Understanding PISA and Its Impact on Policy Initiative

A Review of the Evidence
  • Petra Lietz
  • Molie Tobin
  • Dita Nugroho


The International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA) first started a programme of evaluation studies in education with the Pilot Study to explore the feasibility of such an endeavour in 1959–1961 (Foshay et al., 1962).


Education Policy Policy Process Assessment Programme Education Policy Making National Assessment Programme 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Anderson, J. O., Chiu, M. H., & Yore, L. D. (2010). First cycle of PISA (2000–2006)—International perspectives on successes and challenges: Research and policy directions. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8(3), 373–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Berry, R., & Adamson, B. (2011). Assessment reform past, present and future. In R. Berry & B. Adamson (Eds.), Assessment reform in education (Vol. 14, pp. 3–14). Netherlands: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Best, M., Knight, P., Lietz, P., Lockwood, C., Nugroho, D., & Tobin, M. (2013). The impact of national and international assessment programmes on education policy, particularly policies regarding resource allocation and teaching and learning practices in developing countries. Final report. London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London.Google Scholar
  4. Braun, H., Kanjee, A., & Bettinger, E. (2006). Improving education, through assessment, innovation, and evaluation. Cambridge, MA: American Academy of Arts and Sciences.Google Scholar
  5. Breakspear, S. (2012). The policy impact of PISA (OECD Education Working Paper 71). Paris: OECD.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bridgman, P., & Davis, G. (2004). The Australian policy handbook. Australia: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  7. de Landshere, G. (1997). History of educational research. In J. P. Keeves (Ed.), Educational research, methodology and measurement: An international handbook (2nd ed., pp. 8–16). Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
  8. Else-Quest, N. M., Hyde, J. S., & Linn, M. C. (2010). Cross-national patterns of gender differences in mathematics: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 136(1), 103–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Figazollo, L. (2009). Impact of PISA 2006 on the education policy debate. Retrieved from Scholar
  10. Foshay, A. W., Thorndike, R. L., Hotyat, F., Pidgeon, D. A., & Walker, D. A. (1962). Educational achievements of thirteen-year-olds in twelve countries: Results of an international research project, 1959–1961. Hamburg: UNESCO Institute for Education.Google Scholar
  11. Gilmore, A. (2005). The impact of PIRLS (2001) and TIMSS (2003) in low and middle-income countries: An evaluation of the value of World Bank support for international surveys of reading literacy (PIRLS) and mathematics and science (TIMSS). Amsterdam: International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA).Google Scholar
  12. Government of India. (2011). Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) thirteenth joint review mission 17th to 31st January 2011. Retrieved from
  13. Grek, S. (2009). Governing by numbers: The PISA ‘effect’ in Europe. Journal of Education Policy, 24(1), 23–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Haddad, W. D., & Demsky, T. (1995). Education policy-planning process: An applied framework. fundamentals of educational planning 51. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization, International Inst. for Educational Planning.Google Scholar
  15. Hansen, K. Y., Gustafsson, J. E., & Rosén, M. (2014). Northern lights on TIMSS and PIRLS 2011: Differences and similarities in the Nordic countries. Norway: Norden.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hanushek, E. A., & Woessmann, L. (2010). The high cost of low educational performance: The long-run economic impact of improving PISA outcomes. Paris: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
  17. Howie, S., & Plomp, T. (2006). Contexts of learning mathematics and science: Lessons. London & New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  18. Husén, T. (Ed.). (1967). International study of achievement in mathematics: A comparison of twelve countries (Vols. 1–2). Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
  19. Kamens, D. H., & Benavot, A. (2011). National, regional and international learning assessments: Trends among developing countries, 1960–2009. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 9(2), 285–300.Google Scholar
  20. Kellaghan, T., Greaney, V., & Murray, T. S. (2009). Using the results of a national assessment of educational achievement. National assessments of educational achievement (Vol. 5). Washington, DC: World Bank.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Levine, V. (2013). Education in Pacific Island states. Reflections on the failures of “grand remedies” (Pacific Islands Policy. Issue 8). Honolulu, Hawai’i: East-West Center. Retrieved from
  22. Lietz, P. (2006). Issues in the change in gender differences in reading achievement in cross-national research studies since 1992: A meta-analytic view. International Education Journal, 7(2), 127–149.Google Scholar
  23. Loveless, T. (2009). The 2008 Brown center report on American education: How well are American students learning? Retrieved from Scholar
  24. Maligalig, D. S., & Albert, J. R. (2008). Measures for assessing basic education in the Philippines. (Discussion Paper Series No. 2008-16). Manila: Philippine Institute for Development Studies.Google Scholar
  25. Mesa, V., Gómez, P., & Cheah U. H. (2011). Influence of international studies of student achievement on mathematics teaching and learning. In M. A. Clements, A. Bishop, C. Keitel, J. Kilpatrick, & F. Leung (Eds.), Third international handbook of mathematics education (pp. 861–900). New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
  26. Noah, H. J. (1983, November 1). The use and abuse of comparative education. Inaugural lecture as Gardner Cowles Professor of Economics and Education. Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  27. NPM(1003)9a. PISA 2012 technical standards. Final version. Paper presented at the PISA 2012 National Project Manager Meeting, Boston, USA, March 2010.Google Scholar
  28. Owens, T. L. (2013). Thinking beyond league tables: A review of key PISA research questions. In H.-D. Meyer & A. Benavot (Eds.), PISA, power, and policy: The emergence of global educational governance (pp. 27–49). Southampton, Oxford: Oxford Studies in Comparative Education.Google Scholar
  29. Postlethwaite, T. N. (1967). School organization and student achievement: A study based on achievement in mathematics in twelve countries. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
  30. Postlethwaite, T. N., & Kellaghan, T. (2008). National assessments of education achievement. France and Belgium: International Academy of Education (IAE) and the International Institute for Educational Planning (IIEP), UNESCO.Google Scholar
  31. Sutcliffe, S., & Court, J. (2005). Evidence-based policymaking: What is it? How does it work? What relevance for developing countries? London: Overseas Development Institute.Google Scholar
  32. Takrifin, A. (2009, Desember). Ujian nasional: Invalid, inreliabel, inkonstitusional dan beretentangan dengan ham. Forum Tarbiyah, 7(2).Google Scholar
  33. UNESCO. (2013). The use of student assessment for policy and learning. Improvement Education Policy and Reform Unit (EPR). (Education Policy Research Working Document No. 1). Bangkok, Thailand: UNESCO Bangkok. Retrieved November 22, 2013, from Scholar
  34. Wiseman, A. W. (2010). The uses of evidence for educational policymaking: Global contexts and international trends. In A. Luke, G. J. Kelly, & J. Green (Eds.), Review of research in education (Vol. 34, pp. 1–24). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.Google Scholar
  35. Young, E., & Quinn, L. (2002). Writing effective public policy papers: A guide to policy advisers in central and Eastern Europe. Budapest: Open Society Institute.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Sense Publishers 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Petra Lietz
    • 1
  • Molie Tobin
    • 2
  • Dita Nugroho
    • 3
  1. 1.Australian Council for Educational ResearchAustralia
  2. 2.Australian Council for Educational ResearchAustralia
  3. 3.Australian Council for Educational ResearchAustralia

Personalised recommendations