Investigation of PISA 2015 Reading Ability Achievement of Turkish Students in Terms of Student and School Level Variables

Abstract

The aim of this study is to determine the students-level and school-level factors that are related to reading ability achievement of students who participated PISA 2015 (Programme for International Student Assessment) from Turkey. The effects of the student and school level factors on reading achievement of students were tested by 2 level hierarchical linear model.  According to the findings, there are differences between schools in terms of students' reading ability scores in Turkey. When the findings of the effects of the student level variables on the reading ability scores are examined; mother’s socio-economic status, parental emotional support, and unfair teacher behavior variables seem to affect students' reading ability achievement. When the findings of the effects of the school level variables on the reading ability scores are examined; school size, teacher education level, and student behavior that hinders learning variables have a significant effect on the average reading ability scores of schools. When the student and school level variables mentioned above were modeled together, the significant effect of the school size variable was lost while the teacher education level and the student behavior that hinders learning variables continued to have a significant effect on the schools average reading ability scores.

Keywords

• Reading ability
• Hierarchical linear model
• Student level factors
• PISA
• School level factors

Investigation of PISA 2015 Reading Ability Achievement of Turkish Students in Terms of Student and School Level Variables

Öz

The aim of this study is to determine the students-level and school-level factors that are related to reading ability achievement of students who participated PISA 2015 (Programme for International Student Assessment) from Turkey. The effects of the student and school level factors on reading achievement of students were tested by 2 level hierarchical linear model. According to the findings, there are differences between schools in terms of students' reading ability scores in Turkey. When the findings of the effects of the student level variables on the reading ability scores are examined; mother’s socio-economic status, parental emotional support, and unfair teacher behavior variables seem to affect students' reading ability achievement. When the findings of the effects of the school level variables on the reading ability scores are examined; school size, teacher education level, and student behavior that hinders learning variables have a significant effect on the average reading ability scores of schools. When the student and school level variables mentioned above were modeled together, the significant effect of the school size variable was lost while the teacher education level and the student behavior that hinders learning variables continued to have a significant effect on the schools average reading ability scores.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• PISA
• Reading ability
• Hierarchical linear model
• Student level factors
• School level factors

References

1. Allen, J., Gregory, A., Mikami, A., Lun, J., Hamre, B., & Pianta, R. (2013). Observations of effective teacher–student interactions in secondary school classrooms: Predicting student achievement with the classroom assessment scoring system—secondary. School Psychology Review, 42(1), 76.
2. Anılan, H. (1998). Beşinci sınıf öğrencilerinin Türkçe dersinde okuduğunu anlama becerisiyle ilgili hedef davranışların gerçekleşme düzeyleri [Level of achievement of the general objectives related to the ability of understanding reading in Turkish leassons by fifth grade students]. Unpublished Master Dissertation, Pamukkale Üniversitesi, Denizli.
3. Akyol, H., Ateş, S., & Yıldırım, K. (2008). Sınıf öğretmenlerinin kullandıkları okuma stratejileri ve bu stratejileri tercih nedenleri [Reading strategies used by primary school teachers and the reasons for choosing these strategies]. VII. National Symposium on Teacher Education (2-4 May 2008). Çanakkale. Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart Üniversitesi. Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım, 723-728.
4. Bölükbaşı, C., & Sarıbaş, M. (2011). İlköğretim Birinci Kademe (1, 2, 3. Sınıf) Türkçe Öğretimi Sorunları. [Primary Education (1st, 2nd, 3rd Grade) Turkish Teaching Problems]. Academic student journal of Turkish researches, (1), 20-26.
5. Breakspear, S. (2012). The policy impact of PISA: An exploration of the normative effects of international benchmarking in school system performance. OECD Education Working Papers, (71), 1.
6. Brozo, W. G., Shiel, G., & Topping, K. (2007). Engagement in reading: Lessons learned from three PISA countries. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 51(4), 304-315.
7. Cartwright, F., & Allen, M. K. (2002). Understanding the rural-urban reading gap. Human Resources Development Canada. Service Canada, Ottawa, ON K1A 0J9, Canada.
8. Christenson, S. L., Rounds, T., & Gorney, D. (1992). Family factors and student achievement: An avenue to increase students' success. School Psychology Quarterly, 7(3), 178.

