TF
TruthOrFake
Fact Check: On average, 79% of U.S. adults nationwide are literate in 2024. In czech republic this statistic is 99%-100%.

Fact Check: On average, 79% of U.S. adults nationwide are literate in 2024. In czech republic this statistic is 99%-100%.

March 14, 2025•by TruthOrFake
✓
VERDICT
Mostly True

# Claim Analysis: "On average, 79% of U.S. adults nationwide are literate in 2024. In the Czech Republic, this statistic is 99%-100%." ## 1. Introduc...

Claim Analysis: "On average, 79% of U.S. adults nationwide are literate in 2024. In the Czech Republic, this statistic is 99%-100%."

1. Introduction

The claim asserts that, as of 2024, approximately 79% of adults in the United States are literate, while the literacy rate in the Czech Republic is reported to be between 99% and 100%. This statement raises questions about the accuracy of literacy statistics in both countries and the methodologies used to derive these figures.

2. What We Know

United States Literacy Rates

  • According to multiple sources, including the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), the average literacy rate among U.S. adults is reported to be 79% in 2024, with 21% classified as illiterate 469.
  • A significant portion of these adults, approximately 54%, are said to have literacy skills below the sixth-grade level 56.

Czech Republic Literacy Rates

  • The Czech Republic is frequently cited as having a literacy rate of 99% to 100%. A report from the NCES indicates that the literacy score for high school students in the Czech Republic is notably high, suggesting a strong educational system 2.
  • Other sources corroborate this high literacy rate, with the World Population Review listing the Czech Republic among countries with near-universal literacy 3.

3. Analysis

Evaluation of U.S. Literacy Statistics

  • The claim about U.S. literacy rates is supported by several credible sources, including the NCES, which is a reliable government agency that conducts educational research. However, the statistics may vary slightly based on the definitions of literacy used and the populations surveyed.
  • The statistics indicating that 21% of adults are illiterate and that 54% have literacy below the sixth-grade level raise concerns about educational disparities in the U.S. These figures are alarming and suggest systemic issues in education that merit further investigation.

Evaluation of Czech Republic Literacy Statistics

  • The claim regarding the Czech Republic's literacy rate is also well-supported. The high literacy rate is consistent across various reports, including those from reputable educational institutions and international assessments.
  • However, it is important to consider the context of these statistics. The Czech Republic, as a developed nation with a strong educational infrastructure, is less likely to experience the same literacy challenges faced by developing countries. This context may influence the interpretation of these statistics.

Source Reliability and Potential Bias

  • The NCES is a credible source; however, it is essential to note that reports from educational institutions can sometimes emphasize positive outcomes to reflect well on educational policies. This potential bias should be considered when interpreting the data.
  • Other sources, such as World Population Review and various educational blogs, may not have the same level of scrutiny or peer review, which could affect their reliability. For instance, while the World Population Review is generally reliable, it compiles data from various studies, which may differ in methodology.

Methodological Concerns

  • The methodologies used to assess literacy rates can vary significantly. For example, some studies may define literacy in terms of reading comprehension, while others may include writing and numeracy skills. Understanding these definitions is crucial for accurately interpreting the statistics.
  • Additional information on how literacy is measured in both countries would be beneficial. For instance, knowing the specific assessments used and the demographics of the surveyed populations would provide a clearer picture of the literacy landscape.

4. Conclusion

In conclusion, the claim that "on average, 79% of U.S. adults nationwide are literate in 2024, while in the Czech Republic, this statistic is 99%-100%" is assessed as "Mostly True." The evidence supporting the U.S. literacy rate comes from credible sources like the NCES, which indicates a literacy rate of 79%. Similarly, the Czech Republic's literacy rate is corroborated by multiple reputable sources, consistently reporting figures between 99% and 100%.

However, it is important to acknowledge the nuances in these statistics. The U.S. literacy rate reflects significant educational disparities, with a notable percentage of adults lacking basic literacy skills. In contrast, the high literacy rate in the Czech Republic may be influenced by its developed educational system, which is less likely to face the same challenges as other nations.

