PISA 2025: England bucks the trend but what does it mean?
The latest Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) results offer some welcome news. In an international climate of falling attainment, England’s 15-year-olds have maintained their performance in reading and mathematics and improved significantly in science.
That has placed England among the world’s leading education systems. But the results require careful interpretation. England has risen partly because many other developed economies have gone backwards - not because achievement has improved dramatically across the board. Nor should strong performance at 15 be confused with having a successful system of lifelong education.
How did the UK perform?
PISA 2025 assessed 760,000 15-year-olds across 91 countries and economies. Science was the principal subject, alongside assessments of reading, mathematics and, for the first time, computational problem-solving.
The overall UK results were comfortably above OECD averages:[1]
Country or nation | Science | Reading | Mathematics |
England | 516 | 497 | 492 |
Northern Ireland | 492 | 482 | 473 |
Scotland | 491 | 488 | 467 |
Wales | 476 | 459 | 456 |
United Kingdom | 511 | 494 | 488 |
OECD average | 482 | 461 | 463 |
England was the strongest-performing UK nation in all three core subjects. It ranked eighth internationally in science, joint ninth in reading and tenth in mathematics, although precise league-table positions should be treated cautiously because the performance of several countries was not statistically distinguishable.
The results also reveal important differences within the UK. Northern Ireland and Scotland remained above the OECD average while Wales remained below in all three subjects.
England is outperforming many developed economies
England now compares favourably with most major Western economies, although there is still a sizeable gap with the very strongest systems - Singapore and Japan.
The wider international picture is troubling. Between 2015 and 2025, average OECD performance fell by 28 points in reading - equivalent to around a year and a half of learning - and by 22 points in mathematics. One in five pupils across OECD countries is now a low performer in all three core subjects. The OECD points to declining engagement with sustained reading, absenteeism and digital distractions as possible contributors to this deterioration. Its central conclusion is that many education systems are struggling to adapt to technological and social change.
England’s performance therefore represents resilience against an international decline rather than an unqualified educational breakthrough.
Did education reforms cause England’s success?
It is tempting to attribute the results directly to the reforms introduced in England since 2010: systematic phonics, a more knowledge-rich national curriculum, greater emphasis on mathematics and science, the English Baccalaureate and stronger school accountability.
There is a plausible connection. The pupils assessed in 2025 entered primary school as many of these reforms were being implemented and experienced the revised national curriculum throughout most of their education. The contrast with Scotland and Wales, where curriculum and accountability policies followed different paths, strengthens the argument that England’s emphasis on core knowledge may have helped it withstand the international downturn.
But PISA does not establish causation. Education systems differ in their demographics, institutional structures, teacher supply, funding, qualifications and experience of the pandemic. Several policies were introduced simultaneously, making their individual effects difficult to isolate.
More importantly, England’s underlying trend is less dramatic than its league-table position suggests. Its reading and mathematics scores were statistically unchanged from 2022. Mathematics remains below its 2018 result. Science improved significantly from 503 in 2022 to 516, but was not significantly different from England’s scores in 2015 or 2018. The national report for England therefore supports a claim of comparative resilience, particularly in science, rather than a general transformation in attainment.
The sensible conclusion is that policymakers should preserve what appears to be working - curriculum coherence, subject knowledge and high expectations - while addressing the system’s remaining weaknesses.
The unfinished business
National averages conceal large inequalities. In England, the difference in science performance between the most and least advantaged quarters of pupils was 81 points. The equivalent gaps were 66 points in reading and 89 points in mathematics. Pupils eligible for free school meals performed significantly below other pupils in every subject. England also recorded widening gender gaps favouring boys in mathematics and science, while girls continued to outperform boys in reading.
What does PISA mean for lifelong education?
PISA measures performance at one point in a much longer educational journey. Strong foundations at 15 increase the likelihood that people can continue learning, but knowledge and skills must subsequently be extended, applied and renewed.
England’s challenge is that the coherence visible in the school curriculum is not always matched after age 16. Too many young people encounter fragmented academic, technical and vocational routes, weak progression between qualification levels and repeated attempts to secure English and mathematics qualifications through a resit system that often reproduces failure.
A lifelong education system should treat literacy, numeracy, scientific reasoning and digital competence as continuing capabilities rather than hurdles to be cleared at school. They should be reinforced through apprenticeships, technical qualifications, higher technical education and adult learning - not separated from occupational education.
The results also strengthen the case for better progression from Levels 2 and 3 into the neglected “missing middle” at Levels 4 and 5. England needs more visible pathways through which people can move from initial technical training into advanced technician, supervisory and professional roles. Modular provision and the Lifelong Learning Entitlement could help, but only if learners can understand the routes, afford to participate and accumulate recognised credit across institutions and throughout their working lives.
Five policy lessons
First, governments should retain a strong common entitlement to knowledge. Applied and technical learning depends upon literacy, numeracy and scientific understanding; it is not an alternative to them.
Second, the next phase of reform must concentrate on the lower-performing quarter of pupils. High national rankings should not obscure persistent disadvantage or the large number who fail to reach baseline proficiency.
Third, the UK nations should learn from one another. Devolution permits experimentation, but it should also generate systematic comparison of curricula, pedagogy, assessment and progression outcomes. The widening gap between England and the other nations cannot simply be dismissed as a league-table curiosity.
Fourth, digital education requires greater discrimination. Young people need to learn how to use AI and digital tools critically, but technology cannot substitute for sustained attention, deep reading and subject knowledge. The OECD’s PISA 2025 analysis associates excessive and recreational device use in school with weaker performance.
Finally, education policy must look beyond age 15. The test of a successful system is not simply whether young people perform well in an international assessment, but whether they can continue to learn, progress and adapt over a lifetime.
PISA 2025 gives England grounds for cautious confidence. It suggests that stability, curriculum coherence and academic expectations matter. But the larger lesson is that strong schooling must become the foundation of a connected lifelong education system - not the point at which coherent educational policy comes to an end.
-------
[1] How to read the scores: PISA results are expressed on a statistical scale rather than as percentages. Higher scores indicate stronger average performance. As a broad guide, 20 PISA points are sometimes equated with approximately one year of learning, although this is not an exact conversion. Small score differences may not be statistically significant.
