Hello KBers … if it is too long don’t read it … but the outcomes of our education system are important.

What NZ’s 2025 PISA Results Tell Us

Alwyn Poole — with analytical/formatting support from AI

General Analysis

My take on implications

• Even small improvements, or arrested decline, provide some hope — and yes, I know “hope isn’t a plan”, but it can be a motivator for seeking further and more substantial improvements.
  
• There is little here to give politicians or any ilk bragging rights. These 15-year-olds would have had two years under National, six years under Labour, and two further years under National. The curriculum changes under National will have had little or no effect, although positive energy around improving achievement may have helped.
  
• These students also endured the Covid response, which possibly gives further hope that children can achieve despite tough times.
  
• There is a lot more to do, and the concerns around the huge gaps related to socio-economics remain. The fact that NZ’s total EQI spend is only $250 million — as little as 3% of funding for the highest-EQI schools — is a major issue that needs addressing. A more detailed and consistent curriculum may have marginal effects on equity, but there is a great deal more to be done to close the gaps, as a public education system should.

1. Overall picture: New Zealand is still performing above the OECD average

New Zealand students scored above the OECD average in mathematics, reading and science, and New Zealand also had a relatively high proportion of top-performing students.

For example:

New Zealand PISA 2025 performance compared with the OECD average
Measure	New Zealand	OECD average	Difference
Science – Level 2+	81%	74%	+7 pts
Mathematics – Level 2+	71%	65%	+6 pts
Reading – Level 2+	77%	69%	+8 pts
Science – Level 5/6	13%	7%	+6 pts
Mathematics – Level 5/6	11%	8%	+3 pts
Reading – Level 5+	14%	6%	+8 pts

However, the trend is much more concerning than the absolute position.

2. The biggest concern is the long-term decline

The 2025 results were approximately the same as 2022, but:

mathematics is below 2018 and 2015 levels;

reading is below 2018 and 2015 levels;

science has been comparatively stable for more than a decade;

the gap between high and low performers widened in reading.

Even more concerning:

Since 2015, the percentage of students below Level 2 increased by:

8 percentage points in mathematics

5 percentage points in reading

no significant change in science.

New Zealand still has a reasonably strong education system by international standards, but there is ongoing evidence of deterioration in foundational academic performance.

Key needs for improvement are:

Mathematics: strengthen foundational numeracy, confidence with problem solving, and sustained achievement over time.

Literacy and reading: improve comprehension, vocabulary development, critical reading, and written response skills.

Problem solving: build students’ ability to apply knowledge in unfamiliar and real-world contexts.

Independent learning: develop study planning, self-regulation, reflection, and effective help-seeking habits.

Academic resilience: support perseverance, confidence, and the ability to keep learning when work becomes challenging.

3. There is a significant achievement gap associated with socioeconomic status

The highest socioeconomic group outperformed the lowest socioeconomic group by 89 points in science. The OECD average gap was 85 points.

Between 2015 and 2025, New Zealand’s socioeconomic performance gap in science remained stable, while the OECD average gap narrowed.

This indicates that simply maintaining the current system may not be enough to reduce educational inequality.

The data also show that only 13% of disadvantaged New Zealand students achieved in the top quarter of science performance.

4. Student mindset is a major priority

New Zealand students demonstrate relatively positive attitudes:

78% say they are curious about many different things;

63% say they make additional effort when work becomes challenging;

74% demonstrate a growth mindset.

Students with a growth mindset in New Zealand had a 59-point science performance advantage compared with students with a fixed mindset, after socioeconomic factors were taken into account.

That is substantially larger than the OECD average difference of 28 points.

Recommendation

Our education programmes should therefore not focus exclusively on teaching content.

They should incorporate:

• growth mindset;
• perseverance;
• goal setting;
• learning strategies;
• confidence;
• problem solving;
• reflection;
• independent learning.

5. Self-directed learning is a clear weakness

This is one of the clearest areas where an education provider could potentially add value.

