Programme for International Student Assessment 2025: national report for Scotland

7 Learning in the Digital World

7.1 How Learning in the Digital World is assessed

As well as assessing science, mathematics and reading, each PISA cycle includes an additional innovative domain designed to capture skills that are increasingly important in modern life. In PISA 2025, this domain focused on Learning in the Digital World (LDW), which the OECD defines as “the capacity to engage in an iterative and self-regulated process of knowledge building and problem solving using computational tools and practices”.

The domain reflects the growing importance of digital technologies in how pupils learn, work and interact with information. It was designed to assess whether pupils can solve problems using digital tools in digital learning environments, and to provide evidence on how digital technologies are used to support learning and how these experiences are associated with educational outcomes.

The assessment focused on two closely related areas: computational problem solving and self-regulated learning. Computational problem solving refers to pupils’ ability to use computational tools and practices, including programming and computer modelling, to solve unfamiliar problems. Pupils complete a series of interactive tasks that require them to explore problems, conduct experiments, identify patterns, evaluate evidence and refine their solutions. The assessment is designed to capture not only what pupils know but also how effectively they apply that knowledge in a digital context.

A distinctive feature of the assessment is its focus on self-regulated learning. Pupils are required to work through increasingly complex tasks using resources such as tutorials, examples and automated feedback. Success therefore depends not only on technical skills, but also on pupils’ ability to monitor their progress, adapt their strategies, make effective use of available support and persist when faced with difficulties.

The results presented in this report relate to the computational problem solving component of the assessment. Analysis of the self-regulated learning component is not included. The OECD will analyse this component separately, and Scotland will follow the OECD’s approach to reporting these results.

The assessment did not measure pupils’ ability to search for information online or evaluate the reliability of online sources. Instead, it focused on how pupils build knowledge and solve problems within structured digital learning environments.

Results are reported on a proficiency scale ranging from below Level 1 to Level 6. At the lower levels, pupils can complete simple tasks and make basic modifications to programs or models. At higher levels, pupils can develop increasingly sophisticated solutions, identify and resolve errors, and use computational approaches efficiently and effectively to solve complex problems. Level 3 represents an important point on the scale, as pupils at this level begin to demonstrate the knowledge and skills needed to tackle more demanding computational problem solving tasks independently.

The PISA 2025 assessment for Learning in the Digital World had two main components:

• A cognitive assessment that measured pupils’ ability to learn and solve problems using computational tools and practices in digital environments.
• The Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Familiarity Questionnaire, which collected information on pupils’ access to and use of digital technologies, their experiences of using digital tools for learning in and outside school, and their attitudes towards information and communication technology and learning more generally.

Together, these components provide information on both pupils’ digital learning and problem solving skills and the wider digital environments and experiences that may support their development.

7.2 Scotland’s performance in computational problem solving

Computational problem solving assesses pupils’ ability to understand, formulate and solve problems that can be addressed using computational approaches. It focuses on skills such as identifying patterns, breaking down complex problems into manageable parts, developing algorithms and evaluating solutions.

Scotland achieved a mean score of 515 points in computational problem solving in PISA 2025. This was significantly higher than the OECD average of 500 points.

7.3 Comparison with the rest of the United Kingdom

As with the other PISA domains, there was variation in computational problem solving performance across the four UK nations.

Scotland achieved a mean computational problem solving score of 515 points, compared with 523 points for the United Kingdom as a whole. Scotland’s score was significantly lower than England (525 points) and the UK overall, significantly higher than Wales (501 points), and not significantly different from Northern Ireland (513 points).

The pattern differed somewhat between boys and girls.

Among girls, Scotland achieved a mean computational problem solving score of 512 points. This was not significantly different from England (512 points), the UK overall (511 points) or Northern Ireland (509 points), and was significantly higher than Wales (496 points).

Among boys, Scotland achieved a mean computational problem solving score of 517 points. This was significantly lower than England (537 points) and the UK overall (533 points), significantly higher than Wales (507 points), and not significantly different from Northern Ireland (516 points).

Overall, Scotland’s computational problem solving performance was significantly lower than England and the UK average, significantly higher than Wales, and not significantly different from Northern Ireland. However, the pattern differed by sex: girls in Scotland performed at a similar level to girls in England and the UK overall, while boys in Scotland performed significantly lower than boys in both England and the UK overall.

7.4 How Scotland’s computational problem solving performance compares internationally

Scotland’s score was significantly higher than the OECD average (500 points).

Scotland’s computational problem solving performance was significantly lower than seven countries and UK administrations, including Japan, Estonia and Australia.

Scotland performed at a statistically similar level to nine countries and UK administrations, including Ireland, Czechia and Poland.

Scotland performed significantly higher than 24 countries and UK administrations, including Denmark, Sweden and Israel. Scotland’s score was also significantly higher than the OECD average.

Overall, Scotland performed strongly in computational problem solving relative to many participating OECD countries and economies. Scotland scored significantly above the OECD average and at a level statistically similar to a number of other education systems. However, Scotland remained below the highest performing countries and economies.

