PISA 2009 Results Learning to Learn Student

Engagement Strategies and Practices Volume III

Oecd pdf download

https://ebookgate.com/product/pisa-2009-results-learning-to-
learn-student-engagement-strategies-and-practices-volume-iii-
oecd/

Get Instant Ebook Downloads – Browse at https://ebookgate.com

Instant digital products (PDF, ePub, MOBI) available
Download now and explore formats that suit you...

Everyday Executive Function Strategies Improve Student

Engagement Self Regulation Behavior and Learning 1st
Edition Valerie Saxton Sharpe
https://ebookgate.com/product/everyday-executive-function-strategies-
improve-student-engagement-self-regulation-behavior-and-learning-1st-
edition-valerie-saxton-sharpe/
ebookgate.com

PISA PISA Data Analysis Manual SPSS Second Edition Oecd

Organisation For Economic Co-Operation And Development

https://ebookgate.com/product/pisa-pisa-data-analysis-manual-spss-
second-edition-oecd-organisation-for-economic-co-operation-and-
development/
ebookgate.com

OECD Economic Surveys 2009 Israel Oecd

https://ebookgate.com/product/oecd-economic-surveys-2009-israel-oecd/

ebookgate.com

Strong performers and successful reformers in education

lessons from PISA for Japan Oecd

https://ebookgate.com/product/strong-performers-and-successful-
reformers-in-education-lessons-from-pisa-for-japan-oecd/

ebookgate.com
How to Cheat in 3ds Max 2009 Get Spectacular Results Fast
Michele Bousquet

https://ebookgate.com/product/how-to-cheat-in-3ds-max-2009-get-
spectacular-results-fast-michele-bousquet/

ebookgate.com

Energy Statistics of OECD Countries 2009 Statistiques de l

energie des pays de l OCDE 2009 1st Edition Oecd

https://ebookgate.com/product/energy-statistics-of-oecd-
countries-2009-statistiques-de-l-energie-des-pays-de-l-ocde-2009-1st-
edition-oecd/
ebookgate.com

Technology Enhanced Learning Best Practices Knowledge and

Learning Society Books Volume 4 1st Edition Miltiadis
Lytras
https://ebookgate.com/product/technology-enhanced-learning-best-
practices-knowledge-and-learning-society-books-volume-4-1st-edition-
miltiadis-lytras/
ebookgate.com

Engagement Matters Personalised Learning for Grades 3 to 6

Kathy Walker

https://ebookgate.com/product/engagement-matters-personalised-
learning-for-grades-3-to-6-kathy-walker/

ebookgate.com

BEST PRACTICES IN ENGAGING ONLINE LEARNERS THROUGH ACTIVE

AND EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING STRATEGIES 2nd Edition Stephanie
Smith Budhai
https://ebookgate.com/product/best-practices-in-engaging-online-
learners-through-active-and-experiential-learning-strategies-2nd-
edition-stephanie-smith-budhai/
ebookgate.com
PISA 2009 Results:
Learning to Learn
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT, STRATEGIES
AND PRACTICES
VOLUME III

Programme for International Student Assessment

PISA 2009 Results:
Learning to Learn
Student Engagement,
Strategies and Practices 
(Volume III)
This work is published on the responsibility of the Secretary-General of the OECD. The opinions
expressed and arguments employed herein do not necessarily reflect the official views of the
Organisation or of the governments of its member countries.

Please cite this publication as:

OECD (2010), PISA 2009 Results: Learning to Learn – Student Engagement, Strategies and Practices (Volume III)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264083943-en

ISBN 978-92-64-09147-4 (print)

ISBN 978-92-64-08394-3 (PDF)

The statistical data for Israel are supplied by and under the responsibility of the relevant Israeli authorities. The use of such data
by the OECD is without prejudice to the status of the Golan Heights, East Jerusalem and Israeli settlements in the West Bank
under the terms of international law.

Photo credits:
Getty Images © Ariel Skelley
Getty Images © Geostock
Getty Images © Jack Hollingsworth
Stocklib Image Bank © Yuri Arcurs

Corrigenda to OECD publications may be found on line at: www.oecd.org/publishing/corrigenda.

PISATM, OECD/PISATM and the PISA logo are trademaks of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).
All use of OECD trademarks is prohibited without written permission from the OECD.
© OECD 2010

You can copy, download or print OECD content for your own use, and you can include excerpts from OECD publications, databases and multimedia
products in your own documents, presentations, blogs, websites and teaching materials, provided that suitable acknowledgment of OECD as source
and copyright owner is given. All requests for public or commercial use and translation rights should be submitted to [email protected]. Requests for
permission to photocopy portions of this material for public or commercial use shall be addressed directly to the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC)
at [email protected] or the Centre français d’exploitation du droit de copie (CFC) at [email protected].
 Foreword

One of the ultimate goals of policy makers is to enable citizens to take advantage of a globalised world economy.
This is leading them to focus on the improvement of education policies, ensuring the quality of service provision,
a more equitable distribution of learning opportunities and stronger incentives for greater efficiency in schooling.

Such policies hinge on reliable information on how well education systems prepare students for life. Most countries
monitor students’ learning and the performance of schools. But in a global economy, the yardstick for success
is no longer improvement by national standards alone, but how education systems perform internationally. The
OECD has taken up that challenge by developing PISA, the Programme for International Student Assessment, which
evaluates the quality, equity and efficiency of school systems in some 70 countries that, together, make up nine-
tenths of the world economy. PISA represents a commitment by governments to monitor the outcomes of education
systems regularly within an internationally agreed framework and it provides a basis for international collaboration
in defining and implementing educational policies.

The results from the PISA 2009 assessment reveal wide differences in educational outcomes, both within and
across countries. The education systems that have been able to secure strong and equitable learning outcomes,
and to mobilise rapid improvements, show others what is possible to achieve. Naturally, GDP per capita influences
educational success, but this only explains 6% of the differences in average student performance. The other 94%
reflect the potential for public policy to make a difference. The stunning success of Shanghai-China, which tops
every league table in this assessment by a clear margin, shows what can be achieved with moderate economic
resources in a diverse social context. In mathematics, more than a quarter of Shanghai-China’s 15-year-olds can
conceptualise, generalise, and creatively use information based on their own investigations and modelling of
complex problem situations. They can apply insight and understanding and develop new approaches and strategies
when addressing novel situations. In the OECD area, just 3% of students reach this level of performance.

While better educational outcomes are a strong predictor of economic growth, wealth and spending on education
alone are no guarantee for better educational outcomes. Overall, PISA shows that an image of a world divided
neatly into rich and well-educated countries and poor and badly-educated countries is out of date.

This finding represents both a warning and an opportunity. It is a warning to advanced economies that they cannot
take for granted that they will forever have “human capital” superior to that in other parts of the world. At a time of
intensified global competition, they will need to work hard to maintain a knowledge and skill base that keeps up
with changing demands.

PISA underlines, in particular, the need for many advanced countries to tackle educational underperformance so
that as many members of their future workforces as possible are equipped with at least the baseline competencies
that enable them to participate in social and economic development. Otherwise, the high social and economic
cost of poor educational performance in advanced economies risks becoming a significant drag on economic
development. At the same time, the findings show that poor skills are not an inevitable consequence of low national
income – an important outcome for countries that need to achieve more with less.

But PISA also shows that there is no reason for despair. Countries from a variety of starting points have shown the
potential to raise the quality of educational outcomes substantially. Korea’s average performance was already high
in 2000, but Korean policy makers were concerned that only a narrow elite achieved levels of excellence in PISA.
Within less than a decade, Korea was able to double the share of students demonstrating excellence in reading
literacy. A major overhaul of Poland’s school system helped to dramatically reduce performance variability among

PISA 2009 Results: Learning to Learn – Volume III © OECD 2010 3

 Foreword

schools, reduce the share of poorly performing students and raise overall performance by the equivalent of more
than half a school year. Germany was jolted into action when PISA 2000 revealed a below-average performance and
large social disparities in results, and has been able to make progress on both fronts. Israel, Italy and Portugal have
moved closer to the OECD average and Brazil, Chile, Mexico and Turkey are among the countries with impressive
gains from very low levels of performance.

But the greatest value of PISA lies in inspiring national efforts to help students to learn better, teachers to teach better,
and school systems to become more effective.

A closer look at high-performing and rapidly improving education systems shows that these systems have many
commonalities that transcend differences in their history, culture and economic evolution.

First, while most nations declare their commitment to education, the test comes when these commitments are
weighed against others. How do they pay teachers compared to the way they pay other highly-skilled workers?
How are education credentials weighed against other qualifications when people are being considered for jobs?
Would you want your child to be a teacher? How much attention do the media pay to schools and schooling? Which
matters more, a community’s standing in the sports leagues or its standing in the student academic achievement
league tables? Are parents more likely to encourage their children to study longer and harder or to spend more time
with their friends or in sports activities?

In the most successful education systems, the political and social leaders have persuaded their citizens to make the
choices needed to show that they value education more than other things. But placing a high value on education
will get a country only so far if the teachers, parents and citizens of that country believe that only some subset of
the nation’s children can or need to achieve world class standards. This report shows clearly that education systems
built around the belief that students have different pre-ordained professional destinies to be met with different
expectations in different school types tend to be fraught with large social disparities. In contrast, the best-performing
education systems embrace the diversity in students’ capacities, interests and social background with individualised
approaches to learning.

Second, high-performing education systems stand out with clear and ambitious standards that are shared across the
system, focus on the acquisition of complex, higher-order thinking skills, and are aligned with high stakes gateways
and instructional systems. In these education systems, everyone knows what is required to get a given qualification,
in terms both of the content studied and the level of performance that has to be demonstrated to earn it. Students
cannot go on to the next stage of their life – be it work or further education – unless they show that they are qualified
to do so. They know what they have to do to realise their dream and they put in the work that is needed to achieve it.

Third, the quality of an education system cannot exceed the quality of its teachers and principals, since student
learning is ultimately the product of what goes on in classrooms. Corporations, professional partnerships and
national governments all know that they have to pay attention to how the pool from which they recruit is established;
how they recruit; the kind of initial training their recruits receive before they present themselves for employment;
how they mentor new recruits and induct them into their service; what kind of continuing training they get; how
their compensation is structured; how they reward their best performers and how they improve the performance of
those who are struggling; and how they provide opportunities for the best performers to acquire more status and
responsibility. Many of the world’s best-performing education systems have moved from bureaucratic “command
and control” environments towards school systems in which the people at the frontline have much more control
of the way resources are used, people are deployed, the work is organised and the way in which the work gets
done. They provide considerable discretion to school heads and school faculties in determining how resources
are allocated, a factor which the report shows to be closely related to school performance when combined with
effective accountability systems. And they provide an environment in which teachers work together to frame what
they believe to be good practice, conduct field-based research to confirm or disprove the approaches they develop,
and then assess their colleagues by the degree to which they use practices proven effective in their classrooms.

Last but not least, the most impressive outcome of world-class education systems is perhaps that they deliver high-
quality learning consistently across the entire education system, such that every student benefits from excellent
learning opportunities. To achieve this, they invest educational resources where they can make the greatest
difference, they attract the most talented teachers into the most challenging classrooms, and they establish effective
spending choices that prioritise the quality of teachers.

4 © OECD 2010 PISA 2009 Results: Learning to Learn – Volume III

 Foreword

These are, of course, not independently conceived and executed policies. They need to be aligned across all aspects
of the system, they need to be coherent over sustained periods of time, and they need to be consistently implemented.
The path of reform can be fraught with political and practical obstacles. Moving away from administrative and
bureaucratic control toward professional norms of control can be counterproductive if a nation does not yet have
teachers and schools with the capacity to implement these policies and practices. Pushing authority down to lower
levels can be as problematic if there is not agreement on what the students need to know and should be able to do.
Recruiting high-quality teachers is not of much use if those who are recruited are so frustrated by what they perceive
to be a mindless system of initial teacher education that they will not participate in it and turn to another profession.
Thus a country’s success in making these transitions depends greatly on the degree to which it is successful in
creating and executing plans that, at any given time, produce the maximum coherence in the system.

These are daunting challenges and thus devising effective education policies will become ever more difficult as
schools need to prepare students to deal with more rapid change than ever before, for jobs that have not yet been
created, to use technologies that have not yet been invented and to solve economic and social challenges that we
do not yet know will arise. But those school systems that do well today, as well as those that have shown rapid
improvement, demonstrate that it can be done. The world is indifferent to tradition and past reputations, unforgiving
of frailty and complacency and ignorant of custom or practice. Success will go to those individuals and countries
that are swift to adapt, slow to complain and open to change. The task of governments will be to ensure that
countries rise to this challenge. The OECD will continue to support their efforts.

***
This report is the product of a collaborative effort between the countries participating in PISA, the experts and
institutions working within the framework of the PISA Consortium, and the OECD Secretariat. The report was
drafted by Andreas Schleicher, Francesca Borgonovi, Michael Davidson, Miyako Ikeda, Maciej Jakubowski,
Guillermo Montt, Sophie Vayssettes and Pablo Zoido of the OECD Directorate for Education, with advice as well as
analytical and editorial support from Marilyn Achiron, Simone Bloem, Marika Boiron, Henry Braun, Nihad Bunar,
Niccolina Clements, Jude Cosgrove, John Cresswell, Aletta Grisay, Donald Hirsch, David Kaplan, Henry Levin,
Juliette Mendelovitz, Christian Monseur, Soojin Park, Pasi Reinikainen, Mebrak Tareke, Elisabeth Villoutreix and
Allan Wigfield. Volume II also draws on the analytic work undertaken by Jaap Scheerens and Douglas Willms in the
context of PISA 2000. Administrative support was provided by Juliet Evans and Diana Morales.

The PISA assessment instruments and the data underlying the report were prepared by the PISA Consortium, under
the direction of Raymond Adams at the Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER) and Henk Moelands
from the Dutch National Institute for Educational Measurement (CITO). The expert group that guided the preparation
of the reading assessment framework and instruments was chaired by Irwin Kirsch.

The development of the report was steered by the PISA Governing Board, which is chaired by Lorna Bertrand
(United Kingdom), with Beno Csapo (Hungary), Daniel McGrath (United States) and Ryo Watanabe (Japan) as vice
chairs. Annex C of the volumes lists the members of the various PISA bodies, as well as the individual experts and
consultants who have contributed to this report and to PISA in general.

