For both reading and science, the performance of students in all provinces, with the exception of Prince Edward Island, was at or above the OECD average. Students in Newfoundland and Labrador and New Brunswick performed at the average in reading and above the average in science; students in Manitoba performed at the average in both domains; and students in Prince Edward Island performed below the average in both domains. Students in all other provinces performed above the average in both domains.
Within Canada, students in British Columbia performed above the Canadian average in both domains, as shown in Table 2.2. Students in Ontario performed at the average in both domains, while students in Alberta performed above the average in science and at the average in reading. Students in Quebec performed at the average in reading and below the average in science, while students in the remaining provinces performed below the Canadian average in both domains.
Figures 2.3 and 2.4 show the difference in average scores between those in the lowest decile (10th percentile) and those in the highest (90th percentile) in reading and in science. For reading, differences ranged from 226 points in Saskatchewan to 245 in Newfoundland and Labrador, while for science they ranged from 213 points in Quebec to 242 in Manitoba. In all provinces (with the exception of Newfoundland and Labrador in reading and science, and Manitoba and Alberta in science only), the difference in performance between high achievers and low achievers was smaller than the OECD average. This indicates that Canada’s education systems achieve a slightly greater degree of equity.
Figure 2.3 PISA 2012 Reading
ŝīĞƌĞŶĐĞďĞƚǁĞĞŶŚŝŐŚĂŶĚůŽǁĂĐŚŝĞǀĞƌƐ͕ĂŶĂĚĂ͕ƉƌŽǀŝŶĐĞƐ͕ĂŶĚK
300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700
10th 25th 75th 90th 226
Difference between the 90th and 10th percentiles*
* Jurisdictions are shown from the least to the most difference between the two percentiles.
Percentiles of performance
95% Confidence interval
300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700
10th 25th 75th 90th
213
Difference between the 90th and 10th percentiles*
* Jurisdictions are shown from the least to the most difference between the two percentiles.
Percentiles of performance
95% Confidence interval
Figure 2.4 PISA 2012 Science
ŝīĞƌĞŶĐĞďĞƚǁĞĞŶŚŝŐŚĂŶĚůŽǁĂĐŚŝĞǀĞƌƐ͕ĂŶĂĚĂ͕ƉƌŽǀŝŶĐĞƐ͕ĂŶĚK
ƐƟŵĂƚĞĚĂǀĞƌĂŐĞƌĞĂĚŝŶŐĂŶĚƐĐŝĞŶĐĞƐĐŽƌĞƐ͕ďLJƉƌŽǀŝŶĐĞĂŶĚůĂŶŐƵĂŐĞŽĨƚŚĞƐĐŚŽŽůƐLJƐƚĞŵ
Anglophone school system Francophone school system ŝīĞƌĞŶĐĞďĞƚǁĞĞŶƐLJƐƚĞŵƐΎ Average
Standard
error Average
Standard error
Score ĚŝīĞƌĞŶĐĞ
Standard error Reading
Nova ScoƟa 509 (3.2) 486 (7.4) 23 (8.2)
New Brunswick 505 (3.4) 471 (3.0) 34 (4.5)
Quebec 518 (3.5) 520 (4.0) -2 (5.0)
Ontario 530 (4.6) 487 (2.8) 43 (5.3)
Manitoba 495 (3.4) 494 (5.6) 2 (6.8)
lberta 525 (4.1) 506 (9.8) 20 (10.5)
BriƟsh Columbia 535 (4.5) 509 (8.2) 26 (9.8)
Canada 525 (2.4) 517 (3.6) 8 (4.7)
Science
Nova ScoƟa 517 (3.1) 482 (5.3) 35 (6.2)
New Brunswick 517 (3.3) 475 (3.1) 42 (4.6)
Quebec 514 (3.6) 516 (3.6) -2 (4.8)
Ontario 528 (4.5) 487 (3.1) 41 (5.4)
Manitoba 503 (3.3) 496 (6.2) 7 (7.0)
lberta 540 (4.7) 507 (6.5) 33 (8.0)
BriƟsh Columbia 545 (4.0) 517 (8.2) 28 (9.6)
Canada 529 (2.4) 513 (3.2) 16 (4.3)
* Results in bold indicate a staƟsƟcal diīerence between the two school systems. negaƟve diīerence means that the result Ĩor the Ĩrancophone school system is higher. The Canadian results include students Ĩrom all provinces.
Table 2.3
/ŶŵŽƐƚƉƌŽǀŝŶĐĞƐƐƚƵĚĞŶƚƐĂƩĞŶĚŝŶŐŵĂũŽƌŝƚLJͲůĂŶŐƵĂŐĞƐĐŚŽŽůƐLJƐƚĞŵƐŽƵƚƉĞƌĨŽƌŵĞĚ ƐƚƵĚĞŶƚƐǁŚŽĂƩĞŶĚŵŝŶŽƌŝƚLJͲůĂŶŐƵĂŐĞƐLJƐƚĞŵƐŝŶƌĞĂĚŝŶŐĂŶĚƐĐŝĞŶĐĞ
This section examines the performance of minority-language students in seven provinces (Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba, Alberta, and British Columbia).19
As shown in Table 2.3, the relative performance of students in the two systems varied across provinces and by domain. In reading, differences in performance between students in the anglophone and francophone systems aggregated across Canada were not statistically signi¿cant. At the provincial level, students in majority-language school systems outperformed their counterparts in minority-language systems in four of the seven provinces. This difference ranged from 43 points favouring students attending anglophone schools in Ontario to 23 points in Nova Scotia. In Quebec, Manitoba, and Alberta, the differences were not statistically signi¿cant.
