Iceland had the highest inequality-adjusted education index score worldwide, amounting to **** out of one on the index. Germany followed with an index score of ****. The inequality-adjusted education index is the education index in the Human Development Index adjusted for inequality.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
The average for 2021 based on 41 countries was 111.6 index points. The highest value was in Luxembourg: 422.59 index points and the lowest value was in Turkey: 10.85 index points. The indicator is available from 2017 to 2021. Below is a chart for all countries where data are available.
This statistic illustrates the ranking of China's education among ** countries in the global soft power index list from 2015 to 2019. According to the Soft Power ** study results of 2019, China ranked number ** in the education category among ** countries worldwide making an four-place jump since the previous year.
Explore the Times Higher Education World University Rankings 2025 below. Trusted worldwide by students, teachers, governments and industry experts, the list ranks 2,092 institutions from 115 countries and territories.
This study provides an update on measures of educational attainment for a broad cross section of countries. In our previous work (Barro and Lee, 1993), we constructed estimates of educational attainment by sex for persons aged 25 and over. The values applied to 129 countries over a five-year intervals from 1960 to 1985.
The present study adds census information for 1985 and 1990 and updates the estimates of educational attainment to 1990. We also have been able to add a few countries, notably China, which were previously omitted because of missing data.
Dataset:
Educational attainment at various levels for the male and female population. The data set includes estimates of educational attainment for the population by age - over age 15 and over age 25 - for 126 countries in the world. (see Barro, Robert and J.W. Lee, "International Measures of Schooling Years and Schooling Quality, AER, Papers and Proceedings, 86(2), pp. 218-223 and also see "International Data on Education", manuscipt.) Data are presented quinquennially for the years 1960-1990;
Educational quality across countries. Table 1 presents data on measures of schooling inputs at five-year intervals from 1960 to 1990. Table 2 contains the data on average test scores for the students of the different age groups for the various subjects.Please see Jong-Wha Lee and Robert J. Barro, "Schooling Quality in a Cross-Section of Countries," (NBER Working Paper No.w6198, September 1997) for more detailed explanation and sources of data.
The data set cobvers the following countries: - Afghanistan - Albania - Algeria - Angola - Argentina - Australia - Austria - Bahamas, The - Bahrain - Bangladesh - Barbados - Belgium - Benin - Bolivia - Botswana - Brazil - Bulgaria - Burkina Faso - Burundi - Cameroon - Canada - Cape verde - Central African Rep. - Chad - Chile - China - Colombia - Comoros - Congo - Costa Rica - Cote d'Ivoire - Cuba - Cyprus - Czechoslovakia - Denmark - Dominica - Dominican Rep. - Ecuador - Egypt - El Salvador - Ethiopia - Fiji - Finland - France - Gabon - Gambia - Germany, East - Germany, West - Ghana - Greece - Grenada - Guatemala - Guinea - Guinea-Bissau - Guyana - Haiti - Honduras - Hong Kong - Hungary - Iceland - India - Indonesia - Iran, I.R. of - Iraq - Ireland - Israel - Italy - Jamaica - Japan - Jordan - Kenya - Korea - Kuwait - Lesotho - Liberia - Luxembourg - Madagascar - Malawi - Malaysia - Mali - Malta - Mauritania - Mauritius - Mexico - Morocco - Mozambique - Myanmar (Burma) - Nepal - Netherlands - New Zealand - Nicaragua - Niger - Nigeria - Norway - Oman - Pakistan - Panama - Papua New Guinea - Paraguay - Peru - Philippines - Poland - Portugal - Romania - Rwanda - Saudi Arabia - Senegal - Seychelles - Sierra Leone - Singapore - Solomon Islands - Somalia - South africa - Spain - Sri Lanka - St.Lucia - St.Vincent & Grens. - Sudan - Suriname - Swaziland - Sweden - Switzerland - Syria - Taiwan - Tanzania - Thailand - Togo - Tonga - Trinidad & Tobago - Tunisia - Turkey - U.S.S.R. - Uganda - United Arab Emirates - United Kingdom - United States - Uruguay - Vanuatu - Venezuela - Western Samoa - Yemen, N.Arab - Yugoslavia - Zaire - Zambia - Zimbabwe
Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 (CC BY-NC 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
In 2019, Education Price Index in Luxembourg was up 3.4% from a year earlier.
