TIMSS has an effect in relation to curriculum planning (the didactic level). When Denmark first participated in the study in 1995, the pupils did quite poorly. Next time, in 2007, there were dramatic improvements: The pupils had improved by the equivalent of almost an entire year. Something must have occurred between 1995 and 2007 – but we do not know exactly what. We believe that the pupils performed poorly in 1995 because the pupils were not very interested in mathematics and the science subjects, and because the teachers were uncertain about what they should expect from the pupils.
After TIMSS 1995, the focus was placed on increasing and strengthening children’s interest in science. Among other things, TIMSS 2007 showed that the steps taken after 1995 had worked for the youngest children. The study also showed that it was important to take steps towards maintaining an interest in mathematics and science in older pupils.
· TIMSS 2007 (the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study) is an international comparison of pupil performances in mathematics and science.
· The last time Denmark took part in TIMMS was 1995. The TIMSS studies, which have been carried out regularly since the 1960s, have always been planned and managed by the IEA (the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement).
· Danish pupils from the fourth grade in 137 schools took part in the TIMMS 2007 study.
· The TIMSS scores function as a measure of the pupils’ skills and are set at an average mark of 500 points internationally with a spread = 100, i.e. figures from about 300 to about 700.
· 37 countries participated.
· Danish pupils were better than the average, mathematics = 523, science = 517. Ten countries were better at mathematics, 14 were better at science.
· Danish pupils were particularly good at geometry (graphical methods) and life sciences (about living things).
· Danish pupils were better than Norwegian and Swedish pupils, except in science, where Sweden was better.
· Denmark had more pupils above the benchmark for “good performance” (7% compared to the international 5%), and fewer pupils under the benchmark for “poor performance” (5% compared to the international 10%).
· Danish pupils had moved up the scale by a figure corresponding to about one year.
· Negative social inheritance was less strong in Denmark than in Norway and Sweden (cf. results in PISA).
· School and class sizes had no significance on the level of TIMSS scores (analyses of Danish figures).
· The total annual time spent had no correlation with the level of TIMSS scores (analyses of international data).
· There were no gender differences – except for a small difference in terms of numbers theory in mathematics (the boys did particularly well at this).
· There was a difference in TIMSS scores between Danish pupils and pupils with a different ethnic background, even after adjusting for socioeconomic factors. The difference after the adjustment was not large.
· There was a difference in TIMSS scores between bilingual pupils and Danish-speaking pupils, even after a socioeconomic adjustment. The less Danish spoken in the home, the greater the difference.
· Danish pupils were generally not very positive about mathematics and science. Danish pupils were not typical in relation to other countries: the attitude in Denmark had no connection with the performance level in the TIMSS scores.
· The self-confidence of Danish pupils was extremely high compared with pupils internationally.
· Danish pupils did not have much homework in the two subjects; and when homework was set, it was done by the weaker pupils in particular.
· Danish teachers felt well equipped professionally to teach mathematics and science, better than the average of teachers internationally (particularly in mathematics, where the figure was more than 90%).
· On the other hand, Danish teachers did not regard their working conditions as favourable. Significantly fewer Danish teachers had a “high” degree of acceptance of their working conditions compared with international results, and significantly more Danish teachers also had a “low” degree of acceptance of their working conditions.
· Danish headteachers felt that on average they had better opportunities to cover their needs for teaching resources than their international colleagues.
· The school climate was significant for the TIMSS scores. The better the climate, the higher the TIMSS scores. Danish scores for school climate, seen through the eyes of teachers and headteachers, were similar to (or slightly higher than) the international level.
