PIAAC: Young adults by numeracy proficiency level (%). Below Level 1

Percentage of young (age 16-24) adults scoring below 176 points on the 0 to 500 point scale on the 0 to 500 point scale. Tasks at this level require the respondents to carry out simple processes such as counting, sorting, performing basic arithmetic operations with whole numbers or money, or recognizing common spatial representations in concrete, familiar contexts where the mathematical content is explicit with little or no text or distractors. The target population was the non-institutionalized population, aged 16-24 years, residing in the country at the time of data collection, irrespective of nationality, citizenship or language status. The proportion of adults scoring at different levels of proficiency adds up to 100% when the percentage of numeracy-related non-respondents are taken into account. Adults in the missing category were not able to provide enough background information to impute proficiency scores because of language difficulties, or learning or mental disabilities (literacy-related non-response). For more information, consult the OECD PIAAC website: http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/


PIAAC: Mean Young Adult Numeracy Proficiency. Female

Numeracy is defined as the ability to access, use, interpret and communicate mathematical information and ideas in order to engage in and manage the mathematical demands of a range of situations in adult life. To this end, numeracy involves managing a situation or solving a problem in a real context, by responding to mathematical content/information/ideas represented in multiple ways. The target population was the non-institutionalized population, aged 16-24 years, residing in the country at the time of data collection, irrespective of nationality, citizenship or language status. For more information, consult the OECD PIAAC website: http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/

OECD Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies (PIAAC)


PIAAC: Mean Young Adult Numeracy Proficiency. Male


PIAAC: Adults by proficiency level in problem solving in technology-rich environments (%). Level 1

Percentage of adults scoring 241 to less than 291 points on the 0 to 500 point scale. At this level, tasks typically require the use of widely available and familiar technology applications, such as e-mail software or a web browser. There is little or no navigation required to access the information or commands required to solve the problem. The tasks involve few steps and a minimal number of operators. Only simple forms of reasoning, such as assigning items to categories, are required; there is no need to contrast or integrate information. The target population for the survey was the non-institutionalized population, aged 16-65 years, residing in the country at the time of data collection, irrespective of nationality, citizenship or language status. For more information, consult the OECD PIAAC website: http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/


PIAAC: Adults by proficiency level in problem solving in technology-rich environments (%). Level 2

Percentage of adults scoring 291 to less than 341 points on the 0 to 500 point scale. At this level, tasks typically require the use of both generic and more specific technology applications. For instance, the respondent may have to make use of a novel online form. Some navigation across pages and applications is required to solve the problem. The task may involve multiple steps and operators. The goal of the problem may have to be defined by the respondent, though the criteria to be met are explicit. There are higher monitoring demands. Some unexpected outcomes or impasses may appear. The task may require evaluating the relevance of a set of items to discard distractors. Some integration and inferential reasoning may be needed. The target population for the survey was the non-institutionalized population, aged 16-65 years, residing in the country at the time of data collection, irrespective of nationality, citizenship or language status. For more information, consult the OECD PIAAC website: http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/


PIAAC: Adults by proficiency level in problem solving in technology-rich environments (%). Level 3

Percentage of adults scoring equal to or higher than 341 points on the 0 to 500 point scale. At this level, tasks typically require the use of both generic and more specific technology applications. Some navigation across pages and applications is required to solve the problem. The use of tools (e.g. a sort function) is required to make progress towards the solution. The task may involve multiple steps and operators. The goal of the problem may have to be defined by the respondent, and the criteria to be met may or may not be explicit. There are typically high monitoring demands. Unexpected outcomes and impasses are likely to occur. The task may require evaluating the relevance and reliability of information in order to discard distractors. Integration and inferential reasoning may be needed to a large extent. The target population for the survey was the non-institutionalized population, aged 16-65 years, residing in the country at the time of data collection, irrespective of nationality, citizenship or language status. For more information, consult the OECD PIAAC website: http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/


PIAAC: Adults by proficiency level in problem solving in technology-rich environments (%). Below Level 1

Percentage of adults scoring below 241 points on the 0 to 500 point scale. Tasks are based on well-defined problems involving the use of only one function within a generic interface to meet one explicit criterion without any categorical or inferential reasoning, or transforming of information. Few steps are required and no sub-goal has to be generated. The target population for the survey was the non-institutionalized population, aged 16-65 years, residing in the country at the time of data collection, irrespective of nationality, citizenship or language status. For more information, consult the OECD PIAAC website: http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/


PIAAC: Adults by proficiency level in problem solving in technology-rich environments (%). Failed the ICT Core Test

Adults in this category had prior computer experience but failed the ICT core test, which assesses basic ICT skills, such as the capacity to use a mouse or scroll through a web page, needed to take the computer-based assessment. Therefore, they did not take part in the computer-based assessment, but took the paper-based version of the assessment, which does not include the problem solving in technology-rich environment domain. For more information, consult the OECD PIAAC website: http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/


PIAAC: Female adults by proficiency level in problem solving in technology-rich environments (%). Level 1

Percentage of female adults scoring 241 to less than 291 points on the 0 to 500 point scale. At this level, tasks typically require the use of widely available and familiar technology applications, such as e-mail software or a web browser. There is little or no navigation required to access the information or commands required to solve the problem. The tasks involve few steps and a minimal number of operators. Only simple forms of reasoning, such as assigning items to categories, are required; there is no need to contrast or integrate information. The target population for the survey was the non-institutionalized population, aged 16-65 years, residing in the country at the time of data collection, irrespective of nationality, citizenship or language status. For more information, consult the OECD PIAAC website: http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/


PIAAC: Female adults by proficiency level in problem solving in technology-rich environments (%). Level 2

Percentage of female adults scoring 291 to less than 341 points on the 0 to 500 point scale. At this level, tasks typically require the use of both generic and more specific technology applications. For instance, the respondent may have to make use of a novel online form. Some navigation across pages and applications is required to solve the problem. The task may involve multiple steps and operators. The goal of the problem may have to be defined by the respondent, though the criteria to be met are explicit. There are higher monitoring demands. Some unexpected outcomes or impasses may appear. The task may require evaluating the relevance of a set of items to discard distractors. Some integration and inferential reasoning may be needed. The target population for the survey was the non-institutionalized population, aged 16-65 years, residing in the country at the time of data collection, irrespective of nationality, citizenship or language status. For more information, consult the OECD PIAAC website: http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/


PIAAC: Female adults by proficiency level in problem solving in technology-rich environments (%). Level 3

Percentage of female adults scoring equal to or higher than 341 points on the 0 to 500 point scale. At this level, tasks typically require the use of both generic and more specific technology applications. Some navigation across pages and applications is required to solve the problem. The use of tools (e.g. a sort function) is required to make progress towards the solution. The task may involve multiple steps and operators. The goal of the problem may have to be defined by the respondent, and the criteria to be met may or may not be explicit. There are typically high monitoring demands. Unexpected outcomes and impasses are likely to occur. The task may require evaluating the relevance and reliability of information in order to discard distractors. Integration and inferential reasoning may be needed to a large extent. The target population for the survey was the non-institutionalized population, aged 16-65 years, residing in the country at the time of data collection, irrespective of nationality, citizenship or language status. For more information, consult the OECD PIAAC website: http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/


PIAAC: Female adults by proficiency level in problem solving in technology-rich environments (%). Below Level 1

Percentage of female adults scoring below 241 points on the 0 to 500 point scale. Tasks are based on well-defined problems involving the use of only one function within a generic interface to meet one explicit criterion without any categorical or inferential reasoning, or transforming of information. Few steps are required and no sub-goal has to be generated. The target population for the survey was the non-institutionalized population, aged 16-65 years, residing in the country at the time of data collection, irrespective of nationality, citizenship or language status. For more information, consult the OECD PIAAC website: http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/


PIAAC: Female adults by proficiency level in problem solving in technology-rich environments (%). Failed ICT Core Test

Percentage of female adults who had prior computer experience but failed the ICT core test, which assesses the basic ICT skills needed to take the computer-based assessment, such as the capacity to use a mouse or scroll through a web page. Therefore, they did not take part in the computer-based assessment, but took the paper-based version of the assessment, which does not include the problem solving in technology-rich environment domain. For more information, consult the OECD PIAAC website: http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/


PIAAC: Female adults by proficiency level in problem solving in technology-rich environments (%). No computer experience or failed the ICT core test

