Problem Statement: In cross-cultural studies such as PISA, it is not possible to use a single form, since the scales are applied to different countries, and it is necessary to translate the form into the language of the country that will use it. Language differences may have a strong impact on measurement inequalities. Nevertheless, translated tests may not function in the same way, because of different culture and language characteristics of different countries. This situation may be described as the test not being equivalent, or fair, for different cultures. Translation is the first step of a long-lasting process in adapting the test to different cultures; the basic objective of adaptation is to preserve the structural equivalence between the versions of two or more languages, and to protect the test content. Purpose of Study: This study aims to examine the factorial invariance of some of the PISA questionnaire in relation to its scientific context, and the equality of the questionnaire across the ten countries, by a multi-group confirmatory factor analysis model. Methods: In this study, samplings from ten countries were used. For the crosscultural invariance of PISA questionnaires, a set of confirmatory factor analysis procedures were used. If the introduction of a set of invariance constraints results in a substantial reduction in goodness of fit, then there is evidence against the appropriateness of those invariance constraints. Confirmatory factor analyses were conducted with LISREL. Findings and Results: As a result, in the model in which there is a constraint indicating that factor loadings should be equal for all countries, there is no evidence of a decrease in fit index level, exceeding the criterion in comparison to the baseline model. This result strongly supports the conclusion that factor loadings do not vary from one country to another. However, in the model in which error variances are also constrained, NNFI and RFI fit indexes show higher declines than .01, when compared to the baseline model. Conclusions and Recommendations: This finding indicates that error variances may vary from one country to another. Furthermore, fit indexes show higher decreases, exceeding the limits in the model in which there is a constraint on equivalency of correlations between factors, when compared to the baseline model.