Across the OECD, 63% of students who graduated with a bachelor’s degree did so from public institutions in 2022. However, private education is slowly becoming more common across all levels of tertiary education as the share of graduates from public institutions has decreased by 3 percentage points since 2013.
On average, women are over-represented in tertiary education, but they remain under-represented in some fields. Only 15% of female new entrants at tertiary level choose a science, technology, engineering or mathematics (STEM) field, compared to 41% of male new entrants. In contrast, only 4% of male entrants opted for the field of education and 8% for health and welfare, shares which have not changed since 2015.
Completion rates for tertiary education show disparities related to students’ parental and immigration background. Students with less educated parents and who come from immigrant backgrounds tend to have lower completion rates than those with more educated parents or from non-immigrant backgrounds.
Education at a Glance 2024
Participation in tertiary education is essential for developing advanced skills and ensuring access to many highly qualified professions. Students entering tertiary education face important decisions including the type of institution (public or private), their fields of study and whether they want to study abroad. These choices will significantly impact their academic and professional trajectories but are often influenced by various external factors.
The financial aspect is a major consideration. The cost of studying varies widely depending on the country and level of education, influencing students' decisions. Tuition fees, living expenses and the availability of scholarships or financial aid can either enable or limit access to certain institutions or programmes (Chapter C5). In many cases, students from lower-income families face significant barriers, which can restrict their educational opportunities and outcomes.
Choosing a field of study is another pivotal decision. Students often balance personal interests with pragmatic considerations, such as labour-market demand and potential international opportunities. STEM fields are frequently promoted due to the high labour-market demand for graduates. However, these fields also show gender disparities, with women under-represented in many STEM disciplines due to societal norms and educational biases.
Studying abroad presents a unique opportunity for personal and academic growth. It allows students to immerse themselves in a new culture, develop language skills and gain a global perspective. International education can enhance employability, as employers often value the diverse experiences and adaptability that come from studying in a foreign country. Countries actively seek to attract mobile students due to the substantial economic benefits they bring. These students often pay higher tuition fees than domestic students, providing a significant source of revenue for educational institutions. If foreign students choose to remain in the country after graduation, they continue to contribute economically by joining the workforce, paying taxes and fostering innovation.
In some OECD countries, private institutions account for a larger share of graduates than public institutions across all levels of tertiary education, particularly in Latin America and Asia.
The proportion of mobile students among all tertiary enrolments has risen in nearly all countries since 2013, notably in Central and East European countries.
Mobile students are heavily represented in STEM fields, with on average around 30% of all mobile students enrolled in such fields, compared to 19% of national (non-mobile) students.
This chapter draws from data on graduates, new entrants and enrolled students. For more information on the definitions please refer to the Education at a Glance 2024 Sources, Methodologies and Technical Notes.
There has been a reversal in gender education outcomes at tertiary levels of education over the last decades, notably those related to participation and achievement. Across OECD countries, women comprised 56% of first-time entrants into tertiary education in 2022 and they constitute a majority of new entrants in every OECD country. The share is the highest in Iceland, where 64% of first-time entrants are women and it is narrowest in Germany, Japan, Korea and Switzerland (Table B4.2). Women are also more likely to finish their tertiary degree than men. In 2023, there were 1.4 female graduates for every male graduate at bachelor’s and master’s level (OECD, 2023[1]).
One in two students choose to pursue studies in education, health and welfare, or a STEM field, but the gender distribution among these fields varies considerably. On average, only 15% of female new entrants choose a STEM field, compared to 41% of male new entrants. These disparities persist across countries, with Chile and Finland showing the largest gaps, while the Netherlands and the Republic of Türkiye have the smallest (Figure B4.2).
Progress in encouraging more women to pursue STEM-related fields has been slow, with the share of female new entrants who choose to study STEM fields increasing by less than 1 percentage point between 2015 and 2022 across OECD countries. Luxembourg stands out with the share of female new entrants choosing a STEM field increasing from 8% to 16% over the past six years. The share of female new entrants who chose a STEM field has fallen by at least 5 percentage points in Greece, Mexico, Poland and the United Kingdom (Table B4.2).
