Finally we know: let’s all go to Estonia, gratulations to Singapore, etc. PISA 2012 2015 has arrived. I had the luck to experience a very kind breeze that brought the reports a bit earlier on my desk, so I have read them already.
As has become traditional, there is a lot to chew on, but if you only could look at one thing only, this Figure would be it imho (red emphasis by me!):
Not that this should surprise – remember Project Follow Through – but it can be in sharp contrast with what many people tend to think or say, even if they are from the same organization. But the chart is more than what I emphasized. To me, it’s a ‘to do’ list in education. SES? Students arriving to later class or skipping school days, girls who are still outperformed, repeating grades,… These are all examples of both stuff to work on and stuff that can be a bad idea. Let’s get busy.
From experience to meaning... 
PISA 2015 neem ik aan 🙂
Inderdaad 🙂
Reblogged this on kadir kozan.
[…] Er is een grafiek over leerkrachtgestuurd versus onderzoekend leren die volgens mij de belangrijkste…. […]
[…] Maybe the most relevant figure from PISA, imho by Pedro De Bruyckere […]
Werkvorm onderzoekend leren wordt nochtans sterk gepromoot in STEM-onderwijs…
hallo, wat is dan de conclusie die U trekt ivm de rode kaders? Een meer leerkrachtgestuurde aanpak binnen STEM? Op het eerste zicht lijkt het me vreemd voor wetenschappen dat een onderzoekende aanpak een negatieve samenhang vertoont met wetenschapsscores, tenzij wetenschapscores op PISA eerder kennis dan competentie meet. Hoe zou u dat duiden?
Leerkrachtgestuurd, ja, en dit past ook bij wat je bvb hier kan lezen. Maar vergis je niet: je moet dit samen zien met adaptief onderwijs (dus het gaat niet over klassiek onderwijs).
Check ook deze grafieken:
[…] niet gaan liggen, maar na de vorige drie posts (hier, hier en vooral hier), wil ik even stilstaan bij een verhaal dat ik al op mijn Engelstalige blog bracht, en dat eerder iets lijkt te zeggen over […]
[…] niet gaan liggen, maar na de vorige drie posts (hier, hier en vooral hier), wil ik even stilstaan bij een verhaal dat ik al op mijn Engelstalige blog bracht, en dat eerder iets lijkt te zeggen over […]
[…] many countries are now discussing the results of PISA 2015 and educators discuss graphs such as these, there is also another discussion worth of your attention: the OECD made a big change: most […]
[…] biggest discovery in post-2015 PISA analysis was the positive link between explicit instruction and higher achievement in the 2015 core assessment subject, science. The most important factor […]
[…] in science among 15-year-olds, the finding was that such minimal guided instruction methods lagged far behind explict instruction in determining student success. In short, the increase in the amount of inquiry […]
[…] Maybe the most relevant Figure from PISA, imho […]
[…] a new fever surrounding the approach originally constructed by Engelmann and Becker. If you examine the latest PISA-results, you can see that they are not that far off from the results of the biggest experiment in education […]
[…] But there is more. Again in my personal opinion, I do think that pedagogy and pedagogical innovations shouldn’t be blind for insights from didactical – evidence-informed – and cognitive psychological or epistemological research – the distinction between primary and secondary learning processes – , or even research by the OECD themselves showing that inquiry based learning does have issues. […]
[…] I could repeat some of the elements from my open letter to Schleicher, although he does try to defend his answer to questions about the importance of memorization since the discussion he had at the Wise conference last year. Again, I’ve seen the charts he uses at page 233 and 234 before, but they don’t explain the chart from PISA 2015 I shared before. […]