Theoretical framework

Reading literacy is not only a cognitive issue. It also covers non-cognitive aspects, such as reading attitudes and practices. Most current models of reading achievement or reading acquisition consider reading practices and reading attitudes or motivation as key factors related to reading (Kamil & al., 2000; McKenna & al., 1995). For Guthrie & Wigfield (2000), motivation is the link between frequent reading and reading achievement. Motivation towards reading mediates the so-called “Matthew effect” (Stanovich, 1986) that refers to the circular relationship between practices, attitudes and achievement. Better readers tend to read more because they are motivated to read, which leads to improved vocabulary and better skills. As a result, the gap between good and poor readers grows over time. According to Guthrie & Wigfield, “As students become engaged readers, they provide themselves with self-generated learning opportunities that are equivalent to several years of education.”(2000, p. 404).

Results from PISA 2000 (Kirsch & al., 2003) and PISA 2009 (OECD, 2010) have shown in an international context that:

-        engagement in reading, as defined in PISA (time spent on reading for pleasure, time spent in reading a diversity of material, high motivation and interest in reading), widely varies from country to country;

-        on average, females are more engaged than males in reading;

-        engagement in reading is one of the best predictors of reading proficiency (OECD, 2010).

Objectives and research questions

In PISA 2009, 19 countries took part to an optional assessment of digital reading. In each country, a subsample of 15 year-olds was administered not only the paper and pencil PISA test, but also different reading tasks online. The results of this additional study will be reported in June 2011 by OECD; data are still under embargo.

The aim of our study is to investigate the relationships between engagement in reading, especially online reading practices, and digital reading proficiency of 15 year-olds in the 11 European countries which took part to this option (11 out of 19).  

The OECD (2010) report PISA 2009 results: Learning to learn has already investigated in depth how engagement in reading relate to print reading proficiency.

Our study is focused on the relationship between reading practices, attitudes and digital reading proficiency. A special attention is dedicated here to online reading practices. Indeed, online reading practices are more likely to have a stronger link with digital reading proficiency than with print reading.

The following research questions are addressed:

-        do students who enjoy reading and read a diversity of print material read better online?

-        do students who read more frequently online read better online? Which kind of online reading activities are more positively related to digital proficiency?

-        do students who read more frequently online read less print material or conversely?

For each of those research questions, special attention will be dedicated to:

-        country differences;

-        gender differences or interactions.

Guthrie, J.T., Schafer, W. D., Von Secker, C. & Alban, T. (2000).Contribution of reading instruction and text resources to achievement and engagement in a statewide school improvement program. Journal of Educational Research, 93, 211-226. Guthrie, J. & Wigfield, A. (2000), Engagement and motivation in reading. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson & R. Barr (Eds), Handbook of reading research. Vol III. LEA, 403-425 Guthrie, J & Davis, M. H. (2002). Motivating struggling readers in middle school through an engagement model of classroom practice. Reading and Writing Quarterly. In press. Kamil, M.L., Mosenthal, P.B., Pearson, P. D.& Barr, R. (eds) (2000). Handbook of reading research.Vol III. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Kirsch, I., de Jong, J., Lafontaine, D., McQueen, J., Mendelovits, J. & Monseur, C. (2003). Reading for change. Performance and engagement across countries. Results of PISA 2000. Paris : OECD. McKenna, M., Kear, D. J., & Ellsworth, R.A. (1995). Children’s attitudes toward reading: a national survey. Reading Research Quarterly, 30/4, 934-956. OECD (2011). PISA 2009 Results: Students on line. Paris: OECD. Stanovich, K. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 360-407.