Reading Performance And Self-regulated Learning Of Hong .
Asia-Pacific Edu ResDOI 10.1007/s40299-015-0246-1REGULAR ARTICLEReading Performance and Self-regulated Learning of Hong KongStudents: What We Learnt from PISA 2009Kit-ling Lau1 Esther Sui-chu Ho1 De La Salle University 2015Abstract The outperformance of Chinese students inlarge-scale international assessments has increasinglyattracted the attention of researchers. This study exploredthe relationship between an important student factor, selfregulated learning (SRL), and Hong Kong students’ reading performance on Programme of International StudentAssessment (PISA). Using data from PISA 2009, this studyfound that Hong Kong students obtained an overall strongperformance on the PISA 2009 reading assessment. Theywere relatively good at reflecting and evaluating andreading continuous texts. Compared with the OECD average, Hong Kong students showed better reading engagement and perceived a more positive classroom disciplinaryclimate in their reading lessons, but they used fewer controlstrategies, had poorer awareness of effective readingstrategies, and perceived a lower degree of teacher stimulation and scaffolding. Reading enjoyment and controlstrategies were the most important SRL componentsfacilitating Hong Kong students’ reading performance,after controlling for other background variables in multilevel analysis. Possible cultural and contextual factorsaffecting Hong Kong students’ SRL and reading performance, and their relationship are discussed to shed light forunderstanding the paradox of Chinese learners andimproving the instructional practices in Chinese classes.Keywords Chinese culture Hong Kong students PISA Reading performance Self-regulated learning& Kit-ling Laudinkylau@cuhk.edu.hk1Department of Curriculum and Instruction, Faculty ofEducation, The Chinese University of Hong Kong,Shatin, N.T., Hong KongIn recent years, evidence of the strong academic performance of students from Chinese and East Asian societies,which are rooted in Confucian Heritage Culture (CHC), hasbeen clearly demonstrated in large-scale internationalassessments, such as the Programme of International Student Assessment (PISA) and the Trends in InternationalMathematics and Science Study (TIMSS). The superioracademic achievement of Chinese students has aroused theinterest of researchers on the paradox of Chinese learners,who have long been stereotyped as passive, rote learnersbut perform much more strongly than their Westerncounterparts (Ho 2009; Morrison 2006). Institutional andresource factors do not likely account for their strongperformance because certain contextual features shared bythese countries (e.g. large class sizes, ability sorting, smallpublic expenditures on education) are considered unfavourable for student learning (Hojo and Oshio 2012; Lee2014; Leung 2002). Most discussions have focused on howteaching practices and student characteristics under theinfluence of CHC affect students’ learning and performance. Many researchers attribute Chinese students’superior academic achievement to the emphasis that CHCplaces on education and effort (Jeynes 2008; Morrison2006; Zhang and Kong 2012). Because of this emphasis,Chinese parents, teachers, and students all have a strongconviction that students should work hard to perform wellon competitive examinations. Conversely, emphasis onconformity and respect for authority in CHC is criticized asencouraging passive, rote learning without developingstudents’ higher order and critical thinking skills (Gowet al. 1996; Ho 1994, 2009; Ho et al. 2001; Littlewood1999).Herein, we explore the relationship between an important student factor, self-regulated learning (SRL), andHong Kong students’ reading performance on PISA 2009.123
K. Lau, E. S. HoSRL is widely viewed as crucial to successful learning(Perry et al. 2004; Pintrich and Zusho 2002). Measures ofSRL were included in the PISA 2009 Student Questionnaire as an important factor in students’ reading performance. The emphasis on students’ active role in SRL (Parisand Paris 2001) seems to contradict the traditional view ofteaching and learning in Chinese classes. This paperaddresses two controversial discussions on Chinese learners. First, by comparing the SRL indices of Hong Kongstudents with their counterparts in other East Asian andtop-ranking Western countries, we explore whetherstereotyped impressions of Chinese learners remain validin today’s Hong Kong. Second, since Hong Kong was ahigh-performing region in PISA 2009, the relationshipbetween its students’ SRL and reading performance isexamined to explore whether the proposed positive effectsof SRL on student learning could be applied in explainingthe high performance