Discover and read the best of Twitter Threads about #PISA2018
Most recents (5)
#PISA is not intended to rank countries, since education has many dimensions, it's impossible to extract them into one number, let alone comparing among countries. That's not #pisa2018 for.
Participating countries can use #PISA to diagnose their deficiency of their education systems. This is more important and makes more sense than ranking countries. The ranking makes good stories for media, but it's not the whole stories.
The ranking in #PISA is useless. Read deeper into finding which part of competence is lacking is more beneficial.
My quick thread #PISA2018.
Congratulations to students & educators across Canada & in Ontario (congrats to all across world but this thread focuses on #OntEd).
#OnPoli #NoCutsToEducation #AEFO #ETFO #OECTA #OSSTF (Canada results:analyses @CCMEC cmec.ca/Publications/L… 1/
Congratulations to students & educators across Canada & in Ontario (congrats to all across world but this thread focuses on #OntEd).
#OnPoli #NoCutsToEducation #AEFO #ETFO #OECTA #OSSTF (Canada results:analyses @CCMEC cmec.ca/Publications/L… 1/
Hoje conhecemos os resultados do #PISA2018. As provas foram aplicadas apenas em computador em maio de 2018, com cerca de 13 mil estudantes brasileiros de 663 escolas, na faixa dos 15 anos de idade. Nesse fio, vou postar as diferentes manchetes/matéria sobre o Brasil. +
Um dado positivo, o país melhorou em leitura, matemática e ciências em relação ao Pisa de 2015. 2/n gauchazh.clicrbs.com.br/educacao-e-emp…
Apesar do avanço, são poucos os estudantes no Brasil que atingem as maiores notas na avaliação. 3/n agenciabrasil.ebc.com.br/educacao/notic…
#PISA #PISA2018
L'intégralité des résultats :
📕 Volume 1 (🇬🇧) : oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/5f07…
📗 Volume 2 (🇬🇧) : oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/b5fd…
📘 Volume 3 (🇬🇧) : oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/acd7…
📕 Volume 1 (🇫🇷) : oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/ec30…
L'intégralité des résultats :
📕 Volume 1 (🇬🇧) : oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/5f07…
📗 Volume 2 (🇬🇧) : oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/b5fd…
📘 Volume 3 (🇬🇧) : oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/acd7…
📕 Volume 1 (🇫🇷) : oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/ec30…
Evolution du score moyen de la France par rapport à #PISA 2015 :
Compréhension écrite : 493 (↘️ -7)
Mathématiques : 495 (↗️ +2)
Sciences : 493 (↘️ -2)
(certains médias parlent de stagnation...)
Compréhension écrite : 493 (↘️ -7)
Mathématiques : 495 (↗️ +2)
Sciences : 493 (↘️ -2)
(certains médias parlent de stagnation...)
Les scores de la Finlande, jadis (ou toujours ?) modèle des socio-constructivites, elle poursuit sa chute :
Compréhension écrite : 520 (↘️ -6)
Mathématiques : 507 (↘️ -4)
Sciences : 522 (↘️- 9)
Compréhension écrite : 520 (↘️ -6)
Mathématiques : 507 (↘️ -4)
Sciences : 522 (↘️- 9)
The #PISA2018 results are out. Generally, countries scored within an expected range given their past records. Except one. The scores are astonishing for B-S-J-G, an acronym for the four Chinese provinces that participated (Beijing, Shanghai, Jiangsu, and Guangdong).
Out of 77 international systems, B-S-J-G scored number one in all three subjects: reading, math, and science. Scores increased dramatically from 2015-2018. In fact, the gains are so large that they are bound to raise eyebrows.
B-S-J-G’s scores increased by 61 scale score points (from 494 to 555) in reading, by 60 points (531 to 591) in math, and by a whopping 72 points (518 to 590) in science. How uncommon are gains like these? I examined PISA data from 2006-2015.
