ראמ"ה מדידה בשירות הלמידה

"'
1.3.2009
http://rama.education.gov.il
"

© 2008 # *

, ...

“That which
Campbell's Law
"The more any quantitative social indicator is used for social decision making, the more subject it will be to corruption pressures and the more apt it will be to distort and corrupt the social processes it is intended to monitor.”
"achievement tests may well be valuable indicators of general school achievement under conditions of normal teaching aimed at general competence.
But when test scores become the goal of the teaching process, they both lose their value as indicators of educational status and distort the educational process in undesirable ways.”
Campbell, Donald T., "Assessing the Impact of Planned Social Change“. The Public Affairs Center, Dartmouth College, December, 1976.
© 2008 # *
,
:
?

© 2008 # *

International Comparisons
OECD Average = 500
1
Reading
Reading
Reading
"If you want to reform the world
- you must reform education"
© 2008 # *
"?
"
" , , . , , ,
" -, , , "
© 2008 # *
© 2008 # *
":
"
", :

; ", ; ; , ;
,
;

;

; ;

-, ;

, , ,

© 2008 # *
" ?
" - ?

" ( 1) *
( 1)*

( 2)

( 2)

( 1)

© 2008 # *
–
":

© 2008 # *

" -
" ' "
-
© 2008 # *

© 2008 # *

1.
2.
5.
5.
5.
"
hnu2986 (h) - :
© 2008 # *
–
© 2008 # *

International Assessments
(1995, 1999, 2003, 2007, 2011) – 67 countries
PIRLS - Reading Assessment
(2000, 2003, 2006, 2009) – 64 countries
SITES - Information Technology

:
Black = figure in this Excel file
Red = figure in this Excel file, but to be published only on line
Green = item available in the Ch 2 items Word file
Figure 2.1
PISA 2006 content areas for the knowledge of science domain
Figure 2.5
Figure 2.6
Figure 2.7
The relationship between items and students on the proficiency scale [NB Fig 2.1 in 2003]
Figure 2.8
Summary descriptions of the six proficiency levels on the combined science scale
Figure 2.9
A map of released science questions in PISA 2006, illustrating the proficiency levels
Figure 2.10
A map of selected science questions in PISA 2006, crossing-references knowledge and competencies
Figure 2.11a
Figure 2.11b
Figure 2.11c
(Web only) Percentage of studnets at each level of proficiency on the science scale
Figure 2.11d
(Web only) Performance of males and females on the science scale
Figure 2.12a
Figure 2.12b
Student performance on the science scale and spending per student
Figure 2.13
Comparison of the performances on the different scales in science
Figure 2.14a
Figure 2.14b
Figure 2.14c
Countries where students demonstrate a relative weakness on the Using scientific evidence scale
Figure 2.14d
Countries where students demonstrate a relative strength in Using scientific evidence
Figure 2.14e
Range of rank of the countries on the different scientific scales
Figure 2.15
Performance of males and females on the Identifiying scientific issues scale
Figure 2.16
Performance of males and females on the Explaining phenomena scientifically scale
Figure 2.17
Performance of males and females on the Using scientific evidence scale
Figure 2.18a
Mean score on the Knowledge about science and on the Knowledge of science scales
Figure 2.18b
(Web only) Mean score, variation and gender difference in student performance on the Knowledge about science scale
Figure 2.18c
(Web only) Performance of males and females on the Knowledge about science scale
Figure 2.19a
Countries with relative strengths and weaknesses on the "Physical systems" scale
Figure 2.19b
Countries with relative strengths and weaknesses on the “Earth and space systems” scale
Figure 2.19c
Countries with relative strengths and weaknesses on the “Living systems” scale
Figure 2.19d
(Web only) Gender differences on the "Physical systems", "Earth and space systems" and "Living systems" scales
Figure 2.19e
(Web only) Performance of males and females on the "Physical systems" scale
Figure 2.19f
(Web only) Performance of males and females on the "Earth and space systems" scale
Figure 2.19g
(Web only) Performance of males and females on the "Living systems" scale
Figure 2.20
Summary descriptions of the six proficiency levels in Identifying scientific issues
Figure 2.21a
Percentage of students at each level of proficiency on the Identifying scientific issues scale
Figure 2.21b
Distribution of student performance on the Identifying scientific issues scale
Figure 2.21c
Multiple comparisons of mean performance on the Identifying scientific issues scale
Figure 2.22
Summary descriptions of the six proficiency levels in Explaining phenomena scientifically
Figure 2.25a
Percentage of students at each level of proficiency on the Explaining phenomena scientifically scale
Figure 2.25b
Figure 2.25c
Figure 2.26
Figure 2.27
Grand Canyon
Figure 2.28
Mary Montagu
Figure 2.29
Physical Exercise
Figure 2.30
Summary descriptions of the six proficiency levels in Using scientific evidence
Figure 2.31a
Percentage of students at each level of proficiency on the Using scientific evidence scale
Figure 2.31b
Distribution of student performance on the Using scientific evidence scale
Figure 2.31c
Multiple comparisons of mean performance on the Using scientific evidence scale
Figure 2.32
Acid Rain
Figure 2.33
DataF2.11a&d
Table 2.1c
Table 2.4c
Table 2.4c
Mean score, variation and gender differences in student performance on the science scale
Copy value of AF and AG for the graph 2.11d and sort by colum AO
All students
Gender differences
Figure 2.11a
Figure 2.11a
OECD
average
Gradation bars extend from the 5th to the 95th percentiles
Countries are ranked in descending order of mean score.
Mean score on the science scale
95% confidence interval around the mean score
Source: OECD PISA database 2006, Table 2.1c.
Figure 2.11a
Performance on the science scale of males and females
Note: Gender differences that are statistically significant are marked in darker colour (see Annex A3).
Figure 2.11d (web only)
Trend
Science scale
Source: OECD PISA 2006 database.
No statistically significant difference from comparison country.