Conversely, men in OECD countries continue to show little interest in fields related to education and health. Only 4% of all male new entrants opt to study the field of education, and 8% choose health and welfare, with no significant changes since 2015. No country has a greater share of men than women choosing to studying health or medicine. Costa Rica and Israel see the largest share of men entering the field of education, with 9% of all male tertiary entrants choosing the field, while Belgium has the greatest share of male new entrants opting for health and welfare, at 14% Table B4.2).
Reducing gender biases in teaching strategies and facilitating spaces where female students can interact with role models can effectively encourage them to pursue careers in male-dominated fields. Recent studies have demonstrated the impact of teachers’ gender biases on girls’ performance and educational decisions, as well as the long-term effect of brief encounters with female role models, particularly in male-dominated fields (Delaney and Devereux, 2021[2]).
Various countries have implemented policies to attract female students into STEM fields. Ireland’s STEM passport offers mentoring programmes connecting female students with industry professionals (National University of Ireland Maynooth, 2023[3]). Germany’s Alliance for Women in MINT Professions launched the #empowerGirl internship programme in 2023, offering positions to young women interested in STEM (MINTvernetzt, 2024[4]). In some countries, policies target the whole student population irrespective of gender. Luxembourg’s Fairness in Teaching (FIT) project trains teachers to adopt impartial and just treatment or behaviour without favouritism or discrimination in their practices (FIT, 2024[5]). The Flemish Community of Belgium aims to boost STEM enrolment among all students by 2030 and strengthening STEM-competences in broader society (Flemish Government, 2024[6]). The initiative known as Spain's STEAM Alliance for Female Talent, Girls Rising in Science, aims to promote STEAM vocations among girls and young women and reduce the gender gap, with over 150 companies and organisations already on board (Ministerio de Educación, Formación Profesional y Deportes, 2024[7]).
Policies targeting male students at tertiary or upper secondary level are not common, but some countries have introduced initiatives to improve boys’ academic performance in school, which could potentially have a positive impact later in their studies. In Germany and the United Kingdom, literacy programmes encourage boys to read through football-related activities including texts, reading sessions, discussions, excursions and exchanges with professional footballers (Welmond and Gregory, 2021[8]).
Addressing the underachievement of boys, especially those from disadvantaged backgrounds, can yield positive outcomes without detracting from girls' progress. Studies indicate that boys' performance in school is particularly sensitive to socio-economic factors, suggesting that policies targeting disadvantaged students, regardless of gender, could help address underperformance among boys (Delaney and Devereux, 2021[2]).
Data on tertiary completion rates were collected in 2022, disaggregated by two equity dimensions: parents’ educational attainment and migration background. The results from this data collection underscore the importance of looking beyond national averages to analyse outcomes for potentially disadvantaged subgroups. A total of 15 countries and economies were able to provide the relevant data.
The completion patterns in tertiary education exhibit considerable differences across countries. The Flemish Community of Belgium, Slovenia and the United States have the greatest difference in completion rates (based on the theoretical duration plus three years for Slovenia, and two years for the United States) between students with at least one tertiary-educated parent and those whose parents had lower than tertiary attainment. In several other countries, such as Portugal, Sweden and Switzerland, completion rates for students differ less with parental educational background (Figure B4.3).
In Finland, students from highly educated backgrounds seem to study at a slower pace, completing their tertiary studies later than students whose parents had lower educational achievement. Among students with at least one tertiary-educated parent, the completion rate based on the theoretical duration is 9 percentage points lower than those whose parents’ highest attainment was below upper secondary education, and 8 percentage points lower than those with at least one parent with upper secondary or post-secondary non-tertiary attainment. Three years after the theoretical duration, however, the opposite holds: the completion rate among students with at least one tertiary-educated parent is 7 percentage points higher than those whose parents lacked upper secondary attainment, and 3 percentage points higher than those with parents upper secondary or post-secondary non-tertiary attainment. A similar pattern can be observed in Estonia, but the difference in completion rates after three years is smaller (Table B4.4). This pattern is also observed when looking at students’ duration of studies: a study conducted in Finland over the period 1980-2010 found that students with the lowest parental education graduated 1.8 months sooner than students with parents with the highest education (Lehti and Kinnari, 2024[9]).
Differences can also be found when looking at students’ immigration status in different countries. Students with an immigrant background had completion rates (after the theoretical duration plus three years) that were at least 15 percentage points lower than for those without such a background in the Netherlands and Slovenia. In Finland and Israel, the differences between second-generation immigrants and non-immigrants are small, but first-generation immigrants had lower completion rates, which may reflect barriers to adjusting to the culture and language of the host country. In the United States, first-generation immigrants have slightly higher completion rates than the other two categories (Figure B4.4).
