1

IASSIST, 2003T. Scott MurrayStatistics CanadaMay, 2003

Literacy and Numeracy:How does it add up?

2

Literacy and numeracy: Skills as modes of adult behavior:

Literacy is defined as the ability to understand and employ printed information in daily activities - at home, at work and in the community – to achieve one’s goals and to develop one’s knowledge and potential

IALS measured two forms of reading literacy:

Prose literacy: the knowledge and skills needed to understand anduse information from texts including editorials, news stories,brochures and instructional materials.

Document literacy: the knowledge and skills required to locate and use

information contained in various formats, including job applications,

payroll forms, transportation schedules, maps, tables and charts.

3

Literacy and numeracy: Skills and as modes of adult behavior (Cont’d):

Numeracy is defined as the knowledge and skills required to effectively manage the mathematical demands of diverse situations

The IALS study measured a sub-domain of numeracy: Quantitative literacy – the knowledge and skills

required to apply arithmetic operations, either alone or sequentially, to numbers embedded in printed

materials, such as balancing a cheque book, figuring out a tip, completing an order form or determining the amount

of interest on a loan from an advertisement.

4

Determinants of the Relative Difficulty of Adult Reading Tasks

Relative task difficulty depends upon:

Characteristics of Text

Readability e.g.

Vocabulary

Sentence length

Processes/Characteristics of the Task

Type of Match

Locate

Cycle

Integrate

Generate

Plausibility of distractors

Type of information

Formulate variables

Type of calculation

Operation specificity

5

Lifelong LearningLifelong Learning

... Learning is a lifelong process by which individuals acquire knowledge and skills that they use to adapt to the changing environment and for personal and societal benefit.

• Lifewide

• Lifelong

6

Birth Childhood Youth Adult Older Adult

RetirementFamily Schooling Work Parenting

Lifelong: Key Stages

7

Looking across the Looking across the lifecycle: what have we lifecycle: what have we

learned?learned?

8

ChildrenChildren

9

Outcomes - Not RiskOutcomes - Not Risk

• Development across ages

• Development across outcomes: learning and behaviour

10

VulnerabilityVulnerability

Vulnerable children have poor outcomes for theirage which jeopardize their future development.

The NLSCY index of vulnerability sets thresholds for learning and behaviour outcomes.

A child is considered vulnerable if one or more learning or behaviour outcome is below the threshold.

Children may experience short episodes orprolonged periods of vulnerability.

11

Behaviour and LearningBehaviour and LearningResults from the Vulnerability Index illustrate that...

72.4% of Canadian children aged 0-11 have no identifiable behaviour or learning problems.

27.6% have at least one identifiable learning or behavioural problem.

1.2 million children between the ages 0-11 nationwide were vulnerable in 1996.

Source: NLSCY, Cycle 2

At least one Learning orBehavioural Problem

72.4%

27.6%

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

No Problems

Vulnerability Status

Per

cen

tag

e o

f ch

ild

ren

ag

ed 0

-11

12

Vulnerable

1994 1996

71.1%

56.2%

71.9%

28.9% 28.1%

14.9%

15.7

%13.2%

Vulnerability Is Not a Permanent Vulnerability Is Not a Permanent State for Most ChildrenState for Most Children

Newly Vulnerable

Positive Development Resilient

Long term Vulnerable

Not Vulnerable

13

Children with persistent low learning scores have Children with persistent low learning scores have characteristics associated with disadvantagecharacteristics associated with disadvantage

28.7

21.7

10.9

48.1

19.3

17.6

13.1

42.9

25.7

59.9

28.8

28.3

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Highest income quartile

Lowest income quartile

Mother's education lessthan high school

Boys

One-parent family

Mother has highdepression score

Proportion of children (%)

Positive learning development Persistent low scores

Source : NLSCY, 1994-1995, 1996-1997, 1998-1999

14

Children Who are Read to More Often Children Who are Read to More Often Have Advanced Scores on the PPVTHave Advanced Scores on the PPVT

Does Reading to Your Child Help them Score higher on the PPVT?