of Chinese students.Self-regulated Learning and Chinese LearnersSRL is an active process whereby learners set goals fortheir learning, and monitor, direct, and control their cognitive processes, motivation, and actions to achieve thesegoals (Paris and Paris 2001; Pintrich 2000; Pintrich andZusho 2002). Over the past decade, the definition of SRLhas broadened to encompass strategy, metacognition, andmotivation (Butler 2002; Winnie and Perry 2000; Zimmerman 2001). Early conceptualizations of SRL focusedon cognitive and metacognitive features. Cognition concerns the application of different cognitive strategies forlearning. Metacognitive strategies are used to control andregulate cognition. Self-regulated learners are strategiclearners, skilful in choosing a repertoire of effectivelearning strategies to suit the task and applying themappropriately (Dignath and Buttner 2008; Perry 1998;Perry et al. 2007; Zimmerman and Martinex-Pons 1988). Inrecent years, motivational variables have been integratedinto SRL as possible prerequisites of strategic processes.Growing evidence suggests that SRL processes and motivational beliefs are reciprocally interactive (Efklides 2011;Schunk and Ertmer 2000). To become self-regulatedlearners, students also need to be self-efficacious, intrinsically motivated, and persistent when facing difficulties(Dignath and Buttner 2008; Paris and Paris 2001; Perry1998; Perry et al. 2007).These major components of SRL are essential to students’reading development (Horner and Shwery 2002; Housandand Reis 2008; Paris and Paris 2001; Perry et al. 2007). Manyprevious studies have supported significant relationshipsbetween students’ use of reading strategies, motivation, andcomprehension (e.g. Borkowski 1992; Brown 2002; Deshler123and Schumaker 1993; Guthrie and Wigfield 2000; Palincsarand Brown 1984; Pressley et al. 1998). Good readers are selfregulated learners who skilfully use a repertoire of readingstrategies before, during, and after reading a text and whobelieve they can read well because of their active, strategicreading (Hilden and Pressley 2007).According to the social-cognitive model of SRL, environmental and personal processes interact cyclically toshape students’ learning behaviours (Pintrich and Zusho2002; Schunk and Ertmer 2000). Environmental factors atthe micro-level (e.g. teachers’ instructional practices) andmacro-level (e.g. cultural context of teaching and learning)have been highlighted in recent SRL research (Butler 2002;Paris and Paris 2001; Pintrich and Zusho 2002; Pintrich andSchrauben 1992; Tang and Neber 2008; Wolters and Pintrich 1998). Summarizing the findings of previous studies,effective instructional practices that promote SRL includedirect strategy instruction, open and authentic learningtasks, mastery-oriented assessment, and providing studentswith sufficient autonomy and scaffolding to develop independent learning (Housand and Reis 2008; Lombaerts et al.2009; Perry 1998; Perry et al. 2006; Perry and VandeKamp2000; Perry et al. 2002; Perry et al. 2004, 2007; Pintrichet al. 1994; Schunk and Zimmerman 1997; Turner 1995).Since the concept of SRL is derived from Western theoriesand studies, its applicability to other cultures must be examined (Pintrich and Zusho 2002; McInerney 2008). Studiesconducted in Chinese contexts have revealed controversialviews on the nature and importance of SRL among Chineselearners. First, the description of self-regulated learners andSRL-based instruction seems to contradict traditional views ofteaching and learning in Chinese classrooms. Influenced byCHC, instructional practices in traditional Chinese classes arealways described as teacher-centred and authoritarian. Chinese students are stereotyped as passive learners who rely onteachers’ instruction and rote-based learning at the expense ofcritical thinking (Gow et al. 1996; Ho 1994, 2009; Ho et al.2001). The strong academic performance of such Chinesestudents, who do not seem to be self-regulating, challenges thepostulation that self-regulated students are more likely toachieve and suggests that other, more important factors maycontribute to their success. On the other hand, SRL has beenemphasized in the recent curriculum reform of mainlandChina (Ministry of Education, People’s Republic of China,2002) and Hong Kong (Curriculum Development Council ofHong Kong [HKCDC], 2001a).1 The positive impacts of SRLon students’ reading development have also been replicated inChina (Cheng 2001; Lau 2006; Lau and Chan 2003; Law et al.1Although Hong Kong is a city of the PRC, it maintains its owneducation system under ‘one country, two systems’. Hong Kong’sschool curriculum and public examinations are separate frommainland China’s.