Private institutions are becoming a more common choice among students pursuing tertiary studies. The choice of a public or private institution can be influenced by various factors, including students’ expectations about future opportunities after graduation and the availability of financial support. These decisions may also be affected by their country’s institutional context, and the effects of their governments’ education policies.
While public and independent private tertiary institutions frequently co-exist, as in Costa Rica and the United States, the institutional context can greatly differ from one country to another. The United Kingdom only have government-dependent private institutions at tertiary level but Greece and Luxembourg have no private tertiary institutions whatsoever, while Canada only has a negligible amount of private tertiary institutions (Table B4.1).
The share of tertiary graduates who studied at public institutions exceeds the share from private institutions and tends to rise with the level of tertiary education. Across OECD countries, 58% of those graduating from short-cycle tertiary programmes attended public institutions, increasing to 63% at bachelor’s level, 65% at master’s level and 76% at doctoral level or equivalent. In a few countries, the majority of tertiary students earned their degrees at a private institution, regardless of the level of education. In Chile, Costa Rica, Hungary, Israel, Korea and Mexico, at least 50% of students at bachelor’s, master’s and doctoral level graduated from a private institution in 2022. In Colombia, that is also the case at bachelor’s and master’s level, but not at doctoral level (Figure B4.1).
Countries also differ in how the share of public graduates has changed through time. Since 2013, private institutions have accounted for an increasing share of graduates from short-cycle tertiary, bachelor’s and master’s or equivalent programmes. On the other hand, the share of graduates from public institutions at doctoral level has been stable over that period, except in Colombia, Estonia, Hungary and the Netherlands, where it has decreased by more than 20%. In Hungary, from 2019-21, most of the institutions maintained by the government were taken over by public trusts with a public service task and became private institutions (Eurydice, 2024[10]). In 2022, 24% of students graduating from a bachelor’s programme in Hungary did so from a public institution, down from 87% in 2013 (Table B4.1. ).
Private expenditure contributes considerably to the funding of tertiary education institutions in many of the countries which have a large share of students enrolled in private institutions. Private expenditure accounted for over 60% of total expenditure on education at tertiary level in Chile and over 55% in Japan and Korea (OECD, 2023[1]). Private institutions in these contexts may rely less on public funds, and more on household expenditure in the form of tuition fees and donations. They may have a more market-oriented approach to setting their tuition fees, their accessibility and the programmes they offer.
In Latin America, both public and private institutions have grown in the last decades, especially private universities, with the aim of meeting growing demand for higher education and to include an increasing number of less favoured social groups (Brunner and Labraña, 2020[11]). In Colombia and Chile, the share of graduates who studied at public institutions has fallen since 2013, reflecting the shift in students’ choices towards private universities.
Students' decisions about which type of institution to enrol in are influenced by various factors. Students in Brazil may choose to attend private institutions as public universities have more selective entry criteria, potentially due to competition for places and/or limited capacity to enrol students. In Colombia, students at private institutions benefit from flexible payment options and no entry examinations. In Germany, private higher education institutions complement public institutions in so far that they offer attractive study options (e.g. distance-learning programs) that are well-suited for employed people as well as for people with a vocational background. They offer access to fields of study to which the access at public institutions is very competitive and restrictive, for example psychology (Bildungsberichterstattung, 2022[12]).
The tuition fees charged by universities and the availability of financial support have a significant influence on students' choice of public or private institutions. In Australia and Japan, the average tuition fees in independent private institutions are twice those in public institutions for full-time national students in bachelor’s programmes or equivalent. In contrast, in Lithuania and Romania, the fees for public and private institutions are relatively similar (see Table C5.1). In many countries, tertiary students have access to grants and public or government-guaranteed private loans to finance their studies. In Australia and Japan, these two forms of financial support could cover a significant share of students’ tuition fees, alleviating the additional financial burden of choosing a private institution. Notably, in the United Kingdom, where there are only private institutions, 84% of students receive one or both types of financial aid (see Table C5.3).
