Adults on 'Literacy Level One' and their Participation in Adult Education (PIAAC Database)

Author(s):

Anke Grotlueschen(presenting / submitting)

Conference:

ECER 2015

Network:

09. Assessment, Evaluation, Testing and Measurement

Format:

Paper

Session Information

09 SES 03 B, Investigating Adolescent and Adult Competencies in Their Relations to Educational Participation and Transition

Paper Session

Time:

2015-09-08

17:15-18:45

Room:

328. [Main]

Chair:

Jana Strakova

Contribution

More than a hundred years of adult educational research point at a double selectivity: The repeated pattern says that those people who already reached higher educational degrees, are the most likely to participate in adult and further education. This is confirmed via the European Adult Education Survey AES that is repeated every three to five years (Bilger 2013). The pattern is also well-known since the International Adult Literacy Survey (OECD und Statistics Canada 2000) and its successors, for adult education see especially the works by Desjardins and Rubenson. (Desjardins und Rubenson 2013).

The German Level One Survey (Grotlüschen und Riekmann 2012) found that about 28% of the low performers participate in non-formal adult education, compared to some 47% of the German population as a whole. The most widespread theoretical explanation for this situation refers to Pierre Bourdieus field theory (Bourdieu 1982) as well as Michael Vesters term 'Milieu' (Vester et al. 2001) and uses it in a more recent adaptation for adult education by Heiner Barz and Rudolf Tippelt (Barz und Tippelt 2004). The core assumption says that habits are different according to social class and lifestyle and thus influence the choice of educational activities of high skilled or low skilled subpopulations.

But adult education is more than classical learning in courses and the selectivity of supply formats might differ. With the paradigm shift from adult education towards lifelong learning, the European Commission launched a Memorandum that offers a wider approach towards learning (o.A. 2000). This paper is said to have a too narrow focus onto employability while the UNESCO white papers on lifelong lfocus citizenship as well (UNESCO 2009). The supranational institutions agree that not only institutionalized procedures shape the learning environment, but self-directed or informal learning as well play a fundamental role in lifelong learning. Meanwhile, the European Commission and Eurostat defined non-formal, formal and informal learning (European Commission/Eurostat (2006)). Two core research questions arise now:

Which intra-national differences arise between high performers and low performers with regard to formal, non-formal and informal adult education?

Which international differences arise between high performers and low performers with regard to formal, non-formal and informal adult education?

Both questions can be addressed with the PIAAC large scale assessment database, published by the OECD in 2013.

Method

The PIAAC (OECD 2013) database is used for descriptive analyses about forms of learning and cross-country differences. It offers proficiency data in three subdomains as well as background questions on skills use and job requirements. Socio-demographic variables are also available. This analysis focuses the subpopulation of low skilled people, defined as performing on PIAAC Literacy level 1 and below. PIAAC uses Item Response Theory with ten plausible values per person and domain. The samples are weighted. These characteristics lead to the need of special software packages such as the IDB analyzer for SPSS and the ‘repest piaac’ macro for Stata. The latter is especially relevant when computing analyses’ within the subpopulation of level 1 and below. The participation rates for formal, non-formal and informal learning and adult education are the most widespread indicators that are used for comparison intra- and inter-nationally. These indicators have been published by OECD for the whole populations of the participating countries. Bud participation rates for the subgroup of level 1 and below are not yet published, but they are required by policy makers. The cross-country and cross-proficiency comparisons prove to be important markers for policy makers. The analyses are descriptive and lay the ground for further multivariate analyses. We do not claim causality – this would require controls like formal education and home language. The analysis aims at describing the subpopulations as they currently exist and it aims at showing which kinds of training are more attractive than others. This does not even mean that the training format itself is the reason for being attractive: The reasons will be located elsewhere, i.e. in the type of employment.

Expected Outcomes

Findings: Cross-country differences are substantial and intra-national differences confirm the so-called Mathew Effect (to him that has shall more be given). For the low skilled subpopulation, formal adult education is more selective than non-formal adult education. Participation rates show that training and seminars are easier to access than open and distance learning or private lessons. For the low skilled subpopulation, learning at work is less selective than non-formal and informal learning. At a first glance, this contradicts earlier research (i.e. via the Berichtssystem Weiterbildung), but sampling and definitions are different in both surveys. A second glance shows that lower selectivity of learning at work depends on the type of learning and implies that employment itself causes learning. Reasons for learning in this subpopulation are vastly located within work life. But fear of unemployment is not a reason for learning.

References

Literaturverzeichnis Barz, Heiner; Tippelt, Rudolf (Hg.) (2004): Weiterbildung und soziale Milieus in Deutschland. Band 1. Praxishandbuch Milieumarketing. Bielefeld: Bertelsmann. Bilger, Frauke (Hg.) (2013): Weiterbildungsverhalten in Deutschland. Resultate des Adult Education Survey 2012. Bielefeld: wbv (Theorie und Praxis der Erwachsenenbildung). Bourdieu, Pierre (1982): Die feinen Unterschiede. Kritik der gesellschaftlichen Urteilskraft. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp (suhrkamp taschenbuch wissenschaft). Desjardins, Richard; Rubenson, Kjell (2013): Participation Patterns in Adult Education: the role of institutions and public policy frameworks in resolving coordination problems. In: European journal of education 48 (2), S. 262–280. DOI: 10.1111/ejed.12029. European Commission/Eurostat (2006): Classification of Learning Activities. Manual. Luxemburg. Online verfügbar unter http://www.uis.unesco.org/StatisticalCapacityBuilding/Workshop%20Documents/Education%20workshop%20dox/2010%20ISCED%20TAP%20IV%20Montreal/NFE_CLA_Eurostat_EN.pdf. Grotlüschen, Anke; Riekmann, Wibke (Hg.) (2012): Funktionaler Analphabetismus in Deutschland. Ergebnisse der ersten leo. - Level-One Studie. Münster, Westf: Waxmann (Alphabetisierung und Grundbildung, 10). Online verfügbar unter http://blogs.epb.uni-hamburg.de/leo/?cat=505. o.A. (2000): Memorandum über Lebenslanges Lernen. Arbeitsdokument der Kommissionsdienststellen. Kommission der Europäischen Gemeinschaften. Brüssel. OECD (2013): OECD Skills Outlook 2013: First Results from the Survey of Adult Skills: OECD Publishing. OECD; Statistics Canada (2000): Literacy in the Information Age. Final Report of the International Adult Literacy Survey. Paris. UNESCO (2009): Harnessing the power and potential of adult learning and education for a viable future. Belém Framework for Action, zuletzt geprüft am 14.01.2014. Vester, Michael; Oertzen, Peter von; Geiling, Heiko u.a. (2001): Soziale Milieus im gesellschaftlichen Strukturwandel. Zwischen Integration und Ausgrenzung. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

Author Information

Anke Grotlueschen (presenting / submitting)

Hamburg University

Hamburg

Search the ECER Programme

Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
Search for authors and in the respective field.
For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.