Steve Rasmussen's PowerPoint presentation at the 2012 ASCD Conference

1. Apples and Oranges :
International Comparisons
Are we failing our students?
ASCD Presentation
Philadelphia
March 24, 2012
Dr. Steve Rasmussen, Superintendent
Issaquah School District – Issaquah, WA

2. “There are three kinds of lies; lies, damn
lies, and statistics.”
Mark Twain

3. NAEP: National Assessment of Education
Progress
PISA: Program for International
Student Assessment
TIMSS: Trends in International
Mathematics and Science
Study
PIRLS: Progress in International Reading
Literacy Study

4. “Sometimes rankings can make small
gaps appear big and vice versa.”
Tom Loveless, Brookings Institution
2012 Brown Center Report on
American Education

6. Conclusion:
1. Dubious Claims of Causality
2. Misuse of National Rankings: Average
Score Ranking
3. The A+ Fallacy
2012 Brown Center Report on
American Education

7. “Figures don‟t lie, but liars figure.”
Mark Twain

10. BEHIND THE FACTS: PISA 2009
 PISA rankings are determined by nations’ average scores. Some
researchers suggest that average score comparisons are not useful.
Even presuming that the scores have meaning, average student are
not likely to be the leaders in the field of math and science.
 In the last PISA (2009), the U.S. had 25% of all high-scoring students
in the world! See the chart above.
 The fact that one in four high-scoring students came from the U.S.
and the remaining high-scores from the other 58 countries suggests
that American schools are actually doing very well.
 Well-resourced school serving wealthy neighborhoods show excellent
results. Poor resourced schools serving low-income communities of
color do far worse.
 UNICEF studied poverty in 22 wealthy nations, the U.S. ranked 21st.
 The highest scoring countries have less diversity and less poverty.

11. “When it comes to student achievement and
school improvement, it‟s poverty not stupid!”
Mel Riddile, Assoc. Dir. for High Schools
NASSP 2010

12. USA F&R Meal Rate and PISA
Score
Schools with <10% 551
School with 10-24.9% 527
Schools with 25-49.9% 502
Schools with 50-74.9% 471
Schools with >75% 446
U.S. average 500
OECD average 493

13. Comparing Apples to Apples: Poverty Rates and PISA
Scores
Country Poverty Rate
PISA Score
United States <10% 551
Finland 3.4% 536
Netherlands 9.0% 508
Belgium 6.7%
506
Norway 3.6% 503
Switzerland 6.8% 501
France 7.3% 496
Denmark 2.4% 495
Czech Republic 7.2% 478

14. Poverty Rates and PISA Scores 10% - 24.9%
Country Poverty Rate
PISA Score
South Korea (no poverty rates) <10% 539
Finland <10% 536
United States <10-24.9% 527
Canada 13.6% 524
New Zealand 16.3% 521
Japan 14.3% 520
Australia 11.6% 515
Poland 14.5% 500
Germany 10.9% 497
Ireland 15.7% 496
Hungary 13.1% 494
United Kingdom 16.2% 494
Portugal 15.6% 489
Italy 15.7% 486
Greece 12.4% 483
Austria 13.3% 471

15. Poverty Rates of 22 OECD Countries Tested
(Countries that have poverty rates) Their
Population, Ave. Score
Country Population Poverty Rate PISA
Average Score
Finland 5.4M 3.4% 536
Canada 33.4M 13.6% 524
New Zealand 4.4M 16.3% 521
Japan 127.9M 14.3% 520
Australia 22.8M 11.6% 515
Netherlands 16.8M 9.0% 508
Belgium 11.0M 6.7% 506
Norway 4.9M 3.6% 503
Switzerland 7.8M 6.8% 501
Poland 38.1M 14.5% 500
United States 313.1M 21.7% 500
Germany 81.7M 10.9% 497
Ireland 4.5M 15.7% 496
France 65.3M 7.3% 496
Denmark 5.6M 2.4% 495
United Kingdom 62.2M 16.2% 494
Hungary 9.9M 13.1% 494
Portugal 10.5M 15.6% 489
Italy 60.6M 15.7% 486
Greece 10.7M 12.4% 483
Czech Republic 10.5M 7.2% 478
Austria 8.4M 13.3% 471