Statistically significantly above the OECD average
Not statistically significantly different from the OECD average
Statistically significantly below the OECD average
Finland
DataF2.11c
0 added in green
Percentage of students at each level of proficiency on the science scale
Level 1
Below level 1 (below 334.94 score points)
Level 2 (from 409.54 to 484.14 score points)
Level 6 (above 707.93 score points)
Estonia
-6.7
-1.0
21.0
33.7
26.2
10.1
1.4
7.7
6.7
1.0
84.7
Figure 2.11c (web only)
Figure 2.11c
Percentage of students at each level of proficiency on the science scale
Countries are ranked in descending order of percentage of 15-year-olds in Levels 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6.
Source: OECD PISA database 2006, Table 2.1a.
&L &R&D &T &Z&F
-3.5577023566
-0.5345150683
13.6106946814
29.1386592488
32.2469140816
16.9618613337
3.9496532295
-6.7001454518
-0.9531426575
21.0042227348
33.6854607722
26.1624638062
10.0885029708
1.4060616068
-7.0163157194
-1.7276083378
16.9344398092
28.6907583328
29.7128348904
13.8516883224
2.066354588
-7.8237705148
-2.1905913868
19.0579205461
28.8485820878
27.6586696401
12.0267563765
2.3937094479
-8.8764505854
-1.4112520434
25.9837028048
35.6673503083
22.7677334908
5.0376615829
0.2558491844
-8.7255075615
-2.5135272822
21.1813713661
31.7552727358
25.4924873111
9.2337278955
1.0981058479
-9.7033821033
-1.9406943878
18.5578624623
27.2947634441
27.8664198905
12.926674474
1.710203238
-8.8534319143
-3.1787213319
18.4571050371
27.4818328926
26.9782106723
12.4296819056
2.6210162461
-9.8227052309
-3.0321487998
20.2218966808
27.7287634185
24.576609706
11.7730283116
2.8448478524
-10.2887556377
-2.6331660911
20.9599182325
28.6910203345
25.2096807685
9.9866770878
2.2307818479
-10.6793000801
-2.2829307644
21.1181095241
26.9411879153
25.8433644064
11.4831539074
1.6519534024
-9.6827933091
-4.0197755826
19.7040149046
25.0838356042
23.9079555493
13.608504567
3.9931204832
-11.0640533656
-2.818601621
23.142805995
27.5694857826
22.494867454
10.7386746396
2.1715111422
-12.3465992505
-2.6905695842
26.0308834948
31.0915598934
20.9628628113
6.2385092073
0.6390157585
-11.3091442512
-4.0685290368
21.3590110308
27.8696673174
23.5689065997
9.9904844166
1.8342573476
-11.9644890762
-3.5457528896
24.0071838246
29.7199511868
21.3500362643
8.2785458701
1.1340408883
-12.0530733186
-3.4787322033
23.4041849468
27.7693110165
21.7072242315
9.7720963507
1.8153779325
-11.5566834812
-4.5064758675
21.7763987714
28.1803995111
23.517344684
9.0592372208
1.4034604639
-12.0388212244
-4.3026123869
21.7838013363
28.2540551986
23.6496078674
8.7854597753
1.1856422111
-12.573391536
-3.7989223646
25.1773941983
29.4847272219
21.0850639109
6.7893706701
1.0911300981
-11.9211871796
-4.8094764237
21.7934390177
25.9215633758
21.8071764565
10.8584635027
2.8886940439
-13.9563875399
-2.999750678
29.2819158146
31.0014371798
17.6670788386
4.5622713501
0.5311585989
-13.7659725281
-3.2221232272
27.5113139416
29.4274560172
19.3020494837
6.0759044283
0.6951803739
-12.2080955444
-4.8342030979
20.7715692106
27.6492786662
24.4562213233
9.1285532115
0.9520789462
-13.840987905
-3.5930231408
28.985570012
32.9085029961
16.5842160202
3.8135827258
0.2741172001
-14.0868453171
-4.3392774297
25.956674334
29.317794841
19.5100606067
6.08049215
0.7088553216
-14.9055240033
-4.7353894289
27.3610081959
30.2229627317
17.8872396182
4.5478275994
0.3400484227
-15.0167460167
-5.1814254793
28.0347296235
28.0937966119
17.8964485846
5.2075149037
0.5693387804
-16.00424886
-4.3388270138
27.401469204
29.8130115512
17.4650047227
4.5399981189
0.4374405294
-14.7386921125
-5.8255148634
25.8772552913
28.2502359878
18.9843935362
5.5975445505
0.7263636583
-15.2113546817
-5.8544936638
