Literacy in Everyday Life

Results From the 2003

National Assessment 

of Adult Literacy 

U.S. Department of Education

NCES 2007–480

Literacy in Everyday Life

Results From the 2003

National Assessment 

of Adult Literacy 

April 2007

Mark Kutner

Elizabeth Greenberg

Ying Jin

Bridget Boyle

Yung-chen Hsu

Eric Dunleavy

American Institutes 

for Research

Sheida White

Project Officer

National Center for 

Education Statistics

U.S. Department of Education

NCES 2007–480
U.S. Department of Education

Margaret Spellings

Secretary

Institute of Education Sciences

Grover J. Whitehurst

Director

National Center for Education Statistics

Mark Schneider

Commissioner

The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) is the primary federal entity for collecting, analyzing, and reporting data

related to education in the United States and other nations. It fulfills a congressional mandate to collect, collate, analyze, and

report full and complete statistics on the condition of education in the United States; conduct and publish reports and specialized analyses of the meaning and significance of such statistics; assist state and local education agencies in improving

their statistical systems; and review and report on education activities in foreign countries.

NCES activities are designed to address high-priority education data needs; provide consistent, reliable, complete, and accurate indicators of education status and trends; and report timely, useful, and high-quality data to the U.S. Department of

Education, the Congress, the states, other education policymakers, practitioners, data users, and the general public. Unless

specifically noted, all information contained herein is in the public domain.

We strive to make our products available in a variety of formats and in language that is appropriate to a variety of audiences.

You, as our customer, are the best judge of our success in communicating information effectively. If you have any comments

or suggestions about this or any other NCES product or report, we would like to hear from you. Please direct your comments

to:

National Center for Education Statistics

Institute of Education Sciences

U.S. Department of Education

1990 K Street NW

Washington, DC 20006–5651

April 2007

The NCES World Wide Web Home Page address is http://nces.ed.gov.

The NCES World Wide Web Electronic Catalog is http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch.

Suggested Citation

Kutner, M., Greenberg, E., Jin, Y., Boyle, B., Hsu, Y., and Dunleavy, E. (2007). Literacy in Everyday Life: Results From the 2003

National Assessment of Adult Literacy (NCES 2007–480). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for

Education Statistics.

For ordering information on this report, write to:

U.S. Department of Education

ED Pubs

P.O. Box 1398

Jessup, MD 20794–1398

or call toll free 1–877–4ED–Pubs or order online at http://www.edpubs.org.

Content Contact

Sheida White

(202) 502-7473

sheida.white@ed.gov
Executive Summary

The 2003 National Assessment of Adult

Literacy (NAAL) assessed the English literacy of adults in the United States for the

first time since the 1992 National Adult Literacy

Survey. The assessment was administered to more

than 19,000 adults (ages 16 and older) in households or prisons. Unlike indirect measures of literacy, which rely on self-reports and other subjective

evaluations, the assessment measured literacy directly through tasks completed by adults. These tasks

represent a range of literacy activities that adults are

likely to face in their daily lives.

Three types of literacy were measured by the assessment on scales of 0 to 500:

■ Prose literacy.The knowledge and skills needed to search, comprehend, and use information from continuous texts. Prose examples

include editorials, news stories, brochures, and

instructional materials.

■ Document literacy. The knowledge and skills

needed to search, comprehend, and use information from noncontinuous texts. Document

examples include job applications, payroll

forms, transportation schedules, maps, tables,

and drug and food labels.

■ Quantitative literacy. The knowledge and

skills needed to identify and perform computations using numbers that are embedded in

printed materials. Examples include balancing 

iii

Literacy Levels

Cautions in Interpretation

Demographic Characteristics

and Literacy

Education and Literacy

Employment, Earnings, and

Job Training

Literacy and the Family

Community and Civic

Involvement
a checkbook, figuring out a tip, completing an

order form, and determining the amount of

interest on a loan from an advertisement.

This report describes how adults use written information in workplace, family, and community settings, as well as the relationship between literacy and

formal education.The analyses in this report examine differences related to literacy based on selfreported background characteristics among groups

in 2003, as well as changes within groups between

1992 and 2003, by using standard t tests to determine

statistical significance. Statistical significance is

reported at p < .05. Differences that are not statistically significant either are not discussed or are

referred to as “not statistically significant.”

Literacy Levels

The Committee on Performance Levels for Adult

Literacy, appointed by the National Research

Council’s Board on Testing and Assessment (BOTA),

recommended a set of performance levels for the

prose, document, and quantitative scales. Drawing on

the committee’s recommendations, the U.S.

Department of Education decided to report the

assessment results by using four literacy levels for

these scales: Below Basic, Basic, Intermediate, and

Proficient.

BOTA’s Committee on Performance Levels for Adult

Literacy also recommended reporting the 2003 results

by using a separate category: nonliterate in English.

Adults were considered to be nonliterate in English if

they were unable to complete a minimum number of

simple literacy questions or if they were unable to

communicate in English or Spanish.Adults who were

classified as nonliterate in English because they could

not complete a minimum number of simple literacy

questions were generally able to complete the background questionnaire, which was administered orally

in either English or Spanish; for reporting purposes,

they were included in the Below Basic literacy level.

Adults who were classified as nonliterate in English

because they were unable to communicate in either

English or Spanish could not complete the background questionnaire; they are not included in the

analyses in this report that rely on background data.

Adults who could not be tested because of a cognitive or mental disability are also not included in the

analyses in this report,but in the absence of any information about their literacy abilities, they are not considered to be nonliterate in English.

Cautions in Interpretation

The purpose of this report is to examine the relationship between literacy and various self-reported

background factors.This report is purely descriptive

in nature. Readers are cautioned not to draw causal

inferences based solely on the results presented here.

It is important to note that many of the variables

examined in this report are related to one another,

and complex interactions and relationships have not

been explored here.

Demographic Characteristics and Literacy

Between 1992 and 2003, there were no statistically

significant changes in average prose and document

literacy for the total population ages 16 and older,

while average quantitative literacy increased. The

percentage of adults with Below Basic quantitative literacy decreased, and the percentage of adults with

Proficient prose and document literacy also decreased.

In 2003, some 5 percent of adults were nonliterate in

English.

Women had higher average prose and document literacy than men in 2003, which was a change from

1992.In 1992,men had higher average document literacy than women, and the differences between men

and women in prose literacy were not statistically

significant. Men had higher average quantitative literacy than women in both 1992 and 2003, but the

gap between men and women narrowed.

iv

Literacy in Everyday Life
The prose, document, and quantitative literacy of

Black adults increased between 1992 and 2003, and

the prose literacy of Asian/Pacific Islander adults also

increased. The average prose and document literacy

of Hispanic adults decreased, but there was not a statistically significant change for Hispanic adults on the

quantitative scale.There were no statistically significant changes in prose and document literacy for

White adults, although their quantitative literacy

increased. In 2003,White and Asian/Pacific Islander

adults had higher average prose, document, and

quantitative literacy than Black and Hispanic adults.

Black adults had higher average prose and document

literacy than Hispanic adults.

Adults who spoke only English before starting school

had higher average document literacy than other

adults.They also had higher average prose and quantitative literacy than adults who spoke Spanish before

starting school.Among adults who spoke a language

other than English before starting school, average

prose and document literacy decreased as the age at

which individuals learned English increased.

Between 1992 and 2003, the average literacy of adults

50 years of age and older increased on all three scales.

Between 1992 and 2003, there was a decline in the

average prose literacy of adults between the ages of 25

and 39 and between the ages of 40 and 49.Among all

age groups, adults ages 65 and older had the lowest

average prose, document, and quantitative literacy.

Adults who had been diagnosed or identified as having a learning disability had lower average prose, document, and quantitative literacy than adults who did

not have a learning disability. On all three scales, a

higher percentage of adults with a learning disability

had Below Basic literacy and a lower percentage had

Proficient literacy than adults who did not have a

learning disability.

A higher percentage of adults with Below Basic prose,

document, and quantitative literacy lived in households with income below $10,000 than adults with

higher levels of literacy.A higher percentage of adults

with Proficient prose, document, and quantitative literacy than adults with lower levels of literacy lived in

households with incomes above $100,000.

Education and Literacy

Educational attainment increased between 1992 and

2003, with a higher percentage of adults completing

an associate’s or college degree and fewer adults ending their education before completing high school.

In 2003, average prose, document, and quantitative

literacy increased with each increasing level of education, except for students who were still in high

school.

Adults who received their high school diploma or

college degree at an age that indicated they likely

began school at the traditional age and continued

straight through until graduation had higher levels of

prose, document, and quantitative literacy than adults

who received their high school diploma or college

degree when they were older.

Between 1992 and 2003, prose literacy declined for

adults with a high school diploma, and prose and

document literacy declined for adults with some college or with higher levels of education. There were

no statistically significant changes in quantitative literacy at any education level between 1992 and 2003.

White adults had higher average prose literacy scores

than Black and Hispanic adults for all levels of educational attainment. Between 1992 and 2003, average

prose and quantitative literacy scores increased for

Black adults with a high school diploma, a GED, or

some vocational classes taken after high school.

Average prose literacy declined among Hispanic

adults at all educational levels except those who were

still in high school or who had a college degree or

higher.Average document literacy decreased among

Hispanic adults who had completed some college or

v

Executive Summary
obtained an associate’s degree or whose highest educational level was less than high school or some high

school.

Employment, Earnings, and Job Training

In 2003, adults with higher literacy levels were more

likely to be employed full-time and less likely to be

out of the labor force than adults with lower literacy

levels.Adults with lower literacy levels also generally

earned lower incomes.

On all three literacy scales, a higher percentage of

adults with Proficient literacy were employed in professional and related occupations and management,

business, and financial occupations than in other

occupations. Many individuals with lower literacy

levels were employed in service occupations.

Specifically, 30 to 35 percent of adults with Below

Basic and 22 to 24 percent of adults with Basic

prose, document, and quantitative literacy worked

in service jobs, compared with 7 to 10 percent of

adults with Proficient prose, document, and quantitative literacy.

Women with higher levels of literacy were less likely to have received public assistance than women

with low levels of literacy. If they had received public assistance, they did so for a shorter amount of time

than women with lower literacy levels.

Most adults who thought their reading, mathematics,

or computer skills limited their job opportunities had

not participated in any job training in the past year.

Literacy and the Family

In 2003, a higher percentage of parents with

Intermediate or Proficient prose literacy than parents

with Basic or Below Basic prose literacy read to their

young children 5 or more days per week. A higher

percentage of parents with Intermediate or Proficient

prose literacy than parents with lower levels of literacy had children between the ages of 3 and 5 who

knew the alphabet.

A higher percentage of parents with Intermediate or

Proficient prose literacy than parents with Basic or

Below Basic prose literacy talked to their school-age

children every day about things they studied in

school.The percentage of parents who never helped

their children with homework or worked on homework with their children declined with each higher

prose literacy level.

Community and Civic Involvement

Among U.S. citizens of voting age, the percentage of

adults who voted in the 2000 presidential election

was higher in each prose and document literacy level

than in the next lower level.Adults with lower levels

of prose and document literacy were also less likely

to obtain information about current events, public

affairs, and the government from a variety of print

and nonprint sources than were adults with higher

levels of literacy.

Adults with higher levels of prose and document literacy gave unpaid time as a volunteer to a group or

an organization more frequently than adults with

lower levels of literacy; the percentage of adults who

volunteered once a week or more during the previous year increased at each higher level of literacy.

Adults with higher levels of prose and document literacy were also more likely to send and receive email or to use the Internet—two activities generally

required for participating in online communities.

vi

Literacy in Everyday Life
Acknowledgments

The National Assessment of Adult Literacy

(NAAL) is a complex project whose successful completion is due to the work of

countless individuals from many organizations. We

at the American Institutes for Research (AIR)

especially want to thank the staff at the National

Center for Education Statistics (NCES) who have

supported the project. Sheida White, the NAAL

project officer, has provided substantive guidance

and direction to all aspects of the assessment. Her

intellectual contributions are reflected throughout

the assessment, analyses, and report. Andrew

Kolstad, the project’s senior technical advisor and

project officer of the 1992 National Adult Literacy

Survey, provided both technical guidance and an

institutional memory throughout the project and

helped us reflect on all statistical and technical

issues. Steven Gorman also played a key role in

guiding all aspects of the assessment, especially those

related to the statistical aspects of the assessment.

Peggy Carr, NCES Associate Commissioner for

Assessment,provided the project and team members

with ongoing support, recommendations, and

encouragement. William Tirre and Arnold

Goldstein of NCES played invaluable roles in

reviewing the report and guiding it through the

review process. We also thank Marilyn Seastrom,

NCES Chief Statistician, and members of the

NCES/Education Statistics Services Institute (ESSI)

Technical Review Team, Kevin Bromer, LaTisha

Jones,Alison Slade,Aparna Sundaram, and Jed Tank,

vii
who reviewed the report and made many suggestions

that have improved the final product. Other government reviewers who provided thoughtful comments

are Tom Snyder and John Wirt of NCES; Cheryl

Keenan, Director, Division of Adult Education and

Literacy in the Office of Vocational and Adult

Education (OVAE); and Ricardo Hernandez of

OVAE.We also want to thank Jaleh Soroui of the ESSI

for her ongoing substantive contributions to the

NAAL. Young Chun, Linda Shafer, and Alan

Vanneman of the National Assessment of Educational

Progress (NAEP-ESSI) reviewed the report and provided important comments and suggestions.

Our colleagues at Westat, Inc., planned, developed,

and implemented the complex sampling and weighting necessary for the successful completion of the

assessment. Westat also planned and carried out all

phases of the data collection and was responsible for

training and managing a group of 400 field data collection staff.This study could not have been successful without the outstanding work of the Westat project director, Martha Berlin, and the Westat team,

including Michelle Amsbary, Leyla Mohadjer, and

Jacquie Hogan.

Many staff at AIR made substantial contributions to

this report, often under tight timelines. Stéphane Baldi

and Justin Baer, senior members of the AIR NAAL

team,provided substantive and technical contributions

throughout the duration of the project. Rachel

Greenberg and Elizabeth Moore provided ongoing

research and technical support in developing the

assessment, preparing the data and text, and shepherding the report through the revision and review

process.Terry Salinger, Larry Condelli, and Jon Cohen

provided technical support, guidance, and suggestions

during many phases of the NAAL project.

We are especially appreciative of the skills and contributions by Holly Baker, who edited the report

through multiple revisions, and by Heather Block,

who designed and redesigned the report. Also, Janan

Musa provided the AIR team with guidance and

administrative and logistical support throughout the

project.

We also want to acknowledge the essential contributions of three other individuals.Archie Lapointe was

an active member of the AIR team during the early

stages of the NAAL, and the project greatly benefited from his experience and wisdom.Another former

member of the AIR team, Eugene Johnson, who

directed the assessment’s psychometrics and preliminary analysis activities, played an essential role in the

project.We also want to acknowledge the contributions of Richard Venezky, who provided invaluable

guidance, support, and friendship, and whose memory we cherish.

Thousands of adults participated in the assessment.

Their willingness to spend time answering the background questions and assessment items was essential

to ensuring that meaningful data about the literacy of

America’s adults could be obtained.This study would

not have been possible without their participation.

viii

Literacy in Everyday Life
Contents

Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii

Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii

List of Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi

List of Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xvii

Chapter 1: Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Defining and Measuring Literacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Establishing Literacy Levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Conducting the Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Interpretation of Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Cautions in Interpretation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Organization of the Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Chapter 2: Demographic Characteristics and Literacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Total Population . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Gender . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Race and Ethnicity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

Language Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Age . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

Learning Disabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

Household Income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

Chapter 3: Education and Literacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

Highest Level of Educational Attainment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

Highest Level of Educational Attainment by Race/Ethnicity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

Age at School Completion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

Other Types of Adult Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

ix
Chapter 4: Employment, Earnings, and Job Training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .45

Employment Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

Occupation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

Weekly Wage or Salary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

Job Skills and Job Training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

Public Assistance Participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58

Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60

Chapter 5: Literacy and the Family . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .63

Parent-Child Literacy-Related Interactions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

Educational Resources in the Home . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67

School Involvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70

Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70

Chapter 6: Community and Civic Involvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .73

Voting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73

Sources of Information About Current Events, Public Affairs, and the Government . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74

Volunteering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76

Online Communities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77

Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78

Appendix A: Sample Assessment Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .81

Appendix B: Definitions of All Subpopulations and Background Variables Reported . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .91

Appendix C: Technical Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .99

Appendix D: Estimates and Standard Errors for Tables and Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .107

Appendix E: Additional Analyses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .139

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .153

x

Literacy in Everyday Life
xi

Contents

List of Tables

Table Page

1-1. Correlations among the prose, document, and quantitative scales: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

1-2. Overview of the literacy levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

2-1. Percentage of adults in selected population groups: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

2-2. Percentage of Hispanic adults, by Hispanic ethnicity: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

2-3. Percentage of adults in each household income category, by prose, document, and quantitative literacy level: 2003 . . . . . 32

3-1. Percentage of adults, by highest educational attainment: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

3-2. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores of adults, by highest educational attainment: 1992 and 2003 . 36

3-3. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores of adults, by highest educational attainment and 

race/ethnicity: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

3-4. Percentage of adults in the Below Basicand Basicprose literacy levels who learned English at 16 years of age or older,

by enrollment status in an adult English as a Second Language class: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

4-1. Description of major occupational groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48

4-2. Percentage of adults in each occupational group: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48

4-3. Percentage of adults in each occupational group, by prose, document, and quantitative literacy level: 1992 and 2003 . . . . 51

4-4. Percentage of women who received public assistance for varying lengths of time, by prose, document, and quantitative 

literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60

5-1. Percentage of parents who tried to teach their children under the age of 8 to read words during the previous month,

by prose literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

C-1. Weighted and unweighted household response rate, by survey component: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101

C-2. Weighted and unweighted prison response rate, by survey component: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102

D2-1. Estimates and standard errors for Table 2-1. Percentage of adults in selected population groups: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . 108

D2-2. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 2-1. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores of adults:

1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109

D2-3. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 2-2. Percentage of adults in each prose, document, and quantitative literacy 

level: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109

D2-4. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 2-3. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores of adults,

by gender: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109

D2-5. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 2-4. Percentage of adults in each prose, document, and quantitative literacy 

level, by gender: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110

D2-6. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 2-5. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores of adults, by

race/ethnicity: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110

D2-7. Estimates and standard errors for Figures 2-6a, 2-6b, and 2-6c. Percentage of adults in each prose, document, and 

quantitative literacy level, by race/ethnicity: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111

D2-8. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 2-7. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores of adults,

by Hispanic ethnicity: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
Table Page

D2-9. Estimates and standard errors for Table 2-2. Percentage of Hispanic adults, by Hispanic ethnicity: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . 112

D2-10. Estimates and standard errors for Figures 2-8a, 2-8b, and 2-8c. Percentage of adults in each prose, document, and 

quantitative literacy level, by Hispanic ethnicity: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112

D2-11. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 2-9. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores of adults,

by language spoken before starting school: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113

D2-12. Estimates and standard errors for Figures 2-10a, 2-10b, and 2-10c. Percentage of adults in each prose, document, and 

quantitative literacy level, by language spoken before starting school: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113

D2-13. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 2-11. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores of adults who

spoke a language other than or in addition to English before starting school, by age learned English: 1992 and 2003 . . . 114

D2-14. Estimates and standard errors for Figures 2-12a, 2-12b, and 2-12c. Percentage of adults in each prose, document, and 

quantitative literacy level who spoke a language other than or in addition to English before starting school, by age 

learned English: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114

D2-15. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 2-13. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores of adults,

by age: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115

D2-16. Estimates and standard errors for Figures 2-14a, 2-14b, and 2-14c. Percentage of adults in each prose, document, and 

quantitative literacy level, by age: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115

D2-17. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 2-15. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores of adults,

by learning disability status: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116

D2-18. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 2-16. Percentage of adults in each prose, document, and quantitative literacy 

level, by learning disability status: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116

D2-19. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 2-17. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores of adults,

by household income: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117

D2-20. Estimates and standard errors for Table 2-3. Percentage of adults in each household income category, by prose,

document, and quantitative literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118

D3-1. Estimates and standard errors for Table 3-1. Percentage of adults, by highest educational attainment: 1992 and 2003 . . 119

D3-2. Estimates and standard errors for Table 3-2. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores of adults,

by highest educational attainment: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119

D3-3. Estimates and standard errors for Figures 3-1a, 3-1b, and 3-1c. Percentage of adults in each prose, document, and 

quantitative literacy level, by highest educational attainment: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120

D3-4. Estimates and standard errors for Table 3-5. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores of adults,

by highest educational attainment and race/ethnicity: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121

D3-5. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 3-2. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores of adults,

by age obtained high school diploma or GED: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121

D3-6. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 3-3. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores of adults,

by age obtained college degree: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121

D3-7. Estimates and standard errors for Table 3-4. Percentage of adults in the Below Basicand Basicprose literacy levels who

learned English at 16 years of age or older, by enrollment status in an adult English as a Second Language class: 2003 . . . 122

xii

Literacy in Everyday Life
Table Page

D3-8. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 3-4. Percentage of adults in each prose literacy level who learned English at 

16 years of age or older, by enrollment status in an adult English as a Second Language class: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122

D3-9. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 3-5. Average document and quantitative literacy scores of adults, by whether 

they had received information technology certification: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122

D3-10. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 3-6. Average document and quantitative literacy scores of adults who had 

received information technology certification, by highest educational attainment: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122

D4-1. Estimates and standard errors for Figures 4-1a, 4-1b, and 4-1c. Percentage of adults in each employment status 

category, by prose, document, and quantitative literacy level: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123

D4-2. Estimates and standard errors for Table 4-2. Percentage of adults in each occupational group: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . 123

D4-3. Estimates and standard errors for Figures 4-2a, 4-2b, and 4-2c. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy 

scores of adults, by occupational group: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124

D4-4. Estimates and standard errors for Table 4-3. Percentage of adults in each occupational group, by prose, document, and 

quantitative literacy level: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125

D4-5. Estimates and standard errors for Figures 4-3a, 4-3b, and 4-3c. Percentage of full-time employed adults in each weekly

gross earnings category, by prose, document, and quantitative literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126

D4-6. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 4-4. Percentage of adults who thought their reading skills limited their job 

opportunities, by prose and document literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126

D4-7. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 4-5. Percentage of adults who thought their mathematics skills limited their 

job opportunities, by quantitative literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127

D4-8. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 4-6. Percentage of adults who thought their computer skills limited their job

opportunities, by document and quantitative literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127

D4-9. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 4-7. Percentage of adults in each prose and document literacy level who 

thought their reading skills limited their job opportunities “a lot” or “some,” by whether or not they participated in job

training that emphasized reading: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127

D4-10. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 4-8. Percentage of adults in each quantitative literacy level who thought their 

mathematics skills limited their job opportunities “a lot” or “some,” by whether or not they participated in job training 

that emphasized mathematics: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128

D4-11. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 4-9. Percentage of adults in each quantitative literacy level who thought their 

computer skills limited their job opportunities “a lot” or “some,” by whether or not they participated in job training that

emphasized computers: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128

D4-12. Estimates and standard errors for Figures 4-10a, 4-10b, and 4-10c. Percentage of women who were currently receiving 

public assistance or had received public assistance in the past, by prose, document, and quantitative literacy level: 2003 . 128

D4-13. Estimates and standard errors for Table 4-4. Percentage of women who received public assistance for varying lengths 

of time, by prose, document, and quantitative literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129

D5-1. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 5-1. Percentage of parents who read to or with their children under age 8 

during the previous week, by prose literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129

D5-2. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 5-2. Percentage of parents whose children between the ages of 3 and 5 knew 

the letters of the alphabet, by prose literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129

xiii

Contents 
Table Page

D5-3. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 5-3. Percentage of parents with children who did not already know the letters 

of the alphabet who tried to teach their children between the ages of 3 and 5 the letters of the alphabet during the 

previous month, by prose literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130

D5-4. Estimates and standard errors for Table 5-1. Percentage of parents who tried to teach their children under the age of 8 

to read words during the previous month, by prose literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130

D5-5. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 5-4. Percentage of parents who engaged in rhyming activities with their 

children under the age of 8 during the previous month, by prose literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130

D5-6. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 5-5. Percentage of parents who talked to their school-age children about 

things they studied in school, by prose literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131

D5-7. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 5-6. Percentage of parents who helped or worked with their school-age 

child on homework, by prose literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131

D5-8. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 5-7. Percentage of parents whose children ages 2 through 17 often saw them 

reading, by prose literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131

D5-9. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 5-8. Percentage of adults who lived with children under age 18 and had 

reading materials in the home, by prose literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132

D5-10. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 5-9. Percentage of parents whose children ages 2 through 17 had their own 

books, by prose literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132

D5-11. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 5-10. Percentage of all adults and adults living in households with children 

under age 18 who had a computer in their home with word processing capability or Internet access, by prose literacy 

level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132

D5-12. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 5-11. Percentage of parents who were involved in one to four activities in 

their children’s schools, by prose literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133

D6-1. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 6-1. Percentage of adult citizens of voting age who voted in the 2000 

presidential election, by prose and document literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133

D6-2. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 6-2. Percentage of adults who got information about current events, public 

affairs, and the government from each of the following sources: newspapers, magazines, books or brochures,

the Internet, by prose literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134

D6-3. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 6-3. Percentage of adults who got information about current events, public 

affairs, and the government from each of the following sources: family members, friends, or coworkers, radio and 

television, by prose literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135

D6-4. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 6-4. Percentage of adults who volunteered during the past year, by prose and 

document literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135

D6-5. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 6-5. Percentage of adults who sent or received e-mail messages and found 

information on the Internet, by prose literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136

D6-6. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 6-6. Percentage of adults who sent or received e-mail messages and found 

information on the Internet, by document literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136

D6-7. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 6-7. Percentage of adults who sent or received e-mail messages and found 

information on the Internet, by quantitative literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137

xiv

Literacy in Everyday Life
Table Page

E-1. Percentage of adults in the Below Basic and Basicquantitative literacy levels who learned English at 16 years of age or

older, by enrollment status in an adult English as a Second Language class: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140

E-2. Percentage of adults in each quantitative literacy level who learned English at 16 years of age or older, by enrollment 

status in an adult English as a Second Language class: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140

E-3. Average prose literacy scores of adults, by whether they had received information technology certification: 2003 . . . . . . 140

E-4. Average prose literacy scores for adults who had received information technology certification, by highest educational

attainment: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140

E-5. Percentage of adults who thought their reading skills limited their job opportunities, by quantitative literacy level: 2003 . . 141

E-6. Percentage of adults who thought their mathematics skills limited their job opportunities, by prose and document 

literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141

E-7. Percentage of adults who thought their computer skills limited their job opportunities, by prose literacy level: 2003 . . . 141

E-8. Percentage of adults in each quantitative literacy level who thought their reading skills limited their job opportunities 

“a lot” or “some,” by whether or not they participated in job training that emphasized reading: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142

E-9. Percentage of adults in each prose and document literacy level who thought their mathematics skills limited their job 

opportunities “a lot” or “some,” by whether or not they participated in job training that emphasized mathematics: 2003 . 142

E-10. Percentage of adults in each prose and document literacy level who thought their computer skills limited their job 

opportunities “a lot” or “some,” by whether or not they participated in job training that emphasized computers: 2003 . . 142

E-11. Percentage of parents who read to or with their children under age 8 during the previous week, by document and 

quantitative literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143

E-12. Percentage of parents whose children between the ages of 3 and 5 knew the letters of the alphabet, by document and

quantitative literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143

E-13. Percentage of parents with children who did not already know the letters of the alphabet who tried to teach their 

children between the ages of 3 and 5 the letters of the alphabet during the previous month, by document and 

quantitative literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144

E-14. Percentage of parents who tried to teach their children under the age of 8 to read words during the previous month,

by document and quantitative literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145

E-15. Percentage of parents who engaged in rhyming activities with their children under the age of 8 during the previous 

month, by document and quantitative literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145

E-16. Percentage of parents who talked to their school-age children about things they studied in school, by document and 

quantitative literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146

E-17. Percentage of parents who helped or worked with their school-age child on homework, by document and quantitative 

literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146

E-18. Percentage of parents whose children ages 2 through 17 often saw them reading, by document and quantitative 

literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147

E-19. Percentage of adults who lived with children under age 18 and had reading materials in the home, by document and 

quantitative literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147

E-20. Percentage of parents whose children ages 2 through 17 had their own books, by document and quantitative literacy

level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148

xv

Contents 
xvi

Literacy in Everyday Life

E-21. Percentage of all adults and adults living in households with children under age 18 who had a computer in their 

home with word processing capability or Internet access, by document and quantitative literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . 148

E-22. Percentage of parents who were involved in one to four activities in their children’s schools, by document and 

quantitative literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149

E-23. Percentage of adult citizens of voting age who voted in the 2000 presidential election, by quantitative literacy level:

2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149

E-24. Percentage of adults who got information about current events, public affairs, and the government from each of the 

following sources: newspapers, magazines, books or brochures, the Internet, by document and quantitative literacy 

level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150

E-25. Percentage of adults who got information about current events, public affairs, and the government from each of the 

following sources: family members, friends, or coworkers, radio and television, by document and quantitative literacy 

level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151

E-26. Percentage of adults who volunteered during the past year, by quantitative literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
xvii

Contents 

List of Figures

Figure Page

1-1. Difficulty of selected prose literacy tasks: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

1-2. Difficulty of selected document literacy tasks: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

1-3. Difficulty of selected quantitative literacy tasks: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

2-1. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores of adults: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

2-2. Percentage of adults in each prose, document, and quantitative literacy level: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

2-3. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores of adults, by gender: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

2-4. Percentage of adults in each prose, document, and quantitative literacy level, by gender: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

2-5. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores of adults, by race/ethnicity: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

2-6a. Percentage of adults in each prose literacy level, by race/ethnicity: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

2-6b. Percentage of adults in each document literacy level, by race/ethnicity: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

2-6c. Percentage of adults in each quantitative literacy level, by race/ethnicity: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

2-7. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores of adults, by Hispanic ethnicity: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

2-8a. Percentage of adults in each prose literacy level, by Hispanic ethnicity: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

2-8b. Percentage of adults in each document literacy level, by Hispanic ethnicity: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

2-8c. Percentage of adults in each quantitative literacy level, by Hispanic ethnicity: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

2-9. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores of adults, by language spoken before starting school: 1992 

and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

2-10a. Percentage of adults in each prose literacy level, by language spoken before starting school: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . 22

2-10b. Percentage of adults in each document literacy level, by language spoken before starting school: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . 23

2-10c. Percentage of adults in each quantitative literacy level, by language spoken before starting school: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . 23

2-11. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores of adults who spoke a language other than or in addition to

English before starting school, by age learned English: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

2-12a. Percentage of adults in each prose literacy level who spoke a language other than or in addition to English before 

starting school, by age learned English: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

2-12b. Percentage of adults in each document literacy level who spoke a language other than or in addition to English 

before starting school, by age learned English: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

2-12c. Percentage of adults in each quantitative literacy level who spoke a language other than or in addition to English 

before starting school, by age learned English: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

2-13. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores of adults, by age: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

2-14a. Percentage of adults in each prose literacy level, by age: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

2-14b. Percentage of adults in each document literacy level, by age: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

2-14c. Percentage of adults in each quantitative literacy level, by age: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

2-15. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores of adults, by learning disability status: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

2-16. Percentage of adults in each prose, document, and quantitative literacy level, by learning disability status: 2003 . . . . . . . . . 30
xviii

Literacy in Everyday Life

Figure Page

2-17. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores of adults, by household income: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

3-1a. Percentage of adults in each prose literacy level, by highest educational attainment: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

3-1b. Percentage of adults in each document literacy level, by highest educational attainment: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

3-1c. Percentage of adults in each quantitative literacy level, by highest educational attainment: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

3-2. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores of adults, by age obtained high school diploma or GED: 2003 . . 41

3-3. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores of adults, by age obtained college degree: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

3-4. Percentage of adults in each prose literacy level who learned English at 16 years of age or older, by enrollment status 

in an adult English as a Second Language class: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

3-5. Average document and quantitative literacy scores of adults, by whether they had received information technology 

certification: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

3-6. Average document and quantitative literacy scores of adults who had received information technology certification,

by highest educational attainment: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

4-1a. Percentage of adults in each employment status category, by prose literacy level: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

4-1b. Percentage of adults in each employment status category, by document literacy level: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

4-1c. Percentage of adults in each employment status category, by quantitative literacy level: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

4-2a. Average prose literacy scores of adults, by occupational group: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

4-2b. Average document literacy scores of adults, by occupational group: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50

4-2c. Average quantitative literacy scores of adults, by occupational group: 1992 and 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

4-3a. Percentage of full-time employed adults in each weekly gross earnings category, by prose literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . 52

4-3b. Percentage of full-time employed adults in each weekly gross earnings category, by document literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . 53

4-3c. Percentage of full-time employed adults in each weekly gross earnings category, by quantitative literacy level: 2003 . . . . 53

4-4. Percentage of adults who thought their reading skills limited their job opportunities, by prose and document literacy 

level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

4-5. Percentage of adults who thought their mathematics skills limited their job opportunities, by quantitative literacy 

level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

4-6. Percentage of adults who thought their computer skills limited their job opportunities, by document and quantitative 

literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56

4-7. Percentage of adults in each prose and document literacy level who thought their reading skills limited their job 

opportunities “a lot” or “some,” by whether or not they participated in job training that emphasized reading: 2003 . . . . . . 57

4-8. Percentage of adults in each quantitative literacy level who thought their mathematics skills limited their job 

opportunities “a lot” or “some,” by whether or not they participated in job training that emphasized mathematics: 2003 . . 57

4-9. Percentage of adults in each quantitative literacy level who thought their computer skills limited their job 

opportunities “a lot” or “some,” by whether or not they participated in job training that emphasized computers: 2003 . . . 57

4-10a. Percentage of women who were currently receiving public assistance or had received public assistance in the past,

by prose literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58

4-10b. Percentage of women who were currently receiving public assistance or had received public assistance in the past,

by document literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
xix

Contents 

Figure Page

4-10c. Percentage of women who were currently receiving public assistance or had received public assistance in the past,

by quantitative literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

5-1. Percentage of parents who read to or with their children under age 8 during the previous week, by prose literacy 

level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

5-2. Percentage of parents whose children between the ages of 3 and 5 knew the letters of the alphabet, by prose literacy 

level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

5-3. Percentage of parents with children who did not already know the letters of the alphabet who tried to teach their 

children between the ages of 3 and 5 the letters of the alphabet during the previous month, by prose literacy level: 2003 . 65

5-4. Percentage of parents who engaged in rhyming activities with their children under the age of 8 during the previous 

month, by prose literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66

5-5. Percentage of parents who talked to their school-age children about things they studied in school, by prose literacy 

level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67

5-6. Percentage of parents who helped or worked with their school-age child on homework, by prose literacy level: 2003 . . . . 67

5-7. Percentage of parents whose children ages 2 through 17 often saw them reading, by prose literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . 68

5-8. Percentage of adults who lived with children under age 18 and had reading materials in the home, by prose literacy 

level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68

5-9. Percentage of parents whose children ages 2 through 17 had their own books, by prose literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . 69

5-10. Percentage of adults living in households with children under age 18 who had a computer in their home with word 

processing capability or Internet access, by prose literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69

5-11. Percentage of parents who were involved in one to four activities in their children’s schools, by prose literacy level: 2003 . . 70

6-1. Percentage of adult citizens of voting age who voted in the 2000 presidential election, by prose and document literacy

level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74

6-2. Percentage of adults who got information about current events, public affairs, and the government from each of the 

following sources: newspapers, magazines, books or brochures, the Internet, by prose literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75

6-3. Percentage of adults who got information about current events, public affairs, and the government from each of the 

following sources: family members, friends, or coworkers, radio and television, by prose literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . 76

6-4. Percentage of adults who volunteered during the past year, by prose and document literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77

6-5. Percentage of adults who sent or received e-mail messages and found information on the Internet, by prose literacy 

level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78

6-6. Percentage of adults who sent or received e-mail messages and found information on the Internet, by document 

literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79

6-7. Percentage of adults who sent or received e-mail messages and found information on the Internet, by quantitative 

literacy level: 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80

Introduction

Using written information is an important

part of everyday life in the United States.

Adults in most workplaces are surrounded

by written information: health and safety postings,

brochures describing their benefits, instruction

manuals, memos, reports, and e-mail. Parents of

school-aged children often receive written notices

and forms from their children’s schools: field trip

permission slips, flyers about parent meetings or

parent-teacher conferences, descriptions of course

offerings, and applications for determining eligibility for free lunches and subsidized medical care.

Older adults receive mailings explaining their Social

Security and Medicare benefits. The millions of

adults who take medication encounter labels

explaining dosages, timing for taking the medication, interactions with other medications or food,

and possible side effects. Getting a driver’s license,

registering to vote, and renting or purchasing a

place to live all require reading and understanding

written information.

The 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy

assessed the English literacy of adults (ages 16 and

older) in the United States for the first time since the

1992 National Adult Literacy Survey.The assessment

was administered to approximately 18,000 adults living in households and to 1,200 prison inmates.This

report presents findings from the 2003 assessment

and describes changes in adult literacy since 1992.

1

Defining and Measuring

Literacy 

Establishing Literacy Levels

Conducting the Survey

Interpretation of Results

Cautions in Interpretation

Organization of the Report

CHAPTER ONE

1
It describes how American adults 16 years of age and

older with varying literacy levels use written information in workplace, family, and community settings

at the beginning of the 21st century.The report also

examines the relationship between literacy and formal education and between literacy and health.

Additional reports are planned using data from the

2003 NAAL, including a report that examines the

basic reading skills of America’s adults and explores

the relationship between basic reading skills and literacy.An in-depth look at adults who were at the lowest literacy levels in 2003 will also be presented in that

report. A separate report will describe the literacy of

prison inmates. The report The Health Literacy of

America’s Adults was published in September 2006

(Kutner, Greenberg, Jin, and Paulsen 2006)

Defining and Measuring Literacy 

Defining Literacy

Unlike indirect measures of literacy—which rely on

self-reports and other subjective evaluations of literacy and education—the 1992 and 2003 adult literacy assessments measured literacy directly by tasks

representing a range of literacy activities that adults

are likely to face in their daily lives.

The literacy tasks in the assessment were drawn from

actual texts and documents, which were either used

in their original format or reproduced in the assessment booklets. Each question appeared before the

materials needed to answer it, thus encouraging

respondents to read with purpose.

Respondents could correctly answer many assessment questions by skimming the text or document

for the information necessary to perform a given literacy task.All tasks were open-ended.

The 2003 adult literacy assessment covered the same

content as the 1992 assessment, and both assessments

used the same definition of literacy:

Using printed and written information to function in society, to achieve one’s goals, and to

develop one’s knowledge and potential.

This definition implies that literacy goes beyond simply being able to sound out or recognize words and

understand text. A central feature of the definition is

that literacy is related to achieving an objective and

that adults often read for a purpose.

Measuring Literacy

As in 1992, three literacy scales—prose literacy, document literacy, and quantitative literacy—were used

in the 2003 assessment:

■ Prose literacy. The knowledge and skills needed

to perform prose tasks (i.e., to search, comprehend, and use information from continuous

texts). Prose examples include editorials, news

stories, brochures, and instructional materials.

Prose texts can be further broken down as

expository, narrative, procedural, or persuasive.

■ Document literacy. The knowledge and skills

needed to perform document tasks (i.e., to

search, comprehend, and use information from

noncontinuous texts in various formats).

Document examples include job applications,

payroll forms, transportation schedules, maps,

tables, and drug and food labels.

■ Quantitative literacy. The knowledge and skills

required to perform quantitative tasks (i.e., to

identify and perform computations, either

alone or sequentially, using numbers embedded

in printed materials). Examples include balancing a checkbook, figuring out a tip, completing

an order form, and determining the amount of

interest on a loan from an advertisement.

Table 1-1 shows the correlations among the prose,

document, and quantitative scales in 2003. All the

correlations are between .86 and .89. In chapter 12

2

Literacy in Everyday Life
of the Technical Report and Data File User’s Manual for

the 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey, Rock and

Yamamoto (2001) examined the correlations among

the three scales and concluded that even though the

scales were highly related, there were still group differences across the scales, indicating that the scales

did not all measure the same construct.

Several changes were made to the 1992 data. Several

items were recategorized onto different literacy scales

(prose to document). In addition, several dichotomous

items were rescored using the partial credit model.To

accommodate these changes,the 1992 data were recalibrated to provide item characteristic parameters comparable to the 2003 data. Data from the common test

blocks used in both the 1992 and 2003 assessments

were pooled for this rescaling. Following standard psychometric procedure for linking across years, the population mean and standard deviation of the 1992 scales

were kept constant in 1992 and 2003,even though the

rescaling changed the item parameters slightly.

Because of the rescaling, the 1992 results in this report

may differ slightly from the findings reported following the 1992 data collection.

Background Questionnaire

The 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy

household background questionnaire was used to

collect data about various demographic and background characteristics. A primary goal of the assessment was to measure literacy trends between 1992

and 2003, so many of the questions on the 2003

background questionnaire were identical to questions on the 1992 background questionnaire. The

2003 background questionnaire also included some

new questions that were added in response to input

from stakeholders and users of the 1992 data.

