ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT
ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENTEXECUTIVESUMMARYReading for ChangePERFORMANCE AND ENGAGEMENTACROSS COUNTRIESRESULTS FROM PISA 2000Programme for International Student Assessment
PISA AND READING READING LITERACY AND PISA2The PISA survey offers a new framework for assessing reading literacyHow well do young people and adultsread? The answer to this seeminglysimple question is central to modernsocieties. Despite new forms of oraland visual communication, the writtenword is more important than ever ineconomic and social interaction. As theworld becomes more complex, all citizensneed to use reading and writingeffectively to thrive in their daily lives.Reading literacy means much morethan being able to recognise lettersand words. It means being able to usereading skills to perform a widevariety of tasks in various situations,both within and beyond aneducational context.The OECD Programme for InternationalStudent Assessment (PISA) has for thefirst time established an explicitframework for examining the extent towhich students from around the worldhave these foundation reading literacyskills at age 15, on the eve of theircompletion of compulsory education.The box below summarises PISA’smain characteristics.The results of the first PISA survey, in2000, allow a rich profile to be drawnof reading literacy among students in32 countries. The results show not justhow well students can perform invarious reading tasks, but also therelationship between reading literacyskills and other characteristics,including the characteristics of theirhomes and schools, the students’attitudes to reading and their readinghabits. Looking closely at these results,one can learn more about factorsassociated with reading success.WHY READING LITERACY MATTERS3The kinds of reading skill assessed in PISA make a demonstrable difference toone’s chances in later life.Following the publication ofKnowledge and Skills for Life – FirstResults from PISA 2000, the readingliteracy results are analysed in greaterdepth in a thematic report, Reading forChange: Performance and EngagementAcross Countries. Its main findings aresummarised in this document.Reading literacy is needed to functionwell in adult life, whether in fulfillingpersonal goals, progressing in thelabour market or participating morewidely in society. Three-quarters of adults with thelowest level of reading literacy wereeither in relatively low-paying jobs (inthe bottom 40% of earners) or notworking;When measuring student readingliteracy skills at age 15, how can oneknow the benefits that proficiency willbring in later life? An indirect butpowerful piece of evidence comesfrom the International Adult LiteracySurvey (IALS), which in the mid1990s assessed adults aged 16-65 in asimilar range of reading literacy skills.This survey classified adults at fivelevels of reading literacy and found that: Adults with the lowest level ofreading literacy were less than aquarter as likely to participate incontinuing education and training asthose at the top two levels. Adults at the two lowest readingliteracy levels were typically twice aslikely to be unemployed as those at thethree highest levels;Students who enter adult life with lowreading literacy skills therefore notonly have poorer chances in the labourmarket but also are less likely than theOECD average to upgrade these skills,leading to a widening divide. Althoughthe adult literacy survey wasconstructed differently from PISA,there was an overlap in the items used,and from this it is possible to estimate15-year-olds’ results in terms of IALSscores. Extrapolating from therelationships between literacy skillsand social and economic outcomesobserved by IALS in the adultpopulation, to the student populationassessed by PISA, provides someinsights into possible futureconsequences of low literacy performanceat age 15. The results suggest thatthose with the lowest PISA scores areat risk in adulthood, facing increasedchances of unemployment, reducedprospects of having a well-paid joband a limited likelihood of engagingin future learning. What is PISA? A three-yearly survey, starting in2000, of knowledge and skills of15-year-olds in the principalindustrialised countries. More than265,000 students from 32 countriescompleted pencil-and-paper tests intheir schools, and filled outquestionnaires about themselves.Schools also provided backgroundinformation through questionnaires. A new way of looking at studentperformance, assessing youngpeople’s capacity to useknowledge and skills to meet reallife challenges. PISA assessesliteracy in reading, mathematicsand science, as well as askingThe findings: student performance and beyondstudents about their attitudes andapproaches to learning. A unique collaboration amongcountries to monitor educationaloutcomes. Co-ordinated by theparticipating governments throughthe OECD, the survey drew onleading expertise throughout theworld to improve information onstudent outcomes and give countriesbenchmarks for improvement.Participating in PISA 2000: 28OECD countries (all of its thenmembers except Turkey) plus Brazil,Latvia, Liechtenstein and the RussianFederation.The PISA results presented belowgive countries valuableinformation about how well theirstudents perform in readingliteracy. PISA identifies wherethere are particular problems ofunder-achievement, how wideinequalities in studentperformance within each countryare, and in some cases particularaspects of reading literacy andparticular types of text thatstudents handle better than others.However, this is only the start ofthe story. PISA also allows one tolook at the characteristics ofstudents who do well and torelate the results to what happensin education. Some importantfactors such as students’ homebackground are hard to influence.Others, such as the way in whichschools are organised, are moreamenable to change. One crucialfactor that education systems canwork on is the degree to whichstudents are active and wellmotivated readers. This reportshows that the degree to whichstudents are engaged in reading isa crucial factor associated withreading proficiency.
