Students’ financial literacy: results from PISA 2015
Wednesday 24 May 2017 Financial Literacy and Education Commission Washington DC
Andreas SCHLEICHER
results from PISA 2015 Wednesday 24 May 2017 Financial Literacy and - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Students financial literacy: results from PISA 2015 Wednesday 24 May 2017 Financial Literacy and Education Commission Washington DC Andreas SCHLEICHER Globalisation and digital technologies have made financial products and services more
Andreas SCHLEICHER
fare home? Or would it be better to buy pizza and invite friends home? Balance their priority and plan what to spend money on
and services Remember that some of the purchases have ongoing costs
legitimate, they should know what to do if they are not sure Being alert to possible fraud
by their household insurance Knowing what risk is and what insurance is meant for
to pay interest on the loan, on top of the advertised price for the compute Make an informed decision about credit
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Italy Spain United States Canadian provinces Chile Australia OECD average-10 Slovak Republic Russia Lithuania Poland B-S-J-G (China) Netherlands Belgium (Flemish)
%
Working outside school hours (e.g. a holiday job, part-time work) Working in a family business Occasional informal jobs (e.g. baby-sitting or gardening) Any work activity (working outside school hours and/or working in a family business and/or occasional informal jobs)
Table IV.5.15 Percentage of students who receive money from:
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Chile Poland Russia Italy Lithuania Slovak Republic B-S-J-G (China) Spain United States OECD average-10 Belgium (Flemish) Canadian provinces Australia Netherlands % Students holding a bank account Students holding a bank account who perform below proficiency Level 4
Table IV.5.13b At Level 4, students can apply their understanding of complex financial concepts, interpret and evaluate financial documents such as a bank statement, and make financial decisions taking into account longer-term consequences, such as understanding the overall cost implication of paying back a loan Students who have a bank account but do not reach proficiency Level 4
master’s or doctoral levels who had a public student loan in 2013/14
United States who had a public student loan in 2013/14
in the Netherlands
Canada
Source: Education at a Glance 2016
20 40 60 80 100 Australia United States Netherlands Participating Canadian provinces %
Percentage of 15-year-old students who perform at Level 4 and above
B-S-J-G (China) Belgium (Flemish) Canadian provinces Russia Netherlands Australia United States Poland Italy Spain Lithuania Slovak Republic Chile Peru Brazil
380 400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 580
Mean financial literachy score
Figure IV.3.2
10 20 30 Russia Italy United States Belgium (Flemish) OECD average-7 Spain Slovak Republic Australia Poland Three-year score-point difference
Change between 2012 and 2015
420 440 460 480 500 520
Students who discuss money matters more
with parents Students who discuss money matters equally
friends Students who discuss money matters more
with friends
Score points
Figure IV.5.2
300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650
Peru 117 Brazil 78 Chile 103 Slovak Republic 80 Lithuania 71 Spain 79 United States 97 OECD average-10 89 Italy 60 Poland 73 Australia 107 Netherlands 104 Belgium (Flemish) 110 Russia 46 Canadian provinces 77 B-S-J-G (China) 132
Score points
Wealthiest quarter (ESCS) Third quarter Second quarter Poorest quarter
Difference between students in the top quarter and students in the bottom quarter of this index
Table IV.4.11
Mean score, by quarters of the PISA index of economic, social and cultural status (ESCS)
In math 15-year-old Americans rank 30th out
10 20 30 40
Lithuania Spain Slovak Republic Poland Chile Italy OECD average-10 Netherlands Brazil Australia United States Peru Canadian provinces Russia Belgium (Flemish) B-S-J-G (China)
Score-point difference
Students’ performance in financial literacy is lower than the performance of students with similar scores in mathematics and reading Students’ performance in financial literacy is higher than the performance of students with similar scores in mathematics and reading
Figure IV.3.12
Difference between the actual financial literacy score and the score predicted by students’ performance in mathematics and reading
Highest performing countries/economies
On average, students who hold a bank account perform better in financial literacy than students of similar socio-economic status who do not have a bank account
Figure IV.5.5
20 40 60 80 100
Slovak Republic Russia Lithuania Poland B-S-J-G (China) Chile United States OECD average-10 Italy Belgium (Flemish) Australia Spain Canadian provinces Netherlands
Score-point difference
After accounting for socio-economic status Before accounting for socio-economic status
Difference between students who have a bank account and students who do not
1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 Try to borrow money from a family member Try to borrow money from a friend Save up to buy it Not buy it Odds ratio
Level 2 or 3 Level 4 or 5
Figure IV.6.2
High performing students are more than three times as likely as low-performing students in financial literacy to choose the statement "Save up to buy it" rather than "Buy it with money that really should be used for something else“, after accounting for performance in mathematics and reading and
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
I want to be able to select from among the best opportunities available when I graduate I want top grades in most or all of my courses I see myself as an ambitious person I want to be one of the best students in my class I want to be the best, whatever I do
Score-point difference Before accounting for performance in other domains After accounting for performance in mathematics and reading
Financial literacy skills for all students Address the needs of low- performing students Tackle socio- economic inequalities early on Provide equal
learning to boys and girls Help students make the most of available learning
school Target parents at the same time as young people Provide young people with safe
learn by experience
Evaluate the impact of initiatives in and outside of school