Investigating Reading Literacy in PISA 2018 Assessment
Keywords:
PISA 2018 Assessment, reading literacy, mathematics literacy, science literacyAbstract
This study aims to investigate the predictors of reading performance and how reading performance predicts mathematics and science performances in PISA 2018 Assessment. For this purpose, the country in the focus (Turkey), the highest performer (China) in the world, and the lowest performer (Mexico) among the OECD members countries were selected as the research sample. A total of 12058 students participated from China (Male=6283, Female=5775), 6890 students from Turkey (Male=3494, Female=3396), and 7299 students from Mexico (Male=3473, Female=3826) in PISA 2018 Assessment. The results revealed that ‘Index of economic, social and cultural status’, ‘Meta-cognition: assess credibility’, and ‘Meta-cognition: summarizing’ are the most significant factors affecting students’ reading literacy in all three countries. Total explained variance explained is 41%, 41%, and 39% for Turkey, China and Mexico, respectively. ‘Index highest parental occupational status’, ‘Duration in early childhood education and care’, ‘Attitude towards school: learning activities’, and ‘Subjective well-being: Sense of belonging to school’ are not significant predictors for reading literacy of students from all three countries. In addition, regarding the predictivity of reading literacy, total variance explained is 65% in mathematics performance and approximately 77% in science performance for all three countries.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
References
Aikens, N. L., & Barbarin, O. (2008). Socioeconomic differences in reading trajectories: The contribution of family, neighborhood, and school contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(2), 235–251.
Akbaslı, S., Sahin M., & Yaykiran, Z. (2016). The effect of reading comprehension on the performance in science and mathematics. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(16), 108-121.
Artelt, C., Schiefele, U., & Schneider, W. (2001). Predictors of reading literacy. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 16(3), 363-383.
Berberoğlu, G., & Kalender, İ. (2005). Öğrenci başarısını yıllara, okul türlerine, bölgelere göre incelenmesi: ÖSS ve PISA analizi. Eğitim Bilimleri ve Uygulama, 22(4), 21-35.
Bilgi, A. D., & Özmen, E. R. (2018). The effectiveness of modified multi-component cognitive strategy ınstruction in expository text comprehension of students with mild ıntellectual disabilities. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 18(1), 61-84.
Bozkurt, B. Ü. (2016). Türkiye’de okuma eğitiminin karnesi: PISA ölçeğinden çıkarımlar. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 16(4), 1673-1686.
Cano, F., García, A., Berbén, A. B. G., & Justicia, F. (2014) Science Learning: A path analysis of its links with reading comprehension, question-asking in class and science achievement, International Journal of Science Education, 36(10), 1710-1732.
Cromley, J. G. (2009). Reading achievement and science proficiency: International comparisons from the Programme on International Student Assessment. Reading Psychology, 30, 89–116.
Elleman, A. M., Lindo, E. J., Morphy, P., & Compton, D. L. (2009). The impact of vocabulary instruction on passage-level comprehension of school-age children: A meta-analysis. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 2(1), 1-44.
Englert, C. S., & Hiebert, E. H. (1984). Children's developing awareness of text structures in expository materials. Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 65-74.
Erdem, E. (2016). Relationship between mathematical reasoning and reading comprehension: the case of the 8th grade. Necatibey Faculty of Education Electronic Journal of Science & Mathematics Education, 10(1), 393-414.
Erdoğan, E., & Güvendir, M. A. (2019). Uluslararası öğrenci değerlendirme programında öğrencilerin sosyoekonomik özellikleri ile okuma becerileri arasındaki ilişki. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 20, 493-523.
Fuentes, P. (1998). Reading comprehension in mathematics. The Clearing House, 72(2), 81-88.
Geske, A., & Ozola A. (2008). Factors influencing reading literacy at the primary school level. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 6, 71-77.
Grimm, K. J. (2008). Longitudinal associations between reading and mathematics achievement. Developmental Neuropsychology, 33(3), 410-426.
Hindman, A. H., Skibbe, L. E., Miller, A., & Zimmerman, M. (2010). Ecological contexts and early learning: Contributions of child, family, and classroom factors during Head Start, to literacy and mathematics growth through first grade. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 25(2), 235-250.
Jacobs, J. E., ve Paris, S. G. (1987). Children's metacognition about reading: Issues in definition, measurement, and instruction. Educational Psychologist, 22(3-4), 255-278.
Kendeou, P., & Van Den Broek, P. (2007). The effects of prior knowledge and text structure on comprehension processes during reading of scientific texts. Memory & Cognition, 35(7), 1567-1577.
Kim, Y. S., Petscher, Y., Schatschneider, C., & Foorman, B. (2010). Does growth rate in oral reading fluency matter in predicting reading comprehension achievement? Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(3), 652–667.
King, A. (1991). Effects of training in strategic questioning on children’s problem-solving performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 307–317.
Kır, G. (2016). Differences between school types in reading related factors based on 2009 cycle of PISA (Unpublished master’s thesis). Bilkent University, Ankara.
Klauda, S. L., & Guthrie, J. T. (2008). Relationships of three components of reading fluency to reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(2), 310–321.
Lerkkanen, M. K., Rasku-Puttonen, H., Aunola, K., & Nurmi, J. E. (2005). Mathematical performance predicts progress in reading comprehension among 7-year olds. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 20(2), 121-137.
Logan, S., Medford, E., & Hughes, N. (2011). The importance of intrinsic motivation for high and low ability readers' reading comprehension performance. Learning and Individual Differences, 21(1), 124–128.
Manolitsis, G., Georgiou, G. K., & Tziraki, N. (2013). Examining the effects of home literacy and numeracy environment on early reading and math acquisition. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 28(4), 692-703.
MEB (2019). PISA 2018 Türkiye ön ulusal raporu. Ankara.
Mikk, J. (2015). Explaining the difference between PISA 2009 reading scores in Finland and Estonia. Educational Research and Evaluation, 21(4), 324-342.
Miyamoto, A., Pfost, M., & Artelt, C. (2019). the relationship between intrinsic motivation and reading comprehension: Mediating effects of reading amount and metacognitive knowledge of strategy use. Scientific Studies of Reading, 23(6), 445-460.
Nelson, J.R., & Stage, S.A. (2007). Fostering the development of vo-cabulary knowledge and reading comprehension through contex-tually-based multiple meaning vocabulary instruction. Education & Treatment of Children, 30(1), 1–22.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD] (2009). PISA Data Analysis Manual: SPSS and SAS (2nd Edition). Paris: OECD.
OECD (2017). PISA 2015 technical report. Paris: OECD.
OECD (2019a). PISA 2018 assessment and analytical framework. Paris: OECD Publishing. doi:https://doi.org/10.1787/b25efab8-en
OECD (2019b). PISA 2018 results volume I: What students know and can do. Paris: OECD Publishing.
O’Reilly, T., &McNamara, D. S. (2007). The impact of science knowledge, reading skill, and reading strategy knowledge on more traditional ‘High-Stakes’ measures of high school students’ science achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 44, 161–196.
Osterholm, M. (2005). Characterizing reading comprehension of mathematical texts. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 63, 325–346.
Ozuru, Y., Dempsey, K., & McNamara, D. S. (2009). Prior knowledge, reading skill, and text cohesion in the comprehension of science texts. Learning and instruction, 19(3), 228-242.
Perry, L. B., & McConney, A. (2010). Does the SES of the school matter? An examination of socioeconomic status and student achievement using PISA 2003. Teachers College Record, 112(4), 1137-1162.
Pressley, M., & Gaskins, I. (2006). Metacognitively competent reading comprehension is constructively responsive reading: How can such reading be developed in students? Metacognition Learning, 1(1), 99-113.
Pyle, N., Vasquez, A. C., Lignugaris/Kraft, B., Gillam, S. L., Reutzel, D. R., Olszewski, A., ... & Pyle, D. (2017). Effects of expository text structure interventions on comprehension: A meta‐analysis. Reading Research Quarterly, 52(4), 469-501.
Rajchert, J. M., Żułtak, T., & Smulczyk, M. (2014). Predicting reading literacy and its improvement in the Polish national extension of the PISA study: The role of intelligence, trait-and state-anxiety, socio-economic status and school-type. Learning and Individual Differences, 33, 1-11.
Reed, D. K., Petscher, Y., & Truckenmiller, A. J. (2017). The contribution of general reading ability to science achievement. Reading Research Quarterly, 52(2), 253-266.
Roberts, G., Torgesen, J. K., Boartmen, A., & Scammacca, N. (2008). Evidence-based strategies for reading instruction of older students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 23(2), 63–69.
Sénéchal, M. (2006). Testing the home literacy model: Parent involvement in kindergarten is differentially related to Grade 4 reading comprehension, fluency, spelling, and reading for pleasure. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10, 59–87.
Sénéchal, M., & LeFevre, J.-A. (2002). Parental involvement in the development of children’s reading skill: A five-year longitudinal study. Child Development, 73, 445–460.
Shala, A., & Grajcevci, A. (2018). Kosovo’s low performance in PISA 2015: An explanation from a socioeconomic perspective. Educational Process: International Journal, 7(1), 48-59.
Soodla, P., Jõgi, A. L., & Kikas, E. (2017). Relationships between teachers’ metacognitive knowledge and students’ metacognitive knowledge and reading achievement. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 32(2), 201-218.
Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisi- tion of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 360-407.
Taboada, A., Tonks, S.M., Wigfield, A., & Guthrie, J.T. (2009). Effects of motivational and cognitive variables on reading com-prehension. Reading and Writing, 22(1), 85 –106.
Akbaslı, S., Sahin M., & Yaykiran, Z. (2016). The effect of reading comprehension on the performance in science and mathematics. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(16), 108-121.
Artelt, C., Schiefele, U., & Schneider, W. (2001). Predictors of reading literacy. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 16(3), 363-383.
Berberoğlu, G., & Kalender, İ. (2005). Öğrenci başarısını yıllara, okul türlerine, bölgelere göre incelenmesi: ÖSS ve PISA analizi. Eğitim Bilimleri ve Uygulama, 22(4), 21-35.
Bilgi, A. D., & Özmen, E. R. (2018). The effectiveness of modified multi-component cognitive strategy ınstruction in expository text comprehension of students with mild ıntellectual disabilities. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 18(1), 61-84.
Bozkurt, B. Ü. (2016). Türkiye’de okuma eğitiminin karnesi: PISA ölçeğinden çıkarımlar. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 16(4), 1673-1686.
Cano, F., García, A., Berbén, A. B. G., & Justicia, F. (2014) Science Learning: A path analysis of its links with reading comprehension, question-asking in class and science achievement, International Journal of Science Education, 36(10), 1710-1732.
Cromley, J. G. (2009). Reading achievement and science proficiency: International comparisons from the Programme on International Student Assessment. Reading Psychology, 30, 89–116.
Elleman, A. M., Lindo, E. J., Morphy, P., & Compton, D. L. (2009). The impact of vocabulary instruction on passage-level comprehension of school-age children: A meta-analysis. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 2(1), 1-44.
Englert, C. S., & Hiebert, E. H. (1984). Children's developing awareness of text structures in expository materials. Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 65-74.
Erdem, E. (2016). Relationship between mathematical reasoning and reading comprehension: the case of the 8th grade. Necatibey Faculty of Education Electronic Journal of Science & Mathematics Education, 10(1), 393-414.
Erdoğan, E., & Güvendir, M. A. (2019). Uluslararası öğrenci değerlendirme programında öğrencilerin sosyoekonomik özellikleri ile okuma becerileri arasındaki ilişki. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 20, 493-523.
Fuentes, P. (1998). Reading comprehension in mathematics. The Clearing House, 72(2), 81-88.
Geske, A., & Ozola A. (2008). Factors influencing reading literacy at the primary school level. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 6, 71-77.
Grimm, K. J. (2008). Longitudinal associations between reading and mathematics achievement. Developmental Neuropsychology, 33(3), 410-426.
Hindman, A. H., Skibbe, L. E., Miller, A., & Zimmerman, M. (2010). Ecological contexts and early learning: Contributions of child, family, and classroom factors during Head Start, to literacy and mathematics growth through first grade. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 25(2), 235-250.
Jacobs, J. E., ve Paris, S. G. (1987). Children's metacognition about reading: Issues in definition, measurement, and instruction. Educational Psychologist, 22(3-4), 255-278.
Kendeou, P., & Van Den Broek, P. (2007). The effects of prior knowledge and text structure on comprehension processes during reading of scientific texts. Memory & Cognition, 35(7), 1567-1577.
Kim, Y. S., Petscher, Y., Schatschneider, C., & Foorman, B. (2010). Does growth rate in oral reading fluency matter in predicting reading comprehension achievement? Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(3), 652–667.
King, A. (1991). Effects of training in strategic questioning on children’s problem-solving performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 307–317.
Kır, G. (2016). Differences between school types in reading related factors based on 2009 cycle of PISA (Unpublished master’s thesis). Bilkent University, Ankara.
Klauda, S. L., & Guthrie, J. T. (2008). Relationships of three components of reading fluency to reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(2), 310–321.
Lerkkanen, M. K., Rasku-Puttonen, H., Aunola, K., & Nurmi, J. E. (2005). Mathematical performance predicts progress in reading comprehension among 7-year olds. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 20(2), 121-137.
Logan, S., Medford, E., & Hughes, N. (2011). The importance of intrinsic motivation for high and low ability readers' reading comprehension performance. Learning and Individual Differences, 21(1), 124–128.
