***** of the examinees in the screening test for gifted and talented students in Hebrew education in Israel in the 2021/22 school year were boys. Boys were the leading group in the country in terms of the number of examinees in these screening tests. ***** girls were sent to participate in the screening tests for gifted students in the country, representing approximately ** percent of all examinees this year. In comparison, the share of girls sent for screening tests in Arab education in the country in the same year stood at over ** percent.

Estimated average scores and percent distribution of 15-year-old students, science, by proficiency level, Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), Canada, provinces and participating countries, Council of Ministers of Education Canada (CMEC). This table is included in Section C: Elementary-secondary education: Student achievement of the Pan Canadian Education Indicators Program (PCEIP). PCEIP draws from a wide variety of data sources to provide information on the school-age population, elementary, secondary and postsecondary education, transitions, education finance and labour market outcomes. The program presents indicators for all of Canada, the provinces, the territories, as well as selected international comparisons and comparisons over time. PCEIP is an ongoing initiative of the Canadian Education Statistics Council, a partnership between Statistics Canada and the Council of Ministers of Education, Canada that provides a set of statistical measures on education systems in Canada.

Abstract

The PIRLS 2001 aimed to generate a database of student achievement data in addition to information on student, parent, teacher, and school background data for the 35 countries that participated in PIRLS 2001.

Geographic coverage

Nationally Coverage

Analysis unit

Units of analysis in the study are schools, students, parents and teachers.

Universe

The PIRLS 2001 target populations are all children in "the upper of the two grades with the most 9-year-olds at the time of testing" (PIRLS, 1999) in each participating country. This corresponds to the fourth grade in most countries. This population was chosen because it represents an important transition point in children's development as readers. In most countries, by the end of fourth grade, children are expected to have learned how to read, and are now reading to learn.

The teachers in the PIRLS 2001 international database do not constitute representative samples of teachers in the participating countries. Rather, they are the teachers of nationally representative samples of students. Therefore, analyses with teacher data should be made with students as the units of analysis and reported in terms of students who are taught by teachers with a particular attribute. Teacher data are analyzed by linking the students to their teachers. The student-teacher linkage data files are used for this purpose. The same caveat applies to analyses of schools and parents.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

To be acceptable for PIRLS 2001, national sample designs had to result in probability samples that gave accurate weighted estimates of population parameters such as means and percentages, and for which estimates of sampling variance could be computed. The PIRLS 2001 sample design is derived from the design of IEA's TIMSS (see Foy & Joncas, 2000), with minor refinements. Since sampling for PIRLS was to be implemented by the National Research Coordinator (NRC) in each participating country - often with limited resources - it was essential that the design be simple and easy to implement while yielding accurate and efficient samples of both schools and students.

The international project team provided manuals and expert advice to help NRCs adapt the PIRLS sample design to their national system, and to guide them through the phases of sampling. The School Sampling Manual (PIRLS, 1999) describes how to implement the international sample design to select the school sample; and offers advice on initial planning, adapting the design to national situations, establishing appropriate sample selection procedures, and conducting fieldwork. The Survey Operations Manual and School Coordinator Manual (PIRLS, 2001b, 2001a) provide information on sampling within schools, assigning assessment booklets and questionnaires to sampled students, and tracking respondents and non-respondents. To automate the rather complex within-school sampling procedures, NRCs were provided with sampling software jointly developed by the IEA Data Processing Center and Statistics Canada (IEA, 2001).

In IEA studies, the target population for all countries is known as the international desired target population. This is the grade or age level that each country should address in its sampling activities. The international desired target population for PIRLS 2001 was the following: "All students enrolled in the upper of the two adjacent grades that contain the largest proportion of 9-year-olds at the time of testing."