Angel Gurría
OECD Secretary-General

PISA 2009 Results: Learning to Learn – Volume III © OECD 2010 5

 Table of Contents

Executive summary. ..........................................................................................................................................................................................................13

Introduction to PISA....................................................................................................................................................................................................17

Reader’s Guide.........................................................................................................................................................................................................................23

Chapter 1 Effective Learners, Proficient Readers........................................................................................................................25

How PISA 2009 examines engagement in reading and approaches to learning.............................................................................. 28

Engagement in reading activities and reading performance.......................................................................................................................... 29

• Are students who enjoy reading better readers?. ..........................................................................................................................................29
• The association between time spent reading for enjoyment and reading performance.....................................................32
• The association between the material students read and reading performance......................................................................34
• On line reading and reading performance of print texts.........................................................................................................................39

Approaches to learning and reading performance. .............................................................................................................................................. 42

• The association between strategies to understand and remember information and reading performance. ...............42
• The association between strategies to summarise information and reading performance. ..............................................45
• The association between the use of memorisation, elaboration and control strategies
and reading performance..............................................................................................................................................................................................48

Do observed associations mirror the demographic and socio-economic background of students?..................................52

• What do high-performing readers look like?...................................................................................................................................................52

Chapter 2 The Reading and Learning Habits of 15-Year-Olds.....................................................................................59

Profiles of readers......................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 60

The reading habits of 15-year-old students. ............................................................................................................................................................... 63

• How often do students read for enjoyment?....................................................................................................................................................63
• What do students read for enjoyment?................................................................................................................................................................70
• How much do students enjoy reading?...............................................................................................................................................................76

Approaches to learning. ........................................................................................................................................................................................................... 77

• Awareness of effective strategies to understand and remember information.............................................................................77
• Awareness of effective strategies to summarise information.................................................................................................................79
• Use of memorisation, elaboration and control strategies.......................................................................................................................79

Chapter 3 Tackling gender and socio-economic inequalities in reading...............................................85

Inequalities in reading performance and the role of engagement in reading and learning strategies. ............................86
How reading habits and approaches to learning mediate the gender gap in reading performance..................................88
How reading habits and approaches to learning mediate socio-economic inequities in reading performance.............91
The underachievement of disadvantaged boys. ....................................................................................................................................................... 94

PISA 2009 Results: Learning to Learn – Volume III © OECD 2010 7

 Table of Contents

Policy Implications..........................................................................................................................................................................................................97
Engagement in reading matters. .........................................................................................................................................................................................97
Approaches to learning matter. ..........................................................................................................................................................................................98
Levelling the playing field matters....................................................................................................................................................................................98

References..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................101

Annex A Technical Background.................................................................................................................................................................105

Annex A1: Construction of reading scales and indices from the student, school and parent context
questionnaires..................................................................................................................................................................................................106
Annex A2: The PISA target population, the PISA samples and the definition of schools. ......................................................114
Annex A3: Standard errors, significance tests and sub-group comparisons....................................................................................127
Annex A4: Quality assurance..........................................................................................................................................................................................129
Annex A5: Latent profile analysis.................................................................................................................................................................................131

Annex B Tables of results...................................................................................................................................................................................133

Annex B1: Results for countries and economies................................................................................................................................................134
Annex B2: Results for regions within countries..................................................................................................................................................227

Annex C The development and implementation of PISA – A collaborative effort. ........................261

This book has...

StatLinks 2 ®
A service that delivers Excel files
from the printed page!
Look for the StatLinks at the bottom left-hand corner of the tables or graphs in this book.
To download the matching Excel® spreadsheet, just type the link into your Internet browser,
starting with the http://dx.doi.org prefix.
If you’re reading the PDF e-book edition, and your PC is connected to the Internet, simply
click on the link. You’ll find StatLinks appearing in more OECD books.

8 © OECD 2010 PISA 2009 Results: Learning to Learn – Volume III

 Table of Contents

Boxes
Box III.A Key features of PISA 2009. ....................................................................................................................................................................................20

Box III.1.1 A cycle of engagement in reading activities, learning strategies and reading performance.............................................................27
Box III.1.2 The association between reading habits, approaches to learning and reading performance...........................................................28
Box III.1.3 Interpreting PISA indices........................................................................................................................................................................................29
Box III.1.4 Interpreting differences in PISA scores: how large a gap?...........................................................................................................................30

Figures
Figure III.A A map of PISA countries and economies..........................................................................................................................................................21

Figure III.1.1 How does PISA define “engagement in reading activities”?.......................................................................................................................26

Figure III.1.2 How does PISA define “learning strategies”?. .................................................................................................................................................26
Figure III.1.3 Relationship between enjoying reading and performance in reading.....................................................................................................31
Figure III.1.4 How proficient in reading are students who don’t enjoy reading?...........................................................................................................32
Figure III.1.5 Relationship between time spent reading for enjoyment and performance in reading. ....................................................................33
Figure III.1.6 Relationship between the types of materials students read and performance in reading..................................................................36
Figure III.1.7 Performance on the reading scale of students who read different materials. ........................................................................................38
Figure III.1.8 Relationship between diversity in reading habits and performance in reading....................................................................................40
Figure III.1.9 Relationship between reading on line and performance in reading........................................................................................................41
Figure III.1.10 Association between awareness of effective strategies to understand and remember information and performance
in reading....................................................................................................................................................................................................................43
Figure III.1.11 How students’ awareness of effective strategies to understand and remember information relates to their
reading performance...............................................................................................................................................................................................44
Figure III.1.12 How proficient in reading are students who are not aware of effective strategies to understand
and remember information?..................................................................................................................................................................................45
Figure III.1.13 Association between awareness of effective strategies to summarise information and performance in reading.......................46
Figure III.1.14 How students’ awareness of effective strategies to summarise information relates to their reading performance....................47
Figure III.1.15 How PISA 2009 assesses students’ use of learning strategies.....................................................................................................................48
Figure III.1.16 Relationship between the use of control strategies and performance in reading.................................................................................49
Figure III.1.17 Relationship between the use of memorisation strategies and student performance in reading.....................................................50
Figure III.1.18 Relationship between the use of elaboration strategies and performance in reading. .......................................................................51
Figure III.1.19 How the reading process can be characterised..............................................................................................................................................52
Figure III.1.20 Profiles of readers.....................................................................................................................................................................................................53
Figure III.1.21 Share of students by reader profile. ....................................................................................................................................................................54
Figure III.1.22 How different kinds of readers perform in reading........................................................................................................................................55
Figure III.1.23 Country-level performance in reading and the prevalence of different profiles of readers. .............................................................56

Figure III.2.1 Share of boys and girls who are either deep and wide readers or deep and narrow readers...........................................................61
Figure III.2.2 Share of socio-economically advantaged and disadvantaged students who are either deep and wide readers
or deep and narrow readers..................................................................................................................................................................................62
Figure III.2.3 Percentage of students who read for enjoyment.............................................................................................................................................64
Figure III.2.4 Percentage of boys and girls who read for enjoyment..................................................................................................................................65
Figure III.2.5 Change in the percentage of boys and girls who read for enjoyment between 2000 and 2009.....................................................66
Figure III.2.6 Percentage of students who read for enjoyment, by socio-economic background.............................................................................67
Figure III.2.7 Does time spent in regular lessons at school crowd-out reading for enjoyment?................................................................................68
Figure III.2.8 Does participation in remedial lessons crowd-out reading for enjoyment?. .........................................................................................68
Figure III.2.9 Does participation in enrichment lessons crowd-out reading for enjoyment?. ....................................................................................69
Figure III.2.10 Do education systems which value promoting the interpretation of literary texts at school have a larger number
of students who read for enjoyment?.................................................................................................................................................................69

PISA 2009 Results: Learning to Learn – Volume III © OECD 2010 9

 Table of Contents

Figure III.2.11 Do education systems which value traditional literature courses have a larger number of students who read
for enjoyment?...........................................................................................................................................................................................................70
Figure III.2.12 What students read for enjoyment......................................................................................................................................................................71
Figure III.2.13 Change in what students read for enjoyment between 2000 and 2009, OECD average..................................................................73
Figure III.2.14 What boys and girls read for enjoyment, OECD average............................................................................................................................73
Figure III.2.15 What boys and girls read on line, OECD average. ........................................................................................................................................74
Figure III.2.16 What students enjoy about reading, OECD average.....................................................................................................................................74
Figure III.2.17 To what extent do students who read for enjoyment enjoy reading.........................................................................................................75
Figure III.2.18 Disparities in enjoyment of reading, OECD average. ...................................................................................................................................76
Figure III.2.19 To what extent are students aware of effective strategies to understand and remember information?..........................................78
Figure III.2.20 To what extent are students aware of effective strategies to summarise information?........................................................................80
Figure III.2.21 Socio-economic disparities in the use of control strategies........................................................................................................................81

Figure III.3.1 How engagement in reading activities and approaches to learning contribute to disparities in reading performance................87
Figure III.3.2 How engagement in reading activities and learning strategies contribute to disparities in reading performance
across OECD countries...........................................................................................................................................................................................88
Figure III.3.3 The role of engagement in reading and approaches to learning as mediators of gender differences
in reading performance..........................................................................................................................................................................................89
Figure III.3.4 Boys’ reading performance if they enjoyed reading as girls.......................................................................................................................90
Figure III.3.5 Boys’ reading performance if they were as aware of effective summarising strategies as girls........................................................91
Figure III.3.6 The role of engagement in reading and approaches to learning as mediators of socio-economic disparities
in reading performance..........................................................................................................................................................................................92
Figure III.3.7 Reading performance of socio-economically disadvantaged students if they were as aware of effective summarising
strategies as socio-economically advantaged students.................................................................................................................................93
Figure III.3.8 Reading performance of socio-economically disadvantaged students if they enjoyed reading as much as
socio-economically advantaged students.........................................................................................................................................................94
Figure III.3.9 Reading performance of socio-economically disadvantaged boys if they were as aware of effective summarising
strategies as socio-economically advantaged girls.........................................................................................................................................95
Figure III.3.10 Reading performance of socio-economically disadvantaged boys if they enjoyed reading as much as
socio-economically advantaged girls.................................................................................................................................................................95

Figure A3.1 Labels used in a two-way table......................................................................................................................................................................... 127

Figure A5.1 Latent profile analysis with two categorical latent variables................................................................................................................... 131

Tables
Table III.A Comparing the contribution of students’ engagement in reading and approaches to learning to reading performance
and equity...................................................................................................................................................................................................................16

Table A1.1 Levels of parental education converted into years of schooling............................................................................................................. 109
Table A1.2 A multilevel model to estimate grade effects in reading, accounting for some background variables. ..................................... 111

Table A2.1 PISA target populations and samples.............................................................................................................................................................. 116

Table A2.2 Exclusions................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 118
Table A2.3 Response rates........................................................................................................................................................................................................ 120
Table A2.4a Percentage of students at each grade level.................................................................................................................................................... 123
Table A2.4b Percentage of students at each grade level, by gender.............................................................................................................................. 124
Table A2.5 Percentage of students and mean scores in reading, mathematics and science, according to whether students
are in or out of the regular education system in Argentina...................................................................................................................... 126

Table III.1.1 Index of enjoyment of reading and reading performance, by national quarters of this index...................................................... 134
Table III.1.2 Proportion of students with low levels of enjoyment of reading, by reading proficiency level.................................................... 136
Table III.1.3 Percentage of students and reading performance, by time spent reading for enjoyment............................................................... 137

10 © OECD 2010 PISA 2009 Results: Learning to Learn – Volume III

 Table of Contents

Table III.1.4 Percentage of students and reading performance, by whether students spend any time reading for enjoyment
and gender............................................................................................................................................................................................................... 138
Table III.1.5 Percentage of students and reading performance, by whether students spend any time reading for enjoyment
and socio-economic background..................................................................................................................................................................... 140
Table III.1.6 Reading diverse materials and performance................................................................................................................................................. 142
Table III.1.7 Reading diverse materials and performance, by gender........................................................................................................................... 143
Table III.1.8 Percentage of students who read fiction, comic books and other materials.......................................................................................... 146
Table III.1.9 Reading performance of students who read fiction, comic books and others materials.................................................................... 148
Table III.1.10 Index of diversity of reading materials and performance, by national quarters of this index........................................................ 150
Table III.1.11 Proportion of students with low levels of reading diversity, by reading proficiency level. ............................................................ 152
Table III.1.12 Index of online reading activities and performance, by national quarters of this index................................................................. 153
Table III.1.13 Proportion of students with low levels of online reading activities, by reading proficiency level............................................... 155
Table III.1.14 Index of understanding and remembering and reading performance, by national quarters of this index. ............................... 156
Table III.1.15 Proportion of students with low levels of understanding and remembering, by reading proficiency level.............................. 158
Table III.1.16 Index of summarising and reading performance, by national quarters of this index....................................................................... 159
Table III.1.17 Proportion of students with low levels of summarising, by reading proficiency level. ................................................................... 161
Table III.1.18 Index of control strategies and reading performance, by national quarters of this index............................................................... 162
Table III.1.19 Proportion of students with low levels of control strategies, by reading proficiency level............................................................ 164
Table III.1.20 Index of memorisation strategies and reading performance, by national quarters of this index.................................................. 165
Table III.1.21 Proportion of students with low levels of memorisation strategies, by reading proficiency level. .............................................. 167
Table III.1.22 Index of elaboration strategies and reading performance, by national quarters of this index....................................................... 168
Table III.1.23 Proportion of students with low levels of elaboration strategies, by reading proficiency level.................................................... 170
Table III.1.24 Unadjusted and adjusted score point differences associated with reading different types of materials.................................... 171
Table III.1.25 Unadjusted and adjusted score point differences associated with reading different types of materials, by gender. ............. 172
Table III.1.26 Engagement in reading and learning strategies, and change in reading performance.................................................................... 174
Table III.1.27 Percentage of students, by reader profile....................................................................................................................................................... 176
Table III.1.28 Reading performance, by reader profile. ....................................................................................................................................................... 177
Table III.1.29 Percentage of students, by reader profile and gender................................................................................................................................ 179
Table III.1.30 Percentage of students, by reader profile and socio-economic background...................................................................................... 181

Table III.2.1 Percentage of students reading the following types of texts..................................................................................................................... 185
Table III.2.2 Percentage of students doing the following tasks for school. .................................................................................................................. 186
Table III.2.3 Index of interpretation of literary texts and reading performance, by national quarters of this index........................................ 187
Table III.2.4 Index of use of texts containing non-continuous materials and reading performance, by national quarters of this index....... 189
Table III.2.5 Index of reading activities for traditional literature courses and reading performance, by national quarters of this index....... 191
Table III.2.6 Index of use of functional texts and reading performance, by national quarters of this index..................................................... 193
Table III.2.7 Percentage of students who read diverse materials.................................................................................................................................... 195
Table III.2.8 Percentage of boys and girls who read diverse materials............................................................................................................................ 196
Table III.2.9 Percentage of students doing diverse online reading activities.................................................................................................................. 198
Table III.2.10 Percentage of boys and girls doing diverse online reading activities.................................................................................................... 199
Table III.2.11 Percentage of students according to what they enjoy about reading.................................................................................................... 202
Table III.2.12 Effect sizes for gender differences in engagement in reading and approaches to learning............................................................ 203
Table III.2.13 Effect sizes for socio-economic differences in engagement in reading and approaches to learning.......................................... 205
Table III.2.14 Effect sizes for the difference between students with and without an immigrant background in engagement
in reading and approaches to learning........................................................................................................................................................... 207
Table III.2.15 Effect sizes for the difference between students who speak and those who do not speak the language of assessment
at home in engagement in reading and approaches to learning............................................................................................................ 209
Table III.2.16 Index of enjoyment of reading and index of summarising, by quarter of the PISA index of economic, social
and cultural status (ESCS).................................................................................................................................................................................... 211

