Is Brazilian education improving? Evidence from Pisa and Saeb

Authors

  • Martin Carnoy Stanford University, Stanford, Estados Unidos
  • Tatiana Khavenson University Higher School of Economics, Institute of Education, Moscou, Rússia
  • Izabel Fonseca Stanford University, Stanford, Estados Unidos
  • Leandro Costa Banco Mundial, Brasília, Distrito Federal, Brasil
  • Luana Marotta School of Education, Stanford University, Stanford, Estados Unidos

Keywords:

Evaluation, Basic Education, Pisa, Saeb

Abstract

This article assesses the changes in mathematics and reading scores of socially advantaged or disadvantaged Brazilian students, in the International Student Assessment Program – Pisa – between 2000 and 2012, and the National Basic Education Assessment System – Saeb – between 1995 to 2013, in order to extract some provisional conclusions regarding the variations in the effectiveness of basic education in Brazil (1st to 8th/9th grades). Our findings show that the gains in the Pisa math test are much larger than in the reading test. The gains (or their absence), in the Saeb test, for the 1999-2013 period, are also higher in mathematics than in Portuguese. Part of the gains in the Pisa math test and most of those in the reading test result from the gradual increase in the number of years fifteen year-old students spend in school. The gains in the Pisa test for more advantaged Brazilian students are lower than for those coming from families with lower educational resources; this also applies for the Saeb test.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Martin Carnoy, Stanford University, Stanford, Estados Unidos

Graduate School of Education, Stanford University, Stanford, Estados Unidos

Tatiana Khavenson, University Higher School of Economics, Institute of Education, Moscou, Rússia

National Research University Higher School of Economics, Institute of Education, Moscou, Rússia

Izabel Fonseca, Stanford University, Stanford, Estados Unidos

Graduate School of Education, Stanford University, Estados Unidos

 

Leandro Costa, Banco Mundial, Brasília, Distrito Federal, Brasil

Banco Mundial, Brasília, Distrito Federal, Brasil;

Luana Marotta, School of Education, Stanford University, Stanford, Estados Unidos

Graduate School of Education, Stanford University, Stanford, Estados Unidos

References

ADAMSON, F. How does context matter? Comparing achievement scores, opportunities to learn, and teacher preparation across socio-economic quintiles in TIMSS and PISA. Dissertation (PhD Philosophy) – Stanford University, 2010.

BOURDIEU, P.; PASSERON, J. C. La reproduction. Paris: Minuit, 1970.

BRAY, M. Private supplementary tutoring: comparative perspectives on patterns and implications. Compare: A Journal of Comparative Education, v. 36, n. 4, p. 515-530, 2006.

BUCHMANN, C. Measuring family background in international studies of education: conceptual issues and methodological challenges. In: PORTER, A.; GAMORAN, A. (Ed.). Methodological advances in cross-national surveys of educational achievement. Washington D.C.: National Academy Press, 2002. p. 150-197.

CARNOY, M. E.; ROTHSTEIN, R. What do international tests really show about american student performance. Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute, 2013.

CHUDGAR, A.; LUSCHEI, T. F.; FAGIOLI, L. P. Constructing socio-economic status measures using the trends in international mathematics and science study data. East Lansing: Michigan State University, 2012.

COLEMAN, J. S. Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, n. 94, (Special Supplement), p. 95-120, 1988.

COLEMAN, J. S. et al. Equality of educational opportunity. Washington, DC: National Government Printing Office, 1966.

GRONMO, L. S.; OLSEN, R. V. TIMSS versus PISA: the case of pure and applied mathematics. In: IEA INTERNATIONAL RESEARCH CONFERENCE. 2. Washington, D.C., November 8-11, 2006.

HANUSHEK, E.; KIMKO, D. Schooling, labor force quality, and the growth of nations. American Economic Review, v. 90, n. 5, p. 1184-1208, 2000.

HANUSHEK, E.; PETERSON, P.; WOESSMANN, L. Endangering prosperity. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution, 2013.