Reading Performance and Self-regulated Learning of Hong Kong Students: What We Learnt from 2008; Zhang and Wu 2009). Since few studies have directlycompared SRL between Chinese and Western students, it isunclear whether the traditional stereotyped impression ofChinese learners remains valid after the curriculum reform.Moreover, most previous studies only examined the relationship between Chinese students’ SRL and reading performance, without considering other factors. It is unclear whetherSRL remains crucial to Chinese students’ strong performanceafter controlling for students’ background factors.Reading Assessment in PISAPISA is an international assessment coordinated by theOrganization for Economic Co-operation and Development(OECD). It assesses the extent to which 15-year-old students nearing the completion of their compulsory educationhave acquired the knowledge and skills essential formeeting the challenges in society. Since 2000, the PISAhas been administered every three years. The assessmentcovers reading, mathematical, and scientific literacy, whichare alternated as major domains of the assessment. Readingwas the major domain in 2000 and 2009. The OECD(2009) defines reading literacy as ‘understanding, using,reflecting on and engaging with written texts, in order toachieve one’s goals, to develop one’s knowledge andpotential, and to participate in society’ (p. 23). This definition emphasizes the interactive nature of reading and theconstructive nature of comprehension, and is parallel withchanges in society, economy, and culture.In PISA 2009, with reading as a major assessment domain,the OECD reported an overall composite reading score aswell as subscales scores for three different reading processes(accessing and retrieving, integrating and interpreting, andreflecting and evaluating) and two types of reading materials(continuous and non-continuous texts). According to thePISA 2009 assessment framework (OECD 2009), the ‘accessand retrieve’ subscale refers to the process of finding andselecting the required information. The ‘integrate andinterpret’ subscale assesses the ability to form a broadunderstanding of the text and create meaning from something not stated in the text. The ‘reflect and evaluate’ subscale requires students to make reflections and evaluationsbased on knowledge, ideas, or attitudes beyond the text inorder to relate the textual information to their own conceptual and experiential frames of reference. The PISA readingstimulus texts are generally classified into continuous andnon-continuous texts. Continuous texts are typically composed of sentences organized into paragraphs, while noncontinuous texts are mostly organized in matrix format basedon combinations of lists (e.g. tables, graphs, diagrams).Subscale reading scores reflect students’ reading ability fromsurface to high-order comprehension for different types oftexts and, thus, provide a comprehensive basis for makingcross-national comparisons between Chinese students andstudents in other countries on their reading ability.Besides the assessment of the three literacy domains,PISA also gathers contextual and personal information fromstudents and school principals to understand factors relatedto students’ performance. Because of the importance ofSRL, measures of SRL components have been included inall PISA Student Questionnaires since its first implementation. The present study mainly focuses on PISA 2009 data.In PISA 2009, student questionnaires covered all three mainSRL constructs: reading engagement, use of learningstrategies, and metacognition. Indices of reading engagement include reading enjoyment, reading diversity, andonline reading. Indices of strategy use include memorization, elaboration, and control strategies. The two indices ofmetacognition are students’ awareness of the most effectivestrategies to understand and remember information and tosummarize information. Moreover, three indices of theperceived teaching and classroom climate in reading lessons, including disciplinary climate, teachers’ stimulationfor students’ engagement, and their use of structuring andscaffolding strategies, were selected from the PISA 2009Student Questionnaire to explore the relationship betweenChinese students’ SRL and instructional environment.Hong Kong was the first Chinese region to participate inPISA.2 Hong Kong students have