PISA science framework 2018 vs 2025 and its impact in physics education: Literature review

Utama Alan Deta, Septy Kurrota Ayun, Luthfiyaul Laila, Binar Kurnia Prahani, Nadi Suprapto


Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) evaluates education systems in participating countries. Junior high school students are tested in math, science, and reading for the PISA Scientific Literacy test. This study contrasts the PISA Science Framework 2018 and 2025. This literature research uses systematic Literature Review (SLR) and bibliometric analysis. The method finds, reviews, evaluates, and interprets all research related to scientific literacy, PISA Framework 2018 and 2025, and its impact on Physics Education. The research used the Scopus database to find PISA Science Framework-related scientific articles. Results showed that PISA Framework 2025 evolves science literacy and scientific information function. The language is simplified to be more coherent by emphasizing the main idea of science. Procedural and epistemic knowledge are expanded and clarified. The finding is also supported by VOSviewer visualization of data results. This framework implies that physics education will assess students' understanding of fundamental physics principles and their rationality in applying them, including decision-making. In conclusion, the PISA Science Framework 2018 needs to be updated to the PISA Framework 2025 by the OECD to accommodate the students' needs in this era.


Aditomo, A., & Klieme, E. (2020). Forms of inquiry-based science instruction and their relations with learning outcomes: evidence from high and low-performing education systems. International Journal of Science Education, 42(4), 504–525. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2020.1716093
Arifin, L., & Sunarti, T. (2017). The improvement of students’ scientific literacy through guided inquiry learning model on fluid dynamics topic. Jurnal Penelitian Fisika Dan Aplikasinya (JPFA), 7(2), 68. https://doi.org/10.26740/jpfa.v7n2.p68-78
Astalini, A., Darmaji, D., Kurniawan, D. A., & Minarsih, M. (2022). Identification of HOTS Creative Thinking, Science Process Skills and Digital Literacy in Physics Subject. Jurnal Penelitian Fisika Dan Aplikasinya (JPFA), 12(1), 47–61. https://doi.org/10.26740/jpfa.v12n1.p47-61
Bao, L., & Koenig, K. (2019). Physics education research for 21st century learning. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 1(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-019-0007-8
Binkley, M., Erstad, O., Herman, J., Raizen, S., Ripley, M., Miller-Ricci, M., & Rumble, M. (2012). Defining Twenty-First Century Skills. In Assessment and Teaching of 21st Century Skills (pp. 17–66). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2324-5_2
Choueiri, M. E., & Choueiri, B. M. (2023). Introduction to STEM education and road safety: an overview. World Safety Organization, 32(2), 56–63.
Coffay, M., Coenen, L., & Tveterås, R. (2022). Effectuated sustainability: Responsible Innovation Labs for impact forecasting and assessment. Journal of Cleaner Production, 376, 134324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.134324
Courtney, M., Karakus, M., Ersozlu, Z., & Nurumov, K. (2022). The influence of ICT use and related attitudes on students’ math and science performance: multilevel analyses of the last decade’s PISA surveys. Large-Scale Assessments in Education, 10(1), 8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40536-022-00128-6
DeBoer, G. E. (2000). Scientific literacy: Another look at its historical and contemporary meanings and its relationship to science education reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(6), 582–601. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2736(200008)37:6<582::AID-TEA5>3.0.CO;2-L
Deta, U. A., Zulaiha, P., Agustina, R., Fadillah, R. N., Prakoso, I., Lestari, N. A., Yantidewi, M., & Kurnia Prahani, B. (2019). The Scientific Literacy Profile of Tsunami Disaster Mitigation of Non-Science Undergraduate Student in Universitas Negeri Surabaya. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1417, 012095. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1417/1/012095
García-Carmona, A. (2022). La comprensión de aspectos epistémicos de la naturaleza de la ciencia en el nuevo currículo de Educación Secundaria Obligatoria, tras la LOMLOE. Revista Española de Pedagogía, 80(283). https://doi.org/10.22550/REP80-3-2022-01
