Indonesia vs Jordan: PISA: 15-year-olds by mathematics proficiency level (%). Below Level 1
PISA: 15-year-olds by mathematics proficiency level (%). Below Level 1 over time
- Indonesia
- Jordan
How they compare
Indonesia currently reports 40.6% against 30.7% in Jordan, a difference of 9.9%.
That makes Indonesia's figure about 1.3 times Jordan's.
The two have swapped places 3 times across 5 shared years of data; in 2006 it was Jordan ahead.
Indonesia ranks 3rd and Jordan ranks 6th of 53 countries.
Indonesia has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Indonesia | Jordan | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 39.4% | 36.2% | 3.2% | Indonesia |
| 2010s | 40.3% | 35.4% | 4.9% | Indonesia |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher pisa: 15-year-olds by mathematics proficiency level (%). below level 1, Indonesia or Jordan?
- Indonesia, at 40.6% against 30.7% in Jordan as of 2018.
- What is the difference in pisa: 15-year-olds by mathematics proficiency level (%). below level 1 between Indonesia and Jordan?
- 9.9%, with Indonesia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Indonesia and Jordan?
- 5 years are reported by both, from 2006 to 2018.
- How do Indonesia and Jordan rank globally for pisa: 15-year-olds by mathematics proficiency level (%). below level 1?
- Indonesia ranks 3rd and Jordan ranks 6th of 53 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), published as PISA: 15-year-olds by mathematics proficiency level (%). Below Level 1. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Percentage of 15-year-old students below the lowest proficiency level (scoring 358 or below) on the PISA mathematics scale. Students below Level 1 may be able to perform very direct and straightforward mathematical tasks, such as reading a single value from a well-labeled chart or table where the labels on the chart match the words in the stimulus and question, so that the selection criteria are clear and the relationship between the chart and the aspects of the context depicted are evident, and performing arithmetic calculations with whole numbers by following clear and well-defined instructions. Data reflects country performance in the stated year according to PISA reports, but may not be comparable across years or countries. Consult the PISA website for more detailed information: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/