On average, there is a 45 percentage point difference in the rates of participation in adult learning between those with the highest literacy proficiency levels (at or above Level 4) and those with the lowest (at or below Level 1), as determined by the Survey of Adult Skills.
Even among those with the same level of education, skills proficiency helps drive engagement in adult learning. On average, 74% of tertiary-educated adults with the highest proficiency levels in adaptive problem-solving (Level 4) participated in adult learning compared to just 42% of their similarly educated peers with the lowest levels (at or below Level 1).
Educational attainment amplifies the connection between the regular use of skills and participation in adult learning. Among adults who read the most frequently in their everyday lives, 68% of those with tertiary education engage in training, compared to just 42% of those whose highest qualification is below upper secondary.
Education at a Glance 2025
Survey of Adult Skills (PIAAC); 25-64 year olds; participation in the last 12 months; in per cent
For data, see Table A5.1. For a link to download the data, see Tables and Notes section.
Context
Participation in adult learning provides adults who have finished their initial education with additional skills that may help keep them connected to an ever-evolving technological landscape. In the current global economy, adults are likely to need to keep upskilling and reskilling throughout their lives in response to this rapid technological change in order to maintain a favourable position in the labour market (Kazepov, Cefalo and Pot, 2019[1]). As well as the benefits of increased human capital and employability, adult learning also has potential non-monetary returns such as increased civic participation, which in turn often promotes social cohesion at a societal level (Rüber, Rees and Schmidt-Hertha, 2018[2]). These economic and social benefits underscore the importance of adult learning as a vital component of lifelong education systems.
Many OECD and partner countries have identified adult learning, or lifelong learning, as important for economic growth and equal access to opportunity. For example, the European Pillar of Social Rights Action Plan set the goal of having 60% of all adults in the European Union participating in adult learning by 2030 (European Commission, 2021[3]). The United States’ Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act, and Canada’s regional adult learning initiatives aim to increase access to the labour market as well as to monitor the success of adult learning initiatives (Sekmokas et al., 2024[4]).
Adult learning programmes and initiatives are not guaranteed to bridge educational and skills gaps (Lee and Morris, 2016[5]). Although participation in adult learning can help close those gaps and better prepare the workforce, skills disparities are persistent and inequalities are evident when looking at skills proficiency and participation in adult learning (Janmaat and Green, 2013[6]). There are several data sources available with data on internationally comparable indicators of adult learning participation, of which three are discussed in Box A5.1. This chapter highlights the results of the 2023 Survey of Adult Skills (a product of the Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies; PIAAC) which provides insight on participation in adult learning in relation to skills proficiency and use (OECD, 2024[7]).
Other findings
Reported rates of participation in adult learning vary across the Survey of Adult Skills (PIAAC), the EU Adult Education Survey (EU-AES) and the EU Labour Force Survey (EU-LFS); however, the demographic patterns revealed through these data are consistent across the three surveys (Box A5.1).
Work by the Nordic-Baltic PIAAC network connecting PIAAC data with national register data finds that individuals who achieved higher grades in lower secondary education are more likely to demonstrate numeracy proficiency at or above Level 3 in the Survey of Adult Skills (Box A5.2).
The use of skills and participation in adult learning show similar patterns regardless of the context of skills use. Adults who use reading skills infrequently in everyday life have virtually the same participation in adult learning (24%) as those who report using them infrequently in the workplace (27%), on average across the OECD.
Adult learning sits at the intersection of human capital development and social inclusion. Participation in formal and/or non-formal education and training may provide adults with the skills they need to succeed and thrive in the labour market. Research, however, reveals the persistence of the “Matthew effect” of cumulative advantage and disadvantage. As a result of persistent barriers and non-participation, adults with lower skills proficiency or lower levels of formal education remain difficult to engage in adult-learning opportunities, while those with higher skills proficiency and educational attainment may continue to benefit from well-established learning networks (Broek et al., 2023[8]).
