ENGLISH READING LITERACY OF MALAYSIAN
LOWER SECONDARY STUDENTS USING
RASCH MEASUREMENT MODEL
BY
KAMAL JAMIL IBRAHIM BADRASAWI
A dissertation submitted in fulfillment of the
requirement for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
Institute of Education
International Islamic University
Malaysia
APRIL 2012
ii
ABSTRACT
English is an important second language in Malaysia. It is a compulsory school
subject taught to all children in the national primary and secondary schools, to be used
in their personal studies and future workplace/life. Given the importance of English,
the development of English literacy needs to be monitored over time. However, this is
currently done based on their results in national standardized examinations. The input
from these national examinations, though useful, is insufficient to give a complete
picture about the level of students’ performance in English literacy as there are no
national benchmarks at the different levels of schooling. This limitation is especially
critical for students in the lower secondary stage as this level of schooling is
considered as the foundation level in which the development of English literacy is
necessary for their performance in the future at the upper levels of schooling, tertiary
education, and their future career. Thus, this study seeks to examine the performance
of these school children and attempts to answer questions related to their performance
in this skill. Among them are these two major questions: What is the performance
level of Malaysian lower secondary school children in English reading literacy? And
which groups of Malaysian lower secondary school children are at risk of
underachieving in English reading literacy? A sample of 944 Form 1, 2, and 3 students
was selected from 11 national-type schools in two states in Malaysia using the
multistage cluster random sampling procedure. A test of English reading, comprising
60 items, was used. Both RMM and MFRM analyses, in addition to descriptive
analyses, were used to answer the research questions. The results indicated that, in
general, male students slightly outperformed female students, and Form 1 and 2
students outperformed Form 3 students. Closer examination of other demographic
variables including race, school location, parents’ education and SES indicated that
gender does not exclusively influence student performance. The results also showed
that items within the same reading skill categories did not have the same difficulty
level. The most difficult skill category was interpreting information and the easiest
one was finding out word meanings. To conclude, not all males performed better and
not all females were underachieving. The findings show a need for monitoring of
students’ progress over time and the use of a robust measurement model to do so.
Furthermore, the use of the Rasch Measurement Model for test equating and in item
analysis demonstrates the robustness and utility of the model in ensuring fair
measurement. Implications and recommendations are stated for stakeholders.
iii
خلاصة البحث
ينُظر إلى اللغة الإنجليزية كلغة ثانية ىامة في ماليزيا، وتعُتبر من الدوضوعات الدراسية الإجبارية التي تدَُرّسُ لطلبة الدرحلة الأساسية والثانوية، ليتمكن الطلبة من استخدامها في إكمال تحصيلهم الأكاديمي،
ونظرا لأهمية اللغة الإنجليزية، توجد حاجة إلى متابعة تحصيل الطلبة فيها . واستخدامها في مهنة الدستقبلوتَكْمُن الدشكلة في أن معطيات . حيث تتَمُّ ىذه الدتابعة استناداً إلى نتائج الامتحانات الوطنية الدوحدة
ىذه الامتحانات الوطنية، رغم فائدتها، ليست كافية لإعطاء صورة كاملة عن مستوى أداء الطلبة في ىذا القيد أمر . اللغة الإنجليزية؛ بسبب عدم وجود معايير وطنية لذذه الدادة في مختلف مستويات التعليم
بالغ الأهمية وخاصة بالنسبة للطلبة في الدرحلة الثانوية الدنيا، حيث تُ عَدُّ ىذه الدرحلة مرحلة التأسيس، ويعُتبر أداء الطلبة فيها باللغة الانجليزية ضروريا لأدائهم في الدستقبل في مستويات دراسية أعلى، كما في
لذلك يهدف ىذا البحث إلى دراسة أداء . الدرحلة الجامعية والدراسات العليا، وفي وظيفة الدستقبل كذلكما : ومن بين ىذه الأسئلة. الطلبة في الدرحلة الثانوية الدنيا وتحاول الإجابة عن أسئلة متعلقة بهذا الأداء
مستوى أداء طلبة الددارس الثانوية الدنيا في مهارة القراءة في اللغة الإنجليزية؟ وما لرموعات الطلبة التي طالبٍ (944)تعاني من التحصيل الدتدني في مهارة القراءة في اللغة الإنجليزية؟ ىذا وقد تم اختيارُ عيّنةٍ
وتم . مدرسة من ولايتين في ماليزيا باستخدام الطريقة العنقودية العشوائية متعددة الدراحل11وطالبةٍ من وللإجابة على أسئلة البحث تم . سسالاً 60استخدامُ اختبارِ قراءةٍ في اللغة الإنجليزية يحتوي على