Percentage of female adults who either 1) reported having no prior computer experience or 2) had prior computer experience but failed the ICT core test, which assesses basic ICT skills needed to take the computer-based assessment, such as the capacity to use a mouse or scroll through a web page. This group of adults did not take part in the computer-based assessment and instead took the paper-based version of the assessment, which does not include the problem solving in technology-rich environment domain. For more information, consult the OECD PIAAC website: http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/


PIAAC: Female adults by proficiency level in problem solving in technology-rich environments (%). No computer experience

Percentage of female adults who reported having no prior computer experience; therefore, they did not take part in the computer-based assessment but took the paper-based version of the assessment, which does not include the problem solving in technology-rich environment domain. For more information, consult the OECD PIAAC website: http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/


PIAAC: Female adults by proficiency level in problem solving in technology-rich environments (%). Opted out of computer-based assessment

Percentage of female adults who opted to take the paper-based assessment without first taking the ICT core assessment, even if they reported some prior experience with computers. They also did not take part in the computer-based assessment, but took the paper-based version of the assessment, which does not include the problem solving in technology-rich environment domain. For more information, consult the OECD PIAAC website: http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/


PIAAC: Male adults by proficiency level in problem solving in technology-rich environments (%). Level 1

Percentage of male adults scoring 241 to less than 291 points on the 0 to 500 point scale. At this level, tasks typically require the use of widely available and familiar technology applications, such as e-mail software or a web browser. There is little or no navigation required to access the information or commands required to solve the problem. The tasks involve few steps and a minimal number of operators. Only simple forms of reasoning, such as assigning items to categories, are required; there is no need to contrast or integrate information. The target population for the survey was the non-institutionalized population, aged 16-65 years, residing in the country at the time of data collection, irrespective of nationality, citizenship or language status. For more information, consult the OECD PIAAC website: http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/


PIAAC: Male adults by proficiency level in problem solving in technology-rich environments (%). Level 2

Percentage of male adults scoring 291 to less than 341 points on the 0 to 500 point scale. At this level, tasks typically require the use of both generic and more specific technology applications. For instance, the respondent may have to make use of a novel online form. Some navigation across pages and applications is required to solve the problem. The task may involve multiple steps and operators. The goal of the problem may have to be defined by the respondent, though the criteria to be met are explicit. There are higher monitoring demands. Some unexpected outcomes or impasses may appear. The task may require evaluating the relevance of a set of items to discard distractors. Some integration and inferential reasoning may be needed. The target population for the survey was the non-institutionalized population, aged 16-65 years, residing in the country at the time of data collection, irrespective of nationality, citizenship or language status. For more information, consult the OECD PIAAC website: http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/


PIAAC: Male adults by proficiency level in problem solving in technology-rich environments (%). Level 3

Percentage of male adults scoring equal to or higher than 341 points on the 0 to 500 point scale. At this level, tasks typically require the use of both generic and more specific technology applications. Some navigation across pages and applications is required to solve the problem. The use of tools (e.g. a sort function) is required to make progress towards the solution. The task may involve multiple steps and operators. The goal of the problem may have to be defined by the respondent, and the criteria to be met may or may not be explicit. There are typically high monitoring demands. Unexpected outcomes and impasses are likely to occur. The task may require evaluating the relevance and reliability of information in order to discard distractors. Integration and inferential reasoning may be needed to a large extent. The target population for the survey was the non-institutionalized population, aged 16-65 years, residing in the country at the time of data collection, irrespective of nationality, citizenship or language status. For more information, consult the OECD PIAAC website: http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/


PIAAC: Male adults by proficiency level in problem solving in technology-rich environments (%). Below Level 1

Percentage of male adults scoring below 241 points on the 0 to 500 point scale. Tasks are based on well-defined problems involving the use of only one function within a generic interface to meet one explicit criterion without any categorical or inferential reasoning, or transforming of information. Few steps are required and no sub-goal has to be generated. The target population for the survey was the non-institutionalized population, aged 16-65 years, residing in the country at the time of data collection, irrespective of nationality, citizenship or language status. For more information, consult the OECD PIAAC website: http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/


PIAAC: Male adults by proficiency level in problem solving in technology-rich environments (%). Failed ICT Core Test

Percentage of male adults who had prior computer experience but failed the ICT core test, which assesses the basic ICT skills needed to take the computer-based assessment, such as the capacity to use a mouse or scroll through a web page. Therefore, they did not take part in the computer-based assessment, but took the paper-based version of the assessment, which does not include the problem solving in technology-rich environment domain. For more information, consult the OECD PIAAC website: http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/


PIAAC: Male adults by proficiency level in problem solving in technology-rich environments (%). No computer experience or failed the ICT core test

Percentage of male adults who either 1) reported having no prior computer experience or 2) had prior computer experience but failed the ICT core test, which assesses basic ICT skills needed to take the computer-based assessment, such as the capacity to use a mouse or scroll through a web page. This group of adults did not take part in the computer-based assessment and instead took the paper-based version of the assessment, which does not include the problem solving in technology-rich environment domain. For more information, consult the OECD PIAAC website: http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/


PIAAC: Male adults by proficiency level in problem solving in technology-rich environments (%). No computer experience

Percentage of male adults who reported having no prior computer experience; therefore, they did not take part in the computer-based assessment but took the paper-based version of the assessment, which does not include the problem solving in technology-rich environment domain. For more information, consult the OECD PIAAC website: http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/


PIAAC: Male adults by proficiency level in problem solving in technology-rich environments (%). Opted out of computer-based assessment

Percentage of male adults who opted to take the paper-based assessment without first taking the ICT core assessment, even if they reported some prior experience with computers. They also did not take part in the computer-based assessment, but took the paper-based version of the assessment, which does not include the problem solving in technology-rich environment domain. For more information, consult the OECD PIAAC website: http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/


PIAAC: Adults by proficiency level in problem solving in technology-rich environments (%). No computer experience

Adults in this category reported having no prior computer experience; therefore, they did not take part in the computer-based assessment but took the paper-based version of the assessment, which does not include the problem solving in technology-rich environment domain. For more information, consult the OECD PIAAC website: http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/


PIAAC: Adults by proficiency level in problem solving in technology-rich environments (%). Opted out of computer-based assessment

Adults in this category opted to take the paper-based assessment without first taking the ICT core assessment, even if they reported some prior experience with computers. They also did not take part in the computer-based assessment, but took the paper-based version of the assessment, which does not include the problem solving in technology-rich environment domain. For more information, consult the OECD PIAAC website: http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/


PIAAC: Distribution of Adult Problem Solving in Technology-Rich Environments Scores: 5th Percentile Score

The 5th percentile score is the score below which 5 percent of adults (age 16 to 65) scored. For more information, consult the OECD PIAAC website: http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/


PIAAC: Distribution of Adult Problem Solving in Technology-Rich Environments Scores: 10th Percentile Score

The 10th percentile score is the score below which 10 percent of adults (age 16 to 65) scored. For more information, consult the OECD PIAAC website: http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/


PIAAC: Distribution of Adult Problem Solving in Technology-Rich Environments Scores: 25th Percentile Score

The 25th percentile score is the score below which 25 percent of adults (age 16 to 65) scored. For more information, consult the OECD PIAAC website: http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/


PIAAC: Distribution of Adult Problem Solving in Technology-Rich Environments Scores: 50th Percentile Score

The 50th percentile score is the score below which 50 percent of adults (age 16 to 65) scored. For more information, consult the OECD PIAAC website: http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/


PIAAC: Distribution of Adult Problem Solving in Technology-Rich Environments Scores: 75th Percentile Score

The 75th percentile score is the score below which 75 percent of adults (age 16 to 65) scored. For more information, consult the OECD PIAAC website: http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/


PIAAC: Distribution of Adult Problem Solving in Technology-Rich Environments Scores: 90th Percentile Score

The 90th percentile score is the score below which 90 percent of adults (age 16 to 65) scored. For more information, consult the OECD PIAAC website: http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/


PIAAC: Distribution of Adult Problem Solving in Technology-Rich Environments Scores: 95th Percentile Score

The 95th percentile score is the score below which 90 percent of adults (age 16 to 65) scored. For more information, consult the OECD PIAAC website: http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/


PIAAC: Young adults by proficiency level in problem solving in technology-rich environments (%). Level 1

Percentage of young (age 16-24) adults scoring 241 to less than 291 points on the 0 to 500 point scale. At this level, tasks typically require the use of widely available and familiar technology applications, such as e-mail software or a web browser. There is little or no navigation required to access the information or commands required to solve the problem. The tasks involve few steps and a minimal number of operators. Only simple forms of reasoning, such as assigning items to categories, are required; there is no need to contrast or integrate information. The target population was the non-institutionalized population, aged 16-24 years, residing in the country at the time of data collection, irrespective of nationality, citizenship or language status. For more information, consult the OECD PIAAC website: http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/