This challenge is now compounded by the rapid spread of artificial intelligence (AI) in both the workplace and everyday life. While there remains debate over precisely how AI will affect the labour market and need for skills, the consensus is that transformations will take place – and indeed have already begun. It is likely that AI will change the tasks people perform in their jobs and therefore affect the skills they need. This will include increasing the need for basic digital and data science skills combined with complementary cognitive skills (OECD, 2023[9]). Additional research into workplace task changes between 2012 and 2024 shows that demand has especially increased for tasks that were already important in 2012, such as analytical tasks like mathematics and problem-solving, with evidence indicating that problem-solving skills improve mainly through informal adult learning in the workplace (Weel, 2025[10]). These skills, as well as literacy, numeracy and adaptive problem-solving skills will remain critical for individuals and economies in the era of AI (OECD, 2024[7]). Recent OECD work on AI capability indicators has introduced a framework for assessing the development of AI in relation to human capabilities, helping policymakers anticipate which human skills will remain essential or become more valuable as AI systems advance (OECD, 2025[11])
Participation in adult learning and skills proficiency
To prepare for a changing skills landscape, it is useful to understand the relationship between skills proficiency and participation in adult learning. Adults with higher proficiency levels in literacy have higher rates of participation in adult learning across all OECD countries. On average 26% of adults with low literacy proficiency (at or below Level 1) participate in adult learning compared to 70% of adults with high literacy proficiency (at or above Level 4). That makes adults with high literacy skills more than 2.5 times more likely to participate in formal and/or non-formal education and training. While it is true for all OECD countries that participation increases with proficiency level, there are differences in overall rates of participation between countries. For example, in Korea, even adults with a literacy proficiency of Level 4 and above participate less frequently than the OECD average for adults with Level 2 (Figure A5.1). This could be due to the common practice of working long hours which leaves reduced time for participating in additional training or learning opportunities (Hijzen and Thewissen, 2020[12]).
Adults with higher educational attainment are also more likely to participate in adult learning, but by isolating participation rates to a given attainment level, it is possible to see that the relationship between proficiency and participation persists. Across all participating OECD countries and economies there are differences by skill proficiency level among people with the same level of education. For example, on average, 74% of tertiary-educated adults with Level 4 proficiency in adaptive problem-solving participate in formal and/or non-formal education and training, 32 percentage points more than among tertiary-educated adults with proficiency at or below Level 1 (42%). For most countries, the difference in participation rates is smaller between tertiary-educated adults with proficiency Levels 2, 3 or 4 and most pronounced between these three levels of proficiency and those who are at or below Level 1. It is important to note that socio-demographic factors, such as language proficiency and migration background, can influence skill assessment outcomes. These factors may vary between countries and could partly explain differences in participation rates among tertiary-educated adults by proficiency level (Figure A5.2).
Survey of Adult Skills (PIAAC); 25-64 year olds; participation in the last 12 months; in per cent
For data, see Table A5.1. For a link to download the data, see Tables and Notes section.
Having a higher level of educational attainment does not equalise participation rates, as skill proficiency still helps to drive engagement. Belief in one’s abilities, or self-efficacy, is key motivator for participating in lifelong learning initiatives and those with lower proficiency may feel less confident to up- or reskill (Boeren, 2017[13]). Moreover, adults with lower proficiency levels may be more likely to be outside the labour force or to be in precarious working conditions that provide less frequent or inconsistent training opportunities (Cedefop, 2017[14]). Understanding how individuals navigate adult learning systems is therefore crucial as it reveals how to shape policies that both empower learners and strengthen an adult learning system’s capacity to deliver effective upskilling (Broek et al., 2023[8]).
Studying adult participation in education and training is crucial for developing effective lifelong learning policies. International surveys are valuable tools for developing relevant adult learning indicators, but methodological differences significantly affect the comparability of surveys. Understanding these differences may strengthen the development of adult learning indicators and help clarify the best use cases for each survey’s data.
The three surveys covered in this box – the Survey of Adult Skills (PIAAC), the EU Adult Education Survey (EU-AES) and the EU Labour Force Survey (EU-LFS) – all cover 25-64 year-olds and provide participation rates in formal and/or non-formal education over a 12 month period. Historically, the EU-LFS measured participation in the 4 weeks prior to the survey; however, since 2021, EU-LFS is obligated to at least biannually collect data on participation in the last 12 months (Regulation (EU) 2019/1700). Accordingly, this box uses EU-LFS data based on the 12 month reference period.
