Country
Data profiles:
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Adult skills (Survey of Adult Skills, PIAAC, 2012) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions (TALIS 2018) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Adult skills (Survey of Adult Skills, PIAAC, 2012) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions (TALIS 2018) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions (TALIS 2018) |
| Adult skills (Survey of Adult Skills, PIAAC, 2012) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions, primary education (TALIS 2018) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Adult skills (Survey of Adult Skills, PIAAC, 2012) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions, lower and upper secondary education (TALIS 2018) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Adult skills (Survey of Adult Skills, PIAAC, 2015) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions (TALIS 2018) |
| ECEC staff, leaders and their working conditions (Starting Strong Survey 2018) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions (TALIS 2018) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Adult skills (Survey of Adult Skills, PIAAC, 2012) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions (TALIS 2018) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Adult skills (Survey of Adult Skills, PIAAC, 2012) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions, primary to upper secondary education (TALIS 2018) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Adult skills (Survey of Adult Skills, PIAAC, 2012) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions (TALIS 2018) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Adult skills (Survey of Adult Skills, PIAAC, 2012) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions (TALIS 2018) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Adult skills (Survey of Adult Skills, PIAAC, 2012) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions, primary and lower secondary education (TALIS 2018) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Adult skills (Survey of Adult Skills, PIAAC, 2012) |
| ECEC staff, leaders and their working conditions (Starting Strong Survey 2018) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Adult skills (Survey of Adult Skills, PIAAC, 2015) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Adult skills (Survey of Adult Skills, PIAAC, 2018) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions (TALIS 2018) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions (TALIS 2018) |
| ECEC staff, leaders and their working conditions (Starting Strong Survey 2018) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Adult skills (Survey of Adult Skills, PIAAC, 2012) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Adult skills (Survey of Adult Skills, PIAAC, 2015) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions (TALIS 2018) |
| ECEC staff, leaders and their working conditions (Starting Strong Survey 2018) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Adult skills (Survey of Adult Skills, PIAAC, 2012) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions (TALIS 2018) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Adult skills (Survey of Adult Skills, PIAAC, 2012) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions, primary and lower secondary education (TALIS 2018) |
| ECEC staff, leaders and their working conditions (Starting Strong Survey 2018) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Adult skills (Survey of Adult Skills, PIAAC, 2012) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions, primary and lower secondary education (TALIS 2018) |
| ECEC staff, leaders and their working conditions (Starting Strong Survey 2018) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions (TALIS 2018) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Adult skills (Survey of Adult Skills, PIAAC, 2015) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions (TALIS 2018) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Adult skills (Survey of Adult Skills, PIAAC, 2018) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions (TALIS 2018) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Adult skills (Survey of Adult Skills, PIAAC, 2012) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions (TALIS 2018) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Adult skills (Survey of Adult Skills, PIAAC, 2015) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions (TALIS 2018) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Adult skills (Survey of Adult Skills, PIAAC, 2012) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions (TALIS 2018) |
| ECEC staff, leaders and their working conditions (Starting Strong Survey 2018) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Adult skills (Survey of Adult Skills, PIAAC, 2012) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions, lower and upper secondary education (TALIS 2018) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Adult skills (Survey of Adult Skills, PIAAC, 2012) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions (TALIS 2018) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Adult skills (Survey of Adult Skills, PIAAC, 2015) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions, lower and upper secondary education (TALIS 2018) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Adult skills (Survey of Adult Skills, PIAAC, 2012) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions, primary and lower secondary education (TALIS 2018) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Adult skills (Survey of Adult Skills, PIAAC, 2012) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions, primary to upper secondary education (TALIS 2018) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Adult skills (Survey of Adult Skills, PIAAC, 2015) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions, primary to upper secondary education (TALIS 2018) |
