Argentina AR: Literacy Rate: Adult: % of People Aged 15 and Above data was reported at 97.193 % in 2001. This records an increase from the previous number of 96.041 % for 1991. Argentina AR: Literacy Rate: Adult: % of People Aged 15 and Above data is updated yearly, averaging 96.041 % from Dec 1980 (Median) to 2001, with 3 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 97.193 % in 2001 and a record low of 93.913 % in 1980. Argentina AR: Literacy Rate: Adult: % of People Aged 15 and Above data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Argentina – Table AR.World Bank.WDI: Social: Education Statistics. Adult literacy rate is the percentage of people ages 15 and above who can both read and write with understanding a short simple statement about their everyday life.;UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS). UIS.Stat Bulk Data Download Service. Accessed September 19, 2023. https://apiportal.uis.unesco.org/bdds.;Weighted average;

Literacy rate, youth female (% of females ages 15-24) in Argentina was reported at 99.76 % in 2018, according to the World Bank collection of development indicators, compiled from officially recognized sources. Argentina - Literacy rate, youth female (% of females ages 15-24) - actual values, historical data, forecasts and projections were sourced from the World Bank on July of 2025.

Argentina: Literacy rate: The latest value from 2001 is 97 percent, an increase from 96 percent in 1991. In comparison, the world average is 83.69 percent, based on data from 31 countries. Historically, the average for Argentina from 1980 to 2001 is 95.67 percent. The minimum value, 94 percent, was reached in 1980 while the maximum of 97 percent was recorded in 2001.

Literacy rate, adult total (% of people ages 15 and above) in Argentina was reported at 99 % in 2018, according to the World Bank collection of development indicators, compiled from officially recognized sources. Argentina - Literacy rate, adult total (% of people ages 15 and above) - actual values, historical data, forecasts and projections were sourced from the World Bank on July of 2025.

Elderly literacy rate, population 65+ years, male (%) in Argentina was reported at 98.15 % in 2018, according to the World Bank collection of development indicators, compiled from officially recognized sources. Argentina - Elderly literacy rate, population 65+ years, male - actual values, historical data, forecasts and projections were sourced from the World Bank on June of 2025.

Literacy rate, adult male (% of males ages 15 and above) in Argentina was reported at 98.94 % in 2018, according to the World Bank collection of development indicators, compiled from officially recognized sources. Argentina - Literacy rate, adult male (% of males ages 15 and above) - actual values, historical data, forecasts and projections were sourced from the World Bank on July of 2025.

Historical chart and dataset showing Argentina literacy rate by year from 1980 to 2001.

Historical dataset showing Argentina literacy rate by year from 1980 to 2001.

Argentina AR: Literacy Rate: Youth Female: % of Females Aged 15-24 data was reported at 99.000 % in 2001. This stayed constant from the previous number of 99.000 % for 1991. Argentina AR: Literacy Rate: Youth Female: % of Females Aged 15-24 data is updated yearly, averaging 99.000 % from Dec 1980 (Median) to 2001, with 3 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 99.000 % in 2001 and a record low of 97.000 % in 1980. Argentina AR: Literacy Rate: Youth Female: % of Females Aged 15-24 data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Argentina – Table AR.World Bank.WDI: Social: Education Statistics. Youth literacy rate is the percentage of people ages 15-24 who can both read and write with understanding a short simple statement about their everyday life.;UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS). UIS.Stat Bulk Data Download Service. Accessed April 5, 2025. https://apiportal.uis.unesco.org/bdds.;Weighted average;

Argentina AR: Gender Parity Index (GPI): Literacy Rate: Youth Aged 15-24 data was reported at 1.000 Ratio in 2001. This stayed constant from the previous number of 1.000 Ratio for 1991. Argentina AR: Gender Parity Index (GPI): Literacy Rate: Youth Aged 15-24 data is updated yearly, averaging 1.000 Ratio from Dec 1980 (Median) to 2001, with 3 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 1.000 Ratio in 2001 and a record low of 1.000 Ratio in 2001. Argentina AR: Gender Parity Index (GPI): Literacy Rate: Youth Aged 15-24 data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Argentina – Table AR.World Bank.WDI: Social: Education Statistics. Gender parity index for youth literacy rate is the ratio of females to males ages 15-24 who can both read and write with understanding a short simple statement about their everyday life.;UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS). UIS.Stat Bulk Data Download Service. Accessed April 5, 2025. https://apiportal.uis.unesco.org/bdds.;Weighted average;

