Introduction

The Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), conducted by the OECD, measures 15-year-olds’ ability to apply reading, mathematics, and science knowledge to real-life challenges. The author argues that PISA scores serve as a direct indicator of a nation’s academic capacity, reflecting its potential for scientific advancement, political stability, and educational success. This analysis examines how immigration from low-achieving nations impacts U.S. education, focusing on the reproduction of academic performance gaps, particularly among Hispanic and Muslim populations. The author contends that diversity policies, including those accommodating Muslim culture, lower standards and harm educational outcomes, advocating for assimilation to Western norms as a solution.

Related: Michigan Muslim-Black Problem in Education.

PISA as an Indicator of National Academic Capacity

PISA scores provide a global benchmark for assessing the academic capacity of nations, according to the author. For countries that participate, these scores reflect the general proficiency of their populations in reading, math, and science, correlating with advancements in science, technology, and political stability. The author emphasizes that PISA does not measure the elite—often “brain-drained” from developing nations—but the broader population, offering insight into the challenges of mass immigration. The author notes that no African, Latin American, or Muslim-majority nation scored in the top half of PISA 2018, with South Africa and India opting not to participate due to poor performance. Even Israel, often considered an academic leader, scored similarly to Turkey (465 vs. 463 mean in 2018). Updated 2022 PISA data shows similar trends, with Israel at 462 and Turkey at 456.

PISA Scores and U.S. Demographics

PISA 2018 data reveals significant disparities within the U.S. across demographic groups. U.S. Whites outperformed most other White nations, scoring 521 (mean), surpassed only by Estonia (525) and competitive with Japan (520) and South Korea (520). U.S. Asians scored even higher (549), aligning with top performers like Singapore (556). However, U.S. Hispanics (470) and U.S. Blacks (436) scored well below the OECD average (488), with an 89-point gap between U.S. Whites and Blacks in science. The author argues that these gaps reflect the academic performance challenges rooted in the educational systems of immigrants’ nations of origin, particularly from Latin America and Muslim-majority countries, which are reproduced in the U.S.

PISA 2018 Scores: U.S. Demographic Breakdown
Education SystemMeanReadingMathScience
U.S. Asians549556539551
Estonia525523523530
U.S. Whites521531503529
United States495505478502
U.S. Multiracial492501474502
OECD Average488487489489
U.S. Hispanics470481452478
U.S. Blacks436448419440
PISA 2018 Scores: Global Comparisons with U.S. Subgroups
Education SystemMeanReadingMathScience
B-S-J-Z (China)579555591590
Singapore556549569551
U.S. Asians549556539551
Macau (China)542525558544
Hong Kong531524551517
U.S. Whites521531503529
Japan520504527529
South Korea520514526519
Taiwan517503531516
United States495505478502
OECD Average488487489489
U.S. Hispanics470481452478
Israel465470463462
Turkey¹463466454468
U.S. Blacks436448419440
Malaysia¹431415440438
Thailand¹413393419426
Indonesia382371379396
Philippines¹350340353357

Note: The author changed "Chinese Taipei" to Taiwan. B-S-J-Z (China) scores reflect testing in prosperous cities, not the entire country, where rural areas remain underdeveloped. Singapore, a city-state with a ~75% ethnic Chinese population, scores 556 (mean), with science at 551, 61 points above the OECD average. In contrast, Malaysia scores 431 (mean), with science at 438, 51 points below the OECD average, outperforming Thailand (413), Indonesia (382), and the Philippines (350).

Impact of Hispanic Immigration

The author highlights Hispanic immigration as a significant challenge for U.S. education, particularly in states like Texas and cities like Chicago. In Texas (2021), with a student population of 26.5% White, 53% Hispanic, 12.7% Black, and 4.7% Asian, reading pass rates were 42% (58% failed) and math pass rates were 37% (63% failed), a 50% decline from 2010 to 2021 (TEA, 2021). Updated 2023 data shows slight improvement: 45% passed reading (55% failed), 40% passed math (60% failed). Despite this, Texas’s graduation rate is 90%, which the author views as fraudulent given low proficiency rates. Approximately 60% of students are economically disadvantaged, 22% are English learners, and 12% require Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) for special needs, contributing to educational challenges.

