Abstract
Results from the PISA international surveys in 2012 and 2015 show that the performance of Czech pupils in mathematics was statistically comparable with the OECD average. However, in the long-term comparison, the results appear to have statistically worsened in the Czech Republic. The PISA score of other European countries with similar economies in terms of GDP and common historical-cultural development, namely Estonia, Poland, and Slovenia, was higher or even significantly higher. The search for the causes of this leads, among other things, to the study of the mathematics curricula of these states. Our paper gives a brief overview of the education systems of the selected countries, while also conducting a qualitative comparative analysis of relevant curriculum documents for lower secondary education. We place emphasis on the differences between the Czech curriculum and the curricula of the other countries. This is explored with the overall aim of formulating educational objectives pertaining to mathematics learning, the subject matter and its division, and required learning outcomes. In the last chapter we present the most significant differences (the lowest number of mathematics lessons, the absence of general mathematical goals and competencies, the lack of emphasis on home preparation of pupils, the absence of unified testing and insufficiently detailed learning content and outcomes), which could be an inspiration for improving the Czech mathematics curriculum.
References
Abdelfattah, F. & Lam, J. (2018). Linking homework to achievement in mathematics: An examination of 8th grade Arab participation in TIMSS 2015. International Journal of Instruction, 11(4), 607–624. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.11438a
Akiba, M., LeTendre, G.K. & Scribner, J.P. (2007). Teacher quality, opportunity gap, and national achievement in 46 countries. Educational Researcher, 36(7), 369–387. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X07308739
Afanasjev, J. & Lepmann, T. (2006). The development of the Estonian national school mathematics curriculum in 1990–2005. Online submission, paper presented at the Teaching mathematics: Retrospective and perspectives international conference (7th, Tartu, Estonia, May 12–13). Available from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED495299
Anczewska, M. & Charzy´nska, K. (2012). Educational assessment of pupils in Poland. SA-eDUC JOURNAL, 9(1), 1–9.
Anderson, L.W. & Krathwohl, D.R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing. A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Longman.
Blank, R.K. (2013). Science instructional time is declining in elementary schools: What are the implications for student achievement and closing the gap? Science Education, 97(6), 830–847. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21078
Blomeke, S., Olsen, R. & Suhl, U. (2016). Relation of student achievement to the quality of their teachers and instructional quality. In T. Nilson & J.-E. Gustafsson (Eds.), Teacher quality, instructional quality and student outcomes. A series of in-depth analyses based on data of the international association for the evaluation of educational achievement (IEA), Volume 2 (21–50). Cham: Springer Open.
Bray, M. & Thomas, R.M. (1995). Levels of comparison in educational studies. Different insights from different literatures and the value of multilevel analyses. Harvard Educational Revue, 65(3), 472–490. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.65.3.g3228437224v4877
Brezovar, D., et al. (2013). Matematična kompetenca in osnovne kompetence v znanosti in tehnologiji. Ljubljana: Andragoški center Slovenije. Available from https://mm.acs.si/pismenost/doc/2013/Matematika znanost tehnologija.pdf
Cattaneo, M. A., Oggenfuss, Ch. & Wolter, S.C. (2016). The more, the better? The impact of instructional time on student performance. IZA Discussion Paper, No. 9797, 1–22.
Cheema, J.R. & Sheridan, K. (2015). Time spent on homework, mathematics anxiety and mathematics achievement: Evidence from a US sample. Issues in Educational Research, 25(3), 246–259.
Cooper, H., Robinson, J. & Patall, E. (2006). Does homework improve academic achievement? A synthesis of research, 1987–2003. Review of Educational Research, 76(1), 1–62.
Čerych, L., et al. (1999). Czech education and Europe. Prague: Education policy association.