The higher proportion of graduates from doctoral programmes or equivalent in public institutions can be attributed to under-developed financial ties between the private sector and research-oriented institutions. Across OECD countries, in 2016, two-thirds of research and development funding in tertiary institutions came from government sources, with less than 10% coming from businesses and the private non-profit sector. Similarly, surveys of businesses indicated that only 15% reported co-operation with higher education institutions in developing new products or processes (OECD, 2019[13]). Finally, in 2019, the share of current expenditure on R&D activities as percentage of total expenditure in tertiary education was 83% for public institutions, compared to 17% in private institutions (OECD, 2022[14]).
The proportion of mobile students – international or foreign – among all tertiary enrolments has risen in nearly all countries between 2013 and 2022 (Figure B4.5). New Zealand is a notable exception, with a 6 percentage-point decrease in the share of international students attributed largely to stringent travel restrictions coinciding with the start of the academic year. Many Central and East European countries saw very large increases in mobile students, albeit from low levels in 2013. In Estonia, the share of international students increased from 3% in 2013 to 11% in 2022. Similarly, the share increased from 4% to 13% in Latvia, and from 10% to 19% in Canada (Table B4.3).
The most substantial increase has been in the share of mobile students enrolled in master's or equivalent programmes, rising from 10% in 2013 to 15% in 2022. Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Portugal have attracted notably more mobile master’s students with considerable increases of at least 10 percentage points in the proportion of mobile students at this level of education. For doctoral or equivalent programmes, the share of international students increased more slowly among OECD countries, with Chile, Estonia and Hungary seeing the largest increases of at least 20 percentage points (Table B4.3).
Across OECD countries, national and mobile students often make very different choices about fields of study. Mobile students are highly represented in STEM fields with 30% of all international or foreign students enrolled in these fields on average, compared to 19% of non-mobile students. In Denmark, 40% of mobile students enrol in STEM fields compared to only 22% of national students, similar differences can be seen in Sweden and Türkiye (Figure B4.6 and Table B4.3). Korea is an exception, where 34% of non-mobile students are enrolled in STEM compared to 16% of mobile students. Scientific, mathematical and technical knowledge are transferable across different education systems, facilitated by international curriculum standardisation and use of a common language, enabling students to pursue their studies abroad.
Mobile students are less likely to choose fields leading to careers in health and welfare compared to national students. On average 11% of mobile students are enrolled in health and welfare compared to 15% of non-mobile students. Regulatory policies and the cost of having a degree recognised may deter students from studying for these careers abroad. Bulgaria and Romania are exceptions, were the share of mobile students enrolled in health and welfare fields is 30% higher than the share of non-mobile students (Figure B4.6 and Table B4.3).
Some countries have succeeded in attracting international students to fields aligned with employers' needs, helping to close skill gaps. Across OECD countries, digital proficiency, medical knowledge and scientific expertise are in high demand and some countries are making use of the pool of mobile students to address local skill shortages. In Bulgaria and Romania, over 40% of mobile students have enrolled in health and welfare programmes, aligning with the most-needed skills in their labour markets (OECD, 2022[15]). Latvia and the Slovak Republic, where a considerable share of mobile students are pursuing degrees in health and welfare, are also among the countries which have significantly increased their share of mobile students at tertiary level since 2013 (Table B4.3). How successful this strategy is will depend on countries’ retention policies and measures to facilitate labour-market transitions.
OECD countries have implemented a number of initiatives to attract and retain international students. Factors such as language of instruction, cultural affinity and post-study job opportunities influence student mobility. Institutions often adapt language requirements and work restrictions to accommodate the needs of international students. Some countries also offer family residence permits and access to the labour market to encourage student retention (OECD, 2022[16]). Mobile students in the Slovak Republic can automatically access the labour market without applying for a permit or a labour-market test (OECD, 2022[16]). Brazil has dedicated programmes for students from developing countries to pursue further studies (Ministry of External Relations of Brazil, 2024[17]). In Finland, several measures have proven effective in attracting international students, including adjusting application periods, facilitating joint degree programmes and establishing a centralised English-language application platform (European Commission, 2018[18]).
Foreign students are those who are not citizens of the country in which they are enrolled and where the data are collected. Although they are counted as internationally mobile, they may be long-term residents or even be born in the “host” country. Therefore, for student mobility and bilateral comparisons, interpretations of data based on the concept of foreign students should be made with caution.