PIAAC: Young adults by proficiency level in problem solving in technology-rich environments (%). Level 2

Percentage of young (age 16-24) adults scoring 291 to less than 341 points on the 0 to 500 point scale. At this level, tasks typically require the use of both generic and more specific technology applications. For instance, the respondent may have to make use of a novel online form. Some navigation across pages and applications is required to solve the problem. The task may involve multiple steps and operators. The goal of the problem may have to be defined by the respondent, though the criteria to be met are explicit. There are higher monitoring demands. Some unexpected outcomes or impasses may appear. The task may require evaluating the relevance of a set of items to discard distractors. Some integration and inferential reasoning may be needed. The target population was the non-institutionalized population, aged 16-24 years, residing in the country at the time of data collection, irrespective of nationality, citizenship or language status. For more information, consult the OECD PIAAC website: http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/


PIAAC: Young adults by proficiency level in problem solving in technology-rich environments (%). Level 3

Percentage of young (age 16-24) adults scoring equal to or higher than 341 points on the 0 to 500 point scale. At this level, tasks typically require the use of both generic and more specific technology applications. Some navigation across pages and applications is required to solve the problem. The use of tools (e.g. a sort function) is required to make progress towards the solution. The task may involve multiple steps and operators. The goal of the problem may have to be defined by the respondent, and the criteria to be met may or may not be explicit. There are typically high monitoring demands. Unexpected outcomes and impasses are likely to occur. The task may require evaluating the relevance and reliability of information in order to discard distractors. Integration and inferential reasoning may be needed to a large extent. The target population was the non-institutionalized population, aged 16-24 years, residing in the country at the time of data collection, irrespective of nationality, citizenship or language status. For more information, consult the OECD PIAAC website: http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/


PIAAC: Young adults by proficiency level in problem solving in technology-rich environments (%). Below Level 1

Percentage of young (age 16-24) adults scoring below 241 points on the 0 to 500 point scale. Tasks are based on well-defined problems involving the use of only one function within a generic interface to meet one explicit criterion without any categorical or inferential reasoning, or transforming of information. Few steps are required and no sub-goal has to be generated. The target population was the non-institutionalized population, aged 16-24 years, residing in the country at the time of data collection, irrespective of nationality, citizenship or language status. For more information, consult the OECD PIAAC website: http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/


PIAAC: Young adults by proficiency level in problem solving in technology-rich environments (%). Failed ICT Core Test

Percentage of young (age 16-24) adults who had prior computer experience but failed the ICT core test, which assesses basic ICT skills needed to take the computer-based assessment, such as the capacity to use a mouse or scroll through a web page. Therefore, they did not take part in the computer-based assessment, but took the paper-based version of the assessment, which does not include the problem solving in technology-rich environment domain. For more information, consult the OECD PIAAC website: http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/


PIAAC: Young adults by proficiency level in problem solving in technology-rich environments (%). No computer experience or failed the ICT core test

Percentage of young (age 16-24) adults who either 1) reported having no prior computer experience or 2) had prior computer experience but failed the ICT core test, which assesses basic ICT skills needed to take the computer-based assessment, such as the capacity to use a mouse or scroll through a web page. This group of adults did not take part in the computer-based assessment and instead took the paper-based version of the assessment, which does not include the problem solving in technology-rich environment domain. For more information, consult the OECD PIAAC website: http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/


PIAAC: Young adults by proficiency level in problem solving in technology-rich environments (%). No computer experience

Percentage of young (age 16-24) adults who reported having no prior computer experience; therefore, they did not take part in the computer-based assessment but took the paper-based version of the assessment, which does not include the problem solving in technology-rich environment domain. For more information, consult the OECD PIAAC website: http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/


PIAAC: Young adults by proficiency level in problem solving in technology-rich environments (%). Opted out of computer-based assessment

Percentage of young (age 16-24) adults who opted to take the paper-based assessment without first taking the ICT core assessment, even if they reported some prior experience with computers. They did not take part in the computer-based assessment, but took the paper-based version of the assessment, which does not include the problem solving in technology-rich environment domain. For more information, consult the OECD PIAAC website: http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/


PIRLS: Mean performance on the reading scale, total

Mean performance on the reading scale for fourth grade students. Total is the average scale score for fourth graders on the PIRLS reading assessment. The scale centerpoint is 500. Data reflects country performance in the stated year, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PIRLS website for more detailed information: http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/

International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA) Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS)


PIRLS: Fourth grade students reaching the advanced international benchmark in reading achievement (%)

Fourth grade students reaching the advanced international benchmark in reading achievement (%) is the share of fourth grade students scoring at least 625 on the reading assessment. When reading Literary Texts, students at the advanced international benchmarking level can: A) Integrate ideas and evidence across a text to appreciate overall themes, and B) Interpret story events and character actions to provide reasons, motivations, feelings, and character traits with full text-based support. When reading Informational Texts, students at the advanced international benchmark can A) Distinguish and interpret complex information from different parts of text, and provide full text-based support, B) Integrate information across a text to provide explanations, interpret significance, and sequence activities, and C) Evaluate visual and textual features to explain their function. The procedure for identifying International Benchmarks changed from the PIRLS 2001 method of using percentiles to a method based on scores that do not change from PIRLS cycle to cycle. In PIRLS 2001, the Advanced benchmark was called the "Top 10% Benchmark" (90th percentile score), which corresponded to a scale score of 615. The 2001 data in this database were recalculated based on a 625 Advanced Benchmark score and are different than the data found in the 2001 PIRLS report. Data reflects country performance in the stated year, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PIRLS website for more detailed information: http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/


PIRLS: Female 4th grade students reaching the advanced international benchmark in reading achievement (%)

Female 4th grade students reaching the advanced international benchmark in reading achievement (%) is the share of female 4th grade students scoring at least 625 on the reading assessment. When reading Literary Texts, students at the advanced international benchmarking level can: A) Integrate ideas and evidence across a text to appreciate overall themes, and B) Interpret story events and character actions to provide reasons, motivations, feelings, and character traits with full text-based support. When reading Informational Texts, students at the advanced international benchmark can A) Distinguish and interpret complex information from different parts of text, and provide full text-based support, B) Integrate information across a text to provide explanations, interpret significance, and sequence activities, and C) Evaluate visual and textual features to explain their function. The procedure for identifying International Benchmarks changed from the PIRLS 2001 method of using percentiles to a method based on scores that do not change from PIRLS cycle to cycle. In PIRLS 2001, the Advanced benchmark was called the "Top 10% Benchmark" (90th percentile score), which corresponded to a scale score of 615. The 2001 data in this database were recalculated based on a 625 Advanced Benchmark score and are different than the data found in the 2001 PIRLS report. Data reflects country performance in the stated year, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Data reflects country performance in the stated year, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PIRLS website for more detailed information: http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/


PIRLS: Male 4th grade students reaching the advanced international benchmark in reading achievement (%)

Male 4th grade students reaching the advanced international benchmark in reading achievement (%) is the share of male 4th grade students scoring at least 625 on the reading assessment. When reading Literary Texts, students at the advanced international benchmarking level can: A) Integrate ideas and evidence across a text to appreciate overall themes, and B) Interpret story events and character actions to provide reasons, motivations, feelings, and character traits with full text-based support. When reading Informational Texts, students at the advanced international benchmark can A) Distinguish and interpret complex information from different parts of text, and provide full text-based support, B) Integrate information across a text to provide explanations, interpret significance, and sequence activities, and C) Evaluate visual and textual features to explain their function. The procedure for identifying International Benchmarks changed from the PIRLS 2001 method of using percentiles to a method based on scores that do not change from PIRLS cycle to cycle. In PIRLS 2001, the Advanced benchmark was called the "Top 10% Benchmark" (90th percentile score), which corresponded to a scale score of 615. The 2001 data in this database were recalculated based on a 625 Advanced Benchmark score and are different than the data found in the 2001 PIRLS report. Data reflects country performance in the stated year, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Data reflects country performance in the stated year, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PIRLS website for more detailed information: http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/


PIRLS: Fourth grade students who did not reach the low international benchmark in reading achievement (%)

Fourth grade students who did not reach the low international benchmark in reading achievement (%) is the share of fourth grade students who did not score at least 400 on the reading assessment. These figures were calculated by the World Bank EdStats team by subtracting the share of students reaching the low international benchmark from 100. Data reflects country performance in the stated year, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PIRLS website for more detailed information: http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/


