pisa 2015 vol v: collaborative problem solving - germany
TRANSCRIPT
Collaborative problem solving
Key findings
Andreas SchleicherDirector for Education and Skills
Collaborative problem-solving skills vary across countries, and are not an automatic by product of disciplinary knowledge
Individual skills explain less than two-thirds of the variation in student performance on the PISA collaborative problem-solving scale; and only three
quarters of the performance differences among countries on this measure are explained by the relative standing of countries on the 2012 PISA assessment of
individual problem-solving skills.
Singapore
Japan
Hong Kong (China)Korea
EstoniaCanada FinlandMacao (China)New Zealand Australia
Chinese TaipeiGermany
United StatesDenmark United KingdomNetherlands
Sweden AustriaNorway Slovenia Belgium
Czech RepublicIceland PortugalB-S-J-G (China) Spain
France Luxembourg
Latvia
ItalyCroatiaRussia HungaryIsrael Lithuania
Slovak RepublicGreeceChile
BulgariaUruguay Costa Rica
ThailandUnited Arab
EmiratesMexico
Colombia
TurkeyPeru
MontenegroBrazil
Tunisia380
400
420
440
460
480
500
520
540
560
Mean scoreFigure V.3.3
Mean performance on the PISA
collaborative problem-solving scale
PISA 2015 defines collaborative problem-solving competency as the capacity of an individual to effectively engage in a process whereby two or more agents attempt to solve a problem by sharing the understanding and effort required to come to a solution and pooling their knowledge, skills and efforts to reach that solution.
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
20
25
Japa
n
552
Austr
alia
53
1
Un
ite
d S
tate
s
52
0
Ne
w Z
eala
nd
533
Kore
a
53
8
Sin
gapo
re
561
Icela
nd
4
99
Ho
ng K
on
g (
Chin
a)
5
41
De
nm
ark
520
Germ
any 5
25
Austr
ia
50
9
Un
ite
d K
ing
dom
519
Ma
ca
o (
Ch
ina
) 5
34
Ca
nad
a
535
Sw
ede
n
510
Esto
nia
535
Ne
therl
and
s
51
8
Fin
land
53
4
Ch
ine
se
Taip
ei 5
27
Co
sta
Ric
a 4
41
OE
CD
avera
ge
500
Czech R
epu
blic
4
99
Lu
xe
mbo
urg
49
1
Tha
iland
4
36
Peru
418
Me
xic
o
433
Spain
496
Ch
ile
457
Belg
ium
501
Co
lom
bia
429
No
rwa
y
50
2
Port
ug
al 4
98
Uru
guay
443
Fra
nce
49
4
Slo
vak R
epub
lic
46
3
Bra
zil
4
12
La
tvia
48
5
Bulg
aria
4
44
Hu
nga
ry
472
Slo
ven
ia 5
02
Gre
ece
45
9
Isra
el 4
69
Ita
ly
478
Cro
atia
4
73
Un
ite
d A
rab E
mira
tes
435
Lithu
ania
46
7
B-S
-J-G
(C
hin
a)
4
96
Tun
isia
3
82
Mo
nte
neg
ro 4
16
Turk
ey 4
22
Ru
ssia
4
73
Sco
re-p
oin
t d
iffe
ren
ce Statistically significantly above the OECD average
Not statistically significantly different from the OECD average
Statistically significantly below the OECD average
Performance in collaborative problem solving
relative to performance in reading, mathematics and science
Figure V.3.9
All countries can make headway