A separate background questionnaire was developed for the prison study. The prison background

questionnaire was used to collect demographic data

on inmates and provided contextual data on their

experiences in prison that were related to literacy,

including participation in classes, job training, and

prison work assignments.

Establishing Literacy Levels

The Committee on Performance Levels for Adult

Literacy, appointed by the National Research

Council’s Board on Testing and Assessment (BOTA),

recommended a set of performance levels for the

2003 assessment (Hauser et al. 2005). Drawing on the

committee’s recommendations, the U.S. Department

of Education decided to report the assessment results

by using four literacy levels for each scale.Table 1-2

summarizes the knowledge, skills, and capabilities

that adults needed to demonstrate to be classified

into one of the four levels. Figures 1-1, 1-2, and 1-3

show the types of tasks and where they are located

on the prose, document, and quantitative scales.

BOTA’s Committee on Performance Levels for

Adult Literacy also recommended reporting the

2003 results by using a separate category: nonliterate in English.Adults were considered to be nonliterate in English if they were unable to complete a

minimum number of simple literacy questions or if

they were unable to communicate in English or

Spanish.Adults who were classified as nonliterate in

English because they could not complete a minimum number of simple literacy questions were

generally able to complete the background questionnaire, which was administered orally in either

English or Spanish; for reporting purposes, they

3

Chapter 1: Introduction

Table 1-1. Correlations among the prose, document,

and quantitative scales: 2003

Prose Document Quantitative

Prose 1.0 .86 .87

Document .86 1.0 .89

Quantitative .87 .89 1.0

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
4

Literacy in Everyday Life

Table 1-2. Overview of the literacy levels

Level and definition Key abilities associated with level

Below Basic indicates no more than the

most simple and concrete literacy skills.

Score ranges for Below Basic:

Prose: 0–209

Document: 0–204

Quantitative: 0–234

Basic indicates skills necessary to perform

simple and everyday literacy activities.

Score ranges for Basic:

Prose: 210–264

Document: 205–249

Quantitative: 235–289

Intermediate indicates skills necessary to

perform moderately challenging literacy

activities.

Score ranges for Intermediate:

Prose: 265–339

Document: 250–334

Quantitative: 290–349

Proficient indicates skills necessary to perform more complex and challenging literacy

activities.

Score ranges for Proficient:

Prose: 340–500

Document: 335–500

Quantitative: 350–500

Adults at the Below Basic level range from being nonliterate in English to having

the abilities listed below:

■ locating easily identifiable information in short, commonplace prose texts

■ locating easily identifiable information and following written instructions in

simple documents (e.g., charts or forms) 

■ locating numbers and using them to perform simple quantitative operations

(primarily addition) when the mathematical information is very concrete and

familiar

■ reading and understanding information in short, commonplace prose texts

■ reading and understanding information in simple documents

■ locating easily identifiable quantitative information and using it to solve simple, one-step problems when the arithmetic operation is specified or easily

inferred

■ reading and understanding moderately dense, less commonplace prose texts

as well as summarizing, making simple inferences, determining cause and

effect, and recognizing the author’s purpose 

■ locating information in dense, complex documents and making simple inferences about the information

■ locating less familiar quantitative information and using it to solve problems

when the arithmetic operation is not specified or easily inferred

■ reading lengthy, complex, abstract prose texts as well as synthesizing information and making complex inferences 

■ integrating, synthesizing, and analyzing multiple pieces of information located

in complex documents

■ locating more abstract quantitative information and using it to solve multistep problems when the arithmetic operations are not easily inferred and the

problems are more complex 

NOTE: Although the literacy levels share common names with the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) levels, they do not correspond to the NAEP levels.

SOURCE: Hauser, R.M, Edley, C.F. Jr., Koenig, J.A., and Elliott, S.W. (Eds.). (2005).Measuring Literacy: Performance Levels for Adults, Interim Report.Washington, DC: National Academies Press; White, S. and Dillow, S.

(2005).Key Concepts and Features of the 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy (NCES 2006-471). U.S. Department of Education.Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
5

Chapter 1: Introduction

Figure 1-1. Difficulty of selected prose literacy tasks: 2003

Proficient 

340–500 

Intermediate

265–339

Basic

210–264

Below Basic

0–209

Prose literacy scale 

0 

150 

200 

450 

250 

300 

400 

350 

500 

361 Evaluate information to determine which legal document is applicable to a specific healthcare situation. 

403 Find the information required to define a medical term by searching through a complex document. 

409 Infer the purpose of an event described in a magazine article. 

332 Compare two different systems of government, using information in a complex text that is not organized with section headers or other 

organizing devices. 

331 List two facts from a business magazine article that explain why a marketer quoted in the article has a particular opinion.

266 Explain why the author of a first-person narrative chose a particular activity instead of an alternative activity. 

254 Find information in a pamphlet for prospective jurors that explains how citizens were selected for the jury pool. 

199 Find information in a short, simple prose passage. 

345 Compare viewpoints in two editorials with contrasting interpretations of scientific and economic evidence. 

304 Infer the meaning of a metaphor in a poem. 

245 Find information in a newspaper article that explains how students who participate in a school program benefit from the program. 

190 Determine how long an event lasted, based on information in a short newspaper article. 

345 Compare and contrast the meaning of metaphors in a poem. 

284 Summarize the work experience required for a specific job, based on information in a newspaper job advertisement. 

241 Explain the meaning of a metaphor used in a narrative. 

213 Find, in a long narrative passage, the name of the person who performed a particular action. 

183 Identify how often a person should have a specified medical test, based on information in a clearly written pamphlet. 

161 Identify what it is permissible to drink before a medical test, based on a short set of instructions. 

NOTE:The position of a question on the scale represents the average scale score attained by adults who had a 67 percent probability of successfully answering the question. Only selected questions are presented.

Scale score ranges for performance levels are referenced on the figure.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
6

Literacy in Everyday Life

Figure 1-2. Difficulty of selected document literacy tasks: 2003

Proficient 

335–500 

Intermediate

250–334

Basic

205–249

Below Basic

0–204

Document literacy scale 

0 

150 

100 

200 

250 

300 

400 

350 

500 

228 Determine and categorize a person’s body mass index (BMI) given the person’s height and weight, a graph that can be used to

determine BMI based on height and weight, and a table that categorizes BMI ranges. 

206 Locate the intersection of two streets on a clearly labeled map. 

249 Summarize what the articles in a specified section of a magazine are about, using information in the magazine’s table of contents. 

239 Find a table in an almanac with information on a specified topic. 

191 Find the phone number to call to get directions to a job fair, based on information presented in a newspaper job advertisement. 

158 Find the percentage of a market a particular retailer had in 1992, based on information presented in a bar graph. 

117 Circle the date of a medical appointment on a hospital appointment slip. 

355 Apply information given in a text to graph a trend. 

372 Contrast financial information presented in a table regarding the differences between various types of credit cards. 

388 Interpret survey data presented in a nested table. 

297 Find the age range during which children should received a particular vaccine, using a chart that shows all the childhood vaccines and 

the ages children should receive them. 

280 Follow directions, using a clearly labeled map. 

269 Find the time a television program ends, using a newspaper television schedule that lists similar programs showing at different times 

on different channels. 

261 Enter product numbers for office supplies on an order form, using information from a page in an office supplies catalog. 

NOTE:The position of a question on the scale represents the average scale score attained by adults who had a 67 percent probability of successfully answering the question. Only selected questions are presented.

Scale score ranges for performance levels are referenced on the figure.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
7

Chapter 1: Introduction

Figure 1-3. Difficulty of selected quantitative literacy tasks: 2003

Proficient 

350 –500 

Intermediate

290–349

Basic

235–289

Below Basic

0–234

Quantitative literacy scale 

0 

175 

125 

225 

275 

325 

475 

375 

425 

500 

237 Calculate the cost of a sandwich and salad, using prices from a menu. 

232 Compare two prices by identifying the appropriate numbers and subtracting. 

257 Calculate the weekly salary for a job, based on hourly wages listed in a job advertisement. 

245 Locate two numbers in a bar graph and calculate the difference between them. 

217 Calculate the price difference between two appliances, using information in a table that includes price and other information about the 

appliances. 

178 Calculate the change from a $20 bill after paying the amount on a receipt. 

138 Add two numbers to complete an ATM deposit slip. 

356 Calculate the yearly cost of a specified amount of life insurance, using a table that gives cost by month for each $1,000 of coverage. 

291 Determine what time a person can take a prescription medication, based on information on the prescription drug label that relates 

timing of medication to eating. 

309 Determine whether a car has enough gasoline to get to the next gas station, based on a graphic of the car’s fuel gauge, a sign stating the miles to the next gas station, and information given in the question about the car’s fuel use. 

328 Calculate the cost of raising a child for a year in a family with a specified income, based on a newspaper article that provides the 

percentage of a typical family’s budget that goes toward raising children. 

404 Determine the number of units of flooring required to cover the floor in a room, when the area of the room is not evenly divisible by the units in which the flooring is sold. 

470 Calculate an employee's share of health insurance costs for a year, using a table that shows how the employee's monthly cost varies 

with income and family size. 

284 Perform a two-step calculation to find the cost of three baseball tickets, using an order form that gives the price of one ticket and the 

postage and handling charge. 

301 Calculate the total cost of ordering office supplies, using a page from an office supplies catalog and an order form. 

NOTE:The position of a question on the scale represents the average scale score attained by adults who had a 67 percent probability of successfully answering the question. Only selected questions are presented.

Scale score ranges for performance levels are referenced on the figure.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
were included in the Below Basic literacy level.

Adults who were classified as nonliterate in English

because they were unable to communicate in either

English or Spanish could not complete the background questionnaire; they are not included in the

analyses in this report that rely on background data.

Adults who could not be tested because of a cognitive or mental disability are also not included in the

analyses in this report, but in the absence of any

information about their literacy abilities, they are

not considered to be nonliterate in English.

Conducting the Survey1

The 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy

included two samples: (1) adults ages 16 and older

living in households and (2) inmates ages 16 and

older in federal and state prisons. Each sample was

weighted to represent its share of the total population

of the United States, and the samples were combined

for reporting. Household data collection was conducted from March 2003 through February 2004;

prison data collection was conducted from March

through July 2004. For the household sample, the

screener response rate was 82 percent and the background questionnaire response rate was 76 percent.

The final household sample response rate was 62

percent. For the prison sample, 97 percent of prisons

who were selected for the study agreed to participate

and the background questionnaire response rate for

prison inmates was 91 percent.The final prison sample response rate was 88 percent.

Household interviews were conducted in respondents’ homes; prison interviews usually took place in

a classroom or library in the prison.Whenever possible, interviewers administered the background questionnaire and assessment in a private setting.

Assessments were administered one-on-one using a

computer-assisted personal interviewing system

(CAPI) programmed into laptop computers.

Respondents were encouraged to use whatever aids

they normally used when reading and when performing quantitative tasks, including eyeglasses, magnifying glasses, rulers, and calculators.

Three percent of adults were unable to participate in

the assessment because they could not communicate

in either English or Spanish or because they had a

mental disability that prevented them from being

tested. Literacy scores for these adults could not be

estimated, and they are not included in the results

presented in this report.

Additional information on sampling, response rates,

and data collection procedures is in appendix C.

Interpretation of Results

The statistics presented in this report are estimates of

performance based on a sample of respondents,

rather than the values that could be calculated if

every person in the nation answered every question

on the assessment. Estimates of performance of the

population and groups within the population were

calculated by using sampling weights to account for

the fact that the probabilities of selection were not

identical for all respondents. Information about the

uncertainty of each statistic that takes into account

the complex sample design was estimated by using

Taylor series procedures to estimate standard errors.

The analyses in this report examine differences related to literacy based on self-reported background

characteristics among groups in 2003, as well as

changes within groups between 1992 and 2003, by

using standard t tests to determine statistical significance. Statistical significance is reported at p < .05.

Differences between averages or percentages that are

statistically significant are discussed by using comparative terms such as higher or lower. Differences that are

8

Literacy in Everyday Life

1 Nonresponse bias analyses are discussed on page 102 of the report.

All percentages in this section are weighted. For the unweighted percentages, see tables C-1 and C-2 in appendix C.
not statistically significant either are not discussed or

are referred to as “not statistically significant.” Failure

to find a statistically significant difference should not

be interpreted as meaning that the estimates are the

same; rather, failure to find a difference may also be

due to measurement error or sampling.

Detailed tables with estimates and standard errors for

all tables and figures in this report are in appendix D.

Appendix C includes more information about the

weights used for the sample and the procedures used

to estimate standard errors and statistical significance.

Cautions in Interpretation

The purpose of this report is to examine the relationship between literacy and various self-reported

background factors.This report is purely descriptive.

Readers are cautioned not to draw causal inferences

based solely on the results presented here. It is important to note that many of the variables examined in

this report are related to one another, and complex

interactions and relationships have not been explored

here.

Organization of the Report

Chapter 2 of the report presents the prose, document, and quantitative literacy for the adult population of the United States as a whole and discusses

how literacy changed between 1992 and 2003. The

chapter also examines how literacy varies across

groups with different demographic characteristics,

including gender, race and ethnicity, language background, age, and household income.With the exception of the analyses related to household income, all

the analyses in the chapter are based on the combined household and prison samples.

Chapter 3 explores the relationship between education and literacy and also discusses how that relationship changed between 1992 and 2003. In addition to

focusing on educational attainment, the analyses in

the chapter examine the relationship between literacy and other types of adult education, including basic

skills classes, English as a second language classes, and

information technology (IT) certification.The chapter also includes a focus on educational attainment by

race and ethnicity.All analyses in the chapter are based

on the combined household and prison samples.

Chapter 4 examines how adults with different levels

of literacy functioned in the labor market and the

workplace and also discusses changes between 1992

and 2003. Topics explored in the chapter include

employment status, occupation, weekly wage or

salary, job training, and participation in public assistance programs. All analyses in the chapter are based

on the household sample only because prison

inmates are not part of the same labor market as

adults living in households.

Chapter 5 examines how parents, grandparents, and

guardians with different literacy levels interacted

with the children living in their homes around issues

related to literacy and school. The chapter also

describes the relationship between the literacy of

adults living in a home and the likelihood that the

home had educational resources—including books

and computers—that encourage children to read

and to actively engage in other academic and intellectual pursuits. Analyses in the chapter are limited

to the household sample because prison inmates do

not have the same opportunity to interact with children as do adults living in households. Additionally,

because the types of educational activities that parents do with their children change as the children

get older, many of the analyses in the chapter are

limited to parents or households with children in an

age range at which the activity being discussed is

likely to occur.

Chapter 6 examines how adults with different literacy levels participated in government and community affairs by voting, staying informed, and volunteer9

Chapter 1: Introduction
ing. Because most of the background questions on

which this chapter is based were new in 2003, the

analyses in the chapter are based on the 2003 sample

only. Prison inmates are not included in the analyses

in this chapter because they are not able to vote or

participate in community activities outside the

prison and do not have the same opportunities to

stay informed about issues related to current events,

public affairs, and the government.

The analyses for chapters 2 and 3 present results

from all three literacy scales: prose, document, and

quantitative. The analyses in chapters 4, 5, and 6—

which look at literacy in workplace, family, and

community settings—present some results using

only one or two of the three scales. In these

instances, results for the other scale(s) are presented

in appendix E.

Throughout the report, 1992 results are presented in

grey or black and 2003 results are presented in color.

The years are also labeled on the figure axes next to

the corresponding results.

10

Literacy in Everyday Life
Demographic Characteristics 

and Literacy

The 2003 adult literacy assessment examined

the relationship between demographic characteristics and literacy, including changes in

literacy between 1992 and 2003.The population of

the United States has grown more diverse since adult

literacy was last assessed in 1992 (table 2-1).Between

1992 and 2003, the percentages of adults living 

in the United States who were Hispanic or

Asian/Pacific Islander increased, and the percentage

who were non-Hispanic White decreased. In 1992,

5 percent of the U.S. adult population spoke only

Spanish before starting school; by 2003, that percentage had increased to 8 percent. Over the same

period, the percentage of the U.S. adult population

who spoke only English before starting school

decreased from 86 to 81 percent.

The adult population of the United States also got

older between 1992 and 2003 (table 2-1).Although

the percentage of the population ages 65 and older

did not change, adults ages 50 to 64 went from 

16 percent of the population to 21 percent, and

adults ages 40 to 49 went from 17 percent of the

population to 20 percent.

The analyses in this chapter examine how literacy

levels for the total adult population and within different demographic groups changed between 1992

and 2003 and also how literacy levels varied among

different demographic groups. The relationship

between literacy and poverty is also examined. All 

11

Total Population

Gender

Race and Ethnicity

Language Background

Age

Learning Disabilities

Household Income

Summary

CHAPTER TWO

2
analyses in this chapter, except for those relating to

poverty, are based on the combined household and

prison samples.

Total Population

There were no statistically significant differences in

the average prose and document literacy of the adult

population of the United States between 1992 and

2003 (figure 2-1). Average quantitative literacy

increased from 275 to 283.

In 2003, some 30 million American adults had Below

Basic prose literacy, 27 million had Below Basic document literacy, and 46 million had Below Basic quantitative literacy.There were some changes in the distribution of adults among the four literacy levels

Literacy in Everyday Life

Figure 2-1. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores of adults: 1992 and

2003

1992 2003

0

150

200

250

Average score

300

350

500

Prose Document Quantitative

276 275 271 271 275 283*

Literacy scale

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons. Adults

who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3

percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are excluded from this figure.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education

Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

12

Table 2-1. Percentage of adults in selected population groups: 1992 and 2003

Characteristic 1992 2003

Gender 

Male 48 49

Female 52 51

Race/ethnicity

White 77 70*

Black 11 12

Hispanic 8 12*

Asian/Pacific Islander 2 4*

American Indian/Alaska Native 1 1

Multiracial — 2

Language spoken before 

starting school

English only 86 81*

English and Spanish 2 2

English and other language 3 4

Spanish 5 8*

Other language 4 5

Age learned English

Native Language English Only 86 81*

10 or younger 8 10*

11 to 15 2 2*

16 to 20 1 2 

21 or older 2 3*

Does not speak English 1 3*

Age

16–18 6 6

19–24 13 11*

25–39 33 28*

40–49 17 20*

50–64 16 21*

65 and older 15 15

Household income

Less than $10,000 — 10

$10,000–$14,999 — 7 

$15,000–$19,999 — 6 

$20,000–$29,999 — 12 

$30,000–$39,999 — 11

$40,000–$59,999 — 19

$60,000–$99,999 — 22

$100,000 or greater — 13

— Not available.

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of

age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are

excluded from this table. In 1992, respondents were allowed to identify only one race but could

identify “other” as their race. In 2003, respondents were allowed to identify multiple races but could

not choose “other” as their race. All adults of Hispanic origin are classified as Hispanic, regardless of

race.The Asian/Pacific Islander category includes Native Hawaiians.The English and Spanish category includes adults who spoke languages in addition to both English and Spanish.The Spanish

category includes adults who spoke Spanish and additional non-English languages. Results for

adults who identified “other” as their race in 1992 are not included in this table.The percentage of

the population that identified “other” as their race in 1992 rounds to 0. Comparable household

income data were not available for 1992.

SOURCE: U.S.Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of

Adult Literacy.
between 1992 and 2003 (figure 2-2). Between 1992

and 2003, the percentage of adults with Proficient

prose literacy decreased. On the document scale, the

percentage of adults with Below Basic and Proficient

literacy declined, and the percentage of adults with

Intermediate literacy increased. The percentage of

adults with Below Basic quantitative literacy declined

between 1992 and 2003, and the percentage of adults

with Intermediate quantitative literacy increased.

Nonliterate in English

In 2003, approximately 3 percent of the NAAL sample (representing 7 million adults in the U.S. adult

population) at the bottom of the Below Basic level did

poorly on the easiest test questions. They were considered to be nonliterate in English.

Another 2 percent of the NAAL sample (representing approximately 4 million adults in the U.S. adult

population) could not take the test in 2003 because

of language barriers. They did not speak either

English or Spanish, the two languages in which

interviews were conducted.2 They also could not

understand the interviewers when the interviewers

tried to ask them the questions on the background

questionnaire, such as age, education, and income.

Because no test results and very little other information are available on these adults who could not be

interviewed in either English or Spanish, they are not

included in the results presented in this report.

These adults who could not be interviewed in either

English or Spanish (representing 2 percent of the

U.S. adult population), along with those did very

poorly on the simple test questions (representing 3

percent of the U.S. adult population), are considered

to be nonliterate in English. A total of 5 percent of

the adult population of the United States (11 million

adults) is estimated to be nonliterate in English.

Although both the adults who could not participate

in the assessment because of language barriers and

the adults who did poorly on the easiest test questions are all considered to be nonliterate in English,

the adults who could not participate in the assessment because of language barriers (representing 2

percent of the U.S. adult population) are not included in the results presented in this report.These adults

could not be included because they were unable to

provide the background information that forms the

basis for this report.The adults who are considered to

13

Chapter 2: Demographic Characteristics and Literacy

Figure 2-2. Percentage of adults in each prose, document, and quantitative literacy level:

1992 and 2003

2003

1992

2003

1992 14

14

14

12*

26

22*

Quantitative

2003

1992 Document

Prose

80 40 20 60 0 20 40 60 80 100

Percent Below Basic Percent Basic and above

Literacy scale

and year

28 43 15

29 44 13*

22 49 15

22 53* 13*

32 30 13

33 33* 13

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of

age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are

excluded from this figure.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education

Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

2

Although interviews were conducted in English or Spanish, all

materials that respondents were asked to read were in English only.

The number 4 million, as well as the number 7 million in the previous paragraph, is based on the entire adult population of the

United States.Although the NAAL sample was considerably smaller than this, it was designed to be representative of the adult population of the United States, so results for all adults can be inferred

on the basis of the NAAL data.
14

Literacy in Everyday Life

be nonliterate in English because they did poorly on

the easiest test questions (representing 3 percent of

the U.S. adult population) were generally able to

respond to the background questionnaire, which was

administered orally.These adults are included in the

Below Basic category in this report.

Gender

In 2003, women had higher average prose and document literacy than men, and men had higher average quantitative literacy than women (figure 2-3). In

1992, there was no difference between men and

women in their average prose literacy, although men

had higher average document and quantitative literacy than women.

Between 1992 and 2003, women’s average document and quantitative literacy increased, while

women’s average prose literacy remained at 277.

During this same time period, average prose and

document literacy of men declined, while there was

not a statistically significant change in average quanFigure 2-3. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores of adults, by gender:

1992 and 2003

1992 2003

0

150

200

250

Average score

300

350

500 Prose Document Quantitative

Male Female Male Female Male Female

276 272*277 277 274 269*268 272*

283 286

269

279*

Gender

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons. Adults

who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3

percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are excluded from this figure.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education

Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Figure 2-4. Percentage of adults in each prose, document, and quantitative literacy level,

by gender: 1992 and 2003

15

15

13

12

27 42

29 43

29 44

29 46 2003 

1992 Female

2003 

1992 Male

80 40 20 60 0 20 40 60 80 100

Percent Below Basic Percent Basic and above 

Gender and year 

Prose

16

13*

14

14

14

14

14

11*

21 49

23* 51*

23 50

22 54* 2003 

1992 Female

2003 

1992 Male

80 40 20 60 0 20 40 60 80 100

Percent Below Basic Percent Basic and above 

Gender and year 

Document

17

13*

13

13

24

21*

28

22*

29 31

31* 33*

34

2003 35 32*

1992 Female

2003 

1992 Male

80 40 20 60 0 20 40 60 80 100

Percent Below Basic Percent Basic and above 

Gender and year 

Quantitative

28

17

9

11*

16

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient 

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of

age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are

excluded from this figure.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education

Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
15

Chapter 2: Demographic Characteristics and Literacy

titative literacy for men. Between 1992 and 2003,

the gap in quantitative literacy between men and

women narrowed.

There were some changes in the distribution of men

and women among the literacy levels between 1992

and 2003 (figure 2-4). The percentage of women

with Below Basic quantitative and document literacy

declined. The percentage of men with Below Basic

quantitative literacy also declined, as did the percentage of men with Proficient prose and document

literacy. The percentage of women with Proficient

quantitative literacy increased.

Race and Ethnicity

In 2003, the average prose, document, and quantitative literacy of White and Asian/Pacific Islander

adults was higher than for Black and Hispanic adults

(figure 2-5).3 Black adults had higher average prose

and document literacy than Hispanic adults.

Black adults had higher average prose, document, and

quantitative literacy in 2003 than in 1992.The average prose literacy of Asian/Pacific Islander adults

increased as well. During the same period, the 

3The way race and ethnicity were measured changed between 1992

and 2003.This change is discussed in appendix B.

Figure 2-5. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores of adults, by race/ethnicity: 1992 and

2003 

1992 2003

Prose Document Quantitative

White Black Hispanic Asian/

Pacific

 Islander

American

 Indian/

Alaska

 Native

Multiracial White Black Hispanic Asian/

Pacific

 Islander

American

 Indian/

Alaska

 Native

Multiracial White Black Hispanic Asian/

Pacific

 Islander

American

 Indian/

Alaska

 Native

Multiracial

287288

237243*

234

216*

255

271*

254

264

273 281 282

230238* 238

224*

259

272

247

258

269

288

297*

222

238* 233 233

268

285

245

265 270

0 

150 

200 

250 

Average score 

300 

350 

500 

Race/ethnicity

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003

and 4 percent in 1992) are excluded from this figure. In 1992, respondents were allowed to identify only one race but could identify “other” as their race. In 2003, respondents were allowed to identify multiple

races but could not choose “other” as their race. All adults of Hispanic origin are classified as Hispanic, regardless of race.The Asian/Pacific Islander category includes Native Hawaiians. Results for adults who identified “other” as their race in 1992 are not included in this figure.The percentage of the population that identified “other” as their race in 1992 rounds to 0.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
average prose and document literacy of Hispanic

adults declined, while their average quantitative literacy remained the same. Average quantitative literacy

increased among White adults, but there were no significant changes among White adults in prose and

document literacy.

Between 1992 and 2003, there was a decrease in the

percentages of White, Black, and Asian/Pacific

Islander adults with Below Basic prose, document, and

quantitative literacy, while there was an increase in

the percentage of Hispanic adults with Below Basic

prose and document literacy (figures 2-6a, 2-6b, and

2-6c).The percentage of American Indian and Alaska

Native adults with Basic prose literacy decreased (figure 2-6a). The percentage of White adults with

Proficient document literacy also declined (figure 2-

6b).

16

Literacy in Everyday Life

Figure 2-6a. Percentage of adults in each prose literacy level, by race/ethnicity: 1992 and

2003

Multiracial 2003 

2003 

1992 American Indian/

Alaska Native

2003 

1992 Asian/

Pacific Islander

2003 

1992 

Hispanic

2003 

1992 

White

2003 

1992 

Black

9

7*

30

24*

35

44*

25

14*

17

19

7

80 40 20 60 0 20 40 60 80 100

Percent Below Basic Percent Basic and above 

Race/ethnicity 

and year 

25 48 18

25 51* 17

41 27 2

43 31* 2

33 28 5

30* 23* 4*

30 36 9

32 42 12

43 35 5

29* 41 10

35 54 4

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient 

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of

age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are

excluded from this figure. In 1992, respondents were allowed to identify only one race but could

identify “other” as their race. In 2003, respondents were allowed to identify multiple races but could

not choose “other” as their race. All adults of Hispanic origin are classified as Hispanic, regardless of

race.The Asian/Pacific Islander category includes Native Hawaiians. Results for adults who identified “other” as their race in 1992 are not included in this figure.The percentage of the population

that identified “other” as their race in 1992 rounds to 0.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult

Literacy.
17

Chapter 2: Demographic Characteristics and Literacy

Figure 2-6c. Percentage of adults in each quantitative literacy level, by race/ethnicity:

1992 and 2003 

Multiracial 2003 

19

13*

57

47*

50

50

31

19*

43

32

27

2003 

1992 American Indian/

Alaska Native

2003 

1992 Asian/

Pacific Islander

2003 

1992 

Hispanic

2003 

1992 

White

2003 

1992 

Black

Race/ethnicity 

and year 

80 40 20 60 0 20 40 60 80 100

Percent Below Basic Percent Basic and above 

32 34 15

32 39* 17

30 12 1

36* 15* 2

31 16 3

29 17 4

29 28 12

34 35 12

35 19 4

31 27 10

37 29 7

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient 

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of

age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are

excluded from this figure. In 1992, respondents were allowed to identify only one race but could

identify “other” as their race. In 2003, respondents were allowed to identify multiple races but could

not choose “other” as their race. All adults of Hispanic origin are classified as Hispanic, regardless of

race.The Asian/Pacific Islander category includes Native Hawaiians. Results for adults who identified “other” as their race in 1992 are not included in this figure.The percentage of the population

that identified “other” as their race in 1992 rounds to 0.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult

Literacy.

Figure 2-6b. Percentage of adults in each document

literacy level, by race/ethnicity: 1992

and 2003 

Multiracial 2003 

10

8*

31

24*

28

36*

19

11*

19

16

9

2003 

1992 American Indian/

Alaska Native

2003 

1992 Asian/

Pacific Islander

2003 

1992 

Hispanic

2003 

1992 

White

2003 

1992 

Black

Race/ethnicity 

and year 

80 40 20 60 0 20 40 60 80 100

Percent Below Basic Percent Basic and above 

53

56

19 53 18

19 58* 15*

33 34 2

35 40* 2

29 38 5

26* 33* 5

23 48 10

22 54 13

31 47 3

27 51 6

27 55 9

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient 

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of

age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are

excluded from this figure. In 1992, respondents were allowed to identify only one race but could

identify “other” as their race. In 2003, respondents were allowed to identify multiple races but could

not choose “other” as their race. All adults of Hispanic origin are classified as Hispanic, regardless of

race.The Asian/Pacific Islander category includes Native Hawaiians. Results for adults who identified “other” as their race in 1992 are not included in this figure.The percentage of the population

that identified “other” as their race in 1992 rounds to 0.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult

Literacy.
18

Literacy in Everyday Life

Hispanic Ethnicity

In both 1992 and 2003, Hispanics of Mexican origin

represented the largest Hispanic ethnicity in the U.S.

(table 2-2). Between 1992 and 2003, the percentage

of Hispanics of Central or South American origin

increased from 11 to 16 percent and the percentage

of Hispanics of other origin decreased from 17 to 12

percent in the United States.

In 2003, Hispanic adults of Puerto Rican and other

origin had higher average prose and document literacy than Hispanic adults of Mexican and Central or

South American origin (figure 2-7).Hispanic adults of

Puerto Rican origin also had higher average quantitative literacy than Hispanic adults of Mexican origin.

Average prose and document literacy for Hispanic

adults of Mexican and Central or South American

origin declined between 1992 and 2003. Average

document and quantitative literacy improved for

Hispanic adults of Puerto Rican origin between

1992 and 2003.

Figure 2-7. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores of adults, by Hispanic ethnicity: 1992 and

2003 

1992 2003

Prose Document Quantitative

Mexican Puerto 

Rican

Cuban Central or 

South 

American

Other Mexican Puerto 

Rican

Cuban Central or 

South 

American

Other Mexican Puerto 

Rican

Cuban Central or 

South 

American

Other

204*

224 230

242

233

207

229

204*

269

242*

230

207*

231

249* 247

227

239

220*

268

250

227 223 221

244* 249 257

229 234

261 254

0

150

200

250

Average score

300

350

500

Hispanic ethnicity

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003

and 4 percent in 1992) are excluded from this figure. All adults of Hispanic origin are classified as Hispanic, regardless of race.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Table 2-2. Percentage of Hispanic adults, by

Hispanic ethnicity: 1992 and 2003

Hispanic ethnicity 1992 2003

Mexican 55 58

Puerto Rican 12 10

Cuban 5 4

Central or South American 11 16*

Other 17 12*

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of

age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are

excluded from this table. All adults of Hispanic origin are classified as Hispanic, regardless of race.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult

Literacy.
19

Chapter 2: Demographic Characteristics and Literacy

The distribution of adults across the four performance levels differed by type of Hispanic ethnicity

(figures 2-8a, 2-8b, and 2-8c). In 2003, some 49 to 50

percent of Hispanic adults of Mexican, Cuban, and

Central or South American origin had Below Basic

prose literacy, while 28 percent of Hispanic adults of

Puerto Rican origin had Below Basic prose literacy.

Between 1992 and 2003, there was an increase in the

percentage of Hispanic adults of Mexican, Central or

South American, and other origin with Below Basic

prose literacy. The percentage of Hispanic adults of

Mexican and Central or South American origin with

Below Basic document literacy also increased. For

Hispanic adults of Puerto Rican origin, the percentage with Below Basic document and quantitative literacy decreased between 1992 and 2003, but there

was no significant change in the percentage of this

group with Below Basic prose literacy.

Figure 2-8a. Percentage of adults in each prose literacy level, by Hispanic ethnicity: 1992

and 2003 

40

49*

34

28

37

49

38

50*

14

2003 28*

1992 Other

2003 

1992 Central or

 South American

2003 

1992 Cuban

2003 

1992 

Puerto Rican

2003 

1992 Mexican

80 40 20 60 0 20 40 60 80 100

Percent Below Basic Percent Basic and above 

Hispanic ethnicity 

and year 

32 24 4

27* 20* 4

40 24 2

38 31 3

29 26 8

22 24 5

32 26 4

27* 19* 4

32 44 10

36 33* 4*

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient 

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of

age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are

excluded from this figure. All adults of Hispanic origin are classified as Hispanic, regardless of race.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult

Literacy.
20

Literacy in Everyday Life

Figure 2-8c. Percentage of adults in each quantitative literacy level, by Hispanic ethnicity: 1992 and 2003 

54

55*

59

44*

40

36

53

49*

31

39

29 15 3

27* 15* 3

30 10 1

34* 20* 2

33 20 6

28 25 11

34 12 1

31* 17* 3

2003 33* 23* 6

1992 Other

2003 

1992 Central or

 South American

2003 

1992 Cuban

2003 

1992 

Puerto Rican

2003 

1992 Mexican

80 40 20 60 0 20 40 60 80 100

Percent Below Basic Percent Basic and above 

Hispanic ethnicity 

and year 

36 28 5

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient 

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of

age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are

excluded from this figure. All adults of Hispanic origin are classified as Hispanic, regardless of race.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult

Literacy.

Figure 2-8b. Percentage of adults in each document

literacy level, by Hispanic ethnicity:

1992 and 2003 

33

42*

31

19*

25

40

24

37*

14

21

29 35 4

24* 29* 5*

32 34 4

32 45* 4*

28 37 10

15* 30 15*

36 38 2

27* 31 5*

23 50 13

2003 26 45 8*

1992 Other

2003 

1992 Central or

 South American

2003 

1992 Cuban

2003 

1992 

Puerto Rican

2003 

1992 Mexican

80 40 20 60 0 20 40 60 80 100

Percent Below Basic Percent Basic and above 

Hispanic ethnicity 

and year 

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient 

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of

age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are

excluded from this figure. All adults of Hispanic origin are classified as Hispanic, regardless of race.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult

Literacy.
21

Chapter 2: Demographic Characteristics and Literacy

Language Background

The analyses in this section examine the English literacy of adults in relationship to two aspects of their

language background: the language or languages

adults spoke before starting school and the age at

which adults learned to speak English.

Language Spoken Before Starting School

In 2003, adults who spoke only English before starting school had higher average document literacy

than other adults (figure 2-9).Adults who spoke only

English before starting school also had higher average prose and quantitative literacy than adults who

spoke Spanish but no English or who spoke English

and Spanish before starting school.

Between 1992 and 2003, the average quantitative literacy of adults who spoke only English or English

plus another language before starting school

increased,but there was no significant change in their

prose or document literacy. The average literacy

score of adults who spoke Spanish but no English

before starting school declined 17 points on the

prose and document scales.

In 2003, a higher percentage of adults who spoke

Spanish but no English before starting school than

adults who spoke English only, English and Spanish,

English and another language, or another language

before starting school had Below Basic prose, document, and quantitative literacy (figures 2-10a, 2-10b,

and 2-10c). Sixty-two percent of adults who spoke

only Spanish before starting school had Below Basic

Figure 2-9. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores of adults, by language spoken before

starting school: 1992 and 2003 

1992 2003

English

 only

English

 and

 Spanish

English

 and other

Spanish Other

 language

English

 only

English

 and

 Spanish

English

 and other

Spanish Other

 language

English

 only

English

 and

 Spanish

English

 and other

Spanish Other

 language

282 283

255 262

273 278

205

188*

239

249

275 276

253 259 260 268

216

199*

241

257*

280

289*

247

261*

271

289*

212 211

246

270*

0

150

200

250

Average score

300

350

500

Prose Document Quantitative

Language

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003

and 4 percent in 1992) are excluded from this figure.The English and Spanish category includes adults who spoke languages in addition to both English and Spanish.The Spanish category includes adults who

spoke Spanish and additional non-English languages.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
22

Literacy in Everyday Life

prose and quantitative literacy in 2003,and 49 percent

of these adults had Below Basic document literacy.

A lower percentage of adults who spoke English only

or English combined with a language other than

Spanish before starting school had Below Basic prose

and document literacy in 2003 than in 1992 (figures

2-10a and 2-10b). In addition, a lower percentage of

adults who spoke English only or English combined

with another language (Spanish or other) before starting school had Below Basic quantitative literacy in

2003 than in 1992 (figure 2-10c).Among adults who

spoke Spanish but no English before starting school,

the percentage with Below Basic prose and document

literacy increased between 1992 and 2003, but there

was no significant change in the percentage with

Below Basic quantitative literacy.

In 2003, among adults who spoke Spanish but no

English before starting school, 61 percent had Below

Basic prose literacy while 49 percent had Below Basic

document literacy.Among adults who spoke English

only or English combined with another language

before starting school, the percentage with Below

Basic prose literacy was not statistically significant

from the percentage who had Below Basic document

literacy.

Figure 2-10a. Percentage of adults in each prose

literacy level, by language spoken

before starting school: 1992 and

2003 

11

9*

19

14

15

7*

52

61*

32

2003 26

1992 Other

 language

2003 

1992 Spanish

2003 

1992 English and

 other

2003 

1992 English and

 Spanish

2003 

1992 English only

80 40 20 60 0 20 40 60 80 100

Percent Below Basic Percent Basic and above 

Language and year 

27 46 16

27 49* 15

38 39 4

38 42 6

30 43 13

33 51* 9

30 16 2

25* 13* 1*

35 29 5

33 34 7

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient 

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of

age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are

excluded from this figure.The English and Spanish category includes adults who spoke languages

in addition to both English and Spanish.The Spanish category includes adults who spoke Spanish

and additional non-English languages.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult

Literacy.
23

Chapter 2: Demographic Characteristics and Literacy

Figure 2-10c. Percentage of adults in each quantitative literacy level, by language spoken before starting school: 1992 and

2003 

23

18*

43

31*

31

15*

62

62

42

2003 28*

1992 Other

 language

2003 

1992 Spanish

2003 

1992 English and

 other

2003 

1992 English and

 Spanish

2003 

1992 English only

Language and year 

32 32 13

33 35* 15

31 21 6

39* 26 4

29 27 14

38* 34* 14

25 11 2

25 11 2

31 20 7

33 29* 10

80 40 20 60 0 20 40 60 80 100

Percent Below Basic Percent Basic and above 

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient 

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of

age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are

excluded from this figure.The English and Spanish category includes adults who spoke languages

in addition to both English and Spanish.The Spanish category includes adults who spoke Spanish

and additional non-English languages.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult

Literacy.

Figure 2-10b. Percentage of adults in each document literacy level, by language spoken before starting school: 1992 and

2003 

12

9*

18

12

19

10*

41

49*

29

2003 20*

1992 Other

 language

2003 

1992 Spanish

2003 

1992 English and

 other

2003 

1992 English and

 Spanish

2003 

1992 English only

Language and year 

80 40 20 60 0 20 40 60 80 100

Percent Below Basic Percent Basic and above 

21 51 16

21 56* 13*

29 54* 5

24 46 11

25 57* 8

30 27 2

25* 23 3

26 39 7

24 46* 10*

30 45 7

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient 

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of

age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are

excluded from this figure.The English and Spanish category includes adults who spoke languages

in addition to both English and Spanish.The Spanish category includes adults who spoke Spanish

and additional non-English languages.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult

Literacy.
24

Literacy in Everyday Life

Age Learned English

In 2003, among adults who spoke a language other

than English before starting school, average prose and

document literacy decreased as the age at which

adults learned English increased (figure 2-11).Adults

who learned English at age 10 or younger or

between the ages of 11 and 15 also had higher average quantitative literacy than adults who learned

English at a later age.

Figure 2-11. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores of adults who spoke a language other

than or in addition to English before starting school, by age learned English: 1992 and 2003 

Prose Document Quantitative

Age learned English

263

235

205

208

257

248

211

203

260

251

218

196

274*

242

191

187

267*

251

229*

206

278*

265

238*

223*

10 or younger 11–15 16–20 21 or older 10 or younger 11–15 16–20 21 or older 10 or younger 11–15 16–20 21 or older

0

150

200

250

Average score

300

350

500

1992 2003

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003

and 4 percent in 1992) are excluded from this figure.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
25

Chapter 2: Demographic Characteristics and Literacy

A lower percentage of adults who learned English at

age 10 or younger had Below Basic prose, document,

or quantitative literacy in 2003 than in 1992 (figures

2-12a, 2-12b, and 2-12c).Among adults who learned

English between the ages of 16 and 20, the percentage with Below Basic document and quantitative literacy decreased by 11 percentage points between

1992 and 2003. Among adults who learned English

at age 21 or older, the percentage with Below Basic

quantitative literacy decreased by 13 percentage

points between 1992 and 2003.

