刍议PISA对我国基础教育科学课程评价的启示

文章详细介绍了PISA测试,并主要介绍了2006年PISA科学测评,其重点评价的领域是科学素养,科学素养界定将四个相互联系的特点作了定义;与PISA的评价理念有着类似的内涵,我国科学教育也要求以知识与技能、过程与方法（科学探究）、情感态度与价值观三维目标为依据,全面评价学生的科学素养：阐述了PISA对我国基础教育科学课程评价的几点思考和建议。     

历史—社会—文化视域下的PISA科学素养

在历史—社会—文化的视域下考察PISA科学素养的起源、内容和演变规律发现,社会现代化进程中产生的未来主义思想和标准化理念为PISA科学素养提供了文化土壤;OECD的科学教育宗旨和教育治理理念隐含的刚性框架制约了PISA科学素养的形式;其内容和演变过程受到科学素养专家组时任主席的研究偏好影响,不具备历史的归因逻辑。这使得PISA科学素养本质上是一种基础素养,不能彰显国际科学教育的发展趋势,是无法直接迁移的教育文化。在认识和理解PISA科学素养时,应该持审慎的态度,在本土的视野下进行深入探讨。     

试析PISA科学素养测评

国际教育评估项目PISA对青少年科学素养的测评,因其规模、过程、内容、标准、功能等的标准化运作和成功实践,越来越引起人们的关注。文章简要介绍了PISA监测项目的概况,深入剖析其科学素养监测的特点,以期对相关研究和实践有所裨益。     

如何塑造科学公民? PISA2025科学素养测评框架对未来科学教育的启示

<正>未来人才需要具备哪些核心技能?如何培养青少年儿童的科学素养?教育在塑造学生素养方面将发挥什么作用?在6月15日召开的PISA2025科学素养测评框架发布会现场,经济合作与发展组织(OECD)教育与技能司司长Andreas Schleicher以及来自测评框架研发团队的斯坦福大学科学教育学荣休教授Jonathan Osborne、迪肯大学科学与环境教育学副教授Peta J.White、牛津大学天体物理学教授Katherine Blundell OBE共同展开在线小组对话,围绕主持人和网友提问,探讨如何塑造科学公民,以及PISA2025科学素养测评框架对未来科学教育的启示。     

从PISA2015科学素养测评看数学素养的重要性

本文从PISA2015科学素养测评"科学地解释现象、设计与评估科学探究实验、科学地解释数据和证据"三个方面分析数学素养在科学领域的应用,并给出在学校教育中综合提升学生科学素养与数学素养的一些建议。     

评估全球科学教育的整体成效——OECD《PISA2025科学素养测评框架(草案)》解读

<正>2023年6月,经济合作与发展组织(OECD)发布《PISA2025科学素养测评框架(草案)》(PISA 2025SCIENCE FRAMEWORK (DRAFT)),明确了PISA2025科学评估的主要内容。与十年前PISA2015科学评估框架将“科学素养”(scientific literacy)这一概念作为科学评估的核心要素不同(见图1),《PISA2025科学素养测评框架》转向了一个更广泛的框架,该框架将“科学能力”(Science Competencies)作为评估的核心要素,其重点是评估全球科学教育的总体成果(见图2),使科学框架与数学和阅读框架保持一致。     

PISA科学素养评估框架的启示

在探讨PISA测试对科学素养评价框架和具体题目的设定与对应分析时,依次介绍了PISA科学素养评价框架中的科学能力维度、科学知识分类、题目背景和认知层次要求以及难度层次评价标准,并对我国在学生科学探究与理性思维素养评价方面给出建议。     

PISA2003对学生学业成绩的测评、分析及其启示

国际学生评价项目──PISA2003对学生的阅读、数学/科学素养以及问题解决的能力进行了测评。分析研究PISA2003的测评原则与目的、测试框架与方法等,可对我国实施教育质量监控予以一定启示。尤其是PISA2003对测评结果的分析,对我国教育政策的制定和教育改革的深化有着重要参考价值。     

PISA2015科学素养测试内容及特点

2013年3月,经济合作与发展组织发布了《PISA2015科学框架草案》,其目的是为PISA2015科学素养测试题目的编制提供依据.该框架将“科学地解释现象”、“评价和设计科学探究”、“科学地解释数据和证据”定义为科学素养的三种能力,把PISA2006测试框架中的“科学知识”定性为“内容性知识”,“有关科学的知识”细化为“程序性知识”和“认知性知识”,并首次提出科学素养能力和知识类型的“认知需求”框架.这是PISA测试对“科学素养”内涵给出的最新解释.对此进行分析研究,会对我国科学教育教学实践提供借鉴和启示.     