The Times Higher Education World University Rankings 2020 includes almost 1,400 universities across 92 countries, standing as the largest and most diverse university rankings ever to date. The table is based on 13 carefully calibrated performance indicators that measure an institution’s performance across teaching, research, knowledge transfer and international outlook.
CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedicationhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
License information was derived automatically
This Subnational Human Development Index Database contains for the period 1990-2017 for 1625 regions within 161 countries the national and subnational values of the Subnational Human Development Index (SHDI), for the three dimension indices on the basis of which the SHDI is constructed – education, health and standard of living --, and for the four indicators needed to create the dimension indices -- expected years of schooling, mean years of schooling, life expectancy and gross national income per capita.
This statistic represents the ranking in the Gulf Cooperation Council region for quality of math and science of education in 2018, by country. During the measured time period, the rank of Qatar was ***** out of 140 countries for the quality of math and science of education.
Finland had the highest quality of primary education in the world in 2017, with an index score of ***. The index runs on a scale of one (low quality) to seven (very good). Switzerland, Singapore, the Netherlands, and Estonia rounded out the top five for countries with the highest quality of primary education. A solid foundation Primary school age children are generally between the ages of six and eleven years old. Primary school is the first stage of formal education and consists of general knowledge and fundamental skills in areas like mathematics, reading, writing, and science, with student enrollment rates being particularly high in advanced economies. This helps young students to form a solid base for further study as they get older. Primary education in the United States Primary schools in the United States, where they are called elementary schools, can be either private or public institutions, with enrollment in public schools generally higher than in private schools. Education from the age of five is mandatory in the U.S., whether that be through the state-funded public school system, private schooling, or through an approved home school program. Depending on state law, students can leave school between the ages of 16 and 18.
The dashboard project collects new data in each country using three new instruments: a School Survey, a Policy Survey, and a Survey of Public Officials. Data collection involves school visits, classroom observations, legislative reviews, teacher and student assessments, and interviews with teachers, principals, and public officials. In addition, the project draws on some existing data sources to complement the new data it collects. A major objective of the GEPD project was to develop focused, cost-effective instruments and data-collection procedures, so that the dashboard can be inexpensive enough to be applied (and re-applied) in many countries. The team achieved this by streamlining and simplifying existing instruments, and thereby reducing the time required for data collection and training of enumerators.
National
Schools, teachers, students, public officials
Sample survey data [ssd]
The aim of the Global Education Policy Dashboard school survey is to produce nationally representative estimates, which will be able to detect changes in the indicators over time at a minimum power of 80% and with a 0.05 significance level. We also wish to detect differences by urban/rural location.
For our school survey, we will employ a two-stage random sample design, where in the first stage a sample of typically around 200 schools, based on local conditions, is drawn, chosen in advance by the Bank staff. In the second stage, a sample of teachers and students will be drawn to answer questions from our survey modules, chosen in the field. A total of 10 teachers will be sampled for absenteeism. Five teachers will be interviewed and given a content knowledge exam. Three 1st grade students will be assessed at random, and a classroom of 4th grade students will be assessed at random. Stratification will be based on the school’s urban/rural classification and based on region. When stratifying by region, we will work with our partners within the country to make sure we include all relevant geographical divisions.
For our Survey of Public Officials, we will sample a total of 200 public officials. Roughly 60 officials are typically surveyed at the federal level, while 140 officials will be surveyed at the regional/district level. For selection of officials at the regional and district level, we will employ a cluster sampling strategy, where roughly 10 regional offices (or whatever the secondary administrative unit is called) are chosen at random from among the regions in which schools were sampled. Then among these 10 regions, we also typically select around 10 districts (tertiary administrative level units) from among the districts in which schools werer sampled. The result of this sampling approach is that for 10 clusters we will have links from the school to the district office to the regional office to the central office. Within the regions/districts, five or six officials will be sampled, including the head of organization, HR director, two division directors from finance and planning, and one or two randomly selected professional employees among the finance, planning, and one other service related department chosen at random. At the federal level, we will interview the HR director, finance director, planning director, and three randomly selected service focused departments. In addition to the directors of each of these departments, a sample of 9 professional employees will be chosen in each department at random on the day of the interview.