Elderly literacy rate, population 65+ years, both sexes (%) in Argentina was reported at 97.58 % in 2018, according to the World Bank collection of development indicators, compiled from officially recognized sources. Argentina - Elderly literacy rate, population 65+ years, both sexes - actual values, historical data, forecasts and projections were sourced from the World Bank on July of 2025.

Argentine: Literacy rate: Pour cet indicateur, UNESCO fournit des données pour la Argentine de 1980 à 2001. La valeur moyenne pour Argentine pendant cette période était de 95.67 pour cent avec un minimum de 94 pour cent en 1980 et un maximum de 97 pour cent en 2001.

Argentina AR: Literacy Rate: Youth Male: % of Males Aged 15-24 data was reported at 99.000 % in 2001. This records an increase from the previous number of 98.000 % for 1991. Argentina AR: Literacy Rate: Youth Male: % of Males Aged 15-24 data is updated yearly, averaging 98.000 % from Dec 1980 (Median) to 2001, with 3 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 99.000 % in 2001 and a record low of 96.000 % in 1980. Argentina AR: Literacy Rate: Youth Male: % of Males Aged 15-24 data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Argentina – Table AR.World Bank.WDI: Social: Education Statistics. Youth literacy rate is the percentage of people ages 15-24 who can both read and write with understanding a short simple statement about their everyday life.;UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS). UIS.Stat Bulk Data Download Service. Accessed April 5, 2025. https://apiportal.uis.unesco.org/bdds.;Weighted average;

Literacy rate, youth (ages 15-24), gender parity index (GPI) in Argentina was reported at 1.0052 % in 2018, according to the World Bank collection of development indicators, compiled from officially recognized sources. Argentina - Ratio of young literate females to males (% ages 15-24) - actual values, historical data, forecasts and projections were sourced from the World Bank on July of 2025.

Argentine: Youth literacy rate, ages 15-24: Pour cet indicateur, UNESCO fournit des données pour la Argentine de 1980 à 2001. La valeur moyenne pour Argentine pendant cette période était de 98 pour cent avec un minimum de 97 pour cent en 1980 et un maximum de 99 pour cent en 2001.

Abstract

The PIRLS 2011 aimed to generate a database of student achievement data in addition to information on student, parent, teacher, and school background data for the 57 areas that participated

Geographic coverage

In 2011, nationally representative samples of students in 49 countries participated in PIRLS and prePIRLS. Forty-five countries assessed fourth grade students, and some countries participated in one or more of the other available options initiated in 2011 to permit wider participation at the end of the primary school cycle: four countries assessed their sixth-grade students; and three countries participated in prePIRLS, a less difficult version of PIRLS inaugurated in 2011 to be a stepping stone to PIRLS. In addition, PIRLS 2011 included nine benchmarking participants, mostly regions of countries that also participated in PIRLS, including three Canadian provinces, two Emirates, the Andalusian region of Spain, and the US state of Florida. Malta and South Africa used benchmarking to collect information relevant to their language of instruction policies.

Analysis unit

Units of analysis in the study are schools, students, parents and teachers

Universe

PIRLS is a study of student achievement in reading comprehension in primary school and is targeted at the grade level in which students are at the transition from learning to read to reading to learn, which is the fourth grade in most countries. The formal definition of the PIRLS target population makes use of UNESCO's International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) in identifying the appropriate target grade:

"…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. For most countries, the target grade should be the fourth grade, or its national equivalent."