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Once/week Few times/week Daily Many times/Day

How Often Parents or Another Adult Read to Their Child

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of

4-6

Ye

ar

Old

s

X² analysis - p < .001NLSCY cycle 3 data, 4-6 year olds

Score of 0-85 + delayed, 115- 160 = advanced

26%

6%

18%

10%

Advanced

Delayed

15-1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0

NLSCY - Grade 2

NLSCY - Grade 4

NLSCY - Grade 6

NLSCY - Grade 6

IALS - Youth Aged

16 to 25

TIMSS - Grade 7

TIMSS - Grade 8

SAIP93 - Age 13

SAIP97 - age 13

SAIP93 - Age 16

SAIP97 - Age 16

NF

NS

PE

NB

QU

ON

MN

SK

AB

BC

Figure 16-1. Inter-Provinicial Differences in Mathematics Scores

Years of Schooling

Provincial Differences in Mathematics Scores

Source: Vulnerable Children, J. D. Willms, UNB

16

The profile for Quebec shows that the high average level of reading performance achieved by Quebec students is not attributable to students in a few elite schools. Instead, Quebec’s success rests with it outstanding performance among schools serving students of average SES. There are a few schools of very low SES, and these tend to have relatively low school performance.

School Profile for Quebec

Source: J. D. Willms, UNB

17

The analysis of socioeconomic gradients (Figure 3) indicated that Ontario students scored well below their counterparts in Quebec and Alberta, across the full range of SES. The school profile above shows that the SES intake of most schools in Ontario is above the OECD mean. However, the majority of Ontario’s schools scored below the regression line, indicating that they were not performing as well as other Canadian schools with comparable student intake. Thus, Ontario’s relatively low overall performance is not attributable to a few low SES schools with low performance. Rather, it is associated with a more general pattern of slightly lower than expected performance among the majority of its schools.

School Profile for Ontario

Source: J. D. Willms, UNB

18

School Profile for Alberta

The relatively high performance of Alberta students is partially owing to its relatively high level of SES. The results in Tables 1 and 2 indicated that its mean score after adjusting for SES was about 535, similar to the Canadian average. This is reflected in its school profile as well. Most of the schools in Alberta serve a relatively advantaged population. Among these schools there are many that are performing well above norms, but there are others that have relatively low performance, given their SES intake.

Source: J. D. Willms, UNB

19

YouthYouth

20

Out of 38 countries, only 6 scored significantly higher than Out of 38 countries, only 6 scored significantly higher than Canada in Math and only 5 in Science -- TIMMS Grade 8Canada in Math and only 5 in Science -- TIMMS Grade 8

–Each of the provinces exceed the international average in Math and Science

–Significant improvement in Math and Science from 1995

–No gender difference in Math

–In 1999, advantage in Science favoured boys

–Quebec students excel in Math, significantly higher than Canadian average

–Alberta students excel in Science, significantly higher than Canadian average

21Source: Programme for International Student Assessment, 2000.

Canada rates near the top of the world in READING literacy

FinlandBritish ColumbiaQuebec

CanadaOntario

ManitobaSaskatchewanNew ZealandAustralia

IrelandKorea

United KingdomJapan

Nova ScotiaPrince Edward IslandNewfoundlandSweden

AustriaBelgium

IcelandNorwayFrance

United StatesNew Brunswick

DenmarkSwitzerland

SpainCzech Republic

ItalyGermanyLiechtenstein

HungaryPoland

GreecePortugal

Russian FederationLatvia

LuxembourgMexico

Brazil

Alberta

375 425 475 525 575

95% Confidence interval

Average score

Average reading score

22

17% of Canadian 15-year-olds are at level 5 Reading 17% of Canadian 15-year-olds are at level 5 Reading performance and less than 10% are at or below Level 1-- PISAperformance and less than 10% are at or below Level 1-- PISA

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Canada

FinlandJ apan

Australia

United Kingdom

Sweden

BelgiumFrance

United States

Switzerland

I taly

Germany

Russian Federation

Mexico

Level 5

Level 4

Level 3

Level 2

Level 1

Below Level 1

23

Socio-economic Gradients of G8 Countries Socio-economic Gradients of G8 Countries and Finland, PISA READINGand Finland, PISA READING

24

Factors important to PISA reading performanceFactors important to PISA reading performance

– Number of books at home

– Participation in cultural activities

– Cultural or academic interactions with parents

– Even when we control for SES

– From YITS: parental education expectations

Home Environment

Individual Characteristics

– Gender

– Reading enjoyment

– Student career expectations

– From YITS: Student education expectations

25

More variation in student reading performance More variation in student reading performance

