PISA研究的政策导向探析

PISA是一项在各参与国政府共同利益驱动下开展的政策导向研究,其政策导向主要包括效能、竞争力导向、终身学习导向、社会公平导向和成本效益导向。我国开展教育质量监测和评价的目的也是为了改进教育政策,因此PISA研究的政策导向能够给予我国教育质量监测和评价以启示。     

On the supranational spell of PISA in policy

Abstract

Background: PISA results appear to have a large impact upon government policy. The phenomenon is growing, with more countries taking part in PISA testing and politicians pointing to PISA results as reasons for their reforms.

Purpose: The aims of this research were to depict the policy reactions to PISA across a number of jurisdictions, to see whether they exhibited similar patterns and whether the same reforms were evident.

Sources of evidence: We investigated policy and media reactions to the 2009 and 2012 PISA results in six cases: Canada, China (Shanghai), England, France, Norway and Switzerland. Cases were selected to contrast high-performing jurisdictions (Canada, China) with average performers (England, France, Norway and Switzerland). Countries that had already been well reported on in the literature were excluded (Finland, Germany).

Design and methods: Policy documents, media reports and academic articles in English, French, Mandarin and Norwegian relating to each of the cases were critically evaluated.

Results: A policy reaction of ‘scandalisation’ was evident in four of the six cases; a technique used to motivate change. Five of the six cases showed ‘standards-based reforms’ and two had reforms in line with the ‘ideal-governance’ model. However, these are categorisations: the actual reforms had significant differences across countries. There are chronological problems with the notion that PISA results were causal with regard to policy in some instances. Countries with similar PISA results responded with different policies, reflecting their differing cultural and historical education system trajectories.

Conclusions: The connection between PISA results and policy is not always obvious. The supranational spell of PISA in policy is in the way that PISA results are used as a magic wand in political rhetoric, as though they conjure particular policy choices. This serves as a distraction from the ideological basis for reforms. The same PISA results could motivate a range of different policy solutions.     

相似性原理在物理教学中的应用

本文结合教学实例,从概念教学、规律教学、习题教学三个角度谈相似性原理在物理教学中的应用。     

试谈可比性的形式、实质及其组成部分

可比性是比较文学的根本属性，它既是比较文学研究的学理依据，也是检验标准。比较文学的可比性包括：跨越性、交叉性和文学性(最终体现为比较诗学)三个方面。跨越性和交叉性从形式上限制了研究的范围，而文学性从内容上规范着研究的目的。可比性把比较文学研究的形式和内容辩证地统一起来。     

从逻辑关系角度看字和词的可比性

关于字和词,目前仍然有不少人会混淆它们的概念,从而对字和词进行错误的比较。这其中有一个原因就是没有意识到字和词是属于两个不同体系中的单位,从而错误地把字和词的关系处理成平行关系。将从逻辑关系的角度阐述为什么不能把字和词处理成平行关系的原因,进而说明字和词在本质上并没有可比性。     

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.     

家庭社会经济地位对学生学业成就的影响——基于PISA2018中国样本数据的分析

中国经济社会已进入高质量发展阶段,探讨学生学业成就水平受其家庭社会经济地位影响的程度,有助于识别基础教育领域存在的不平衡、不充分发展问题,为处境不利的青少年教育、城乡教育均衡等相关政策的完善提供实证依据。PISA2018年中国样本数据表明:家庭社会经济地位与青少年在校生阅读素养成绩具有显著相关,在低家庭社会经济地位学生群体中两者的相关强度最大;相较于个体水平的家庭社会经济地位,校均家庭社会经济地位对阅读素养成绩影响的效果量明显更大;在家庭社会经济地位各构成指标中,父亲职业指数、父亲受教育年限、母亲职业指数对阅读素养成绩的影响力较大。在未来,政府一方面要进一步促进教育公平,特别是精准帮扶处境不利青少年学生群体,加强处境不利学生家长的职业教育和培训,另一方面可考虑改进中小学招生政策,优化学校生源结构,让处境不利学生有机会到校均家庭社会经济地位较高的学校中学习。     

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.     

