PISA 2018

Scientific Competencies Framework

Cited from:
OECD (2019), PISA 2018 Assessment and Analytical Framework, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris,
https://doi.org/10.1787/b25efab8-en.

Scientific literacy is the ability to engage with science-related issues, and with the ideas of
science, as a reflective citizen.
A scientifically literate person, therefore, is willing to engage in reasoned discourse about
science and technology which requires the competencies of:
▪ Explaining phenomena scientifically: Recognising, offering and evaluating explanations
for a range of natural and technological phenomena.
▪ Evaluating and designing scientific enquiry: Describing and appraising scientific
investigations and proposing ways of addressing questions scientifically.
▪ Interpreting data and evidence scientifically: Analysing and evaluating data, claims and
arguments in a variety of representations and drawing appropriate scientific conclusions.

Table 1 provide a detailed description of the tasks that make up each of the three competencies
that comprise scientific literacy. This set of scientific competencies reflects a view that science
is best seen as an ensemble of social and epistemic practices that are common across all of its
subfields (National Research Council, 2012). Hence, all of these competencies are framed as
actions, conveying what the scientifically literate person both understands and is capable of
doing.

Table 1. PISA 2018 Scientific Competencies

Scientific Competencies Description

Explaining phenomena Recognising, offering and evaluating explanations
scientifically for a range of natural and technological phenomena
through:
• Recalling and applying appropriate scientific
knowledge;
• Identifying, using and generating explanatory
models and representations;
• Making and justifying appropriate predictions;
• Offering explanatory hypotheses;
• Explaining the potential implications of
scientific knowledge for society
Evaluating and designing Describing and appraising scientific investigations
scientific enquiry and proposing ways of addressing questions
scientifically through:
• Identifying the question explored in a given
scientific study;
• Distinguishing questions that are possible to
investigate scientifically;
 Scientific Competencies
Interpreting data and evidence
scientifically
Description
• Proposing a way of exploring a given question
scientifically;
• Evaluating ways of exploring a given question
scientifically;
• Describing and evaluating a range of ways that
scientists use to ensure the reliability of data and
the objectivity and generalisability of
explanations.
Analysing and evaluating scientific data, claims and
arguments in a variety of representations and
drawing appropriate
conclusions through:
• Transforming data from one representation to
another;
• Analysing and interpreting data and drawing
appropriate conclusions;
• Identifying the assumptions, evidence and
reasoning in science-related texts;
• Distinguishing between arguments that are based
on scientific evidence and theory and those
based on other considerations;
• Evaluating scientific arguments and evidence
from different sources (e.g. newspaper, Internet,
journals).

Competency 1: Explaining phenomena scientifically

Science has managed to develop a set of explanatory theories that have transformed our
understanding of the natural world. Moreover, such knowledge has enabled the development
of technologies that support human life, such as treatments for various diseases and rapid
communication across the globe. The competency to explain scientific and technological
phenomena thus depends on a knowledge of these major explanatory ideas of science.

Explaining some scientific phenomena, however, requires more than just the ability to recall
and use theories, explanatory ideas, information, and facts (content knowledge). Offering
scientific explanations also requires an understanding of how such knowledge has been derived
and the level of confidence one can hold about any scientific claims. Hence, individuals also
require a knowledge of the standard forms and procedures used in scientific enquiry to obtain
such knowledge (procedural knowledge) and an understanding of their own role and function
in justifying the knowledge produced by science (epistemic knowledge).

Demonstrating the competency of explaining phenomena scientifically requires students to

recall the appropriate content knowledge in a given situation and use it to interpret and provide
an explanation for the phenomenon of interest. Such knowledge can also be used to generate
tentative explanatory hypotheses for an observed phenomenon or when presented with data. A
scientifically literate person is expected to be able to draw on standard scientific models to
construct simple representations for everyday phenomena and then use these representations to
make predictions. This competency includes the ability to describe or interpret phenomena and
predict possible changes. In addition, it may involve recognising or identifying appropriate
descriptions, explanations, and predictions.
Competency 2: Evaluating and designing scientific enquiry
Scientific literacy requires students to have some understanding of the goal of scientific
enquiry, which is to generate reliable knowledge about the natural world (Ziman, 1978). Data
obtained by observation and experiment, either in the laboratory or in the field, lead to the
development of models and explanatory hypotheses that enable predictions that can then be
tested experimentally. New claims and hypotheses are always provisional and may not stand
up when subjected to critical peer review (Longino, 1990). Hence, scientists commit to
publishing or reporting their findings and the methods used in obtaining the evidence that
support these findings. Measurements, however, all contain a degree of error. Much of the work
of the experimental scientist is, therefore, devoted to the resolution of uncertainty by repeating
measurements, collecting larger samples, building instruments that are more accurate, and
using statistical techniques that assess the degree of confidence in any result.

