1 Experiences with the Adult Education Survey in Norway and cross-country comparisons of AES data.

1

Experiences with the Adult Education Survey in Experiences with the Adult Education Survey in Norway and cross-country comparisons of AES Norway and cross-country comparisons of AES

datadata

• Basic information about the Norwegian AES

• Cross-country comparisons based on AES data– Selected findings from our preliminary analyses

Possibilities and limitations Suggestions for further analyses

Timetable AES in Norway

• May – mid August 2007:– Fieldwork

• July- December 2007: – Processing, validation, calibration of final weights

• December 2007 (minor corrections later on in April 2008):– Microdata and control tables to Eurostat

• January 2008:– Online dissemination of first national results www.ssb.no/en/vol

• October 2008:– Short web-article based on tables from New Cronoswww.ssb.no/vis/magasinet/analyse/art-2008-11-12-01.html

• October 2009:– ”Adult learning in Norway and other European countries”

Article in Statistics Norway’s biannual ”Utdanning SA”, a publication with statistical analyses in the field of education

Data collection• Mode

– CATI: All respondents: 73,6 % Participants in FED: 56,1 % Participants in FED or NFE: 63,9 %

– CAPI: All respondents: 26,4 % Participants in FED: 43,9 % Participants in FED or NFE: 36,1 %

• Response rate – Net sample whole survey: 3330– Net sample Eurostat part of survey (age 25-64): 3018– Response rate (unweighted): 67,7 %

Questionnaire• Modules not covered:

– Attitudes, Social participation, Information about learning possibilities

– Cultural participation (only BOOKHOME included)

• Variables not covered: – EDUAB,ISCDAB2– EXIST2J– ISCEDFATH1D, ISCEDMOTH1D (Can be retrieved from registers)– ISCOFATH1D, ISCOMOTH1D (Can be retrieved from registers)– NFEPROV (A version from previous national surveys was used)– ICTSKILLS, ICTLEVELS– FRLGSKIL

Comparing the level of adult learning across countries

• Possible measures found in the AES– Participation rates in formal, non-formal and informal learning– Average number of learning activities per person/participant– Average number of hours in formal and non-formal education and

training per person/participant Unfortunately, only instruction hours are included in the AES

– Homework/self-study is often the most time-consuming part, especially in formal education

• Advantageous to include several measures in the analysis

Participation in formal education in the last 12 months in the population 25-64 years. Per cent

2

2

3

3

3

4

4

5

5

5

6

6

6

6

10

10

13

15

0 5 10 15 20

France

Greece

Bulgaria

Cyprus

Hungary

Austria

Italy

Germany

Estonia

Latvia

Spain

Lithuania

Poland

Slovakia

Finland

Norway

Sweden

Great Britain

Per cent

Participation in non-formal training in the last 12 months in the population 25-64 years. Per cent

7

13

19

20

27

31

31

34

35

39

40

40

40

41

43

51

51

69

0 20 40 60 80

Hungary

Greece

Poland

Italy

Spain

Lithuania

Latvia

France

Bulgaria

Cyprus

Austria

Estonia

Great Britain

Slovakia

Germany

Finland

Norway

Sweden

Per cent

Average number of instruction hours in non-formal training per participant 25-64 years. Hours

41

44

44

47

62

70

72

76

76

78

79

80

84

95

100

103

111

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Great Britain

Bulgaria

Italy

Estonia

Cyprus

Lithuania

Sweden

Latvia

Germany

Norway

Greece

Poland

Austria

Finland

Spain

France

Hungary

Total number of instruction hours per participant

Distribution of participants in non-formal training 25-64 years, by number of instruction hours. Per cent

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

1-5 6-10 11-20 21-50 51-100 101-200 200+

Number of instruction hours in non-formal training

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of

all

NF

E-

pa

rtic

ipa

nts

Germany

Great Britain

Norway

Sweden

Patterns of adult learning in sub-groups of the population

• Educational attainment

• Gender

• Age

• Employment and characteristics of main job

• Link patterns of participation in different parts of the population to issues of motivation and perceived obstacles to adult learning

• Sample size varies considerably between countries– May place rather tight constraints on the level of detail in sub-population

breakdowns E.g. limited number of unemployed in the Norwegian AES data set

Participation in formal education in the last 12 months in the population 25-64 years, by educational attainment level. Per cent

0

5

10

15

20

25

Great

Brit

ain

Sweden

Norway

Finla

nd

Slova

kia

Spain

Italy

Poland

Lithuan

ia

Latvi

a

Germ

any

Estonia

Cypru

s

Austria

Bulgar

ia

Hungary

Greec

e

France

Pe

r c

en

t

ISCED 2 or below

ISCED 3+4

ISCED 5+6

Participation in non-formal training in the last 12 months in the population 25-64 years, by educational attainment level. Per cent

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Sweden

Finla

nd

Norway

Germ

any

Slova

kia

Estonia

Great

Brit

ain

Austria

Cypru

s

Bulgar

ia

Lithuan

ia

Latvi

a

Spain

Italy

Poland

Greec

e

Hungary

Pe

r c

en

t ISCED 2 or below

ISCED 3+4

ISCED 5+6

Understanding the ”Matthew- pattern” in adult learning

• Adults with limited formal education are over-represented amongst non-employed

• The impact of incentives, and the challenge of motivation:– The wage returns to workplace training are lower for those with less than secondary

education (Bassanini et al. 2005: 150)

– Employers also often get a higher return from training employees with tertiary education (Døving et al. 2006:159)

– Previous encounters with education and training shape our ”learner identity”, in positive or negative ways (Antikainen 2006)

Benefits of a general versus stratified initial education system?

