pp 1–13 | Cite as

Low-numerate adults, motivational factors in learning, and their employment, education and training status in Germany, the US, and South Korea

  • Huacong LiuEmail author
Original Article


Drawing on the PIAAC data, in this paper I examine how motivational factors such as motivation to learn and grit are related to low-numerate adults’ employment status and their actual participation in lifelong learning in Germany, the United States and South Korea. In particular, the study uses PIAAC self-reported data on the degree to which the respondent “likes learning new things”, and “likes to get to the bottom of difficult things” as proxies of motivational factors in adult learning. Findings show that across three countries both motivation to learn and grit have independent relationships with adults’ employment status and actual participation in adult learning. Considering that low-skilled adults are the ones who need further learning the most, yet are repeatedly reported to have the lowest rate of participation in further learning, these findings highlight the motivational factors in adult learning. They also suggest that motivation to learn and grit may mitigate the disadvantages that ‘vulnerable’ adults experience due to low numeracy skills. Implications for mathematics educators and adult education research are discussed.


Low numeracy skills Motivational factors Adult education and learning PIAAC 



  1. Attanasio, O. P., Blundell, R. W., Conti, G., & Mason, G. (2018). Inequality in socioemotional skills: A cross-cohort comparison (No. W18/22). IFS Working Papers.Google Scholar
  2. Avvisati, F., & Keslair, F. (2014). REPEST: Stata module to run estimations with weighted replicate samples and plausible values. Statistical Software Components S457918, Boston College Department of Economics.Google Scholar
  3. BMBF. (2018). Weiterbildungsverhalten in Deutschland 2018. Ergebnisse des Adult Education Survey (AES). Bonn. Retrieved from
  4. Buff, A., Reusser, K., & Dinkelmann, I. (2017). Parental support and enjoyment of learning in mathematics: does change in parental support predict change in enjoyment of learning? ZDM Mathematics Education. Scholar
  5. Bynner, J., & Parsons, S. (2006). New light on literacy and numeracy. London: National Research and Development centre for adult literacy and numeracy.Google Scholar
  6. Cambria, J., Brandt, H., Nagengast, B., & Trautwein, U. (2017). Frame of Reference effects on values in mathematics: Evidence from German secondary school students. ZDM Mathematics Education. Scholar
  7. Coben, D. (2000). Numeracy, mathematics, and adult learning. In I. Gal (Ed.), Adult numeracy development: Theory, research, practice (pp. 33–50). Cresskill: Hampton Press.Google Scholar
  8. Coben, D. (2002). Mathematics or common sense? Researching ‘invisible’ mathematics through adults’ mathematics life histories. In D. Coben, J. O’Donoghue, & G. E. FitzSimons (Eds.), Perspectives on adults learning mathematics: Research and practice (pp. 53–65). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Condelli, L., Safford-Ramus, K., Sherman, R., Coben, D., Gal, I., & Hector-Mason, A. (2006). A review of the literature in adult numeracy: research and conceptual issues. (Prepared by American Institutes for Research for the Adult Numeracy Initiative of the US. Department of Education, Office of Vocational and Adult Education). Retrieved from
  10. Crittenden, A. H. (2000). A case study of the perception of the development and transfer of work related mathematical concepts to personal finance management for women in a remedial mathematics class. Dissertation Abstracts International, 61 (09), 3437A. (UMI No. 9986406).Google Scholar
  11. Cunha, F., Heckman, J. J., Lochner, L., & Masterov, D. V. (2006). Interpreting the evidence on life cycle skill formation. Handbook of the Economics of Education,1, 697–812.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Deming, D. J. (2017). The growing importance of social skills in the labor market. The Quarterly Journal of Economics,132(4), 1593–1640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS). (2012). 2011 Skills for Life survey: A survey of literacy, numeracy and ICT levels in England. London (BIS Research Paper, 81). Retrieved from
  14. Desjardins, R. (2013). The economics of adult education: A critical assessment of the state of investment in adult education. Adult learning in a precarious age. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  15. Duckworth, A. L., Peterson, C., Matthews, M. D., & Kelly, D. R. (2007). Grit: Perseverance and passion for long-term goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,9, 1087–1101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Espinoza, R., Sarzosa, M., Urzúa, S., & Miyamoto, K. (2014). The causal effect of skills: An international study (pp. 1–53). Maryland: University of Maryland.Google Scholar