HAUSER, R. Some methodological issues in cross national educational research: quality and equity in student achievement. EurAmerica, v. 43, n. 4, p. 709-752, 2013.

HEATH, S. Brice. Ways with words: language, life, and work in communities and classrooms. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1983.

JENCKS, C.; PHILLIPS, M. The black-white test score gap. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1998.

KLEIN, R. Uma re-análise dos resultados do Pisa: problemas de comparabilidade. Ensaio: Avaliação e Políticas Públicas em Educação, v. 19, n. 73, p. 1-20, out./dez. 2011.

MARTINS, M. A Difference in Differences Analysis of an Extra Year of Compulsory Education in Brazilian Primary Schools. MA paper – Stanford University, 2014.

ORGANIZATION OF ECONOMIC COOPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT – OECD. Pisa 2009 results: what students know and can do – student performance in reading, mathematics, and science. Paris: OECD, 2010a. v. I.

ORGANIZATION OF ECONOMIC COOPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT – OECD. Pisa 2009 results: overcoming social background. Paris: OECD, 2010b. v. II.

ORGANIZATION OF ECONOMIC COOPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT – OECD. Pisa 2012 results: what students know and can do – student performance in reading, mathematics, and science. Paris: OECD, 2013. v. I.

PEAKER G. F. The Plowden children four years later. Slough: National Foundation for Educational Research in England and Wales, 1971.

RAUDENBUSH, S. W.; CHEONG, Y. F.; FOTIU, R. P. Social inequality, social segregation, and their relationship to reading literacy in 22 countries. In: BINKLEY, M.; RUST, K.; WILLIAMS, T. (Ed.). Reading literacy in an international perspective. Washington, D.C.: NCES, 1996. p. 3-62.

SCHULTZ, T. Investment in human capital. American Economic Review, v. 51, n. 1, p. 1-17, 1961.

SCHULZ, W. Measuring the Socio-economic background of students and its effect on achievement in PISA 2000 and PISA 2003. In: ANNUAL MEETINGS OF THE AMERICAN EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH ASSOCIATION. San Francisco, California, April 7-11, 2005. Disponível em: <http://works.bepress.com/wolfram_schulz/10/>. Acesso em: 14 fev. 2013.

SCOTT, E. Comparing NAEP, TIMSS and PISA in Mathematics and Science. Washington, D.C.: National Center of Educational Statistics, 2004. Disponível em: <http://nces.ed.gov/timss/pdf/naep_timss_pisa_comp.pdf>. Acesso em: 4 jul. 2013.

SIRIN, S. Socioeconomic status and academic achievement: a meta-analytical review of research. Review of Educational Research, v. 75, n. 3, p. 417-453, 2005.

UNESCO. World education report 2005. Paris: Unesco, 2005.

WOESSMANN, L. How equal are educational opportunities? Family background and student achievement in Europe and the United States. CESifo Working Paper, Munich, n. 1162, 2004.

Downloads

Published

2015-09-30

How to Cite

Carnoy, M., Khavenson, T., Fonseca, I., Costa, L., & Marotta, L. (2015). Is Brazilian education improving? Evidence from Pisa and Saeb. Cadernos De Pesquisa, 45(157), 450–485. Retrieved from https://publicacoes.fcc.org.br/cp/article/view/3331

Issue

Vol. 45 No. 157: jul./set.2015

Section

Articles

License

Authors who publish in this journal agree to the following terms:

a. Authors retain the copyright and grant the journal the right to first publication, with the paper simultaneously licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution license that allows the sharing of the paper with acknowledgment of authorship and initial publication in this journal.

b. Authors are authorized to assume additional contracts separately, for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the paper published in this journal (for example publishing in institutional repository or as a book chapter), with acknowledgment of authorship and initial publication in this journal.

c. Authors are allowed and encouraged to publish and distribute their paper on-line (for example in institutional repositories or on their personal page) at any moment before or during the editorial process, as this can generate productive changes, as well as increase the impact and citation of the published paper (See The Effect of Open Access).