PISA 2025 Results Singapore: Rankings & Scores

Singapore's PISA 2025 results are in: 1st in reading (535), 2nd in mathematics (563), 2nd in science (560), and 2nd in computational problem solving (563)— plus the full PISA 2025 score table for all 91 participating education systems, published by the OECD on 8 September 2026.

Sources: MOE Singapore — Press Release, 8 Sep 2026 ; OECD — PISA 2025 Results (Vol. I): Singapore Country Note

Countries & economies

760,000

Students tested

~33 million 15-year-olds represented

~6,600

Singapore students

157 schools, Apr–May 2025

Science

Major domain in 2025

Reading & maths were minor domains

Sources: OECD — PISA 2025 Results (Vol. I): Singapore Country Note ; OECD — Press Release, 8 Sep 2026

These results provide useful insights about our students as learners — they are curious, they persevere even when learning gets hard, and they care about the world around them. Our students have strong foundations in reading, mathematical and scientific literacies, and 21st Century Competencies, which are all essential for thriving in life and at work. The findings also show where we can do better.

Source: MOE Singapore — Press Release, 8 Sep 2026

Singapore's Four PISA 2025 Results

Singapore sat all four PISA 2025 domains and placed top-two in every one of them — one of only two education systems to do so, alongside B-S-J-Z (China): Beijing, Shanghai, Jiangsu and Zhejiang, four Chinese jurisdictions reported together, not the whole of China.

535

Reading — 1st of 81

563

Mathematics — 2nd of 81

560

Science — 2nd of 82

563

Comp. Problem Solving — 2nd of 76

Sources: MOE Singapore — Press Release, 8 Sep 2026 ; OECD — PISA 2025 Results (Volume I): Student Performance in PISA 2025

Charts below show the top 12 systems in each domain, led by Computational Problem Solving— the newest domain and the one MOE highlighted in its press release — followed by reading, mathematics and science. The dashed line marks the OECD average in each chart.

Computational Problem Solving — top 12

Singapore: 563 (#2 of 76)

Macao (China)

572

Singapore

563

B-S-J-Z (China)

560

Japan

557

Chinese Taipei

551

Hong Kong (China)

545

Estonia

541

Korea

538

Australia

532

New Zealand*

531

#10

Canada*

525

#11

United Kingdom

523

#12

Computational Problem Solving — PISA 2025 mean score. Scale shown is 250–620, not zero-based, so the gap between systems is visible.

SingaporeOther systemsOECD average

B-S-J-Z (China) = Beijing, Shanghai, Jiangsu and Zhejiang only — four jurisdictions, not all of China. The rest of the country does not sit PISA.

Reading — top 12

Singapore: 535 (#1 of 81)

Singapore

535

B-S-J-Z (China)

527

Chinese Taipei

508

Japan

503

Macao (China)

501

Korea

501

Ireland

500

Estonia

499

New Zealand*

497

United Kingdom

494

#10

Australia

491

#11

Canada*

490

#12

Reading — PISA 2025 mean score. Scale shown is 250–620, not zero-based, so the gap between systems is visible.

SingaporeOther systemsOECD average

B-S-J-Z (China) = Beijing, Shanghai, Jiangsu and Zhejiang only — four jurisdictions, not all of China. The rest of the country does not sit PISA.

Mathematics — top 12

Singapore: 563 (#2 of 81)

B-S-J-Z (China)

612

Singapore

563

Macao (China)

549

Chinese Taipei

546

Japan

525

Korea

522

Hong Kong (China)

522

Estonia

508

Switzerland

499

United Kingdom

488

#10

Canada*

485

#11

Poland

484

#12

Mathematics — PISA 2025 mean score. Scale shown is 250–620, not zero-based, so the gap between systems is visible.

SingaporeOther systemsOECD average

B-S-J-Z (China) = Beijing, Shanghai, Jiangsu and Zhejiang only — four jurisdictions, not all of China. The rest of the country does not sit PISA.

Science — top 12

Singapore: 560 (#2 of 82)

B-S-J-Z (China)

597

Singapore

560

Macao (China)

541

Chinese Taipei

540

Japan

538

Estonia

527

Korea

526

United Kingdom

511

Canada*

510

New Zealand*

509

#10

Australia

509

#11

Finland

504

#12

Science — PISA 2025 mean score. Scale shown is 250–620, not zero-based, so the gap between systems is visible.

SingaporeOther systemsOECD average

B-S-J-Z (China) = Beijing, Shanghai, Jiangsu and Zhejiang only — four jurisdictions, not all of China. The rest of the country does not sit PISA.

Sources: MOE Singapore — Press Release, 8 Sep 2026 ; OECD — PISA 2025 Results (Volume I): Student Performance in PISA 2025 ; OECD — PISA 2025 Results (Vol. I): Singapore Country Note

A rank isn't always a real gap

In computational problem solving, Singapore's 563 is not statistically different from B-S-J-Z (China)'s 560 or Japan's 557 — the ranking order looks decisive, but those three scores are within the assessment's margin of error of each other. Macao's 572, on the other hand, has no statistical ties to Singapore's score. In science, Singapore's 560 also has no statistical ties — that 2nd place is a real gap above 3rd.