PIRLS: Female 4th grade students who did not reach the low international benchmark in reading achievement (%)

Female 4th grade students who did not reach the low international benchmark in reading achievement (%) is the share of female 4th grade students who did not score at least 400 on the reading assessment. These figures were calculated by the World Bank EdStats team by subtracting the share of students reaching the low international benchmark from 100. Data reflects country performance in the stated year, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PIRLS website for more detailed information: http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/


PIRLS: Male 4th grade students who did not reach the low international benchmark in reading achievement (%)

Male 4th grade students who did not reach the low international benchmark in reading achievement (%) is the share of male 4th grade students who did not score at least 400 on the reading assessment. These figures were calculated by the World Bank EdStats team by subtracting the share of students reaching the low international benchmark from 100. Data reflects country performance in the stated year, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PIRLS website for more detailed information: http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/


PIRLS: Mean performance on the reading scale, female

Mean performance on the reading scale for fourth grade students. Female is the average scale score for female fourth graders on the PIRLS reading assessment. The scale centerpoint is 500. Data reflects country performance in the stated year, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PIRLS website for more detailed information: http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/


PIRLS: Fourth grade students reaching the high international benchmark in reading achievement (%)

Fourth grade students reaching the high international benchmark in reading achievement (%) is the share of fourth grade students scoring at least 550 on the reading assessment. When reading Literary Texts, students at the high benchmarking level can A) Locate and distinguish significant actions and details embedded across the text, B) Make inferences to explain relationships between intentions, actions, events, and feelings, and give text-based support, C) Interpret and integrate story events and character actions and traits from different parts of the text, D) Evaluate the significance of events and actions across the entire story, and E) Recognize the use of some language features (e.g., metaphor, tone, imagery). When reading Informational Texts, students at this benchmarking level can: A) Locate and distinguish relevant information within a dense text or a complex table, B) Make inferences about logical connections to provide explanations and reasons, C) Integrate textual and visual information to interpret the relationship between ideas, and D) Evaluate content and textual elements to make a generalization. The procedure for identifying International Benchmarks changed from the PIRLS 2001 method of using percentiles to a method based on scores that do not change from PIRLS cycle to cycle. In PIRLS 2001, the High Benchmark was called the "Upper Quarter Benchmark" or 75th percentile score, which corresponded to a scale score of 570. The 2001 data in this database were recalculated based on a 550 High Benchmark score and are different than the data found in the 2001 PIRLS report. Data reflects country performance in the stated year, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PIRLS website for more detailed information: http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/


PIRLS: Female 4th grade students reaching the high international benchmark in reading achievement (%)

Female 4th grade students reaching the high international benchmark in reading achievement (%) is the share of female 4th grade students scoring at least 550 on the reading assessment. When reading Literary Texts, students at the high benchmarking level can A) Locate and distinguish significant actions and details embedded across the text, B) Make inferences to explain relationships between intentions, actions, events, and feelings, and give text-based support, C) Interpret and integrate story events and character actions and traits from different parts of the text, D) Evaluate the significance of events and actions across the entire story, and E) Recognize the use of some language features (e.g., metaphor, tone, imagery). When reading Informational Texts, students at this benchmarking level can: A) Locate and distinguish relevant information within a dense text or a complex table, B) Make inferences about logical connections to provide explanations and reasons, C) Integrate textual and visual information to interpret the relationship between ideas, and D) Evaluate content and textual elements to make a generalization. The procedure for identifying International Benchmarks changed from the PIRLS 2001 method of using percentiles to a method based on scores that do not change from PIRLS cycle to cycle. In PIRLS 2001, the High Benchmark was called the "Upper Quarter Benchmark" or 75th percentile score, which corresponded to a scale score of 570. The 2001 data in this database were recalculated based on a 550 High Benchmark score and are different than the data found in the 2001 PIRLS report. Data reflects country performance in the stated year, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PIRLS website for more detailed information: http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/


PIRLS: Male 4th grade students reaching the high international benchmark in reading achievement (%)

Male 4th grade students reaching the high international benchmark in reading achievement (%) is the share of male 4th grade students scoring at least 550 on the reading assessment. When reading Literary Texts, students at the high benchmarking level can A) Locate and distinguish significant actions and details embedded across the text, B) Make inferences to explain relationships between intentions, actions, events, and feelings, and give text-based support, C) Interpret and integrate story events and character actions and traits from different parts of the text, D) Evaluate the significance of events and actions across the entire story, and E) Recognize the use of some language features (e.g., metaphor, tone, imagery). When reading Informational Texts, students at this benchmarking level can: A) Locate and distinguish relevant information within a dense text or a complex table, B) Make inferences about logical connections to provide explanations and reasons, C) Integrate textual and visual information to interpret the relationship between ideas, and D) Evaluate content and textual elements to make a generalization. The procedure for identifying International Benchmarks changed from the PIRLS 2001 method of using percentiles to a method based on scores that do not change from PIRLS cycle to cycle. In PIRLS 2001, the High Benchmark was called the "Upper Quarter Benchmark" or 75th percentile score, which corresponded to a scale score of 570. The 2001 data in this database were recalculated based on a 550 High Benchmark score and are different than the data found in the 2001 PIRLS report. Data reflects country performance in the stated year, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PIRLS website for more detailed information: http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/


PIRLS: Fourth grade students reaching the intermediate international benchmark in reading achievement (%)

Fourth grade students reaching the intermediate international benchmark in reading achievement (%) is the share of fourth grade students scoring at least 475 on the reading assessment. When reading Literary Texts, students at the intermediate benchmarking level can A) Retrieve and reproduce explicitly stated actions, events, and feelings, B) Make straightforward inferences about the attributes, feelings, and motivations of main characters, C) Interpret obvious reasons and causes and give simple explanations, and D) Begin to recognize language features and style. When reading Informational Texts, students at the informational level can A) Locate and reproduce two or three pieces of information from within the text, and B) Use subheadings, text boxes, and illustrations to locate parts of the text. The procedure for identifying International Benchmarks changed from the PIRLS 2001 method of using percentiles to a method based on scores that do not change from PIRLS cycle to cycle. In PIRLS 2001, the Intermediate Benchmark was called the "Median Benchmark" (50th percentile score or median), which corresponded to a scale score of 510. The 2001 data in this database were recalculated based on a 475 Intermediate Benchmark score and are different than the data found in the 2001 PIRLS report. Data reflects country performance in the stated year, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PIRLS website for more detailed information: http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/


PIRLS: Female 4th grade students reaching the intermediate international benchmark in reading achievement (%)

Female 4th grade students reaching the intermediate international benchmark in reading achievement (%) is the share of female 4th grade students scoring at least 475 on the reading assessment. When reading Literary Texts, students at the intermediate benchmarking level can A) Retrieve and reproduce explicitly stated actions, events, and feelings, B) Make straightforward inferences about the attributes, feelings, and motivations of main characters, C) Interpret obvious reasons and causes and give simple explanations, and D) Begin to recognize language features and style. When reading Informational Texts, students at the informational level can A) Locate and reproduce two or three pieces of information from within the text, and B) Use subheadings, text boxes, and illustrations to locate parts of the text. The procedure for identifying International Benchmarks changed from the PIRLS 2001 method of using percentiles to a method based on scores that do not change from PIRLS cycle to cycle. In PIRLS 2001, the Intermediate Benchmark was called the "Median Benchmark" (50th percentile score or median), which corresponded to a scale score of 510. The 2001 data in this database were recalculated based on a 475 Intermediate Benchmark score and are different than the data found in the 2001 PIRLS report. Data reflects country performance in the stated year, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PIRLS website for more detailed information: http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/


PIRLS: Male 4th grade students reaching the intermediate international benchmark in reading achievement (%)

Male 4th grade students reaching the intermediate international benchmark in reading achievement (%) is the share of male 4th grade students scoring at least 475 on the reading assessment. When reading Literary Texts, students at the intermediate benchmarking level can A) Retrieve and reproduce explicitly stated actions, events, and feelings, B) Make straightforward inferences about the attributes, feelings, and motivations of main characters, C) Interpret obvious reasons and causes and give simple explanations, and D) Begin to recognize language features and style. When reading Informational Texts, students at the informational level can A) Locate and reproduce two or three pieces of information from within the text, and B) Use subheadings, text boxes, and illustrations to locate parts of the text. The procedure for identifying International Benchmarks changed from the PIRLS 2001 method of using percentiles to a method based on scores that do not change from PIRLS cycle to cycle. In PIRLS 2001, the Intermediate Benchmark was called the "Median Benchmark" (50th percentile score or median), which corresponded to a scale score of 510. The 2001 data in this database were recalculated based on a 475 Intermediate Benchmark score and are different than the data found in the 2001 PIRLS report. Data reflects country performance in the stated year, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PIRLS website for more detailed information: http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/