within than between schoolswithin than between schools

- 100

- 80

- 60

- 40

- 20

0

20

40

60

80

100

Belg

ium

Ger

man

y

Hun

gary

Aus

tria

Pola

nd

Gre

ece

Czec

h Re

publ

ic

Ital

y

Sw

itze

rlan

d

Mex

ico

Port

ugal

Japa

n

Uni

ted

Sta

tes

Luxe

mbo

urg

Uni

ted

King

dom

Aus

tral

ia

New

Zea

land

Kore

a

Den

mar

k

Irel

and

Cana

da

Spa

in

Nor

way

Finl

and

Sw

eden

Icel

and

Variation of performance

between schools

Variation of performance within

schools

Variation explained by institutional structures

26

300 400 500 600 700 800

Reading achievement Reading achievement

Pro

po

rtio

n o

f p

op

ula

tio

n

Pro

po

rtio

n o

f p

op

ula

tio

n

Public

Private

Private

Public

The apparent private

school advantage

After controlling for parental SES-private

school advantage disappears

400 500 600 700300

27

Effects on PSE attendance associated with youth’s age, sex, parental education, and literacy scores:

International Adult Literacy Study, 1994

Source: J. D. Willms, UNB

Odds RatioAge of respondent (years) 1.46

Respondent is female 1.81

At least one parent completed university 1.81

Prose Literacy Score at Levels 1 or 2 0.09

Prose literacy Score at Level 3 0.45

Prose literacy Score at Level 5 2.20

Respondent’s quantitative literacy score is highrelative to his or her prose literacy score 1.45

28

29

30

Document literacy levels among low educated adults

Per cent of population aged 16-65 who have not completed upper secondary education but who score at Levels 3 and 4/5 on the document scale, 1994-1998

Countries are ranked by the proportion of the population without upper secondary graduation who are at Levels 3 and 4/5Source: International Adult Literacy Survey, 1994-1998.

31

When comparing Youth (16-25) to older generation (46-55)

Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 3/4

32

0 10 20 30 40 50

Canada

Finland

United Kingdom

Norway

New Zealand

Australia

United States

Ireland

P ortugal

Hungary

Denmark

Slovenia

Netherlands

Belgium (Flanders)

Switzerland

Sweden

Chile

Czech Republic

Germany

P oland

Educational attainmentLiteracy proficiencyExperience

Standardised regression w eights x 100

Earnings and literacy proficiency, controlling for education and labour force experience

Countries are ranked by the magnitude of the effect parameter associated with educational attainment.

33

Odds of participating in employer-sponsored adult education and training, by document literacy levels and by extent of literacy engagement at work, population aged 25-65, 1994-1998

Likelihood of receiving employer support for training

Countries are ranked by the odds of the 4th quartile. The statistical difference to the United States is computed for the 4th quartile.Note: Statistical difference is significant at p < .05.Source: International Adult Literacy Survey, 1994-1998. Adult Education Participation in North America: International Perspectives.

34

Likelihood of receiving employer support for trainingOdds of participating in employer-sponsored adult education and training, by document literacy levels and by extent of literacy engagement at work, population aged 25-65, 1994-1998

Countries are ranked by the odds of the 4th quartile. The statistical difference to the United States is computed for the 4th quartile.Note: Statistical difference is significant at p < .05.Source: International Adult Literacy Survey, 1994-1998. Adult Education Participation in North America: International Perspectives.

35

Prose Literacy by Age: Canada

180

200

220

240

260

280

300

320

340

360

18 28 38 48 58 68 78

Age (years)

Pro

se L

itera

cy

Postsecondary graduates

All adults

Non-postsecondary graduates

36

A reconciliation of PISA and IALS scales:Percentile distributions and Levels

Percentiles

225

275

325

Level 5Level 4

Level 3

Level 4

Level 3

100

80

60

40

Level 2

480

552

625

335

407

800

375

Level 2

Level 1

Below Level 1

20

0

396

459

529

Mean535

329

703648

593

Prose IALS PISA

Mean285

234209

257

283

354330

308

500

Level 1

37

Percentage at Proficiency Levels for Canada: on IALS Scales

43.7

60.7 63.656.3

39.3 36.4

60

40

20

0

20

40

60

80

Pisa 2000:

Age 15

IALS 1994:

Age 16-25

IALS 1994:

Age 26-65

Levels 3 and 4/5

Levels 1 and 2

Percentage

38

What we will soon know

From YITS/PISA: How PSE access and

persistence are conditioned on literacy skill?

From IALS/ALL: How rapidly are skill profiles evolving?

From ALL Level 1 Study: What are the component

reading skills of level 1

respondents

From WES-Skill How literacy interacts with

firm characteristics

From ALL: Tools for individuals

diagnosis and PDQ locator test and full test placement

From ALL: Small area estimates for CSDS + FEDS

39

• Library use is highly conditioned on literacy i.e. non-users have very low skills

• There is little difference in literacy between occasional library users and frequent library users