Details

Published: 06 November 2013

Hits: 68171

Dr Kerry Hempenstall, Senior Industry Fellow, School of Education, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia.

 Updated version of: Hempenstall, K. (2009). Research-driven reading assessment: Drilling to the core. Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties, 14(1), 17-52.

All my blogs can be viewed on-line or downloaded as a Word file or PDF at https://www.dropbox.com/sh/olxpifutwcgvg8j/AABU8YNr4ZxiXPXzvHrrirR8a?dl=0

New Addition – April 2025

This front section comprises new research topics added to the older original set that is still available - at the above address.

The reason for the new section is to consider Literacy assessment based upon the National Reading Panel’s Big Five components has issues that have changed over time. The new section emphasises papers published between 2020 to 2025. In contrast, the older set contains material going back quite some years.

So, the interesting question is - has the material changed over time? If so, how?

Well, there’s quite an amount of relevantly recent resources: Lets look.

AI Overview

In the 2012 Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS), nearly 25% of Australian Year 4 students failed to meet the international reading standard for their age, according to a post on the Parliament of Australia website. This means a significant portion of Australian children were not reading at the expected level for their age based on the international benchmark. The Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER) has reported that PIRLS has been measuring trends in year 4 students' reading literacy achievement every 5 years since 2001, with ACER also reporting that the Australian proficient standard is the PIRLS Intermediate benchmark. 

_______________________________________________________________________________________________ 

“In the 2021 PIRLS, 80% of Australian Year 4 students met the PIRLS Intermediate benchmark, which is equivalent to the Australian proficient standard in reading. This means they demonstrated more than elementary reading skills for their age, including the ability to make inferences, interpret character actions, and identify central ideas in texts. 

The PIRLS test, conducted every five years, assesses the reading literacy of students in Year 4. In the 2021 study, Australia participated alongside over 400,000 students from 65 countries, according to Teacher Magazine. 

While Australia's performance remained steady, some students from disadvantaged backgrounds and rural areas tended to score lower than their peers. The Australian Broadcasting Corporation reports that only 57% of Indigenous Year 4 students met the intermediate international benchmark, compared to 83% of non-Indigenous students.”

https://www.acer.org/au/discover/article/year-4-students-hold-their-ground-in-international-reading-assessment

_______________________________________________________________________________________________ 

“International comparisons (2023)

• Australia’s average reading score for 2021 was statistically higher than the average scores of 28 other countries, including Germany, New Zealand and France.
• Australia’s average reading score for 2021 was statistically lower than the average scores of 6 other countries: Singapore, Hong Kong and England (which tested in English), and Russia, Finland and Poland.
• Australia was one of 8 countries that achieved a similar average score in 2021 compared to 2016, while 21 countries experienced a decline and 3 countries managed to improve their average score.
• 80% of Australian year 4 students met or exceeded the PIRLS Intermediate benchmark (the Australian proficient standard) compared to 90% in the highest achieving country, Singapore, and 92% in Hong Kong – which both tested in English.
• 14% of Australian year 4 students achieved the Advanced benchmark compared to 35% in Singapore, the highest achieving country.

Teaching during a pandemic”

Year 4 students hold their ground in international reading assessment: PIRLS

Media release 16 May 2023 

ACER Discover

https://www.acer.org/au/discover/article/year-4-students-hold-their-ground-in-international-reading-assessment

_______________________________________________________________________________________________ 

“Australia’s average score of 540 points in PIRLS 2021 was statistically similar to the average score in PIRLS 2016 (544 points) and remains higher than the average score for 2011 (527 points). Achievement since 2016 was stable in every Australian state and territory except Victoria, where the average score fell 14 points.

• Australia’s average reading score for 2021 was statistically lower than the average scores of 6 other countries: Singapore, Hong Kong and England (which tested in English), and Russia, Finland and Poland.
• Australia was one of 8 countries that achieved a similar average score in 2021 compared to 2016, while 21 countries experienced a decline and 3 countries managed to improve their average score.
• 80 percent of Australian Year 4 students met or exceeded the PIRLS Intermediate benchmark (the Australian proficient standard) compared to 90 percent in the highest achieving country, Singapore, and 92 percent in Hong Kong – which both tested in English.
• 14 percent of Australian year 4 students achieved the Advanced benchmark compared to 35 percent in Singapore, the highest achieving country.”

(2023) Year 4 students hold their ground in international literacy assessment. Educators Matters.

https://www.educationmattersmag.com.au/year-4-students-hold-their-ground-in-international-literacy-assessment/

_______________________________________________________________________________________________ 

“The 2021 results show students in Australia outperformed their peers in 28 other countries, including New Zealand, France and Germany.

Australia’s average score was lower than the average scores for 6 other countries, including Singapore, Hong Kong and England (all tested in English), as well as other top-performing countries, the Russian Federation, Finland and Poland.

Of all participating countries, students in Singapore scored the highest, on average, on the PIRLS 2021 assessment, followed by students in Hong Kong and the Russian Federation. In Singapore, 1 in every 3 students reached the Advanced benchmark for reading comprehension and a similar proportion of students reached the High benchmark.”

Teacher Magazine (2025)

https://www.teachermagazine.com/au_en/articles/pirls-2021-year-4-reading-and-literacy-results

_______________________________________________________________________________________________ 

“In 2024, the average reading score for the nation at grade 8 was 2 points lower than 2022 and 5 points lower compared to 2019. NAEP scores are also reported at five selected percentiles to show the progress made by lower- (10th and 25th percentiles), middle- (50th percentile), and higher- (75th and 90th percentiles) performing students. Compared to 2022, scores were lower at the 10th, 25th, and 50th percentiles. Compared to the first reading assessment in 1992, the average score was not significantly different in 2024.

Lower average reading score in 2024 reflected in score declines for lower- and middle-performing students

Average scores are reported on the NAEP reading scale that ranges from 0 to 500. NAEP scores are also reported at five selected percentiles to show the progress made by lower- (10th and 25th percentiles), middle- (50th percentile), and higher- (75th and 90th percentiles) performing students.

• The average reading score for eighth-grade students in 2024 was lower by two points compared to 2022, but was not significantly different in comparison to the first reading assessment in 1992.
• Compared to 2022, the 2024 reading scores were lower for eighth-graders at the 10th, 25th, and 50th percentiles.
• Compared to 1992, the reading scores for eighth-grade students at the 10th and 25th percentiles were lower in 2024. The scores for eighth-graders at the 50th, 75th, and 90th percentiles were not significantly different from 1992.”

Nationside Repord Card (2025)

https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/reports/reading/2024/g4_8/national-trends/?grade=8

_______________________________________________________________________________________________ 

“Almost 5,500 Year 4 students from 281 schools around Australia participated in the PIRLS 2021 assessment. Internationally, over 400,000 students in 65 countries and educational systems took part in PIRLS 2021

Australian Year 4 students scored higher, on average, in the PIRLS 2021 assessment than Year 4 students in 28 other countries. Australian students’ average score of 540 points in PIRLS 2021 is similar to the average score of Australian students in PIRLS 2016 and higher than the average score in PIRLS 2011. 80% of Year 4 students in Australia met the proficient standard (the PIRLS Intermediate benchmark), including 14% at the Advanced benchmark and 34% at the High benchmark. The proportion of Australian Year 4 students who did not meet the proficient standard (20%) has not changed since PIRLS 2016. Students in the Australian Capital Territory scored higher, on average, than students in all other jurisdictions.

Female Year 4 students scored higher, on average, than male Year 4 students in Australia and in New South Wales, Queensland, Western Australia and South Australia. Students who identified as having a First Nations background scored 491 points on average, lower than the average 547 points for students from other backgrounds. Differences in the average reading scores of First Nations background students and other Australian students have changed little over 3 cycles of PIRLS. The difference was 57 points in 2011, 67 points in 2016 and 56 score points in 2021. Australian students who had many books in the home scored 566 points on average, 12 points higher than students with an average number of books in the home (554 points), and 60 points higher than those with a few books in the home (506 points). Australian students in more disadvantaged schools scored 508 points on average, which was 32 points lower than students in neither more affluent nor more disadvantaged schools (540 score points), and 54 points lower than students in more affluent schools (562 points). Australian students who attended schools in major cities scored 546 points on average, 19 points higher than students in provincial areas (527 points), and 62 points, on average, higher than students who attended schools in remote areas (485 points). Australian students showed a relative strength in the Literary reading purpose, but no difference in their performance on the Informational purpose subscale and overall reading. Australian students had a relative strength in the Interpreting, Integrating and Evaluating processes Inferencing subscale, with a mean of 534 points.