There are limitations in the available evidence, particularly regarding the definitions and methodologies used to measure literacy. Variations in how literacy is defined and assessed can lead to different interpretations of the data. Additionally, while the sources cited are generally reliable, potential biases in reporting and variations in methodology should be considered.

Readers are encouraged to critically evaluate information and consider the context and definitions behind statistics to form a well-rounded understanding of literacy rates in different countries.

5. Sources

  1. National Center for Education Statistics. (2024). Reading, Mathematics, and Science Literacy of 15-Year-Olds. Retrieved from NCES
  2. National Center for Education Statistics. (2024). Report on the Condition of Education 2024. Retrieved from NCES
  3. World Population Review. (2025). Literacy Rate by Country. Retrieved from World Population Review
  4. Cross River Therapy. (2024). 55 US Literacy Statistics: Literacy Rate, Average Reading Level. Retrieved from Cross River Therapy
  5. Mission Graduate NM. (2025). US Literacy Statistics 2025 — Latest Data Shared. Retrieved from Mission Graduate NM
  6. ResetEra. (2024). Literacy Statistics 2024-2025 (US ranks 36th). Retrieved from ResetEra
  7. LSU University Rec. (2024). Top 38 Countries with the Highest Literacy Rates 2024. Retrieved from LSU University Rec
  8. USA Data Hub. (2024). U.S. Literacy Rates by State 2024. Retrieved from USA Data Hub
  9. The National Literacy Institute. (2024). Literacy Statistics 2024-2025 (Where we are now). Retrieved from The National Literacy Institute
  10. Data Pandas. (2025). Literacy Rate By Country 2025. Retrieved from Data Pandas

Got your own claim to verify? It's 100% Free!

Join thousands who trust our AI-powered fact-checking. Completely free with no registration required. Your claim could be the next important truth we uncover.

Have a claim you want to verify? It's 100% Free!

Our AI-powered fact-checker analyzes claims against thousands of reliable sources and provides evidence-based verdicts in seconds. Completely free with no registration required.

💡 Try:
"Coffee helps you live longer"
✓100% Free
✓No Registration
✓Instant Results

Comments

Comments

Leave a comment

Loading comments...

More Fact Checks to Explore

Discover similar claims and stay informed with these related fact-checks

Fact Check: On average, 79% of U.S. adults nationwide are literate in 2024. In most developed countries this statistic is 99%-100%.
Partially True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: On average, 79% of U.S. adults nationwide are literate in 2024. In most developed countries this statistic is 99%-100%.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: On average, 79% of U.S. adults nationwide are literate in 2024. In most developed countries this st...

