Creative minds, creative schools

PISA 2022 results

 Most school subjects strive to foster creativity
Figure III.1.1
Percentage of countries/economies in which subject areas refer to creativity in secondary education curricula
Visual Arts (73)

Technology (69)

Performance Arts (72)

Reading (80)

Science (76)

Mathematics (76)

Foreign Languages (70)

Geography (73)

History (73)

Citizenship (68)

Physical Education (71)

%
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
 Su

-0.6
-0.5
-0.4
-0.3
-0.2
-0.1
0.0
0.1
zh
ou
(C
hi
na
)
Ji n
an
(C
hi
Ku na
du )
s(
In
do
ne
s ia
Da )
eg
u
(K
or
Ot e a)
t aw
a
(C
a na
da
Si
nt )
r a(
Po
rt
ug
Bo
go a l)
tá
(C
ol
om
bi
a)

Av
er
ag
He e
lsi
nk
i(
Fi
nl
an
d)
So
br
Bo al
go (B
tá ra
zil
20 )
Standardised differences between 10- and 15-year-olds, average across sites

19
(C
He ol
om
lsi bi
nk a)
i2
01
9
Ho (F
us in
to la
n nd
(U )
ni
te
d
St
at
15-year-olds tend to report lower creativity than 10-year-olds

es
Ist
an )
Uk bu
l(
ra Tü
in rk
e iye
(1 )
9
of
27
re
gi
on
s)
 Challenges to integration of creative thinking in education:
policymakers’ perspective Figure III.3.3
Percentage of jurisdictions reporting the following challenges to integrate creative thinking in their education system

Overcrowded curriculum 53

Lack of assessment focus on creativity 52

Lack of teacher training or pedagogical resources to develop student creativity 51

Lack of appropriate facilities, equipment and/or materials 45

Lack of system-level guidelines/standards or learning progressions on
developing creativity 43

Focus on preparing for high stakes exams 38

Financial constraints 32

Unclear evidence to support integrating creativity in education 26

Lack of political will or high-level strategy focused on developing student
creativity 18

Other 13
%
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
PISA participants
Around 690,000 15-year-old students in
81 countries and economies took PISA 2022
PISA 2022 competency model for creative thinking
Figure III.1.2
 Overall country performance in creative thinking
Student performance Singapore
40

Canada* Korea
Australia*
New Zealand* Estonia
Denmark* Finland
Latvia* Belgium
Lithuania Poland Spain
Czechia Portugal Chinese Taipei
Netherlands* France Germany
Israel Macao (China)
Hong Kong (China)* Malta Italy
Iceland Chile Croatia Hungary
30
Slovenia
Mexico Slovak Republic
United Arab Emirates Serbia
Costa Rica Qatar Uruguay
Ukrainian regions (18 of 27) Greece
Jamaica* Romania
Malaysia Colombia
Moldova Mongolia
Brunei Darussalam Kazakhstan
Peru
Panama* Brazil Saudi Arabia
Baku (Azerbaijan) El Salvador
Bulgaria Thailand Countries/economies statistically significantly
Jordan
20 North Macedonia Indonesia above the OECD average
Palestinian Authority
Countries/economies not statistically
significantly above or below the OECD average
Dominican Republic** Morocco
Philippines Uzbekistan Countries/economies statistically significantly
Albania** below the OECD average
 -8
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
6

-10
Chile 31
Mexico 29
Australia* 37
New Zealand* 36
Costa Rica 27
Canada* 38 Score-point difference
El Salvador 23
Jamaica* 26
Finland 36
Uruguay 29
Panama* 23
Colombia 26
Korea 38
Portugal 34
Israel 32
Latvia* 35
Denmark* 35
Singapore 41
Belgium 35
Qatar 28
OECD average 33
Poland 34
Spain 33
United Arab Emirates 28
Lithuania 33
Estonia 36
Brazil 23
Germany 33
France 32
Malta 31
Serbia 29
Iceland 30
Italy 31
Czechia 33
Saudi Arabia 23
Peru 23
Croatia 30
Jordan 20
Malaysia 25
Netherlands* 32
Hungary 31
Greece 27
Romania 26
Some countries do much better in creative thinking
than expected from PISA mathematics performance

Slovak Republic 29
Baku (Azerbaijan) 23
Ukrainian regions (18 of 27) 27
Relative performance in creative thinking based on performance in mathematics

Moldova 24
Mongolia 25
Indonesia 19
Palestinian Authority 18
Slovenia 30
Dominican Republic** 15
Thailand 21
Kazakhstan 24
Score-point difference between actual and expected performance in creative thinking

North Macedonia 19
Chinese Taipei 33
Brunei Darussalam 24
Hong Kong (China)* 32
Bulgaria 21
Morocco 15
Philippines 14
Macao (China) 32
Uzbekistan 14
Figure III.2.5

