The OECD’s PISA 2018 tested around 600,000 15-year-old students in 79 countries and economies on reading, science and mathematics. The main focus was on reading, with most students doing the test on computers.
1. PISA 2018 Results
Programme for International Student Assessment
First results from PISA 2018
Andreas
Schleicher
Embargo until
3 December
9:00 Paris time
5. What does the test measure?
Reading
students’ capacity to understand, use,
evaluate, reflect on and engage with
texts in order to achieve one’s goals,
develop one’s knowledge and potential, and
participate in society
Mathematics
students’ capacity to formulate, employ
and interpret mathematics in a variety of
contexts. It includes reasoning
mathematically and using mathematical
concepts, procedures, facts and tools to
describe, explain and predict phenomena
Science
the ability to engage with science-related
issues, and with the ideas of science, as a
reflective citizen. A scientifically literate
person is willing to engage in reasoned
discourse about science and technology,
which requires the competencies to explain
phenomena scientifically, evaluate and
design scientific enquiry, and interpret
data and evidence scientifically
6. Who are the PISA students: Target population
PISA target population
PISA students are aged between 15 years 3
months and 16 years 2 months at the time of the
assessment
They have completed at least 6 years of formal
schooling
Enrolled in:
They can be enrolled in any type of institution
- full-time or part-time education
- academic or vocational programmes
- public or private schools or foreign schools within the
country
7. Who are the PISA students: technical standards
Schools situated in remote
regions and are inaccessible,
very small schools, because
of organisational or
operational factors that
precluded participation
Students might be excluded
because of intellectual
disability or limited
proficiency in the language
of the assessment
The overall exclusion rate
within a country is required to
be below 5%
Exclusion could take place
either through the schools
that participated or the
students who participated
within schools
In 31 of the 79 countries and
economies that participated
in PISA 2018, the percentage
of school-level exclusions
amounted to less than 1%;
it was 4% or less in all
except five countries
The overall exclusion rate
remained below 2% in 28
participating countries and
economies, below 5% in 63
participating countries and
economies, and below 7% in
all except 4 countries
Strict technical standards
on student exclusion
Why a school or student
could be excluded:
9. Share of 15-year-olds covered by PISA
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Germany
HongKong(China)
Slovenia
BruneiDarussalam
Malta
Finland
Ireland
CzechRepublic
Singapore
Moldova
NorthMacedonia
Montenegro
Belgium
Russia
Estonia
Greece
Qatar
Cyprus
ChineseTaipei
Kazakhstan
UnitedArabEmirates
Spain
Iceland
France
Netherlands
Norway
Japan
Lithuania
Poland
Hungary
Australia
Chile
Croatia
Switzerland
Austria
NewZealand
Latvia
Serbia
Macao(China)
OECDaverage
Korea
Denmark
Belarus
Portugal
Luxembourg
Ukraine
Lebanon
Canada
SlovakRepublic
UnitedStates
Sweden
Indonesia
UnitedKingdom
Italy
SaudiArabia
Kosovo
Georgia
BosniaandHerzegovina
B-S-J-Z(China)
Israel
Argentina
Uruguay
Albania
Peru
DominicanRepublic
Romania
Turkey
Thailand
Malaysia
Bulgaria
VietNam
Philippines
Mexico
Brazil
Morocco
CostaRica
Colombia
Jordan
Panama
Baku(Azerbaijan)
%
On OECD average, PISA 2018 represents 88.2% of the
entire 15-year-old population across OECD countries
12. Albania, Colombia, Macao (China), Moldova, Peru,
Portugal, Qatar
These seven countries/economies (Albania,
etc) saw an improving trend in their students’
mean reading, mathematics and science
Estonia, Israel, Montenegro, Poland, Romania, Russia, Serbia
Singapore Singapore saw an improving trend in reading and
science, and a non-significant trend in
Jordan, Chile
Germany
Germany saw an improving trend
in reading (since 2000), a non-
significant trend in mathematics
(since 2003) and a declining trend
in science (since 2006)
Georgia, Malaysia, North Macedonia, Turkey
Brazil, Bulgaria, Italy, Kazakhstan, Malta, Mexico
Argentina, Denmark, Indonesia, Japan, Latvia, Luxembourg,
Norway, Panama, Spain, the United Arab Emirates, the United
Kingdom, the United States, Uruguay
Austria, Croatia, Greece, Hong Kong (China), Ireland, Lithuania,
Slovenia
France, Chinese Taipei
Belgium, Canada, the Czech
Republic, Hungary, Switzerland
Sweden, Thailand
Costa Rica
Australia, Finland, Iceland, Korea, the Netherlands, New Zealand,
the Slovak Republic
Reading Mathematics Science
Legend: Improving trend Non-significant trend Declining trend
Not all countries and economies can
compare their students’ performance over
the same period!
