both their enjoyment of learning science (intrinsic motivation) and their belief that science is useful for their future careers (instrumental motivation).

-Student truancy is less of a problem in Japan than in other PISA-participating countries/economies. On average across OECD countries, 20% of students reported that they had skipped one day of school or more in the two weeks prior to the PISA test; in Japan, 2% of students so reported.

-While similar shares of boys (19%) and girls (18%) in Japan expect to pursue a career in science (the OECD averages are 25% and 24%, respectively), girls envisage themselves as health professionals more than boys do; and boys see themselves as becoming ICT professionals, scientists or engineers more than girls do, similar to the OECD average
4. I would like to explore the mental health stats of Japanese students and how it relates to performance and socioeconomic class.

# data[].attributes.body
1. The country you wish to cover
JAPAN

2. Trends in student performance by gender, age, and content focus (e.g. math, science, l literacy)
15 year old students, boys and girls
MATH :
- boys outperformed girls in math by 10 points, which is wider than the average
gender gap in math across OECD countries.
- Japan had it's highest scores in mathematics from 2012- 2015 and in 2003; these scores were above the OECD average ad the trend in Japan.

SCIENCE :
- girls outperformed boys in science by 2 points on avg across OECD countries.
- Japan scored above the trend in Japan and above the OECD average from 2006 - 2018.

READING :
- girls in Japan significantly outperformed the boys, by 30 points on avg across OECD countries.
- Japan scored above its trend and above the OECD average in 2000 and from 2009 - 2015.

3. Key Findings you found of interest you discovered in the PISA report for this country.
- One's socio-economic status is a predictor in how they perform in mathematics and science.

- 12% of disadvantage students score it the top quarter of reading performance.

- Disadvantaged students have a 14% chance on average of being enrolled in a school that scores in the top quarter of reading performance.

4. What you'd like to find out more about that IS NOT included in the report.
- I would like to know the teaching style used during this time was similar to the teaching style used in the US during the same time period.
- I would like to know if the teaching method differed between students deemed to be at and advantage and those thought to be at a disadvantage.

# data[].attributes.body
1.     Portugal

2.     When looking at the trends in student performance by gender, it is clear that girls are doing sufficiently better and scoring much higher than boys. The text stated that on average scoring 24 points higher than boys. Boys outperformed girls in mathematics by 4 points and girls outperformed boys by 2 points. Age shows that all information was gained from 15-year-olds within the study. There is no way to see trends for other ages based on the study. Finally, socio-economic status showed a strong predictor of performance in reading, mathematics, and science. Those with a higher students outperformed those disadvantaged. 80% of students showed to have at least level 2 reading proficiency. 77% were level 2 or higher in mathematics and 80% were level 2 or higher in science.

3.     Some of the key finding that I found were that only 80% of students attained a level 2 reading proficiency by the age of 15. I think this number should be higher. In addition, with socio-economic status able to predict success, I think that it shows the lack of education format or inclusivity for those who are disadvantaged. Finally, I found it interesting that girls significantly lead boys in reading and wonder why this is.

4.     I would like to know more about why only 80% of children are at a level 2 proficiency and why this number is not higher by the age of 15.

# data[].attributes.body
1. The country you wish to cover-
ITALY
2. Trends in student performance by gender, age, and content focus (e.g. math, science,  literacy)
15 year old students; boys and girls
focused on reading, math and science
3. Key Findings of interest you discovered in the PISA report for this country/nation.
Reading performance declined amongst girls and remained stable in boys
Science performance declined in about the same amount for boys and girls
Compared to the OECD average, a smaller proportion of students in Italy performed at the highest levels of proficiency (Level 5 or 6) in at least one subject; while a similar proportion of students achieved a minimum level of proficiency (Level 2 or higher) in at least one subject.

Italy scored at a similar level as Portugal and Spain in mathematics, but lower than these two countries in science and lower than Portugal in reading, and scored at a similar level as Switzerland in reading, but below Switzerland in mathematics and science.

4. What you'd like to find out more about that IS NOT included in the report.
I would like to know about what time of year this survey takes place. How many times they do it in a decade. How many students they survey. Do they survey more girls than boys or more boys than girls?