PISA 2009 Results: Learning to Learn – Volume III © OECD 2010 11

 Table of Contents

Table III.3.1 Effect of socio-economic background and gender on reading performance and the mediating role of enjoyment
of reading and summarising strategies............................................................................................................................................................ 212
Table III.3.2 Index of enjoyment of reading and reading performance, by national quarters of this index and gender............................... 213
Table III.3.3 Predicted reading performance of boys if boys had the same value on the index of summarising as girls.............................. 215
Table III.3.4 Predicted reading performance of boys if boys had the same value on the index of enjoyment of reading as girls. ............ 216
Table III.3.5 Predicted reading performance of students from different socio-economic backgrounds if they had the same value
on the index of summarising as socio-economically advantaged students......................................................................................... 217
Table III.3.6 Predicted reading performance of students from different socio-economic backgrounds if they had the same value
on the index of enjoyment of reading as socio-economically advantaged students........................................................................ 218
Table III.3.7 Reading performance by gender and socio-economic background. .................................................................................................... 219
Table III.3.8 Predicted reading performance of boys from different socio-economic backgrounds if they had the same value
on the index of summarising as socio-economically advantaged girls. ............................................................................................... 220
Table III.3.9 Predicted reading performance of boys from different socio-economic backgrounds if they had the same value
on the index of enjoyment of reading as socio-economically advantaged girls................................................................................... 221
Table III.3.10 The role of enjoyment of reading and summarising strategies as mediators of socio-economic background and gender....... 222
Table III.3.11 The role of teachers’ stimulation of their students’ enjoyment of reading........................................................................................... 224

Table S.I.a Index of enjoyment of reading and reading performance, by national quarters of this index...................................................... 227
Table S.I.b Percentage of students and reading performance, by time spent reading for enjoyment............................................................... 229
Table S.I.c Percentage of students who read diverse materials.................................................................................................................................... 230
Table S.I.d Index of diversity of reading materials and performance, by national quarters of this index........................................................ 231
Table S.I.e Percentage of students doing diverse online reading................................................................................................................................. 233
Table S.I.f Index of online reading activities and performance, by national quarters of this index................................................................. 234
Table S.I.g Effect sizes for gender differences in engagement in reading and approaches to learning............................................................ 236
Table S.I.h Effect sizes for socio-economic differences in engagement in reading and approaches to learning.............................................. 238
Table S.I.i Percentage of students reading the following types of texts....................................................................................................................... 240
Table S.I.j Percentage of students doing the following tasks for school. .................................................................................................................. 241
Table S.I.k Index of interpretation of literary texts and reading performance, by national quarters of this index........................................ 242
Table S.I.l Index of use of texts containing non-continuous materials and reading performance, by national quarters of this index....... 244
Table S.I.m Index of reading activities for traditional literature courses and reading performance, by national quarters of this index....... 246
Table S.I.n Index of use of functional texts and reading performance, by national quarters of this index..................................................... 248
Table S.I.o Index of understanding and remembering and reading performance, by national quarters of this index. ............................... 250
Table S.I.p Index of summarising and reading performance, by national quarters of this index....................................................................... 252
Table S.I.q Index of control strategies and performance on the reading scale, by national quarters of this index...................................... 254
Table S.I.r Index of memorisation strategies and reading performance, by national quarters of this index...................................................... 256
Table S.I.s Index of elaboration strategies and reading performance, by national quarters of this index....................................................... 258

12 © OECD 2010 PISA 2009 Results: Learning to Learn – Volume III

 Executive Summary
PISA results show that mastering strategies that assist learning, such as methods to remember and understand or
summarise texts and reading widely, are essential if students are to become proficient readers. Practicing reading
by reading for enjoyment is most closely associated with better outcomes when it is accompanied by high levels of
critical thinking and strategic learning. Across OECD countries, students who have low levels of awareness about
which strategies are most effective for understanding, remembering and summarising information are less proficient
readers than those who have high levels of awareness about these strategies, regardless of their reading habits.

In all countries, students who enjoy reading the most perform significantly better than students who enjoy reading the least.
There has been considerable debate as to what type of reading may be most effective in fostering reading skills and
improving reading performance. The results from PISA suggest that, although students who read fiction are more likely
to achieve high scores, it is students who read a wide variety of material who perform particularly well in reading.
Compared with not reading for enjoyment at all, reading fiction for enjoyment appears to be positively associated with
higher scores in the PISA 2009 reading assessment, while reading comic books is associated with little improvement in
reading proficiency in some countries, and with lower overall reading performance in other countries. Also, students
who are extensively engaged in online reading activities, such as reading e-mails, chatting on line, reading news
online, using an on line dictionary or encyclopaedia, participating in online group discussions and searching for
information online, are generally more proficient readers than students who do little online reading.

On average across OECD countries, 37% of students – and 45% or more in Austria, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg –
report that they do not read for enjoyment at all.
In all but a few countries, students who use appropriate strategies to understand and remember what they read, such
as underlining important parts of the texts or discussing what they read with other people, perform at least 73 points
higher in the PISA assessment – that is, one full proficiency level or nearly two full school years – than students who
use these strategies the least. In Belgium, Switzerland and Austria, the quarter of students who use these strategies
the most score an average of 110 points higher than the quarter of students who use them the least. That translates
into a difference of roughly one-and-a-half proficiency levels or nearly three years of formal schooling.

In all countries, boys are not only less likely than girls to say that they read for enjoyment, they also have different
reading habits when they do read for pleasure.
Most boys and girls in the countries that took part in PISA 2009 sit side by side in the same classrooms and
work with similar teachers. Yet, PISA reveals that in OECD countries, boys are on average 39 points behind girls
in reading, the equivalent of an average year of schooling. PISA suggests that differences in how boys and girls
approach learning and how engaged they are in reading account for most of the gap in reading performance
between boys and girls, so much so that this gap could be predicted to shrink by 14 points if boys approached
learning as positively as girls, and by over 20 points if they were as engaged in reading as girls. This does not mean
that if boys’ engagement and awareness of learning strategies rose by this amount, the increase would automatically
translate into respective performance gains, since PISA does not measure causation. But the fact that most of the
gender gap can be explained by boys being less engaged, and less engaged students having lower performance,
is a good reason to look hard for more effective ways of increasing boys’ interest in reading at school or at home.

PISA 2009 Results: Learning to Learn – volume III © OECD 2010 13

 Executive Summary

PISA reveals that, although girls have higher mean reading performance, enjoy reading more and are more aware
of effective strategies to summarise information than boys, the differences within genders are far greater than those
between the genders. Moreover, the size of the gender gap varies considerably across countries, suggesting that boys
and girls do not have inherently different interests and academic strengths, but that these are mostly acquired and
socially induced. The large gender gap in reading is not a mystery: it can be attributed to differences that have been
identified in the attitudes and behaviours of boys and girls.

Girls are more likely than boys to be frequent readers of fiction, and are also more likely than boys to read magazines.
However, over 65% of boys regularly read newspapers for enjoyment and only 59% of girls do so. Although
relatively few students say that they read comic books regularly, on average across OECD countries, 27% of boys
read comic books several times a month or several times a week, while only 18% of girls do so.

High-performing countries are also those whose students generally know how to summarise information.
Across OECD countries, the difference in reading performance between those students who know the most about
which strategies are best for summarising information and those who know the least is 107 score points. And
students who say that they begin the learning process by figuring out what they need to learn, then ensure that
they understand what they read, figure out which concepts they have not fully grasped, try to remember the most
important points in a text and look for additional clarifying information when they do not understand something
they have read, tend to perform better on the PISA reading scale than those who do not.

While factors such as predisposition, temperament, peer pressure and socialisation may contribute to boys having less
interest in reading than girls, boys could be encouraged to enjoy reading more and to read more for enjoyment.
PISA results suggest that boys would be predicted to catch up with girls in reading performance if they had higher levels
of motivation to read and used effective learning strategies. In Finland, for example, if boys were equally aware as girls
of the most effective ways of summarising complex information in their reading, their scores in the PISA assessment
would be predicted to be 23 points higher. Similarly, in most of the countries that participated in PISA 2009, if the
most socio-economically disadvantaged students had the same levels of awareness about these strategies as their most
advantaged peers, their reading performance would be predicted to be at least 15 points higher.

Across OECD countries, if socio-economically disadvantaged students were as aware of effective strategies to
summarise information as advantaged students, the performance gap between the two groups of students could be
20% narrower. The poor reading proficiency seen among socio-economically disadvantaged boys is of particular
concern because, without the ability to read well enough to participate fully in society, these students and their
future families will have fewer opportunities to escape a cycle of poverty and deprivation. On average in the OECD
area, socio-economically disadvantaged boys would be predicted to perform 28 points higher in reading if they
had the same level of awareness of effective summarising strategies as socio-economically advantaged girls and 35
points higher if they enjoyed reading as much as socio-economically advantaged girls.

In recent years, the gender gap in reading engagement has widened, as well as the gender gap in reading performance.
Changing students’ attitudes and behaviours may be inherently more difficult than providing equal access to
high quality teachers and schools, two of the factors that explain the low performance of socio-economically
disadvantaged students − an area where PISA shows that over the past decade, some countries have achieved
significant progress.
The following table provides selected results from the volume.
• The first column shows students’ mean reading scores.
• The second column shows the percentage of students who reported high levels of awareness about effective
learning strategies and who regularly read a wide range of materials, including fiction and non-fiction books or
at least magazines and newspapers, for enjoyment (considered ‘wide and deep’ or ‘narrow and deep’ readers).
• The third column shows the score point differences in reading between boys and girls, with negative numbers
indicating an advantage for boys and positive numbers indicating an advantage for girls.
• The fourth column shows gender differences in the percentage of ‘wide and deep’ or ‘narrow and deep’ readers.
• The fifth column shows the portion of the gender gap that would be predicted to be closed if boys had the same
level of enjoyment of reading as girls.
• The sixth column shows the score point difference between the top and bottom quarters of the socio-economic
distribution of students.

14 © OECD 2010 PISA 2009 Results: Learning to Learn – volume III

 Executive Summary

• The seventh column shows the differences in the share of students who are ‘wide and deep’ or ‘narrow and deep’
readers between the top and bottom quarters of the socio-economic distribution of students. Larger numbers
indicate a higher share of ‘wide and deep’ or ‘narrow and deep’ readers among socio-economically advantaged
students.
• The last column shows the portion of the socio-economic gap in reading performance that would be predicted
to be closed if socio-economically disadvantaged students had the same level of awareness of effective reading
strategies (here, summarising strategies) as socio-economically advantaged students.

Values that are larger than the OECD average are shown in light blue; while values that are smaller than the OECD
average are shown in medium blue and values that are not statistically different from the OECD average are shown
in dark blue.

PISA 2009 Results: Learning to Learn – volume III © OECD 2010 15

 Executive Summary

• Table III.A •
Comparing the contribution of students’ engagement in reading and approaches
to learning to reading performance and equity
Statistically significantly above the OECD average
Not statistically significantly different from the OECD average
Statistically significantly below the OECD average

Difference in Proportion of the

the percentage Socio- Socio-economic socio-economic gap
of girls and Proportion economic differences in the that could be closed
Percentage of boys that can of the overall differences percentage of if socio-economically
”wide and be considered gender gap that in reading students that are disadvanatged students
deep” Difference ”wide and deep” could be closed performance “wide and deep” and had values on the
and in reading and “narrow and if boys enjoyed (top – bottom “narrow and deep” index of summarising
Mean “narrow and performance deep” readers reading as quarter (top – bottom quarter as socio-economically
Reading Score deep readers” (G – B) (G – B) much as girls of ESCS) of ESCS) advantaged students
Mean Score % Dif. Dif. % Dif. Dif. %
OECD average 493 45 39 11 61 89 17 20

Korea 539 35 35 5 30 70 32 27
OECD

Finland 536 60 55 20 64 62 17 27
Canada 524 37 34 14 86 68 15 13
New Zealand 521 37 46 11 63 102 14 20
Japan 520 54 39 6 33 73 18 25
Australia 515 35 37 9 76 91 16 22
Netherlands 508 34 24 9 102 83 23 23
Belgium 506 46 27 3 81 116 23 27
Norway 503 56 47 14 52 70 17 22
Estonia 501 61 44 14 65 60 12 17
Switzerland 501 54 39 11 76 94 22 24
Poland 500 50 50 20 49 88 17 20
Iceland 500 49 44 20 58 62 12 18
United States 500 30 25 7 95 105 12 14
Sweden 497 43 46 16 68 91 19 18
Germany 497 41 40 0 80 105 21 23
Ireland 496 45 39 14 48 86 5 15
France 496 46 40 1 54 110 20 21
Denmark 495 48 29 8 75 80 21 20
United Kingdom 494 40 25 10 90 91 11 19
Hungary 494 52 38 15 65 118 20 20
Portugal 489 43 38 9 61 87 17 24
Italy 486 39 46 7 56 85 15 20
Slovenia 483 45 55 16 42 87 15 20
Greece 483 34 47 1 54 90 18 13
Spain 481 38 29 6 73 83 22 15
Czech Republic 478 47 48 14 59 84 12 23
Slovak Republic 477 52 51 16 35 87 13 18
Israel 474 36 42 17 44 102 14 19
Luxembourg 472 50 39 8 70 114 16 19
Austria 470 50 41 10 70 102 20 23
Turkey 464 38 43 12 25 92 16 11
Chile 449 37 22 17 57 91 19 15
Mexico 425 36 25 6 27 82 16 17

Shanghai-China 556 59 40 5 31 74 21 11
Partners

Hong Kong-China 533 41 33 7 44 46 15 14

Singapore 526 59 31 11 81 98 19 17
Liechtenstein 499 49 32 14 76 62 25 34
Chinese Taipei 495 44 37 6 53 76 24 17
Macao-China 487 44 34 11 38 25 18 23
Latvia 484 45 47 20 52 63 16 19
Croatia 476 53 51 19 40 74 17 19
Lithuania 468 53 59 21 47 83 20 17
Dubai (UAE) 459 56 51 10 38 102 15 19
Russian Federation 459 46 45 16 43 78 9 16
Serbia 442 43 39 16 37 67 18 24
Bulgaria 429 42 61 20 27 132 22 16
Uruguay 426 35 42 15 30 116 15 20
Romania 424 44 43 13 23 85 16 17
Thailand 421 40 38 12 22 63 15 8
Trinidad and Tobago 416 49 58 19 26 92 10 19
Colombia 413 46 9 10 41 89 12 19
Brazil 412 37 29 14 34 83 13 16
Montenegro 408 42 53 8 30 80 18 15
Jordan 405 34 57 14 12 66 12 9
Tunisia 404 45 31 11 0 63 12 4
Indonesia 402 43 37 11 8 45 18 13
Argentina 398 40 37 14 24 122 15 15
Kazakhstan 390 46 43 13 -1 84 12 12
Albania 385 50 62 17 38 77 15 10
Qatar 372 42 50 8 23 56 9 14
Panama 371 37 33 13 10 108 10 13
Peru 370 50 22 9 19 129 20 14
Azerbaijan 362 32 24 6 21 50 12 4
Kyrgyzstan 314 34 53 7 10 94 18 14

Countries are ranked by their mean reading score.