PIRLS expected all participating countries to define their national desired population to correspond as closely as possible to its definition of the international desired population. Using its national desired population as a basis, each participating country had to define its population in operational terms for sampling purposes. This definition, known in IEA terminology as the national defined population, is essentially the sampling frame from which the first stage of sampling takes place. Ideally, the national defined population should coincide with the national desired population, although in reality there may be some school types or regions that cannot be included; consequently, the national defined population is usually a very large subset of the national desired population. All schools and students in the desired population not included in the defined population are referred to as the excluded population.

The international sample design for PIRLS is generally referred to as a two-stage stratified cluster sample design. The first stage consists of a sample of schools, which may be stratified; the second stage consists of a sample of one or more classrooms from the target grade in sampled schools.

For more information on the approach to sampling adopted please consult section 5 of the PIRLS 2001 user guide.

Sampling deviation

Although countries were expected to do everything possible to maximize coverage of the population by the sampling plan, schools could be excluded, where necessary, from the sampling frame for the following reasons:

• They were in geographically remote regions.

• They were extremely small in size.

• They offered a curriculum or a school structure that was different from the mainstream educational system(s).

• They provided instruction only to students in the categories defined as “within-school exclusions.”

Within-school exclusions were limited to students who, because of some disability, were unable to take the PIRLS tests. NRCs were asked to define anticipated within school exclusions. Because these definitions can vary internationally, they were also asked to follow certain rules adapted to their jurisdictions. In addition, they were to estimate the size of the included population so that their compliance with the 95 percent rule could be projected. The general PIRLS rules for defining within-school exclusions included the following three groups:

• Educable mentally-disabled students. These are students who were considered, in the professional opinion of the school principal or other qualified staff members, to be educable mentally disabled – or who had been so diagnosed in psychological tests. This category included students who were emotionally or mentally unable to follow even the general instructions of the PIRLS test. It did not include students who merely exhibited poor academic performance or discipline problems.

• Functionally-disabled students. These are students who were permanently physically disabled in such a way that they could not perform in the PIRLS tests. Functionally-disabled students who could perform were included in the testing.

• Non-native-language speakers. These are students who could not read or speak the language of the test, and so could not overcome the language barrier of testing. Typically, a student who had received less than one year of instruction in the language of the test was excluded, but this definition was adapted in different countries. A major objective of PIRLS was that the effective target population, the population actually sampled by PIRLS, be as close as possible to the international desired population. Each country had to account for any exclusion of eligible students from the international desired population. This applied to school-level exclusions as well as within-school exclusions. See Appendix B of the PIRLS 2001 Technical Report (attached as Related Material) for a detailed account of sample implementation in each country

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

• PIRLS Background Questionnaires By gathering information about children’s experiences together with reading achievement on the PIRLS test, it is possible to identify the factors or combinations of factors that relate to high reading literacy. An important part of the PIRLS design is a set of questionnaires targeting factors related to reading literacy. PIRLS administered four questionnaires: to the tested students, to their parents, to their reading teachers, and to their school principals.

• Student Questionnaire Each student taking the PIRLS reading assessment completes the student questionnaire. The questionnaire asks about aspects of students’ home and school experiences – including instructional experiences and reading for homework, self perceptions and attitudes towards reading, out-of-school reading habits, computer use, home literacy resources, and basic demographic information.

• Learning to Read (Home) Survey The learning to read survey is completed by the parents or primary caregivers of each student taking the PIRLS reading assessment. It addresses child-parent literacy interactions, home literacy resources, parents’ reading habits and attitudes, homeschool connections, and basic demographic and socioeconomic indicators.

• Teacher Questionnaire The reading teacher of each fourth-grade class sampled for PIRLS completes a questionnaire designed to gather information about classroom contexts for developing reading literacy. This questionnaire asks teachers about characteristics of the class tested (such as size, reading levels of the students, and the language abilities of the students). It also asks about instructional time, materials and activities for teaching reading and promoting the development of their students’ reading literacy, and the grouping of students for reading instruction. Questions about classroom resources, assessment practices, and home-school connections also are included. The questionnaire also asks teachers for their views on opportunities for professional development and collaboration with other teachers, and for information about

***** of the examinees in the screening test for gifted and talented students in Arab education in Israel in the 2021/22 school year were girls. The number of girls sent for the screening test was slightly higher than the number of boys, which was *****. Girls represented nearly ** percent of all examinees sent for screening tests that year. In comparison, the share of girls sent for screening tests in Hebrew education in the country in the same year was only ** percent.