27.2817731052
28.4742899018
17.0961304554
5.4685746927
0.6133834994
-14.5453941646
-6.6315875974
22.7963709407
27.1649694902
20.8572256314
7.1981151111
0.8063370646
-15.5766832393
-6.5235080385
25.3542713234
28.574330741
18.0883107218
5.3503511972
0.5325447388
-16.9629383459
-5.2427574562
30.2036175919
28.3442795235
15.0661662565
3.6720441558
0.5081966701
-16.8698875918
-7.1695924488
28.9418537663
29.4265048082
14.1697620476
3.1901214357
0.2322779016
-16.825634158
-7.5535786091
24.2379694567
23.9914564198
18.2957637479
7.5468616868
1.5487359217
-18.6964521983
-5.7752455848
28.8210983529
28.8333812099
14.74606234
3.0410712922
0.0866890219
-17.9964679291
-7.2628140106
27.6087095887
27.3890697211
15.1346162471
4.1998800296
0.4084424738
-21.2344938328
-14.9124447282
24.0292223127
20.808074897
13.77551731
4.4343436866
0.8059032326
-26.6409633126
-11.8879207227
32.2627175285
21.8306848677
6.5731403657
0.7877185192
0.0168546837
-26.6541070749
-13.0687202566
29.8682663553
20.10256996
8.4026433371
1.7848589997
0.1188340163
-25.4061356409
-16.7414984879
29.7832611173
19.7265368527
6.9007021146
1.3199382956
0.121927491
-24.3496463549
-18.2960217175
25.167079995
18.8391620985
10.2922125374
2.6157256725
0.4401516243
-28.1661919256
-16.1560054633
30.7537402498
18.7167287266
5.5802832964
0.6104493038
0.0166010344
-33.4875973382
-12.5828142791
33.2405058678
16.2895472092
3.9967745176
0.4014869012
0.0012738869
-33.6832585909
-12.8822138101
31.2769413659
15.055442705
6.1848473766
0.900667647
0.0166285046
-30.9377149748
-15.963812757
31.8272348132
16.562072188
4.2448845029
0.456945663
0.0073351011
-32.9568983352
-17.2739910411
30.9960936619
14.8786436356
3.6141592496
0.2772500922
0.0029639845
-32.7763393548
-18.1685668356
30.7506004071
14.8308402095
3.1959667638
0.276043626
0.0016428033
-27.9187831617
-28.3349846613
25.5975412048
13.6248856643
4.0755117724
0.4371599574
0.0111335782
-33.9899860664
-26.1817164245
27.2035681758
10.559980289
1.9028013845
0.1593719603
0.0025756995
-33.0938428631
-27.9206057265
23.7793078599
11.2505454918
3.4022558757
0.5176305514
0.0358116316
-41.2832343324
-20.3227391184
27.5364359875
9.4534273564
1.3789177731
0.0252454322
-35.0877302499
-27.6629253984
24.9731664504
10.2214771768
1.9373198071
0.1126741196
0.0047067979
-53.1314393618
-19.3755225218
22.4054313046
4.6795044849
0.4042638842
0.0038384428
-31.4964259728
-47.6016599042
13.8874357781
5.0439855249
1.6415504866
0.3093924165
0.0195499168
-28.1775190236
-58.1585914848
10.0447468374
2.8908562666
0.7055695332
0.0227168545
DataF2.12ab
Table 2.xxx (this was Tab 2.6 in PISA 2003) Created on 19Jun2007. Need to be updated.
Economic and social indicators and the relationship with performance in mathematics
3
Economic and social indicators
Mean performance on the science scale
GDP per capita (In equivalent US dollars using purchasing power parities) EAG2004
GDP per capita (In equivalent US dollars using purchasing power parities) EAG2004
Australia
527
30875
Australia
30875
527
Austria
511
33235
Austria
33235
511
Belgium
510
31975
Belgium
31975
510
Canada
534
32413
Canada
32413
534
Countries
Mean performance on the science scale
Cumulative expenditure per student between 6 and 15 years (In equivalent US dollars using purchasing power parities)
Cumulative expenditure per student between 6 and 15 years (In equivalent US dollars using purchasing power parities)
Australia
527
63675
Australia
63675
527
Austria
511
86473
Austria
86473
511
Belgium
510
70818
Belgium
70818
510
Student performance on the science scale and national income
Relationship between performance in mathematics and GDP per capita, in US dollars, converted using purchasing power parities (PPPs).