# data[].attributes.body
1.     The country you wish to cover

Australia

2.     Trends in student performance by gender, age, and content focus (e.g. math, science,  literacy)

AGE

-       15 years old (above average in other countries in all subjects)

o   Mean score in reading

§  Australia = 503

§  OECD Average = 487

o   Mean score in Math

§  Australia = 491

§  OECD Average = 489

o   Mean score in Science

§  Australia = 503

§  OECD Average = 489

GENDER -girls outperformed boys

-       Boys outperformed girls in math

-       Similar in science

o   Gender gap in reading

§  Australia = 31

§  OECD Average = 30

o   Gender gap in Math

§  Australia = 5

§  OECD Average = -6

o   Gender gap in Science

§  Australia = -2

§  OECD Average = 2

3.     Key Findings you found of interest you discovered in the PISA report for this country.

·       Australian students reported being bullied more frequently, skipped school more often and felt lonely at school.

·       In Australia, student competition was higher than on average across OECD countries.

·       Amongst high-performing students in mathematics or science, one in three boys in Australia expect to work as an engineer or science professional at the age of 30, while about one in five girls expects to do so. About one in three high-performing girls expects to work in health-related professions, while one in six high-performing boys expects to do so. Some 4% of boys and a negligible percentage of girls in Australia expect to work in ICT-related profession.

4.     What you'd like to find out more about that IS NOT included in the report (e.e equity concerns, areas of substantial success, differences with the U.S.) These wondering will become part of what you will investigate further for your final project.

-       Extra curricular activities

-       Location of schools

-       Differences with the US (teaching styles)

# data[].attributes.headline
Final Project Padlet Brainstorm (Stefanie Szawerda)

# data[].attributes.subject
Final Project Padlet Brainstorm (Stefanie Szawerda)

# data[].attributes.body
1. The Country You Wish to Cover

1. Finland

2. Trends in Student Performance by gender, age, and content focus

1. Content Focus

1. Students in Finland scored higher than the OECD average in reading (520 score points), mathematics (507) and science (522)

2. In reading, the four participating Chinese provinces/municipalities (Beijing, Shanghai, Jiangsu and Zhejiang) out performed Finland, while Canada, Estonia, Hong Kong (China), Ireland, Korea and Macao (China) scored around the same level as Finland

3. In mathematics, 11 countries.economies outperformed Finland, while Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Slovenia, Sweden and the United Kingdom scored around the same level as Finland

4. In science, the four participating Chinese Provinces/municipalities, Estonia, Japan, Macao (China) and Singapore outperformed Finland, while Canada, Hong Kong (China, Korea and Chinese Taipei scored around the same level as Finland

5. Meaning reading, mathematics and science performance continued to decline in Finland

1. In all three subjects, the decline began after 2006

2. The negative trend line shows no sign of a reversal of performance in any subject

3. IN mathematics, declines were similarly rapid at all levels of the performance distribution; in reading and science, in contrasts, the declining trend was particularly noticeable amongst the lowest achieving students

2. Gender

1. The gender gap in reading in Finland (52 score points) was one of the widest across all PISA 2018 participating countries/economies \

2. Boys were less likely than girls, and disadvantaged students (60%) were less likely than advantaged students (76%) to hold a growth mindset

1. This latter gap (16 percentage points) is wider than the average across OECD countries (12 percentage points)

3. Key Findings You Found of Interest

1. Gap In Socio-Economic Status

1. In Finland, the gap in performance related to students’ socio-economic status (79 score points) is smaller than the average difference between advantaged and disadvantaged students (89 score points) across OECD countries

1. In Finland, this gap widened since PISA 2009 (61 score points) while it remained the same on average across OECD countries

2. Growth Mindset

1. Some 67% of students in Finland hold a growth mindset, they disagreed or strongly disagreed with the statement “Your intelligence is something about you that you can’t change very much” (OECD average 63%

4. What You’d Like to Find out more About

1. What do the average classroom settings look like in Finland? What is unique about their school system? What is their daily schedule?