For our school survey, we select only schools that are supervised by the Minsitry or Education or are Private schools. No schools supervised by the Ministry of Defense, Ministry of Endowments, Ministry of Higher Education , or Ministry of Social Development are included. This left us with a sampling frame containing 3,330 schools, with 1297 private schools and 2003 schools managed by the Minsitry of Education. The schools must also have at least 3 grade 1 students, 3 grade 4 students, and 3 teachers. We oversampled Southern schools to reach a total of 50 Southern schools for regional comparisons. Additionally, we oversampled Evening schools, for a total of 40 evening schools.
A total of 250 schools were surveyed.
Computer Assisted Personal Interview [capi]
The dashboard project collects new data in each country using three new instruments: a School Survey, a Policy Survey, and a Survey of Public Officials. Data collection involves school visits, classroom observations, legislative reviews, teacher and student assessments, and interviews with teachers, principals, and public officials. In addition, the project draws on some existing data sources to complement the new data it collects. A major objective of the GEPD project was to develop focused, cost-effective instruments and data-collection procedures, so that the dashboard can be inexpensive enough to be applied (and re-applied) in many countries. The team achieved this by streamlining and simplifying existing instruments, and thereby reducing the time required for data collection and training of enumerators.
More information pertaining to each of the three instruments can be found below:
School Survey: The School Survey collects data primarily on practices (the quality of service delivery in schools), but also on some de facto policy indicators. It consists of streamlined versions of existing instruments—including Service Delivery Surveys on teachers and inputs/infrastructure, Teach on pedagogical practice, Global Early Child Development Database (GECDD) on school readiness of young children, and the Development World Management Survey (DWMS) on management quality—together with new questions to fill gaps in those instruments. Though the number of modules is similar to the full version of the Service Delivery Indicators (SDI) Survey, the number of items and the complexity of the questions within each module is significantly lower. The School Survey includes 8 short modules: School Information, Teacher Presence, Teacher Survey, Classroom Observation, Teacher Assessment, Early Learner Direct Assessment, School Management Survey, and 4th-grade Student Assessment. For a team of two enumerators, it takes on average about 4 hours to collect all information in a given school. For more information, refer to the Frequently Asked Questions.
Policy Survey: The Policy Survey collects information to feed into the policy de jure indicators. This survey is filled out by key informants in each country, drawing on their knowledge to identify key elements of the policy framework (as in the SABER approach to policy-data collection that the Bank has used over the past 7 years). The survey includes questions on policies related to teachers, school management, inputs and infrastructure, and learners. In total, there are 52 questions in the survey as of June 2020. The key informant is expected to spend 2-3 days gathering and analyzing the relavant information to answer the survey questions.
Survey of Public Officials: The Survey of Public Officials collects information about the capacity and orientation of the bureaucracy, as well as political factors affecting education outcomes. This survey is a streamlined and education-focused version of the civil-servant surveys that the Bureaucracy Lab (a joint initiative of the Governance Global Practice and the Development Impact Evaluation unit of the World Bank) has implemented in several countries. The survey includes questions about technical and leadership skills, work environment, stakeholder engagement, impartial decision-making, and attitudes and behaviors. The survey takes 30-45 minutes per public official and is used to interview Ministry of Education officials working at the central, regional, and district levels in each country.
The aim of the Global Education Policy Dashboard school survey is to produce nationally representative estimates, which will be able to detect changes in the indicators over time at a minimum power of 80% and with a 0.05 significance level.
Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Overview This dataset presents the Times Higher Education (THE) World University Rankings 2025, evaluating universities globally based on critical academic and research performance indicators. It provides a comprehensive view of institutions' strengths in teaching, research, industry collaboration, and international diversity.
Data Source The rankings are based on THE’s methodology, which incorporates a balanced mix of quantitative and qualitative indicators, assessing universities across multiple dimensions to determine their global standing.
Column Description - Rank & Dense Rank – Global ranking of universities. - University Name & Location – Institution names and respective countries. - Overall Score – Aggregated performance score. - Teaching Score – Quality of education and student experience. - Research Environment & Research Quality – Academic research output and impact. - Industry Engagement – Collaboration and funding from industries. - International Outlook – Global student and faculty diversity. - Number of FTE Students – Full-time equivalent student count. - Students per Staff – Student-to-faculty ratio. - International Students (%) – Proportion of international students.
