Historical dataset showing Austria literacy rate by year from N/A to N/A.

Austria: Literacy rate: The latest value from is percent, unavailable from percent in . In comparison, the world average is 0.00 percent, based on data from countries. Historically, the average for Austria from to is percent. The minimum value, percent, was reached in while the maximum of percent was recorded in .

Austria: Female literacy rate, ages 15-24: The latest value from is percent, unavailable from percent in . In comparison, the world average is 0.00 percent, based on data from countries. Historically, the average for Austria from to is percent. The minimum value, percent, was reached in while the maximum of percent was recorded in .

Between 2019 and 2022, it was reported that ** percent of Austrian adults had information literacy. This refers to the ability to verify the reliability of information, get information about goods or services, or read or download newspapers. Furthermore, around ** percent of Austrians reported having communication and collaboration skills, including sending messages with attached files, making calls over the internet, participating in social networks, and taking part in consultation or voting via the internet.

Abstract

PIRLS provides internationally comparative data on how well children read by assessing students’ reading achievement at the end of grade four. PIRLS 2016 is the fourth cycle of the study and collects considerable background information on how education systems provide educational opportunities to their students, as well as the factors that influence how students use this opportunity. In 2016 PIRLS was extended to include ePIRLS – an innovative assessment of online reading.

The results of PIRLS 2016 demonstrate a number of positive developments in reading literacy worldwide. For the first time in the history of the study, as many as 96 percent of fourth graders from over 60 education systems achieved above the PIRLS low international benchmark.

Geographic coverage

Nationally representative samples of approximately 4,000 students from 150 to 200 schools participated in PIRLS 2016. About 319,000 students, 310,000 parents, 16,000 teachers, and 12,000 schools participated in total.

Analysis unit

The unit of analysis describes:

• Schools

• Students

• Parents

• Teachers

Universe

All students enrolled in the grade that represents four years of schooling counting from the first year of ISCED Level 1, providing the mean age at the time of testing is at least 9.5 years.

All students enrolled in the target grade, regardless of their age, belong to the international target population and should be eligible to participate in PIRLS. Because students are sampled in two stages, first by randomly selecting a school and then randomly selecting a class from within the school, it is necessary to identify all schools in which eligible students are enrolled. Essentially, eligible schools for PIRLS are those that have any students enrolled in the target grade, regardless of type of school.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

PIRLS is designed to provide valid and reliable measurement of trends in student achievement in countries around the world, while keeping to a minimum the burden on schools, teachers, and students. The PIRLS program employs rigorous school and classroom sampling techniques so that achievement in the student population as a whole may be estimated accurately by assessing just a sample of students from a sample of schools. PIRLS assesses reading achievement at fourth grade. The PIRLS 2016 cycle also included PIRLS Literacy-a new, less difficult reading literacy assessment, and ePIRLS-an extension of PIRLS with a focus on online informational reading.

PIRLS employs a two-stage random sample design, with a sample of schools drawn as a first stage and one or more intact classes of students selected from each of the sampled schools as a second stage. Intact classes of students are sampled rather than individuals from across the grade level or of a certain age because PIRLS pays particular attention to students’ curricular and instructional experiences, and these typically are organized on a classroom basis. Sampling intact classes also has the operational advantage of less disruption to the school’s day-to-day business than individual student sampling.

SAMPLE SIZE

For most countries, the PIRLS precision requirements are met with a school sample of 150 schools and a student sample of 4,000 students for each target grade. Depending on the average class size in the country, one class from each sampled school may be sufficient to achieve the desired student sample size. For example, if the average class size in a country were 27 students, a single class from each of 150 schools would provide a sample of 4,050 students (assuming full participation by schools and students). Some countries choose to sample more than one class per school, either to increase the size of the student sample or to provide a better estimate of school level effects.

For countries choosing to participate in both PIRLS and PIRLS Literacy, the required student sample size is doubled-i.e., around 8,000 sampled students. Countries could choose to select more schools or more classes within sampled schools to achieve the required sample size. Because ePIRLS is designed to be administered to students also taking PIRLS, the PIRLS sample size requirement remains the same for countries choosing also to participate in ePIRLS.

PIRLS STRATIFIED TWO-STAGE CLUSTER SAMPLE DESIGN

The basic international sample design for PIRLS is a stratified two-stage cluster sample design, as follows:

• First Sampling Stage. For the first sampling stage, schools are sampled with probabilities proportional to their size (PPS) from the list of all schools in the population that contain eligible students. The schools in this list (or sampling frame) may be stratified (sorted) according to important demographic variables. Schools for the field test and data collection are sampled simultaneously using a systematic random sampling approach. Two replacement schools are also pre-assigned to each sampled school during the sample selection process, and these replacement schools are held in reserve in case the originally sampled school refuses to participate. Replacement schools are used solely to compensate for sample size losses in the event that the originally sampled school does not participate. School sampling is conducted for each country by Statistics Canada with assistance from IEA Hamburg, using the sampling frame provided by the country’s National Research Coordinator.

• Second Sampling Stage. The second sampling stage consists of the selection of one (or more) intact class from the target grade of each participating school. Class sampling in each country is conducted by the National Research Coordinator using the Within-School Sampling Software (WinW3S) developed by IEA Hamburg and Statistics Canada. Having secured a sampled school’s agreement to participate in the assessment, the National Research Coordinator requests information about the number of classes and teachers in the school and enters it in the WinW3S database.

Classes smaller than a specified minimum size are grouped into pseudo-classes prior to sampling. The software selects classes with equal probabilities within schools. All students in each sampled class participate in the assessment. Sampled classes that refuse to participate may not be replaced.

For countries participating in both PIRLS and PIRLS Literacy, students within a sampled class are randomly assigned either a PIRLS or PIRLS Literacy booklet through a booklet rotation system. This is done to ensure that PIRLS and PIRLS Literacy are administered to probabilistically equivalent samples. In countries taking part in ePIRLS, all students assessed in PIRLS are expected to participate in ePIRLS.

STRATIFICATION

Stratification consists of arranging the schools in the target population into groups, or strata, that share common characteristics such as geographic region or school type. Examples of stratification variables used in PIRLS include region of the country (e.g., states or provinces); school type or source of funding (e.g., public or private); language of instruction; level of urbanization (e.g., urban or rural area); socioeconomic indicators; and school performance on national examinations.

In PIRLS, stratification is used to:

• Improve the efficiency of the sample design, thereby making survey estimates more reliable

• Apply different sample designs, such as disproportionate sample allocations, to specific groups of schools (e.g., those in certain states or provinces)

• Ensure proportional representation of specific groups of schools in the sample School stratification can take two forms: explicit and implicit. In explicit stratification, a separate school list or sampling frame is constructed for each stratum and a sample of schools is drawn from that stratum. In PIRLS, the major reason for considering explicit stratification is disproportionate allocation of the school sample across strata. For example, in order to produce equally reliable estimates for each geographic region in a country, explicit stratification by region may be used to ensure the same number of schools in the sample for each region, regardless of the relative population size of the regions.

Implicit stratification consists of sorting the schools by one or more stratification variables within each explicit stratum, or within the entire sampling frame if explicit stratification is not used. The combined use of implicit strata and systematic sampling is a very simple and effective way of ensuring a proportional sample allocation of students across all implicit strata. Implicit stratification also can lead to improved reliability of achievement estimates when the implicit stratification variables are correlated with student achievement.

National Research Coordinators consult with Statistics Canada and IEA Hamburg to identify the stratification variables to be included in their sampling plans. The school sampling frame is sorted by the stratification variables prior to sampling schools so that adjacent schools are as similar as possible. Regardless of any other explicit or implicit variables that may be used, the school size is always included as an implicit stratification variable.

SCHOOL SAMPLING FRAME

One of the National Research Coordinator’s most important sampling tasks is the construction of a school sampling frame for the target population. The sampling frame is a list of all schools in the country that have students enrolled in the target grade and is the list from which the school sample is drawn. A well-constructed sampling frame provides complete coverage of the national target population without being contaminated by incorrect or duplicate entries or entries that refer to elements that are not

Abstract

The OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) is a collaborative effort undertaken by all member countries and a number of non-member partner countries to measure how well students, at age 15, are prepared to meet the challenges they may encounter in future life. Age 15 is chosen because at this age, in most OECD countries, students are approaching the end of compulsory schooling, and so, some measure of the knowledge, skills and attitudes accumulated over approximately ten years of education is gained from an assessment at this time. the PISA assessment takes a broad approach to assessing knowledge, skills and attitudes that reflect current changes in curricula, moving beyond the school based approach towards the use of knowledge in everyday tasks and challenges. the skills acquired reflect the ability of students to continue learning throughout their lives by applying what they learn in school to non-school environments, evaluating their choices and making decisions. the assessment, jointly guided by the participating governments, brings together the policy interests of countries by applying scientific expertise at both national and international levels.