Abstract

The Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), conducted by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), is a collaborative effort among OECD Member countries to measure how well 15-year-old young adults approaching the end of compulsory schooling are prepared to meet the challenges of today's knowledge societies. The assessment is forward-looking: rather than focusing on the extent to which these students have mastered a specific school curriculum, it looks at their ability to use their knowledge and skills to meet real-life challenges. This orientation reflects a change in curricular goals and objectives, which are increasingly concerned with what students can do with what they learn at school. Thirty-two countries participated in the first PISA survey in 2000. It included 28 Member countries of the OECD, and four non-OECD countries.

Geographic coverage

Participating in PISA 2000: 43 countries - 32 in a first wave and a further 11 administering the same survey in 2001.

Analysis unit

The base PISA target population in each country consisted of 15-year-old students attending educational institutions located within the participating country. In practice, this refers to students who were aged between 15 years and 3 (complete) months and 16 years and 2 (complete) months at the beginning of the assessment period and who were enrolled in an educational institution, regardless of the grade level or type of institution and of whether they are fulltime or part-time students.

Sampling procedure

More than a quarter of a million students, representing almost 17 million 15-year-olds enrolled in the schools of the 32 participating countries, were assessed in 2000.

The school Samples: The sampling design used for the PISA assessment was a two-stage stratified sample in most countries. The first-stage sampling units consisted of individual schools having 15-year-old students. In all but a few countries, schools were sampled systematically from a comprehensive national list of all eligible schools with probabilities proportional to a measure of size. The measure of size was a function of the estimated number of eligible 15-year-old students enrolled. Prior to sampling, schools in the sampling frame were assigned to strata formed either explicitly or implicitly.

The second-stage sampling units in countries using the two-stage design were students within sampled schools. Once schools were selected to be in the sample, a list of each sampled school's 15-year-old students was prepared. From each list that contained more than 35 students, 35 students were selected with equal probability and for lists of fewer than 35, all students on the list were selected.

In three countries, a three-stage design was used. In such cases, geographical areas were sampled first (called first-stage units) using probability proportional to size sampling, and then schools (called second-stage units) were selected within sampled areas. Students were the third-stage sampling units in three-stage designs.

For more on the sampling design for schools, refer to chapter 4 in the document "PISA 2000 Technical Report" provided as an external resource.

The student Samples: Student selection procedures in the main study were the same as those used in the field trial. Student sampling was generally undertaken at the national centres from lists of all eligible students in each school that had agreed to participate. These lists could have been prepared at national, regional, or local levels as data files, computer-generated listings, or by hand, depending on who had the most accurate information. For more detailed information on student samples, refer to chapter 4 in the document "PISA 2000 Technical Report" provided as an external resource.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

PISA 2000 used pencil-and-paper assessments, lasting two hours for each student. Questionnaires used both multiple-choice items and questions requiring students to construct their own answers. Items were typically organised in units based on a passage describing a real-life situation. A total of seven hours of assessment items was included, with different students taking different combinations of the assessment items. A Student and a School Questionnaire were used in PISA 2000 to collect data that could be used in constructing indicators pointing to social, cultural, economic and educational factors that are thought to influence, or to be associated with, student achievement. PISA 2000 did not include a teacher questionnaire.

For the Student Questionnaire, the scope included the following: basic demographics, global measures of socio-economic status, student description of school/instructional processes, student attitudes towards reading and reading habits, student access to educational resources outside school, institutional patterns of participation and programme orientation, language spoken in the home, nationality, student expectations.