Source: OECD PISA database 2006, Table 2.6.
Figure 2.12b
Student performance on the science scale and spending per student
Relationship between performance in mathematics and cumulative expenditure on educational institutions per student between the ages of 6 and 15 years, in US dollars, converted using purchasing power parities (PPPs)
&L &R&D &T &Z&F
Figures 2.12a&b
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Canada
526.8795885579
510.8371541347
510.3634836232
534.4697772924
512.8607460748
495.8943099672
563.3228338783
495.2198386381
515.6491300303
473.3779639079
503.9317287158
490.7937740719
508.3289300322
475.3972206022
531.3885087885
522.1481407545
409.651951838
524.8615057278
530.3843607802
486.527957167
497.8065021466
474.305889181
488.433398223
488.4245224033
503.3340058419
511.5239097705
423.832745074
514.7735478396
488.9068367754
Australia
Austria
Belgium
526.8795885579
510.8371541347
510.3634836232
512.8607460748
495.8943099672
563.3228338783
495.2198386381
515.6491300303
473.3779639079
503.9317287158
490.7937740719
508.3289300322
475.3972206022
531.3885087885
522.1481407545
409.651951838
524.8615057278
530.3843607802
486.527957167
497.8065021466
474.305889181
488.433398223
488.4245224033
503.3340058419
511.5239097705
423.832745074
514.7735478396
488.9068367754
Comparison of the performances on the different scales in science
Each scale is 20 or more score points higher than the science scale
Each scale is between 10 and 19.99 score points higher than the science scale
Each scale is between 0 to 9.99 score points higher than the science scale
Each scale is 20 or more score points lower than the science scale
Each scale is between 10 and 19.99 score points lower than the science scale
Each scale is between 0 to 9.99 score points lower than the science scale
Performance difference between the science scale and each scale:
Science score
479
-17
4
1
-4
2
10
-0
Serbia
436
-5
5
-11
-5
5
14
-0
Slovenia
519
-2
4
-3
-9
15
-2
12
Thailand
421
-8
-1
2
0
9
11
-14
Tunisia
386
-2
-2
-4
4
-33
6
7
Uruguay
428
1
-5
1
3
-31
5
-7
Source: OECD PISA database 2006, Tables 2.1c, 2.2c, 2.3c, 2.4c, 2.7, 2.8, 2.9 and 2.10.
&R&D &T &Z&F
DataF2.15&F2.21b
Figure 2.14e
Range of rank of the countries on the different scientific scales
Science scale
&R&D &T &Z&F &F
Figure 2.15
Table 2.1c
Table 2.1c
Copy value of AF and A15 for the graph 2.11d and sort by colum AN
Mean score, variation and gender differences in student performance on the identifying scientific issues scale
Mean score, variation and gender differences in student performance on the identifying scientific issues scale
All students
Gender differences
DataF2.16&2.25b
Figure 2.15.
Performance of males and females on the Identifying scientific issues scale
DataF2.16&2.25b
Non Signif
Figure 2.16
Table 2.2c
Table 2.2c
Table 2.2c
Mean score, variation and gender differences in student performance on the explaining phenomena scientifically scale
All students
Gender differences
DataF2.17&2.31b
Figure 2.16
Performance of males and females on the Explaining phenomena scientifically scale
DataF2.17&2.31b
Trend
Figure 2.17
Table 2.3c
Table 2.3c
Table 2.3c
Mean score, variation and gender differences in student performance on the using scientific evidence scale
All students
Gender differences
DataF2.18a
Figure 2.17
Performance of males and females on the Using scientific evidence scale
DataF2.18a
275
402.963585837
306.6379205582
575
511.799679644
385.0545425197
425.1729192648
478.147736644
469.2173056689
409.1716920217
487.3065984644
280.0559253035
531.7383224806
404.0724180487
516.8109233429
455.5548892151
524.3575693293
373.5430118156
478.4253901266
409.7496925796
493.7141785837
484.2343196384