9. Çelenk, S. (2003). Okul başarısının ön koşulu: Okul aile dayanışması [The Prerequisite for School Success: Home-School Cooperation]. İlköğretim online, 2(2).
10. Desimone, L. (1999). Linking parent involvement with student achievement: Do race and income matter? The journal of educational research, 93(1), 11-30.
11. Erberber, E. (2010). Analyzing Turkey's data from TIMSS 2007 to investigate regional disparities in eighth grade science achievement. In the Impact of International Achievement Studies on National Education Policymaking (pp. 119-142). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
12. Fairclough, N. (2000). New Labour, New Language? (London, Routledge).
13. Fredriksson, P., Öckert, B., & Oosterbeek, H. (2013). Long-term effects of class size. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 128(1), 249–285.
14. Fryer, R. G. (2013). Teacher incentives and student achievement: Evidence from New York City public schools. Journal of Labor Economics, 31(2), 373-407.
15. Grek, S. (2009). Governing by numbers: The PISA ‘effect’in Europe. Journal of education policy, 24(1), 23-37.
16. Grodner, A., & Rupp, N. G. (2013). The role of homework in student learning outcomes: Evidence from a field experiment. The Journal of Economic Education, 44(2), 93-109.
17. Gümüşeli, A. İ. (2004). Ailenin katılım ve desteğinin öğrenci başarısına etkisi. [The Family Factor on the Student’s Success of School]. Özel okullar birliği bülteni, 2(6), 14-17.
18. Gür, B. S., Celik, Z., & Özoğlu, M. (2012). Policy options for Turkey: A critique of the interpretation and utilization of PISA results in Turkey. Journal of Education Policy, 27(1), 1-21.
19. Güvendir, M. A. (2014). Öğrenci başarılarının belirlenmesi sınavında öğrenci ve okul özelliklerinin Türkçe başarısı ile ilişkisi [Student and School Characteristics' Relation to Turkish Achievement in Student Achievement Determination Exam]. Eğitim ve Bilim, Education and Science, 39(172), 20-26.
20. Hofmann, D. A., Griffin, M., A., & Gavin, M. B. (2000). The application of hierarchical linear modeling to organizational research. In K. J. Klein & S. W. J. Kozlowski (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations (pp. 467-511).
21. Hox, J. (2002). Quantitative methodology series. Multilevel analysis techniques and applications. Mahwah, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
22. Kahraman, Ü., & Çelik, K. (2017). Analysis of PISA 2012 results in terms of some variables. Journal of Human Sciences, 14(4), 4797-4808.
23. Kaldan, E. S. (2007). İlköğretim 3. Sınıf Öğrencilerinin Türkçe Dersinde Okuduğunu Anlama Becerilerini Etkileyen Ekonomik ve Demografik Faktörler [Economic and demografic factors that affect the 3rd grade primary school students'reading comprehension skill in Turkish class]. Unpublished Master thesis, Gaziantep Üniversitesi.
24. Kapıkıran, Ş., & Kıran, H. (1999). Ev ödevinin öğrencinin akademik başarısına etkisi. [The effect of homework on student's academic achievement]. Pamukkale University Faculty of Education Journal, 5(5), 54-60.
25. Kotte, D., Lietz, P., & Lopez, M. M. (2005). Factors Influencing Reading Achievement in Germany and Spain: Evidence from PISA 2000. International Education Journal, 6(1), 113-124.
26. Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2009). A review of empirical evidence about school size effects: A policy perspective. Review of educational research, 79(1), 464-490.
27. Lietz, P., & Kotte, D. (2004). Factors influencing reading achievement in Germany and Finland: Evidence from PISA 2000. The Seeker, 215-228.
28. Lingard, B. & Rawolle, S. (2004) Mediatizing educational policy: the journalistic field, science policy, and cross-field effects, Journal of Education Policy, 19(3), 361-380.