consistently demonstratedstrong performance on all PISA cycles. Recently, more Chinese regions have joined the project. About 475,000 studentsfrom 65 countries or regions participated in PISA 2009.Besides Hong Kong, other participating Chinese and EastAsian countries/regions included Shanghai, Taipei, Macao,Korea, Singapore, and Japan. The high performance of students from these regions has increasingly attracted researchers’ attention. Against this background, we aim to answer thefollowing three questions from the PISA 2009 dataset. First,how are Hong Kong students performing on the overallreading literacy scale and subscales? By comparing HongKong students’ reading subscale scores with those of other topranking countries, we aim to examine whether Chinese students outperformed students from other countries in differentlevels of reading processes. Second, what are the levels ofHong Kong students’ SRL in term of strategy use, metacognition, and reading engagement? Standardized PISA indexscores allow cross-national comparisons to examine whetherChinese students are less self-regulated than are students fromother countries. Third, are different components of SRL significantly related to Hong Kong students’ reading2The first PISA cycle, PISA 2000, only involved OECD countries.Hong Kong joined PISA 2000 ? in 2002 with other non-OECDcountries and regions. The assessment of PISA 2000 ? was the sameas PISA 2000.123
K. Lau, E. S. Hoperformance? The relationships between different SRL components and reading performance is examined together withstudents’ gender and family and school background to determine whether SRL continues to play a significant role inChinese students’ reading performance, as proposed in theWestern SRL model, when controlling for backgroundvariables.MethodDatabase and SampleThe present study is an analysis of the 2009 PISA dataset.The data were collected in Hong Kong in April and May2009. School selection was based on a two-step stratifiedsampling design. In the first stage, schools were stratifiedby school type (government, aided, and independent) andstudent intake ability (high, medium, and low) according toinformation provided by Hong Kong Education Bureau.Stratified sampling ensured that schools of all backgroundswere appropriately represented in the sample. In the secondstage, 35 fifteen-year-old students were randomly selectedfrom each sample school. A total of 4837 students from151 schools were accepted for final analysis according tothe OECD sampling standard. These students were spreadacross six secondary school grades, but mostly (65.8 %)from secondary four. The sample had approximately thesame proportion of boys (52.9 %) and girls (47.1 %).VariablesReading performance.3 The PISA 2009 reading test consisted of 30 stimulus texts. A total of 131 test items withdifferent formats, including multiple-choice, closed-constructed response, open-constructed response, and shortresponse items, were designed using the PISA assessmentframework to capture students’ performance in differentreading processes and types of texts. All items werereviewed by PISA Governing Board subject expert groupsand were piloted in a field trial in all participating countries/regions before a final set of items was selected for themain study (see OECD 2010a, p. 187 for detailed designand item descriptions). Reading performance was represented by reading literacy scores. A combined readingliteracy scale, with a mean score of 500 and a standarddeviation of 100 was established in PISA 2000.Measures of SRL. Eight indices were selected from thePISA 2009 Student Questionnaire to explore the three main3Electronic reading was added as an optional assessment in PISA2009, but this paper only focuses on the paper-based assessment ofreading.123components of SRL. The learning strategy scale consists ofthree subscales measuring self-reported use of memorization,elaboration, and control strategies. The metacognition scaleconsists of two subscales: awareness of the most effectivestrategies to (1) understand and remember information and (2)summarize information. The reading engagement subscalesinclude reading enjoyment, reading material diversity, andonline reading. Among these measures, reading enjoyment,reading diversity, and the three learning strategies alsoappeared in the PISA 2000 cycle, with minor modifications.Online reading