PISA科学素养框架“十年之变”对物理学科关键能力评价的启示

PISA是评价15岁学生阅读、数学、科学素养的国际大型测评项目,PISA科学素养的测评框架具有一定的指导价值。基于PISA科学素养框架从2015到2025的“十年之变”,挖掘其变化趋势,对于中学物理学科关键能力评价,提出以真实情境为载体,以物理学科关键能力为重心,以核心价值为导向的评价启示。     

PISA学习参与度评价

国际学生评估项目(PISA)越来越重视学生的学习参与度评价,特别是在针对具体学科领域的参与度评价上做了许多有益的探索,为我国基础教育课程中"情感态度与价值观"的评价提供了借鉴.     

Placing PISA and PISA for schools in two federalisms,Australia and the USA

ABSTRACT

This paper accepts that the OECD’s PISA has become influential in policy terms globally, but analyses the ways that the main PISA and PISA for Schools tests are positioned differently in Australia and the USA because of contrasting educational federalisms in the two nations. Our argument is that while PISA is undoubtedly influential, its effects are nonetheless mediated by the political structures – here, the different models of federalism – present within different nations, which in turn leads to quite distinct ‘PISA effects’. For instance, Australia oversamples on main PISA to make its data available for national and state-level policymaking, whereas the USA, with its focus on local governance in schooling, does not oversample, meaning that main PISA does not have a comparable policy salience as in Australia. Conversely, the newer PISA for Schools test originated in the USA with pressure from educators and philanthropic interests and has been implemented in a good number of schools, but it has not been taken up in the same way in Australia. Our analyses show how these differences reflect the idiosyncratic workings of federalism in the two nations, in which the federal government has a stronger policy and funding role in Australia than has hitherto been the case for the federal government in the USA.     

试论PISA对大学生评价的启示

针对现行大学生评价存在的不足和缺陷,结合PISA项目的成功经验,科学客观地评价大学生,要树立以大学生可持续发展为核心的评价理念,要突出以大学生创新能力培养为重点评价内容,要构建学生、学校、家长、社会＂四位一体＂的评价主体模式,要强化评价结果的政策分析。     

Who makes it into PISA? Understanding the impact of PISA sample eligibility using Turkey as a case study (PISA 2003–PISA 2012)

ABSTRACT

New evidence presented in this paper shows that existing accounts of Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) in developing countries underestimate both progress and inequality because they do not take into account the large proportion of 15–16-year olds who are ineligible for the PISA sampling frame, primarily due to dropout or delay. In such countries, who makes it into PISA (sample eligibility) heavily influences representivity and therefore the interpretation of PISA results. We use PISA in Turkey 2003–2012 as a case study to show how combining measures of access (from the Turkish Demographic and Health Surveys) and learning outcomes (from PISA) can account for changes in the underlying population. We find the percentage of 15–16-year olds reaching Level 2 in PISA is up to twice as large as that reflected in official PISA reports. These findings have strong implications for inter-country and inter-temporal comparisons using PISA, particularly for developing countries.     

PISA2021创造性思维测试述评

经合组织发布的《PISA2021创造性思维框架草案(第三版)》,为创造性思维测试提供了依据。该框架明确了15周岁学生创造性思维的定义、影响因素和表现形式,提出了"四领域三维度"的创造性思维素养模型;基于该模型编制了合理有效的测试工具,开发了科学详尽的评价标准;同时结合创造性思维的影响因素设计了背景调查问卷。该测试沿用PISA测试研制的框架、构建了清晰的素养模型和操作性强的评价指标体系、开发了特定思维测试的新范式,将对培养与评价学生创造性思维产生巨大影响。     

PISA and education reform in Shanghai

This article examines how Chinese education officials interpret and utilise selective information from Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) to legitimate and consolidate contested reform messages and initiatives in Shanghai. A content analysis of data obtained from newspaper articles, official documents and education essays published in China yielded two key findings. First, Chinese officials turn to PISA data to highlight the existing problems of academic burden and ‘school choice fever’ that validate the need for reform. Second, they aim to garner support for on-going reform initiatives that seek to redefine the aims and nature of education in Shanghai. In both instances, the education officials do not just rely on the resources from PISA to advance local reforms. They also re-interpret the information in such a way that allows them to create new possibilities and realities. The example of Shanghai illustrates the symbiotic relationship between PISA/Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and the domestic education system that is characterised by both dependence and independence.     

PISA抽样方法简介与PISA2015中国抽样实践

学生能力国际评价(PISA)是由经济合作与发展组织发起的大规模国际教育评价项目,抽样对评价结果的国际可比性至为关键。本文对PISA的抽样方法与理念、抽样的各个环节与技术标准进行介绍,并简要介绍PISA2015中国抽样的实践情况,基于PISA的抽样经验,对我国国内大型教育测评项目未来抽样的数据收集等环节提出一些设想与展望。     

PISA对大规模教育质量的评价解读

大规模教育质量的评价在很大程度上影响着国家和地区教育发展的走向。本文以PISA2006结果报告为中心,解析PISA对大规模教育质量和相关影响因素评价的理念和方法,为研究和开展我国大规模教育质量评价提供借鉴。