PISA AND READING 4HOW PISA MEASURES READING LITERACYReading literacy is no longer considered to be simply the ability to read andwrite, acquired in childhood as a single well-defined skill. Today, it is viewed asan advancing set of knowledge, skills and strategies, which individuals developand build on throughout life, through experience and not just formal education.5For examples of tasks and theirassociated proficiency levels,see pages 8-10Student Proficiency LevelsTwo thirds of OECD studentsscore between 400 and 600Below Level 1A broad measure .PointsAccording to the agreed PISA definition, Reading literacy is understanding, using and reflecting on written texts, in order to achieveone’s goals, to develop one’s knowledge and potential, and to participate in society.Reporting results: covers different dimensions of reading literacy Tasks are assigned point scoresaccording to their difficulty.This dynamic interpretation of readingliteracy emphasises the interactionbetween reading skills and theirapplication. To assess student literaciesaccording to this definition, it isimportant to vary the readingsituations, the forms of text and thekinds of question on which studentsare tested. Texts and tasks thereforevaried according to these differentdimensions in PISA 2000. Forexample, their subject matter rangedfrom fiction or letters that might beused for private reading purposes, toother kinds of text that students mayencounter in a work context, ininforming themselves about the worldor in educational contexts. The form oftext varied from continuous proseorganised in sentences or paragraphs,to other, “non-continuous” writtenmaterials such as forms or tables.Finally, the tasks presented to studentsrepresent different aspects of the waysin which people use writteninformation. Some tasks requiredstudents to retrieve information fromone or more parts of a text, somerequired them to interpret specificphrases or show an understanding ofthe text overall, while others requiredthem to reflect on the content of thetext, relating it to their priorknowledge of the world. which allows a deeper analysis of students’ strengths andweaknesses in reading literacy across countries.These different dimensions of PISAreading tasks make it possible to gofurther than previous internationalsurveys in examining students’ readingabilities.The analysis presented belowreports reading literacy on five separate“subscales”, as well as reporting anoverall reading literacy scale, whichrepresents reading literacy performanceacross all aspects of reading. Three of thesubscales break down reading by natureof task: retrieving, interpreting andreflecting/ evaluating. Two break itdown by the form of text: continuous(prose) and non-continuous forms. Inthis way, countries can see morespecifically where their students’ relativestrengths and weaknesses lie.In reporting on students’ readingliteracy skills, PISA describes acontinuous gradation ofperformance in reading literacy,rather than specifying a particularcut-off point between the “literate”and the “illiterate”. It does so bycreating scales representing readingtasks of ascending difficulty. Each ofthe 141 reading tasks used in PISAhas an associated reading literacyscore. A student’s reading literacyperformance can be expressed as ascore on each scale (the five subscalesdescribed above and the overallreading literacy scale). This representsthe kind of task that the student islikely to perform successfully six timesout of ten (see note opposite).The overall reading literacy scalewas constructed to make the averagescore of all students in OECDcountries equal to 500, and to putthe middle two-thirds of studentswithin 100 points of the OECDaverage – between 400 and 600points. A student scoring below 400is roughly in the bottom one-sixthof students in OECD countries, andsomeone scoring above 600 is inthe top one-sixth.Level 1335Level 2407 408Level 3480 481552 553Level 4Level 5625 626500 points OECD mean score which are used to divide students’ proficiency into five levels.To give more meaning to these results,students’ proficiency is classified infive different levels, according to theirpoint score. The diagram above showshow the levels are defined.Students able to complete many of themost difficult PISA tasks are classifiedat Level 5. Note that all tasks above625 points are “Level 5” tasks – noupper limit has been defined. Studentsare classified as reaching Level 1 ifthey can be expected to complete atleast half of all tasks between 335points and 407 points. These are thesimplest reading tasks that wereassessed in the PISA framework –demonstrating some capacity toconstruct, expand and reflect on themeaning of texts. Students who do notreach this level may still be able toread in a technical sense, but haveserious difficulties in using readingliteracy in practice.Note on scores and proficiency levels:Students’ proficiency scores arebased on the most difficult type oftask that they can be predicted toperform correctly most of thetime, given their performance onthe PISA test.More precisely, to be classified at,say, Level 2, a student must haveat least a 50% chance of correctlycompleting a “Level 2” task, i.e.one associated with a proficiencyscore between 408 and 480 points.For this to be true of the weakest“Level 2” student, at 408 points, theirchance of completing a task rated as408 must be considerably better than50-50 – since they will be much lesslikely to get a harder Level 2 itemcorrect. In fact, the probability ofgetting the 408-point question rightmust be at least 62%. Therefore, allpoint scores are assigned according tothe point rating of the task that thestudent can be predicted, with 62%certainty, to complete correctly.