| ECEC staff, leaders and their working conditions (Starting Strong Survey 2018) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Adult skills (Survey of Adult Skills, PIAAC, 2012) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions, primary and lower secondary education (TALIS 2018) |
| Adult skills (Survey of Adult Skills, PIAAC, 2012) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Adult skills (Survey of Adult Skills, PIAAC, 2017) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions (TALIS 2018) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions (TALIS 2018) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions (TALIS 2018) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions, primary and lower secondary education (TALIS 2018) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions, lower and upper secondary education (TALIS 2018) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions (TALIS 2018) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions (TALIS 2018) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions, primary to upper secondary education (TALIS 2018) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions, lower and upper secondary education (TALIS 2018) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Adult skills (Survey of Adult Skills, PIAAC, 2018) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions (TALIS 2018) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Adult skills (Survey of Adult Skills, PIAAC, 2018) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions (TALIS 2018) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions (TALIS 2018) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Adult skills (Survey of Adult Skills, PIAAC, 2018) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions (TALIS 2018) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions (TALIS 2018) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Adult skills (Survey of Adult Skills, PIAAC, 2015) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions (TALIS 2018) |
| Overview of the education system (EAG 2024) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions (TALIS 2018) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions, primary to upper secondary education (TALIS 2018) |
| Student performance in 18 out of 27 regions (PISA 2022) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Student performance (PISA 2022) |
| Teachers and teaching conditions, primary to upper secondary education (TALIS 2018) |
Profile View
Select first some countries to compare, choose the charts you wish to display and customise them.
The percentage of low performers in all subjects (mathematics, reading and science) is one of the lowest among PISA-participating countries and economies. (4.1 %, rank 80/80 , 2022) Download Indicator
The percentage of low performers in at least one subject (among mathematics, reading and science) is one of the lowest among PISA-participating countries and economies. (16.6 %, rank 79/80 , 2022) Download Indicator
The percentage of top performers in all subjects (mathematics, reading and science) is one of the highest among PISA-participating countries and economies. (5.4 %, rank 5/80 , 2022) Download Indicator
Student performance in mathematics
The mean score in mathematics performance is one of the highest among PISA-participating countries and economies. (552 PISA Score, rank 2/80 , 2022) Download Indicator
Boys' performance in mathematics is one of the highest among PISA-participating countries and economies. (559 PISA Score, rank 2/80 , 2022) Download Indicator
Girls' performance in mathematics is one of the highest among PISA-participating countries and economies. (544 PISA Score, rank 2/80 , 2022) Download Indicator
The difference between girls' and boys' in mathematics performance is among the highest compared to other countries and economies participating in PISA. (15 PISA Score, rank 4/56 , 2022) Download Indicator
The percentage of low performers in mathematics (below proficiency Level 2) is one of the lowest among PISA-participating countries and economies. (8.4 %, rank 79/80 , 2022) Download Indicator
The percentage of top performers in mathematics (proficiency Level 5 or 6) is one of the highest among PISA-participating countries and economies. (28.6 %, rank 3/80 , 2022) Download Indicator
The percentage of low-performing boys in mathematics (below proficiency Level 2) is one of the lowest among PISA-participating countries and economies. (8.5 %, rank 79/80 , 2022) Download Indicator
The percentage of top-performing boys in mathematics (proficiency Level 5 or 6) is one of the highest among PISA-participating countries and economies. (32.5 %, rank 3/80 , 2022) Download Indicator
The percentage of low-performing girls in mathematics (below proficiency Level 2) is one of the lowest among PISA-participating countries and economies. (8.4 %, rank 79/80 , 2022) Download Indicator
The percentage of top-performing girls in mathematics (proficiency Level 5 or 6) is one of the highest among PISA-participating countries and economies. (24.4 %, rank 3/80 , 2022) Download Indicator
The change in maths performance between 2015 and 2018 shows one of the strongest increases among PISA-participating countries and economies. (-6 PISA Score, rank 8/48 , 2022) Download Indicator
Over the period of participation in PISA, the average decennial rate of change in mean mathematics performance of Macao (China) was among the highest. (18 PISA Score, rank 3/37 , 2022) Download Indicator
Student performance in reading
Over the period of participation in PISA, the average decennial rate of change in mean reading performance of Macao (China) was among the highest. (14 PISA Score, rank 7/26 , 2022) Download Indicator
The mean score in reading performance is one of the highest among PISA-participating countries and economies. (510 PISA Score, rank 7/80 , 2022) Download Indicator
Boys' performance in reading is one of the highest among PISA-participating countries and economies. (503 PISA Score, rank 4/80 , 2022) Download Indicator
Girls' performance in reading is one of the highest among PISA-participating countries and economies. (518 PISA Score, rank 8/80 , 2022) Download Indicator
The difference between girls and boys in reading performance is one of the largest among PISA-participating countries and economies in favour of girls. (-14 PISA Score, rank 6/78 , 2022) Download Indicator
The percentage of low performers in reading (below proficiency Level 2) is one of the lowest among PISA-participating countries and economies. (12.6 %, rank 78/80 , 2022) Download Indicator
The percentage of low-performing boys in reading (below proficiency Level 2) is one of the lowest among PISA-participating countries and economies. (15.3 %, rank 78/80 , 2022) Download Indicator
The percentage of low-performing girls in reading (below proficiency Level 2) is one of the lowest among PISA-participating countries and economies. (9.8 %, rank 78/80 , 2022) Download Indicator
Student performance in science
Over the period of participation in PISA, the average decennial rate of change in mean science performance of Macao (China) was among the highest. (24 PISA Score, rank 3/24 , 2022) Download Indicator
The mean score in science performance is one of the highest among PISA-participating countries and economies. (543 PISA Score, rank 3/80 , 2022) Download Indicator
Boys' performance in science is one of the highest among PISA-participating countries and economies. (544 PISA Score, rank 3/80 , 2022) Download Indicator
Girls' performance in science is one of the highest among PISA-participating countries and economies. (542 PISA Score, rank 3/80 , 2022) Download Indicator
The percentage of low performers in science (below proficiency Level 2) is one of the lowest among PISA-participating countries and economies. (7.4 %, rank 80/80 , 2022) Download Indicator
The percentage of top performers in science (proficiency Level 5 or 6) is one of the highest among PISA-participating countries and economies. (14.7 %, rank 5/80 , 2022) Download Indicator
The percentage of low-performing boys in science (below proficiency Level 2) is one of the lowest among PISA-participating countries and economies. (8.5 %, rank 79/80 , 2022) Download Indicator
The percentage of top-performing boys in science (proficiency Level 5 or 6) is one of the highest among PISA-participating countries and economies. (16.8 %, rank 5/80 , 2022) Download Indicator
The percentage of low-performing girls in science (below proficiency Level 2) is one of the lowest among PISA-participating countries and economies. (6.4 %, rank 80/80 , 2022) Download Indicator
The percentage of top-performing girls in science (proficiency Level 5 or 6) is one of the highest among PISA-participating countries and economies. (12.6 %, rank 6/80 , 2022) Download Indicator
Educational outcomes
The percentage of students who had attended pre-primary education (ISCED 0) for one year or less is one of the lowest among PISA-participating countries and economies. (1.4 %, rank 77/80 , 2022) Download Indicator
Participation in education
A large share of disadvantaged students in Macao (China) have repeated a grade, compared to other countries and economies participating in PISA. (33.3 %, rank 8/76 , 2022) Download Indicator
The difference in grade repetition between advantaged students and disadvantaged students is one of the largest among 15-year-old students. (-22.3 %, rank 71/76 , 2022) Download Indicator
Macao (China) registered one of the smallest changes between 2018 and 2022 in the percentage of students who had repeated a grade at least once in primary, lower secondary or upper secondary school. (-8.2 %, rank 34/39 , 2022) Download Indicator
School climate
The disciplinary climate in language-of-instruction lessons is one of the best compared to other countries and economies. (0.38 PISA Index, rank 6/80 , 2022) Download Indicator