Garfield, E. (2009). From the science of science to Scientometrics visualizing the history of science with HistCite software. Journal of Informetrics, 3(3), 173–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2009.03.009
Guleria, D., & Kaur, G. (2021). Bibliometric analysis of ecopreneurship using VOSviewer and RStudio Bibliometrix, 1989–2019. Library Hi Tech, 39(4), 1001–1024. https://doi.org/10.1108/LHT-09-2020-0218
Habibul Haque Khondker. (2004). Glocalization as Globalization: Evolution of a Sociological Concept. Bangladesh E-Journal of Sociology, 1(2), 1–9.
Hariyono, E., Abadi, A., Liliasari, L., Wijaya, A. F. C., & Fujii, H. (2018). Designing Geoscience Learning for Sustainable Development: A Professional Competency Assessment for Postgraduate Students in Science Education Program. Jurnal Penelitian Fisika Dan Aplikasinya (JPFA), 8(2), 61. https://doi.org/10.26740/jpfa.v8n2.p61-70
Helen Quinn, Heidi Schweingruber, & Thomas Keller. (2012). A Framework for K-12 Science Education. National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/13165
Hestenes, D. (1987). Toward a modeling theory of physics instruction. American Journal of Physics, 55(5), 440–454. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.15129
König, C., Khorramdel, L., Yamamoto, K., & Frey, A. (2021). The Benefits of Fixed Item Parameter Calibration for Parameter Accuracy in Small Sample Situations in Large‐Scale Assessments. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 40(1), 17–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/emip.12381
Kuei-Ping Shih, Hung-Chan Chen, Chih-Yung Chan, & Tai-Chien Kao. (2020). The Development and Implementation of Scaffolding-Based Self-Regulated Learning System for e/m-Learning. Educational Technology & Society, 13(1), 80–93.
Kühl, N., Goutier, M., Ensslen, A., & Jochem, P. (2019). Literature vs. Twitter: Empirical insights on customer needs in e-mobility. Journal of Cleaner Production, 213, 508–520. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.12.003
Mahtari, S., Wati, M., Rizky, S., Dewantara, D., & Prahani, B. K. (2021). Profile of students’ scientific literacy on particle dynamics. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2104(1), 012013. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/2104/1/012013
Marconi, G., Cascales, C. C., Covacevich, C., & Halgreen, T. ,. (2020). What matters for language learning? The questionnaire framework for the PISA 2025 Foreign Language Assessment.
McGrew, S., Breakstone, J., Ortega, T., Smith, M., & Wineburg, S. (2018). Can Students Evaluate Online Sources? Learning From Assessments of Civic Online Reasoning. Theory & Research in Social Education, 46(2), 165–193. https://doi.org/10.1080/00933104.2017.1416320
Milda, Suyono, Sri Rahayu, Y., Hariyono, E., Prahani, B. K., & Annur, S. (2022). Profil of science literacy skill of junior high school student on energy materials in living systems in online learning. 020009. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0117637
Ningsih, I., Winarni, R., & Roemintoyo, R. (2019). Implementation of Digital Literacy to Achieve 21st Century Skills in The 2013’s Curriculum. Proceedings of the Proceedings of the 1st Seminar and Workshop on Research Design, for Education, Social Science, Arts, and Humanities, SEWORD FRESSH 2019, April 27 2019, Surakarta, Central Java, Indonesia. https://doi.org/10.4108/eai.27-4-2019.2286855
OECD. (2014). Education at a Glance 2014 OECD indicators. OECD Publisher.
OECD. (2019). PISA 2018 Assessment and Analytical Framework. OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/b25efab8-en
OECD. (2023). PISA 2025 Science Framework. OECD Publishing.
Pan, Y.-T., Yang, K.-K., Hong, Z.-R., & Lin, H.-S. (2018). The Effect of Interest and Engagement in Learning Science on Adults’ Scientific Competency and Environmental Action. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(12). https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/94225
Paul, J., Lim, W. M., O’Cass, A., Hao, A. W., & Bresciani, S. (2021). Scientific procedures and rationales for systematic literature reviews (SPAR‐4‐SLR). International Journal of Consumer Studies, 45(4). https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12695
Radišić, J., Selleri, P., Carugati, F., & Baucal, A. (2021). Are students in Italy really disinterested in science? A person‐centered approach using the PISA 2015 data. Science Education, 105(2), 438–468. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21611
