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

Loading...

PPT – PISA-PIRLS-Taskforce of IRA International Reading Association Annual Convention, May 9, 2011 (Orlando, FL, USA) PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 541fd6-ZWM3Y



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

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

Description:

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

Number of Views:183
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 52
Provided by: readingOr7
Learn more at: http://www.reading.org
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

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


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)
  • 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

3
  • Introduction of Presenters IRA PIRLS/PISA Task
    Force
  • William G. Brozo
  • wbrozo_at_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

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

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

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

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

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

10
PISA Products www.pisa.oecd.org
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

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

13
Reading-related Components of PISA 2009
Component Short Description / Comment
Print-based test of reading literacy Includes 28 link items and 64 new items
School Questionnaire Gathers background information on schools (size, management structure, resources etc.)
Student Questionnaire Includes 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 reading Involved simulated internet environment administered in 19 countries.
14
PISA Reading Literacy Framework
15
Mean Scores of Selected Countries Relative to
OECD Country Average (2009)
Above OECD Avg Not Significantly Different Below 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)
Significant Increase No Change Significant 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
  • 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)
20
Changes in Frequency of Reading for Pleasure
(2000-2009) Percentages Who Read for Enjoyment
21
Use of Reading Strategies (OECD Average
Performance by Quarter)
Index of Summarising
Index of Understanding Remembering
22
Reading for Enjoyment and SES (Ireland)
23
Effects of Strategy Usage on Print Reading
Performance - IRELAND
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

25
  • Key Findings Germany
  • Christine Garbe
  • christine.garbe_at_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.eu
  • Frequent author and presenter on topics related
    to PISA and adolescent literacy

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).

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 .

29
Major Trends and New Developments for German
Adolescents some good news
  • The improvement of Germanys 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)

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

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.

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.

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.

34
  • Key Findings - US
  • William G. Brozo
  • wbrozo_at_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)

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

37
READING LITERACY RACE
Race/Ethnicity Score P lt .05
U.S. Average 500
OECD Average 493
White 525 X
Asian 541 X
Black 441 X
Hispanic 466 X
Shanghai-China 556 X
Republic of Korea 539 X
Finland 536 X
Hong Kong China 533 X
Singapore 526 X
38
READING LITERACY SOCIOECONOMIC CONTEXTS
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

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

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

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

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

44
  • Conclusions Implications for Adolescent Literacy
    Practice and Policy
  • William G. Brozo
  • wbrozo_at_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

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

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

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

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

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

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