This competency draws on content knowledge, a knowledge of the common procedures used
in science (procedural knowledge) and the function of these procedures in justifying any
claims advanced by science (epistemic knowledge). Procedural and epistemic knowledge
serve two functions. First, such knowledge is required by individuals to appraise scientific
investigations, thus deciding whether appropriate procedures have been followed and whether
the conclusions are warranted. Second, such knowledge allows individuals to propose, at least
in broad terms, how a scientific question might be investigated appropriately.

The competency of evaluating and designing scientific enquiry is required to evaluate reports
of scientific findings and investigations critically. It relies on the ability to discriminate
scientific questions from other forms of enquiry, or in other words, to recognise questions that
can be investigated scientifically. This competency requires a knowledge of the key features of
a scientific investigation, such as what things should be measured, what variables should be
changed or controlled, and what action should be taken so that accurate and precise data can
be collected. It requires an ability to evaluate the quality of data, which in turn depends on
recognising that data are not always completely accurate. It also requires the competency to
identify if an investigation is driven by an underlying theoretical premise or, alternatively,
whether it seeks to determine identifiable patterns.

A scientifically literate person should also be able to recognise the significance of previous
research in judging the value of any given scientific enquiry. Moreover, students need to
understand the importance of developing a sceptical disposition to all media reports in science,
recognising that all research builds on previous work, that the findings of any one study are
always subject to uncertainty, and that the study may be biased by its sources of funding. This
competency requires students to possess both procedural and epistemic knowledge but may
also draw on their content knowledge of science.

Competency 3: Interpreting data and evidence scientifically

Interpreting data is a core activity for all scientists. It typically begins by looking for patterns,
perhaps through constructing simple tables or graphical visualisations. Any relationships or
patterns in the data must then be read using a knowledge of standard patterns. The scientifically
literate individual can also be expected to understand that uncertainty is an inherent feature of
all measurement, and that one criterion for expressing our confidence in a finding is the
probability that it might have occurred by chance. All of this draws on a body of procedural
knowledge.
It is not sufficient, however, to understand the procedures that have been applied to obtain a
data set. The scientifically literate individual needs to be able to judge whether these procedures
are appropriate and whether the ensuing claims are justified (epistemic knowledge). For
instance, many sets of data can be interpreted in multiple ways, and scientists must argue in
support of their own interpretation while defending it from the critique of others. Resolution of
which interpretation is the best requires a knowledge of science (content knowledge). A
critical and sceptical disposition towards all empirical evidence is indeed the hallmark of the
professional scientist.

Students who can interpret data and evidence scientifically should be able to convey the
meaning of a piece of scientific evidence and its implications to a specified audience in their
own words, using diagrams or other representations as appropriate. This competency requires
the use of mathematical tools to analyse or summarise data, and the ability to use standard
methods to transform data to different representations.

This competency also includes accessing scientific information and producing and evaluating
arguments and conclusions based on scientific evidence (Kuhn, 2010; Osborne, 2010). It may
also involve evaluating alternative conclusions using evidence; giving reasons for or against a
given conclusion; and identifying the assumptions made in reaching a conclusion. In short, the
scientifically literate individual should be able to identify logical or flawed connections
between evidence and conclusions.

References:
Kuhn, D. (2010), “Teaching and learning science as argument”, Science Education, Vol. 94/5,
pp. 810-824, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sce.20395.
Longino, H. (1990), Science as Social Knowledge, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
National Research Council (2012), A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices,
Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas, The National Academies Press, Washington,
D.C., https://doi.org/10.17226/13165.
Osborne, J. (2010), “Arguing to Learn in Science: The Role of Collaborative, Critical
Discourse”, Science, Vol. 328/5977, pp. 463-466,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1183944.
Ziman, J. (1978), Reliable Knowledge: An Exploration of the Grounds for Belief in Science,
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.