Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Skills matter - Additional results from the survey of adult skills

5,604 views

Published on

In the wake of the technological revolution that began in the last decades of the 20th century, labour-market demand for information-processing and other high-level cognitive and interpersonal skills have been growing substantially. Based on the results from the 33 countries and regions that participated in the 1st and 2nd round of the Survey of Adult Skills in 2011-12 and in 2014-15, this report describes adults’ proficiency in three information-processing skills, and examines how proficiency is related to labour-market and social outcomes. It also places special emphasis on the results from the 3rd and final round of the first cycle of PIAAC in 2017-18, which included 6 countries (Ecuador, Hungary, Kazakhstan, Mexico, Peru and the United States). The Survey of Adult Skills, a product of the OECD Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies (PIAAC), was designed to provide insights into the availability of some of these key skills in society and how they are used at work and at home. The first survey of its kind, it directly measures proficiency in three information-processing skills: literacy, numeracy and problem-solving in technology-rich environments.

Published in: Education
  • If you want to enjoy the Good Life: making money in the comfort of your own home with just your laptop, then this is for YOU … Here’s How YOU Can Stake Out Your Personal Claim In Our EIGHT MILLION DOLLAR GOLDMINE. STARTING TODAY! Link: https://tinyurl.com/v4srq2w
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here

Skills matter - Additional results from the survey of adult skills

  1. 1. Andreas Schleicher Director for Education and Skills Skills matter ADDITIONAL RESULTS FROM THE SURVEY OF ADULT SKILLS 1 LOCATION, DATE
  2. 2. Survey of Adult Skills in brief in literacy, numeracy and problem solving in technology-rich environments. 245 thousand adults… Representing 1.15 billion 16-65 year-olds in 39 countries/economies Took an internationally agreed assessment… The assessment was administered either in computer- based or paper-based versions.
  3. 3. Survey of Adult Skills Participating countries 5 2011-12 (**see notes A and B in the Reader’s Guide).
  4. 4. 6 (**see notes A and B in the Reader’s Guide). Survey of Adult Skills Participating countries 2014-15
  5. 5. 7 (**see notes A and B in the Reader’s Guide). Survey of Adult Skills Participating countries 2017-18
  6. 6. Survey of Adult Skills in brief Sample sizes ranged from.. a minimum of approximately 4 500 to a maximum of nearly 27 300. The survey collected background information of adults for about 40 minutes. Respondents with very low literacy skills were directed to a test of basic “reading component” skills. The survey also collects a range of generic skills such as collaborating with others and organising one’s time, required of individuals in their work.
  7. 7. Literacy The ability to... Understand, evaluate, use and engage with written texts. In order to.. Achieve one’s goals, and to develop one’s knowledge and potential. Literacy encompasses a range of skills from.. The decoding of written words and sentences The comprehension, interpretation and evaluation of complex texts. Numeracy The ability to… Access, use, interpret and communicate mathematical information and ideas In order to.. Engage in and manage the mathematical demands of a range of situations in adults. Numeracy involves Managing a situation or solving a problem in a real context, by responding to mathematical content/information/ideas represented in multiple ways. Problem Solving In Technology-rich Environments The ability to… Use digital technology communication tools and networks to acquire and evaluate information, communicate with others and perform practical tasks. The assessment focuses on the abilities to… Solve problems for personal, work and civic purposes by setting up appropriate goals and plans, and accessing and making use of information through computers and computer networks. “Key information-processing skills” Survey of Adult Skills Skills assessed 9
  8. 8. Literacy proficiency and GDP per capita 10 [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE][CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] R² = 0.2928 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 80,000 90,000 PIAAC literacy score GDP per capita in 2017 (2010 constant prices $, PPP)
  9. 9. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Wage High levels of health Participation in volunteer activities High levels of political efficacy High levels of trust Percentage-point change associated with a change of one standard deviation in proficiency in numeracy (OECD average) Numeracy and positive outcomes
  10. 10. Effect of education, numeracy proficiency and numeracy use at work on wages Percentage change in wages associated with a one standard deviation increase in years of education, proficiency in numeracy and numeracy use at work 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Greece Ecuador Italy Denmark CzechRepublic Sweden Turkey Finland Norway Korea Mexico Kazakhstan Austria France Netherlands Flanders(Belgium) UnitedStates2017 Poland Peru Cyprus¹ Lithuania Slovenia OECDaverage Spain Estonia Germany Australia NorthernIreland(UK) Ireland Japan NewZealand Canada Hungary SlovakRepublic Israel UnitedStates2012/2014 England(UK) Chile Singapore Years of education Proficiency (numeracy) Numeracy at work% Statistically significant differences are marked in a darker tone
  11. 11. What can adults do?
