Evolution of adult numeracy from quantitative literacy to numeracy: Lessons learned from international assessments

Abstract

Historically, numeracy has tended to be forgotten and overlooked in adult education, especially compared to literacy. Yet evidence exists to show that numeracy should be made a priority, and that building the foundational numeracy skills of young people and adults is vital for their well-being in work and life in the 21st century. In the past three decades, there has been an increasing awareness of the role and importance of mathematics and numeracy skills in adult life. This concerns every adult as an individual, as a member of society and as a worker, and how proficiency in these areas is critical in underpinning the skills necessary to negotiate the challenges of 21st-century life. This article describes how this growing understanding and awareness of numeracy has been enhanced through the evolution of the assessment of numeracy in international adult skills surveys. It began with the International Adult Literacy Survey (IALS) in the 1990s, continued with the Adult Literacy and Lifeskills (ALL) survey in the mid-2000s, and in 2011 finally led to the Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies (PIAAC). The latter’s second cycle is due to start collecting data in 2021–2022 and the results are due to be published in 2023. The development and ongoing refinement of the theoretical frameworks and constructs that underpin these programmes and the assessments themselves, alongside the research based on the rich data of empirical and background information emerging from these surveys, have contributed significantly to our knowledge and understanding of numeracy in people’s lives.

Résumé

Évolution de l’apprentissage du calcul, de la littératie quantitative à la numératie : les enseignements des évaluations internationales – Historiquement, l’éducation des adultes a eu tendance à oublier et à négliger l’apprentissage du calcul, par rapport à l’alphabétisation notamment. Toutefois, certains éléments prouvent qu’il faudrait faire de l’apprentissage du calcul une priorité et qu’au 21e siècle, il est crucial de développer les compétences arithmétiques de base des jeunes et des adultes pour leur bien-être professionnel et privé. Ces trois dernières décennies, on s’est de plus en plus rendu compte du rôle et de l’importance des compétences mathématiques et arithmétiques à l’âge adulte. Ceci s’applique à tous les adultes en tant qu’individus, membres de la société et travailleurs, et à la mesure dans laquelle la maîtrise de ces disciplines est essentielle comme base des compétences nécessaires pour faire face aux défis de la vie au 21e siècle. Cet article décrit comment la compréhension et la sensibilisation croissantes à l’égard de l’apprentissage du calcul se sont améliorées grâce à l’évolution de l’évaluation de la numératie dans les enquêtes internationales sur les compétences des adultes, ce qui a commencé avec l’Enquête internationale sur l’alphabétisation des adultes (EIAA) dans les années 90, avant de continuer à la moitié des années 2000 avec l’Enquête sur l’alphabétisation et l’autonomie fonctionnelle des adultes (ALL) avant de conduire enfin en 2011 au Programme pour l’évaluation internationale des compétences des adultes (PIAAC). Le second volet de ce dernier doit démarrer en 2021-2022 avec la collecte de données, la publication des résultats étant prévue pour 2023. Le développement et le perfectionnement constant des cadres et structures théoriques qui sous-tendent ces programmes et les évaluations elles-mêmes, au même titre que les recherches s’appuyant sur des informations empiriques et contextuelles émergeant de ces enquêtes, ont considérablement enrichi notre connaissance et notre compréhension de l’apprentissage du calcul dans la vie des gens.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Figure 1
Figure 2

Notes

  1. 1.

    A resolution adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1987 (UN 1987) proclaimed 1990 as International Literacy Year (ILY). The purpose of ILY was to raise public awareness of low literacy rates worldwide, especially among girls and women. In a call for action, all Member States were invited to ensure adequate nationwide preparation to contribute to the success of ILY, which “got things moving” (Ryan 1990, p. 12).

  2. 2.

    In a nutshell, the conceptual framework of the new literacy studies (NLS) recognises the existence of multiple “literacies” and literacy practices which occur in different contexts (e.g. the home, the workplace, the market, the bank, in hospital etc.) and cultural environments.

  3. 3.

    IALS is omitted here because, as discussed later in this article, it did not include the construct of “numeracy”.

  4. 4.

