The latest international mathematics rankings present African education systems with an uncomfortable question: why do countries with large populations of young people, ambitious development plans and growing demand for technical skills struggle to translate those advantages into strong performance in international assessments?
The 2025 Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), published in September 2026, places China’s participating jurisdictions at the top of the mathematics table with 612 points. Singapore follows with 563, while Japan records 525.
Among the African countries represented in the assessment, Morocco scored 358 points, Zambia 337, Kenya 335 and Rwanda 317.
Those results are substantially below the OECD average of 463 points.
They also highlight a challenge extending beyond mathematics examinations: whether education systems are equipping enough young people with the analytical and problem-solving skills needed for increasingly technology-intensive economies.
But the rankings require context. PISA measures the performance of 15-year-old students in participating education systems.
It does not measure the innate mathematical ability of an entire population, and its results cannot establish that African students are inherently less capable than their counterparts elsewhere.
The more consequential question is what prevents mathematical ability from being developed consistently across schools and communities.
What Africa Might Have Expected — and What the Results Show
Africa’s demographic profile makes education outcomes particularly important.
A large and growing population of young people could become a source of skilled workers, entrepreneurs, researchers and engineers. But that potential depends partly on whether children acquire foundational skills and whether education systems can turn those foundations into advanced capabilities.
The PISA results reveal a substantial gap between that ambition and the measured performance of the African participants.
| Country or economy | PISA 2025 mathematics score |
|---|---|
| Morocco | 358 |
| Zambia | 337 |
| Kenya | 335 |
| Rwanda | 317 |
| OECD average | 463 |
| China: Beijing, Shanghai, Jiangsu and Zhejiang | 612 |
The figures show that the four African participants scored below the OECD average. China’s participating jurisdictions recorded a score more than 250 points above each of the African countries listed.
These comparisons should not be interpreted as a comprehensive ranking of Africa against the rest of the world. Only a limited number of African countries participated, and the results cannot automatically be extended to countries that were not assessed.
Nevertheless, the scores provide a useful starting point for examining learning outcomes in the countries represented.
Kenya, Rwanda and Zambia: The Foundational Skills Challenge
The country-level findings provide more detail about the nature of the gap.
In Kenya, only 11% of students reached at least Level 2 proficiency in reading, compared with an OECD average of 69%. The OECD also reported that almost no Kenyan students reached the highest mathematics proficiency levels, Levels 5 and 6.
Rwanda recorded an even smaller proportion of students reaching the minimum mathematics proficiency threshold: 8%, compared with 65% across OECD countries.
The OECD defines Level 2 mathematics proficiency as the ability to recognise how a simple situation can be represented mathematically, even without direct instructions. At the higher levels, students are expected to model complex situations and select, compare and evaluate problem-solving strategies.
For policymakers, the distinction between foundational and advanced skills matters.
A country cannot build a broad pipeline of engineers, data analysts, scientists and other technically skilled workers if large proportions of students leave school without the mathematical foundations needed for further learning.
Zambia recorded 337 points in mathematics, while Kenya scored 335 and Rwanda 317. These results establish a baseline against which future assessments can be compared, but they do not, by themselves, identify the causes of each country’s performance.
What Might African Education Systems Be Missing?
The PISA results establish the learning gap, but they do not justify attributing it to a single cause.
Several areas deserve investigation by governments, education authorities and researchers.
1. Foundational learning
Mathematics builds cumulatively. Students who struggle with basic arithmetic, fractions, algebraic reasoning or interpreting mathematical information may find more advanced topics increasingly difficult.
The low proportions of students reaching minimum proficiency in Kenya and Rwanda suggest that foundational learning deserves particular attention. However, identifying the precise causes requires country-level evidence on curricula, teaching, attendance, learning materials and classroom conditions.
2. The quality and consistency of classroom instruction
Access to schooling does not automatically guarantee that students are learning effectively.
Education systems need to examine whether teachers have the preparation, resources and support required to teach mathematics clearly, identify learning difficulties and help students progress from basic procedures to independent reasoning.
The PISA scores alone cannot establish the extent of teacher shortages or differences in classroom quality in each African country. Those questions require additional national data.
3. The transition from memorisation to problem-solving
PISA assesses whether students can apply mathematical knowledge to practical situations, not simply recall formulas or reproduce familiar procedures.
This creates an important distinction for education systems: students need opportunities to practise explaining their reasoning, interpreting unfamiliar problems and selecting appropriate methods.
Curriculum coverage and examination performance remain relevant, but they are not necessarily sufficient evidence that students can transfer what they have learned to new situations.