现代意识观照下的可比性问题

由于比较文学特有的跨学科、跨文化的性质,决定了“可比性”是其学理根据的最根本问题,也是它本身学科的科学性要求。历来构成可比性“第一原理”的是普遍性或共性,它来自两方面,即事物固有的属性和人们的思维方式与情感方式。对普遍性或共性的确认,及相应的其它环节,学者们均做了过细的研究,然而也受到了现代思潮的严重冲击。后者从哲学、方法论、文化政治学、文艺学等多种角度,批评普遍性或共性的概念是形而上学的理性主义的产物,忽略了事物与现象的许多具体而复杂的细节,不利于弱势文化的独立生存,也不符合文学领域充满了个性鲜明的独创的事实。为应对现代思潮的挑战,因而提出“类似性”（affinity）的范畴。Affinity源自拉丁语affinis,原意是指有关系、有联系的属性和化学反应的能力。它不同于以往表示同一性质的概念,着重的是不同事物彼此的关系与联系,彼此发生感应和作用的特性方面,讲究的是动态的合,而不是静止的一。它的理论根据主要是维特根斯坦的“游戏原理”和“家族相似性”。由此,在比较文学的视野内将以全新的观点看待同和异的问题,为跨学科、跨文化的研究提供新的理念和方法。     

从PISA看国内语文阅读考试改革——以2002～2009年的上海阅读开放题为例

语文阅读考试改革向来是争论的焦点.本文在分析PISA阅读素养测试的基本特征的基础上,以PISA的阅读素养架构为蓝本,分析2002～2009这八年间上海中考语文阅读开放题,以此为突破口考察国内语文阅读考试存在的问题,探查语文阅读考试可能的改进方向.     

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。     

Competitive comparison and PISA bragging rights: sub-national uses of the OECD's PISA in Canada and the USA

Participation in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development's (OECD) Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) has continuously expanded: from 43 systems in 2000 to 65 systems in the 2012 cycle, with 71 signed up for PISA 2015. There also has been a growth in sub-national participation, expanding PISA's reach beyond the nation-state. This paper explores sub-national PISA participation in Canada and the USA, asking how PISA is being used within sub-national education policy spaces. We draw on analysis of documents and data from interviews with officials at sub-national, national, and international levels. Findings illustrate some of the diverse motivations and uses of PISA, providing insights into the effects of PISA at the sub-national scale. As such, we argue that competitive comparison in education has deepened through the enhanced granularity of international large-scale assessment data to new scales beyond the nation-state.     

On Examining Specificity in Latent Construct Indicators

A latent variable modeling procedure for examining specificity in any indicator of a common factor for a set of repeatedly administered measures is outlined in a longitudinal design setting with measurement invariance and specificity stability over time. The method permits one to test whether there is specificity in a given indicator and in the affirmative case allows one to point and interval estimate the specificity variance in that measure. The discussed procedure is readily applicable with popular software, is based on empirically testable conditions, and is illustrated with an example.     

对高等教育统计指标设置的一些思考

高等教育统计是高校实行科学管理的重要手段。是制定教育政策、编制教育发展规划的重要依据。随着教育体制改革的不断深化和办学形式的多样化,统计指标的界定出现了不少新问题,积极解决目前高等教育统计指标设置和解释中存在着的一些不足,才能为高等教育的发展提供保障。     

Seeing education through the prism of PISA

International comparisons are never easy and they are not perfect. But PISA shows what is possible in education and it helps countries to see themselves in the mirror of student performance and educational possibilities in other countries. This article summarises key policy insights from PISA. It highlights how excellence and improving equity need not be conflicting policy objectives, but that they tend to be jointly achieved only when deliberate policies are in place that match resources with needs and when stratification and grade repetition are contained. The article also shows how a number of countries have been able to raise learning outcomes and moderate the impact of social background in the last decade and highlights some of the policies and practices that characterise these countries.     

农村基础教育质量监控指标的探讨

农村基础教育质量监控指标是农村基础教育质量监控长效机制的重要内容。探讨农村基础教育质量监控指标的依据、原则和内容,对全面评判基础教育课程改革成效,完善基础教育质量评价指标体系,增强农村基础教育质量监控实效具有重要意义。     

略论西部农村现代化的社会指标体系

从社会学的专业视角出发，利用中国社会统计年鉴的数据资料进行分析，提出了实现西部农村现代化的社会指标体系。     

Seeing education with one's own eyes and through PISA lenses: considerations of the reception of PISA in European countries

The paper addresses the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development's Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) as a public policy instrument, whose worldwide circulation is mediated by processes of reinterpretation, negotiation, and re-contextualization, where national, local, and international agencies intertwine. It is focused on the active reception of PISA in six European spaces (Francophone Belgium, France, Hungary, Portugal, Romania, and Scotland) along its first three cycles. The paper identifies two contrasting developments: the Program's divergent uses and its attractiveness in different social worlds. The paper gives particular attention to what is called the ‘update of reference societies’ in the context of national receptions of PISA. These ‘updates’ are analyzed as part of a composite process that involves domestic reasons, either related to current agendas for education or to deep historical factors, and injunctions related to PISA's rationale and PISA objects.