Why do boys and girls perform differently on PISA Reading in Finland? The effects of reading fluency, achievement behaviour, leisure reading and homework activity
Abstract:The present study examined gender gap in Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) Reading and mediators of the gender gap in a Finnish sample (n = 1,309). We examined whether the gender gap in PISA Reading performance can be understood via the effects of reading fluency, achievement behaviour (mastery orientation and task-avoidant behaviour) or the amount of time spent with leisure reading and homework. Girls outperformed boys in all measures except for achievement behaviour. The models explaining P… Show more
“…In particular, there is a large disadvantage for boys at the lower end of the distribution: at the 5th and 10th percentile, boys score almost one half standard deviation (50 PISA points) less than girls. Torppa et al ( 2018 ) investigate this for an extension of Finnish PISA data and find that general reading fluency (speed) is the main explanation for this difference, whereas other indicators like mastery orientation, homework activity or leisure book reading frequency are not very influential. Fig.…”
In this paper, we decompose worldwide PISA mathematics and reading scores. While mathematics scores are still tilted towards boys, girls have a larger advantage in reading over boys. Girls’ disadvantage in mathematics is increasing over the distribution of talents. Our decomposition shows that part of this increase can be explained by an increasing trend in productive endowments and learning productivity, although the largest part remains unexplained. Countries’ general level of gender (in)equality also contributes to girls’ disadvantage. For reading, at the upper end of the talent distribution, girls’ advantage can be fully explained by differences in learning productivity, but this is not so at lower levels.
“…In particular, there is a large disadvantage for boys at the lower end of the distribution: at the 5th and 10th percentile, boys score almost one half standard deviation (50 PISA points) less than girls. Torppa et al ( 2018 ) investigate this for an extension of Finnish PISA data and find that general reading fluency (speed) is the main explanation for this difference, whereas other indicators like mastery orientation, homework activity or leisure book reading frequency are not very influential. Fig.…”
In this paper, we decompose worldwide PISA mathematics and reading scores. While mathematics scores are still tilted towards boys, girls have a larger advantage in reading over boys. Girls’ disadvantage in mathematics is increasing over the distribution of talents. Our decomposition shows that part of this increase can be explained by an increasing trend in productive endowments and learning productivity, although the largest part remains unexplained. Countries’ general level of gender (in)equality also contributes to girls’ disadvantage. For reading, at the upper end of the talent distribution, girls’ advantage can be fully explained by differences in learning productivity, but this is not so at lower levels.
“…Gender difference has also been an area of interest in literacy research. Girls have been shown to have an advantage in reading fluency and reading comprehension in several studies (Logan & Johnston, 2009;Torppa, Eklund, Sulkunen, Niemi, & Ahonen, 2018), including large-scale international studies, such as the Program for International Student Assessment (OECD, 2013b). Similar patterns have also been observed in some ORC studies (Forzani, 2016;Salmerón, García, & Vidal-Abarca, 2018).…”
The present study evaluated the extent to which literacy skills (reading fluency, written spelling, and reading comprehension), together with nonverbal reasoning, prior knowledge, and gender, are related to students' online research and comprehension (ORC) performance. The ORC skills of 426 sixth graders were measured using a Finnish adaptation of the Online Research and Comprehension Assessment. Results of a structural equation model showed that these ORC skills were divided into six highly correlated factors, and that they formed a common factor in ORC. Altogether, these predictor variables explained 57% of the variance in ORC. Reading comprehension, along with gender, was the strongest predictor for ORC performance. In addition, reading fluency and written spelling explained ORC variance over and above reading comprehension. These findings suggest that struggling readers probably face difficulties online.
“…Firstly, the findings from our study indicate a gender gap in letter-sound knowledge that is already present when they first attend primary school, and secondly, that these differences tend to persist throughout their first year. Research has demonstrated the impact of letter-sound knowledge on future reading skills (Hulme et al, 2012 ; Torppa et al, 2018 ). The gender gap, already observed in 5-to-6-year-old children, accumulates and may be one of several factors that explain the gender differences found in PISA 2015.…”
Literacy is the cornerstone of a primary school education and enables the intellectual and social development of young children. Letter-sound knowledge has been identified as critical for developing proficiency in reading. This study explored the development of letter-sound knowledge in relation to gender during the first year of primary school. 485 Norwegian children aged 5–6 years completed assessment of letter-sound knowledge, i.e., uppercase letters- name; uppercase letter -sound; lowercase letters- name; lowercase letter-sound. The children were tested in the beginning, middle, and end of their first school year. The results revealed a clear gender difference in all four variables in favor of the girls which were relatively constant over time. Implications for understanding the role of gender and letter-sound knowledge for later reading performance are discussed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
