PISA 2022 offers a complex picture of Italian education after the pandemic years. The OECD study assesses 15-year-olds in mathematics, reading and science, focusing not only on what students remember but how effectively they can use knowledge to solve problems and interpret real situations.
Italy performed close to the OECD average in mathematics, above it in reading and below it in science. Compared with 2018, mathematics performance fell, reading was broadly stable and science improved.
Mathematics: 70% reach baseline proficiency
Seventy per cent of Italian students reached at least Level 2 in mathematics, close to the OECD average of 69%. Level 2 is treated as a baseline proficiency threshold, where students can recognise how a simple situation may be represented mathematically and apply basic procedures.
Top performers at Levels 5 or 6 represented 7% of Italian students, compared with 9% across the OECD. The challenge is therefore not only supporting low performers, but also enabling more students to reach advanced levels.
Reading is a relative strength
In reading, 79% of Italian students reached at least Level 2, compared with the OECD average of 74%. Five per cent reached Level 5 or above, against an OECD average of 7%.
Long-term reading performance has been broadly flat. That can be read positively as resilience during a disrupted period, but the lack of structural improvement still points to room for stronger comprehension, analysis and source evaluation.
Science: baseline proficiency is average, excellence less common
In science, 76% of Italian students reached at least Level 2, matching the OECD average. Only 4% were top performers, compared with 7% across the OECD. Average performance improved from 2018 but remained below the OECD average.
This matters in an economy increasingly shaped by STEM skills. Scientific literacy is useful not only for researchers but for understanding data, health, climate, technology and complex information.
The digital-distraction issue
PISA also collects information on learning conditions. In Italy, 38% of students reported being distracted by their own digital devices in most or all mathematics lessons, compared with 30% across the OECD. Twenty-nine per cent reported distraction caused by other students’ devices.
This does not prove that technology itself harms learning. It does show that the quality of digital integration matters as much as access to devices. A computer can support learning or create distraction depending on rules, content and classroom practice.
How to read PISA
PISA is not a complete ranking of school quality. It is a comparative assessment with methodological limits and does not capture many important dimensions, from creativity to educational relationships. It does, however, provide a common method for observing trends and differences.
For Italy, the picture suggests a dual priority: reduce the share of students below baseline proficiency and increase the share reaching advanced levels. Digital transformation may help, but the data underline that tools and platforms work only when embedded in coherent teaching strategies.
