From review findings to sustained improvement in post-PISA improvement planning

For decisions concerning post-PISA improvement planning, education indicators should support decisions by describing outcomes and variation with definitions and limitations that permit responsible interpretation.

Application to post-PISA improvement planning

This may require coverage and missingness analysis, population and sampling information, disaggregated results, and uncertainty estimates where relevant, supported by triangulation with administrative and qualitative evidence and indicator definitions and metadata.

The reference point is the PISA 2022 follow-up during 2024. The corrective action should be proportionate to the identified condition and tested where risk permits. When examining post-PISA improvement planning, wider implementation should follow evidence of benefit and acceptable unintended effects.

In examining from review findings to sustained improvement in post-PISA improvement planning, when examining post-PISA improvement planning, the first PISA 2022 results were released on 5 December 2023, with mathematics as the principal assessment domain and reading and science also reported. The cycle was conducted after major disruption to education systems. Comparisons require attention to participation, coverage and the exceptional context; changes from earlier cycles should not be attributed to a single cause without further evidence.

For decisions concerning post-PISA improvement planning, effectiveness is the demonstrated change in the condition the action was intended to address.

A narrow control over corrective action may create false assurance. In the present context, proxy measures treated as direct outcomes, changes in definition presented as changes in performance and small differences overstated may produce acceptable aggregate reporting while individual learners remain exposed to material disadvantage. For post-PISA improvement planning, adverse cases should form part of the sample wherever they may reveal a material control weakness.

Controls for post-PISA improvement planning

Across the defined scope, responsibility should be identifiable at the point where consequential decisions are made. For post-PISA improvement planning, the corrective action should be tested on a scale proportionate to the risk before wider implementation, unless immediate system-wide action is necessary to protect learners.

When examining post-PISA improvement planning, decisions concerning the matter should remain traceable to the information available for the stated reference period.

• Report uncertainty and revisions.
• Document numerator and denominator.
• Test comparability.
• Analyse missing information before using it to determine a learner or provider outcome.
• Avoid causal claims unsupported by the design.

Review of post-PISA improvement planning

A competent review of post-PISA improvement planning should set a baseline and success measure before intervention, define the review period, compare the result with the intended outcome and examine adverse or unequal effects. For post-PISA improvement planning, continue monitoring long enough to determine whether the improvement is sustained.

For post-PISA improvement planning, methods should be proportionate to the significance and recurrence of the problem; low-risk local issues and systemic learner-protection failures require different levels of control.