استخدام كلٍّ من نموذج راش الخاص بالبيانات الثنائية ونموذج راش متعدد الأوجو، إضافة إلى التحليل وبشكل عام، فقد أشارت النتائج إلى أن الطلاب الذكور تفوقوا قليلاً على الطالبات، وأن طلبة . الوصفي
وبتحليلٍ أعمق للمتغيرات . الصف الأول والثاني الثانوي تفوقوا على طلبة الصف الثالث الثانويتبين أن الجنس (العِرق وموقع الددرسة و الدستوى التعليمي والوضع الاقتصادي للآباء)الديمغرافية الأخرى
وكانت مهارة تفسير الدعلومات الأكثر صعوبة ومهارة إيجاد معنى . حصراً لا يسثر على أداء الطلبةىذا ولم يحصل جميع الطلاب على مستوى أفضل من جميع الطالبات، وليس . الكلمات الأكثر سهولة
وأخيراً، تُظهِرُ النتائج الحاجة إلى متابعة أداء الطلبة مع مرور الوقت . كل الطالبات كان أدااىن متدنياً وعلاوة على ذلك، دلَّ إستخدام نموذج راش للقياس في طريقة التكافس . باستخدام نموذج قياس مناسب
. الرأسي بين الإختبارات وفي تحليل الأسئلة على قوة وفائدة ىذا النموذج في ضمان تحقيق مقياس عادل . واختُتِمت الدراسةُ بالدعاني الدستفادة منها والتوصيات لذوي الاختصاص
iv
APPROVAL PAGE
The dissertation of Kamal J I Badrasawi has been approved by the following:
______________________________
Noor Lide Abu Kassim
Supervisor
_______________________________
Mohamad Sahari Nordin
Supervisor
_______________________________
Ssekamanya Siraje Abdullah
Supervisor
______________________________
Ainol Zubairi
Internal Examiner
______________________________
Arshad Abd Samad
External Examiner
______________________________
Fatimah Daud
Chairman
v
DECLARATION
I hereby declare that this thesis is the result of my own investigations, except where
otherwise stated. I also declare that it has not been previously or concurrently
submitted as a whole for any other degrees at IIUM or other institutions.
Kamal J I Badrasawi
Signature .................................................. Date ………………………………
vi
INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY
MALAYSIA
DECLARATION OF COPYRIGH AND
AFFIRMATION OF FAIR USE OF UNPUBLISHED
RESEARCH
Copyright@2012 by International Islamic University Malaysia. All rights
reserved.
ENGLISH READING LITERACY OF MALAYSIAN LOWER
SECONDARY STUDNETS USING RASCH MEASUREMENT MODEL
I hereby affirm that The International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM) hold
all rights in the copyright of this work and henceforth and reproduction or use in
any form or by means whatsoever is prohibited without the written consent of
IIUM. No part of this unpublished research may be reproduced, stored in a
retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form of by means, electronic, mechanical,
photocopying, recording or otherwise without prior written permission of the
copyright holder.
Affirmed by Kaml J I Badrasawi
………………………….. …………………………
Signature Date
vii
This study is dedicated to:
My beloved prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him),
the first and best role model teacher, and the source of
knowledge, wisdom, purification and mercy,
“Allah did confer a great favour on the believers when He sent among them an
apostle from among themselves, rehearsing unto them the Signs of Allah,
sanctifying them, and instructing them in Scripture and Wisdom,
while, before that, they had been in manifest error” ( Qur’an 3:164)
all who have contributed directly and indirectly
to the success of this work:
parents, teachers, brothers, sisters, wife, daughters, friends, and
my late father in law, Abu Mohammad
viii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First and foremost, all praise belongs to Allah, the Lord of the Universe, whose mercy,
guidance and blessings have enabled me to complete this study successfully.
I would like to express my everlasting and heartfelt gratitude to my
supervisor, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Noor Lide Abu Kassim for all her highly appreciated
guidance, invaluable comments and constant encouragement. Her approaches and
character will influence my future career.
My deepest and heartfelt gratitude are also extended to my supervisory
committee members Prof. Dr. Mohamad Sahari Nordin and Assoc. Prof. Dr.
Ssekamanya Siraje Abdullah for their constructive comments, distinguished support
and encouragement. Special thanks go to Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ainol Zubairi for her
insightful feedback, and Prof. Mike Linacre for the great clarification throughout the
course of this study.
