Home / Press review / Archive / Magazine / Society / School in Europe / Background

The Pisa story, by Kerstin Martens, Stephan Leibfried

« back . 1 . 2

The first OECD results appeared in 1992: Bildung auf einen Blick (Education at a glance), which has since then appeared yearly. It is a collection of national, official education statistics made to be comparable. In this case, the subject was certifications and the types of school and education as well as their distribution according to years of birth. In September 2007, the latest report caught our attention once more: "Bad marks for the education system (FAZ) and "Germany has to repeat a year” (DIE ZEIT). And PISA? "PISA was then created here in my office”, says Schleicher. During the work on Bildung auf einen Blick, it became clear: performances and failed performances in an education system could not be comprehended using only official data. One had a huge amount of administration data to hand: how much money is put into education? How many teachers are there? How many and which certifications and marks? etc. However, what does that say for performances by the students and about the competences they have?

In the middle of the 90's, a network produced the decisive concept: we require additional data on the achievements of the children; we must find out what competences the children possess. We must go into schools in all countries with tests to be done at the same age level, for 15-16 year-olds. A school may have hardly any children doing repeat years, and may produce a lot of sixth form students, and yet the competence level may be very low - and vice-versa – or it can unite both phenomena in a positive and in a negative sense. It must always remain open in such assessments whether the school and/or the parents (and others) "create” these competences.

Tom Alexander, at that time the Director of the Education Department, presented this idea in 1995 to the member states. Most of them were against it: too expensive, too few political learning effects. How can an international organisation dare to evaluate our education system? "Unpermitted intervention”. Alexander was not discouraged by this. He wanted this project to happen; allowed his colleagues to continue working on it in spite of the defeat and did lobbying work in the background. In 1997, a new agreement was reached, and this time most countries agreed – the PISA starting gun had fired. More than 300 scientists were called in, in order to make the project methodically resistant against attack. After this initial promotion effort, the work of the OECD office became easier: today, only the instruments for investigation are developed here, and the publication of results is supervised.

In December 2001, the first PISA report hit Germany like a bomb. In the three tests – reading, maths and natural sciences – Germany was among the last-ranking countries. Only countries such as Luxembourg, Mexico and Brazil were even worse. A "PISA shock" went through the country, which had really only accompanied the PISA set-up. This was a major scratch in German self-confidence. Whilst we had always seen ourselves as the leading nation in education, an international organisation showed us that, in an international comparison, we just about made the (lower) medium level. And this in the era of "knowledge-based society”, green cards for qualified employees and economic service globalisation. What was going to become of the country?

Educational policies became the election topic overnight. In no other country could one find as many newspaper reports about PISA 2001, the OECD and the education policy. WDR (the West German broadcasting service) started their own television show, der große PISA-Test (the big PISA test) with Jörg Pilawa. PISA became a synonym for testing things. After the end of the Cold War and also shortly after the 9.11.2001, the USA on the other hand had other worries, and ignored PISA. In France, PISA proved to be important planning material for Paris – and certainly worth a derisive glance at Germany.

In short: when the USA and France approached the OECD for new education data in the 1980'S, they could never have known what avalanches would thereby be set off, and where they would be activated. The OECD had to develop expertise on education statistics. The OECD was – together with the investigation experts – raised to a level of eminence in national education policies: with PISA, the OECD had developed instruments via which the national education systems could be made comparable. PISA, the indicator point "orphan”; initially unwanted by the OECD, but then adopted and further developed.

Yet is education really to be measured in "figures”? This question should really be asked anyway with reference to marks, intelligence tests or enrolment limits. But the question of comparability disappears in the face of the comparisons: today, the countries would have great difficulty in getting away from PISA. PISA is presently too widely spoken of. A one-sided retreat from this international comparative trial would only cause even more speculations on the education-political reasons for withdrawal. PISA for all as "the ghosts I summoned”? Or have all the states realised: in the future, this piper will play the tune? Education is the best basis for expanding job markets and personal contentment?

So what results has PISA 2007 brought us? At least in Natural Sciences, Germany is no longer at an average level. But what does that mean? Does it mean that we've caught up with other industrial nations? Does it mean that our education system now "measures” up better? That's hardly possible within six years. PISA 2007 did not have the shock effect which it produced in 2001 – we have got too used to the repeated criticisms for that. What PISA has done is to provoke a long-lasting and recurrent discussion on education targets, standards and competences.

With PISA, the OECD has triggered a permanent debate in education, integration and familial policies which was previously unthinkable: the urgently-needed integration of children "with a migrational background” in order to strengthen the general level of education. The educational support of children from socially weak families, in order to secure Germany's economic position. And even our "sacred cow”, the tripartite school system, is being discussed and, in several federal states, has already been reformed.

The OECD has established education policy internationally as a political field in a way which no other institution has so far achieved. It has broken down education systems into manageable figures, which allow 'best practices' to be shown in addition to deficits. In this way, the OECD has succeeded in making all knowledge-orientated industrial nations clear how central these topic is. Seen from this perspective, PISA is not a curse, but a blessing. And how long will we have PISA? This is hard to forecast. "This is basically a system, which runs along by itself very well”, according to Schleicher.

« back . 1 . 2

Further articles on the subject » Domestic Policy, » Europe, » Germany
More from the press review on the subject » Domestic Policy, » Europe, » Germany