2. How does Finland feel about standardized tests? Are they more project based or test based?

3. What do students in Finland do for college/university and how does lower levels of schooling prepare them for this?

# data[].attributes.body
1.     The country you wish to cover: Italy

2.     Trends in student performance by gender, age, and content focus (e.g. math, science, l literacy)

·      Italy scored below average in reading and science and was average in mathematics.

·      Reading performance declined mostly amongst girls. Science performance declined by a similar amount for both boys and girls.

·      “Amongst high-performing students in mathematics or science, about one in four boys in Italy expects to work as an engineer or science professional at the age of 30, while only one in eight girls expects to do so; about one in four girls expects to work in health-related professions, while only one in nine high-performing boys expects so.”

·      “In Italy, 77% of students attained at least Level 2 proficiency in reading (OECD average: 77%).”

·      “Some 5% of students in Italy were top performers in reading, meaning that they attained Level 5 or 6 in the PISA reading test (OECD average: 9%).”

·      “Some 76% of students in Italy attained Level 2 or higher in mathematics (OECD average: 76%).”

·      “In Italy, 3% of students were top performers in science, meaning that they were proficient at Level 5 or 6 (OECD average: 7%). “

3.     Key Findings you found of interest you discovered in the PISA report for this country.

·      I found it interesting that there was about 12% of students considered “disadvantage” based on their socio-economic status that still scored as the highest performers of reading. This goes to show that socio-economic status does not directly relate to your educational level.

·      The statistic that stated 57% of students had skipped a day of school in the two weeks prior to testing caught my attention.

·      The information under school climate was helpful to understand the dynamic of the classrooms. I saw that 74% of students agreed that their teacher shows enjoyment in teaching. This benefits the students in wanting to learn.

4.     What you'd like to find out more about that IS NOT included in the report. These wondering will become part of what you will investigate further for your final project.

·      What are the teaching methods that Italy uses? How do they relate or differ from the US?

·      How are students classified by disadvantaged or advantaged?

·      Do the students prepare for this exam or is it just based on what they learn in their general curriculum?

# data[].attributes.body
1. Country: Italy

2.      Trends in student performance by gender, age, and content focus (e.g. math, science,  literacy)

-It is found that Italy scores below the OECD average in both reading and science. When it comes to mathematics Italy falls in the average range.

-Mathematics:

“Some 76% of students in Italy attained Level 2 or higher in mathematics (OECD average: 76%). At a minimum, these students can interpret and recognize, without direct instructions, how a (simple) situation can be represented mathematically (e.g. comparing the total distance across two alternative routes, or converting prices into a different currency).”

-Science:

“Some 74% of students in Italy attained Level 2 or higher in science (OECD average: 78%). At a minimum, these students can recognise the correct explanation for familiar scientific phenomena and can use such knowledge to identify, in simple cases, whether a conclusion is valid based on the data provided.”

-Reading

“In Italy, 77% of students attained at least Level 2 proficiency in reading (OECD average: 77%). At a minimum, these students can identify the main idea in a text of moderate length, find information based on explicit, though sometimes complex criteria, and can reflect on the purpose and form of texts when explicitly directed to do so.”

-Gender:

“In Italy, boys outperformed girls in mathematics by 16 score points, which was wider than the average gender gap in mathematics across OECD countries (5 score points). While girls slightly outperformed boys in science (by two score points) on average across OECD countries in PISA 2018, in Italy girls and boys performed similarly in science.”

Overall, it was found that there was a strong gender stereotyping. “Amongst high-performing students in mathematics or science, about one in four boys in Italy expects to work as an engineer or science professional at the age of 30, while only one in eight girls expects to do so; about one in four girls expects to work in health-related professions, while only one in nine high-performing boys expects so. Only 7% of boys and almost no girls in Italy expect to work in ICT-related professions.”

3.     Key Findings you found of interest you discovered in the PISA report for this country.

-One thing that really stood out to me was under the section ‘School Climate,” you can see a significant difference between Italy and OECD average. For instance, Italy’s average of skipping a whole day of school in the two weeks prior to the PISA test was 36% higher than the OECD average. Also, Italy’s average of schoolmates cooperating with each other was found to be 12% lower than the OECD average.

