Mostrando entradas con la etiqueta evaluation. Mostrar todas las entradas
Mostrando entradas con la etiqueta evaluation. Mostrar todas las entradas

10 false ideas on education in Finland

Rosa María Torres
Less is more . e-volv

1. FALSE: Finland has the highest investment in education

Finland allocates 11.2% of its public budget to education, from early childhood to higher education, including the latter (the Ministry of Education and Culture deals with the whole system). 

The average in OECD countries is 12%. Many countries with poorer learning outcomes and not providing free education have higher education budgets (for example Switzerland, Sweden, Germany, the United States, the Netherlands, or the UK).

Education is free, including transportation and a daily school meal for all students. (Textbooks are not free in higher secondary education). 

- OECD, Education at a Glance 2015 (2012 data).

2. FALSE: The secret is more time dedicated to school 

Finland is the OECD country that dedicates less time to school education.
Schooling starts at age 7. 180 days a year, less school hours, less homework. 

A teacher teaches an average of 600 hours a year, 4 classes a day or less. (A school teacher in the United States teaches 1.080 hours a year, 5 or 6 classes a day). 

The formula is less class time, more and longer recesses (75 minutes in total).

Finland is the OECD country with the least homework. Students have more free time to play, to engage in physical activity, to learn out of school, to be with family and friends.  

3. FALSE: Intensive use of technology for teaching and learning in schools

The Finnish school system trusts teachers' skills and expertise. Finland's education strength is pedagogy, not technology. ICTs are at the service of pedagogy rather the other way round. 

Finland is back from some illusions created by technologies over the past decades. It ratifies the importance of handwriting, of reading on paper, of not relying solely on keyboards and screens. 

ICTs are not confined to laboratories any more. They are incorporated to classrooms and other learning spaces within the schools.

4. FALSE: Finland has great education infrastructure

A few modern and innovative school buildings have been built over the past few years. But most school buildings have been operating for many years, and are well maintained.

The key is the organization and use of space, and the creation of a stimulating and informal learning environment. Everything aims at generating collaboration, group work, peer learning, in and out of classrooms.

Class groups are small (max. 20 students per class) so as to facilitate interaction and personalized attention. This is considered especially important in the first two grades.

5. FALSE: Teacher candidates are selected from "best students"

"The best" are not necessarily those with the best grades or the most titles.

Several aspects are valued and observed in the selection of "future best teachers": motivation, attitude towards lifelong learning, reading habits, critical thinking, creativity, artistic and communication skills, knowledge of languages, values such as empathy, perseverance and social commitment. 
6. FALSE: Finland has the highest teacher salaries

Teacher salaries in Finland are below the OECD average.

The key behind teachers' excellent performance is not the economic incentive. There are other factors explaining their motivation and professionalism.

Finnish teachers are carefully selected, trained with high quality standards, and socially respected. They enjoy professional autonomy and take decisions every day in their work. The education administration, parents and the whole society trust them. They feel important and respected for what they do.

7. FALSE: Teachers are not unionized

95% of Finnish teachers are unionized.

The Finnish teacher union (OAJ) is strong and a main actor in education and education reform in the country. Its 120.400 members come from all levels of the education system, from early childhood education to higher education. 

8. FALSE: Finland applies standardized tests 

Finland is not a fan of standardized tests. It does not believe in them it avoids them. It applies one single standardized test to students after they are 16 of years of age. 

The main concern of the school system is learning, not grading or testing. Less time devoted to testing, more time devoted to teaching and learning. 

There is no teacher evaluation system in place. No standardized tests are applied to teachers. 

9. FALSE: Finland sets and publishes rankings 

Finland encourages collaboration, not competition, between learners, teachers and schools. Consequently, it avoids ranking them

It does not publish learning outcomes. 

Finland's objective has never been to be the best in the world, not even in Europe. The objective remains being the best education system for its own students. 

10. FALSE: Finland is satisfied with its education system and its learning outcomes  

Despite its top performance in PISA and its many top economic, social and cultural indicators, Finland is dissatisfied, always looking for ways to make education more meaningful and pleasurable for students. 

The country is currently engaged in a holistic and profound basic education curriculum reform. It is also rethinking the role of ICTs in teaching and learning, and revisiting early childhood education. 

