Finland’s advantage over the OECD average in PISA has narrowed
In Finland, students’ results in the PISA study have declined more over the past decade than in most OECD countries, although the country still exceeds the organisation’s average in mathematics, reading literacy and science. YLE News reports.
In science, Finland’s advantage over the OECD average had previously reached 63 points. In 2015, it was 38 points, and in the 2025 study cycle it was 22 points. At the same time, differences in learning outcomes within schools have risen to a record level, while reading literacy indicators continue to decline.
Motivation during the test
National study director Arto K. Ahonen noted that, for Finnish students, the level of effort exerted explained 14% of the variation in science scores. On average in other OECD countries, this figure was 3%.
After the two-hour test, participants are asked how seriously they answered and whether they would have changed their effort if the result had affected their school grades. Only 41% of Finnish teenagers said they would continue completing a task even if it became difficult. At the same time, an analysis of testing logs found no significant difference between the number of correct answers during the first and second hours of the exam.
More current news is available on the UA.News Telegram channel Telegram.
Textbooks and digital materials
Vesa Suomalainen, a biology and geography teacher at Tesoma School in Tampere, links the weakening of basic knowledge among new seventh-graders to changes in primary education. About ten years ago, physics, chemistry, biology, geography and health education were combined into one subject — environmental studies.
According to the teacher, only digital learning materials are used for environmental studies in Tampere, which may also affect the level of knowledge. He noted that many students in the science and mathematics track prefer a pen and notebook.
Socioeconomic status
The study also recorded a decline in results among students from the highest socioeconomic quartile. Ahonen suggested that this could partly be explained by the fact that the indicators of the lowest quartile are already at a low level. The phone ban introduced in autumn 2025 could not yet have affected the results, while international comparisons of such bans produce contradictory conclusions.