- “According to school principals in Italy, 84% of teachers in advantaged schools and 80% of teachers in disadvantaged schools are “fully certified” (the difference is not statistically significant). The proportions of teachers with at least a master’s degree are similar in advantaged and disadvantaged schools.” This was something that stood out to me as there wasn’t a huge difference found in the percentage of certified teachers at advantaged schools compared to disadvantaged schools.

4.     What you'd like to find out more about that IS NOT included in the report (e.e equity concerns, areas of substantial success, differences with the U.S.) These wondering will become part of what you will investigate further for your final project.

What is an advantage and disadvantage of this school system?
What would the United States look like if they had this schooling system? Better or worse?
What are Italy's teaching methods and education strategies?

# data[].attributes.body
1.     The country you wish to cover: Italy

2.      Trends in student performance by gender, age, and content focus (e.g. math, science,  literacy)

-It is found that Italy scores below the OECD average in both reading and science. When it comes to mathematics though Italy falls in the average range.

-Mathematics:

“Some 76% of students in Italy attained Level 2 or higher in mathematics (OECD average: 76%). At a minimum, these students can interpret and recognise, without direct instructions, how a (simple) situation can be represented mathematically (e.g. comparing the total distance across two alternative routes, or converting prices into a different currency).”

-Science:

“Some 74% of students in Italy attained Level 2 or higher in science (OECD average: 78%). At a minimum, these students can recognise the correct explanation for familiar scientific phenomena and can use such knowledge to identify, in simple cases, whether a conclusion is valid based on the data provided.”

-Reading

“In Italy, 77% of students attained at least Level 2 proficiency in reading (OECD average: 77%). At a minimum, these students can identify the main idea in a text of moderate length, find information based on explicit, though sometimes complex criteria, and can reflect on the purpose and form of texts when explicitly directed to do so.”

-Gender:

“In Italy, boys outperformed girls in mathematics by 16 score points, which was wider than the average gender gap in mathematics across OECD countries (5 score points). While girls slightly outperformed boys in science (by two score points) on average across OECD countries in PISA 2018, in Italy girls and boys performed similarly in science.”

Overall, it was found that there was a strong gender stereotyping. “Amongst high-performing students in mathematics or science, about one in four boys in Italy expects to work as an engineer or science professional at the age of 30, while only one in eight girls expects to do so; about one in four girls expects to work in health-related professions, while only one in nine high-performing boys expects so. Only 7% of boys and almost no girls in Italy expects to work in ICT-related professions.”

3.     Key Findings you found of interest you discovered in the PISA report for this country.

-One thing that really stood out to me was under the section ‘School Climate,” you can see significant difference between Italy and OECD average. For instance, in Italy’s average of skipped a whole day of school in the two weeks prior to the PISA test was 36% higher than the OECD average. Also, Italy’s average of schoolmates cooperating with each other was found to be 12% lower than the OECD average.

- “According to school principals in Italy, 84% of teachers in advantaged schools and 80% of teachers in disadvantaged schools are “fully certified” (the difference is not statistically significant). The proportions of teachers with at least a master’s degree are similar in advantaged and disadvantaged schools.” This was something that stood out to me as there wasn’t a huge difference found in the percentage of certified teachers at advantaged schools compared to disadvantaged schools.

4.     What you'd like to find out more about that IS NOT included in the report (e.e equity concerns, areas of substantial success, differences with the U.S.) These wondering will become part of what you will investigate further for your final project.

1)    What similarities and differences compared to specifically the U.S.?

2)    What are Italy’s education strategies/teaching methods?

3)    What are the differences between disadvantaged and advantaged schools? What makes one better?

