OK, this article relates to the UK, but the US is lower down the table than the UK, and I’m not sure whether or where Canada are.
What are folks’ views on this kind of pan-global comparison of education? Is it healthy, unhelpful, challenging, thought-provoking?
First of all, the fact that China “does not compete as a country” immediately makes their results meaningless. You cannot compare a country’s largest and most cosmopolitan cities to another country’s everything. It doesn’t work that way.
Secondly, once you look at the results for actual COUNTRIES (Singapore is a nation-state but it’s really just a city) the differences are incredibly small.
The test can be used guardedly but favours rote learning. Which is not a very helpful indicator of educational success in the 21st century.
Looking at that, it’s not that bad.
Even accounting for the countries that are greater than 50 points above the average, there are only three outliers. All highly dense areas, easing the burden of educating a populace.
The rest of the countries seem to be within ~50 points +/- of the average. The UK and US are just on and behind that average, respectively.
While I’m never against making education better, this report isn’t anything alarming.
Something I wrote last week about a similar test, the NIMSS:
Anti-education screeds often talk about how the US is failing students in STEM education, with references to studies showing US kids in the middle of the pack of nations on international tests.
Probably the biggest such test is the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study: their report is here: TIMSS - TIMSS 2011 Results.
I was recently looking through it, and found some statistics that are, I think, important for folks to know, with a focus on North Carolina kids taking the fourth-grade math test (I focus here because it’s closest to my own bailiwick–not trying to cherrypick stats).
First, the international average score on the test is normed at 500. The US scores significantly above average, at 541. North Carolina scores above the national average, at 554.
But where it gets interesting is when you break it down by poverty.
In schools containing 25%-50% low-income students, the score jumps to 568.
In schools containing 10-25% low-income students, the score jumps to 587–for reference, these kids perform as well as students in China and Japan.
In schools containing fewer than 10% low-income students, THESE SCHOOLS DON’T EXIST.
I’m not a statistician, granted, and there may well be a flaw in my analysis. But a superficial look at these statistics confirms my belief that our number one educational priority ought to involve the reduction of students living in poverty.
I haven’t analyzed PISA even at this superficial level, but I do think it’s worth looking at how results break down by poverty rates, both within our country and around the world; at the same time, income inequality within a country is worth looking at (the US has a really high income inequality rate compared to a lot of countries).
Here in Arizona our schools are rated A through F, just like kids are graded. Every year they do a big announcement of the grade each school got, how it compares to last year, etc. Some bright bulb got the idea of mapping these schools’ grades compared to how wealthy a given neighborhood is. Surprise! From the wealthiest part of town (mostly A schools) through the middle class (mostly B and C schools) through the poorest parts (D and F schools). See here http://www.blogforarizona.com/blog/2013/11/income-geography-and-state-school-grades.html
I think this is true all over the country. We are good at educating middle class and above students. Not so good at educating poor kids. It’s a poverty problem, not an education problem.
http://www.oecd.org/pisa/keyfindings/PISA-2012-results-snapshot-Volume-I-ENG.pdf
(Above is a PDF with the scores. The BBC chart truncates a lot. Be sure to check out footnotes 1 and 2 in the PDF! 
)
I think it’s useless as a measuring stick as the testing standards differ per country. China is the obvious example - why are they allowed to have four (4) different locales be tested separately instead of a score for the entire country? And what does this mean anyway - the entire city of Shanghai? Certain schools, certain pupils, what?
I also don’t trust the Shanghai scores - 7% better than #2? Really? I don’t doubt that kids could do that, but a random group of kids from Shanghai consistently beating the rest of the world by 5-7% in math, reading, and science, year-over-year? Sorry… bullshit meter is pinging, and hard.
Mine doesn’t ping that hard. If you single out Massachusetts, I believe it’s #1. I’m sure you can pick cities in the US that are similarly high on the scale.
True, and that’s why the rankings are largely useless. If one country gets to cherry-pick their PISA testing locations/students, then what good is PISA?
More at the link.