Overall, the three surveys differ in their definitions, question wording, survey design, primary objectives and data collection methods. These methodological differences can lead to differences in reported participation rates across the surveys. Furthermore, while the Survey of Adult Skills is input harmonised (using identical questionnaires and methods across countries), EU-AES and EU-LFS are output harmonised, allowing for national adaptations to data collection methods and question ordering, which can further affect comparability.
One significant way in which these three surveys differ is when taking into account guided on-the-job training, a form of workplace training in which a trainee receives real-time feedback or demonstrations as they perform their tasks. The Survey of Adult Skills and EU-AES both count guided on-the-job training but the EU-LFS survey does not, thus creating a potential source of discrepancy between reported levels of participation. This difference is apparent across most countries participating in all three surveys.
Survey of Adult Skills (PIAAC) 2023; EU-AES 2022 and EU-LFS 2022
Note: Education and training refers to formal and/or non-formal education and training. EU-AES is the EU Adult Education Survey; EU-LFS is the EU Labour Force Survey. The data in the chart refer to participation over the past 12 months for all three surveys.
Despite the differences in participation rates among the three surveys, they all show the following demographic patterns in participation in education and training (Figure A5.3):
Gender: Across all surveys, women typically exhibit slightly higher rates of participation than men. Estonia, Finland, Latvia and Sweden consistently show substantial gender differences favouring women, whereas Czechia and Italy report higher rates for men.
Age: Younger adults (25-34 year-olds) consistently have higher participation than older adults (55-64 year-olds). Participation rates decline with age across all surveys and countries.
Educational attainment: Adults with tertiary education participate significantly more than those with lower education levels, emphasising persistent disparities. This is evident across all surveys and countries.
Labour-force status: Adults in employment participate significantly more than those who are unemployed or outside the labour force. This is evident across almost all surveys and countries.
These consistent demographic patterns show that despite differences in their reported rates, all three surveys are able to capture important underlying trends in adult learning participation. Nevertheless, identifying the unique strengths of each survey is important for making the best use of their data for the development of relevant indicators on adult learning. According to Eurostat, for example, the EU-AES generally provides a more accurate measure of overall participation in adult learning, while the EU-LFS could be particularly valuable for analysing trends and conducting detailed cross-sectional analyses due to its larger sample size and more frequent data collection (Eurostat, 2024[15]). Meanwhile, the Survey of Adult Skills uniquely links participation in adult learning to skills proficiency and use, offering insights which the other two surveys can not.
Recognising the differences in reported rates, efforts are underway at the European level to improve data collection methods, including revisions to survey instruments. Belgium, for example, recently introduced changes in the 2024 Labour Force Survey to improve how non-formal learning is captured, which may introduce a break in the series, but will improve the measurement of adult learning over time (Statistics Belgium, 2025[16]). Better data are essential to build a more complete and nuanced understanding of how, where and why adults engage in learning throughout their lives.
Participation in adult learning and frequency of use of skills in everyday life
Use of core skills outside of the workplace such as reading instructions, managing personal finances or navigating the Internet reinforces the learning gained from initial education. Research suggests that the relationship between proficiency and engagement in practice is reciprocal, meaning that increased use of a skill is likely to increase an individual’s proficiency, which in turn further increases that individual’s likelihood of continuing to use the skill and engage in learning (Reder, Gauly and Lechner, 2020[17]).
Across all levels of education, adults who use reading skills the most frequently in their everyday lives are about 2.4 times more likely to participate in adult learning than those who use them the least frequently. However, as Figure A5.4 shows, educational attainment further increases participation in adult learning among people who frequently exercise their skills. On average across OECD countries and economies, 68% of tertiary-educated adults who make high use of their reading skills participate in adult learning compared to about 42% of adults of the highest frequency of use but with below upper secondary attainment. That is a 26 percentage point difference in participation between the highest and lowest levels of educational attainment (Figure A5.4 and Table A5.2. ).
Survey of Adult Skills (PIAAC); 25-64 year olds; participation in the last 12 months; in per cent
For data, see Table A5.2. For a link to download the data, see Tables and Notes section.