4. Unequal access to educational opportunities
Students’ learning experiences can differ according to where they live, the schools they attend and the resources available to them.
Averages can conceal substantial differences between students within the same country. Governments therefore need to examine not only national scores but also the distribution of learning outcomes across regions, income groups, school types and genders.
5. The ability to identify and develop exceptional talent
The development of a small number of outstanding mathematics students is not the same as raising achievement across an entire school system.
Specialist competitions can help identify students with advanced abilities. But countries also need pathways that allow those students to receive further training, access advanced learning opportunities and progress into research, engineering and other technical fields.
The broader challenge is to combine excellence at the top with stronger foundational learning for the many.
Africa’s Global Mathematics Record Is More Complicated Than PISA Suggests
The PISA results should not be treated as the only measure of African mathematical achievement.
International school assessments and specialist olympiads examine different populations and skills.
PISA tests a broad sample of 15-year-olds in participating education systems. The International Mathematical Olympiad (IMO), by contrast, is a specialist competition involving selected high-school students who tackle challenging mathematical problems.
Success in an olympiad does not mean that the average student in a country has strong mathematics skills. Equally, a country’s performance in a broad school assessment does not tell the full story about its most advanced students.
South Africa’s results at the IMO illustrate the distinction.
At the 2025 competition, South Africa finished 38th among 110 participating countries, its best position in 25 years, according to the South African Mathematics Foundation.
The six-member team won one silver medal, four bronze medals and one honourable mention.
That performance demonstrates that African students can achieve recognition in a demanding international mathematics competition. It does not, however, establish that South Africa’s overall school mathematics outcomes are comparable to those of the highest-scoring PISA systems.
The two assessments measure different things and should be interpreted accordingly.
South Africa’s Pan-African Mathematics Results
South Africa has also recorded strong results in the Pan-African Mathematics Olympiad, a continental competition.
According to the South African Mathematics Foundation, South Africa finished first in the 2025 competition, winning three gold medals, two silver medals and one bronze.
In 2026, the country placed fourth, with two silver medals and four bronze medals.
These results offer a different perspective on the continent’s mathematical talent.
They show that African students are competing successfully in specialist settings, even while the broader PISA results point to significant foundational learning challenges in the African countries assessed.
The distinction is important: Africa’s challenge is not simply whether exceptional students exist, but whether education systems can provide strong mathematics learning to a much larger share of their children.
Why the Gap Matters for Africa’s Economic Future
Mathematics is relevant to far more than school examinations.
Engineering, manufacturing, construction, financial services, scientific research and many technology-related occupations depend on quantitative reasoning.
For African economies seeking to expand industrial production, improve infrastructure and develop higher-value services, the quality of mathematics education can influence the depth of the future skills pipeline.
Weak foundational learning can make it harder for students to progress into advanced technical subjects. It can also increase the burden on universities, vocational institutions and employers that need to provide additional training.
But PISA scores should not be treated as a direct forecast of economic performance. Productivity and development also depend on infrastructure, investment, institutions, access to finance, technology and the availability of suitable jobs.
The assessment is best understood as one indicator of a country’s educational capacity, rather than a verdict on its economic future.
More African Participation Would Improve the Picture
The 2025 PISA assessment included Kenya, Rwanda, Zambia and Morocco among its African participants. Mauritius also appears in the OECD’s country and economy listings.
The OECD identifies Kenya, Rwanda and Zambia among the first-time participants in the 2025 cycle.
That participation matters because international comparisons are more informative when they cover a wider range of education systems.
Without broader participation, the available results cannot show how the full range of African countries compares with other regions. Nor can the scores of four countries be treated as a continental average.
Expanding participation, while maintaining reliable sampling and assessment standards, would give African governments and researchers more evidence with which to evaluate learning outcomes and track progress over time.
The Real Test Is Whether Learning Improves
The latest mathematics rankings place the African participants well below the OECD average, while specialist competitions show that African students can achieve strong results in advanced mathematical problem-solving.
Both findings can be true at the same time.
The policy challenge is to connect exceptional talent with a broader improvement in learning: strengthening foundational mathematics, supporting teachers, identifying learning gaps early and creating opportunities for students to develop more advanced skills.
For African governments, the significance of the PISA results lies less in the prestige of a global ranking than in the questions it raises about the quality and reach of education.
The measure of progress will not simply be whether a handful of students win international medals. It will be whether substantially more children can reason mathematically, solve unfamiliar problems and acquire the skills needed to participate in the economies their countries are trying to build.
