1. 1
1 Richard Desjardins
OECD Education
Insights from Nordic results in
IALS and ALL
Presentation at Swedish and Norwegian Club in Paris,
Paris, October 22, 2012

2. 2
2 Nordic participation in IALS and ALL
• International Adult Literacy Survey (IALS)
Sweden (1994)
Denmark (1998)
Finland (1998)
Norway (1998)
• Adult Literacy and Lifeskills Survey (ALL)
Norway (2003)
• OECD Survey of Adult Skills (2012)
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
Norway
Sweden

3. 3
3 Key information processing skills directly
measured
• International Adult Literacy Survey (1994-1998)
Literacy (prose , document, quantitative as separate domains)
• Adult Literacy and Lifeskills Survey (2003-2007)
Literacy (prose , document as separate domains) , numeracy, problem solving
• OECD Survey of Adult Skills (2012)
Literacy (prose , document combined) , numeracy, problem solving in technology-rich
environments
• Cover only a narrow range of skill but are nevertheless key because their
mastery to at least a minimum level of functionality:
Influences the potential to develop and maintain other higher order and job specific skills
(basic building blocks)
Helps people to cope with text-based processing tasks which are relevant to a wide range of
jobs and are of increasing importance in a wide variety of contexts: civic, social, political
and personal life (widely applicable and transversal across contexts)
Serves as a clear policy focus because this can be seen as a human right, has pervasive
public benefits in the economic and social realm, and as general skills are subject to
market failure.

4. 4
4 Comparative distribution of key information
processing skills of adults (1994-1998)
Per cent Adults 16-65 in 1994-1998 Level 2 Level 1
100
Level 3 Level 4/5
80
60
40
20
0
20
20
40
40
60
60
80
80
100 28, 33, 37, 46% at Levels 1 & 2
100
Italy
Switzerland
Germany
Hungary
Sweden
Ireland
Canada
International
Netherlands
Chile
Denmark
Poland
Finland
New Zealand
Belgium (Flanders)
United Kingdom
Slovenia
United States
Portugal
Norway (Bokmal)
Czech Republic
Australia
Source: International Adult Literacy Survey,1994-1998

5. 5
5 Comparative distribution of key information
processing skills of adults (2003-2007)
Adults 16-65 in 2003-2007
Per cent
100
Level 2 Level 1
Level 3 Level 4/5
80
60
40
20
0
20
20
40
40
60
60
80
80
33% at Levels 1 & 2 – no change from 1998
1% percentage point shift from Level 1 to 2
100
100
Norway
Italy
Switzerland
Hungary
Bermuda
Canada
Netherlands
New Zealand
International
United States
Source: Adult Literacy and Lifeskills Survey, 2003-2007

6. 6
6 Comparative distribution of key information
processing skills of youths (1994-1998)
Per cent
Youths 16-25 in 1994-1998
100
Level 2 Level 1
80
Level 3 Level 4/5
60
40
20
0
20
20
40
40
60
60
80
80
100 16, 21, 22, 38% at Levels 1 & 2
100
Sweden
United States
Hungary
Switzerland
Germany
Italy
Czech Republic
Ireland
Netherlands
Denmark
International
Finland
Chile
Poland
New Zealand
Canada
Belgium (Flanders)
United Kingdom
Portugal
Slovenia
Norway (Bokmal)
Australia
Source: International Adult Literacy Survey,1994-1998

7. 7
7 Comparative distribution of key information
processing skills of youths (2003-2007)
Per cent Youths 16-25 in 2003-2007
Level 2 Level 1
100
Level 3 Level 4/5
80
60
40
20
0
20
20
40
40
60
60
80
80 23% at Levels 1 & 2 – 1% percentage point increase in 5 years
100
Small percentage point shift from Level 1 to 2
100
Norway
Switzerland
Hungary
Italy
Netherlands
International
New Zealand
Canada
Bermuda
United States
Source: Adult Literacy and Lifeskills Survey, 2003-2007

8. 8
8 Low performance at Level 1 and 2 linked to
economic disadvantage
Odds ratios showing the likelihood of adults with low levels of foundation skills (Levels 1 & 2)
in multiple skill domains experiencing poor outcomes compared to those with higher levels of skills
3.5
In lowest two quintiles
3.0 of personal income
2.5
Unemployed
2.0
1.5 Received social
assistance in last year
1.0
0.5 Did not receive
investment income in last
0.0 year
0 1 2 3 4
Number of information processing skills
(prose literacy, document literacy, numeracy, problem solving)
in which adults show low performance
Adjusted for education, parental education, age, gender and migration status
Source: Adult Literacy and Lifeskills Survey, 2003-2007