Source: OECD, PISA 2009 Database.
12 http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888932360309

16 © OECD 2010 PISA 2009 Results: Learning to Learn – volume III

 Introduction to PISA
The PISA surveys
Are students well prepared to meet the challenges of the future? Can they analyse, reason and communicate
their ideas effectively? Have they found the kinds of interests they can pursue throughout their lives as productive
members of the economy and society? The OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) seeks to
answer these questions through its triennial surveys of key competencies of 15-year-old students in OECD member
countries and partner countries/economies. Together, the group of countries participating in PISA represents nearly
90% of the world economy.1

PISA assesses the extent to which students near the end of compulsory education have acquired some of the
knowledge and skills that are essential for full participation in modern societies, with a focus on reading, mathematics
and science.

PISA has now completed its fourth round of surveys. Following the detailed assessment of each of PISA’s three main
subjects – reading, mathematics and science – in 2000, 2003 and 2006, the 2009 survey marks the beginning of
a new round with a return to a focus on reading, but in ways that reflect the extent to which reading has changed
since 2000, including the prevalence of digital texts.

PISA 2009 offers the most comprehensive and rigorous international measurement of student reading skills to date.
It assesses not only reading knowledge and skills, but also students’ attitudes and their learning strategies in reading.
PISA 2009 updates the assessment of student performance in mathematics and science as well.

The assessment focuses on young people’s ability to use their knowledge and skills to meet real-life challenges. This
orientation reflects a change in the goals and objectives of curricula themselves, which are increasingly concerned
with what students can do with what they learn at school and not merely with whether they have mastered specific
curricular content.

PISA’s unique features include its:

• Policy orientation, which connects data on student learning outcomes with data on students’ characteristics and
on key factors shaping their learning in and out of school in order to draw attention to differences in performance
patterns and identify the characteristics of students, schools and education systems that have high performance
standards.
• Innovative concept of “literacy”, which refers to the capacity of students to apply knowledge and skills in key
subject areas and to analyse, reason and communicate effectively as they pose, interpret and solve problems in
a variety of situations.
• Relevance to lifelong learning, which does not limit PISA to assessing students’ competencies in school subjects,
but also asks them to report on their own motivations to learn, their beliefs about themselves and their learning
strategies.
• Regularity, which enables countries to monitor their progress in meeting key learning objectives.
• Breadth of geographical coverage and collaborative nature, which, in PISA 2009, encompasses the 34 OECD
member countries and 41 partner countries and economies.2

PISA 2009 Results: Learning to Learn – Volume III © OECD 2010 17

 Introduction to PISA

The relevance of the knowledge and skills measured by PISA is confirmed by studies tracking young people in the
years after they have been assessed by PISA. Longitudinal studies in Australia, Canada and Switzerland display
a strong relationship between performance in reading on the PISA assessment at age 15 and future educational
attainment and success in the labour market (see Volume I Chapter 2).3

The frameworks for assessing reading, mathematics and science in 2009 are described in detail in PISA 2009
Assessment Framework: Key Competencies in Reading, Mathematics and Science (OECD, 2009).

Decisions about the scope and nature of the PISA assessments and the background information to be collected are
made by leading experts in participating countries. Governments guide these decisions based on shared, policy-
driven interests. Considerable efforts and resources are devoted to achieving cultural and linguistic breadth and
balance in the assessment materials. Stringent quality-assurance mechanisms are applied in designing the test, in
translation, sampling and data collection. As a result, PISA findings are valid and highly reliable.

Policy makers around the world use PISA findings to gauge the knowledge and skills of students in their own country
in comparison with those in other countries. PISA reveals what is possible in education by showing what students in
the highest performing countries can do in reading, mathematics and science. PISA is also used to gauge the pace of
educational progress by allowing policy makers to assess to what extent performance changes observed nationally
are in line with performance changes observed elsewhere. In a growing number of countries, PISA is also used to set
policy targets against measurable goals achieved by other systems, to initiate research and peer-learning designed to
identify policy levers and to reform trajectories for improving education. While PISA cannot identify cause-and-effect
relationships between inputs, processes and educational outcomes, it can highlight key features in which education
systems are similar and different, sharing those findings with educators, policy makers and the general public.

The first report from the 2009 assessment

This volume is the third of six volumes that provide the first international report on results from the PISA 2009
assessment. It explores the information gathered on students’ levels of engagement in reading activities and attitudes
towards reading and learning and describes 15-year-olds’ motivations, engagement and learning strategies.

The other volumes cover the following issues:

• Volume I, What Students Know and Can Do: Student Performance in Reading, Mathematics and Science, summarises
the performance of students in PISA 2009, starting with a focus on reading, and then reporting on mathematics and
science performance. It provides the results in the context of how performance is defined, measured and reported,
and then examines what students are able to do in reading. After a summary of reading performance, it examines
the ways in which this performance varies on subscales representing three aspects of reading. It then breaks down
results by different formats of reading texts and considers gender differences in reading, both generally and for
different reading aspects and text formats. Any comparison of the outcomes of education systems needs to take into
consideration countries’ social and economic circumstances and the resources they devote to education. To address
this, the volume also interprets the results within countries’ economic and social contexts. The chapter concludes
with a description of student results in mathematics and science.
• Volume II, Overcoming Social Background: Equity in Learning Opportunities and Outcomes, starts by closely
examining the performance variation shown in Volume I, particularly the extent to which the overall variation in
student performance relates to differences in results achieved by different schools. The volume then looks at how
factors such as socio-economic background and immigrant status affect student and school performance, and the
role that education policy can play in moderating the impact of these factors.
• Volume IV, What Makes a School Successful? Resources, Policies and Practices, explores the relationships between
student-, school- and system-level characteristics, and educational quality and equity. It explores what schools
and school policies can do to raise overall student performance and, at the same time, moderate the impact of
socio-economic background on student performance, with the aim of promoting a more equitable distribution of
learning opportunities.
• Volume V, Learning Trends: Changes in Student Performance Since 2000, provides an overview of trends in
student performance in reading, mathematics and science from PISA 2000 to PISA 2009. It shows educational
outcomes over time and tracks changes in factors related to student and school performance, such as student
background and school characteristics and practices.

18 © OECD 2010 PISA 2009 Results: Learning to Learn – Volume III

 Introduction to PISA

• Volume VI, Students On Line: Reading and Using Digital Information explains how PISA measures and reports
student performance in digital reading and analyses what students in the 20 countries participating in this
assessment are able to do.
All data tables referred to in the analysis are included at the end of the respective volume. A Reader’s Guide is also
provided in each volume to aid in interpreting the tables and figures accompanying the report.

Technical annexes that describe the construction of the questionnaire indices, sampling issues, quality assurance
procedures and the process followed for developing the assessment instruments, and information about reliability
of coding are posted on the OECD PISA website (www.pisa.oecd.org). Many of the issues covered in the technical
annexes are elaborated in greater detail in the PISA 2009 Technical Report (OECD, forthcoming).

The PISA student population

In order to ensure the comparability of results across countries, PISA devoted a great deal of attention to assessing
comparable target populations. Differences between countries in the nature and extent of pre-primary education
and care, in the age of entry to formal schooling, and in the structure of the education system do not allow school
grade levels to be defined so that they are internationally comparable. Valid international comparisons of educational
performance, therefore, need to define their populations with reference to a target age. PISA covers students who are
aged between 15 years 3 months and 16 years 2 months at the time of the assessment and who have completed at least
6 years of formal schooling, regardless of the type of institution in which they are enrolled, whether they are in full-time
or part-time education, whether they attend academic or vocational programmes, and whether they attend public or
private schools or foreign schools within the country. (For an operational definition of this target population, see the
PISA 2009 Technical Report [OECD, forthcoming].) The use of this age in PISA, across countries and over time, allows
the performance of students to be compared in a consistent manner before they complete compulsory education.

As a result, this report can make statements about the knowledge and skills of individuals born in the same year who
are still at school at 15 years of age, despite having had different educational experiences, both in and outside school.

Stringent technical standards were established to define the national target populations and to identify permissible
exclusions from this definition (for more information, see the PISA website www.pisa.oecd.org). The overall exclusion
rate within a country was required to be below 5% to ensure that, under reasonable assumptions, any distortions in
national mean scores would remain within plus or minus 5 score points, i.e. typically within the order of magnitude
of two standard errors of sampling (see Box I.1.2). Exclusion could take place either through schools that participated
or students who participated within schools. There are several reasons why a school or a student could be excluded
from PISA. Schools might be excluded because they are situated in remote regions and are inaccessible or because
they are very small, or because of organisational or operational factors that precluded participation. Students might be
excluded because of intellectual disability or limited proficiency in the language of the test.

In 29 out of 65 countries participating in PISA 2009, the percentage of school-level exclusions amounted to less than
1%; it was less than 5% in all countries. When the exclusion of students who met the internationally established
exclusion criteria is also taken into account, the exclusion rates increase slightly. However, the overall exclusion
rate remains below 2% in 32 participating countries, below 5% in 60 participating countries, and below 7% in
all countries except Luxembourg (7.2%) and Denmark (8.6%). In 15 out of 34 OECD countries, the percentage of
school-level exclusions amounted to less than 1% and was less than 5% in all countries. When student exclusions
within schools are also taken into account, there were 9 OECD countries below 2% and 25 countries below 5%.
Restrictions on the level of exclusions in PISA 2009 are described in Annex A2.

The specific sample design and size for each country aimed to maximise sampling efficiency for student-level
estimates. In OECD countries, sample sizes ranged from 4 410 students in Iceland to 38 250 students in Mexico.
Countries with large samples have often implemented PISA both at national and regional/state levels (e.g. Australia,
Belgium, Canada, Italy, Mexico, Spain, Switzerland and the United Kingdom). This selection of samples was
monitored internationally and adhered to rigorous standards for the participation rate, both among schools selected
by the international contractor and among students within these schools, to ensure that the PISA results reflect
the skills of the 15-year-old students in participating countries. Countries were also required to administer the test
to students in identical ways to ensure that students receive the same information prior to and during the test (for
details, see Annex A4).

PISA 2009 Results: Learning to Learn – Volume III © OECD 2010 19

 Introduction to PISA

Box III.A Key features of PISA 2009

Content
• The main focus of PISA 2009 was reading. The survey also updated performance assessments in mathematics
and science. PISA considers students’ knowledge in these areas not in isolation, but in relation to their ability to
reflect on their knowledge and experience and to apply them to real-world issues. The emphasis is on mastering
processes, understanding concepts and functioning in various contexts within each assessment area.

• For the first time, the PISA 2009 survey also assessed 15-year-old students’ ability to read, understand and
apply digital texts.

Methods
• Around 470 000 students completed the assessment in 2009, representing about 26 million 15-year-olds in
the schools of the 65 participating countries and economies. Some 50 000 students took part in a second
round of this assessment in 2010, representing about 2 million 15-year-olds from 10 additional partner
countries and economies.

• Each participating student spent two hours carrying out pencil-and-paper tasks in reading, mathematics and
science. In 20 countries, students were given additional questions via computer to assess their capacity to
read digital texts.

• The assessment included tasks requiring students to construct their own answers as well as multiple-choice
questions. The latter were typically organised in units based on a written passage or graphic, much like the
kind of texts or figures that students might encounter in real life.

• Students also answered a questionnaire that took about 30 minutes to complete. This questionnaire focused
on their background, learning habits, attitudes towards reading, and their involvement and motivation.

• School principals completed a questionnaire about their school that included demographic characteristics
and an assessment of the quality of the learning environment at school.

Outcomes
PISA 2009 results provide:

• a profile of knowledge and skills among 15-year-olds in 2009, consisting of a detailed profile for reading
and an update for mathematics and science;

• contextual indicators relating performance results to student and school characteristics;

• an assessment of students’ engagement in reading activities, and their knowledge and use of different
learning strategies;

• a knowledge base for policy research and analysis; and

• trend data on changes in student knowledge and skills in reading, mathematics, science, changes in student
attitudes and socio-economic indicators, and in the impact of some indicators on performance results.

Future assessments
• The PISA 2012 survey will return to mathematics as the major assessment area, PISA 2015 will focus on
science. Thereafter, PISA will turn to another cycle beginning with reading again.

• Future tests will place greater emphasis on assessing students’ capacity to read and understand digital texts
and solve problems presented in a digital format, reflecting the importance of information and computer
technologies in modern societies.

20 © OECD 2010 PISA 2009 Results: Learning to Learn – Volume III

 Introduction to PISA

• Figure III.A •
A map of PISA countries and economies

OECD countries Partner countries and economies in PISA 2009 Partners countries in previous PISA surveys
Australia Japan Albania Mauritius* Dominican Republic
Austria Korea Argentina Miranda-Venezuela* Macedonia
Belgium Luxembourg Azerbaijan Montenegro Moldova
Canada Mexico Brazil Netherlands-Antilles*
Chile Netherlands Bulgaria Panama
Czech Republic New Zealand Colombia Peru
Denmark Norway Costa Rica* Qatar
Estonia Poland Croatia Romania
Finland Portugal Georgia* Russian Federation
France Slovak Republic Himachal Pradesh-India* Serbia
Germany Slovenia Hong Kong-China Shanghai-China
Greece Spain Indonesia Singapore
Hungary Sweden Jordan Tamil Nadu-India*
Iceland Switzerland Kazakhstan Chinese Taipei
Ireland Turkey Kyrgyzstan Thailand
Israel United Kingdom Latvia Trinidad and Tobago
Italy United States Liechtenstein Tunisia
Lithuania Uruguay
Macao-China United Arab Emirates*
Malaysia* Viet Nam* * These partner countries and economies carried out
Malta* the assessment in 2010 instead of 2009.

Notes

1. The GDP of countries that participated in PISA 2009 represents 87% of the 2007 world GDP. Some of the entities represented
in this report are referred to as partner economies. This is because they are not strictly national entities.

2. Thirty-one partner countries and economies originally participated in the PISA 2009 assessment and ten additional partner
countries and economies took part in a second round of the assessment.