  12. 12. Description of proficiency levels: Literacy 14 Adults at Level 1 can • Read relatively short digital or print continuous, non-continuous, or mixed texts to locate a single piece of information. • Complete simple forms, understand basic vocabulary, determine the meaning of sentences, and read continuous texts with a degree of fluency. Adults at Level 1 can • Integrate two or more pieces of information based on criteria • Compare and contrast or reason about information and make low-level inferences. •Read relatively short digital or print continuous, non-continuous, or mixed texts to locate a single piece of information. Adults at Level 2 can Understand and respond appropriately to dense or lengthy texts. • Understand text structures and rhetorical devices. • Identify, interpret, or evaluate one or more pieces of information and make appropriate inferences. Adults at Level 3 can • Make complex inferences and appropriately apply background knowledge as well as interpret or evaluate subtle truth claims or arguments. •Perform multiple-step operations to integrate, interpret, or synthesise information from complex or lengthy texts that involve conditional and/or competing information. Adults at Level 4/5 can
  13. 13. 100 80 60 40 20 0 20 40 60 80 Ecuador Peru Mexico Turkey Chile Kazakhstan Italy Greece Spain Slovenia Israel Cyprus¹ Lithuania France Hungary Singapore Northern Ireland (UK) Ireland Poland OECD average United States 2017 Austria Germany United States 2012/2014 England (UK) Korea Denmark Czech Republic Canada Flanders (Belgium) Slovak Republic Russian Federation² Estonia Norway New Zealand Australia Sweden Netherlands Finland Japan Proportion of the population Level 2 Level 1 and below Level 3 Level 4/5 Literacy proficiency levels
  14. 14. 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 Score Kazakhstan Peru Literacy skills in younger and older generations 55-65 to 16-24 years old Chile Singapore Ecuador Mexico Germany Hungary United States 2017 UK OECD 55-65 OECD 16-24
  15. 15. Literacy proficiency: country average and variation [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [C… [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE][CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CEL… [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 190 210 230 250 270 290 310 Interquartile range Average score
  16. 16. Description of proficiency levels: Numeracy 21 Adults at Level 1 can • Complete tasks involving basic mathematical processes in common, concrete contexts where the mathematical content is explicit with little text and minimal distractors. • Perform simple processes involving counting, sorting, basic arithmetic operations, understanding simple percent, and locating elements of simple or common graphical or spatial representations. Adults at Level 1 can • Perform tasks that require identifying and acting upon mathematical information and ideas embedded in a range of common contexts where the mathematical content is fairly explicit or visual with relatively few distractors. • Interpret relatively simple data and statistics in texts, tables and graphs. Adults at Level 2 can • Complete tasks that require an understanding of mathematical information that may be less explicit, embedded in contexts that are not always familiar, and represented in more complex ways. • Perform tasks requiring several steps and that may involve a choice of problem-solving strategies and relevant processes. Adults at Level 3 can • Understand a broad range of mathematical information that may be complex, abstract or embedded in unfamiliar contexts. • Understand arguments and communicate well-reasoned explanations for answers or choices. Adults at Level 4/5 can
  17. 17. 100 80 60 40 20 0 20 40 60 80 Ecuador Peru Mexico Chile Turkey Kazakhstan Spain Italy Greece Cyprus¹ United States 2017 Israel Ireland United States 2012/2014 France Northern Ireland (UK) Poland Slovenia England (UK) Korea Lithuania OECD average Singapore Canada Australia Russian Federation² New Zealand Estonia Germany Hungary Austria Czech Republic Flanders (Belgium) Slovak Republic Denmark Norway Netherlands Sweden Finland Japan Proportion of the population Level 2 Level 1 and below Level 3 Level 4/5 Numeracy proficiency levels
  18. 18. Low performers in literacy and/or numeracy 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Ecuador Peru Chile Mexico Turkey Italy Israel Spain Greece Kazakhstan France Slovenia Singapore UnitedStates2017 UnitedStates… Ireland Poland OECDaverage NorthernIreland(UK) England(UK) Canada Germany Hungary Australia Lithuania NewZealand Korea Denmark Austria RussianFederation² Cyprus¹ Estonia Sweden Flanders(Belgium) CzechRepublic Norway SlovakRepublic Netherlands Finland Japan in both literacy and numeracy in literacy only in numeracy only At or below Level 1 Proportion of the population
