Examination of Turkey’s PISA 2018 reading literacy scores within student-level and school-level variables

Year 2021, , 248 - 264, 01.01.2021

Hasan Yücel Ertem

https://doi.org/10.17275/per.21.14.8.1

Cited By: 9

Abstract

The purpose of the current study was to investigate both student-level and school-level factors influencing reading literacy of students in Turkey by using PISA 2018 data. The study focused on reading literacy since the main subject of PISA 2018 was selected as reading literacy. The design of the study is a correlational research examining the relationship between student and school variables and reading literacy. The stratified random sample consisted of 6890 15-year students from 186 different schools. Data coming from PISA 2018 dataset were analysed by Hierarchical Linear Modelling (HLM) at student and school levels. Student-level variables of disciplinary climate in test language lessons, enjoyment of reading, information and community technologies (ICT) competence, parental emotional support, perceived discriminating climate, and perceived cooperation significantly predicted reading literacy, while reading literacy was also predicted by school-level variables of proportion of parents involved in the school, shortage of educational material, student behaviour hindering learning, and teacher behaviour hindering learning. Fifty-seven percent of variance between reading literacy scores of the students were caused by differences between schools. Student-level variables which are disciplinary climate in test language lessons, enjoyment of reading, ICT competence, parental emotional support, perceived discriminating climate, and perceived cooperation significantly predicted reading literacy. On the other hand, school-level variables predicting reading literacy significantly were proportion of parents involved in the school, shortage of educational material, student behaviour hindering learning, and teacher behaviour hindering learning. By considering results of the current study, collaboration between school stakeholders is recommended to increase performance of the students.

Keywords

PISA 2018, Reading literacy, ICT competence, Student Behavior, Hierarchical Linear Modelling