Mar 14, 2025
Read more →
🔍
Unverified
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: THIS IS STRAIGHT OUT OF THE MAGA PROJECT 2025 : PLEASE READ THIS ARTICLE AND SHARE FAR AND WIDE ❤ THANK YOU FOLKS ❤ LIKE THE MAGA, THE PP HAS A 100 DAY AGENDA : The first rule of Fight Club is you do not talk about Fight Club. Over the past year, if you asked around Ottawa about the transition team that was planning Pierre Poilievre’s first days in government, you were likely to be met with shrugs. The members of the team were not named, and those in the know were not talking. Even The Hill Times, the Ottawa parliamentary affairs outlet that excels at digging up gossipy news, had come up empty-handed. At the outset of 2025, they approached a dozen Conservatives close to Poilievre, all of whom stayed tight-lipped. His campaign manager Jenni Byrne ran a very tight organization, and slip-ups might incur her wrath. Besides, any operative whose party is on the verge of power knows it’s best to maintain utmost organizational secrecy. Such discipline, however, sometimes falters under the influence of a few drinks. That’s what Bryan Evans, a political science professor at Toronto Metropolitan University, found out in late 2024. Around the winter holidays, he ducked into his neighbourhood bar and ran into an old acquaintance. The man wasn’t himself on the transition team, but it turned out he was deeply informed. They slid onto stools for a conversation. While they didn’t run in the same circles, and certainly didn’t share political opinions, his acquaintance knew that Evans had an understanding and appreciation for the machinery of government. For ten years he was employed by the Ontario government, including a stint in the Ministry of Labour after Progressive Conservative Mike Harris had come to power in the mid 1990s. Relying on insights from that experience, he wrote his doctoral dissertation on that government and its radical agenda. In December 2024, Poilievre was riding high in the polls, as he had been for nearly two years. So maybe it was the overconfidence talking. Over beers, Evans’s drinking companion laid out more about the transition planning than anything yet discovered by well-connected reporters in the establishment media. The group was preparing for a Poilievre government to hit the ground running. It was going to be a blitzkrieg. “You were there at the start of the Mike Harris government.” “Yeah,” Evans said. “That’s going to be the playbook.” It was an ominous sign. Mike Harris’s government had moved quickly to make dramatic reforms. They had a hundred-day agenda, and they got a lot done: laying off public sector employees, cutting funding to education, slashing social assistance rates, deregulating industries, repealing equity laws, selling off Crown corporations, and empowering the government to impose user fees on public services. “It’s going to come hard and fast from every direction again,” Evan’s acquaintance said. The groups and communities impacted, as well as the political opposition, both inside Parliament and outside, would have to fight on dozens of fronts at once. One of Harris’s key first steps was to balance the budget as a way of supercharging their plans, according to Guy Giorno, the premier’s top strategist. He described this as their “agenda within the agenda,” the “factor which meant that absolutely everybody rolled in the same direction.” It began the process of shrinking public spending, and was followed up by deregulation, rolling back labour protections, freezing the minimum wage, and encouraging the subcontracting of public services. Back in the 1990s, Harris had been convinced by Alberta Premier Ralph Klein’s advisors that he would have to move speedily to implement his agenda, lest he get tripped up by protests or a stubborn public service. Those advisors had once encouraged Klein to read the work of economist Milton Friedman (Pierre Poilievre’s own ideological guru). In the 1980’s, Friedman had written that “a new administration has some six to nine months in which to achieve major changes; if it does not seize the opportunity to act decisively during that period, it will not have another such opportunity.” It’s the lesson Friedman had drawn from his first laboratory, Chile. After the U.S. backed overthrow of democratic socialist Salvador Allende, the military dictator Augusto Pinochet had instituted a violent, rapid-fire makeover of the economy, following Friedman’s radical free market rulebook: privatization, deregulation, cutbacks to the public sector, and attacks on labour unions. Purging the public service As for the composition of Poilievre’s transition group, Bryan Evans’ acquaintance belatedly recalled his Fight Club rules. He wouldn’t divulge names, but offered some ideas. There were Poilievre’s policy advisors, as well as some former senior public servants, lawyers, and an ex-Cabinet minister. He admitted that some people who had been around for the Mike Harris days were in there too. Even before they were sworn in as the government in 1995, Harris’s team had laid groundwork within the public service to ensure they could take swift control of the levers of power. Members of his transition team had shown up to their first meeting with outgoing NDP government officials with a list of six high-ranking deputy ministers they wanted to meet quickly. Those civil servants were the A-list, empowered to advise and serve Harris’s agenda; several others, considered unfriendly, received their pink slips as part of a careful purge. As one NDP official remarked, his own party had “assumed office, but never took power. These guys are taking power even before they have assumed office.” Poilievre’s transition team also was thinking very strategically about how they would wield the machinery of the state. Who did they want to bring into the higher ranks of public service to help advance their plans? Who should be removed? And who might they want for the most important position of all, the top ranking civil servant, the Clerk of the Privy Council? These were some of the questions they were asking while plotting their first moves. When it came to policy plans, one crucial difference between the two eras was that Mike Harris’ Conservatives publicly had rolled out their agenda years in advance. Harris’s young ideologues put out detailed papers, organized policy conferences, eventually published a manifesto, the Common Sense Revolution, of which they printed 2.5 million copies. Everyone knew what was coming, even if it would still shock people when it arrived and extend far beyond what Harris had promised. Would Poilievre’s team, for instance, follow Mike Harris’s “playbook” on healthcare? Harris had lulled Ontario into complacency by assuaging voters’ fears about protecting health services. Their manifesto was crystal clear: “We will not cut healthcare spending.” But the result turned out to look very different: forty hospital closures, 25,000 staff laid off, and declining per capita real funding at a time of growing need. Poilievre’s team, by contrast, hadn’t laid out many policy details. And yet, over the years and in the run-up to the spring of 2025, Poilievre had telegraphed a lot in past election platforms, online videos, and podcast interviews with Jordan Peterson. It hinted at what his sweeping agenda would entail if he was able to secure a majority government—an assault on the country’s collective assets and already tattered social programs, a renewed attack on unions, activist and Indigenous defenders, and a bonanza of deregulation and privatization that would make his billionaire backers cheer. This is an excerpt from Martin Lukacs’s THE POILIEVRE PROJECT : A RADICAL BLUEPRINT FOR CORPORATE RULE published by Breach Books and available for order.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: THIS IS STRAIGHT OUT OF THE MAGA PROJECT 2025 : PLEASE READ THIS ARTICLE AND SHARE FAR AND WIDE ❤ TH...

