IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/24930.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Taking PISA Seriously: How Accurate are Low Stakes Exams?

Author

Listed:
  • Ş. Pelin Akyol
  • Kala Krishna
  • Jinwen Wang

Abstract

PISA is seen as the gold standard for evaluating educational outcomes worldwide. Yet, being a low-stakes exam, students may not take it seriously resulting in downward biased scores and inaccurate rankings. This paper provides a method to identify and account for non-serious behavior in low-stakes exams by leveraging information in computer-based assessments in PISA 2015. We compare the score/rankings with no corrections to those generated using the PISA approach as well as our method which fully corrects for the bias. We show that the total bias is large and that the PISA approach corrects for only about half of it.

Suggested Citation

  • Ş. Pelin Akyol & Kala Krishna & Jinwen Wang, 2018. "Taking PISA Seriously: How Accurate are Low Stakes Exams?," NBER Working Papers 24930, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:24930
    Note: DEV ED LS
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w24930.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Uri Gneezy & John A. List & Jeffrey A. Livingston & Xiangdong Qin & Sally Sadoff & Yang Xu, 2019. "Measuring Success in Education: The Role of Effort on the Test Itself," American Economic Review: Insights, American Economic Association, vol. 1(3), pages 291-308, December.
    2. Hanushek, Eric A. & Link, Susanne & Woessmann, Ludger, 2013. "Does school autonomy make sense everywhere? Panel estimates from PISA," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 212-232.
    3. Ghazala Azmat & Caterina Calsamiglia & Nagore Iriberri, 2016. "Gender Differences in Response to Big Stakes," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 14(6), pages 1372-1400.
    4. Eric A. Hanushek & Ludger Wössmann, 2006. "Does Educational Tracking Affect Performance and Inequality? Differences- in-Differences Evidence Across Countries," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 116(510), pages 63-76, March.
    5. Attali, Yigal & Neeman, Zvika & Schlosser, Analia, 2011. "Rise to the Challenge or Not Give a Damn: Differential Performance in High vs. Low Stakes Tests," Foerder Institute for Economic Research Working Papers 275743, Tel-Aviv University > Foerder Institute for Economic Research.
    6. Lounkaew, Kiatanantha, 2013. "Explaining urban–rural differences in educational achievement in Thailand: Evidence from PISA literacy data," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 213-225.
    7. Jalava, Nina & Joensen, Juanna Schrøter & Pellas, Elin, 2015. "Grades and rank: Impacts of non-financial incentives on test performance," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 161-196.
    8. Victor Lavy, 2015. "Do Differences in Schools' Instruction Time Explain International Achievement Gaps? Evidence from Developed and Developing Countries," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 125(588), pages 397-424, November.
    9. Gema Zamarro & Collin Hitt & Ildefonso Mendez, 2019. "When Students Don’t Care: Reexamining International Differences in Achievement and Student Effort," Journal of Human Capital, University of Chicago Press, vol. 13(4), pages 519-552.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Leaver,Clare & Lemos,Renata Freitas & Dillenburg Scur,Daniela, 2019. "Measuring and Explaining Management in Schools : New Approaches Using Public Data," Policy Research Working Paper Series 9053, The World Bank.
    2. Ludger Woessmann, 2016. "The Importance of School Systems: Evidence from International Differences in Student Achievement," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 30(3), pages 3-32, Summer.
    3. Uri Gneezy & John A. List & Jeffrey A. Livingston & Xiangdong Qin & Sally Sadoff & Yang Xu, 2019. "Measuring Success in Education: The Role of Effort on the Test Itself," American Economic Review: Insights, American Economic Association, vol. 1(3), pages 291-308, December.
    4. Brunello, Giorgio & Kiss, David, 2022. "Math scores in high stakes grades," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    5. José M. Cordero & Víctor Cristóbal & Daniel Santín, 2018. "Causal Inference On Education Policies: A Survey Of Empirical Studies Using Pisa, Timss And Pirls," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(3), pages 878-915, July.
    6. Griselda, Silvia, 2024. "Gender gap in standardized tests: What are we measuring?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 221(C), pages 191-229.
    7. Calsamiglia, Caterina & Loviglio, Annalisa, 2019. "Grading on a curve: When having good peers is not good," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    8. Catherine Haeck & Pierre Lefebvre, 2020. "The Evolution of Cognitive Skills Inequalities by Socioeconomic Status across Canada," Working Papers 20-04, Research Group on Human Capital, University of Quebec in Montreal's School of Management.
    9. Burgess, Simon & Metcalfe, Robert & Sadoff, Sally, 2021. "Understanding the response to financial and non-financial incentives in education: Field experimental evidence using high-stakes assessments," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    10. Maria A. Cattaneo & Chantal Oggenfuss & Stefan C. Wolter, 2017. "The more, the better? The impact of instructional time on student performance," Education Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(5), pages 433-445, September.
    11. Hanushek, Eric A., 2021. "Addressing cross-national generalizability in educational impact evaluation," International Journal of Educational Development, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    12. Bach, Maximilian & Fischer, Mira, 2020. "Understanding the Response to High-Stakes Incentives in Primary Education," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 261, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    13. Chapman, Bruce & Lounkaew, Kiatanantha, 2013. "Introduction to the special issue on Economic Research for Education Policy," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 200-203.
    14. Gust, Sarah & Hanushek, Eric A. & Woessmann, Ludger, 2024. "Global universal basic skills: Current deficits and implications for world development," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    15. Noam Angrist & Peter Bergman & Moitshepi Matsheng, 2022. "Experimental evidence on learning using low-tech when school is out," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 6(7), pages 941-950, July.
    16. Hervé, Justine & Mani, Subha & Behrman, Jere R. & Laxminarayan, Ramanan & Nandi, Arindam, 2024. "Food Coma Is Real: The Effect of Digestive Fatigue on Adolescents' Cognitive Performance," IZA Discussion Papers 16909, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    17. Jo Blanden & Matthias Doepke & Jan Stuhler, 2022. "Education inequality," CEP Discussion Papers dp1849, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    18. Del Boca Daniela & Monfardini Chiara & See Sarah Grace, 2023. "Early Childhood Education Attendance and Students’ Later Outcomes in Europe," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 23(4), pages 1081-1136, October.
    19. Borghans, Lex & Diris, Ron & Tavares, Mariana, 2025. "Time Well Spent? The Role of Test Effort in Explaining Achievement Gaps," IZA Discussion Papers 17734, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    20. José Manuel Cordero & Daniel Santín & Rosa Simancas, 2017. "Assessing European primary school performance through a conditional nonparametric model," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 68(4), pages 364-376, April.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C53 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Forecasting and Prediction Models; Simulation Methods
    • I20 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - General
    • I21 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Analysis of Education

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:24930. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.