Apples and Oranges :International Comparisons

Are we failing our students?

ASCD PresentationPhiladelphia

March 24, 2012Dr. Steve Rasmussen, Superintendent

Issaquah School District – Issaquah, WA

“There are three kinds of lies; lies, damn lies, and statistics.”

Mark Twain

NAEP: National Assessment of Education Progress

PISA: Program for International Student Assessment

TIMSS: Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study

PIRLS: Progress in International Reading Literacy Study

“Sometimes rankings can make small gaps appear big and vice

versa.” Tom Loveless, Brookings

Institution 2012 Brown Center Report

on American

Education

Conclusion:

1. Dubious Claims of Causality

2. Misuse of National Rankings: Average Score Ranking

3. The A+ Fallacy

2012 Brown Center Report on

American Education

“Figures don’t lie, but liars figure.”

Mark Twain

BEHIND THE FACTS: PISA 2009 PISA rankings are determined by nations’ average scores. Some

researchers suggest that average score comparisons are not useful. Even presuming that the scores have meaning, average student are not likely to be the leaders in the field of math and science.

In the last PISA (2009), the U.S. had 25% of all high-scoring students in the world! See the chart above.

The fact that one in four high-scoring students came from the U.S. and the remaining high-scores from the other 58 countries suggests that American schools are actually doing very well.

Well-resourced school serving wealthy neighborhoods show excellent results. Poor resourced schools serving low-income communities of color do far worse.

UNICEF studied poverty in 22 wealthy nations, the U.S. ranked 21st.

The highest scoring countries have less diversity and less poverty.

“When it comes to student achievement and school improvement, it’s poverty not stupid!”

Mel Riddile, Assoc. Dir. for High Schools NASSP 2010

USA F&R Meal Rate and PISA Score

Schools with <10% 551School with 10-24.9% 527Schools with 25-49.9% 502Schools with 50-74.9% 471Schools with >75% 446

U.S. average 500OECD average 493

Comparing Apples to Apples: Poverty Rates and PISA Scores 

Country Poverty Rate PISA Score

United States <10%551

Finland 3.4% 536Netherlands 9.0% 508Belgium 6.7%

506Norway 3.6%

503Switzerland 6.8% 501France 7.3% 496Denmark 2.4% 495Czech Republic 7.2%

478

Poverty Rates and PISA Scores 10% - 24.9%  

  South Korea (no poverty rates) <10% 539 Finland <10% 536 United States <10-24.9% 527 Canada 13.6% 524 New Zealand 16.3% 521 Japan 14.3% 520 Australia 11.6% 515 Poland 14.5% 500 Germany 10.9% 497 Ireland 15.7% 496 Hungary 13.1% 494 United Kingdom 16.2% 494 Portugal 15.6% 489 Italy 15.7% 486 Greece 12.4% 483 Austria 13.3% 471

Country Poverty Rate PISA Score

Poverty Rates of 22 OECD Countries Tested (Countries that have poverty rates) Their Population, Ave. ScoreCountry Population Poverty Rate PISA Average Score

Finland 5.4M 3.4% 536Canada 33.4M 13.6% 524New Zealand 4.4M 16.3% 521Japan 127.9M 14.3% 520Australia 22.8M 11.6% 515Netherlands 16.8M 9.0% 508Belgium 11.0M 6.7% 506Norway 4.9M 3.6% 503Switzerland 7.8M 6.8% 501Poland 38.1M 14.5% 500United States 313.1M 21.7% 500Germany 81.7M 10.9% 497Ireland 4.5M 15.7% 496France 65.3M 7.3% 496Denmark 5.6M 2.4% 495United Kingdom 62.2M 16.2% 494Hungary 9.9M 13.1% 494Portugal 10.5M 15.6% 489Italy 60.6M 15.7% 486Greece 10.7M 12.4% 483Czech Republic 10.5M 7.2% 478Austria 8.4M 13.3% 471

US K—20 Student Population 2012

US Total Population 313.1M

K—12 Population (17.6%)55.0M

Public K—12 (90%) 49.6M Private K—12 (10%) 5.4M

College/Grad School (7.3%)23.0M

Public College (85%) 19.6M Private College (15%) 3.4M

US population in K—20 (25%) 78.0M

“You are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts.”

Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan

• Shanghai, China topped the list with 556 (but it’s not a country). Only 35% of their students go onto high school and not all children are allowed to go to school.

• Of all the nations participating in PISA, the U.S. has, by far, the largest number of students living in poverty—21.7%. The next closest countries have poverty rates 75% of ours (United Kingdom and New Zealand).

• U.S. students in school with 10% or less poverty are #1 in the world.

• U.S. students in schools with 10-24% poverty are 3rd behind South Korea and Finland.

• U.S. students in schools with 25-50% poverty are 10th in the world.

• U.S. students in schools with 50% poverty are near the bottom.

• The other surprises were Germany with less than half our poverty, scores below the U.S. as did France with less than a third our poverty and Sweden with a low of 3.6% poverty rate.

Observations from PISA Results:

LESS-REPORTED FINDINGS: PISA 2009

The best performing school systems manage to provide high-quality education for all children.

Students from low SES backgrounds score a year behind affluent students.

In schools where students are required to repeat grades, the test scores are lower and the achievement gap is larger.

Tracking students (ability grouping) results in the gap becoming larger. The earlier the practice, the larger gap. Poor children are more frequently placed into the lower track.

Schools that have autonomy over curriculum, finances and assessment score higher.

Schools that compete for students (vouchers, charters, etc.) show no achievement score advantage.

Private schools do no better once family wealth factors are considered.

Students that attended pre-school score higher, even after more than 10 yrs.

ARE INTERNATIONAL COMPARISONS USEFUL? CAVEAT EMPTOR

• Most countries define the job of students is learning and schools spend most of their time on academics. We add Driver’s Ed, Drug Prevention and Football.

• Most developing countries are struggling with issues of universal access and gender parity. This is no longer a central issue in the US.

• India concentrates its resources on a small number of elite students. Only now is it beginning to take on the challenge of educating “all” students.

• Most Asian and European countries place responsibility for academics success on the individual student and rely on exams to sort students.

• Politicians in Japan defer to professional educators matters such as curriculum. Our politicians have no “compunction” about imposing the latest fads on our schools including class size, charter schools, testing, merit pay, evaluation systems, etc. regardless of what educators say.

NOW WHAT? HOW SHOULD WE PARTICIPATE IN THE GLOBAL MARKET PLACE OF SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT IDEAS?

1. Move beyond the “here’s a country that got it right syndrome”.

(A+ syndrome)

2. Learn from New Zealand’s market based education policies of 1990s.

3. The “global market place” works both ways. Other countries see strengths in US system including China and Japan: Creativity and less testing, problem solving, and other skills central to the 21st century work place. The US is moving to more test-based initiatives (Yong Zhoa, Catching Up or Leading the Way, 2009).

4. Look for ideas and practices that have proven to be applicable across a variety of cultural setting.

“The challenge to our pundits is that we continually look for gold in other countries, when all along we are sitting on Acres of Diamonds!”

Anonymous

Observations from a Superintendent

As the federal government (since 2002 ESEA under both Democrats and Republicans) has become even more top-down and prescriptive, local school become less autonomous and less like our successful international counterparts.

Finally, the push for privatizing public education through charters, tuition tax credits, vouchers and the likes (Market Driven Reforms) does not result in better test scores and has the effect of increasing segregation, and the inequalities that lead to low test scores.

Making education a national priority: A serious investment in Teaching and Learning.

Fostering a professional climate in schools: Attracted the best and brightest to the profession.

The availability of “good” schools for all. Getting serious about helping all students fulfill the fundamental right to a high-quality education regardless of their Zip Code and SES.

Final Thoughts on US Education 2012 and Beyond

“If we can ever get our values right, the ‘lessons learned’ will take care of themselves.”

Edward B. FiskeFormer Educational Editor, New York Times andEducation Week, March 7, 2012