References

• Acar, T., & Öğretmen, T. (2012). Çok düzeyli istatistiksel yöntemler ile 2006 PISA fen bilimleri performansının incelenmesi. Eğitim ve Bilim, 37(163), 178-189.
• Acar, T. (2015). Examination of the PISA 2009 reading skills and information and communication technology (ICT) use skills of Turkish students. Educational Research and Reviews, 10(13), 1825. Doi: 10.5897/ERR2015.231
• Aksu, G., Güzeller, C. O., & Eser, M. T. (2017). Öğrencilerin matematik okuryazarlığı performanslarının aşamalı doğrusal model (HLM) ile incelenmesi: PISA 2012 Türkiye örneği. Eğitim ve Bilim, 42(191). doi: 10.15390/EB.2017.6956.
• Akyüz, G., & Pala, N. M. (2010). The effect of student and class characteristics on mathematics literacy and problem solving in PISA 2003. Elementary Education Online, 9(2), 668-678.
• Alacacı, C. & Erbaş, A. K. (2010). Unpacking the inequality among Turkish schools: Findings from PISA 2006. International Journal of Educational Development, 30(2010), 182-192. doi:10.1016/j.ijedudev.2009.03.006.
• Åström, M., & Karlsson, K. G. (2007). Using hierarchical linear models to test differences in Swedish results from OECD’s PISA 2003: Integrated and subject-specific science education. Nordic Studies in Science Education, 3(2), 121-131.
• Aytekin, G. K., & Tertemiz, N. I. (2018). PISA sonuçlarının (2003-2015) eğitim sistemi ve ekonomik göstergeler kapsamında incelenmesi: Türkiye ve Güney Kore örneği. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 19(1), 103-128. doi: 10.29299/kefad.2018.19.004.
• Barro, R. J. (2013). Education and economic growth. Annals of Economics and Finance, 14 (2), 277-304.
• Berberoğlu, G., Çalışkan, M., & Karslı, N. (2019). Variables predicting PISA scientific literacy scores in Turkey. International Journal of Science and Education, 2(2), 38-49.
• Bilicioğlu, A., & Yılmaz, K. (2017). Öğrencilerin sınav kaygısı, fene yönelik ilgi ve ebeveyn desteği değişkenleri üzerine uluslararası bir karşılaştırma: Türkiye–Singapur. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 17(3), 1201-1220.
• Bozkurt, B. Ü. (2016). Türkiye’de okuma eğitiminin karnesi: PISA ölçeğinden çıkarımlar. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 16(4), 1673-1686.
• Cheema, J. R., & Kitsantas, A. (2014). Influences of disciplinary classroom climate on high school student self-efficacy and mathematics achievement: A look at gender and racial–ethnic differences. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12(5), 1261-1279.
• Cheema, J. R. (2018). Adolescents' enjoyment of reading as a predictor of reading achievement: new evidence from a cross‐country survey. Journal of Research in Reading, 41(S1), S149-S162. doi: 10.1111/1467-9817.12257.
• Chi, S., Liu, X., Wang, Z., & Won Han, S. (2018). Moderation of the effects of scientific inquiry activities on low SES students’ PISA 2015 science achievement by school teacher support and disciplinary climate in science classroom across gender. International Journal of Science Education, 40(11), 1284-1304. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2018.1476742.
• Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, New York, NY: Pearson
• Çelen, F. K., Çelik, A., & Seferoğlu, S. S. (2011). Türk eğitim sistemi ve PISA sonuçları. In XIII. Conference on Akademik Bilişim 2-4 February 2011 (pp. 1-9). Malatya. İnönü University.
• Delen, E., & Bulut, O. (2011). The relationship between students’ exposure to technology and their achievement in science and math. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10(3), 311-317.
• Demir, İ., & Kılıç, S. (2009). Effects of computer use on students’ mathematics achievement in Turkey. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1, 1802–1804. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2009.01.319.
• Demir, İ., Kılıç, S., & Ünal, H. (2010). Effects of students’ and schools’ characteristics on mathematics achievement: findings from PISA 2006. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 3099-3103. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.472.
• Demir, İ., Ünal, H., & Kılıç, S. (2010). The effect of quality of educational resources on mathematics achievement: Turkish case from PISA-2006. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 1855-1859. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.998.
• Dinç, F. (2017). Velilerin eğitime katılım düzeyleri ile öğrenci başarısı arasındaki ilişki. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Pamukkale University, Denizli.
• Doğan, U. C. (2018). Ailenin katılım ve desteği ile ilkokul öğrencilerinin ingilizce dersi akademik başarısı arasındaki ilişkiler. Unpublished Master's thesis, Maltepe University, İstanbul.
