Malaysia's PISA 2025 Results: The poverty gap isn't just wide – it's huge
This is a gap we cannot afford to ignore.
AMAR-SINGH HSS
THE PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment) 2025 data confirms that a student's family background remains one of the strongest predictors of academic performance in Malaysia.
Socio-economically advantaged 15-year-olds, the top 25 per cent by family wealth, parental education and home resources, outscored their disadvantaged peers (the bottom 25 per cent) by 82 points in science (See graphic).
What this means in the real-world terms is of extreme concern because, in standard OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) PISA methodology, 20 score points roughly represent one year of schooling.
Consequently, an 82-point difference corresponds to approximately four years of formal education.
This means that our 15-year-olds in the bottom 25 per cent socio-economic group are four schooling years behind the top 25 per cent.
This is a gap we cannot afford to ignore.
This is the ‘inverse care law of education’ or the ‘social determinants of education’ – children who need the most support, resources, and high-quality teaching to succeed are the ones least likely to receive them.
The data also shows that nearly two-thirds (63 per cent) of Malaysia's most disadvantaged students failed to reach even baseline science proficiency (Level 2) in 2025.
Of some hope is that 10 per cent of disadvantaged students were able to score in the top quarter of science performance, suggesting that they are academically resilient despite their socio-economic disadvantage.
While such gaps occur in many OECD countries (OECD average of 85 points difference for socio-economic groups), it should alarm us.
These are the children we are leaving behind, and have been doing so for years.
Comparison of Malaysia’s PISA score for 2018 and 2022 showed that the gap narrowed modestly between 2018 and 2022, but has since widened again by 2025, back to nearly its 2018 level.
This points to an education system in which opportunity remains uneven - students from disadvantaged homes are less likely to access the resources, environments and support that translate into strong academic outcomes.
Recommendations
1. Move away from aggregate national averages that conceals the problem and use disaggregated PISA Scores and educational outcomes data by socio-economic status.
2. While we need to support all students, we should target resources at the students furthest behind and schools serving lower-income communities. Hence resource allocation should follow need: a needs-weighted funding for schools serving high numbers of disadvantaged students.
3. Set a clear, time-bound target for reducing the gap significantly between disadvantaged and advantaged students. It may be better to use PISA's baseline proficiency threshold (Level 2), the minimum skill level OECD considers necessary to participate effectively in society and further learning, rather than score points.
If we do not act concertedly, we risk continuing with our ‘two-tier’ education outcomes.
Generations of children denied the chance to reach even baseline proficiency will grow into adults with fewer opportunities, lower earning potential, and less capacity to participate fully in public life.
These will be reflected in our workforce productivity, our capacity for social mobility, and ultimately in all of society.
This is written by Dato' Dr Amar-Singh HSS, Consultant Paediatrician, Child-Disability Activist. The views expressed in this article are his own and do not necessarily reflect those of Sinar Daily.
Download Sinar Daily application.Click Here!