The same phenomenon is found among adults who use reading skills the least in the context of everyday life. On average, 44% of adults with tertiary attainment who use reading skills the least frequently in everyday life participate in adult learning compared to only 14% of adults in the same situation with below upper secondary attainment (Table A5.2. ).
Survey of Adult Skills (PIAAC); 25-64 year olds; participation in the last 12 months; in per cent
For data, see Table A5.2. For a link to download the data, see Tables and Notes section.
Differences in participation rates based on the frequency of everyday skill use among adults with the same levels of attainment highlight how both factors work together to drive engagement. For example, among tertiary-educated adults, those who read the least frequently in everyday life are about 1.6 times less likely to participate in adult learning than their peers who read the most frequently. This gap increases to about 2.1 times less for those who have upper secondary attainment and 3 times less for those with below upper secondary attainment (Table A5.2. ).
Integrating data from the Survey of Adult Skills (PIAAC) with data from national registers - centralized government databases containing demographic, civil‐status, and residential information - provides powerful analytical tools for exploring the relationship between adult skills, educational outcomes and labour-market trajectories. The Nordic-Baltic PIAAC Network has pioneered efforts to use such linked data, enhancing the depth and accuracy of longitudinal analyses. This textbox will provide an example of how these combined data may be useful in understanding skills and lifelong learning.
The approach developed by the network involves matching individual survey respondents with their corresponding register data using personal identification numbers. This method enables individuals’ education pathways and labour-market experiences to be tracked over an extended timeframe, from 1990 to 2023. The registers provide valuable background information such as grade point averages (GPAs) from lower secondary school.
The analyses demonstrate the possibility of combining cross-sectional data from the Survey of Adult Skills with annual administrative data from registers to establish a longitudinal picture of individuals both before and after they took part in the survey:
Before participating: Education pathways from lower secondary school to tertiary education, grade point average from lower secondary education and labour-market experience.
PIAAC information: Detailed information from the background questionnaire and measured adult skills.
After participating: Participation in further education (second chance, post-secondary and tertiary education), being neither employed nor in education or training (NEET), labour-market status, weak or strong affiliation to the labour market, total hours worked and earnings.
Analyses based on PIAAC Cycle 2 (2023) data in Sweden have revealed important relationships (Figure A5.6) (Statistics Sweden, n.d.[18]):
There is a strong link between GPA at the end of lower secondary education (15-16 years-old) and adult skills (16-29 years-old). Individuals who achieved higher GPAs in lower secondary education are more likely to demonstrate numeracy proficiency at or above Level 3 as adults.
Conversely, those who had lower GPAs during adolescence (15-16 years-old) are more likely to have numeracy proficiency at or below Level 1, highlighting the predictive nature of early skills.
Irrespective of GPAs, a greater share of 25-29 year-olds performed at or above Level 3 in numeracy proficiency, compared to the 16-19 year-old cohort.
Two further studies also combined data from Cycle 1 of the Survey of Adult Skills with register data: one conducted in Denmark and one in Norway (Nordic Baltic PIAAC Network, 2024[19]).
The Norwegian study investigated the relationship between adult skills among 16-24 year-olds as measured in Cycle 1 of the Survey of Adult Skills and their NEET status in 2013, two years after the cycle was conducted (Barth et al., 2019[20]). Analysts found that young adults’ skills measured in PIAAC Cycle 1 are highly correlated with skills acquired early in life, measured as their GPA at the end of compulsory school. These results are consistent with the results from the Swedish study based on PIAAC Cycle 2. The study also found that early skills, as measured by the GPA, protect more against being NEET in 2013, compared to adult skills measured in PIAAC Cycle 1, despite these adult skills having been measured more recently.
Survey of Adult Skills (PIAAC)
Note: GPAs in lower secondary education are measured from 0 to 320.
Source: Swedish National Registry.
The Danish study investigated whether skill levels and use of skills made a difference to low-skilled workers’ employment. The target population for the study was low-skilled unemployed workers in PIAAC Cycle 1. The study combined data from Cycle 1 with register data about total hours worked over the period 2012-19 (Rotger, Jeppesen and Larsen, 2022[21]). The study found that use of IT skills outside work was one of the most predictive factors for the number of hours worked by this group during this period. The more these individuals used IT skills outside work, the greater their likelihood of working many hours during 2012-19. Other factors which affect the likelihood positively were their hourly wages in their previous job, number of job-search activities within four weeks and whether they were in full-time employment before they became unemployed.