509.0447779418
510.1469837237
528.6410859842
447.1633987201
502.5070551933
402.6374672425
491.9749834697
376.64005021
403.9296657669
341.5799119713
534.7105358879
381.5180483214
486.1840581632
419.2531029466
487.5963076003
564.1572483178
456.4780046701
385.671642161
517.3269361726
493.3374413585
519.9751948356
509.0625063223
526.8041266215
489.8656396
387.9826615856
529.9399964676
465.7430640481
541.0086521796
543.5840439913
473.0779274716
484.3423146875
543.4534667928
496.6040175696
501.0031179691
511.6964675992
531.7485117952
477.5373146651
Trend
Figure 2.18a
Mean score on the Knowledge about science and on the Knowledge of science scales
Countries are ranked in descending order of the difference between the Knowledge of science and the Knowledge about science.
Source: OECD PISA database 2006, Tables 2.7, 2.8, 2.9 and 2.10.
&R&D &T &Z&F
DataF2.18bc
Azerbaijan
Azerbaijan
Table 2.7
Table X
Mean score, variation and gender differences in student performance on the Knowledge about Science subscale
Mean score, variation and gender differences in student performance on the Knowledge about Science subscale
All students
Gender differences
13.32
Note: Values that are statistically significant are indicated in bold (see Annex Ax).
MIN
352
358
MAX
550
566
Figure 2.18b
Mean score and variation in student performance on the Knowledge about science scale
OECD
average
Mean score on the Knowledge about science subscale
&R&D &T &Z&F &A
Figure 2.19a
Figure 2.18c
Performance of males and females on the Knowledge about science scale
Figure 2.19a
Trend
Data F2.19a
Figure 2.19a
Physical systems
Countries where students are relatively strong in this content area
Mean science performance
Countries where students are relatively weak in this content area
Figure 2.19b
Figure 2.19a
Physical systems
T2.1c
T2.1c
T2.8
T2.9
T2.10
Living systems (Mean performance)
Physical systems (mean performance
Science - Living systems
Science - Physical systems
Earth and space systems
Figure 2.19c
Figure 2.19a
Physical systems
Second sort for the top and bottom group of countries only
T2.1c
T2.1c
T2.8
T2.9
T2.10
Figure 2.19c
Living systems
Figure 2.19a
Physical systems
Second sort for the top and bottom group of countries only
T2.1c
T2.1c
T2.8
T2.9
T2.10
Figure 2.19d
Gender differences on the "Physical systems", "Living systems" and "Earth and space systems" scales
Physical systems
Living systems
Source: OECD PISA database 2006, Tables 2.8, 2.9 and 2.10.
&R&D &T &Z&F
DataF2.19d
Austria
Chile
Difference (M - F)
Gender differences on the science Physical systems, Living systems and Earth and space subscales
Mean score
OECD average
Source: OECD PISA database 2006, Tables 2.8, 2.9 and 2.10.
&R&D &T &Z&F
DataF2.19f
Performance of males and females on the "Physical systems" scale
DataF2.19f
275
526.9195008525
543.3167832145
575
410.5137540887
492.8635665321
351.8277958418
576.0050842925
417.2170788212
512.119637249
384.6666247444
522.0228624924
436.5011802795
488.354004777
525.5117160642
539.8490352485
494.7747626147
451.7665022928
546.7552859081
550.489346019
546.3886219497
476.3699645403
517.3101278965
547.1610550071
527.7184259109
397.5780196809
507.038481897
507.6516768524
520.4174273268
345.2734991099
550.876894703
484.7536510214
562.653411371
423.4567643982
498.9009292118
519.032609104
526.1212861933
516.0105338437
527.0755500072
414.163884927
493.539831083
528.9872420271
526.017294272
499.9318813547
495.1829415153
557.5454289555
389.0235005559
435.2185608095
398.8497175721
442.2113148663
500.7780490637
481.7592991053
393.4503011279
452.8402073209
541.4812402706
428.4272836214
429.4373097088
537.1312961248
426.5017716956
Trend
Table 2.11a
Figure 2.9a