Long-term trends in mean performance
in reading, mathematics and science
Comparison over time:
Reading: 2000 to 2018
Mathematics: 2003 to 2018
Science: 2006 to 2018
Longest period available for countries
and economies was chosen for
comparison
17. Learning time ≠ learning outcomes
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Finland
Germany
Switzerland
Sweden
Estonia
NewZealand
Japan
CzechRepublic
Macao(China)
Netherlands
Ireland
France
UnitedKingdom
Australia
Norway
Iceland
Canada
Belgium
Slovenia
HongKong(China)
Latvia
OECDaverage
Lithuania
Uruguay
Luxembourg
Portugal
SlovakRepublic
Denmark
Poland
Hungary
Singapore
Austria
UnitedStates
ChineseTaipei
Israel
Croatia
Korea
Russia
Bulgaria
Greece
Italy
Turkey
Chile
Brazil
Colombia
Mexico
CostaRica
Montenegro
Peru
Qatar
UnitedArabEmirates
Thailand
DominicanRepublic
Scorepointsinreadingperhouroflearningtime
Hours
Time in school
Learning out of school
Productivity
Note: Learning time is based on reports by 15-year-old students in the same country/economy in response to the PISA 2015 questionnaire,
Productivity is measured by score points in reading per hour of total learning time
20. -0.05
-0.04
-0.03
-0.02
-0.01
0.00
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
Motivation to master
tasks
Self-efficacy Fear of failure Learning goals Value of school
Changeintheindex Growth mindset and student attitudes
Change in the following indices when students disagreed or strongly disagreed that "your intelligence is
something about you that you can’t change very much“:
Fig III.14.5
All linear regression models account for
students' and schools' socio-economic profile
21. 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Boys Girls Disadvantaged Advantaged Without an immigrant
background
With an immigrant
background
Score-pointdifference Growth mindset matters more for some groups
Students who disagreed or strongly disagreed that "your intelligence is something about you that you can’t
change very much", by the following groups of students
Gender Socio-economic status Immigrant background
Fig III.14.4
31. 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
It was clear to me that the teacher
liked teaching us
The enthusiasm of the teacher
inspired me
It was clear that the teacher likes to
deal with the topic of the lesson
The teacher showed enjoyment in
teaching
Score-pointdifferenceinreading
compared to students who reported “strongly disagree”
Disagree Agree Strongly agree
Teacher enthusiasm and reading performance Fig III.5.3
33. -0.02
0.00
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.10
0.12
0.14
0.16
Teacher enthusiasm Teachers' stimulation
of reading
engagement
Teacher-directed
instruction
Teacher feedback Adaptive instruction Teacher support
Changeintheindexofenjoymentofreading
Change in the index of enjoyment of reading
Before accounting for reading performance and other teaching practices
After accounting for reading performance
Enjoyment of reading and teaching practices
Fig III.6.5
34. R² = 0.09
R² = 0.10
R² = 0.12
R² = 0.18
300
320
340
360
380
400
420
440
460
480
500
520
540
00 05 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Averagereadingscore
Percentage of students in schools whose principal reported that the above behaviours hinder student learning "a lot"
Teacher behaviour hindering learning and reading performance
Fig III.7.4
The R2 is indicated in bold when the association is significant
Based on country-level analysis
Teachers not meeting indiviudal students‘ needs
Teacher absenteeism
Staff resisting change
Teachers not being well prepared for classes
Teachers being too strict with students
35. -0.60
-0.40
-0.20
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
Index of
disciplinary
climate
Index of exposure
to bullying
Index of sense of
belonging at
school
Index of teacher
support
Index of teacher
feedback
Index of student
co-operation
Index of student
competition
Changeinstudents’averagelifesatisfactionassociatedwith
aone-unitincreaseintheschool-levelindices
After accounting for student and school characteristics
Before accounting for student and school characteristics
Students' life satisfaction and school climate
Change in the school-level index associated with a one-point change on the student life-satisfaction scale
Fig III.11.7
GreaterLifeSatisfaction
37. -20
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
20
25
Students seem
to value co-
operation
It seems that
students are co-
operating with
each other
Students seem
to share the
feeling that co-
operating with
each other is
important
Students feel
that they are
encouraged to
co-operate with
others
Students seem
to value
competition
It seems that
students are
competing with
each other
Students seem
to share the
feeling that
competing with
each other is
important
Students feel
that they are
being compared
with others
Score-pointdifferenceinreading
Score-point difference when students reported that the below statements are
"very true" or "extremely true"
After accounting for students' and schools' socio-economic profile
Before accounting for students' and schools' socio-economic profile
Student co-operation and competition, and reading performance
Fig III.8.3
OECD average
Student co-operation Student competition
38. 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Happy Lively Proud Joyful Cheerful Scared Miserable Afraid Sad
Type of student according to the time they spend on the Internet outside of school:
Low Internet users Moderate Internet users Average Internet users High Internet users Heavy Internet users
Percentageofstudents
Internet use outside of school and students' feelings, OECD average
Fig III.12.4
Positive feelings Negative feelings
39. Inclusion
The right to be equal
The right to be different
Social background
GenderLocation
Immigration
44. Students with
disadvantaged
social background
Students with
advantaged
social background
Growth mindset
Positive feeling
Life satisfaction
Sense of belonging
Bullying
Discipline
Teacher enthusiasm
Teacher support
Co-operation
Compounding disadvantage
53. Find out more about our work at www.oecd.org/pisa
PISA 2018: Insights and Implications
PISA 2018 Results (Volume I): What Students Know and Can Do
PISA 2018 Results (Volume II): Where All Students Can Succeed
PISA 2018 Results (Volume III): What School Life Means for Students’ Lives
Take the test: www.oecd.org/pisa/test
FAQs: www.oecd.org/pisa/pisafaq
PISA indicators on Education GPS: http://gpseducation.oecd.org
PISA Data Explorer: www.oecd.org/pisa/data
Email: Andreas.Schleicher@OECD.org
Thank you