As a new initiative in 2011, prePIRLS was developed as a less difficult version of PIRLS to provide more assessment options for developing countries where students may not be prepared for the demands of PIRLS. prePIRLS is based on the same view of reading comprehension as PIRLS but is designed to assess basic reading skills that are a prerequisite for success on PIRLS. Botswana, Colombia, and South Africa administered prePIRLS to their fourth grade students. Colombia also administered PIRLS to the same fourth grade students, providing the basis for a link between the PIRLS and prePIRLS scales.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The basic sample design used in PIRLS 2011 was a two-stage stratified cluster design, with the first stage consisting of a sample of schools, and the second stage consisting of a sample of intact classrooms from the target grade in the sampled schools. 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.

Each country participating in PIRLS 2011 needed a plan for defining its national target population and applying the TIMSS and PIRLS sampling methods to achieve a nationally representative sample of schools and students. The development and implementation of the national sampling plan is a collaborative exercise involving the country’s National Research Coordinator (NRC) and the PIRLS sampling experts.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

• PIRLS Background Questionnaires By gathering information about children’s experiences together with reading achievement on the PIRLS test, it is possible to identify the factors or combinations of factors that relate to high reading literacy. An important part of the PIRLS design is a set of questionnaires targeting factors related to reading literacy. PIRLS administered four questionnaires: to the tested students, to their parents, to their reading teachers, and to their school principals.

• Student Questionnaire Each student taking the PIRLS reading assessment completes the student questionnaire. The questionnaire asks about aspects of students’ home and school experiences – including instructional experiences and reading for homework, selfperceptions and attitudes towards reading, out-of-school reading habits, computer use, home literacy resources, and basic demographic information.

• Learning to Read (Home) Survey The learning to read survey is completed by the parents or primary caregivers of each student taking the PIRLS reading assessment. It addresses child-parent literacy interactions, home literacy resources, parents’ reading habits and attitudes, homeschool connections, and basic demographic and socioeconomic indicators.

• Teacher Questionnaire The reading teacher of each fourth-grade class sampled for PIRLS completes a questionnaire designed to gather information about classroom contexts for developing reading literacy. This questionnaire asks teachers about characteristics of the class tested (such as size, reading levels of the students, and the language abilities of the students). It also asks about instructional time, materials and activities for teaching reading and promoting the development of their students’ reading literacy, and the grouping of students for reading instruction. Questions about classroom resources, assessment practices, and home-school connections also are included. The questionnaire also asks teachers for their views on opportunities for professional development and collaboration with other teachers, and for information about their education and training.

• School Questionnaire The principal of each school sampled for PIRLS responds to the school questionnaire. It asks school principals about enrollment and school characteristics (such as where the school is located, resources available in the surrounding area, and indicators of the socioeconomic background of the student body), characteristics of reading education in the school, instructional time, school resources (such as the availability of instructional materials and staff), home-school connections, and the school climate.

Response rate

For a full table of school participation rates, which vary by country, please see Appendix C on page 262 of the PIRLS 2011 Report.

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

In the third quarter of 2024, an internet user in Argentina spent, on average, ** minutes (or *** hour and ** minutes) per day reading online or print press media. That is around *** percent less than in 2020, when the average amounted to ** minutes (one hour and ** minutes).