For the School Questionnaire, the scope included: quality of the school’s human and material resources, global measures of school-level SES, school-level variables on instructional context, institutional structure/type, urbanisation/community type, school size, parental involvement, public/private control and funding.

Translations were made from English to French and vice versa to provide the national translation teams with two source versions of all materials (see Chapter 5) and the team often pointed out useful information such as typographical errors, ambiguities and translation difficulties, and some cultural issues. For additional information on translations, refer to chapter 5 of the document "PISA 2000 Technical Report" provided as an external resource.

Cleaning operations

National Project Managers (NPMs) were required to submit their national data in KeyQuest® 2000, the generic data entry package developed by Consortium staff. After the data entry process was completed, NPMs were required to implement some checking procedures using KeyQuest® before submitting data to the Consortium, and to rectify any integrity errors. For detailed information on data entry and editing, refer to chapter 11 in the document "PISA 2000 Technical Report" provided as an external resource.

Response rate

For schools: A response rate of 85 percent was required for initially selected schools. If the initial school response rate fell between 65 and 85 percent, an acceptable school response rate could still be achieved through the use of replacement schools. To compensate for a sampled school that did not participate, where possible two replacement schools were identified for each sampled school. Furthermore, schools with a student participation rate between 25 and 50 percent were not considered as a participating school for the purposes of calculating and documenting response rates. However, data from such schools were included in the database and contributed to the estimates included in the initial PISA international report. Data from schools with a student participation rate of less than 25 percent were not included in the database.

For students: A response rate of 80 percent of selected students in participating schools was required. A student who had participated in the first part of the testing session was considered to be a participant. A student response rate of 50 percent was required for a school to be regarded as participating: the student response rate was computed using only students from schools with at least a 50 percent response rate.

For more detailed information on response rates, refer to chapter 4 in the document "PISA 2000 Technical Report" provided as an external resource.

Historical Dataset of Country Place Elementary School is provided by PublicSchoolReview and contain statistics on metrics:Total Students Trends Over Years (2007-2023),Total Classroom Teachers Trends Over Years (2007-2023),Distribution of Students By Grade Trends,Student-Teacher Ratio Comparison Over Years (2007-2023),American Indian Student Percentage Comparison Over Years (2007-2023),Asian Student Percentage Comparison Over Years (2006-2022),Hispanic Student Percentage Comparison Over Years (2007-2023),Black Student Percentage Comparison Over Years (2007-2023),White Student Percentage Comparison Over Years (2007-2023),Two or More Races Student Percentage Comparison Over Years (2013-2023),Diversity Score Comparison Over Years (2007-2023),Free Lunch Eligibility Comparison Over Years (2007-2023),Reduced-Price Lunch Eligibility Comparison Over Years (2006-2023),Reading and Language Arts Proficiency Comparison Over Years (2011-2022),Math Proficiency Comparison Over Years (2011-2022),Overall School Rank Trends Over Years (2011-2022)

According to the 2018 results presented as part of the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), among Latin American and Caribbean members and partners of the OECD, Chile was the country with the highest share of students in schools whose principals described as having sufficient digital devices connected to the internet. In that year, that applied to **** percent of Chilean students tested. Meanwhile, Brazil had the lowest share amongst countries surveyed, with **** percent of students.

Abstract

The Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) is a triennial international survey which aims to evaluate education systems worldwide by testing the skills and knowledge of 15-year-old students.

As in previous cycles, the 2015 assessment covers science, reading and mathematics, with the major focus in this cycle on scientific literacy. Financial literacy is an optional assessment, as it was in 2012. A questionnaire about students' background is distributed to all participating students. Students may also choose to complete additional questionnaires: one about their future studies/career, a second about their familiarity with information and communication technologies. School principals complete a questionnaire about the learning environment in their schools, and parents of students who sit the PISA test can choose to complete a questionnaire about the home environment. Seventy-two countries and economies, including all 35 OECD countries, participated in the PISA 2015 assessment.