    PIAAC’s three main components are (1) direct assessment; (2) a module on skills use; and (3) a background questionnaire. The direct assessment in turn has four components (reading, writing, reading components and problem-solving in technology-rich environments). The module on skills use also has four components (cognitive skills, interaction and social skills, physical skills and learning skills). Finally, the background questionnaire collects data on five background factors (demographic characteristics, education and training, social and linguistic background, employment status and income, and use of ICTs and literacy and numeracy practices).

  5. 5.

    Test items in international surveys are constructed to include a stimulus (e.g. a picture) as well as a question. These stimuli are taken from real-life materials used in a range of contexts or situations in everyday life, at work etc.

  6. 6.

    Psychometrics refers to the field of mathematics that is concerned with the statistical description and analysis of data as variables and with the statistical description of the relationships between variables. IRT refers to the design, analysis and scoring of tests, and is based on the relationship between individuals’ performance on a test item and their overall levels of performance as a measure of their ability. For more details, see OECD (2016b).

  7. 7.

    To equate scores across different assessments there need to be psychometric links between the assessments – so a significant proportion of the test questions have to be common to the different assessments. In testing jargon, these questions are called “link” or “anchor” questions.

  8. 8.

    PIAAC Cycle 1 was conducted in three rounds (in 24 + 9 + 6 countries/economies) between 2011 and 2017. Cycle 2 is due to start collecting data in 2021–2022 and the results due to be published in 2023.

  9. 9.

    PIAAC uses a total of 6 levels, starting with low proficiency at “below Level 1” and ending with high proficiency at “Level 5”.

  10. 10.

    Industry 4.0 refers to the fourth industrial revolution, which connects the physical with the digital. Gig economy refers to “a labour market characterized by the prevalence of short-term contracts or freelance work as opposed to permanent jobs” (OUP n.d.).

  11. 11.

    For more information about the 6th PIAAC International Conference held 28–29 January 2020 in Rome, Italy, visit http://www.piaacconference2020.org/ [accessed 19 March 2020].

  12. 12.

    The Reading Components test set, a PIAAC add-on, assesses adults’ proficiency in print vocabulary (word meaning), sentence processing and passage comprehension (see Grotlüschen et al. 2020 in this issue).

  13. 13.

    The term “number sense” refers to a person’s general understanding of different types of numbers and arithmetic operations, and it involves an understanding to be able to make decisions and solve problems using numbers in flexible ways in different contexts.

References

  1. AAMT & AiGroup (Australian Association of Mathematics Teachers and Australian Industry Group). (2014). Tackling the school–industry mathematics divide. Canberra, ACT: Commonwealth of Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Addey, C., & Sellar. S. E. (2019). Is it worth it? Rationales for (non)participation in international large-scale learning assessments. Education Research and Foresight Working Papers Series, No. 24. ED-2019/WP/2. Paris: UNESCO. Retrieved 2 March 2020 from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000368421/PDF/368421eng.pdf.multi.

  3. Baker, D., & Street, B. (1994). Literacy and numeracy: Concepts and definitions. In T. Husen & E. A. Postlethwaite (Eds.), Encyclopedia of education (Vol. 6, pp. 3453–3459). NY: Pergamon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Barton, D., & Hamilton, M. (2003 [2000]). Literacy practices. In David Barton (Ed.), Situated literacies. Reading and writing in context (pp. 1–6). London: Routledge.

  5. Binkley, M., Erstad, O., Herman, J., Raizen, S., Ripley, M., Miller-Ricci, M., et al. (2012). Defining twenty-first century skills. In P. Griffin, B. McGaw, & E. Care (Eds.), Assessment and Teaching of 21st Century Skills (pp. 17–66). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  6. 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. Washington DC: American Institutes for Research. Retrieved 2 March 2020 from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED495456.pdf.

  7. FYA (Foundation for Young Australians) (2017). The New Basics: Big data reveals the skills young people need for the New Work Order. Melbourne VIC: Foundation for Young Australians. Retrieved 3 March 2020 from https://www.fya.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/The-New-Basics_Update_Web.pdf.

