One in three adults in Spain (31%) has “relevant deficiencies” in mathematics, language or problem solving (APS, in English), according to the international PIAAC test of the OECD (International Program for the Assessment of Skills Competencies). the Adult Population, in its English acronym). Furthermore, one in five (21%) has these training gaps simultaneously in two or all three areas evaluated.
In general, the Spanish population between 16 and 65 years old appears below the OECD and EU averages in the three sections: 247 points compared to 260 in reading; 250 for 263 in mathematics; and 241 versus 251 in adaptive problem solving. Spain is basically the same as in 2011-12, when the previous edition of PIAAC was held. It drops three points in reading and rises six in mathematics.
The Ministry of Education maintains that the performance of adults on this test is “average” in reading and mathematics and significantly lower in APS. However, in the commentary that accompanies the results distributed by the OECD, the head of PIAAC places Spain in the group of those that have “significant differences” with respect to the averages.
The countries that appear highest in the three categories are Finland, Japan and Sweden, with scores that are close to 300 points in mathematics and language and 275 in problem solving. Below, Chile, Poland and Lithuania stand out. Spain is part of a group of countries made up of Korea, Hungary, the United States and Italy.
In the lower third
In general, Spain appears in the lower third of the classification offered by the OECD in the three tests, although expert analysts usually explain that in this type of reports the evolution of a country between editions is usually more relevant – stagnation for adults Spanish – than the comparison with others, or even the fine scrutiny of internal data.
For example, in Spain equity in results stands out. In this classification it appears among the best: the difference between those that perform the most and those that perform the least is smaller than in most countries (around 130 points away, when the most unequal countries are at 160, with the United States United at the head).
However, this equity is usually achieved at the cost of appearing at the bottom of the rankings. If the Spanish results are broken down by performance levels, it is observed that in reading there are six times as many citizens in the two lowest levels (8.8% in the last and 21.5% in the penultimate for a total of 30 .3%) than in the two highest (0.3% in the best, 5.6% in the second best).
In other words, we have three times as many people in the low performance group as Japan (the first country on the list) and six times fewer in the highest performance group, as can be seen in the graph. With other figures, practically the same thing happens in mathematical competence.
The (downside) fairness of the system is shown in all angles of analysis. When the results are broken down by age groups, the difference between those aged 55-65 (those who consistently perform the least in all countries) is 22 points in Spain, 30 for the OECD average. The same happens depending on the origin of the respondent: migrants, who also perform worse, obtain 36 points less than natives of Spanish parents, when the average difference is 45 points in the EU. The gender gap is also less present, although it continues to stand out in mathematics in favor of men, as the TIMSS test showed a week ago: they perform ten points better, a statistically significant distance.
Between equal and worse
The comparison with the previous edition of PIAAC shows a general decline in reading results. Of the total number of participants in both tests, only Finland and Denmark have improved significantly, says the OECD. Faced with this, 14 nations remain the same and 11 have worsened.
In mathematics, the evolution is more distributed: there are eight improvements, 12 countries that are the same (Spain among them) and seven declines.
The age effect
PIAAC also includes an analysis of what it calls “the effect of aging” on reading comprehension, how much the passing of the years affects. Having two studies with the same population cohorts allows us to observe the evolution of a certain age group.
“Comparisons obtained from the results of the second test reveal substantial losses of skills that are related to age starting at age 35 (but more rarely among younger adults),” analyzes the Ministry of Education. Some competence losses that are also observed in Spain.
Young adults born between 1989 and 1996 scored seven points less in 2023 (when they were between 27 and 34 years old) than in 2012 (when they were between 16 and 23 years old), “a non-significant difference,” according to Education. “In the next group, 35-44 years in 2023, the observed loss is 10 points (a significant difference) and 16 points in the 45-54 year group. In the oldest generation (44 to 54 years in 2012), the loss is somewhat smaller with 13 points less (significant decrease).”
With the age perspective there is also a paradox. On the one hand, says the OECD, many countries that have participated in the sample “have seen an increase in the proportion of older adults in their populations.” Since these groups “typically have lower skills,” and weigh more on the total, they pull the average down. However, the new generations are more educated than the previous ones (in Spain the early leaving rate has been cut in half in a decade), so its inclusion in PIAAC (from the age of 16) pulls the results upwards. How much each factor weighs has not been analyzed – or shared –.
#adults #significant #deficiencies #reading #mathematics #Spain