In 2003, a higher percentage of adults who learned

English at ages 16 to 20 or age 21 or older had Below

Basic prose literacy than Below Basic document literacy (figures 2-12a and 2-12b).

Figure 2-12a. Percentage of adults in each prose

literacy level who spoke a language

other than or in addition to English

before starting school, by age

learned English: 1992 and 2003 

18

10*

34

28

53

51

65

2003 62

1992 21 or older

2003 

1992 16–20

2003 

1992 

11–15

2003 

1992 10 or

 younger

80 40 20 60 0 20 40 60 80 100

Percent Below Basic Percent Basic and above 

Age and year 

33 39 10

34 47* 10

34 27 4

38 30 4

30 15 2

31 16 3

25 10 #

26 12 #

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient 

# Rounds to zero.

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of

age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are

excluded from this figure.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult

Literacy.
26

Literacy in Everyday Life

Figure 2-12c. Percentage of adults in each quantitative literacy level who spoke a language other than or in addition to

English before starting school, by

age learned English: 1992 and 2003 

35

22*

39

31

59

48*

70

57*

26 13 2

30 17 5

21 7 2

27* 14* 2

33 21 6

32 25 9

36* 32* 10

33 25 10

2003 

1992 21 or older

2003 

1992 16–20

2003 

1992 

11–15

2003 

1992 10 or

 younger

80 40 20 60 0 20 40 60 80 100

Percent Below Basic Percent Basic and above 

Age and year 

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient 

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of

age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are

excluded from this figure.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult

Literacy.

Figure 2-12b. Percentage of adults in each document literacy level who spoke a language other than or in addition to

English before starting school, by

age learned English: 1992 and 2003 

19

10*

23

24

45

34*

51

2003 45

1992 21 or older

2003 

1992 16–20

2003 

1992 

11–15

2003 

1992 10 or

 younger

80 40 20 60 0 20 40 60 80 100

Percent Below Basic Percent Basic and above 

Age and year 

26 46 9

26 57* 8

26 43 7

25 41 10

29 25 2

29 34* 3

32 22 1

31 18 1

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient 

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of

age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are

excluded from this figure.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult

Literacy.
27

Chapter 2: Demographic Characteristics and Literacy

Age

In 2003, among all age groups, adults ages 65 and

older had the lowest average prose, document, and

quantitative literacy (figure 2-13). Between 1992 and

2003, however, the average literacy of adults ages 65

and older increased on all three scales. Between 1992

and 2003, there was also an increase in the prose,

document, and quantitative literacy of adults between

the ages of 50 and 64.There was a decline in the average prose literacy of adults between the ages of 25

and 39 and between 40 and 49. The average document literacy of adults between the ages of 40 and 49

declined, and the average quantitative literacy of

adults between the ages of 25 and 39 increased.

Figure 2-13. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores of adults, by age: 1992 and 2003 

Prose Document Quantitative

Age

0

150

200

250

Average score

300

350

500

270

280 288 293

269

235

270

282 286 284

258

221

264

277

286

292

272

235

267

276 283* 282*

278*

248* 268

277 282 277*

270*

235*

267

279

292*

289

289*

257*

16–18 19–24 25–39 40–49 50–64 65+ 16–18 19–24 25–39 40–49 50–64 65+ 16–18 19–24 25–39 40–49 50–64 65+

1992 2003

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and

4 percent in 1992) are excluded from this figure. Age was calculated on the basis of birth date information provided by respondents, and ages were grouped according to key life stages as described in appendix B.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
28

Literacy in Everyday Life

In 2003, adults ages 65 and older were more likely to

have Below Basic prose, document, and quantitative

literacy than adults in any of the younger age groups

(figures 2-14a, 2-14b, and 2-14c). For adults ages 50

to 64 or ages 65 and older, the percentage with Below

Basic prose, document, and quantitative literacy

decreased between 1992 and 2003. Among adults

ages 50 to 64, the percentage with Proficient prose,

document, and quantitative literacy increased

between 1992 and 2003, but there was no statistically significant change in the percentage of adults ages

65 and older with Proficient literacy on any of the

scales.

Figure 2-14a. Percentage of adults in each prose

literacy level, by age: 1992 and 2003 

10

11

10

11

10

12*

9

11

16

13*

33

23*

35 49 6

37 48 5

29 49 13

29 48 12

24 46 20

25 45 18

23 45 23

27* 47 15*

31 43 11

27* 44 15*

37 27 3

2003 38 34* 4

1992

65+

2003

1992

50–64

2003

1992

40–49

2003

1992

25–39

2003

1992

16–18

2003

1992

19–24

80 40 20 60 0 20 40 60 80 100

Percent Below Basic Percent Basic and above

Age and year

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of

age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are

excluded from this figure. Age was calculated on the basis of birth date information provided by

respondents, and ages were grouped according to key life stages as described in appendix B.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult

Literacy.
29

Chapter 2: Demographic Characteristics and Literacy

Figure 2-14c. Percentage of adults in each quantitative literacy level, by age: 1992 and

2003 

2003

1992

65+

2003

1992

50–64

2003

1992

40–49

2003

1992

25–39

2003

1992

16–18

2003

1992

19–24

80 40 20 60 0 20 40 60 80 100

Percent Below Basic Percent Basic and above

Age and year

30

28

22

21

21

17*

19

19

27

19*

49

34*

38 27 6

38 28 6

37 33 9

36 33 10

31 33 15

31 35 17

28 33 20

32* 34 16*

29 18 5

37* 24* 5

34 29 10

30* 34* 17*

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of

age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are

excluded from this figure. Age was calculated on the basis of birth date information provided by

respondents, and ages were grouped according to key life stages as described in appendix B.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult

Literacy.

Figure 2-14b. Percentage of adults in each document literacy level, by age: 1992 and

2003 

2003

1992

65+

2003

1992

50–64

2003

1992

40–49

2003

1992

25–39

2003

1992

16–18

2003

1992

19–24

80 40 20 60 0 20 40 60 80 100

Percent Below Basic Percent Basic and above

Age and year

10

11

7

9

9

8

10

10

17

12*

38

27*

24 57 10

24 56 9

19 58 15

20 58 13

18 53 21

19 56* 17*

18 52 20

20* 54 15*

27 48 9

23* 54* 12*

31 29 2

33 38* 3

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of

age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are

excluded from this figure. Age was calculated on the basis of birth date information provided by

respondents, and ages were grouped according to key life stages as described in appendix B.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult

Literacy.
30

Literacy in Everyday Life

Learning Disabilities

In 2003,4 6 percent of adults reported they had been

diagnosed or identified as having a learning disability (data not shown). Adults who had a learning disability had lower average prose, document, and quantitative literacy than adults who did not have a learning disability (figure 2-15).Among adults who had a

learning disability, 24 percent had Below Basic prose

and document literacy and 38 percent had Below

Basic quantitative literacy (figure 2-16). In comparison, among adults who did not have a learning disability, 13 percent had Below Basic prose literacy, 12

percent had Below Basic document literacy, and 20

percent had Below Basic quantitative literacy. There

were also differences at the upper end of the scales: 7

percent of adults who had a learning disability had

Proficient literacy on all three scales, compared with

13 to 14 percent of adults who did not have a learning disability.

Figure 2-15. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores of adults, by

learning disability status: 2003

252

276

247

272

254

284

Learning disability No learning disability

0

150

200

250

Average score

300

350

500

Prose Document Quantitative

Literacy scale

NOTE: Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could

not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in

2003) are excluded from this figure.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Figure 2-16. Percentage of adults in each prose,

document, and quantitative literacy

level, by learning disability status: 2003

Prose

80 40 20 60 0 20 40 60 80 100

Percent Below Basic Percent Basic and above 

Disability status 

No learning disability

Learning disability 24 34 35 7

13 28 45 14

Document

24 28 42 7

12 22 53 13

80 40 20 60 0 20 40 60 80 100

Percent Below Basic Percent Basic and above 

Disability status 

No learning disability

Learning disability

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient 

Quantitative

38 32 23 7

20 33 33 14

80 40 20 60 0 20 40 60 80 100

Percent Below Basic Percent Basic and above 

Disability status 

No learning disability

Learning disability

Note: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of

age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this figure.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

4

In 2003,adults were asked if they had ever been diagnosed or identified as having a learning disability. In 1992, adults were asked if

they currently had a learning disability.The change in the question

wording was made to try to eliminate responses that included selfdiagnosed learning disabilities. Because of the change in wording,

results for adults with learning disabilities cannot be compared

between 1992 and 2003.
31

Chapter 2: Demographic Characteristics and Literacy

Household Income

Adults’ household income was divided into eight

categories: less than $10,000, $10,000–$14,999,

$15,000–$19,999, $20,000–$29,999, $30,000-

$39,999, $40,000–$59,999, $60,000–$99,999, and

$100,000 or greater. Average prose, document, and

quantitative literacy was higher for adults in each

increasing level of household income, with two

exceptions. On the prose and quantitative scales, the

differences in average literacy between adults who

lived in households with incomes of $10,000 to

$14,999 and adults who lived in households with

incomes of $15,000 to $19,999 were not statistically significant. On the document scale, the difference

in average literacy between adults who lived in

households with incomes below $10,000 and adults

who lived in households with incomes between

$10,000 and $14,999 was not statistically significant

(figure 2-17).

With each higher level of prose, document, and

quantitative literacy—from Below Basic through

Proficient—the percentage of adults with household

incomes below $10,000 decreased (table 2-3). For

example, 26 percent of adults with Below Basic prose

literacy lived in households with incomes below

$10,000 compared with 14 percent of adults with

Basic prose literacy, 5 percent of adults with

Intermediate prose literacy, and 2 percent of adults

with Proficient prose literacy.

Figure 2-17. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores of adults, by household income: 2003

Prose Document Quantitative

Household income

0

150

200

250

Average score

300

350

500

229 237 244

257

268

282

303

316

225 232 240

256 263

278

297 304

223

237 244

261

271

286

303

314

< $10,000

$10,000–$14,999

$15,000–$19,999

$20,000–$29,999

$30,000–$39,999

$40,000–$59,999

$60,000–$99,999

$100,000 or greater

< $10,000

$10,000–$14,999

$15,000–$19,999

$20,000–$29,999$30,000–$39,999

$40,000–$59,999

$60,000–$99,999

$100,000 or greater

< $10,000

$10,000–$14,999

$15,000–$19,999

$20,000–$29,999

$30,000–$39,999

$40,000–$59,999

$60,000–$99,999

$100,000 or greater

NOTE: Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are

excluded from this figure.

SOURCE: U.S.Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
32

Literacy in Everyday Life

At the top of the income scale, the percentage of

adults living in households with incomes above

$100,000 was higher at each higher level of literacy

(table 2-2). For example, 2 percent of adults with

Below Basic prose literacy lived in households with

incomes of $100,000 or more, while 6 percent of

adults with Basic prose literacy, 16 percent of adults

with Intermediate prose literacy, and 30 percent of

adults with Proficient prose literacy lived in households with incomes of $100,000 or more.

Table 2-3. Percentage of adults in each household income category, by prose, document, and quantitative 

literacy level: 2003

Literacy scale and Less than $10,000– $15,000– $20,000– $30,000– $40,000– $60,000– $100,000

literacy level $10,000 $14,999 $19,999 $29,999 $39,999 $59,999 $99,999 or greater 

Prose

Below Basic 26 16 12 16 12 12 5 2

Basic 14 10 8 15 13 19 15 6

Intermediate 5 5 4 11 11 21 27 16

Proficient 2 1 2 5 7 18 35 30

Document

Below Basic 27 17 11 16 11 11 5 3

Basic 13 12 8 15 14 18 13 6

Intermediate 6 5 4 11 11 21 26 16

Proficient 3 1 2 6 6 19 36 27

Quantitative

Below Basic 26 16 11 16 11 12 7 2

Basic 9 8 6 14 14 21 19 9

Intermediate 4 4 3 10 11 22 28 18

Proficient 2 2 2 5 6 18 37 29

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive

or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this figure.

SOURCE: U.S.Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
33

Chapter 2: Demographic Characteristics and Literacy

Summary

This chapter examined how the literacy levels for the

total adult population of the United States, as well as

for adults from different demographic groups,

changed between 1992 and 2003, and also how literacy levels varied among different demographic

groups in 2003.

Total Population 

There were no statistically significant changes in the

average prose and document literacy of the adult

population of the United States between 1992 and

2003.Average quantitative literacy increased between

1992 and 2003.

Between 1992 and 2003, the percentages of adults

with Below Basic document and quantitative literacy

decreased, and the percentages of adults with

Proficient prose and document literacy also decreased.

Gender 

Women had higher average prose and document literacy than men in 2003. This was a change from

1992 when men had higher average document literacy than women and the differences between men

and women in prose literacy were not statistically

significant. Men had higher average quantitative literacy than women in both 1992 and 2003, but the

gap between men and women narrowed between the

two years.

Despite the overall gain made by women in quantitative literacy, a higher percentage of men than

women had Proficient quantitative literacy in 2003.A

higher percentage of men than women also had

Below Basic prose and document literacy.

Race and Ethnicity 

In 2003,White and Asian/Pacific Islander adults had

higher average prose, document, and quantitative literacy than Black and Hispanic adults. Black adults

had higher average prose and document literacy than

Hispanic adults.

Although their average literacy levels remained lower

than those of White and Asian/Pacific Islander adults,

Black adults had higher average prose, document, and

quantitative literacy in 2003 than in 1992.The average prose literacy of Asian/Pacific Islander adults

increased as well. Among Hispanic adults, however,

average prose and document literacy declined

between 1992 and 2003, while average quantitative

literacy did not change statistically. Quantitative literacy increased among White adults, but there were no

significant changes among White adults in prose and

document literacy.

In 2003, a higher percentage of Hispanic adults had

Below Basic prose literacy than Below Basic document

literacy.There were no statistically significant differences among the other racial/ethnic groups in the

percentages of adults with Below Basic prose and document literacy.

Language Background 

Between 1992 and 2003, the average quantitative literacy of adults who spoke English only or English

plus another language before starting school

increased,but there was no significant change in their

prose or document literacy. The average literacy of

adults who spoke Spanish but no English before

starting school declined on the prose and document

scales.

A higher percentage of adults who spoke Spanish but

no English before starting school than adults who

spoke English, English and Spanish, English and

another language, or another language before starting

school had Below Basic prose, document, and quantitative literacy.Among adults who spoke only Spanish

before starting school, 61 percent had Below Basic

prose literacy, 49 percent had Below Basic document
34

Literacy in Everyday Life

literacy, and 62 percent had Below Basic quantitative

literacy.

In 2003, among adults who spoke a language other

than or in addition to English before starting school,

average prose and document literacy increased as the

age at which the adults learned to speak English

decreased.

Age 

Among all the age groups in 2003, adults ages 65

and older had the lowest average prose, document,

and quantitative literacy. However, the average

prose, document, and quantitative literacy of adults

in that age group, as well as adults in the next oldest age group (50 to 64), increased between 1992

and 2003.

Learning Disabilities

In 2003, adults who had been diagnosed or identified

as having a learning disability had lower average prose,

document, and quantitative literacy than adults who

did not have a learning disability.Among adults with a

learning disability,24 to 38 percent had Below Basic literacy on all three scales, compared with 12 to 20 percent of adults who did not have a learning disability.

Household Income

With each higher level of prose, document, and

quantitative literacy—from Below Basic through

Proficient—the percentage of adults with household

incomes below $10,000 decreased and the percentage of adults with household incomes of $100,000 or

greater increased.
Education and Literacy

The analyses in this chapter examine the relationship between education and literacy.

The first section of the chapter focuses on

adults’ highest level of educational attainment and

compares the literacy levels of adults with different

levels of educational attainment in 1992 and 2003.

Results are presented for all adults and separately by

race/ethnicity. The analyses in the chapter also

examine whether adults who completed high

school or college at traditional ages (19 or younger

for high school and 23 or younger for college) had

literacy that was different from adults who completed their schooling at a later age. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the relationship between

other types of education—English as a Second

Language (ESL) instruction and information technology certification—and literacy.

35

# toc

CHAPTER ONE

1

Highest Level of Educational

Attainment

Highest Level of Educational

Attainment by Race/Ethnicity

Age at School Completion

Other Types of Adult

Education

Summary

CHAPTER THREE

3
Highest Level of Educational Attainment

Educational attainment increased between 1992 and

2003, with a higher percentage of adults completing

an associate’s or bachelor’s degree and fewer adults

ending their education before completing high school

(table 3-1).Between 1992 and 2003,the percentage of

adults who did not have a high school diploma but

were not still in school declined by 6 percentage

points, from 21 percent to 15 percent of the population.At the same time, the percentage of adults with a

postsecondary degree increased: 11 percent of adults

had an associate’s degree in 1992 compared with 12

percent in 2003, 10 percent had a bachelor’s degree in

1992 compared with 12 percent in 2003, and 9 percent had taken graduate classes or had a graduate

degree in 1992 compared with 11 percent in 2003.

Excluding people who were still in high school, adults

with higher levels of education had higher levels of

prose, document, and quantitative literacy (table 3-2).

Literacy scores rose with successive levels of educational attainment; they were lowest across the three

scales for adults who did not complete high school

and highest for adults with graduate study or a graduate degree.

Although there were no measurable changes in literacy for the total population between 1992 and 2003,

there were statistically significant declines on the prose

and document scales for many levels of highest educational attainment. Average prose literacy scores

decreased significantly for all levels of highest educational attainment, with the exception of adults who

were still in high school or who had completed a

36

Literacy in Everyday Life

Table 3-2. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores of adults, by highest educational attainment: 1992 and 2003

Educational attainment 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003 

Still in high school 268 262 270 265 263 261

Less than/some high school 216 207* 211 208 209 211

GED/high school equivalency 265 260 259 257 265 265

High school graduate 268 262* 261 258 267 269

Vocational/trade/business school 278 268* 273 267 280 279

Some college 292 287* 288 280* 295 294

Associate’s/2-year degree 306 298* 301 291* 305 305

Bachelor’s degree 325 314* 317 303* 324 323

Graduate studies/degree 340 327* 328 311* 336 332

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003

and 4 percent in 1992) are excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Prose Document Quantitative

Table 3-1. Percentage of adults, by highest educational attainment: 1992 and 2003

Educational attainment 1992 2003

Still in high school 4 3*

Less than/some high school 21 15*

GED/high school equivalency 4 5*

High school graduate 27 26*

Vocational/trade/business school 5 6

Some college 9 11*

Associate’s/2-year degree 11 12*

Bachelor’s degree 10 12*

Graduate studies/degree 9 11*

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of

age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are

excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education

Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
General Educational Development (GED) certificate.

Declines in average document literacy scores occurred

among adults at the postsecondary level of education.

The fact that average prose literacy decreased or

remained the same for all levels of highest educational attainment raises an interesting question. How

could prose literacy scores decrease at every level of

education beyond high school without a decrease in

the overall score? This pattern is called Simpson’s

Paradox (Simpson 1951).The answer is that the relative size of the groups changed. From 1992 to

2003, the percentage of adults with postsecondary

education increased and the percentage of adults

who did not complete high school decreased. The

increase in the percentage of adults with postsecondary education, who, on average, had higher prose

scores than adults who did not complete high

school, offsets the fact that average prose literacy

scores declined at every level of educational attainment beyond high school.

The declining literacy of adults with higher educational attainment was reflected in changes in the distribution of adults in the prose and document literacy levels between 1992 and 2003 (figures 3-1a and

3-1b). Changes between 1992 and 2003 in the distribution of adults among literacy levels are discussed for three groups of adults: adults without a

high school diploma or GED certificate, adults

whose highest level of education was a high school

diploma or GED credential, and adults with postsecondary education.

Adults Without a High School Diploma

In 2003, adults who had not completed high school

and were not currently enrolled in school were more

likely than adults with higher levels of education to

have Below Basic prose, document, and quantitative

literacy (figures 3-1a, 3-1b, and 3-1c). On the prose

scale, half of adults without a high school diploma or

GED credential had Below Basic literacy, compared

with 10 percent of adults with a GED or a high

school equivalency credential; 13 percent of high

school graduates; and 10 percent of adults who had

taken classes in a vocational, trade, or business school.

Adults Whose Highest Level of Education Was a High

School Diploma or GED Credential

Secondary school students can earn either a traditional high school diploma or a General Educational

Development (GED) credential. A GED credential

can be obtained by passing a test that measures high

school-level academic skills. The GED provides an

alternative educational path for adults who have

dropped out of high school before completing all the

requirements for graduation.

In 2003, there were no statistically significant differences between adults who ended their education

with a traditional secondary school diploma and

those who ended their education with a GED in

their average prose, document, or quantitative literacy (table 3-2). Also, there were no statistically significant differences in the distribution of adults across

the prose, document, and quantitative levels by their

type of high school diploma or GED credential (figures 3-1a, 3-1b, and 3-1c).

Adults With Postsecondary Education

Postsecondary education in the United States takes a

number of forms, including 2-year degree programs

and community colleges; certificates or degrees from

vocational, trade, or business schools; 4-year colleges

and universities; and graduate studies after completion

of a 4-year degree. In 2003, the average literacy of

adults increased with each level of postsecondary education on all three scales (table 3-2).

On the prose scale, 41 percent of adults who had

either received a graduate degree or taken graduate

37

Chapter 3: Education and Literacy
courses and 31 percent of adults who graduated

from a 4-year college or university had Proficient literacy, compared with 19 percent of adults who

ended their education with an associate’s or 2-year

degree; 11 percent of adults who had completed

some college; and 5 percent of adults who took

vocational, trade, or business classes after high school

but did not attend college (figure 3-1a). On the 

document scale, 31 percent of adults who had either

received a graduate degree or taken graduate courses and 25 percent of adults who graduated from a 

4-year college or university had Proficient literacy,

compared with 16 percent of adults who ended

their education with an associate’s or 2-year degree;

10 percent of adults who had completed some college; and 7 percent of adults who took vocational,

38

Literacy in Everyday Life

Figure 3-1b. Percentage of adults in each document

literacy level, by highest educational

attainment: 1992 and 2003

10

13

44

45

9

13

12

13

8

9

4

5

3

3

2

2

1

32 23 1

29* 25 2

30 53 4

28 54 6

22 60 10

26 59 7

15 67 14

19* 65 10

12 60

15 66* 16*

9 52 37

11 62* 25*

5 48 45

9* 59* 31*

29 52 5

24 54 9

31 58 3

24 57 9

1

2003 

1992 

2003 

1992 

2003 

1992 

2003 

1992 

2003 

1992 

2003 

1992 

2003 

1992 

2003 

1992 

2003 

1992 

Graduate

studies/degree

Bachelor’s degree

Associate’s/

2-year degree

Some college

Vocational/trade/

business school

High school 

graduate

GED/high school

equivalency

Less than/some 

high school

Still in

 high school

80 40 20 60 0 20 40 60 80 100

Percent Below Basic Percent Basic and above 

Educational attainment 

and year 

25

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient 

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of

age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are

excluded from this figure.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Figure 3-1a. Percentage of adults in each prose literacy level, by highest educational

attainment: 1992 and 2003

45

50*

9

10

11

13

9

10

5

11

14 37 45 4

38 17

33* 16 1

42 46 3

45 43 3

39 44* 4

29 53 9

36* 49 5*

4 23 59 14

25 59 11

2 16 58 23

4* 20* 56 19

2 10 49 40

3 14* 53 31*

1 6 43 51

2003 1 10* 48 41*

1992 

2003 

1992 

2003 

1992 

2003 

1992 

2003 

1992 

2003 

1992 

2003 

1992 

2003 

1992 

2003 

1992 

Graduate

studies/degree

Bachelor’s degree

Associate’s/

2-year degree

Some college

Vocational/trade/

business school

High school 

graduate

GED/high school

equivalency

Less than/some 

high school

Still in

 high school

80 40 20 60 0 20 40 60 80 100

Percent Below Basic Percent Basic and above 

Educational attainment 

and year 

37 48 5

36 47 6

1

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient 

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of

age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are

excluded from this figure.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
trade, or business classes after high school but did

not attend college (figure 3-1b).

Although literacy in 2003 increased with each

increasing level of postsecondary education, between

1992 and 2003 there were declines in literacy for

adults with the same level of highest educational

attainment. The percentage of adults who ended

their education with a bachelor’s degree with

Proficient prose literacy decreased from 40 percent in

1992 to 31 percent in 2003 (figure 3-1a). For adults

who took graduate classes or completed a graduate

degree, the percentage with Proficient prose literacy

fell 10 percentage points—from 51 percent to 41

percent—between 1992 and 2003.

Highest Level of Educational Attainment

by Race/Ethnicity

White adults at all levels of educational attainment

had higher average prose, document, and quantitative

literacy than Black and Hispanic adults at the corresponding levels of educational attainment (table 3-3).

White adults with 4-year college degrees or higher

had higher average prose, document, and quantitative

literacy than Asian adults with the same level of highest educational attainment.White adults who ended

their education with a regular high school diploma,

a GED, or some vocational classes taken after high

school also had higher average prose, document, and

quantitative literacy than Asian adults at the corresponding levels of educational attainment.

Highest Level of Educational Attainment and Literacy

Among White Adults

Between 1992 and 2003, average prose and document literacy declined for White adults with some

college or higher education (table 3-3). Average

prose literacy for White adults with a high school

diploma, a GED, or some vocational classes taken

after high school also declined between 1992 and

2003. Average document and quantitative literacy

increased between 1992 and 2003 for White adults

whose highest educational level was less than high

school or some high school. There were no other

significant changes in literacy among White adults

at any other level of educational attainment.

39

Chapter 3: Education and Literacy

Figure 3-1c. Percentage of adults in each quantitative literacy level, by highest educational attainment: 1992 and 2003

31

31

65

64

25

26

26

24

18

18

11

10

8

7

5

37 27 6

25 9 1

25 10 1

46 26 3

43 28 3

34 42 13

36 43 11

29 45 18

30 45 18

21 44 31

4 22 43 31

2 15 43 39

2003 3 18 43 36

1992 

2003 

1992 

2003 

1992 

2003 

1992 

2003 

1992 

2003 

1992 

2003 

1992 

2003 

1992 

2003 

1992 

Graduate

studies/degree

Bachelor’s degree

Associate’s/

2-year degree

Some college

Vocational/trade/

business school

High school 

graduate

GED/high school

equivalency

Less than/some 

high school

Still in

 high school

80 40 20 60 0 20 40 60 80 100

Percent Below Basic Percent Basic and above 

Educational attainment 

and year 

42 29 5

41 29 5

38 25 5

41 35 6

39 35 8

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of

age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are

excluded from this figure.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
Highest Level of Educational Attainment and Literacy

Among Black Adults

Between 1992 and 2003, average prose and quantitative literacy increased for Black adults with a high

school diploma, a GED, or some vocational classes

taken after high school (table 3-3). Average quantitative literacy also increased for Black adults whose

highest educational level was less than high school

or some high school. There were no other significant changes in literacy among Black adults at any

other level of educational attainment.

Highest Level of Educational Attainment and Literacy

Among Hispanic Adults

Between 1992 and 2003, average prose literacy

decreased among all Hispanic adults except those

who were still in high school and those who had a

college degree or higher (table 3-3). Average document literacy decreased among Hispanic adults who

had completed some college or obtained an associate’s

degree or whose highest educational level was less

than high school or some high school.There were no

other significant changes in literacy among Hispanic

adults at any other level of educational attainment.

Highest Level of Educational Attainment and Literacy

Among Asian/Pacific Islander Adults

Between 1992 and 2003, there were no statistically

significant differences on the prose, document, and

quantitative literacy scales at any level of educational attainment among Asian/Pacific Islander adults

(table 3-3).

Literacy in Everyday Life

40

Table 3-3. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores of adults, by highest educational attainment and race/ethnicity: 1992 and 2003

Literacy scale and

educational attainment 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003

Prose

Still in high school 280 278 243 236 243 226 264 274

Less than high school/some high school 227 231 199 202 183 161* 184 212

High school graduate/GED/vocational classes 276 271* 236 241* 243 231* 239 230

Some college/associate’s degree 306 300* 270 266 281 265* 279 284

College degree or higher 339 328* 288 280 294 283 282 292

Document

Still in high school 283 279 242 241 241 223 261 279

Less than high school/some high school 220 229* 192 197 193 171* 200 207

High school graduate/GED/vocational classes 269 266 230 234 244 239 234 240

Some college/associate’s degree 301 292* 261 259 280 265* 279 280

College degree or higher 328 313* 277 272 292 281 287 291

Quantitative

Still in high school 279 279 225 227 233 218 254 270

Less than high school/some high school 224 235* 169 190* 178 177 191 205

High school graduate/GED/vocational classes 278 280 225 235* 242 245 245 243

Some college/associate’s degree 308 309 261 262 278 275 281 291

College degree or higher 335 334 279 280 299 302 305 313

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003

and 4 percent in 1992) are excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

White Black Hispanic Asian/Pacific Islander
Age at School Completion

Adults who received their high school degree or college degree at an age that indicated they likely began

school at the traditional age and continued straight

through until graduation had higher levels of prose,

document, and quantitative literacy than adults who

received their degrees when they were older (figures

3-2 and 3-3).

Age at High School Completion

In the United States, students who begin kindergarten between the ages of 4 and 6, and continue

through their schooling without a break, complete

high school between the ages of 17 and 19, although

some students with disabilities may continue to be

enrolled in school through age 21. Adults who

received their high school diploma or GED credential at age 19 or younger had an average prose literacy score of 290, compared with an average prose literacy score of 252 for adults who received their high

school diploma or GED credential between 20 and

24 years of age (figure 3-2). The average document

literacy score of adults who received their high

school diploma or GED credential by age 19 was

283; for adults who completed high school between

the ages of 20 and 24, the average document literacy

score was 251. On the quantitative scale, adults who

received their high school diploma or GED credential at age 19 or younger had an average score of 297,

and those who received their high school diploma or

41

Chapter 3: Education and Literacy

Figure 3-3. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores of adults, by age

obtained college degree: 2003

23 or younger 24–29 30 or older

Prose Document Quantitative

0

150

200

250

Average score

300

350

500

325

310 311 313

294 293

332

317 322

Literacy scale

NOTE: Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons. Adults

who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3

percent in 2003) are excluded from this figure.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Figure 3-2. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores of adults, by age

obtained high school diploma or GED:

2003

19 or younger 20–24 25 or older

Prose Document Quantitative

290

252 256

283

251 244

297

257

266

0

150

200

250

Average score

300

350

500

Literacy scale

NOTE: Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons. Adults

who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3

percent in 2003) are excluded from this figure.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
GED credential between 20 and 24 years of age had

an average score of 257.

Age at College Completion

Adults who obtained their college degree at age 23

or younger had higher average prose, document, and

quantitative literacy than adults who completed their

college degree at an older age (figure 3-3).

Other Types of Adult Education

Prose, document, and quantitative literacy also differed among adults who had participated in education activities other than or in addition to high school

and college.Training offered by employers and labor

unions is discussed in chapter 4. Participation in

English as a Second Language classes and information

technology (IT) certification are discussed here.5

English as a Second Language instruction

English as a Second Language (ESL) instruction is

often available to adults through school districts,

colleges, community-based organizations, businesses, unions, and faith-based organizations (Senior

Service America and the Center for Applied

Linguistics 2006). Thirty-nine percent of adults

who learned English at the age of 16 years or older

with Below Basic prose literacy and 63 percent with

Basic prose literacy had attended or were currently

enrolled in adult ESL classes (table 3-4).

Eighty-two percent of adults who learned English at

16 years of age or older who had never enrolled in

an adult ESL class had Below Basic prose literacy,

compared with 63 percent of adults who had attended such classes and 69 percent of adults who were

currently enrolled (figure 3-4). Among adults who

Literacy in Everyday Life

42

Table 3-4. Percentage of adults in the Below Basic and Basic prose literacy levels who learned English at 

16 years of age or older, by enrollment status in an adult English as a Second Language class: 2003

Took class less Took class Took class more

Prose literacy level Currently enrolled than 2 years ago 2-5 years ago than 5 years ago Never took class

Below Basic 4 9 9 17 61

Basic 5 13 11 34 36

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or

cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Figure 3-4. Percentage of adults in each prose literacy level who learned English at 16

years of age or older, by enrollment 

status in an adult English as a Second

Language class: 2003

100 60 80 40 20 0 20 40 60 80

Percent Below Basic Percent Basic and above 

Enrollment status 

Currently enrolled

Previously enrolled

Never enrolled

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient 

82 12 6 1

63

69

26 10 #

24 8 #

# Rounds to zero.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of

age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this figure.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

5 Adults may also take basic skills classes to improve their basic reading, writing, and mathematics skills. However, there is not a uniform

definition of basic skills classes that is recognized by all adults, so

collecting accurate and consistent information on participation in

basic skills classes requires a series of questions to gauge the content

of classes an adult may consider to be basic skills classes. This was

beyond the scope of the NAAL, so participation in basic skills classes is not discussed here.
had previously enrolled in an adult ESL class or who

were currently enrolled in an adult ESL class, 24 to

26 percent had Basic prose literacy.

Information Technology Certification

Information technology (IT) is a growing area of

employment, and certification is becoming more

commonly available (Bureau of Labor Statistics

2006).In the 2003 NAAL,adults were asked whether

they had received any type of IT certification sponsored by hardware and software manufacturers or by

industry and professional associations. Adults who

had received IT certification had higher document

and quantitative literacy scores than adults who had

not received information technology certification

(figure 3-5).

The average document and quantitative literacy of

adults with information technology certification was

higher among adults with higher levels of other education (figure 3-6). Adults who had information

technology certification but did not have either a

regular high school diploma or a GED had an average document literacy score of 252, adults who had

received information technology certification and a

high school diploma had an average document literacy score of 273, adults who had received IT certification and attended some college or received an

associate’s degree had an average document literacy

score of 284, and adults who had received information technology certification and a college degree

had an average document literacy score of 303.

43

Chapter 3: Education and Literacy

Figure 3-6. Average document and quantitative literacy scores of adults who had received

information technology certification, by

highest educational attainment: 2003

High school 

graduate/GED

Less than/

some high 

school

College graduate/

Postsecondary

Some college/

Associate’s 

degree

Document Quantitative

0 

150 

200 

250 

Average score 

300 

350 

500 

252

273

284

303

255

284

301

327

Literacy scale

NOTE: Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons. Adults

who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3

percent in 2003) are excluded from this figure.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Figure 3-5. Average document and quantitative literacy scores of adults, by whether they

had received information technology

certification: 2003

Certification No certification

Document Quantitative

0

150

200

250

Average score

300

350

500

285

269

302

281

Literacy scale

NOTE: Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons. Adults

who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3

percent in 2003) are excluded from this figure.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
The average document and quantitative literacy of

adults who combined information technology certification with either a high school diploma or a GED

was higher than for all adults with a high school

diploma or a GED (figures 3-1b, 3-1c, and 3-6).

Summary

This chapter examined the relationship between

education and literacy.The percentage of adults who

had completed some college or higher levels of education increased between 1992 and 2003. In 2003,

among adults who were not still in high school, average prose, document, and quantitative literacy

increased with each increasing level of education.

However, between 1992 and 2003, prose and document literacy for adults with some college or higher

levels of education declined.

There were no statistically significant differences in

average prose, document, and quantitative literacy

between adults whose highest level of education was

a regular high school diploma and adults whose

highest level of education was a GED or a high

school equivalency credential.

White adults had higher average prose literacy scores

than Black and Hispanic adults for all levels of educational attainment. However, average prose and

quantitative literacy increased between 1992 and

2003 for Black adults with a high school diploma, a

GED, or some vocational classes taken after high

school. Average quantitative literacy increased

between 1992 and 2003 for Black adults whose

highest educational level was less than high school or

some high school. Average prose literacy declined

between 1992 and 2003 among all Hispanic adults

except those who were still in high school or had a

college degree or higher. Average document literacy

decreased among Hispanic adults who had completed some college or obtained an associate’s degree or

whose highest educational level was less than high

school or some high school.

High school graduates who obtained their diploma

or GED at age 19 or younger had higher average

prose, document, and quantitative literacy than adults

who obtained their high school diploma or GED

credential at older ages. College graduates who

received their college degree at age 23 or younger

had higher average prose, document, and quantitative

literacy than adults who received college degrees at

older ages.

Adults who had received information technology

certification had higher average document and quantitative literacy scores than adults who had not

received certification. The average document and

quantitative literacy of adults with information technology certification was higher among adults with

higher levels of other education.

44

Literacy in Everyday Life
Employment, Earnings, and 

Job Training

The analyses in this chapter examine the

employment status, occupation, and earnings of adults with different levels of literacy. Individuals’ perceptions of the extent that reading, mathematics, and computer skills limited their

job opportunities are also investigated across literacy levels. Finally, literacy and public assistance participation, as well as length of time on public assistance, is examined.6 Data from the 1992 National

Adult Literacy Survey and the 2003 National

Assessment of Adult Literacy are compared, using a

common scaled method, to examine differences in

the literacy of adults within different employment

status and occupational attainment groups.

All analyses in this chapter are based on the household sample only. Analyses by occupational group

include only adults who were employed at some

point during the 3 years prior to the assessment.

Analyses of earnings include only adults who were

employed full-time at the time of the assessment.

Analyses of skills and job training include only

adults who were not retired at the time of the

assessment.

45

# toc

CHAPTER ONE

1

Employment Status

Occupation

Weekly Wage or Salary

Job Skills and Job Training

Public Assistance Participation

Summary

CHAPTER FOUR

4

6 The relationship between literacy and household income was discussed in

chapter 2.
Employment Status

Higher percentages of adults with higher literacy

levels than adults with lower literacy levels were

employed full-time, and lower percentages were out

of the labor force (figures 4-1a, 4-1b, and 4-1c). For

example, lower percentages of adults with Below

Basic prose, document, and quantitative literacy

were employed either part- or full-time than adults

with higher literacy levels. Similarly, lower percentages of adults with Basic prose, document, and

quantitative literacy were employed full-time and

higher percentages were out of the labor force than

adults with Intermediate or Proficient literacy. Lower

percentages of adults with Intermediate literacy than

adults with Proficient literacy worked full-time, and

higher percentages of adults with Intermediate literacy than adults with Proficient literacy were out of

the labor force.

Across the prose, document, and quantitative scales,

approximately two-thirds of adults with Proficient literacy and half of adults with Intermediate literacy

were employed full-time.At least 50 percent of adults

with Below Basic literacy, on each of the three scales,

were not in the labor force.

46

Literacy in Everyday Life

Figure 4-1a. Percentage of adults in each employment status category, by prose literacy

level: 1992 and 2003 

Full-time Part-time Unemployed Not in labor force 

Literacy level and year 

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003 

14

64

18

3

14

66

17

3

12

44

38

6

12

42

40

6

14

54

27

5

10

35*

51*

5

8

29

57

6

15

54

26

5 0

20

40

60

80

100

60

80

40

20

Percent not 

 employed 

Percent 

 employed 

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of

age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are excluded from

this figure.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult

Literacy.

Figure 4-1b. Percentage of adults in each employment status category, by document literacy level: 1992 and 2003 

Full-time Part-time Unemployed Not in labor force 

60

15

63*

19*

4

15

68

15

3

14

55

27

5

14

54

27

6

41

7

12

40

9

32*

55*

5 5

9

27

12

42

40

6

Literacy level and year 

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

1992 2003 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 

0

20

40

60

80

100

60

80

40

20

Percent not 

 employed 

Percent 

 employed 

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of

age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are excluded from

this figure.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult

Literacy.
The percentages of adults with Below Basic prose and

document literacy who were employed full-time

increased between 1992 and 2003, but there was no

statistically significant change on the quantitative

scale. Between 1992 and 2003 there were also corresponding decreases in the percentages of adults with

Below Basic prose and document literacy who were

out of the labor force. Among adults with Proficient

document literacy, there was a decrease between

1992 and 2003 in the percentage of adults who were

employed full-time.

Occupation

Given the varying level of skills required by different

jobs,the study looked at the literacy of adults with different types of jobs.7The 1992 and 2003 occupational groups were coded using different classifications.For

the analyses presented in this report, 1992 results were

coded into 2003 categories using a cross walk developed by the U.S. Census Bureau. However, some

occupations could not be precisely linked between

1992 and 2003, and there was some sampling error in

how other occupations were linked.8

Table 4-1 shows the 10 occupational groups examined

in this study and the occupations represented in those

groups. The largest occupational groups in the 2003

household sample were Professional and related and

Service, accounting for 20 percent and 19 percent of

employed respondents, respectively (table 4-2).9

Chapter 4: Employment, Earnings, and Job Training

Figure 4-1c. Percentage of adults in each employment status category, by quantitative

literacy level: 1992 and 2003 

Full-time Part-time Unemployed Not in labor force 

53

7

10

31

50

7

10

34

14

47

34

5

15

48

32

5

14

57

25

4

14

58

23

5

13

66

17

4

12

67

18

3

Literacy level and year 

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

1992 2003 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 

0

20

40

60

80

100

60

80

40

20

Percent not 

 employed 

Percent 

 employed 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of

age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are excluded from

this figure.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult

Literacy.