ČSÚ. (2008). Metodika. Mezinárodní klasifikace vzdělávání (ISCED 97). Praha: Český statistický úřad. Available from https://www.czso.cz/documents/10180/20536112/022608.pdf/c483e906-0604-4212-824e-acc7cd9b2cf3?version=1.0
ČŠI. (2016). Rozdíly mezi školami v matematické gramotnosti. Sekundární analýzy výsledků mezinárodního šetření PISA. Praha: ČŠI. Available from https://www.csicr.cz/Csicr/media/Prilohy/PDF el. publikace/Mezin%c3%a1rodn%c3%ad%20%c5%a1et%c5%99en%c3%ad/PISA SA rozdily matgra.pdf
ČŠI. (2018). K povinnosti vypracovávání domácích úkolů. Available from http://www.vzdelavacisluzby.cz/dokumenty/banka-souboru/3636481.pdf [retrieved March 2019]
Desimone, L.M. & Long, D. (2010). Teacher effects and the achievement gap: Do teacher and teaching quality influence the achievement gap between black and white and high-and low-SES students in the early grades. Teachers College Record, 112(12), 3024–3073.
Dettmers, S., Trautwein, U. & Lüdtke, O. (2009). The relationship between homework time and achievement is not universal: evidence from multilevel analyses in 40 countries. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 20(4), 375–405. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243450902904601
Dvořák, D. (2015). Proměny kurikulárního diskurzu: o aktérech, standardech a ledních medvědech. In D. Greger (Ed.), Srovnávací pedagogika: Proměny a výzvy (101–117). Praha: Univerzita Karlova v Praze, Pedagogická fakulta.
Earnets, D. & Amador, J. M. (2019). Lessons planimation: prospective elementary teachers’ interactions with mathematics curricula. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 22(1), 37–68. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-017-9374-2
Eurostat. (2017a). Purchasing power adjusted GDP per capita. Available from https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/tgm/table.do?tab=table&init=1&plugin=1&pcode=sdg 10 10&language=en [retrieved November 2018]
Eurostat. (2017b). GDP per capita in PPS. Available from https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/tgm/table.do?tab=table&init=1&language=en&pcode=tec00114&plugin=1 [retrieved November 2018]
Eurydice. (2008). The system of education in Poland. Warszawa: Eurydice.
Eurydice. (2009). National testing of pupils in Europe: Objectives, organisation and use of results. Brussels: Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency. https://doi.org/10.2797/18294
Eurydice. (2014). The system of education in Poland. Warszawa: Eurydice.
Eurydice. (2017). The education system in the Republic of Slovenia 2016/2017. Ljubljana: Eurydice.
Güven, U. & Ak¸cay, A.O. (2019). Trends of homework in mathematics: Comparative research based on TIMSS study. International Journal of Instruction, 12(1), 1367–1382. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2019.12187a
HTM. (2011). P˜ohikooli riiklik ˜oppekava. Tallin, Toompea: Haridus- jaTeadusministeerium. Available from https://www.riigiteataja.ee/akt/114012011001 [retrieved November 2018]
HTM. (2014). National curriculum for basic schools. Available from https://www.riigiteataja.ee/en/eli/524092014014/consolide [retrieved November 2018]
Janík, T., et al. (2011). Kvalita školy a kurikula: od expertního šetření ke standardu kvality. Praha: Národní ústav pro vzdělávání, školské poradenské zařízení a zařízení pro další vzdělávání pedagogických pracovníků (NÚV), divize VÚP.
Janík, T. (2013). Od reformy kurikula k produktivní kultuře vyučování a učení. Pedagogická orientace, 23(5), 634–663. https://doi.org/10.5817/PedOr2013-5-634
Janík, T., Maňák, J. & Knecht, P. (2009). Cíle a obsahy školního vzdělávání a metodologie jejich utváření. Brno: Paido.
Janík, T., Maňák, J., Knecht, P. & Němec, J. (2010). Proměny kurikula současné české školy: vize a realita. Orbis scholae, 4(3), 9–35. https://doi.org/10.14712/23363177.2018.109
Ježková, V., et al. (1996). Vzdělávací systémy v zahraničí. Praha: Karolinum.