Source: OECD — PISA 2025 Results (Volume I): Student Performance in PISA 2025

PISA 2025 Rankings by Country: Full Table (All 91 Education Systems)

The counts differ by domain: 81 systems are ranked in reading, 81 in mathematics, 82 in science, and 76 in computational problem solving — 91 distinct systems took part across all four domains combined. Uzbekistan has science data only, which is why it appears in one table and not the others.

Tap a domain below to open its full ranked table. Every row shows the mean score and how it compares to the OECD average for that domain.

Computational Problem Solving — full ranked table (76 systems)

SingaporeAbove OECD averageBelow OECD average* sampling standards not fully met

Rank	Education system	Mean score	vs OECD avg
#1	Macao (China)	572	+72 vs OECD
#2	Singapore	563	+63 vs OECD
#3	B-S-J-Z (China)	560	+60 vs OECD
#4	Japan	557	+57 vs OECD
#5	Chinese Taipei	551	+51 vs OECD
#6	Hong Kong (China)	545	+45 vs OECD
#7	Estonia	541	+41 vs OECD
#8	Korea	538	+38 vs OECD
#9	Australia	532	+32 vs OECD
#10	New Zealand*	531	+31 vs OECD
#11	Canada*	525	+25 vs OECD
#12	United Kingdom	523	+23 vs OECD
#13	Switzerland	520	+20 vs OECD
#14	Czechia	517	+17 vs OECD
#15	United States*	513	+13 vs OECD
#16	Lithuania	512	+12 vs OECD
#17	Ireland	511	+11 vs OECD
#18	Austria	509	+9 vs OECD
#19	Belgium	508	+8 vs OECD
#20	Latvia	507	+7 vs OECD
#21	Poland	507	+7 vs OECD
#22	Finland	507	+7 vs OECD
#23	Netherlands*	506	+6 vs OECD
#24	Denmark	506	+6 vs OECD
#25	Luxembourg	506	+6 vs OECD
#26	Sweden	503	+3 vs OECD
#27	Portugal	501	+1 vs OECD
#28	Spain	499	-1 vs OECD
#29	Germany	498	-2 vs OECD
#30	France	497	-3 vs OECD
#31	Slovak Republic	497	-3 vs OECD
#32	Brunei Darussalam	496	-4 vs OECD
#33	Hungary	495	-5 vs OECD
#34	Norway*	491	-9 vs OECD
#35	Italy	490	-10 vs OECD
#36	Iceland	490	-10 vs OECD
#37	Slovenia	486	-14 vs OECD
#38	Malaysia	484	-16 vs OECD
#39	Ukrainian regions (17 of 27)	478	-22 vs OECD
#40	Thailand	476	-24 vs OECD
#41	United Arab Emirates	476	-24 vs OECD
#42	Türkiye	473	-27 vs OECD
#43	Chile	466	-34 vs OECD
#44	Croatia	464	-36 vs OECD
#45	Malta	463	-37 vs OECD
#46	Uruguay	462	-38 vs OECD
#47	Viet Nam	461	-39 vs OECD
#48	Greece	461	-39 vs OECD
#49	Mexico	453	-47 vs OECD
#50	Moldova	452	-48 vs OECD
#51	Qatar	452	-48 vs OECD
#52	Colombia	432	-68 vs OECD
#53	Cyprus	427	-73 vs OECD
#54	Indonesia	427	-73 vs OECD
#55	Saudi Arabia	426	-74 vs OECD
#56	Bulgaria	425	-75 vs OECD
#57	Montenegro	423	-77 vs OECD
#58	Ecuador	422	-78 vs OECD
#59	Georgia	413	-87 vs OECD
#60	Jordan	408	-92 vs OECD
#61	Brazil	406	-94 vs OECD
#62	Argentina	403	-97 vs OECD
#63	Uzbekistan	402	-98 vs OECD
#64	El Salvador	401	-99 vs OECD
#65	Palestinian Authority	393	-107 vs OECD
#66	North Macedonia	389	-111 vs OECD
#67	Azerbaijan	388	-112 vs OECD
#68	Kyrgyzstan	388	-112 vs OECD
#69	Dominican Republic	379	-121 vs OECD
#70	Morocco	374	-126 vs OECD
#71	Guatemala	369	-131 vs OECD
#72	Kosovo	359	-141 vs OECD
#73	Lebanon	358	-142 vs OECD
#74	Armenia	354	-146 vs OECD
#75	Paraguay	352	-148 vs OECD
#76	Kenya	278	-222 vs OECD
OECD average		500

76 ranked systems shown for Computational Problem Solving. Systems marked with an asterisk (*) did not fully meet PISA 2025 sampling standards — interpret those rows with caution. B-S-J-Z (China) = Beijing, Shanghai, Jiangsu and Zhejiang only — four jurisdictions, not all of China. The rest of the country does not sit PISA.

