Chapter 6
Table 6.3 Latin America and OECD Scores on PISA Assessment Tests
Mean PISA Scores in Reading
Mean PISA Scores in Math
Mean PISA Scores in Science
Country
2000
2003
2006
2000
2003
2006
2000
2003
2006
Argentina Brazil Chile Colombia Mexico Peru Uruguay OECD countries
418 396 410 n.d. 422 327 n.d. 500
n.d. 403 n.d. n.d. 400 n.d. 434 500
376 393 442 385 410 n.d. 413 500
388 334 384 n.d. 387 292 n.d. 500
n.d. 356 n.d. n.d. 385 n.d. 422 500
381 370 411 370 406 n.d. 427 500
396 375 415 n.d. 422 333 n.d. 500
n.d. 390 n.d. n.d. 405 n.d. 438 500
391 390 438 388 410 n.d. 428 500
Sources: OECD (2001, 2004, 2007). Note: PISA scores are statistically normalized, with the score for OECD countries as a median (500). Results show deviations from that median; a country’s score can be above or below the median, with a greater (lesser) difference from the median representing a greater (lesser) difference between the performance of that country’s students and that of students in OECD countries. n.d. = no data.
born lack of progress, in spite of years of policy reforms and growing resources devoted to education.3 Table 6.3 shows the scores from students of the seven Latin American countries that have participated in at least one of the three rounds of PISA,4 compared to the OECD average. It is easy to observe that Latin American students consistently underperform. Beyond the general averages reported in the table, a more-detailed analysis of the comparative-performance PISA data would reveal that the average score of 15-yearold students in participating countries could be considered the equivalent of about one grade level below the one characteristic of the lowest 25 percent of OECD students tested. A similar comparison with leading countries such as Finland and Korea would give rise to further disappointing conclusions about the quality of education in Latin American countries.5
3
Several important caveats are in order: first, many assessment tests do not capture important aspects of what most educators, and all reasonable definitions of education quality, would deem pertinent, since they are generally focused on two or three subjects and are hence of limited value in assessing less tangible abilities (creativity, initiative, complex thinking). Second, by themselves, they capture far more than what a particular school can deliver, since some determinants of learning that are not directly controlled by the school (family background, innate ability, previous educational history, and so on) can dramatically impact scores and can be monitored only through in-depth statistical analysis—albeit quite imperfectly. The most important factor is the amount of value added by a particular educational experience—what influences do particular systems, schools, teachers, or school types have on learning? These data are rarely available; nonetheless when effectively planned and executed, standardized tests offer a reasonable approximation to valuing education quality and constitute widely used tools to assess the performance of education systems worldwide. 4
PISA is used to test 15-year-olds worldwide and evaluates factors related to education and employability skills. Six Latin American countries participated in the 2000 and/or 2003 PISA tests: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Mexico, Peru (only in 2000), and Uruguay (starting in 2003). In the 2006 round, Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, and Uruguay participated. 5
For a benchmarking exercise involving comparisons between Latin America and leading performers in several education dimensions, see IDB (2006a).
Copyright © by the Inter-American Development Bank. All rights reserved. For more information visit our website: www.iadb.org/pub
126