  8. Evans, J., Yasukawa, K., Mallows, D., & Creese, B. (2017). Numerical skills and the numerate environment: Affordances and demands. Adults Learning Mathematics, 12(1), 17–26.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Gal, I. (2016). Assessment of adult numeracy skills. Background paper commissioned for the UNESCO Global Education Monitoring Report 2016. Report number: ED/GEMR/MRT/2016/P1/8 REV, Paris: UNESCO. Retrieved 3 March 2020 from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000245573.

  10. 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 Murray, S. T., Clermont, Y., & Binkley, M. (Eds), Measuring adult literacy and life skills: New frameworks for assessment (pp. 137–191). Ottawa, ON: Statistics Canada. Retrieved 3 March 2020 from https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/en/pub/89-552-m/89-552-m2005013-eng.pdf?st=JBzir8Ag.

  11. Geiger, V., Goos, M., & Forgasz, H. (2015). A rich interpretation of numeracy for the 21st century: A survey of the state of the field. ZDM Mathematics Education, 47(4), 531–548.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Griffin, P., McGaw, B., & Care, E. (Eds.). (2012). Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Grotlüschen, A., Mallows, D., Reder, S., & Sabatini, J. (2016). Adults with low proficiency in literacy or numeracy. OECD Education Working Papers, No. 131, EDU/WKP(2016)5. Paris: OECD Publishing. Retrieved 3 March 2020 from https://doi.org/10.1787/5jm0v44bnmnx-en.

  14. Grotlüschen, A., Nienkemper, B., & Duncker-Euringer, C. (2020). International assessment of low reading proficiency in the adult population: A question of components or lower rungs? International Review of Education, online first. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11159-020-09829-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Hamilton, M., Maddox, B., & Addey, C. (Eds.). (2015). Literacy as numbers: Researching the politics and practices of international literary assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Hoogland, K., de Koning, J., Bakker, A., Pepin, B. E. U., & Gravemeijer, K. (2018). Changing representation in contextual mathematical problems from descriptive to depictive: The effect on students’ performance. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 58, 122–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Hoyles, C., Noss, R., Kent, P., & Bakker, A. (2010). Improving mathematics at work: The need for techno-mathematical literacies. London and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Hoyles, C., Wolf, A., Molyneux-Hodson, S., & Kent, P. (2002). Mathematical skills in the workplace. Final report to the Science, Technology and Mathematics Council. London: Institute of Education, University of London. Retrieved 3 March 2020 from https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/1515581/1/Hoyles2002MathematicalSkills.pdf.

  19. Jonas, N. (2018). Numeracy practices and numeracy skills among adults. OECD Education Working Papers, No. 177. EDU/WKP(2018)13. Paris: OECD Publishing. Retrieved 3 March 2020 from http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/8f19fc9f-en.

  20. Jorgensen, R. (2011). Young workers and their dispositions towards mathematics: Tensions of a mathematical habitus in the retail industry. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 76(1), 87–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Kent, P., Bakker, A., Hoyles, C., & Noss, R. (2011). Measurement in the workplace: The case of process improvement in manufacturing industry. ZDM Mathematics Education, 43(5), 747–758.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kirsch, I. S., Jungeblut, A., Jenkins, L., & Kolstad, A. (Eds.). (1993). Adult literacy in America: A first look at the results of the national adult literacy survey. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, US Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Maddox, B. (Ed.). (2018). International large-scale assessments in education: Insider research perspectives. London: Bloomsbury.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Madison, B., & Steen, L. A. (Eds.). (2003). Quantitative literacy: Why numeracy matters for schools and colleges. Princeton, NJ: The National Council on Education and the Disciplines.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Murray, S., Clermont, Y., & Binkley, M. (Eds) (2005). Measuring adult literacy and life skills: New frameworks for Assessment. Ottawa, ON: Statistics Canada. Retrieved 3 March 2020 from https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/en/pub/89-552-m/89-552-m2005013-eng.pdf?st=JBzir8Ag.

  26. NCES (National Centre for Educational Statistics) (n.d.). International Adult Literacy Survey (IALS) [dedicated webpage]. Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences (IES)/National Center for Education Statistics (NCER). Retrieved 9 March 2020 from https://nces.ed.gov/surveys/ials/.