Reading — full ranked table (81 systems)

SingaporeAbove OECD averageBelow OECD average* sampling standards not fully met

Rank	Education system	Mean score	vs OECD avg
#1	Singapore	535	+74 vs OECD
#2	B-S-J-Z (China)	527	+66 vs OECD
#3	Chinese Taipei	508	+47 vs OECD
#4	Japan	503	+42 vs OECD
#5	Macao (China)	501	+40 vs OECD
#6	Korea	501	+40 vs OECD
#7	Ireland	500	+39 vs OECD
#8	Estonia	499	+38 vs OECD
#9	New Zealand*	497	+36 vs OECD
#10	United Kingdom	494	+33 vs OECD
#11	Australia	491	+30 vs OECD
#12	Canada*	490	+29 vs OECD
#13	United States*	490	+29 vs OECD
#14	Poland	482	+21 vs OECD
#15	Hong Kong (China)	480	+19 vs OECD
#16	Finland	474	+13 vs OECD
#17	Italy	474	+13 vs OECD
#18	Türkiye	472	+11 vs OECD
#19	Switzerland	470	+9 vs OECD
#20	Czechia	468	+7 vs OECD
#21	Austria	467	+6 vs OECD
#22	Sweden	466	+5 vs OECD
#23	Belgium	466	+5 vs OECD
#24	Germany	465	+4 vs OECD
#25	Lithuania	464	+3 vs OECD
#26	Portugal	462	+1 vs OECD
#27	Denmark	460	-1 vs OECD
#28	France	456	-5 vs OECD
#29	Croatia	453	-8 vs OECD
#30	Norway*	453	-8 vs OECD
#31	Hungary	452	-9 vs OECD
#32	Spain	451	-10 vs OECD
#33	Slovak Republic	448	-13 vs OECD
#34	Slovenia	445	-16 vs OECD
#35	Luxembourg	443	-18 vs OECD
#36	Netherlands*	441	-20 vs OECD
#37	Israel	436	-25 vs OECD
#38	Chile	436	-25 vs OECD
#39	United Arab Emirates	433	-28 vs OECD
#40	Latvia	430	-31 vs OECD
#41	Brunei Darussalam	426	-35 vs OECD
#42	Uruguay	423	-38 vs OECD
#43	Greece	423	-38 vs OECD
#44	Iceland	422	-39 vs OECD
#45	Ukrainian regions (17 of 27)	418	-43 vs OECD
#46	Montenegro	418	-43 vs OECD
#47	Qatar	418	-43 vs OECD
#48	Costa Rica	416	-45 vs OECD
#49	Malta	415	-46 vs OECD
#50	Serbia	415	-46 vs OECD
#51	Romania	413	-48 vs OECD
#52	Peru	390	-71 vs OECD
#53	Argentina	389	-72 vs OECD
#54	Saudi Arabia	387	-74 vs OECD
#55	Bulgaria	387	-74 vs OECD
#56	Ecuador	385	-76 vs OECD
#57	Kazakhstan	385	-76 vs OECD
#58	Georgia	384	-77 vs OECD
#59	Cyprus	379	-82 vs OECD
#60	Mongolia	374	-87 vs OECD
#61	Azerbaijan	374	-87 vs OECD
#62	Dushanbe (Tajikistan)	368	-93 vs OECD
#63	Philippines	367	-94 vs OECD
#64	El Salvador	366	-95 vs OECD
#65	Indonesia	365	-96 vs OECD
#66	Jordan	363	-98 vs OECD
#67	North Macedonia	357	-104 vs OECD
#68	Paraguay	352	-109 vs OECD
#69	Palestinian Authority	350	-111 vs OECD
#70	Armenia	348	-113 vs OECD
#71	Cambodia	347	-114 vs OECD
#72	Dominican Republic	346	-115 vs OECD
#73	Kyrgyzstan	344	-117 vs OECD
#74	Kosovo	340	-121 vs OECD
#75	Guatemala	337	-124 vs OECD
#76	Lebanon	331	-130 vs OECD
#77	Zambia	325	-136 vs OECD
#78	Morocco	321	-140 vs OECD
#79	Kenya	320	-141 vs OECD
#80	Kurdistan Region (Iraq)	312	-149 vs OECD
#81	Rwanda	301	-160 vs OECD
OECD average		461

81 ranked systems shown for Reading. Systems marked with an asterisk (*) did not fully meet PISA 2025 sampling standards — interpret those rows with caution. B-S-J-Z (China) = Beijing, Shanghai, Jiangsu and Zhejiang only — four jurisdictions, not all of China. The rest of the country does not sit PISA.

Mathematics — full ranked table (81 systems)