PISA combines the assessment of domain-specific cognitive areas such as science, mathematics and reading with information on students' home background, their approaches to learning, their perceptions of their learning environments and their familiarity with computers. A high priority in PISA 2006 is an innovative assessment of student attitudes towards science - questions about this were contextualised within the cognitive part of the test. Bringing the attitude items closer to the cognitive questions allowed questions to be targeted at specific areas, with the focus on interest in science and students' support for scientific enquiry. Student outcomes are then associated with these background factors.

PISA uses: i) strong quality assurance mechanisms for translation, sampling and test administration; ii) measures to achieve cultural and linguistic breadth in the assessment materials, particularly through countries' participation in the development and revision processes for the production of the items; and iii) state of the art technology and methodology for data handling. the combination of these measures produces high quality instruments and outcomes with superior levels of validity and reliability to improve the understanding of education systems as well as students' knowledge, skills and attitudes.

PISA is based on a dynamic model of lifelong learning in which new knowledge and skills necessary for successful adaptation to a changing world are continuously acquired throughout life. PISA focuses on things that 15-year-old students will need in the future and seeks to assess what they can do with what they have learned. the assessment is informed, but not constrained, by the common denominator of national curricula. thus, while it does assess students' knowledge, PISA also examines their ability to reflect, and to apply their knowledge and experience to real world issues. For example, in order to understand and evaluate scientific advice on food safety an adult would need not only to know some basic facts about the composition of nutrients, but also to be able to apply that information. the term "literacy" is used to encapsulate this broader concept of knowledge and skills.

PISA is designed to collect information through three-yearly cycles and presents data on the reading, mathematical and scientific literacy of students, schools and countries. It provides insights into the factors that influence the development of skills and attitudes at home and at school, and examines how these factors interact and what the implications are for policy development.

PISA 2006 is the third cycle of a data strategy defined in 1997 by participating countries. the results allow national policy makers to compare the performance of their education systems with those of other countries. Similar to the previous cycles, the 2006 assessment covers the domains of reading, mathematical and scientific literacy, with the major focus on scientific literacy. Students also respond to a background questionnaire, and additional supporting information is gathered from the school authorities. Fifty-six countries and regions, including all 30 OECD member countries, are taking part in the PISA 2006 assessment. together, they comprise almost 90% of the world's economy.

Since the aim of PISA is to assess the cumulative yield of education systems at an age where compulsory schooling is still largely universal, testing focused on 15-year-olds enrolled in both school-based and work-based educational programmes. Between 5 000 and 10 000 students from at least 150 schools will typically be tested in each country, providing a good sampling base from which to break down the results according to a range of student characteristics.

The primary aim of the PISA assessment is to determine the extent to which young people have acquired the wider knowledge and skills in reading, mathematical and scientific literacy that they will need in adult life. the assessment of cross-curricular competencies continues to be an integral part of PISA 2006. the main reasons for this broadly oriented approach are: • Although specific knowledge acquisition is important in school learning, the application of that knowledge in adult life depends crucially on the acquisition of broader concepts and skills. In science, having specific knowledge, such as the names of plants and animals, is of less value than understanding broad topics such as energy consumption, biodiversity and human health in thinking about the issues under debate in the adult community. In reading, the capacity to develop interpretations of written material and to reflect on the content and qualities of text are central skills. In mathematics, being able to reason quantitatively and to represent relationships or dependencies is more apt than the ability to answer familiar textbook questions when it comes to deploying mathematical skills in everyday life. • In an international setting, a focus on curriculum content would restrict attention to curriculum elements common to all or most countries. this would force many compromises and result in an assessment too narrow to be of value for governments wishing to learn about the strengths and innovations in the education systems of other countries. • Certain broad, general skills are essential for students to develop. they include communication, adaptability, flexibility, problem solving and the use of information technologies. these skills are developed across the curriculum and an assessment of them requires a broad cross-curricular focus.

