Pisa測試模糊成功教育關鍵

Every three years, the OECD tests the skills and knowledge of 15-year-olds around the world, using the results to rank participating education systems. In 2015, more than half a million teenagers — representing 28m students in 72 countries — took the test, known as the Programme for International Student Assessment, or Pisa.

每三年，經(jīng)濟合作與發(fā)展組織(OECD)都會測試世界各國15歲的孩子的技能與知識，并利用測試結果對參與的教育體系進行排名。2015年，50多萬青少年——代表72個國家的2800萬學生——參加了這一名為國際學生評估項目(Programme for International Student Assessment，簡稱Pisa)的測試。

The first Pisa test was performed in 2000, but since then it has grown to become a global school league table, carefully watched by governments, policymakers and journalists alike. Its influence provokes fear in education ministries, and criticism by academics.

Pisa于2000年問世，自那以來它已發(fā)展為一個全球學校排行榜，受到各國政府、政策制定者及新聞工作者等各界的密切關注。它的影響力在教育部門內部引發(fā)擔憂，也招致學者們批評。

If a country does poorly — or even just not as well as in previous years — that can be a career-limiting result for an education minister. In a 2014 open letter to the OECD, academics accused Pisa of stifling innovation, encouraging rote learning and being too narrow.

如果一個國家表現(xiàn)不佳——或者甚至只是不如往年那么好——那可能限制該國教育部長的仕途。2014年，在一封致OECD的公開信中，學者們指責Pisa扼殺創(chuàng)新、鼓勵死記硬背，而且過于狹隘。

The problem is not with the test in principle — having impartial data that show whether education systems are delivering the basics is a good thing — but with the way it has become the dominant metric of success. As soon as Pisa became a global benchmark, ministers began to focus on working their way up its league table. In theory, rankings should encourage innovation; in practice, it is easier to copy the approach of the league leaders.

問題并不是這項測試在原則上有什么不對——有不偏不倚的數(shù)據(jù)表明教育體系是否傳授了基本技能是一件好事——而在于它已成為衡量成功的主要標準。一旦Pisa成為全球基準，教育部長們就開始專注于提升本國在Pisa測試中的排名。理論上，排名應該鼓勵創(chuàng)新;實際上，效仿名列前茅的教育體系是更加便利的做法。

Although some European countries, such as Finland and Switzerland, do well in Pisa results, Asian countries tend to dominate the leaderboard. The latest round, in 2015, tested students in maths, reading, science, collaborative problem solving and financial literacy — but it was the maths and reading results that made headlines.

雖然一些歐洲國家(如芬蘭和瑞士)在Pisa測試中的結果不錯，但亞洲國家傾向于在Pisa榜單上占據(jù)高位。2015年舉行的最新一輪考試檢測了學生們在數(shù)學、閱讀、科學、協(xié)作解決問題上的能力，以及金融基本知識——但只有數(shù)學和閱讀成績成了頭條新聞。

In 2015, the top seven countries for maths were Singapore, Hong Kong, Macau, Taiwan, Japan, China and South Korea, all of which have a reputation for pushing children hard, emphasising rote learning and focusing on exams. Pisa is explicit about not encouraging rote learning, yet the experts who prize high positions in the rankings are nevertheless turning to it to achieve their ends.

2015年，數(shù)學成績最優(yōu)異的7個經(jīng)濟體分別是新加坡、香港、澳門、臺灣、日本、中國和韓國，這些國家都以給孩子們施加很大壓力、強調死記硬背和重視考試而聞名。Pisa明確表示不提倡死記硬背，但那些渴望提高排名的專家們紛紛轉向這種方式來實現(xiàn)目標。

There are risks in copying the Asian model. The future of education cannot be a move towards exam factories with narrow curricula. Even in Asia, there are doubts over whether the model is working. While the west turns to Singapore and Shanghai as models of excellence, Asian parents are looking to the western system — or at least parts of it — for an alternative. More UK independent schools are establishing Asian franchises and more Asian parents are sending children to UK boarding schools, where numbers of mainland Chinese children rose 10 per cent last year to nearly 8,000. These wealthy parents hope 19th-century institutions might hold the key to 21st-century success — that these schools will develop creativity, innovation, critical thinking and character.

效仿亞洲模式是有風險的。教育的未來不能向著教學大綱狹窄的考試工廠發(fā)展。即使在亞洲，這種模式的有效性也受到了質疑。當西方把新加坡和上海視為優(yōu)秀榜樣時，亞洲的父母們則將西方的教育體制——或至少是其中的某些部分——視為一種替代選擇。越來越多的英國獨立學校正在亞洲建立特許經(jīng)營校區(qū)，而越來越多的亞洲父母將孩子送往英國的寄宿學校;去年，在英國寄宿學校就學的中國大陸學生增加10%，達到近8000人。這些富有的父母們希望19世紀的學府能抓住21世紀成功的精髓——即這些學校會培養(yǎng)學生的創(chuàng)造力、創(chuàng)新能力、批判性思維及性格。

The conflict over the Pisa test raises a more fundamental question: how should we measure success in education? This is hard to answer. When I asked an education minister what education outcomes he would pay for, the answer went like this: “Of course we need literacy and numeracy, but we can’t ignore sciences, or languages. History, geography and IT are vital. Citizenship, wellbeing and healthy eating matter, as does behaviour management. We can’t drop sport, or things like poetry, music, drama and after-school clubs.”

圍繞Pisa測試的沖突引發(fā)了一個更為根本的問題：我們該如何衡量教育的成功?這個問題很難回答。我問過一位教育部長，他愿意花錢買到的教育成果是什么，他這樣回答：“當然，我們需要識字和算術，但我們也不能忽視科學或語言。歷史、地理和信息技術同樣是至關重要的。公民權利和義務、幸福和健康飲食相當重要，行為管理也是。我們不能放棄體育運動，或者詩歌、音樂、戲劇和課外活動等。”

It is easy to mock bureaucrats who cannot decide on the specific results they want to measure, but setting goals for a perfect education system is far harder and more complex than for a business. If we want to build a successful global education system, we need to decide what success looks like. Then we can decide how to measure it. If Pisa provokes that debate, it does us all a service.

我們很容易嘲笑那些無法決定自己想要衡量什么特定結果的官僚們，但是，為一個完美的教育體系設立目標，要比為一家企業(yè)設定目標困難得多，也復雜得多。如果我們想要建立一個成功的全球教育體系，我們首先需要界定什么是成功。接著我們才能確定如何衡量它。如果Pisa引發(fā)了那樣的辯論，那么它幫了我們所有人一個忙。

The writer is a founder of five education non-governmental organisations and author of ‘How to Lead’

本文作者是五家非政府教育組織的創(chuàng)始人，著有《領導之道》(How to Lead)一書