SingaporeAbove OECD averageBelow OECD average* sampling standards not fully met

Rank	Education system	Mean score	vs OECD avg
#1	B-S-J-Z (China)	612	+149 vs OECD
#2	Singapore	563	+100 vs OECD
#3	Macao (China)	549	+86 vs OECD
#4	Chinese Taipei	546	+83 vs OECD
#5	Japan	525	+62 vs OECD
#6	Korea	522	+59 vs OECD
#7	Hong Kong (China)	522	+59 vs OECD
#8	Estonia	508	+45 vs OECD
#9	Switzerland	499	+36 vs OECD
#10	United Kingdom	488	+25 vs OECD
#11	Canada*	485	+22 vs OECD
#12	Poland	484	+21 vs OECD
#13	Netherlands*	483	+20 vs OECD
#14	Ireland	480	+17 vs OECD
#15	Belgium	480	+17 vs OECD
#16	New Zealand*	480	+17 vs OECD
#17	Australia	478	+15 vs OECD
#18	Austria	477	+14 vs OECD
#19	Czechia	477	+14 vs OECD
#20	Denmark	471	+8 vs OECD
#21	Lithuania	470	+7 vs OECD
#22	Slovak Republic	469	+6 vs OECD
#23	Finland	469	+6 vs OECD
#24	Italy	468	+5 vs OECD
#25	Sweden	464	+1 vs OECD
#26	Germany	464	+1 vs OECD
#27	United States*	463	+0 vs OECD
#28	Türkiye	462	-1 vs OECD
#29	Latvia	460	-3 vs OECD
#30	Portugal	460	-3 vs OECD
#31	Slovenia	460	-3 vs OECD
#32	Hungary	459	-4 vs OECD
#33	Luxembourg	458	-5 vs OECD
#34	France	458	-5 vs OECD
#35	Spain	457	-6 vs OECD
#36	Croatia	455	-8 vs OECD
#37	United Arab Emirates	453	-10 vs OECD
#38	Norway*	452	-11 vs OECD
#39	Iceland	450	-13 vs OECD
#40	Viet Nam	443	-20 vs OECD
#41	Malta	439	-24 vs OECD
#42	Brunei Darussalam	435	-28 vs OECD
#43	Israel	433	-30 vs OECD
#44	Albania*	433	-30 vs OECD
#45	Ukrainian regions (17 of 27)	431	-32 vs OECD
#46	Greece	424	-39 vs OECD
#47	Azerbaijan	422	-41 vs OECD
#48	Romania	419	-44 vs OECD
#49	Mongolia	419	-44 vs OECD
#50	Serbia	417	-46 vs OECD
#51	Georgia	416	-47 vs OECD
#52	Chile	403	-60 vs OECD
#53	Malaysia	397	-66 vs OECD
#54	Saudi Arabia	390	-73 vs OECD
#55	Mexico	388	-75 vs OECD
#56	Jordan	388	-75 vs OECD
#57	Costa Rica	387	-76 vs OECD
#58	Peru	382	-81 vs OECD
#59	Dushanbe (Tajikistan)	382	-81 vs OECD
#60	Colombia	381	-82 vs OECD
#61	North Macedonia	380	-83 vs OECD
#62	Lebanon	377	-86 vs OECD
#63	Brazil	377	-86 vs OECD
#64	Armenia	376	-87 vs OECD
#65	Philippines	371	-92 vs OECD
#66	Argentina	367	-96 vs OECD
#67	Cambodia	366	-97 vs OECD
#68	Ecuador	366	-97 vs OECD
#69	Indonesia	364	-99 vs OECD
#70	Kyrgyzstan	364	-99 vs OECD
#71	Morocco	355	-108 vs OECD
#72	Palestinian Authority	354	-109 vs OECD
#73	Kosovo	350	-113 vs OECD
#74	El Salvador	346	-117 vs OECD
#75	Dominican Republic	339	-124 vs OECD
#76	Kurdistan Region (Iraq)	339	-124 vs OECD
#77	Guatemala	334	-129 vs OECD
#78	Paraguay	334	-129 vs OECD
#79	Kenya	326	-137 vs OECD
#80	Zambia	314	-149 vs OECD
#81	Rwanda	312	-151 vs OECD
OECD average		463

81 ranked systems shown for Mathematics. Systems marked with an asterisk (*) did not fully meet PISA 2025 sampling standards — interpret those rows with caution. B-S-J-Z (China) = Beijing, Shanghai, Jiangsu and Zhejiang only — four jurisdictions, not all of China. The rest of the country does not sit PISA.

Science — full ranked table (82 systems)