International students are those who left their country of origin and moved to another country for the purpose of study. The country of origin of a tertiary student is defined according to the criteria of “country of upper secondary education”, “country of prior education” or “country of usual residence” (see below). Depending on country-specific immigration legislation, mobility arrangements (such as the free mobility of individuals within the European Union and the European Economic Area) and data availability, international students may be defined as students who are not permanent or usual residents of their country of study, or alternatively as students who obtained their prior education in a different country.
Mobile students are students who are either international or foreign.
National students are students who are not internationally mobile. Their number is computed as the difference between the total number of students in each destination country and the number of international or foreign students.
New entrants to a tertiary level of education are students enrolling for the first-time in a tertiary level of education but who may have previously entered and completed a degree in another tertiary level of education.
Parents’ educational attainment refers to the highest level of educational attainment of at least one parent: below upper secondary corresponds to ISCED 2011 Levels 0, 1 and 2, and includes recognised qualifications from ISCED 2011 Level 3 programmes, which are not considered as sufficient for ISCED 2011 Level 3 completion, and without direct access to post-secondary non-tertiary education or tertiary education; upper secondary or post-secondary non-tertiary corresponds to ISCED 2011 Levels 3 and 4; and tertiary corresponds to ISCED 2011 Levels 5, 6, 7 and 8.
Students with an immigrant background are students whose mother and father were both born in a country.
First generation: Those born outside the country and whose both parents were also born in another country.
Second generation: Those born in the country but whose both parents were born in another country.
Defining and identifying mobile students, as well as their types of learning mobility, are a key challenge for developing international education statistics, since current international and national statistical systems only report domestic educational activities undertaken within national boundaries (OECD, 2018[19]).
Data on international and foreign students are therefore obtained from enrolments in their countries of destination. This is the same method used for collecting data on total enrolments, i.e. records of regularly enrolled students in an education programme.
Data refer to the 2021/22 academic year and are based on the UNESCO-Institute of Statistics (UIS)/OECD/Eurostat data collection on education statistics administered by the OECD in 2023. Data for some countries may have a different reference year. For more information see Education at a Glance 2024 Sources, Methodologies and Technical Notes (OECD, 2024[20])).
The UNESCO Institute of Statistics (UIS) provided data for Argentina, China, India, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia and South Africa.
References
[12] Bildungsberichterstattung (2022), Education in Germany.
[11] Brunner, J. and J. Labraña (2020), “The transformation of higher education in Latin America: From elite access to massification and universalisation”, in Higher Education in Latin America and the Challenges of the 21st Century, Springer International Publishing, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44263-7_3.
[2] Delaney, J. and P. Devereux (2021), “The Economics of Gender and Educational Achievement: Stylized Facts and Causal Evidence”, in Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Economics and Finance, Oxford University Press, https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190625979.013.663.
[18] European Commission (2018), Attracting and retaining international students in the EU - National Report of Finland, http://www.emn.fi (accessed on 23 May 2024).
[10] Eurydice (2024), National Education Systems, https://eurydice.eacea.ec.europa.eu/national-education-systems/hungary/organisation-private-education (accessed on 17 May 2024).
[5] FIT (2024), Ensure Fair Teaching Practices, Fairness in Teaching website, https://www.fairnessinteaching-project.eu/.
[6] Flemish Government (2024), STEM-Agenda 2030 – STEM-competences for a future and mission-oriented policy, https://assets.vlaanderen.be/image/upload/v1624978438/STEM_agenda_2030_pjxpnw.pdf (accessed on 23 May 2024).
[9] Lehti, H. and H. Kinnari (2024), “Students’ cultural and economic family background and duration of university studies in Finland”, European Education, Vol. 56/1, pp. 32-49, https://doi.org/10.1080/10564934.2024.2308244.
[7] Ministerio de Educación, Formación Profesional y Deportes (2024), Alianza Steam por el Talento Femenino, https://alianzasteam.educacionfpydeportes.gob.es/quienes-somos/mision-entidades-colaboradoras.html.
[17] Ministry of External Relations of Brazil (2024), Selection process, https://www.gov.br/mre/en/subjects/culture-and-education/educational-themes/study-opportunities-for-international-applicants/pec-g/selection-process#requisitos (accessed on 23 May 2024).