• Erdem-Kara, B., & Tat, O. (2019). Eğitim kaynaklarının kullanım etkinliği üzerine bir uluslararası karşılaştırma. Eğitimde Kuram ve Uygulama, 15(2), 153-170. doi: 10.17244/eku.478617
• Gall, G., & Gall, J. P. Borg.(2003). Educational Research: An Introduction. New York, NY: Pearson.
• Garson, G. D. (2013). Hierarchical Linear Modeling: Guide and Applications. Los Angeles, LA: Sage.
• Gamazo, A., Martinez-Abad, F., Olmos-Miguelanez, S., & Jose Rodriguez-Conde, M. (2018). Assessment of factors related to school effectiveness in PISA 2015. A multilevel analysis. Revista de Educacion, 379(2018), 56-84. doi: 10.4438/1988-592X-RE-2017-379-369.
• Gonida, E. N., & Cortina, K. S. (2014). Parental involvement in homework: Relations with parent and student achievement‐related motivational beliefs and achievement. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 376-396.
• Gümüş, S., & Atalmış, E. H. (2011). Exploring the relationshıp between purpose of computer usage and reading skills of Turkish students: Evidence from PISA 2006. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10(3), 129-140.
• Güzeller, C. O., & Akın, A. (2014). Relationship between ICT variables and mathematics achievement based on PISA 2006 database: International evıdence. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 13(1), 184-192.
• Ho, E. S. C. (2010). Family influences on science learning among Hong Kong adolescents: What we learned from PISA. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8(3), 409-428.
• Hu, X., Gong, Y., Lai, C., & Leung, F. K. (2018). The relationship between ICT and student literacy in mathematics, reading, and science across 44 countries: A multilevel analysis. Computers & Education, 125(2018), 1-13. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2018.05.021.
• Huang, H., & Sebastian, J. (2015). The role of schools in bridging within-school achievement gaps based on socioeconomic status: a cross-national comparative study. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 45(4), 501-525. doi: 10.1080/03057925.2014.905103.
• Hwang, J., Choi, K. M., Bae, Y., & Shin, D. H. (2018). Do Teachers’ Instructional Practices Moderate Equity in Mathematical and Scientific Literacy?: an Investigation of the PISA 2012 and 2015. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 16(1), 25-45. doi: 10.1007/s10763-018-9909-8.
• İş Güzel, Ç. (2014). Uluslararası öğrenci değerlendirme programı’nda (PISA 2003) Türk öğencilerin öğrenci ve okula ilişkin etkenlerin ve etkileşimlerinin matematik okuryazarlığına etkisi. Akdeniz Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 15, 11-30.
• Lee, Y. H., & Wu, J. Y. (2012). The effect of individual differences in the inner and outer states of ICT on engagement in online reading activities and PISA 2009 reading literacy: Exploring the relationship between the old and new reading literacy. Learning and Individual Differences, 22(3), 336-342. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2012.01.007.
• Liu, H., Van Damme, J., Gielen, S., & Van Den Noortgate, W. (2015). School processes mediate school compositional effects: model specification and estimation. British Educational Research Journal, 41(3), 423-447. doi: 10.1002/berj.3147.
• Mercik, V. (2015). Eğitimde fırsat eşitliği, toplumsal genel başarı ve adalet ilişkisi: PISA projesi kapsamında Finlandiya ve Türkiye deneyimlerinin karşılaştırması. Unpublished Master's thesis, Balıkesir University, Balıkesir.
• Oliver, M., McConney, A., & Woods-McConney, A. (2019). The efficacy of Inquiry-Based instruction in science: A comparative analysis of six countries using PISA 2015. Research in Science Education, 1-22. doi: 10.1007/s11165-019-09901-0.
• Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. (2017). Education Policy Outlook: Turkey.
• Özberk, E. H., Kabasakal, K. A., & Öztürk, N. B. (2017). Investigating the Factors Affecting Turkish Students’ PISA 2012 Mathematics Achievement Using Hierarchical Linear Modeling. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 32(3), 544-559. doi: 10.16986/HUJE.2017026950.
• Özer Özkan, Y. (2016). Examining the effective variables on classification of school's success through PISA 2012 Turkey data. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 8(2), 117-130. Doi: 10.15345/iojes.2016.02.011.
• Özer-Özkan, Y. & Acar-Güvendir, M. (2014). socioeconomic factors of students' relation to mathematic achievement: comparison of PISA and ÖBBS. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 6(3), 776-789. doi: 10.15345/iojes.2014.03.020.
• Özkan, M., Özkan, Y. Ö., & Güvendir, M. A. (2019). Türkiye ve Singapur okullarının öğretmenlerin mesleki gelişimleri ve öğrenimi aksatan öğretmen davranışları açısından incelenmesi. Eğitim ve Bilim, 44(198), 309-325. doi: 10.15390/EB.2019.7806.