SingaporeAbove OECD averageBelow OECD average* sampling standards not fully met

Rank	Education system	Mean score	vs OECD avg
#1	B-S-J-Z (China)	597	+115 vs OECD
#2	Singapore	560	+78 vs OECD
#3	Macao (China)	541	+59 vs OECD
#4	Chinese Taipei	540	+58 vs OECD
#5	Japan	538	+56 vs OECD
#6	Estonia	527	+45 vs OECD
#7	Korea	526	+44 vs OECD
#8	United Kingdom	511	+29 vs OECD
#9	Canada*	510	+28 vs OECD
#10	New Zealand*	509	+27 vs OECD
#11	Australia	509	+27 vs OECD
#12	Finland	504	+22 vs OECD
#13	United States*	502	+20 vs OECD
#14	Switzerland	501	+19 vs OECD
#15	Ireland	500	+18 vs OECD
#16	Austria	497	+15 vs OECD
#17	Hong Kong (China)	496	+14 vs OECD
#18	Poland	495	+13 vs OECD
#19	Türkiye	494	+12 vs OECD
#20	Czechia	490	+8 vs OECD
#21	Belgium	490	+8 vs OECD
#22	Lithuania	488	+6 vs OECD
#23	Germany	486	+4 vs OECD
#24	Netherlands*	485	+3 vs OECD
#25	Sweden	485	+3 vs OECD
#26	Slovenia	484	+2 vs OECD
#27	France	483	+1 vs OECD
#28	Italy	483	+1 vs OECD
#29	Portugal	482	+0 vs OECD
#30	Hungary	480	-2 vs OECD
#31	Denmark	478	-4 vs OECD
#32	Spain	477	-5 vs OECD
#33	Croatia	476	-6 vs OECD
#34	Slovak Republic	475	-7 vs OECD
#35	Luxembourg	474	-8 vs OECD
#36	Norway*	470	-12 vs OECD
#37	Latvia	468	-14 vs OECD
#38	United Arab Emirates	458	-24 vs OECD
#39	Viet Nam	457	-25 vs OECD
#40	Malta	453	-29 vs OECD
#41	Ukrainian regions (17 of 27)	448	-34 vs OECD
#42	Uruguay	445	-37 vs OECD
#43	Chile	442	-40 vs OECD
#44	Israel	442	-40 vs OECD
#45	Iceland	441	-41 vs OECD
#46	Brunei Darussalam	439	-43 vs OECD
#47	Mauritius	438	-44 vs OECD
#48	Uzbekistan	438	-44 vs OECD
#49	Montenegro	435	-47 vs OECD
#50	Albania*	435	-47 vs OECD
#51	Qatar	434	-48 vs OECD
#52	Kazakhstan	420	-62 vs OECD
#53	Malaysia	419	-63 vs OECD
#54	Colombia	414	-68 vs OECD
#55	Mexico	414	-68 vs OECD
#56	Saudi Arabia	413	-69 vs OECD
#57	Cyprus	411	-71 vs OECD
#58	Azerbaijan	409	-73 vs OECD
#59	Brazil	409	-73 vs OECD
#60	Jordan	407	-75 vs OECD
#61	Peru	406	-76 vs OECD
#62	Ecuador	393	-89 vs OECD
#63	Argentina	393	-89 vs OECD
#64	Indonesia	389	-93 vs OECD
#65	El Salvador	385	-97 vs OECD
#66	Cambodia	382	-100 vs OECD
#67	North Macedonia	378	-104 vs OECD
#68	Philippines	373	-109 vs OECD
#69	Lebanon	372	-110 vs OECD
#70	Armenia	369	-113 vs OECD
#71	Kyrgyzstan	363	-119 vs OECD
#72	Dominican Republic	361	-121 vs OECD
#73	Palestinian Authority	359	-123 vs OECD
#74	Morocco	358	-124 vs OECD
#75	Kosovo	357	-125 vs OECD
#76	Paraguay	355	-127 vs OECD
#77	Kurdistan Region (Iraq)	352	-130 vs OECD
#78	Guatemala	351	-131 vs OECD
#79	Zambia	337	-145 vs OECD
#80	Kenya	335	-147 vs OECD
#81	Dushanbe (Tajikistan)	334	-148 vs OECD
#82	Rwanda	317	-165 vs OECD
OECD average		482

82 ranked systems shown for Science. Systems marked with an asterisk (*) did not fully meet PISA 2025 sampling standards — interpret those rows with caution. B-S-J-Z (China) = Beijing, Shanghai, Jiangsu and Zhejiang only — four jurisdictions, not all of China. The rest of the country does not sit PISA.

Sources: MOE Singapore — Press Release, 8 Sep 2026 ; OECD — PISA 2025 Results (Volume I): Student Performance in PISA 2025

What Computational Problem Solving Actually Is

Computational Problem Solving (CMPS) is the focus of PISA 2025's innovative domain, “Learning in the Digital World”. MOE reports that more than half of Singapore students are top performers in CMPS, compared with about a quarter across OECD countries on average. Note the different bar for “top performer” here: for CMPS it means Levels 5–6, while for reading, mathematics and science a “low performer” is defined as below Level 2.

Students are “highly effective in applying computational practices such as conducting experiments, analysing data, and building and debugging computational artefacts.”

MOE, PISA 2025 press release

Source: MOE Singapore — Press Release, 8 Sep 2026

Two sample CMPS units released by MOE (Annex B) make the domain concrete:

Recycling Claw

Students program a robotic claw to sort objects, mimicking a recycling plant. Sub-scale: Programming. Process assessed: build and debug computational artefacts.

Fitness App

Students model relationships between exercises and fitness for an app helping astronauts stay healthy in low gravity. Sub-scale: Modelling. Process assessed: conduct experiments; analyse data.

Source: MOE Singapore — Press Release, 8 Sep 2026

Singapore is one of only two systems worldwide with over two-thirds proficient learners and more than a quarter engaged learners in CMPS:

28%

"Competent learners"

Proficient AND engaged (OECD avg 14%)

~65%

Reached the relevant OECD proficiency level

But only half also showed basic proficiency in science, reading & maths

Sources: MOE Singapore — Press Release, 8 Sep 2026 ; OECD — PISA 2025 Results (Volume I): Student Performance in PISA 2025

PISA 2022 → 2025: What Changed for Singapore

In PISA 2022, Singapore ranked 1st in all three domains it sat that cycle (see the full PISA 2022 country rankings archive). In 2025 it is 1st in reading only — mathematics and reading both fell, while science stayed about the same:

Domain	2022	2025	Change
Reading	543	535	-8
Mathematics	575	563	-12
Science	561	560	-1

Source: OECD — PISA 2025 Results (Vol. I): Singapore Country Note

MOE's own framing: “performance differences between our top and low performers increased from 2022 to 2025.” The gap between the top 10% and bottom 10% of students widened in all three domains between 2022 and 2025. Looking back further, since 2015 the share of low performers (below Level 2) has risen +4 percentage points in mathematics and +3 percentage points in reading, with no significant change in science.