Mean score, variation and gender differences in student performance on the Science Physical Systems subscale
Mean score, variation and gender differences in student performance on the Science Physical Systems subscale
Distribution of student performance on the science Physical systems scale
All students
Gender differences
Iceland
493
(1.6)
96
(1.2)
501
(2.5)
486
(2.5)
15
(3.8)
331
(5.5)
369
(3.0)
428
(3.3)
558
(1.8)
617
(3.1)
647
(3.4)
Iceland
331
159
3
3
151
Iceland
501
486
Italy
485
460
7.09
Latvia
495
(2.4)
83
(1.2)
507
(3.1)
483
(2.8)
24
(3.1)
359
(4.2)
387
(3.0)
436
(4.0)
551
(3.2)
603
(4.8)
633
(4.0)
Latvia
359
131
5
5
134
Latvia
507
483
Mexico
423
406
6.78
Poland
497
(2.1)
95
(1.1)
512
(2.4)
482
(2.6)
30
(2.8)
346
(3.9)
373
(3.3)
430
(3.0)
563
(3.0)
620
(4.1)
654
(3.6)
Poland
346
147
4
4
153
Poland
512
482
Lithuania
499
481
6.62
Norway
491
(2.7)
102
(1.7)
500
(3.5)
482
(3.0)
18
(3.6)
322
(5.3)
361
(4.5)
423
(4.6)
562
(3.1)
621
(3.5)
654
(3.7)
Norway
322
164
5
5
157
Norway
500
482
Belgium
519
494
6.41
Lithuania
490
(2.2)
89
(1.2)
499
(2.6)
481
(2.6)
18
(2.8)
343
(4.4)
373
(2.4)
428
(3.0)
551
(3.5)
608
(3.5)
637
(3.4)
Lithuania
343
143
4
4
142
Lithuania
499
481
Sweden
526
507
5.71
Croatia
493
(2.2)
89
(1.3)
508
(3.0)
478
(2.7)
30
(3.9)
351
(4.2)
381
(2.8)
430
(3.4)
552
(2.8)
609
(3.0)
641
(3.0)
Croatia
351
137
4
4
144
Croatia
508
478
Ireland
516
493
5.70
Figure 2.19g (web only)
Performance of males and females on the"Living systems" scale
DataF2.19g
275
427.2063477214
342.6252080789
575
386.1312001514
446.7786100314
421.9947989335
434.5701656783
493.7073921601
408.5126981444
499.6824084627
392.3246448019
429.0094918978
424.5764078305
393.5654205634
533.7793057364
511.7159631708
435.8989557389
527.7352499078
534.3853773256
478.9677918751
510.4896582549
514.2909086391
494.7392698583
495.3908245546
444.1563139821
500.9992182504
503.7465863728
529.1722940556
408.6260543597
514.6948654056
568.8605668493
525.6297564278
468.5741270552
489.0219672754
501.634554861
480.0002091467
390.6342648532
510.2093219806
514.9964034332
494.8998521546
556.3530166539
523.5995346398
479.9098878554
512.6068677434
563.5659167627
503.291450821
530.0876103869
433.6438389754
505.0379944482
459.6707270495
491.0384530604
504.622719122
528.2913137395
521.2914249319
529.024760375
522.2087510296
391.864858338
329.6716701767
Trend
Figure 2.21a
Table 2.9
Figure 2.8a
Mean score, variation and gender differences in student performance on the science Living systems subscale
Mean score, variation and gender differences in student performance on the science Living Systems subscale
Distribution of student performance on the science Living systems scale
All students
Gender differences
Croatia
498
(2.1)
90
(1.2)
495
(3.0)
500
(2.7)
-5
(3.9)
354
(2.7)
383
(3.6)
436
(3.0)
558
(2.6)
616
(2.8)
650
(4.3)
Croatia
354
140
4
4
148
Croatia
495
500
Norway
496
(2.8)
106
(1.8)
495
(3.6)
498
(3.2)
-3
(3.8)
316
(7.1)
361
(7.3)
426
(4.0)
571
(3.6)
628
(3.7)
663
(4.2)
Norway
316
175
6
6
161
Norway
495
498
Macao-China
528
522
2.15
Korea
498
(2.8)
90
(1.7)
501
(4.1)
495
(3.2)
6
(4.7)
350
(8.1)
384
(4.6)
436
(2.6)
562
(3.2)
611
(3.3)
641
(3.8)
Korea
350
143
5
5
137
Korea
501
495
Montenegro
427
433
1.96
Slovak Republic
Luxembourg
499
(1.4)
106
(1.2)
504
(2.3)
493
(2.2)
11
(3.4)
321
(4.8)
358
(2.9)
426
(3.0)
573
(3.0)
635
(2.3)
670
(5.2)
Luxembourg
321
174
3
3
168
Luxembourg
504
493
France
494
486
1.69
France
490
(3.0)
107
(1.6)
494
(3.8)
486
(3.7)
7
(4.4)
311
(7.0)
354
(3.8)
418
(5.4)
565
(4.2)
626
(3.5)
659
(4.5)
France
311
173
6
6
163
France
494
486
Lithuania
500
506
1.66
Italy
488
(1.7)
99
(1.0)
489
(2.5)
486
(2.3)
3
(3.3)
326
(3.4)
358
(2.6)
419
(2.8)
556
(2.5)
615
(2.8)
652
(2.9)
Italy