PIRLS: Fourth grade students reaching the low international benchmark in reading achievement (%)

Fourth grade students reaching the low international benchmark in reading achievement (%) is the share of fourth grade students scoring at least 400 on the reading assessment. When reading Literary Texts, students at the low benchmarking level can locate and retrieve an explicitly stated detail. When reading Informational Texts, students at the low benchmark can locate and reproduce explicitly stated information that is at the beginning of the text. The procedure for identifying International Benchmarks changed from the PIRLS 2001 method of using percentiles to a method based on scores that do not change from PIRLS cycle to cycle. In PIRLS 2001, the Low Benchmark was called the "Lower Quarter Benchmark" (25th percentile score), which corresponded to a scale score of 435. The 2001 data in this database were recalculated based on a 400 Low Benchmark score and are different than the data found in the 2001 PIRLS report. Data reflects country performance in the stated year, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PIRLS website for more detailed information: http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/


PIRLS: Female 4th grade students reaching the low international benchmark in reading achievement (%)

Female 4th grade students reaching the low international benchmark in reading achievement (%) is the share of female 4th grade students scoring at least 400 on the reading assessment. When reading Literary Texts, students at the low benchmarking level can locate and retrieve an explicitly stated detail. When reading Informational Texts, students at the low benchmark can locate and reproduce explicitly stated information that is at the beginning of the text. The procedure for identifying International Benchmarks changed from the PIRLS 2001 method of using percentiles to a method based on scores that do not change from PIRLS cycle to cycle. In PIRLS 2001, the Low Benchmark was called the "Lower Quarter Benchmark" (25th percentile score), which corresponded to a scale score of 435. The 2001 data in this database were recalculated based on a 400 Low Benchmark score and are different than the data found in the 2001 PIRLS report. Data reflects country performance in the stated year, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PIRLS website for more detailed information: http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/


PIRLS: Male 4th grade students reaching the low international benchmark in reading achievement (%)

Male 4th grade students reaching the low international benchmark in reading achievement (%) is the share of male 4th grade students scoring at least 400 on the reading assessment. When reading Literary Texts, students at the low benchmarking level can locate and retrieve an explicitly stated detail. When reading Informational Texts, students at the low benchmark can locate and reproduce explicitly stated information that is at the beginning of the text. The procedure for identifying International Benchmarks changed from the PIRLS 2001 method of using percentiles to a method based on scores that do not change from PIRLS cycle to cycle. In PIRLS 2001, the Low Benchmark was called the "Lower Quarter Benchmark" (25th percentile score), which corresponded to a scale score of 435. The 2001 data in this database were recalculated based on a 400 Low Benchmark score and are different than the data found in the 2001 PIRLS report. Data reflects country performance in the stated year, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PIRLS website for more detailed information: http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/


PIRLS: Mean performance on the reading scale, male

Mean performance on the reading scale for fourth grade students. Male is the average scale score for male fourth graders on the PIRLS reading assessment. The scale centerpoint is 500. Data reflects country performance in the stated year, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PIRLS website for more detailed information: http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/


PIRLS: Distribution of Reading Scores: 5th Percentile Score

The 5th percentile score is the score below which 5 percent of students scored. Data reflects country performance in the stated year, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PIRLS website for more detailed information: http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/


PIRLS: Distribution of Reading Scores: 10th Percentile Score

The 10th percentile score is the score below which 10 percent of students scored. Data reflects country performance in the stated year, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PIRLS website for more detailed information: http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/


PIRLS: Distribution of Reading Scores: 25th Percentile Score

The 25th percentile score is the score below which 25 percent of students scored. Data reflects country performance in the stated year, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PIRLS website for more detailed information: http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/


PIRLS: Distribution of Reading Scores: 50th Percentile Score

The 50th percentile score is the score below which 50 percent of students scored. Data reflects country performance in the stated year, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PIRLS website for more detailed information: http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/


PIRLS: Distribution of Reading Scores: 75th Percentile Score

The 75th percentile score is the score below which 75 percent of students scored. Data reflects country performance in the stated year, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PIRLS website for more detailed information: http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/


PIRLS: Distribution of Reading Scores: 90th Percentile Score

The 90th percentile score is the score below which 90 percent of students scored. Data reflects country performance in the stated year, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PIRLS website for more detailed information: http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/


PIRLS: Distribution of Reading Scores: 95th Percentile Score

The 95th percentile score is the score below which 90 percent of students scored. Data reflects country performance in the stated year, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PIRLS website for more detailed information: http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/


PISA: Mean performance on the mathematics scale

Average score of 15-year-old students on the PISA mathematics scale. The metric for the overall mathematics scale is based on a mean for OECD countries of 500 points and a standard deviation of 100 points. Data reflects country performance in the stated year according to PISA reports, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PISA website for more detailed information: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/

OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA)


PISA: 15-year-olds by mathematics proficiency level (%). Below Level 1

Percentage of 15-year-old students below the lowest proficiency level (scoring 358 or below) on the PISA mathematics scale. Students below Level 1 may be able to perform very direct and straightforward mathematical tasks, such as reading a single value from a well-labeled chart or table where the labels on the chart match the words in the stimulus and question, so that the selection criteria are clear and the relationship between the chart and the aspects of the context depicted are evident, and performing arithmetic calculations with whole numbers by following clear and well-defined instructions. Data reflects country performance in the stated year according to PISA reports, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PISA website for more detailed information: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: Female 15-year-olds by mathematics proficiency level (%). Below Level 1

Percentage of 15-year-old female students below the lowest proficiency level (scoring 358 or below) on the PISA mathematics scale. Students below Level 1 may be able to perform very direct and straightforward mathematical tasks, such as reading a single value from a well-labeled chart or table where the labels on the chart match the words in the stimulus and question, so that the selection criteria are clear and the relationship between the chart and the aspects of the context depicted are evident, and performing arithmetic calculations with whole numbers by following clear and well-defined instructions. Data reflects country performance in the stated year according to PISA reports, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PISA website for more detailed information: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: Male 15-year-olds by mathematics proficiency level (%). Below Level 1

Percentage of 15-year-old male students below the lowest proficiency level (scoring 358 or below) on the PISA mathematics scale. Students below Level 1 may be able to perform very direct and straightforward mathematical tasks, such as reading a single value from a well-labeled chart or table where the labels on the chart match the words in the stimulus and question, so that the selection criteria are clear and the relationship between the chart and the aspects of the context depicted are evident, and performing arithmetic calculations with whole numbers by following clear and well-defined instructions. Data reflects country performance in the stated year according to PISA reports, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PISA website for more detailed information: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: 15-year-olds by mathematics proficiency level (%). Level 1

Percentage of 15-year-old students scoring higher than 358 but lower than or equal to 420 points on the PISA mathematics scale. At Level 1, students can answer questions involving familiar contexts where all relevant information is present and the questions are clearly defined. They are able to identify information and to carry out routine procedures according to direct instructions in explicit situations. They can perform actions that are almost always obvious and follow immediately from the given stimuli. Data reflects country performance in the stated year according to PISA reports, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PISA website for more detailed information: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: Female 15-year-olds by mathematics proficiency level (%). Level 1

Percentage of 15-year-old female students scoring higher than 358 but lower than or equal to 420 points on the PISA mathematics scale. At Level 1, students can answer questions involving familiar contexts where all relevant information is present and the questions are clearly defined. They are able to identify information and to carry out routine procedures according to direct instructions in explicit situations. They can perform actions that are almost always obvious and follow immediately from the given stimuli. Data reflects country performance in the stated year according to PISA reports, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PISA website for more detailed information: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: Male 15-year-olds by mathematics proficiency level (%). Level 1

Percentage of 15-year-old male students scoring higher than 358 but lower than or equal to 420 points on the PISA mathematics scale. At Level 1, students can answer questions involving familiar contexts where all relevant information is present and the questions are clearly defined. They are able to identify information and to carry out routine procedures according to direct instructions in explicit situations. They can perform actions that are almost always obvious and follow immediately from the given stimuli. Data reflects country performance in the stated year according to PISA reports, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PISA website for more detailed information: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: 15-year-olds by mathematics proficiency level (%). Level 2