Sources: OECD — PISA 2025 Results (Vol. I): Singapore Country Note ; MOE Singapore — Press Release, 8 Sep 2026

Proficiency Levels and Singapore's Academic All-Rounders

Beyond the mean score, PISA sorts students into proficiency levels. Singapore has both a high floor (few students below the basic Level 2) and a high ceiling (many students at the top Levels 5–6):

90%

Science: Level 2+

OECD avg 74%

26%

Science: top performers (L5/6)

OECD avg 7%

89%

Maths: Level 2+

OECD avg 65%

37%

Maths: top performers (L5/6)

OECD avg 8%

86%

Reading: Level 2+

OECD avg 69%

22%

Reading: top performers (L5+)

OECD avg 6%

Source: OECD — PISA 2025 Results (Vol. I): Singapore Country Note

Singapore places 2nd for the share of students reaching mathematics Levels 5/6, behind only B-S-J-Z (China):

1.B-S-J-Z (China)54%
2.Singapore37%
3.Chinese Taipei32%
4.Macao (China)29%
5.Korea23%
6.Japan22%
7.Hong Kong (China)21%

Share of students reaching Mathematics Levels 5–6, PISA 2025.

Source: OECD — PISA 2025 Results (Vol. I): Singapore Country Note

Reading Level 2+ shares range enormously worldwide — from 93% (B-S-J-Z) down to 4% (Rwanda) — which is the scale PISA is measuring against.

1st / ONLY

15% of Singapore students are academic all-rounders — top performers in reading, mathematics AND science at once.

The highest share of any participating system. OECD average: 3%.

Source: MOE Singapore — Press Release, 8 Sep 2026

That breadth of strength across subjects is part of what feeds into Singapore's secondary school outcomes — see our guide to Singapore's best secondary schools for how these academic outcomes play out school by school.

Environmental Science: Singapore's Other Top Result

PISA 2025 also introduced environmental science as a new assessment module. Singapore ranked 2nd globally, with 27%of students reaching top Levels 5–6, versus an OECD average of just 7%.

90%

Reached baseline Level 2

OECD avg 74%

94%

Believe they can positively impact the environment

OECD avg 81%

94%

Believe collective action can help

OECD avg 82%

85%

Know how to work with others on it

OECD avg 68%

62%

Interested in an environment-related career

Same as OECD average (62%)

Sources: MOE Singapore — Press Release, 8 Sep 2026 ; OECD — PISA 2025 Results (Vol. I): Singapore Country Note

Digital Habits and AI Use

PISA 2025 asked students about their digital habits for the first time in this much depth. 78% of Singapore students compare different sources when searching for information online, versus an OECD average of 64%.

66%

Use AI chatbots for schoolwork weekly+

OECD avg 46%

Never use AI chatbots

OECD avg 14%

2.1 hrs

Digital device use at school for learning (daily)

OECD avg 1.7 hrs

43%

Attend phone-banning schools

Up from 16% in 2022 (OECD 49% / 34% in 2022)

Sources: MOE Singapore — Press Release, 8 Sep 2026 ; OECD — PISA 2025 Results (Vol. I): Singapore Country Note

What Singapore students use AI chatbots for (at least weekly):

Preliminary research on a new topic

Singapore

46%

OECD avg

31%

Summarising a text

Singapore

41%

OECD avg

30%

Drafting text for writing assignments

Singapore

45%

OECD avg

29%

Source: OECD — PISA 2025 Results (Vol. I): Singapore Country Note

29% of Singapore students say peers are often distracted by devices in most or all science lessons (OECD average 28%). Across the OECD, digitally distracted students score 11 points lower in science on average; in Singapore that penalty is smaller, at 6 points.

The OECD's AI-writing finding

Across the OECD, students who did NOT use AI to draft text for writing assignments outperformed those who did. Among students who used AI frequently, those who had been taught how to assess the quality of AI-generated information did better than those given no guidance at all. See our guide to how MOE is using AI in Singapore classrooms for the guidance side of that equation.

Source: OECD — Press Release, 8 Sep 2026

The Family-Support Gap

This is the one place Singapore trails the OECD average, and the most actionable finding for parents in the entire report. MOE's own figures:

Weekly family discussion about how they are doing in school

Singapore

49%

OECD avg

60%

Family takes interest in what they learned

Singapore

39%

OECD avg

58%

Both figures declined from 2022. Family support fell in almost all participating PISA systems over the same period — this is not a Singapore-only trend.

Source: MOE Singapore — Press Release, 8 Sep 2026

OECD's own questionnaire (a differently worded set of questions, same direction of travel): 55% of Singapore students say parents asked at least weekly what they did at school (down from 62% in 2022), and 37% had at least weekly discussions about problems at school (down from 47% in 2022).

