Search for specific education indicators by country, theme or level of education and compare the results using interactive charts and tables.

Base Theme

Education at a Glance 2019 (EAG 2019): Highlights
EAG 2019, Chapter A: The output of educational institutions and the impact of learning
EAG 2019, Chapter B: Access to education, participation and progression
EAG 2019, Chapter C: Financial resources invested in education
EAG 2019, Chapter D: Teachers, learning environment and organisation of schools
TALIS 2018: Full selection of indicators
TALIS 2018: Starting Strong Survey
Survey of Adult Skills (PIAAC): Full selection of indicators
PISA 2018: Highlight indicators
PISA 2018 Results (Volume II): Where All Students Can Succeed
PISA 2018 Results (Volume III): What School Life Means for Students' Lives
PISA 2015 (Volume IV): Students' Financial Literacy
PISA 2015 (Volume V): Collaborative Problem Solving
Access & Participation
Organisation & Governance
Finance & Funding
Learning environment
Students' Well-Being
Teachers
Evaluation & Quality assurance
Equity
Gender
Digital divide
Special needs
Socio-economic status
Migrant background
Economic & Social outcomes
Internationalisation
Research & Innovation
School leadership
Trends shaping education
Attainment
Skills
Low performers
Computers, education & skills
Early childhood education & care
Tertiary education
Demographic, social & economic indicators
Computers, education & skills
The following findings, based on an analysis of the 2012 Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) data, tell us that, despite the pervasiveness of information and communication technologies (ICT) in our daily lives, these technologies have not yet been as widely adopted in formal education. But where they are used in the classroom, their impact on student performance is mixed, at best. In fact, PISA results show no appreciable improvements in student achievement in reading, mathematics or science in most countries that had invested heavily in ICT for education.

  • The countries with the greatest integration of ICT in schools are Australia, Denmark, the Netherlands and Norway. Rapid increases in the share of students doing schoolwork on computers can often be related to large-scale laptop-acquisition programmes, such as those observed in Australia, Chile, Greece, New Zealand, Sweden and Uruguay.
  • On average, seven out of ten students use computers at school – a proportion unchanged since 2009. Among these students, the frequency of computer use increased in most countries during the period.
  • Only 42% of students in Korea and 38% of students in Shanghai-China reported that they use computers at school – and Korea and Shanghai-China were among the top performers in the digital reading and computer-based mathematics tests in the OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) in 2012.
  • Singapore, Korea, Hong Kong-China, Japan, Canada and Shanghai-China were the top-performing countries/economies in digital reading in 2012; Singapore, Shanghai-China, Korea, Hong Kong-China, Macao-China, Japan and Chinese Taipei were top performers in the 2012 computer-based mathematics assessment.
  • Overall, the relationship between computer use at school and performance is graphically illustrated by a hill shape, which suggests that limited use of computers at school may be better than no use at all, but levels of computer use above the current OECD average are associated with significantly poorer results.
  • On average across TALIS countries, 20% of teachers reported a high level of need to develop their ICT skills for teaching.


  • Browser View

    Select OECD Countries

    Australia
    Austria
    Belgium
    Belgium (Flanders)
    Belgium (excluding Flanders)
    Canada
    Alberta (Canada)
    Canadian provinces
    Chile
    Czech Republic
    Denmark
    Estonia
    Finland
    France
    Germany
    Greece
    Hungary
    Iceland
    Ireland
    Israel
    Italy
    Japan
    Korea
    Latvia
    Lithuania
    Luxembourg
    Mexico
    Netherlands
    New Zealand
    Norway
    Poland
    Portugal
    Slovak Republic
    Slovenia
    Spain
    Sweden
    Switzerland
    Turkey
    United Kingdom
    England (United Kingdom)
    Northern Ireland (United Kingdom)
    United States
    OECD average

    Non-OECD Countries

    G20 average
    TALIS average
    Albania
    Algeria
    Argentina
    Buenos Aires (Argentina)
    Baku (Azerbaijan)
    Belarus
    Bosnia and Herzegovina
    Brazil
    Brunei Darussalam
    Bulgaria
    China
    B-S-J-Z (China)
    Hong Kong (China)
    Macao (China)
    Shanghai (China)
    Chinese Taipei
    Colombia
    Costa Rica
    Croatia
    Dominican Republic
    Ecuador
    Egypt
    Georgia
    India
    Indonesia
    Jordan
    Kazakhstan
    Kyrgyz Republic
    Kosovo
    Lebanon
    North Macedonia
    Malaysia
    Malta
    Moldova
    Montenegro
    Morocco
    Panama
    Peru
    Philippines
    Qatar
    Romania
    Russian Federation
    Saudi Arabia
    Serbia
    Singapore
    South Africa
    Tajikistan
    Thailand
    Trinidad and Tobago
    Tunisia
    United Arab Emirates
    Abu Dhabi (UAE)
    Ukraine
    Uruguay
    Viet Nam
    The data table will display up to four selected countries (unselect the OECD average to have one more).
    Click the arrows for more indicators
    Click the arrows for more indicators
    Click the arrows for more indicators
    Click the arrows for more indicators:
    Country Profile quick links
    Note: These values should be interpreted with care since they are influenced by countries' specific contexts and trade-offs. In education, there is often no simple most- or least-efficient model. For instance, the share of private expenditure in education must be read against other measures designed to mitigate inequities, such as loans and grants; longer learning time is an opportunity to convey more and better content to students, but may hinder investments in other important areas. If you want further information on the nature of different variables, please take the time to read the analysis and contextual information, available at the website for each publication.
    The OECD average includes only OECD countries which are listed here: http://www.oecd.org/about/membersandpartners/

    *TALIS averages are based on all countries participating in the TALIS survey, including partner countries and economies. This explains the difference between the OECD average and the TALIS average. Data from the TALIS survey and Education at a Glance (EAG) may differ. See Annex E of the TALIS technical report and Annex 3 of EAG 2019 for more details about the data collections.

    B-S-J-Z (China) refers to the four PISA-participating provinces/municipalities of the People's Republic of China: Beijing, Shanghai, Jiangsu and Zhejiang.

    For additional notes, please refer to annexes in the list of links below the introductory text.