Related texts in this blog 
» Rosa María Torres, FINLANDIA
» Rosa María Torres, Sobre la educación en Finlandia | On education in Finland

Critical voices of PISA in Latin America

Rosa María Torres
(in process)

Critical voices of PISA proliferate in Latin America. At the same time, new countries are ready to participate in PISA 2015. Dissatisfaction and criticism are framed within the growing international criticism to standardized tests and to the growing importance given to educational evaluation worldwide and in this region in particular.

I compile here a few texts and statements referred to such criticism and to alternative proposals. Many more are probably out there (meetings, events, publications, fora, blogs, etc.) Please leave any additional information and comments in this blog.

The results of the last UNESCO's LLECE (Laboratorio Latinoamericano de la Calidad de la Educación) tests, applied in 2013 in 15 Latin American countries, were made public in December 2014 (TERCE: Third Regional Study on the Quality of Education). In April 2015 UNESCO will complete the information with an analysis of the "associated factors" that explain such results. TERCE results will be an important input to take stock of where we are as a region in terms of (primary) school outcomes in the three areas evaluated: language, mathematics and natural sciences in third and sixth grades.

An in-depth debate on educational evaluation, and on international tests such as LLECE and PISA, is essential vis à vis the post-2015 scenario. The what, how and what for of evaluation has decisive impact on the what, how and what for of teaching and learning, and on the overall way of doing education policy and education.

I am translating this post from the original one in Spanish, in this same blog (Voces críticas de PISA en América Latina). The texts remain in Spanish; I am translating only their descriptions.

Basic information on PISA

PISA is an international test proposed by OECD. It is applied every three years, since 2000, in public and private institutions, to 15-year-old students. It covers three areas:  reading, mathematics and science. 10 countries in Latin America and the Caribbean have participated in PISA so far: Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Chile, Mexico, Panama, Perú, Trinidad & Tobago, and Uruguay. They have systematically occupied the last positions in PISA.

PISA 2000: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Peru.
PISA 2003: Brazil, Mexico, Uruguay.
PISA 2006: Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Chile, Mexico, Uruguay.
PISA 2009: Argentina Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica,
Chile, Mexico, Panama, Peru, Trinidad & Tobago, Uruguay.
PISA 2012: Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Chile, Mexico, Peru, Uruguay.

June 2013 

Meeting in Uruguay (14 June). Ministers of education of MERCOSUR (sub-regional grouping created in 1991, integrated by Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay and Venezuela, and Associate States: Chile, Colombia, Peru, Ecuador, Guyana, and Surinam) drafted and sent a letter to Mr. Andreas Schleicher, PISA coordinator, expressing several concerns and the need to "LatinoAmericanize" PISA. Some highlights of the letter:
1. The particularities of Latin America and of its 15-year-olds, including high drop out rates.

2. Discrepancies with the culture of rankings and concern around their public exposure and use.

3. Proposal to include in the tests "situations that are relevant to the life contexts of young people in our region".  

4. Need to diversify the software used to apply the tests in digital format, including Free Software.

April 2014 

PISA, ¿para qué?¿El Ecuador en PISA?, Rosa María Torres, blog OTRA∃DUCACION

In February 2014, the Ecuadorian government announced its decision to join PISA (PISA for Development pilot project). This article discusses the importance (or not) of participating in PISA in the case of "developing countries" and in the case of Ecuador specifically. It recommends Ecuador not to join PISA. Topics dicussed include:

a) the growing international movement against standardized tests;
b) the growing international
concerns around PISA;
the enormous weight placed on evaluation in the country, at all levels and in all areas (Ecuador is one of the countries infected by GERM: competition, evaluation, standardization, standardized tests, excellence, titles). PISA would exarcerbate such tendencies, which contradict the spirit of Sumak Kawsay (Good Living) adopted in the new Constitution (2008); and
d) the fact that Ecuador already participates in a comparative regional evaluation: UNESCO's LLECE, which is closer and is more pertinent to the region than OECD's PISA.

The article provides also an account of recent criticism to PISA in and out of the region.

August 2014
Statement by the Working Group of CLACSO. No a PISA. Por una evaluación al servicio de una educación emancipadora. (NO to PISA: Towards an evaluation serving an emancipatory education).