Potential Use Cases - Comparative University Analysis – Identify top-performing institutions based on key metrics. - Higher Education Research – Study global education trends over time. - Decision-Making for Students & Academics – Assist students in selecting universities. - Policy & Investment Research – Evaluate funding impact on institutional performance.
Who Can Benefit? - Students & Parents – Choosing the best universities. - Researchers & Analysts – Understanding global higher education trends. - Education Consultants & Institutions – Benchmarking performance. - Policymakers & Investors – Assessing university funding and development impact.
This dataset is a valuable resource for data analysis, visualization, and insights into the ever-evolving landscape of global higher education.
Russia topped Coursera's ranking of technology skills in 2020. Among other countries of Central and Eastern Europe, Belarus and Ukraine followed, at the **** and **** percentile, respectively. Romania was the only listed country of the region outside the Cutting-Edge category, at the **** percentile.
The Times Higher Education World University Rankings 2024 include 1,907 universities across 108 countries and regions. The table is based on a new methodology, which includes 18 carefully calibrated performance indicators that measure an institution’s performance across five areas: teaching, research environment, research quality, industry, and international outlook.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
The average for 2021 based on 158 countries was 4.48 percent. The highest value was in Kiribati: 14.2 percent and the lowest value was in Nigeria: 0.38 percent. The indicator is available from 1970 to 2023. Below is a chart for all countries where data are available.
The Times Higher Education World University Rankings 2011-2012 list the best global universities and are the only international university performance tables to judge world class universities across all of their core missions – teaching, research, knowledge transfer and international outlook.
This statistic describes the scores on the Social Progress Index for access to advanced education in the Middle East and North Africa in 2016, by country. During this time period, the United Arab Emirates scored ** out of 100 on access to advanced education, compared to Yemen's score of *.
The dashboard project collects new data in each country using three new instruments: a School Survey, a Policy Survey, and a Survey of Public Officials. Data collection involves school visits, classroom observations, legislative reviews, teacher and student assessments, and interviews with teachers, principals, and public officials. In addition, the project draws on some existing data sources to complement the new data it collects. A major objective of the GEPD project was to develop focused, cost-effective instruments and data-collection procedures, so that the dashboard can be inexpensive enough to be applied (and re-applied) in many countries. The team achieved this by streamlining and simplifying existing instruments, and thereby reducing the time required for data collection and training of enumerators.
National
Schools, teachers, students, public officials
Sample survey data [ssd]
The aim of the Global Education Policy Dashboard school survey is to produce nationally representative estimates, which will be able to detect changes in the indicators over time at a minimum power of 80% and with a 0.05 significance level. We also wish to detect differences by urban/rural location.
For our school survey, we will employ a two-stage random sample design, where in the first stage a sample of typically around 200 schools, based on local conditions, is drawn, chosen in advance by the Bank staff. In the second stage, a sample of teachers and students will be drawn to answer questions from our survey modules, chosen in the field. A total of 10 teachers will be sampled for absenteeism. Five teachers will be interviewed and given a content knowledge exam. Three 1st grade students will be assessed at random, and a classroom of 4th grade students will be assessed at random. Stratification will be based on the school’s urban/rural classification and based on region. When stratifying by region, we will work with our partners within the country to make sure we include all relevant geographical divisions.
For our Survey of Public Officials, we will sample a total of 200 public officials. Roughly 60 officials are typically surveyed at the federal level, while 140 officials will be surveyed at the regional/district level. For selection of officials at the regional and district level, we will employ a cluster sampling strategy, where roughly 10 regional offices (or whatever the secondary administrative unit is called) are chosen at random from among the regions in which schools were sampled. Then among these 10 regions, we also typically select around 10 districts (tertiary administrative level units) from among the districts in which schools werer sampled. The result of this sampling approach is that for 10 clusters we will have links from the school to the district office to the regional office to the central office. Within the regions/districts, five or six officials will be sampled, including the head of organization, HR director, two division directors from finance and planning, and one or two randomly selected professional employees among the finance, planning, and one other service related department chosen at random. At the federal level, we will interview the HR director, finance director, planning director, and three randomly selected service focused departments. In addition to the directors of each of these departments, a sample of 9 professional employees will be chosen in each department at random on the day of the interview.