7 Respondents who had held a job in the last 3 years were asked to

provide the name of their occupation along with the most important activities or duties of their job. This information was used to

assign each job an occupational code from the 2000 Census

Bureau’s Classified Index of Occupations, U.S. Department of

Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Housing and Household

Economic Statistics Division. Occupations from 1992 and 2003

were then collapsed into 10 major occupational groups.

8 For more information on this cross walk see U.S Census Bureau

(2003). For more information on the coding, see appendix B.

9 The percentages in table 4-2, which are based on the adult literacy data, were compared with results from the 2000 Census

(Fronczek and Johnson 2003).All differences are within 4 percentage points.

47
Literacy in Everyday Life

Table 4-1. Description of major occupational groups 

Management, Business, and Financial Management occupations (e.g., chief executives; general and operations managers; farmers, ranchers, and agricultural managers;

and purchasing managers) and business and financial operations occupations (e.g., accountants and auditors; wholesale and retail

buyers; and insurance underwriters).

Professional and related Computer and mathematical occupations; architecture and engineering occupations; life, physical, and social science occupations;

community and social services occupations; legal occupations; education, training, and library occupations; arts, design, entertainment, sports, and media occupations; and healthcare practitioner and technical occupations.

Service Healthcare support occupations; protective service occupations; food preparation and serving related occupations; building and

grounds cleaning and maintenance occupations; and personal care and service occupations.

Sales and related Cashiers; counter and rental clerks; demonstrators, product promoters, and models; insurance sales agents; real estate brokers and

agents; retail salespersons; sales engineers; sales representatives, wholesale and manufacturing; sales worker supervisors; securities,

commodities, and financial services sales; and travel agents.

Office and Administrative Support Communications equipment operators; computer operators; customer service representatives; data entry and information processing workers; desktop publishers; financial clerks; information and record clerks; material recording, scheduling, dispatching, and distributing occupations; office and administrative support worker supervisors and managers; office clerks, general; Postal Service

workers; and secretaries and administrative assistants.

Farming, Fishing, and Forestry Agricultural workers; fishers and fishing vessel operators; forest, conservation, and logging workers.

Construction and Extraction Boilermakers; brickmasons and stonemasons; carpenters; carpet, floor, and tile installers and finishers; cement masons and terrazzo

workers; construction and building inspectors; construction equipment operators; construction laborers; drywall installers; electricians; elevator installers and repairers; glaziers; hazardous materials removal workers; insulation workers; painters and paperhangers;

pipelayers and plumbers; plasterers and stucco masons; roofers; sheet metal workers; first-line supervisors/managers of construction

trades and extraction workers; earth drillers, except oil and gas; mining machine operators; and helpers, extraction workers.

Installation, Maintenance, and Repair Avionics technicians; automotive glass installers and repairers; small engine mechanics; maintenance workers, machinery; telecommunications line installers and repairers; and helpers—installation, maintenance, and repair workers.

Production Assemblers and fabricators; food processing occupations; metal workers and plastic workers; printing occupations; textile, apparel,

and furnishing occupations; woodworkers; plant and system operators; and other production occupations (e.g., dental laboratory

technicians; inspectors, testers, sorters, samplers, and weighers; and photographic process workers).

Transportation and Material Air transportation occupations (e.g., aircraft pilots and flight engineers and air traffic controllers); motor vehicle operators (e.g.,

Moving busdrivers; taxi drivers and chauffeurs; and truckdrivers and driver/sales workers); rail transportation occupations; water transportation occupations; and material moving occupations.

Source: Adapted from the Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2004-05 Edition, U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, retrieved 11/10/05 from http://www.bls.gov/oco/home.htm.

Table 4-2. Percentage of adults in each occupational group: 1992 and 2003

Occupational group 1992 2003

Management, Business, and Financial 8 12

Professional and related 17 20

Service 20 19

Sales and related 12 11

Office and Administrative Support 17 14

Farming, Fishing, and Forestry 1 1

Construction and Extraction 5 7

Installation, Maintenance, and Repair 4 4

Production 10 8

Transportation and Material Moving 6 6

Note: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive

or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are excluded from this table.The 1992 and 2003 occupational groups were coded using different classifications. For the analyses presented in this

report, 1992 results were recoded into 2003 categories using a crosswalk developed by the U.S. Census Bureau. However, some occupations could not be precisely linked between 1992 and 2003, and there was

some sampling error in how other occupations were linked.Therefore, all comparisons between 1992 and 2003 occupational groups should be made with caution. Occupational information is available only for

adults who were employed at some point during the 3 years prior to the assessment.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

48
According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, job

growth in Professional and related and Service occupations is projected to account for over half the new jobs

added to the nation’s workforce from 2004 to 2014

(Hecker 2005). Because these occupational groups

have very different educational requirements and

earnings, it is useful to examine the literacy levels of

adults in these occupations.

Figures 4-2a, 4-2b, and 4-2c present the average

prose, document, and quantitative scores for each

occupational group in 1992 and 2003.The occupational groups with the highest average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores in 1992,

Professional and related and Management, Business, and

Financial, were also ranked the highest in 2003.

Likewise, the occupational groups with the lowest

average prose, document, and quantitative literacy

levels in 1992 were the lowest ranking groups in

2003.The occupational groups with the lowest average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores

were Service; Farming, Fishing, and Forestry;

Transportation and Material Moving; Production; and

Construction and Extraction.

Between 1992 and 2003, there was a statistically significant decrease in average prose literacy scores in 6

of the 10 occupational groups (Management, Business,

49

Chapter 4: Employment, Earnings, and Job Training

Figure 4-2a. Average prose literacy scores of adults, by occupational group: 1992 and 2003 

316

306*

321 317*

266 262

288

279*

292 287*

254

219*

261 255

273 279

257 255 261

252*

Management,

 Business, and

 Financial

Professional

 and related

Service Sales and

 related

Office and

 Administrative

 Support

Farming, Fishing, 

and Forestry

Construction 

and Extraction

Installation, 

Maintenance,

 and Repair

Production Transportation and

 Material Moving

1992 2003

0

150

200

250

Average score

300

350

500

Occupational group

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are excluded from this figure.The 1992 and 2003 occupational groups were coded using different classifications. For the analyses presented in this report, 1992 results were recoded into 2003 categories using a crosswalk developed by the U.S. Census Bureau. However, some occupations could not be precisely linked between 1992 and 2003, and there was some sampling error in how other occupations were

linked.Therefore, all comparisons between 1992 and 2003 occupational groups should be made with caution. Occupational information is available only for adults who were employed at some point during the 

3 years prior to the assessment.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
and Financial; Professional and related; Sales and related;

Office and Administrative Support; Farming, Fishing, and

Forestry; and Transportation and Material Moving).

Average document literacy scores decreased significantly in 4 occupational groups (Management,

Business, and Financial; Professional and related;

Construction and Extraction; and Transportation and

Material Moving). In contrast, average quantitative literacy scores increased during 1992 to 2003 for adults

employed in the Installation, Maintenance, and Repair

and Production occupations.

In 2003, workers employed in two occupations—

Professional and related and Management, Business, and

Financial—accounted for a majority of adults with

Proficient literacy on all three scales (table 4-3). In

contrast, only 7 to 8 percent of individuals with

Below Basic literacy levels worked in these two

occupational groups. On the three scales, between

30 and 35 percent of those with Below Basic were in

Service jobs in 2003. Conversely, 7 to 12 percent of

those with Proficient literacy skills were employed in

these occupations.

50

Literacy in Everyday Life

Figure 4-2b. Average document literacy scores of adults, by occupational group: 1992 and 2003 

308

297*

316

305*

262 259

282 281 287 284

251

225

261

251*

272 280

253 253 259

250*

Management,

 Business, and

 Financial

Professional

 and related

Service Sales and

 related

Office and

 Administrative

 Support

Farming, Fishing, 

and Forestry

Construction 

and Extraction

Installation, 

Maintenance,

 and Repair

Production Transportation and

 Material Moving

1992 2003

0

150

200

250

Average score

300

350

500

Occupational group

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are excluded from this figure.The 1992 and 2003 occupational groups were coded using different classifications. For the analyses presented in this report, 1992 results were recoded into 2003 categories using a crosswalk developed by the U.S. Census Bureau. However, some occupations could not be precisely linked between 1992 and 2003, and there was some sampling error in how other occupations were

linked.Therefore, all comparisons between 1992 and 2003 occupational groups should be made with caution. Occupational information is available only for adults who were employed at some point during the 

3 years prior to the assessment.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
51

Chapter 4: Employment, Earnings, and Job Training

Figure 4-2c. Average quantitative literacy scores of adults, by occupational group: 1992 and 2003 

Management,

 Business, and

 Financial

Professional

 and related

Service Sales and

 related

Office and

 Administrative

 Support

Farming, Fishing, 

and Forestry

Construction 

and Extraction

Installation, 

Maintenance,

 and Repair

Production Transportation and

 Material Moving

1992 2003

0

150

200

250

Average score

300

350

500

Occupational group

322 318 320 321

261 263

287 293 289 293

260

241

271 265

280

293*

257

267* 263 263

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are excluded from this figure.The 1992 and 2003 occupational groups were coded using different classifications. For the analyses presented in this report, 1992 results were recoded into 2003 categories using a crosswalk developed by the U.S. Census Bureau. However, some occupations could not be precisely linked between 1992 and 2003, and there was some sampling error in how other occupations were

linked.Therefore, all comparisons between 1992 and 2003 occupational groups should be made with caution. Occupational information is available only for adults who were employed at some point during the 

3 years prior to the assessment.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Table 4-3. Percentage of adults in each occupational group, by prose, document, and quantitative literacy level:

1992 and 2003

1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003

Prose

Below Basic 3 3 3 4 32 30 6 8 8 8 4 3 10 15* 5 2* 19 15 12 11

Basic 5 8* 8 10* 25 24 12 12 15 14 2 1* 7 9 5 4 13 11* 8 9

Intermediate 9 15* 18 21* 18 16 14 12* 20 16* 1 #* 5 5 4 4 8 7 5 4

Proficient 17 19 36 42* 10 10 9 7 15 13 1 # 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2*

Document 

Below Basic 3 3 4 5 33 35 7 6 8 6 3 3 9 15* 5 2* 17 15 11 10

Basic 5 7* 8 10* 25 24 12 10 15 13 2 1* 7 9* 5 4 14 12 8 9

Intermediate 9 15* 17 20* 18 16* 13 12* 19 17* 1 #* 5 6 4 4 8 7* 6 5

Proficient 15 17 36 39 11 12 9 9 15 12 1 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1*

Quantitative 

Below Basic 3 3 5 5 32 33 9 8 10 10 2 2 8 12* 5 2* 16 13 11 10

Basic 6 9* 12 14* 22 22 13 12 19 16* 2 1* 5 8* 4 4 11 9 6 7

Intermediate 10 15* 21 23* 15 14 13 11 20 16* 1 #* 5 5 4 4 7 6 5 4

Proficient 19 22 36 37 9 7 9 10 11 12 1 1 4 3 4 3 4 4 4 2*

# Rounds to zero.

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive

or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are excluded from this table.The 1992 and 2003 occupational groups were coded using different classifications. For the analyses presented in this

report, 1992 results were recoded into 2003 categories using a crosswalk developed by the U.S. Census Bureau. However, some occupations could not be precisely linked between 1992 and 2003, and there was

some sampling error in how other occupations were linked.Therefore, all comparisons between 1992 and 2003 occupational groups should be made with caution. Occupational information is available only for

adults who were employed at some point during the 3 years prior to the assessment.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Service

Sales and

related

Management,

Business, and

Financial

Professional

and related

Farming,

Fishing, and

Forestry

Construction

and Extraction

Office and

Administrative

Support Production

Transportation

and Material

Moving

Installation,

Maintenance,

and Repair
Weekly Wage or Salary

In general, adults with lower literacy levels earned

lower salaries (figures 4-3a, 4-3b, and 4-3c). On each

of the three scales, 17 to 18 percent of adults with

Below Basic literacy earned less than $300 a week,

while 3 to 6 percent of adults with Proficient literacy

fell into that earnings category. Conversely, on each

of the three scales, 12 to 14 percent of adults with

Proficient literacy earned $1950 or more each week

compared with 2 to 3 percent of adults with Below

Basic literacy. A person who worked for an entire

year (52 weeks) and earned $300 per week would

earn approximately $16,000 over the course of the

year, while a person who worked for an entire year

and earned $1950 per week would earn approximately $101,000 over a year.

52

Literacy in Everyday Life

Figure 4-3a. Percentage of full-time employed

adults in each weekly gross earnings

category, by prose literacy level: 2003 

18

41

7

18

12

3

2

1

12

31

8

19

17

17

18

8

6

8

20

11

17

13

13

12

12

19

16

5

2

4

4 10

Literacy level

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Percent

less than $500

Percent

$500 or more

Less than $300

$850–$1149

$300–$499

$1150–$1449

$500–$649

$1450–$1949

$650–$849

$1950 or more

0

20

40

60

80

100

60

80

40

20

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of

age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this figure.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy .
53

Chapter 4: Employment, Earnings, and Job Training

Figure 4-3b. Percentage of full-time employed

adults in each weekly gross earnings

category, by document literacy level:

2003 

18

41

8

16

11

3

1

3

11

32

11

19

16

5

3

4

8

19

16

17

19

8

7

7

6

14

22

10

14

12

10

12

Percent

less than $500

Percent

$500 or more

Literacy level

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Less than $300

$850–$1149

$300–$499

$1150–$1449

$500–$649

$1450–$1949

$650–$849

$1950 or more

0

20

40

60

80

100

60

80

40

20

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of

age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this figure.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Figure 4-3c. Percentage of full-time employed

adults in each weekly gross earnings

category, by quantitative literacy level:

2003 

7

17

12

2

2

2 17

17

18

10

7

8

22

10

16

13

13

14

17

42

11

27

7

17 3

10

13

19

18

3

5

6

Percent

less than $500

Percent

$500 or more

Literacy level

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Less than $300

$850–$1149

$300–$499

$1150–$1449

$500–$649

$1450–$1949

$650–$849

$1950 or more

0

20

40

60

80

100

60

80

40

20

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of

age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this figure.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
Job Skills and Job Training

Reading, mathematics, and computer skills are essential to entering, retaining, and advancing in many

jobs throughout the labor force.As technological and

economic changes continue, individuals whose literacy skills had previously been adequate may suddenly find themselves lacking sufficient basic skills, a situation that limits their opportunities for jobs or

career advancement (Davenport 2005). Respondents

(except those who were retired) were asked to what

extent they believed that their reading, mathematics,

and computer skills limited their job opportunities.

Reading Skills

In 2003, adults with lower levels of prose and document literacy were more likely to report that their

reading skills limited their job opportunities than were

adults in the higher literacy levels.Thirty-five percent

of adults with Below Basic prose literacy and 34 percent

of adults with Below Basic document literacy reported

that their reading skills limited their job opportunities

“a lot” (figure 4-4).An additional 22 percent of adults

with Below Basic prose literacy and 20 percent of

adults with Below Basic document literacy indicated

that there was “some” limitation to their job opportunities as a result of their reading skills. In contrast,

54

Literacy in Everyday Life

Figure 4-4. Percentage of adults who thought their reading skills limited their job opportunities, by prose and

document literacy level: 2003 

Prose Document

34

11

8

7

35

15

9

33

62

81 92

30

62

85 96

Percent

opportunities

not limited

Percent

 opportunities

 limited

Percent

opportunities

not limited

Percent

 opportunities

 limited

0

20

20

40

40

60

60

80

80

100

100

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Literacy level

0

20

20

40

40

60

60

80

80

100

100

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Literacy level

13

20

12

16 4

4

2

2

13

22

14 7

6 3

2

1

1

Not at all A little Some A lot

Note: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive

or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this figure. Adults who reported that they were retired are not included in these analyses.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
nearly all those with Proficient prose and document literacy (92 to 96 percent) agreed that their reading

skills did “not at all” limit their job opportunities.

Thirty percent of adults with Below Basic prose literacy and 33 percent of adults with Below Basic document literacy indicated that their reading skills did

“not at all” limit their job opportunities. Also,

62 percent of adults with Basic literacy indicated that

their job opportunities were “not at all” limited by

their reading skills.

Mathematics Skills

Fewer adults with Below Basic quantitative literacy

felt that their mathematics skills limited their job

opportunities “a lot” when compared with the percentage of those with Below Basic prose and document literacy who felt limited by their reading skills.

In 2003, some 25 percent of adults with Below Basic

quantitative literacy reported that their mathematics

skills limited their job opportunities “a lot,” while 40

percent reported that their job opportunities were

“not at all” limited by their mathematics skills (figure

4-5). Nearly 90 percent of adults with Proficient

quantitative literacy and 80 percent of adults with

Intermediate quantitative literacy reported that their

job opportunities were “not at all” limited by their

mathematics skills.

55

Chapter 4: Employment, Earnings, and Job Training

Figure 4-5. Percentage of adults who thought their

mathematics skills limited their job

opportunities, by quantitative literacy

level: 2003 

40

66

80 89

20

20

40

40

60

60

80

80

100

100

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Literacy level

16

19

25

13

13

8

11

7 3

8

3

Percent

opportunities

not limited

Percent

 opportunities

 limited

1

Not at all A little Some A lot

0

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of

age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this figure. Adults who

reported that they were retired are not included in these analyses.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
Computer Skills

In 2003, 51 percent of adults with Below Basic document literacy and 43 percent of adults with Below

Basic quantitative literacy believed that their job

opportunities were limited “a lot” by their computer

skills.Yet 28 percent of adults with Below Basic document literacy and 32 percent of adults with Below

Basic quantitative literacy did “not at all” feel that

their computer skills limited their job opportunities

(figure 4-6).

Approximately 67 percent of adults with Proficient

document literacy and 70 percent with Proficient

quantitative literacy reported that their computer

skills did “not at all” limit their job opportunities.

Fifty-eight percent of adults with Intermediate document literacy and 61 percent with Intermediate quantitative literacy reported that their job opportunities

were “not at all” limited by their computer skills.

Training to Improve Reading, Mathematics, and 

Computer Skills

Regardless of their literacy levels, 9 percent of adults

who reported that their reading skills limited their

job opportunities “a lot” or “some” had participated

in job training activities to improve their English

reading skills during the past year (data not shown).

Eight percent of adults who thought that their job

opportunities were limited “a lot” or “some” by their

mathematics skills participated in job training activities that emphasized mathematics during the past

year. Of all adults who believed that their job opportunities were limited “a lot” or “some” by their computer skills, 12 percent had participated in computer

job training activities during the past year.

Literacy in Everyday Life

Figure 4-6. Percentage of adults who thought their computer skills limited their job opportunities, by document and quantitative literacy level: 2003 

Document Quantitative

0

20

20

40

40

60

60

80

80

100

100

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Literacy level

0

20

20

40

40

60

60

80

80

100

100

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Literacy level

11

14

43

15

14

20

17

12

11

18

8

5

9

12

51

14

14

27

17

13

13

18

9

6

Percent

opportunities

not limited

Percent

 opportunities

 limited

Percent

opportunities

not limited

Percent

 opportunities

 limited

Not at all A little Some A lot

32

50 61 70

28

45

58 67

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive

or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this figure. Adults who reported that they were retired are not included in these analyses.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

56
A lower percentage of adults who reported that their

reading skills limited their job opportunities and who

participated in job training activities with a reading

focus had Below Basic prose literacy and a higher percentage had Intermediate prose literacy than adults

who reported that their reading skills limited their

job opportunities and had not participated in job

training with a reading focus (figure 4-7).

Among adults in each quantitative literacy level who

reported that their mathematics skills limited their

job opportunities, there were no statistically significant differences in the percentages who did and did

not participate in job training that emphasized mathematics (figure 4-8).

A lower percentage of adults who reported that their

computer skills limited their job opportunities and

who participated in job training activities with a

computer focus had Below Basic quantitative literacy

and a higher percentage had Intermediate and Proficient

quantitative literacy than adults who reported that

their computer skills limited their job opportunities

and had not participated in job training with a computer focus (figure 4-9).

57

Chapter 4: Employment, Earnings, and Job Training

Figure 4-7. Percentage of adults in each prose and

document literacy level who thought

their reading skills limited their job

opportunities “a lot” or “some,” by

whether or not they participated in job

training that emphasized reading: 2003 

27 41 30 2

42 35 22 2

23 33 40 3

35 29 33 3

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Did not

 participate

Participated

Document

Did not

 participate

Participated

Prose

80 40 20 60 0 20 40 60 80 100

Percent Below Basic Percent Basic and above

Literacy scale and

participation

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of

age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this figure. Adults who

reported that they were retired are not included in these analyses.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Figure 4-8. Percentage of adults in each quantitative

literacy level who thought their mathematics skills limited their job opportunities “a lot” or “some,” by whether or not

they participated in job training that

emphasized mathematics: 2003 

38 34 23 4

47 33 17 3

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

80 40 20 60 0 20 40 60 80 100

Percent Below Basic Percent Basic and above

Participation

Did not

 participate

Participated

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of

age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this figure. Adults who

reported that they were retired are not included in these analyses.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Figure 4-9. Percentage of adults in each quantitative literacy level who thought their

computer skills limited their job

opportunities “a lot” or “some,” by

whether or not they participated in

job training that emphasized computers: 2003 

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

80 40 20 60 0 20 40 60 80 100

Percent Below Basic Percent Basic and above

Participation

Did not

 participate

Participated 20 37 33 10

38 35 22 5

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of

age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this figure. Adults who

reported that they were retired are not included in these analyses.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
Public Assistance Participation10

As found with the 1992 National Adult Literacy

Survey, there is a relationship between literacy and

participation in public assistance (Barton and Jenkins

1995).Among women with Below Basic prose literacy, 10 percent had previously received public assistance and 4 percent were currently receiving public

assistance (figure 4-10a). For women with Basic

prose literacy, 11 percent had previously received

public assistance and 3 percent were currently

receiving public assistance. In contrast, among

women with Proficient prose literacy, 3 percent had

previously received public assistance and less than 0.5

percent were currently receiving public assistance.

58

Literacy in Everyday Life

10 The main public assistance program in the United States is

Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF). This program

targets needy families with children, primarily single mothers.

Therefore the analyses in this section are limited to women only.

Figure 4-10a. Percentage of women who were currently receiving public assistance or

had received public assistance in the

past, by prose literacy level: 2003 

Never Past participation Current participation

Literacy level

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Percent never

 received public

 assistance

Percent received

 public assistance

0

20

40

60

80

100

60

80

40

20

86 97

10

4

11

3

8

1

3 #

86 91

# Rounds to zero.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of

age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this figure.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Figure 4-10b. Percentage of women who were currently receiving public assistance or

had received public assistance in the

past, by document literacy level:

2003 

Never Past participation Current participation

86 87 91 96

11

4

10

3

8

2

4

Literacy level

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

0

20

40

60

80

100

60

80

40

20

Percent never

 received public

 assistance

Percent received

 public assistance

#

# Rounds to zero.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of

age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this figure.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
The patterns for the document and quantitative

scales were similar (figures 4-10b and 4-10c).

Respondents who had received public assistance

were asked the total amount of time they had

received public assistance in their lifetime.Table 4-4

displays the percentages of women who were on

public assistance for various amounts of time: never;

less than 6 months; 6 months to a year; over a year

but less than 2 years; 2 to 3 years; and over 3 years.

In general, a lower percentage of women with higher levels of literacy than women with lower levels of

literacy received public assistance. If they did receive

public assistance, they participated for shorter periods

of time. Of those who received public assistance for

over 3 years, higher percentages of women were at

the Basic literacy level than at the Intermediate level of

literacy across all three scales. Similarly, higher percentages of women with prose, document, and quantitative Intermediate literacy received public assistance

for over 3 years than women with Proficient literacy.

On the quantitative scale, a higher percentage of

women with Below Basic literacy than with Basic literacy received public assistance for over 3 years.

59

Chapter 4: Employment, Earnings, and Job Training

Figure 4-10c. Percentage of women who were currently receiving public assistance or

had received public assistance in the

past, by quantitative literacy level:

2003 

Never Past participation Current participation

83 89 93 98

13

4

10

2

6

1 2

Literacy level

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

0

20

40

60

80

100

60

80

40

20

Percent never

 received public

 assistance

Percent received

 public assistance

#

# Rounds to zero.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of

age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this figure.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
Summary

This chapter examined literacy skills in relation to

employment status, occupational attainment, weekly

wage or salary, perceived job opportunities, and public assistance participation for the 2003 household

sample. In addition, trends in adult literacy between

1992 and 2003 were discussed for employment status

and occupational attainment.

A higher percentage of adults with higher literacy

levels were employed full-time and a lower percentage were out of the labor force than adults with lower

literacy levels.

On all three literacy scales, individuals with Proficient

literacy levels were most likely to be employed in

Professional and related and Management, Business, and

Financial occupations. Many individuals with lower

literacy levels were employed in Service occupations.

Specifically, 30 to 35 percent of adults with Below

Basic and 22 to 24 percent of adults with Basic prose,

document, and quantitative literacy worked in

Service jobs. Conversely, 7 to 12 percent of adults

with Proficient literacy were employed in Service

occupations.

In general, those with lower literacy levels earned

lower incomes. In the three lowest income categories, a greater percentage of adults scored in the

Below Basic or Basic levels when compared with the

percentage of those with Proficient literacy.

Conversely, of adults earning $1450 or more a week,

fewer than 5 percent were at the Below Basic literacy

level, compared with the approximately 25 percent

who scored at the Proficient level of literacy on any of

the three scales.

Of adults with Below Basic prose and document literacy, 34 to 35 percent felt that their reading skills limited their job opportunities “a lot.” Of adults with

60

Literacy in Everyday Life

Table 4-4. Percentage of women who received public assistance for varying lengths of time, by prose, document, and quantitative literacy level: 2003

Less than 6 months More than

Literacy scale and literacy level Never 6 months to 1 year 1–2 years 2–3 years 3 years

Prose

Below Basic 87 2 1 3 2 6

Basic 87 2 2 2 2 5

Intermediate 91 2 2 1 2 3

Proficient 97 1 11#1

Document

Below Basic 86 2 1 2 2 7

Basic 87 2 2 2 2 5

Intermediate 91 2 2 2 2 3

Proficient 96 1 11#1

Quantitative

Below Basic 84 2 2 3 2 7

Basic 89 2 2 2 2 4

Intermediate 93 1 1 1 1 2

Proficient 98 1 #1#1

# Rounds to zero.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive

or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
Below Basic quantitative literacy, 25 percent felt limited by their mathematics skills, while 43 to 51 percent

of adults with Below Basic document and quantitative

literacy felt hindered by their computer skills.A small

proportion (8 to 12 percent) of adults who reported

that their job opportunities were limited “a lot” or

“some” by insufficient reading, mathematics, or computer skills participated in training or education

within the previous year.

In general, women with higher levels of literacy were

less likely to have received public assistance. If they

did receive public assistance, they reported participating for a shorter amount of time when compared

with women with lower levels of literacy.

61

Chapter 4: Employment, Earnings, and Job Training

63

# toc

CHAPTER ONE

1

Literacy and the Family

The analyses in this chapter examine how

parents, grandparents, and guardians with

different literacy levels interacted with the

children living in their homes around issues related

to literacy and school.The analyses also examine the

relationship between the literacy of adults living in

a home and whether or not the home had educational resources—including books and computers—that encourage children to read and actively

engage in other academic and intellectual pursuits.

Throughout the chapter, the word parent refers to

parents, grandparents, or guardians who had children living in their household for at least 10 days

out of the month.

Parent-Child Literacy-Related

Interactions

Educational Resources in the

Home

School Involvement

Summary

CHAPTER FIVE

5
Literacy in Everyday Life

Parent-Child Literacy-Related Interactions

Reading to Children

Higher percentages of parents with Intermediate or

Proficient prose literacy than parents with Basic prose

literacy who had children under age 8 reported that

they read to their children 5 or more days a week:

half of parents with Proficient prose literacy and 44

percent of parents with Intermediate prose literacy

read to their children 5 or more days compared with

36 percent of parents with Basic prose literacy (figure

5-1). Additionally, a higher percentage of parents

with Basic than with Below Basic prose literacy who

had children under age 8 reported that they read to

their children 5 or more days a week: 36 percent of

parents with Basic prose literacy read to their children

5 or more days compared with 27 percent of parents

with Below Basic prose literacy.

A lower percentage of parents with Below Basic than

with Basic prose literacy who had children under age

8 reported that they read to their children during the

previous week: 41 percent of parents with Below Basic

prose literacy did not read to their children at all

compared with 25 percent of parents with Basic prose

literacy (figure 5-1).Additionally, a lower percentage

of parents with Basic prose literacy than parents with

either Intermediate or Proficient prose literacy reported

that they read to their children at all during the previous week: 25 percent of parents with Basic prose

literacy did not read to their children at all compared

with 17 percent of parents with Intermediate prose literacy and 14 percent of parents with Proficient prose

literacy.

Learning the Alphabet

In addition to reading to their children, parents may

participate in other types of literacy-related activities

with them.Knowing the letters of the alphabet before

starting school is a predictor of a school-age child’s

reading level (Adams 1990,Schatschneider et al.2004;

Whitehurst and Lonigan 2001).The 2003 adult literacy assessment background questionnaire included a

question asking parents with young children how

often they tried to teach their children the letters of

the alphabet. Parents were given the option of saying

that their children already knew the letters of the

alphabet. In this section, results are reported on this

question for parents with children ages 3 through 5.

A higher percentage of parents with Intermediate or

Proficient prose literacy than parents with Basic prose

literacy reported that they had children between the

ages of 3 and 5 who knew the letters of the alphabet.

Additionally,a higher percentage of parents with Basic,

Intermediate, or Proficient prose literacy than parents

Figure 5-1. Percentage of parents who read to or

with their children under age 8 during

the previous week, by prose literacy

level: 2003

5 or more days 3 to 4 days 1 to 2 days Never 

41

25 17 14

Percent did not 

 read to child 

Percent read 

 to child 

0

20

20

40

40

60

60

80

80

100

100

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Literacy level 

18

27

21

36

21

44

22

50

19 14 14 18

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age

and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or

cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this figure.Parents includes -

parents, grandparents, and guardians who had a child living with them 10 or more days a month.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

64
with Below Basic prose literacy reported that they had

children between the ages of 3 and 5 who knew the

letters of the alphabet (figure 5-2). Among parents

with children between the ages of 3 and 5 who did

not already know the letters of the alphabet, 19 percent of parents with Below Basic prose literacy reported that they never tried to teach their children the

letters of the alphabet, compared with 7 percent of

parents with Intermediate prose literacy and 8 percent

of parents with Proficient prose literacy (figure 5-3).

Learning to Read Words

Most parents reported that they pointed out words to

their children under the age of 8 and asked the children what the words meant at least a few times a

week (table 5-1). Across literacy levels, there were

only a few significant differences in the frequency

with which parents reported that they tried to teach

their children to read words: a higher percentage of

parents with Intermediate prose literacy than parents

with Below Basic prose literacy taught their children

words a few times a week or more, and a higher 

65

Chapter 5: Literacy and the Family

Figure 5-2. Percentage of parents whose children

between the ages of 3 and 5 knew the

letters of the alphabet, by prose literacy

level: 2003

12

21

27 31

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Literacy level

Percent 

0

20

40

60

80

100

NOTE:Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households.Adults who could

not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in

2003) are excluded from this figure.Parents includes parents, grandparents, and guardians who had

a child living with them 10 or more days a month.

SOURCE: U.S.Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Figure 5-3. Percentage of parents with children

who did not already know the letters of

the alphabet who tried to teach their

children between the ages of 3 and 5

the letters of the alphabet during the

previous month, by prose literacy level:

2003

19 7 8

62

10

10

73

10

10

73

10

11

66

12

14

Less than Never 

once a week 

Every day/a few Once a week 

times a week 

Percent did not 

 teach child 

 letters 

Percent taught 

 child letters 

0

20

20

40

40

60

60

80

80

100

100

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Literacy level 

7

NOTE:Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age

and older living in households.Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or

cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this figure.Parents includes

parents, grandparents, and guardians who had a child living with them 10 or more days a month.

SOURCE: U.S.Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Table 5-1. Percentage of parents who tried to teach

their children under the age of 8 to read

words during the previous month, by

prose literacy level: 2003

Less than Every day/

Child already once Once a a few times

reads well Never a week week a week

Below Basic 5 25 9 8 53

Basic 4 22 8 7 59

Intermediate 4 20 8 7 61

Proficient 4 20 11 8 57

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age

and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or

cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.Parents includes

parents, grandparents, and guardians who had a child living with them 10 or more days a month.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
66

Literacy in Everyday Life

percentage of parents with Proficient prose literacy

than parents with Basic or Intermediate prose literacy

taught their children to read words less than once a

week. There were no statistically significant differences across parents’ prose literacy levels in the percentage who reported that their children under age

8 could already read well (table 5-1).

Rhyming Activities

The ability to hear and understand rhymes is an

important skill for children learning to read (Anthony

and Lonigan 2004). Parents of young children often

engage in a variety of activities that help make their

children sensitive to the sounds of rhymes: singing

songs, reciting nursery rhymes, or playing rhyming

games such as “patty cake” or “ring around the rosey.”

The percentage of parents who reported that they

had engaged in some type of rhyming activity with

their children under the age of 8 during the previous

month ranged from 81 to 90 percent across the four

prose literacy levels (figure 5-4). Higher percentages

of parents with Intermediate or Proficient prose literacy

than parents with Basic prose literacy reported engaging in rhyming activities with their children, and a

higher percentage of parents with Basic prose literacy

than parents with Below Basic prose literacy reported

engaging in rhyming activities.

Talking to Children About School and Homework

Schools usually encourage parents to be actively

involved in their children’s education (Carey, Lewis,

and Faris 1998). The percentage of parents who

reported that they talked to their school-age children every day about things they studied in school

ranged from 56 to 71 percent across the four prose

literacy levels (figure 5-5). A lower percentage of

parents with Below Basic prose literacy than parents

with Basic, Intermediate, or Proficient prose literacy

reported that they talked to their children about

things they studied in school. Eleven percent of parents with Below Basic prose literacy who had schoolage children never talked to their children about

things they studied in school compared with 2 percent of parents with Basic, Intermediate, or Proficient

prose literacy. Conversely, a lower percentage of parents with Intermediate or Proficient prose literacy than

parents with Basic prose literacy reported that they

talked to their children every day about things they

studied in school, and a higher percentage of parents

with Basic prose literacy than parents with Below

Basic prose literacy talked to their children every day

about things they studied in school.

Figure 5-4. Percentage of parents who engaged in

rhyming activities with their children

under the age of 8 during the previous

month, by prose literacy level: 2003

Less than Never 

once a week 

Every day/a few Once a week 

times a week 

13 10 10 19

Percent did not 

 engage in 

 rhyming 

 activities 

 with child 

Percent 

 engaged in 

 rhyming 

 activities 

 with child 

0

20

20

40

40

60

60

80

80

100

100

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Literacy level 

8

11

68

8

10

71

7

11

73

9

62

11

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age

and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or

cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this figure.Parents includes

parents, grandparents, and guardians who had a child living with them 10 or more days a month.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
67

The percentage of parents who reported that they

helped their children with homework or worked

with their children on homework at least occasionally ranged from 75 to 92 percent across the four literacy levels (figure 5-6). The percentage of parents

who reported that they never worked with their

children on homework declined with each increasing prose literacy level: 25 percent of parents with

Below Basic prose literacy, 14 percent of parents with

Basic prose literacy, 11 percent of parents with

Intermediate prose literacy, and 8 percent of parents

with Proficient prose literacy never helped or worked

with their children on homework.

Educational Resources in the Home

Families’ environments differ in the extent to which

they provide resources that encourage children to

read and actively engage in other academic and

intellectual pursuits.The next section of this chapter examines the relationship between parents’ literacy and educational resources in the home.

Reading and Reading Materials in the Home

According to parents’ self-reports, parents with high

literacy levels were more likely to be seen reading by

their children. Ninety percent of adults with Proficient

prose literacy, 81 percent of adults with Intermediate

Chapter 5: Literacy and the Family

Figure 5-5. Percentage of parents who talked to

their school-age children about things

they studied in school, by prose literacy

level: 2003

11

13

21

56

2

12

21

65

2

8

21

69

2

5

22

71

Percent did not 

 talk to child 

 about school 

Percent talked 

 to child about 

 school 

0

20

20

40

40

60

60

80

80

100

100

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Literacy level 

Once a week Never 

or less 

A few times 

a week 

Every day 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age

and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or

cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this figure.Parents includes

parents, grandparents, and guardians who had a child living with them 10 or more days a month.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Figure 5-6. Percentage of parents who helped or

worked with their school-age child on

homework, by prose literacy level: 2003

25 14 11 8

17

19

39

19

26

42

22

30

38

27

32

34

Percent no 

 homework 

with child 

Percent 

 homework 

with child 

0

20

20

40

40

60

60

80

80

100

100

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Literacy level 

Once a week Never 

or less 

A few times 

a week 

Every day 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age

and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or

cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this figure.Parents includes

parents, grandparents, and guardians who had a child living with them 10 or more days a month.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
prose literacy, 73 percent of adults with Basic prose

literacy, and 60 percent of adults with Below Basic

prose literacy said that their children ages 2 through

17 often saw them reading (figure 5-7).

The percentage of adults who lived with children

under the age of 18 and had no reading materials in

their home decreased with each increasing level of

prose literacy: 19 percent of adults with Below Basic

prose literacy and 3 percent or fewer of adults with

higher levels of literacy who lived with children

under age 18 reported that they had no reading

materials in their home (figure 5-8).11

Conversely, the percentage of adults who lived with

children under the age of 18 and reported that they

had many reading materials in their home increased

with each increasing level of prose literacy: 54 percent

of adults with Below Basic prose literacy, 83 percent of

adults with Basic prose literacy, 92 percent of adults

with Intermediate prose literacy, and 96 percent of

adults with Proficient prose literacy who lived with

children under the age of 18 reported that they had

many reading materials in their home.12

68

Literacy in Everyday Life

12 The 2003 background questionnaire asked all adults with children under age 18 living in their home whether they had 25 or

more books in their home and also whether they had a variety of

magazines and other reading materials in their home. Adults who

had both 25 or more books and a variety of magazines and other

reading materials in their home were categorized as having many

reading materials in their home; adults who had either 25 or more

books or a variety of magazines and other reading materials in their

home were categorized as having some reading materials in their

home; adults who had neither 25 or more books nor a variety of

magazines and other reading materials in their home were categorized as having no reading materials in their home.

Figure 5-8. Percentage of adults who lived with

children under age 18 and had reading

materials in the home, by prose literacy

level: 2003

Many Some None 

19

28

3

14

1

8 4

Percent no 

 reading 

materials 

 in home 

Percent 

 reading 

materials 

 in home 

0

20

20

40

40

60

60

80

80

100

100

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Literacy level 

#

54 83 92 96

# Rounds to zero.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age

and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or

cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this figure.Parents includes

parents, grandparents, and guardians who had a child living with them 10 or more days a month.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Figure 5-7. Percentage of parents whose children

ages 2 through 17 often saw them reading, by prose literacy level: 2003

60

73

81

90

Percent

0

20

40

60

80

100

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Literacy level

NOTE: Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could

not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in

2003) are excluded from this figure.Parents includes parents, grandparents, and guardians who had

a child living with them 10 or more days a month.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

11 Questions about reading materials in the home were not asked of

respondents who were under the age of 18 unless there were

younger children in the home.
Across the four prose literacy levels, 93 to 100 percent of parents said that their children ages 2 through

17 had at least one or two books of their own (figure 5-9). However, higher percentages of parents

with Intermediate or Proficient prose literacy than parents with Basic prose literacy reported that their children had their own books, and a higher percentage

of parents with Basic prose literacy than parents with

Below Basic prose literacy reported that their children

had their own books.

Computers in the Home

Adults were asked whether they had a computer in

their home that could be used for word processing

and whether they had a computer in their home

with Internet access. Among adults living in households with children under the age of 18, the percentage of adults who said they lived in a home that had

a computer with word processing capability or

Internet access increased with every increasing level

of prose literacy (figure 5-10).

69

Chapter 5: Literacy and the Family

Figure 5-9. Percentage of parents whose children

ages 2 through 17 had their own books,

by prose literacy level: 2003

93 98 99 100 Percent

0

20

40

60

80

100

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Literacy level

NOTE: Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could

not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in

2003) are excluded from this figure.Parents includes parents, grandparents, and guardians who had

a child living with them 10 or more days a month.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Figure 5-10. Percentage of adults living in households with children under age 18 who had a computer in their

home with word processing capability or Internet access, by prose literacy level: 2003

93

39

67

83

Computer with word 

processing capability

Computer with 

Internet access Percent 

0

20

40

60

80

100

Percent 

0

20

40

60

80

100

50

75

89

96

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

NOTE: Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are

excluded from this figure.Parents includes parents, grandparents, and guardians who had a child living with them 10 or more days a month.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
70

Literacy in Everyday Life

School Involvement

Parents of school-age children were asked whether

they had been involved in their children’s schools

during the previous year in any of the following

ways:

■ Volunteered to help out at the school, including

in the classroom, on a field trip, or at a school

event such as a party or school fair

■ Gone to a parent-teacher or other type of

meeting at the school

■ Spoken individually with a teacher to see how

their children were doing in school

■ Sent food or other items to share in the classroom

Forty percent of parents with Proficient prose literacy

reported doing all four activities during the previous

year compared with 29 percent of parents with

Intermediate prose literacy, 25 percent of parents with

Basic prose literacy, and 23 percent of parents with

Below Basic prose literacy (figure 5-11).A higher percentage of parents with Below Basic prose literacy than

parents with Intermediate or Proficient prose literacy had

done none of these activities during the past year.

