Philippines
Explore the OECD's reports or draw from a wide variety of education indicators and data to construct your own, customised country reports, highlighting the facts, developments and outcomes of your choice.




Philippines
Student performance (PISA 2025)
  • In 2025, the average score of 15-year-old students in science in Philippines was 373 PISA score points (OECD average: 482 PISA score points), and the score difference between boys and girls was -12 PISA score points (OECD average: -1 PISA score points).
  • Low performers in science accounted for 68.4% of students in Philippines (OECD average: 25.7%), while 0.2% were top performers, scoring at Level 5 or 6 (OECD average: 7.2%). The performance difference between students at the 90th and 10th percentiles was 222 PISA score points (OECD average: 258 PISA score points).
  • Between 2022 and 2025, science performance in Philippines changed by 17 PISA score points (OECD average: -3 PISA score points). Over its longer period of participation in PISA, the average decennial rate of change in science performance was 22 PISA score points (OECD average: -7 PISA score points).
  • In mathematics, 15-year-old students in Philippines scored 371 PISA score points on average (OECD average: 463 PISA score points). The score difference between boys and girls was -6 PISA score points (OECD average: 13 PISA score points), while mathematics performance changed by 16 PISA score points between 2022 and 2025 (OECD average: -9 PISA score points).
  • Reading performance averaged 367 PISA score points score points in Philippines (OECD average: 461 PISA score points). The difference between boys and girls was -27 PISA score points (OECD average: -30 PISA score points), and reading performance changed by 20 PISA score points between 2022 and 2025 (OECD average: -14 PISA score points).
  • Students in Philippines scored 434 PISA score points on average in computational problem solving (OECD average: 500 PISA score points), while 74.6% performed better than expected based on their science performance (OECD average: 56.3%).
  • Some 82.4% of students in Philippines reported that they like learning new things in school (OECD average: 68.8%), and 81.5% reported that they like to know how things work (OECD average: 74%). Regarding student perserverance, 76.1% reported that they finish what they start (OECD average: 61.2%), and 78.1% that they put in additional effort when work becomes challenging (OECD average: 59.5%).
  • Students in Philippines reported their engagement as well as their learning dispositions across indices such as: 0.14 for curiosity (OECD average: 0 ), 0.27 for perseverance (OECD average: 0 ), 0.3 for goal setting (OECD average: 0 ), 0.17 for help seeking (OECD average: 0 ) and -0.08 for cognitive adaptability (OECD average: 0.01 ).
  • Some 87.1% of students in Philippines reported feeling that they belong at school (OECD average: 76.2%), while 87.8% reported that they make friends easily (OECD average: 80%) and 73.1% that they believe their peers like them (OECD average: 83.1%).
  • Socio-economic status accounted for 12.9% of the variation in science performance in Philippines (OECD average: 11.6%). The science-performance gap separating students in the top quarter of the socio-economic distribution from those in the bottom quarter was 76 PISA score points (OECD average: 84 PISA score points).
  • Moderate use of digital devices for learning at school is associated with different levels of science performance in Philippines: students reporting no use scored 382 PISA score points (OECD average: 480 PISA score points), those using them for two to three hours per day scored 399 PISA score points (OECD average: 499 PISA score points), and those using them for more than seven hours scored 381 PISA score points (OECD average: 481 PISA score points).
  • Students in Philippines reported varying levels and forms of AI use for schoolwork: the AI-use index stood at 0.3 (OECD average: 0 ), 4.8% did not use AI for schoolwork (OECD average: 13.7%), 10.2% did not use AI to help them learn (OECD average: 20.7%), and 70.8% reported learning to assess AI-generated information in class (OECD average: 62.6%).
  • Environmental-science performance averaged 371 PISA score points score points in Philippines (OECD average: 480 PISA score points), while the score difference between boys and girls was -17 PISA score points (OECD average: -5 PISA score points). Some 19.7% of students achieved at least a baseline proficiency in environmental science (OECD average: 24.6%).
  • In Philippines, students reported their environmental awareness and sense of agency as follows: -0.22 on the environmental-awareness index (OECD average: -0.14 ), 0.06 on beliefs in their capacity to generate environmental change (OECD average: 0 ), and 0.32 on collective environmental efficacy (OECD average: 0 ).
  • Select first some countries to compare, choose the charts you wish to display and customise them.

