The following comments I excluded from the text:
Metropolis - part 5 - Bike networks
Article published 4 days ago concerns a study published 10 December 2024. The author ignores the remark that in the case of results for Poland: "Be careful."
Economic Observatory.pl
Poles have problem knowing the text
According to OECD data, 39% of adults in Poland reached level 1 or lower in the PIAAC survey in terms of text understanding. The average for OECD countries was 26%. This means that Poland is clearly worse than the average developed country. It's not that these people can't read at all. Persons at level 1 are able to realize short texts and simple letters if the information is clearly provided. The problem arises erstwhile you request to find the right information in a longer text, combine any facts, realize the instructions, draw a conclusion or separate the applicable information from the little crucial one.
www.oecd.org/en
Poles have problem knowing the text
According to OECD data, 39% of adults in Poland reached level 1 or lower in the PIAAC survey in terms of text understanding. The average for OECD countries was 26%. This means that Poland is clearly worse than the average developed country. It's not that these people can't read at all. Persons at level 1 are able to realize short texts and simple letters if the information is clearly provided. The problem arises erstwhile you request to find the right information in a longer text, combine any facts, realize the instructions, draw a conclusion or separate the applicable information from the little crucial one.
I wonder what the survey is.
Shortcut:
Study of Adult Skills collects data through individual interview and self-esteem. As with the household survey, data collection takes place in the homes of respondents. In Poland, 5014 adults took part in the survey (which gives an overall consequence rate of 57%). The trial was selected to be typical of about 23.3 million people aged 16–65 surviving in Poland at the time of data collection, regardless of nationality, nationality or linguistic status. The analyses were carried out to exclude crucial systematic errors resulting from the deficiency of consequence (see the Readers' Guide for more information on these analyses).
Some participants did not talk the language of the evaluation fluently adequate and were incapable to communicate with the pollster well adequate to respond to the questionnaire. In specified cases, the questionnaire ‘to be completed at home’ was proposed.
And here's a very interesting point:
Caution should be exercised erstwhile interpreting results for Poland due to the advanced percent of respondents with different consequence patterns. For more information see Reader's Guide OECD (2024) entitled ‘ Do adults have the skills they request to win in a changing world? Adult Skills survey 2023’ .
We scope to the source:
https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/survey-of-adult-skills-2023_3639d1e2-en/full-report/the-methodology-of-the-2023-survey-of-adult-skills-and-the-quality-of-data_f06aecea.html#section-d1e16955-979fd8ccd0
5. Methodology of skill investigating of adults in 2023 and data quality
[...]
Nine surveyors were identified in Poland who had relatively large proportion of cases with different consequence patterns, utilizing the same criteria that led to case recognition in another countries. All data from these questionnairers (774 cases in total) were excluded from the data utilized to estimation the population model, which determines the relation between variables from the first questionnaire and the results in the direct evaluation to make competence estimates (OECD, in preparation[1]). This exclusion increases the robustness of the model, providing its estimation only on the basis of cases considered to be sufficiently qualitative.
Moreover, stronger evidence has been gathered that six of these surveyers in Poland violated data collection protocols throughout the survey. For example, any of these pollers were Unbelievably productive by conducting multiple interviews in 1 day. Others did not evidence interviews or get responsive telephone numbers, which made it hard to validate interviews. Another surveyer was found guilty of falsifying 7 cases during data collection (accidents that were immediately removed from the data set as part of the quality control process and are not included in 774 cases considered in this note). However, twenty-seven another cases collected from this poller were validated and remained in the data collection. As these factors rise concerns about the quality of all cases filled by these six pollers, the answers to questions about cognitive evaluation for all of these six pollers were excluded from the database (total of 559). The likely values for these cases were then estimated on the basis of only their replies to the preliminary questionnaire (for which no different patterns were detected) and the parameters estimated by the population model.
Other cases with different consequence patterns were besides identified in Poland, which could suggest deficiency of commitment or a reasonable level of effort during the evaluation. Since these cases were not concentrated within any circumstantial surveyer, they were left in the data set and treated like all another cases, given the difficulty of establishing nonsubjective criteria to find whether reasonable effort has been put in place and whether the results of the evaluation actually reflect the competence of respondents. Although akin cases happen in all countries, the number of specified cases in Poland may possibly have a crucial impact on the estimated level of competence of the full population. This should be remembered erstwhile interpreting results for Poland. For this reason, in the OECD (2024[3]) the results for Poland were marked with an asterisk.
Nine surveyors were identified in Poland who had relatively large proportion of cases with different consequence patterns, utilizing the same criteria that led to case recognition in another countries. All data from these questionnairers (774 cases in total) were excluded from the data utilized to estimation the population model, which determines the relation between variables from the first questionnaire and the results in the direct evaluation to make competence estimates (OECD, in preparation[1]). This exclusion increases the robustness of the model, providing its estimation only on the basis of cases considered to be sufficiently qualitative.
Moreover, stronger evidence has been gathered that six of these surveyers in Poland violated data collection protocols throughout the survey. For example, any of these pollers were Unbelievably productive by conducting multiple interviews in 1 day. Others did not evidence interviews or get responsive telephone numbers, which made it hard to validate interviews. Another surveyer was found guilty of falsifying 7 cases during data collection (accidents that were immediately removed from the data set as part of the quality control process and are not included in 774 cases considered in this note). However, twenty-seven another cases collected from this poller were validated and remained in the data collection. As these factors rise concerns about the quality of all cases filled by these six pollers, the answers to questions about cognitive evaluation for all of these six pollers were excluded from the database (total of 559). The likely values for these cases were then estimated on the basis of only their replies to the preliminary questionnaire (for which no different patterns were detected) and the parameters estimated by the population model.
Other cases with different consequence patterns were besides identified in Poland, which could suggest deficiency of commitment or a reasonable level of effort during the evaluation. Since these cases were not concentrated within any circumstantial surveyer, they were left in the data set and treated like all another cases, given the difficulty of establishing nonsubjective criteria to find whether reasonable effort has been put in place and whether the results of the evaluation actually reflect the competence of respondents. Although akin cases happen in all countries, the number of specified cases in Poland may possibly have a crucial impact on the estimated level of competence of the full population. This should be remembered erstwhile interpreting results for Poland. For this reason, in the OECD (2024[3]) the results for Poland were marked with an asterisk.
Does anyone want Poles to look bad in the survey or what?
Six "unsound" pollsters were detected, but possibly others did, huh?
Certainly, articles in Polish-language media are intentionally - incomprehensible and with logical and stylistic errors written to make it hard for readers to realize the content, or even mask crucial information or manipulate it.
https://observatoreconomy.pl/2026/06/17/almost-40-polakow-ma-problem- with-text-to-quiet-hamulet-economy/
https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/survey-of-adults-skills-2023-country-notes_ab4f6b8c-en/poland_9d76682b-en.html
https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/do-adults-have-the-skills-they-need-to-thrive-in-a-changing-world_b263dc5d-en.html
https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/survey-of-adult-skills-2023_3639d1e2-en.html
https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/survey-of-adult-skills-2023_3639d1e2-en/full-report/component-2.html#acknowledge-d1e79-a91e08725f
![Oznaczanie treści AI 2026: nowe obowiązki dla firm, influencerów i twórców [PORADNIK]]()
