Multiple Dimensions of Korean Adolescents’ Reading Attitudes and Achievement

Multiple Dimensions of Korean Adolescents’ Reading Attitudes

and Achievement

Bong Gee Jang, Oakland UniversityMike McKenna, University of Virginia

Ji Hoon Ryoo, University of Virginia

Overview Background Method Results Discussion

Agenda

McKenna, M. C., Conradi, K., Lawrence, C., Jang, B. G., & Meyer, J. P. (2012). Reading attitudes of middle school students: Results of a U.S. survey. Reading Research Quarterly, 47, 282-306.

Jang, B. G. & McKenna, M. C. (2013, December). Multiple dimensions of Korean adolescents’ reading attitudes and achievement. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Literacy Research Association, Dallas, TX.

Overview Background Method Results Discussion

Below basicAt or Above Basic

66%

34%

NAEP 2009 4th Grade Reading

Overview Background Method Results Discussion

Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA)

World’s Top Ten Next Ten

1. Korea2. Finland3. Canada4. New Zealand5. Japan6. Australia7. Netherlands8. Belgium9. Norway10. Estonia

11. Switzerland12. Poland13. Iceland14. United States15. Sweden16. Germany17. Ireland18. France19. Denmark20. United Kingdom

Overview Background Method Results Discussion

Research Questions

To what extent do the four dimensions of reading attitudes relate to the reading achievement of Korean adolescents?

To what extent do the four subscales of SARA differ based on gender and grade after controlling for engagement and achievement?

Overview Background Method Results Discussion

Survey Methodology

“The purpose of survey research is to describe specific characteristics of a large group of persons, objects, or institutions” (Jaeger, 1997, p. 449)

Overview Background Method Results Discussion

Measures – Reading AttitudesSurvey of Adolescent Reading Attitudes (McKenna et al.,

2012)

Cronbach’s alpha reliabilities are .91 for the full scale, .85 for the Recreational Print Scale, .78 for the Recreational Digital Scale, .72 for the Academic Digital Scale and .73 for the Academic Print scale.

Overview Background Method Results Discussion

Measures – Reading Comprehension

Noh Reading Inventory (NRI; Noh, 2011)

The reliability of the inventory is .84 for 7th graders, .84 for 8th graders and .77 for 9th graders (Yoon, 2008).

Levels Items

Factual Comprehension 9

Inferential Comprehension 13

Critical Comprehension 8

Overview Background Method Results Discussion

Data Collection

Overview Background Method Results Discussion

Analysis

Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) To examine if there was any teacher cluster effect on

the students’ attitudes and comprehension scores Values between 0.10 and 0.25 are acceptable in Hedges

and Hedberg (2007)

Overview Background Method Results Discussion

Analysis

Structural Equation Modeling (SEM)Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling (ESEM;

Asparouhovn & Muthen, 2009) Recommended when the strict requirement of zero

cross-loadings in confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) fails to find a better-fitting model

Evaluation criteria: CFI >.96, RMSEA ≤.06, SRMR ≤.10

Overview Background Method Results Discussion

A Proposed Model

Correlations

Overview Background Method Results Discussion

Correlations

Overview Background Method Results Discussion

Correlations

Overview Background Method Results Discussion

ANOVAs

ANOVAs

ANOVAs

ANOVAs

Overview Background Method Results Discussion

Base Model

Overview Background Method Results Discussion

Revised Model

Model Comparison

Overview Background Method Results Discussion

Criteria Base Model Revised Model

Chi Square 682.260 429.000

df 184 167

p-value <0.000 <0.000

BIC 41624.926 41480.012

RMSEA 0.068 0.052

CFI 0.899 0.947

SRMR 0.069 0.045

ImplicationsTest-driven school culture in Korea shapes

attitudes differently over time.American culture is moving in this direction (e.g.,

NAEP, PISA, CCSS).More extensive technology integration in Korea

shapes attitudes differently.No gender differences in attitudes toward

recreational reading in digital settings.

Overview Background Method Results Discussion

Next Step

Overview Background Method Results Discussion