My sincere thanks go to the International Islamic University Malaysia,
particularly the Institute of Education (INSTED), for giving me a partial scholarship
and the opportunity to pursue my PhD study, and I would like to thank all the lecturers
and staff for their great efforts, help and sincerity. I cannot forget to send my best
Doa’ and prayers to the soul of Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ahmad Marzouki, for his
commitment, encouragement, support and gentleness.
I would always be grateful to all principals, teachers and students, who
accepted to participate in the study, for their kind cooperation.
Many thanks are extended to my colleagues, friends and lecturers from several
countries for their moral support, and Dr. Ahmad Asa’d, Dr. Kaseh Abu Bakar, Dr.
Enas AbdAllah, Dr. Sharifah Sariyah, Dr. Mohammad HajHamad, Ustaz Ismail
Abdullah, Mr. Nassir Abu Saa’, Mohammad Muslim, Mohammed Borhandden,
Muhajir Bin Taslikhan, Omran Musleh, Noor Sharifah Kamaruddin, Huda Skaik,
Sheila Lallmamode, Hafsah Mwita, Harith Zyood and Marwan Badran in particular.
I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my family: parents, Jamil and
Nemah, sisters and brothers, who have always wished me success in my entire life. I
would never forget my parents’ in law continuous prayers for my success. My wife,
Manal, deserves all my great acknowledgement and thanks for her support and
patience. My eternal love goes to my two daughters Nematullah and Menatullah.
Finally, I would also like to thank many other people who have contributed in
the completion of this work. Their names are deeply rooted in my heart.
May Allah SWT bless you all.
ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract .............................................................................................................. ii
Abstract in Arabic .............................................................................................. iii
Approval Page ..................................................................................................... iv
Declaration Page ................................................................................................ v
Copyright Page .................................................................................................... vi
Dedication .......................................................................................................... vii
Acknowledgements ............................................................................................ viii
List of Tables ...................................................................................................... xiii
List of Figures .................................................................................................... xv
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ............................................................ 1
1.1 Background of the Study .................................................................. 1
1.1.1 Benchmarks in Literacy and Numeracy ............................. 5
1.2 Statement of the Problem .................................................................. 8
1.3 Purpose of the Study ......................................................................... 11
1.4 Objectives of the Study ..................................................................... 12
1.5 Research Questions ........................................................................... 13
1.6 Rationale of the Study ....................................................................... 13
1.7 Significance of the Study .................................................................. 14
1.8 Delimitations of the Study ................................................................ 15
1.9 Theoretical Framework ..................................................................... 16
1.10 Definitions of Terms ....................................................................... 23
1.11 Organization of the Study ............................................................... 25
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................... 27
2.1. Literacy Skill .................................................................................... 27
2.1.1 Defining Literacy ................................................................... 28
2.1.2 Historical Background of Literacy ........................................ 33
2.1.2.1 Simple Literacy ............................................................ 33
2.1.2.2 Concept of Functional Literacy ................................... 34
2.1.2.3 Analytical Perspective ................................................. 34
2.1.2.4 Literacy and Lifelong Learning ................................... 34
2.1.3 English Literacy ..................................................................... 35
2.1.3.1 English as a Global Language ..................................... 35
2.1.3.2 English Language in the Malaysian Context ............... 39
x
2.1.3.2.1 English Language in the Malaysian Curriculum 41
2.1.3.2.1.1 Secondary Education Structure in
Malaysia ....................................................
41
2.1.3.2.1.2 English Language Syllabus for Secondary
Level .........................................................
42
2.1.4 English Literacy in the Current Study ................................... 43
2.2 Reading Literacy Skill ...................................................................... 44
2.2.1 Nature of Reading Skill ......................................................... 45
2.2.2 Divisibility of Reading Skill .................................................. 47
2.2.2.1 Reading as a Unitary Skill ........................................... 47
2.2.2.2 Reading as a Multi-divisible Skill ............................... 49
2.2.3 Reading Taxonomies ............................................................. 54
2.2.3.1 Munby’s Taxonomy .................................................... 55
2.2.3.2 Grabe’s Taxonomy ...................................................... 58
2.2.3.3 Barrett’s Comprehension Taxonomy ........................... 59
2.2.3.4 Vacca and Vacca Levels of Comprehension ............... 63
2.2.4 How Reading is Tested .......................................................... 65
2.2.4.1 ACTFL ......................................................................... 65
2.2.4.2 Masters and Forster Scales .......................................... 66
2.2.4.3. KET ............................................................................ 66
2.3 Monitoring Educational Performance ............................................... 67
2.3.1 Monitoring Learners’ Development ...................................... 68
2.3.1.1 International Studies .................................................... 70
2.3.1.1.1 IEA .................................................................... 70
2.3.1.1.2 TIMSS ............................................................... 71
2.3.1.1.3 PISA .................................................................. 72
2.3.1.1.4 PIRLS ................................................................ 73
2.3.1.1.5 IEA studies and Rasch Model ........................... 74
2.3.1.2. National Assessment ................................................... 75
2.3.1.2.1 NAEP ................................................................. 75
2.3.1.2.2 NCLB ................................................................ 75
2.3.1.2.3 NAPLAN ........................................................... 76
2.3.1.2.4 Progress /Achievement Map .............................. 77
2.3.1.2.5 ‘Can-do’, ‘Checklist’ or ‘Outcomes-Based’
Model ..................................................................