  27. NCES. (1997). The International Adult Literacy Survey: A technical report. Washington, DC: National Centre for Educational Statistics.

    Google Scholar 

  28. OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) (2013). OECD skills outlook 2013: First results from the survey of adult skills. Paris: OECD Publishing. Retrieved 3 March 2020 from http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264204256-en.

  29. OECD (2016a). Skills matter: Further results from the Survey of Adult Skills, Paris: OECD Skills Studies series, OECD Publishing. Retrieved 3 March 2020 from https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264258051-en.

  30. OECD (2016b). Technical report of the Survey of Adult Skills (PIAAC) (2nd edn), Paris: OECD Skills Studies series, OECD Publishing. Retrieved 8 April 2020 from http://www.oecd.org/skills/piaac/PIAAC_Technical_Report_2nd_Edition_Full_Report.pdf .

  31. OECD (2019). Skills matter: Additional results from the Survey of Adult Skills, Paris: OECD Skills Studies series. OECD Publishing. Retrieved 3 March 2020 from https://doi.org/10.1787/1f029d8f-en.

  32. OECD & HRDC (Human Resources Development Canada) (1997). Literacy skills for the knowledge society: Further results from the International Adult Literacy Survey, Paris: OECD Publishing. Retrieved 3 March 2020 from https://vital.voced.edu.au/vital/access/services/Download/ngv:32828/SOURCE2?view=true

  33. OECD &Statistics Canada (1995). Literacy, economy and society: Results of the first International Adult Literacy Survey. Paris/Ottawa, ON: OECD Publishing/Statistics Canada. Retrieved 3 March 2020 from https://www.oecd.org/education/skills-beyond-school/41529765.pdf.

  34. OECD & Statistics Canada (2005). Learning a living: First results of the Adult Literacy and Life Skills Survey. Paris/Ottawa, ON: OECD Publishing/Statistics Canada. Retrieved 3 March 2020 from https://www.oecd.org/education/innovation-education/34867438.pdf.

  35. OUP (Oxford University Press). (n.d.). Gig economy. In Lexico.com [online dictionary]. Detroit, MI: Lexico.com. Retrieved 16 March 2020 from https://www.lexico.com/definition/gig_economy.

  36. P21 (Partnership for 21st Century Skills) (2016). Framework for 21st century learning. Washington, DC: Partnership for 21st Century Skills. Retrieved 3 Marc 2020 from http://static.battelleforkids.org/documents/p21/P21_Framework_Brief.pdf.

  37. Palm, T. (2006). Word problems as simulations of real-world situations: a proposed framework. For the Learning of Mathematics, 26(1), 42–47.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Palm, T. (2008a). Impact of authenticity on sense making in word problem solving. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 67(1), 37–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Palm, T. (2008b). Performance assessment and authentic assessment: a conceptual analysis of the literature. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 13, Art. 4.

  40. Pellegrino, J. W., & Hilton, M. L. (2012). Education for life and work: Developing transferable knowledge and skills in the 21st century. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  41. PIAAC NEG (Programme in Assessment of Adult Competencies Numeracy Expert Group) (2009). PIAAC numeracy: A conceptual framework. OECD Education Working Papers, No. 35. EDU/WKP(2009)14. Paris: OECD Publishing. Retrieved 3 March 2020 from http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/220337421165.

  42. Reder, S. (2009). Scaling up and moving in: Connecting social practices views to policies and programs in adult education. Literacy and Numeracy Studies, 16(2)/17(1), 35–50.

  43. Ryan, J. (1990). International Literacy Year, 1990: From rhetoric to reality. UNESCO Courier, XLII(7), 10–12. Retrieved 10 March 2020 from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000086187?posInSet=1&queryId=36a2e882-01c4-4cb3-9fd9-d926065868a1.

  44. Sabatini, J. P., & Bruce, K. M. (2009). PIAAC reading component: A conceptual framework. OECD Education Working Papers, No. 33. EDU/WKP(2009)12. Paris: OECD Publishing. Retrieved 3 March 2020 from https://doi.org/10.1787/220367414132.