Macao (China) ranked among the countries with the smallest difference in mathematics performance between students arriving late for school at least once in the two weeks prior to the PISA test and those who didn't (after accounting for students' and schools' socio-economic profile). (-42 PISA Score points, rank 70/70 , 2022) Download Indicator
The share of students who reported having missed school for more than three consecutive months because they were bored is smaller in Macao (China)than in other OECD and partner countries/economies. (8.7 %, rank 67/69 , 2022) Download Indicator
Classroom environment
The difference in mathematics score between students attending a school with ability grouping in classes and those who do not is relatively large in Macao (China), after accounting for students' and schools' socio-economic profile. (9 PISA Score points, rank 1/11 , 2022) Download Indicator
Between 2018 and 2022, the change in the index of shortage of educational material in Macao (China) was relatively more significant than in other OECD and partner countries/economies. (0.06 PISA Index, rank 5/39 , 2022) Download Indicator
Students' engagement, drive and self-beliefs
The time spent on homework per day in a typical school week in Macao (China) is long compared to the other OECD and partner countries/economies. (2 Hours, rank 6/80 , 2022) Download Indicator
Sense of belonging at school
In 2015, the index of sense of belonging was one of the lowest among PISA-participating countries and economies. (-0.31 PISA Index, rank 71/78 , 2022) Download Indicator
Parental support and education expectations
In Macao (China), families tend to be less supportive than in the other OECD and partner countries/economies. (-0.43 PISA Index, rank 77/78 , 2022) Download Indicator
Performance and socio-economic status
The variance of results in mathematics is weakly associated with the socio-economic status of students, as measured by the PISA index of economic, social and cultural status (ESCS). (5 %, rank 74/79 , 2022) Download Indicator
The maths performance of students in the bottom international decile of economic, social and cultural status (ESCS) scale is among the highest, compared to countries and economies participating in PISA. (495 PISA Score, rank 1/64 , 2022) Download Indicator
The maths performance of students in the top international decile of economic, social and cultural status (ESCS) scale is among the highest, compared to countries and economies participating in PISA. (598 PISA Score, rank 3/79 , 2022) Download Indicator
The percentage of low performers in maths among disadvantaged students in Macao (China) is among the lowest compared to countries and economies participating in PISA. (13.6 %, rank 79/79 , 2022) Download Indicator
The percentage of top performers in maths among disadvantaged students in Macao (China) is among the highest compared to countries and economies participating in PISA. (19.7 %, rank 2/79 , 2022) Download Indicator
The percentage of low performers in maths among advantaged students in Macao (China) is among the lowest compared to countries and economies participating in PISA. (4.1 %, rank 78/79 , 2022) Download Indicator
The percentage of top performers in maths among advantaged students in Macao (China) is among the highest compared to countries and economies participating in PISA. (40 %, rank 3/79 , 2022) Download Indicator
Compared to the share non-disadvantaged low performers in maths, the share of disadvantaged low performers in maths is one of the lowest among countries and economies participating in PISA. (2.2 Ratio, rank 73/79 , 2022) Download Indicator
Macao (China) is one of the countries where the relationship between reading performance and socio-economics status (ESCS) is the weakest. (2.5 %, rank 77/79 , 2022) Download Indicator
The percentage of low performers in mathematics among socio-economically disadvantaged students is one of the lowest among PISA-participating countries and economies. (13.9 %, rank 58/60 , 2012) Download Indicator
Macao (China) has one of the smallest differences in mathematics score associated with repeating a grade among OECD and partner countries/economies, after accounting for students' and schools' socio-economic profile. (-80 PISA Score points, rank 70/75 , 2022) Download Indicator
The variance of results in science is weakly associated with the socio-economic status of students, as measured by the PISA index of economic, social and cultural status (ESCS). (2.2 %, rank 77/79 , 2022) Download Indicator
The difference in science performance associated with a one-unit increase in the PISA index of economic, social and cultural status (ESCS) is one of the smallest among PISA-participating countries and economies. (14 PISA Score, rank 75/79 , 2022) Download Indicator
Performance and diversity
After accounting for socio-economic status, the difference in mathematics performance between non-immigrant and immigrant students is one of the largest among PISA-participating countries and economies, in favour of non-immigrants. (22 PISA Score, rank 4/30 , 2022) Download Indicator
In Macao (China), the difference in mathematics performance between immigrant students who speak the language of assessment at home and immigrant students who do not is relatively low compared to the other OECD and partner countries. (11 PISA Score, rank 15/17 , 2022) Download Indicator
Macao (China) has a relatively low share of low performers in mathematics among students with an immigrant background, compared to other OECD and partner countries. (6.7 %, rank 75/76 , 2022) Download Indicator