78
2.3.2 Monitoring of Educational Performance in the Malaysian
Context ..................................................................................
79
2.3.3 Boys’ and Girls’ Underachievement ..................................... 80
2.4 Rasch Measurement Model (RMM) ................................................. 81
2.4.1 Introduction ............................................................................ 81
2.4.2 Limitations of the Classical Test Theory ............................... 83
2.4.3 The Rasch Measurement Model ............................................ 85
2.4.4 Properties of the Rasch Measurement Model ........................ 86
2.4.4.1 Separation and Reliability ........................................... 86
2.4.4.2 Specific Objectivity ..................................................... 87
2.4.4.3 Conjoint Additivity ...................................................... 88
2.4.4.4 Unidimensionality ....................................................... 89
2.4.4.5 Identifying Misfitting items and Misfitting Persons .... 89
2.4.4.6 Local Independence ..................................................... 91
xi
2.4.5 The Many-Facets Rasch Model (MFRM) for Measurement . 91
2.5 Literacy from Islamic Perspective .................................................... 93
CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ............................... 98
3.1. Introduction ...................................................................................... 98
3.2 Research Design ............................................................................... 98
3.3 Population of the Study ..................................................................... 100
3.3.1 Sample of the Study ............................................................... 100
3.3.2 Sampling Procedure and Characteristics of Respondents ..... 102
3.4 Instrument of the Study ..................................................................... 105
3.4.1 Selection of Items .................................................................. 105
3.4.2 Pilot study .............................................................................. 106
3.4.2.1 Analysis of Data from Pilot Study ............................... 107
3.4.2.1.1 Categorizing Items According to Skill Areas .... 107
3.4.2.1.2 Investigating Item Distribution and Item
Difficulty Levels .................................................
109
3.4.2.1.3 Performance of Students According to Forms ... 120
3.4.2.2 Conclusions ................................................................. 121
3.4.3 Instrument for Final Study ..................................................... 122
3.4.3.1 Reading Test Rationale and Description ..................... 122
3.4.3.2 What Was Assessed? ................................................... 122
3.4.3.3 How Was Reading Assessed? ...................................... 126
3.5 Data Collection ................................................................................. 127
3.6. Data Analysis ................................................................................... 128
3.6.1 Screening and Cleaning Data ................................................. 128
3.6.2 Rasch Measurement Model Analysis .................................... 129
3.6.3 Multifaceted Rasch Model Analysis ...................................... 129
3.6.4 SPSS Analysis ....................................................................... 130
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS OF THE STUDY ......................................... 131
4.1 Introduction ....................................................................................... 131
4.2 Adequacy of Reading Test ................................................................ 131
4.2.1 Summary of Item Difficulty and Students Ability Measures 132
4.2.2 Validity of Item Test .............................................................. 132
4.2.2.1 Validity of MCQ Test: Item polarity, Fit, and
Unidimensionality ........................................................
132
4.2.2.1.1 Item Polarity ...................................................... 132
4.2.2.1.2 Item Fit .............................................................. 135
4.2.2.1.3 Unidimensionality ............................................. 137
4.2.3 Construct Validity .................................................................. 137
4.2.3.1 Continuum of Increasing Intensity .............................. 137
4.2.3.2 Empirical Scaling of Reading Test .............................. 139
4.2.4 Consistency of Results with Purpose of Measurement .......... 145
4.2.4.1 Reliability and Separation ........................................... 145
4.2.4.2 Precision of Measures .................................................. 146
4.2.4.3 Test Targeting .............................................................. 146
4.2.5 Validity of Students’ Responses ............................................ 147
xii
4.2.6 Conclusion of Adequacy of Reading Test .............................. 149
4.3 Students’ English Reading Literacy Performance ............................ 150
4.3.1 Students’ Performance in Reading Skill Areas ..................... 150
4.3.2 Male and Female Students’ Reading Performance Levels .... 157
4.3.2.1 Distribution of Reading Performance Measures for
Male and Female Students ...........................................