  17. FitzSimons, G. E., & Coben, D. (2009). Adult numeracy for work and life: Curriculum and teaching implications of recent research. In R. Maclean & D. Wilson (Eds.), International handbook of education for the changing world of work: Bridging academic and vocational learning: 1–6 (pp. 2731–2745). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Frenzel, A. C., Goetz, T., Ludtke, O., Pekrun, R., & Sutton, R. E. (2009). Emotional transmission in the classroom: Exploring the relationship between teacher and student enjoyment. Journal of Educational Psychology,101(3), 705–716.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gal, I. (2002). Adults’ statistical literacy: Meanings, components, responsibilities. International Statistical Review,70(1), 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gal, I., Alatorre, S., Close, S., Evans, J., Johansen, L., Maguire, T. et al. (2009). PIAAC Numeracy. A conceptual framework. OECD Education Working Paper No. 35. Paris: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
  21. Gal, I., Grotlüschen, A., Tout, D., Kaiser, G. (2020). Numeracy, adult education, and ‘vulnerable’ learners: A critical review of a neglected field. ZDM Mathematics Education, 52(2).Google Scholar
  22. Gal, I., van Groenestijn, M., Manly, M., Schmitt, M. J., & Tout, D. (2005). Adult numeracy and its assessment in the ALL survey: A conceptual framework and pilot results. In T. S. Murray, Y. Clermont, & M. Binkley (Eds.), Measuring adult literacy and life skills: New frameworks for assessment (pp. 137–191). Ottawa: Statistics Canada.Google Scholar
  23. Gorges, J., Maehler, D. B., Koch, T., & Offerhaus, J. (2016). Who likes to learn new things: Measuring adult motivation to learn with PIAAC data from 21 countries. Large-scale Assessments in Education,4(1), 9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Grotlüschen, A., & Bonna F. (2008). German-language literature review. In Teaching, learning and assessment for adults: Improving foundation skills. OECD Publishing. Retrieved from
  25. Grotlüschen, A., Buddeberg, K., Dutz, G., Heilmann, L., Stammer, C. (2019a). LEO 2018Living with low literacy. Press brochure, Hamburg.
  26. Grotlüschen, A., Buddeberg, K., Redmer, A., Ansen, H., & Dannath, J. (2019b). Vulnerable subgroups and numeracy practices: How poverty, debt, and unemployment relate to everyday numeracy practices. Adult Education Quarterly. Scholar
  27. Grotlüschen, A., Mallows, D., Reder, S., & Sabatini, J. (2016). Adults with low proficiency in literacy or numeracy. OECD Education Working Papers, No. 131, OECD Publishing, Paris,
  28. Guerra, N., Modecki, K., & Cunningham, W. (2014). Developing social-emotional skills for the labor market: The PRACTICE model. The World Bank.Google Scholar
  29. Guglielmino, P. J., & Guglielmino, L. M. (2011). An exploration of cultural dimensions and economic indicators as predictors of self-directed learning readiness. International Journal of Self-Directed Learning,8(1), 29–45.Google Scholar
  30. Guglielmino, P. J., Guglielmino, L. M., & Long, H. B. (1987). Self-directed learning readiness and performance in the workplace. Higher Education,16(3), 303–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hodgen, J., Coben, D., & Rhodes, V. (2010). Feedback, talk and engaging with learners: Formative assessment in adult numeracy. London: National Research and Development Centre for Adult Literacy and Numeracy.Google Scholar
  32. John, O. P., & Srivastava, S. (1999). The Big-Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. In L. A. Pervin & O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (Vol. 2, pp. 102–138). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  33. Jonas, N. (2012). In the most recent birth cohorts, adults have fewer difficulties in writing, but greater ones in arithmetic. INSEE PREMIERE, No 1426. Paris. Retrieved from
  34. Kautz, T., Heckman, J. J., Diris, R., Ter Weel, B., & Borghans, L. (2014). Fostering and measuring skills: Improving cognitive and non-cognitive skills to promote lifetime success (No. w20749). Cambridge: National Bureau of Economic Research.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kibum, K., Jiwon, P., & Soo-yong, B. (2019). Gender, nonformal learning, and earnings in South Korea. Journal of Comparative and International Education. Scholar