3. Marks, G.N (2007); Bertschy, K., M.A. Cattaneo and S.C. Wolter (2009); OECD (2010a).

PISA 2009 Results: Learning to Learn – Volume III © OECD 2010 21

 Reader’s Guide
Data underlying the figures
The data referred to in this volume are presented in Annex B and, in greater detail, on the PISA website
(www.pisa.oecd.org).
Five symbols are used to denote missing data:
a The category does not apply in the country concerned. Data are therefore missing.
c There are too few observations or no observation to provide reliable estimates (i.e. there are fewer than
30 students or less than five schools with valid data).
m Data are not available. These data were not submitted by the country or were collected but subsequently
removed from the publication for technical reasons.
w Data have been withdrawn or have not been collected at the request of the country concerned.
x Data are included in another category or column of the table.

Country coverage
This publication features data on 65 countries and economies, including all 34 OECD countries and 31 partner
countries and economies (see Figure IV.A). The data from another ten partner countries were collected one year
later and will be published in 2011.
The statistical data for Israel are supplied by and under the responsibility of the relevant Israeli authorities.
The use of such data by the OECD is without prejudice to the status of the Golan Heights, East Jerusalem and
Israeli settlements in the West Bank under the terms of international law.

Calculating international averages

An OECD average was calculated for most indicators presented in this report. The OECD average corresponds
to the arithmetic mean of the respective country estimates.
Readers should, therefore, keep in mind that the term “OECD average” refers to the OECD countries included
in the respective comparisons.

Rounding figures
Because of rounding, some figures in tables may not exactly add up to the totals. Totals, differences and
averages are always calculated on the basis of exact numbers and are rounded only after calculation.
All standard errors in this publication have been rounded to one or two decimal places. Where the value 0.00
is shown, this does not imply that the standard error is zero, but that it is smaller than 0.005.

Reporting student data

The report uses “15-year-olds” as shorthand for the PISA target population. PISA covers students who are aged
between 15 years 3 months and 16 years 2 months at the time of assessment and who have completed at least
6 years of formal schooling, regardless of the type of institution in which they are enrolled and of whether
they are in full-time or part-time education, of whether they attend academic or vocational programmes, and
of whether they attend public or private schools or foreign schools within the country.

Reporting school data

The principals of the schools in which students were assessed provided information on their schools’
characteristics by completing a school questionnaire. Where responses from school principals are presented
in this publication, they are weighted so that they are proportionate to the number of 15-year-olds enrolled
in the school.

PISA 2009 Results: Learning to Learn – Volume III © OECD 2010 23

 Reader’s Guide

Focusing on statistically significant differences

This volume discusses only statistically significant differences or changes. These are denoted in darker colours
in figures and in bold font in tables. See Annex A3 for further information.

Abbreviations used in this report

ESCS PISA index of economic, social and cultural status
GDP Gross domestic product
ISCED International Standard Classification of Education
PPP Purchasing power parity
S.D. Standard deviation
S.E. Standard error

Further documentation
For further information on the PISA assessment instruments and the methods used in PISA, see the PISA 2009
Technical Report (OECD, forthcoming) and the PISA website (www.pisa.oecd.org).

This report uses the OECD’s StatLinks service. Below each table and chart is a url leading to a corresponding
Excel workbook containing the underlying data. These urls are stable and will remain unchanged over time.
In addition, readers of the e-books will be able to click directly on these links and the workbook will open in
a separate window, if their Internet browser is open and running.

24 © OECD 2010 PISA 2009 Results: Learning to Learn – Volume III

 1

Effective Learners,
Proficient Readers
This chapter examines how engaging in reading activities and approaching
learning positively relates to reading proficiency. More specifically, it looks
at how much students enjoy reading, how much time they spend reading
for enjoyment, and what they read for enjoyment. The chapter also
examines the extent to which 15-year-olds have “learned how to learn” as
indicated by their knowledge and use of specific learning strategies, such
as understanding, remembering and summarising. Students’ reading and
learning habits are then related to their reading performance.

PISA 2009 Results: Learning to Learn – volume III © OECD 2010 25

 1
Effective Learners, Proficient Readers

The ability to transmit information in written form as well as orally is one of humankind’s greatest assets. Sharing
information across time and space without being limited by the strength of one’s voice, the size of a venue or the
accuracy of memory has been fundamental to human progress. And yet, learning how to read and write requires
effort, because it cannot be achieved without mastering a collection of complex skills. As Pinker notes (1995),
“Children are wired for sound, but print is an optional accessory that must be painstakingly bolted on”.
The brain is biologically primed to acquire language, but writing and reading are relatively recent achievements in
human history. As such, exposure to written material does not automatically trigger a set of biological processes that
lead to reading proficiency and writing (OECD, 2007a). Becoming a proficient reader is a goal that requires practice
and dedication. More than ever, reading is key to acquiring knowledge, and mastery of reading is a precondition for
individuals’ success in all domains of life (for example, Cunningham and Stanovich, 1998; Smith, Mikulecky, Kibby
and Dreher, 2000). The pervasiveness of information technology means that reading proficiency is becoming even
more crucial. New media are continually emerging and redefining what it means to be an avid reader and how to
teach and learn reading. With information overload becoming a growing problem, people must also learn how to
manage a constant flow of information and identify material relevant to their needs.
Reading was the main focus of the PISA 2009 assessment. The PISA assessment was developed to accommodate a
wide and deep conception of reading literacy, one that aims to encompass the range of situations in which people
read, the different forms in which written text is presented, and the variety of approaches that readers bring to texts.
These approaches range from the functional and finite, such as finding a particular piece of practical information, to
the more expansive: reading to learn and understand other ways of doing, thinking and being (Volume I, What Students
Know and Can Do, for a detailed description of the PISA approach to assessing student reading performance).
This chapter examines how engaging in reading activities and approaching learning relates to reading proficiency.
The analyses seek to offer pointers on what parents, teachers and school administrators can do to help students
become proficient and engaged readers. Figure III.1.1 and Figure III.1.2 illustrate how PISA measures reading habits
and approaches to learning. Students who are highly engaged in a wide range of reading activities and who adopt
particular strategies to aid them in their learning are more likely than other students to be effective learners and to
perform well at school (Guthrie & Wigfield, 2000; Guthrie, Wigfield, & You, in press). Research also shows a strong
link between the incidence and intensity of reading practices, reading motivation and reading proficiency among
adults (OECD and Statistics Canada, 2000).

• Figure III.1.1 •
How does PISA define “engagement in reading activities”?

Enjoyment of reading
Reading for school

Time spent reading

Reading habits for enjoyment

Diversity of on line
reading activities Diversity of reading materials

• Figure III.1.2 •
How does PISA define “learning strategies”?

Memorisation strategies
Understanding and remembering
Control strategies
Approaches to learning

Summarising Elaboration strategies

26 © OECD 2010 PISA 2009 Results: Learning to Learn – volume III

 1
Effective Learners, Proficient Readers

Results emerging from this volume suggest that students who read for enjoyment, who self-direct their learning
(i.e. use control strategies) and particularly students who enjoy reading and who know what they should do when
they have to understand, remember and summarise complex information, are students who perform well in the PISA
reading assessment. Failure to succeed in academic work at school may result in student disaffection, low levels
of practice and failure to develop effective learning strategies (OECD, 2001; Skinner et al., 2009). As Box III.1.1
suggests, PISA cannot determine causal relationships among engagement in reading activities, learning strategies
and reading achievement. What PISA can do, however, is indicate the cumulative strength of such relationships
among students approaching the end of compulsory education.

Box III.1.1 A cycle of engagement in reading activities, learning strategies

and reading performance
Students who are highly engaged in diverse reading activities and who are aware of what strategies work best
for reading and understanding texts perform better in the PISA reading assessment. However, this finding
cannot be interpreted as direct evidence of a causal relationship between being engaged in reading, adopting
effective learning strategies and achieving high levels of reading proficiency. Evidence presented in this
chapter rather reflects the cumulative observed association between how engaged students are, the learning
strategies they adopt and how well they do.
What does cumulative association mean? Studies in education and applied psychology suggest that reading
proficiency is the result of multiple developmental cumulative cycles (Aunola, et al., 2002 for a review).
Attitudes towards reading and learning, motivation, engagement in reading activities and reading proficiency
are mutually reinforcing. Positive reinforcement operates at two levels. The first reflects the fact that the
future depends on the past. Past engagement matters for current and future engagement and past reading
performance is also a very good predictor of future reading performance (Fredericks, Blumenfeld, and Paris,
2004; Stanovich, 2004). This suggests that a student’s past reading activities will influence his or her future
reading activities. Similarly, how effectively the student applied learning strategies in the past is one of the
factors that determine how well he or she will apply learning strategies in the future.
The second level indicates that associations among engagement, learning strategies and performance are
circular. Engaging in reading activities, adopting effective learning strategies and being a proficient reader are
mutually dependent: as students read more they become better readers; and when they read well and expect
good performance in reading, they tend to read more and enjoy reading (Nurmi, et al., 2003).
The graph below illustrates how results on associations between how engaged in reading activities students
are, the learning strategies they adopt and how well they read should be interpreted in the context of the
two levels of reinforcement.

Engagement
Time
Engagement

Engagement
Performance

Engagement
Performance

Performance

Performance

The evidence that emerges from PISA on the positive interplay between engagement in reading activities,
the adoption of particular learning strategies and reading performance suggests that preparing students to
read well and promoting a passion for reading and effective learning does not necessarily involve trade-
offs. Students who are highly engaged and are effective learners are most likely to be proficient readers and
proficient readers are also those students that are most engaged and interested in reading.

PISA 2009 Results: Learning to Learn – volume III © OECD 2010 27

 1
Effective Learners, Proficient Readers

How PISA 2009 examines engagement in reading and approaches to learning

Most children come to school willing to learn. International surveys of primary school-age children generally reveal
high levels of interest in and positive attitudes towards reading, mathematics and science among these students
(see Mullis et al, 2007). How can schools foster and strengthen this predisposition and ensure that young adults leave
school with the motivation and capacity to continue learning throughout life? Schools can influence students’ attitudes
towards learning as much by fostering motivation as by imparting knowledge and skills. In fact, many adults with little
interest in learning blame their lack of motivation on bad experiences at school in their early years (McKenna, Kear,
Ellsworth, 1995). Motivation, engagement and the use of effective learning strategies can be regarded as important
outcomes in their own right, as they can affect students’ quality of life during their adolescence, and can influence their
decision to pursue further education or their capacity to seize labour market opportunities.
This volume looks at how engagement in reading activities and approaches to learning relate to reading performance
and analyses the degree to which engagement in reading and approaches to learning could have potential compensatory
effects. The volume not only describes the strong positive link that exists between engagement in reading, approaches
to learning and reading performance, but illustrates that boys and socio-economically disadvantaged students have
lower levels of engagement and approach learning less effectively than girls and socio-economically advantaged
students. Chapter 2 of this volume maps countries according to the extent to which their students, in general, and
some groups of students in particular, are engaged in reading activities and know about and use learning strategies
in their studies. By so doing, Chapter 2 identifies the relationship that 15-year-olds in participating countries and
economies have with reading and learning. Chapter 3 suggests that a large part of the gap in reading performance
between boys and girls and socio-economically disadvantaged and advantaged students could be closed if they had
similar reading and learning habits.

Box III.1.2 The association between reading habits, approaches to learning and
reading performance

Results presented in the chapter on the relationship between reading performance and students’ reading habits
and approaches to learning can be used to answer two main policy issues:
How strong is the association between reading performance and reading habits and approaches to learning?
Two indicators can be used to answer this question: the slope and the inter-quartile range.
The slope represents the score point difference that is associated with a change of one unit in reading habits
and approaches to learning. This indicator measures how powerful the association is.
• If this number is low, no differences are observed in the reading performance of students with different
reading habits and approaches to learning. Students whose reading habits and approaches to learning are
similar to those of the average student in the OECD area (index value of 0) have a reading performance that
is similar to the reading performance of students who are one standard deviation above the average students
in the OECD area with respect to their reading habits and approaches to learning (index value of 1).
• If this number is high and positive, large differences are observed in the reading performance of students with
different reading habits and approaches to learning. Students whose reading habits and approaches to learning
are similar to those of the average student in the OECD area (index value of 0) have a reading performance that
is lower than the reading performance of students who are one standard deviation above the average students
in the OECD area with respect to their reading habits and approaches to learning (index value of 1).
The inter-quartile range represents the difference between the students with the highest and those with the lowest
reading habits and approaches to learning (i.e. those in the top and bottom quartiles of these indicators). This indicator
shows how severe inequalities in reading performance between “enthusiastic and unenthusiastic readers” are.
Are reading habits and approaches to learning good predictors of performance?
The proportion of the variation in student performance that is accounted for by engaging in reading and approaches
to learning, or “explained variance”, helps to answer this question by identifying the proportion of the observed
variation in student performance that can be attributed to reading habits and approaches to learning.
• If this number is low, knowing the reading habits of students or how they approach their learning tells very
little about their reading performance.
• If this number is high, by knowing the reading habits of students or how they approach their learning one can
predict students’ reading performance relatively well.

28 © OECD 2010 PISA 2009 Results: Learning to Learn – volume III

 1
Effective Learners, Proficient Readers

Box III.1.3 Interpreting PISA indices

Comparing countries that are above or below the OECD average on each of the indices of reading engagement
and learning strategies:
Indices used to characterise students’ engagement in reading activities and awareness and use of learning
strategies were constructed so that the average OECD student would have an index value of zero and about
two-thirds of the OECD student population would be between the values of -1 and 1 (i.e. the index has
a standard deviation of 1). Negative values on the index, therefore, do not imply that students responded
negatively to the underlying question. Rather, students with negative scores are students who responded
less positively than the average response across OECD countries. Likewise, students with positive scores are
students who responded more positively than the average student in the OECD area (Annex A1 for a detailed
description of how indices were constructed).
Most of the indicators of engagement-in-reading activities and approaches to learning are based on students’
self-reports. Such measures can thus suffer from a degree of measurement error because students are asked to
assess their level of engagement in reading activities and their use of different learning strategies retrospectively.
Apart from potential measurement error, cultural differences in attitudes towards self-enhancement can influence
country-level results in engagement-in-reading activities and the use of learning strategies (Bempechat, et al.,
2002). The literature consistently shows that response biases, such as social desirability, acquiescence and
extreme response choice, are more common in countries with low GDP than in more affluent countries, as they
are, within countries, among individuals with lower socio-economic background and less education.
As in the first PISA cycle, many of the self-reported indicators of engagement in reading and approaches to
learning and reading are strongly and positively associated with reading performance within countries, but
show a weak or negative association with performance at the country level. This may be due to different
response biases across countries or the fact that country-level differences in reading performance are due to
many factors that go beyond levels of engagement in reading activities and approaches to learning, and that
are negatively associated with reading performance and positively associated with engagement in reading
and approaches to learning.
PISA 2009 used two indicators aimed at assessing the extent to which students are aware of effective strategies
to understand, remember and summarise information. These measures suffer less from self-reported biases
because they gauge whether students agree with education experts on what strategies work best to achieve
certain goals (Annex A1 for a detailed description of how these indices were constructed). Analyses presented
in this volume confirm that these indicators are strongly associated with reading performance both within and
across countries. This evidence is in line with previous studies that attempt to measure the influence of self-
reported bias in country-level attitudinal scales in previous PISA cycles (Lie and Turmo, 2005), and suggests
that self-reported biases may be at least partially responsible for observed cross-country differences in self-
reported engagement-in-reading activities and approaches to learning.
Caution is advised when comparing levels of engagement and the use of different learning strategies across
countries because students in different countries may not always mean the same thing when answering
questions. The PISA 2009 Technical Report (OECD, forthcoming) contains a detailed description of all the
steps that were taken in PISA 2009 to ensure the highest possible level of cross-country comparability and to
assess the validity of cross-country comparisons based on the indices featured in the report.1

Engagement in reading activities and reading performance

This section examines the relationship between engagement in reading activities and reading performance, focusing
on three aspects of how students engage in reading activities:
• how much students enjoy reading;
• how much time students spend reading for enjoyment; and
• what students read for enjoyment.