Source: OECD — PISA 2025 Results (Vol. I): Singapore Country Note

Growth mindset — reported straight, not spun

62% of Singapore students report a growth mindset, below the OECD average of 69%. This is a genuine area where Singapore trails. The nuance worth knowing: for the students in Singapore who do have a growth mindset, the science-score benefit is larger than elsewhere — 36 points higher in science, versus a 28-point benefit across the OECD on average. That does not offset having fewer growth-mindset students overall; it is a separate fact worth knowing alongside it.

Source: OECD — PISA 2025 Results (Vol. I): Singapore Country Note

Set against the family-support gap, Singapore students score well on other attitudes and school climate measures:

77%

Curious about many things

OECD avg 73%

69%

Apply extra effort when work is hard

OECD avg 60%

96%

Feel safe in classrooms

OECD avg 93%

10%

Skipped a day of school in the past fortnight

OECD avg 22% (lower is better)

20%

Bullying victims, few times a month+

OECD avg 20% — up from 2022

23%

Do not exercise outside school at all

OECD avg 17%

Sources: OECD — PISA 2025 Results (Vol. I): Singapore Country Note ; MOE Singapore — Press Release, 8 Sep 2026

MOE points to Parenting for Wellness (a joint HPB, MSF and MOE programme launched in 2024) and Grow Well SG as existing responses to the family-engagement and physical-activity findings above. For the broader pressure this sits inside, see our analysis of PSLE stress and tuition culture in Singapore.

The Global Picture: OECD-Wide Declines

Singapore's dip in mathematics and reading is part of a much larger pattern. Across the OECD, one in five 15-year-olds is now a low performer in science, mathematics and reading — up from 16% in 2022.

−28

OECD reading, 2015–2025

~1.5 years of learning

−22

OECD maths, 2015–2025

~1 year of learning

−14

OECD reading, 2022–2025

Across 35 OECD countries

−9

OECD maths, 2022–2025

Science was unchanged

PISA 2025 recorded the lowest OECD averages ever measured in all three core domains. Non-OECD participants declined less over 2015–2025 (reading −16, maths −8).

Sources: OECD — Press Release, 8 Sep 2026 ; OECD — PISA 2025 Results (Volume I): Student Performance in PISA 2025

Across the OECD, advantaged students scored 85 points higher in science than disadvantaged students; that gap narrowed between 2022 and 2025, but mostly because advantaged students' scores fell, not because disadvantaged students improved. Science performance did improve, 2015–2025, in a specific set of systems: Lithuania, the Slovak Republic, Türkiye, the Dominican Republic, Georgia, Macao (China), Montenegro, Qatar, Thailand, the United Arab Emirates and Uruguay — several of them (Türkiye, the Slovak Republic, Montenegro, Qatar and the UAE) raised their share of top performers while also cutting low performers.

Source: OECD — Press Release, 8 Sep 2026

The ten highest-performing systems across science, mathematics and reading combined are mostly Chinese jurisdictions, plus Estonia, Japan, Korea, Singapore, Chinese Taipei and the United Kingdom.

Source: OECD — Press Release, 8 Sep 2026

PISA 2025 shows that reversing declines in student performance is urgent. The most successful education systems focus on fewer areas in greater depth, invest in teachers, engage parents and provide targeted support for the students and schools that need it the most. Technology and AI can strengthen learning and help prepare young people for the future, but only when used purposefully and not as a substitute for attention, effort and understanding.

Source: OECD — Press Release, 8 Sep 2026

The Bottom Line

Confident results, one clear gap to close

for Singapore families reading the PISA 2025 report

Singapore stayed near the top of a system that is, on average, declining faster than at any point on record — the one place it trails the OECD average is family engagement, which is also the one lever parents can pull directly.

For students

Singapore's strengths are real: top-two in every domain, the highest share of academic all-rounders in the world, and strong problem-solving skills that go beyond memorised syllabus content.

For parents

The most useful takeaway from the whole report may be the smallest number in it: a weekly conversation about school is something every family can do, and it is exactly the measure where Singapore currently sits below the OECD average.

The numbers are strong.

The conversation is the gap.

Frequently Asked Questions

What were Singapore’s PISA 2025 results?

Singapore ranked 1st in reading (535, OECD average 461), 2nd in mathematics (563, OECD average 463), 2nd in science (560, OECD average 482), and 2nd in computational problem solving (563, OECD average 500).

Which country topped PISA 2025?

B-S-J-Z (China) — Beijing, Shanghai, Jiangsu and Zhejiang — led mathematics (612) and science (597). Macao (China) led computational problem solving (572). Singapore led reading (535). Singapore and B-S-J-Z are the only two systems that placed top-two across science, mathematics and reading.

What is computational problem solving in PISA 2025?

Computational Problem Solving (CMPS) is the focus of PISA 2025’s innovative domain, "Learning in the Digital World". More than half of Singapore students are top performers (Levels 5–6) in CMPS, versus about a quarter across OECD countries on average. Sample units released by MOE include "Recycling Claw" (programming a robotic claw to sort objects) and "Fitness App" (modelling exercise and fitness relationships).

How did Singapore’s PISA 2025 scores compare to PISA 2022?

Singapore scored lower than in 2022 in mathematics (575 → 563) and reading (543 → 535), and about the same in science (561 → 560). Singapore ranked 1st in all three domains in 2022 but is 1st in reading only in 2025, and the gap between top and bottom performers widened in all three domains between 2022 and 2025.

