ABSTRACT
Evidence-based policies, decisions, and practices are highly valued and underachieved in the international mathematics and science education reforms. Many in the mathematics and science education research communities lament the lack of influence that research results have on the education profession, schools, and teaching. Academic research done in isolation of end-users—with the faint hope that teachers, politicians, and bureaucrats will access and utilise these results to inform curriculum, assessment, and instruction and to influence public policy—has not worked. Some funding agencies require dissemination of research and development results to the broader political and education communities; therefore, applicants agree to these requirements without fully realizing the breadth of these demands. However, to achieve such knowledge transfer requirements, researchers need to become more (a) aware of the needs, players, and processes of ‘speaking truth to power’; (b) active in knowledge transfer and influencing public policy; and (c) alert to values and normative premises of the policy makers. This article outlines the essential principles, barriers within the academic community, international efforts, and future considerations for knowledge transfer regarding international assessments. Specific articles on PISA 2000, 2003, and 2006 included in this special issue are used to illustrate these insights into verification of curricular influences, educational opportunity and equality, regional comparisons, and direct influence on policy.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
REFERENCES
American Association for the Advancement of Science (1990). Science for all Americans: Project 2061. New York: Oxford University Press.
American Association for the Advancement of Science (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy: Project 2061. New York: Oxford University Press.
Anderson, J. O., Chiu, M.-H., & Yore, L. D. (2010). Introduction to the Special Issue. First cycle of PISA (2000-2006)—International perspectives on successes and challenges: Research and policy directions. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. doi:10.1007/s10763-010-9210-y
Anderson, J. O., Lin, H.-L., Treagust, D. F., Ross, S. P., & Yore, L. D. (2007). Using large-scale assessment datasets for research in science and mathematics education: Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 5(4), 591–614.
Anderson, J. O., Milford, T., Jagger, S., & Yore, L. D. (2009, April). National influences on science education reform in Canada. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Garden Grove, CA.
August, D., & Shanahan, T. (Eds.). (2006). Developing literacy in second-language learners: Report of the national literacy panel on language-minority children and youth. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Brickhouse, N. W. (2006). Celebrating 90 years of Science Education: reflections on the gold standard and ways of promoting good research [Editorial]. Science Education, 90(1), 1–7.
Bybee, R. W., Fensham, P. J., & Laurie, R. (Eds.). (2009). Scientific literacy and contexts in PISA science [Special Issue]. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(8), 861–960.
Coertjens, L., Boeve-de Pauw, J., De Maeyer, S., & Van Petegem, P. (2010). Do schools make a difference in their students’ environmental attitudes and awareness? Evidence from PISA 2006. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. doi:10.1007/s10763-010-9200-0
Cohn, D. (2007). How can academics influence public policy? Academic Matters, 18–19.
Dolin, J., & Krogh, L. B. (2010). The relevance and consequences of PISA science in a Danish context. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. doi:10.1007/s10763-010-9207-6
Duke, N. K. (2010). R&D: The real-world reading and writing U.S. children need. Phi Delta Kappan, 91(5), 68–71.
Fensham, P. J. (2008). Science education policy-making: Eleven emerging issues. Paris: UNESCO. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0015/001567/156700e.pdf.
Fensham, P. J. (2009). The link between policy and practice in science education: The role of research. Science Education, 93(6), 1076–1095.
Ford, C. L., Yore, L. D., & Anthony, R. J. (1997, March). Reforms, visions, and standards: A cross-curricular view from an elementary school perspective. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching, Oak Brook, IL. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED406168).
Fuchs, T., & Wößmann, L. (2007). What accounts for international differences in student performance? A re-examination using PISA data. Empirical Economics, 32(2), 433–464.
Giles, C. (2010, February 5). UK QE: Policy-based evidence-making. Financial Times. Retrieved from http://blogs.ft.com/money-supply/2010/02/04/uk-quantitative-easing-policy-based-evidence-making/.
Gilleece, L., Cosgrove, J., & Sofroniou, N. (2010). Equity in mathematics and science outcomes: Characteristics associated with high and low achievement on PISA 2006 in Ireland. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. doi:10.1007/s10763-010-9199-2
Gist, J. R. (1998). Decision making in public administration. In J. Rabin, W. B. Hildreth, & G. J. Miller (Eds.), Handbook of public administration (2nd ed., pp. 265–292). New York: Marcel Dekker.
Hand, B., Prain, V., & Yore, L. D. (2001). Sequential writing tasks’ influence on science learning. In P. Tynjälä, L. Mason, & K. Lonka (Eds.), Writing as a learning tool: Integrating theory and practice (vol. 7 of Studies in Writing, pp. 105–129). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer/Springer.
Hess, F. M. (2008). The politics of knowledge. Phi Delta Kappan, 89(5), 354–356.