157
4.3.2.2. Reading Performance Levels for Male and Female
Students ........................................................................
160
4.3.2.2.1 Reading Performance levels .............................. 161
4.3.2.2.2 Grammar Performance levels ............................ 165
4.3.3 Form1, 2 and 3 Students’ Reading Literacy Performance ..... 172
4.3.4 Underachievers in English Reading Literacy Skill ................ 177
4.3.4.1 Comparison between Male and Female Subgroups’
Reading Performance ...................................................
177
4.3.4.1.1 School Location ................................................. 177
4.3.4.1.2 Students’ Form .................................................. 178
4.3.4.1.3 Students’ Race ................................................... 179
4.3.4.1.4 Father’s Job ....................................................... 181
4.3.4.1.5 Mother’s Job ...................................................... 182
4.3.4.1.6 Father’s Education ............................................. 183
4.3.4.1.7 Mother’s Education ........................................... 185
4.3.4.1.8 Schools .............................................................. 187
4.3.5 Summary of Reading Skill Categories Location/ Order
Using Facets ..........................................................................
190
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION, IMPLICATIONS, AND
RECOMMENDTAIONS OF THE STUDY ..................................................
194
5.1 Adequacy of Reading Test ................................................................ 194
5.2 Item Difficulty: Rasch Model and Judgmental Analysis .................. 196
5.3 Equating Tests Using Rasch Measurement Model ........................... 197
5.4 Students’ Performance on English Reading Literacy Areas ............. 200
5.5 Male and Female Students’ Performance Level in English Reading
Literacy .............................................................................................
205
5. 6 Students’ Performance across Different Grade Forms .................... 206
5.7 Students Subgroups’ Performance in English Literacy Skill ............ 207
5.8 Conclusions of the Study .................................................................. 213
5.9 Implications of the Study .................................................................. 215
5.9.1 Implications for Language Teachers and Test Developers .... 215
5.9.2 Implications for Policy Makers ............................................. 216
5.10 Recommendations of the Study ...................................................... 218
5.10.1 Recommendations for Further Research ............................. 219
BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................. 222
APPENDICES ................................................................................................... 238
xiii
LIST OF TABLES
Table No. Page No.
2.1 Reading skills/ Sub skills in Munby’s Taxonomy (1978) 56
2.2 Barret’s Taxonomy and Bloom’s Taxonomy 62
3.1 Sample-size Range for Calibration 101
3.2 Summary of Study Sample in KL and Selangor 104
3.3 Distribution of Sample for the Pilot Study 106
3.4 Item and Person Reliability 109
3.5 Item Fit and Fit Statistics 110
3.6 Means and Medians of 2004, 2005 and 2007 Sets 112
3.7 Distribution of Reading Skills /Sub skills with Text Type
and Context Type
124
4.1. Item Polarity Statistics: Correlation Order 134
4. 2 Item Statistics: Misfit Order 136
4.3 Item Difficulty: Rasch Model and Experts Judgment 142
4.4 Reliability of the Item Difficulty Estimates 145
4.5 Reliability of the Person Ability Estimates 146
4.6 Frequency of Students within Intended Measure-Square
Ranges
147
4.7 Means and Medians of Reading Skill Areas 153
4.8 Means and Medians of Item Context Types 156
4. 9 Means and Medians of Males’ and Females’ Reading
Performance
157
xiv
4.10 Description of Reading Performance Levels 166
4.11 Means and Medians of Reading Performance of Form 1,
Form 2 and Form3 Students
172
4.12 Summary of Students’ Reading Performance: Means and
Median Estimates
176
4.13 Means and Medians of Urban and Rural Students’ Estimated
Reading Performance
177
4.14 Means and Medians of Form 1, Form 2 and Form 3
Students’ Estimated Reading Performance
179
4.15 Means and Medians of Chinese, Malay and Indian Students’
Estimated Reading Performance
180
4.16 Means and Medians of Low, Medium, and High SES
Students’ Estimated Reading Performance (Father’s Job)
181
4.17 Means and Medians of Low, Medium, and High SES
Students’ Estimated Reading Performance (Mother’s Job)
183
4.18 Means and Medians of Students’ Estimated Reading
Performance in Terms of Father’s Education
184
4.19 Means and Medians of Students’ Estimated Reading
Performance in Terms of Mother’s Education
186
4.20 Means and Medians of Students’ Estimated Reading
Performance in Terms of School Performance
188
4.21 Reading Skill Categories’ Measurement Report 192
xv
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure No. Page No.