Apr 6, 2025
Read more →
🔍
Unverified
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: THIS IS STRAIGHT OUT OF THE MAGA PROJECT 2025 : PLEASE READ THIS ARTICLE AND SHARE FAR AND WIDE ❤ THANK YOU FOLKS ❤ LIKE THE MAGA, THE PP HAS A 100 DAY AGENDA : The first rule of Fight Club is you do not talk about Fight Club. Over the past year, if you asked around Ottawa about the transition team that was planning Pierre Poilievre’s first days in government, you were likely to be met with shrugs. The members of the team were not named, and those in the know were not talking. Even The Hill Times, the Ottawa parliamentary affairs outlet that excels at digging up gossipy news, had come up empty-handed. At the outset of 2025, they approached a dozen Conservatives close to Poilievre, all of whom stayed tight-lipped. His campaign manager Jenni Byrne ran a very tight organization, and slip-ups might incur her wrath. Besides, any operative whose party is on the verge of power knows it’s best to maintain utmost organizational secrecy. Such discipline, however, sometimes falters under the influence of a few drinks. That’s what Bryan Evans, a political science professor at Toronto Metropolitan University, found out in late 2024. Around the winter holidays, he ducked into his neighbourhood bar and ran into an old acquaintance. The man wasn’t himself on the transition team, but it turned out he was deeply informed. They slid onto stools for a conversation. While they didn’t run in the same circles, and certainly didn’t share political opinions, his acquaintance knew that Evans had an understanding and appreciation for the machinery of government. For ten years he was employed by the Ontario government, including a stint in the Ministry of Labour after Progressive Conservative Mike Harris had come to power in the mid 1990s. Relying on insights from that experience, he wrote his doctoral dissertation on that government and its radical agenda. In December 2024, Poilievre was riding high in the polls, as he had been for nearly two years. So maybe it was the overconfidence talking. Over beers, Evans’s drinking companion laid out more about the transition planning than anything yet discovered by well-connected reporters in the establishment media. The group was preparing for a Poilievre government to hit the ground running. It was going to be a blitzkrieg. “You were there at the start of the Mike Harris government.” “Yeah,” Evans said. “That’s going to be the playbook.” It was an ominous sign. Mike Harris’s government had moved quickly to make dramatic reforms. They had a hundred-day agenda, and they got a lot done: laying off public sector employees, cutting funding to education, slashing social assistance rates, deregulating industries, repealing equity laws, selling off Crown corporations, and empowering the government to impose user fees on public services. “It’s going to come hard and fast from every direction again,” Evan’s acquaintance said. The groups and communities impacted, as well as the political opposition, both inside Parliament and outside, would have to fight on dozens of fronts at once. One of Harris’s key first steps was to balance the budget as a way of supercharging their plans, according to Guy Giorno, the premier’s top strategist. He described this as their “agenda within the agenda,” the “factor which meant that absolutely everybody rolled in the same direction.” It began the process of shrinking public spending, and was followed up by deregulation, rolling back labour protections, freezing the minimum wage, and encouraging the subcontracting of public services. Back in the 1990s, Harris had been convinced by Alberta Premier Ralph Klein’s advisors that he would have to move speedily to implement his agenda, lest he get tripped up by protests or a stubborn public service. Those advisors had once encouraged Klein to read the work of economist Milton Friedman (Pierre Poilievre’s own ideological guru). In the 1980’s, Friedman had written that “a new administration has some six to nine months in which to achieve major changes; if it does not seize the opportunity to act decisively during that period, it will not have another such opportunity.” It’s the lesson Friedman had