If London were a country, how would it do in PISA?

John Jerrim.

Since 2009, parts of China have been participated in the OECD’s triennial PISA testing.

In 2009 and 2012, Shanghai topped the international rankings and by quite some distance, with 15-year-olds in this Chinese city estimated to be up to two and a half years ahead of their counterparts in England.

Yet China’s participation in PISA also led to controversy.

Why was it allowed to enter just Shanghai into the study, rather than a random sample from the whole country, as other nations are required to do?

In England, London tends to outperform other parts of the country in terms of GCSE performance. Might London then rival Shanghai if it too were included as a separate entity in the PISA rankings?

Let’s look at the evidence.

London did not perform so well in PISA 2009 and 2012

In one of my papers published since the last PISA results [PDF] I tried to estimate how pupils in London performed in PISA. The results from this exercise can be found in the table below.

Actually, London did not fare too well in the results. With an average maths score of 479, reading score of 483 and science score of 497, it was below both the OECD average and the scores for the rest of the UK. In maths, pupils were three years behind 15-year-olds in Shanghai. 

One obvious question to ask, then, is why is there no evidence of a “London effect” in PISA?

It’s hard to say for sure. But, by using the fact that PISA results have been linked to the National Pupil Database, I was able to find some clues (keeping in mind that GCSEs and PISA tests are taken just six months apart).

Most importantly, the analysis showed how pupils from disadvantaged and ethnic minority backgrounds in England were likely to do much worse on the PISA test than one would anticipate, given how they performed in their GCSEs. For instance, black and Asian teenagers scored almost 30 PISA points lower than predicted (given their GCSEs).

Of course, as an ethnically and socially diverse city, London has a disproportionately large share of ethnic minority and disadvantaged pupils. Once this has been controlled for, the difference between London and the rest of the UK was vastly reduced. 

Regional variation in PISA 2015

Regional variation in PISA scores in England was also something I considered in work on PISA 2015 [PDF]. The key results are in the table below.

Interestingly, London seemed roughly in line with the England average in the PISA 2015 results. Yet it was still some way behind the top-performing area (the south east), with a difference in science of around 30 PISA test points (in statistical terms, an effect size of 0.3). At the other end of the table was the north west and north east, and the west Midlands, which brought down England’s average PISA score.

Key message

So although London schools may outperform the rest of England in GCSE examinations, there is no evidence that the same is true in PISA.

More work needs to be done to understand why pupils from ethnic minority and disadvantaged backgrounds perform so differently across these two assessments. 

Other posts in this series can be found here, here and here.

Tagged with: ,
Posted in International comparisons, Teaching, learning, curriculum & assessment
9 comments on “If London were a country, how would it do in PISA?
  1. GCSEs and PISA – Not surprising that there is a different pattern of performance across the two.

    Schools and especially Academy schools have taken various GCSE ‘gaming’ techniques to new heights. PISA questions are not content specific and are much more cognitively demanding than GCSE, which has adapted to the DfE pushing knowledge-based, instructional approaches, backed up by coercive discipline. My prediction for the current PISA round is that this pattern will become even clearer. London has a higher proportion of Academies than anywhere else in England.

    It would be interesting to see if the same pattern applies to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland where there are no Academies and the marketisation culture is much weaker.

    See this Schools Week article and my comment.


  2. […] Other posts in this series can be found here, here, here, here and here. […]

  3. […] Other posts in this series can be found here, here, here, here, here and here. […]

  4. […] Other posts in this series can be found here, here, here, here, here, here and here. […]

  5. […] Other posts in this series can be found here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here. […]

  6. […] Other posts in this series can be found here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here. […]

  7. […] Other posts in this series can be found here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here. […]

  8. […] Other posts in this series can be found here,  here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here. […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

UCL Institute of Education

This blog was written by academics at the UCL Institute of Education (IOE), for anyone interested in current issues in education and related social sciences.
IOE Tweets
%d bloggers like this: