PISA has helped policy makers lower the cost of political action by backing difficult decisions with evidence – but it has also raised the political cost of inaction by exposing shortcomings in policy and practice. This aids the development of education systems that can deliver high-quality instruction, equitable learning opportunities for all and nurture student well-being.

OECD 2022 Insights and Interpretations, page 2

The PISA 2022 reports were released globally this week, and here in NZ we had Andreas Schleicher online to provide an overview of what the data revealed, with a particular focus on where NZ is represented.

When it comes to making sense of the data from PISA 2022, it’s important to consider factors such as the overall performance of students across countries, trends over time, disparities among different student groups, and the impact of various educational policies and practices.

Unsurprisingly, the global surveys across Maths, Reading and Science continue to reveal a downward trend in achievement since they started in 2000. With 23 years of this pattern being revealed it needs to be recognised that there are wider forces and influences at play than any single ‘silver bullet’ may provide the solution for. We must acknowledge that education is impacted by and a reflection of the broader society within which it operates.

Singling out and blaming particular teaching methods, or the performance of previous governments, simply doesn’t account for the now 23-year trend across pretty much all countries represented in the surveys. These are shallow arguments that lack the depth of understanding that the data opens us up to.

A critical analysis of the data from PISA 2022 can provide insights into the strengths and weaknesses of different educational systems, the effectiveness of teaching approaches, and the potential impact of socioeconomic factors on student performance. This can be valuable for policymakers, educators, and researchers to identify best practices and areas for improvement in education. The New Zealand MoE has published their key findings in their Aotearoa Summary Report.

One of the things I find intriguing is the fact that the downward trend is persistent from the start of the when these surveys were administered in 2000. It begs the question, “what was the situation before 2000? Had the decline started even earlier? If so, when? If not, what has happened from 2000 on that is different?”

There’s also a question to be asked about the structure and reliability of the data that informs these results, particularly taking into account the way in which certain questions may be interpreted in different cultural or socio-economic settings. For the 2022 survey on Maths, for example, a lot of attention was paid to creating questions that were based on solving real-life problems, rather than simply solving equations. While this sounds a good idea, some respondents may find difficulty in working it out if the ‘real life’ example isn’t something experienced in their ‘real world’.

The same applies to the questions about wellbeing from which a lot of conclusions were made about the relationship between a students personal circumstance and their achievement. A fellow panelist on the call with Andreas Schleicher leads a school comprising a very large number of students from families without two parents in the home or where neither parent may be working at present etc. She pointed out that responding to a list of questions asking about their home circumstances caused many respondents in her school to feel a level of ‘shame’ or inadequacy, with the negative responses they were required to make reinforcing their view of themselves as being less worthy or capable.

Then there’s the issue of to what extent we should be relying purely on one source of information and data gathering to inform our view of achievement patterns. In New Zealand this conversation is fraught with difficulty given the paucity of any other form of data that can provide reliable comparisons across years and across age groups etc. In Australia, for example, there have been national test in place for some time, and as Helen Georgiou from the University of Wollongong and Sally Larsen from the University of New England point out, the question of whether Australian students are falling behind can really depend on what test you are looking at.

That aside, it’s worth considering what we can learn from the wealth of data that has been collected for the PISA22 survey. Besides the data relating specifically to achievement across mathematics, reading and science, the PISA 2022 reports contain a lot of information that has been gathered about the context of the learners – including socio-economic status, exposure to bullying, perceptions of self-confidence and the use of digital devices etc. – particularly during the period of the COVID-19 pandemic. It is the correlations between this information and the achievement data that provides some of the most intriguing, and challenging, insights when it comes to thinking about how we might address the downward trajectory.

I’ve noted just some of the key themes identified in the presentation of the reports, and added some thoughts on what we could be practically focusing on in order to make a difference here:

1. Self-Motivation of Students to Learn: survey responses revealed that the self-motivation of students to learn on their own is low across the board. We need to be doing more at the school and classroom level to build this level of confidence, and provide tools and strategies that support the development of self-directed and self-managing learners. This could include:
   • Enhanced Engagement Strategies: Develop and implement innovative teaching methods that foster intrinsic motivation, like project-based learning or personalized learning plans.
   • Life Skills Curriculum: Introduce programs focusing on self-directed learning, resilience, and goal-setting to cultivate students’ self-motivation.
     –
2. Poverty Needn’t be a Destiny: The report notes that poverty isn’t always a determining factor in the success of students, factors such as parental interest in school activity can be more impactful for example. This could be achieved through things such as:
   • Parental Involvement Programs: Encourage and support initiatives that actively involve parents in their children’s education, highlighting the impact of parental interest and engagement.
   • Mentoring and Support Networks: Establish mentorship programs or support networks to guide students from economically disadvantaged backgrounds, providing resources beyond the classroom.
     –
3. Performance Variation within Schools: contrary to what some might expect, the variance in achievement levels was more significant within schools than between schools – certainly in New Zealand. Consideration needs to be given to things such as:
   • Intra-School Support Programs: Implement targeted interventions within schools to address performance gaps, such as peer tutoring, tailored support for struggling students, or enrichment programs for high achievers.
   • Data-Driven Decision Making: Use data analytics to identify and address performance discrepancies within schools, allowing for more tailored and effective interventions.
     –
4. Boredom as a Cause of Absenteeism: This came through strongly in the report on experiences during the COVID pandemic. It is acknowledged that this problem existed before COVID, but was exacerbated by the time away from school as experienced now with countries, including New Zealand, having difficulty getting students to come back to school. Punishing students or families for non-attendance isn’t really an answer. As a system, schools and teachers must take responsibility for reviewing what they do to make school more interesting and enagaging through things such as…
   • Engagement Initiatives: Design dynamic and interactive lesson plans, incorporate hands-on activities, and promote student involvement in decision-making to combat boredom and increase attendance.
   • Student-Centered Curriculum: Encourage teachers to diversify teaching methodologies to cater to different learning styles, fostering a more engaging classroom environment.
     –
5. Digital Distraction: Strong messages came through the report on the extent to which the use of digital technologies were and are a distraction to learning. Much of what is reported signals obsessive, or addictive behaviours. Banning mobile phones was identified as a successful strategy, but this leads to further problems of anxiety and detachment, plus ignores the fact that our learners are growing up in a digitally rich world and schools should be places where the responsible use of digital technologies is modelled and discussed. Some strategies to consider are:
   • Digital Wellness Programs: Educate students about healthy technology usage and incorporate strategies to manage digital distractions into the curriculum.
   • Promotion of Offline Activities: Encourage extracurricular activities that promote face-to-face interaction and wellbeing, reducing reliance on digital devices.
     –
6. Wellbeing in Education: The report notes that we need to be considering the experience we are providing
   learners at school. Our schools must be about more than simply transferring knowledge. The big question here is ‘how well do we know our learners, and how is this reflected in our learning design?” We must focus on:
   • Inclusive School Culture: Foster a supportive and inclusive school environment that prioritises student wellbeing, implementing mental health support services and stress management programs.
   • Teacher Training on Wellbeing: Provide professional development for educators on recognising and addressing student wellbeing concerns within the classroom.
     –
7. Early Childhood Education Advantage: The evidence revealed a clear performance advantage for learners at age 15 who have had an early childhood education experience. We need to continue to focus on:
   • Investment in Early Childhood Programs: Advocate for increased access to quality early childhood education, highlighting its long-term positive impact on academic performance and social development.
   • Transition Support: Develop smoother transition programs that leverage the benefits of early childhood education into later stages of schooling.