Indonesia PISA Result — Sekolah Data Pacmann Project
Analyzing the PISA performance of Indonesian students is crucial for understanding the current state of education in the country. First, examining how Indonesia compares to international benchmarks provides a clear picture of its overall educational standing in core subjects like Math, Read, and Science. Second, by looking at the distribution of scores within different countries in Asia, we can identify potential regional disparities in educational achievement. Are there countries where students consistently outperform others? This information can be crucial for allocating resources and crafting policies to address educational inequalities. Finally, exploring the gender gap in PISA scores allows us to assess how boys and girls perform in different subjects. Understanding these disparities can inform efforts to promote equal educational opportunities for all students in Indonesia. Ultimately, analyzing PISA data allows us to identify areas for improvement and contribute to discussions on how to enhance the quality and equity of education across the country.
Objective
- How has Indonesia’s performance in PISA scores (Math, Read, Science) changed over time (2003–2018)? Are there any significant improvements or areas where performance has stagnated?
- Is there a significant difference in PISA scores between students in different countries within Asia?
- What rank is Indonesia as a whole in the PISA test?
- Is there a gender gap in PISA scores among Indonesian students across Math, Read, and Science subjects, and how has this gap changed over the assessment cycles (2003–2018)? Are there any subjects where the gap is widening or narrowing?
Dataset
Data are drawn from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s Programme for International Student Assessment (or PISA), which measures 15-year-olds’ ability to use their reading, mathematics and science knowledge and skills to meet real-life challenges.
Reading performance measures the capacity to understand, use and reflect on written texts in order to achieve goals, develop knowledge and potential, and participate in society. Mathematical performance measures the mathematical literacy of a 15 year-old to formulate, employ and interpret mathematics in a variety of contexts to describe, predict and explain phenomena, recognising the role that mathematics plays in the world. A mathematically literate student recognises the role that mathematics plays in the world in order to make well-founded judgments and decisions needed by constructive, engaged and reflective citizens. Scientific performance measures the scientific literacy of a 15 year-old in the use of scientific knowledge to identify questions, acquire new knowledge, explain scientific phenomena, and draw evidence-based conclusions about science-related issues.
The data set includes the following information:
Location: Country alpha‑3 codes; OAVG = Average across all OECD countries
Indicator: Reading performance (PISAREAD), Mathematical performance (PISAMATH), and Scientific performance (PISASCIENCE)
Subject: BOY, GIRL, TOT
Time: Year (2000, 2003, 2006, 2009, 2012, 2015, 2018)
Value: Mean Score
I use this data because The Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) is a globally recognized assessment that evaluates student proficiency in Math, Reading, and Science. PISA data offers several advantages:
- International Comparison: It allows comparison of student performance across different countries, providing a benchmark for Indonesia’s educational standing.
- Standardized Assessment: PISA uses standardized tests, ensuring scores are comparable across all participating countries.
- Subject Breakdown: Scores are provided for Math, Reading, and Science, allowing for a targeted analysis of strengths and weaknesses.
Features Used to Answer My Objectives:
- Country Code: This identifies the country (Indonesia in your case) for filtering and focusing the analysis.
- Indicator: This specifies the subject area (Math, Reading, Science) being assessed.
- Value of the Test: This represents the actual PISA score achieved by each student.
- Location: Used to analyze score distribution across different countries.
- Time: For time series analyze
Insight
Based on this visualization, the trend in Indonesia’s PISA scores shows an increase from PISA 2000 to 2018, with slight increases in reading and science, and sharper increases in mathematics. Even though the trend throughout the period was upward, in PISA 2018, Indonesia’s scores fell relatively in all areas. The sharpest decline occurred in the area of reading.
The positive trend in Indonesia’s PISA scores from 2000 to 2018, particularly the sharp rise in math, is encouraging. However, the decline in scores across all subjects, especially reading in 2018, requires investigation.
To capitalize on the momentum in math and address the reading decline, i recommend a multi-pronged approach.
- First, a thorough analysis should be conducted to pinpoint the cause of the 2018 dip.