    The following list displays indicators for which your selected country shows the highest and lowest values among countries. The list can be sorted by level of education or by age group. All rankings are calculated including available data from OECD and partner countries. Find out more about the methodology here.

    Show indicators for which your country ranks among the top or bottom: Sort by:

    Student performance in science

    In Philippines, the average decennial rate of change in mean science performance over the period of participation in PISA was among the largest increases across countries with available data. (22 PISA Score, rank 6/47 , 2025) Download Indicator

    Student performance in mathematics

    Girls outperform boys in mathematics performance with one of the largest score-point differences. (-6 PISA Score points, rank 55/61 , 2025) Download Indicator

    The score difference in mathematics between the 10% of students with the highest scores and the 10% of students with the lowest scores is one of the smallest among PISA-participating countries and economies. (160 PISA Score points, rank 82/89 , 2025) Download Indicator

    The change in maths performance between 2022 and 2025 shows one of the largest increases among PISA-participating countries and economies. (16 PISA Score points, rank 5/46 , 2025) Download Indicator

    Student performance in reading

    The average change in reading performance between 2022 and 2025 shows one of the strongest increases among PISA-participating countries and economies. (20 PISA Score points, rank 1/50 , 2025) Download Indicator

    Student performance in computational problem solving

    In Philippines, the share of students scoring higher than expected in computational problem-solving based on their performance in science was among the largest across countries with available data. (74.6 %, rank 3/84 , 2025) 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 immigrants. (-77 PISA Score, rank 63/65 , 2025) Download Indicator

    After accounting for socio-economic status, the difference in reading performance between immigrant and non-immigrant students is one of the largest among PISA-participating countries and economies, in favour of non-immigrants. (-118 PISA Score, rank 71/71 , 2025) Download Indicator

    After accounting for socio-economic status, the difference in science performance between non-immigrant and immigrant students is one of the largest among PISA-participating countries and economies, in favour of immigrants . (-107 PISA Score, rank 70/71 , 2025) Download Indicator

    Classroom environment

    The ratio of students to teaching staff in socio-economically advantaged schools is one of the largest among PISA-participating countries and economies. (23 Students, rank 6/86 , 2025) Download Indicator

    The difference in science performance associated with a one-unit increase in the index of teacher support is relatively large in Philippines, before accounting for students' and schools' socio-economic profile. (0.62 PISA Index, rank 10/81 , 2025) Download Indicator

    Learning environement

    The share of students in schools whose principal reported that the use of cell phones is not allowed on the school premises is relatively low in Philippines. (20.5 %, rank 82/88 , 2025) Download Indicator

    Student well-being

    In 2025, the index of sense of belonging was one of the lowest among PISA-participating countries and economies. (-0.29 PISA Index, rank 80/82 , 2025) Download Indicator

    The percentage of students who feel like they belong at school is one of the highest among countries and economies participating in PISA. (87.1 %, rank 8/88 , 2025) Download Indicator

    In Philippines, the share of students who agreed or strongly agreed that they make friends easily was among the largest across countries with available data. (87.8 %, rank 8/88 , 2025) Download Indicator

    Bullying

    In 2025, the index of exposure to bullying was one of the highest among PISA-participating countries and economies. (0.7 PISA Index, rank 3/88 , 2025) Download Indicator

    Compared to other PISA-participating countries and economies, the percentage of students who reported being bullied (includes any type of bullying act) at least a few times a month is one of the highest. (47.2 %, rank 3/89 , 2025) Download Indicator

    Philippines had one of the largest shares of students who reported being cyberbullied (information about them that was upsetting were published online without their consent). (13.9 %, rank 2/86 , 2025) Download Indicator

    Students' engagement, drive and self-beliefs

    Philippines had one of the highest shares of students who agree or strongly agree they love learning new things in school. (82.4 %, rank 6/86 , 2025) Download Indicator

    Philippines had one of the highest shares of students who agree or strongly agree school has taught them things that could be useful in a job. (81.3 %, rank 6/87 , 2025) Download Indicator

    Philippines had one of the smallest shares of students who disagree that intelligence is something about you that you cannot change very much. (44.2 %, rank 83/87 , 2025) Download Indicator

    The index of perseverance among students in Philippines is relatively high compared to other PISA-participating countries and economies. (0.27 PISA Index, rank 10/81 , 2025) Download Indicator