The percentage of students with an immigrant backgroung is one of the highest among countries and economies participating in PISA. (60.3 %, rank 1/80 , 2022) Download Indicator
Among 15 year-olds, the share of first generation immigrant students in Macao (China) is one of the highest among OECD and partner countries with available data. (22 %, rank 3/80 , 2022) Download Indicator
Among 15 year-olds, the share of second generation immigrant students in Macao (China) is one of the highest among OECD and partner countries with available data. (38.3 %, rank 1/80 , 2022) Download Indicator
Resources for education
Macao (China) ranked among the countries with the largest difference in mathematics performance associated with principals reporting that the school's capacity to provide instruction is hindered to some extent or a lot by a lack of educational material, after accounting for students' and schools' socio-economic profile. (42 PISA Score points, rank 1/9 , 2022) Download Indicator
Macao (China) ranked among the countries with the largest difference in mathematics performance associated with principals reporting that the school's capacity to provide instruction is hindered to some extent or a lot by a lack of physical infrastructure, after accounting for students' and schools' socio-economic profile. (23 PISA Score points, rank 1/17 , 2022) Download Indicator
The change between 2012 and 2022 in the number of computers per student at schoolin Macao (China) is small compared to the other OECD and partner countries. (-0.15 Ratio, rank 37/40 , 2022) Download Indicator
The change between 2015 and 2022 in the number of computers per student at schoolin Macao (China) is small compared to the other OECD and partner countries. (-0.34 Ratio, rank 28/31 , 2022) Download Indicator
The change between 2018 and 2022 in the number of computers per student at schoolin Macao (China) is small compared to the other OECD and partner countries. (-0.44 Ratio, rank 34/34 , 2022) Download Indicator
In Macao (China), digital device policies are enforced at the school to a greater extent compared to the other OECD and partner countries/economies. (0.38 PISA Index, rank 7/45 , 2022) Download Indicator
Teachers
Before accounting for students' and schools' socio-economic profile, Macao (China) has one of the smallest differences in mathematics performance per 10 percentage-points increase in the share of teachers fully certified by the appropriate authority. (-3 PISA Score points, rank 23/28 , 2022) Download Indicator
Governance
The percentage of students attending government or public schools is one of the lowest among PISA-participating countries and economies. (3.1 %, rank 78/78 , 2022) Download Indicator
The percentage of students attending government-dependent private schools is one of the highest among PISA-participating countries and economies. (88.2 %, rank 1/78 , 2022) Download Indicator
Schools in Macao (China) are highly autonomous, as measured by the percentage of tasks for which they have considerable responsibility. (0.63 PISA Index, rank 3/66 , 2022) Download Indicator
Between 2018 and 2022, Macao (China) recorded a particularly small change in the share of 15-year-old students attending government-independent private schools, compared to the other OECD and partner countries/economies. (-0.3 %, rank 15/17 , 2022) Download Indicator
Macao (China) has a school system where school selectivity is more intense than in the other OECD and partner countries/economies. (2.87 PISA Index, rank 7/80 , 2022) Download Indicator
Macao (China) has a relatively high percentage of students in schools whose principal reported that there are two or more other schools in this area that compete for these students. (91.1 %, rank 3/80 , 2022) Download Indicator
*Macao (China) has a relatively low percentage of students in schools whose principal reported that there is one other school in this area that compete for these students. (2.3 %, rank 79/80 , 2022) Download Indicator
Demographic indicators
The coverage of the national 15-year-old population in PISA 2018 is one the higest among countries and economies participating in PISA. (98.29 Ratio, rank 5/80 , 2022) Download Indicator
COVID-19 effects on education
In Macao (China), students are characterized by their weak cooperation, when compared to other OECD and partner countries/economies, as measured by the PISA index of cooperation. (-0.26 PISA Index, rank 39/39 , 2022) Download Indicator
Macao (China) is one of the OECD and partner countries/economies with the lowest level of empathy, as measured by the PISA index of empathy. (-0.13 PISA Index, rank 38/43 , 2022) Download Indicator
Macao (China) is one of the OECD and partner countries/economies with the lowest level of stress resistance, as measured by the PISA index of student's stress resistance. (-0.12 PISA Index, rank 36/42 , 2022) Download Indicator
General findings
- Singapore scored significantly higher than all other countries/economies in mathematics (575 points) and, along with Hong Kong (China), Japan, Korea, Macao (China), and Chinese Taipei, outperformed all other countries and economies in mathematics. Another 17 countries also performed above the OECD average (472 points), ranging from Estonia (510 points) to New Zealand (479 points).