  19. 19. Description of proficiency levels: Problem Solving in Technology-rich environment 25 Adults at Level 1 can • Adults who either failed ICT core test or had no prior computer experience took the paper-based version of the assessment. • Adults who “opted out” of taking computer-based assessment opted to take the paper-based assessment without first taking the ICT core assessment, even if they reported some prior experience with computers. Adults who did not pass the test • Complete tasks in which the goal is explicitly stated and for which the necessary operations are performed in a single and familiar environment. • Solve problems in the context of technology-rich environments whose solutions involve a relatively small number of steps, and a limited amount of monitoring across a large number of actions Adults at Level 1 can • Complete problems that have explicit criteria for success, a small number of applications, and several steps and operators. • Can monitor progress towards a solution and handle unexpected outcomes or impasses. Adults at Level 2 can • Complete tasks involving multiple applications, a large number of steps, impasses, and the discovery and use of ad hoc commands in a novel environment. • Establish a plan to arrive at a solution and monitor its implementation as they deal with unexpected outcomes and impasses. Adults at Level 3 can
  20. 20. 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Ecuador Peru Turkey Mexico Kazakhstan Greece Chile Poland Lithuania Russian Federation² Slovak Republic Ireland Israel United States 2012/2014 Slovenia Hungary Northern Ireland (UK) United States 2017 OECD average Estonia England (UK) Australia Korea Canada Austria Czech Republic Flanders (Belgium) Germany Japan New Zealand Norway Netherlands Denmark Singapore Sweden Finland 55-65 Level 2 55-65 Level 3 Level 2 Level 3 % Proficient in solving problems in a digital environment – by age Older adults (55-65) Young adults (25-34)
  21. 21. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 New Zealand Netherlands Sweden Norway United States 2017 Denmark England (UK) Flanders (Belgium) United States 2012/2014 Canada Germany Northern Ireland (UK) Finland Australia Lithuania Singapore Czech Republic Slovenia Austria OECD average Kazakhstan Hungary Estonia Korea Greece Ireland Russian Federation² Slovak Republic Ecuador Peru Turkey Mexico Proportion of the population No computer experience Opted out of computer-based assessment Failed ICT core Problem solving assesment: Not tried or failed
  22. 22. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Peru Turkey Mexico Ecuador Korea Chile Poland SlovakRepublic RussianFederation² Lithuania Greece Slovenia Singapore Kazakhstan Japan NorthernIreland(UK) Hungary Austria Ireland Estonia OECDaverage CzechRepublic Germany Israel Flanders(Belgium) Canada England(UK) Finland Australia UnitedStates2012/2014 Netherlands Norway Denmark UnitedStates2017 NewZealand Sweden 55-65 25-34 Score Proficiency in PSTRE by age: Failed ICT core or no computer experience
  23. 23. PROFICIENCY IN INFORMATION PROCESSING SKILLS AND SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS Information processing skills are closely related to socio- demographic characteristics such as: • educational attainment • age • parental education • Immigrant background • and gender
  24. 24. Literacy and socio-demographic characteristics: a summary – OECD average 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Native-born and native-language minus foreign-born and foreign-language 25-34 year-olds - 55-65 year-olds Tertiary - Less than upper secondary (adults aged 25-65) At least one parent attained tertiary - Neither parent attained upper secondary Men - Women Differences in literacy score Age Educational Attainment Parents’ education Gender Score Immigrant background
  25. 25. EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT AND PROFICIENCY Literacy proficiency is strongly related to educational attainment. • Adults with higher levels of education tend to have higher proficiency • There are considerable differences between countries in the average literacy proficiency of adults with educational qualifications at similar levels