In Salvador, Bahía, Brazil (11-12 August, 2014), at a CLACSO Working Group meeting (LatinAmerican Council of Social Sciences) “Education Policies and Right to Education in Latin America and the Caribbean", a large group of intellectuals linked to CLACSO expressed their opposition to PISA. They highlighted seven points: 
a) The assumption that good education is the one that confirms the acquisition by students of knowledge that is presumably universal, objective and apolitical, and that is measured by a Ministry of Education.

b) The alledged identity between the act of measuring and its capacity to reflect the learning processes and their improvement.

c) PISA's alledged condition of being a unique and infallible measurement instrument.

d) The relationship between the instrument and teachers' working conditions, inasmuch as it imposes orientations and incentives.

e) The impact of this correct-answer pedagogy on the subjectivity of teachers, students and families who live in constant pressure vis à vis the outcomes.

f) The mercantilization implied in an instrument that is administered globally. 

g) The association between the application of the tests and the evaluation of the quality of education, a concept that is not universal.
October 2014

One of the points raised at the Encuentro Nacional "Más y Mejor Educación para Todos: Desafíos para la próxima década", (National Congress "More and Better Education for All: Challenges for the Next Decade"), held in Buenos Aires on 30-31 October, was getting out of PISA. See note of Página/12 (Spanish).

The congress was organized by the two most important teacher unions in Argentina (CTERA and SADOP); two new universities (UMET and UNIPE), and CLACSO. The event was promoted also by Argentina's National Congress.

November 2014  

Salir de PISA, Pablo Gentili, Blog Contrapuntos, El País, 11 Nov. 2014.

The article elaborates the arguments behind the proposal of "getting out of PISA" presented at the national congress in Argentina (30-31 October). The proposal goes beyond Argentina and other Latin American countries engaged with PISA. University rankings are revised and questioned, as well as the overall ranking culture applied to education, PISA included. Criticism to PISA is illustrated with cases such as that coming from a group of intellectuals and academics in the US, Canada and other developed countries, the Statement by CLACSO Working Group, and the article by Rosa María Torres in Ecuador.

November 2014

Comunidad Educativa, the community of signatories of the Pronunciamiento Latinoamericano por una Educación para Todos (Latin American Statement on Education for All, containing critical positions on educational evaluation) discusses the issue and the possibility of a statement saying NO to PISA.

Related posts in OTRA∃DUCACION (in English)
Stop PISA!  |  ¡Paren PISA!
Sobre evaluación en educación | On Evaluation in Education
Take the Test!
Un GERMen infecta a los sistemas escolares | How GERM is infecting schools around the world

Global learning crisis?

Texto en español: ¿Crisis global de aprendizaje?

International organizations are speaking of a global learning crisis. Is it really a global learning crisis?. Speaking of a "learning crisis" has the risk - once again - of blaming the victim, not acknowledging the teaching crisis behind such learning crisis, and ignoring the overall responsibility of the school system, historically unable to respond to learners' and learning needs.

The fact that the term learning crisis becomes very attractive for the modern and powerful evaluation and testing industry is also a matter of concern. We discuss here also the need to acknowledge teacher learning and not only student learning; teachers' learning is also in crisis. Aldo, it is clear that the so-called "learning crisis" affects not only poor countries but also rich ones, and is thus really global.

Children are not learning in school

A major 'discovery' came up from the extensive international meetings and deliberations stimulated by the 2015 deadline of the Education for All - EFA goals (1990-2000-2015) and the Millennium Development Goals - MDG (2000-2015): millions of children are not learning the basics in school. Of the 650 million children going to school worldwide, 250 million are not learning to read, write and calculate, even after 3 or more years of schooling.
In 2011, of 41 countries surveyed:
- after 4 years or less in school: 1 in 4 children are unable to read all or part of a sentence
- after 5-6 years in school: 1 in 3 children are unable to read all or part of a sentence
- 61% of children who cannot read are girls
- 25% of children in low and middle income countries cannot read.

Illustration: Claudius Ceccon (Brazil)

The term illiteracy applies not only to adults but to children as well. Illiteracy is linked to lack of access to school, but also to access to poor quality and insufficient education, and to lack of opportunities for reading and writing. The combination of poverty and poor teaching, poor learning and poor reading conditions reinforces the worst predictions for the poor.

In 'developing countries' we know this for a long time. Completing four years of school, prescribed by the MDGs as equivalent to 'primary education', is clearly insufficient to make a child literate - able to read, write and calculate in real life situations - especially if that child comes from deprived socio-economic contexts and subordinate languages and cultures.

The same is true with adult literacy: the usual quick literacy programmes - more concerned with statistics than with actual learning - leave people half way, with weak and volatile reading and writing skills. A short 'post-literacy' programme does not add much. Just like children, young people and adults need a solid basic education, and exposure to reading and writing environments and acts.