In summary, linking PIAAC and register data provides unique research possibilities. The relationship between skills acquired early in life, adult skills and subsequent labour-market outcomes underscores the value of investing in early education and continuous skill development through lifelong learning initiatives.
Participation in adult learning and frequency of use of skills in the workplace
Adults working in a role which is well matched to their skills will be asked to use their skills frequently in the workplace. This gives them a structural motivation to engage in skills use compared to their everyday lives, where they will have greater autonomy over which skills they engage with and how often they do so. Despite this, skill use in both the workplace and everyday life produce similar patterns in participation in adult learning. On average across OECD countries and economies, 59% of those who make use of their reading skills the most frequently in everyday life participate in adult learning, compared to 66% among those who do so in the workplace. Participation rates fall to 24% among adults who use reading skills the least frequently in everyday life and 27% among those who rarely or never do so in the workplace (Table A5.2. and Table A5.3.).
Motivation, opportunity and engagement form an interconnected system that spans both everyday life and the workplace with recent technological shifts only deepening that connection. As remote and hybrid work arrangements turn many homes into offices, the boundary between personal and professional learning contexts has begun to blur. At the same time, the digital revolution and expansion of digital access has transformed how adult learning is created and delivered, enabling programmes to reach learners wherever they are and helping reach individuals who are most difficult to reach (ITC, 2021[22]). Technology alone, however, is not enough to transform adult learning systems. Although engagement varies by skills proficiency and educational attainment, participation in adult education remains insufficient at all levels as training struggles to meet the pace of technological change. Effective adult learning systems must engage all populations by offering accessible, high-quality learning opportunities that meet diverse needs in response to rapidly changing demands.
Adults refer to 25-64 year-olds.
Adult learning means the participation of adults in lifelong learning. In this chapter, the term “adult learning” is used interchangeably with the term “education and training” and refers to formal and/or non-formal education and training. Adult learning usually refers to learning activities after the end of initial education. The participation in education and training covers participation in both formal and non-formal education and training, defined in the Classification of Learning Activities (CLA) (Eurostat, 2016[23]) as:
Formal education and training is defined as “education that is institutionalised, intentional and planned through public organisations and recognised private bodies, and - in their totality - constitute the formal education system of a country. Formal education programmes are thus recognised as such by the relevant national education or equivalent authorities, e.g. any other institution in cooperation with the national or sub-national education authorities. Formal education consists mostly of initial education [...]. Vocational education, special needs education and some parts of adult education are often recognised as being part of the formal education system. Qualifications from formal education are by definition recognised and, therefore, are within the scope of ISCED. Institutionalised education occurs when an organisation provides structured educational arrangements, such as student-teacher relationships and/or interactions, that are specially designed for education and learning”.
Non-formal education and training is defined as “education that is institutionalised, intentional and planned by an education provider. The defining characteristic of non-formal education is that it is an addition, alternative and/or complement to formal education within the process of lifelong learning of individuals. It is often provided in order to guarantee the right of access to education for all. It caters to people of all ages but does not necessarily apply a continuous pathway structure; it may be short in duration and/or low-intensity; and it is typically provided in the form of short courses, workshops or seminars. Non-formal education mostly leads to qualifications that are not recognised as formal or equivalent to formal qualifications by the relevant national or sub-national education authorities or to no qualifications at all. Nevertheless, formal, recognised qualifications may be obtained through exclusive participation in specific non-formal education programmes; this often happens when the non-formal programme completes the competencies obtained in another context”.
For methodological information, please see the Survey of Adult Skills (PIAAC) 2023 – Reader’s Companion (OECD, 2024[24]).
The tables in this chapter present only the estimated percentages. The corresponding standard errors are available in the online version of the tables, accessible via the StatLinks provided in the Tables and Notes section. Readers are highly encouraged to consult these online tables, as the precision of the estimates varies, and in some cases, standard errors are relatively large.