STUDENT RESULTS STUDENT PERFORMANCE IN READING LITERACY OVERALL67The PISA results show important variations in the reading literacy abilities of 15-year-olds,both between and within countries.Differences between countriesDifferences within countriesAs shown in the first column of thetable, the mean student score in the 32countries in PISA 2000* varies by 150points on the overall reading literacyscale. In Finland, students are on averagenear the top of Level 3, in Brazil nearthe top of Level 1: a huge gap. Most ofthe 28 OECD member countriesparticipating* have mean scores withinLevel 3, but six are in Level 2: Greece,Hungary, Luxembourg, Mexico, Polandand Portugal.Within each country, there are someexceptionally good readers and someexceptionally poor ones. Every countryhas some students failing even to reachLevel 1 and others showing advancedreading literacy skills, at Level 5,although in both cases this can be asfew as 1% of all students in a country.Note also, however, that some of thecountries around the middle of thedistribution have very similar meanscores, and it is not always possible tosay with confidence, on the basis ofthe sample, which of two countrieshas students who perform better. Thelast two columns of the table thereforegive a range of possible positions ofeach country, relative to the others inthe survey.Mean Student Score by CountryCountryFinlandCanadaNew ZealandAustraliaIrelandKoreaUnited eUnited StatesDenmarkSwitzerlandSpainCzech rtugalRussian Fed.LatviaLuxembourgMexicoBrazilMean 2487484483480479474470462458441422396Range of rank order positionsfor each country based onsample (with 95% 101116161516162019212121242526262728282929303132* Note that even thoughthe ranking estimatesshown here relate to the32 countriesparticipating, studentperformance in theNetherlands cannot bedetermined withsufficient reliability for amean score to bereported. Averages aretherefore shown only for31 countries, 27 of themOECD members.The performance of students within acountry can therefore be looked at bothin terms of the numbers of students whohave the highest level of proficiency andthe number who do not manage toprogress beyond the lowest levels:Some interesting contrasts betweenpatterns of performance in differentcountries are shown in the box. In three countries, Australia, Finlandand New Zealand, at least 18% ofstudents are at Level 5 – twice theOECD average. In three countries, Brazil, Luxembourgand Mexico, at least one in three havenot progressed beyond Level 1,compared to just over one in six acrossOECD countries.Overall, PISA shows that it is possible tocontain inequalities in student performance within countries, and that this doesnot have to come at the expense of overall standards. Three of the five countrieswhere variation in student performanceis the smallest, Finland, Japan andKorea, also have mean scores statisticallysignificantly above the OECD average.Differences in patterns of performance: some contrastsFinland, Korea and New Zealandall have mean reading literacy scoreswell above the OECD average. Buttheir students’ results are verydifferently distributed across the levels.Korean students have the most compactdistribution, with seven in ten studentsin Levels 3 or 4. Only 6% of Koreansshow very low reading literacy skills(below Level 2) and only 6% very highreading literacy skills (at Level 5).Most Finnish students are also at Levels3 and 4 (61%), but there are also manystudents (18%) at Level 5. Thus Finlandmanages to combine compact withhigh performance better than any othercountry.In contrast, New Zealand’s students aremore widely spread over the wholedistribution. More are at Level 5 (19%)than in any other country, but alsomore below Level 2 (14%) than in mostother countries that perform above theOECD average. Thus, one in threestudents in New Zealand has eithervery advanced or very limited readingliteracy skills, compared to only one ineight Koreans.Germany and Italy both have similarmean scores, somewhat below theOECD average. However, Germanyhas the widest internal variation inperformance, whereas Italy is amongthe countries with the narrowestdifferences.Although the best performing tenthof German 15-year-olds are nearlyall on Level 5 the lowest scoringtenth do not even reach Level 1. Inonly three other OECD countries dothe bottom 10% lack any readingliteracy proficiency recognised byPISA. One of these, Mexico is, bycontrast with Germany, a low-scoringcountry with a compact distribution.Only 7% of Mexicans, compared to28% of Germans, reach Levels 4 and5.Conversely, the pattern in Germanycan be contrasted with that ofAustria, whose students performabove the OECD average. Bothcountries have 9% on Level 5, butGermany has 23% below Level 2,compared to Austria’s 15%.