    Philippines had one of the smallest shares of students who disagree that school has done little to prepare them for adult life when they leave school. (32.6 %, rank 86/87 , 2025) Download Indicator

    In Philippines, the share of students who reported that they like to know how things work was among the largest across countries with available data. (81.5 %, rank 9/86 , 2025) Download Indicator

    The share of students who agreed or strongly agreed that they finish what they start was among the largest in Philippines compared with other countries with available data. (76.1 %, rank 3/87 , 2025) Download Indicator

    In Philippines, the share of students who agreed or strongly agreed that they apply additional effort when work becomes challenging was among the largest across countries with available data. (78.1 %, rank 4/87 , 2025) Download Indicator

    The share of students who agreed or strongly agreed that they finish tasks they started even when they become boring placed Philippines among countries with the largest shares. (68.1 %, rank 7/87 , 2025) Download Indicator

    Students’ readiness for learning in the digital age

    The share of students reporting that students get distracted by using digital resources in most or every school science lesson was among the largest in Philippines compared with other countries with available data. (39.4 %, rank 6/83 , 2025) Download Indicator

    Students' environmental competence

    The mean score in environmental science is one of the lowest among PISA-participating countries and economies. (371 PISA Score points, rank 73/82 , 2025) Download Indicator

    In Philippines, socio-economically disadvantaged students had low performances in environmental science compared to other OECD and partner countries. (343 PISA Score points, rank 75/81 , 2025) Download Indicator

    Student involvement in environmental actions

    The percentage of students reporting their participation to at least one environmental-related activity is relatively high in Philippines. (91.2 %, rank 7/88 , 2025) Download Indicator

    Students’ use of artificial intelligence for schoolwork  

    Philippines had one of the smallest shares of students who do not use artificial intelligence for schoolwork. (4.8 %, rank 78/82 , 2025) Download Indicator

    Philippines had one of the smallest shares of students who do not use artificial intelligence to summarise assigned reading texts. (14.2 %, rank 80/82 , 2025) Download Indicator

    Philippines had one of the smallest shares of students who do not use artificial intelligence to draft texts for writing assignments. (17.5 %, rank 74/82 , 2025) Download Indicator

    In Philippines, few 15 year-old students report not using artificial intelligence to help them learn, compared to other countries participating in PISA. (10.2 %, rank 73/82 , 2025) Download Indicator

    The mean science performance of students reporting almost daily use of AI to help them learn and being tasked in school lessons to assess the quality of AI-generated information was among the lowest in Philippines compared with other countries with available data. (402 PISA Score, rank 76/83 , 2025) Download Indicator

    Resources for education

    In Philippines, a large share of students attend schools whose principal reported that the school's capacity to provide instruction is hindered to some extent or a lot by a lack of physical infrastructure. (58.4 %, rank 7/88 , 2025) Download Indicator


    The data table will display up to six selected countries.
    General findings
    
                            
    • B-S-J-Z (China) and Singapore were the two highest-performing systems across science, mathematics and reading in PISA 2025. Additionally, Estonia, Japan, Korea, Macao (China), Chinese Taipei and the United Kingdom were among the top-10 performing education systems in all three domains.
    • PISA 2025 recorded the lowest OECD-average performance observed so far in science, reading and mathematics. Reading declined after peaking around 2012, science declined more gradually over the past decade, and mathematics fell especially sharply after 2018.
    • Around three-quarters of students demonstrated at least baseline proficiency in science: they pass from knowing some science to using science at a basic level.
    • Socio-economic background remains strongly associated with student achievement, accounting for 12% of within-country variation in science performance.
    • Students reported more teacher support in science lessons compared to 2015 in about half of countries/economies. Teacher support remains positively associated with science performance and learning attitudes.
    • The provision of study help such as peer-to-peer tutoring is associated with higher science performance.
    Visualisations
    Click the arrow sign next to the title: arrows to display other variables
    Click the arrow sign next to the title: arrows to display other variables
    Click the arrow sign next to the title: arrows to display other variables
    