In Chicago, with a student body 46.7% Hispanic/Latino (CPS, 2023), 25% passed reading (75% failed) and 20% passed math (80% failed), reflecting a multi-generational issue. The author notes that 67% of Hispanic immigrants over 15 are functionally illiterate, straining resources and lowering standards to avoid accusations of racism. PISA 2018 data shows U.S. Hispanics (470 mean) scoring below the OECD average (488), though higher than Latin American nations like Chile (438), Mexico (416), and Argentina (395). The following table compares these scores:

PISA 2018 Scores: U.S. Hispanics and Latin American Nations
Education SystemMeanReadingMathScience
OECD Average488487489489
U.S. Hispanics470481452478
Chile438452417444
U.S. Blacks436448419440
Uruguay424427418426
Mexico¹416420409419
Costa Rica¹415426402416
Colombia¹405412391413
Peru¹402401400404
Brazil¹400413384404
Argentina395402379404
Dominican Rep.334342325336

According to Pew (2015), 82% of immigrants were non-White, with Hispanics comprising 48%. The author notes that many White immigrants, such as Muslims in Flint, Michigan, perform as poorly as Black students (e.g., Flint 2023: 25% passed reading, 75% failed). The author argues that Muslim culture, as seen in low PISA scores from Muslim-majority nations (e.g., Turkey: 463), creates significant barriers to education, requiring assimilation to Western norms for academic success.

Another challenge is the high rate of single motherhood among Hispanics, which the author links to social and educational issues. In 2020, 52.1% of Hispanic births were to unmarried mothers, compared to 26.8% for Whites, contributing to higher welfare costs and educational strain.

Economic and Social Costs of Immigration

The author argues that mass immigration from low-achieving nations, including Latin America and Muslim-majority countries, has driven U.S. education standards down, as schools allocate disproportionate resources to struggling students. A 2005 Bear-Stearns study highlighted the economic distortions caused by illegal immigrants, noting that states with high undocumented populations (e.g., California, Texas) face increased demand for public services. The study estimated the illegal immigrant population at up to 20 million, costing $30 billion annually in social services and forgoing $35 billion in taxes due to off-the-books labor. The author estimates this population at ~20 million in 2023, noting that official estimates like the 11 million figure from the Center for Migration Studies have remained stagnant for 30 years, failing to account for recent surges. From FY2021 to FY2024, U.S. Customs and Border Protection recorded 10.8 million encounters, with an additional ~2 million gotaways (homeland.house.gov, 2024), supporting the author’s view that the true number is closer to 20 million, reflecting entry policies under the Biden administration.

The Bear-Stearns study noted: “States with high populations of undocumented immigrants have experienced extra demand for public services… Although the federal government has the sole authority to govern immigration flows, the responsibility for providing support to legal and illegal immigrants rests with state and local governments.” The author adds that this burden leads Blue States and cities to redirect immigrants elsewhere, exacerbating national challenges. The reliance on cheap, illegal labor, while boosting productivity, leaves millions in poverty, displacing native-born workers, particularly Black Americans, in industries like meatpacking.

Conclusion

PISA scores reveal the academic disparities between nations, which the author argues are reproduced in the U.S. through mass immigration from low-achieving regions like Latin America and Muslim-majority countries. Hispanic and Muslim students, hindered by cultural barriers and social issues like high single motherhood rates, contribute to declining educational standards, particularly in states like Texas and cities like Chicago. The author contends that diversity policies, especially those accommodating Muslim culture, exacerbate these issues by lowering standards, and that assimilation to Western norms is essential for academic success. The economic and social costs of illegal immigration, with a population likely exceeding 20 million, further strain public resources, highlighting the need for immigration policies that prioritize educational compatibility.

References

Bristol Blog banner