What percentage of Singapore students are "academic all-rounders"?

15% of Singapore students are top performers in reading, mathematics AND science simultaneously — the highest share of any participating education system. The OECD average is 3%.

How many countries and students took part in PISA 2025?

PISA 2025 tested 760,000 students across 91 countries and economies, representing about 33 million 15-year-olds. Singapore’s sample was about 6,600 students (6,551 in OECD’s technical count) across 157 schools — 145 public secondary schools and 12 private schools — tested April–May 2025.

Do Singapore students use AI chatbots for schoolwork?

Yes — 66% of Singapore students use AI chatbots for schoolwork at least weekly, versus an OECD average of 46%, and only 4% never use them (OECD 14%). But across the OECD, students who did NOT use AI to draft text for writing assignments outperformed those who did.

Is family support for Singapore students weaker than other countries?

On this specific measure, yes. About 49% of Singapore students report weekly family discussion about how they are doing in school, versus an OECD average of 60%, and 39% say their family takes interest in what they learned, versus an OECD average of 58%. Both figures declined from 2022, and family support fell in almost all participating systems over the same period.

Methodology and Limitations

PISA is an OECD-run, triennial study of 15-year-olds' reading, mathematics and science literacy. PISA 2025 tested 760,000 students across 91 countries and economies, representing about 33 million 15-year-olds, between routine cycles. Science was the major (focal) domain this cycle; reading and mathematics were minor domains; the innovative domain was “Learning in the Digital World” (computational problem solving).

What the asterisk (*) means

A system name marked with an asterisk in the tables above did not fully meet one or more PISA 2025 sampling standards. Interpret those rows with more caution than an unmarked row.

Why the domain counts differ

Uzbekistan has data for science only, which is why the four full tables above have different lengths (81, 81, 82 and 76 ranked systems).

Rank differences of a few points are often not statistically meaningful.Wherever this page makes a rank claim near a tie — the CMPS cluster around Singapore, B-S-J-Z and Japan is the clearest example — we have paired it with the statistical-significance caveat from the source table.

One transparency note: the OECD's own summary box for computational problem solving lists the top three as “B-S-J-Z (China), Macao (China) and Singapore” with scores “572, 563 and 560…respectively” — which conflicts with the OECD's own descending-order sentence elsewhere in the same report, and with the underlying data table. We treat Table I.2.4 as authoritative: Macao 572 > Singapore 563 > B-S-J-Z 560, which is what this page reports throughout.

Source: OECD — PISA 2025 Results (Volume I): Student Performance in PISA 2025

Still to come from this PISA cycle: Foreign Language Assessment results in April 2027, full Learning in the Digital World results and analysis in May 2027, and self-directed learning analyses later in 2027.

Sources: OECD — Press Release, 8 Sep 2026 ; OECD — PISA 2025 Results (Vol. I): Singapore Country Note

For the 2022 baseline this page compares against, see the PISA 2022 country rankings archive. To browse the schools behind these results, see our directory of Singapore primary schools.

Cite this page

SGSchoolKaki. “PISA 2025 Results: How Singapore's 15-Year-Olds Actually Did.” Published 9 Sept 2026. https://sgschoolkaki.com/blog/pisa-2025-results-singapore. Underlying data: OECD, PISA 2025 Results (Volume I); MOE Singapore press release, 8 Sep 2026.

Sources

1.MOE Singapore — “PISA 2025: Singapore Students Demonstrate Strong Real-World Problem-Solving Skills in Computational Thinking Domain”, press release, 8 Sep 2026. moe.gov.sg
2.OECD — PISA 2025 Results (Volume I): Singapore country note. oecd.org
3.OECD — PISA 2025 Results (Volume I), “Student performance in PISA 2025” (mean-score tables I.2.1–I.2.4). oecd.org
4.OECD — “PISA 2025: Students' Reading and Mathematics Performance Declined Sharply Across the OECD”, press release, 8 Sep 2026. oecd.org

Every score in the tables above was cross-checked against two independent primary sources (MOE Annex A and OECD Tables I.2.1–I.2.4) with zero mismatches. See also our PISA 2022 country rankings archive for the prior cycle, and our guide to AI in Singapore schools for more on the digital-habits findings above.

PISA 2025 Results: How Singapore's 15-Year-Olds Actually Did

Singapore's Four PISA 2025 Results

Computational Problem Solving — top 12

Reading — top 12

Mathematics — top 12

Science — top 12

A rank isn't always a real gap

PISA 2025 Rankings by Country: Full Table (All 91 Education Systems)

Computational Problem Solving — full ranked table (76 systems)

Reading — full ranked table (81 systems)

Mathematics — full ranked table (81 systems)

Science — full ranked table (82 systems)

What Computational Problem Solving Actually Is

PISA 2022 → 2025: What Changed for Singapore

Proficiency Levels and Singapore's Academic All-Rounders

Environmental Science: Singapore's Other Top Result

Digital Habits and AI Use

The OECD's AI-writing finding

The Family-Support Gap

Growth mindset — reported straight, not spun

The Global Picture: OECD-Wide Declines

Confident results, one clear gap to close

Frequently Asked Questions

Methodology and Limitations

Cite this page

Sources

Find a Tutor?

Join as a Tutor?