Ho, E. S. C. (2010). Family influences on science learning among Hong Kong adolescents: What we learned from PISA. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. doi:10.1007/s10763-010-9198-3
Kennedy, M. M. (1999). Infusing educational decision making with research. In G. J. Cizek (Ed.), Handbook of educational policy (pp. 54–80). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Knipprath, H. (2010). What PISA tells us about the quality and inequality of Japanese education in mathematics and science. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. doi:10.1007/s10763-010-9196-5
Knott, J., & Wildavsky, A. (1980). If dissemination is the solution, what is the problem? Science Communication, 1(4), 537–578.
Kubiatko, M., & Vlckova, K. (2010). The relationship between ICT use and science knowledge for Czech students: A secondary analysis of PISA 2006. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. doi:10.1007/s10763-010-9195-6
Landry, R., Lamari, M., & Amara, N. (2003). The extent and determinants of the utilization of university research in government agencies. Public Administration Review, 63(2), 192–205.
Lavonen, J., & Laaksonen, S. (2009). Context of teaching and learning school science in Finland: Reflections on PISA 2006 results. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(8), 922–944.
Marmot, M. G. (2004). Evidence based policy or policy based evidence? British Medical Journal, 328(7445), 906–907.
McConney, A., & Perry, L. B. (2010). Science and mathematics achievement in Australia: The role of school socioeconomic composition in educational equity and effectiveness. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. doi:10.1007/s10763-010-9197-4
Milford, T. (2009). An investigation of international science achievement using the OECD’s PISA 2006 dataset. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Victoria, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada.
Milford, T., Ross, S. P., & Anderson, J. O. (2010). An opportunity to better understand schooling: The growing presence of PISA in the Americas. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. doi:10.1007/s10763-010-9201-z
Moje, E. B. (2008). Foregrounding the disciplines in secondary literacy teaching and learning: A call for change. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 52(2), 96–107.
Neumann, K., Fischer, H. E., & Kauertz, A. (2010). From PISA to educational standards: The impact of large-scale assessments on science education in Germany. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. doi:10.1007/s10763-010-9206-7
Norris, S. P., & Phillips, L. M. (2003). How literacy in its fundamental sense is central to scientific literacy. Science Education, 87(2), 224–240.
Norris, S. P., Phillips, L. M., & Macnab, J. S. (2009). The gold standard and knowing what to do. In M. C. Shelley II, L. D. Yore, & B. Hand (Eds.), Quality research in literacy and science education: International perspectives and gold standards (pp. 603–620). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2003). The PISA 2003 assessment framework—mathematics, reading, science and problem solving: Knowledge and skills. Paris: Author.
Osborne, J., & Dillon, J. (2008). Science education in Europe: Critical reflections. London: Nuffield Foundation.
Rees, W. E. (2008). Science, cognition and public policy. Academic Matters, 9–12.
Rocard, M., Csermely, P., Jorde, D., Lenzen, D., Walberg-Henriksson, H., & Hemmo, V. (2007). Science education now: A renewed pedagogy for the future of Europe. Luxembourg, Belgium: European Commission.
Ross, S. P. (2008). Motivation correlates of academic achievement: Exploring how motivation influences academic achievement in the PISA 2003 dataset. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Victoria, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada.
Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2008). Teaching disciplinary literacy to adolescents: Rethinking content-area literacy. Harvard Educational Review, 78(1), 40–61.
Shelley, M. C., II. (2009). Speaking truth to power with powerful results: Impacting public awareness and public policy. In M. C. Shelley II, L. D. Yore, & B. Hand (Eds.), Quality research in literacy and science education: International perspectives and gold standards (pp. 443–466). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
Those who read well at 15 succeed (2010, February 11). The Globe and Mail, p. A20. Retrieved from http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/editorials/those-who-read-well-at-15-succeed/article1465434/.
United States National Council of Teachers of English & International Reading Association (1996). Standards for English language arts. Urbana, IL, & Newark, DE: Authors.
United States National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
United States National Research Council (1996). The national science education standards. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
United States National Research Council (2009). Learning science in informal environments: People, places, and pursuits. Committee on Learning Science in Informal Environments. P. Bell, B. Lewenstein, A. W. Shouse, & M. A. Feder (Eds.). Board on Science Education, Center for Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Yore, L. D., Pimm, D., & Tuan, H.-L. (2007). The literacy component of mathematical and scientific literacy. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 5(4), 559–589.
Yore, L. D., Shelley, M. C., II, & Hand, B. (2009). Reflections on beyond the Gold Standards era and ways of promoting compelling arguments about science literacy for all. In M. C. Shelley II, L. D. Yore, & B. Hand (Eds.), Quality research in literacy and science education: International perspectives and gold standards (pp. 623–649). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Yore, L.D., Anderson, J.O. & Chiu, MH. Moving PISA Results into the Policy Arena: Perspectives on Knowledge Transfer for Future Considerations and Preparations. Int J of Sci and Math Educ 8, 593–609 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-010-9211-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-010-9211-x