Appendix C
The International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA) Reading Literacy Study (1990)
The IEA international reading survey (1990) showed that, overall, New Zealand students at age nine perform well above the international average in literacy achievement, but deeper analysis of the overall results shows that there are significant disparities between sub-groups.
There is a wide gap between the highest and lowest levels of reading achievement and a significant difference between the average performance of Māori and Pacific Islands students and that of others. Māori performed significantly below the international average, and Māori boys performed at a level below that of Māori girls. On average, Māori students outperformed Pacific Islands students. Wagemaker (1992) reports that on three comprehension tasks, there were large significant differences between Pākehā and Māori children (mean differences of around eleven percent items correct), and Pākehā and Pacific Islands children (mean differences of around fifteen percent items correct). Differences were not present on the word recognition task.
Children whose home language is not the language of instruction have markedly lower literacy levels than other children. Out of thirty-two systems of education, New Zealand has the largest gap in achievement between children who are learning in their home language and those who are not (many of whom were Pacific Islands children). A reanalysis by Wilkinson (1998) revealed significant differences between these children on both comprehension and word recognition. The differences remained after controlling for socio-economic status. Pākehā students had significantly higher scores on comprehension and word recognition after controlling for socio-economic status. Limited relationships between word recognition and comprehension were found, and socio-economic status was significantly related to both measures.
New Zealand also had the second largest score difference between gender groups when compared with other countries in the study.
Wagemaker, H. “Preliminary findings of the IEA literacy study: New Zealand achievement in the national and international context.” Educational Psychology 12 (3&4) 1992, : pp. 195-214.
Wilkinson, I.A.G. “Dealing with diversity: Achievement gaps in reading literacy among New Zealand students.” Reading Research Quarterly 35 (2), 1998. pp: 144-168.
International Adult Literacy Survey (1997)
This survey, which was the first comprehensive study of its type in New Zealand, was conducted in March 1996 as part of a series of international surveys known as the International Adult Literacy Survey. It surveyed a random sample of 4223 adults ranging in age from sixteen to sixty-five years and used a wide range of prose, document, and quantitative literacy texts containing the type of information that people encounter in everyday circumstances .
The results show that around one in five New Zealanders is operating at a highly effective level of literacy, able to manage abstract concepts and employ specialised knowledge in interpreting information. Over half of New Zealand adults are operating at a level considered to be a requirement to meet the demands of “everyday life”.
However, of particular concern is the high concentration of adults with very poor literacy skills (around one in five New Zealanders). There are, overall, poorer literacy skills among the unemployed. Poor literacy was also found to be concentrated within the Pacific Islands and other ethnic minority groups and within the Māori population. Results for Pacific Islands and other ethnic minority groups were reflected in the relatively poor English skills of those for whom English was not their first language.
Ministry of Education. Adult literacy in New Zealand: Results from the International Adult Literacy Survey
National Education Monitoring Project (Monitoring Report 6: Reading and Speaking Assessment Results, 1996)
The results of this project confirmed the lower performance of Māori compared with non-Māori on reading tasks. It also found examples of inverse relationships between performance and the proportion of Māori on school rolls. Schools with Pacific Islands students were in a similar situation. In addition, the project found that, in general, there were significant differences in performance between students in the low-decile grouping (deciles 1 to 3) and those in the middle- and high-decile groupings.
Approximately twenty percent of the national sample in NEMP were below “expected bands” in oral reading on measures of decoding and comprehension. (Whereas ten percent were considered to be just below expected bands, a further ten percent were of particular concern.) Significant differences were found between schools (decile 1–3 versus the rest), and significant differences were found between Māori and non-Māori on all ten oral and silent reading tasks and on one of four speaking tasks. Significant differences between Pacific Islands and non-Pacific Islands children are indicated, based on school comparisons.
Flockton, L. and Crooks, T. Reading and Speaking Assessment Results 1996: National Education Monitoring Report 6. Wellington: Ministry of Education. 1997.