The share of top performers is limited
Percentage of low-achieving students and top performers in
collaborative problem solving
Table V.3.1
0102030405060708090
100
Sin
ga
pore
New
Zea
land
Can
ad
a
Au
str
alia
Fin
land
Jap
an
Unite
d S
tate
s
Hon
g K
on
g (
Ch
ina
)
Ge
rma
ny
Esto
nia
Unite
d K
ing
do
m
Ma
cao
(C
hin
a)
Ko
rea
Neth
erl
an
ds
Chin
ese
Ta
ipe
i
Sw
ed
en
Au
str
ia
Den
ma
rk
OE
CD
avera
ge
Be
lgiu
m
Norw
ay
Luxe
mb
ourg
Fra
nce
Ice
lan
d
B-S
-J-G
(C
hin
a)
Slo
ve
nia
Isra
el
Czech
Rep
ublic
Po
rtug
al
Sp
ain
Italy
Latv
ia
Ru
ssia
Hun
ga
ry
Slo
va
k R
ep
ub
lic
Lith
uan
ia
Cro
atia
Bu
lga
ria
Gre
ece
Un
ite
d A
rab
Em
ira
tes
Uru
gua
y
Chile
Th
aila
nd
Bra
zil
Colo
mbia
Costa
Ric
a
Pe
ru
Me
xic
o
Mo
nte
ne
gro
Tu
rke
y
Tu
nis
ia
Students at Level 4
0102030405060708090
100Students below Level 2
%
%
12% of German students can solve problem-solving tasks with fairly high collaboration complexity, maintaining awareness of group
dynamics and taking initiative to overcome obstacles and resolve disagreements and conflicts
Boys are lagging behind
When individual problem-solving skills were at the centre of PISA in 2012, boys scored higher in most countries. In
contrast, on the 2015 assessment of collaborative problem-solving girls outperformed boys in in every country
-50
-45
-40
-35
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
Fin
land
Sw
ede
n
Austr
alia
Ne
w Z
eala
nd
La
tvia
Ca
nad
a
Ma
ca
o (
Ch
ina
)
Un
ite
d A
rab E
mira
tes
Slo
ven
ia
Ho
ng K
on
g (
Chin
a)
Tha
iland
Un
ite
d K
ing
dom
Kore
a
Bulg
aria
Gre
ece
No
rwa
y
Slo
vak R
epub
lic
Germ
any
OE
CD
avera
ge
Fra
nce
Lithu
ania
Ch
ine
se
Taip
ei
Ne
therl
and
s
Icela
nd
Cro
atia
Esto
nia
Japa
n
Mo
nte
neg
ro
Czech R
epu
blic
Un
ite
d S
tate
s
Hu
nga
ry
Ru
ssia
Lu
xe
mbo
urg
Belg
ium
Austr
ia
Ita
ly
Turk
ey
Spain
Isra
el
B-S
-J-G
(C
hin
a)
De
nm
ark
Sin
gapo
re
Port
ug
al
Bra
zil
Uru
guay
Ch
ile
Me
xic
o
Tun
isia
Co
lom
bia
Co
sta
Ric
a
Peru
Sco
re-p
oin
t d
iffe
ren
ce
Gender differences in collaborative problem-solving performance (boys minus girls)
Figure V.4.3
Girls perform better in all
countries and economies
Attitudes towards collaboration vary across countries too
If schools foster boys’ appreciation of others and their interpersonal friendships and relationships, then they may also
see better outcomes among boys in collaborative problem-solving
-0.60
-0.40
-0.20
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
La
tvia
Slo
vak R
epub
licC
zech R
epu
blic
Japa
nR
ussia
Pola
nd
Ita
lyN
eth
erl
and
sF
inla
nd
Mo
nte
neg
roS
loven
iaB
elg
ium
Cro
atia
Peru
Fra
nce
Un
ite
d K
ing
dom
Ma
ca
o (
Ch
ina
)B
ulg
aria
Hu
nga
ryIr
ela
nd
Esto
nia
Icela
nd
Turk
ey
Ne
w Z
eala
nd
OE
CD
avera
ge
Lu
xe
mbo
urg
De
nm
ark
Ho
ng K
on
g (