Across Canada, students in the anglophone school systems outperformed those in the francophone school systems in science by 16 points. Students in majority-language school systems outperformed their peers in minority-language systems in ¿ve of the seven provinces. The differences between systems varied from 28 points in British Columbia to 42 points in New Brunswick. In Quebec and Manitoba, the differences were not statistically signi¿cant.
19 Only seven out of 10 provinces had minority-language schools with a suf¿cient sample of students.
ĂŶĂĚŝĂŶĨĞŵĂůĞƐŽƵƚƉĞƌĨŽƌŵĞĚŵĂůĞƐŝŶƌĞĂĚŝŶŐ͕ǁŚŝůĞŶŽƐŝŐŶŝĮĐĂŶƚĚŝīĞƌĞŶĐĞƐĞdžŝƐƚĞĚ between the genders in science
As was the case in PISA 2000, girls performed signi¿cantly better than boys in PISA 2012 on the reading test in all countries and all provinces. On average across OECD countries, girls outperformed boys by 38 points in PISA 2012, while in Canada this difference was 35 points. This difference is much larger than the 10-point difference favouring boys in mathematics. At the provincial level, the gender gap favouring girls ranged from 26 points in British Columbia to 53 points in Newfoundland and Labrador (Appendix B.2.11).
In science, on average across OECD countries, males had a statistically signi¿cant higher score, but the one-point difference was small compared to the larger gender gap in reading and the more moderate gender difference in mathematics. In Canada, and across all provinces, no statistically signi¿cant gender differences were observed between boys and girls in this domain.
ĂŶĂĚŝĂŶƐƚƵĚĞŶƚƐ͛ƉĞƌĨŽƌŵĂŶĐĞŝŶƌĞĂĚŝŶŐƌĞŵĂŝŶĞĚƌĞůĂƟǀĞůLJƐƚĂďůĞŽǀĞƌƟŵĞǁŚŝůĞ performance in science decreased
PISA 2012 is the ¿fth assessment of reading since 2000, when the ¿rst major assessment of reading took place, and the third assessment of science since 2006, when the ¿rst major assessment of science took place.
thile this secƟon looks at changes over Ɵme͕ perĨormance diīerences should be interpreted with cauƟon͕ Ĩor several reasons. &irst͕ since data are available Ĩor only three points in Ɵme Ĩor science͕ it is not possible to determine the edžtent to which observed diīerences in this domain are indicaƟve oĨ longer-term changes. Secondly͕ in order to allow Ĩor comparability over Ɵme͕ some common assessment items were used in each survey. However͕ because there are a limited number oĨ common items͕ an addiƟonal source oĨ measurement error must be taken into account Ĩor these comparisons over Ɵme (a linking error).
ConseƋuently only changes that are indicated as staƟsƟcally signiĮcant should be considered.
On average across OECD countries, reading performance remained unchanged. The OECD average of 496 points in 2012 was not signi¿cantly different from the baseline average score of 500 in 2000. However, there were changes in performance in some of the 39 countries that participated in both PISA 2000 and PISA 2012. In 11 countries reading performance improved on a statistically signi¿cant basis, while in six it declined. Although Canada’s average score in reading decreased from 534 in 2000 to 523 in 2012, this decrease was not statistically signi¿cant (Figure 2.5).
On average across OECD countries, science performance remained unchanged between PISA 2006 and PISA 2012, although changes in performance were observed in some of the 55 countries that participated in both surveys. Science performance increased on a statistically signi¿cant basis in 17 countries and decreased in eight. In Canada, the decrease in science performance was statistically signi¿cant between 2006 (534) and 2012 (525) (Figure 2.5).
Although Canada continues to perform well in both reading and science, its international standing among PISA participants has slipped. In reading the number of countries outperforming Canada has risen from one in 2000 to ¿ve in 2012: while Finland (which previously led Canada) has fallen behind, Hong-Kong-China, Korea, and Japan have pulled ahead, and they have been joined by newcomers Shanghai-China and Singapore.
2000 2003 2006 2009 2012 540
535 530 525 520 515 510 505 500
534
528 527
524 523
534
529
525
Reading Science
Figure 2.5
W/^ͲĂŶĂĚŝĂŶƌĞƐƵůƚƐŽǀĞƌƟŵĞ͕ϮϬϬϬͲϮϬϭϮ Reading and Science
Similarly, in science two countries outperformed Canada in 2006, whereas in 2012 this number rose to seven: Finland and Hong-Kong continued to outperform Canada, and they have been joined by Estonia, Korea, Japan, Shanghai-China, and Singapore.
While reading performance did not change signi¿cantly for Canada overall between 2000 and 2012, it decreased in Prince Edward Island, Quebec, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta. Declines ranged from 16 points in Quebec to 34 in Manitoba. Performance in reading did not change signi¿cantly in the remaining provinces (see Appendix B.2.13). For science, performance decreased between 2006 and 2012 in Newfoundland and Labrador (-11), Prince Edward Island (-18), Quebec (-15), and Manitoba (-21), and remained unchanged in the six remaining provinces (see Appendix B.2.14). In no Canadian province have scores in either reading or science improved since 2000 or 2006 respectively.