The aim of this study was to chart the media participation of adolescents in Argentina, Egypt, Finland and India. The questions surveyed personal, social and public use of media as well as media literacy. First, the respondents were asked what media equipment (e.g. newspapers, radio, television, mobile phone, music players, video game consoles, computers) they had access to at home or somewhere else, and how often the respondents used them. They were also asked if a variety of media-related services were offered in their community/neighbourhood (e.g. libraries, movie theatres, internet cafés). In addition, the survey examined respondents' opinions on a variety of statements relating to matters such as media skills, rules for media use in the family, interest in media content, and fandom. Next, the respondents were asked which media they used for information-seeking regarding schoolwork, practical everyday matters such as timetables or the weather, current events and politics, puberty and sexuality, products and services, and which media they used for e.g. contacting relatives and friends, searching for a romantic partner, or contacting celebrities. They were also asked if they used media together with their families, friends, partners or virtual friends. It was asked if the respondents published their opinions via different media channels about social, political, cultural and environmental matters or human rights matters. The respondents were also asked if they would have liked to publish their opinions more often and why they had not done so. In addition to publishing opinions, they were asked if they published their own creative content, such as text, music, drawings, videos or computer programmes. Regarding media literacy, opinions were examined on the reliability and truthfulness of news articles, television programmes, internet pages, and advertisements. It was also surveyed whether the respondents thought that young people should be discussed more often in the media. They were also asked if the media often portrayed a distorted image of foreign countries and cultures. Next, the respondents' interest in a variety of themes was examined (both in "factual" and in "fictional" media), along with whether they published opinions or content regarding these themes or discussed them with other people (the themes included e.g. news, politics and society, the environment, human rights, sports, beauty and fashion, art, science, history, technology, and celebrities). The respondents were also asked if they had ever been interviewed for a newspaper article, a radio or television programme or some other medium, and to what extent it was possible for young people to have their opinions heard. The survey also charted respondents' experiences of limitations set on media use by e.g. governmental authorities or legislation, religion, school, family or friends. Finally, the respondents' internet use was surveyed with regard to how often they used the internet in different places (e.g. at school, at home, at a friend's home, in public or on a mobile phone) and for different purposes (e.g. information-seeking, e-mail, shopping, instant messaging, social media, gaming, or watching videos/movies). The respondents' mobile phone use was also examined with regard to how often they used a mobile phone for phone calls, SMS messages, gaming, listening to music or radio, using the internet, taking photos and watching videos, among others. Background variables included age, gender, country, type of neighbourhood, parents' occupations (categorised), ethnic group as well as the language spoken at home and the language used for responding to the questionnaire (mother tongue/English).

Abstract

PISA assesses the extent to which students near the end of compulsory education have acquired some of the knowledge and skills that are essential for full participation in modern societies, with a focus on reading, mathematics and science. PISA focuses on young people’s ability to use their knowledge and skills to meet real-life challenges. This orientation reflects a change in the goals and objectives of curricula themselves, which are increasingly concerned with what students can do with what they learn at school and not merely with whether they have mastered specific curricular content. PISA also aims to examine students' learning strategies, their competencies in areas such as problem solving that involves multiple disciplines and their interests in different topics. This kind of broader assessment started in PISA 2000, which asked students about their motivation and other aspects of their attitudes towards learning, their familiarity with computers and, under the heading "self-regulated learning", about their strategies for managing and monitoring their own education. The assessment of students' motivations and attitudes continued in PISA 2006, with special attention given to students' attitudes towards and interest in science. Returning to reading as the major subject of assessment, PISA 2009 focused on students' engagement in reading activities and their understanding about their own reading and learning strategies.

PISA’s unique features include: - Policy orientation, which connects data on student learning outcomes with data on students’ characteristics and on key factors shaping their learning in and out of school in order to draw attention to differences in performance patterns and to identify the characteristics of students, schools and education systems that have high performance standards. - Innovative concept of “literacy”, which refers to the capacity of students to apply knowledge and skills in key subject areas and to analyse, reason and communicate effectively as they pose, interpret and solve problems in a variety of situations. - Relevance to lifelong learning, which does not limit PISA to assessing students’ competencies in school subjects, but also asks them to report on their own motivation to learn, their beliefs about themselves and their learning strategies. - Regularity, which enables countries to monitor their progress in meeting key learning objectives. - Breadth of geographical coverage and collaborative nature, which, in PISA 2009, encompasses the 34 OECD member countries and 41 partner countries and economies.

Geographic coverage

75 countries and economies, including all 34 OECD countries and 41 partner countries and economies: Albania, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Chinese Taipei, Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Himachal Pradesh-India, Hong Kong-China, Hungary, Iceland, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan Korea, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Macao-China, Malaysia, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Miranda-Venezuela, Montenegro, Netherlands, Netherlands-Antilles, New Zealand, Norway, Panama, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Russian Federation, Serbia, Shanghai-China, Singapore, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Tamil Nadu-India, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay, Vietnam.