Survey of Adult Skills (PIAAC) Cycle 2 (2023).
References
[20] Barth, E. et al. (2019), “NEET status and early versus later skills among young adults: Evidence From linked register-PIAAC data”, Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 65/1, pp. 140-152, https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2019.1659403.
[13] Boeren, E. (2017), “Understanding adult lifelong learning participation as a layered problem”, Studies in Continuing Education, Vol. 39/2, pp. 161-175, https://doi.org/10.1080/0158037x.2017.1310096.
[8] Broek, S. et al. (2023), “What makes adults choose to learn: Factors that stimulate or prevent adults from learning”, Journal of Adult and Continuing Education, Vol. 29/2, pp. 620-642, https://doi.org/10.1177/14779714231169684.
[14] Cedefop (2017), “Investing in skills pays off: The economic and social cost of low-skilled adults in the EU”, Cedefop Research Paper, No. 60, Publications Office of the European Union, https://doi.org/10.2801/23250.
[3] European Commission (2021), European Pillar of Social Rights Action Plan, https://op.europa.eu/webpub/empl/european-pillar-of-social-rights/en/ (accessed on 1 May 2025).
[15] Eurostat (2024), “Participation in education and training during the last 12 months – differences between data available from two sources”, Information Note, European Commission, https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser-backend/api/public/explanatory-notes/get/Info_note_TRNG_AL_20240423.pdf.
[23] Eurostat (2016), Classification of Learning Activities (CLA) Manual: 2016 Edition, Publications Office of the Euorpean Union, https://doi.org/10.2785/874604.
[12] Hijzen, A. and S. Thewissen (2020), “The 2018-2021 working time reform in Korea: A preliminary assessment”, OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers, No. 248, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/0e828066-en.
[22] ITC (2021), Digital Inclusion in Adult Learning: Practices and Recommendations, International Training Center of the ILO, https://www.itcilo.org/sites/default/files/2021-04/Digital%20Inclusion%20publication_Final_0.pdf.
[6] Janmaat, J. and A. Green (2013), “Skills inequality, adult learning and social cohesion In The United Kingdom”, British Journal of Educational Studies, Vol. 61/1, pp. 7-24, https://doi.org/10.1080/00071005.2012.756161.
[1] Kazepov, Y., R. Cefalo and M. Pot (2019), “A social investment perspective on lifelong learning:”, in Lifelong Learning Policies for Young Adults in Europe, Policy Press, https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvt6rk3z.9.
[5] Lee, M. and P. Morris (2016), “Lifelong learning, income inequality and social mobility in Singapore”, International Journal of Lifelong Education, Vol. 35/3, pp. 286-312, https://doi.org/10.1080/02601370.2016.1165747.
[19] Nordic Baltic PIAAC Network (2024), Main findings from Nordic studies combining PIAAC and other data sources, https://nll.org/artikler/main-findings-from-nordic-studies-combining-piaac-and-other-data-sources/ (accessed on 26 May 2025).
[11] OECD (2025), Introducing the OECD AI Capability Indicators, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/be745f04-en.
[7] OECD (2024), Do Adults Have the Skills They Need to Thrive in a Changing World?: Survey of Adult Skills 2023, OECD Skills Studies, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/b263dc5d-en.
[24] OECD (2024), Survey of Adult Skills – Reader’s Companion: 2023, OECD Skills Studies, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/3639d1e2-en.
[9] OECD (2023), OECD Employment Outlook 2023: Artificial Intelligence and the Labour Market, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/08785bba-en.
[17] Reder, S., B. Gauly and C. Lechner (2020), “Practice makes perfect: Practice engagement theory and the development of adult literacy and numeracy proficiency”, International Review of Education, Vol. 66/2-3, pp. 267-288, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11159-020-09830-5.
[21] Rotger, G., T. Jeppesen and M. Larsen (2022), The importance of basic skills for employment, VIVE, https://www.vive.dk/da/udgivelser/basale-faerdigheders-betydning-for-beskaeftigelse-yxdj10xg/ (accessed on 1 May 2025).