Geographic coverage

PISA 2015 covered 72 counteies (35 OECD countries and 37 partner countries and economies. All countries attempted to maximise the coverage of 15-year-olds enrolled in education in their national samples, including students enrolled in special educational institutions.

Analysis unit

To better compare student performance internationally, PISA targets a specific age of students. PISA students are aged between 15 years 3 months and 16 years 2 months at the time of the assessment, and have completed at least 6 years of formal schooling. They can be enrolled in any type of institution, participate in full-time or part-time education, in academic or vocational programmes, and attend public or private schools or foreign schools within the country. Using this age across countries and over time allows PISA to compare consistently the knowledge and skills of individuals born in the same year who are still in school at age 15, despite the diversity of their education histories in and outside of school.

Universe

To provide valid estimates of student achievement, the sample of students had to be selected using established and professionally recognised principles of scientific sampling in a way that ensured representation of the full target population of 15-year-old students in the participating countries. Furthermore, quality standards had to be maintained with respect to (i) the coverage of the PISA international target population, (ii) accuracy and precision, and (iii) the school and student response rates.

National Project Managers (NPMs) might have found it necessary to reduce their coverage of the target population by excluding, for instance, a small, remote geographical region due to inaccessibility, or a language group, possibly due to political, organisational or operational reasons, or special education needs students. Areas deemed to be part of a country (for the purpose of PISA), but which were not included for sampling, although this occurred infrequently, were designated as non-covered areas. Care was taken in this regard because, when such situations did occur, the national desired target population differed from the international desired target population. In an international survey in education, the types of exclusion must be defined consistently for all participating countries and the exclusion rates have to be limited. Indeed, if a significant proportion of students were excluded, this would mean that survey results would not be representative of the entire national school system. Thus, efforts were made to ensure that exclusions, if they were necessary, were minimised according to the PISA 2015 Technical Standards (see Appendix F of the Technical Report).

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

In all but one country, the Russian Federation, the sampling design used for the PISA assessment was a two-stage stratified sample design. The first-stage sampling units consisted of individual schools having 15-year-old students, or the possibility of having such students at the time of assessment. Schools were sampled systematically from a comprehensive national list of all PISA-eligible schools, known as the school sampling frame, with probabilities that were proportional to a measure of size. The measure of size was a function of the estimated number of PISA-eligible 15-year-old students enrolled in the school. This is referred to as systematic probability proportional to size (PPS) sampling. Prior to sampling, schools in the sampling frame were assigned to mutually exclusive groups based on school characteristics called explicit strata, formed to improve the precision of sample-based estimates. The second-stage sampling units in countries using the two-stage design were students within sampled schools. Once schools were selected to be in the sample, a complete list of each sampled school's 15-year-old students was prepared. Each country had to set a target cluster size (TCS) of 42 students for computer-based countries and 35 for paper-based countries, although with agreement countries could use alternative values. The sample size within schools is prescribed, within limits, in the PISA Technical Standards (see Annex F of the Technical Report). From each list of students that contained more than the target cluster size, a sample of around 42 students were selected with equal probability and for lists with fewer than the target number, all students on the list were selected.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

Paper-based tests were used, with assessments lasting two hours. In a range of countries and economies, an additional 40 minutes were devoted to the computer-based assessment of mathematics, reading and problem solving.

Test items were a mixture of questions requiring students to construct their own responses and multiple-choice items. The items were organised in groups based on a passage setting out a real-life situation. A total of about 390 minutes of test items were covered, with different students taking different combinations of test items.

