Recent results from the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) show that Indigenous students in Australia scored lower than non-Indigenous students in science, reading, and math. Specifically, Indigenous students scored 72 points lower in science, 76 points lower in reading, and 74 points lower in math. These scores are part of a broader trend in PISA assessments, where the average score is typically around 500 points. However, these results only tell part of the story. Since 2022, Indigenous science scores have increased by 16 points, while non-Indigenous scores have stayed the same. In reading and math, Indigenous scores have remained steady, while non-Indigenous scores have slightly declined. Similar patterns are seen in the National Assessment Program – Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN), which tests Australian students in years 3, 5, 7, and 9. These assessments also highlight the gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous students, but they do not fully capture the progress made by some Indigenous students. A 2024 study led by Peter Anderson found that comparing Indigenous students with non-Indigenous averages can obscure the progress made by some schools and systems when Indigenous students are matched with Indigenous peers who had similar starting points. These gains were not visible in traditional comparisons. PISA is designed by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) to measure how well 15-year-olds apply their knowledge to real-life challenges. However, this means Indigenous students are not only being compared to their non-Indigenous peers in Australia but also to the OECD's version of "real life." Australian data shows that 80% of Indigenous students who took the most recent PISA test come from the lowest two socioeconomic quarters, with half coming from the lowest quarter alone. This highlights that Indigenous students are not starting from the same position as their non-Indigenous peers, and the differences in access to resources and support are significant. Reporting these results as a straightforward issue of "performance" oversimplifies a much more complex situation. It aligns with what is known as "deficit framing," which focuses on the shortcomings of Indigenous students rather than on the education system or broader societal factors. A 2022 review of 51 studies on Australian schools found a widespread lack of readiness among teachers, curricula, and school cultures to effectively support Indigenous students. In September 2007, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Australia initially opposed it but endorsed it in 2009. Three of its articles specifically address education, including the right of Indigenous peoples to establish and control their own educational systems, to teach in their own languages, and to access all levels of education without discrimination. However, these rights have not been fully integrated into Australia's education system. A rights-based framework could offer a more equitable way to view education and test results. This includes assessing whether Indigenous students can learn in their own languages, whether Indigenous knowledge is included in the curriculum as a distinct and valid form of knowledge, and whether Indigenous communities have a genuine say in how schools serving their children are governed. Tracking outcomes within specific groups over time could ensure that improvements are visible and the system is held accountable. Under this approach, the 16-point rise in Indigenous science scores since 2022 is something to understand, investigate, and build on, rather than a minor note in a larger gap. Non-Indigenous students' PISA results should also prompt questions about the education system, rather than serving as a benchmark for others.