# data[].attributes.body
1. The country you wish to cover - Australia
2. Trends in student performance by gender, age, and content focus (e.g. math, science,  literacy):
- 80% of students attained at least Level 2 proficiency in reading
- Some 13% of students in Australia were top performers in reading, meaning that they attained Level 5 or 6 in the PISA reading test
- Some 78% of students in Australia attained Level 2 or higher in mathematics
- 10% of students scored at Level 5 or higher in mathematics
- Some 81% of students attained Level 2 or higher in science
- 9% of students were top performers in science, meaning that they were proficient at Level 5 or 6
3. Key Findings of interest you discovered in the PISA report for this country/nation.
- Reading performances declined in 2000.
- Performances in math declined in 2003 and science declined in 2012.
- In reading, more rapid declines were observed amongst the country’s lowest-achieving students.
- In mathematics and science, performance declined.
- Some 24% of advantaged students, but only 6% of disadvantaged students, were top performers in reading in PISA 2018.
- Socio-economically advantaged students outperformed disadvantaged students in reading.
- Girls significantly outperformed boys in reading – by 30 score points on average across OECD countries.
4. What you'd like to find out more about that IS NOT included in the report.
- What are the similarities and differences between the U.S. and Australia education systems?
- How do the teachers teach in the classroom?
- What are the race/ethnicities involved?

# data[].attributes.body
1. The country you wish to cover: Germany

2. Trends in student performance by gender, age, and content focus (e.g. math, science, l literacy)

- It was found that German students score above the OECD average in all three content focuses (reading, science and mathematics)

- Reading: about 79% of students reached at least a Level 2 in reading (higher than the OECD average). They are able to determine the main idea of a reading and are able to reflect on the purpose of the text.

- Mathematics: 79% of students reached Level 2 or higher in mathematics (higher than the OECD average, which was 76%). Able to understand how a problem can be introduced in a mathematical way. 13% of students reached a Level 5 in mathematics.

- Science: Approximately 80% of students reached a Level 2 or higher in science (higher than the OECD average, which was 78%).

- Gender: Girls performed better than boys in reading by 26 points. However, boys performed better than girls in mathematics. “In Germany, girls scored 7 points lower than boys in mathematics, which is wider than the average gender gap in mathematics across OECD countries (5 score points)”. As for science, they had similar performance levels.

3.     Key Findings you found of interest you discovered in the PISA report for this country.

- “A majority of students across OECD countries holds a growth mindset (they disagreed or strongly disagreed with the statement "Your intelligence is something about you that you can’t change very much"). In Germany, 74% of students hold a growth mindset.” I thought this was important to acknowledge as something that interested me because having a growth mindset is so vital for learning and improving the learning process.

- “Compared to the OECD average, a larger proportion of students in Germany performed at the highest levels of proficiency (Level 5 or 6) in at least one subject; while a similar proportion of students achieved a minimum level of proficiency (Level 2 or higher) in all three subjects”. I found this interesting because it really highlights just how well all Germany’s students are performing. It seems to be a repetitive theme, thus, suggesting that the education system in Germany is doing really well.

- “School principals in Germany reported more staff shortage and greater material shortage than the OECD average; and school principals of disadvantaged schools more often reported staff shortage than principals of advantaged schools”. I thought this was interesting because their students seem to be doing better than average, despite the shortages they may experience.

4. What you'd like to find out more about that IS NOT included in the report. These wondering will become part of what you will investigate further for your final project.

- Does Germany approach education differently than other countries, leading them to perform better than the OECD average?

- What makes a student qualified for an “advantaged” or “disadvantaged” school in Germany? How do they determine this?

- How do the schools approach teach for their “advantaged” and “disadvantaged” students?

- What does Germany’s overall teaching approach look like? Could be a beneficial addition for other countries?

