How Do Britain’s Schools and Pupils
Perform? – A Look at the International
Evidence
October 2013

Following publication of a new report by the Organisation for Economic Development
(OECD) which suggested that British teenagers were leaving school with low literacy and
numeracy skills,1 a separate report published earlier this year by the Sutton Trust provides
an important reminder that selectively quoting ‘evidence’ on the state of Britain’s schools
and the standard of education they provide can be misleading and dangerous. 2

The Sutton Trust report says that big variations in England’s education rankings in global
league tables can be misleading, should be treated with caution and can obscure the true
challenges facing schools.

The report says that apparent differences in performance between different global tables,
are the result of three key factors:
 Different countries are included in the different tables;
 League tables exaggerate the importance of raw test scores; and
 Some countries do better on one survey than another, perhaps because the surveys
test different aspects of literacy, numeracy and science.

“Sir Peter Lampl, chair of the Sutton, said: ‘Whatever the average ranking of English
education, we need to focus on reducing social segregation which is greater in England
than almost all other OECD countries. We also need to improve teaching standards
across the board and not focus so much on structures if we are to match those countries
that consistently outperform the rest of the world – not just places like Hong Kong and
Japan, but successful European education systems – and use their achievement as our
benchmark.”

The most recent OECD PISA league tables place England equal 23rd in reading, equal 27th
in maths and 16th in science out of 65 countries.3

Perhaps more important than the numerical ranking is what PISA tells us about the
strengths and weaknesses of countries’ education systems.4 PISA 2009 had some
interesting things to say on schools systems, choice and equity, finding, for example that:
 Comprehensive school systems produce better and more equitable results;
 UK state schools outperform private schools;
 Dividing students into different educational tracks at an early age does not improve
performance;
 Financial constraints limit school ‘choice’ for low income families;
 School systems that offer parents more school choices are less effective in raising the
performance of all children; and
 Exclusions and school transfer of pupils reduces performance.
1
OECD, OECD Skills Outlook 2013: First Results from the Survey of Adult Skills (OECD publishing, 2013)
Smithers, A., Confusion in the Ranks: how good are England’s schools (The Sutton Trust, 2013)
3 OECD, PISA 2009 Results: What Students Know and Can Do: Student Performance in Reading, Mathematics and
Science (Volume I) (OECD Publishing, 2010)
4 OECD, PISA 2009 Results: What Makes a School Successful? – Resources, Policies and Practices (Volume IV)
(OECD Publishing, 2010)
2

Crucially, Pisa is unequivocal in saying that: “The bottom line is that the quality of a school
system cannot exceed the quality of its teachers.”

A separate global index prepared for Pearson by the Economist Intelligence Unit placed
England 6th of 40 countries, much higher than its Pisa ranking and ahead of the USA,
Germany and France.5

The top ranked countries were Finland and South Korea where, despite huge differences,
there was a shared social belief in the importance of education and its “underlying moral
purpose”. These countries also had among the lowest levels of school choice and Finland
had the lowest levels of school autonomy.

The Pearson report concluded that spending on education was important but less so than
other factors. For example it said successful countries gave teachers a high status and
have a ‘culture’ of education.

It also emphasised the importance of high-quality teachers and the need to find ways to
recruit the best staff – including raising teacher status, professional respect and pay.

Other global surveys include the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study
(TIMMS) and Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS) taken by pupils
aged ten and 14 in England and Northern Ireland in May and June 2011 and published in
December 2012.

These showed that England was in the top 10 countries for both primary and secondary
maths and was one of the most improved countries for maths between 1995-2011. In
primary literacy tests, England was ranked 11th out of 45 nations; and for science,
England’s ranking was 15th out of 50 countries for primary science and 9th out of 42
countries for secondary science.

The National Foundation for Educational Research (NFER) says that the TIMSS data
shows that England’s secondary schools deliver a world class science education and
strike an important balance between high achievement and positive pupil attitudes in
science, which many of the highest performing countries do not. 6

NFER add that Government proposals to reform GCSEs could derail that success instead
of building on it. The report’s authors argue that it is critical, therefore, that in designing the
criteria for the new GCSEs, policy makers do not rush to dismantle what is good, instead,
reform should carefully be considered in light of our system’s strengths, using an
evidence-based approach.

Another area of strength for UK education is in the early years. In 2012, the Starting Well
Index was launched by the Economist Intelligence Unit.7 The index takes a global look at
pre-school quality, availability and affordability in 45 OECD countries.

The UK came out near the top of the index, being ranked fourth out of 45 countries,
behind Finland, Sweden and Norway but ahead of France, Germany and the Netherlands.
5
Economist Intelligence Unit, The Learning Curve: Lessons In Country Performance In Education (Pearson, 2012)
Burdett, N., Weaving, H., Science education - have we overlooked what we are good at? (NFER, 2013)
7 Economist Intelligence Unit, Starting well; Benchmarking early education across the world (Economist Intelligence Unit,
2012)
6