School safety is an important condition for teaching and learning, yet its relationship with academic achievement may differ across educational contexts. Comparative evidence across differently structured schooling systems remains limited. This comparative education study examined associations between school safety factors and mathematics achievement in Gauteng Province, South Africa, and Singapore using data from the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) 2019. Guided by Maslow's hierarchy of needs and Scheerens' input-process-output framework, the study conceptualised safety and belonging as conditions supporting learning within broader school and socioeconomic contexts. The study employed two-level hierarchical linear modelling to investigate how learner-, teacher-, and school-level safety conditions were associated with mathematics achievement across the two educational contexts. The analysis included 5633 Grade 9 students from 150 Gauteng schools and 4853 students from 153 Singapore schools. Data were drawn from TIMSS learner, teacher, and school questionnaires, as well as mathematics achievement data. Students in Gauteng reported considerably higher levels of theft, threats, physical harm, and resource shortages than students in Singapore. Multilevel analyses identified safety-related associations with mathematics achievement in both contexts: threats and property damage were negatively associated with achievement in both contexts, whereas other learner- and school-level associations differed across contexts. The results suggest that school safety should be understood not only as a disciplinary concern but as part of broader institutional and contextual conditions associated with educational opportunity and learner achievement. The study contributes comparative evidence supporting contextually responsive approaches to physical and psychosocial school safety.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mathelela Steyn Mokgwathi (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: