Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

PISA-PIRLS-Taskforce of IRA International Reading Association Annual Convention, May 9, 2011 (Orlando, FL, USA) PISA 2009: A Critical Analysis of Trends.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "PISA-PIRLS-Taskforce of IRA International Reading Association Annual Convention, May 9, 2011 (Orlando, FL, USA) PISA 2009: A Critical Analysis of Trends."— Presentation transcript:

1 PISA-PIRLS-Taskforce of IRA International Reading Association Annual Convention, May 9, 2011 (Orlando, FL, USA) PISA 2009: A Critical Analysis of Trends and Developments with Implications for Adolescent Literacy Practice and Policy William G. Brozo George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia, USA Christine Garbe University of Cologne, Germany Gerry Shiel St. Patrick's College, Dublin, Ireland

2 Map of Presentation Introduction of Presenters; IRA PIRLS/PISA Task Force (Bill Brozo) Major Trends and Developments in PISA (Gerry Shiel) Major Trends and Developments in PISA (Gerry Shiel) Key Findings – Ireland (Gerry Shiel) Key Findings – Germany (Christine Garbe) Key Findings – US (Bill Brozo) Conclusions: Implications for Adolescent Literacy Practice and Policy (Bill Brozo) Discussion 2

3 Introduction of Presenters; IRA PIRLS/PISA Task Force William G. Brozo wbrozo@gmu.edu George Mason University, Virginia, USA

4 Bill Brozo Professor of Literacy at George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia, USA Degrees from the University of North Carolina and the University of South Carolina Member of PISA/PIRLS Task Force since its inception in 2003 Involved in international projects in the Balkans and Europe and most recently in Oman Scholarship focuses on issues of adolescent literacy 4

5 PISA/PIRLS Task Force In 2003, The International Reading Association Board of Directors requested that an International Task Force be convened to consider the PISA 2000 findings Of particular interest to the board were the policy and practice implications of PISA Original Task Force members in addition to me included Keith Topping of Scotland, Renate Valtin of Germany, Maria Dionisio of Portugal, and Cathy Roller of IRA 5

6 PISA/PIRLS Task Force Generated reports and PowerPoint slide shows available at the IRA website Given numerous presentations at national and international conferences After a 2-3 year period of relative dormancy, the Task Force was given new life in 2010 when the IRA Board of Directors authorized its reconstitution to coincide with findings from PISA 2009 6

7 PISA/PIRLS Task Force Current Task Force members include: Gerry Shiel of Ireland; Christine Garbe of Germany; Sari Sulkunen of Finland; Amby Pandian of Malaysia Bill Brozo serves as the chairperson of the Task Force 7

8 Gerry Shiel Research Fellow since 1997 at the Educational Research Centre at St. Patricks College in Dublin Consultant to OECD on Cycles II, III, and IV of PISA, including PISA 2009 Current chair of Federation of European Literacy Association Author of numerous research, policy, and practical publications related to reading literacy 8

9 Major Trends and Developments in PISA / Key Findings Ireland Gerry Shiel gerry.shiel@erc.ie St. Patricks College, Dublin, Ireland

10 PISA Products – www.pisa.oecd.org 10

11 What is PISA? Programme for International Student Assessment - Project of OECD International survey of achievement of 15-year-old students Reading literacy, mathematical literacy, scientific literacy Three-yearly cycles - 2000, 2003, 2006, 2009, 2012... In 2009, 65 countries/economies participated in PISA - 34 OECD member/candidate countries and 31 partner countries = nearly 90 % of world economy 11

12 Purposes of PISA Describe the performance of 15-year olds in reading literacy and in other areas Examine equity in performance within and across countries, and identify factors associated with equity Examine variables associated with reading literacy (enjoyment of reading, engagement in reading) Monitor trends in performance and related indicators 12

13 Reading-related Components of PISA 2009 13 ComponentShort Description / Comment Print-based test of reading literacyIncludes 28 link items and 64 new items School QuestionnaireGathers background information on schools (size, management structure, resources etc.) Student QuestionnaireIncludes questions on included items on engagement in reading, enjoyment of reading, use of reading strategies, frequency of reading a range of print and digital texts, reading self- efficacy Test of electronic readingInvolved simulated internet environment; administered in 19 countries.