Students answered a background questionnaire, which took 30 minutes to complete, that sought information about themselves, their homes and their school and learning experiences. School principals were given a questionnaire, to complete in 30 minutes, that covered the school system and the learning environment. In some countries and economies, optional questionnaires were distributed to parents, who were asked to provide information on their perceptions of and involvement in their child’s school, their support for learning in the home, and their child’s career expectations, particularly in mathematics. Countries could choose two other optional questionnaires for students: one asked students about their familiarity with and use of information and communication technologies, and the second sought information about their education to date, including any interruptions in their schooling and whether and how they are preparing for a future career.

The PISA 2015 Science Test Questions are available in 90 other languages.

Cleaning operations

Software specially designed for PISA facilitated data entry, detected common errors during data entry, and facilitated the process of data cleaning. Training sessions familiarised National Project Managers with these procedures.

Response rate

A response rate of 85% was required for initially-selected schools. If the initial school response rate fell between 65% and 85%, an acceptable school response rate could still be reached through the use of replacement schools.

An overall response rate of 80% of selected students in participating schools was required. A student who had participated in the original or follow-up cognitive sessions was considered to be a participant. A minimum student response rate of 50% within each school was required for a school to be regarded as participating: the overall student response rate was computed using only students from schools with at least a 50% student response rate. Again, weighted student response rates were used for assessing this standard.

According to data retrieved by the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) in 2018, in all Latin American and Caribbean countries analyzed, the share of ** year-old students with a desktop computer at home differed by at least ** percentage points between the bottom and top socio-economic and cultural quartiles. In concerning access to a laptop at home, the differences were even more pronounced, with at least ** percentage points between the two groups mentioned. In both cases, the biggest level of inequality among these countries was observed for Mexico. While only ** percent of ** year-old pupils in the bottom quartile had a laptop at home, the same was true for ** percent of those in the top quartile.

This dataset tracks annual asian student percentage from 2014 to 2023 for Kingsbury Country Day School vs. Michigan and Kingsbury Country Day School District

This dataset tracks annual asian student percentage from 1991 to 2023 for Brea Country Hills Elementary School vs. California and Brea-Olinda Unified School District

Historical Dataset of Brea Country Hills Elementary School is provided by PublicSchoolReview and contain statistics on metrics:Total Students Trends Over Years (1987-2023),Total Classroom Teachers Trends Over Years (1990-2023),Distribution of Students By Grade Trends,Student-Teacher Ratio Comparison Over Years (1990-2023),American Indian Student Percentage Comparison Over Years (1995-1998),Asian Student Percentage Comparison Over Years (1991-2023),Hispanic Student Percentage Comparison Over Years (1991-2023),Black Student Percentage Comparison Over Years (1991-2023),White Student Percentage Comparison Over Years (1991-2023),Two or More Races Student Percentage Comparison Over Years (2009-2023),Diversity Score Comparison Over Years (1991-2023),Free Lunch Eligibility Comparison Over Years (1995-2023),Reduced-Price Lunch Eligibility Comparison Over Years (2002-2023),Reading and Language Arts Proficiency Comparison Over Years (2010-2022),Math Proficiency Comparison Over Years (2010-2022),Overall School Rank Trends Over Years (2010-2022)

In the PISA test 2022, Finnish students performed well above the OECD average in reading, mathematics, and science knowledge. Finnish students scored 490 points in reading, 484 points in mathematics, and 511 in science. OECD’s Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) is a worldwide study that evaluates educational systems in selected countries by assessing student performance in reading, mathematics, and science. It was conducted for the first time in 2000 and then repeated every three years. Finnish PISA success Finland has been among the top-ranking countries in all PISA tests since 2000, but in recent years the Nordic country has shown decline in performance. The downward trend of Finland's mean score continued in 2022. While the ranking in science literacy remained at its previous level, reading and mathematical literacy performance declined. Meanwhile, Estonia has surpassed Finland in the PISA ranking as the European leader. Large gender gap in reading skills Finnish students continued to perform well in reading literacy, but the difference in reading skills of girls and boys has been one of the widest in the participating countries. Another worrying trend has been the increasing influence of socio-economic background on learning outcomes. In particular, the number of poor-performing readers in the lowest socioeconomic quarter has been on the rise, while the results of the highest socioeconomic groups have remained the same.