Only about 34% of New Zealand students reported that they often or very often plan their approach to studying.

Only 45% regularly ask themselves questions about the material to check whether they have understood it.

This suggests that many students may have reasonable academic ability but lack strong learning-to-learn skills.

And the report provides evidence that these skills matter.

A one-unit increase in:

• goal-setting → +6 science points
• help-seeking → +11 science points

A clear aim of our system should be teaching students how to learn, rather than simply giving them more academic content – or simply relying on a “knowledge rich curriculum.”

6. School engagement is another significant issue

Attendance is still poor – although we have recently seen some incremental change.

In 2025:

32% of students reported missing at least one full day of school during the previous two weeks;

OECD average: 22%.

Attendance is closely connected to learning opportunity.

7. Classroom environments need attention

In New Zealand, classroom disruption is a significant concern:

24% of students said they cannot work well in most or all lessons.

41% reported noise and disorder disrupting most or every science lesson.

36% said classmates do not listen to the teacher.

Students need learning environments where they can:

• concentrate without unnecessary disruption;
• participate confidently in class activities;
• ask questions and receive clear explanations;
• collaborate productively with classmates; and
• receive individual support when needed.

8. Teacher support is relatively strong — but has declined

New Zealand students reported relatively positive teacher support:

75% said teachers show interest in every student’s learning;

69% said teachers continue teaching until students understand;

79% said teachers give extra help when needed.

However, these figures have declined compared with 2015.

So the issue does not appear to be simply “New Zealand teachers aren’t supporting students.”

Instead, the system appears to be under pressure.

9. Digital learning and AI are changing the education market

New Zealand students reported spending approximately:

2.5 hours per day using digital devices at school for learning.

The OECD average was 1.7 hours.

AI adoption is also already significant.

47% of New Zealand students reported using AI chatbots to help them learn at least once a week.

Other uses include:

• preliminary research: 32%;
• summarising texts: 28%;
• drafting writing assignments: 24%.

We need to teach students how to use AI correctly for learning.

For example:

AI-assisted learning + critical thinking + verification + independent reasoning.

10. Digital distraction remains a real problem

As I said – when the cell phone ban was introduced – students will find a way around it.

New Zealand students use digital devices more than the OECD average:

38% reported that their peers are often distracted by digital devices during most or all science lessons. The OECD average is 28%.

11. Bullying is a significant issue

25% of New Zealand students reported being victims of at least one form of bullying a few times per month or more. The OECD average was 20%.

The report also identifies a significant relationship between cyberbullying and achievement.

Students reporting certain forms of cyberbullying scored, on average, 54 points lower in science than their peers.

We need to focus on:

• student wellbeing;
• belonging;
• peer relationships;
• respectful communication;
• digital citizenship.

12. Parent engagement has weakened

In 2025:

75% of students said parents/guardians asked at least weekly what they did at school;

only 43% reported weekly discussions about problems at school.

In 2022 these figures were 81% and 55%.

As I have always said parents need to be a significant part of the learning ecosystem and very much welcomed by schools as partners.

13. There are significant limitations on the New Zealand PISA data

Our:

• student response rate was below the target;
• student exclusions exceeded the tolerance;
• school participation rate was below target.

The OECD estimates that the reported mean scores could be 10–15 points higher than hypothetical scores including non-respondents.

However, the OECD also says that because the 2022 results were biased in a similar direction, comparisons between 2022 and 2025 are unlikely to be materially affected.

AI says:

“PISA 2025 provides a strong directional indicator of the challenges and opportunities facing New Zealand education, while the OECD notes limitations in the New Zealand sample and recommends caution when interpreting absolute scores.”