– On average, adults with less education may face fewer demands for training in their daily working life – harder to see the needs/benefits of education and training?

Understanding the ”Matthew- pattern” in adult learning

• AES provides data on:– Motivation (details only for NFE activities)– Attitudes to adult learning (not included in all countries)– Obstacles to adult learning (no separation between formal/non-

formal activities)– Willingness to participate (more) in education and training. Learning

begets learning?

• Interesting to look at how motivational patterns and obstacles vary by educational attainment

The willingness to participate in education and training in the population 25-64 years, by participation in the last 12 months. Per cent

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80

Hungary

Bulgaria

France

Spain

Italy

Austria

Estonia

Lithuania

Finland

Greece

Sweden

Great Britain

Norway

Latvia

Slovakia

Poland

Cyprus

Participated in education or training Did not participate in education and training

Participation in formal education in the last 12 months in the population 25-64 years, by age. Per cent

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Great

Brit

ain

Sweden

Finla

nd

Norway

Lithuan

ia

Slova

kia

Spain

Poland

Latvi

a

Germ

any

Estonia

Italy

Austria

Cypru

s

Bulgar

ia

Hungary

Greec

e

France

Pe

r c

en

t

25-34 years

35-54 years

55-64 years

Participation in non-formal training in the last 12 months in the population 25-64 years, by age. Per cent

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Sweden

Finla

nd

Norway

Germ

any

Slova

kia

Estonia

France

Great

Brit

ain

Austria

Cypru

s

Bulgar

ia

Lithuan

ia

Latvi

a

Spain

Italy

Poland

Greec

e

Hungary

Pe

r c

en

t

25-34 years

35-54 years

55-64 years

Lack of employer's support

0

5

10

15

20

25

Norway

Sweden

Finla

nd

Slova

kia

Poland

Latvi

a

Germ

any

Bulgar

ia

Great

Brit

ain

Austria

Cypru

s

Spain

Estonia

Pe

r c

en

t

25-34 years 35-54 years 55-64 years

Age differences in the main reasons why adults didn’t participate in education or training even though they wanted to participate

Gender and adult learning - moving beyond overall male and female participation rates

• AES provides opportunities to take into consideration:– Employment patterns– Household composition

Impact of having younger children

– Fields of education and training– Motivation and obstacles– Etc.

Training conflicted with work schedule

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Lithuania

Greece

Great Britain

Poland

Spain

Germany

Sweden

Finland

Norway

Austria

Latvia

Per cent

Men Women

Gender differences in the main reasons why adults didn’t participate in education or training even though they wanted to participate

Didn't have time due to family responsibilities

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

Spain

Great Britain

Greece

Germany

Austria

Latvia

Poland

Finland

Sweden

Norway

Lithuania

Per cent

Men Women

Gender differences in the main reasons why adults didn’t participate in education or training even though they wanted to participate

Participation in formal education in the last 12 months in the population 25-64 years, by self-defined labour status. Per cent

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Great

Brit

ain

Finla

nd

Sweden

Norway

Lithuan

ia

Poland

Latvi

a

Slova

kia

Spain

Estonia

Germ

any

Italy

Austria

Hungary

Cypru

s

Bulgar

ia

Greec

e

Pe

r c

en

t

Employed

Unemployed

Inactive

Participation in non-formal training in the last 12 months in the population 25-64 years, by self-defined labour status. Per cent

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Sweden

Finla

nd

Norway

Germ

any

Slova

kia

Bulgar

ia

Estonia

Great

Brit

ain

Cypru

s

Austria

Lithuan

ia

Latvi

a

Spain

Italy

Poland

Greec

e

Hungary

Pe

r c

en

t

Employed

Unemployed

Inactive

Participation in non-formal training and job related non-formal training in the last 12 months in the population 25-64 years. Per cent

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Hungary

Greece

Poland

Italy

Spain

Latvia

Lithuania

France

Bulgaria

Cyprus

Austria

Estonia

Great Britain

Slovakia

Germany

Norway

Finland

Sweden

Per cent

Participation non-formal training Participation job related non-formal training

Percentage of participants in non-formal training in the last 12 months with at least one training activity taking place fully or partly within paid working hours. NFE-participants 25-64 years. Per cent

63

82

67

76

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Great Britain Germany Norway Sweden

Pe

r c

en

t

Results from logit-analysis on participation in non-formal training amongst employed. Probability of participation, estimates for constructed individuals. Per cent

  Sweden Norway Germany Great Britain

Reference 60,9 39,9 41,9 39,2

Woman 67,8 42,0 41,0 49,2

ISCED 2 or below 53,4 32,7 21,4 32,8

ISCED 5+6 71,2 47,4 50,3 41,8

25-34 years 59,2 42,3 44,5 41,6

50-64 years 53,2 35,1 35,0 40,3

ISCO1-3. Managers, professionals, technicians and associate professionals 88,9 64,3 67,9 50,9

ISCO4-5. Clerks and sales 77,4 58,9 56,1 46,3

ISCO6-7. Skilled agricultural and fishery workers, craft and related trades workers 69,9 50,8 40,3 41,8

1-10 empl. 49,9 31,0 37,2 30,5

50+ empl. 68,0 44,0 47,3 42,3

Part-time 57,4 39,8 36,2 27,3

Reference is: Male with ISCED 3+4 education, 35-49 years, ISCO8-9 (Plant and machine operators and assemblers and elementary occupations), employed full-time in a firm with 11-49 employees.

Source: Adult Education Survey

Thank you for your attentionThank you for your attention