Are students who enjoy reading better readers?

Being interested in and enjoying a particular subject affects both the degree and the continuity of engagement in
learning and the depth of understanding achieved, an effect that research has shown to operate largely independently
of students’ general motivation to learn.

PISA 2009 Results: Learning to Learn – volume III © OECD 2010 29

 1
Effective Learners, Proficient Readers

In all countries – except Kazakhstan – students who enjoy reading the most perform significantly better than students
who enjoy reading the least. Figure III.1.3 (Table III.1.1) shows the share of the variation in student reading performance
that can be explained by a change in one unit in the index of enjoyment of reading and variations in performance
on the reading scale across different groups of students. Enjoying or being interested in reading has been found to be
associated with high levels of reading proficiency and the use of deep-level reading strategies (Schiefele, 2009). This is
a useful measure of the strength in the relationship between students who reported enjoying reading and their reading
performance. For each country, four groups of students were identified according to the extent to which they enjoy
reading (top quarter, second quarter, third quarter and bottom quarter), as they reported in the PISA questionnaire.
For each country, Figure III.1.3 displays the length of the line connecting the reading score of the group of students
who enjoy reading the most and the group of students who enjoy reading the least – in other words, the performance
gap between the top and the bottom groups. Countries are ranked according to the share of the variation in reading
performance that is associated with a one unit change in the enjoyment of reading index; thus, countries on the upper
part of Figure III.1.3 are those where a large share of variation in student performance can be explained by how much
students reported enjoying reading, while countries where a relatively small share of this variation can be explained by
how much students reported enjoying reading are in the lower part of Figure III.1.3.

What is meant by a difference of, say, 70 points between the scores of two different groups of students? What does
such a difference translate into? Box III.1.4 can be used to visualise the different ways in which a given difference in
PISA score points can be used and thought of.

Box III.1.4 Interpreting differences in PISA scores: how large a gap?

In PISA 2009, student performance in reading is described through seven proficiency levels (Levels 1b, 1a, 2,
3, 4, 5 and 6). A difference of about 73 score points represents one proficiency level on the PISA reading scale.
This can be considered a comparatively large difference in student performance. For example, as described
in Volume I, What Students Know and Can Do, and the PISA 2009 assessment framework, students proficient
at Level 3 on the overall reading literacy scale are capable of completing moderately complex reading tasks,
such as locating multiple pieces of information, making links between different parts of a text, and relating the
text to familiar knowledge. Meanwhile, students proficient at Level 2 on the reading literacy scale are able to
locate information that meets several conditions, to make comparisons or contrasts around a single feature, to
work out what a well-defined part of a text means, even when the information is not prominent, and to make
connections between the text and personal experience.
For the 32 OECD countries in which a sizeable number of 15-year-olds in the PISA samples were enrolled in
at least two different grade levels, the difference between students in the two grades implies that one school
year corresponds to an average of 39 score points on the PISA reading scale (Table A1.2).
The difference in performance on the reading scale between the countries with the highest and lowest mean
performance is 242 score points, and the performance gap between the countries with the fifth highest and
the fifth lowest mean performance is 154 score points.
In relation to the overall distribution of students on the PISA reading scale, one hundred points represent one
standard deviation, which means that two-thirds of the OECD student population has scores within 100 points
of the OECD mean.

Across OECD countries, 18% of student variation in reading performance can be explained by differences in
how much students reported enjoying reading. The explained variation in reading performance is higher than
20 percentage points in 16 OECD countries and one partner economy. In Australia, New Zealand, France, Ireland,
Sweden, Finland, Iceland, the United Kingdom, Switzerland, Austria, Norway, the Czech Republic, Germany,
Luxembourg and Belgium, and the partner country Singapore, the quarter of students who enjoy reading the most
can perform reading tasks that are more than 1.5 proficiency levels higher than students who enjoy reading the least.

The difference between the top and the bottom quarters on the index of enjoyment of reading shows what large
inequalities in reading performance there are between enthusiastic and unenthusiastic readers in all countries. Table
III.1.1 also shows the score point difference that is associated with a change in one unit in the index of enjoyment
of reading.2 On average across OECD countries, a difference of one unit on the index of enjoyment of reading
corresponds to 40 points on the PISA reading scale, or the equivalent of an average school year’s progress.

30 © OECD 2010 PISA 2009 Results: Learning to Learn – volume III

 1
Effective Learners, Proficient Readers

• Figure III.1.3 •
Relationship between enjoying reading and performance in reading

Bottom quarter Third quarter

Second quarter Top quarter
% of variance
explained in
student performance
Finland 27
Australia 26
Ireland 24
Switzerland 22
New Zealand 22
Norway 22
Iceland 22
Sweden 22
Chinese Taipei 22
United Kingdom 22
Denmark 21
Germany 21
France 21
Estonia 21
Czech Republic 21
Hungary 20
Canada 20
Austria 20
Poland 19
Liechtenstein 18
Lithuania 18
OECD average 18
Spain 18
Korea 18
United States 17
Slovenia 17
Luxembourg 17
Singapore 17
Greece 17
Latvia 17
Netherlands 17
Belgium 17
Italy 16
Japan 15
Russian Federation 15
Slovak Republic 14
Portugal 14
Hong Kong-China 14
Croatia 14
Dubai (UAE) 14
Shanghai-China 12
Albania 12
Macao-China 11
Montenegro 10
Serbia 9
Bulgaria 9
Chile 8
Israel 8
Thailand 8
Uruguay 7
Trinidad and Tobago 7
Qatar 7
Turkey 6
Jordan 5
Romania 5
Brazil 5
Azerbaijan 4
Mexico 4
Argentina 4
Indonesia 3
Kyrgyzstan 2
Peru 2
Panama 1
Colombia 1
Tunisia 0
Kazakhstan 0
250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600
Mean score

Countries are ranked in descending order of the percentage of explained variance in student performance.
Source: OECD, PISA 2009 Database, Table III.1.1.
1 2 http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888932360176

PISA 2009 Results: Learning to Learn – volume III © OECD 2010 31

 1
Effective Learners, Proficient Readers

Figure III.1.4 (Table III.1.2) shows a strong association between how much students enjoy reading and how well
they perform in the PISA reading assessment. It places students who have lower-than-average levels of enjoyment of
reading across the proficiency levels, detailed in Volume I, What Students Know and Can Do, and represents two
sample countries, Finland and Japan, where the relationship between enjoyment of reading activities and reading
performance is markedly different. In the context of Figure III.1.4, students with low levels of enjoyment of reading
are those whose values on the index of enjoyment in reading are below the average for their country.

• Figure III.1.4 •
How proficient in reading are students who don’t enjoy reading?

Finland OECD average Japan

% 100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Level 1a or below Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 or above

Note: This figure shows the proportion of students with below average levels of enjoyment of reading (compared to the average student in the
country), by proficiency level on the reading scale.
Source: OECD, PISA 2009 Database, Table III.1.2.
1 2 http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888932360176

In the absence of an association between enjoyment of reading and reading performance, students with average
or below-average levels of enjoyment would make up 50% of students in each proficiency level. On average
though, students who do not enjoy reading tend to be vastly over-represented in proficiency Levels 1b, 1a, 2 and
3 and are under-represented in Levels 4, 5 and 6. The distribution of students who have lower-than-average levels
of enjoyment of reading across the seven proficiency levels is not uniform across countries. In Israel, Belgium,
Japan, Portugal, the United States and the Slovak Republic, and in the partner countries and economies Qatar,
Brazil, Shanghai-China, Macao-China, Hong Kong-China and Dubai (UAE), the gradient is very gentle, suggesting a
weak association between enjoyment of reading and reading performance, while in Australia, the Czech Republic,
Estonia and Finland, and the partner economy Chinese Taipei, the gradient is relatively steep.

The association between time spent reading for enjoyment and reading performance
Time spent reading for enjoyment measures how frequently and for how long students read. The amount of time
students spend reading for enjoyment provides an indicator of their interest in reading. The frequency of reading
is strongly related to reading comprehension (Baker & Wigfield, 1999; Cipielewski & Stanovich, 1992). Stanovich
(1986) describes a circular association, the so-called Matthew effect, between reading practices and achievement.
Better readers tend to read more because they are more motivated to read, which, in turn, leads to improved
vocabulary and comprehension skills.

PISA 2009 asked students how much time they usually spend reading for enjoyment. Students could choose from “I
do not read for enjoyment”, “I read for up to 30 minutes a day”, “I read for more than 30 minutes but less than 60
minutes a day”, “I read for between 1 and 2 hours a day” and “I read for more than 2 hours a day”.

32 © OECD 2010 PISA 2009 Results: Learning to Learn – volume III

 1
Effective Learners, Proficient Readers

• Figure III.1.5 •
Relationship between time spent reading for enjoyment and performance in reading

Do not read for enjoyment

Up to 30 minutes a day
Score point difference More than 30 minutes to less than 60 minutes a day
between students
who read up to One to two hours a day
30 minutes a day
and students who More than two hours a day
don't read for enjoyment

Iceland 66
Liechtenstein 64
Shanghai-China 63
Belgium 63
France 62
Switzerland 60
Sweden 60
Norway 58
Austria 57
Netherlands 57
Luxembourg 56
Australia 55
Germany 55
Chinese Taipei 55
Finland 54
Slovenia 53
New Zealand 52
Canada 49
Czech Republic 48
Ireland 48
United States 47
United Kingdom 47
Estonia 45
OECD average 44
Japan 44
Singapore 42
Slovak Republic 41
Italy 40
Denmark 39
Hungary 37
Lithuania 36
Croatia 35
Poland 35
Hong Kong-China 34
Korea 32
Portugal 32
Spain 31
Greece 29
Serbia 29
Macao-China 27
Thailand 26
Russian Federation 25
Dubai (UAE) 24
Turkey 24
Latvia 24
Israel 23
Bulgaria 23
Uruguay 22
Montenegro 22
Kyrgyzstan 15
Qatar 14
Chile 12
Romania 12
Jordan 10
Indonesia 10
Brazil 7
Azerbaijan 4
Argentina 4
Albania 4
Mexico -1
Trinidad and Tobago -2
Kazakhstan -2
Panama -4
Colombia -5
Tunisia -11
Peru -13
250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600
Mean score

Countries are ranked in descending order of the score point difference.

Source: OECD, PISA 2009 Database, Table III.1.3.
1 2 http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888932360176

PISA 2009 Results: Learning to Learn – volume III © OECD 2010 33

 1
Effective Learners, Proficient Readers

Students who read for enjoyment tend to be more proficient readers than students who do not read for enjoyment
in all PISA participating countries. Figure III.1.5 (Table III.1.3) shows the average score in the PISA 2009 reading
assessment for five groups of students in each country: students who do not read for enjoyment; students who read
for up to 30 minutes per day; students who spend between half an hour and one hour daily reading for enjoyment;
students who spend between one and two hours; and a group of extremely dedicated readers who reported spending
more than two hours per day reading for enjoyment. Countries are ranked by the length of the line connecting the
average score of the group of students who read for less than 30 minutes a day for enjoyment and the group of
students who do not read for enjoyment.

On average across OECD countries, over one-third of students – and 40% or more in Austria, the Netherlands,
Luxembourg, Switzerland, Belgium, Japan, the Czech Republic, the United States, Ireland, Germany, the Slovak
Republic, Norway and in the partner countries Liechtenstein and Argentina – reported that they did not read for
enjoyment at all.3 The average performance for these students on the reading scale, 460 points, is well below the
average for the OECD as a whole. Another one-third of students across OECD countries read for 30 minutes or less
per day. Their mean performance, 504 points, is in line with the OECD average of 493 points. A further 17% of
students across OECD countries read for between half-an-hour and one hour per day, with performance levels of
527 points. Students who reported reading for longer, between one and two hours per day, or assiduous readers,
who read for enjoyment for more than two hours daily, score 532 and 527 points, respectively (Table III.1.3).

In more than two-thirds of countries that participated in PISA, the score point difference associated with at least
some daily reading for enjoyment is far greater than the score point difference associated with increasing amounts
of time spent reading. The gap in performance between students who read for enjoyment for 30 minutes or less
per day and students who do not read for enjoyment is more than 30 points in 36 countries; in Iceland, Belgium,
France, the partner country Liechtenstein and the partner economy Shanghai-China, it is above 60 points. However,
the performance gap between students who read for enjoyment between 30 minutes and one hour and students
who read 30 minutes or less is above 30 points in only eight countries: Australia, Ireland, New Zealand, Germany,
the Czech Republic, and the partner countries and economy Bulgaria, Qatar and Dubai (UAE). In no country is the
performance gap between students who read for enjoyment between one and two hours per day and students who
read between half-an-hour and one hour per day more than 20 points.

Figure III.1.5 indicates that, in most countries, the score point difference between students who spend less than 30
minutes per day reading for enjoyment and students who spend no time reading for enjoyment is greater than the
score point difference between students who spend half an hour to an hour reading for enjoyment and students who
spend less than 30 minutes. In general, the score point difference between different groups of students decreases as
students spend more time reading for enjoyment. This may mean that the returns on the time students spend reading
for enjoyment decrease as time invested by students increases or, alternatively, that poor readers need more time to
read a text. Of course, it is not just how long students spend reading, but also the types of materials and their levels
of complexity that are relevant. This is considered in the next section.

Results presented in Figure III.1.5 indicate that reading for enjoyment is associated with reading proficiency. The
low reading performance among students who do not read for enjoyment calls for education systems to encourage
reading both in and outside of school. The existence of a threshold effect and in how fast students of different
abilities are able to access written information means that the focus should remain on encouraging students to read
daily for enjoyment rather than on how much time they spend reading.

The association between the material students read and reading performance
There has been considerable debate as to which type of reading may be most effective in fostering reading skills
and improving reading performance. The results from PISA suggest that, although the students who reported reading
fiction are more likely to have higher scores in the 2009 PISA reading assessment, it is the students who read a wide
variety of materials who perform particularly well in reading. Table III.1.6 illustrates that in all countries except for
Turkey and the partner country Kazakhstan, these students perform better on the PISA reading scale than students
who show less diverse reading patterns.