  26. 26. 150 170 190 210 230 250 270 290 310 330 Japan Netherlands Finland Sweden Australia CzechRepublic Flanders(Belgium) Norway UnitedStates2012/2014 NewZealand Poland Austria England(UK) NorthernIreland(UK) UnitedStates2017 Hungary SlovakRepublic France Germany Denmark Ireland OECDaverage Korea Canada Estonia Singapore Slovenia Lithuania Cyprus¹ Spain Italy RussianFederation² Israel Greece Turkey Kazakhstan Mexico Chile Peru Ecuador Less than upper secondary Upper secondary Tertiary Literacy proficiency by level of educational attainment (25-65 year olds): Score
  27. 27. 36 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325 350 375 400 Lower than upper secondary Upper secondary Tertiary United States 2017 Score 25th percentile Mean 75th percentile Lower than upper secondary Upper secondary Tertiary 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325 350 375 400 Finland Score Mean literacy proficiency and distribution of literacy scores, by educational attainment (25-65 year-olds) Level 1 and below Level 2 OECD average
  28. 28. FROM PISA TO PIAAC The cohorts participating in PISA in 2000-2009 form part of the PIAAC sample. • A positive relationship exists between countries’ performance in a given round of PISA and the proficiency of the corresponding age cohort in PIAAC some years later. • This emphasises the importance of good quality schooling in improving the overall skill level of the population in the long-run.
  29. 29. Mean numeracy proficiency in PISA and in the Survey of Adult Skills: PIAAC (PISA 2006 cohorts) and PISA 2006 [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELL…[CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE][CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] R² = 0.5138 200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 PIAAC numeracy score PISA 2006 mathematics score
  30. 30. PROFICIENCY AND AGE Proficiency is closely related to age • On average, proficiency is highest among adults aged around 30 years and is lowest among adults aged 60-65. • Proficiency tends to increase with age between the ages of 16 and 30-34 years • There are considerable variations in the age proficiency profiles between countries. These are likely to reflect the different historical patterns of educational expansion over time as well as changes in educational policies and quality between and within countries • The observed age-proficiency profiles are consistent with evidence regarding loss of cognitive ability with increasing age.
  31. 31. 150 170 190 210 230 250 270 290 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 Score Age OECD literacy Mexico literacy OECD numeracy Mexico numeracy Skill proficiency and age: Mexico
  32. 32. GENDER AND PROFICIENCY • In most countries, the difference between the literacy proficiency of men and women is negligible with a slight advantage for men. • In numeracy, the advantage for men over women is more marked. • In problem solving in TRE, differences between men and women are negligible with a slight advantage for men in some countries • Men’s advantage tends to increase with age.
  33. 33. Literacy score differences between men and women -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Turkey Chile Germany Netherlands Flanders(Belgium) Peru Norway Canada UnitedStates2012/2014 Singapore England(UK) NorthernIreland(UK) Australia Sweden Austria NewZealand Spain Japan Ireland Israel OECDaverage Mexico France Italy Denmark Korea Finland Ecuador CzechRepublic UnitedStates2017 Cyprus¹ Greece Estonia Slovenia Hungary SlovakRepublic Poland Lithuania Kazakhstan RussianFederation² Literacy (men - women) Numeracy (men - women) Advantage to women Advantage to men
  34. 34. -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 Israel RussianFederation² Italy Slovenia Estonia Poland Denmark Lithuania Greece UnitedStates2012/2014 Cyprus¹ NewZealand Singapore France Chile Australia Flanders(Belgium) Hungary OECDaverage Canada SlovakRepublic Netherlands Finland Sweden Norway Austria Ecuador UnitedStates2017 Peru Kazakhstan Korea Ireland Spain Mexico Turkey Japan England(UK) Germany CzechRepublic NorthernIreland(UK) 25-44 24 or less 45-65 Difference in literacy proficiency among men and women by age Advantage to men Advantage to women
  35. 35. PROFICIENCY AND IMMIGRATION BACKGROUND • In most, though not all, countries, native born adults tend to score higher in all the domains assessed than adults born in a country other than their country of residence. • With a few exceptions, immigrants who have lived in their country of residence for 5 years or more tend to score better than recent immigrants.
