Are teenagers growing dimmer?

学习目标

• 准确区分学业表现、测试排名与个人能力，识别比较口径。
• 掌握52个查阅词条中的10个优先表达，迁移12项关键结构。
• 用有分寸的英语概括作者观点，评估论证并写出180–220词评论。

EVERY THREE years the OECD, a club mostly of rich countries, releases the results of international school tests sat by 15-year-olds all across the world. There were reasons to hope that the latest data, published on September 8th, would bring positive news. Marks in mathematics, reading and science had collapsed in the previous round of testing, which was carried out just after the pandemic. Policymakers dared hope that, with the calamity well in the past, grades might start to rebound.

每隔三年，经济合作与发展组织（OECD）这个成员大多为富裕国家的组织，都会公布一项国际学校测评的结果，参加测评的是世界各地的15岁学生。 人们有理由期待，9月8日公布的最新数据会带来好消息。 上一轮测评在疫情刚结束后进行，当时数学、阅读和科学成绩大幅下滑。 政策制定者甚至敢于期待：既然那场灾难早已过去，成绩或许会开始回升。

That is not what happened. On the contrary, in rich countries—the primary focus of the tests—scores have fallen further (see chart 1). In literacy, the decline is actually speeding up. These data suggest that there are long-running factors pushing down achievement in schools, and that without swift correction, pupils’ abilities could yet plumb further depths. Anyone who cares about the young of today—and the economies of tomorrow—ought to be alarmed.

然而，事情并没有这样发展。 恰恰相反，在这些测评主要关注的富裕国家，分数进一步下跌了（见原报道图1）。 在阅读素养方面，下降甚至正在加速。 这些数据提示，存在一些长期因素，正在拉低学校的学习成绩；如果不迅速纠正，学生的能力仍可能跌至更低水平。 任何关心当今年轻人以及未来经济的人，都应该为此感到警惕。

The OECD’s project, known as PISA, takes a measure of young people’s aptitudes as they approach the end of their compulsory school days. The number of school systems taking part has expanded over the years: the latest tests were sat in all 38 OECD member-countries and in 53 other places (many of them developing economies). The results are used to create an international league table of sorts.

OECD这项名为“国际学生评估项目”（PISA）的测评，在年轻人即将结束义务教育阶段时，衡量他们的能力。 这些年来，参与的教育体系数量不断增加：最新一轮测评覆盖了全部38个OECD成员国以及另外53个地方，其中许多属于发展中经济体。 这些结果被用来编制某种国际排行榜。

This year, as in almost every round since 2000, Asian school systems rule the roost. Children in China—taking part for the first time since 2018—have wiped the floor with almost everyone else (though scores there are skewed because the tests are sat in only four rich provinces). In science and maths they score 100 points above the average for OECD countries (as a broad rule of thumb, 20 points is considered to be about as much as an average pupil gains in a full year of learning). Kids in Singapore, Macau, Taiwan and Japan follow behind.

今年与2000年以来几乎每一轮测评一样，亚洲教育体系都占据领先地位。 中国学生自2018年以来首次参测，成绩远远胜过几乎所有其他参测者；不过，由于测评仅在四个富裕省份进行，中国的分数并不能均衡反映全国情况。 他们在科学和数学方面的得分，比OECD国家的平均水平高出100分；粗略地说，20分被认为大约相当于普通学生完整学习一年所取得的进步。 新加坡、澳门、台湾和日本的学生紧随其后。

Estonia still looks the best school system in the West. Turkey is rising very fast. And there is heartening news for Britain, whose youngsters now rank inside the world’s top ten in all three disciplines. Compared with three years ago, Britain has pushed up its science results and held reading and mathematics broadly steady. That counts as a good result when many others are heading down.