14 PISA Reading Literacy Framework 14

15 Mean Scores of Selected Countries Relative to OECD Country Average (2009) 15 Above OECD AvgNot Significantly DifferentBelow OECD Avg Shanghai-China (556)United States (500)Italy (486) Korea (539)Sweden (497)Spain (481) Finland (536)Germany (497)Czech Rep (478) Canada (524)France (496)Luxembourg (472) New Zealand (521)Ireland (496)Austria (470) Australia (515)OECD Average (493)

16 Changes in Overall Reading Performance (2000-09) (Selected Countries) 16 Significant IncreaseNo ChangeSignificant Decline Chile (+40)United States (-5)Ireland (-31) Israel (+22)Canada (-10)Sweden (-19) Poland (+21)Finland (-11)Czech Republic (-13) Portugal (+19)Australia (-13) S. Korea (+15) Germany (+13)

17 Trends in gender differences in reading (2000- 2009) 17

18 Aspects of Reading Engagement and Learning Assessed in PISA 18 Engagement Time spent reading for enjoyment Enjoyment of reading scale (attitude to reading) Diversity of print-reading materials Diversity of online reading activities Reading for school Learning Understanding and remembering Summarising Memorisation strategies Elaboration strategies Control strategies 18

19 Association between Reading for Enjoyment and Reading Performance (OECD Average) 19

20 Changes in Frequency of Reading for Pleasure (2000-2009) – Percentages Who Read for Enjoyment 20

21 Use of Reading Strategies (OECD Average – Performance by Quarter) 21 Index of Summarising Index of Understanding & Remembering

22 Reading for Enjoyment and SES (Ireland) 22

23 Effects of Strategy Usage on Print Reading Performance - IRELAND 23

24 Reflections on Ireland Decline in overall reading performance Demographic and other changes since 2000 Decline in reading for enjoyment Effects of different reading strategies Draft plan to improve literacy and numeracy 24

25 Key Findings – Germany Christine Garbe christine.garbe@uni-koeln.de University of Cologne, Germany

26 Christine Garbe Professor of German Language and Literature at the University of Cologne after many years at Leuphana University, Lueneburg Coordinator of major Adolescent Literacy grant Projects in Europe – ADORE, BaCuLit Initiator of an International ADOLESCENT LITERACY NETWORK: www.alinet.euwww.alinet.eu Frequent author and presenter on topics related to PISA and adolescent literacy 26

27 Major Trends and New Developments for German Adolescents: Some good news Germany is one of the seven OECD-member states that significantly improved in reading competences In PISA 2000 Germany performed well below the OECD-average (500) with 483 points; in PISA 2009 Germany reached 497 points and is thus just above the OECD-average (493). 27

28 Major Trends and New Developments for German Adolescents: some good news Germany improved its results on the overall reading literacy scale mainly because of improvements by the poor readers. In PISA 2000 the students at risk (performing below level 2) were 22,6 %; in PISA 2009, this reduced to 18,5 %. With regard to the highest performers - level 5 (in PISA 2009 including level 6) - no progress was made: the share of students declined from 8,8 to 7,6 %. 28

29 Major Trends and New Developments for German Adolescents: some good news The improvement of Germany´s overall results in reading literacy was brought about by reducing the gap between the strong and poor readers In particular, students with migrant backgrounds improved considerably: they achieved 26 points more than in PISA 2000, twice as much as the whole German cohort (+ 13 points) 29

30 Major Trends and New Developments for German Adolescents: not so good news Nevertheless the gap between German native speakers and Second language learners / students with migrant background is still too large: German natives reach 514 points, students with migrant background reach 470 points The difference of 44 points is equivalent to more than one year of schooling 30

31 Major Trends and New Developments for German Adolescents: not so good news German students are relatively weak performers in the Reading literacy subscale Reflect and evaluate, i.e. in the most complex and demanding tasks With 491 points, Germany ranks at position 27 (out of 65), whereas in the overall reading scale at position 20. Students of Ireland (position 16) and the US (position 10) perform much better in this aspect. 31

32 Major Trends and New Developments for German Adolescents: not so good news Gender differences in reading did not change significantly between 2000 and 2009 Girls are performing 40 points better than boys in overall reading competence. There are slight differences in the three subscales: Access and retrieve information: 38 points. Integrate and interpret: 36 p. Reflect and evaluate: 44 p. 32

33 Major Trends and New Developments for German Adolescents: not so good news Boys are over-represented in the lowest proficiency levels: Below level 2 (poor performers) there are 18,5 % German Students. Boys: 24 %, Girls: 12,6 % Reading for Enjoyment (outside of school) did not increase in Germany: 41 % of German youth do not read for pleasure (in 2000 42 %) Especially where boys are concerned: 50 % compared with 25 % girls do not read for pleasure. 33

34 Key Findings - US William G. Brozo wbrozo@gmu.edu George Mason University, Virginia, USA

35 Major Trends and New Developments for U.S. Adolescents No state- or school district-level results are available Overall, 15-year-olds in the United States achieved a slightly but not significantly lower score in 2009 (500) compared with 2000 (504) Up slightly but not significantly from 2003 (495) 35

36 READING LITERACY: GENDER Girls outperformed boys in reading literacy in the United States as in every participating country In 2000 the disparity between girls and boys in the U.S. was 28 points; in 2009, there was a 25 point difference in overall achievement favoring girls Girls overall achievement was 518 in 2000 and 513 in 2009 compared with boys 490 in 2000 and 488 in 2009 36

