Do Prospective Teachers Care About PISA Studies? A Pilot Study among University Students in Germany
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The results of international comparison studies such as the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) have initiated intense discussions about educational reforms in Germany. Although in-service and pre-service teachers are an essential part of such reforms, little is known about their attitudes towards PISA studies. The present study aims to fill this gap through the investigation of pre-service teachers’ awareness, interest, perception, and attitudes towards PISA. A questionnaire was used to survey a sample of 107 university students who were participating in a teacher education program. The results reveal that 100% of the participants are aware of PISA. Nearly 69% of the participants think that the impact of PISA is rather high or very high, while 41% of them believe that PISA results are reliable. Accordingly, half of the participants seem to be interested in PISA results for their country. The present study discusses these findings in the light of the expected outcomes as proposed in standards for teacher education.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it