Stephen Krashen
Sullivan
and Brown (2014) examined determinants of performance on a vocabulary test given
to 9,400 42-year olds in the UK. A great deal of data on these subjects
gathered throughout their lifetimes was available, and the researchers were
able to examine the impact of a wide variety of predictors.
Among
the important results were these:
The
amount of pleasure reading done (books):
Those
who said they did more book reading for pleasure at age 42 had nigher levels of
vocabulary development, even when social factors such as parental education and
parental occupation were controlled, as well as the subjects' level of
education and occupation.
Sullivan and Brown also reported that those who reported doing more
reading as children and at age 16 also had higher vocabulary scores, but the
amount of reading done at age 42 predicted vocabulary independent of earlier
reading.
In other words, continuing to read as an adult counts. Language and
literacy development is possible at any age.
What kind of reading was done:
Those who read "high-brow" fiction had larger vocabularies
than those who read middle-brow fiction, who in turn had larger vocabularies
than those who read low-brow fiction. Low-brow readers did not have
significantly higher vocabularies than those who read nothing. Reading fiction,
at least middle-brow fiction, counts.
The same was true for "factual" books, except that low-brow
factual book readers did slightly better than those who read nothing.
High-brow fiction readers did better than high-brow "factual"
book readers, once again demonstrating the value of fiction.
It was not entirely clear what is high, middle or low-brow. Sullivan and
Brown state that "crime, thrillers and mystery" are middle-brow
fiction, "contemporary literary fiction" is high-brow, and "science
and politics, economics and current affairs" are high-brown nonfiction.
Other genres are not so defined.
Note (see table) that those who are regular readers, every day (3.5%
increase) or several times a week (2.3%) of "middle-brow" fiction do
as well as those who read "high-brow" books less frequently (eg. once
a month = 1% advantage).
[e.g. middle brow (3.4%) + several times per week (2.3%) = 5.7%; high-brow
(5.3%) + once a month (1%) = 6.3%]
A gap in the study is that only two kinds of reading were considered:
Books and newspapers. There was no analysis of magazine reading, or reading
articles and blogs from the computer.
Additional results
Newspaper reading: Those who read regular newspapers performed somewhat
better on the vocabulary test. Those who read both regular newspapers and
tabloids did not do better than those who read nothing, and those who read only
tabloids did worse than those who read no newspapers of any kind.
Music: The results here are odd. Those who said they played a musical
instrument at age ten did slightly better on the vocabulary test. Those who
said they played an instrument at age 16 were no different than those who didn't
play an instrument, and those who played an instrument at 42 did significantly
better on the vocabulary test. Apparently, if you continue to play you might
experience a decline but then later it pays off. The advantage at age 42,
however, was modest, a advantage over those who didn't play an instrument at
42. In contrast, those who read books every day were 3.5% better than
nonreaders, and those who read several times a week were 2.3% better than
nonreaders.
This table presents Sullivan and Brown's results. The statistical
technique used, multiple regression, enables the researcher to measure the
impact of each predictor, holding the others constant, that is assuming that
they do not influence each other.
As was the case in an earlier study of 16 year olds (Sullivan and Brown,
2013, summarized in http://skrashen.blogspot.com/2013/09/new-evidence-for-power-of-reading.html),
social class of the parents was a strong predictor of vocabulary size when
reading behavior was not considered. Once reading predictors were added to the
analysis, parental social class variables were no longer significant
predictors. This suggests that reading can help overcome at least some of the
effects of poverty.