• Özmusul, M., & Kaya, A. (2014). Türkiye’nin PISA 2009 ve 2012 sonuçlarına ilişkin karşılaştırmalı bir analiz. Journal of European Education, 4(1), 23-40.
• Polidano, C., Hanel, B., & Buddelmeyer, H. (2013). Explaining the socio-economic status school completion gap. Education Economics, 21(3), 230-247. doi: 10.1080/09645292.2013.789482.
• Program for International Student Assessment. (2019). PISA 2018: Highlight indicators. Retrieved from https://gpseducation.oecd.org/IndicatorExplorer?plotter=h5&query=2&indicators....
• Reparaz, C., & Sotés-Elizalde, M. A. (2019). Parental involvement in schools in Spain and Germany: Evidence from PISA 2015. International Journal of Educational Research, 93(2019), 33-52. doi: 10.1016/j.ijer.2018.10.001.
• Roeser, R. W., & Eccles, J. S. (1998). Adolescents' perceptions of middle school: Relation to longitudinal changes in academic and psychological adjustment. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 8(1), 123-158. Doi: 10.1207/s15327795jra0801_6.
• Schachner, M. K., He, J., Heizmann, B., & Van de Vijver, F. J. (2017). Acculturation and school adjustment of immigrant youth in six European countries: Findings from the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). Frontiers in Psychology, 8(649), 1-11. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00649.
• Sebastian, J., Moon, J. M., & Cunningham, M. (2017). The relationship of school-based parental involvement with student achievement: A comparison of principal and parent survey reports from PISA 2012. Educational Studies, 43(2), 123-146. doi: 10.1080/03055698.2016.1248900.
• Sortkær, B., & Reimer, D. (2018). Classroom disciplinary climate of schools and gender–evidence from the Nordic countries. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 29(4), 511-528. doi: 10.1080/09243453.2018.1460382.
• Tat, O., Koyuncu, İ., & Gelbal, S. (2019). The influence of using plausible values and survey weights on multiple regression and hierarchical linear model parameters. Journal of Measurement and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 10(3), 235-248. doi: 10.21031/epod.486999.
• Tavsancil, E., Yildirim, O., & DEMIR, S. B. (2019). Direct and ındirect effects of learning strategies and reading enjoyment on PISA 2009 reading performance. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 19(82), 169-190.
• Topping, K. (2006). PISA/PIRLS data on reading achievement: Transfer into international policy and practice. The Reading Teacher, 59(6), 588-590. doi: 10.1598/RT.59.6.9.
• Üstün, U., Özdemir, E., Cansız, M., & Cansız, N. (2019). What are the factors affecting Turkish students’ science literacy? A hierarchical linear modelling study using PISA 2015 data. Hacettepe University Journal of Education. Advance online publication. doi: 10.16986/HUJE.2019050786.
• Walker, J. M., Shenker, S. S., & Hoover-Dempsey, K. V. (2010). Why do parents become involved in their children's education? Implications for school counselors. Professional School Counseling, 14(1), 27-41. doi: 2156759X1001400104.
• Yang, K. E., & Ham, S. H. (2017). Truancy as systemic discrimination: Anti-discrimination legislation and its effect on school attendance among immigrant children. The Social Science Journal, 54(2), 216-226. doi: 10.1016/j.soscij.2017.02.001.
• Yavuz, E., & Çetin, B. (2017). PISA 2012 problem çözme okuryazarlığına etki eden okul değişkenlerinin incelenmesi: Türkiye-Sırbistan karşılaştırması. Eğitimde ve Psikolojide Ölçme ve Değerlendirme Dergisi, 8(4), 435-452. doi: 10.21031/epod.334610.
• Yıldırım, K. (2012). PISA 2006 verilerine göre Türkiye’de eğitimin kalitesini belirleyen temel faktörler. Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 10(2), 229-255.
• Yıldırım, Y., Şahin, M. G., & Sezer, E. (2017). PISA 2012 Türkiye örnekleminde okul özelliklerinin matematik okuryazarlığına etkisi. Elementary Education Online, 16(3), 1092-1100. doi: 10.17051/ilkonline.2017.330244.
• Yıldız, M., & Kaman, Ş. (2016). İlköğretim (2-6. sınıf) öğrencilerinin okuma ve yazma tutumlarının incelenmesi. Türkiye Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 20(2), 507-522.
• Yorulmaz, Y. İ., Çolak, İ., & Ekinci, C. E. (2017). An evaluation of PISA 2015 achievements of OECD countries within income distribution and education expenditures. Turkish Journal of Education, 6(4), 169-185. doi: 10.19128/turje.329755.
• Yurttaş Kumlu, G. D. (2018). Türkiye'de PISA uygulamasına katılan öğrencilerin bilgi ve iletişim teknolojilerine erişimlerinin PISA sonuçlarını yordama düzeyleri. Unpublished Master's thesis, Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Ankara.