# data[].attributes.body
1. France
2. Students in France scored 493 points in reading, the main domain assessed in PISA 2018, slightly above the OECD average (487 score points). France ranked between 20th and 26th in average reading performance, on a par with Belgium, the Czech Republic, Germany, Portugal and Slovenia. On average, students in France scored slightly above the OECD average in mathematics and science. ny students, especially disadvantaged students, hold lower ambitions than would be expected given their academic achievement. In France, 1 in 5 high-achieving disadvantaged students does not expect

to complete tertiary education – while only 1 in 13 high-achieving advantaged students has low expectations for their future education.
3. Some of the key findings from this that I founding were students in France reported great concern about the disciplinary climate at school. One in two students in France reported that there is noise and disorder in most or every lesson, compared with fewer than one in three students who reported so on average across OECD countries. This to me felt bad because it makes it seem the teachers don't care at all.
4. I would like to learn more about how students tend to score higher on mathematics

# data[].attributes.headline
Samantha Cresciullo Final Project - Spain 

# data[].attributes.subject
Samantha Cresciullo Final Project - Spain 

# data[].attributes.body
1. The country you wish to cover - Spain

2. Trends in student performance by gender, age, and content focus (e.g. math, science,  literacy)

In Spain, their mathematics and science scores were below average when comparing it to OECD. They received the same scores as students in Hungary and Lithuania. It was shown that "In mathematics, 75% of students attained Level 2 or higher, and 7% of students scored at Level 5 or higher, compared to 76% and 11%, respectively, on average across OECD countries. In science, 79% of students attained Level 2 or higher, and 4% of students scored at Level 5 or higher, compared to 78% and 7%, respectively, on average across OECD countries." With seeing these numbers Spain says, socioeconomic status comes into play a great amount and affects the rates. Spain is experiencing staff shortages and material shortages. When looking into gender it was founded that boys outperformed girls in mathematics by 6 points and girls slightly outperformed boys in science by 2 points. "About one in three boys in Spain expect to work as an engineer or science professional at the age of 30, and three in ten high-performing girls expect to work in health-related professions." The information for above is regarding all students the age of 15.

3. Key Findings of interest you discovered in the PISA report for this country/nation.

"In Spain, 49% of students enrolled in a disadvantaged school and 31% of students enrolled in an advantaged school attend a school whose principal reported that the capacity of the school to provide instruction is hindered at least to some extent by a lack of teaching staff." - I found this interesting because there comes into question between disadvantage and advantage schooling, but when looking into the numbers there is not a large difference between the two when looking at the teaching staff. In both schools, there is a huge decrease in the staff, causing the school to suffer greatly.

"According to school principals in Spain, 94% of teachers in advantaged schools and 98% of teachers in disadvantaged schools are “fully certified”. The proportions of teachers with at least a master’s degree are similar in advantaged and disadvantaged schools. In Spain, 18% of teachers in disadvantaged schools while 17% in advantaged schools have less than five years of professional experience (the difference is not statistically significant)." - This I found interesting because you would think going to an advanced school would have top teachers with the best education but when comparing the numbers there is not a huge difference between the two when talking about their schooling and certifications.

" In Spain, 17% of students reported being bullied at least a few times a month, compared to 23% on average across OECD countries. At the same time, 92% of students in Spain (and 88% of students on average across OECD countries) agreed or strongly agreed that it is a good thing to help students who cannot defend themselves." When seeing this, the report suspected that those being bullied are least likely to come to school and/or be on time for school. It was founded that 30% of students skipped and 44% of students were late to school. When compared to the OECD numbers the skipping rate was higher in Spain and the lateness numbers were less. This is interesting that there are fewer students getting bullied but more students skipping school.

"As in most countries/economies that distributed the well-being questionnaire, how satisfied students were with the way they look, their relationship with parents or guardians, and their life at school were positively related to their positive feelings." - This stuck out to me and I found it really interesting to learn this.

4. What you'd like to find out more about that IS NOT included in the report. *These wondering will become part of what you will investigate further for your final project

1. What is the difference between disadvanced and advanced schooling?
2. What style of teaching is done within the classroom?
3. What are the scores in literature?

# data[].attributes.body
Country: Brazil

Trends in student performance by gender, age, and content focus (e.g. math, science, l literacy)

1. It was seen in Brazil that the students l scored lower than the OECD average in reading, mathematics, and science. It was seen that “only 2% of students performed at the highest levels of proficiency (Level 5 or 6) in at least one subject (OECD average: 16%), and 43% of students scored below the minimum level of proficiency (Level 2) in all three subjects (OECD average: 13%)” (Reading). There has been an improvement in math from the years 2003-to 2018 but after the year 2009, there was not as much change.