326
158
3
3
161
Italy
489
486
Romania
429
423
1.55
Figure 2.21a
Figure 2.19g
Performance of males and females on the "Earth and space systems" scale
ALBISER_e: Significant dif.: country label in black
DataF2.21a
275
507.5223035443
330.488560196
575
516.2352779425
484.1925936118
537.1405095715
444.1955190842
387.7445920924
549.4134689024
479.9389193319
515.0139124666
520.5901157184
499.9943743365
408.6825522164
387.2645463365
354.0513361027
530.4631015302
426.7844907703
502.8978450371
445.0360526201
515.0409542752
315.6325302085
419.7266054806
429.5750892988
509.8857357271
507.6504935636
506.9102664929
409.5581491051
538.1168088723
490.8888984424
538.7714898752
472.6250623163
543.5316915777
561.5170205114
429.6127481307
512.8153000788
418.8458977052
487.6077933521
384.2138630577
481.4556678155
511.3656248386
537.3065226823
500.6044182526
515.1782508148
511.5055762546
492.2738922656
532.7842063524
446.6499756731
396.3803662666
412.7429457803
545.471129701
535.8772865542
539.9144110995
515.6942649527
501.633786628
405.9538870444
506.6257646534
500.8599320289
Trend
Figure 2.21b
Table 2.8
Figure 2.19c
Mean score, variation and gender differences in student performance on the science Earth and Space subscale
Mean score, variation and gender differences in student performance on the science Earth and Space subscale
Distribution of student performance on the science Earth and space scale
All students
Gender differences
Poland
501
(2.4)
104
(1.6)
510
(2.8)
493
(2.9)
17
(3.1)
329
(4.7)
365
(3.8)
427
(4.1)
573
(3.6)
639
(3.5)
673
(5.6)
Poland
329
167
5
5
167
Poland
510
493
Montenegro
419
404
4.30
Croatia
497
(2.4)
97
(1.2)
502
(3.2)
493
(3.1)
9
(4.1)
339
(3.9)
376
(4.0)
430
(3.6)
562
(3.0)
624
(2.7)
661
(3.8)
Croatia
339
153
5
5
159
Croatia
502
493
Portugal
488
472
4.24
Switzerland
502
(2.9)
108
(1.3)
515
(3.4)
489
(3.4)
26
(3.4)
316
(4.5)
359
(4.4)
431
(3.3)
579
(3.0)
641
(4.6)
675
(4.8)
Switzerland
316
180
6
6
167
Switzerland
515
489
Colombia
384
359
4.19
Sweden
498
(2.3)
103
(1.3)
508
(3.0)
488
(3.0)
20
(3.8)
328
(4.9)
365
(3.4)
427
(3.5)
567
(3.1)
630
(2.8)
670
(4.1)
Sweden
328
166
4
4
168
Sweden
508
488
Italy
481
467
3.79
Latvia
494
(3.3)
105
(1.4)
501
(4.1)
487
(3.6)
13
(3.8)
316
(7.2)
357
(5.5)
424
(4.5)
565
(4.9)
631
(6.5)
667
(3.6)
Latvia
316
171
6
6
167
Latvia
501
487
Austria
511
493
3.75
Belgium
496
(2.4)
114
(1.6)
507
(3.3)
485
(3.1)
22
(4.2)
301
(5.3)
345
(4.6)
420
(3.1)
576
(2.9)
642
(3.0)
678
(2.4)
Belgium
301
191
5
5
177
Belgium
507
485
Spain
493
(2.3)
108
(1.1)
503
(2.8)
484
(2.7)
19
(3.1)
314
(4.9)
355
(4.1)
420
(3.3)
566
(2.9)
635
(3.3)
673
(2.9)
Spain
314
175
4
4
175
Spain
503
484
Latvia
501
487
3.41
Lithuania
487
(2.5)
108
(1.4)
492
(3.1)
481
(3.2)
12
(3.7)
302
(4.7)
343
(3.5)
416
(4.2)
558
(4.2)
630
(4.7)
664
(3.8)
Lithuania
302
180
5
5
172
Lithuania
492
481
Ireland
515
501
3.35
Greece
477
(2.9)
107
(1.7)
480
(4.1)
475
(3.2)
5
(4.5)
297
(5.3)
340
(4.6)
407
(4.0)
551
(3.4)
616
(4.5)
650
(4.6)
Greece
297
175
6
6
167
Greece
480
475
Figure 2.21b
Figure 2.21c
Figure 2.21a.
Percentage of students at each level of proficiency on the Identifying scientific issues scale
ALBISER_e: Significant dif.: country label in black
&L &R&D &T &Z&F
Figure 2.21c
Figure 2.25a
Table 2.1a
Percentage of students at each level of proficiency on the identifying scientific issues scale
0 added in green
DataF2.25a
Distribution of student performance on the Identifying scientific issues scale
OECD
average
Mean score on the Identifying scientific issues scale
&R&D &T &Z&F &A
DataF2.25a
Finland
Finland
Finland
Finland
Finland
Multiple comparisons of mean performance on the Identifying scientific issues scale
Identifying Scientific Issues scale

