What are PISA and TIMSS? What do they tell us?

Proceedings oh the International Congress of Mathematicians, Vol. 3, 2006-01-01, ISBN 978-3-03719-022-7, pags. 1663-1672 01/2006;
Source: OAI


This is a panel discussion on PISA and TIMSS, two international comparative studies in educational achievement. The panelists are Jan de Lange of the Freudenthal Institute, the Netherlands, for PISA, and William Schmidt of Michigan State University, the United States, for TIMSS, with Lee Peng Yee of National Institute of Education, Singapore, as a moderator. They are to explain the nature, the aims, and the conclusions of the two studies, and to argue over their relative merits. This document contains three initial statements from the above-mentioned participants respectively.

Download full-text


Available from: William Schmidt, Jul 23, 2014
1 Follower
35 Reads
  • Source
    • "Through understanding how US curricula addressed both aspects of Unit Iteration (e.g., measuring length using two identical body parts or inappropriate placement of length units), the conceptual richness of Unit Iteration may be enhanced. Our work indirectly supports the call for gaining insights about different nations' curricula from comparison studies (Lee, et al., 2006). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This article compares the opportunity to learn length measurement in the USA and Singapore as revealed in the close analysis of some of their written elementary curriculum materials. Written curricula strongly influence students’ learning of mathematics, without completely determining it. The Trends in Third International Mathematics and Science study 2007 showed the relatively low performance of the US and Singapore fourth graders in measurement, which was attributed in part to the learning opportunities provided to the students. We examined and coded all instances of length measurement in three different US curricula and one Singapore curriculum through Grade 3, using a very detailed scheme that identified particular elements of conceptual, procedural and conventional knowledge and the textual forms that present this knowledge. Results show strong emphasis on measurement procedures, across all grades and curricula, in both countries. However, in numerous ways, the Singapore curriculum is more focused, organizationally, procedurally and conceptually. US curricula provide more diverse access to conceptual knowledge where Singapore materials focus on independent work involving procedures, within and across grade levels. Limitations of the curricula in both countries are discussed. KeywordsLength–Opportunity to learn–Textbook comparison–Spatial measurement–Curriculum analysis–US curricula–Singapore curriculum
    ZDM: the international journal on mathematics education 10/2011; 43(5):681-696. DOI:10.1007/s11858-011-0339-0