According to the 2018 results presented as part of the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), among Latin American and Caribbean members and partners of the OECD, Chile was the country where the most students were in a school whose principals considered as having sufficient internet bandwidth, with a share of nearly *** out of ten students. The Andean country was also the one with the highest share of students in schools with enough digital devices connected to the internet. Out of the countries analyzed, Argentina was the one with the lowest share of students in institutions whose internet speed was believed as sufficient by surveyed principals, at **** percent.

Historical Dataset of Kingsbury Country Day School is provided by PublicSchoolReview and contain statistics on metrics:Total Students Trends Over Years (2014-2023),Total Classroom Teachers Trends Over Years (2014-2023),Distribution of Students By Grade Trends,Student-Teacher Ratio Comparison Over Years (2014-2023),American Indian Student Percentage Comparison Over Years (2019-2021),Asian Student Percentage Comparison Over Years (2014-2023),Hispanic Student Percentage Comparison Over Years (2014-2023),Black Student Percentage Comparison Over Years (2014-2022),White Student Percentage Comparison Over Years (2014-2023),Two or More Races Student Percentage Comparison Over Years (2014-2023),Diversity Score Comparison Over Years (2014-2023),Free Lunch Eligibility Comparison Over Years (2014-2023),Reduced-Price Lunch Eligibility Comparison Over Years (2016-2022),Reading and Language Arts Proficiency Comparison Over Years (2014-2022),Math Proficiency Comparison Over Years (2014-2022),Science Proficiency Comparison Over Years (2021-2022),Overall School Rank Trends Over Years (2014-2022)

This dataset tracks annual hispanic student percentage from 2007 to 2023 for Country Place Elementary School vs. Arizona and Littleton Elementary District (4278) School District

This dataset tracks annual white student percentage from 2007 to 2023 for Country Place Elementary School vs. Arizona and Littleton Elementary District (4278) School District

Estonia was the European country which had the highest combined score in the 2022 PISA survey, which indicates that the small north-eastern European country achieves the best outcomes from its education system, when compared with other European countries. While Estonia performed best in mathematics and science, Ireland performed the best in 2022 in reading. Romania was the European country which performed most poorly across all three indicators.

The average score of Polish students in terms of reading comprehension was *** points in 2022. In maths, Polish 15-year-olds scored *** points, ** points higher than the OECD average. In the natural sciences, Polish students achieved an average score of *** points, which places them in sixth place among the European Union countries. Examinations in primary school Primary school students take an exam at the end of the eighth grade. The eighth-grade exam is a mandatory exam, which means that every student must take it to graduate from school. There is no specified minimum score that a student should obtain, so the eighth-grade exam cannot be failed. The eighth-grade examination is carried out in written form. Students take the exam in three compulsory subjects, i.e., Polish language, mathematics, and a foreign language of their choice. A student may choose only the language that is taught at school as part of compulsory education classes. In 2023, primary school students in Poland had the best results in exams in the ****** language. High school graduation exam (Matura) The Matura exam is taken at the end of general secondary and technical secondary school and its result is a prerequisite for further education. In 2023, over *** thousand graduates of secondary schools passed the Matura exams. The most popular foreign language was English, passed by ** percent of students. English and mathematics were the most popular subjects at an extended level. The exam pass rate amounted to ** percent, which was ** percentage points higher than in the previous school year.

Socio-economic inequalities within countries in Latin America and the Caribbean are observed in different areas, and access to educational tools is no exception. According to data retrieved by the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) in 2018, in seven out of seven Latin American and Caribbean countries analyzed, the share of ** year-old students with desktops at home differed by at least ** percentage points between the bottom and top socioeconomic and cultural quartiles. In Mexico, this difference was the highest, amounting to ** percentage points.