1.1 Relationship between Reading Theory, Measurement
Theory and Reading Test
19
2.1 Kachru’s Three Circles’ of English with Estimates Speaker
Numbers in Millions
37
2.2 Garddol’s Three Overlapping Circles of English 38
2.3 Characteristics of Performance Assessment 92
3.1 Research Procedure 99
3.2 Reading Test : Wright Map 111
3.3 Wright Item Map: Distribution of Items for all Three Sets
2004, 2005 and 2007
113
3.4 Reading skills/ Sub skills : Wright Map 115
3.5 Students Performance According to Forms 120
4.1. Results of the PCA of Standardized Residuals 137
4. 2 Wright Map for Reading Test 138
4.3 Stacks of Items 139
4.4 Empirical Scaling of Items According to Catagories
for Reading Skills/Subskills
141
4.5 Wright Map: Skills Associated to Test Items 144
4.6 Most Misfitting Response Strings 148
4.7 Most Unexpected Responses 149
xvi
4.8 Wright Item-Ability Map: Performance of Lower
Secondary Students on Test of English Reading Skill
151
4.9 Wright Skill – Ability Map: Performance of Lower
Secondary Students on Test of English Reading Skill
152
4. 10 Means of Person Ability and Difficulty Level of Skill
Areas
154
4.11 Means of Person Ability and Difficulty Level of Skill
Areas with Item Contexts
155
4.12 Distribution of Items Measures in Terms of Context Type 156
4.13 Distribution of Males’ and Females’ Reading Performance
Measures
158
4.14 Wright Person Map (Males and Females) 159
4.15 Males and Females Reading Performance in All Skill
Areas
160
4.16 Wright Map: Skills Assciated to Reading Test Items 161
4.17 Reading Skill Performance Levels 162
4.18 Grammar Performance Levels 163
4.19 Distribution of Male and Female Estimated Reading
Performance
171
4.20 Distribution of Male and Female Students’ Estimated
Grammar Performance
171
4.21 Distribution of Reading Performance of Form 1, Form 2,
and Form 3 Students
173
4.22 Distribution of Form 1, Form 2, and Form 3 Estimated
Reading Performance
173
4.23 Distribution of Grammar Performance of Form 1, Form 2,
and Form 3
174
4.24 Wright Person Map for Form1, Form2 and Form 3
Students
175
4.25 Distribution of Urban and Rural Students’ Estimated
Reading Performance
178
xvii
4.26 Distribution of Form 1, 2 and 3 Students’ Estimated
Reading Performance
179
4.27 Distribution of Chinese, Malay and Indian Students’
Estimated Reading Performance
180
4.28 Distribution of Low, Medium, and High SES Students’
Estimated Reading Performance (Father’s Job)
182
4.29 Distribution of Low, Medium, and High SES Students’
Estimated Reading Performance (Mother’s Job)
183
4.30 Distribution of Students’ Estimated Reading Performance
in Terms of Father’s Education
185
4.31 Distribution of Students’ Estimated Reading Performance
in Terms of Mother’s Education
187
4.32 Distribution of Students’ Estimated Reading Performance
in Terms of Their Schools
189
4.33 Location of Reading Skills Associated with Items in
Reading Test
191
1
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
Literacy and numeracy skills have been defined as the ability to read, write and use
numbers. Over time, these definitions have changed because of social, cultural,
economic and political factors. Depending on the context in which they are used,
literacy and numeracy mean different things to different people. For instance, the
Adult Literacy and Numeracy in Scotland (ALNIS) (2001) uses the following
definition for both literacy and numeracy.
The ability to read, write and use numbers, to handle information,
express ideas and opinions, make decisions and solve problems, as
family members, workers, citizens and lifelong learners (Scottish
Executive, 2002, p. 20).
This definition includes the knowledge and the skills to be used in different situations
and contexts. There are many other definitions, and as each presents different
implications in its use, it is difficult to have one single universal definition for these
skills that could be agreed upon and used by all researchers or scholars (Blake &
Blake 2002; Kirsch, 2001; Lonsdale & McCurry, 2004).
