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? 

 

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?

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.”

 

-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. 

 

 

 

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? 

 

-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.”

 

-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?

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?

 

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?

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)

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?

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. 

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

-Japan

-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.

 

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.