爱沙尼亚看起来仍是西方表现最好的教育体系。 土耳其正在迅速进步。 英国也传来了令人振奋的消息：其学生在全部三个学科中均已跻身世界前十。 与三年前相比，英国的科学成绩提高了，阅读和数学成绩则大致保持稳定。 在许多其他地方成绩下滑时，这就算是不错的结果。

Yet zoom out, and the dominant story is of long-term decline. The average scores in the 23 OECD-member countries that have taken part in every edition of PISA reached a peak around 2012 and have been falling ever since. In both maths and reading, their 15-year-olds are now testing at levels that might have been achieved by 14-year olds a decade ago (see chart 2). Findings for America are clouded by low response rates, though the available data suggest that in the latest testing round its scores in literacy have tumbled in line with the rich-world trend. Trends are a little less gloomy in developing countries, where achievement is lower to begin with. But even in many of those places, scores in maths and reading are heading down.

然而，将视野拉远来看，最主要的图景仍是长期下滑。 在每一轮PISA测评中都参加的23个OECD成员国，其平均分在2012年前后达到峰值，此后便一直下降。 在数学和阅读两方面，这些国家15岁学生目前的测试水平，或许只相当于十年前14岁学生可能达到的水平（见原报道图2）。 美国的结果因回应率偏低而存在不确定性，不过，现有数据提示，在最新一轮测评中，其阅读素养得分也随着富裕国家的总体趋势大幅下跌。 发展中国家的趋势略微没有那么令人沮丧，但其学习表现本来就更低。 然而，即使在这些地方，许多国家的数学和阅读成绩也在走低。

Children who were already among the poorest performers are falling even further behind. Across education systems, the gap between low- and high-performing students is now the largest ever recorded by PISA, in all the disciplines it tests. Some 20% of 15-year-olds in OECD countries are considered low performers in all three of reading, mathematics and science—up from 16% when the tests were run four years ago. The OECD argues that these youngsters will struggle to understand anything but the simplest texts, or to make sense of a utility bill.

那些原本就属于表现最差群体的孩子，如今落后得更远了。 在各教育体系中，低表现与高表现学生之间的差距，在PISA测评的所有学科中，都达到有记录以来的最大水平。 OECD国家中，大约20%的15岁学生在阅读、数学和科学三科上全部属于低表现者，高于四年前测评时的16%。 OECD认为，这些年轻人除了最简单的文本以外，理解其他文本都会有困难，甚至可能看不懂一张水电等公用事业账单。

What is causing this decline? The lingering impact of the pandemic doubtless has a role. The youngsters who participated in this year’s PISA tests were about ten years old when covid-19 hit; it is possible they were hurt more by the disruptions of that era than teenagers who were further into their school careers.

是什么造成了这种下滑？ 疫情持续至今的影响无疑起着一定作用。 参加今年PISA测评的年轻人在新冠疫情暴发时大约十岁；那一时期的教育中断，对他们的伤害可能大于对那些当时已经进入更高学习阶段的青少年的伤害。

The pandemic also created new problems that continue unchecked. Rates of absence remain much higher than before covid spread, for reasons that are much contested. Across rich countries about 15% of pupils miss at least a day of primary school every fortnight, up from about 10% in 2019; absences are up in secondary schools, too. Missing even a few days of lessons can have a big impact on grades.

疫情还制造了一些新问题，而且这些问题至今仍未受到遏制。 缺课率依然远高于疫情传播之前，至于原因，人们争论不休。 在富裕国家，大约15%的小学生每两周至少缺课一天，高于2019年的约10%；中学生的缺课情况也在增加。 哪怕只缺几天课，也可能对成绩产生很大影响。

But falling scores will also intensify long-running worries about the impact of technology on children’s learning—and on their reading skills in particular. Ubiquitous phones and widespread access to social media mean young people are getting less practice making sense of complex texts, argues Andreas Schleicher, head of education at the OECD. He points to an increase in the number of test-takers classed as “hasty readers” who blast briskly through the literacy assessment while getting many of the answers wrong. Screens are clearly diverting children from books: the number of nine-year-olds in America who say they read them for pleasure has fallen from nearly 60% in the 1990s to 37% now. Declining literacy could well be dragging down marks in other disciplines—because reading well is key to progressing in subjects such as maths and science, too.