Overall Assessment

I would rate the education environment identified by this report as:

Overall assessment of New Zealand’s education environment based on PISA 2025 indicators
Area	Assessment
Overall academic performance	Strong relative to OECD
Long-term mathematics trend	Concerning
Long-term reading trend	Concerning
Science	Relatively stable
High achievers	Strong
Low achievers	Significant concern
Socioeconomic inequality	Significant
Growth mindset	Strong opportunity
Self-directed learning	Weakness
Attendance	Concerning
Classroom discipline	Concerning
Teacher support	Relatively strong
Digital learning	Major opportunity
AI in education	Major emerging opportunity
Bullying	Significant concern
Parent engagement	Declining

 

Case Study: Comparing New Zealand’s 2025 PISA Results with Estonia

Our Prime Minister has often reference Estonia as a relevant/exemplar nation. So – here is a brief report on achievement, equity, and policy implications

Summary

In PISA 2025, both New Zealand and Estonia performed above the OECD average across the main domains of science, mathematics and reading. Estonia, however, remained one of the strongest-performing education systems internationally, with results near the top of the OECD and Europe. New Zealand’s results were solid and broadly stable compared with 2022, but they showed a larger spread of achievement and a continuing challenge in mathematics and equity.

Headline results

Domain	New Zealand	Estonia	OECD average	Comparison
Science	509	527	482	Estonia scored 18 points higher than New Zealand.
Mathematics	480	508	463	Estonia scored 28 points higher than New Zealand.
Reading	497	499	461	The two countries were very close, with Estonia 2 points higher.
Computational problem solving	531	Noted as among Europe’s strongest performers	500	New Zealand performed strongly in this innovative domain; Estonia was also reported as a European leader.

Science: Science was the major domain in PISA 2025. New Zealand’s average score of 509 was above the OECD average and broadly stable over recent PISA cycles. Estonia’s score of 527 placed it among the world’s leading systems and first in Europe according to Estonian education reporting. The gap suggests that Estonia’s students, on average, demonstrated stronger science literacy and application of scientific knowledge.

Mathematics: Mathematics is the clearest area of difference. New Zealand’s average of 480 remained above the OECD average, but Estonia’s 508 was substantially higher. New Zealand also reported that 29% of students were below the baseline proficiency level in mathematics, indicating a significant challenge for foundational numeracy.

Reading: Reading was New Zealand’s strongest area relative to Estonia, with the two countries almost level: New Zealand scored 497 and Estonia 499. However, Estonia’s reading score had declined compared with earlier cycles, while New Zealand’s reading result was broadly similar to 2022 and remained above the OECD average.

Equity and spread of achievement

New Zealand’s results point to a continuing equity concern. Although the achievement gap between advantaged and disadvantaged students narrowed in 2025, New Zealand still had above-average variation in achievement, meaning outcomes differed widely between students.

Estonia’s system is widely noted for combining high performance with comparatively strong equity, where socio-economic background has less impact on learning outcomes than in many OECD systems.

Interpretation for New Zealand

New Zealand’s PISA 2025 results should be read as cautiously positive. Achievement appears to have stabilised after earlier declines and students remain above OECD averages.

At the same time, Estonia shows that higher average performance and stronger equity can coexist. The comparison suggests three priorities for New Zealand: strengthen foundational mathematics, reduce the long tail of underachievement, and continue improving support for disadvantaged learners without lowering expectations for high performers.

Policy lessons from Estonia

Equity with high expectations: Estonia’s results suggest that broad access to quality learning can lift average achievement while keeping gaps comparatively smaller.

Strong science foundations: Estonia’s high science score indicates the value of coherent curriculum, skilled teaching and sustained attention to scientific literacy.

Reading remains important: Even high-performing systems can experience declines in reading, making literacy a continuing priority for both countries.

Digital learning needs discipline: Both countries’ results highlight the growing importance of computational problem solving, but digital tools need to support—not replace—deep learning.

Conclusion

New Zealand performed above the OECD average in PISA 2025 and showed signs of stabilisation, particularly compared with the post-pandemic decline seen internationally. Estonia, however, remained a benchmark system, outperforming New Zealand in science and mathematics and matching it closely in reading. For New Zealand, the comparison reinforces the need to lift mathematics achievement, reduce achievement variation, and build a more consistently high-performing and equitable education system.