International comparisons of student attainment: some issues arising from the PISA study
By Harvey Goldstein. 2004
241 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Education
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b0a37989e3743e65986d11b1cc466a6d152bc77c
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Education
- Candia Morgan
- M. Cattaneo
- Shelley P. Ross
- Anna Tsatsaroni
- Chantal Oggenfuss
- John O. Anderson
- Huann‐shyang Lin
- David F. Treagust
Citations in the corpus
- The more, the better? The impact of instructional time on student performance (2017, result): “Contrary to international comparisons and their limitations (see e.g. Hanushek and Woessmann 2011 or Goldstein 2004) the use of only one country has © 2017 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group CONTACT Stefan C. Wolter stefan.wolter@vwi.unibe.ch Supplemental data for this article…”
- Achievement Inequality and the Institutional Structure of Educational Systems: A Comparative Perspective (2010, unknown): “Yet, as Goldstein (2004) notes, PISA claims to evaluate the performance of educational systems, which seems at odds with the curriculum-independent focus of PISA.”
- Using Large-scale Assessment Datasets for Research in Science and Mathematics Education: Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) (2007, methodology): “Goldstein (2004) , for example, pointed out the limitations of modeling achievement performance as a single dimension as is explicitly done in PISA by using a one-parameter item response model to develop test items and analyze student responses.”
- The PISA mathematics regime: knowledge structures and practices of the self (2014, methodology): “At issue are the ways items are tested, tests administered and test scores interpreted (Goldstein, 2004).”
- Education policies for raising student learning: the Finnish approach (2007, background): “Nagy (1996) and, more recently, Prais (2003, 2004), Riley and Torrance (2003) and Goldstein (2004) have raised concerns about how data are used and interpreted as well as about the robustness of these studies.”