Philadelphia Math+Science Partnership – Schleicher on PISA data

The logo of the Organisation for Economic Co-o...

Image via Wikipedia

Andreas Schleicher, Education Policy Advisor of the Secretary General, Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)
Why learning outcomes matter and what it takes to deliver world class standards
-no longer about improvement by international standards … but the best performing systems
-pace of change as reflected by countries now passing us in terms of college graduates (remained stagnant while other countries have progressed)
-so far, increase in knowledge workers has not resulted in change to type of work
know what you are looking for …
-years of schooling no longer impacts country‘s growth
-but what are we measuring by “years of schooling”
-it’s not just quantity o education but what people learn to do
-steep decline in demand for routine cognitive skills … and those are the skills easiest to reach and assess
PISA tries to assess students with novel tasks – those they haven’t seen before
-sharp increase in demand for nonroutine interactive skills
PISA shows us way behind rest of world (measure 15 year olds in science extrapolate and apply)
-not just about poor kids; suburban schools do better, but not much
-many countries do well on both equity and performance (example, Finland) – all schools perform equally well despite huge income disparity – NOT the us
-student performance on PISA strong indicator of future success; what you do in school really matters and it’s hard to undo poor education
Poland raised 25 PISA points in 6 years … what impact would that have? major economic impact (trillions of dollars); getting to Finlands level: $260 trillion
improving outcomes …
-does spending $ on education result in better education? it’s important … but more important Is systems ability o get resources where they need to go
how to spend $?
-pay teachers well (Korea)
-keep class sizes small
other than $?
-high ambitious and universal standards
-rigor, focus and coherence
-strong support
-clear standards but lots of local discretion at school level
-accountability and intervention in inverse proportion to success; schools with clear standards and local autonomy do better
public schools often do better
-from prescribed forms of teaching to more personalized learning
implications …
-good performance is possible in short amount of time
Q&A
is us poor performance due to so much local control
-control at school level important, but must have clear standards – need a strong national framework
is new data (after 2006) showing same trend?
-Singapore and other countries will be included
-don’t know trend yet, but predict that better systems will get better
is public policy a factor?
-yes – coherent policies are a facet of stron systems
reading data?
-data is similar, but us a bit better in reading
ww don’t know what kid will need to know in the future
-that’s why PISA doesn’t test content as much as applications and extrapolations
-can students translate math an science into real world
better systems allow teachers to develop their own curriculum based on a set of student outcomes
priorities?
-national common core
-focus on low performing schools to get resource they need
-make teaching a more attractive career – not about money, but a career path (that’s the hard part)
student engagement?
-part of the PISA measurement – very important
-need to see learning opportunities
how do high performing countries’ assessments line up with PISA
-northern Europe, very well
-us … not much difference between TIMMS and PISA
-other countries, highly disparate: Russia, Norway teacher unions?
-in many countries, unions have become true professional organizations – makes teaching more of a career path
%age of students tested ?
-most countries the same
in us, students take less science …
-highly variable across countries
Panel:
Dennis DeTurck (Penn)
-change in curriculum and outcomes beyond simple memorization -“abillity beyond the inclination to serve”
-university responsibility
Pamela Brown (CAO of Phila SD)
-data reinforces what Dr Ackerman has been reccommending for Philadelphia
-grad rate is under 60%
-only 8% of Philly grads go on to graduate from 4 year institutions
-need higher rigor in non AP or IB classes
-pockets of excellence – that need to be replicated across the system for all students
-have raised the bar beyond AYP by setting performance targets measures by multiple criteria; schools at high levels are “vanguard” schools and enjoy more autonomy
-professional development linked to appraisal system
-extanding school day, week, year for many schools
Philip Hopkins (Select Greater Phila)
-companies want collaborative and nonroutine workers who know how to learn – but also with a certain level of content knowledge
-create opportunities in urban centers
-applaud common core standards; high focus on modeling -support keystone exams – important to know via a criterion referenced test how students are doing
-must keep in mind appropriate testing
-need high quality teachers; appropriate  staff development
-must deal with transition costs of moving to higher standards
-Paul Roemer quote about quality of public institutions

Andreas Schleicher, Education Policy Advisor of the Secretary General, Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)

Why learning outcomes matter and what it takes to deliver world class standards

-no longer about improvement by international standards … but the best performing systems

-pace of change as reflected by countries now passing us in terms of college graduates (remained stagnant while other countries have progressed)

-so far, increase in knowledge workers has not resulted in change to type of work

know what you are looking for …

-years of schooling no longer impacts country’s growth

-but what are we measuring by “years of schooling”?

