Abstract
This study investigated the reading demands of restricted-use items administered to South African grade 9 learners as part of the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) 2015. The method proposed by Mullis, Martin and Foy (2013) was used to categorise items into low, medium and high readability groups. The ‘knowing’ domain contained mostly low readability items; the ‘applying’ domain was almost equally medium and high readability items; with the ‘reasoning’ domain containing mostly high readability items. Results show significant differences between the percentage of correct answers between the low and high categories and between the medium and high categories. However, the impact of reading demand on performance cannot be fully analysed without cross-reference to English proficiency. Nevertheless, the higher the readability, the greater the chance is for learners to answer incorrectly. A continued expected low performance for most South African learners is implied.
Highlights
It is widely known that South Africa has performed very poorly in internationally administered literacy tests over the last couple of years
The former, Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS), is an international study of reading comprehension of fourth and fifth graders conducted across many counties world-wide and, the latter, SACMEQ is a collaborative network of fifteen ministries of education who periodically conduct standardised surveys in Southern and Eastern
South African learner achievement in science in the lower secondary grades2 remains disappointingly low. All three these international studies (PIRLS, SACMEQ and Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS)) “speak to each other” in the sense that it shows similar trends and highlights major concerns in literacy, mathematics and science comprehension and knowledge by South African learners. Further questions arise such as: If South African learners have very restricted literacy comprehension, how does this affect the understanding of other subjects, for example, a word problem in mathematics or science where the problems often involve a narrative of some sort? Given the vast evidence of poor achievement and contributing contextual factors, the rationale for the current study is to investigate the role that reading demands may play in South African Grade 9 learners’ ability to demonstrate an understanding of, and engagement with, restricted use science items from the TIMSS 2015 cycle
Summary
It is widely known that South Africa has performed very poorly in internationally administered literacy tests over the last couple of years This is evidenced by the findings of the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS) 2006 cycle (Mullis, Martin, Kennedy, & Foy, 2007), 2011 cycle (Mullis, Martin, Foy & Drucker, 2012) and 2016 cycle (Mullis, Martin, Foy & Hooper, 2017) and by the findings of the Southern and Eastern African Consortium for Monitoring Educational Quality (SACMEQ) 2007 cycle, SACMEQ III (Moloi & Chetty, 2011) and 2013 cycle, SACMEQ IV (Department of Basic Education [DBE], 2017). South African learner achievement in science in the lower secondary grades (or senior phase) remains disappointingly low All three these international studies (PIRLS, SACMEQ and TIMSS) “speak to each other” in the sense that it shows similar trends and highlights major concerns in literacy, mathematics and science comprehension and knowledge by South African learners. The following section is structured according to the IEA’s tripartite model of curriculum implementation to provide a cursory contextual understanding of the South African landscape and discusses: 1) the intended science curriculum at lower secondary level, 2) the implemented science curriculum against some contextual background factors, and 3) the attained curriculum as evidenced by the South African Grade 9 science achievement in TIMSS 2015 concludes the section
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