37 READING LITERACY: RACE 37 Race/EthnicityScoreP <.05 U.S. Average500 OECD Average493 White525 X Asian541 X Black441 X Hispanic466 X Shanghai-China556 X Republic of Korea539 X Finland536 X Hong Kong China533 X Singapore526 X

38 READING LITERACY: SOCIOECONOMIC CONTEXTS 38 Percentage of Students Eligible for Free and Reduced-Price Lunch Score U.S. Average 500 OECD Average 493 Less than 10 percent 551* 10 – 29.9 percent 527* 25 – 49.9 percent 502 50 – 74.9 percent 471* 75 percent or more 446*

39 READING LITERACY: ENGAGEMENT The pattern for U.S. 15-year-olds is similar to the pattern for all students on PISA Higher reading engagement, as demonstrated by time spent reading and attitudes toward reading, is related to higher achievement 39

40 READING LITERACY: ENGAGEMENT Students who do not read for enjoyment had a score of 467 while those who read one, two, or more hours per day had scores from 541-544 Students who strongly agree with the statement I read only if I have to had a score of 459, while those who strongly disagree had a score of 552 For students who view reading as a favorite hobby, their score was 562, while those who do not had a score of 466 40

41 READING LITERACY: READING STRATEGIES 15-year-olds in the U.S. who use reading strategies and processes regarded as effective ways of aiding comprehension had higher scores than those who did not Monitoring comprehension, determining importance, connecting new information with prior knowledge, summarizing, and questioning were all related to higher achievement 41

42 READING LITERACY: READING STRATEGIES Students who almost always check their understanding after reading had a score of 521, while those who almost never do this had a score of 465 Those who almost always try to identify the important points while reading had a score of 532, while those who almost never do this had a score of 436 Students who relate new information to what theyve already learned had a score of 526, while those who almost never do this had a score of 480 42

43 READING LITERACY: READING STRATEGIES Those who summarize what they read had scores ranging from 513 – 519, while those who rarely did this had scores between 460 – 480 Those students who always ask their own questions while reading had a score of 519, while those who almost never do this had a score of 445 43

44 Conclusions: Implications for Adolescent Literacy Practice and Policy William G. Brozo wbrozo@gmu.edu George Mason University, Virginia, USA

45 Implications for Adolescent Literacy Practice and Policy: Gender More attention needs to be given to declining reading achievement and motivation among boys, particularly for boys of color and migrant backgrounds Texts and instructional practices will need to be culturally responsive and orchestrated in ways that capture boys imaginations, sustain their attention, and build competency Boys competencies with non-continuous and alternatively formatted text may serve as bridge to academic literacy 45

46 Implications for Adolescent Literacy Practice and Policy: Race/SES PISA 2009 continues to show most of the lowest performing 15-year-olds are poor and minority children For example, Asian-American and White students in the U.S. have some of the best scores in the world, but Black and Hispanic students rank near the bottom among OECD countries Some argue that the United States runs separate and unequal schools and neighborhoods leading to ill- educated youth The conditions of the schools and neighborhoods for our poor, African American, and Hispanic youth, they assert, are not designed to develop high levels of reading literacy 46

47 Implications for Adolescent Literacy Practice and Policy: Race/SES Furthermore, we accept poverty, violence, drugs, unequal school funding, uncertified teachers, and de facto segregation in the schools that serve these children and in the neighborhoods in which they live These unequal conditions may be the major reason we fall short in international comparisons when we combine the scores of these ill-educated youth with those of youth who enjoy better resources As long as these differences are allowed to exist, some have argued, we will rank about average in international comparisons 47

48 Implications for Adolescent Literacy Practice and Policy: Reading Strategies The evidence is compelling for literacy curricula that emphasizes critical reading processes This emphasis should be the focus right from the start in our language and literacy schemes for children The new Common Core State Standards movement places emphasis on helping students read and succeed with increasingly complex text starting in the early grades 48

49 Implications for Adolescent Literacy Practice and Policy: Reading Strategies To be successful with complex text, students will need to be skillful and flexible with a range of effective reading comprehension strategies, such as questioning, summarizing, identifying importance, connecting new content to prior knowledge, and monitoring comprehension 49

50 Cross-National Implications for Adolescent Literacy Policy and Practice Strive to bring males to achievement levels that parody those of females Close the gap between the lowest and highest performers Increase reading engagement for all youth Stress high-yield reading strategies 50

51 PISA-PIRLS-Taskforce of IRA International Reading Association Annual Convention, May 9, 2011 (Orlando, FL, USA) Discussion


Download ppt "PISA-PIRLS-Taskforce of IRA International Reading Association Annual Convention, May 9, 2011 (Orlando, FL, USA) PISA 2009: A Critical Analysis of Trends."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google