Table 7.1: OECD countries and UK administrations, higher than, similar to and lower than Scotland in computational problem solving, PISA 2025

Higher score than Scotland

• Australia (532)
• Canada (525)
• England (525)
• Estonia (541)
• Japan (557)
• Korea (538)
• New Zealand (531)
• United Kingdom (523)

Similar score to Scotland

• Austria (509)
• Belgium (508)
• Czechia (517)
• Ireland (511)
• Lithuania (512)
• Northern Ireland (513)
• Poland (507)
• Scotland (515)
• Switzerland (520)
• United States (513)

Lower score than Scotland

• Chile (466)
• Colombia (432)
• Costa Rica (452)
• Denmark (506)
• Finland (507)
• France (497)
• Germany (498)
• Greece (461)
• Hungary (495)
• Iceland (490)
• Israel (444)
• Italy (490)
• Latvia (507)
• Luxembourg (507)
• Mexico (453)
• Netherlands (506)
• Norway (491)
• OECD Average (500)
• Portugal (501)
• Slovak Republic (497)
• Slovenia (486)
• Spain (499)
• Sweden (503)
• Türkiye (473)
• Wales (501)

7.5 International comparisons by sex

The pattern of international comparisons differed somewhat between girls and boys.

Among girls, Scotland achieved a mean computational problem solving score of 512 points, which was significantly higher than the OECD average for girls (493 points).

Scotland’s performance among girls was significantly lower than five countries and UK administrations, including Japan, Estonia and Australia; statistically similar to eight countries and UK administrations, including Ireland, Czechia, and Finland; and significantly higher than 26 countries and UK administrations, including Austria, Denmark and Sweden. Scotland’s performance was also significantly higher than the OECD average.

Among boys, Scotland achieved a mean computational problem solving score of 517 points, which was significantly higher than the OECD average for boys (507 points). Scotland’s performance among boys was significantly lower than seven countries and UK administrations, including Japan, Korea and Estonia; statistically similar to 16 countries and UK administrations, including Ireland, Poland and Switzerland; and significantly higher than 17 countries and UK administrations, including France, Finland and Spain. Scotland’s performance was also significantly higher than the OECD average.

Overall, Scotland’s relative international position was stronger among girls than among boys. Fewer countries and UK administrations significantly outperformed Scotland among girls than among boys. Nevertheless, both girls and boys performed significantly above the OECD average for their respective groups and significantly outperformed a substantial number of the countries and UK administrations shown. Scotland’s international standing in computational problem solving was therefore comparatively strong for both sexes, particularly among girls.

7.6 Computational problem solving performance by proficiency level

PISA reports computational problem solving performance using seven proficiency levels, ranging from below Level 1 to Level 6. Higher proficiency levels indicate greater ability to solve complex problems, develop and test solution strategies, and adapt solutions to new situations.

In Scotland, 17.5% of pupils performed at Level 1 or below (14.8% at Level 1 and 2.7% below Level 1). Pupils performing at these levels can complete relatively simple computational tasks but may struggle with more complex or unfamiliar problems requiring multiple steps or strategic planning.

At the highest proficiency levels, 17.4% of pupils achieved Level 5 and 12.3% achieved Level 6, meaning that 29.7% of pupils demonstrated the highest levels of computational problem solving proficiency. Pupils performing at these levels can solve complex computational problems, evaluate alternative solution pathways and apply sophisticated reasoning in unfamiliar contexts.

The largest proportions of pupils performed at the middle proficiency levels. Around one in five pupils achieved Level 4 (22.6%), while 17.3% achieved Level 3 and 12.8% achieved Level 2.

Overall, the distribution of performance was weighted towards the higher proficiency levels. More pupils achieved Level 5 or above (29.7%) than performed at Level 1 or below (17.5%), indicating that a substantial proportion of Scottish pupils demonstrated advanced computational problem solving skills. However, almost one in six pupils remained at the lower end of the proficiency scale, highlighting continued variation in performance across the pupil population.

7.7 Computational problem solving performance by socio-economic background

PISA examines the relationship between pupils’ socio-economic background and computational problem solving performance using the PISA index of economic, social and cultural status (ESCS). This is based on information about pupils’ home and family circumstances, including parents’ education and occupations and resources available in the home.

In 2025, socio-economic background explained around 3% of the variation in computational problem solving performance between pupils in Scotland. This indicates that socio-economic background was related to differences in performance, but accounted for a relatively small proportion of the overall variation between pupils.

PISA also measures the socio-economic gradient, which shows how much performance tends to differ as pupils move up the ESCS scale. A steeper gradient indicates a stronger relationship between socio-economic advantage and performance, while a shallower gradient indicates a weaker relationship. In Scotland, a one-point increase on the ESCS scale was associated with an average increase of 17 points in computational problem solving performance.

As computational problem solving was assessed for the first time in PISA 2025, comparisons over time are not available.

7.7.1 International comparisons of computational problem solving performance by socio-economic background

The relationship between socio-economic background and computational problem solving performance in Scotland was weaker than in many of the countries shown in Figure 7.5.

The proportion of variation in computational problem solving performance explained by socio-economic background in Scotland was significantly lower than in 23 countries, including Australia, France and Germany; and not significantly different from 16 countries, including England, Northern Ireland, Ireland and Wales. No country had a significantly lower proportion of variation explained by socio-economic background than Scotland. Scotland was also not significantly different from the United Kingdom as a whole and was significantly lower than the OECD average.

Scotland’s socio-economic gradient in computational problem solving was 17 points. The gradient was significantly smaller than in 22 countries, including Australia, France and Belgium; and not significantly different from 17 countries, including England, Northern Ireland, Ireland and Wales. No country had a significantly smaller gradient than Scotland. Scotland’s gradient was also not significantly different from the United Kingdom as a whole and was significantly smaller than the OECD average.

Overall, both measures indicate that socio-economic background was less strongly related to computational problem solving performance in Scotland than in many of the countries shown and less strongly related than across the OECD on average. However, Scotland was not significantly different from any of the other UK nations on either measure.