Ježková, V. & Walterová, E. (1997). Vzdělávání v zemích Evropské unie. Praha: Pedagogická fakulta Univerzity Karlovy, Centrum evropských studií.
Karc, E. (2003). System zarz˛adzania o´swiat˛a a reforma edukacji w Polsce. In J. Prokop (Ed.), K otázkám srovnávací pedagogiky (165–170). Praha: Karolinum.
Lavy, V. (2015). Do differences in schools’ instruction time explain international achievement gaps? Evidence from developed and developing countries. The Economic Journal, 125(588), F397–F424. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecoj.12233
Maňák, J. (1992). Problematika domácích úkolů na základní škole. Brno: Masarykova univerzita v Brně.
Maňák, J., Janík, T. & Švec, V. (2008). Kurikulum v současné době. Brno: Paido.
Martin, M.O., et al. (Eds.). (2008). TIMSS 2007 International Mathematics Report. Chestnut Hill, MA: International Study Center.
Martínková, P., Goldhaber, D. & Erosheva, E. (2018). Disparities in ratings of internal and external applicants: A case for model-based inter-rater reliability. PLoS ONE, 13(10), e0203002. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0203002
MEN. (2008). Podstawa programowa kszta lcenia ogólnego dla gimnazjów i szkól ponadgimnazjalnych, których uko´nczenie umo˙zliwia uzyskanie ´swiadectwa dojrzalo´sci po zdaniu egzaminu maturalnego. Warszawa: Ministerstwo Edukacji Narodowej. Available from http://www.dbg.vdg.pl/attachments/article/10/rozporzadzenie 20081223 zal 4.pdf [retrieved November 2018]
MER. (2018a). Ministry of Education and Research (Estonia). Available from https://www.hm.ee/en [retrieved November 2018]
MER. (2018b). National curriculum for basic schools: Appendix 3. Available from https://www.hm.ee/en/national-curricula-2014 [retrieved November 2018]
MESS. (2018). Ministry of Education, Science and Sport (Slovenia). Available from http://www.mizs.gov.si/en/ [retrieved October 2018]
MNE. (2018). Ministry of National Education (Poland). Available from http://en.men.gov.pl/ [retrieved October 2018]
MIZŠ. (2018a). Osnovo šolstvo. Available from http://www.mizs.gov.si/si/ delovna podrocja/direktorat za predsolsko vzgojo in osnovno solstvo/osnovno solstvo/ [retrieved November 2018]
MIZŠ. (2018b). Matematika – Učni načrt. Available from http://www.mizs.gov.si/si/delovna podrocja/direktorat za predsolsko vzgojo in osnovno solstvo/osnovno solstvo/ucni nacrti/ [retrieved November 2018]
MŠMT. (2001). National programme for the Development of Education. White paper. Praha: ÚIV. Available from http://www.msmt.cz/dokumenty/bila-kniha-narodniprogram- rozvoje-vzdelavani-v-ceske-republice-formuje-vladni-strategii-v-oblastivzdelavani-strategie-odrazi-celospolecenske-zajmy-a-dava-konkretni-podnety-k-praci-skol
MŠMT. (2007). Framework Educational Programme for Basic Education. Available from http://www.msmt.cz/file/9481 1 1
MŠMT. (2011). Doporučené učební osnovy předmětů ČJL, AJ a M pro základní školu. Available from http://www.vuppraha.rvp.cz/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Doporucene-ucebni-osnovy-predmetu-CJL-AJ-a-M-pro-zakladni-skolu.pdf
MŠMT. (2017). Rámcový vzdělávací program pro základní vzdělávání. Praha: MŠMT. Available from http://www.msmt.cz/file/43792/
MŠMT. (2018a). Harmonogram. Available from http://www.msmt.cz/vzdelavani/skolstvi-v-cr/skolskareforma/harmonogram [retrieved November 2018]
MŠMT. (2018b). Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports (Czech Republic). Available from http://www.msmt.cz/?lang=2 [retrieved October 2018]
Mullis, I.V. S., et al. (Eds.). (2001). TIMSS assessment frameworks and specifications 2003. Chestnut Hill, MA: International Study Center.