In many countries all over the world, there is much concern with literacy and
numeracy skills. That is because of the vital roles that these two skills play in the
development of the individual and the country. They have been found to contribute to
the achievement and improvement of the economic growth and the social cohesion of
a country (Allowy, Freebody, Gilbert, Muspratt, 2002; Australian Council for
Educational Research (ACER), 2000; Department for Education and Skills, 2004;
Lankshear & Knoble, 2006). In the Commonwealth Department of Education, Science
2
and Training report, Allowy et al. (2002) stressed that literacy is an important element
for people to function in their life. They maintained that literacy is essential not only
for the individual but also the society;
Most theorists and researchers stress the social effects of literacy,
variously crediting it with levering up economies, building social
cohesion, establishing democracy, and establishing and maintaining
levels of civic well-being (p. 24).
According to Bhola (cited in Blunch, 2001), literacy and numeracy have a
strong relationship with economic and social developments of countries in the world.
Blake and Blake (2002) pointed out that the relation between literacy and economic
progress is clear and most of the countries, if not all, have come to the conclusion that
developing skilful and literate citizens is instrumental to their prosperity. This view is
reiterated in a recent report in Australia which stresses the need for learners to have
higher levels of literacy and numeracy in the globalized world.
As the global marketplace becomes increasingly skilled, workers are
required to have higher levels of education built on strong literacy and
numeracy skills. High-quality schooling is, therefore, fundamental if
Australia is to have increased productivity and participation in the
workforce in the future (Council of Australian Governments National
Reform Agenda, 2007, p. 5).
Kirsch (2001) assured that literacy and numeracy are essential for improving
living standards and competing in the global market place. They are deemed as
equally imperative for individual participation in a knowledge based society,
technological advancements across various institutions, sophisticated legal systems
and gigantic public programmes. A report written in the UK showed that a low level
of literacy and numeracy reduces economic competitiveness because people with poor
literacy and numeracy skills are less productive at work, and exhibit low ability to
cope effectively in the community. On the other hand, the promise of a bright future,
3
high earning, and quality life are most likely to be granted for those with brilliant
levels of literacy and numeracy skills (Department for Education and Skills, 2004).
In the American context, reports written on literacy and numeracy have
indicated that in order to help youth to meet the challenges in their present and future
life, literacy and numeracy levels should be improved. The National Centre on
Educational and the Economy Workforce Development Strategies Group (2004)
showed that having low levels of literacy and numeracy is problematic for the states
and the cities as these skills are necessary for youth to become productive members of
society and workforce. High levels in these two skills would ascertain the effective
participation of the individuals in further heightening the productivity in their
countries. This is further supported by the Council of Australian Governments
National Reform Agenda (2007, p. 5) which states that ―literacy and numeracy skills
are strongly correlated with increased participation in the workforce and are the
foundation of building higher skills, which is a central determinant of productivity in
the long run.‖
Furthermore, these two skills are necessary for students to perform successfully
at schools (Council of Australian Governments, 2007; Henry, 2001; Holme, 2004;
Literacy Development Council of Newfoundland and Labrador, 2000). A report by the
Council of Australian Governments (2007) suggested that school teachers‘ first
concern should be on the development of literacy and numeracy skills owing to the
fact that all learning spheres require these two skills, and partly because they are the
principal indicators/ determinants of learners‘ academic success in the future. The
same argument is mooted by Chriswick (cited in Council of Australia Governments,
2007) who asserted that the two skills are considered as the solid bases for the success
in both the academic and work affairs.
4
...the core of literacy and numeracy skills are fundamental requirements
for earning and are essential for work and life opportunities beyond
school. Low levels of literacy and numeracy impact negatively on
educational attainment and employment prospects, resulting in
economic costs that are borne by the whole community (Council of
Australia Governments, 2007, p. 5).
The Literacy Development Council of Newfoundland and Labrador (2000) elucidated
that school children with low levels of literacy and numeracy are unable to learn
school subjects. Consequently, they are predestined to academic failure. Students with
high levels of literacy and numeracy skills, on the other hand, will be more confident
and committed to their academic and work tasks; more likely to stay at school, have
confidence in dealing with their everyday tasks, as well as with lifelong learning and
health (Council of Australian Governments National Reform Agenda, 2007).
It is also found that learners‘ achievement in literacy and numeracy indicates
their participation and engagement in school in future. For instance, the Australian
Council for Educational Research (ACER) (2000) have found poor school
engagement, poor enrolment in grade 12, poor post-secondary entrance scores and
below average successful transitions from schools as being the result of poor literacy
and numeracy attainment in the ninth grade.