-it’s not just quantity o education but what people learn to do

-steep decline in demand for routine cognitive skills … and those are the skills easiest to reach and assess

PISA tries to assess students with novel tasks – those they haven’t seen before

-sharp increase in demand for nonroutine interactive skills

PISA shows us way behind rest of world (measure 15 year olds in science extrapolate and apply)

-not just about poor kids; suburban schools do better, but not much

-many countries do well on both equity and performance (example, Finland) – all schools perform equally well despite huge income disparity – NOT the US

-student performance on PISA strong indicator of future success; what you do in school really matters and it’s hard to undo poor education

Poland raised 25 PISA points in 6 years … what impact would that have? major economic impact (trillions of dollars); getting to Finlands level: $260 trillion

improving outcomes …

-does spending $ on education result in better education? it’s important … but more important Is systems ability o get resources where they need to go

how to spend $?

-pay teachers well (Korea)

-keep class sizes small

other than $?

-high ambitious and universal standards

-rigor, focus and coherence

-strong support

-clear standards but lots of local discretion at school level

-accountability and intervention in inverse proportion to success; schools with clear standards and local autonomy do better

-public schools often do better

-from prescribed forms of teaching to more personalized learning

implications …

-good performance is possible in short amount of time

Q&A

is US poor performance due to so much local control?

-control at school level important, but must have clear standards – need a strong national framework

is new data (after 2006) showing same trend?

-Singapore and other countries will be included

-don’t know trend yet, but predict that better systems will get better

is public policy a factor?

-yes – coherent policies are a facet of strong systems

reading data?

-data is similar, but US a bit better in reading

we don’t know what kids will need to know in the future

-that’s why PISA doesn’t test content as much as applications and extrapolations

-can students translate math an science into real world?

better systems allow teachers to develop their own curriculum based on a set of student outcomes

priorities?

-national common core

-focus on low performing schools to get resource they need

-make teaching a more attractive career – not about money, but a career path (that’s the hard part)

student engagement?

-part of the PISA measurement – very important

-need to see learning opportunities

how do high performing countries’ assessments line up with PISA?

-northern Europe, very well

-US … not much difference between TIMMS and PISA

-other countries, highly disparate: Russia, Norway

role of teacher unions?

-in many countries, unions have become true professional organizations – makes teaching more of a career path

%age of students tested ?

-most countries the same

in US, students take less science …

-highly variable across countries

Panel:

Dennis DeTurck (Penn)

-change in curriculum and outcomes beyond simple memorization -“abillity beyond the inclination to serve”

-university responsibility

Pamela Brown (CAO of Phila SD)

-data reinforces what Dr. Ackerman has been reccommending for Philadelphia

-grad rate is under 60%; only 8% of Philly grads go on to graduate from 4 year institutions

-need higher rigor in non AP / IB classes

-pockets of excellence that need to be replicated across the system for all students

-have raised the bar beyond AYP by setting performance targets measures by multiple criteria; schools at high levels are “vanguard” schools and enjoy more autonomy

-professional development linked to appraisal system

-extanding school day, week, year for many schools

Philip Hopkins (Select Greater Phila)

-companies want collaborative and nonroutine workers who know how to learn – but also with a certain level of content knowledge

-create opportunities in urban centers

-applaud common core standards; high focus on modeling -support keystone exams – important to know via a criterion referenced test how students are doing

-must keep in mind appropriate testing

-need high quality teachers; appropriate  staff development

-must deal with transition costs of moving to higher standards

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]