  36. Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2015). The adult learner (8th ed.). Oxford: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  37. Krapp, A. (2005). Basic needs and the development of interest and intrinsic motivational orientations. Learning and Instruction,15, 381–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Liu, H., Fernandez, F., & Grotlüschen, A. (2019). Examining self-directedness and its relationships with lifelong learning and earnings in Yunnan, Vietnam, Germany, and the United States. International Journal of Educational Development,70, 102088.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Maguire, T., & O’Donoghue, J. (2002). A grounded approach to practitioner training in Ireland: Some findings from a national survey of practitioners in Adult Basic Education. In: L. Ø.Johansen & T. Wedege (Eds.), Numeracy for empowerment and democracy? Proceedings of the 8th International Conference of Adult Learning MathematicsA Research Forum (ALM8) (pp. 120–132). Roskilde, Denmark, Roskilde University, Centre for Research in Learning Mathematics. Hent, UK: Avanti Books.Google Scholar
  40. Marcou, A., & Lerman, S. (2007). Changes in students’ motivational beliefs and performance in a self-regulated mathematical problem-solving environment (pp. 288–297). Cyprus: CERME 5.Google Scholar
  41. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2011). Literacy for life: Further results from the Adult Literacy and Life Skills Survey. Paris: OECD Publishing. Scholar
  42. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2016a). Skills matter: Further results from the survey of adult skills. Paris: OECD Skills Studies, OECD Publishing. Scholar
  43. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2016b). Technical report of the survey of adult skills (PIAAC) (2nd ed.). Paris: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
  44. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2019a). Getting skills right: Future-ready adult learning systems. Paris: OECD Publishing. Scholar
  45. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2019b). The use of test scores in secondary analysis A dialogue between data users and data producers. OECD PIAAC Methodological Seminar, Paris.
  46. Paccagnella, M. (2016). Literacy and numeracy proficiency in IALS, ALL and PIAAC, OECD Education Working Papers, No. 142, OECD Publishing, Paris,
  47. Perels, F., Gürtler, T., & Schmitz, B. (2005). Training of self-regulatory and problem-solving competence. Learning and Instruction,15, 123–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Rammstedt, B., & John, O. P. (2007). Measuring personality in one minute or less: A 10-item short version of the big five inventory in English and German. Journal of Research in Personality,41(1), 203–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Reder, S. (2008). The development of literacy and numeracy in adult life. In S. Reder & J. Bynner (Eds.), Tracking adult literacy and numeracy skills: Findings from Longitudinal Research (pp. 79–104). New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Rubin, D. B. (1987). Multiple imputation for nonresponse in surveys. New York: John Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Schooler, C., & Schoenbach, C. (1994). Social class, occupational status, occupational self-direction, and job income: A cross-national examination. Sociological Forum,9(3), 431–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Schukajlow, S., & Krug, A. (2012). Effects of treating multiple solutions on students’ self-regulation, self-efficacy and value. In: T. Y. Tso (Ed.), Proceedings of the 36th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. Taipei: PME, pp.59–66.Google Scholar
  53. Schukajlow, S., Rakoczy, K., & Pekrun, R. (2017). Emotions and motivation in mathematics education: Theoretical considerations and empirical contributions. ZDM Mathematics Education,49(3), 307–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Swain, J., Baker, E., Holder, D., Newmarch, B., & Coben, D. (2005). ‘Beyond the daily application’: Making numeracy teaching meaningful to adult learners. London: National Research and Development Centre for Adult Literacy and Numeracy.Google Scholar
  55. von Davier, M., Gonzalez, E., & Mislevy, R. (2009). What are plausible values and why are they useful. IERI Monograph Series,2(1), 9–36.Google Scholar
  56. Whitten, D. R. (2018). Understanding the beliefs and behaviours of low-skilled adults as they re-engage with mathematics. Doctoral dissertation, The University of Waikato.Google Scholar
  57. Yamamoto, K., Khorramdel, L., Davier, M. (2013). Scaling PIAAC cognitive data. In: OECD (Ed.), Technical report of the survey of adult skills PIAAC. OECD, Paris, pp. 1–33.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© FIZ Karlsruhe 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of HamburgHamburgGermany

Personalised recommendations