- Second, strategies and policies that contributed to the math improvement can be explored for potential replication in reading and science.
- Third, prioritizing reading comprehension through targeted interventions and teacher training is crucial.
Finally, maintaining the upward trajectory requires continued monitoring of PISA scores, evaluation of educational policies, and best practice sharing to ensure all students benefit from a strong and equitable educational system in Indonesia.
Based on the dataset that I obtained, I only succeeded in identifying a few country codes because the country codes listed in the dataset did not match the official country codes based on the ISO 3166–1 designation. From the data, six Asian countries were obtained, namely HKG (Hong Kong), IDN (Indonesia), JPN (Japan), KOR (South Korea), SGP (Singapore), TWN (Taiwan). From the table, it is found that Indonesia is in the lowest position in all PISA indicators.
Indonesia’s average PISA score of 384.96, the lowest among participating countries, necessitates a comprehensive approach to improvement. Prioritizing core skills and foundational knowledge in Math, Reading, and Science is crucial. This might involve targeted interventions, curriculum adjustments, and strengthened teacher training in these areas. Strategic allocation of resources, focusing on regions with the lowest scores if possible, can further enhance effectiveness. Investing in high-quality teacher training aligned with PISA assessments and fostering knowledge exchange with high-performing countries can be valuable strategies. Finally, establishing a system for monitoring progress and evaluating implemented interventions is essential to ensure continuous improvement and a more equitable educational landscape for all Indonesian students.
Based on the gender of Indonesian students who took the PISA test, there is a considerable gap in the PISAREAD indicator where there is a difference of 25 in the overall average score from 2000–2018, while there is a slight difference in the average scores on the PISAMATH and PISASCIENCE indicators. Further statistical tests are needed to determine whether the difference in the gap is significant enough.
Regardless, investigating the reasons behind this difference is crucial. Tailored interventions and engaging reading materials catering to boys’ interests could be implemented. Promoting gender-sensitive teaching methods and monitoring the effectiveness of these strategies are essential. While math and science gaps are smaller, continued monitoring and encouraging girls’ participation in STEM fields can ensure equal opportunities across all subjects. By addressing these issues, Indonesia can create a more equitable learning environment where all students can thrive.
Conclusion
My analysis of Indonesian PISA data revealed several key insights and prompts some important recommendations for improvement:
Positive Trends:
There’s an overall upward trend in PISA scores across Math, Reading, and Science from 2000 to 2018, with Math showing the most significant improvement.
Areas for Improvement:
Despite the overall increase, a concerning decline in scores occurred in 2018, particularly in Reading. Further investigation is needed to pinpoint the reasons behind this drop. A significant gender gap exists in PISA Reading scores, with girls consistently outscoring boys by a margin of 25 points.
Recommendations:
- Prioritize Core Skills: Strengthen foundational skills in Math, Reading, and Science through targeted interventions, curriculum adjustments, and enhanced teacher training aligned with PISA assessment frameworks.
- Address Reading Gap: Investigate the reasons behind the gender disparity in Reading scores and develop targeted strategies to improve boys’ reading comprehension. This could involve creating engaging reading materials, after-school programs, or incorporating interactive classroom activities.
- Monitor and Evaluate: Regularly track PISA scores and the effectiveness of implemented interventions to ensure continuous progress towards a more equitable educational system.
- Strategic Resource Allocation: Allocate resources strategically, focusing on regions with lower average scores if possible.
- Teacher Training: Invest in high-quality teacher training programs focused on effective teaching methodologies and best practices. Encourage knowledge exchange with high-performing countries.
- Gender Sensitivity: Promote gender-sensitive teaching approaches that cater to diverse learning styles and encourage girls’ participation in STEM fields.
By implementing these recommendations and addressing the identified areas for improvement, Indonesia can work towards a more effective and equitable educational environment where all students have the opportunity to succeed, regardless of gender or location.
References
Dataset source:
https://data.world/professorkao/oecd-programme-for-international-student-assessment
Articles related sources:
https://www.oecd.org/pisa/