16. US K—20 Student Population 2012
US Total Population
313.1M
K—12 Population (17.6%) 55.0M
Public K—12 (90%) 49.6M
Private K—12 (10%) 5.4M
College/Grad School (7.3%)
23.0M
Public College (85%) 19.6M
Private College (15%) 3.4M
US population in K—20 (25%)

17. “You are entitled to your own opinion,
but not your own facts.”
Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan

18. Observations from PISA Results:
• Shanghai, China topped the list with 556 (but it’s not a country). Only 35% of their
students go onto high school and not all children are allowed to go to school.
• Of all the nations participating in PISA, the U.S. has, by far, the largest number of
students living in poverty—21.7%. The next closest countries have poverty rates
75%
of ours (United Kingdom and New Zealand).
• U.S. students in school with 10% or less poverty are #1 in the world.
• U.S. students in schools with 10-24% poverty are 3rd behind South Korea and
Finland.
• U.S. students in schools with 25-50% poverty are 10th in the world.
• U.S. students in schools with 50% poverty are near the bottom.
• The other surprises were Germany with less than half our poverty, scores below
the
U.S. as did France with less than a third our poverty and Sweden with a low of
3.6% poverty rate.

19. LESS-REPORTED FINDINGS: PISA 2009
The best performing school systems manage to provide high-quality education for
all children.
Students from low SES backgrounds score a year behind affluent students.
In schools where students are required to repeat grades, the test scores are lower
and the achievement gap is larger.
Tracking students (ability grouping) results in the gap becoming larger. The earlier
the practice, the larger gap. Poor children are more frequently placed into the
lower track.
Schools that have autonomy over curriculum, finances and assessment score
higher.
Schools that compete for students (vouchers, charters, etc.) show no achievement
score advantage.
Private schools do no better once family wealth factors are considered.
Students that attended pre-school score higher, even after more than 10 yrs.

20. ARE INTERNATIONAL COMPARISONS USEFUL? CAVEAT EMPTOR
• Most countries define the job of students is learning and schools spend most of
their time on academics. We add Driver’s Ed, Drug Prevention and Football.
• Most developing countries are struggling with issues of universal access and
gender parity. This is no longer a central issue in the US.
• India concentrates its resources on a small number of elite students. Only now
is it beginning to take on the challenge of educating “all” students.
• Most Asian and European countries place responsibility for academics success
on the individual student and rely on exams to sort students.
• Politicians in Japan defer to professional educators matters such as curriculum.
Our politicians have no “compunction” about imposing the latest fads on our
schools including class size, charter schools, testing, merit pay, evaluation
systems, etc. regardless of what educators say.

21. NOW WHAT? HOW SHOULD WE PARTICIPATE IN THE GLOBAL MARKET PLACE
OF SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT IDEAS?
1. Move beyond the ―here’s a country that got it right
syndrome‖.
(A+ syndrome)
2. Learn from New Zealand’s market based education policies
of 1990s.
3. The ―global market place‖ works both ways. Other countries
see strengths in US system including China and Japan:
Creativity and less testing, problem solving, and other skills
central to the 21st century work place. The US is moving to
more test-based initiatives (Yong Zhoa, Catching Up or
Leading the Way, 2009).
4. Look for ideas and practices that have proven to be
applicable across a variety of cultural setting.

22. “The challenge to our pundits is that we
continually look for gold in other
countries, when all along we are sitting on
Acres of Diamonds!”
Anonymous

23. Observations from a
Superintendent
As the federal government (since 2002 ESEA under
both Democrats and Republicans) has become
even more top-down and prescriptive, local school
become less autonomous and less like our
successful international counterparts.
Finally, the push for privatizing public education
through charters, tuition tax credits, vouchers and
the likes (Market Driven Reforms) does not result in
better test scores and has the effect of increasing
segregation, and the inequalities that lead to low
test scores.

24. Final Thoughts on US Education
2012 and Beyond
Making education a national priority: A serious
investment in Teaching and Learning.
Fostering a professional climate in schools:
Attracted the best and brightest to the profession.
The availability of “good” schools for all. Getting
serious about helping all students fulfill the
fundamental right to a high-quality education
regardless of their Zip Code and SES.

25. “If we can ever get our values right, the
„lessons learned‟ will take care of
themselves.”
Edward B. Fiske
Former Educational Editor,
New York Times and
Education Week, March
7, 2012