Not being able to read and write is one of the main causes of school repetition in the early years of schooling worldwide. There is no scientific or even rational reason behind the idea that children must learn to read and write in one or two years. And yet, this is often mandated by national education policies and authorities. 'Failure' is typically attributed to the students rather than to the system and to those in charge of defining policies and curricula.

Few countries give students and teachers enough time to make a joyful and meaningful literacy process. Brazil - well known for its high repetition rates and its long-entrenched 'school repetition culture' - groups together the first three years of primary education, called 'literacy cycle'.

We, specialists, have been saying for decades that literacy education must be seen as an objective for at least the whole of primary education, if not of basic education (primary and lower secondary education, according to ISCED). We have also been saying that, given the importance and complexity of the task, groups in the early grades must be rather small and the best teachers should be assigned to such grades (Finland does it), challenging the logic and usual practice of school systems worldwide.

The acknowledgement by the international community of the school 'global learning crisis' comes a bit late, when the deadline for both MDG and EFA goals is coming to an end, after 15 and 25 years respectively. Hopefully such recognition will lead to world awareness and will help reshape the post-2015 education agenda worldwide.

Learning was one of the six Education for All goals approved in Jomtien, Thailand, in 1990, at the launch of the Education for All initiative. (Goal 3: "Improvement in learning achievement such that an agreed percentage of an appropriate age cohort - e.g. 80% of 14 year-olds - attains or surpasses a defined level of necessary learning achievement). Ten years later, at the World Education Forum in Dakar (2000), that goal was eliminated and learning was mentioned only in reference to young people and adults (Goal 3: "Ensuring that the learning needs of all young people and adults are met through equitable access to appropriate learning and life skills programmes"). That same year the Millennium Development Goals were approved; the two goals referred to education did not mention learning.

It is definitely time to move beyond quantitative goals of access and completion, and to incorporate learning at the core of all education goals. It is time to apply the terms 'universalization' or 'democratization' not just to enrollment and completion of a certain school level, but to learning. It is time to assume that the right to education includes not only the right to access formal schooling but also the right to learn.

"Global learning crisis"? - Blaming the victim

There was apparently consensus in choosing the term "global learning crisis". It is certainly global: the crisis affects not only poor but also rich countries. On the other hand, it is clear that acknowledging the learning crisis in the school system implies acknowledging the teaching crisis as well. Speaking of a learning crisis has the risk of placing the problem, as usual, on the side of the learners rather than on the system.

Illustration: Claudius Ceccon

Blaming the victim is daily practice in the school culture. But we know - or should know - that if children are not learning in schools it is not because they are stupid but because the school system - not only teachers individually -- is unable to teach them properly and the social system is unable to offer them adequate learning conditions in and out of school (family welbeing, affection, protection, nutrition, health, sleep, security, etc.).

Both the learning crisis and the teaching crisis are related to an obsolete and dysfunctional school system that needs major changes if we want to ensure learning, learning to learn, and learning to enjoy learning.

Teacher training appears typically as the main 'solution' to educational quality and to student learning. However, even if important, teacher training is not enough. There are other quality factors related to teachers (salaries, professionalism, respect and social appreciation, participation in educational policies and decisions, etc.) and other internal and external factors intervening in school success or failure.

When it comes to teaching and learning, let us not forget that:

(a) The "global learning crisis" affects not only 'developing countries' - focus of Education for All and other international education reports and debates - but also 'developed countries'. Concern and complaints about poor reading and writing skills among primary and high-school students are common and increasingly voiced in rich - OECD - countries.

(b) The "global learning crisis" affects not only students but teachers as well. Millions of school teachers receive inadequate and poor pre- and in-service training, where they learn nothing or what they learn is not relevant and useful for their professional practice and development. There is huge waste of money and time in teacher education and training that do not translate into meaningful teacher learning

(c) Students are blamed for not learning and teachers are blamed for not teaching (or for not teaching in ways that ensure desirable student learning). However, the teaching role is not exclusive of teachers. The whole school system has been designed and operates as a teaching system. And this teaching system - the way we know it - is not adequate for learning and for learners.

Illustration: Frato (Italy)

Even if teachers are trained, and even if they are well trained and paid, the learning crisis - including their own - is there. The label "global learning crisis" may activate the assessment and evaluation machinery, with its fierce competition, standardized tests, and rankings, rather than stimulate the long postponed and much needed teaching-learning revolution.

Now comes PISA for 'developing countries' (PISA-D)

Some of the concerns raised around OECD's PISA tests (reading, mathematics and science, applied every three years to 15 year olds) refer to their inadequacy for "developing countries". 