  36. 36. 150 170 190 210 230 250 270 290 NewZealand Hungary RussianFederation² SlovakRepublic NorthernIreland(UK) CzechRepublic Ireland Cyprus¹ Finland Canada England(UK) Estonia Norway Singapore Lithuania UnitedStates2017 OECDaverage Greece Netherlands Kazakhstan Austria Israel Sweden Flanders(Belgium) Germany Korea UnitedStates2012/2014 Denmark Spain Slovenia Italy France Chile In host country 5 or fewer years In host country more than 5 yearsScore Literacy proficiency among immigrants: length of stay in the country
  37. 37. PARENTAL EDUCATION AND PROFICIENCY • In all countries, there is a positive relationship between proficiency in literacy and numeracy and the educational attainment of parents • The strength of the relationship varies considerably between countries
  38. 38. Literacy proficiency by parental education 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 Ecuador Peru Chile Mexico Kazakhstan Turkey Greece Cyprus¹ Israel RussianFederation² Lithuania Spain Italy UnitedStates2017 Slovenia Ireland Canada Austria OECDaverage Germany Denmark Estonia UnitedStates2012/2014 Hungary Korea CzechRepublic Norway SlovakRepublic France Singapore Poland NorthernIreland(UK) England(UK) Sweden NewZealand Flanders(Belgium) Australia Netherlands Japan Finland Neither parent has attained upper secondary At least one parent has attained tertiary
  39. 39. Training Access to education and training, both general and job-related in positively related to literacy proficiency • Adults with higher levels of literacy tend to have higher participation rates • Norway and New Zealand stand out as countries in which access by adults with low levels of literacy is highest
  40. 40. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Singapore Denmark Chile Finland Sweden UnitedStates2012/2014 NewZealand Israel Netherlands Canada UnitedStates2017 Germany Spain Slovenia Australia Norway Korea Estonia Peru England(UK) Ireland NorthernIreland(UK) Austria OECDaverage CzechRepublic Mexico Hungary Flanders(Belgium) Poland France Lithuania SlovakRepublic Italy Japan Cyprus¹ Turkey Greece Kazakhstan RussianFederation² Ecuador Below level 1 and Level 1 Level 4 and 5% Participation in all education and training, by literacy level (Adults aged 25-65 years)
  41. 41. The intensity of use of information processing skills • The intensity of use of information-processing skills varies between countries • The intensity of the use of information processing skills is related to individual characteristics such as proficiency in literacy and numeracy, age, and educational attainment • Countries rank differently on the two dimensions of skills proficiency and skills use. • The intensity of numeracy at work is closely related to labour market outcomes (employment, wages etc)
  42. 42. Engagement in numeracy practices in everyday life and numeracy score [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELL… [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE][CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] R² = 0.2211 170 190 210 230 250 270 290 310 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 Numeracy proficiency Index of numeracy practices OECD average OECD average
  43. 43. Engagement in numeracy practices at work and numeracy score [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE][CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELL… [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] R² = 0.278 170 190 210 230 250 270 290 310 0.40 0.45 0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 Numeracy proficiency Index of numeracy practices OECD average OECD average
  44. 44. Determinants of engagement in numeracy practices in everyday life: OECD OLS coefficients -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 55-65 year-olds 16-24 year-olds Men Lower than upper secondary Tertiary education Literacy proficiency Numeracy proficiency Workers Students Unemployed and inactive %
  45. 45. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Reading Writing Numeracy ICT Problemsolving Firm size Occupation Industry High-performace work practices Skill proficiency Country fixed effects % of variance explained Explaining information-processing skills used at work