Chin
a)
No
rwa
yG
reece
Co
lom
bia
Bra
zil
Sw
ede
nK
ore
aC
hile
B-S
-J-G
(C
hin
a)
Austr
alia
Germ
any
Sw
itzerl
and
Lithu
ania
Ca
nad
aA
ustr
iaT
un
isia
Qata
rU
rug
uay
Me
xic
oT
ha
iland
Un
ite
d S
tate
sIs
rael
Spain
Ch
ine
se
Taip
ei
Do
min
ican
Rep
ublic
Un
ite
d A
rab E
mira
tes
Port
ug
al
Co
sta
Ric
aS
ing
apo
re
Me
an
ind
ex
Boys Girls
Index of valuing relationships, by genderTable V.5.4a
Val
ue
rela
tio
nsh
ips
mo
re
Girls are more likely
to value relationships
-0.40
-0.30
-0.20
-0.10
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
Ne
therl
and
sN
orw
ay
Fin
land
Ru
ssia
Icela
nd
Slo
vak R
epub
licM
onte
neg
roLa
tvia
Sw
ede
nJapa
nE
sto
nia
Isra
el
Belg
ium
De
nm
ark
Bulg
aria
Turk
ey
Pola
nd
Un
ite
d K
ing
dom
Ma
ca
o (
Ch
ina
)H
unga
ryC
zech R
epu
blic
Lu
xe
mbo
urg
Slo
ven
iaO
EC
D a
vera
ge
Irela
nd
Ho
ng K
on
g (
Chin
a)
Ita
lyA
ustr
alia
Ca
nad
aP
eru
Fra
nce
Ne
w Z
eala
nd
Un
ite
d S
tate
sS
pain
Germ
any
Gre
ece
Qata
rA
ustr
iaK
ore
aB
razil
Uru
guay
Co
lom
bia
Sw
itzerl
and
Ch
ileC
roa
tia
Me
xic
oS
ing
apo
reP
ort
ug
al
Lithu
ania
Co
sta
Ric
aB
-S-J
-G (
Chin
a)
Ch
ine
se
Taip
ei
Tha
iland
Tun
isia
Un
ite
d A
rab E
mira
tes
Do
min
ican
Rep
ublic
Me
an
ind
ex
Boys Girls
Index of valuing teamwork, by genderTable V.5.4b
Val
ue
team
wo
rk m
ore
Boys are more likely to value teamwork
Learning environments can shape attitudes and outcomes in collaboration
PISA asked students about how often they engage in communication-intensive activities such as explaining one’s ideas in science class;
spending time in the laboratory doing practical experiments; arguing about science questions; and taking part in class debates about
investigations. The results show a clear relationship between these activities and positive attitudes towards collaboration
0
1
2
3
I am a goodlistener
I enjoy seeingmy classmatesbe successful
I take intoaccount what
others areinterested in
I enjoyconsidering
differentperspectives
I prefer workingas part of a
team to workingalone
I find that teamsmake better
decisions thanindividuals
I find thatteamwork raises
my ownefficiency
I enjoy co-operating with
peers
Perc
enta
ge-p
oin
t d
iffe
ren
ce
After accounting for gender and students' and schools' socio-economic profile
Before accounting for gender and students' and schools' socio-economic profile
Student interaction in science class
and attitudes towards collaboration
Figure V.6.9
Items comprising the index of valuing relationships Items comprising the index of valuing teamwork
Students who reported that more communication-intensive activities take place in science class have more positive
attitudes towards collaboration
-5
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Lu
xe
mbo
urg
Gre
ece
Sin
gapo
re
Un
ite
d S
