BackgroundFair comparisons of educational systems in large-scale assessments can be made only if the differences in curricula have little impact on the outcomes. This study investigated the sensitivity of science achievement rankings to varying degrees of curriculum implementation in the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS).MethodsCountry-specific teacher-reported curriculum implementation profiles across the TIMSS science domains were charted including their within-country variability across the classrooms for 33 participating countries of TIMSS 2015. A sensitivity test compared the original ranking to TIMSS curriculum implementation scenarios (a least-possible, a most-possible, and more realistic country-specific median implementation).ResultsIn contrast to expectations, no support was found for a positive relationship between opportunity to learn and science achievement at the between-country level or the within-country level, with only minor exceptions. The sensitivity analysis under different curriculum implementation scenarios also suggests little impact on the rank order of the countries.ConclusionsPlausible explanations for this null finding are addressed; attention and research efforts should focus on improving the quality of curriculum implementation indicators in large-scale assessments.

中文翻译：

---

TIMSS国家科学成就排名对课堂学习机会差异的敏感性

背景知识只有在课程差异对成果没有多大影响的情况下，才能进行大规模评估中教育系统的公平比较。这项研究调查了国际数学和科学研究趋势（TIMSS）中科学成就排名对不同程度课程实施的敏感性。在TIMSS 2015的33个参与国家/地区的所有教室中进行。敏感性测试将原始排名与TIMSS课程实施方案（最低可能，最可能，更现实的特定于国家/地区的中位数实施）进行了比较。在国家间或国家内部，没有发现支持学习机会与科学成就之间的积极关系的支持，只有少数例外。在不同的课程实施方案下进行的敏感性分析也表明，对各国的排名影响不大。注意和研究工作应集中在提高大规模评估中课程实施指标的质量上。结论对该无效发现进行了合理的解释。注意和研究工作应集中在提高大规模评估中课程实施指标的质量上。结论对该无效发现进行了合理的解释。注意和研究工作应集中在提高大规模评估中课程实施指标的质量上。