Manolitsis, G., Georgiou, G. K., & Tziraki, N. (2013). Examining the effects of home literacy and numeracy environment on early reading and math acquisition. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 28(4), 692-703.
MEB (2019). PISA 2018 Türkiye ön ulusal raporu. Ankara.
Mikk, J. (2015). Explaining the difference between PISA 2009 reading scores in Finland and Estonia. Educational Research and Evaluation, 21(4), 324-342.
Miyamoto, A., Pfost, M., & Artelt, C. (2019). the relationship between intrinsic motivation and reading comprehension: Mediating effects of reading amount and metacognitive knowledge of strategy use. Scientific Studies of Reading, 23(6), 445-460.
Nelson, J.R., & Stage, S.A. (2007). Fostering the development of vo-cabulary knowledge and reading comprehension through contex-tually-based multiple meaning vocabulary instruction. Education & Treatment of Children, 30(1), 1–22.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD] (2009). PISA Data Analysis Manual: SPSS and SAS (2nd Edition). Paris: OECD.
OECD (2017). PISA 2015 technical report. Paris: OECD.
OECD (2019a). PISA 2018 assessment and analytical framework. Paris: OECD Publishing. doi:https://doi.org/10.1787/b25efab8-en
OECD (2019b). PISA 2018 results volume I: What students know and can do. Paris: OECD Publishing.
O’Reilly, T., &McNamara, D. S. (2007). The impact of science knowledge, reading skill, and reading strategy knowledge on more traditional ‘High-Stakes’ measures of high school students’ science achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 44, 161–196.
Osterholm, M. (2005). Characterizing reading comprehension of mathematical texts. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 63, 325–346.
Ozuru, Y., Dempsey, K., & McNamara, D. S. (2009). Prior knowledge, reading skill, and text cohesion in the comprehension of science texts. Learning and instruction, 19(3), 228-242.
Perry, L. B., & McConney, A. (2010). Does the SES of the school matter? An examination of socioeconomic status and student achievement using PISA 2003. Teachers College Record, 112(4), 1137-1162.
Pressley, M., & Gaskins, I. (2006). Metacognitively competent reading comprehension is constructively responsive reading: How can such reading be developed in students? Metacognition Learning, 1(1), 99-113.
Pyle, N., Vasquez, A. C., Lignugaris/Kraft, B., Gillam, S. L., Reutzel, D. R., Olszewski, A., ... & Pyle, D. (2017). Effects of expository text structure interventions on comprehension: A meta‐analysis. Reading Research Quarterly, 52(4), 469-501.
Rajchert, J. M., Żułtak, T., & Smulczyk, M. (2014). Predicting reading literacy and its improvement in the Polish national extension of the PISA study: The role of intelligence, trait-and state-anxiety, socio-economic status and school-type. Learning and Individual Differences, 33, 1-11.
Reed, D. K., Petscher, Y., & Truckenmiller, A. J. (2017). The contribution of general reading ability to science achievement. Reading Research Quarterly, 52(2), 253-266.
Roberts, G., Torgesen, J. K., Boartmen, A., & Scammacca, N. (2008). Evidence-based strategies for reading instruction of older students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 23(2), 63–69.
Sénéchal, M. (2006). Testing the home literacy model: Parent involvement in kindergarten is differentially related to Grade 4 reading comprehension, fluency, spelling, and reading for pleasure. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10, 59–87.
Sénéchal, M., & LeFevre, J.-A. (2002). Parental involvement in the development of children’s reading skill: A five-year longitudinal study. Child Development, 73, 445–460.
Shala, A., & Grajcevci, A. (2018). Kosovo’s low performance in PISA 2015: An explanation from a socioeconomic perspective. Educational Process: International Journal, 7(1), 48-59.
Soodla, P., Jõgi, A. L., & Kikas, E. (2017). Relationships between teachers’ metacognitive knowledge and students’ metacognitive knowledge and reading achievement. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 32(2), 201-218.
Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisi- tion of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 360-407.
Taboada, A., Tonks, S.M., Wigfield, A., & Guthrie, J.T. (2009). Effects of motivational and cognitive variables on reading com-prehension. Reading and Writing, 22(1), 85 –106.
Downloads
Published
2021-01-14
How to Cite
Koyuncu, İlhan, & Fırat, T. (2021). Investigating Reading Literacy in PISA 2018 Assessment. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 13(2), 263–275. Retrieved from https://www.iejee.com/index.php/IEJEE/article/view/1137
Issue
Section
Articles