PISA 2009 offers a valuable opportunity to explore the association between what students report reading in their
free time and reading performance and although it cannot establish causal relations, it offers a glimpse of how
proficient in reading students who read different materials are. PISA 2009 asked students to indicate how often they
read magazines, comic books, fiction (novels, narratives, stories), non-fiction and newspapers, because they want

34 © OECD 2010 PISA 2009 Results: Learning to Learn – volume III

 1
Effective Learners, Proficient Readers

to. Students could indicate that they read each material “Never or almost never”, “A few times a year”, “About once
a month”, “Several times a month” and “Several times a week”.

Table III.1.6 shows how students who reported reading fiction and non-fiction books regularly, i.e. several times
a month or several times a week, are particularly likely to perform well in the PISA reading assessment. Findings
emerging from analyses of the association between what students reported reading for enjoyment and their reading
performance are in line with evidence suggesting that some reading materials may nurture reading proficiency more
than others (Smith, 1996; OECD 2002). More specifically, reading long and complex texts, such as fiction and non-
fiction books, appears to be particularly associated with how well both students and adults read.

Figure III.1.6 presents the reading performance of students who report reading regularly, either several times a month
or several times a week, and for their enjoyment, different types of material: magazines, comic books, fiction (novels,
narratives, stories), non-fiction, and newspapers.4 Compared to someone who reports not reading fiction for enjoyment,
reading fiction for a student’s own enjoyment appears to be positively associated with higher performance in the PISA
2009 reading assessment, while reading comic books is associated with little improvement in reading proficiency in
some countries, and with lower overall reading performance in other countries (Table III.1.24).

Students who reported reading fiction for their own enjoyment several times a month or several times a week are
more proficient readers than students who do not read fiction, or who reported reading fiction only occasionally
in all countries except Mexico and the partner countries Colombia, Jordan, Tunisia, Peru, Kazakhstan, Brazil,
Argentina and Panama (Table III.1.24).5 The performance difference is 36 points or more – or half a proficiency
level – in as many as 36 countries and 73 points or more – or one proficiency level – in five countries: Sweden,
Australia, Luxembourg, Austria and Finland. Fifteen-year-olds who reported reading non-fiction for their own
enjoyment at least several times a month generally have higher reading scores than students who do not. The score
point difference associated with reading non-fiction, however, appears to be lower than the score point difference
observed for fiction: it is higher than 50 points only in Spain and the partner country Croatia. In 14 countries, no
difference could be observed; but in Turkey and in the partner countries Kazakhstan and Peru, reading non-fiction
books is negatively associated with reading performance.

Reading magazines and newspapers for enjoyment on a regular basis is also associated with higher reading scores,
although, as in the case of non-fiction books, the score point difference between reading these materials frequently
and not reading or reading them only sporadically is lower than in the case of fiction. For example, the score point
difference between students who reported reading newspapers several times a month or several times a week and
students who reported not reading newspapers or reading them once a month or less is 35 points or more only in
Iceland, Israel and Sweden and the partner country Peru. Similarly, the score point difference between students who
read magazines several times a month or several times a week and students who do not read magazines or read
them once a month or less is above 35 points only in six countries: the Netherlands, Hungary, Finland, the Slovak
Republic and the partner countries Bulgaria and Montenegro.

Reading comic books, on the other hand, is generally associated with low levels of reading. proficiency. Students
who reported reading comics several times a month or several times a week have lower reading scores than students
who reported not reading comic books in 33 countries. The difference in performance between students who
reported reading and students who reported not reading comic books is very negative – 30 points or more – in
Estonia and the partner countries Kazakhstan, the Russian Federation and Bulgaria. In 14 countries – Belgium,
Norway, Italy, Iceland, Switzerland, France, the Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, Finland and the partner countries
and economy Jordan, Thailand, Indonesia and Macao-China – students who reported reading comics regularly
achieve higher scores than students who reported not reading comic books regularly. The causal nature of this
relationship cannot be established by PISA. It may well be that students with lower performance levels find comic
books, with a lighter reading load, more accessible.

Students who reported reading fiction and who may also have reported reading other material, except for comic
books, were the students who achieved the highest scores in the reading scale: on average, over 100 points more
than students who read nothing in Iceland, Austria, Sweden, Switzerland, Finland, the Slovak Republic, France,
Luxembourg and the partner country and economy Bulgaria and Dubai (UAE) (Figure III.1.7 and Table III.1.9). On
average, students across the OECD who reported reading fiction and any other material regularly, but not comic
books, have a reading score of 538 points in the reading assessment. In most countries, these students have reading
scores that place them more than one proficiency level above students who do not read any material regularly.

PISA 2009 Results: Learning to Learn – volume III © OECD 2010 35

 1
Effective Learners, Proficient Readers

• Figure III.1.6 [Part 1/2] •

Relationship between the types of materials students read and performance in reading
OECD average OECD average OECD average
53 score points -2 score points 22 score points

Fiction Comic books Non-fiction

Sweden Belgium Croatia
Australia Norway Spain
Luxembourg Italy Slovenia
Austria Jordan Sweden
Finland Iceland Netherlands
France Switzerland Lithuania
Czech Republic Thailand Bulgaria
Switzerland France Poland
Germany Netherlands Australia
United Kingdom Denmark Portugal
Iceland Sweden Slovak Republic
New Zealand Finland Iceland
Ireland Indonesia Ireland
Norway Japan Korea
Belgium Macao-China Chinese Taipei
Slovenia Qatar Serbia
Liechtenstein Singapore Chile
Slovak Republic Slovak Republic United Kingdom
Canada Colombia Estonia
Poland Spain Indonesia
Spain Czech Republic Finland
Netherlands Azerbaijan Trinidad and Tobago
Lithuania Canada Czech Republic
Greece Chinese Taipei Uruguay
Croatia Australia Macao-China
United States Greece Hong Kong-China
Singapore Liechtenstein Latvia
Dubai (UAE) Portugal Denmark
Italy Luxembourg Japan
Japan Argentina Greece
Bulgaria Trinidad and Tobago Thailand
Denmark Hong Kong-China New Zealand
Portugal Germany Montenegro
Russian Federation Chile Mexico
Estonia Korea Albania
Chinese Taipei Montenegro Singapore
Hong Kong-China Uruguay Luxembourg
Hungary Mexico Canada
Macao-China Croatia Russian Federation
Qatar Slovenia Hungary
Korea Peru Brazil
Israel Panama Italy
Trinidad and Tobago United States Belgium
Montenegro Romania Israel
Albania Hungary Liechtenstein
Serbia Kyrgyzstan Austria
Latvia Poland Romania
Thailand Turkey Dubai (UAE)
Romania Brazil Shanghai-China
Chile Shanghai-China Colombia
Shanghai-China Tunisia Kyrgyzstan
Indonesia New Zealand Switzerland
Kyrgyzstan Austria Germany
Uruguay Dubai (UAE) Qatar
Azerbaijan United Kingdom Norway
Turkey Albania Panama
Panama Serbia Argentina
Argentina Ireland Tunisia
Brazil Israel Azerbaijan
Kazakhstan Latvia France
Peru Lithuania Jordan
Tunisia Estonia United States
Jordan Bulgaria Peru
Mexico Russian Federation Turkey
Colombia Kazakhstan Kazakhstan
-40 0 40 80 -40 0 40 80 -40 0 40 80
Score point difference -20 20 60 Score point difference -20 20 60 Score point difference -20 20 60

Note: Score point differences that are statistically significant are marked in a darker tone.
Countries are ranked in ascending order of the score point differences.
Source: OECD, PISA 2009 Database, Table III.1.24.
1 2 http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888932360176

36 © OECD 2010 PISA 2009 Results: Learning to Learn – volume III

 1
Effective Learners, Proficient Readers

• Figure III.1.6 [Part 2/2] •

Relationship between the types of materials students read and performance in reading
OECD average OECD average
15 score points 16 score points

Magazines Newspapers
Bulgaria Iceland
Netherlands Israel
Hungary Sweden
Montenegro Peru
Finland Shanghai-China
Slovak Republic Kyrgyzstan
Romania Jordan
Lithuania Bulgaria
Sweden Netherlands
Uruguay Liechtenstein
Peru Korea
Poland Trinidad and Tobago
Panama Singapore
Belgium Macao-China
Argentina Hong Kong-China
Serbia Uruguay
Kyrgyzstan Chinese Taipei
Latvia Chile
Chile Switzerland
Brazil Japan
Israel Norway
Iceland Croatia
Jordan Tunisia
Thailand Estonia
Slovenia Austria
Switzerland Montenegro
France Turkey
Denmark Italy
Croatia Dubai (UAE)
Indonesia Finland
Qatar Serbia
Dubai (UAE) Hungary
Estonia Poland
Greece Germany
Shanghai-China Indonesia
Norway Belgium
Mexico Azerbaijan
Azerbaijan Latvia
Luxembourg Brazil
Trinidad and Tobago Denmark
Albania Lithuania
Tunisia France
Liechtenstein Thailand
Kazakhstan Australia
Czech Republic Qatar
Italy Slovak Republic
Austria Argentina
Russian Federation Canada
Spain Spain
Canada Romania
Singapore Slovenia
Germany Czech Republic
United States New Zealand
Colombia Mexico
Ireland United States
Korea Luxembourg
Macao-China Greece
United Kingdom Panama
Portugal United Kingdom
Turkey Colombia
Chinese Taipei Albania
Japan Russian Federation
Hong Kong-China Kazakhstan
Australia Portugal
New Zealand Ireland
-40 0 40 80 -40 0 40 80
Score point difference -20 20 60 Score point difference -20 20 60

Note: Score point differences that are statistically significant are marked in a darker tone.
Countries are ranked in ascending order of the score point differences.
Source: OECD, PISA 2009 Database, Table III.1.24.
1 2 http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888932360176

PISA 2009 Results: Learning to Learn – volume III © OECD 2010 37

 1
Effective Learners, Proficient Readers

• Figure III.1.7 •
Performance on the reading scale of students who read different materials

Fiction and comics and other reading materials

Comics and others but no fiction
Others than fiction and comics

Finland
Belgium
Norway
Switzerland
Netherlands
Canada
Korea
Singapore
Japan
Shanghai-China
Australia
Germany
Iceland
Sweden
Hong Kong-China
France
Italy
Denmark
New Zealand
Czech Republic
Greece
Poland
OECD average
Slovenia
Spain
United Kingdom
Chinese Taipei
Slovak Republic
Macao-China
Luxembourg
United States
Ireland
Estonia
Portugal
Austria
Croatia
Hungary
Latvia
Lithuania
Israel
Dubai (UAE)
Turkey
Chile
Russian Federation
Trinidad and Tobago
Thailand
Serbia
Bulgaria
Uruguay
Mexico
Jordan
Romania
Indonesia
Montenegro
Colombia
Brazil
Tunisia
Argentina
Albania
Qatar
Azerbaijan
Kazakhstan
Panama
Peru
Kyrgyzstan
250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600
Mean score

Note: Liechtenstein does not feature in this figure, because of small sample size issues.
Countries are ranked in descending order of the mean performance of students who read fiction, comics and other reading materials.
Source: OECD, PISA 2009 Database, Table III.1.9.
1 2 http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888932360176

38 © OECD 2010 PISA 2009 Results: Learning to Learn – volume III

 1
Effective Learners, Proficient Readers

Students in Israel, Turkey and Mexico, and in the partner countries Colombia, Serbia, Latvia, Romania, Tunisia,
Panama, Kyrgyzstan, Peru, Bulgaria, Argentina, Kazakhstan Uruguay and Brazil who reported reading fiction and
comic books and who may also read other materials, such as magazines, newspapers and non-fiction regularly,
score at least 15 score points lower on the reading scale than students who only read magazines, newspapers and
non-fiction. This variation is not due to different patterns of reading comic books among boys and girls. Indeed, in
several countries, boys and girls who reported reading comic books and who may also read magazines, newspapers
and non-fiction, have lower scores than when they reported reading only magazines, newspapers and non-fiction.
The reading performance of boys who reported reading fiction, comic books and who may also read other material
is lower than the reading performance of boys who reported reading only magazines, newspapers and non-fiction in
26 countries. This suggests that in the vast majority of countries, comic books are not associated with better reading
performance, even when they may help inspire students who are less engaged and motivated to read, such as boys,
to try other reading material, such as fiction.

In most countries, proficient readers are not only those students who enjoy reading and who read for enjoyment
regularly, but they are also those students who are versatile readers. Students who are familiar with several written
codes and practice reading a variety of styles appear to master reading better than students who are more restricted
in their reading habits. Figure III.1.8 appears to contradict commonly held beliefs about how what one reads
influences reading proficiency. While it is true that regularly reading some materials, such as fiction, is associated
with better reading proficiency (Figure III.1.6), reading other materials, such as newspapers and magazines, does so
too if it complements other types of texts.

For each country, four groups of students were identified on the basis of them reporting the extent to which they
read a diversity of materials (top quarter, second quarter, third quarter and bottom quarter). Countries on the upper
part of Figure III.1.8 are those where the diversity of material read explains a large share of the variance in reading
performance among students in each country.

Figure III.1.8 (Table III.1.10) also suggests that the association between the variety of reading material and reading
proficiency is generally large: the gap between the group of students with the most varied reading patterns and
the group with the least varied reading patterns corresponds to one PISA proficiency level or more in Sweden,
Iceland, the Netherlands, Finland, Belgium, France and Switzerland, and is still 36 points or more – half a
proficiency level – in 42 countries.

Diversity of reading materials explains a very high share – 10% or more – of the overall variance in reading
performance in Finland, Sweden, the Netherlands and Iceland (Figure III.1.8). Table III.1.10 also reports the score
point difference that is associated with a change in one unit in the index of diversity of reading materials. The score
point difference represents the average difference in PISA scores that two students can expect to have when one
student has reading patterns that are similar to those of the average student in the OECD area (index value of 0) and
the other reads a greater variety of reading materials than five out of six students in the OECD area (index value of 1).
On average across OECD countries, a difference of one unit on the index of diversity of reading materials corresponds
to 22 points on the PISA reading scale. In Finland, Sweden, France and Iceland however, a difference of one unit on
the index of diversity of reading materials corresponds to more than 30 points.

Students with relatively undiversified reading patterns6 are over-represented among students who are only able to
perform at Levels 1b, 1a, 2 and 3 and under-represented at the higher proficiency Levels 4, 5 and 6 (Table III.1.11).
As Table III.1.11 suggests, the link between diversity of reading materials and reading proficiency is particularly
marked in the Netherlands, Finland and Sweden.

Online reading and reading performance of print texts

Students’ engagement in reading is also indicated by the diversity of the material that students read online and by
the amount of time they spend accessing online material. Online reading is becoming increasingly popular among
many adolescents (Mills, 2010). Students who are extensively engaged in these activities, such as reading e-mails,
chatting on line, reading news on line, using an online dictionary or encyclopaedia, participating in online group
discussions and searching for information online, either because they access several types of online material or
because they access online material regularly, are generally more proficient readers than students who do little
online reading.

