PISA’s Influence on Thought and Action in Mathematics Education

  • Kaye StaceyEmail author
  • Felipe Almuna
  • Rosa M. Caraballo
  • Jean-François Chesné
  • Sol Garfunkel
  • Zahra Gooya
  • Berinderjeet Kaur
  • Lena Lindenskov
  • José Luis Lupiáñez
  • Kyung Mee Park
  • Hannah Perl
  • Abolfazl Rafiepour
  • Luis Rico
  • Franck Salles
  • Zulkardi Zulkardi


This chapter contains short descriptions from contributors in ten countries (Chile, Denmark, France, Indonesia, Iran, Israel, Korea, Singapore, Spain and USA) about some ways in which the PISA Framework and results have influenced thinking and action about mathematics education. In many countries, the PISA results have been a call to action, and have stimulated diverse projects aimed at improving results, principally for teacher education but also some involving students. PISA resources, including the released items, have been used as a basis for assessment as well as for teacher development. Some countries have established national assessments with noticeable consistency with PISA ideas. In many countries, PISA’s concept of mathematical literacy, with its analysis of what makes mathematics education useful for most future citizens, has been extremely influential in curriculum review and also for improving teaching and learning. Countries have also incorporated or adopted the way that PISA describes mathematical competence through the fundamental mathematical capabilities.


