The Importance of Parents’ Own Reading for 10-Year Old Students’ Reading Achievement in the Nordic Countries

Støle, Hildegunn; Wagner, Åse Kari H.; Schwippert, Knut

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-61648-9_14

Cited by 6 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Studies have found many factors affecting students' reading skills and attitudes. Typically, the supportiveness of the home environment (Gustafsson et al, 2013;Hemmerechts et al, 2017;Mullis et al, 2017, Home Environment Support section), socioeconomic background (Hemmerechts et al, 2017;Neff, 2015;Sirin, 2005;Støle et al, 2020), and engagement in reading (Ho & Lau, 2018;Wantchekon & Kim, 2019) are found to be important explanators of reading proficiency. Gender issues also arise regularly in literacy studies since gender difference in large-scale studies has for years favored girls (Gustafsson et al, 2013;OECD, 2019b, 141-149).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Associations between teacher quality, instructional quality and student reading outcomes in Nordic PIRLS 2016 data

Leino

Nissinen

Sirén

2022

Large-scale Assess Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS) focuses on the reading proficiency of students mostly in the fourth year of schooling. A wide selection of studies has shown that family background and early literacy activities at home have substantial associations with student achievement in reading literacy. However, research focusing on teacher qualities and teaching processes is inadequate. In this study, we focus on associations of teacher quality (formal qualifications and professional identity) and instructional quality (classroom management, cognitive activation and teacher support) with cognitive and affective-motivational student outcomes (variables Reading Achievement, Students Confident in Reading, and Students Like Reading). We analyzed PIRLS 2016 data from four Nordic countries (Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden), consisting altogether of 923 teachers and 17,161 students. Using path analysis, we considered selected background variables from teacher and student questionnaires in relation to the outcomes. Overall, the associations of student outcomes with teacher quality and instruction quality were found to be weak in all the countries, and there was little variation between the countries. The strongest association observed in all countries was the positive relation between Teacher Support Perceived by Students and Students Like Reading. Further, a positive Working Atmosphere in the Classroom tended to promote Reading Achievement and Students Confident in Reading. Teacher’s Specialization in reading and the language of the test was positively associated with Teacher’s Self-Efficacy in teaching reading, which in turn was related to measures of instructional quality. The implications for practice are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Associations between teacher quality, instructional quality and student reading outcomes in Nordic PIRLS 2016 data

Leino

Nissinen

Sirén

2022

Large-scale Assess Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Equity, Equality and Diversity in the Nordic Model of Education—Contributions from Large-Scale Studies

Frønes

Pettersen

Radišić

et al. 2020

Equity, Equality and Diversity in the Nordic Model of Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In education, the ‘Nordic model’ refers to the similarities and shared aims of the education systems developed in the five Nordic countries—Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Sweden and Norway—after World War II. Traditionally, there have always been many similarities and links between the Nordic countries through their historical connections and geographical proximity. The common experience of solidarity and political oppression during World War II also created the basis for a common political orientation in the postwar period, which was also reflected in the education systems during the development of the countries’ economies and their establishment of welfare states. At the same time, this very process has been strongly supported by social-democratic governance in these countries in the 1960s and 1970s (Blossing, Imsen, & Moos, 2014). The model is based on a concept of Education for All, where equity, equal opportunities and inclusion are consistently cited as the goal of schooling and orientation (Blossing et al., 2014; Telhaug, Mediås, & Aasen, 2006). This corresponds to the egalitarian idea of a classless society, which is characterised by individual democratic participation, solidarity and mutual respect and appreciation for all. This idea was manifested in, for example, major reallocations of economic resources through the tax systems and free schooling for all, which arose out of the principle that parents’ lack of economic resources should not prevent children from obtaining a good quality education. The equalisation of structural inequalities and creation of equity was—and still is—the task of the education system in the Nordic countries. Worldwide, especially within the Nordic countries, the view is being shared that the education system should be fair and provide access and opportunities for further education, regardless of where someone lives, the status of the parental home, where someone comes from, what ethnic background someone has, what age or gender someone is, what skills one has or whether someone has physical disabilities (Blossing et al., 2014; Quaiser-Pohl, 2013). Some special features of the Nordic system are therefore deeply embedded in the school culture in the countries, for example, through the fact that access to free and public local schools and adapted education is statutory, which is in contrast to many other countries, even other European ones (further developed and discussed in Chap. 10.1007/978-3-030-61648-9_2). The Nordic model is widely considered a good example of educational systems that provide equal learning opportunities for all students. Achieving equity, here meaning the creation of fairness, is expressed concretely in political measures to distribute resources equally and strengthen the equality of marginalised groups by removing the barriers to seize educational opportunities, for example, when mixed-ability comprehensive schools are created or the educational system is made inclusive regarding students with special needs (UNESCO, 1994; Wiborg, 2009). Equality is roughly connoted with ‘sameness in treatment’ (Espinoza, 2007), while equity takes further in consideration also the question of how well the requirements of individual needs are met. Thus, the goal of equity is always linked to the concept of justice, provided that an equality of opportunities is created. If, however, one looks at individual educational policy decisions on the creation of educational justice in isolation, one must weigh which concept of equity or equality is present in each case. For example, it is not enough to formally grant equal rights in the education system to disadvantaged groups, but something must also be done actively to ensure that marginalised groups can use and realise this equality. The complexity of the terms becomes even greater when one considers that to achieve equality, measures can be taken that presuppose an unequal distribution of resources or unequal treatment and, therefore, are not fair e.g., when resources are bundled especially for disadvantaged groups and these are given preferential treatment (will be further developed and discussed in Chap. 10.1007/978-3-030-61648-9_2). Thus, equality and equity rely on each other and are in a field of tension comprising multiple ideas (Espinoza, 2007).

show abstract

Equity, Equality and Diversity in the Nordic Countries—Final Thoughts and Looking Ahead

Frønes

Pettersen

Radišić

et al. 2020

Equity, Equality and Diversity in the Nordic Model of Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the process of preparing this volume, especially in our review of previous scientific work on the Nordic model of education, it appeared that different researchers approached the topic primarily in the form of historical–political policy analyses (Telhaug, Mediås, & Aasen, 2006) and through the qualitative description of individual country portraits or the differences between these (e.g., Antikainen, 2006; Blossing, Imsen, & Moos, 2014; Lundahl, 2016). In these previous analyses, the question was raised whether a common Nordic model of education can be identified at all and to what extent neoliberal policies and broader globalisation trends affect the further development of education systems in the Nordic countries. The latter has especially been discussed in light of the increased competition between these systems emerging currently, here running against the common thread that was adopted shortly after World War II. In contrast to the works mentioned above, this book explicitly chose a quantitative empirical approach to the topic, linked with the attempt to indicate, measure and evaluate educational equity across the Nordic countries using data from large-scale assessment studies. Thus, the approach of this book was more data driven and descriptive than oriented on the political question of whether a common model exists.

show abstract

The Importance of Parents’ Own Reading for 10-Year Old Students’ Reading Achievement in the Nordic Countries

Cited by 6 publications

References 27 publications

Associations between teacher quality, instructional quality and student reading outcomes in Nordic PIRLS 2016 data

Associations between teacher quality, instructional quality and student reading outcomes in Nordic PIRLS 2016 data

Equity, Equality and Diversity in the Nordic Model of Education—Contributions from Large-Scale Studies

Equity, Equality and Diversity in the Nordic Countries—Final Thoughts and Looking Ahead

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About