Overall, we draw a sample of 300 public schools from each of the regions of Ethiopia. As a comparison to the total number of schools in Ethiopia, this consistutes an approximately 1% sample. Because of the large size of the country, and because there can be very large distances between Woredas within the same region, we chose a cluster sampling approach. In this approach, 100 Woredas were chosen with probability proportional to 4th grade size. Then within each Woreda two rural and one urban school were chosen with probability proportional to 4th grade size.
Because of conflict in the Tigray region, an initial set of 12 schools that were selected had to be trimmed to 6 schools in Tigray. These six schools were then distributed to other regions in Ethiopia.
Computer Assisted Personal Interview [capi]
The dashboard project collects new data in each country using three new instruments: a School Survey, a Policy Survey, and a Survey of Public Officials. Data collection involves school visits, classroom observations, legislative reviews, teacher and student assessments, and interviews with teachers, principals, and public officials. In addition, the project draws on some existing data sources to complement the new data it collects. A major objective of the GEPD project was to develop focused, cost-effective instruments and data-collection procedures, so that the dashboard can be inexpensive enough to be applied (and re-applied) in many countries. The team achieved this by streamlining and simplifying existing instruments, and thereby reducing the time required for data collection and training of enumerators.
More information pertaining to each of the three instruments can be found below:
School Survey: The School Survey collects data primarily on practices (the quality of service delivery in schools), but also on some de facto policy indicators. It consists of streamlined versions of existing instruments—including Service Delivery Surveys on teachers and inputs/infrastructure, Teach on pedagogical practice, Global Early Child Development Database (GECDD) on school readiness of young children, and the Development World Management Survey (DWMS) on management quality—together with new questions to fill gaps in those instruments. Though the number of modules is similar to the full version of the Service Delivery Indicators (SDI) Survey, the number of items and the complexity of the questions within each module is significantly lower. The School Survey includes 8 short modules: School Information, Teacher Presence, Teacher Survey, Classroom Observation, Teacher Assessment, Early Learner Direct Assessment, School Management Survey, and 4th-grade Student Assessment. For a team of two enumerators, it takes on average about 4 hours to collect all information in a given school. For more information, refer to the Frequently Asked Questions.
Policy Survey: The Policy Survey collects information to feed into the policy de jure indicators. This survey is filled out by key informants in each country, drawing on their knowledge to identify key elements of the policy framework (as in the SABER approach to policy-data collection that the Bank has used over the past 7 years). The survey includes questions on policies related to teachers, school management, inputs and infrastructure, and learners. In total, there are 52 questions in the survey as of June 2020. The key informant is expected to spend 2-3 days gathering and analyzing the relavant information to answer the survey questions.
Survey of Public Officials: The Survey of Public Officials collects information about the capacity and orientation of the bureaucracy, as well as political factors affecting education outcomes. This survey is a streamlined and education-focused version of the civil-servant surveys that the Bureaucracy Lab (a joint initiative of the Governance Global Practice and the Development Impact Evaluation unit of the World Bank) has implemented in several countries. The survey includes questions about technical and leadership skills, work environment, stakeholder engagement, impartial decision-making, and attitudes and behaviors. The survey takes 30-45 minutes per public official and is used to interview Ministry of Education officials working at the central, regional, and district levels in each country.
The aim of the Global Education Policy Dashboard school survey is to produce nationally representative estimates, which will be able to detect changes in the indicators over time at a minimum power of 80% and with a 0.05 significance level.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Dataset containing university rankings. See source: https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings
Originally used in:
Anahideh, Hadis, and Nasrin Mohabbati-Kalejahi. "Local explanations of global rankings: insights for competitive rankings." IEEE Access 10 (2022): 30676-30693. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/9733934
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
The average for 2022 based on 126 countries was 94.03 percent. The highest value was in Finland: 144.85 percent and the lowest value was in Burkina Faso: 33.72 percent. The indicator is available from 1970 to 2023. Below is a chart for all countries where data are available.
Iceland had the highest inequality-adjusted education index score worldwide, amounting to **** out of one on the index. Germany followed with an index score of ****. The inequality-adjusted education index is the education index in the Human Development Index adjusted for inequality.