[4] MINTvernetzt (2024), Alliance for Women in MINT Professions, https://www.mint-vernetzt.de/news/buendnis-fuer-frauen-in-mint-berufen/ (accessed on 17 May 2024).
[3] National University of Ireland Maynooth (2023), STEM Passport for Inclusion, https://www.maynoothuniversity.ie/all-institute/all-projects/stem-passport-inclusion (accessed on 17 May 2024).
[20] OECD (2024), Education at a Glance 2024 Sources, Methodologies and Technical Notes, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/e7d20315-en.
[1] OECD (2023), Education at a Glance 2023: OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/e13bef63-en.
[14] OECD (2022), Education at a Glance 2022: OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/3197152b-en.
[16] OECD (2022), International Migration Outlook 2022, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/30fe16d2-en.
[15] OECD (2022), Skills for Jobs database, https://www.oecdskillsforjobsdatabase.org/ (accessed on 17 May 2024).
[13] OECD (2019), Benchmarking Higher Education System Performance, Higher Education, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/be5514d7-en.
[19] OECD (2018), OECD Handbook for Internationally Comparative Education Statistics 2018: Concepts, Standards, Definitions and Classifications, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264304444-en.
[8] Welmond, M. and L. Gregory (2021), Educational Underachievement Among Boys and Men, World Bank Group, Washington, DC, http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/111041644611110155/Educational-Underachievement-Among-Boys-and-Men.
Cut-off date for the data: 14 June 2024. Any updates on data and more breakdowns can be found on the OECD Data Explorer (http://data-explorer.oecd.org/s/4s).
In per cent
Note: See under Chapter B4 Tables for StatLink and Box B4.2 for the notes related to this Table.
In per cent
Note: See under Chapter B4 Tables for StatLink and Box B4.2 for the notes related to this Table.
In per cent
Note: See under Chapter B4 Tables for StatLink and Box B4.2 for the notes related to this Table.
Completion rate of full-time students, graduating from any level
Note: See under Chapter B4 Tables for StatLink and Box B4.2 for the notes related to this Table.
Here you will find all the notes and footnotes corresponding to the tables. For the time being, please refer to the Excel file with the tables and charts for detailed information.
Table B4.1 Distribution of graduates in each level of tertiary education, by type of institution (2013 and 2022)
1. Short-cycle tertiary data refer to the Flemish Community of Belgium only.
2. Year of reference differs from 2013: 2015 for Bulgaria and Costa Rica.
3. From 2020, inclusion of the advanced vocational training programmes which are predominantly private training providers..
Table B4.2 Share of female entrants and distribution of female and male new entrants into tertiary education, by selected field of study (2015 and 2022)
1. Year of reference differs from 2022: 2021 for Canada.
2. Year of reference differs from 2015: 2016 for France and Italy; and 2017 for Costa Rica.
3. All fields of study include the field of information and communication technologies.
4. Data refer to the distribution of new entrants into bachelor's programmes rather than all tertiary programmes.
Table B4.3 Share of international or foreign students by level of tertiary education and distribution of tertiary students by selected fields of study and mobility status (2013 and 2022)
1. Year of reference differs from 2013: 2015 for Croatia, Greece and Romania; and 2016 for Argentina and Colombia.
2. Year of reference differs from 2022: 2021 for Argentina and South Africa; and 2018 for Indonesia.
Table B4.4 Completion rates of students who entered a bachelor's (or equivalent) programme, by timeframe and social background (latest available year)
1. Data on bachelor's and equivalent programmes refer only to those with a theoretical duration of three, four or five years in Australia. Only bachelor's programmes with a theoretical duration of three or four years are included for the United Kingdom.
2. Timeframes of reference differ. Data are provided for the theoretical duration of the programme plus two years in the United States (not three years). Data are provided for the theoretical duration of the programme plus one semester (not the theoretical duration) in Sweden.
See Definitions and Methodology sections and Education at a Glance 2024 Sources Methodologies and Technical Notes (https://doi.org/10.1787/e7d20315-en) for more information.
Data and more breakdowns are available on the OECD Data Explorer (http://data-explorer.oecd.org/s/4s).
For more information see Source section and Education at a Glance 2024 Sources, Methodologies and Technical Notes (https://doi.org/10.1787/e7d20315-en).
Please refer to the Reader's Guide for information concerning symbols for missing data and abbreviations.