and metacognition were newly introduced toPISA in 2009. For the metacognition subscales, students areasked to evaluate the quality and usefulness of differentreading strategies for reaching the intended goal on a 6-pointLikert scale. An expert rater scoring system is used to assessthe degree to which a student is aware of the best ways ofunderstanding, remembering, and summarizing readinginformation. Items on reading enjoyment and the threelearning strategies are measured on a 4-point Likert scale;items on reading diversity and online reading are measured ona 5-point Likert scale. All questionnaire indices were scaledusing a weighted maximum likelihood estimate method andstandardized across OECD countries/regions set at 0 and thestandard deviations set at 1 (see OECD 2010b, Annex A1 for adetailed description of items and indices).Measures of teaching and classroom climate. Tounderstand the relationship between classroom context andSRL, three indices of the teaching and classroom climate inreading lessons from PISA 2009 were used: (1) students’perceptions of the disciplinary climate and (2) teachers’stimulation of students’ engagement, and (3) use of structuring and scaffolding strategies. All items were measuredon a 4-point Likert scale. These indices were scaled in thesame way as the SRL indices.Internal consistency reliabilities and mean scores for allselected indices in the Hong Kong sample are listed inTable 1.Statistical AnalysesDescriptive analysis was used to examine all key variablesfrom an international and comparative perspective. Then,correlation analysis, regression analysis, and hierarchicallinear modelling (HLM) were conducted to investigate theassociations between learning strategies, metacognition,reading engagement, learning environment, and literacyperformance.
of SRL on student learning could be applied in explaining the high performance of Chinese students. Self-regulated Learning and Chinese Learners SRL is an active process whereby learners set goals for their learni
All About the Alphabet Reading Alphabet Fun: A Reading Alphabet Fun: B Reading Alphabet Fun: C Reading Alphabet Fun: D Reading Alphabet Fun: E Reading Alphabet Fun: F Reading Alphabet Fun: G Reading Alphabet Fun: H Reading Alphabet Fun: I Reading Alphabet Fun: J Reading Alphabet Fun: K Reading Alphabet Fu
Structure of PP&E Used in Regulated Activities Each class of PP&E comprises the groups for regulated and non- regulated activity. Asset group for regulated activities comprise further breakdown to different regulated activities. Dispatch, Transmission, Distribution (further breakdown based on "Network" & "Supply"
Self-regulation is defined as self-generated thoughts, feelings, and behaviours that are planned and cyclically adapted based on performance feedback to attain self-set goals (Zimmerman, 1986). In essence, highly self-regulated learners approach learning tasks in a mindful, co
regulated turbines can change the pitch angle of the blades, to optimise the performance for each wind speed, the stall-regulated turbines are much simpler and rely only on the aerodynamics of the airfoils. This increases the complexity of the airfoil design. First of all, the airfoils of stall-regulated turbines work
Self-Regulated Learning and Motivation Self-regulated learning is controlled by an interconnected framework of factors that determine its development and sustainability (Bandura, 1993; Boekaerts, 1999; Pintrich, 2000; Zimmerman, 2008) and motivation is a critical factor in this framework
Abstract Self-regulated learning behaviors such as goal setting and monitoring have been found to be crucial to students’ success in computer-based learning environ-ments. Consequently, understanding students’ self-regulated learning behavior has been the subject of increasin
In order to form a theoretical background of the key strategies of self-regulated learning (SRL) skills from high academic performers, it is essential to start by reviewing the concepts of self-regulated learning and their relation to academic achievements and how learners perceive themselves as
Involvement Strategies for Encouraging Students' Self-Regulated Learning Alyssa Gonzalez-DeHass To cite this article: Alyssa Gonzalez-DeHass (2016) Preparing 21st Century Learners: Parent Involvement Strategies for Encouraging Students' Self-Regulated Learning, Childhood Edu