29. Linnakyla, P., Malin, A., & Taube, K. (2004). Factors behind low reading literacy achievement. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 48(3), 231-249.
30. Nonoyama, Y. (2006). A cross-national, multi-level study of family background and school resource effects on student achievement. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Columbia University. Retrieved 6 July, 2007 from UMI.
31. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). (1999). Measuring Student Knowledge and Skills: A New Framework for Assessment. Paris: Author.
32. OECD. (2000). Measuring student knowledge and skills: The PISA 2000 assessment of reading, mathematics and science literacy. Paris: OECD
33. OECD, P. (2014). Results: What Students Know and Can Do Student Performance in Mathematics, Reading and Science (Volume I, Revised edition, February 2014).
34. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). (2006). Assessing Scientific, Reading and Mathematical Literacy: A Framework for PISA 2006. Paris:
35. Özdemir, C. (2017). OECD PISA Türkiye Verisi Kullanılarak Yapılan Araştırmaların Metodolojik Taraması. [A Methodological Review of Research Using OECD PISA Turkey Data] Eğitim Bilim Toplum, 14(56), 10-27.
36. Öztürk, P. (2010). İlköğretim II. kademe Türkçe dersi performans görevi başarı puanları ile akademik başarı ve derse yönelik tutum arasındaki ilişkinin değerlendirilmesi [The evaluation of relation between success grades of Turkish lesson performance task and academic success and attitude to lesson in primary education school level]. Unpublished Master thesis, Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi, Trabzon.
37. Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (Vol. 1). Sage Publishing.
38. Reinikainen, P. (2012). Amazing PISA results in Finnish comprehensive schools. In Miracle of education (pp. 3-18). Sense Publishers.
39. Rindermann, H. (2007). The g‐factor of international cognitive ability comparisons: The homogeneity of results in PISA, TIMSS, PIRLS and IQ‐tests across nations. European Journal of Personality, 21(5), 667-706.
40. Ringarp, J., & Rothland, M. (2010). Is the grass always greener? The effect of the PISA results on education debates in Sweden and Germany. European Educational Research Journal, 9(3), 422-430.
41. Schleicher, A. (2007). Can competencies assessed by PISA be considered the fundamental school knowledge 15-year-olds should possess? Journal of Educational Change, 8(4), 349-357.
42. Swap, S. M. (1993). Developing Home-School Partnerships: From Concepts to Practice. Teachers' College Press, Columbia University, 1234 Amsterdam Avenue, New York, NY 10027 (cloth--ISBN-0-8077-3231-1).
43. Taş, U. E., Arıcı, Ö., Ozarkan, H. B., & Özgürlük, B. (2016). PISA 2015 Ulusal Raporu. [PISA 2015 National Report]. Ankara: Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı.
44. Thomson, S., De Bortoli, L., Nicholas, M., Hillman, K., & Buckley, S. (2010). PISA in brief: highlights from the full Australian report: challenges for Australian education: results from PISA 2009: the PISA 2009 assessment of students' reading, mathematical and scientific literacy.
45. Wellington, J., & Osborne, J. (2001). Language and literacy in science education. McGraw-Hill Education (UK).
46. Yıldırım, K. (2012). The main factors determining the quality of education in Turkey according to the PISA 2006 data. The Journal of Turkish Educational Sciences, 10(2), 229-255.
47. Yore, L. D., Anderson, J. O., & Chiu, M. H. (2010). Moving PISA results into the policy arena: Perspectives on knowledge transfer for future considerations and preparations. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8(3), 593-609.