- Boys outperformed girls in mathematics by nine score points and girls outperformed boys in reading by 24 score points on average across OECD countries. In science, the performance difference between boys and girls is not significant.
- An average of 69% of students are at least basically proficient in mathematics in OECD countries. This means they are beginning to demonstrate the ability and initiative to use mathematics in simple real-life situations.
- In 16 out of 81 countries/economies participating in PISA 2022, more than 10% of students attained Level 5 or 6 proficiency, meaning they are high-performing: they understand that a problem is quantitative in nature and can formulate complex mathematical models to solve it. By contrast, less than 5% of students are high-performing in 42 countries/economies.
Visualisations
to display other variables
to display other variables
to display other variables
- Singapore scored significantly higher than all other countries/economies in reading (543 points) and science (561 points). Behind Singapore, Ireland performed as well as Estonia, Japan, Korea and Chinese Taipei while another 14 education systems performed above the OECD average in reading (476 points), ranging from Macao (China) (510 points) to Italy (482 points).
- About three out of four students have achieved basic proficiency in reading in OECD countries.
- In reading, an OECD average of 7% of students attained the highest proficiency levels of 5 or 6. In 13 countries/economies, more than 10% of students are top performers in reading.
- No change in the OECD average over consecutive PISA assessments up to 2018 has ever exceeded five points in reading: in PISA 2022, however, the OECD average dropped by about 10 score points in reading compared to PISA 2018.. The unprecedented drops reading point to the shock effect of COVID-19 on most countries.
- Only four countries and economies improved their performance between PISA 2018 and 2022 in all three subjects: Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, the Dominican Republic and Chinese Taipei.
- Trend analysis of PISA results reveals a decades-long decline that began well before the pandemic. In reading, performances peaked in 2012 and 2009, respectively, before dipping while performance began a downward descent in mathematics before 2018 in Australia, Belgium, Canada, the Czech Republic, Finland, Hungary, Iceland, Korea, the Netherlands, New Zealand, the Slovak Republic and Switzerland.
Visualisations
to display other variables
to display other variables
to display other variables
- Mean performance in science remained stable.
- In science, the highest-performing education systems are Singapore, Japan, Macao (China), Chinese Taipei, Korea, Estonia, Hong Kong (China) and Canada. Finland performed as well as Canada in science. In addition to these nine countries and economies, another 15 education systems also performed above the OECD average in science (485 points), ranging from Australia (507 points) to Belgium (491 points).
- About three out of four students have achieved basic proficiency science in OECD countries.
- In science, an OECD average of 7% of students attained the highest proficiency levels of 5 or 6. In 14 countries/economies, more than 10% of students are top performers in science.
- Only four countries and economies improved their performance between PISA 2018 and 2022 in all three subjects: Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, the Dominican Republic and Chinese Taipei.
