Proportion of students at the end of lower secondary achieving at least a minimum proficiency level in mathematics, adjusted location parity index (LPIA) by country
The Adjusted Location Parity Index (LPIA) is calculated by dividing the rural value for the indicator by the urban value for the indicator. If the resulting value exceeds 1, the ratio is inverted and subtracted from 2. The adjusted location parity index is symmetrical around 1 and lies in the range 0-2. An adjusted...
What the numbers show
Proportion of students at the end of lower secondary achieving at least a minimum proficiency level in mathematics, adjusted location parity index (LPIA) is currently reported for 39 countries. The highest value is 1.04 LPIA in Denmark; the lowest is 0.1629 LPIA in Iran, Islamic Republic of.
The median across all reporting countries is 0.8333 LPIA, and the mean is 0.7368 LPIA.
The gap between the highest and lowest reporting country is a factor of about 6.
Over the past decade 8 countries rose and 31 fell. The largest increase was in Chile (up 971.6%), and the largest decrease in Morocco (down 82.1%).
Proportion of students at the end of lower secondary achieving at leas: full country ranking
| # | Country | Latest | Year | 10-year change | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Denmark | 1.04 LPIA | 2018 | up 3.0% | flat |
| 2 | Sweden | 1.02 LPIA | 2018 | up 4.8% | flat |
| 3 | Ireland | 1.01 LPIA | 2018 | up 4.8% | flat |
| 4 | Austria | 0.9982 LPIA | 2018 | up 4.2% | rising |
| 5 | Belgium | 0.9855 LPIA | 2012 | down 5.6% | rising |
| 6 | Finland | 0.9826 LPIA | 2018 | down 0.6% | flat |
| 7 | Netherlands | 0.9608 LPIA | 2012 | down 4.4% | falling |
| 8 | Spain | 0.9598 LPIA | 2018 | up 4.0% | flat |
| 9 | Italy | 0.9398 LPIA | 2015 | down 24.3% | falling |
| 10 | Norway | 0.9397 LPIA | 2018 | down 2.2% | flat |
| 11 | Germany | 0.9209 LPIA | 2012 | down 15.1% | falling |
| 12 | Canada | 0.9197 LPIA | 2018 | down 4.9% | falling |
| 13 | Poland | 0.9141 LPIA | 2018 | down 0.5% | rising |
| 14 | Republic of Korea | 0.9113 LPIA | 2012 | up 8.0% | flat |
| 15 | Iceland | 0.9026 LPIA | 2018 | down 7.9% | falling |
| 16 | Türkiye | 0.8984 LPIA | 2015 | up 105.0% | rising |
| 17 | United States of America | 0.8659 LPIA | 2018 | down 14.6% | falling |
| 18 | Luxembourg | 0.8637 LPIA | 2012 | down 5.2% | falling |
| 19 | Latvia | 0.8347 LPIA | 2018 | down 5.5% | flat |
| 20 | Russian Federation | 0.8333 LPIA | 2018 | down 2.9% | flat |
| 21 | Israel | 0.8245 LPIA | 2018 | down 2.0% | falling |
| 22 | New Zealand | 0.8236 LPIA | 2018 | down 16.3% | falling |
| 23 | Australia | 0.7904 LPIA | 2018 | down 13.7% | falling |
| 24 | Czechia | 0.7897 LPIA | 2018 | down 11.2% | falling |
| 25 | Greece | 0.7074 LPIA | 2018 | down 30.3% | falling |
| 26 | Uruguay | 0.6801 LPIA | 2018 | down 9.5% | falling |
| 27 | Slovakia | 0.6463 LPIA | 2018 | down 25.9% | falling |
| 28 | Chile | 0.6234 LPIA | 2015 | up 971.6% | volatile |
| 29 | Thailand | 0.6214 LPIA | 2018 | down 12.0% | falling |
| 30 | Hungary | 0.5942 LPIA | 2015 | down 24.7% | falling |
| 31 | Portugal | 0.5277 LPIA | 2018 | down 38.8% | falling |
| 32 | Mexico | 0.4086 LPIA | 2018 | down 24.3% | rising |
| 33 | Bulgaria | 0.3734 LPIA | 2018 | down 42.5% | falling |
| 34 | Romania | 0.3392 LPIA | 2018 | down 57.9% | falling |
| 35 | Brazil | 0.3109 LPIA | 2018 | down 34.1% | falling |
| 36 | Indonesia | 0.2966 LPIA | 2018 | down 38.6% | falling |
| 37 | Argentina | 0.2811 LPIA | 2018 | down 32.4% | falling |
| 38 | Morocco | 0.2327 LPIA | 2015 | down 82.1% | volatile |
| 39 | Iran, Islamic Republic of | 0.1629 LPIA | 2015 | down 43.4% | falling |
About this data
The Adjusted Location Parity Index (LPIA) is calculated by dividing the rural value for the indicator by the urban value for the indicator. If the resulting value exceeds 1, the ratio is inverted and subtracted from 2. The adjusted location parity index is symmetrical around 1 and lies in the range 0-2. An adjusted LPI equal to 1 indicates parity between rural and urban locations. In general, a value less than 1 indicates disparity in favor of urban locations and a value greater than 1 indicates disparity in favor of rural locations. For more information, consult the UNESCO Institute for Statistics: http://uis.unesco.org/