[2] Rüber, I., S. Rees and B. Schmidt-Hertha (2018), “Lifelong learning – lifelong returns? A new theoretical framework for the analysis of civic returns on adult learning”, International Review of Education, Vol. 64/5, pp. 543-562, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11159-018-9738-6.
[4] Sekmokas, M. et al. (2024), “Updated framework for monitoring adult learning: Enhancing data identification and indicator selection”, OECD Education Working Papers, No. 317, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/02bbacdc-en.
[16] Statistics Belgium (2025), Break in the time series of lifelong learning in 2024, https://statbel.fgov.be/sites/default/files/files/documents/Werk%20%26%20opleiding/9.3%20Opleidingen%20onderwijs/9.3.6%20Levenslang%20leren/Nota%20breuk%20LLL%202024%20gebruikers-E.pdf (accessed on 18 June 2025).
[18] Statistics Sweden (n.d.), PIAAC Den internationella undersökningen av vuxnas färdigheter [PIAAC The International Adult Skills Survey], https://www.scb.se/contentassets/43fec92b83c24a60aebb22150d6d59fa/uf0546_2022a01_br_a40br2404.pdf (accessed on 17 June 2025).
[10] Weel, B. (2025), TAKEN EN VAARDIGHEDEN OP HET WERK, 2012-2024 [Tasks and skills at work, 2012-2024], https://www.seo.nl/publicaties/taken-en-vaardigheden-op-het-werk-2012-2024-ontwikkeling-van-vraag-en-aanbod-van-werktaken-op-basis-van-de-nederlandse-skills-survey/ (accessed on 10 June 2025).
To download the data for the figures and tables in this chapter, click StatLink above.
Data cut-off for the print publication 13 June 2025.
Table A5.1. Share of adults participating in education and training, by skills proficiency level and educational attainment (2023)
Note: Does not include adults who were only administered the doorstep interview due to a language barrier. Education and training refers to formal and/or non-formal education and training. Literacy proficiency is reported on a scale of six proficiency levels with below Level 1 being the lowest and Level 5 the highest. Adaptative problem-solving proficiency is reported on a scale of five proficiency levels being Level 4 the highest. This table aggregates below Level 1 and Level 1, and Levels 4 and 5. Columns showing the standard errors, and data on all levels of education and adaptative problem-solving proficiency are available for consultation on line.
Table A5.2. Share of adults participating in education and training, by educational attainment and frequency of use of ICT and reading skills in everyday life (2023)
Note: Does not include adults who were only administered the doorstep interview due to a language barrier. Education and training refers to formal and/or non-formal education and training. Frequency of use reflects how often respondents report performing tasks related to each skill domain. In this table, lowest practice refers to the bottom 20% of respondents on the skill use scale, while highest practice refers to the top 20% (80% and above) of respondents on the scale. Columns showing the standard errors and data on all levels of education are available for consultation on line.
Table A5.3. Share of adults participating in education and training, by educational attainment and frequency of use of reading and numeracy skills at work (2023)
Note: Does not include adults who were only administered the doorstep interview due to a language barrier. Education and training refers to formal and/or non-formal education and training. Frequency of use reflects how often respondents report performing tasks related to each skill domain. In this table, lowest practice refers to the bottom 20% of respondents on the skill use scale, while highest practice refers to the top 20% (80% and above) of respondents on the scale. Columns showing the standard errors and data on all levels of education are available for consultation on line.
a – category not applicable; b – break in series; c – there are too few observations to provide reliable estimates; d – contains data from another column; m – missing data; r – values are below a certain reliability threshold and should be interpreted with caution x – contained in another column (indicated in brackets). For further control codes, see the Reader’s Guide.
For further methodological information, see Education at a Glance 2025: Sources, Methodologies and Technical Notes (https://doi.org/10.1787/fcfaf2d1-en)
Survey of Adult Skills (PIAAC); in per cent; 25-64 year-olds
Note: For notes on this table and a link to download the data, see Tables and Notes section above.
Survey of Adult Skills (PIAAC); in per cent; 25-64 year-olds
Note: For notes on this table and a link to download the data, see Tables and Notes section above.
Survey of Adult Skills (PIAAC); in per cent; 25-64 year-olds
Note: For notes on this table and a link to download the data, see Tables and Notes section above.