Summary

This chapter examined how parents with different

literacy levels interacted with the children living in

their homes around issues related to literacy and

school.13 In general, parents with higher literacy did

more literacy-related activities with their children

and had more educational resources in their home.

Specifically, higher percentages of parents with

Intermediate or Proficient prose literacy than parents

with Basic prose literacy read to their children under

age 8 five or more days a week, and a higher percentage of parents with Basic prose literacy than parents

with Below Basic prose literacy read to their children

5 or more days a week.

Additionally, the percentage of parents with children

ages 2 through 17 whose children often saw them

reading increased with each increasing prose literacy

level.The percentage of adults who lived with children under the age of 18 in homes that had many

reading materials also increased with each increasing

prose literacy level.At every prose literacy level, more

than 90 percent of parents of children ages 2 through

17 said that their children had at least one or two

books of their own. However, higher percentages of

parents with Intermediate or Proficient prose literacy

Figure 5-11. Percentage of parents who were

involved in one to four activities in

their children’s schools, by prose literacy level: 2003

Percent not 

 involved in 

 school activities 

Percent 

 involved in 

 school activities 

0

20

20

40

40

60

60

80

80

100

100

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Literacy level 

Four Three Two One None 

15 11 9 7

16

23

18

28

14

25

23

28

11

29

21

29

9

40

15

29

Number of activities

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age

and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or

cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this figure.Parents includes

parents, grandparents, and guardians who had a child living with them 10 or more days a month.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

13 Throughout the chapter, the word parents refers to parents, grandparents, or guardians who had a child living with them 10 days a

month and that convention is also followed in this summary section.
71

than parents with Basic prose literacy had children

who had their own books, and a higher percentage of

parents with Basic prose literacy than parents with

Below Basic prose literacy had children who had their

own books. The percentages of adults living with

children under the age of 18 who had a computer in

their home with word processing capability or

Internet access increased with each increasing prose

literacy level.

A lower percentage of parents with Below Basic prose

literacy than parents with Basic, Intermediate, or

Proficient prose literacy ever talked to their school-age

children about things they studied in school.

Conversely, higher percentages of parents with

Intermediate or Proficient prose literacy than parents

with Basic or Below Basic prose literacy talked to their

school-age children every day about things they

studied in school.

At every prose literacy level, three-quarters of parents

with school-age children helped their children with

homework or worked on homework with their children at least occasionally. However, the percentage of

parents who never helped or never worked on

homework with their children declined with each

increasing prose literacy level.

Chapter 5: Literacy and the Family

73

# toc

CHAPTER ONE

1

Voting

Sources of Information About

Current Events, Public Affairs,

and the Government

Volunteering 

Online Communities

Summary

CHAPTER SIX

6

Community and Civic Involvement

The analyses in this chapter examine how

adults with different literacy levels participated in government and community affairs

by voting, staying informed, and volunteering.The

analyses in the chapter also examine the extent to

which adults of different literacy levels participated

in online communities through sending e-mail and

using the Internet to find information.

Voting

Among U.S. citizens of voting age, the percentage

of adults who voted in the 2000 presidential election was higher in each literacy level than in the

next lower literacy level on the prose and document

scales (figure 6-1).Approximately half of adult citizens with Below Basic prose and document literacy

reported voting in the 2000 presidential election

compared with 84 percent of adult citizens with

Proficient prose and document literacy.
74

Literacy in Everyday Life

Sources of Information About Current

Events, Public Affairs, and the Government

Adults can get information about current events,

public affairs, and the government from printed and

written sources, including newspapers, magazines,

books and brochures, and the Internet.They can also

get information from nonprint sources, including

family, friends, or coworkers and radio and television.

Printed and Written Information

Many adults receive information about current events,

public affairs, and the government from traditional

printed sources such as newspapers, magazines, books,

and brochures. Additionally, over the past decade, the

Internet has become an increasingly important source

of written information on these topics.

Comparisons across levels. Lower percentages of

adults with Below Basic prose and document literacy

than other adults reported reading any information

about current events, public affairs, and the government in newspapers, magazines, books, or brochures

or on the Internet14 (figure 6-2).Twenty-nine percent

of adults with Below Basic prose literacy reported

obtaining no information about current events, public affairs, and the government from newspapers compared with 12 percent of adults with Basic prose literacy, 8 percent of adults with Intermediate prose literacy, and 7 percent of adults with Proficient prose literacy. Seventy-seven percent of adults with Below Basic

prose literacy reported that they received no information about these topics from the Internet compared

with 53 percent of adults with Basic prose literacy, 31

percent of adults with Intermediate prose literacy, and

16 percent of adults with Proficient prose literacy.

Comparisons across sources of written information.

Lower percentages of adults with Below Basic, Basic,

and Intermediate prose literacy got information about

current events, public affairs, and the government

from the Internet than from other written sources.

For adults with Proficient prose literacy, this gap did

not exist; a higher percentage of adults with Proficient

prose literacy got information about these topics

from the Internet than from books or brochures, and

there was no measurable difference in the percentages of adults with Proficient prose literacy who got

information from the Internet and from magazines.

Higher percentages of adults at all levels of prose literacy got written information about current events,

public affairs, and the government from newspapers

than from other written sources.

Figure 6-1. Percentage of adult citizens of voting

age who voted in the 2000 presidential

election, by prose and document literacy level: 2003

14 Document results are in appendix E.

57

63

71

84

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Literacy scale

Prose Document

Percent

0

20

40

60

80

100

53

62

73

84

NOTE: Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could

not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in

2003) are excluded from this figure.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
Chapter 6: Community and Civic Involvement

75

Figure 6-2. Percentage of adults who got information about current events, public affairs, and the government

from each of the following sources: newspapers, magazines, books or brochures, the Internet, by

prose literacy level: 2003

29

25

26

20

12

23

35

8

23

36

33

7

26

32

35

Newspapers 

Percent got no 

 information 

Percent got 

 information 

0

20

20

40

40

60

60

80

80

100

100

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Literacy level 

Magazines

42

25 18 16

Percent got no 

 information 

Percent got 

 information 

0

20

20

40

40

60

60

80

80

100

100

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Literacy level 

23

25

9

30

34

12

35

37

10

37

37

10

A lot Some A little None 

Books or brochures

Percent got no 

 information 

Percent got 

 information 

0

20

20

40

40

60

60

80

80

100

100

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Literacy level 

44

23

25

8

26

30

33

11

20

34

35

11

21

39

30

9

Internet

77

53

31

16

6

9

8

13

17

17

18

25

26

22

31

31

Percent got no 

 information 

Percent got 

 information 

0

20

20

40

40

60

60

80

80

100

100

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Literacy level 

30

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive

or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this figure.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
76

Literacy in Everyday Life

Nonprint Information

Nonprint sources of information about current

events, public affairs, and the government include

family, friends, or coworkers and radio and television.

A lower percentage of adults with Below Basic prose

and document literacy than other adults obtained

information about these topics from nonprint

sources (figure 6-3).15 Twenty-one percent of adults

with Below Basic prose literacy reported getting no

information about current events, public affairs, and

the government from family, friends, or coworkers

during the previous year compared with 10 percent

of adults with Basic prose literacy, 6 percent of adults

with Intermediate prose literacy, and 4 percent of

adults with Proficient prose literacy. The differences

were smaller or not statistically significant among

adults at different literacy levels with regard to the

amount of information about these topics they got

from radio and television.

Volunteering 

Volunteering—working in an unpaid capacity for a

community group or an organization—is another

way adults can participate in civic and community

life. Adults may volunteer only occasionally, such as

working at a fair in a school or making phone calls

to raise funds for a nonprofit group, or they may volunteer regularly, such as coaching a community or

church sports team or serving as an unpaid member

of the board of a nonprofit organization.

Figure 6-3. Percentage of adults who got information about current events, public affairs, and the government

from each of the following sources: family members, friends, or coworkers, radio and television, by

prose literacy level: 2003

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive

or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this figure.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Family, friends, or coworkers 

Percent got no 

 information 

Percent got 

 information 

0

20

20

40

40

60

60

80

80

100

100

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Literacy level 

21

24

33

23

10

25

42

23

6

29

44

21

4

34

44

18

Radio and television

Percent got no 

 information 

Percent got 

 information 

0

20

20

40

40

60

60

80

80

100

100

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Literacy level 

5

14

26

56

2

9

27

62

1

7

30

62

1

9

32

58

A lot Some A little None 

15 Document results are in appendix C.
77

Chapter 6: Community and Civic Involvement

The percentages of adults who volunteered once a

week or more were higher in each prose and document literacy level than in the next lower level (figure 6-4).Twenty-five percent of adults with Proficient

prose literacy reported volunteering once a week or

more during the previous year compared with 20

percent of adults with Intermediate prose literacy, 15

percent of adults with Basic prose literacy,and 10 percent of adults with Below Basic prose literacy.

Conversely, higher percentages of adults with lower

levels of literacy than adults with higher levels of literacy reported that they did not volunteer at all during the previous year. Eighty-three percent of adults

with Below Basic prose literacy did not volunteer during the previous year compared with 69 percent of

adults with Basic prose literacy, 55 percent of adults

with Intermediate prose literacy, and 43 percent of

adults with Proficient prose literacy.

Online Communities

Communicating with neighbors and other individuals in a community on issues of common interest and

concern has traditionally been a key aspect of community involvement.These types of communications

have increasingly been conducted on the Internet and

through e-mail, making it easier for online communities to develop among people who share common

interests and concerns. Higher percentages of adults

with high levels of prose and document literacy than

adults with lower levels of literacy sent and received

e-mail or used the Internet, two activities generally

required for participating in online communities (figures 6-5 and 6-6).

Eighty percent of adults with Below Basic prose literacy reported that in the year prior to the 2003

Figure 6-4. Percentage of adults who volunteered during the past year, by prose and document literacy level:

2003

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive

or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this figure.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Prose 

Once a week or more Less than once a week Never 

Document

82

9

69

16

57

24

47

29

83

8

69

16

55

25

43

32

Percent did 

not volunteer 

Percent 

volunteered 

Percent did 

not volunteer 

Percent 

volunteered 

0

20

20

40

40

60

60

80

80

100

100

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Literacy level 

0

20

20

40

40

60

60

80

80

100

100

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Literacy level 

10

14

19

24

10

15

20

25
assessment, they did not send or receive any e-mail

compared with 52 percent of adults with Basic prose

literacy, 24 percent of adults with Intermediate prose

literacy, and 8 percent of adults with Proficient prose

literacy (figure 6-5). Sixty-seven percent of adults

with Proficient prose literacy reported sending or

receiving an e-mail message at least once a day compared with 48 percent of adults with Intermediate

prose literacy, 24 percent of adults with Basic prose

literacy, and 8 percent of adults with Below Basic

prose literacy.

Additionally, lower percentages of adults with low

levels of prose and document literacy than adults

with higher levels of literacy used the Internet (figures 6-5 and 6-6). Seventy-seven percent of adults

with Below Basic prose literacy did not use the

Internet in the year prior to the 2003 adult literacy

assessment compared with 46 percent of adults with

Basic prose literacy, 20 percent of adults with

Intermediate prose literacy, and 6 percent of adults

with Proficient prose literacy (figure 6-5).Almost half

of adults with Proficient prose literacy used the

Internet every day in the year prior to the 2003 adult

literacy assessment compared with 35 percent of

adults with Intermediate prose literacy, 20 percent of

adults with Basic prose literacy, and 7 percent of

adults with Below Basic prose literacy (figure 6-6).

Summary

This chapter examined how American adults with

different levels of prose and document literacy participated in community and civic affairs.

Among U.S. citizens of voting age, the percentage of

adults who voted in the 2000 presidential election

was higher in each prose and document literacy level

than in the next lower level.

78

Literacy in Everyday Life

Figure 6-5. Percentage of adults who sent or received e-mail messages and found information on the Internet,

by prose literacy level: 2003

E-mail Internet

Every day A few times a week Once a week Less than once a week Never 

7

14 22 24

11 14 15

77

6

46

14

20

14 11

80

52

9

24

10

8

6

6

24

Percent never 

 use e-mail 

Percent use 

 e-mail 

0

20

20

40

40

60

60

80

80

100

100

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Literacy level 

Percent 

 not online 

Percent 

online 

0

20

20

40

40

60

60

80

80

100

100

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Literacy level 

3

7 7

20

8

35

9

49

4

3 8 5 5 5

48

4

67

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive

or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this figure.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
Lower percentages of adults with low levels of prose

and document literacy than adults with higher levels

of literacy obtained information about current

events, public affairs, and the government from a

variety of print and nonprint sources. Lower percentages of adults with Below Basic prose and document literacy than other adults reported reading any

information about current events, public affairs, and

the government in newspapers, magazines, books, or

brochures or on the Internet; they were also less likely to obtain information about these topics from

nonprint sources, including family members, friends,

or coworkers and radio and television. Additionally,

lower percentages of adults with Below Basic, Basic, or

Intermediate levels of prose literacy got information

about current events, public affairs, and the government from the Internet than from other written

sources.There was no measurable differences in the

percentages of adults with Proficient prose literacy

who got information from the Internet and magazines, and a higher percentage of adults with Proficient

prose literacy got information from the Internet than

from books or brochures.

Adults with higher levels of prose and document

literacy volunteered more frequently than adults

with lower levels of literacy: the percentage of

adults who volunteered once a week or more during the previous year was higher at each increasing

level of literacy. Adults with higher levels of prose

and document literacy were also more likely to send

and receive e-mail or use the Internet—two activities generally required for participating in online

communities.

79

Chapter 6: Community and Civic Involvement

Figure 6-6. Percentage of adults who sent or received e-mail messages and found information on the Internet,

by document literacy level: 2003

E-mail Internet

Every day A few times a week Once a week Less than once a week Never 

7

14

20 26

82

55

9

26

10

9

6

79

6

50

12

21

15

8

12

10 14 16

Percent never 

 use e-mail 

Percent use 

 e-mail 

0

20

20

40

40

60

60

80

80

100

100

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Literacy level 

Percent 

 not online 

Percent 

online 

0

20

20

40

40

60

60

80

80

100

100

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Literacy level 

4

22

5

46

4

65

3

6

6

18

9

35

9

46

4

2

5 8

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive

or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this figure.

SOURCE:U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
80

Literacy in Everyday Life

Figure 6-7. Percentage of adults who sent or received e-mail messages and found information on the Internet,

by quantitative literacy level: 2003

69

36

18 8

74

41

21

9

8

5

9

9

14

8

18

25

15

9

22

37

10

8

25

50

6

3

10 6

11

5

12

32

9

5

15

51

5

3 14

69

E-mail Internet

Every day A few times a week Once a week Less than once a week Never

Percent never

 use e-mail

Percent use

 e-mail

0

20

20

40

40

60

60

80

80

100

100

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Literacy level

Percent

 not online

Percent

online

0

20

20

40

40

60

60

80

80

100

100

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Literacy level

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive

or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this figure.

SOURCE: U.S.Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
Sample Assessment Questions

Respondents who participated in the 2003

assessment were asked to complete prose,

document, and quantitative literacy tasks

of varying levels of difficulty.The sample questions

on the following pages illustrate the types of tasks

used to measure the literacy of America’s adults.

These questions were originally developed for the

1992 survey and reused in 2003.

Consistent with the design of the assessment, each

sample question appears before the text or document needed to answer the question.The percentage of respondents who answered the question

correctly is reported, as well as the percentage of

correct responses for each of the four literacy

assessment levels.

More information about the sample assessment

questions can be found on the Internet at

http://nces.ed.gov/naal.

81

APPENDIX A

A
82

Literacy in Everyday Life

Prose Literacy Question

Refer to the article on the next page to answer the following question.

According to the brochure, why is it difficult for people to know if they have high blood pressure?

_______________________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________________

Correct answer

All Adults Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

74 11 70 96 100

NOTE: Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003)

are excluded from these data.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Any statement such as the following:

Symptoms are not usually present

High blood pressure is silent

Percentage of adults who answered the question correctly, prose literacy scale: 2003
83

Appendix A: Sample Assessment Questions
84

Literacy in Everyday Life

Prose Literacy Question

Refer to the article on the next page to answer the following question.

What is the purpose of the Se Habla Español expo?

_______________________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________________

Any statement such as the following:

To enable people to better serve and sell to the Hispanic community

To improve marketing strategies to the Hispanic community

To enable people to establish contacts to serve the Hispanic community

Correct answer

All Adults Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

16 # 3 16 60

# Rounds to zero.

NOTE: Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003)

are excluded from these data.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Percentage of adults who answered the question correctly, 2003
85

Appendix A: Sample Assessment Questions
86

Literacy in Everyday Life

Junior high teachers

Correct answer

Seventy-eight percent of what specific group agree that their school does a good job of encouraging

parental involvement in educational areas?

________________________________________________________________________________

Reduced from original copy

All Adults Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

36 # 4 47 98

# Rounds to zero.

NOTE: Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003)

are excluded from these data.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Document Literacy Question

Percentage of adults who answered the question correctly, 2003
87

Appendix A: Sample Assessment Questions

Suppose that you had your oil tank filled with 140.0 gallons of oil, as indicated on the bill, and you

wanted to take advantage of the five cents ($.05) per gallon deduction.

1. Figure out how much the deduction would be if you paid the bill within 10 days. Enter the

amount of the deduction on the bill in the space provided.

________________________________________________________________________________

Reduced from original copy

$7.00

Correct answer

All Adults Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

52 1 40 92 100

NOTE: Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003)

are excluded from these data.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Percentage of adults who answered the question correctly, 2003

Quantitative Literacy Question
88

Literacy in Everyday Life

Refer to the form on the next page to answer the following question.

Use the following information to fill in the receipt for certified mail.Then fill in the “TOTAL

Postage and Fees” line.

● You are sending a package to Doris Carter.

● Her address is 19 Main Street,Augusta, GA 30901.

● The postage for the package is $1.86.

● The fee for certified mail is $0.75.

This is an example of a task that was scored in three separate parts and treated as three separate questions.

The first two questions were included on the document scale and the third question was included on the quantitative scale.

Question 1 (Document): Enters name and address correctly. No penalty for misspelling.

Correct answer

Correct answer

Question 3 (Quantitative): Either of the following:

Correctly totals postage and fees: $2.61

Correctly totals incorrect fees entered on form

Question 2 (Document): Enters $1.86 and $0.75 on the postage and certified fees lines respectively.

Correct answer

All Adults Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

65 8 54 86 97

NOTE: Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003)

are excluded from these data.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Percentage of adults who answered the question correctly, 2003

All Adults Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

76 13 73 96 100

NOTE: Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003)

are excluded from these data.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Percentage of adults who answered the question correctly, 2003

All Adults Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

78 33 88 96 99

NOTE: Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003)

are excluded from these data.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Percentage of adults who answered the question correctly, 2003

Document and Quantitative Literacy Questions
89

Appendix A: Sample Assessment Questions

Definitions of All Subpopulations 

and Background Variables Reported

S

ome background variables were included in

the analyses in more than one chapter.Those

variables are listed under the chapter where

they first appeared. For the exact wording of background questions, see http://nces.ed.gov/naal.

Chapter 2

Total Population

The 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy

included two samples: (1) adults ages 16 and older

living in households and (2) inmates ages 16 and

older in federal and state prisons. The household

sample also included adults in six states that chose

to participate in a concurrent State Assessment of

Adult Literacy: Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts,

Missouri, Oklahoma, and New York. Each sample

was weighted to represent its share of the total

population of the United States (99 percent for the

household sample and 1 percent for the prison

sample). The household and prison samples were

combined to create a nationally representative

sample of America’s adults. Household data collection was conducted from March 2003 through

February 2004; prison data collection was conducted from March through July 2004.

91

APPENDIX B

B
Gender

Interviewers recorded the gender of each respondent.

Race and Ethnicity

In 2003, all respondents were asked two or three

questions about their race and ethnicity. The first

question asked them to indicate whether they were

Hispanic or Latino.

If a respondent answered that he or she was Hispanic

or Latino, the respondent was asked to choose one or

more of the following groups to describe his or her

Hispanic origin:

■ Mexican, Mexican American, or Chicano

■ Puerto Rican or Puerto Rican American

■ Cuban or Cuban American

■ Central or South American

■ Other Hispanic or Latino background

Respondents who identified more than one of the

groups to describe their Hispanic origin were classified as “Other Hispanic or Latino background.”

Then, all respondents, including those who indicated

they were Hispanic or Latino, were asked to choose

one or more of the following groups to describe

themselves:

■ White

■ Black or African American

■ Asian

■ American Indian or Alaska Native

■ Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander

Individuals who responded yes to the first question

were coded as Hispanic, regardless of their answer to

the second question. Individuals who identified

more than one group on the second question were

coded as Multiracial. Respondents of Native

Hawaiian or Pacific Islander origin were grouped

with those of Asian origin. The White, Black, and

Hispanic groups are reported separately. The interviewer recorded the race/ethnicity of respondents

who refused to answer the question.

In 1992, the race and ethnicity questions were somewhat different. Respondents were first asked to

choose one race from among the following:

■ White

■ Black (African American)

■ American Indian

■ Alaska Native

■ Asian

■ Other

They were then asked whether they were of Spanish

or Hispanic origin or descent. If they indicated they

were, they were asked to choose from among the

same groups as on the 2003 survey to describe their

Hispanic ethnicity.

Because respondents in 2003 were not offered an

“other” category to describe their race and respondents in 1992 were limited to choosing one race,

caution should be exercised when comparing 1992

and 2003 results.

Language Spoken Before Starting School

All respondents were asked what language or languages they learned to speak before starting school.

Their responses were then used to divide respondents into five groups: English only, English and

Spanish, English and other language, Spanish only,

Other language(s).The English and Spanish category

includes adults who spoke languages in addition to

both English and Spanish. The Spanish category

includes adults who spoke Spanish and additional

non-English languages.

92

Literacy in Everyday Life
Age Learned English

Respondents who spoke a language other than

English before starting school were asked their age

when they learned to speak English.They were classified into one of the following categories: 10 or

younger, 11 to 15, 16 to 20, 21 or older.

Age

All respondents were asked to report their birthdates,

and this information was used to calculate their age.

Age groups reported are 16 to 18, 19 to 24, 25 to 39,

40 to 49, 50 to 64, and 65 and older. Age groups

were selected to correspond to key life stages of

many adults:

16–18: Completion of secondary education

19–24: College or job training

25–39: Early career

40–49: Mid career

50–64: Late career

65 and older: Retirement 

Learning Disability

Adults were asked if they had ever been diagnosed or

identified as having a learning disability.

Household Income

Respondents were asked to provide their family’s total

income from all sources, including jobs, investments,

Social Security or retirement, and public assistance.

Household income categories were developed based

on the income categories used by the U.S. Census and

were combined as needed to reflect the NAAL’s sample size. Respondents were coded into the following

household income categories: less than $10,000,

$10,000-$14,999, $15,000–$19,999, $20,000–$29,999,

$30,000–$39,999, $40,000–$59,999, $60,000–$99,999,

$100,000 or greater.

Chapter 3

Highest Educational Attainment

All respondents were asked to indicate the highest

level of education they had completed.The following

options were provided:

■ Still in high school

■ Less than high school 

■ Some high school 

■ GED or high school equivalency

■ High school graduate

■ Vocational, trade, or business school after high

school

■ College: less than 2 years

■ College:Associate’s degree (A.A.)

■ College: 2 or more years, no degree

■ College graduate (B.A. or B.S.)

■ Postgraduate, no degree

■ Postgraduate degree (M.S., M.A., Ph.D., M.D.,

etc.)

Respondents who reported less than high school or

some high school were asked how many years of education they had completed. For certain analyses, some

of these groups were collapsed. For example, respondents who had completed postgraduate studies but

had not received a degree were generally combined

with those who had completed a postgraduate degree.

Age Obtained High School Diploma/GED

Respondents were asked to provide the year they

graduated high school or obtained their GED.Their

age was calculated on the basis of their birthday and

the assumption that they obtained their degree in

June. Respondents were grouped into the following

categories: 19 or younger, 20 to 24, 25 or older, did

not graduate.

93

Appendix B: Definitions of All Subpopulations and Background Variables Reported
Year Obtained College Degree

Respondents were asked what year they graduated

college. Responses were coded into the following

categories: 1997 or later, 1992–96, 1977–91,

1962–76, 1961 or earlier.

Participation in English as a Second Language

Instruction

Respondents who spoke a language other than

English before starting school were asked whether

they were currently enrolled in or had ever taken

part in an English as a Second Language class in the

United States. Respondents were then asked how

long ago they last took a class to improve their

English: within the last two years, 2 to 5 years ago,

more than 5 years ago, currently taking an English as

a Second Language class.

Information Technology (IT) Certification

All respondents were asked whether they had

received any type of information technology skill

certification sponsored by a hardware or software

manufacturer or an industry or professional association and whether they had passed a test to get the

certification.Those who answered yes to both questions were counted as receiving IT certification.

Chapter 4

Labor Force Participation

Household respondents were asked to report what

they were doing during the week before the assessment was administered:

1. working a full-time job for pay or profit (35

hours or more)

2. working for pay or profit part-time (1 to 34

hours)

3. working two or more part-time jobs for pay,

totaling 35 or more hours

4. unemployed, laid off, or looking for work

5. with a job but not at work because of temporary illness, vacation, or work stoppage

6. with a job but on family leave (maternity or

paternity leave)

7. in school

8. keeping house

9. retired

10. doing volunteer work

For analysis, respondents were divided into four

groups: adults working full-time (or working two or

more part-time jobs); those working part-time; those

unemployed, laid off, or looking for work; those out

of the labor force. Adults in categories 1 and 2 were

counted as being employed full-time;those in category 3 were counted as being employed part-time;those

in category 4 were counted as unemployed; those in

categories 5 and 6 were counted as not at work (and

therefore omitted from the analyses of labor force

participation); and those in categories 7 through 10

were counted as being out of the labor force. Adults

in categories 5 and 6 (temporarily not at work) could

not be coded into one of the employment categories

because they were not asked if they usually worked

full-time or part-time. Respondents could pick as

many responses as were applicable, but they were

coded for analysis on the basis of the response highest in the list (e.g., if they said they were working fulltime and also doing volunteer work, they were coded

as working full-time; if they said they were unemployed, laid off, or looking for work and also keeping

house, they were coded as unemployed).

Occupation 

Respondents who had held a job within the past 

3 years were asked to provide the title of their occu94

Literacy in Everyday Life
pation and its most important activities and duties.

This information was used to assign each occupation

a 2000 Census Bureau code. The occupations were

then collapsed into eight major occupational groups:

■ Management, business, and financial

■ Professional and related

■ Service

■ Sales and related

■ Office and administrative support

■ Construction and extraction

■ Installation, maintenance, and repair 

■ Production

The occupational classification system used by the

Census Bureau and other government agencies

underwent substantial changes with the introduction

of the 2000 Standard Occupational Classification

(SOC). Therefore, the 1992 occupational codes/

groups could not be directly compared with the

2003 occupations/groups.The Census Bureau developed a crosswalk as a way to connect the 1992 and

2003 occupational codes.This crosswalk provides the

percentage of people in a 1992 occupation that

would be redistributed to various 2003 occupations.

For example, 73 percent of the 1992 occupation

“Library clerks” would be reclassified in 2003 as

“Library Technicians” while 27 percent would be

coded into “Library assistants, clerical.”

Two steps were used to code the 1992 occupations

into the 10 occupational groups used for the 2003

data. First, occupations that were at least 90 percent

comparable according to the crosswalk were directly coded into the 2003 occupational group. Second,

if fewer than 90 percent of the people in a 1992

occupation could be categorized into a single 2003

occupational group, then individuals in that occupation were randomly assigned to groups according to

the percentages provided in the crosswalk. For

example, for the 1992 occupational group

“Insurance adjusters, examiners, and investigators,”

76 percent were classified in 2003 as “Claims

adjusters, appraisers, examiners, and investigators”

while 24 percent were classified as “Insurance claims

and policy processing clerks.” Therefore, the same

percentages of the 1992 respondents in this occupation were randomly assigned into two different

occupational groups: “Management, business, and

financial,” which includes claims adjusters, and

“Office and administrative support,” which contains

insurance claims clerks.

Weekly Wage or Salary

Respondents who were employed were asked to

report their gross weekly wage or salary (before

deductions) during the previous week. Some respondents were unable to report their weekly wage or

salary before deductions.In these cases,the interviewers asked them to report their take-home pay and

noted that fact. Some respondents reported their pay

per hour, day, 2-week period, month, or year, rather

than per week as requested.This was also noted by the

interviewers, who asked a follow-up question to clarify the time frame the respondents were using.

All reported pay was adjusted to approximate gross

weekly wages or salaries. For respondents who

reported their earnings in units other than weekly

(e.g., per hour or per day), information on the number of hours worked per week (collected in a separate question) was used to compute weekly earnings. For respondents who reported take-home pay

rather than gross pay, adjustments were made to the

wage or salary they reported by adding a FICA

adjustment at a flat rate of 7.65 percent and an additional adjustment based on IRS withholding tables

for single taxpayers in 2003. An additional 10 percent was added as a proxy for state taxes and miscellaneous deductions.

95

Appendix B: Definitions of All Subpopulations and Background Variables Reported
Extent to Which Reading, Mathematics, and Computer

Skills Limit Job Opportunities

Respondents were asked in separate questions how

much they thought their reading, mathematics, and

computer skills limited their job opportunities—for

example, to get a promotion or a (different) job they

would like to have. They could respond with a lot,

some, a little, or not at all.

Participation in Public Assistance

Respondents were asked whether they or anyone in

their household had received Temporary Assistance

for Needy Families (TANF),public assistance,or public welfare payments from the state or local welfare

office during the previous 12 months or whether

they had ever received public assistance in the past.

Respondents were identified as never, past, or current

participants in welfare.

Time Receiving Public Assistance

Respondents were asked about how long,in total,they

had received welfare payments in their lifetime: less

than 6 months, 6 months to 1 year, more than 1 year

but less than 2 years, 2 to 3 years, more than 3 years.

Participation in Reading-, Mathematics-, and 

Computer-Related Job Training

Respondents were asked in separate questions

whether during the past year they had participated in

any training or education, including courses, workshops, formal on-the-job training, or apprenticeships,

intended to improve their English reading skills,

arithmetic or mathematics skills, or computer skills.

Chapter 5

All respondents were asked how many children

under 18 had lived in their household for 10 or more

days during the past month.Those respondents who

indicated that children had lived in their household

were asked how they were related to each of the

children.Their responses to these two questions were

used to target the family literacy questions to adults

with children of the appropriate ages.

Reading to or with Children

Respondents with a child or grandchild living in

their home who was under the age of 8 were asked

whether or not they had read to the child during the

past week. If they answered yes, they were asked to

indicate how often they had read to the child: every

day, 5 or 6 days, 3 or 4 days, 1 or 2 days.

Teaching Children the Letters of the Alphabet/Child

Already Knows Alphabet

Respondents with a child or grandchild living in

their house who was under the age of 8 were asked

how often they tried to teach their child the letters

of the alphabet: every day, a few times a week, once

a week, less than once a week, never, or child (children/grandchild/grandchildren) already knows the

letters of the alphabet. Results are presented in this

report for parents with children ages 3 through 5.

Teaching Children to Read Words

Respondents with a child or grandchild living in

their house who was under the age of 8 were asked

how often they pointed out words to their child and

asked him or her what they said: every day, a few

times a week, once a week, less than once a week,

never, and child (children/grandchild/grandchildren)

already reads well.

Rhyming Activities

Respondents with a child or grandchild living in

their house who was under the age of 8 were asked

how often they sang songs, recited poems or nursery

rhymes, or engaged in other activities that included

96

Literacy in Everyday Life
rhyming words with their child: every day, a few

times a week, once a week, less than once a week,

never.

Talking About School

Respondents with a child or grandchild living in

their house who was 5 or older were asked how

often during a typical school month they talked to

the child about things he or she studied in school:

every day, a few times a week, once a week, less than

once a week, never.

Helping or Working with Children on Homework

Respondents with a child or grandchild living in

their house who was 5 or older were asked how

often during a typical school month they helped or

worked with the child on homework: every day, a

few times a week, once a week, less than once a

week, never.

Reading Materials in the Home

Respondents were asked two true or false questions

about reading materials at home: whether they had

25 books or more at home at the time of interview

and whether there was a variety of magazines and

other reading materials at home. Respondents who

answered true to both questions were classified as

having many reading materials at home; those who

answered true to one of the questions were classified

as having some reading materials; and those who

answered false to both questions were classified as

having no reading materials at home.

Child Sees Adults Reading

Respondents were asked a true or false question about

whether their child (children/grandchild/grandchildren) over age 2 living in the household often saw

them read.

Child Has Own Books

Respondents were asked a true or false question about

whether their child (children/grandchild/grandchildren) over age 2 living in the household had his or her

own books.

Computer with Word Processor in Home

Respondents were asked how many computers they

had at home that could be used for word processing.

They were classified as having at least one computer

that could be used for word processing or having no

computers that could be used for word processing.

Computer with Internet Access

Respondents were asked how many computers they

had at home that could access the Internet or World

Wide Web.They were classified as having at least one

computer that could access the Internet or having no

computers that could access the Internet.

School Involvement

Respondents were asked four questions to indicate

the number of different types of activities they were

involved in at their child’s or grandchild’s school.

They were asked whether during the past year they

had done the following:

■ Volunteered to help out at their child’s (one 

of their children’s/grandchild/grandchildren)

school(s), including in the classroom, on a field

trip, or at school event such as a party or

school fair?

■ Gone to a PTA or other type of parent meeting at their child’s (one of their children’s/

grandchild/grandchildren) school(s)?

■ Spoken individually with their child’s (one 

of their children’s/grandchild/grandchildren)

teacher(s) to see how he or she was doing in

school?

97

Appendix B: Definitions of All Subpopulations and Background Variables Reported
■ Sent food, or other items to share in their

child’s (one of their children’s/grandchild/

grandchildren) classroom(s)?

Respondents were grouped according to the number

of questions that they answered “yes” as none, one,

two, three, or four.

Chapter 6

Voting 

All respondents who either were born in the United

States or indicated in response to a separate question

(that was asked only of people not born in the

United States) that they were citizens of the United

States were asked whether they remembered

whether or not they voted in the 2000 presidential

election. If they said they remembered whether or

not they voted in the election, they were asked

whether they voted. Respondents who did not

remember whether they voted were treated as missing data for this question.

Sources of Information About Current Events, Public

Affairs, and the Government

Respondents were asked how much information

about current events, public affairs, and the government they usually got from each of the following

sources: newspapers, magazines, the Internet, radio

and television, books or brochures, and family members, friends, or coworkers.They were given the following response options: a lot, some, a little, none.

Volunteering

Respondents were asked whether they gave any

unpaid time as a volunteer to a group or an organization during the past year.

Online Communities

Respondents were asked about how often they sent

or received an e-mail message and found information on the Internet.They were given the following

response options: every day, a few times a week, once

a week, less than once a week, never.

98

Literacy in Everyday Life
99

toc

CHAPTER ONE

1

Technical Notes

This appendix describes the sampling, data

collection, weighting and variance estimation, scaling, and statistical testing procedures used to collect and analyze the data for the

2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy

(NAAL). Household data collection was conducted from March 2003 through February 2004;

prison data collection was conducted from March

through July 2004.

Sampling 

The 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy

included two samples: (1) adults ages 16 and older

living in households (99 percent of the sample

weighted) and (2) inmates ages 16 and older in federal and state prisons (1 percent of the sample

weighted). Each sample was weighted to represent

its share of the total population of the United States,

and the samples were combined for reporting.

Household Sample

The 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy

household sample included a nationally representative probability sample of 35,365 households.

The household sample was selected on the basis of

a four-stage, stratified area sample: (1) primary

sampling units (PSUs) consisting of counties or

groups of contiguous counties; (2) secondary sampling units (referred to as segments) consisting of

area blocks; (3) housing units containing households; and (4) eligible persons within households.

Person-level data were collected through a screener,

APPENDIX C

C
a background questionnaire, the literacy assessment,

and the oral module. Of the 35,365 sampled households,4,671 were either vacant or not a dwelling unit,

resulting in a sample of 30,694 households.1A total of

25,123 households completed the screener, which

was used to select survey respondents. The final

screener response rate was 81.2 percent weighted.

On the basis of the screener data, 23,732 respondents

ages 16 and older were selected to complete the

background questionnaire and the assessment;18,186

actually completed the background questionnaire. Of

the 5,546 respondents who did not complete the

background questionnaire, 355 were unable to do so

because of a literacy-related barrier, either the inability to communicate in English or Spanish (the two

languages in which the background questionnaire

was administered) or a mental disability.

The final response rate for the background questionnaire, which included respondents who completed

the background questionnaire and respondents who

were unable to complete the background questionnaire because of language problems or a mental disability, was 76.6 percent weighted. Of the 18,186

adults ages 16 and older who completed the background questionnaire, 17,178 completed at least one

question on each of the three scales—prose, document, and quantitative—measured in the adult literacy assessment. An additional 149 were unable to

answer at least one question on each of the three

scales for literacy-related reasons.2The final response

rate for the literacy assessment, which included

respondents who answered at least one question on

each scale plus the 149 respondents who were unable

to do so because of language problems or a mental

disability, was 96.6 percent weighted.

Cases were considered complete if the respondent

completed the background questionnaire and at least

one question on each of the three scales or if the

respondent was unable to answer any questions

because of language issues (an inability to communicate in English or Spanish) or a mental disability. All

other cases that did not include a complete screener,

a background questionnaire, and responses to at least

one question on each of the three literacy scales were

considered incomplete or missing. Before imputation, the overall response rate for the household sample was 60.1 percent weighted.

For respondents who did not complete any literacy

tasks on any scale, no information is available about

their performance on the literacy scale they were

missing. Completely omitting these individuals from

the analyses would have resulted in unknown biases

in estimates of the literacy skills of the national population because refusals cannot be assumed to have

occurred randomly. For 859 respondents3 who

answered the background questionnaire but refused to

complete the assessment for reasons other than language issues or a mental disability, regression-based

imputation procedures were applied to impute

responses to one assessment item on each scale by

using the NAAL background data on age, gender,

race/ethnicity, education level, country of birth, census region, and metropolitan statistical area status.

On the prose and quantitative scales, a response was

imputed for the easiest task on each scale. On the

100

Literacy in Everyday Life

3 Of the 18,186 household respondents who completed the background questionnaire, 17,178 completed at least one question on

each of the three scales and 149 were unable to answer at least one

question on one or more of the scales for literacy-related reasons.

The remaining 859 respondents completed the background questionnaire but refused to complete the assessment.

1To increase the number of Black and Hispanic adults in the NAAL

sample, segments with moderate to high concentrations of Black

and Hispanic adults were given a higher selection probability.

Segments in which Blacks or Hispanics accounted for 25 percent

or more of the population were oversampled at a rate up to three

times that of the remainder of the segments.

2 Of the 149 respondents who were unable to answer at least one

question on each of the three scales for literacy-related reasons, 65

respondents answered at least one question on one scale. The

remaining 84 respondents did not answer any questions on any scale.
document scale, a response was imputed for the second easiest task because that task was also included on

the health literacy scale. In each of the logistic regression models, the estimated regression coefficients

were used to predict missing values of the item to be

imputed. For each nonrespondent, the probability of

answering the item correctly was computed and then

compared with a randomly generated number

between 0 and 1. If the probability of getting a correct answer was greater than the random number, the

imputed value for the item was 1 (correct).Otherwise

it was 0 (wrong). In addition, a wrong response on

each scale was imputed for 65 respondents who started to answer the assessment but were unable to

answer at least one question on each scale because of

language issues or a mental disability.4

The final household reporting sample—including

the imputed cases—consisted of 18,102 respondents.

These 18,102 respondents are the 17,178 respondents who completed the background questionnaire

and the assessment, plus the 859 respondents who

completed the background questionnaire but refused

to do the assessment for non-literacy-related reasons

and have imputed responses to one item on each

scale, plus the 65 respondents who started to answer

the assessment items but were unable to answer at

least one question on each scale because of language

issues or a mental disability.After including the cases

for which responses to the assessment questions were

imputed, the weighted response rate for the household sample was 62.1 percent (18,102 cases with

complete or imputed data and an additional 439

cases that had no assessment data because of language

issues or a mental disability).5

The household sample was subject to unit nonresponse from the screener, background questionnaire,

literacy assessment, and oral module and to item

nonresponse to background questionnaire items.

Although all background questionnaire items had

response rates of more than 85 percent, two stages of

data collection—the screener and the background

questionnaire—had unit response rates below 85

percent and thus required an analysis of the potential for nonresponse bias.

Table C-1 presents a summary of the household

response rate.