                            
    • Socio-economic background remains strongly associated with student achievement, accounting for 12% of within-country variation in science performance.
    • Gender differences in performance in mathematics and reading are still remarquable, as for all previous PISA studies. Boys still perform better than girls in mathematics by 13 PISA score points while girls outperform boys in reading by 30 PISA score points in 2025, on average accross OECD countries. In science, girls perform almost as well as boys by only 1 score point difference.
    • Some education systems, such as B-S-J-Z (China), Canada, Estonia, Ireland, Japan, Korea and Macao (China), achieved both socio-economic fairness and strong performance.
    • Between 2022 and 2025, narrowing of socio-economic gaps in performance largely reflected declines among advantaged students rather than improvements among disadvantaged students.
    • Two out of three students perceive social mobility as achievable, rising to 75% or more in Portugal and Israel.
    • Girls generally reported higher levels of curiosity, perseverance, help seeking, goal setting a growth mindset, while boys tend to report higher cognitive adaptability.
    Visualisations
    Click the arrow sign next to the title: arrows to display other variables
    Click the arrow sign next to the title: arrows to display other variables
    Click the arrow sign next to the title: arrows to display other variables
    
                            
    • Some 69% of students reported that they like learning new things and 74% reported that they like to know how things work.
    • While 61% of students reported finishing what they start and 60% reported putting in extra effort when work becomes challenging, 52% reported finishing tasks they have started even when they become boring.
    • Girls generally reported higher levels of curiosity, perseverance, help seeking, goal setting a growth mindset, while boys tend to report higher cognitive adaptability.
    • Between 2022 and 2025 students' self-reported curiosity and perseverance declined.
    • Most students feel they belong at school (76%) and make friends easily (80%), and believe their peers like them (83%).
    • While 67% of students believe that school has taught them things that could be useful in a job, 49% reported that school has done little to prepare them for adult life, 24% viewed school has been a waste of time.
    • Bullying is associated with lower student performance and sense of belonging even after accounting for students’ and schools’ socio-economic profiles.
    Visualisations
    Click the arrow sign next to the title: arrows to display other variables
    Click the arrow sign next to the title: arrows to display other variables
    Click the arrow sign next to the title: arrows to display other variables
    
                            
    • On average, 79% of students use AI chatbots to help them to learn, including 26% weekly and 19% almost daily or more.
    • The relationship between AI use and science performance is complex. Students who frequently use AI for learning and learn to assess the quality of AI-generated information at school achieve higher science performance than non- or infrequent users. However, advantaged students have greater access to these opportunities, raising concerns about an AI divide.
    • Moderate use of digital devices for learning at school relates to higher science performance than no or heavy use. However, more than one hour of leisure use at school is linked to lower performance.
    • Some 28% of students reported that their peers are distracted by the use of digital devices during most or every science lesson. Cell-phone bans or subject-specific guidelines relate to less distraction and less time spent on digital devices at school, but their relationship with performance remains unclear.
    • Almost half of 15 year old students are in schools where the use of cell phones is not allowed on the school premises.
    Visualisations
    Click the arrow sign next to the title: arrows to display other variables
    Click the arrow sign next to the title: arrows to display other variables
    Click the arrow sign next to the title: arrows to display other variables
    
                            
    • About three in four students achieve at least baseline proficiency (Level 2) in environmental science.
    • Higher-performing students tend to report stronger environmental awareness, personal agency and collective efficacy.
    • Caring for the environment is widespread: 75% of students reported looking after the global environment is important to them; it is over 90% in B-S-J-Z (China), Indonesia, Korea and Cambodia.
    • Most students believe collective action (82%) and individual action (81%) can address environmental challenges, though fewer know how to collaborate effectively (68%).
    • On average, 28% of students never participated in any of the five environmental activities examined. Among them, 56% do not know anyone engaged in environmental actions, 49% believe others will address the problem and 47% feel their actions would not make a difference.
    • On average, 62% of students are interested in contributing to environmental protection through their future careers, particularly girls, socio-economically advantaged students, higher performing students and students with pro-environmental attitudes.
    Visualisations
    Click the arrow sign next to the title: arrows to display other variables
    Click the arrow sign next to the title: arrows to display other variables
    Click the arrow sign next to the title: arrows to display other variables
    Key
    Diagram of funding flows - Philippines

    Click on the coverpage to see the full OECD iLibrary version
    Key
    Country Reviews for Philippines

    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.
    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: https://www.oecd.org/en/about/members-partners.html

    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: 2026 for school year 2025/2026.

    *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 2024 for more details about the data collections.

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