drawn from his first laboratory, Chile. After the U.S. backed overthrow of democratic socialist Salvador Allende, the military dictator Augusto Pinochet had instituted a violent, rapid-fire makeover of the economy, following Friedman’s radical free market rulebook: privatization, deregulation, cutbacks to the public sector, and attacks on labour unions. Purging the public service As for the composition of Poilievre’s transition group, Bryan Evans’ acquaintance belatedly recalled his Fight Club rules. He wouldn’t divulge names, but offered some ideas. There were Poilievre’s policy advisors, as well as some former senior public servants, lawyers, and an ex-Cabinet minister. He admitted that some people who had been around for the Mike Harris days were in there too. Even before they were sworn in as the government in 1995, Harris’s team had laid groundwork within the public service to ensure they could take swift control of the levers of power. Members of his transition team had shown up to their first meeting with outgoing NDP government officials with a list of six high-ranking deputy ministers they wanted to meet quickly. Those civil servants were the A-list, empowered to advise and serve Harris’s agenda; several others, considered unfriendly, received their pink slips as part of a careful purge. As one NDP official remarked, his own party had “assumed office, but never took power. These guys are taking power even before they have assumed office.” Poilievre’s transition team also was thinking very strategically about how they would wield the machinery of the state. Who did they want to bring into the higher ranks of public service to help advance their plans? Who should be removed? And who might they want for the most important position of all, the top ranking civil servant, the Clerk of the Privy Council? These were some of the questions they were asking while plotting their first moves. When it came to policy plans, one crucial difference between the two eras was that Mike Harris’ Conservatives publicly had rolled out their agenda years in advance. Harris’s young ideologues put out detailed papers, organized policy conferences, eventually published a manifesto, the Common Sense Revolution, of which they printed 2.5 million copies. Everyone knew what was coming, even if it would still shock people when it arrived and extend far beyond what Harris had promised. Would Poilievre’s team, for instance, follow Mike Harris’s “playbook” on healthcare? Harris had lulled Ontario into complacency by assuaging voters’ fears about protecting health services. Their manifesto was crystal clear: “We will not cut healthcare spending.” But the result turned out to look very different: forty hospital closures, 25,000 staff laid off, and declining per capita real funding at a time of growing need. Poilievre’s team, by contrast, hadn’t laid out many policy details. And yet, over the years and in the run-up to the spring of 2025, Poilievre had telegraphed a lot in past election platforms, online videos, and podcast interviews with Jordan Peterson. It hinted at what his sweeping agenda would entail if he was able to secure a majority government—an assault on the country’s collective assets and already tattered social programs, a renewed attack on unions, activist and Indigenous defenders, and a bonanza of deregulation and privatization that would make his billionaire backers cheer. This is an excerpt from Martin Lukacs’s THE POILIEVRE PROJECT : A RADICAL BLUEPRINT FOR CORPORATE RULE published by Breach Books and available for order.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: THIS IS STRAIGHT OUT OF THE MAGA PROJECT 2025 : PLEASE READ THIS ARTICLE AND SHARE FAR AND WIDE ❤ TH...

Apr 6, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: U.S. tariff on Chinese products is expected to surpass 100%.
True

Fact Check: U.S. tariff on Chinese products is expected to surpass 100%.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: U.S. tariff on Chinese products is expected to surpass 100%.

Apr 8, 2025
Read more →
Explore All Fact Checks
Fact Check: On average, 79% of U.S. adults nationwide are literate in 2024. In czech republic this statistic is 99%-100%. | TruthOrFake Blog