1 / 59

Jarkko Hautamäki Using data compiled by Patrik Scheinin , Sirkku Kupiainen and myself

Psychological Theory and Educational Reform: a Finnish perspective using PISA and L2L results, with some Russia/Fin comparisons using PISA data. Jarkko Hautamäki Using data compiled by Patrik Scheinin , Sirkku Kupiainen and myself University of Helsinki, Finland

zenaida-cantu
Télécharger la présentation

Jarkko Hautamäki Using data compiled by Patrik Scheinin , Sirkku Kupiainen and myself

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Psychological Theory and Educational Reform: a Finnish perspective using PISA and L2L results, with some Russia/Fin comparisons using PISA data JarkkoHautamäki Using data compiled by PatrikScheinin, SirkkuKupiainen and myself University of Helsinki, Finland Departments of Education and Teacher Education & Centre for Educational Assessment 10.3.2011 Moscow, Russia The next picture is Patrik’s and the place is Hanko, Finland

  2. The Finnish PISA results have been described as a Miracle… Are there any reasons to believe in educational miracles?

  3. L2L in relation to GPA, National Assessment and PISA

  4. OECD PISA

  5. Are students prepared to meet the challenges of the future? Do they have the knowledge and skills that are essential for full participation in society? Do they have the capacity to continue learning throughout life? What is our situation compared with other countries? • The Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) provides some answers. • PISA is an internationally standardised assessment that was jointly developed by participating OECD countries. • Administered to 15-year-olds in schools. • Repeated every three years: 2001, 2003, 2006, and 2009. • In all PISA cycles the domains of reading, mathematical, and science literacy are assessed, one major/two minor • Tests are typically administered to between 4,500 and 10,000 students in each country.

  6. Learning to learn- Finnishstudiessince 1996- European Union Pilot Project 2008 as a part of defining and measuringkeycompetencies (8 participatingcountries) googlesearch : Eulearning to learnpilot-L2L is used to moredetailedmodelling national education, to complement PISA and otherstudies

  7. Learning-to-learn (Def) = competency and willingness to adapt to novel tasks • activatingone’smastery-of-thinking and perspective-of-hope • bymeans of maintainingcognitive and affectiveself-regulationin-and-oflearningactivity • L2L is thenunderstood as a resulting ’vector’ of cognitive and personalbeliefs ’vectors’

  8. Basic Issue is - Sowhat! – givenourpsychologicalunderstandingorothersource of data, PISA,L2L…

  9. Developing national education using causal information • How are national concerns constituted or identified? • How one can use PISA or any international comparative study to solve national concerns? • David Olson ‘Psychological theory and educational reforms’ presents a communication dilemma between psycho-educational studies and policy-related national educational reforms: • the causal analysis of the factors relevant to the functioning of school as an institution < a break > the intentional analysis of the processes relevant to teaching and learning • Causal modelling produces variances and correlations, which are not easily translated into intentions and goals

  10. Developing national education using causal information • Social science knowledge as well as educational and psychological knowledge – is characterized by 3 rules concerning factors of causality, comparison, and multivariate complexity (see Edward TufteBeautiful evidence, 2006) • Some factors make a difference, some don’t • The differences aren’t very great • It’s more complicated than that

  11. PISA 2003, 2006 and 2009 Someevidence and someinterpretations

  12. PISA 2009 subject means (read, math, science) by country • 500 is the OECD mean with 100 SD • Countries with best results do well in all tests and vice versa

  13. The results cannot be explained by factors associated with just one subject. • Broad explanations are more interesting from the point of educational policy. • However, what psychological theories can be used /proved?

  14. R = 0,42 R2 = 0,18 • Money does have a role in the results BUT • Top results are attained with medium costs.

  15. Gender as an independent factor, or a fact to be explained? Parents’ education as an independent factor, or what are the effective mechanisms?

  16. PISA 09 Reading

  17. In countries with top results even children from the least educated families perform over or on the OECD average (2009).

  18. Contextual factors where politics decide And difficult issues of the schooling systems with its regions, schools, and classes And it all is about mastering the student variation, differences between students, organising schooling by the spesific national institutional solutions

  19. The average yearly number of hours spent in school correlates negatively with PISA results on the country level. Focus on quality rather than quantity…

  20. Total reading, math and science learning time per week (PISA 2009)

  21. Also in 2009 the best results are mostly achieved with relatively low student variation.

  22. Variance components: Between School Variation (2009) This area is empty! • Scandinavian (comprehensive school) model, • Asian model, • Central European model.

  23. 2009 Finnish pupils believe that school is quite interesting and useful. • Among the more positive of those countries that get highest results.