Prison Sample

The 2003 assessment also included a nationally representative probability sample of inmates in federal and

state prisons. A total of 114 prisons were selected to

participate in the adult literacy assessment. Of these

114 prisons, 107 agreed to participate, 3 refused, and

4 were ineligible. The final prison response rate was

97.3 percent weighted. From among the inmates in

those prisons, 1,298 inmates ages 16 and older were

randomly selected to complete the background questionnaire and assessment. Of those 1,298 selected

inmates, 1,161 completed the background questionnaire. Of the 137 who did not complete the background questionnaire, 12 were unable to do so

because of a literacy-related barrier, either the inabil101

Appendix C: Technical Notes

Table C-1. Weighted and unweighted household

response rate, by survey component: 2003

Weighted Unweighted

Response rate Response rate

Survey component (percent) (percent)

Screener 81.2 81.8

Background questionnaire 76.6 78.1

Literacy assessment 96.6 97.2

Overall response rate before imputation 60.1 62.1

Overall response rate after imputation 62.1 63.9

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

4For a more detailed discussion of imputation see Little and Rubin

(2002).

5The 439 cases that had no assessment data because of language

issues or a mental disability include the 355 respondents who were

unable to complete the background questionnaire for one of these

reasons, plus the 84 respondents who did not answer any questions

on any scale because of language issues or a mental disability.
ity to communicate in English or Spanish (the two

languages in which the background questionnaire

was administered) or a mental disability.

The final response rate for the prison background

questionnaire, which included respondents who

completed the background questionnaire and

respondents who were unable to complete the background questionnaire because of language problems

or a mental disability, was 90.6 percent weighted. Of

the 1,161 inmates who completed the background

questionnaire, 1,125 completed at least one question

on each of the three scales—prose, document, and

quantitative—measured in the adult literacy assessment.An additional 8 were unable to answer at least

one question on each of the three scales for literacyrelated reasons.The final response rate for the literacy assessment, which included respondents who

answered at least one question on each scale or were

unable to do so because of language problems or a

mental disability, was 98.9 percent weighted.

The same definition of a complete case used for the

household sample was also used for the prison sample, and the same rules were followed for imputation.

Before imputation, the final response rate for the

prison sample was 87.2 percent weighted.

One response on each scale was imputed on the basis

of background characteristics for 28 inmates who

completed the background questionnaire but had

incomplete or missing assessments for reasons that

were not literacy related. The statistical imputation

procedures were the same as for the household sample. The background characteristics used for the

missing data imputation for the prison sample were

prison security level, region of country/prison type,

age, gender, educational attainment, country of birth,

race/ethnicity, and marital status. A wrong response

on each scale was imputed for the 3 inmates who

started to answer the assessment but were unable to

answer at least one question on each scale because of

language issues or a mental disability.The final prison

reporting sample—including the imputed cases—

consisted of 1,156 respondents. After the cases for

which responses to the assessment questions were

imputed were included, the weighted response rate

for the prison sample was 88.3 percent (1,156 cases

with complete or imputed data and an additional 17

cases that had no assessment data because of language

issues or a mental disability).

Table C-2 presents a summary of the prison response

rate.

Nonresponse Bias

NCES statistical standards require a nonresponse bias

analysis when the unit response rate for a sample is less

than 85 percent.The nonresponse bias analysis of the

household sample revealed differences in the background characteristics of respondents who participated

in the assessment compared with those who refused.

In bivariate unit-level analyses at the screener and

background questionnaire stages, estimated percentages for respondents were compared with those for

the total eligible sample to identify any potential bias

owing to nonresponse. Although some statistically

significant differences existed, the potential for bias

was small because the absolute difference between

estimated percentages was less than 2 percent for all

domains considered. Multivariate analyses were con102

Literacy in Everyday Life

Table C-2. Weighted and unweighted prison

response rate, by survey component: 2003

Weighted Unweighted

Response rate Response rate

Survey component (percent) (percent)

Prison 97.3 97.3

Background questionnaire 90.6 90.4

Literacy assessment 98.9 98.8

Overall response rate before imputation 87.2 86.8

Overall response rate after imputation 88.3 87.9

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for

Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
ducted to further explore the potential for nonresponse bias by identifying the domains with the most

differential response rates. These analyses revealed

that the lowest response rates for the screener were

among dwelling units in segments with high median

income, small average household size, and a large

proportion of renters. The lowest response rates for

the background questionnaire were among males

ages 30 and older in segments with high median

income. However, the variables used to define these

areas and other pockets with low response rates were

used in weighting adjustments. The analysis showed

that weighting adjustments was highly effective in

reducing the bias.The general conclusion was that the

potential amount of nonresponse bias attributable to

unit nonresponse at the screener and background

questionnaire stages was likely to be negligible.

Data Collection 

Household interviews took place in respondents’

homes; prison interviews generally took place in a

classroom or library in the prison. Whenever possible, interviewers administered the background questionnaire and assessment in a private setting. Unless

there were security concerns, a guard was not present in the room when inmates were interviewed.

Interviewers used a computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) system programmed into laptop

computers. The interviewers read the background

questions from the computer screen and entered all

responses directly into the computer.Skip patterns and

follow-up probes for contradictory or out-of-range

responses were programmed into the computer.

After completing the background questionnaire,

respondents were handed a booklet with the assessment questions. The interviewers followed a script

that introduced the assessment booklet and guided

the respondent through the assessment.

Each assessment booklet began with the same seven

questions. After the respondent completed those

questions, the interviewer asked the respondent for

the book and used an algorithm to determine on the

basis of the responses to the first seven questions

whether the respondent should continue in the main

assessment or be placed in the Adult Literacy

Supplemental Assessment (ALSA). Three percent of

adults weighted (5 percent unweighted) were placed

in the ALSA.

ALSA was a performance-based assessment that

allowed adults with marginal literacy to demonstrate

what they could and could not do when asked to

make sense of various forms of print.The ALSA

started with simple identification tasks and sight

words and moved to connected text, using authentic, highly contextualized material commonly found

at home or in the community. Respondents placed

in the ALSA are included in the NAAL sample

based on their responses to the seven questions

Because the ALSA respondents got most or all of the

seven questions at the beginning of the assessment

wrong, they would have been classified into the

Below Basic level on the health scale.

A respondent who continued in the main assessment

was given back the assessment booklet, and the interviewer asked the respondent to complete the tasks in

the booklet and guided the respondent through the

tasks.The main assessment consisted of 12 blocks of

tasks with approximately 11 questions in each block,

but each assessment booklet included only 3 blocks

of questions.The blocks were spiraled so that across

the 26 different configurations of the assessment

booklet, each block was paired with every other

block and each block appeared in each of the three

positions (first, middle, last) in a booklet.

For ALSA interviews, the interviewer read the ALSA

script from a printed booklet and classified the

respondent’s answers into the response categories in

103

Appendix C: Technical Notes
the printed booklet.ALSA respondents were handed

the materials they were asked to read

Following the main assessment or ALSA, all respondents were administered the oral fluency assessment

(not discussed in this report).Respondents were handed a booklet with passages, number lists, letter lists,

word lists, and pseudoword lists to read orally.

Respondents read into a microphone that recorded

their responses on the laptop computer.

Weighting and Variance Estimation

A complex sample design was used to select assessment respondents.The properties of a sample selected through a complex design could be very different from those of a simple random sample in which

every individual in the target population has an

equal chance of selection and in which the observations from different sampled individuals can be considered to be statistically independent of one another. Therefore, the properties of the sample for the

complex data collection design were taken into

account during the analysis of the data. Standard

errors calculated as though the data had been collected from a simple random sample would generally

underestimate sampling errors. One way of addressing the properties of the sample design was by using

sampling weights to account for the fact that the

probabilities of selection were not identical for all

respondents.All population and subpopulation characteristics based on the NAAL data used sampling

weights in their estimation.

The statistics presented in this report are estimates of

group and subgroup performance based on a sample

of respondents, rather than the values that could be

calculated if every person in the nation answered

every question on the instrument. It is therefore

important to have measures of the degree of uncertainty of the estimates. Accordingly, in addition to

providing estimates of percentages of respondents

and their average scale score, this report provides

information about the uncertainty of each statistic.

Because the assessment used clustered sampling, conventional formulas for estimating sampling variability that assume simple random sampling and hence

independence of observations are inappropriate. For

this reason, the NAAL assessment uses a Taylor series

procedure based on the sandwich estimator to estimate

standard errors (Binder 1983).

Scaling

As discussed above, each respondent to the NAAL

received a booklet that included 3 of the 13 assessments blocks. Because each respondent did not

answer all of the NAAL items, item response theory

(IRT) methods were used to estimate average scores

on the prose, document, and quantitative literacy

scales; a simple average percent correct would not

allow reporting results that are comparable for all

respondents. IRT models the probability of answering a question correctly as a mathematical function

of proficiency or skill. The main purpose of IRT

analysis is to provide a common scale on which performance on some latent trait can be compared

across groups, such as those defined by sex, race/ethnicity, or place of birth (Hambleton and

Swaminathan 1985).

IRT models assume that an examinee’s performance

on each item reflects characteristics of the item and

characteristics of the examinee. All models assume

that all items on a scale measure a common latent

ability or proficiency dimension (e.g., prose literacy)

and that the probability of a correct response on an

item is uncorrelated with the probability of a correct

response on another item given fixed values of the

latent trait. Items are measured in terms of their difficulty as well as their ability to discriminate among

examinees of varying ability.

104

Literacy in Everyday Life
The assessment used two types of IRT models to

estimate scale scores. The two-parameter logistic

(2PL) model, which was used for dichotomous items

(that is, items that are scored either right or wrong)

takes the form

,

where is the response of person j to item i, is

the proficiency of person j, is the slope or discrimination parameter for item i, and is the location or

difficulty parameter for item i.

For the partial credit items, the graded response

logistic (GRL) model was used. This model follows

the 2PL model for the probability of a score of 1 (at

least partially correct):

.

It also follows the 2PL model for the probability of a

score of 2 (completely correct):

.

In the equations above, and are the step

parameters corresponding to the response categories

of partially or fully correct.

The scale indeterminacy was solved by setting an origin and unit size to the reported scale means and

standard deviations from the 1992 assessment.6 Linear

transformation was performed to transform the original scale metric to the final reporting metric.

Levels were set and items were mapped to scales based

on the scores corresponding to a 67 percent success

rate on the tasks.

Statistical Testing

The statistical comparisons in this report were based

on the t statistic.Statistical significance was determined

by calculating a t value for the difference between a

pair of means, or proportions, and comparing this

value with published tables of values at a certain level

of significance, called alpha level.The alpha level is an

a priori statement of the probability of inferring that

a difference exists when, in fact, it does not. The

alpha level used in this report is .05, based on a twotailed test.The formula used to compute the t statistic was as follows:

,

where and are the estimates to be compared

and and are their corresponding standard

errors.

105

Appendix C: Technical Notes

6 The means for the 1992 assessment were 276 for prose, 271 for

document, and 275 for quantitative.The standard deviations for the

1992 assessment were 61 for prose, 61 for document, and 66 for

quantitative.The standard deviations for the 2003 assessment were

59 for prose, 57 for document, and 61 for quantitative.

107

toc

CHAPTER ONE APPENDIX D

D1

Estimates and Standard Errors 

for Tables and Figures
108

Literacy in Everyday Life

Table D2-1. Estimates and standard errors for Table 2-1. Percentage of adults in selected population groups:

1992 and 2003

Characteristic 1992 2003

Gender 

Male 48 (0.5) 49 (0.5)

Female 52 (0.5) 51 (0.5)

Race/ethnicity

White 77 (0.8) 70 (1.3)*

Black 11 (0.4) 12 (0.8)

Hispanic 8 (0.5) 12 (1.2)*

Asian/Pacific Islander 2 (0.2) 4 (0.5)*

American Indian/Alaska Native 1 (0.3) 1 (0.1)

Multiracial — 2 (0.2)

Language spoken before starting school

English only 86 (0.6) 81 (1.1)*

English and Spanish 2 (0.2) 2 (0.3)

English and other 3 (0.2) 4 (0.3)

Spanish 5 (0.3) 8 (0.8)*

Other language 4 (0.2) 5 (0.4)

Age learned English

Native Language English Only 86 (0.6) 81 (1.1)*

10 or younger 8 (0.5) 10 (0.6)*

11 to 15 2 (0.1) 2 (0.2)*

16 to 20 1 (0.1) 2 (0.2) 

21 or older 2 (0.1) 3 (0.2)*

Does not speak English 1 (0.1) 3 (0.4)*

Age

16–18 6 (0.2) 6 (0.3)

19–24 13 (0.4) 11 (0.4)*

25–39 33 (0.5) 28 (0.5)*

40–49 17 (0.3) 20 (0.5)*

50–64 16 (0.3) 21 (0.4)*

65 and older 15 (0.5) 15 (0.6)

Household income

Less than $10,000 — 10 (0.5)

$10,000–$14,999 — 7 (0.3) 

$15,000–$19,999 — 6 (0.3) 

$20,000–$29,999 — 12 (0.5) 

$30,000–$39,999 — 11 (0.4) 

$40,000–$59,999 — 19 (0.5) 

$60,000–$99,999 — 22 (0.7) 

$100,000 or greater — 13 (0.7) 

— Not available.

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are excluded from this table. In 1992, respondents were allowed to identify only one race but could

identify “other” as their race. In 2003, respondents were allowed to identify multiple races but could not choose “other” as their race. All adults of Hispanic origin are classified as Hispanic, regardless of race.The

Asian/Pacific Islander category includes Native Hawaiians.The English and Spanish category includes adults who spoke languages in addition to both English and Spanish.The Spanish category includes adults

who spoke Spanish and additional non-English languages. Results for adults who identified “other” as their race in 1992 are not included in this table.The percentage of the population that identified “other” as

their race in 1992 rounds to 0. Household income data were not available for 1992.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
109

Appendix D: Estimates and Standard Errors for Tables and Figures

Table D2-3. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 2-2. Percentage of adults in each prose, document, and

quantitative literacy level: 1992 and 2003

Literacy scale 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003

Prose 14 (0.4) 14 (0.6) 28 (0.4) 29 (0.6) 43 (0.5) 44 (0.7) 15 (0.4) 13 (0.5)*

Document 14 (0.5) 12 (0.5)* 22 (0.4) 22 (0.5) 49 (0.5) 53 (0.7)* 15 (0.4) 13 (0.6)*

Quantitative 26 (0.6) 22 (0.6)* 32 (0.4) 33 (0.5) 30 (0.4) 33 (0.5)* 13 (0.4) 13 (0.5)

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Table D2-4. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 2-3. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy

scores of adults, by gender: 1992 and 2003

Gender 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003

Male 276 (1.2) 272 (1.5)* 274 (1.2) 269 (1.5)* 283 (1.4) 286 (1.3)

Female 277 (1.3) 277 (1.4) 268 (1.2) 272 (1.2)* 269 (1.2) 279 (1.3)*

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons.Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or

mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Prose Document Quantitative

Table D2-2. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 2-1. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy

scores of adults: 1992 and 2003

Literacy scale 1992 2003

Prose 276 (1.1) 275 (1.3)

Document 271 (1.1) 271 (1.2)

Quantitative 275 (1.1) 283 (1.2)*

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons.Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or

mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
110

Literacy in Everyday Life

Table D2-6. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 2-5. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy

scores of adults, by race/ethnicity: 1992 and 2003

Race/ethnicity 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003

White 287 (1.2) 288 (1.5) 281 (1.2) 282 (1.5) 288 (1.1) 297 (1.3)*

Black 237 (1.4) 243 (1.8)* 230 (1.4) 238 (2.1)* 222 (1.6) 238 (2.1)*

Hispanic 234 (2.3) 216 (3.5)* 238 (1.8) 224 (3.6)* 233 (2.3) 233 (3.2)

Asian/Pacific Islander 255 (6.1) 271 (4.0)* 259 (6.1) 272 (5.0) 268 (7.8) 285 (5.1)

American Indian/Alaska Native 254 (4.2) 264 (9.5) 247 (6.2) 258 (6.6) 245 (5.5) 265 (10.8)

Multiracial — 273 (4.6) — 269 (3.9) — 270 (4.1)

— Not available.

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons.Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or

mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are excluded from this table. In 1992, respondents were allowed to identify only one race but could identify “other” as their race. In 2003, respondents

were allowed to identify multiple races but could not choose “other” as their race. All adults of Hispanic origin are classified as Hispanic, regardless of race.The Asian/Pacific Islander category includes Native

Hawaiians. Results for adults who identified “other” as their race in 1992 are not included in this table.The percentage of the population that identified “other” as their race in 1992 rounds to 0.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Prose Document Quantitative

Table D2-5. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 2-4. Percentage of adults in each prose, document, and

quantitative literacy level, by gender: 1992 and 2003

Literacy scale and gender 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003

Prose

Male 15 (0.4) 15 (0.6) 27 (0.5) 29 (0.7) 42 (0.5) 43 (0.7) 16 (0.5) 13 (0.6)*

Female 13 (0.5) 12 (0.6) 29 (0.5) 29 (0.6) 44 (0.6) 46 (0.8) 14 (0.5) 14 (0.6)

Document

Male 14 (0.5) 14 (0.6) 21 (0.4) 23 (0.5)* 49 (0.6) 51 (0.8)* 17 (0.5) 13 (0.6)*

Female 14 (0.6) 11 (0.6)* 23 (0.4) 22 (0.6) 50 (0.7) 54 (0.8)* 13 (0.5) 13 (0.6)

Quantitative

Male 24 (0.7) 21 (0.6)* 29 (0.4) 31 (0.5)* 31 (0.5) 33 (0.5)* 17 (0.5) 16 (0.6)

Female 28 (0.7) 22 (0.8)* 34 (0.5) 35 (0.7) 28 (0.6) 32 (0.7)* 9 (0.4) 11 (0.6)*

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient
111

Appendix D: Estimates and Standard Errors for Tables and Figures

Table D2-8. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 2-7. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy

scores of adults, by Hispanic ethnicity: 1992 and 2003

Hispanic ethnicity 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003

Hispanic/Mexican 224 (2.6) 204 (5.6)* 230 (2.1) 207 (6.2)* 227 (2.5) 223 (4.5)

Hispanic/Puerto Rican 230 (5.0) 242 (6.0) 231 (4.1) 249 (5.7)* 221 (5.1) 244 (5.6)*

Hispanic/Cuban 233 (10.0) 207 (18.1) 247 (11.1) 227 (23.6) 249 (19.5) 257 (14.6)

Hispanic/Central or South American 229 (5.4) 204 (8.3)* 239 (4.5) 220 (7.7)* 229 (4.9) 234 (6.6)

Hispanic/Other 269 (5.4) 242 (5.4)* 268 (5.3) 250 (7.6) 261 (5.4) 254 (5.7)

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons.Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or

mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are excluded from this table. All adults of Hispanic origin are classified as Hispanic, regardless of race. Because adults provided their income in ranges

rather than by precise dollar figures, adults could not be exactly matched to a poverty category.The categories shown in this table represent the best matches possible based upon the categorical data.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Prose Document Quantitative

Table D2-7. Estimates and standard errors for Figures 2-6a, 2-6b, and 2-6c. Percentage of adults in each prose,

document, and quantitative literacy level, by race/ethnicity: 1992 and 2003

Literacy scale and

race/ethnicity 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003

Prose

White 9 (0.4) 7 (0.5)* 25 (0.6) 25 (0.8) 48 (0.6) 51 (0.9)* 18 (0.6) 17 (0.9)

Black 30 (1.1) 24 (1.4)* 41 (0.9) 43 (1.2) 27 (0.9) 31 (1.4)* 2 (0.3) 2 (0.4)

Hispanic 35 (1.2) 44 (1.8)* 33 (0.8) 30 (1.0)* 28 (0.9) 23 (1.1)* 5 (0.5) 4 (0.4)*

Asian/Pacific Islander 25 (3.4) 14 (2.0)* 30 (2.2) 32 (2.2) 36 (2.8) 42 (2.5) 9 (1.7) 12 (1.8)

American Indian/Alaska Native 17 (3.1) 19 (4.2) 43 (3.3) 29 (4.0)* 35 (3.7) 41 (4.5) 5 (1.6) 10 (3.6)

Multiracial — 7 (3.2) — 35 (5.5) — 54 (5.8) — 4 (3.0)

Document

White 10 (0.5) 8 (0.5)* 19 (0.4) 19 (0.7) 53 (0.6) 58 (1.0)* 18 (0.6) 15 (1.0)*

Black 31 (1.1) 24 (1.7)* 33 (0.8) 35 (1.4) 34 (1.0) 40 (1.9)* 2 (0.3) 2 (0.5)

Hispanic 28 (1.1) 36 (1.6)* 29 (0.8) 26 (0.8)* 38 (0.9) 33 (1.2)* 5 (0.5) 5 (0.5)

Asian/Pacific Islander 19 (3.0) 11 (2.2)* 23 (2.1) 22 (2.1) 48 (3.3) 54 (3.0) 10 (2.0) 13 (2.3)

American Indian/Alaska Native 19 (4.0) 16 (3.8) 31 (4.6) 27 (3.9) 47 (5.7) 51 (4.8) 3 (2.0) 6 (2.8)

Multiracial — 9 (2.0) — 27 (2.8) — 55 (3.5) — 9 (2.6)

Quantitative

White 19 (0.6) 13 (0.7)* 32 (0.5) 32 (0.7) 34 (0.6) 39 (0.8)* 15 (0.5) 17 (0.8)

Black 57 (1.1) 47 (1.8)* 30 (0.8) 36 (1.3)* 12 (0.6) 15 (1.1)* 1 (0.2) 2 (0.4)

Hispanic 50 (1.4) 50 (1.7) 31 (0.9) 29 (0.9) 16 (0.8) 17 (0.9) 3 (0.4) 4 (0.5)

Asian/Pacific Islander 31 (3.7) 19 (3.0)* 29 (2.3) 34 (2.9) 28 (2.4) 35 (2.8) 12 (2.5) 12 (2.5)

American Indian/Alaska Native 43 (4.0) 32 (5.8) 35 (2.6) 31 (3.8) 19 (2.5) 27 (4.2) 4 (1.4) 10 (3.6)

Multiracial — 27 (3.1) — 37 (2.7) — 29 (2.6) — 7 (1.7)

— Not available.

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are excluded from this table. In 1992, respondents were allowed to identify only one race but could

identify “other” as their race. In 2003, respondents were allowed to identify multiple races but could not choose “other” as their race. All adults of Hispanic origin are classified as Hispanic, regardless of race.The

Asian/Pacific Islander category includes Native Hawaiians. Results for adults who identified “other” as their race in 1992 are not included in this table.The percentage of the population that identified “other” as

their race in 1992 rounds to 0.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient
112

Literacy in Everyday Life

Table D2-10. Estimates and standard errors for Figures 2-8a, 2-8b, and 2-8c. Percentage of adults in each prose,

document, and quantitative literacy level, by Hispanic ethnicity: 1992 and 2003

Literacy scale and

Hispanic ethnicity 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003

Prose

Hispanic/Mexican 40 (1.4) 49 (2.5)* 32 (0.9) 27 (1.4)* 24 (1.0) 20 (1.4)* 4 (0.4) 4 (0.6)

Hispanic/Puerto Rican 34 (3.8) 28 (3.8) 40 (3.2) 38 (3.0) 24 (3.2) 31 (3.5) 2 (1.0) 3 (1.2)

Hispanic/Cuban 37 (4.2) 49 (8.0) 29 (2.6) 22 (3.7) 26 (3.4) 24 (5.4) 8 (2.0) 5 (1.7)

Hispanic/Central or South American 38 (3.0) 50 (3.5)* 32 (2.1) 27 (2.0)* 26 (2.5) 19 (1.8)* 4 (1.1) 4 (1.0)

Hispanic/Other 14 (2.2) 28 (3.4)* 32 (2.8) 36 (2.5) 44 (3.0) 33 (3.2)* 10 (2.4) 4 (1.1)*

Document

Hispanic/Mexican 33 (1.4) 42 (2.3)* 29 (0.9) 24 (0.9)* 35 (1.1) 29 (1.4)* 4 (0.5) 5 (0.6)*

Hispanic/Puerto Rican 31 (3.1) 19 (4.1)* 32 (2.9) 32 (3.6) 34 (2.5) 45 (4.7)* 4 (1.2) 4 (2.1)

Hispanic/Cuban 25 (5.0) 40 (6.9) 28 (3.0) 15 (2.2)* 37 (3.8) 30 (3.6) 10 (4.0) 15 (4.2)

Hispanic/Central or South American 24 (4.5) 37 (3.1)* 36 (3.6) 27 (1.8)* 38 (4.7) 31 (2.6) 2 (1.5) 5 (1.0)

Hispanic/Other 14 (2.0) 21 (3.4) 23 (2.1) 26 (2.3) 50 (2.7) 45 (3.5) 13 (2.3) 8 (2.0)

Quantitative

Hispanic/Mexican 54 (1.6) 55 (2.2) 29 (1.1) 27 (1.3) 15 (0.9) 15 (1.1) 3 (0.4) 3 (0.5)

Hispanic/Puerto Rican 59 (4.2) 44 (4.5)* 30 (3.1) 34 (2.9) 10 (2.1) 20 (3.4)* 1 (0.6) 2 (1.2)

Hispanic/Cuban 40 (10.2) 36 (5.3) 33 (5.6) 28 (2.6) 20 (6.0) 25 (3.4) 6 (4.5) 11 (3.5)

Hispanic/Central or South American 53 (4.1) 49 (4.0) 34 (3.0) 31 (2.2) 12 (2.2) 17 (2.5) 1 (0.7) 3 (1.1)

Hispanic/Other 31 (3.3) 39 (3.8) 36 (2.6) 33 (2.3) 28 (2.7) 23 (2.6) 5 (1.5) 6 (1.7)

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are excluded from this table. All adults of Hispanic origin are classified as Hispanic, regardless of

race. Because adults provided their income in ranges rather than by precise dollar figures, adults could not be exactly matched to a poverty category.The categories shown in this table represent the best matches

possible based upon the categorical data.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Table D2-9. Estimates and standard errors for Table 2-2. Percentage of Hispanic adults, by Hispanic ethnicity:

1992 and 2003

Hispanic ethnicity 1992 2003

Hispanic/Mexican 55 (2.5) 58 (4.3)

Hispanic/Puerto Rican 12 (1.5) 10 (1.3)

Hispanic/Cuban 5 (0.6) 4 (1.6)

Hispanic/Central or South American 11 (1.0) 16 (2.1)*

Hispanic/Other 17 (1.9) 12 (1.4)*

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are excluded from this table. All adults of Hispanic origin are classified as Hispanic, regardless of

race.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
113

Appendix D: Estimates and Standard Errors for Tables and Figures

Table D2-11. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 2-9. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy

scores of adults, by language spoken before starting school: 1992 and 2003

Language spoken

before starting school 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003

English only 282 (1.2) 283 (1.4) 275 (1.2) 276 (1.3) 280 (1.2) 289 (1.2)*

English and Spanish 255 (2.9) 262 (3.1) 253 (3.6) 259 (3.4) 247 (4.6) 261 (3.8)*

English and other 273 (4.0) 278 (3.1) 260 (4.5) 268 (3.2) 271 (5.6) 289 (4.1)*

Spanish 205 (2.9) 188 (3.8)* 216 (2.8) 199 (4.6)* 212 (3.3) 211 (4.6)

Other language 239 (3.4) 249 (4.6) 241 (3.7) 257 (4.2)* 246 (4.3) 270 (4.3)*

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons.Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or

mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are excluded from this table. English and Spanish category includes adults who spoke languages in addition to both English and Spanish. Spanish category includes adults who spoke Spanish and additional non-English languages.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Prose Document Quantitative

Table D2-12. Estimates and standard errors for Figures 2-10a, 2-10b, and 2-10c. Percentage of adults in each

prose, document, and quantitative literacy level, by language spoken before starting school: 1992

and 2003

Literacy scale and language

spoken before starting school 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003

Prose

English only 11 (0.4) 9 (0.5)* 27 (0.5) 27 (0.7) 46 (0.6) 49 (0.8)* 16 (0.5) 15 (0.7)

English and Spanish 19 (2.1) 14 (2.1) 38 (2.1) 38 (2.2) 39 (2.3) 42 (2.4) 4 (1.0) 6 (1.3)

English and other 15 (1.8) 7 (1.5)* 30 (1.7) 33 (2.8) 43 (2.1) 51 (3.1)* 13 (1.6) 9 (2.1)

Spanish 52 (1.5) 61 (1.8)* 30 (0.9) 25 (1.1)* 16 (1.0) 13 (0.9)* 2 (0.4) 1 (0.3)*

Other language 32 (2.0) 26 (2.2) 35 (1.3) 33 (2.0) 29 (1.7) 34 (2.3) 5 (0.8) 7 (1.3)

Document

English only 12 (0.5) 9 (0.5)* 21 (0.4) 21 (0.6) 51 (0.6) 56 (0.8)* 16 (0.5) 13 (0.7)*

English and Spanish 18 (1.8) 12 (2.5) 30 (2.1) 29 (3.0) 45 (2.3) 54 (3.8)* 7 (1.4) 5 (1.8)

English and other 19 (2.4) 10 (2.0)* 24 (1.4) 25 (2.3) 46 (2.4) 57 (2.9)* 11 (1.5) 8 (2.0)

Spanish 41 (2.0) 49 (2.0)* 30 (1.1) 25 (1.0)* 27 (1.6) 23 (1.3) 2 (0.5) 3 (0.4)

Other language 29 (1.9) 20 (1.9)* 26 (1.2) 24 (1.3) 39 (1.8) 46 (2.0)* 7 (0.9) 10 (1.2)*

Quantitative

English only 23 (0.6) 18 (0.6)* 32 (0.4) 33 (0.6) 32 (0.5) 35 (0.6)* 13 (0.5) 15 (0.6)

English and Spanish 43 (2.6) 31 (3.3)* 31 (1.8) 39 (2.6)* 21 (1.8) 26 (2.8) 6 (1.3) 4 (1.3)

English and other 31 (2.7) 15 (2.7)* 29 (1.4) 38 (2.7)* 27 (1.7) 34 (3.0)* 14 (1.7) 14 (2.6)

Spanish 62 (1.8) 62 (2.2) 25 (1.1) 25 (1.2) 11 (1.0) 11 (1.1) 2 (0.4) 2 (0.5)

Other language 42 (2.1) 28 (2.3)* 31 (1.3) 33 (1.7) 20 (1.4) 29 (1.9)* 7 (1.1) 10 (1.5)

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are excluded from this table. English and Spanish category includes adults who spoke languages in

addition to both English and Spanish. Spanish category includes adults who spoke Spanish and additional non-English languages.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient
114

Literacy in Everyday Life

Table D2-14. Estimates and standard errors for Figures 2-12a, 2-12b, and 2-12c. Percentage of adults in each

prose, document, and quantitative literacy level who spoke a language other than or in addition to

English before starting school, by age learned English: 1992 and 2003

Literacy scale and

age learned English 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003

Prose

10 or younger 18 (1.0) 10 (0.9)* 33 (0.9) 34 (1.3) 39 (1.0) 47 (1.5)* 10 (0.8) 10 (1.0)

11–15 34 (3.0) 28 (3.0) 34 (2.1) 38 (3.1) 27 (2.2) 30 (3.4) 4 (1.2) 4 (1.3)

16–20 53 (3.6) 51 (3.3) 30 (2.2) 31 (2.6) 15 (2.4) 16 (1.9) 2 (0.9) 3 (1.1)

21 or older 65 (3.3) 62 (2.2) 25 (2.2) 26 (1.6) 10 (1.9) 12 (1.4) # (0.2) # (0.2)

Document

10 or younger 19 (1.1) 10 (1.0)* 26 (0.8) 26 (1.4) 46 (1.2) 57 (1.8)* 9 (0.8) 8 (1.2)

11–15 23 (2.6) 24 (2.9) 26 (2.0) 25 (2.0) 43 (2.8) 41 (2.7) 7 (1.6) 10 (1.9)

16–20 45 (3.4) 34 (3.6)* 29 (2.0) 29 (2.2) 25 (2.5) 34 (3.0)* 2 (0.8) 3 (1.1)

21 or older 51 (3.9) 45 (2.5) 31 (2.4) 32 (1.5) 18 (2.8) 22 (1.8) 1 (0.4) 1 (0.4)

Quantitative

10 or younger 35 (1.3) 22 (1.6)* 32 (0.9) 36 (1.4)* 25 (0.9) 32 (1.4)* 9 (0.8) 10 (1.2)

11–15 39 (3.1) 31 (3.0) 33 (2.1) 33 (2.6) 21 (2.1) 25 (2.1) 6 (1.6) 10 (2.1)

16–20 59 (3.6) 48 (3.0)* 26 (2.1) 30 (2.3) 13 (1.9) 17 (1.9) 2 (1.0) 5 (1.3)

21 or older 70 (2.5) 57 (2.5)* 21 (1.8) 27 (1.6)* 7 (1.1) 14 (1.5)* 2 (1.1) 2 (0.6)

# Rounds to zero.

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Table D2-13. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 2-11. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy

scores of adults who spoke a language other than or in addition to English before starting school,

by age learned English: 1992 and 2003

Age learned English 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003

10 or younger 263 (2.1) 274 (1.9)* 257 (2.2) 267 (1.9)* 260 (2.4) 278 (2.5)*

11–15 235 (5.2) 242 (4.9) 248 (4.9) 251 (6.4) 251 (6.0) 265 (6.3)

16–20 205 (6.2) 208 (5.8) 211 (5.4) 229 (5.5)* 218 (6.9) 238 (5.0)*

21 or older 187 (5.2) 191 (3.7) 203 (4.3) 206 (3.5) 196 (5.5) 223 (4.0)*

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons.Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or

mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Prose Document Quantitative
115

Appendix D: Estimates and Standard Errors for Tables and Figures

Table D2-16. Estimates and standard errors for Figures 2-14a, 2-14b, and 2-14c. Percentage of adults in each

prose, document, and quantitative literacy level, by age: 1992 and 2003

Literacy scale and age 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003

Prose

16–18 10 (1.4) 11 (1.7) 35 (2.0) 37 (2.5) 49 (2.2) 48 (2.7) 6 (1.3) 5 (1.4)

19–24 10 (0.8) 11 (1.1) 29 (1.2) 29 (1.3) 49 (1.3) 48 (1.5) 13 (1.1) 12 (1.1)

25–39 10 (0.5) 12 (0.6)* 24 (0.5) 25 (0.7) 46 (0.6) 45 (0.7) 20 (0.6) 18 (0.8)

40–49 9 (0.5) 11 (0.9) 23 (0.8) 27 (1.1)* 45 (0.8) 47 (1.2) 23 (1.0) 15 (1.1)*

50–64 16 (0.7) 13 (0.8)* 31 (0.7) 27 (0.9)* 43 (0.8) 44 (1.1) 11 (0.6) 15 (0.8)*

65+ 33 (1.2) 23 (1.3)* 37 (0.8) 38 (1.2) 27 (1.0) 34 (1.4)* 3 (0.4) 4 (0.6)

Document

16–18 10 (1.1) 11 (1.4) 24 (1.5) 24 (1.8) 57 (1.7) 56 (2.4) 10 (1.2) 9 (1.7)

19–24 7 (0.7) 9 (1.1) 19 (1.0) 20 (1.2) 58 (1.4) 58 (1.7) 15 (1.4) 13 (1.5)

25–39 9 (0.4) 8 (0.7) 18 (0.4) 19 (0.7) 53 (0.6) 56 (1.1)* 21 (0.6) 17 (1.1)*

40–49 10 (0.7) 10 (0.7) 18 (0.6) 20 (0.8)* 52 (0.9) 54 (1.1) 20 (0.9) 15 (0.9)*

50–64 17 (0.8) 12 (0.9)* 27 (0.6) 23 (0.9)* 48 (1.0) 54 (1.2)* 9 (0.5) 12 (1.1)*

65+ 38 (1.7) 27 (1.5)* 31 (1.0) 33 (1.0) 29 (1.4) 38 (1.4)* 2 (0.3) 3 (0.4)

Quantitative

16–18 30 (1.8) 28 (2.3) 38 (1.5) 38 (2.1) 27 (1.5) 28 (2.1) 6 (0.9) 6 (1.3)

19–24 22 (1.3) 21 (1.4) 37 (1.3) 36 (1.3) 33 (1.4) 33 (1.4) 9 (1.0) 10 (1.1)

25–39 21 (0.7) 17 (0.8)* 31 (0.5) 31 (0.8) 33 (0.6) 35 (0.8) 15 (0.5) 17 (0.9)

40–49 19 (0.9) 19 (0.9) 28 (0.6) 32 (0.8)* 33 (0.7) 34 (0.8) 20 (0.7) 16 (0.9)*

50–64 27 (1.1) 19 (1.0)* 34 (0.7) 30 (0.8)* 29 (0.9) 34 (0.9)* 10 (0.6) 17 (0.8)*

65+ 49 (1.5) 34 (1.6)* 29 (0.8) 37 (1.2)* 18 (0.9) 24 (1.2)* 5 (0.5) 5 (0.6)

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are excluded from this table. Age was calculated based on the birth date information provided by

respondents and grouped according to key life stages as described in appendix B.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Table D2-15. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 2-13. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy

scores of adults, by age: 1992 and 2003

Age 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003

16–18 270 (2.3) 267 (2.8) 270 (2.2) 268 (2.9) 264 (2.5) 267 (3.1)

19–24 280 (2.0) 276 (2.4) 282 (2.2) 277 (2.5) 277 (2.0) 279 (2.3)

25–39 288 (1.3) 283 (1.7)* 286 (1.2) 282 (1.8) 286 (1.3) 292 (1.8)*

40–49 293 (2.0) 282 (2.3)* 284 (1.9) 277 (1.8)* 292 (1.8) 289 (1.9)

50–64 269 (1.4) 278 (1.9)* 258 (1.4) 270 (2.1)* 272 (1.8) 289 (1.9)*

65 and older 235 (1.7) 248 (2.0)* 221 (2.2) 235 (2.0)* 235 (2.7) 257 (2.2)*

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons.Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or

mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are excluded from this table. Age was calculated based on the birth date information provided by respondents and grouped according to key life stages

as described in appendix B.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Prose Document Quantitative
116

Literacy in Everyday Life

Table D2-17. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 2-15. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy

scores of adults, by learning disability status: 2003

Disability status Prose Document Quantitative

Learning disability 252 (3.5) 247 (3.3) 254 (3.8)

No learning disability 276 (1.3) 272 (1.1) 284(1.1)

NOTE: Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Table D2-18. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 2-16. Percentage of adults in each prose, document, and

quantitative literacy level, by learning disability status: 2003

Literacy scale and disability status Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Prose

Learning disability 24 (1.8) 34 (1.7) 35 (2.0) 7 (1.1)

No learning disability 13 (0.6) 28 (0.6) 45 (0.7) 14 (0.6)

Document

Learning disability 24 (1.8) 28 (1.2) 42 (1.9) 7 (1.0)

No learning disability 12 (0.5) 22 (0.5) 53 (0.7) 13 (0.6)

Quantitative

Learning disability 38 (2.0) 32 (1.3) 23 (1.4) 7 (1.1)

No learning disability 20 (0.6) 33 (0.5) 33 (0.5) 14 (0.5)

Note: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed

because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
117

Appendix D: Estimates and Standard Errors for Tables and Figures

Table D2-19. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 2-17. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy

scores of adults, by household income: 2003

Literacy scale and household income Average score

Prose

Less than $10,000 229 (2.5)

$10,000–$14,999 237 (2.9)

$15,000–$19,999 244 (3.7)

$20,000–$29,999 257 (2.3)

$30,000–$39,999 268 (2.6)

$40,000–$59,999 282 (1.7)

$60,000–$99,999 303 (1.7)

$100,000 or greater 316 (2.0)

Document

Less than $10,000 225 (3.6)

$10,000–$14,999 232 (2.6)

$15,000–$19,999 240 (3.3)

$20,000–$29,999 256 (2.4)

$30,000–$39,999 263 (2.0)

$40,000–$59,999 278 (1.6)

$60,000–$99,999 297 (1.5)

$100,000 or greater 304 (2.5)

Quantitative

Less than $10,000 223 (3.0)

$10,000–$14,999 237 (2.7)

$15,000–$19,999 244 (3.4)

$20,000–$29,999 261 (2.3)

$30,000–$39,999 271 (2.2)

$40,000–$59,999 286 (1.5)

$60,000–$99,999 303 (1.2)

$100,000 or greater 314 (1.8)

NOTE: Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households.Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
118

Literacy in Everyday Life

Table D2-20. Estimates and standard errors for Table 2-3. Percentage of adults in each household income category, by prose, document, and quantitative literacy level: 2003

Literacy scale and Less than $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000 $60,000 $100,000

literacy level $10,000 to $14,999 to $19,999 to $29,999 to $39,999 to $59,999 to $99,999 or greater 

Prose

Below Basic 26 (1.5) 16 (1.1) 12 (1.0) 16 (1) 12 (1.1) 12 (1.1) 5 (0.9) 2 (0.5)

Basic 14 (0.8) 10 (0.6) 8 (0.5) 15 (0.7) 13 (0.7) 19 (0.8) 15 (1.0) 6 (0.6)

Intermediate 5 (0.4) 5 (0.4) 4 (0.3) 11 (0.6) 11 (0.6) 21 (0.7) 27 (1.0) 16 (1.0)

Proficient 2 (0.3) 1 (0.3) 2 (0.4) 5 (0.7) 7 (0.9) 18 (1.4) 35 (2.0) 30 (2.0)