Razavian, M., Paech, B., & Tang, A. (2019). Empirical research for software architecture decision making: An analysis. Journal of Systems and Software, 149, 360–381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2018.12.003
Redish, E. F. (2004). A Theoretical Framework for Physics Education Research: Modeling Student Thinking.
Santhalia, P. W., & Yuliati, L. (2021). An Exploration of Scientific Literacy on Physics Subjects within Phenomenon-based Experiential Learning. Jurnal Penelitian Fisika Dan Aplikasinya (JPFA), 11(1), 72–82. https://doi.org/10.26740/jpfa.v11n1.p72-82
Soh, T. M. T., Arsad, N. M., & Osman, K. (2010). The Relationship of 21st Century Skills on Students’ Attitude and Perception towards Physics. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 7, 546–554. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.10.073
Sun, H., Xie, Y., & Lavonen, J. (2022). Effects of the use of ICT in schools on students’ science higher-order thinking skills: comparative study of China and Finland. Research in Science & Technological Education, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2022.2116421
Susanti, E., Maulidah, R., & Makiyah, Y. S. (2021). Analysis of problem-solving ability of physics education students in STEM-based project based learning. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2104(1), 012005. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/2104/1/012005
Thornhill-Miller, B., Camarda, A., Mercier, M., Burkhardt, J.-M., Morisseau, T., Bourgeois-Bougrine, S., Vinchon, F., El Hayek, S., Augereau-Landais, M., Mourey, F., Feybesse, C., Sundquist, D., & Lubart, T. (2023). Creativity, Critical Thinking, Communication, and Collaboration: Assessment, Certification, and Promotion of 21st Century Skills for the Future of Work and Education. Journal of Intelligence, 11(3), 54. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence11030054
Tunggyshbay, M., Balta, N., & Admiraal, W. (2023). Flipped classroom strategies and innovative teaching approaches in physics education: A systematic review. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 19(6), em2283. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/13258
White, P. J., Ardoin, N. M., Eames, C., & Monroe, M. C. (2023). Agency in the Anthropocene: Supporting document to the PISA 2025 Science Framework.
Wilson, A. S. P., & Urick, A. (2022). An intersectional examination of the opportunity gap in science: A critical quantitative approach to latent class analysis. Social Science Research, 102, 102645. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2021.102645
Wise, A. F., & Jung, Y. (2019). Teaching with Analytics: Towards a Situated Model of Instructional Decision-Making. Journal of Learning Analytics, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2019.62.4
Wolf, A., Sant’Anna, A., & Vilhelmsson, A. (2022). Using nudges to promote clinical decision making of healthcare professionals: A scoping review. Preventive Medicine, 164, 107320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2022.107320
Wolff, K., Kruger, K., Pott, R., & de Koker, N. (2023). The conceptual nuances of technology-supported learning in engineering. European Journal of Engineering Education, 48(5), 802–821. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2022.2115876
World Economic Forum. (2015). New Vision for Education Unlocking the Potential of Technology. World Economic Forum.
Yu, T.-K., Lin, M.-L., & Liao, Y.-K. (2017). Understanding factors influencing information communication technology adoption behavior: The moderators of information literacy and digital skills. Computers in Human Behavior, 71, 196–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.02.005
Zhang, X., Cheng, X., & Wang, Y. (2023). How Is Science Teacher Job Satisfaction Influenced by Their Professional Collaboration? Evidence from Pisa 2015 Data. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(2), 1137. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20021137


Utama Alan Deta
Septy Kurrota Ayun
Luthfiyaul Laila
Binar Kurnia Prahani
Nadi Suprapto
nadisuprapto@unesa.ac.id (Primary Contact)
Deta, U. A., Ayun, S. K., Laila, L., Prahani, B. K., & Suprapto, N. (2024). PISA science framework 2018 vs 2025 and its impact in physics education: Literature review . Momentum: Physics Education Journal, 8(1), 95–107. https://doi.org/10.21067/mpej.v8i1.9215

Article Details