  24. So… What is so special about Finnish schools?

  25. The Finnish Education System • Basic education still mostly divided to two separate entities of grades 1–6 and grades 7-9 • Girls outperform boys in most subject on most levels • Girls outnumber boys in general upper secondary education and in tertiary education except for technical areas • Vocational/professional education strongly divided into “male” and “female” fields PISA assessment point/position

  26. No streaming or ability grouping • Yet, the choice of first foreign language at grade 3 (and a possible second one at grade 5) can affect class formation in some schools • The same goes for a specific emphasis on music education from grade 1 on and some other “special emphasis” classes (math, science, art) in grades 7-9 • Remedial teaching and special education • Closely integrated into normal teaching; growing emphasis on inclusion • Free school meal as a fixed part of the school day • Emphasis on student welfare: health and dental care, student welfare team, school psychologists, career counsellors (grades 7-9)

  27. All schools create their own curricula based on the national core curriculum and lesson hour distribution • No inspection of schools but mandatory self-evaluation of schools by the municipalities and the schools themselves • No national examinations or testing during (or in the end of) basic education (grades 1-9) • Sample-based assessment in key subjects at grade 9 by the National Board of Education with results published only at the system level (school-level results only given to the schools themselves for internal use) • Pedagogy geared for the teaching of heterogeneous groups with stress on the weaker students

  28. EDUCATIONAL EQUITY ACCOUNTas a way to look for [any] educational and schooling related results from the point-of-view of the educational theory and policy, when repeated and abundant data are available.The amount of data make it increasingly difficult to summarize and draw conclusions [of national gaps].

  29. Educational Equity Account The most essential educational equity factors or factors that have been shown to impede educational equity or the equal realisation of individual educability are gender, parents’ socio-economic or educational status, immigration status, home- and schooling language and, of course, schools. There are also other factors that could be taken into account in estimating national educational equity account in specific areas like in Nordic countries, in Europe, in world.

  30. Educational Equity Account in Finland(PISA 2006, Hautamäki & al, 2008)

  31. What is so special about Finnish schools? Teaching every subject well... … to everybody… ... independently of home background... ... in every school, ... while making every available hour count, …and keeping the atmosphereworkoriented (= serious, butpleasant). This is not possible… without…

  32. This is not possible without: Respect for teaching as a profession… A nationally coordinated core curriculum -> makes requirements explicit -> provides basis for teacher education -> and learning material. Masters level for all… High quality of teacher education… Many applicants -> Possibility of selection… Breadth and quality of educational research… Combined with research based teacher education and research litteracy in schools -> Potential for self directed change.

  33. Russia vs Finland PISA 2009 Somecomparative data

  34. mean read is a mean of 15 plausible values for reading mean math is a mean of 5 plausible values for math mean science is a mean of 5 plausible values for science I have calculated two values for certain analysis level 3 is the 1st principal component of reading, math and science scores balance is the 2nd principal component which tell the tilting of the profile, positive values meaning reading score > math score, and negative values mean that reading score of an individual is lower than his/her math score

  35. Descriptive Statistics FINLAND N Min Max Mean SD mean read 5810 184 744 531 83 mean math 5810 210 783 537 76 mean science 5810 218 799 549 84 Level 3 5810 -2,52 3,04 ,73 ,80 Balance 5810 -2,82 4,38 ,09 ,94 Descriptive Statistics RUSSIA N Min Max Mean SD mean read 5308 124 750 462 86 mean math 5308 191 797 469 80 mean science 5308 133 796 480 85 Level 3 5308 -3,09 3,12 ,03 ,83 Balance 5308 -3,22 3,89 ,12 ,94

  36. Regional differences in Finland and Russia, PISA 2009 data Anova, SPSS Finland, F (11/5809)= 14.23 2,6 % Russia, F (44/5307) = 15,7 11,6 % Ifrounded, in Russia the regionaldifferencesare 4 timeslarger(3 vs 12) than in Finland

  37. Home Language /Russian Data

  38. A possible end?

  39. 9th • Vantaa • 2010 • Region • School • Classes • Pupils

  40. L2L Competence(3rd, 6th and 9th graders), 2010, N for each c. 2000

  41. L2L Beliefs (3rd, 6th and 9th)2010, N 2000 for each

  42. L2L competence and GPA, 9th graders Studentshavebeendivided into 25 % groupsaccording to L2L cognitivetestresults and then GPA hasbeenestimated for students and resultsarepresentedbyschools. The results show thattherearebetweenschooldifferences in givingschoolsmarks, refering to a possiblethreat to educationalequity

  43. Developing national education using causal information • Hautamäki, J., Harjunen, E., Hautamäki, A., Karjalainen, T., Kupiainen, S., Laaksonen, S., Lavonen, J., Pehkonen, E., Rantanen, P. & Scheinin, P. with Halinen, I. and Jakku-Sihvonen, R. (2008). PISA 06 Finland. Analyses, reflections and explanations. Ministry of Education Publications 2008:44. Helsinki: Ministry of Education. (www.minedu.fi/english) • Available also PISA06e.pdf • www.pisa2006.helsinki.fi • www.helsinki.fi/cea

More Related