  45. Stacey, K. (2015). The real world and the mathematical world. In K. Stacey & R. Turner (Eds.), Assessing mathematical literacy: The PISA experience (pp. 57–84). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Straesser, R. (2015). “Numeracy at work”: A discussion of terms and results from empirical studies. ZDM Mathematics Education, 47(4), 665–674.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Street, B. (1998). New literacies in theory and practice: what are the implications for language in education? Linguistics and Education, 10(1), 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Tout, D. (2014). Buried or not? What’s happened to numeracy? Research Developments [blogpost 29 July]. Melbourne: ACER. Retrieved 29 November 2019 from http://rd.acer.edu.au/article/buried-or-not-whats-happened-to-numeracy.

  49. Tout, D., & Schmitt, M. J. (2002). The inclusion of numeracy in adult basic education. In J. Comings, B. Garner, & C. Smith (Eds.), Annual review of adult learning and literacy (Vol. 3, pp. 152–202). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Tout, D., Coben, D., Geiger, V., Ginsburg, L., Hoogland, K., Maguire, T., Thomson, S., & Turner, R. (2017). Review of the PIAAC numeracy assessment framework: Final report. Camberwell, VIC: Australian Council for Educational Research. Retrieved 29 November 2019 from https://research.acer.edu.au/transitions_misc/29.

  51. Tout, D., Demonty, I., Díez-Palomar, J., Geiger, V., Hoogland, K., & Maguire, T. (forthcoming). PIAAC numeracy: An assessment framework for the second cycle of the Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies. Paris: OECD Publishing.

  52. UN (United Nations) (1987). International literacy year. Resolution A/RES/42/104. New York: United Nations General Assembly. Retrieved 9 March 2020 from https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/152995?ln=en.

  53. UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) (2016a). Incheon declaration and Framework for action for the implementation of Sustainable Development Goal 4. Towards inclusive and equitable quality education and lifelong learning opportunities for all. Education 2030. Paris: UNESCO. Retrieved 26 April 2020 from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000245656.

  54. UNESCO (2016b). Target 4.6: Literacy and numeracy. In UNESCO, Global Education Monitoring Report 2016. Education for people and planet: Creating sustainable futures for all (chapter 15; pp. 274–285). Paris: UNESCO. Retrieved 29 November 2019 from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0024/002457/245752e.pdf.

  55. Verschaffel, L., Greer, B., & Van Dooren, W. (Eds.). (2009). Words and worlds: Modelling verbal descriptions of situations. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Wake, G. (2015). Preparing for workplace numeracy: a modelling perspective. ZDM Mathematics Education, 47(4), 675–689.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Weeks, K. W., Higginson, R., Clochesy, J. M., & Coben, D. (2013). Safety in numbers 7. Veni, vidi, duci: A grounded theory evaluation of nursing students’ medication dosage calculation problem-solving schemata construction. Nurse Education in Practice, 13(2), e78–e87.

  58. Wickert, R. & Kevin, M. (1995). No single measure: The final report. Canberra, ACT: Department of Employment, Education and Training.

  59. Windisch, H. C. (2015), Adults with low literacy and numeracy skills: A literature review on policy intervention. OECD Education Working Papers, No. 123. EDU/WKP(2015)12. Paris: OECD Publishing. Retrieved 3 March 2020 from https://doi.org/10.1787/5jrxnjdd3r5k-en.

  60. Yasukawa, K., Rogers, A., Jackson, K., & Street, B. (Eds.). (2018). Numeracy as social practice: Global and local perspectives. New York and London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Zevenbergen, R. (2004). Technologizing numeracy: Intergenerational differences in working mathematically in new times. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 56(1), 97–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dave Tout.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tout, D. Evolution of adult numeracy from quantitative literacy to numeracy: Lessons learned from international assessments. Int Rev Educ 66, 183–209 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11159-020-09831-4

Download citation

Keywords

  • mathematics assessment
  • adult numeracy
  • numeracy education
  • numeracy assessment
  • equity
  • adult literacy and numeracy
  • international adult skills assessments
  • Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies (PIAAC)