PISA is not a single cross-national assessment of the reading, mathematics and science skills of 15-year-old students. It is an ongoing programme that, over the longer term, will lead to the development of a body of information for monitoring trends in the knowledge and skills of students in various countries as well as in different demographic subgroups of each country. On each occasion, one domain will be tested in detail, taking up nearly two-thirds of the total testing time. the major domain was reading literacy in 2000 and mathematical literacy in 2003, and is scientific literacy in 2006. this will provide a thorough analysis of achievement in each area every nine years and a trend analysis every three. Similar to previous cycles of PISA, the total time spent on the PISA 2006 tests by each student is two hours, but information is obtained on about 390 minutes worth of test items. the total set of questions is packaged into 13 linked testing booklets. each booklet is taken by a sufficient number of students for appropriate estimates to be made of the achievement levels on all items by students in each country and in relevant sub-groups within a country (such as males and females, and students from different social and economic contexts). Students also spend 30 minutes answering questions for the context questionnaire.

The PISA assessment provides three main types of outcomes: • Basic indicators that provide baseline profile of the knowledge and skills of students. • Contextual indicators that show how such skills relate to important demographic, social, economic and educational variables. • Indicators on trends that emerge from the on-going nature of the data collection and that show changes in outcome levels and distributions, and in relationships between student-level and school-level background variables and outcomes.

Geographic coverage

OECD countries - Australia - Austria - Belgium - Canada - Czech Republic - Denmark - Finland - France - Germany - Greece - Hungary - Iceland - Ireland - Italy - Japan - Korea - Luxembourg - Mexico - Netherlands - New Zealand - Norway - Poland - Portugal - Slovak Republic - Spain - Sweden - Switzerland - Turkey - United Kingdom - United States

Partner countries/economies - Argentina - Azerbaijan - Brazil - Bulgaria - Chile - Colombia - Croatia - Estonia - Hong Kong-China - Indonesia - Israel - Jordan - Kyrgyzstan - Latvia - Liechtenstein - Lithuania - Macao-China - Montenegro - Qatar - Romania - Russian Federation - Serbia - Slovenia - Chinese Taipei - Thailand - Tunisia - Uruguay

Analysis unit

• Individuals
• Schools

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The questionnaires seek information about: • Students and their family backgrounds, including their economic, social and cultural capital • Aspects of students' lives, such as their attitudes towards learning, their habits and life inside school, and their family environment • Aspects of schools, such

Sample description with regard to sociodemographic variables (n = 558).

Coherence of demographic variables and general awareness regarding PRWs.

Coherence of psychographic variables and general awareness regarding PRWs.

Types of interaction with PRWs and association with demographic variables.

BackgroundChronic pain is among the most burdensome conditions. Its prevalence ranges between 12% and 30% in Europe, with an estimated 21% among Austrian adults. The economic impact of chronic pain from a societal perspective, however, has not been sufficiently researched. This study aims to provide an estimate of the societal costs for working-age adults with chronic pain in Austria. It explores the impact of sex, number of pain sites, self-reported pain severity, health literacy and private health insurance on costs associated with chronic pain.MethodsA bottom-up cost-of-illness study was conducted based on data collected from 54 adult patients with chronic pain at three Viennese hospital outpatient departments. Information on healthcare costs including out-of-pocket expenses and productivity losses due to absenteeism and informal care were collected over 12 months. Resource use estimates were combined with unit costs and mean costs per patient were calculated in € for year 2016.ResultsMean annual societal costs were estimated at EUR 10191. Direct medical costs were EUR 5725 including EUR 1799 out-of-pocket expenses (mainly pain relieving activities and private therapy). Productivity losses including informal care amounted to EUR 4466. Total costs for women and patients with three or more pain sites were significantly higher. No association with health literacy was found but there was a tendency towards higher out-of-pocket expenses for patients with complementary private health insurance.ConclusionThis study is the first to provide a comprehensive assessment of the individual and societal burden of chronic pain in Austria. It highlights that chronic pain is associated with substantial direct medical costs and productivity losses. Patient costs may show systematic differences by health insurance status, implying a need for future research in this area.

Types of interaction with PRWs and association with psychographic variables.

PRW brand recognition.

PRW brand recall.