Analysis unit

• Individual (student, parent)
• School

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The specific sample design and size for each country aimed to maximise sampling efficiency for student-level estimates. In OECD countries, sample sizes ranged from 4,410 students in Iceland to 38,250 students in Mexico. Countries with large samples have often implemented PISA both at national and regional/state levels (e.g. Australia, Belgium, Canada, Italy, Mexico, Spain, Switzerland and the United Kingdom). The selection of samples was monitored internationally and adhered to rigorous standards for the participation rate, both among schools selected by the international contractor and among students within these schools, to ensure that the PISA results reflect the skills of the 15-year-old students in participating countries. Countries were also required to administer the test to students in identical ways to ensure that students receive the same information prior to and during the assessment.

When a school has been selected to participate in PISA, a school co-ordinator is appointed. The school coordinator compiles a list of all 15-year-olds in the school and sends this list to the PISA National Centre in the country, which randomly selects 35 students to participate. The school co-ordinator then contacts the students who have been selected for the sample and obtains the necessary permissions from parents. The testing session is usually conducted by a test administrator who is trained and employed by the National Centre. The test administrator contacts the school co-ordinator to schedule administration of the assessment. The school coordinator ensures that the students attend the testing sessions. This can sometimes be difficult because students may come from different grades and different classes. The test administrator's primary tasks are to ensure that each test booklet is distributed to the correct student and to introduce the tests to the students. After the test is over, the test administrator collects the test booklets and sends them to the National Centre for coding.

In PISA 2009, 13 different test booklets were used in each country. Each booklet had a different subset of PISA questions, so that students answered overlapping groups of questions, in order to produce a wide range of test items while limiting the test time for each student. With 13 different booklets, in each group of 35 students, no more than 3 students were given the same booklet. Booklets were allocated to individual students according to a random selection process. The test administrator's introduction came from a prescribed text so that all students in different schools and countries received exactly the same instructions. Before starting the test, the students were asked to do a practice question from their booklets. The testing session was divided into two parts: the two-hour-long test to assess their knowledge and skills, and the questionnaire session to collect data on their personal background, their learning habits, their attitudes towards reading, and their engagement and motivation. The length of the questionnaire session varied across countries, depending on the options chosen for inclusion, but generally was about 30 minutes. Students were usually given a short break half-way through the test and again before they did the questionnaire.

For more information on PISA's technical background, refer to the documents "PISA 2009 Results: Overcoming Social Background - Volume II", Annex A and "PISA 2009 Technical Report" that are provided as external resources.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

• Questionnaire on Educational Career: Different aspects of experience at school
• ICT Familiarity Component for the Student Questionnaire: Availability of ICT, General computer use, Use of ICT at home, Use of ICT at school, Attitude toward computers
• Parent Questionnaire: Basic parent characteristics, Child's past reading engagement, Parent's own reading engagement, Home reading resources and support, Parent's background, Parent's perception of and involvement in school, School choice
• Reading for School: The kind of reading typically done for school
• School Questionnaire: The Structure and organization of the school, The student and teacher body, The school's resources, School curriculum and assessment, School climate, School policies and practices, About respondent
• Student Questionnaire: About respondent, Family and home, Reading activities, Learning time, School, Test language lessons, Libraries, Strategies in reading and understanding texts

Response rate

• School Response Rates: A response rate of 85% was required for initially selected schools. If the initial school response rate fell between 65% and 85%, an acceptable school response rate could still be achieved through the use of replacement schools. To compensate for a sampled school that did not participate, where possible, two potential replacement schools were identified. Furthermore, a school with a student participation rate between 25% and 50% was not considered as a participating school for the purposes of calculating and documenting response rates. However, data from such schools were included in the database and contributed to the estimates included in the initial PISA international report. Data from schools with a student participation rate of less than 25% were not included in the database, and such schools were regarded as non-respondents.

• Student Response Rates: An overall response rate of 80% of selected students in participating schools was required. A student who had participated in the original or follow-up cognitive sessions was considered to be a participant. A minimum student response rate of 50% within each school was required for a school to be regarded as participating: the overall student response rate was computed using only students from schools with at least a 50% student response rate. Again, weighted student response rates were used for assessing this standard. Each student was weighted by the reciprocal of his/her sample selection