Participating Latin American countries systematically occupy some of the lowest places in PISA rankings, far from "developed" OECD countries
(in the past few years, Mexico, Chile and Colombia have been accepted as OECD countries; they are also at the bottom). 

PISA tests were developed by and for OECD countries. Later, non-OECD countries  have joined PISA, 10 of them from Latin America and the Caribbean: Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Chile, Mexico, Panama, Peru, Trinidad & Tobago, and Uruguay. (See: list of countries that have participated in PISA)

Issues related to the inadequacy or usefulness of PISA for non-OECD countries include the following:

» the need to contextualize the tests, responding to the great heterogeneity (socio-economic, cultural, etc.) of countries, within the same generic category of "developing";

many 15 year olds are out of school because they never enrolled or because they dropped out (drop out rates are high in may countries, especially in secondary education);  

» there is no technical capacity in the majority of countries to administer a complex and massive standardized test such as PISA; 
» many countries participate in international tests (such as UNESCO's LLECE tests in the case of Latin America);
» devastating domestic effects in countries getting low results and rankings in PISA tests;

» the enormous attention dedicated by governments to improve scores and rankings in the next PISA test, distracting time and resources from critical structural issues and from learning as such. 

Some of these concerns have been aired in open letters addressed to OECD, such as the one sent in 2013 by Ministers of Education in Latin America (Los Ministros de Educación del MERCOSUR y la prueba PISA) or the one sent in 2014 by 92 academics from the US and other OECD countries (Stop PISA!). Concerns have also been raised in Chile (Bárbara Figueroa critica la Prueba PISA porque mide asuntos 'ajenos a la realidad educativa chilena') and in Ecuador vis a vis this country's decision to join PISA (PISA ¿para qué? ¿El Ecuador en PISA?). (See: Critical Voices of PISA in Latin America).

Responding to these and other concerns, the OECD proposed PISA for Development (PISA-D), an initiative addressed to middle and low income countries. The idea is to expand the participation of non-OECD countries in PISA. Nine countries - from Africa, Asia, and Latin America and the Caribbean - expressed their interest to participate in the pilot project: Bhutan, Cambodia, Ecuador, Guatemala, Honduras, Panama, Paraguay, Senegal, and Zambia. (See: Technical meeting, June 2013); OECD Call for Tender 100000990, August 2014).
"PISA for Development aims to increase the policy relevance of PISA for developing countries through enhanced PISA survey instruments that are more relevant for the contexts found in developing countries but which produce scores that are on the same scales as the main PISA assessment. The project will also develop an approach and methodology for including out of school children in the surveys. The project’s objectives will be achieved over a 36 month period through a three-way partnership involving the OECD, concerned development partners (DAC members plus the World Bank, UNESCO and other UN bodies and other regional organisations) and partner countries from the developing world".
The OECD sees the following advantages of PISA for Development:
• "A single reference against which to rigorously gauge the degree of progress
made towards targets for educational quality and equity.

• A comparable and robust measure of progress to allow all countries – regardless of their starting point – to establish themselves on an improvement trajectory to achieve targets referenced to common international goals.

• Credible and comparable results: PISA requires participating countries to follow common technical, institutional and administrative standards for the assessment.

• An opportunity to help build institutional capacity. Countries are responsible for overseeing PISA implementation; therefore, participation in PISA can also drive improvements in institutions. This capacity building could be implemented directly with development partners in a way that creates spill-over benefits to other parts of the educational sector."
PISA-D is an OECD strategy for the post-2015 period. 2015 marked the deadline for two major world initiatives: Education for All (EFA, 1990-2000-2015) and the Millennium Development Goals (MDG, 2000-2015). In 2015, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) and the 2030 Agenda were approved.

International awareness around a "global learning crisis" - millions of children worldwide not learning to read, write and calculate after attending school for four years or more - acknowledges for the first time the precariousness of learning in primary schools in most "developing countries" and is contributing to finally place learning as an explicit and fundamental goal. Unfortunately, that goes also with an emphasis on learning assessment starting now in pre-primary education. In that context, OECD/PISA appear as key global partners.

"Developing a universal measure of educational success" is one of eleven areas in which OECD plans to contribute to the 2030 Agenda (Beyond the MDGs: Towards an OECD contribution to the post-2015 agenda). In other words: the aim is to establish ONE definition of 'educational success' and ONE way to measure it worldwide, in the North and in the South. PISA-D is the strategy and the instrument to incorporate that "other part of the world" still absent from the global education evaluation race.