2. Reading: 50% of the students in Brazil have achieved Level 2 proficiency in reading when the OECD average is 77%. Only 2% of students in Brazil reached leave 5 or 6 in reading when the OECD average is 9%

3. Math: 32% of students in Brazil achieved Level 2 or higher in math when the OECD average is 76%. And only 1% achieved level 5 or higher when the OECD is 11%.

4. Science: 45% of students in Brazil attained Level 2 or higher in science when the OECD average is 78%. And just 1% reached a leave of 5 or 6 when the OECD average is 7%.

5. I think when it comes to trends in student performance in Brazil, we must look at socio-economic status. Because in Brazil it was seen that, “socio-economically advantaged students outperformed disadvantaged students in reading by 97 score points”. Of the top performers in reading in Brazil, all 6% came from advantaged students. As well as socio-economic status was a strong predictor of math outcomes and sciences.

6. Gender: Of the OECD countries, “girls significantly outperformed boys in reading – by 30 score points on average across OECD countries” and this was seen in Brazil. So, we see that girls in Brazil are performing higher than boys. But when it came to math it was seen that boys outperformed the girls by 9 points compared to the average of other countries where body outperformed body by 5 points.

7. How students feel about their lives and learning it is that students in Brazil 65% of them say they are satisfied with their lives which is close to the OECD average of 67%. 90% of the students said they are something or always happy while 13% said that they were sad.

8. The content, “The PISA 2018 survey focused on reading, with mathematics, science and global competence as minor areas of assessment; Brazil did not participate in the assessment of global competence. PISA 2018 also included an assessment of young people’s financial literacy, which was optional for countries and economies. Results for reading, mathematics, and science are released on 3 December 2019, and results for global competence and financial literacy in 2020”

Key Findings you found of interest discovered in the PISA report for this country.

1. “Socio-economic status was a strong predictor of performance in reading, mathematics, and sciences in Brazil. Advantaged students outperformed disadvantaged students in reading by 97 score points (OECD average: 89 score points). In PISA 2009, the performance gap in reading related to socioeconomic status was 84 score points in Brazil (OECD average: 87 score points”

1. This is something that is sadly commonly the truth. I think it is important that this is looked at because socioeconomic status is such a telling factor. It also makes me question as future educators are there something that we can do to bridge the gap so all students can have opportunities.

2. “Amongst high-performing students in mathematics or science, about one in three boys in Brazil expect to work as an engineer or science professional at the age of 30, while one in five girls expects to do so (the difference is not statistically significant). About two in five high-performing girls expect to work in health-related professions, while about one in four high-performing boys expects to do so. Some 4% of boys and a negligible percentage of girls in Brazil expect to work in ICT-related professions”

1. This was problematic to me. Because this is continuing the gender script that our society has created. I think the use of the term “expect” leads me to ask the question is it something that boys almost “have” to do?

3. “In Brazil, 29% of students reported being bullied at least a few times a month, compared to 23% on average across OECD countries. At the same time, 85% of students in Brazil (and 88% of students on average across OECD countries) agreed or strongly agreed that it is a good thing to help students who cannot defend themselves”

1. Is this a big factor in student performance? What are the long-term results of bullying?

1. “Some 600 000 students completed the assessment in 2018, representing about 32 million 15-year- old’s in the schools of the 79 participating countries and economies. In Brazil, 10 691 students, in 638 schools, completed the assessment, representing 2 036 861 15-year-old students (65% of the total population of 15-year-olds)”

1. How were the participants found? Is this a diverse population?

2. What you'd like to find out more about that IS NOT included in the report. These wondering will become part of what you will investigate further for your final project.

In a country like Brazil was computer-based testing a fair way to test? Are computers something that is used in thesis students’ everyday education like they are here in the United States?

How are the students found that take this assessment? Are they randomly selected or are they, volunteers? A mix?

Are students with learning disabilities included in this report?

How was the base of reading, math, and sciences determined?

Are there any other factors than test scores that go into low-performing students or high-performing students?

Does race play a role in student performance?