you're reading...
The Finland Chapter

PISA Is But One Education Indicator

Following the announcement that Finnish students had under-performed in the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) – with scores dropping by 2.8, 1.7, and 3 per cent in mathematics, reading, and science respectively – the press release from the Ministry of Education and Culture read “PISA 2012: Proficiency of Finnish youth declining”. Minister Krista Kiuru has explained that a broad-based forum will be set up, for the “general downturn in learning outcomes shows that we must take strong action to develop Finnish education”.

In other words: not good enough, can do better.

On the other hand, Singapore’s Ministry of Education (MOE) proudly proclaimed that “International OECD Study Shows That Singapore Students Are Ready to Thrive in the 21st Century”. Indeed, the participating students have done well vis-à-vis their seniors and international counterparts, but it is debatable whether they can truly “solve problems in a variety of real-life situations”.

It should come as no coincidence that Singapore has consistently come up tops in these ranking exercises. The country’s education system has been premised upon rigid rote memorisation and regurgitation, and its students have been trained to ace tests and examinations. As much as bureaucrats justify that the assessment methodology has been tweaked, one cannot help but express scepticism over claims that PISA scores reflect an individual’s ability to apply knowledge and skills in unfamiliar real-life situations.

PISA’s paper-based (even computer-based) mode of assessment, for example, ignores a student’s ability to communicate or work in groups. Few would disagree that these are crucial real-world skills “for full participation in modern societies”, and while Singapore has moved to diversify testing methods, to reduce pedantic emphasis upon high-stakes testing, PISA will not capture these changes.


PISA’s paper-based (even computer-based) mode of assessment, for example, ignores a student’s ability to communicate or work in groups.

Against this background, the eagerness of some to criticise the Finnish education system because of these recent findings per se seems myopic. “See la, the ‘best education system in the world’ – the one commonly seen to be the perfect alternative to Singapore’s pressure-cooker academic environment – isn’t that great after all!”

Yet, one has to be cognisant that PISA is but one indicator of complex education systems. The quality of an education system – and the preparedness of a student for an uncertain future – is also contingent upon student happiness, campus vibrancy, status and professionalism of educators, and future productivity.

Late last year, for instance, a Global Teacher Status Index found that Singaporeans rated their education system very highly, that teaching was a sought-after profession, and that there were high levels of pupil respect for teachers. A holistic comprehension of Singapore’s education system will only be derived if these assorted indices are complemented by qualitative, on-the-ground feedback from students, teachers, parents, and even employers.

PISA claims to develop “tests which are not directly linked to the school curriculum”, but the tests are ultimately a combination of open-ended and multiple-choice questions. The important assumption is that the PISA knows what is generally best for a country and its education system, and is therefore capable of crafting the right questions. Nonetheless, it simply determines fundamental proficiency in mathematics, reading, and science (within the setting of an examination). And we should acknowledge it as such, without drawing convenient extrapolations.

At the same time, critics have been too quick to pounce upon perceived biases, or nit-pick flawed frameworks: the supposed lack of statistical transparency, the inconsistency of results across dissimilar surveys, and PISA’s ability to reflect and compare a student’s scholastic abilities.

In this vein, Finland’s move to gather its stakeholders in discourse is encouraging. Despite PISA’s shortcomings, it has acknowledged that it will review its pedagogies, and make adjustments wherever necessary. As a solitary indicator, PISA can provide an impetus for consistent improvements. No assessment methodology is perfect, but this commitment to continuous renewal must be heartening.

From the perspective of a Singaporean, this honesty is refreshing. And a good cue for Singapore to never rest on her laurels.

Check out The Finland Chapter, from start to finnish.

About guanyinmiao

A man of knowledge lives by acting, not by thinking about acting. Carlos Castaneda.


8 thoughts on “PISA Is But One Education Indicator

  1. I think we need to note the fact that Singapore, a country focussed on the hothousing of children and using memorising as a main pedagogy, is performing poorer than a country (Finland) that focusses on play, in a written examination. This is the main contention of the whole Singapore vs Finland debate, yes?

    Posted by teddypicks | February 12, 2014, 7:56 pm
    • That is a little too reductive in my opinion. In other words, it’s not fair to generalise the Singapore system as being necessarily premised upon hot-housing / rote memorisation / regurgitation, and the Finnish system as being on focused on play. That is also why when you look at a statistical indicator like PISA you could make useful inferences about how competent students are / well students do in the three domains, but you can’t conclude the efficacy of an education system based on PISA per se.

      Another point about the Finland-Singapore comparison. At the moment a lot of our analysis – I feel – has been built upon very broad and scant comprehension of both systems (the Finnish one in particular). So for me that’s something worth looking at while I’m here, before I write something proper. But even so a commentary would be biased, since I can only gather anecdotes.

      Jin Yao

      Posted by guanyinmiao | February 12, 2014, 8:14 pm


  1. Pingback: The Reform Of Finland’s Universities | guanyinmiao's musings - April 14, 2014

  2. Pingback: Educating Singapore – Moving Beyond Grades | Teacher Sherrie - June 18, 2014

  3. Pingback: Our Finnish Obsession | guanyinmiao's musings - September 15, 2014

  4. Pingback: An Education System Which Embraces Risk | guanyinmiao's musings - April 15, 2015

  5. Pingback: Pasi Sahlberg’s “Finnish Lessons 2.0: What Can The World Learn From Educational Changes In Finland?” | guanyinmiao's musings - July 27, 2017

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.


  • RT @skinnylatte: This. And for everyone on a work visa as well. 2 hours ago
  • RT @mattmikalatos: - 24% of abortion patients identified as Catholic - 17% mainline Protestant - 13% as evangelical Protestant Which is on… 2 hours ago
  • RT @ariannahuff: So, to sum up the Supreme Court’s week: life begins at conception and ends in a mass shooting. 2 hours ago
  • RT @realtonyalonso: Out of 176 Catholic dioceses in the US, *5* offer paid 12 week maternity leave. Less than 40 offer *any length at all*… 2 hours ago
  • RT @__equality9: Thinking about how churches in Singapore are going to be celebrating the anti-abortion ruling in America on Sunday - and h… 20 hours ago
%d bloggers like this: