{"title":"When Students Don't Care: Reexamining International Differences in Achievement and Non-Cognitive Skills","authors":"Gema Zamarro, Collin Hitt, Ildefonso Méndez","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2857243","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Policy debates in education are often framed by using international test scores, such as the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). The obvious presumption is that observed differences in test scores within and across countries reflect differences in cognitive skills and general content knowledge, the things which achievement tests are designed to measure. We challenge this presumption, by studying how much of the within-country and between-country variation in PISA test scores is associated with student effort, rather than true academic content knowledge. Drawing heavily on recent literature, we posit that our measures of student effort are actually proxy measures of relevant non-cognitive skills related to conscientiousness. Completing surveys and tests takes effort and students may actually reveal something about their conscientiousness by the amount of effort they show during these tasks. Our previous work, and that of others validates this claim (e.g. Boe, May and Boruch, 2002; Borghans and Schils, 2012; Hitt, Trivitt and Cheng, 2016; Hitt, 2016; Zamarro et al., 2016). Using parametrizations of measures of survey and test effort we find that these measures help explain between 32 and 38 percent of the observed variation in test scores across countries, while explaining only a minor share of the observed variation within countries.","PeriodicalId":336198,"journal":{"name":"University of Arkansas Department of Education Reform Research Paper Series","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"31","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"University of Arkansas Department of Education Reform Research Paper Series","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2857243","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 31
Abstract
Policy debates in education are often framed by using international test scores, such as the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). The obvious presumption is that observed differences in test scores within and across countries reflect differences in cognitive skills and general content knowledge, the things which achievement tests are designed to measure. We challenge this presumption, by studying how much of the within-country and between-country variation in PISA test scores is associated with student effort, rather than true academic content knowledge. Drawing heavily on recent literature, we posit that our measures of student effort are actually proxy measures of relevant non-cognitive skills related to conscientiousness. Completing surveys and tests takes effort and students may actually reveal something about their conscientiousness by the amount of effort they show during these tasks. Our previous work, and that of others validates this claim (e.g. Boe, May and Boruch, 2002; Borghans and Schils, 2012; Hitt, Trivitt and Cheng, 2016; Hitt, 2016; Zamarro et al., 2016). Using parametrizations of measures of survey and test effort we find that these measures help explain between 32 and 38 percent of the observed variation in test scores across countries, while explaining only a minor share of the observed variation within countries.
教育方面的政策辩论通常以国际考试成绩为框架,例如国际学生评估项目(PISA)。显而易见的假设是,观察到的国家内部和国家之间考试成绩的差异反映了认知技能和一般内容知识的差异,而成就测试的目的是衡量这些差异。我们通过研究国家内部和国家之间的PISA测试分数差异与学生努力有关的程度,而不是真正的学术内容知识,来挑战这一假设。根据最近的文献,我们假设我们对学生努力的测量实际上是与责任心相关的相关非认知技能的替代测量。完成调查和测试需要付出努力,学生们在完成这些任务时所付出的努力实际上可以揭示出他们的责任心。我们之前的工作,以及其他人的工作证实了这一说法(例如Boe, May和Boruch, 2002;Borghans and Schils, 2012;Hitt, Trivitt and Cheng, 2016;希特,2016;Zamarro et al., 2016)。使用调查和测试努力的参数化措施,我们发现这些措施有助于解释32%至38%的观察到的国家之间的考试成绩差异,而只能解释国家内部观察到的变化的一小部分。