Finland
Figure 2.25c
Figure 2.25a
Percentage of students at each level of proficiency on the Explaining phenomena scientifically scale
&L &R&D &T &Z&F
Figure 2.25c
0 added in green
Percentage of students at each level of proficiency on the explaining phenomena scientifically scale
Level 1
DataF2.31a
OECD
average
Mean score on the science scale
&R&D &T &Z&F &A
DataF2.31a
Finland
Finland
Finland
Finland
Finland
Explaining phenomena scientifically scale

Finland
Figure 2.31c
Figure 2.31a
Percentage of students at each level of proficiency on the Using scientific evidence scale
&L &R&D &T &Z&F
Figure 2.31c
0 added in green
Percentage of students at each level of proficiency on the using scientific evidence scale
Level 1
Figure 2.31b
Distribution of student performance on the Using scientific evidence scale
OECD
average
Mean score on the Using scientific evidence scale
&R&D &T &F &A
Finland
Finland
Finland
Finland
Finland
Japan
Japan
Japan
Japan
Japan
Figure 2.31c
Multiple comparisons of mean performance on the Using scientific evidence scale
Using scientific evidence scale

Finland
Japan
© 2008 # *

, , .
() ( ). / ?
, , ,
© 2008 # *

"

:
' ,
'
- ' '
- ' '
30
69
41
58
41
77
© 2008 # *

- –
-
' ' -'
' - :
, , 4/5 " – 80 " -
-0.9 " – 90 " -
– 2/3 " - 67 -
19
35
9
37
29
34
38
31
43
29
32
36
53
31
49
24
30
44
87
61
62
83
60
90
45
67
48

0
25
50
75
100
125
150
' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '

- –
- ( - )
–-1/2 " (-50 " -)

© 2008 # *

-

'
'
' -
( ) ' '
' -
-
35
51
28
39
8
80

10
40
12
21
7
42
© 2008 # *
-

(: )

22
NAEP -
, ", !
© 2008 # *
Value Added Models

" "
' "
"
" "
" "
© 2008 # *

" " – '
- ""
© 2008 # *

"

'-"
" 21

© 2008 # *
""
" "

© 2008 # *

- for learning
as learning –

© 2008 # *
?
:
- Formative Assessment

© 2008 # *
© 2008 # *
© 2008 # *

ראמ"ה מדידה בשירות הלמידה

Documents

Transcript of ראמ"ה מדידה בשירות הלמידה