- Trend analysis of PISA results reveals a decades-long decline that began well before the pandemic. In science, performances peaked in 2012 and 2009, respectively, before dipping. while performance began a downward descent in mathematics before 2018 in Australia, Belgium, Canada, the Czech Republic, Finland, Hungary, Iceland, Korea, the Netherlands, New Zealand, the Slovak Republic and Switzerland.
Visualisations
to display other variables
to display other variables
to display other variables
- Socio-economically advantaged students scored 93 points more in mathematics than disadvantaged students on average across OECD countries. The performance gap attributed to students' socio-economic status is greater than 93 score points in 22 countries or economies and 50 points or fewer in 13 countries or economies.
- Boys outperformed girls in mathematics by nine score points and girls outperformed boys in reading by 24 score points on average across OECD countries. In science, the performance difference between boys and girls is not significant.
- Non-immigrant students scored 29 points more than immigrant students in mathematics on average across OECD countries but non-immigrant students scored only five points more than immigrant students once socio-economic status and language spoken at home had been accounted for.
Visualisations
to display other variables
to display other variables
to display other variables
- Between 2018 and 2022 trends in students' sense of belonging at school were mixed, with equal proportions of countries/economies showing stable, improving or deteriorating trends. Of the 47 education systems with improving or stable trends, only 20 maintained or attained a level of students' sense of belonging at school that was at or above the OECD average.
- Around 10% of students reported feeling unsafe on their way to or from school, or in places outside of the classroom, on average across OECD countries. Some 20% of students reported that they are bullied at least a few times a month.
- Overall, students felt more confident about using digital technology for learning remotely during future school closures than they felt about taking responsibility for their own learning. For instance, on average across OECD countries, about three out of four students reported that they feel confident or very confident about using a learning-management system, a school learning platform or a video communication program, as well as about finding learning resources online on their own.
- Students' experience with learning at home was more positive in systems that were better prepared for remote learning. However, when learning remotely, 40% of all students reported feeling lonely and 50% of all students reported feeling anxious about schoolwork and that they fell behind in their studies; and three in ten students reported that teachers were not available when needed, on average across OECD countries.
Visualisations
to display other variables
to display other variables
to display other variables
- Singapore, Korea, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Estonia and Finland are the highest-performing systems in creative thinking, significantly above the OECD average. Students in Singapore score 41 points on average in creative thinking.
- There is a large performance gap in creative thinking between the highest-performing and lowest-performing country of 28 score points or around four proficiency levels. 97 out of 100 students in the five best-performing countries performed above the average student in the five lowest performing countries.
- Academic excellence is not a pre-requisite for excellence in creative thinking. While around half of all students who performed at the highest level in creative thinking performed at the highest level in mathematics, similar proportions of students within the third quintile of creative thinking performance scored within the second, third and fourth quintiles, respectively, in mathematics. However, very few students below a baseline proficiency in mathematics excelled in creative thinking.
- In no country or economy did boys outperform girls in creative thinking, with girls scoring 3 points higher in creative thinking on average across the OECD. The gender gap is significant in all countries/economies after accounting for mathematics performance and in around half of all countries/economies even after accounting for students reading performance.
- Students with higher socio-economic status performed better in creative thinking, with advantaged students scoring around 9.5 points higher than their disadvantaged peers on average across the OECD. In general, the strength of the association between socio-economic status and performance is weaker in creative thinking than it is for mathematics, reading and science.
Visualisations
to display other variables
to display other variables
to display other variables
All rankings for individual variables are compiled on the basis of OECD and G20 countries for which data are available. The OECD average includes only OECD countries which are listed here: http://www.oecd.org/about/membersandpartners/
Reference years displayed in the Education GPS correspond to the most common year of reference among countries for which data is available on each variable. Data for the latest available year is preferred and some countries may have provided data refering to a more recent or late year. To know more about possible exceptions on data please click on the "Download Indicator" link on each variable. When a year of reference corresponds to a school year encompassing two years, the reference reads as follows: 2018 for school year 2017/2018.
*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 averages. 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 2021 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 country profile text.