Table 2.1: Mean performance on the overall reading scale and five reading subscales (continued) Reading sub-scales Overall Reading Scale
Access and retrieve
Integrate and interpret
Reflect and evaluate
Continuous
Noncontinuous
Montenegro
408
408
420
383
411
398
Mauritius
407
412
405
402
404
415
Jordan
405
394
410
407
417
387
Tunisia
404
393
393
427
408
393
Indonesia
402
399
397
409
405
399
Argentina
398
394
398
402
400
391
Kazakhstan
390
397
397
373
399
371
Moldova
388
390
389
384
387
386
Albania
385
380
393
376
392
366
Georgia
374
357
385
367
381
350
Qatar
372
354
379
376
375
361
Panama
371
363
372
377
373
359
Peru
370
364
371
368
374
356
Azerbaijan
362
361
373
335
362
351
Tamil Nadu-India‡
337
339
341
327
336
332
Himachal Pradesh-India‡
317
315
321
306
318
306
Kyrgyzstan
314
299
327
300
319
293
Country or economy
Table ordered by mean reading score. † School response rate did not meet PISA standards. See Sampling outcomes, Appendix A. ‡ Student sampling did not meet PISA standards. See Sampling outcomes, Appendix A.
All ten participants in PISA 2009+ had populations with a mean overall reading ability that was significantly lower than the OECD average of 493. These mean estimates ranged from 443 in Costa Rica through to 317 in Himachal Pradesh-India. On average, students in Costa Rica performed at the same mean as one OECD country, Chile, and significantly higher than one other OECD country, Mexico. The mean level of Malta’s students was also significantly higher than the lowest performing OECD country, Mexico. Students in the United Arab Emirates and Miranda-Venezuela have a mean ability statistically the same as Mexico. Malaysia, Mauritius, Moldova, Georgia, Tamil Nadu-India and Himachal Pradesh-India all performed significantly lower than any OECD country. The mean overall reading scores in Himachal Pradesh-India and Kyrgyzstan were not significantly different. Table B.2.1 in appendix B provides a complete set of statistical comparisons of country means on the overall reading scale.
Proficiency levels in reading As explained in Chapter 1, the PISA scales (including subscales) are divided into bands called proficiency levels. Students and tasks are placed on the same scale. The higher students are placed on the scale the more likely they are to succeed in any PISA assessment task. PISA results are used to estimate the proportion of 15-year-old students within each country that is performing at each proficiency level. Proficiency levels can be described by examining the characteristics of tasks placed within each level. Consequently, it is possible to estimate the proportion of students within each country that can perform such tasks. This section will report on proficiency levels with regard to overall reading literacy. There are seven proficiency levels in reading, ranging from Level 6, the highest level, involving sophisticated reading tasks that are generally only able to be completed by highly competent readers; through to Level 1b, involving elementary tasks that require only very basic reading skills. Level 2 is considered a baseline level of proficiency at which students begin to demonstrate the reading skills that will enable them to participate effectively and productively in life. Figure 2.1 shows the proportion of the population at each proficiency level of the reading scale for the PISA 2009+ participants, alongside all PISA 2009 participants and the OECD average. The figure is ordered by the proportion of students who are in the baseline Level 2 or above.
PISA Plus 2009
The reading literacy of 15-year-olds | 11