IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/spr/stecpp/978-3-7908-2022-5_11.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

PISA: What makes the difference?

In: The Economics of Education and Training

Author

Listed:
  • Andreas Ammermueller

    (Centre for European Economic Research (ZEW))

Abstract

The large difference in the level and variance of student performance in the 2000 PISA study between Finland and Germany motivates this paper. It analyses why Finnish students showed a significantly higher performance by estimating educational production functions for both countries, using a unique micro-level dataset with imputed data and added school type information. The difference in reading proficiency scores is assigned to different effects, using Oaxaca-Blinder and Juhn-Murphy-Pierce decomposition methods. The analysis shows that German students and schools have on average more favorable characteristics except for the lowest deciles, but experience much lower returns to these characteristics in terms of test scores than Finnish students. The role of school types remains ambiguous. Overall, the observable characteristics explain more of the variation in test scores in Germany than in Finland.

Suggested Citation

  • Andreas Ammermueller, 2008. "PISA: What makes the difference?," Studies in Empirical Economics, in: Christian Dustmann & Bernd Fitzenberger & Stephen Machin (ed.), The Economics of Education and Training, pages 241-265, Springer.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:stecpp:978-3-7908-2022-5_11
    DOI: 10.1007/978-3-7908-2022-5_11
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Contini, Dalit, 2014. "Cross-sectional learning assessments: comparability of regression coefficients and validity of difference-in-difference estimation to evaluate institutional effects," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201431, University of Turin.
    2. Perera, Liyanage Devangi H. & Asadullah, M. Niaz, 2019. "Mind the gap: What explains Malaysia’s underperformance in Pisa?," International Journal of Educational Development, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 254-263.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:stecpp:978-3-7908-2022-5_11. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.