...A key finding was that low school achievement in the literacy and
numeracy substantially increased the likelihood that student would leave
school early regardless of other factors (Australian Council for
Educational Research, 2000, p. 14).
At present, as the world is witnessing the existence of increasingly advanced
technologies, there is a dire need for improving school children‘s performance in
literacy and numeracy skills. Routman (1996) recommends that in USA there is a need
to improve the literacy of students to enable them to function well in the present
technological era. He points out that educational policymakers in USA have to work
to increase the number of school children who can "read, analyze, and use
5
complexities, including those available on computers and electronic Media‖
(Routman, 1996, p. 6).
Finally, it is important to add that in most countries such as Australia, United
States of America, Canada, United Kingdom and others, billions of dollars have been
invested in projects in relation to literacy and numeracy. The common goal of these
projects is to ensure that school children achieve the skills which would enable them
to work effectively in their future daily life. Moreover, given the importance of
literacy and numeracy skills for the development of individuals and their countries,
improving school children literacy and numeracy performance has become the priority
of educational systems and policies, curriculum development, and everyday tasks
related to educational practice (Lankshear & Knobel, 2006; Rowe, 2006). For
example, the Australian National Literacy and Numeracy Plan (1998) explicitly
requires that educational systems set ―priorities for resources which place the
acquisition of effective literacy and numeracy of the whole enterprise of schooling on
top of others‖ (Henry, 2001, p. 27).
1.1.1 Benchmarks in Literacy and Numeracy
Individuals as well as organizations, are continuously seeking to improve their
performance or achievement. One way of doing so is by analyzing what they have
achieved and what they have yet to achieve in accordance to certain indicators or
benchmarks. The essence of the benchmarking exercise, therefore, is to improve their
performance and thereby their effectiveness. Kelly (2001) argues that benchmarking
at schools and colleges is a necessity, not a luxury.
Benchmarking in schools and colleges is particularly apt today, with
curriculum development and public expectations changing quickly.
6
Schools and colleges need to be sensitive and responsive to these
changes... (p. 10).
Broadly, benchmarking can be divided into two categories. One of which
depends on an evaluation of outcomes against an average of statistical achievement,
and the other relies on a comparison of critical process against those in other
organizations, which are recognized to be more effective (Kelly, 2001). In educational
settings, the former has been widely used because schools, for example, are more
concerned with what has been achieved, rather than with how it has been achieved.
According to the Cambridge Dictionary, a benchmark is defined as ―a level of
quality which can be used as a standard when comparing with other things‖
(Cambridge Dictionary Online, 2009). The Australian Council of State School
Organization (2005) explains that benchmarks are used to ensure whether students are
making adequate progress pertinent to learning outcomes specified at a given level,
and to identify those students who are not achieving basic knowledge and skills. It
defines benchmarks as ―standards against which performance can be measured. In
Australia education, they are often ‗minimum‘ standards. They focus on what every
child of a given age can reasonably be expected to achieve in particular learning
areas‖ (p.1).
The Australian Department of Education, Employment and Workforce
Relations (2005) stated that benchmarks are useful as they ―indicate minimum
national standards and help education authorities to ensure that all students achieve at
least the skill levels necessary to access the learning and continue to make further
progress at school‖ (p. 5). In other words, benchmarks provide information on
educational changes including students‘ performance over time. With this
7
information, schools are able to plan, evaluate and develop education programmes that
can enhance the school children's performance of literacy and numeracy.
It is noteworthy to stress that benchmarks commonly focus on certain core
components in literacy and numeracy, and they present the least levels of nationally
acceptable standards of literacy and numeracy in ‗pre-defined‘ areas. In other words,
benchmarks only describe the essential elements of literacy and numeracy that
students are to achieve at the minimum acceptable level (Curriculum Corporation,
2006). It is also important to emphasize that benchmarks are not tests; therefore, the
information gained from them should not be used as such. Nonetheless, benchmark
data are more often than not obtained from standardized tests conducted either at the
national or international levels.
Though limited to some extent, benchmarks are important for nation
development. For example, the Council of Australia Governments National Reform
Agenda (2007) has made it clear that although Australia approximately performs well
in relation to other countries, there still remains a group of 10-15 percent of children
who are not reading even to the minimum level of achievement needed for progress at
school.
At the international level, benchmarks also play a significant role. Martin,
Mullis and Kelly (2000) discussed the importance of profiling students‘ achievement
in mathematics at the TIMSS international benchmarks in the USA. They argued that
the TIMSS results help identify which areas that the national benchmarks have and
have not achieved and on which areas students should focus more.