Document

Below Basic 27 (1.6) 17 (1.3) 11 (1.1) 16 (1.3) 11 (1.1) 11 (1.1) 5 (0.8) 3 (0.7)

Basic 13 (0.8) 12 (0.7) 8 (0.6) 15 (0.8) 14 (0.8) 18 (1.0) 13 (1.0) 6 (0.9)

Intermediate 6 (0.4) 5 (0.4) 4 (0.3) 11 (0.6) 11 (0.5) 21 (0.7) 26 (1.0) 16 (1.0)

Proficient 3 (0.5) 1 (0.3) 2 (0.4) 6 (0.9) 6 (0.9) 19 (1.7) 36 (2.4) 27 (2.8)

Quantitative

Below Basic 26 (1.3) 16 (0.9) 11 (0.8) 16 (1.1) 11 (1.0) 12 (1.0) 7 (0.7) 2 (0.5)

Basic 9 (0.5) 8 (0.5) 6 (0.5) 14 (0.8) 14 (0.7) 21 (0.9) 19 (0.9) 9 (0.9)

Intermediate 4 (0.4) 4 (0.3) 3 (0.3) 10 (0.7) 11 (0.7) 22 (0.9) 28 (1.0) 18 (1.2)

Proficient 2 (0.4) 2 (0.3) 2 (0.4) 5 (0.9) 6 (1.0) 18 (1.6) 37 (2.0) 29 (2.3)

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed

because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
119

Appendix D: Estimates and Standard Errors for Tables and Figures

Table D3-1. Estimates and standard errors for Table 3-1. Percentage of adults, by highest educational attainment: 1992 and 2003

Educational attainment 1992 2003

Still in high school 4 (0.2) 3 (0.2)*

Less than/some high school 21 (0.5) 15 (0.6)*

GED/high school equivalency 4 (0.2) 5 (0.3)*

High school graduate 27 (0.5) 26 (0.6)*

Vocational/trade/business school 5 (0.2) 6 (0.3)

Some college 9 (0.3) 11 (0.4)*

Associate’s/2-year degree 11 (0.3) 12 (0.4)*

Bachelor’s degree 10 (0.3) 12 (0.5)*

Graduate studies/degree 9 (0.3) 11 (0.5)*

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Table D3-2. Estimates and standard errors for Table 3-2. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy

scores of adults, by highest educational attainment: 1992 and 2003

Educational attainment 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003

Still in high school 268 (2.5) 262 (3.7) 270 (2.4) 265 (4.3) 263 (3.2) 261 (4.2)

Less than/some high school 216 (1.4) 207 (2.4)* 211 (1.5) 208 (2.6) 209 (2.1) 211 (2.2)

GED/high school equivalency 265 (2.2) 260 (2.1) 259 (2.3) 257 (2.5) 265 (2.3) 265 (3.1)

High school graduate 268 (1.0) 262 (1.3)* 261 (1.4) 258 (1.5) 267 (1.2) 269 (1.6)

Vocational/trade/business school 278 (2.1) 268 (2.7)* 273 (2.0) 267 (2.5) 280 (2.2) 279 (2.2)

Some college 292 (1.4) 287 (1.6)* 288 (1.6) 280 (1.7)* 295 (1.7) 294 (1.7)

Associate’s/2-year degree 306 (1.9) 298 (2.4)* 301 (1.9) 291 (2.0)* 305 (2.0) 305 (2.1)

Bachelor’s degree 325 (1.9) 314 (2.1)* 317 (1.9) 303 (2.2)* 324 (1.8) 323 (1.8)

Graduate studies/degree 340 (2.0) 327 (2.8)* 328 (1.9) 311 (2.2)* 336 (2.1) 332 (2.1)

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons.Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or

mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Prose Document Quantitative
120

Literacy in Everyday Life

Table D3-3. Estimates and standard errors for Figures 3-1a, 3-1b, and 3-1c. Percentage of adults in each prose,

document, and quantitative literacy level, by highest educational attainment: 1992 and 2003

Literacy scale and

educational attainment 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003

Prose

Still in high school 11 (1.6) 14 (2.5) 36 (2.3) 37 (2.8) 47 (2.5) 45 (3.1) 6 (1.4) 4 (1.5)

Less than/some high school 45 (1.2) 50 (1.4)* 38 (0.8) 33 (1.0)* 17 (0.8) 16 (0.9) 1 (0.2) 1 (0.2)

GED/high school equivalency 9 (1.9) 10 (1.8) 42 (3.2) 45 (2.9) 46 (3.5) 43 (3.0) 3 (1.4) 3 (1.1)

High school graduate 11 (0.7) 13 (1.0) 37 (1.0) 39 (1.2) 48 (1.1) 44 (1.3)* 5 (0.5) 4 (0.6)

Vocational/trade/business school 9 (1.1) 10 (1.8) 29 (1.7) 36 (2.6)* 53 (1.9) 49 (2.7) 9 (1.3) 5 (1.5)*

Some college 4 (0.6) 5 (0.7) 23 (1.4) 25 (1.4) 59 (1.7) 59 (1.7) 14 (1.4) 11 (1.4)

Associate’s/2-year degree 2 (0.5) 4 (0.7)* 16 (1.3) 20 (1.5)* 58 (1.9) 56 (2.0) 23 (2.0) 19 (2.0)

Bachelor’s degree 2 (0.4) 3 (0.5) 10 (0.8) 14 (1.0)* 49 (1.6) 53 (1.7) 40 (1.8) 31 (1.8)*

Graduate studies/degree 1 (0.3) 1 (0.4) 6 (0.8) 10 (1.2)* 43 (2.0) 48 (2.3) 51 (2.2) 41 (2.6)*

Document

Still in high school 10 (1.1) 13 (2.3) 24 (1.6) 24 (2.2) 57 (2.0) 54 (3.0) 9 (1.4) 9 (1.9)

Less than/some high school 44 (1.3) 45 (1.4) 32 (0.7) 29 (0.7)* 23 (1.0) 25 (1.0) 1 (0.2) 2 (0.3)

GED/high school equivalency 9 (1.8) 13 (1.9) 31 (2.9) 30 (2.3) 58 (3.4) 53 (2.8) 3 (1.2) 4 (1.2)

High school graduate 12 (0.8) 13 (1.0) 28 (0.9) 29 (1.1) 54 (1.2) 52 (1.4) 6 (0.7) 5 (0.7)

Vocational/trade/business school 8 (1.0) 9 (1.5) 22 (1.3) 26 (2.3) 60 (1.8) 59 (2.7) 10 (1.3) 7 (1.7)

Some college 4 (0.6) 5 (0.8) 15 (1.1) 19 (1.3)* 67 (1.7) 65 (1.8) 14 (1.6) 10 (1.5)

Associate’s/2-year degree 3 (0.5) 3 (0.7) 12 (1.0) 15 (1.5) 60 (1.7) 66 (2.3)* 25 (1.8) 16 (2.2)*

Bachelor’s degree 2 (0.3) 2 (0.6) 9 (0.7) 11 (1.2) 52 (1.6) 62 (2.5)* 37 (1.7) 25 (2.7)*

Graduate studies/degree 1 (0.2) 1 (0.4) 5 (0.6) 9 (1.1)* 48 (1.9) 59 (2.6)* 45 (2.0) 31 (2.8)*

Quantitative

Still in high school 31 (2.2) 31 (2.9) 37 (1.8) 38 (2.5) 27 (1.8) 25 (2.3) 6 (1.1) 5 (1.4)

Less than/some high school 65 (1.3) 64 (1.3) 25 (0.8) 25 (0.8) 9 (0.6) 10 (0.7) 1 (0.2) 1 (0.2)

GED/high school equivalency 25 (2.9) 26 (3.1) 46 (2.8) 43 (3.1) 26 (2.6) 28 (2.9) 3 (1.2) 3 (1.2)

High school graduate 26 (1.1) 24 (1.4) 41 (1.0) 42 (1.3) 29 (1.0) 29 (1.3) 5 (0.5) 5 (0.7)

Vocational/trade/business school 18 (1.8) 18 (2.1) 39 (2.0) 41 (2.3) 35 (2.0) 35 (2.3) 8 (1.4) 6 (1.4)

Some college 11 (1.1) 10 (1.2) 34 (1.6) 36 (1.8) 42 (1.7) 43 (1.8) 13 (1.4) 11 (1.5)

Associate’s/2-year degree 8 (1.1) 7 (1.1) 29 (1.8) 30 (1.9) 45 (1.9) 45 (2.1) 18 (1.9) 18 (2.1)

Bachelor’s degree 5 (0.7) 4 (0.6) 21 (1.2) 22 (1.2) 44 (1.5) 43 (1.5) 31 (1.8) 31 (1.9)

Graduate studies/degree 2 (0.5) 3 (0.6) 15 (1.3) 18 (1.5) 43 (2.0) 43 (2.1) 39 (2.4) 36 (2.6)

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient
121

Table D3-5. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 3-2. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy

scores of adults, by age obtained high school diploma or GED: 2003

Age Prose Document Quantitative

19 or younger 290 (1.2) 283 (1.1) 297 (1.0)

20–24 252 (2.8) 251 (3.6) 257 (3.4)

25 or older 256 (2.6) 244 (3.5) 266 (3.6)

NOTE: Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons.Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or

mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Table D3-6. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 3-3. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy

scores of adults, by age obtained college degree: 2003

Age Prose Document Quantitative

23 or younger 325 (2.0) 313 (1.8) 332 (1.5)

24–29 310 (3.6) 294 (2.6) 317 (3.5)

30 or older 311 (4.1) 293 (3.6) 322 (4.1)

NOTE: Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons.Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or

mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Appendix D: Estimates and Standard Errors for Tables and Figures

Table D3-4. Estimates and standard errors for Table 3-3. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy

scores of adults, by highest educational attainment and race/ethnicity: 1992 and 2003

Literacy scale and

educational attainment 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003

Prose

Still in high school 280 (3.0) 278 (4.0) 243 (3.1) 236 (5.8) 243 (7.4) 226 (10.0) 264 (16.7) 274 (12.4)

Less than high school/some high school 227 (1.7) 231 (2.9) 199 (2.1) 202 (3.3) 183 (3.2) 161 (4.3)* 184 (14.6) 212 (28.1)

High school graduate/GED/vocational classes 276 (1.0) 271 (1.2)* 236 (1.5) 241 (1.9)* 243 (2.8) 231 (4.2)* 239 (12.7) 230 (7.4)

Some college/associate’s degree 306 (1.5) 300 (2.0)* 270 (2.6) 266 (2.2) 281 (3.8) 265 (2.6)* 279 (7.8) 284 (7.0)

College degree or higher 339 (1.6) 328 (1.8)* 288 (3.3) 280 (3.0) 294 (7.4) 283 (7.3) 282 (5.3) 292 (6.5)

Document 

Still in high school 283 (3.3) 279 (4.6) 242 (4.0) 241 (6.0) 241 (5.0) 223 (12.8) 261 (18.2) 279 (14.0)

Less than high school/some high school 220 (1.8) 229 (3.5)* 192 (2.0) 197 (3.9) 193 (3.3) 171 (4.2)* 200 (14.5) 207 (19.5)

High school graduate/GED/vocational classes 269 (1.3) 266 (1.6) 230 (1.7) 234 (2.3) 244 (2.9) 239 (3.6) 234 (9.8) 240 (9.8)

Some college/associate’s degree 301 (1.7) 292 (1.7)* 261 (2.4) 259 (2.5) 280 (3.5) 265 (3.0)* 279 (6.7) 280 (8.3)

College degree or higher 328 (1.7) 313 (1.7)* 277 (3.3) 272 (3.4) 292 (7.1) 281 (5.4) 287 (6.9) 291 (5.7)

Quantitative 

Still in high school 279 (3.5) 279 (5.2) 225 (5.0) 227 (7.5) 233 (8.1) 218 (10.2) 254 (31.7) 270 (17.3)

Less than high school/some high school 224 (2.5) 235 (3.0)* 169 (3.3) 190 (4.2)* 178 (3.8) 177 (4.2) 191 (17.4) 205 (20.9)

High school graduate/GED/vocational classes 278 (1.1) 280 (1.3) 225 (1.8) 235 (2.3)* 242 (3.5) 245 (3.2) 245 (13.0) 243 (9.7)

Some college/associate’s degree 308 (1.6) 309 (1.7) 261 (2.7) 262 (2.6) 278 (2.9) 275 (3.4) 281 (7.3) 291 (6.1)

College degree or higher 335 (1.5) 334 (1.2) 279 (2.2) 280 (3.6) 299 (7.6) 302 (5.8) 305 (9.3) 313 (3.5)

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons.Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or

mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

White Black Hispanic Asian/Pacific Islander
122

Literacy in Everyday Life

Table D3-8. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 3-4. Percentage of adults in each prose literacy level who

learned English at 16 years of age or older, by enrollment status in an adult English as a Second

Language class: 2003

Enrollment status Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Never enrolled 82 (2.2) 12 (1.6) 6 (1.1) 1 (0.4)

Previously enrolled 63 (2.6) 26 (1.9) 10 (1.5) # (0.2)

Currently enrolled 69 (8.8) 24 (5.8) 8 (4.9) # (0.4)

# Rounds to zero.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Table D3-9. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 3-5. Average document and quantitative literacy scores of

adults, by whether they had received information technology certification: 2003

Certification status Document Quantitative

Certification 285 (2.7) 302 (2.4)

No certification 269 (1.3) 281 (1.2)

NOTE: Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons.Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or

mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Table D3-10. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 3-6. Average document and quantitative literacy scores of

adults who had received information technology certification, by highest educational attainment:

2003

Educational attainment Document Quantitative

Less than/some high school 252 (10.6) 255 (12.5)

High school graduate/GED 273 (4.6) 284 (5.1)

Some college/associate’s degree 284 (4.0) 301 (4.1)

College graduate/postsecondary 303 (5.1) 327 (4.1)

NOTE: Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons.Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or

mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Table D3-7. Estimates and standard errors for Table 3-4. Percentage of adults in the Below Basic and Basic prose

literacy levels who learned English at 16 years of age or older, by enrollment status in an adult

English as a Second Language class: 2003

Currently Took class less Took class Took class more 

Literacy level enrolled than 2 years ago 2-5 years ago than 5 years ago Never took class

Below Basic 4 (0.9) 9 (1.2) 9 (1.1) 17 (1.5) 61 (2.0)

Basic 5 (1.7) 13 (3.0) 11 (1.9) 34 (3.4) 36 (3.9)

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
123

Appendix D: Estimates and Standard Errors for Tables and Figures

Table D4-2. Estimates and standard errors for Table 4-2. Percentage of adults in each occupational group: 1992

and 2003

Occupational group 1992 2003

Management, Business, and Financial 8 (0.3) 12 (0.5)

Professional and related 17 (0.4) 20 (0.5)

Service 20 (0.5) 19 (0.6)

Sales and related 12 (0.4) 11 (0.4)

Office and Administrative Support 17 (0.4) 14 (0.4)

Farming, Fishing, and Forestry 1 (0.2) 1 (0.1)

Construction and Extraction 5 (0.3) 7 (0.3)

Installation, Maintenance, and Repair 4 (0.2) 4 (0.2)

Production 10 (0.5) 8 (0.6)

Transportation and Material Moving 6 (0.3) 6 (0.3)

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed

because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are excluded from this table.The 1992 and 2003 occupational groups were coded using different classifications. For the analyses presented in this report, 1992 results were recoded into 2003 categories using a crosswalk developed by the U.S. Census Bureau. However, some occupations could not be precisely linked

between 1992 and 2003, and there was some sampling error in how other occupations were linked.Therefore, all comparisons between 1992 and 2003 occupational groups should be made with caution.

Occupational information is available only for adults who were employed at some point during the 3 years prior to the assessment.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Table D4-1. Estimates and standard errors for Figures 4-1a, 4-1b, and 4-1c. Percentage of adults in each employment status category, by prose, document, and quantitative literacy level: 1992 and 2003

Literacy scale and literacy level 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003

Prose

Below Basic 57 (1.3) 51 (1.8)* 6 (0.5) 5 (0.6) 8 (0.6) 10 (0.9) 29 (1.3) 35 (1.8)*

Basic 40 (0.8) 38 (1.1) 6 (0.4) 6 (0.4) 12 (0.5) 12 (0.6) 42 (0.8) 44 (1.1)

Intermediate 26 (0.6) 27 (0.9) 5 (0.3) 5 (0.3) 15 (0.5) 14 (0.6) 54 (0.7) 54 (0.9)

Proficient 17 (0.9) 18 (1.3) 3 (0.4) 3 (0.5) 14 (0.9) 14 (1.1) 66 (1.2) 64 (1.6)

Document

Below Basic 60 (1.4) 55 (1.9)* 5 (0.5) 5 (0.6) 9 (0.6) 9 (1.0) 27 (1.4) 32 (1.7)*

Basic 41 (0.9) 40 (1.1) 7 (0.4) 6 (0.5) 12 (0.5) 12 (0.7) 40 (0.9) 42 (1.1)

Intermediate 27 (0.6) 27 (0.8) 6 (0.3) 5 (0.3) 14 (0.4) 14 (0.6) 54 (0.7) 55 (0.9)

Proficient 15 (1.0) 19 (1.5)* 3 (0.4) 4 (0.7) 15 (0.9) 15 (1.4) 68 (1.3) 63 (1.9)*

Quantitative

Below Basic 53 (1.1) 50 (1.4) 7 (0.4) 7 (0.5) 10 (0.5) 10 (0.8) 31 (1.0) 34 (1.3)

Basic 32 (0.7) 34 (1.0) 5 (0.3) 5 (0.4) 15 (0.5) 14 (0.7) 48 (0.8) 47 (1.0)

Intermediate 23 (0.7) 25 (0.9) 5 (0.3) 4 (0.3) 14 (0.5) 14 (0.7) 58 (0.8) 57 (1.0)

Proficient 18 (1.1) 17 (1.3) 3 (0.4) 4 (0.6) 12 (0.9) 13 (1.2) 67 (1.4) 66 (1.6)

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed

because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Not in labor force Unemployed Part time Full time
124

Literacy in Everyday Life

Table D4-3. Estimates and standard errors for Figures 4-2a, 4-2b, and 4-2c. Average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores of adults, by occupational group: 1992 and 2003

Occupational group 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003

Management, Business, and Financial 316 (2.3) 306 (2.3)* 308 (2.1) 297 (2.3)* 322 (1.9) 318 (2.1)

Professional and related 321 (1.7) 317 (1.7)* 316 (1.6) 305 (1.8)* 320 (1.7) 321 (1.6)

Service 266 (1.6) 262 (2.3) 262 (1.7) 259 (2.4) 261 (1.7) 263 (1.9)

Sales and related 288 (2.0) 279 (2.3)* 282 (1.7) 281 (2.3) 287 (2.0) 293 (2.3)

Office and Administrative Support 292 (1.5) 287 (1.7)* 287 (1.6) 284 (1.6) 289 (1.4) 293 (2.0)

Farming, Fishing, and Forestry 254 (7.7) 219 (12.8)* 251 (6.0) 225 (11.7) 260 (6.9) 241 (15.3)

Construction and Extraction 261 (3.1) 255 (3.4) 261 (3.7) 251 (3.4)* 271 (3.7) 265 (3.4)

Installation, Maintenance, and Repair 273 (2.8) 279 (3.7) 272 (3.1) 280 (4.6) 280 (3.8) 293 (3.8)*

Production 257 (2.5) 255 (3.0) 253 (2.4) 253 (2.7) 257 (2.8) 267 (3.2)*

Transportation and Material Moving 261 (2.8) 252 (3.2)* 259 (2.9) 250 (3.3)* 263 (3.1) 263 (3.4)

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are excluded from this table.The 1992 and 2003 occupational groups were coded using different classifications. For the analyses presented in this report, 1992

results were recoded into 2003 categories using a crosswalk developed by the U.S. Census Bureau. However, some occupations could not be precisely linked between 1992 and 2003, and there was some sampling

error in how other occupations were linked.Therefore, all comparisons between 1992 and 2003 occupation groups should be made with caution. Occupational information is available only for adults who were

employed at some point during the 3 years prior to the assessment.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Prose Document Quantitative
125

Appendix D: Estimates and Standard Errors for Tables and Figures

Table D4-4. Estimates and standard errors for Table 4-3. Percentage of adults in each occupational group, by

prose, document, and quantitative literacy level: 1992 and 2003

Literacy scale 

and literacy level 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003

Prose

Below Basic 3 (0.5) 3 (0.9) 3 (0.6) 4 (0.7) 32 (1.6) 30 (1.9) 6 (1.0) 8 (1.1) 8 (0.9) 8 (1.0)

Basic 5 (0.4) 8 (0.8)* 8 (0.5) 10 (0.6)* 25 (0.9) 24 (1.0) 12 (0.8) 12 (0.8) 15 (0.7) 14 (0.8)

Intermediate 9 (0.4) 15 (0.8)* 18 (0.6) 21 (0.7)* 18 (0.6) 16 (0.7) 14 (0.6) 12 (0.6)* 20 (0.6) 16 (0.6)*

Proficient 17 (1.0) 19 (1.7) 36 (1.4) 42 (1.8)* 10 (0.8) 10 (1.0) 9 (1.1) 7 (1.0) 15 (1.1) 13 (1.2)

Document

Below Basic 3 (0.5) 3 (1.0) 4 (0.6) 5 (0.8) 33 (1.6) 35 (2.1) 7 (0.9) 6 (1.1) 8 (0.9) 6 (1.2)

Basic 5 (0.4) 7 (1.0)* 8 (0.5) 10 (0.9)* 25 (0.9) 24 (1.1) 12 (0.7) 10 (0.9) 15 (0.8) 13 (1.0)

Intermediate 9 (0.4) 15 (0.8)* 17 (0.5) 20 (0.8)* 18 (0.6) 16 (0.6)* 13 (0.5) 12 (0.6)* 19 (0.6) 17 (0.7)*

Proficient 15 (1.0) 17 (2.4) 36 (1.3) 39 (2.4) 11 (0.9) 12 (1.3) 9 (0.9) 9 (1.4) 15 (1.1) 12 (1.7)

Quantitative

Below Basic 3 (0.3) 3 (0.6) 5 (0.5) 5 (0.7) 32 (1.2) 33 (1.5) 9 (0.8) 8 (0.8) 10 (0.9) 10 (1.1)

Basic 6 (0.4) 9 (0.7)* 12 (0.6) 14 (0.8)* 22 (0.7) 22 (0.9) 13 (0.6) 12 (0.6) 19 (0.8) 16 (0.8)*

Intermediate 10 (0.5) 15 (0.9)* 21 (0.7) 23 (0.9)* 15 (0.6) 14 (0.7) 13 (0.6) 11 (0.6) 20 (0.8) 16 (0.8)*

Proficient 19 (1.2) 22 (1.8) 36 (1.6) 37 (1.9) 9 (0.8) 7 (0.9) 9 (1.1) 10 (1.1) 11 (1.3) 12 (1.4)

Literacy scale 

and literacy level 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003

Prose

Below Basic 4 (0.6) 3 (0.6) 10 (0.9) 15 (1.2)* 5 (0.7) 2 (0.7)* 19 (1.5) 15 (1.6) 12 (1.0) 11 (1.2)

Basic 2 (0.2) 1 (0.1)* 7 (0.5) 9 (0.5) 5 (0.4) 4 (0.6) 13 (0.8) 11 (0.8)* 8 (0.5) 9 (0.6)

Intermediate 1 (0.2) # (0.1)* 5 (0.3) 5 (0.3) 4 (0.3) 4 (0.4) 8 (0.5) 7 (0.6) 5 (0.3) 4 (0.3)

Proficient 1 (0.2) # (0.2) 3 (0.4) 3 (0.5) 2 (0.4) 2 (0.6) 3 (0.5) 3 (0.5) 3 (0.4) 2 (0.4)*

Document

Below Basic 3 (0.7) 3 (0.6) 9 (1.0) 15 (1.5)* 5 (0.7) 2 (0.8)* 17 (1.5) 15 (1.7) 11 (1.1) 10 (1.5)

Basic 2 (0.3) 1 (0.2)* 7 (0.5) 9 (0.6)* 5 (0.4) 4 (0.7) 14 (0.9) 12 (1.0) 8 (0.6) 9 (0.8)

Intermediate 1 (0.2) # (0.1)* 5 (0.3) 6 (0.4) 4 (0.3) 4 (0.4) 8 (0.5) 7 (0.5)* 6 (0.3) 5 (0.4)

Proficient 1 (0.2) 1 (0.2) 3 (0.5) 3 (0.6) 3 (0.4) 3 (1.1) 3 (0.5) 3 (0.7) 3 (0.5) 1 (0.5)*

Quantitative

Below Basic 2 (0.5) 2 (0.4) 8 (0.7) 12 (1.0)* 5 (0.5) 2 (0.6)* 16 (1.1) 13 (1.2) 11 (0.7) 10 (0.9)

Basic 2 (0.3) 1 (0.1)* 5 (0.4) 8 (0.5)* 4 (0.3) 4 (0.5) 11 (0.6) 9 (0.7) 6 (0.4) 7 (0.5)

Intermediate 1 (0.2) # (0.1)* 5 (0.4) 5 (0.4) 4 (0.3) 4 (0.5) 7 (0.5) 6 (0.6) 5 (0.3) 4 (0.4)

Proficient 1 (0.2) 1 (0.2) 4 (0.5) 3 (0.6) 4 (0.5) 3 (0.8) 4 (0.6) 4 (0.7) 4 (0.5) 2 (0.5)*

# Rounds to zero.

*Significantly different from 1992.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed

because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003 and 4 percent in 1992) are excluded from this table.The 1992 and 2003 occupational groups were coded using different classifications. For the analyses presented in this report, 1992 results were recoded into 2003 categories using a crosswalk developed by the U.S. Census Bureau. However, some occupations could not be precisely linked

between 1992 and 2003, and there was some sampling error in how other occupations were linked.Therefore, all comparisons between 1992 and 2003 occupation groups should be made with caution.

Occupational information is available only for adults who were employed at some point during the 3 years prior to the assessment.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey and 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Service Sales and related

Office and 

administrative 

support

Professional 

and related

Management,

Business, and 

Financial

Farming, Fishing,

and Forestry

Construction and

Extraction

Installation,

Maintenance,

and Repair Production

Transportation and

Material Moving
126

Literacy in Everyday Life

Table D4-6. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 4-4. Percentage of adults who thought their reading skills

limited their job opportunities, by prose and document literacy level: 2003

Literacy scale and literacy level Not at all A little Some A lot

Prose

Below Basic 30 (2.0) 13 (1.2) 22 (1.4) 35 (2.0)

Basic 62 (1.2) 14 (0.8) 15 (0.8) 9 (0.7)

Intermediate 85 (0.7) 7 (0.4) 6 (0.4) 3 (0.3)

Proficient 96 (0.6) 2 (0.4) 1 (0.3) 1 (0.2)

Document

Below Basic 33 (2.0) 13 (1.3) 20 (1.5) 34 (2.0)

Basic 62 (1.3) 12 (0.7) 16 (0.9) 11 (0.8)

Intermediate 81 (0.7) 8 (0.4) 7 (0.4) 4 (0.3)

Proficient 92 (0.9) 4 (0.7) 2 (0.5) 2 (0.4)

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed

because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table. Adults who reported they were retired are not included in these analyses.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Table D4-5. Estimates and standard errors for Figures 4-3a, 4-3b, and 4-3c. Percentage of full-time employed

adults in each weekly gross earnings category, by prose, document, and quantitative literacy level:

2003

Literacy scale 

and literacy level Less than $300 $300–$499 $500–$649 $650–$849 $850–$1149 $1150–$1449 $1450–$1949 $1950 or more

Prose

Below Basic 18 (1.9) 41 (2.9) 18 (2.2) 12 (1.6) 7 (1.3) 3 (0.8) 1 (0.5) 2 (0.8)

Basic 12 (1.0) 31 (1.5) 19 (1.2) 16 (1.2) 12 (1.0) 5 (0.6) 2 (0.5) 4 (0.7)

Intermediate 8 (0.6) 19 (1.0) 17 (0.8) 18 (0.9) 17 (0.9) 8 (0.6) 6 (0.7) 8 (0.8)

Proficient 4 (0.7) 10 (1.3) 11 (1.4) 17 (1.7) 20 (1.9) 13 (1.4) 13 (1.7) 12 (1.7)

Document

Below Basic 18 (2.1) 41 (3.0) 16 (2.4) 11 (2.1) 8 (1.6) 3 (1.2) 1 (1.0) 3 (1.2)

Basic 11 (1.0) 32 (1.6) 19 (1.5) 16 (1.6) 11 (1.2) 5 (0.9) 3 (1.1) 4 (0.9)

Intermediate 8 (0.6) 19 (0.9) 17 (0.8) 19 (1.0) 16 (0.9) 8 (0.7) 7 (1.0) 7 (0.8)

Proficient 6 (1.0) 14 (1.6) 10 (1.8) 14 (2.3) 22 (2.4) 12 (2.1) 10 (3.1) 12 (2.2)

Quantitative

Below Basic 17 (1.7) 42 (2.3) 17 (1.9) 12 (1.6) 7 (1.1) 2 (0.7) 2 (0.8) 2 (0.7)

Basic 11 (0.9) 27 (1.3) 19 (1.1) 18 (1.2) 13 (0.9) 6 (0.8) 3 (0.6) 5 (0.7)

Intermediate 7 (0.7) 17 (1.0) 17 (1.1) 18 (1.1) 17 (1.0) 10 (0.9) 7 (0.9) 8 (0.9)

Proficient 3 (0.7) 10 (1.3) 10 (1.5) 16 (1.9) 22 (2.0) 13 (1.9) 13 (2.0) 14 (2.0)

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed

because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
127

Appendix D: Estimates and Standard Errors for Tables and Figures

Table D4-7. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 4-5. Percentage of adults who thought their mathematics

skills limited their job opportunities, by quantitative literacy level: 2003

Literacy level Not at all A little Some A lot

Below Basic 40 (1.6) 16 (1.0) 19 (1.2) 25 (1.4)

Basic 66 (1.0) 13 (0.6) 13 (0.7) 8 (0.6)

Intermediate 80 (0.8) 11 (0.6) 7 (0.5) 3 (0.3)

Proficient 89 (1.0) 8 (0.8) 3 (0.6) 1 (0.3)

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed

because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table. Adults who reported they were retired are not included in these analyses.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Table D4-8. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 4-6. Percentage of adults who thought their computer

skills limited their job opportunities, by document and quantitative literacy level: 2003

Literacy scale and literacy level Not at all A little Some A lot

Document

Below Basic 28 (1.8) 9 (1.1) 12 (1.2) 51 (2.1)

Basic 45 (1.4) 14 (0.8) 14 (0.8) 27 (1.3)

Intermediate 58 (1.1) 17 (0.6) 13 (0.5) 13 (0.7)

Proficient 67 (1.9) 18 (1.6) 9 (1.1) 6 (0.8)

Quantitative

Below Basic 32 (1.5) 11 (0.8) 14 (0.9) 43 (1.7)

Basic 50 (1.2) 15 (0.7) 14 (0.7) 20 (1.0)

Intermediate 61 (1.2) 17 (0.7) 12 (0.6) 11 (0.7)

Proficient 70 (1.6) 18 (1.3) 8 (0.9) 5 (0.7)

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed

because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table. Adults who reported they were retired are not included in these analyses.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Table D4-9. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 4-7. Percentage of adults in each prose and document literacy level who thought their reading skills limited their job opportunities “a lot” or “some,” by

whether or not they participated in job training that emphasized reading: 2003

Literacy scale and participation Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Prose

Participated 27 (3.7) 41 (3.4) 30 (3.6) 2 (1.1)

Did not participate 42 (1.7) 35 (1.1) 22 (1.1) 2 (0.3)

Document

Participated 23 (3.9) 33 (3.4) 40 (4.2) 3 (1.8)

Did not participate 35 (1.6) 29 (0.8) 33 (1.3) 3 (0.5)

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed

because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table. Adults who reported they were retired are not included in these analyses.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
128

Literacy in Everyday Life

Table D4-10. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 4-8. Percentage of adults in each quantitative literacy

level who thought their mathematics skills limited their job opportunities “a lot” or “some,” by

whether or not they participated in job training that emphasized mathematics: 2003

Participation Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Participated 38 (4.5) 34 (3.6) 23 (3.6) 4 (1.7)

Did not participate 47 (1.7) 33 (1.2) 17 (1.0) 3 (0.5)

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed

because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table. Adults who reported they were retired are not included in these analyses.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Table D4-11. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 4-9. Percentage of adults in each quantitative literacy

level who thought their computer skills limited their job opportunities “a lot” or “some,” by

whether or not they participated in job training that emphasized computers: 2003

Participation Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Participated 20 (2.4) 37 (2.3) 33 (2.5) 10 (1.8)

Did not participate 38 (1.2) 35 (0.8) 22 (0.8) 5 (0.5)

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed

because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table. Adults who reported they were retired are not included in these analyses.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Table D4-12. Estimates and standard errors for Figures 4-10a, 4-10b, and 4-10c. Percentage of women who were

currently receiving public assistance or had received public assistance in the past, by prose, document, and quantitative literacy level: 2003

Literacy scale and literacy level Never Past participation Current participation

Prose

Below Basic 86 (1.5) 10 (1.4) 4 (0.6)

Basic 86 (0.9) 11 (0.9) 3 (0.4)

Intermediate 91 (0.6) 8 (0.6) 1 (0.2)

Proficient 97 (0.8) 3 (0.8) # (0.1)

Document

Below Basic 86 (1.8) 11 (1.7) 4 (0.7)

Basic 87 (1.0) 10 (1.0) 3 (0.4)

Intermediate 91 (0.6) 8 (0.6) 2 (0.2)

Proficient 96 (1.1) 4 (1.1) # (0.2)

Quantitative

Below Basic 83 (1.4) 13 (1.3) 4 (0.5)

Basic 89 (0.8) 10 (0.8) 2 (0.2)

Intermediate 93 (0.7) 6 (0.7) 1 (0.2)

Proficient 98 (0.8) 2 (0.8) # (0.1)

# Rounds to zero.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed

because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
129

Appendix D: Estimates and Standard Errors for Tables and Figures

Table D4-13. Estimates and standard errors for Table 4-4. Percentage of women who received public assistance

for varying lengths of time, by prose, document, and quantitative literacy level: 2003

Less than 6 months More than

Literacy scale and literacy level Never 6 months to 1 year 1–2 years 2–3 years 3 years

Prose

Below Basic 87 (1.4) 2 (0.5) 1 (0.6) 3 (0.7) 2 (0.4) 6 (0.9)

Basic 87 (0.9) 2 (0.3) 2 (0.4) 2 (0.4) 2 (0.4) 5 (0.5)

Intermediate 91 (0.6) 2 (0.2) 2 (0.3) 1 (0.2) 2 (0.2) 3 (0.3)

Proficient 97 (0.7) 1 (0.2) 1 (0.4) 1 (0.4) # (0.3) 1 (0.2)

Document

Below Basic 86 (1.6) 2 (0.6) 1 (0.7) 2 (0.7) 2 (0.7) 7 (0.9)

Basic 87 (1.0) 2 (0.4) 2 (0.4) 2 (0.4) 2 (0.6) 5 (0.5)

Intermediate 91 (0.6) 2 (0.3) 2 (0.3) 2 (0.2) 2 (0.3) 3 (0.3)

Proficient 96 (1.0) 1 (0.4) 1 (0.5) 1 (0.3) # (0.4) 1 (0.4)

Quantitative

Below Basic 84 (1.3) 2 (0.5) 2 (0.6) 3 (0.5) 2 (0.6) 7 (0.7)

Basic 89 (0.8) 2 (0.3) 2 (0.4) 2 (0.3) 2 (0.4) 4 (0.4)

Intermediate 93 (0.7) 1 (0.3) 1 (0.4) 1 (0.2) 1 (0.3) 2 (0.3)

Proficient 98 (0.7) 1 (0.4) # (0.3) 1 (0.3) # (0.3) 1 (0.3)

# Rounds to zero.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed

because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Table D5-1. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 5-1. Percentage of parents who read to or with their

children under age 8 during the previous week, by prose literacy level: 2003

Literacy level Never 1 to 2 days 3 to 4 days 5 or more days

Below Basic 41 (2.6) 14 (1.7) 18 (2.1) 27 (2.4)

Basic 25 (1.6) 19 (1.3) 21 (1.5) 36 (1.9)

Intermediate 17 (1.0) 18 (1.1) 21 (1.3) 44 (1.7)

Proficient 14 (1.7) 14 (1.5) 22 (2.3) 50 (2.7)

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed

because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.Parents includes parents, grandparents, and guardians who had a child living with them 10 or more

days a month.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Table D5-2. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 5-2. Percentage of parents whose children between the

ages of 3 and 5 knew the letters of the alphabet, by prose literacy level: 2003

Literacy level Child already knows letters

Below Basic 12 (2.7)

Basic 21 (2.2)

Intermediate 27 (2.1)

Proficient 31 (3.8)

NOTE: Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households.Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.Parents includes parents, grandparents, and guardians who had a child living with them 10 or more days a month.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
130

Literacy in Everyday Life

Table D5-3. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 5-3. Percentage of parents with children who did not

already know the letters of the alphabet who tried to teach their children between the ages of 3

and 5 the letters of the alphabet during the previous month, by prose literacy level: 2003

Literacy level Never Less than once a week Once a week Every day/a few times a week

Below Basic 19 (3.2) 10 (2.3) 10 (2.2) 62 (3.9)

Basic 7 (1.3) 10 (1.7) 10 (1.5) 73 (2.6)

Intermediate 7 (1.1) 11 (1.6) 10 (1.3) 73 (2.2)

Proficient 8 (2.2) 14 (2.9) 12 (2.5) 66 (4.0)

NOTE:Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed

because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.Parents includes parents, grandparents, and guardians who had a child living with them 10 or more

days a month.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Table D5-5. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 5-4. Percentage of parents who engaged in rhyming activities with their children under the age of 8 during the previous month, by prose literacy level: 2003

Literacy level Never Less than once a week Once a week Every day/a few times a week

Below Basic 19 (1.9) 9 (1.5) 11 (1.5) 62 (2.5)

Basic 13 (1.2) 8 (1.0) 11 (0.9) 68 (1.7)

Intermediate 10 (0.9) 8 (0.8) 10 (0.8) 71 (1.4)

Proficient 10 (1.4) 7 (1.2) 11 (1.3) 73 (2.2)

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed

because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.Parents includes parents, grandparents, and guardians who had a child living with them 10 or more

days a month.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Table D5-4. Estimates and standard errors for Table 5-1. Percentage of parents who tried to teach their children

under the age of 8 to read words during the previous month, by prose literacy level: 2003

Literacy level Child already reads well Never Less than once a week Once a week Every day/a few times a week

Below Basic 5 (1.0) 25 (2.5) 9 (1.3) 8 (1.4) 53 (2.7)

Basic 4 (0.8) 22 (1.6) 8 (0.9) 7 (0.8) 59 (1.8)

Intermediate 4 (0.6) 20 (1.2) 8 (0.7) 7 (0.7) 61 (1.4)

Proficient 4 (1.0) 20 (2.1) 11 (1.5) 8 (1.3) 57 (2.6)

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed

because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.Parents includes parents, grandparents, and guardians who had a child living with them 10 or more

days a month.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
131

Appendix D: Estimates and Standard Errors for Tables and Figures

Table D5-6. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 5-5. Percentage of parents who talked to their school-age

children about things they studied in school, by prose literacy level: 2003

Literacy level Never Once a week or less A few times a week Every day

Below Basic 11 (1.6) 13 (1.8) 21 (2.2) 56 (2.8)

Basic 2 (0.4) 12 (1.2) 21 (1.4) 65 (1.7)

Intermediate 2 (0.3) 8 (0.8) 21 (1.2) 69 (1.3)

Proficient 2 (0.5) 5 (1.2) 22 (2.2) 71 (2.4)

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed

because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.Parents includes parents, grandparents, and guardians who had a child living with them 10 or more

days a month.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Table D5-7. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 5-6. Percentage of parents who helped or worked with

their school-age child on homework, by prose literacy level: 2003

Literacy level Never Once a week or less A few times a week Every day

Below Basic 25 (2.2) 17 (2.1) 19 (2.1) 39 (2.5)

Basic 14 (1.0) 19 (1.3) 26 (1.6) 42 (1.7)

Intermediate 11 (0.8) 22 (1.1) 30 (1.3) 38 (1.3)

Proficient 8 (1.0) 27 (2.3) 32 (2.4) 34 (2.4)

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed

because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.Parents includes parents, grandparents, and guardians who had a child living with them 10 or more

days a month.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Table D5-8. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 5-7. Percentage of parents whose children ages 2 through

17 often saw them reading, by prose literacy level: 2003

Literacy level Often sees adult reading

Below Basic 60 (2.7)

Basic 73 (1.5)

Intermediate 81 (1.2)

Proficient 90 (1.5)

NOTE: Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.Parents includes parents, grandparents, and guardians who had a child living with them 10 or more days a month.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
132

Literacy in Everyday Life

Table D5-9. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 5-8. Percentage of adults who lived with children under

age 18 and had reading materials in the home, by prose literacy level: 2003

Literacy level None Some Many

Below Basic 19 (1.8) 28 (1.9) 54 (2.5)

Basic 3 (0.4) 14 (1.0) 83 (1.1)

Intermediate 1 (0.2) 8 (0.6) 92 (0.6)

Proficient # (0.1) 4 (0.6) 96 (0.7)

# Rounds to zero.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed

because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.Parents includes parents, grandparents, and guardians who had a child living with them 10 or more

days a month.