Mullis, I.V. S., et al. (Eds.). (2012). TIMSS 2011 international results in mathematics. Chestnut Hill, MA: International Study Center.
Mullis, I.V. S., et al. (Eds). (2016). TIMSS 2015 international results in mathematics. Chestnut Hill, MA: International Study Center.
Mullis, I.V. S., Martin, M.O. & Loveless, T. (2016). 20 Years of TIMSS: International trends in mathematics and science achievement, curriculum, and instruction. Chestnut Hill, MA: International Study Center.
OECD. (2004). Learning for tomorrow’s world. First results from PISA 2003. Paris: OECD Publishing.
OECD. (2013a). PISA 2012 assessment and analytical framework: Mathematics, reading, science, problem solving and financial literacy. Paris: OECD Publishing.
OECD. (2013b). PISA 2012 results: What makes schools successful (Volume IV): Resources, policies and practices. Paris: OECD Publishing.
OECD. (2014a). PISA 2012 results in focus. What 15-year-olds know and what they can do with what they know. Paris: OECD Publishing.
OECD. (2014b). PISA 2012 results: What students know and can do. Paris: OECD Publishing.
OECD. (2014c). Does homework perpetuate inequities in education? PISA in Focus, No. 46, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1787/5jxrhqhtx2xt-en
OECD. (2016). Education policy outlook: Estonia. Paris: OECD Publishing.
OECD. (2018). PISA 2015. Results in focus. Paris: OECD Publishing.
Pešková, K., Spurná, M. & Knecht, P. (2017). Teoretický model pro výzkum vnímání kurikulárních změn učiteli ZŠ. Orbis Scholae, 11(2), 99–124. https://doi.org/10.14712/23363177.2018.271
Průcha, J. (1999). Vzdělávání a školství ve světě. Praha: Portál.
Průcha, J. (2012). Srovnávací pedagogika. Praha: Portál.
Rivkin, S. G. & Schiman, J.C. (2013). Instruction time, classroom quality, and academic achievement. The Economic Journal, 125(588), F425–F448. https://doi.org/10.3386/w19464
Roter, A. (2003). Reforma szkolnictwa w Polsce a priorytety Unii Europejskiej. In J. Prokop (Ed.), K otázkám srovnávací pedagogiky (39–43). Praha: Karolinum.
Santiago, P., et al. (2016). OECD reviews of school resources: Estonia 2016. Paris: OECD Publishing.
Slavík, J. & Janík, T. (2012). Kvalita výuky: obsahově zaměřený přístup ke studiu procesů vyučování a učení. Pedagogika, 62(3), 262–286.
Straková, J. (2007). Kurikulární reforma z pohledu šetření Kalibro. Pedagogika, 57(1), 21–36.
Straková, J. (2015). Mezinárodní výzkumy vědomostí a dovedností: historie a současnost. In D. Greger (Ed.), Srovnávací pedagogika: Proměny a výzvy (83–99). Praha: Univerzita Karlova v Praze, Pedagogická fakulta.
UNESCO. (2018). International standard classification of education. Available from http://uis.unesco.org/ [retrieved October 2018]
Walterová, E. (1994). Kurikulum. Proměny a trendy v mezinárodní perspektivě. Brno: Masarykova univerzita v Brně.
Walterová, E. (2006). Srovnávací pedagogika. Vývoj a proměny v globálním kontextu. Praha: Univerzita Karlova, Pedagogická fakulta.
Wiseman, A.W. (2010). The impact of international achievement studies on national education policymaking. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Wi´sniewski, J. (2007). Secondary educatione in Poland: 18 years of changes. Conference paper for fourth ECA education conference, Tirana, 24–26 October 2007. Available from http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTECAREGTOPEDUCATION/Resources/444607-1192636551820/Secondary education in Poland jwi 4r.pdf
Woessmann, L. (2016). The importance of school system: Evidence from international difference in student achievement. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 30(3), 3–32. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.30.3.3