STUDENT RESULTS ASPECTS OF READING89Students will need to be able to perform different kinds of reading task in their adult lives. They will have to be ableto locate information, to interpret what they read and to reflect more widely on its meaning. The following threepages show examples of texts included in PISA, and how they were used to assess these different aspects of readingliteracy. They also report on the results for students in the performance of each type of reading task.How retrieving information is assessed in PISAEasier PISA tasks typically require studentsto find a single piece of explicitly statedinformation, often using the same wordsas in the text. For example, they wereasked, after reading the Running Shoesexample below: “According to the article,why should sports shoes not be too rigid?” Acorrect answer, identifying that thisrestricts movement, involved matchinga single word in the question with thesame word in the text, and to repeat ashort phrase stated there. It is classifiedas Level 1 on the retrieving scale.As retrieving tasks get harder, they mayintroduce more and competinginformation and greater ambiguity
ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT P rogramme for I nternational S tudent A ssessment RESULTS FROM PISA 2000 Reading for Change PERFORMANCE AND ENGAGEMENT ACROSS COUNTRIES EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Bruksanvisning för bilstereo . Bruksanvisning for bilstereo . Instrukcja obsługi samochodowego odtwarzacza stereo . Operating Instructions for Car Stereo . 610-104 . SV . Bruksanvisning i original
10 tips och tricks för att lyckas med ert sap-projekt 20 SAPSANYTT 2/2015 De flesta projektledare känner säkert till Cobb’s paradox. Martin Cobb verkade som CIO för sekretariatet för Treasury Board of Canada 1995 då han ställde frågan
service i Norge och Finland drivs inom ramen för ett enskilt företag (NRK. 1 och Yleisradio), fin ns det i Sverige tre: Ett för tv (Sveriges Television , SVT ), ett för radio (Sveriges Radio , SR ) och ett för utbildnings program (Sveriges Utbildningsradio, UR, vilket till följd av sin begränsade storlek inte återfinns bland de 25 största
Hotell För hotell anges de tre klasserna A/B, C och D. Det betyder att den "normala" standarden C är acceptabel men att motiven för en högre standard är starka. Ljudklass C motsvarar de tidigare normkraven för hotell, ljudklass A/B motsvarar kraven för moderna hotell med hög standard och ljudklass D kan användas vid
LÄS NOGGRANT FÖLJANDE VILLKOR FÖR APPLE DEVELOPER PROGRAM LICENCE . Apple Developer Program License Agreement Syfte Du vill använda Apple-mjukvara (enligt definitionen nedan) för att utveckla en eller flera Applikationer (enligt definitionen nedan) för Apple-märkta produkter. . Applikationer som utvecklas för iOS-produkter, Apple .
the ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT (the "OECD" or the "Organisation") on actions administered by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and funded or co-funded by the EU Preamble 1. WHEREAS, it is recalled that article 220 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union calls on the EU to establish all appropriate forms of cooperation with the .
och krav. Maskinerna skriver ut upp till fyra tum breda etiketter med direkt termoteknik och termotransferteknik och är lämpliga för en lång rad användningsområden på vertikala marknader. TD-seriens professionella etikettskrivare för . skrivbordet. Brothers nya avancerade 4-tums etikettskrivare för skrivbordet är effektiva och enkla att
Den kanadensiska språkvetaren Jim Cummins har visat i sin forskning från år 1979 att det kan ta 1 till 3 år för att lära sig ett vardagsspråk och mellan 5 till 7 år för att behärska ett akademiskt språk.4 Han införde två begrepp för att beskriva elevernas språkliga kompetens: BI