Albania** 13
 0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Uzbekistan

% (R²)
Kazakhstan
Jamaica*
Jordan
Morocco
United Arab Emirates
Baku (Azerbaijan)
Indonesia
Albania**
Hong Kong (China)*
Saudi Arabia
Palestinian Authority
Dominican Republic**
Croatia
Korea
Macao (China)
Canada*
Chile
Philippines
Estonia
Denmark*
Spain
Latvia*
Qatar
Finland
Chinese Taipei
Italy
Creative thinking

Serbia
Australia*
Netherlands*
Mexico
Slovenia
Malta
Portugal
Thailand
Iceland
Malaysia
OECD average
Greece
North Macedonia
Mongolia
Brazil
Poland
Germany
Mathematics

El Salvador
Ukrainian regions (18 of 27)
Colombia
Panama*
Relationship between students' socio-economic status and
performance in creative thinking, mathematics and reading

Uruguay
Singapore
Belgium
Percentage of variation in performance explained by socio-economic status

Moldova
Czechia
Lithuania
Brunei Darussalam
France
Israel
New Zealand*
Slovak Republic
Peru
Bulgaria
Hungary
Figure III.3.10

Romania
 Girls scored higher than boys

-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
Mexico 29
Peru 23
Chile 31
Score-point dif. (boys - girls)
Costa Rica 27
El Salvador 23
Uruguay 29
Panama* 23
Indonesia 19
Colombia 26
Uzbekistan 14
Italy 31
Ukrainian regions (18 of 27) 27
Singapore 41
Portugal 34
Romania 26
Hungary 31
Spain 33
Belgium 35
Brazil 23
France 32
Israel 32
Canada* 38
Dominican Republic** 15
Latvia* 35
Serbia 29
Denmark* 35
OECD average 33
Australia* 37
Poland 34
Girls are stronger creative thinkers

Czechia 33
Greece 27
Morocco 15
Croatia 30
Kazakhstan 24
Moldova 24
Korea 38
Germany 33
North Macedonia 19
Netherlands* 32
Bulgaria 21
New Zealand* 36
Malaysia 25
Slovak Republic 29
Albania** 13
Estonia 36
Lithuania 33
Chinese Taipei 33
Mongolia 25
Baku (Azerbaijan) 23
Score-point difference in creative thinking between boys and girls

Hong Kong (China)* 32

Thailand 21
Macao (China) 32
Brunei Darussalam 24
Philippines 14
Slovenia 30
Malta 31
Iceland 30
Qatar 28
United Arab Emirates 28
Jamaica* 26
Saudi Arabia 23
Palestinian Authority 18
Finland 36
Jordan 20
Figure III.3.4
 90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80

120
110
100
%
United Arab Emirates
Jamaica*
Slovak Republic
Bulgaria
Israel
Netherlands*
Romania
North Macedonia
Hungary
Qatar
Morocco
Germany

%
Philippines
Colombia
Peru
Kazakhstan
Poland
Brunei Darussalam
Brazil
Thailand
El Salvador
Slovenia
Ukrainian regions (18 of 27)
France
Czechia
Serbia
Jordan
Chinese Taipei
Between-school variation

Moldova
Croatia
Belgium
Malaysia
Uruguay
Can every school be a creative school?

Lithuania
Palestinian Authority
Performance variation between schools

Macao (China)
Mongolia
OECD average
Indonesia
Greece
Malta
Panama*
Hong Kong (China)*
OECD average: 74%
Within-school variation

Italy
Mexico
Costa Rica
Albania**
Saudi Arabia
Australia*
Korea
Dominican Republic**
New Zealand*
Singapore
Canada*
Chile
Performance variation within schools
OECD average: 26%

Baku (Azerbaijan)
Uzbekistan
Portugal
Finland
Estonia
Spain
Latvia*
Iceland
Figure III.3.2

Denmark*
Student beliefs, attitudes and expectations
Figure III.5.1

Beliefs about Attitudes towards Social-emotional Expectations for the

creativity creative thinking characteristics future

Creative self- Curiosity

efficacy
The nature of Persistence Expected end of
creativity education
Openness to Perspective taking
intellect
Assertiveness
Openness to art
Co-operation
and experience
Growth mindset Expected job at 30
on creativity Stress resistance years old
Imagination and
adventurousness Emotional control
Student beliefs, attitudes and expectations
Figure III.5.1

Beliefs about Attitudes towards Social-emotional Expectations for the

creativity creative thinking characteristics future

Creative self- Curiosity

efficacy
The nature of Persistence Expected end of
creativity education
Openness to Perspective taking
intellect
Assertiveness
Openness to art
Co-operation
and experience
Growth mindset Expected job at 30
on creativity Stress resistance years old
Imagination and
adventurousness Emotional control
 Change in creative thinking performance associated with change in
attitudes towards creative thinking Figure III.5.7
Change in creative thinking score associated with agreeing/strongly agreeing or feeling confident/very confident with
the following statements; OECD average
After accounting for gender and students' and schools' socio-economic profile Before accounting for gender and students' and schools' socio-economic profile
7
Imagination and Openness to art
Score-point difference