  46. 46. 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 Peru SlovakRepublic Lithuania Mexico Turkey Greece Japan Germany Ecuador Slovenia Chile Spain Kazakhstan Cyprus¹ Hungary Italy Poland France RussianFederation² OECDaverage CzechRepublic Austria Israel Korea Estonia Ireland Flanders(Belgium) Canada Singapore NorthernIreland(UK) Netherlands Denmark UnitedStates2017 England(UK) UnitedStates2012/2014 Australia Sweden Finland NewZealand Norway High likelihood of automation (>70%) Significant likelihood of automation (50-70%) Percentage of workers Likelihood of automation or significant change to jobs
  47. 47. Labour market and social outcomes • Better skilled workers are more likely to be employed (in some countries), earn higher wages (in most countries) and have better social outcomes (in most countries). • Workers who use their skills more frequently are also more likely to earn higher wages • Workers are mismatched if their skills do not match the job’s requirements • A large share of workers is mismatched by qualifications, by literacy proficiency or by field-of-study • Only workers mismatched by qualifications suffer a wage penalty
  48. 48. Effect of education and numeracy proficiency on the likelihood of being employed -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 RussianFederation² Peru Singapore Flanders(Belgium) Austria Ecuador Mexico Japan UnitedStates2017 Israel Greece Korea Kazakhstan Slovenia Australia Poland Hungary Norway France Chile Netherlands Denmark Canada OECDaverage Turkey Finland Ireland Estonia NorthernIreland(UK) CzechRepublic Germany Cyprus¹ Sweden NewZealand UnitedStates2012/2014 England(UK) Italy Lithuania SlovakRepublic Spain Years of education Numeracy score Statistically significant differences are marked in a darker tone Percentage-point change Marginal effects of a one standard deviation increase in years education and numeracy on the likelihood of being employed among adults not in formal education
  49. 49. Effect of education, numeracy proficiency and numeracy use at work on wages 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Greece Ecuador Italy Denmark CzechRepublic Sweden Turkey Finland Norway Korea Mexico Kazakhstan Austria France Netherlands Flanders(Belgium) UnitedStates2017 Poland Peru Cyprus¹ Lithuania Slovenia OECDaverage Spain Estonia Germany Australia NorthernIreland(UK) Ireland Japan NewZealand Canada Hungary SlovakRepublic Israel UnitedStates2012/2014 England(UK) Chile Singapore Years of education Numeracy Numeracy at work Statistically significant differences are marked in a darker tone % Percentage change in wages associated with a one standard deviation increase in years of education, proficiency in numeracy and numeracy use at work
  50. 50. 02040 Qualification mismatch% 02040 Literacy mismatch % 02040 SlovakRepublic Slovenia Turkey Poland Mexico Denmark CzechRepublic Flanders… Peru Singapore Finland Spain USA2017 Cyprus¹ Korea Hungary Netherlands USA2012/2014 Chile Greece Kazakhstan OECDaverage Germany Norway Austria Italy Ecuador Lithuania Northern… Russian… Estonia Japan Sweden Canada Israel Australia Field-of-study mismatch % Mismatched (over) Mismatched (under) Total mismatch Mismatch (percent of workers)
  51. 51. Effect of qualification, numeracy and field-of-study mismatch on wages -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 UnitedStates2017 Israel Peru Turkey Singapore Canada Japan UnitedStates2012/2014 Ireland NorthernIreland(UK) Estonia Cyprus¹ Mexico England(UK) Poland Kazakhstan Spain Chile Korea Greece Netherlands OECDaverage Slovenia Lithuania Denmark NewZealand Hungary Germany France CzechRepublic Finland Norway SlovakRepublic Austria Sweden Flanders(Belgium) Italy Ecuador Over-qualified Over-skilled Field of stud mismatched Statistically significant differences are marked in a darker tone % Percentage difference in wages between overqualified, overskilled or field-of-study mismatched workers and their well-matched counterparts
  52. 52. Data products Data Explorer Public Use Files (all countries except Australia) Background Questionnaire Codebook SAS and STATA tools IEA Data Analyser Technical Report Education and Skills On-line
  53. 53. Find Out More About PIAAC at: www.oecd.org/site/piaac All national and international publications The complete micro-level database Email edu.piaac@oecd.org Thank you

×