Hillman, K., O’Grady, E., Rodrigues, S., Schmid, M., & Thomson, S. (2023). Progress in International Reading Literacy Study: Australia’s results from PIRLS 2021. Australian Council for Educational Research. https://doi.org/10.37517/978-1-74286-693-2

https://research.acer.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?params=/context/pirls/article/1006/&path_info=PIRLS2021report_Australia.pdf

_______________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Me: “The mean scores for Australian students in PISA 2000 was 528 points, compared to 515 for PISA 2009. A decline in average scores was also noted between PISA 2000 and PISA 2006, when reading literacy was a minor domain (ACER, 2010).”

https://www.nifdi.org/resources/hempenstall-blog/393-literacy-assessment-based-upon-the-national-reading-panel-s-big-five-components.html

_______________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Me: “In a three-year Australian study “Wyatt-Smith and Castleton investigated how Australian teachers made judgments about student writing using literacy benchmark standards (Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs [DEETYA] 1998; Wyatt-Smith and Castleton 2005). … Teachers made judgments based on their own experience; explicit literacy standards were not part of teachers' experience, and teachers accepted that their "in head" standards varied from year to year and from class to class. (Bolt, 2011, p.158). Studies by Feinberg and Shapiro (2009) and by Bates and Nettlebeck (2001) each noted that informal assessments were significantly less accurate for struggling readers, and significantly overestimated their capabilities. …

In the largest, most comprehensive evidenced-based review ever conducted of research on how children learn to read the National Reading Panel (NRP; National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, 2000) presented its findings. For its review, the Panel selected methodologically sound research from the approximately 100,000 reading studies that have been published since 1966, and from another 15,000 earlier studies.

The specific areas the NRP noted as crucial for reading instruction were phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension. Students should be explicitly and systematically taught:

1. Phonemic awareness: The ability to hear and identify individual sounds in spoken words.
2. Phonics: The relationship between the letters of written language and the sounds of spoken language.
3. Fluency: The capacity to read text accurately and quickly.
4. Vocabulary: All the words students must know to communicate effectively.

• Comprehension: The ability to understand what has been read.”

What is the place for national assessment in the prevention and resolution of reading difficulties.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/19404158.2013.840887

_______________________________________________________________________________________________ 

“An extensive body of research on reading instruction has concluded that there are five essential sets of knowledge and skills for reading and that a high quality literacy program should include all five components. These components are inter-related — the development of each is dependent on the others — but an emphasis on phonics in the early years is necessary to build foundational word reading skills. Research also shows that the most effective method of teaching is systematic and explicit instruction.”

The Five ‘Keys’ to Reading. (2025).

https://fivefromfive.com.au/the-five-keys-to-reading/

_______________________________________________________________________________________________ 

“The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) is the largest nationally representative, continuing evaluation of the condition of education in the United States. It has served as a national yardstick of student achievement since 1969.”

The Nation's Report Card (NAEP).

https://www.nagb.gov/news-and-events/news-releases/2009/release-20090428.html

_______________________________________________________________________________________________ 

“NAEP, also known as “The Nation's Report Card,” is a program of the US Department of Education that provides information on state and national student achievement. It also provides information on how student achievement has changed over time.”

National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) (2015). California Department of Education.

https://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/nr/#:~:text=NAEP%2C%20also%20known%20as%20%E2%80%9CThe,achievement%20has%20changed%20over%20time.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________ 

“NAEP conducts state and large-district assessments in grades four and eight and national assessments in grades four, eight, and twelve. Results are based on a representative sample of students, and individual student or school results are not provided. In California, district-level results are available only for Fresno Unified School District (USD) through 2019, Los Angeles USD, and San Diego USD.”

California Educator. (2019).

https://www.cta.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/november-09.pdf

This next segment is the original, broader document and includes earlier periods.

There is considerable interest and controversy in both the US and Australian communities concerning how our students are faring in the task of mastering reading, and how our education system deals with such a vital skill. There is concern in both countries that national and international comparisons have not been flattering.

For decades, the National Assessment of Educational Progress (known as “The Nation’s Report Card”) has shown that 2 out of 3 students are not proficient in reading by the end of the 4th grade—the first year of schooling in which reading is an essential tool skill.4 Over 1 out of 3—more than a million students per year—fail to reach even the basic skill level (Stone, 2013, p.3).

There is a current public perception that either educational outcomes for students have been declining or that the education system is increasingly less able to meet rising community and employer expectations (Jones, 2012).

Parental concerns about literacy are becoming increasingly evident in Australia, too. In the Parents’ Attitudes to Schooling report (Department of Education, Science and Training, 2007), only 37.5% of the surveyed parents believed that students were leaving school with adequate skills in literacy. There has been an increase in dissatisfaction since the previous Parents' Attitudes to Schooling survey in 2003, when 61% of parents considered primary school education as good or very good, and 51% reported secondary education as good or very good. Recent reports in the press suggest that employers too have concerns about literacy development among young people generally, not simply for those usually considered to comprise an at-risk group (Collier, 2008).

 Confidence in US public schools (Jones, 2012).

Read more ...