A big player and evaluation enthusiast such as the World Bank blesses global learning benchmarks and recommends them especially for "developing countries."
"In a global economy the primary benchmark for success is no longer improvement by national standards, but the best-performing education systems internationally. (Having said that, it’s also important for countries to set and measure learning goals that reflect their own national priorities and values.) This usually means participating in one of the many international assessment programs that test the math, science, problem solving or other competencies of students at the same grade or age level in different education systems around the world. Countries – particularly developing and emerging economies – may feel at a disadvantage in this global benchmarking, but should keep in mind that steady improvement over time is the important thing." (Education: Measuring for Success in Today’s World, 9 May 2014).

Issues that may need more focused attention and discussion 

The following issues were mentioned in "The PISA for Development initiative moves forward: Have my wishes been fulfilled?" (2 Feb. 2015):

- A test with questions that 15-year-olds in emerging and developing economies can actually answer.

The OECD’s original plan was to draw solely on their existing pool of 337 PISA questions to create the PISA for Development test. One and a half year later, the OECD started to explore using  questions from other regional and international assessments to supplement the PISA questions. The idea is to make sure 15-year-olds in emerging and developing countries can actually answer.

- A test that emerging and developing economies can afford.

The PISA for Development pilot is about twice as expensive as the regular PISA exercise, since it  involves lots of developmental work, in an effort to adapt the questionnaires to the contexts of these countries and to develop a methodology to include out-of-school students. Donors such as the World Bank have provided financial support to facilitate countries' participation. It is essential, however, to take a hard look at the long-term sustainability of PISA for Development, if countries are expected to cover the costs on their own.

- A test that contributes to learning for all.

The pilot faced the challenge of collecting learning data on the entire 15-year-old cohort in a country, including those who are out of school. This may include youth who never went to school or who are semi-literate.

PISA-D is administered both in and outside of school. Eight countries – Bhutan, Cambodia, Ecuador, Guatemala, Honduras, Paraguay, Senegal and Zambia – participated  in the school-based implementation of PISA-D, which was carried out from 2015 to 2018. Six countries administered the out-of-school assessment: Guatemala, Honduras, Panama, Paraguay, Senegal and Zambia. 

PISA-D countries can compare their results to the more than 80 countries participating in PISA.

PISA-D results

PISA-D results were released by OECD on 11 December, 2018, in Quito. Results included seven countries: Cambodia, Ecuador, Guatemala, Honduras, Paraguay, Senegal and Zambia. Bhutan is not included since it arrived late.







Related texts in this blog

Sobre evaluación en educación  | On Evaluation in Education
Artículos sobre PISA  | Articles on PISA
25 Years of Education for All  | 25 años de Educación para Todos


Artículos sobre PISA ▸ Articles on PISA

Artículos sobre las pruebas PISA publicados en este blog
Articles on OECD's PISA published in this blog

» Correa, Moreno y PISA: Disputa política y evaluación educativa

» El Ecuador en las pruebas internacionales de educación

  Bienestar de los estudiantes de 15 años en diez países (PISA)  

» Aprender a resolver problemas y de manera colaborativa (PISA 2015)

» "Creo que Paulo [Freire] habría disfrutado mucho conociendo escuelas, aulas y bibliotecas finlandesas"

» 10 ideas falsas sobre Finlandia y la educación
» 10 false ideas on education in Finland

Now comes PISA for "developing countries"
» Ahora viene PISA para "países en desarrollo"

» Stop PISA! ▸ ¡Paren PISA!

» ¿PISA para qué? El Ecuador en PISA-D

» Los ministros de educación del MERCOSUR y las pruebas PISA

» Prueba PISA: Seis conclusiones y una pregunta

» Repensando el entusiasmo evaluador y las pruebas

» Glosario mínimo sobre la educación en Finlandia

» ¿China, Corea del Sur o Finlandia?

» Un GERMen infecta a los sistemas escolares (traducción al español del artículo de Pasi Sahlberg)
» How GERM is infecting schools around the world, by Pasi Sahlberg

» Una prueba no prueba nada (en proceso)

» Voces críticas de PISA en América Latina (en proceso)

» PISA con humor

Las políticas educativas en Finlandia no están orientadas a sacar buena nota en PISA (entrevista con Pasi Sahlberg)

Más evaluación, ¿mejor educación?


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...