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 2021 (EAG 2021): Highlights
EAG 2021, Chapter A: The output of educational institutions and the impact of learning
EAG 2021, Chapter B: Access to education, participation and progression
EAG 2021, Chapter C: Financial resources invested in education
EAG 2021, Chapter D: Teachers, learning environment and organisation of schools
Survey of Adult Skills (PIAAC): Full selection of indicators
TALIS 2018: Highlight indicators
TALIS 2018 (Volume I): Teachers and School Leaders as Lifelong Learners
TALIS 2018 (Volume II): Teachers and School Leaders as Valued Professionals
TALIS 2018: Starting Strong Survey
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 2018 Results (Volume IV): Are Students Smart About Money?
PISA 2018 Results (Volume V): Effective Policies, Successful Schools
PISA 2018 Results (Volume VI): Are Students Ready to Thrive in an Interconnected World?
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
Vocational education & training (VET)
Tertiary education
Demographic, social & economic indicators
Digital divide
  • There is 0.77 computer per student in school on average across OECD countries, 96% of which are connected to the Internet. In Australia, Austria, Canada, the Czech Republic, Iceland, Macao, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States, there is at least one computer per student, and at least 95% of them are connected. By contrast, in Albania, Algeria, Indonesia, Kosovo and Tunisia, there is less than one computer per every five students, and less than 70% of them are connected.
  • Students in OECD countries spend on average 25 minutes per day on line at school. In Australia, Denmark, Greece and Sweden, they spend 39 or more minutes per day. By contrast, in Germany, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Korea, Macao, Poland, Shanghai, Singapore, Turkey and Uruguay, at least 50% of students reported never being on line at school.
  • In 2012, across OECD countries, less than 1% of students reported that they had never used a computer or accessed the Internet. Jordan showed the highest levels of non-use, 7%.
  • Students in Australia, Brazil, Korea, Singapore, Sweden and the United States perform better in digital reading than in print reading.
  • On average, 38% of adults without computer experience and below upper secondary education are employed. The likelihood of being employed increases with each additional level of education and skills proficiency. The greatest returns associated with increased education and ICT and problem-solving skills are observed in Norway and Poland. In these countries, the odds ratio increases as skills improve, which is not the case in Estonia and the Slovak Republic.
  • Estonia, Hungary, Norway, Poland, Slovenia, Sweden and the United Arab Emirates have the widest gender gaps in digital reading.
  • The more frequently students play one-player video games and collaborative online games, the worse their relative performance on print reading. However, these negative effects may be counterbalanced by positive effects on their ability to navigate through digital texts.
  • In Australia, Chile, Denmark, Mexico, Norway and Abu Dhabi, more than one in two teachers reported that students use ICT "frequently" or "in all or nearly all lessons", while fewer than one in four teachers in Croatia, Finland, France, Israel, Japan, Malaysia and Serbia reported so.
  • Teachers ranked their professional development needs and cited teaching students with special needs first, followed by using ICT for teaching and using new technologies in the workplace. Larger proportions of teachers in Brazil, Italy and Malaysia reported so.


  • Browser View

    Select OECD Countries

    Australia
    Austria
    Belgium
    Belgium (Flanders)
    Belgium (French)
    Belgium (excl. Flemish)
    Canada
    Alberta (Canada)
    Canadian provinces
    Chile
    Colombia
    Costa Rica
    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 (UK)
    Northern Ireland (UK)
    United States
    OECD average

    Non-OECD Countries

    G20 average
    TALIS average
    Albania
    Algeria
    Argentina
    Buenos Aires (Argentina)
    Azerbaijan
    Belarus
    Bosnia and Herzegovina
    Brazil
    Brunei Darussalam
    Bulgaria
    China
    B-S-J-Z (China)
    Hong Kong (China)
    Macao (China)
    Shanghai (China)
    Chinese Taipei
    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/

    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. Some countries may have provided data refering to another 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 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.