不过，分数下滑也会加剧人们长期以来对技术影响儿童学习，尤其是影响阅读能力的担忧。 OECD教育负责人安德烈亚斯·施莱歇尔认为，无处不在的手机和广泛可及的社交媒体，使年轻人理解复杂文本的练习越来越少。 他指出，被归为“草率阅读者”的参测学生人数有所增加：他们飞快地做完阅读测评，却答错了许多题。 屏幕显然正在把儿童的注意力从书本上引开：美国九岁儿童中，自称为了乐趣而读书的比例，已从20世纪90年代的近60%降至如今的37%。 阅读能力下降很可能还在拖累其他学科的成绩，因为良好的阅读能力，也是数学和科学等学科学习取得进步的关键。

Tackling these challenges requires first-rate policies in schools. But on a wide range of issues, education ministries seem to be dropping the ball. Mr Schleicher worries that schools have become “complacent” and that they are increasingly inclined to tell pupils and parents that “mediocre work is great”. He criticises overzealous and haphazard use of educational software in classrooms, arguing in a guest essay for The Economist that pupils have too often become “crash-test dummies” for unproven kit. Some data suggest that schools have been allowed to grow rowdier. In one recent survey rich-world teachers reported that the amount of time they spend simply keeping order is creeping up.

应对这些挑战，需要学校实行一流的政策。 然而，在许多问题上，各国教育部门似乎都没有尽到责任。 施莱歇尔担心，学校已经变得“自满”，并且越来越倾向于告诉学生和家长：“平庸的作业也很棒。” 他批评课堂上过于热衷、又缺乏章法地使用教育软件，并在为《经济学人》撰写的一篇客座文章中指出，学生太多时候成了未经验证的设备和软件的“碰撞测试假人”。 一些数据提示，学校可能被放任变得更加吵闹、失序。 在最近一次调查中，富裕国家的教师表示，他们仅仅用于维持秩序的时间就在逐渐增加。

PISA may itself share some blame for setting school reformers on a dodgy course. When the tests were first carried out in 2000, Finland shocked the world by coming top of the table. Policymakers who trekked to Helsinki for lessons returned with messages that teachers in their home countries were only too happy to receive. Finland appeared to have achieved striking results with only limited testing and inspections. Its educational establishment espoused “play-based” learning, especially for younger children. It argued that teachers should spend less time talking in front of blackboards and more time helping pupils work things out for themselves.

PISA本身也可能应当为把学校改革者引向不可靠的方向，承担一部分责任。 2000年首次开展这项测评时，芬兰登上榜首，震惊了世界。 前往赫尔辛基取经的政策制定者，带回了一些本国教师十分乐意听到的经验。 芬兰似乎在考试和督导较少的情况下，仍取得了显著成绩。 芬兰教育界倡导“以游戏为基础”的学习，尤其主张对低龄儿童采用这种方式。 他们认为，教师应该少花些时间站在黑板前讲授，多花些时间帮助学生自己弄明白问题。

Yet since that first test almost no country has seen its scores fall as steeply as Finland—a slide that continues in the latest results. Finland’s critics posit that the high marks it achieved in 2000 in fact reflected old-fashioned educational approaches that were still prevalent in its schools well into the 1990s—and not the newer “progressive” policies for which it became famous. If that is the case, the error may have set dozens of school systems off-course.

然而，自首次测评以来，几乎没有哪个国家的分数下降得像芬兰这样急剧，而且这种下滑在最新结果中仍在延续。 芬兰的批评者提出，2000年取得的高分，实际上反映的是其学校直到20世纪90年代相当一段时期仍然普遍采用的传统教育方式，而非后来使其声名鹊起的新式“进步主义”政策。 如果确实如此，这种误判可能已经把几十个教育体系带偏了。

What countries could serve as new models? Asian school systems have shared somewhat in the declines recorded in recent years, but generally less than other rich places. The big gap in scores between East and West suggests policies in East Asia deserve another look. Parents there are fanatical about schooling and often dig deep into their pockets for extra lessons. Critics are right that such social factors are difficult to replicate. But the region’s politicians have made wise decisions, too. Asian countries are much less obsessed than Western ones with keeping classes small: they generally choose to have fewer teachers, whom they can pay more and train more intensely. That seems to work better than adding ever more staff to schools—the main way that America, in particular, has long tried to drive up scores.