SOURCE: U.S.Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Table D5-11. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 5-10. Percentage of all adults and adults living in households with children under age 18 who had a computer in their home with word processing capability or Internet access, by prose literacy level: 2003

Computer capability and literacy level All adults Adults living with children

Computer with word processing capability

Below Basic 40 (2.0) 50 (2.6)

Basic 66 (1.2) 75 (1.4)

Intermediate 84 (0.7) 89 (0.8)

Proficient 94 (0.7) 96 (0.7)

Computer with Internet access

Below Basic 33 (1.9) 39 (2.7)

Basic 59 (1.3) 67 (1.6)

Intermediate 78 (0.8) 83 (1.0)

Proficient 90 (1.0) 93 (1.1)

NOTE: Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.Parents includes parents, grandparents, and guardians who had a child living with them 10 or more days a month.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Table D5-10. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 5-9. Percentage of parents whose children ages 2 through

17 had their own books, by prose literacy level: 2003

Literacy level Child has own books

Below Basic 93 (1.2)

Basic 98 (0.4)

Intermediate 99 (0.2)

Proficient 100 (0.3)

NOTE: Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.Parents includes parents, grandparents, and guardians who had a child living with them 10 or more days a month.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
133

Appendix D: Estimates and Standard Errors for Tables and Figures

Table D5-12. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 5-11. Percentage of parents who were involved in one to

four activities in their children’s schools, by prose literacy level: 2003

Literacy level None One Two Three Four

Below Basic 15 (2.3) 16 (2.0) 18 (2.2) 28 (2.4) 23 (2.1)

Basic 11 (1.3) 14 (1.2) 23 (1.5) 28 (1.5) 25 (1.6)

Intermediate 9 (1.0) 11 (0.8) 21 (1.1) 29 (1.2) 29 (1.3)

Proficient 7 (1.5) 9 (1.5) 15 (1.7) 29 (2.3) 40 (2.5)

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed

because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.Parents includes parents, grandparents, and guardians who had a child living with them 10 or more

days a month.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Table D6-1. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 6-1. Percentage of adult citizens of voting age who voted

in the 2000 presidential election, by prose and document literacy level: 2003

Literacy level Prose Document

Below Basic 53 (2.2) 57 (2.2)

Basic 62 (1.3) 63 (1.4)

Intermediate 73 (1.0) 71 (1.0)

Proficient 84 (1.4) 84 (1.7)

NOTE: Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
134

Literacy in Everyday Life

Table D6-2. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 6-2. Percentage of adults who got information about current events, public affairs, and the government from each of the following sources: newspapers,

magazines, books or brochures, the Internet, by prose literacy level: 2003

Source and literacy level None A little Some A lot

Newspapers

Below Basic 29 (1.4) 25 (1.3) 26 (1.3) 20 (1.3)

Basic 12 (0.6) 23 (0.8) 35 (0.9) 30 (0.9)

Intermediate 8 (0.5) 23 (0.6) 36 (0.7) 33 (0.8)

Proficient 7 (0.7) 26 (1.5) 32 (1.5) 35 (1.7)

Magazines

Below Basic 42 (1.6) 23 (1.4) 25 (1.4) 9 (0.8)

Basic 25 (0.8) 30 (0.9) 34 (1.0) 12 (0.6)

Intermediate 18 (0.6) 35 (0.8) 37 (0.8) 10 (0.5)

Proficient 16 (1.1) 37 (1.7) 37 (1.7) 10 (0.9)

Books or brochures

Below Basic 44 (1.6) 23 (1.3) 25 (1.4) 8 (0.7)

Basic 26 (0.9) 30 (1.0) 33 (1.0) 11 (0.6)

Intermediate 20 (0.7) 34 (0.8) 35 (0.8) 11 (0.5)

Proficient 21 (1.3) 39 (1.7) 30 (1.7) 9 (0.8)

Internet

Below Basic 77 (1.5) 6 (0.8) 9 (1.0) 8 (0.8)

Basic 53 (1.2) 13 (0.7) 17 (0.8) 17 (0.9)

Intermediate 31 (1.0) 18 (0.6) 25 (0.8) 26 (0.8)

Proficient 16 (1.3) 22 (1.4) 31 (1.7) 31 (1.7)

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed

because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
135

Appendix D: Estimates and Standard Errors for Tables and Figures

Table D6-3. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 6-3. Percentage of adults who got information about current events, public affairs, and the government from each of the following sources: family members, friends, or coworkers, radio and television, by prose literacy level: 2003

Source and literacy level None A little Some A lot

Family, friends, or coworkers

Below Basic 21 (1.2) 24 (1.4) 33 (1.5) 23 (1.3)

Basic 10 (0.5) 25 (0.8) 42 (1.0) 23 (0.8)

Intermediate 6 (0.3) 29 (0.7) 44 (0.8) 21 (0.7)

Proficient 4 (0.5) 34 (1.6) 44 (1.7) 18 (1.2)

Radio and television

Below Basic 5 (0.5) 14 (0.9) 26 (1.5) 56 (1.7)

Basic 2 (0.2) 9 (0.5) 27 (0.9) 62 (1.0)

Intermediate 1 (0.1) 7 (0.3) 30 (0.8) 62 (0.9)

Proficient 1 (0.2) 9 (0.7) 32 (1.6) 58 (1.7)

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed

because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Table D6-4. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 6-4. Percentage of adults who volunteered during the past

year, by prose and document literacy level: 2003

Literacy scale and literacy level Never Less than once a week Once a week or more

Prose

Below Basic 83 (1.2) 8 (0.8) 10 (0.9)

Basic 69 (1.0) 16 (0.8) 15 (0.8)

Intermediate 55 (0.9) 25 (0.8) 20 (0.7)

Proficient 43 (1.8) 32 (1.7) 25 (1.6)

Document

Below Basic 82 (1.4) 9 (0.9) 10 (1.1)

Basic 69 (1.1) 16 (0.8) 14 (0.9)

Intermediate 57 (0.9) 24 (0.7) 19 (0.7)

Proficient 47 (2.1) 29 (1.8) 24 (2.0)

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed

because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
136

Literacy in Everyday Life

Table D6-5. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 6-5. Percentage of adults who sent or received e-mail messages and found information on the Internet, by prose literacy level: 2003

Source and literacy level Never Less than once a week Once a week A few times a week Every day

E-mail

Below Basic 80 (1.4) 4 (0.6) 3 (0.5) 5 (0.6) 8 (1.0)

Basic 52 (1.3) 9 (0.6) 5 (0.4) 11 (0.6) 24 (1.2)

Intermediate 24 (1.0) 10 (0.5) 5 (0.3) 14 (0.6) 48 (1.1)

Proficient 8 (0.9) 6 (0.9) 4 (0.7) 15 (1.2) 67 (1.8)

Internet

Below Basic) 77 (1.4) 6 (0.7) 3 (0.5) 7 (0.7) 7 (0.9)

Basic 46 (1.3) 14 (0.7) 7 (0.5) 14 (0.7) 20 (1.1)

Intermediate 20 (0.9) 14 (0.6) 8 (0.4) 22 (0.7) 35 (1.0)

Proficient 6 (0.7) 11 (1.1) 9 (1.1) 24 (1.5) 49 (2.1)

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed

because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Table D6-6. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 6-6. Percentage of adults who sent or received e-mail messages and found information on the Internet, by document literacy level: 2003

Source and literacy level Never Less than once a week Once a week A few times a week Every day

E-mail

Below Basic 82 (1.4) 4 (0.7) 2 (0.4) 5 (0.6) 8 (1.1)

Basic 55 (1.4) 9 (0.8) 4 (0.5) 10 (0.6) 22 (1.3)

Intermediate 26 (0.9) 10 (0.5) 5 (0.3) 14 (0.5) 46 (1.1)

Proficient 9 (1.0) 6 (1.2) 4 (1.0) 16 (1.4) 65 (2.3)

Internet

Below Basic 79 (1.4) 6 (0.8) 3 (0.5) 7 (0.8) 6 (0.9))

Basic 50 (1.4) 12 (0.8) 6 (0.6) 14 (0.8) 18 (1.1)

Intermediate 21 (0.9) 15 (0.6) 9 (0.5) 20 (0.6) 35 (1.0)

Proficient 8 (0.9) 12 (1.6) 9 (1.4) 26 (1.9) 46 (2.5)

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed

because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
137

Appendix D: Estimates and Standard Errors for Tables and Figures

Table D6-7. Estimates and standard errors for Figure 6-7. Percentage of adults who sent or received e-mail messages and found information on the Internet, by quantitative literacy level: 2003

Source and literacy level Never Less than once a week Once a week A few times a week Every day

E-mail

Below Basic 74 (1.3) 6 (0.7) 3 (0.4) 6 (0.6) 10 (0.9)

Basic 41 (1.2) 11 (0.6) 5 (0.4) 12 (0.6) 32 (1.1)

Intermediate 21 (1.0) 9 (0.6) 5 (0.4) 15 (0.6) 51 (1.1)

Proficient 9 (1.0) 5 (0.9) 3 (0.6) 14 (1.2) 69 (1.8)

Internet

Below Basic 69 (1.4) 8 (0.7) 5 (0.5) 9 (0.7) 9 (0.8)

Basic 36 (1.2) 14 (0.7) 8 (0.5) 18 (0.7) 25 (1.0)

Intermediate 18 (0.9) 15 (0.7) 9 (0.5) 22 (0.8) 37 (1.0)

Proficient 8 (0.9) 10 (1.2) 8 (1.0) 25 (1.6) 50 (1.9)

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed

because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

139

E

Additional Analyses

APPENDIX E
140

Literacy in Everyday Life

Table E-2. Percentage of adults in each quantitative literacy level who learned English at 16 years of age or

older, by enrollment status in an adult English as a Second Language class: 2003

Enrollment status Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Never enrolled 73 (2.1) 15 (1.2) 9 (1.0) 3 (0.6)

Previously enrolled 58 (2.2) 28 (1.5) 12 (1.2) 3 (0.6)

Currently enrolled 68 (7.9) 22 (4.6) 10 (3.9) 1 (0.7)

NOTE:This table is an extension of figure 3-4 in the text. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in

households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table. Results are not reported for the document scale because the model did not converge for this scale.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Table E-1. Percentage of adults in the Below Basic and Basic quantitative literacy levels who learned English at

16 years of age or older, by enrollment status in an adult English as a Second Language class: 2003

Took class less Took class Took class more 

Literacy level Currently enrolled than 2 years ago 2–5 years ago than 5 years ago Never took class

Below Basic 4 (0.9) 8 (1.1) 10 (1.2) 18 (1.5) 60 (2.0)

Basic 4 (1.2) 14 (2.1) 13 (2.0) 28 (2.5) 41 (2.8)

NOTE:This table is an extension of table 3-4 in the text. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table. Results are not reported for the document

scale because the model did not converge for this scale.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Table E-4. Average prose literacy scores for adults who had received information technology certification, by

highest educational attainment: 2003

Educational attainment Average score

Less than/some high school 255 (10.4)

High school graduate/GED 274 (3.9)

Some college/associate’s degree 292 (3.1)

College graduate/postsecondary 313 (4.0)

NOTE:This table is an extension of figure 3-6 in the text. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Table E-3. Average prose literacy scores of adults, by whether they had received information technology

certification: 2003

Certification status Average score

Certification 291 (2.0)

No certification 273 (1.4)

NOTE:This table is an extension of figure 3-5 in the text. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households or prisons. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Additional Tables for Chapter 3: Education and Literacy
141

Appendix E: Additional Analyses

Table E-5. Percentage of adults who thought their reading skills limited their job opportunities, by quantitative

literacy level: 2003

Literacy level Not at all A little Some A lot

Below Basic 40 (1.6) 15 (1.0) 21 (1.2) 25 (1.5)

Basic 72 (1.0) 10 (0.6) 11 (0.7) 7 (0.5)

Intermediate 86 (0.7) 6 (0.5) 5 (0.5) 3 (0.3)

Proficient 94 (0.8) 4 (0.6) 1 (0.4) 1 (0.3)

NOTE:This table is an extension of figure 4-4 in the text. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in

households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table. Adults who reported they were retired are not

included in these analyses.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Table E-6. Percentage of adults who thought their mathematics skills limited their job opportunities, by prose

and document literacy level: 2003

Literacy scale and literacy level Not at all A little Some A lot

Prose

Below Basic 38 (1.9) 15 (1.1) 18 (1.3) 30 (1.8)

Basic 61 (1.2) 14 (0.7) 15 (0.8) 10 (0.7)

Intermediate 76 (0.8) 11 (0.5) 8 (0.5) 4 (0.4)

Proficient 87 (1.0) 9 (0.8) 3 (0.5) 2 (0.4)

Document

Below Basic 39 (2.1) 15 (1.3) 16 (1.4) 31 (2.0)

Basic 60 (1.3) 14 (0.8) 15 (0.9) 11 (0.8)

Intermediate 75 (0.8) 11 (0.5) 9 (0.5) 5 (0.4)

Proficient 84 (1.4) 9 (1.0) 4 (0.8) 3 (0.4)

NOTE:This table is an extension of figure 4-5 in the text. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in

households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table. Adults who reported they were retired are not

included in these analyses.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Table E-7. Percentage of adults who thought their computer skills limited their job opportunities, by prose

literacy level: 2003

Literacy level Not at all A little Some A lot

Below Basic 28 (1.8) 8 (0.9) 13 (1.1) 51 (2.0)

Basic 46 (1.4) 14 (0.7) 15 (0.7) 26 (1.2)

Intermediate 58 (1.1) 18 (0.7) 12 (0.6) 12 (0.7)

Proficient 72 (1.6) 15 (1.2) 8 (0.9) 5 (0.6)

NOTE:This table is an extension of figure 4-6 in the text. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in

households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table. Adults who reported they were retired are not

included in these analyses.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Additional Tables for Chapter 4: Employment, Earnings, and Job Training
142

Literacy in Everyday Life

Table E-9. Percentage of adults in each prose and document literacy level who thought their mathematics skills

limited their job opportunities “a lot” or “some,” by whether or not they participated in job training

that emphasized mathematics: 2003

Literacy scale and participation Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Prose

Participated 20 (3.2) 40 (3.2) 35 (3.6) 6 (1.7)

Did not participate 32 (1.6) 35 (1.1) 29 (1.2) 4 (0.5)

Document

Participated 18 (3.4) 27 (3.3) 49 (4.3) 6 (2.3)

Did not participate 28 (1.5) 28 (0.9) 38 (1.3) 6 (0.7)

NOTE:This table is an extension of figure 4-8 in the text. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in

households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table. Adults who reported they were retired are not

included in these analyses.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Table E-10. Percentage of adults in each prose and document literacy level who thought their computer skills

limited their job opportunities “a lot” or “some,” by whether or not they participated in job training

that emphasized computers: 2003

Literacy scale and participation Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Prose

Participated 11 (1.9) 29 (2.2) 49 (2.6) 12 (1.9)

Did not participate 27 (1.2) 35 (0.9) 33 (1.0) 5 (0.5)

Document

Participated 7 (1.8) 25 (2.8) 62 (3.5) 7 (2.2)

Did not participate 24 (1.1) 27 (0.7) 42 (1.0) 7 (0.5)

NOTE:This table is an extension of figure 4-9 in the text. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in

households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table. Adults who reported they were retired are not

included in these analyses.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Table E-8. Percentage of adults in each quantitative literacy level who thought their reading skills limited their

job opportunities “a lot” or “some,” by whether or not they participated in job training that

emphasized reading: 2003

Participation Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient

Participated 46 (5.2) 33 (3.8) 19 (3.8) 2 (1.2)

Did not participate 53 (1.6) 31 (1.1) 14 (0.8) 2 (0.4)

NOTE:This table is an extension of figure 4-7 in the text. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in

households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table. Adults who reported they were retired are not

included in these analyses.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
143

Appendix E: Additional Analyses

Table E-12. Percentage of parents whose children between the ages of 3 and 5 knew the letters of the alphabet,

by document and quantitative literacy level: 2003

Literacy scale and literacy level Child already knows letters

Document

Below Basic 11 (3.4)

Basic 20 (2.9)

Intermediate 26 (2.1)

Proficient 30 (5.2)

Quantitative

Below Basic 12 (2.2)

Basic 23 (2.2)

Intermediate 27 (2.3)

Proficient 36 (4.4)

NOTE:This table is an extension of figure 5-2 in the text. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed

because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.Parents includes parents, grandparents, and guardians who had a child living with them 10 or more

days a month.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Table E-11. Percentage of parents who read to or with their children under age 8 during the previous week, by

document and quantitative literacy level: 2003

Literacy scale and literacy level Never 1 to 2 days 3 to 4 days 5 or more days

Document

Below Basic 47 (3.3) 15 (2.4) 16 (2.6) 22 (3.1)

Basic 26 (1.7) 18 (1.6) 21 (1.8) 36 (2.3)

Intermediate 18 (1.0) 18 (1.1) 21 (1.3) 43 (1.7)

Proficient 16 (2.0) 15 (2.2) 20 (2.9) 49 (3.7)

Quantitative

Below Basic 33 (2.2) 17 (1.6) 19 (1.8) 31 (2.4)

Basic 23 (1.3) 18 (1.2) 20 (1.4) 39 (1.9)

Intermediate 18 (1.2) 17 (1.2) 22 (1.4) 44 (1.9)

Proficient 16 (2.0) 15 (1.8) 22 (2.4) 48 (3.2)

NOTE:This table is an extension of figure 5-1 in the text. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in

households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.Parents includes parents, grandparents, and

guardians who had a child living with them 10 or more days a month.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Additional Tables for Chapter 5: Literacy and the Family
144

Literacy in Everyday Life

Table E-13. Percentage of parents with children who did not already know the letters of the alphabet who tried

to teach their children between the ages of 3 and 5 the letters of the alphabet during the previous

month, by document and quantitative literacy level: 2003

Literacy scale and literacy level Never Less than once a week Once a week Everyday/a few times a week

Document

Below Basic 24 (4.5) 7 (4.0) 11 (2.9) 59 (5.6)

Basic 7 (1.2) 11 (2.8) 9 (1.5) 73 (3.3)

Intermediate 6 (1.0) 12 (1.9) 9 (1.2) 72 (2.4)

Proficient 12 (3.0) 9 (4.2) 15 (3.0) 65 (5.2)

Quantitative

Below Basic 14 (2.4) 8 (2.4) 10 (1.9) 68 (3.5)

Basic 8 (1.3) 12 (2.1) 9 (1.3) 72 (2.6)

Intermediate 6 (1.3) 12 (2.1) 10 (1.3) 72 (2.7)

Proficient 9 (2.7) 11 (3.8) 15 (3.0) 66 (4.9)

NOTE:This table is an extension of figure 5-3 in the text. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in

households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.Parents includes parents, grandparents, and

guardians who had a child living with them 10 or more days a month.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
145

Appendix E: Additional Analyses

Table E-14. Percentage of parents who tried to teach their children under the age of 8 to read words during the

previous month, by document and quantitative literacy level: 2003

Child already Less than Everyday/

Literacy scale and literacy level reads well Never once a week Once a week a few times a week

Document

Below Basic 4 (1.5) 27 (3.0) 8 (1.9) 8 (1.8) 53 (3.6)

Basic 4 (0.8) 20 (1.5) 7 (1.1) 8 (1.0) 61 (2.1)

Intermediate 4 (0.6) 20 (1.2) 9 (0.8) 7 (0.7) 60 (1.4)

Proficient 4 (1.2) 24 (2.3) 9 (1.7) 7 (1.5) 56 (3.3)

Quantitative

Below Basic 4 (0.9) 21 (2.1) 7 (1.1) 8 (1.3) 59 (2.4)

Basic 3 (0.6) 23 (1.5) 8 (0.8) 7 (0.8) 60 (1.7)

Intermediate 4 (0.7) 21 (1.4) 8 (0.8) 7 (0.8) 59 (1.6)

Proficient 6 (1.2) 19 (2.3) 11 (1.7) 8 (1.5) 57 (3.0)

NOTE:This table is an extension of table 5-1 in the text. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.Parents includes parents, grandparents, and guardians

who had a child living with them 10 or more days a month.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Table E-15. Percentage of parents who engaged in rhyming activities with their children under the age of 8

during the previous month, by document and quantitative literacy level: 2003

Everyday/

Literacy scale and literacy level Never Less than once a week Once a week a few times a week

Document

Below Basic 22 (2.6) 10 (1.8) 10 (2.0) 58 (3.4)

Basic 14 (1.3) 8 (0.9) 9 (1.1) 69 (1.9)

Intermediate 11 (0.8) 7 (0.7) 11 (0.8) 71 (1.3)

Proficient 10 (1.6) 10 (1.5) 12 (2.0) 68 (2.9)

Quantitative

Below Basic 16 (1.6) 10 (1.3) 11 (1.1) 64 (2.2)

Basic 10 (0.9) 8 (0.8) 10 (0.9) 72 (1.5)

Intermediate 11 (1.0) 7 (0.8) 10 (0.8) 71 (1.5)

Proficient 14 (1.9) 9 (1.5) 12 (1.6) 66 (2.7)

NOTE:This table is an extension of figure 5-4 in the text. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in

households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.Parents includes parents, grandparents, and

guardians who had a child living with them 10 or more days a month.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
146

Literacy in Everyday Life

Table E-17. Percentage of parents who helped or worked with their school-age child on homework, by

document and quantitative literacy level: 2003

Literacy scale and literacy level Never Once a week or less A few times a week Every day

Document

Below Basic 28 (2.5) 20 (2.4) 17 (2.2) 36 (2.8)

Basic 14 (1.1) 19 (1.4) 25 (1.7) 42 (1.8)

Intermediate 10 (0.7) 21 (1.0) 30 (1.2) 39 (1.2)

Proficient 10 (1.2) 27 (2.4) 31 (2.8) 33 (2.7)

Quantitative 

Below Basic 19 (1.6) 17 (1.7) 21 (1.8) 43 (2.1)

Basic 12 (0.9) 19 (1.1) 28 (1.4) 40 (1.5)

Intermediate 10 (0.8) 22 (1.2) 31 (1.4) 37 (1.4)

Proficient 11 (1.4) 28 (2.4) 30 (2.5) 31 (2.5)

NOTE:This table is an extension of figure 5-6 in the text. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in

households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.Parents includes parents, grandparents, and

guardians who had a child living with them 10 or more days a month.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Table E-16. Percentage of parents who talked to their school-age children about things they studied in school,

by document and quantitative literacy level: 2003

Literacy scale and literacy level Never Once a week or less A few times a week Every day

Document

Below Basic 10 (1.6) 13 (2.0) 24 (2.8) 54 (3.2)

Basic 3 (0.5) 12 (1.2) 21 (1.6) 64 (1.9)

Intermediate 2 (0.3) 9 (0.7) 21 (1.1) 69 (1.2)

Proficient 2 (0.5) 5 (1.2) 21 (2.3) 72 (2.6)

Quantitative 

Below Basic 5 (0.9) 13 (1.5) 23 (1.8) 59 (2.2)

Basic 3 (0.4) 10 (1.0) 20 (1.2) 67 (1.4)

Intermediate 2 (0.3) 8 (0.9) 21 (1.3) 69 (1.4)

Proficient 2 (0.6) 6 (1.4) 24 (2.1) 68 (2.4)

NOTE:This table is an extension of figure 5-5 in the text. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in

households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.Parents includes parents, grandparents, and

guardians who had a child living with them 10 or more days a month.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
147

Appendix E: Additional Analyses

Table E-19. Percentage of adults who lived with children under age 18 and had reading materials in the home,

by document and quantitative literacy level: 2003

Literacy scale and literacy level None Some Many

Document

Below Basic 19 (1.9) 25 (2.1) 56 (2.7)

Basic 4 (0.5) 16 (1.1) 80 (1.3)

Intermediate 2 (0.2) 9 (0.6) 90 (0.7)

Proficient 1 (0.1) 5 (0.9) 94 (0.9)

Quantitative

Below Basic 13 (1.2) 23 (1.4) 65 (1.9)

Basic 2 (0.3) 11 (0.7) 87 (0.9)

Intermediate 1 (0.2) 7 (0.6) 92 (0.6)

Proficient # (0.1) 6 (1.0) 94 (1.0)

# Rounds to zero.

NOTE:This table is an extension of figure 5-8 in the text. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in

households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.Parents includes parents, grandparents, and

guardians who had a child living with them 10 or more days a month.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Table E-18. Percentage of parents whose children ages 2 through 17 often saw them reading, by document and

quantitative literacy level: 2003

Literacy scale and literacy level Often sees adult reading

Document

Below Basic 61 (2.8)

Basic 73 (1.5)

Intermediate 80 (1.0)

Proficient 89 (1.5)

Quantitative 

Below Basic 67 (2.0)

Basic 76 (1.3)

Intermediate 82 (1.2)

Proficient 87 (1.7)

NOTE:This table is an extension of figure 5-7 in the text. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed

because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.Parents includes parents, grandparents, and guardians who had a child living with them 10 or more

days a month.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
148

Literacy in Everyday Life

Table E-21. Percentage of all adults and adults living in households with children under age 18 who had a

computer in their home with word processing capability or Internet access, by document and

quantitative literacy level: 2003

Computer capability, literacy scale, and literacy level All adults Adults living with children

Computer with word processing capability

Document

Below Basic 39 (1.9) 51 (2.9)

Basic 63 (1.3) 73 (1.5)

Intermediate 83 (0.7) 87 (0.8)

Proficient 93 (0.8) 94 (1.0)

Quantitative

Below Basic 45 (1.5) 56 (2.0)

Basic 73 (1.0) 81 (1.1)

Intermediate 87 (0.7) 92 (0.7)

Proficient 94 (0.7) 97 (0.6)

Computer with Internet access 

Document

Below Basic 32 (1.8) 40 (2.9)

Basic 56 (1.3) 65 (1.8)

Intermediate 77 (0.8) 81 (1.0)

Proficient 88 (1.2) 89 (1.5)

Quantitative

Below Basic 38 (1.5) 13 (0.7)

Basic 66 (1.1) 32 (0.8)

Intermediate 81 (0.9) 39 (0.8)

Proficient 90 (1.0) 17 (0.9)

NOTE:This table is an extension of figure 5-10 in the text. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed

because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.Parents includes parents, grandparents, and guardians who had a child living with them 10 or more

days a month.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Table E-20. Percentage of parents whose children ages 2 through 17 had their own books, by document and

quantitative literacy level: 2003

Literacy scale and literacy level Child has own books

Document

Below Basic 92 (1.3)

Basic 97 (0.4)

Intermediate 99 (0.2)

Proficient 100 (0.2)

Quantitative

Below Basic 95 (0.8)

Basic 98 (0.3)

Intermediate 99 (0.3)

Proficient 100 (0.2)

NOTE:This table is an extension of figure 5-9 in the text. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed

because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.Parents includes parents, grandparents, and guardians who had a child living with them 10 or more

days a month.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.
149

Appendix E: Additional Analyses

Table E-22. Percentage of parents who were involved in one to four activities in their children’s schools, by

document and quantitative literacy level: 2003

Literacy scale and literacy level None One Two Three Four

Document

Below Basic 18 (2.7) 18 (2.3) 22 (2.7) 22 (2.7) 21 (2.5)

Basic 11 (1.3) 14 (1.3) 22 (1.6) 28 (1.7) 25 (1.7)

Intermediate 9 (0.9) 11 (0.8) 20 (1.1) 30 (1.2) 30 (1.3)

Proficient 9 (1.6) 8 (1.4) 18 (2.3) 30 (2.8) 36 (2.9)

Quantitative

Below Basic 13 (2.0) 17 (1.6) 21 (1.9) 27 (1.8) 23 (1.9)

Basic 11 (1.1) 11 (1.0) 21 (1.2) 29 (1.4) 28 (1.4)

Intermediate 9 (1.0) 10 (0.9) 20 (1.3) 29 (1.3) 31 (1.5)

Proficient 9 (1.8) 11 (1.4) 20 (2.0) 28 (2.2) 33 (2.3)

NOTE:This table is an extension of figure 5-11 in the text. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in

households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.Parents includes parents, grandparents, and

guardians who had a child living with them 10 or more days a month.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Table E-23. Percentage of adult citizens of voting age who voted in the 2000 presidential election, by

quantitative literacy level: 2003

Literacy level Percent

Below Basic 53 (1.7)

Basic 66 (1.1)

Intermediate 75 (1.0)

Proficient 84 (1.3)

NOTE:This table is an extension of figure 6-1 in the text. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in households. Adults who could not be interviewed

because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Additional Tables for Chapter 6: Community and Civic Involvement
Literacy in Everyday Life

Table E-24. Percentage of adults who got information about current events, public affairs, and the government

from each of the following sources: newspapers, magazines, books or brochures, the Internet, by

document and quantitative literacy level: 2003

Source, literacy scale, and literacy level None A little Some A lot

Newspapers

Document

Below Basic 27 (1.5) 24 (1.4) 27 (1.4) 23 (1.4)

Basic 12 (0.6) 21 (0.8) 35 (1.0) 31 (1.0)

Intermediate 9 (0.4) 23 (0.6) 35 (0.7) 33 (0.7)

Proficient 10 (0.8) 30 (1.7) 32 (1.7) 29 (1.8)

Quantitative

Below Basic 21 (1.1) 23 (1.0) 31 (1.1) 25 (1.1)

Basic 10 (0.5) 23 (0.7) 36 (0.8) 31 (0.8)

Intermediate 9 (0.5) 24 (0.7) 35 (0.8) 33 (0.8)

Proficient 9 (0.8) 26 (1.4) 31 (1.4) 35 (1.6)

Magazines

Document

Below Basic 40 (1.7) 24 (1.5) 26 (1.4) 10 (0.9)

Basic 25 (0.9) 28 (1.0) 35 (1.0) 13 (0.7)

Intermediate 19 (0.6) 34 (0.8) 36 (0.8) 10 (0.5)

Proficient 20 (1.2) 40 (1.9) 33 (1.7) 7 (1.0)

Quantitative

Below Basic 35 (1.3) 24 (1.1) 29 (1.2) 12 (0.7)

Basic 21 (0.7) 32 (0.9) 36 (0.9) 11 (0.5)

Intermediate 18 (0.7) 36 (0.9) 36 (0.9) 10 (0.5)

Proficient 20 (1.3) 37 (1.6) 34 (1.6) 9 (0.8)

Books or brochures

Document

Below Basic 41 (1.7) 24 (1.4) 26 (1.4) 9 (0.9)

Basic 25 (0.9) 28 (1.0) 35 (1.0) 13 (0.7)

Intermediate 21 (0.7) 34 (0.8) 35 (0.8) 11 (0.5)

Proficient 27 (1.6) 39 (1.9) 27 (1.7) 7 (0.9)

Quantitative

Below Basic 35 (1.3) 25 (1.1) 30 (1.2) 11 (0.7)

Basic 23 (0.8) 31 (0.9) 35 (0.9) 12 (0.6)

Intermediate 21 (0.8) 35 (0.9) 34 (0.9) 10 (0.5)

Proficient 24 (1.4) 41 (1.7) 29 (1.6) 7 (0.8)

Internet

Document

Below Basic 78 (1.5) 6 (0.8) 8 (0.9) 7 (0.9)

Basic 56 (1.3) 12 (0.8) 16 (0.9) 16 (1.0)

Intermediate 32 (1.0) 18 (0.6) 24 (0.7) 26 (0.8)

Proficient 17 (1.5) 21 (1.8) 33 (2.0) 29 (2.1)

Quantitative

Below Basic 70 (1.3) 8 (0.7) 10 (0.9) 11 (0.8)

Basic 45 (1.1) 15 (0.6) 20 (0.8) 20 (0.8)

Intermediate 29 (1.0) 19 (0.7) 27 (0.9) 26 (0.8)

Proficient 17 (1.4) 22 (1.4) 29 (1.7) 33 (1.6)

NOTE:This table is an extension of figure 6-2 in the text. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in

households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

150
151

Appendix E: Additional Analyses

Table E-25. Percentage of adults who got information about current events, public affairs, and the government

from each of the following sources: family members, friends, or coworkers, radio and television, by

document and quantitative literacy level: 2003

Source, literacy scale, and literacy level None A little Some A lot

Family, friends, or co-workers

Document

Below Basic 20 (1.3) 23 (1.4) 33 (1.7) 23 (1.4)

Basic 11 (0.6) 26 (0.9) 41 (1.1) 22 (0.8)

Intermediate 6 (0.3) 29 (0.7) 44 (0.8) 21 (0.6)

Proficient 5 (0.6) 31 (1.9) 45 (2.0) 19 (1.4)

Quantitative

Below Basic 17 (0.9) 23 (1.0) 36 (1.3) 24 (1.0)

Basic 8 (0.4) 26 (0.7) 43 (0.9) 23 (0.7)

Intermediate 6 (0.4) 30 (0.7) 44 (0.9) 20 (0.7)

Proficient 6 (0.6) 36 (1.5) 43 (1.6) 15 (1.1)

Radio and television

Document

Below Basic 5 (0.6) 13 (1.0) 25 (1.6) 57 (1.8)

Basic 2 (0.2) 9 (0.5) 27 (1.0) 63 (1.1)

Intermediate 1 (0.1) 7 (0.3) 30 (0.7) 62 (0.8)

Proficient 2 (0.3) 10 (0.8) 32 (1.9) 57 (2.0)

Quantitative

Below Basic 4 (0.4) 11 (0.7) 25 (1.1) 60 (1.3)

Basic 2 (0.2) 8 (0.4) 28 (0.8) 62 (0.9)

Intermediate 1 (0.2) 8 (0.4) 30 (0.8) 61 (0.9)

Proficient 1 (0.2) 9 (0.8) 33 (1.6) 57 (1.7)

NOTE:This table is an extension of figure 6-3 in the text. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in

households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

Table E-26. Percentage of adults who volunteered during the past year, by quantitative literacy level: 2003

Literacy level Never Less than once a week Once a week or more

Below Basic 80 (1.0) 9 (0.8) 12 (0.8)

Basic 64 (0.9) 20 (0.8) 17 (0.8)

Intermediate 53 (1.0) 27 (0.9) 20 (0.8)

Proficient 47 (1.8) 29 (1.7) 24 (1.6)

NOTE:This table is an extension of figure 6-4 in the text. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard errors are in parentheses. Adults are defined as people 16 years of age and older living in

households. Adults who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities (3 percent in 2003) are excluded from this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy.

153

toc

CHAPTER ONE REFERENCES

1

References

Adams, M. (1990). Beginning to Read. Cambridge, MA:

MIT Press.

Anthony, J.L., and Lonigan, C.J. (2004). The Nature of

Phonological Awareness: Converging Evidence From

Four Studies of Preschool and Early Grade Children.

Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(1): 43–55.

Baker, D.W., Gazmararian, J.A., Williams, M.V., Scott, T.,

Parker, R.M., Green, D., Ren, J., and Peel, J. (2004).

Health Literacy and Use of Outpatient Physician

Services by Medicare Managed Care Enrollees.

Journal of General Internal Medicine, 19(3): 215–220.

Baker, D.W., Parker, R.M.,Williams, M.V., and Clark,W.S.

(1998). Health Literacy and the Risk of Hospitalization.

Journal of General Internal Medicine, 13(12): 791–798.

Barton, P.E., and Jenkins, L. (1995). Literacy and Dependency:

The Literacy Status of Welfare Recipients in the United States.

Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.

Becker, G.S. (1993). Human Capital: A Theoretical and

Empirical Analysis,With Special Reference to Education (3rd

ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Binder, D.A. (1983). On the variances of asymptotically

normal estimates for complex surveys. International

Statistical Review, 51, 279–292.

Brown, P. (1990). The “Third Wave”: Education and the

Ideology of Parentocracy. British Journal of Sociology of

Education, 11, 65–85.
154

Literacy in Everyday Life

Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, Career Guide to Industries, 2006-07 Edition. (2006).

Computer Systems Design and Related Services. Retrieved December 5, 2006 from

http://www.bls.gov/oco/cg/cgs033.htm.

Carey, N., Lewis, L., and Farris, E. (1998). Parent Involvement in Children’s Education: Efforts by Public Elementary

Schools (NCES 98-032). U.S. Department of Education.Washington, DC: National Center for Education

Statistics.

Davenport,T.H. (2005).Thinking for a Living: How to Get Better Performance and Results From Knowledge Workers.

Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Ehrenberg, R., and Smith, R. (1997). Modern Labor Economics: Theory and Public Policy (6th ed.). Boston:

Addison-Wesley.

Fox, S., and Rainie, L. (2000). The Online Health Care Revolution: How the Web Helps Americans Take Better Care

of Themselves. Washington, DC: Pew Charitable Trusts.

Fronczek, P., and Johnson, P. (2003).Occupations: 2000: Census 2000 Brief.Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.

Gordon, M.M., Hampson, R., Capell, H.A., and Madhok, R. (2002). Illiteracy in Rheumatoid Arthritis

Patients as Determined by the Rapid Estimate of Adult Literacy in Medicine (REALM) Score.

Rheumatology (Oxford), 41(7): 750–754.

Hambleton, R.K., and Swaminathan, H. (1985). Item Response Theory: Principles and Applications. Boston:

Kluwer-Nijhoff Publishing.

Hauser, R.M., Edley, C.F. Jr., Koenig, J.A., and Elliott, S.W. (Eds.). (2005). Measuring Literacy: Performance Levels

for Adults, Interim Report. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

Hecker, M.W. (2005). Occupational Employment Projections to 2014. Monthly Labor Review, 128(11).

Institute of Medicine. (2004). Health Literacy: A Prescription to End Confusion. Washington, DC: Institute of

Medicine, Board on Neuroscience and Behavioral Health, Committee on Health Literacy.

Kaestle, C., Campbell,A., Finn, J., Johnson, S., and Mikulecky, L. (2001).Adult Literacy and Education in America:

Four Studies Based on the National Adult Literacy Survey (NCES 1999-469). U.S. Department of Education.

Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.

Kutner, M., Greenberg, E., Jin,Y., and Paulsen, C. (2006). The Health Literacy of America’s Adults: Results from

the 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy (NCES 2006-483). U.S. Department of Education, National

Center for Education Statistics.Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Lindau, S.T.,Tomori, C., McCarville, M.A., and Bennett, C.L. (2001). Improving Rates of Cervical Cancer

Screening and Pap Smear Follow-Up for Low-Income Women With Limited Health Literacy. Cancer

Investigation, 19(3):316–323.
155

References

Little, R.J.A., and Rubin, D.B. (2002). Statistical Analysis with Missing Data. Hoboken, New Jersey:Wiley.

Rock, D. and Yamamoto, K. (2001). Construct Validity of the Adult Literacy Scales. In U.S. Department of

Education. National Center for Education Statistics. Technical Report and Data File User’s Manual for the 1992

National Adult Literacy Survey,NCES 2001–457,by I.Kirsch,K.Yamamoto,N.Norris,D.Rock,A.Jungeblut,

P. O’Reilly, M. Berlin, L. Mohadjer, J. Waksberg, H. Goskel, J. Burke, S. Rieger, J. Green, M. Klein, A.

Campbell, L. Jenkins,A. Kolstad, P. Mosenthal, and S. Baldi.

Schatschneider, C., Fletcher, J.M., Francis, D.J., Carlson, C.D., and Foorman, B.R. (2004). Kindergarten

Prediction of Reading Skills: A Longitudinal Comparative Analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(2):

265-282.

Senior Service America and the Center for Applied Linguistics. (2006). A Guide for Providers: Engaging

Immigrant Seniors in Community Service and Employment Programs. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of

Labor.

Simpson, E.H. (1951).The Interpretation of Interaction in Contingency Tables. Journal of the Royal Statistical

Society, Ser. B13: 238-241.

Sum,A. (1999). Literacy in the Labor Force: Results from the National Adult Literacy Survey (NCES 1999-470). U.S.

Department of Education.Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.

Taylor, H. (n.d.) Explosive Growth of “Cyberchondriacs” Online. Retrieved November 5, 2003, from

http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/printerfriend/index.asp?PID=229.

U.S. Census Bureau. (2003). The Relationship Between the 1990 Census and Census 2000 Industry and Occupation

Classification Systems (Technical Paper No. 65).Washington, DC:Author. Retrieved February 2, 2007, from

http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/ioindex/pdfio/techpaper2000.pdf

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2000). Healthy People 2010: Understanding and Improving

Health. Washington, DC:Author.

Wasik, B.H., and Herrmann, S. (2004). Family Literacy: History, Concepts, and Services. In B. H.Wasik (Ed.),

Handbook of Family Literacy (pp. 1–22). Mahwah, NJ, and London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

White, S., and Dillow, S. (2005). Key Concepts and Features of the 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy

(NCES 2006-471). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education

Statistics.

Whitehurst, G.J., and Lonigan, C.J. (1998). Child Development and Emergent Literacy. Child Development,

69(3): 848–872.

Whitehurst, G.J., and Lonigan, C.J. (2001). Emergent Literacy: Development from Prereaders to Readers. In

S. B. Neuman and D. K. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook of Early Literacy Research (pp. 11–29). New York and

London:The Guilford Press.