9. 9
9 Low performance at Level 1 and 2 linked to
social disadvantage
Odds ratios showing the likelihood of adults with low levels of foundation skills (Levels 1 & 2)
in multiple skill domains experiencing poor outcomes compared to those with higher levels of skills
2.5
2.0
Has fair to poor
health
1.5
Does not participate
1.0 in community groups
or organizations
0.5
0.0
0 1 2 3 4
Number of information processing skills
(prose literacy, document literacy, numeracy, problem solving)
in which adults show low performance
Adjusted for education, parental education, age, gender and migration status
Source: Adult Literacy and Lifeskills Survey, 2003-2007

10. 10
10 Nordic countries characterized by comparatively high
levels of key information processing skills
• Also characterized by high levels of participation in Adult Education
(AE)
• Substantial differences in level of participation in AE between countries
at comparable stages in the modernisation process and similar economies:
• Group1 (>50%): Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden.
• Group2 (35-50%): Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom
and the United States. Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Switzerland.
• Group3 (20-35%): Austria, Belgium (Flanders), and Germany. Czech
Republic, and Slovenia. France, Italy and Spain.
• Group4 (<20%): Greece and Portugal. Hungary and Poland.

11. 11
11 And distinctly characterized by high
volumes of adult education over lifespan
Full time equivalent years of adult education
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
FI DE SE DK BE NO AT UK ES LV LT BG EE PT FR IT NL HR HU GR SI CZ SK PL RO
Formal education (job-related reasons)
Non-formal education (job-related reasons)
Formal education (non-job related reasons)
Non-formal education (non-job related reasons)
Source: EU Adult Education Survey, 2005-2008

12. 12
12 And not least, high levels of equity in access to adult
education
• Disadvantaged groups are similar among Nordic
countries and non-Nordic countries
those who are women, older, from low socio-economic
backgrounds, low-educated, low-skilled, in low-skill jobs,
unemployed, and/or immigrants are the least likely to
participate
• Distinctiveness of Nordic countries lies in the
attenuation of differences among otherwise
disadvantaged groups.

13. Nordic countries feature highest levels of access for
13
13
least educated
Full time equivalent years of adult education
2
At least some tertiary education
1.8
Upper secondary, post-secondary non-
1.6 tertiary education
Less than upper secondary education
1.4
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
DK SE FI NO AT NL DE BE HR EE LV ES PT UK LT FR HU PL IT SI SK GR CY CZ BG RO
Source: EU Adult Education Survey, 2005-2008

14. 14
14 A key question is why?
• Long shared history of supporting and fostering a rich
adult learning culture
• Various historical, social and cultural factors are
behind this, but Nordic countries also share a strong
record of public policy that aims to:
Promote adult learning
Foster favourable structural conditions
Target various barriers to participation
Ensure that disadvantaged groups have equal access
• Nordic “institutional” model of lifelong learning with
the state as a major player
focus on equity
correcting for market failures

15. Targeted adult education by skill level
15
15 Changes in per cent of adults aged 16 to 65 in adult education between
IALS 1994/1998 and ALL 2003, by literacy levels
Per cent
20
15
10
5
0
-5
-10
Switzerland Switzerland Norway Canada United States Switzerland
(German) (French) (Italian)
Level 4/5 Level 3 Level 2 Level 1
Source: Adult Literacy and Life Skills Survey, 2003; International Adult Literacy Survey, 1994-1998.

16. 16
16 Despite positive scenario in Nordic countries vis-a-vis
international peers:
The job is not finished
• Inequalities in the distribution still exist
• Barriers continue to persist among certain groups
despite targeted effort

17. 17Adults in Nordic & non-Nordic countries experience similar
17
barriers to AE and nearly to same extent
Per cent reporting different types of barriers to AE
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
NO FI IS SE DK PT UK ES DE NL AT
Job related barriers Family/household related barriers
Institutional barriers Dispositional barriers
Source: Eurobarometer, 2003.

18. 18
18 Nordics more likely to overcome barriers to AE even if
face barriers to same extent
Percent participating in AE despite perceived barriers
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
FI IS SE DK NO UK NL DE AT ES PT
Job related barriers Family/household related barriers
Institutional barriers Dispositional barriers
Source: Eurobarometer, 2003.

19. 19
19
Overcoming barriers to adult learning
• Nordic countries comparatively successful at overcoming
perceived family and job related barriers
• Policy matters to overcome barriers
• Family and job-related barriers linked to wider social and welfare
state policies focusing on structural relations between state-
family, state-work, work-family.
• Institutional barriers appear more persistent (~ 50 %
participated)
More directly related to education and skills policies
Many recent reforms relate to targeting of institutional barriers
• Dispositional barriers are perhaps the most challenging (~ 40 %
participated)
Can be related to both wider social policy and specific education/skills policies
Incentivising adults who otherwise are not inclined to participate (e.g., vouchers)

20. 20
20
Conclusions
• Targeted policy measures seem to help in reducing
structural constraints and hence boost participation
rates
Good for maintenance and development of adults skills
• Available data suggests that it is (individually based)
dispositional constraints that may be most challenging
for public policy to address and overcome