Latvia vs Liechtenstein: PISA: 15-year-olds by reading proficiency level (%). Level 3
PISA: 15-year-olds by reading proficiency level (%). Level 3 over time
- Latvia
- Liechtenstein
How they compare
Latvia currently reports 29.0% against 28.6% in Liechtenstein, a difference of 0.4%.
The two have swapped places 3 times across 5 shared years of data; in 2000 it was Liechtenstein ahead.
Latvia ranks 7th and Liechtenstein ranks 10th of 55 countries.
Across the 2 decades both report, Latvia averaged higher in 1 and Liechtenstein in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Latvia | Liechtenstein | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 29.8% | 30.7% | 0.9% | Liechtenstein |
| 2010s | 33.0% | 28.6% | 4.4% | Latvia |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher pisa: 15-year-olds by reading proficiency level (%). level 3, Latvia or Liechtenstein?
- Latvia, at 29.0% against 28.6% in Liechtenstein as of 2018.
- What is the difference in pisa: 15-year-olds by reading proficiency level (%). level 3 between Latvia and Liechtenstein?
- 0.4%, with Latvia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Latvia and Liechtenstein?
- 5 years are reported by both, from 2000 to 2012.
- How do Latvia and Liechtenstein rank globally for pisa: 15-year-olds by reading proficiency level (%). level 3?
- Latvia ranks 7th and Liechtenstein ranks 10th of 55 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), published as PISA: 15-year-olds by reading proficiency level (%). Level 3. 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 scoring higher than 480 but lower than or equal to 553 on the PISA reading scale. Readers at Level 3 can represent the literal meaning of single or multiple texts in the absence of explicit content or organizational clues. Readers can integrate content and generate both basic and more advanced inferences. They can also integrate several parts of a piece of text in order to identify the main idea, understand a relationship or construe the meaning of a word or phrase when the required information is featured on a single page. They can search for information based on indirect prompts, and locate target information that is not in a prominent position and/or is in the presence of distractors. In some cases, readers at this level recognize the relationship between several pieces of information based on multiple criteria. Level 3 readers can reflect on a piece of text or a small set of texts, and compare and contrast several authors’ viewpoints based on explicit information. Reflective tasks at this level may require the reader to perform comparisons, generate explanations or evaluate a feature of the text. Some reflective tasks require readers to demonstrate a detailed understanding of a piece of text dealing with a familiar topic, whereas others require a basic understanding of less-familiar content. Tasks at Level 3 require the reader to take many features into account when comparing, contrasting or categorizing information. The required information is often not prominent or there may be a considerable amount of competing information. Texts typical of this level may include other obstacles, such as ideas that are contrary to expectation or negatively worded. 2000, 2003, and 2006 PISA assessments used a different reading proficiency scale (Levels 1 to 5) than later assessments. PISA 2000/2003/2006 Level 3 data have been included in this database as Level 3 because they are based on an identical score range. Use caution in comparing proficiency scores across years. For more information on comparability of results, consult the PISA website: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/