Percentage of 15-year-old students scoring higher than 420 but lower than or equal to 482 points on the PISA mathematics scale. At Level 2, students can interpret and recognize situations in contexts that require no more than direct inference. They can extract relevant information from a single source and make use of a single representational mode. Students at this level can employ basic algorithms, formulae, procedures, or conventions to solve problems involving whole numbers. They are capable of making literal interpretations of the results. Data reflects country performance in the stated year according to PISA reports, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PISA website for more detailed information: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: Female 15-year-olds by mathematics proficiency level (%). Level 2

Percentage of 15-year-old female students scoring higher than 420 but lower than or equal to 482 points on the PISA mathematics scale. At Level 2, students can interpret and recognize situations in contexts that require no more than direct inference. They can extract relevant information from a single source and make use of a single representational mode. Students at this level can employ basic algorithms, formulae, procedures, or conventions to solve problems involving whole numbers. They are capable of making literal interpretations of the results. Data reflects country performance in the stated year according to PISA reports, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PISA website for more detailed information: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: Male 15-year-olds by mathematics proficiency level (%). Level 2

Percentage of 15-year-old male students scoring higher than 420 but lower than or equal to 482 points on the PISA mathematics scale. At Level 2, students can interpret and recognize situations in contexts that require no more than direct inference. They can extract relevant information from a single source and make use of a single representational mode. Students at this level can employ basic algorithms, formulae, procedures, or conventions to solve problems involving whole numbers. They are capable of making literal interpretations of the results. Data reflects country performance in the stated year according to PISA reports, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PISA website for more detailed information: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: 15-year-olds by mathematics proficiency level (%). Level 3

Percentage of 15-year-old students scoring higher than 482 but lower than or equal to 545 points on the PISA mathematics scale. At Level 3, students can execute clearly described procedures, including those that require sequential decisions. Their interpretations are sufficiently sound to be a base for building a simple model or for selecting and applying simple problem- solving strategies. Students at this level can interpret and use representations based on different information sources and reason directly from them. They typically show some ability to handle percentages, fractions and decimal numbers, and to work with proportional relationships. Their solutions reflect that they have engaged in basic interpretation and reasoning. Data reflects country performance in the stated year according to PISA reports, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PISA website for more detailed information: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: Female 15-year-olds by mathematics proficiency level (%). Level 3

Percentage of 15-year-old female students scoring higher than 482 but lower than or equal to 545 points on the PISA mathematics scale. At Level 3, students can execute clearly described procedures, including those that require sequential decisions. Their interpretations are sufficiently sound to be a base for building a simple model or for selecting and applying simple problem- solving strategies. Students at this level can interpret and use representations based on different information sources and reason directly from them. They typically show some ability to handle percentages, fractions and decimal numbers, and to work with proportional relationships. Their solutions reflect that they have engaged in basic interpretation and reasoning. Data reflects country performance in the stated year according to PISA reports, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PISA website for more detailed information: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: Male 15-year-olds by mathematics proficiency level (%). Level 3

Percentage of 15-year-old male students scoring higher than 482 but lower than or equal to 545 points on the PISA mathematics scale. At Level 3, students can execute clearly described procedures, including those that require sequential decisions. Their interpretations are sufficiently sound to be a base for building a simple model or for selecting and applying simple problem- solving strategies. Students at this level can interpret and use representations based on different information sources and reason directly from them. They typically show some ability to handle percentages, fractions and decimal numbers, and to work with proportional relationships. Their solutions reflect that they have engaged in basic interpretation and reasoning. Data reflects country performance in the stated year according to PISA reports, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PISA website for more detailed information: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: 15-year-olds by mathematics proficiency level (%). Level 4

Percentage of 15-year-old students scoring higher than 545 but lower than or equal to 607 on the PISA mathematics scale. At Level 4, students can work effectively with explicit models for complex concrete situations that may involve constraints or call for making assumptions. They can select and integrate different representations, including symbolic, linking them directly to aspects of real-world situations. Students at this level can utilize their limited range of skills and can reason with some insight, in straightforward contexts. They can construct and communicate explanations and arguments based on their interpretations, arguments, and actions. Data reflects country performance in the stated year according to PISA reports, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PISA website for more detailed information: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: Female 15-year-olds by mathematics proficiency level (%). Level 4

Percentage of 15-year-old female students scoring higher than 545 but lower than or equal to 607 on the PISA mathematics scale. At Level 4, students can work effectively with explicit models for complex concrete situations that may involve constraints or call for making assumptions. They can select and integrate different representations, including symbolic, linking them directly to aspects of real-world situations. Students at this level can utilize their limited range of skills and can reason with some insight, in straightforward contexts. They can construct and communicate explanations and arguments based on their interpretations, arguments, and actions. Data reflects country performance in the stated year according to PISA reports, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PISA website for more detailed information: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: Male 15-year-olds by mathematics proficiency level (%). Level 4

Percentage of 15-year-old male students scoring higher than 545 but lower than or equal to 607 on the PISA mathematics scale. At Level 4, students can work effectively with explicit models for complex concrete situations that may involve constraints or call for making assumptions. They can select and integrate different representations, including symbolic, linking them directly to aspects of real-world situations. Students at this level can utilize their limited range of skills and can reason with some insight, in straightforward contexts. They can construct and communicate explanations and arguments based on their interpretations, arguments, and actions. Data reflects country performance in the stated year according to PISA reports, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PISA website for more detailed information: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: 15-year-olds by mathematics proficiency level (%). Level 5

Percentage of 15-year-old students scoring higher than 607 but lower than or equal to 669 on the PISA mathematics scale. At Level 5, students can develop and work with models for complex situations, identifying constraints and specifying assumptions. They can select, compare, and evaluate appropriate problem-solving strategies for dealing with complex problems related to these models. Students at this level can work strategically using broad, well-developed thinking and reasoning skills, appropriate linked representations, symbolic and formal characterizations, and insight pertaining to these situations. They begin to reflect on their work and can formulate and communicate their interpretations and reasoning. Data reflects country performance in the stated year according to PISA reports, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PISA website for more detailed information: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: Female 15-year-olds by mathematics proficiency level (%). Level 5

Percentage of 15-year-old female students scoring higher than 607 but lower than or equal to 669 on the PISA mathematics scale. At Level 5, students can develop and work with models for complex situations, identifying constraints and specifying assumptions. They can select, compare, and evaluate appropriate problem-solving strategies for dealing with complex problems related to these models. Students at this level can work strategically using broad, well-developed thinking and reasoning skills, appropriate linked representations, symbolic and formal characterizations, and insight pertaining to these situations. They begin to reflect on their work and can formulate and communicate their interpretations and reasoning. Data reflects country performance in the stated year according to PISA reports, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PISA website for more detailed information: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: Male 15-year-olds by mathematics proficiency level (%). Level 5

Percentage of 15-year-old male students scoring higher than 607 but lower than or equal to 669 on the PISA mathematics scale. At Level 5, students can develop and work with models for complex situations, identifying constraints and specifying assumptions. They can select, compare, and evaluate appropriate problem-solving strategies for dealing with complex problems related to these models. Students at this level can work strategically using broad, well-developed thinking and reasoning skills, appropriate linked representations, symbolic and formal characterizations, and insight pertaining to these situations. They begin to reflect on their work and can formulate and communicate their interpretations and reasoning. Data reflects country performance in the stated year according to PISA reports, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PISA website for more detailed information: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: 15-year-olds by mathematics proficiency level (%). Level 6

Percentage of 15-year-old students scoring higher than 669 on the PISA mathematics scale. At Level 6, students can conceptualize, generalize and utilize information based on their investigations and modeling of complex problem situations, and can use their knowledge in relatively non-standard contexts. They can link different information sources and representations and flexibly translate among them. Students at this level are capable of advanced mathematical thinking and reasoning. These students can apply this insight and understanding, along with a mastery of symbolic and formal mathematical operations and relationships, to develop new approaches and strategies for attacking novel situations. Students at this level can reflect on their actions, and can formulate and precisely communicate their actions and reflections regarding their findings, interpretations, arguments, and the appropriateness of these to the original situation. Data reflects country performance in the stated year according to PISA reports, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PISA website for more detailed information: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: Female 15-year-olds by mathematics proficiency level (%). Level 6