Mathematics Education Mathematics Teacher Mathematics Curriculum Mathematical Literacy Mathematics Textbook 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Ahmadi, H., & Rafiepour, A. (2013). Mathematics and mobile phone: How students encounter with real world problems. Roshd Mathematics Educational Journal, 112, 16–21.Google Scholar
  2. Aunión, J. A. (2007). La educación española retrocede. El País, 5.12.2007. Google Scholar
  3. Breakspear, S. (2012). The policy impact of PISA: An exploration of the normative effect of international benchmarking in school system performance (OECD education working papers, N° 71). doi: 10.1787/5k9fdfqffr28-en.
  4. Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2010). Common core state standards for mathematics. Washington, DC: National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and the Council of Chief State School Officers. Math. Accessed 23 Aug 2013.
  5. Instituto de Evaluación. (2011). Evaluación general de diagnóstico 2010. Educación secundaria obligatoria. Segundo curso Informe de resultados. Madrid: Ministerio de Educación.Google Scholar
  6. Díaz, P., & Suárez, E. (2010). El nuevo estudio PISA consagra el estancamiento de la educación española. El Mundo, 7.12.2010.Google Scholar
  7. Egelund, N. (2008). The value of international comparative studies of achievement: A Danish perspective. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 15(3), 245–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Erlangga, D. P. (2012, April). 70 Persen Anak Indonesia Sulit Hidup di Abad 21 (70% Indonesian students realised will find difficult to live in 21st century). Kompas. Accessed 23 Aug 2013.
  9. European Communities. (2007). Key competences for lifelong learning: European reference framework. Accessed 3 Dec 2013.
  10. Faramarzpour, N., & Rafiepour, A. (2013). What the unwritten rules say about captain’s age? Roshd Mathematics Educational Journal, 112, 4–9.Google Scholar
  11. Goh, C.-T. (1997). Shaping our future: Thinking schools, learning nation. Speech by Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong at the opening of the 7th international conference on thinking on Monday, 2 June 1997, Singapore. Accessed 23 Aug 2013.
  12. Gooya, Z. (2013). Editor’s note. Roshd Mathematics Educational Journal, 110, 2–3.Google Scholar
  13. Harwell, M., Post, T., Cutler, A., Maeda, Y., Anderson, E., Norman, K.-W., et al. (2009). The preparation of students from National Science Foundation–funded and commercially developed high school mathematics curricula for their first university mathematics course. American Educational Research Journal, 46(1), 203–223. doi: 10.3102/0002831208323368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hasanpour, M., & Gooya, Z. (2013). Teachers’ perspectives about new mathematics textbook in grade nine. Roshd Mathematics Educational Journal, 111, 4–9.Google Scholar
  15. Instituto de Evaluación. (2010). Sistema estatal de indicadores de la educación. Madrid: Ministerio de Educación.Google Scholar
  16. Kamaliyah, Zulkardi, & Darmawijoyo. (2013). Developing the sixth level of PISA-like mathematics problems for secondary school students. Indonesian Mathematical Society Journal on Mathematics Education (IndoMS-JME), 4(1), 9–28.Google Scholar
  17. Karimianzadeh, A., & Rafiepour, A. (2012). Common sense and solving real mathematical problem. Roshd Mathematics Educational Journal, 107, 37–44.Google Scholar
  18. Korea Institute of Curriculum and Evaluation (KICE). (2009). Redesigning elementary and secondary school curriculum for developing future Koreans’ core competences. RRC 2009-10-1. Seoul: KICE.Google Scholar
  19. Kwon, O. N. (2013). Story telling mathematics textbooks: Its development, impact, and prospects. In M. Inprasitha (Ed.), Proceedings of the 6th East Asia Regional Conference on Mathematics Education (EARCOME6) (pp. 155–162). Khon Kaen: Center for Research in Mathematics Education.Google Scholar
  20. Legifrance. (2006). Décret n° 2006-830 du 11 juillet 2006, annexe. Accessed 23 Aug 2013.
  21. Lindenskov, L. & Weng, P. (2010). 15 matematikopgaver i PISA: et materiale for matematiklærere og andre med interesse i grundskolens matematikundervisning. (English: 15 Mathematics tasks in PISA: Material for mathematics teachers and other with interest in mathematics in primary and lower secondary school) (p. 74). Copenhagen: The Danish School of Education, Aarhus University. ISBN: 978-87-7430-198-1.Google Scholar
  22. MENJVA/DGESCO. (2009a). Document d’accompagnement collège, raisonnement et demonstration. Accessed 23 Aug 2013.
  23. MENJVA/DGESCO (2009b). Banque de problèmes pour les mathématiques. Accessed 23 Aug 2013.
  24. MENJVA/DGESCO (2011). Vade-mecum pour la compétence 3. Accessed 23 Aug 2013.
  25. Ministerio de Educación. (2009). Objetivos Fundamentales y Contenidos Mínimos Obligatorios de la Educación Básica y Media. Actualización 2009. Santiago: MINEDUC.Google Scholar
  26. Ministerio de Educación y Ciencia. (2006). Ley Orgánica 2/2006, de 3 de mayo, de Educación. BOE, 106, 17158–17207.Google Scholar
  27. Ministry of Education, Denmark. (2003). Fælles Mål 2003 — Matematik. Faghæfte 12. (English: Common goals 2003—Mathematics. School Subject Text No. 12). Copenhagen: Ministry of EducationGoogle Scholar
  28. Ministry of Education, Denmark. (2009). Fælles Mål 2009 — Matematik. Faghæfte 12. (English: Common goals 2009—Mathematics. School Subject Text No. 12). Copenhagen: Ministry of Education.Google Scholar
  29. Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology (MEST). (2011). Mathematics curriculum. Seoul: Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology.Google Scholar
  30. Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology (MEST). (2013). Mathematics 2. Seoul: Korea.Google Scholar
  31. Mortimore, P., David-Evans, M., Laukkanen, R., & Valijarvi, J. (2004). OECD-rapport om grundskolen Danmark (OECD—Report on primary and lower secondary school in Denmark). Copenhagen: Ministry of Education. Temahæfteserie nr. 5 [English: Thematic serie no 5].Google Scholar
  32. Niss, M. (Ed.). (2002). Mathematical competencies and the learning of mathematics: The Danish KOM Project. Roskilde: Roskilde University.Google Scholar
  33. Niss, M. (2003). Mathematical competencies and the learning of mathematics. The Danish KOM Project. In A. Gagatsis & S. Papastavridis (Eds.), Third Mediterranean conference on mathematics education (pp. 115–124). Athens: The Hellenic Mathematical Society and Cyprus Mathematical Society.Google Scholar
  34. Nurfuadah, R. N. (2013) Penyebab Indeks Matematika Siswa RI Terendah di Dunia (Reason why Indonesian students have low achievement in the world). Kampus Okezone. Accessed 23 Aug 2013.
  35. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2005). The definition and selection of key competencies. DeSeCo Executive Summary. Accessed 11 Oct 2013.
  36. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2006) PISA released items—mathematics. OECD Publishing. Accessed 23 Aug 2013.
  37. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2010a). PISA 2009 assessment framework: Key competencies in reading, mathematics and science. PISA, OECD Publishing. doi: 10.1787/9789264062658-en. Accessed 23 Aug 2013.
  38. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2010b). PISA 2009 results: Learning trends. Changes in student performance since 2000 (Volume V). Accessed 23 Aug 2013.
  39. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2013a). PISA 2012 assessment and analytical framework: Mathematics, reading, science, problem solving and financial literacy. OECD Publishing. Accessed 23 Aug 2013.
  40. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2013b). PISA 2012 released mathematics items. Accessed 8 Oct 2013.
  41. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2003). The PISA 2003 assessment framework. Mathematics, reading, science and problem solving knowledge and skills. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  42. Rafiepour, A., & Abdolahpour, K. (2013). Investigating students’ modeling competency through grade, gender, and location. Paper presented at CERME 2013 (8th congress of European Research in Mathematics Education. 6–10 February 2013. Antalya, Turkey.) Accessed 23 Aug 2013.
  43. Rafiepour, A., & Stacey, K. (2009). Applying a mathematical literacy framework to the Iranian Grade 9 mathematics textbook. In M. Tzekaki, M. Kaldrimidou, & C. Sakonidis (Eds.), Proceedings of the 33rd conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 4, pp. 433–440). Thessaloniki: PME.Google Scholar
  44. Rafiepour, A., Stacey, K., & Gooya, Z. (2012). Investigating grade nine textbook problems for characteristics related to mathematical literacy. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 2(4), 403–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Recio, T. (2010). El informe PISA como arma contra el sistema educativo. El País, 4.12.2010.Google Scholar
  46. Rico, L. (2011). El estudio PISA y la evaluación de la competencia matemática. Matematicalia, 7(1), 1–12.Google Scholar
  47. Rychen, D. S., & Salganik, L. H. (2003). Key competencies for a successful life and a well-functioning society. Göttingen: Hogrefe Publishing GmbH. ISBN 9781616762728.Google Scholar
  48. Schoenfeld, A. H. (2004). The math wars. Educational Policy, 18(1), 253–286. doi: 10.1177/0895904803260042.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Sembiring, R. K., Hoogland, K., & Dolk, M. (2010). A decade of PMRI in Indonesia. Utrecht: APS International.Google Scholar
  50. Solar, H., Rojas, F., & Ortiz, A. (2011). Competencias matemáticas: Una línea de investigación. Paper presented at the XIII Conferência interamericana de educação matemática, Recife, Brasil. Accessed 23 Aug 2013.
  51. Stacey, K. (2011). The PISA view of mathematical literacy in Indonesia. Journal of Indonesian Mathematics Society B (Journal on Mathematics Education), 2(2), 95–126. Accessed 1 Oct 2013.
  52. Unidad Europea de Eurydice. (2002). Las competencias clave. Un concepto en expansión dentro de la educación general obligatoria. Madrid: Ministerio de Educación, Ciencia y Cultura.Google Scholar
  53. Wardhani, S., & Rumiati. (2011). Instrumen penilaian hasil belajar matematika SMP: belajar dari PISA dan TIMSS (Instrument evaluation for mathematics achievement in Junior high school: learning from PISA and TIMSS). Program BERMUTU (Better education through reformed management and universal teacher upgrading). Yogyakarta: PPPTK Matematika.…pdf. Accessed 23 Aug 2013.
  54. Widjaja, W. (2011). Toward mathematics literacy in the 21st century: Perspectives from Indonesia. Southeast Asian Mathematics Education Journal, 1(1), 75–84.Google Scholar
  55. Zulkardi, Z. (2010). PISA, KTSP and UN. In Proceedings of the fifteenth national conference on mathematics (Prosiding KNM XV). IndoMS and Mathematics Department UNIMA Manado (pp. 53–54). Accessed 23 Aug 2013.