Openness to intellect Creative self-efficacy

adventurousness and experience
6

0
Would like to Coming up with Often get lost in Enjoy learning Enjoy doing Can suggest Reflect on See beauty in Enjoy artistic Can think of Can tell creative Can be creative
travel to places I new ideas is thought new things something several movies I watch everyday things activities many ideas for stories
have never satisfying to me creative solutions to solving
been problems disagreements
with people
Student beliefs, attitudes and expectations
Figure III.5.1

Beliefs about Attitudes towards Social-emotional Expectations for the

creativity creative thinking characteristics future

Creative self- Curiosity

efficacy
The nature of Persistence Expected end of
creativity education
Openness to Perspective taking
intellect
Assertiveness
Openness to art
Co-operation
and experience
Growth mindset Expected job at 30
on creativity Stress resistance years old
Imagination and
adventurousness Emotional control
 Change in creative thinking performance
associated with social-emotional characteristics Figure III.5.11
Change in creative thinking score associated with agreeing/strongly agreeing (or disagreeing/strongly disagreeing)*
with the following statements; OECD average
After accounting for gender and students' and schools' socio-economic profile Before accounting for gender and students' and schools' socio-economic profile
6
Score-point difference

Stress Emotional
Perspective taking Curiosity Persistence Assertiveness Co-operation
resistance control
5

0
*Think there is only Want to Like to know how Be curious about Apply additional Complete tasks Be able to work Speak up to others Like to help others *Overreact to every
one correct understand why things work many different effort when work even when they under pressure about things that little thing in life
position in a people behave the things becomes become more matter to me
disagreement way they do challenging difficult
 Change in student creative thinking performance associated with
their parents’ beliefs about creativity Figure III.5.8
Score point difference between students whose parents agree/strongly agree that it is possible to be creative in
nearly any subject and those who disagree/strongly disagree, before and after accounting for gender and students'
and schools' socio-economic profile
Score dif. Before accounting for gender, students' and schools' socio-economic profile After accounting for gender, students' and schools' socio-economic profile
6

0
Italy

Hong Kong (China)*

Korea

Latvia*
Brazil

Macao (China)
OECD average

Dominican Republic**
Belgium

Saudi Arabia

Panama*
Germany
Croatia

Portugal

Colombia
Student beliefs, attitudes and expectations
Figure III.5.1

Beliefs about Attitudes towards Social-emotional Expectations for the

creativity creative thinking characteristics future

Creative self- Curiosity

efficacy
The nature of Persistence Expected end of
creativity education
Openness to Perspective taking
intellect
Assertiveness
Openness to art
Co-operation
and experience
Growth mindset Expected job at 30
on creativity Stress resistance years old
Imagination and
adventurousness Emotional control
 Creative thinking performance and expected end of education
Figure III.5.13

Mean score
OECD average
40

37
35 35
35

32
32
31
30

27
27
25

20
ISCED 2 ISCED 3.3 ISCED 3.4 ISCED 4 ISCED 5 ISCED 6 ISCED 7 ISCED 8
Lower secondary Upper secondary Upper secondary Post-secondary non- Short-cycle tertiary Bachelor's or Master's or equivalent Doctoral or equivalent
education education education tertiary education education equivalent level level level
(4.2%) (5.2%) (15.4%) (5.5%) (6.4%) (17.9%) (21.2%) (24.1%)
 Student use of digital devices and creative thinking proficiency
Figure III.6.9
Mean score in creative thinking; OECD average
Digital learning activities at school Digital learning activities on weekends
Mean score Digital leisure at school Digital leisure on weekends

33

28
None Up to 1 hour More than 1 hour More than 2 hours More than 3 hours More than 4 hours More than 5 hours More than 6 hours More than 7 hours
and up to 2 hours and up to 3 hours and up to 4 hours and up to 5 hours and up to 6 hours and up to 7 hours
 Some takeaways

Academic excellence is not a pre-requisite for excellence in creative thinking. But a baseline level of
proficiency in one domain complements proficiency in the other.

Girls are stronger creative thinkers than boys, and their better reading skills only explains part of this.

Girls have more positive beliefs about creativity and in their capacity to do creative work; and they feel more
imaginative and open to perspective taking...

…together with curiosity, openness to intellect and persistence, those are characteristics associated with
stronger creative thinking.

Socio-economically advantaged students outperformed their less advantaged peers, though the strength of
the association between socio-economic status and performance is weaker in creative thinking than for
mathematics, reading and science.
Find out more about our work at www.oecd.org/pisa

PISA main reports PISA Country notes

Email: [email protected]
X : SchleicherEDU
WeChat : AndreasSchleicher
Take the test: bit.ly/PISA-Test
PISA FAQs: www.oecd.org/pisa/pisafaq
PISA Data Explorer: www.oecd.org/pisa/data