The vocabulary test had 20 items. The mean score was 63% correct
(12.6/20). A 5% advantage means one item more was correct.
predictor
|
compared to
|
||
parent occupation
|
a routine job
|
% better
|
Significance
|
mangerial
|
0.1
|
Ns
|
|
intermediale
|
0.1
|
Ns
|
|
long-term unemployed
|
-1.5
|
Sig
|
|
parental ed
|
no exam taken
|
||
secondary schools exams not passed
|
1.2
|
very sig
|
|
secondary schools exams passed
|
0.7
|
Ns
|
|
degree
|
0.5
|
Ns
|
|
newspaers in home at 16
|
none
|
||
both
|
0.7
|
Ns
|
|
Regular newspapers only
|
0.4
|
ns
|
|
tabloids only
|
-0.7
|
Ns
|
|
Book reading at 16
|
rarely or never
|
||
more than once a week
|
1.8
|
very sig
|
|
once a week
|
0.9
|
very sig
|
|
less than once q week
|
0.3
|
very sig
|
|
child reading
|
never/hardly ever
|
||
often
|
3.5
|
very sig
|
|
sometimes
|
2 pt 5
|
very sig
|
|
plays musical instrucment
|
does ntt play
|
||
age 10
|
0.6
|
Sig
|
|
age 16
|
-0.6
|
Ns
|
|
age 18 exam score
|
3.5
|
very sig
|
|
prior vocabulary test score
|
|||
age 5
|
0.1
|
very sig
|
|
age 10
|
0.2
|
very sig
|
|
age 16
|
0.3
|
very sig
|
|
education age 42
|
no exam taken
|
||
secondary school exams not passed
|
1.7
|
very sig
|
|
secondary school exams passed
|
1.8
|
very sig
|
|
degree
|
1.9
|
very sig
|
|
elite degree
|
2.2
|
very sig
|
|
occupation age 42
|
routine
|
||
Mangerial
|
2.4
|
very sig
|
|
Intermediale
|
1.7
|
very sig
|
|
long-term unemployed
|
-1
|
Sig
|
|
Frequency of reading at 42
|
no reading
|
||
reads books every day
|
3.5
|
very sig
|
|
several times a week
|
2.3
|
very sig
|
|
at least once a month
|
1
|
0.14
|
|
every few months
|
1.1
|
0.12
|
|
at least once a year
|
0.4
|
ns
|
|
fiction at 42
|
no reading
|
||
low-brow
|
0.8
|
ns
|
|
middle-brow
|
3.4
|
very sig
|
|
high-brow
|
5.3
|
very sig
|
|
factual books at 42
|
no reading
|
||
low-brow
|
1.1
|
sign
|
|
middle-brow
|
2.3
|
very sig
|
|
high-brow
|
3
|
very sig
|
|
read newspapers at 42
|
no reading
|
||
Both
|
0.2
|
ns
|
|
regular newspapers only
|
1.2
|
sig
|
|
tabloids only
|
-1.3
|
very sig
|
|
musiclal instrument at 42
|
does not play
|
1.2
|
0.02
|
overall r2 = .56
|
|||
very significant: ..01 or less
|
|||
significant = .05 or less
|
|||
not significant = larger than .05
|
Since the predictors are independent of each other, we can predict the
best readers by adding them. Taking the maximum scores from each category:
Book reading at 16: 1.8
Read as child: 3.5
Elite degree: 2.2
Managerial occupation: 2.4
Reads books every day 3.5
High-brow fiction: 5
High-brow factual books: 3
Regular Newspaper: 1.2
Child reading: 3.5
Regular newspaper: 1.2
Plays musical instrument: 1.2
Plays musical instrument: 1.2
Total = 39.3
.393% of 20 = 7.86 point advantage
Those with all the advantages will thus score an average of nearly eight
points higher (out of 20) than those with the least advantages.
Sources:
Sullivan, A. and Brown, M. 2013.
Social inequalities in cognitive scores at age 16: The role of reading. London:
Centre for Longitudinal Studies,
Institute of Education, University of
London www.cls.ioe.ac.uk
Sullivan, A. and Brown, M. 2014. Vocabulary from
adolescence to middle-age. Centre for Longitudinal Studies
Institute of
Education, University of London
amazing re3port
ReplyDeletejealousy quotes