Percentage of 15-year-old female students scoring higher than 669 on the PISA mathematics scale. At Level 6, students can conceptualize, generalize and utilize information based on their investigations and modeling of complex problem situations, and can use their knowledge in relatively non-standard contexts. They can link different information sources and representations and flexibly translate among them. Students at this level are capable of advanced mathematical thinking and reasoning. These students can apply this insight and understanding, along with a mastery of symbolic and formal mathematical operations and relationships, to develop new approaches and strategies for attacking novel situations. Students at this level can reflect on their actions, and can formulate and precisely communicate their actions and reflections regarding their findings, interpretations, arguments, and the appropriateness of these to the original situation. Data reflects country performance in the stated year according to PISA reports, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PISA website for more detailed information: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: Male 15-year-olds by mathematics proficiency level (%). Level 6

Percentage of 15-year-old male students scoring higher than 669 on the PISA mathematics scale. At Level 6, students can conceptualize, generalize and utilize information based on their investigations and modeling of complex problem situations, and can use their knowledge in relatively non-standard contexts. They can link different information sources and representations and flexibly translate among them. Students at this level are capable of advanced mathematical thinking and reasoning. These students can apply this insight and understanding, along with a mastery of symbolic and formal mathematical operations and relationships, to develop new approaches and strategies for attacking novel situations. Students at this level can reflect on their actions, and can formulate and precisely communicate their actions and reflections regarding their findings, interpretations, arguments, and the appropriateness of these to the original situation. Data reflects country performance in the stated year according to PISA reports, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PISA website for more detailed information: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: Mean performance on the mathematics scale. Female

Average score of 15-year-old female students on the PISA mathematics scale. The metric for the overall mathematics scale is based on a mean for OECD countries of 500 points and a standard deviation of 100 points. Data reflects country performance in the stated year according to PISA reports, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PISA website for more detailed information: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: Mean performance on the mathematics scale. Male

Average score of 15-year-old male students on the PISA mathematics scale. The metric for the overall mathematics scale is based on a mean for OECD countries of 500 points and a standard deviation of 100 points. Data reflects country performance in the stated year according to PISA reports, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PISA website for more detailed information: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: Distribution of Mathematics Scores: 5th Percentile Score

The 5th percentile score is the score below which 5 percent of students scored. Data reflects country performance in the stated year according to PISA reports, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PISA website for more detailed information: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: Distribution of Mathematics Scores: 10th Percentile Score

The 10th percentile score is the score below which 10 percent of students scored. Data reflects country performance in the stated year according to PISA reports, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PISA website for more detailed information: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: Distribution of Mathematics Scores: 25th Percentile Score

The 25th percentile score is the score below which 25 percent of students scored. Data reflects country performance in the stated year according to PISA reports, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PISA website for more detailed information: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: Distribution of Mathematics Scores: 50th Percentile Score

The 50th percentile score is the score below which 50 percent of students scored. Data reflects country performance in the stated year according to PISA reports, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PISA website for more detailed information: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: Distribution of Mathematics Scores: 75th Percentile Score

The 75th percentile score is the score below which 75 percent of students scored. Data reflects country performance in the stated year according to PISA reports, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PISA website for more detailed information: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: Distribution of Mathematics Scores: 90th Percentile Score

The 90th percentile score is the score below which 90 percent of students scored. Data reflects country performance in the stated year according to PISA reports, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PISA website for more detailed information: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: Distribution of Mathematics Scores: 95th Percentile Score

The 95th percentile score is the score below which 90 percent of students scored. Data reflects country performance in the stated year according to PISA reports, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PISA website for more detailed information: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: Mean performance on the reading scale

Average score of 15-year-old students on the PISA reading scale. The metric for the overall reading scale is based on a mean for participating OECD countries set at 500, with a standard deviation of 100. Data reflects country performance in the stated year according to PISA reports, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PISA website for more detailed information: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: 15-year-olds by reading proficiency level (%). Below Level 1B

Percentage of 15-year-old students scoring students below the lowest proficiency level (1B) on the PISA reading scale. Students with scores below Level 1b (less or equal to 262 points) usually do not succeed at the most basic reading tasks that PISA measures. This does not necessarily mean that they are illiterate, but that there is insufficient information on which to base a description of their reading proficiency. 2000, 2003, and 2006 PISA assessments used a different reading proficiency scale (Below Level 1 to Level 5) than later assessments, which use a reading scale from Below Level 1B to Level 6. Because an equivalent proficiency level to "Below Level 1B" and Level 1B were not calculated for the 2000, 2003, and 2006 PISA Reports, the data are not currently available for those years. Use caution in comparing proficiency scores across years. For more information on comparability of results, consult the PISA website: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/.

OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) (http://www.oecd.org/pisa/)


PISA: 15-year-olds by reading proficiency level (%). Below Level 1C

Percentage of 15-year-old students scoring students below the lowest proficiency level (1C) on the PISA reading scale. Students with scores below Level 1C (less or equal to 189 points) usually do not succeed at the most basic reading tasks that PISA measures. Use caution in comparing proficiency scores across years. For more information on comparability of results, consult the PISA website: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: Female 15-year-olds by reading proficiency level (%). Below Level 1C

Percentage of 15-year-old female students scoring students below the lowest proficiency level (1C) on the PISA reading scale. Students with scores below Level 1C (less or equal to 189 points) usually do not succeed at the most basic reading tasks that PISA measures. Use caution in comparing proficiency scores across years. For more information on comparability of results, consult the PISA website: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: Male 15-year-olds by reading proficiency level (%). Below Level 1C

Percentage of 15-year-old male students scoring students below the lowest proficiency level (1C) on the PISA reading scale. Students with scores below Level 1C (less or equal to 189 points) usually do not succeed at the most basic reading tasks that PISA measures. Use caution in comparing proficiency scores across years. For more information on comparability of results, consult the PISA website: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: 15-year-olds by reading proficiency level (%). Level 1A

Percentage of 15-year-old students scoring higher than 335 but lower than or equal to 407 on the PISA reading scale. Readers at Level 1a can understand the literal meaning of sentences or short passages. Readers at this level can also recognize the main theme or the author’s purpose in a piece of text about a familiar topic, and make a simple connection between several adjacent pieces of information, or between the given information and their own prior knowledge. They can select a relevant page from a small set based on simple prompts, and locate one or more independent pieces of information within short texts. Level 1a readers can reflect on the overall purpose and on the relative importance of information (e.g. the main idea vs. non-essential detail) in simple texts containing explicit cues. Most tasks at this level contain explicit cues regarding what needs to be done, how to do it, and where in the text(s) readers should focus their attention. 2000, 2003, and 2006 PISA assessments used a different reading proficiency scale (Levels 1 to 5) than later assessments. PISA 2000/2003/2006 Level 1 data have been included in this database as Level 1A because they are based on an identical score range.  Use caution in comparing proficiency scores across years. For more information on comparability of results, consult the PISA website: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: Female 15-year-olds by reading proficiency level (%). Level 1A

Percentage of 15-year-old female students scoring higher than 335 but lower than or equal to 407 on the PISA reading scale. Readers at Level 1a can understand the literal meaning of sentences or short passages. Readers at this level can also recognize the main theme or the author’s purpose in a piece of text about a familiar topic, and make a simple connection between several adjacent pieces of information, or between the given information and their own prior knowledge. They can select a relevant page from a small set based on simple prompts, and locate one or more independent pieces of information within short texts. Level 1a readers can reflect on the overall purpose and on the relative importance of information (e.g. the main idea vs. non-essential detail) in simple texts containing explicit cues. Most tasks at this level contain explicit cues regarding what needs to be done, how to do it, and where in the text(s) readers should focus their attention. 2000, 2003, and 2006 PISA assessments used a different reading proficiency scale (Levels 1 to 5) than later assessments. PISA 2000/2003/2006 Level 1 data have been included in this database as Level 1A because they are based on an identical score range.  Use caution in comparing proficiency scores across years. For more information on comparability of results, consult the PISA website: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: Male 15-year-olds by reading proficiency level (%). Level 1A

Percentage of 15-year-old male students scoring higher than 335 but lower than or equal to 407 on the PISA reading scale. Readers at Level 1a can understand the literal meaning of sentences or short passages. Readers at this level can also recognize the main theme or the author’s purpose in a piece of text about a familiar topic, and make a simple connection between several adjacent pieces of information, or between the given information and their own prior knowledge. They can select a relevant page from a small set based on simple prompts, and locate one or more independent pieces of information within short texts. Level 1a readers can reflect on the overall purpose and on the relative importance of information (e.g. the main idea vs. non-essential detail) in simple texts containing explicit cues. Most tasks at this level contain explicit cues regarding what needs to be done, how to do it, and where in the text(s) readers should focus their attention. 2000, 2003, and 2006 PISA assessments used a different reading proficiency scale (Levels 1 to 5) than later assessments. PISA 2000/2003/2006 Level 1 data have been included in this database as Level 1A because they are based on an identical score range.  Use caution in comparing proficiency scores across years. For more information on comparability of results, consult the PISA website: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: 15-year-olds by reading proficiency level (%). Level 1B