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kaye Stacey
    • 1
    Email author
  • Felipe Almuna
    • 1
  • Rosa M. Caraballo
    • 2
  • Jean-François Chesné
    • 3
  • Sol Garfunkel
    • 4
  • Zahra Gooya
    • 5
  • Berinderjeet Kaur
    • 6
  • Lena Lindenskov
    • 7
  • José Luis Lupiáñez
    • 2
  • Kyung Mee Park
    • 8
  • Hannah Perl
    • 9
  • Abolfazl Rafiepour
    • 10
  • Luis Rico
    • 2
  • Franck Salles
    • 11
  • Zulkardi Zulkardi
    • 12
  1. 1.Melbourne Graduate School of EducationThe University of MelbourneMelbourneAustralia
  2. 2.University of GranadaGranadaSpain
  3. 3.Office for the Evaluation of Educational Activities and ExperimentationsMinistry of National EducationParisFrance
  4. 4.Consortium for Mathematics and its ApplicationsBedfordUSA
  5. 5.Shahid Beheshti UniversityTehranIran
  6. 6.National Institute of EducationSingaporeSingapore
  7. 7.Institut for Uddannelse og PædagogikAarhus Universitet i EmdrupCopenhagenDenmark
  8. 8.College of EducationHongik UniversitySeoulSouth Korea
  9. 9.Ministry of EducationJerusalemIsrael
  10. 10.Shahid Bahonar University of KermanKermanIran
  11. 11.Office for Students’ AssessmentMinistry of National EducationParisFrance
  12. 12.Sriwijaya UniversityPalembangIndonesia

Personalised recommendations