哪些国家可以成为新的榜样？ 亚洲教育体系在近年的分数下降中也受到了一定影响，但总体降幅小于其他富裕地区。 东西方之间巨大的分数差距表明，东亚的教育政策值得重新审视。 那里的家长对孩子的学业极为投入，而且经常为额外课程掏出大笔钱。 批评者说，这些社会因素难以复制，这一点是对的。 但该地区的政策制定者也作出了一些明智的决定。 与西方国家相比，亚洲国家没有那么执着于维持小班规模；它们通常选择聘用较少的教师，从而可以支付更高的报酬，并提供更充分的培训。 这种做法似乎比不断增加学校教职工更有效，后者尤其是美国长期以来试图提高成绩的主要办法。

Britain’s march up the rankings deserves more attention than it has received. Starting some 15 years ago under a Conservative-led coalition government, school reformers in England—by a long way the largest of the country’s four separate school systems—zigged when much of the rest of the world zagged.

英国排名不断上升，理应得到比目前更多的关注。 大约15年前，在一个由保守党领导的联合政府执政期间，英格兰的学校改革者开始采取与世界上许多其他地方不同的路线；英格兰也是该国四个独立教育体系中规模遥遥领先的一个。

The nation made its curriculums more fact-filled (some prefer to say “knowledge-rich”) at a time when policymakers elsewhere had been waxing lyrical about instilling vague soft skills. It made exams more rigorous, deprioritised coursework (on which it is easy to cheat) and toughened inspections. Politicians also sought to steer schools away from newfangled styles of instruction that are fashionable but untested, and back towards methods that are more dyed-in-the-wool.

英格兰让课程包含更多事实知识，有些人更愿意称之为“知识丰富型”课程；而在同一时期，其他地方的政策制定者一直在热情赞颂向学生灌输模糊的软技能。 英格兰提高了考试的严格程度，降低了平时课程作业的重要性，因为这种作业很容易作弊，同时加强了学校督导。 政策制定者还试图引导学校，远离那些时髦却未经检验的新奇教学方式，重新转向更为传统的教学方法。

That England’s policies have had some protective effect on school marks is most evident when comparing it with school systems just next door that have chosen a starkly different path. Twenty years ago children in Scotland outperformed their peers south of the border. Now they tend to do worse—even though school spending per pupil is much higher. Scotland’s critics blame a modish curriculum, as well as a lax approach to discipline. Covid or screens do not explain the disparity, given that these scourges have affected all children in Britain in a fairly similar way.

把英格兰与近邻那些走上截然不同道路的教育体系相比较时，最能看出其政策对学校成绩起到了一定保护作用。 二十年前，苏格兰儿童的表现优于边界以南的同龄人。 如今，他们的表现往往更差，尽管每名学生获得的学校教育支出要高得多。 苏格兰的批评者将此归咎于追逐时尚的课程，以及宽松的纪律管理。 作者认为，新冠疫情或屏幕使用无法解释这种差距，因为这些祸患对英国所有儿童的影响相当相似。

Test scores are not the measure of a person, nor proof that they are destined for failure or success. But good grades are highly predictive of fatter earnings, better health and longer lives, among a world of other benefits. At the national level, improvements in a country’s braininess track closely with later economic growth; one analysis concludes that increasing PISA test scores by 25 points could push up annual GDP growth in rich countries by half a percentage point. There is not yet much evidence that artificial intelligence will reduce the returns on a top-class education, but there are plenty of reasons to think the technology will make mincemeat of the weakly skilled. Time for school-reformers to hit the books. ■

考试分数不是衡量一个人的唯一尺度，也不能证明他注定失败或成功。 不过，好成绩能够较强地预测更高的收入、更好的健康状况和更长的寿命，以及许多其他益处。 在国家层面，国民认知能力的改善与此后的经济增长密切相关；一项分析认为，PISA分数提高25分，可能让富裕国家的年度GDP增长率提高0.5个百分点。 目前还没有多少证据表明，人工智能会降低优质教育的回报，但有充分理由认为，这种技术将让技能薄弱者遭受沉重打击。 学校改革者该好好做功课了。

学习资料

精读笔记 · 精读音频