Percentage of 15-year-old students scoring higher than 262 but lower than or equal to 335 on the PISA reading scale. Readers at Level 1b can evaluate the literal meaning of simple sentences. They can also interpret the literal meaning of texts by making simple connections between adjacent pieces of information in the question and/or the text. Readers at this level can scan for and locate a single piece of prominently placed, explicitly stated information in a single sentence, a short text or a simple list. They can access a relevant page from a small set based on simple prompts when explicit cues are present. Tasks at Level 1b explicitly direct readers to consider relevant factors in the task and in the text. Texts at this level are short and typically provide support to the reader, such as through repetition of information, pictures or familiar symbols. There is minimal competing information. 2000, 2003, and 2006 PISA assessments used a different reading proficiency scale (Below Level 1 to Level 5) than later assessments. Data for 2000, 2003, and 2006 for Level 1B were not included in PISA reports, but values in this database were calculated based on the current Level 1B score range. Use caution in comparing proficiency scores across years. For more information on comparability of results, consult the PISA website: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: Female 15-year-olds by reading proficiency level (%). Level 1B

Percentage of 15-year-old female students scoring higher than 262 but lower than or equal to 335 on the PISA reading scale. Readers at Level 1b can evaluate the literal meaning of simple sentences. They can also interpret the literal meaning of texts by making simple connections between adjacent pieces of information in the question and/or the text. Readers at this level can scan for and locate a single piece of prominently placed, explicitly stated information in a single sentence, a short text or a simple list. They can access a relevant page from a small set based on simple prompts when explicit cues are present. Tasks at Level 1b explicitly direct readers to consider relevant factors in the task and in the text. Texts at this level are short and typically provide support to the reader, such as through repetition of information, pictures or familiar symbols. There is minimal competing information. 2000, 2003, and 2006 PISA assessments used a different reading proficiency scale (Below Level 1 to Level 5) than later assessments. Data for 2000, 2003, and 2006 for Level 1B were not included in PISA reports, but values in this database were calculated based on the current Level 1B score range. Use caution in comparing proficiency scores across years. For more information on comparability of results, consult the PISA website: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: Male 15-year-olds by reading proficiency level (%). Level 1B

Percentage of 15-year-old male students scoring higher than 262 but lower than or equal to 335 on the PISA reading scale. Readers at Level 1b can evaluate the literal meaning of simple sentences. They can also interpret the literal meaning of texts by making simple connections between adjacent pieces of information in the question and/or the text. Readers at this level can scan for and locate a single piece of prominently placed, explicitly stated information in a single sentence, a short text or a simple list. They can access a relevant page from a small set based on simple prompts when explicit cues are present. Tasks at Level 1b explicitly direct readers to consider relevant factors in the task and in the text. Texts at this level are short and typically provide support to the reader, such as through repetition of information, pictures or familiar symbols. There is minimal competing information. 2000, 2003, and 2006 PISA assessments used a different reading proficiency scale (Below Level 1 to Level 5) than later assessments. Data for 2000, 2003, and 2006 for Level 1B were not included in PISA reports, but values in this database were calculated based on the current Level 1B score range. Use caution in comparing proficiency scores across years. For more information on comparability of results, consult the PISA website: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: 15-year-olds by reading proficiency level (%). Level 1C

Percentage of 15-year-old students scoring higher than 189 but lower than or equal to 262 on the PISA reading scale. Readers at Level 1C can understand and affirm the meaning of short, syntactically simple sentences on a literal level, and read for a clear and simple purpose within a limited amount of time. Tasks at this level involve simple vocabulary and syntactic structures. Use caution in comparing proficiency scores across years. For more information on comparability of results, consult the PISA website: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: Female 15-year-olds by reading proficiency level (%). Level 1C

Percentage of 15-year-old female students scoring higher than 189 but lower than or equal to 262 on the PISA reading scale. Readers at Level 1C can understand and affirm the meaning of short, syntactically simple sentences on a literal level, and read for a clear and simple purpose within a limited amount of time. Tasks at this level involve simple vocabulary and syntactic structures. Use caution in comparing proficiency scores across years. For more information on comparability of results, consult the PISA website: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: Male 15-year-olds by reading proficiency level (%). Level 1C

Percentage of 15-year-old male students scoring higher than 189 but lower than or equal to 262 on the PISA reading scale. Readers at Level 1C can understand and affirm the meaning of short, syntactically simple sentences on a literal level, and read for a clear and simple purpose within a limited amount of time. Tasks at this level involve simple vocabulary and syntactic structures. Use caution in comparing proficiency scores across years. For more information on comparability of results, consult the PISA website: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: 15-year-olds by reading proficiency level (%). Level 2

Percentage of 15-year-old students scoring higher than 407 but lower than or equal to 480 on the PISA reading scale. Readers at Level 2 can identify the main idea in a piece of text of moderate length. They can understand relationships or construe meaning within a limited part of the text when the information is not prominent by producing basic inferences, and/or when the text(s) include some distracting information. They can select and access a page in a set based on explicit though sometimes complex prompts, and locate one or more pieces of information based on multiple, partly implicit criteria. Readers at Level 2 can, when explicitly cued, reflect on the overall purpose, or on the purpose of specific details, in texts of moderate length. They can reflect on simple visual or typographical features. They can compare claims and evaluate the reasons supporting them based on short, explicit statements. Tasks at Level 2 may involve comparisons or contrasts based on a single feature in the text. Typical reflective tasks at this level require readers to make a comparison or several connections between the text and outside knowledge by drawing on personal experience and attitudes. 2000, 2003, and 2006 PISA assessments used a different reading proficiency scale (Levels 1 to 5) than later assessments. PISA 2000/2003/2006 Level 2 data have been included in this database as Level 2 because they are based on an identical score range. Use caution in comparing proficiency scores across years. For more information on comparability of results, consult the PISA website: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: Female 15-year-olds by reading proficiency level (%). Level 2

Percentage of 15-year-old female students scoring higher than 407 but lower than or equal to 480 on the PISA reading scale. Readers at Level 2 can identify the main idea in a piece of text of moderate length. They can understand relationships or construe meaning within a limited part of the text when the information is not prominent by producing basic inferences, and/or when the text(s) include some distracting information. They can select and access a page in a set based on explicit though sometimes complex prompts, and locate one or more pieces of information based on multiple, partly implicit criteria. Readers at Level 2 can, when explicitly cued, reflect on the overall purpose, or on the purpose of specific details, in texts of moderate length. They can reflect on simple visual or typographical features. They can compare claims and evaluate the reasons supporting them based on short, explicit statements. Tasks at Level 2 may involve comparisons or contrasts based on a single feature in the text. Typical reflective tasks at this level require readers to make a comparison or several connections between the text and outside knowledge by drawing on personal experience and attitudes. 2000, 2003, and 2006 PISA assessments used a different reading proficiency scale (Levels 1 to 5) than later assessments. PISA 2000/2003/2006 Level 2 data have been included in this database as Level 2 because they are based on an identical score range. Use caution in comparing proficiency scores across years. For more information on comparability of results, consult the PISA website: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/


PISA: Male 15-year-olds by reading proficiency level (%). Level 2

Percentage of 15-year-old male students scoring higher than 407 but lower than or equal to 480 on the PISA reading scale. Readers at Level 2 can identify the main idea in a piece of text of moderate length. They can understand relationships or construe meaning within a limited part of the text when the information is not prominent by producing basic inferences, and/or when the text(s) include some distracting information. They can select and access a page in a set based on explicit though sometimes complex prompts, and locate one or more pieces of information based on multiple, partly implicit criteria. Readers at Level 2 can, when explicitly cued, reflect on the overall purpose, or on the purpose of specific details, in texts of moderate length. They can reflect on simple visual or typographical features. They can compare claims and evaluate the reasons supporting them based on short, explicit statements. Tasks at Level 2 may involve comparisons or contrasts based on a single feature in the text. Typical reflective tasks at this level require readers to make a comparison or several connections between the text and outside knowledge by drawing on personal experience and attitudes. 2000, 2003, and 2006 PISA assessments used a different reading proficiency scale (Levels 1 to 5) than later assessments. PISA 2000/2003/2006 Level 2 data have been included in this database as Level 2 because they are based on an identical score range. Use caution in comparing proficiency scores across years. For more information on comparability of results, consult the PISA website: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/