2012 | 22 | 1 | 31-42
Article title

When PISA does not matter? The case of the Czech Republic and Germany

Title variants
Languages of publication
The present paper gives an overview of the reflections of and reactions to publishing the results of the first wave of the OECD study Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) in the Czech Republic and in Germany. The choice of these two countries enables us to document how the same results could be perceived very differently in diverse country contexts and could lead to a different reaction from policy-makers. In spite of large reforms and numerous policy measures being adopted in Germany in reaction to the PISA results, compared with no response from policy-makers in the Czech Republic, it is argued, that in both countries policy-makers failed to tackle the major problem of their educational systems-its selective nature. In the final section we discuss various mis(uses) of PISA and its supranational and global character influencing local policies.
Physical description
  • [1] Baumert, J. Schümer, G. (2001). Familiäre Lebensverhältnisse, Bildungsbeteiligung und Komptetenzerwreb im nationalen Vergleich. In Deutsches PISA-Konsortium (Eds.). PISA 2000, Basiskomptenz von Schülerinnen und Schülern im internationalien Vergleich. Opladen: Leske & Budrich, 2002, 323–410.
  • [2] Carvalho, L.M. (2009). PISA and Educational Public Policies: Studies in Six European Countries. Sísifo: Educational sciences Journal, no. 10. Available at:
  • [3] Department of Education and Skills. (2011). Literacy and Numeracy for Learning and Life. The National Strategy to Improve Literacy and Numeracy among Children and Young People 2011–2020. Dublin: DES. Available at: 〈〉.
  • [4] Duru-Bellat, M., Suchuat, B. (2005). Organisation and Context, Efficiency and Equity of Educational Systems: What PISA Tells Us. European Educational Research Journal 4, No. 3, 181–194.[Crossref]
  • [5] Education at a Glance. (2002). Paris, OECD.
  • [6] Education Policy Analysis. (2002). Paris, OECD.
  • [7] Ertl, H. (2006). Educational Standards and the Changing Discourse on Education: The Reception and Consequences of the PISA Study in Germany. Oxford Review of Education 32, No. 5, 619–634.[Crossref]
  • [8] Ertl, H., Phillips, D. (2000). The Enduring Nature of the Tripartite System of Secondary Schooling in Germany: Some Historical Explanations. British Journal of Educational Studies 48, 391–412.[Crossref]
  • [9] Figazzolo, L. (2009). Impact of PISA 2006 on the Education Policy Debate. Brussels: Education International. Available at:
  • [10] Gorard, S., Smith, E. (2004). An International Comparison of Equity in Education Systems. Comparative Education 40(1), 15–28.[Crossref]
  • [11] Greger, D. (2005). Développement et débat autour du modèle de collège unique en République Tchèque et dans d’autres pays d’Europe centrale et orientale. Lyon: INRP, 2005. Availaible at www:
  • [12] Greger, D., Walterová, E. (2007). In Pursuit of Educational Change: The Transformation of Education in the Czech Republic. Orbis scholae 1, 11–44.
  • [13] Haahr, J., Nielsen, T., Hansen, E., Jakobsen, S. (2005). Explaining Student Performance: Evidence from the International PISA, TIMSS and PIRLS Surveys. Danish Technological Institute,, accessed August 2005.
  • [14] Kaščák, O., Pupala, B. (2011). Pisa v kritickej perspektíve. Orbis scholae 5, 53–70.
  • [15] Key Data on Education in Europe 2005. (2005). Luxembourg: European Commission.
  • [16] Knowledge and Skills for Life. First Results from PISA 2000. (2001). Paris, OECD.
  • [17] PISA-Konsortium Deutschland (2003). PISA 2003 Ergebnisse des zweiten internationalen Vergleichs Zusammenfassung.
  • [18] Kotásek, J., Greger, D., Procházková, I. (2004). Demand for Schooling in the Czech Republic (Country Report for OECD). Paris: OECD, 2004. Available at www: 〈〉.
  • [19] Koucký, J. et al. (2004). Učení pro život: Výsledky výzkumu OECD PISA 2003. Praha: Tauris.
  • [20] Koretz, D. (2008). Measuring Up. What Educational Testing Really Tells Us. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  • [21] Matějů, P., Straková, J. (2005). The Role of the Family and the School in the Reproduction of Educational Inequalities in the Post-Communist Czech Republic. Brtitish Jurnal of Sociology of Education 26, 15–38.
  • [22] Rochex, J.-Y. (2006). Social, Methodological, and Theoretical Issues Regarding Assessment: Lessons from a Secondary Analysis of PISA 2000 Literacy Tests. Review of Research in Education 30. Special Issue on Rethinking Learning: What Counts as Learning and What Learning Counts, 163–212.[WoS][Crossref]
  • [23] Schmidt, G. (2004). Reactions of Participating Countries as Reflected in their Press: A Comparison. European Education 35, no. 4, 58–69.[Crossref]
  • [24] Straková, J. (2007). The Impact of the Structure of the Education System on the Development of Educational Inequalities in the Czech Republic. Czech Sociological Review 43, 589–610.
  • [25] Štech, S. (2011). PISA-nástroj vzdělávací politiky nebo výzkumná metoda? Orbis scholae 5, 123–133.
  • [26] Walterová, E., Černý, K., Greger, D., Chvál, M. (2010). Školství - věc (ne)veřejná? Názory veřejnosti na školu a vzdělávání. Praha: Karolinum.
Document Type
Publication order reference
YADDA identifier
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.