tate
s
No
rwa
y
Ma
ca
o (
Ch
ina
)
Spain
Ca
nad
a
Ne
w Z
eala
nd
De
nm
ark
Ch
ine
se
Taip
ei
Ho
ng K
on
g (
Chin
a)
Czech R
epu
blic
Fin
land
Esto
nia
Un
ite
d A
rab E
mira
tes
Austr
alia
Port
ug
al
B-S
-J-G
(C
hin
a)
Tha
iland
Sw
ede
n
OE
CD
avera
ge
Slo
ven
ia
Peru
Icela
nd
La
tvia
Ch
ile
Slo
vak R
epub
lic
Bra
zil
Mo
nte
neg
ro
Austr
ia
Co
lom
bia
Cro
atia
Japa
n
Bulg
aria
Lithu
ania
Un
ite
d K
ing
dom
Uru
guay
Ru
ssia
Belg
ium
Ne
therl
and
s
Hu
nga
ry
Me
xic
o
Turk
ey
Germ
any
Tun
isia
Fra
nce
Co
sta
Ric
a
Kore
a
Sco
re-p
oin
t d
iffe
ren
ce
At the school level At the student level
Students being threatened by other students and
performance in collaborative problem solving
Figure V.7.3
In most countries, students score higher when they reported not being threatened
by other students
Change in score after accounting for students' and schools' socio-economic profile
Looking beyond school walls
Only a quarter of the performance variation in collaborative problem-solving skills lies between schools,
much less than is the case in the school disciplines
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Ma
ca
o (
Ch
ina
)
Icela
nd
No
rwa
y
Fin
land
Ca
nad
a
Ho
ng K
on
g (
Chin
a)
De
nm
ark
Spain
Esto
nia
La
tvia
Austr
alia
Un
ite
d S
tate
s
Ne
w Z
eala
nd
Un
ite
d K
ing
dom
Kore
a
Sw
ede
n
Ru
ssia
Port
ug
al
Mo
nte
neg
ro
Japa
n
Un
ite
d A
rab E
mira
tes
Co
sta
Ric
a
OE
CD
avera
ge
Sin
gapo
re
Gre
ece
Tun
isia
Ch
ine
se
Taip
ei
Lithu
ania
Bra
zil
Ita
ly
Me
xic
o
Tha
iland
Ch
ile
Cro
atia
Germ
any
Uru
guay
Austr
ia
Czech R
epu
blic
Slo
vak R
epub
lic
Turk
ey
Isra
el
Co
lom
bia
Lu
xe
mbo
urg
Ne
therl
and
s
Slo
ven
ia
Fra
nce
Belg
ium
B-S
-J-G
(C
hin
a)
Peru
Bulg
aria
Hu
nga
ry
CPS Science Reading Mathematics
Percentage of variation in performance explained by socio-economic status
How well socio-economic status predicts performance in
four PISA subjects
Figure V.4.7
Looking beyond school walls
Technology
400
440
480
520
560
600
Me
xic
o
Bra
zil
-2
4
Co
lom
bia
-1
6
Peru
-3
3
Co
sta
Ric
a -1
9
Tha
iland
-2
9
Uru
guay -4
7
Ch
ile -3
6
Slo
vak R
epub
lic
-35
Bulg
aria
-6
5
Lithu
ania
-5
3
Cro
atia
-3
8
Gre
ece
-68
Hu
nga
ry -4
8
Isra
el -
60
Ru
ssia
-4
0
Ita
ly -4
0
Spain
Fra
nce
-19
Belg
ium
-1
2
La
tvia
-5
1
Icela
nd
-2
5
Slo
ven
ia -2
8
Lu
xe
mbo
urg
-4
6
OE
CD
avera
ge -2
9
B-S
-J-G
(C
hin
a)
-3
3
Port
ug
al -
50
Austr
ia
-30
Ne
therl
and
s
-24
Czech R
epu
blic
-4
6
Ch
ine
se
Taip
ei
Austr
alia
14
Un
ite
d K
ing
dom
-1
4
Ma
ca
o (
Ch
ina
)
Sw
ede
n -3
9
De
nm
ark
-2
1
Fin
land
-29
Germ
any -2
2
Esto
nia
-4
2
Ne
w Z
eala
nd -2
9
Kore
a
-24
Ho
ng K
on
g (
Chin
a)
-3
4
Japa
n 1
4
Sin
gapo
re -1
8
Mean score
Top quarter Third quarter Second quarter Bottom quarter
Index of ICT use at school:
Using ICT and digital devices at school and
performance in collaborative problem solving
Figure V.3.12
Performance difference between top and bottom
quarters of the index of ICT use at school
Looking beyond school walls
Parents have a major role to play
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
Qata
rA
ustr
iaH
unga
ryIta
lyK
ore
aB
-S-J
-G (
Chin
a)
Gre
ece
Ma
ca
o (
Ch
ina
)S
pain
Belg
ium
Turk
ey
Bulg
aria
Un
ite
d S
tate
sP
eru
Pola
nd
Tun
isia
Co
lom
bia
Do
min
ican
Rep
ublic
Austr
alia
Germ
any
Czech R
epu
blic
Lu
xe
mbo
urg
Ch
ine
se
Taip
ei
Japa
nS
loven
iaS
ing
apo
reC
hile
Cro
atia
OE
CD
avera
ge
Lithu
ania
Port
ug
al
Ca
nad
aB
razil
Fra
nce
Esto
nia
Ru
ssia
Icela
nd
Ne
w Z
eala
nd
Irela
nd
No
rwa
yD
enm
ark
Slo
vak R
epub
licU
nite
d A
rab E
mira
tes
Co
sta
Ric
aIs
rael
Sw
ede
nU
nite
d K
ing
dom
Mo
nte
neg
roU
rug
uay
Sw
itzerl
and
Ho
ng K
on
g (
Chin
a)
Tha
iland
La
tvia
Me
xic
oN
eth
erl
and
sF
inla
nd
Pe
rcen
tage
-po
int
diffe
ren
ce
Percentage of parents who discussed their child’s progress with a teacher on their own initiative
Percentage of parents who discussed their child’s progress on the initiative of one of their child’s teachers
Percentage of parents who discuss their child's progress with teachers,
by schools' socio-economic profile
Figure V.7.13
More parents discuss their child's progress in disadvantaged schools
Difference between schools in the top and bottom quartiles of the PISA index of economic, social and cultural status
More parents discuss their child's progress in advantaged schools
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
No
rwa
y
Icela
nd
Sw
ede
n
Lu
xe
mbo
urg
Port
ug
al
Japa
n
Austr
alia
La
tvia
Fin
land
Isra
el
Gre
ece
Un
ite
d S
tate
s
Esto
nia
Spain
Lithu
ania
Sin
gapo
re
Bulg
aria
Ita
ly
Ca
nad
a
OE
CD
avera
ge
Ne
w Z
eala
nd
Cro
atia
Turk
ey
Slo
vak R
epub
lic
Czech R
epu
blic
De
nm
ark
Ne
therl
and
s
Co
sta
Ric
a
Ch
ine
se
Taip
ei
Kore
a
Ma
ca
o (
Ch
ina
)
Germ
any
Un
ite
d A
rab E
mira
tes
Uru
guay
Mo
nte
neg
ro
Ru
ssia
Un
ite
d K
ing
dom
Ho
ng K
on
g (
Chin
a)
Tha
iland
Bra
zil
Austr
ia
Fra
nce
Belg
ium
Slo
ven
ia
Me
xic
o
Hu
nga
ry
Ch
ile
Peru
Co
lom
bia
B-S
-J-G
(C
hin
a)
Tun
isia
Sco
re-p
oin
t d
iffe
ren
ce
At the school level At the student level
Talking to parents after school and performance in
collaborative problem solving
Figure V.7.10
In most countries, students score higher when they reported talking to their
parents after school
Change in score after accounting for students' and schools' socio-economic profile
22
22 Thank you
Find out more about our work at www.oecd.org– All publications
– The complete micro-level database
Email: [email protected]
Twitter: SchleicherEDU
and remember:
Without data, you are just another person with an opinion