PISA 2009 Results: Learning to Learn – volume III © OECD 2010 39

 1
Effective Learners, Proficient Readers

• Figure III.1.8 •
Relationship between diversity in reading habits and performance in reading

Bottom quarter Third quarter

Second quarter Top quarter
% of variance
explained in
student performance
Finland 14
Sweden 13
Netherlands 13
Iceland 11
Belgium 9
Switzerland 9
Norway 9
France 8
Spain 8
Italy 8
Denmark 7
Liechtenstein 7
Croatia 7
Slovak Republic 7
Slovenia 6
Germany 6
Czech Republic 6
Poland 6
Lithuania 6
OECD average 6
Bulgaria 6
Australia 6
Macao-China 5
Korea 5
Estonia 5
Austria 5
Uruguay 4
Luxembourg 4
Canada 4
Japan 4
Chile 4
Thailand 4
Greece 4
Jordan 4
Montenegro 4
United Kingdom 4
Hungary 3
Ireland 3
Latvia 3
Chinese Taipei 3
Indonesia 2
Trinidad and Tobago 2
Israel 2
Romania 2
Serbia 2
Singapore 2
New Zealand 2
Hong Kong-China 2
Kazakhstan 2
Portugal 2
United States 2
Qatar 1
Azerbaijan 1
Shanghai-China 1
Dubai (UAE) 1
Peru 1
Brazil 1
Argentina 1
Albania 1
Kyrgyzstan 1
Russian Federation 0
Mexico 0
Tunisia 0
Panama 0
Colombia 0
Turkey 0
250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600
Mean score

Countries are ranked in descending order of the percentage of explained variance in student performance.
Source: OECD, PISA 2009 Database, Table III.1.10.
1 2 http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888932360176

40 © OECD 2010 PISA 2009 Results: Learning to Learn – volume III

 1
Effective Learners, Proficient Readers

• Figure III.1.9 •
Relationship between reading on line and performance in reading

Bottom quarter Third quarter

Second quarter Top quarter
% of variance
explained in
student performance
Bulgaria 15
Peru 15
Panama 12
Argentina 10
Mexico 10
Romania 9
Colombia 9
Brazil 8
Chile 8
Uruguay 7
Jordan 7
Indonesia 7
Thailand 7
Trinidad and Tobago 7
Hungary 6
Slovak Republic 6
France 6
Russian Federation 6
Australia 5
Serbia 5
Kazakhstan 4
New Zealand 4
Poland 4
Japan 4
Lithuania 4
Albania 4
Ireland 4
Kyrgyzstan 4
Israel 3
Croatia 3
United States 3
Tunisia 3
Azerbaijan 3
OECD average 3
Netherlands 3
Turkey 3
Italy 3
Singapore 2
Spain 2
United Kingdom 2
Qatar 2
Austria 2
Canada 2
Korea 2
Montenegro 2
Macao-China 2
Dubai (UAE) 2
Finland 2
Denmark 2
Slovenia 2
Estonia 2
Latvia 1
Sweden 1
Germany 1
Hong Kong-China 1
Czech Republic 1
Greece 1
Belgium 1
Iceland 1
Luxembourg 1
Chinese Taipei 1
Norway 0
Shanghai-China 0
Switzerland 0
Portugal 0
Liechtenstein 0
250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600
Mean score

Countries are ranked in descending order of the percentage of explained variance in student performance.
Source: OECD, PISA 2009 Database, Table III.1.12.
1 2 http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888932360176

PISA 2009 Results: Learning to Learn – volume III © OECD 2010 41

 1
Effective Learners, Proficient Readers

Volume VI of this report, Students On Line: Reading and Using Digital Information explains how PISA measures
and reports student performance in digital reading and analyses what students participating in this assessment can
do. However, PISA 2009 also examined the extent to which students are engaged in online reading activities for
enjoyment by asking students how often they were involved in the following activities: reading emails; chatting
on line; reading online news; using an online dictionary or encyclopaedia (e.g. <Wikipedia®>); searching online
information to learn about a particular topic; taking part in online group discussions or forums; and searching for
practical information online (e.g. schedules, events, tips, recipes). Students could indicate that they read each
material “never or almost never”, “several times a month”, “several times a week” or “several times a day”. Students
could also indicate that they did not know what the activity was.

Figure III.1.9 (Table III.1.12) illustrates that, in 45 countries, the extent to which students reported reading online
explains less than 5% of the student variation in reading performance and that in general, the difference in the
reading performance of students who reported being the most engaged in reading activities and the group that
reports being the least engaged in each country is smaller than the gap observed for differences in how much
students reported enjoying reading or the time students allocate to reading for enjoyment.

Reading online is associated with better reading performance in all PISA participating countries and economies,
excluding Liechtenstein. Although the score point difference that is associated with online reading is quantitatively
small, results presented in Figure III.1.9 disprove commonly held beliefs that students who engage too much in online
reading are poorer readers of print texts. In all the countries that participated in PISA 2009, the score point difference
that is associated with a one unit difference in the index of online reading activities is lower than 30 points; but it
is at least 20 points in Australia, France, New Zealand, Hungary, the Slovak Republic, the Netherlands, Ireland and
the partner countries Bulgaria, Argentina and Uruguay.

Approaches to learning and reading performance

Countries vary widely in the extent to which different learning strategies are used by students in general and by some
particular groups of students. Within the OECD countries, girls are more knowledgeable than boys about effective
ways to understand, remember and summarise texts. Girls also use memorisation and control strategies more than
boys, while boys rely more than girls on elaboration strategies. Students from socio-economically advantaged
backgrounds know more about and report using learning strategies more than students from socio-economically
disadvantaged backgrounds, although memorisation strategies are used to the same extent by students from all
socio-economic backgrounds (Chapter 2 of this volume for a detailed description of whether students in general,
and some groups of students in particular, have high levels of engagement in reading activities and know how to
approach their learning effectively).

This section examines the relationship between awareness and the use of learning strategies and reading performance.
The learning strategies examined in the context of PISA 2009 are:
• awareness of the most effective strategies to understand and remember information;
• awareness of the most effective strategies to summarise information;
• use of control strategies;
• use of memorisation strategies; and
• use of elaboration strategies.

The association between strategies to understand and remember information and

reading performance
PISA 2009 assessed the extent to which students were aware that doing things like “after reading the text, I discuss
its content with other people”, “I underline important parts of the text” and “I summarise the text in my own words”
were effective strategies to understand and remember information, while doing things like “I concentrate on the
parts of the text that are easy to understand”, “I quickly read through the text twice” and “I read the text aloud to
another person” were less effective strategies. In order to determine the relative effectiveness of different strategies,
PISA 2009 consulted reading experts in participating countries. Student awareness of what strategies were effective
was then established by comparing the rating of students with those of the experts. Annex A1 describes in detail
how the index was constructed.

42 © OECD 2010 PISA 2009 Results: Learning to Learn – volume III

 1
Effective Learners, Proficient Readers

Across the OECD countries, an increase of one unit on the index of understanding and remembering information
is associated with a performance difference of 35 points or more in 25 countries. The relationship appears to be
particularly strong in the case of Belgium and Switzerland. Most of these countries perform above the OECD average
in the PISA 2009 reading assessment. The association between the extent to which students are aware of appropriate
strategies to understand and remember information and how well they read is strongest in countries where students
generally read the best. Figure III.10 (Tables I.2.3 and III.1.14) illustrates how countries in which the average student
is aware that “discussing the content of a text they just read with other people”, “underlining important parts of a
text and summarising the text in their own words” are effective strategies to understand and remember information
are also the countries where students tend to perform better in the PISA reading assessment.

• Figure III.1.10 •
Association between awareness of effective strategies
to understand and remember information and performance in reading
Mean score Mean score
600 600

OECD average
Above average reading performance
Above average awareness
of effective strategies to understand
and remember information

Shanghai-China
550 550
Korea
Hong Kong-China Finland United
Kingdom
Canada Singapore
Ireland
Japan Denmark
Sweden New Zealand Australia Belgium
United Switzerland
States Netherlands
Poland Chinese
Norway Taipei Liechtenstein
Estonia
500 Hungary Germany
500
OECD average Iceland France
Macao-China Portugal
Latvia Slovenia Italy
Croatia
Slovak Republic Spain
Israel
Luxembourg Greece
Czech Austria
Lithuania Republic
Turkey
Russian
Federation Dubai
450 (UAE) 450
Chile
Serbia
Bulgaria
Uruguay
Romania Mexico
Thailand
Trinidad
Colombia Brazil and Tobago
Tunisia Montenegro
Jordan
400 Indonesia 400
Argentina

Kazakhstan Albania

Qatar
Peru
Panama

Azerbaijan
350 350

Below average reading performance

Below average awareness
of effective strategies to understand
Kyrgyzstan
and remember information
300 300
-1.0 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4
Mean index of understanding
Source: OECD, PISA 2009 Database, Tables III.1.14 and I.2.3. and remembering information
1 2 http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888932360176

PISA 2009 Results: Learning to Learn – volume III © OECD 2010 43

Other documents randomly have
different content
 Fig. 23.
To Pack the Wheels (Fig. 22).—The gunner and No. 3 lift the wheels and place them
separately on the pack, where they are secured by No. 4; No. 4 places and secures the
lifting-bars; Nos. 3 and 5 take off their haversacks and secure them on the wheel-pack.
Unpacking is performed in the reverse order to packing.

WEIGHT CARRIED BY EACH MULE.

Gun-mule. Carriage-mule.
Saddle 69 lbs. Saddle 69 lbs.
Gun 218 " Carriage 205 "
287 " 274 "
Wheel-mule. Ammunition-mule.
Saddle 60 lbs. Saddle 58 lbs.
Wheels 123 " Two chests with 8 rounds each 280 "
Shafts, etc. 22 "
205 " 338 "
 CHAPTER II.
The Pack-train. How Packed.

PACK-TRAINS.

Gen. Holabird says: A pack-mule carries on an average 200

pounds. Allow one pack-mule to six or seven men for detachments
out scouting from five to eight days; twelve mules to two officers
and sixty or seventy men for six days; eight mules to one officer and
fifty men of cavalry for six days.
The above allowance does not contemplate the carrying of forage.
Cavalry drill-regulations state: With fifty packs there should be
twelve packers. Each troop should have four mess-boxes, seven-
eighths inch lumber, dovetailed, 11 inches by 18 inches by 26 inches,
and, when packed in pack-cover, without lids.
In camp or garrison, logs of wood, 26 inches long, and sacks of
corn, double-sacked and lashed to avoid breaking sacks, having the
weight it is intended the mule should carry, are kept on hand for drill
purposes.
Each pack should be provided with two coils of three-eighths inch
rope, 18 to 28 feet long, for lashing packs.
The pack-saddle consists of the saddle proper; two pads; crupper;
corona; manta or pack-cover; two pieces of canvas, each 84 inches
by 22 inches, stitched together on the long edges; halter and strap;
canvas cincha, 10 inches wide; sling-rope, half-inch best hand-laid
manilla whale-line, 20 to 32 feet long; and leather cincha, with lash-
rope, five-eighths inch whale-line 42 feet long. There should be one
blind for every five packs.
The size of rope is given by the measurement of its diameter.
 A "full-rigged" saddle has sling-straps and cargo-cincha; the sling
and lash ropes are then dispensed with.
While saddling, loading, or readjusting the packs, the animals
should be blinded. The mules should be trained to stand perfectly
quiet while the blind is on; they should never be led or forced to
move without first removing the blind.

TO FIT THE SADDLE.

The pack-saddle is fitted to the animal in a manner similar to that

of the riding-saddle; it is so constructed that it can be placed one
and one-half inches farther forward than the riding-saddle.
If the pads are not square, draw the screws, unlace the pads from
the skirts, then square and fit them to the animal by placing the
canvas cincha immediately around the animal's girth, the front edge
touching the breast-bone (cartilages of true ribs), the middle of the
cincha being exactly in the middle of the lower edges of the pads;
then screw the pads to the saddle-bars, keeping the cincha in place
till the adjustment is made; then remove the cincha and replace the
pads.
Adjust the canvas cincha so as to be long enough to go nearly
around the girth of the mule, over the saddle.
Adjust the crupper by lengthening or shortening the lace-strings
that attach it to the saddle, taking care not to make it too tight.

TO SADDLE.

Place the corona on the mule's back, about two to two and one
half inches in front of where the pommel end of the saddle is to rest;
place the folded saddle-blanket over the corona; take the saddle by
both yokes and place it squarely in position, a little in rear of its
proper place; place the crupper under the dock and gently move the
saddle forward to position; pass the ring end of the canvas cincha
over the saddle from left to right and under the belly; pass the latigo
through the ring and tighten the cincha; when cinched, the ring end
of the cincha should be above the lower edge of the near pad.

CARGOES.

The rations should be carefully put up in one-hundred-pound

packs lashed solidly, and carried on the best pack-mules; each pack
is plainly marked with its contents and weight.
Salt, sugar, coffee, and beans are double-sacked, and lashed in
one-hundred-pound packages. Bacon, in one-hundred-pound
packages, is packed in from five to eight pounds of clean straw or
hay, double-sacked and lashed firmly.
The yeast-powder cases should be opened and hay or straw
stuffed closely around the boxes to prevent shaking, and, with other
articles, lashed into one-hundred-pound packages.
Each cargo is in two side-packs of about one hundred to one
hundred and twenty-five pounds each, and should match in size,
shape, and weight as nearly as practicable, each side-pack having,
as nearly as may be, the following proportions: width one half more
than thickness, length nearly one half more than the width; e. g., 12
inches by 18 inches by 25 inches.
All the salt, sugar, coffee, and beans should not be placed in one
cargo. Ammunition should be in cargoes.
Pads or cushions of hay 26 inches by 44 inches may be placed
under the cincha to keep long and rough packs from the animal's
hips and shoulders.

TO LOAD CARGO.

The packers should work by threes, designated Nos. 1, 2, and 3.

No. 1 is on the near side, No. 2 on the off side of the mule; when
No. 3 works with No. 1 he is nearest the croup; when with No. 2 he
is opposite the mule's shoulders.
 The mule is placed near to and with its left side next to the cargo
by No. 2, who then puts on the blind.
No. 1, on the near side, passes the centre of the sling-rope over
the saddle to the off side far enough to allow the rope to pass over
the off-side pack and come back within his reach, the parts of the
rope separated by six to twelve inches. Nos. 2 and 3 take the off-
side pack, place it well up on the saddle; No. 2 grasps the loop of
the sling-rope with his right hand, brings the rope up against the
pack and lets the loop drop over his right shoulder in readiness to
pass it over the pack; No. 2 holds the pack in place.
No. 3 passes to the near side and with No. 1 takes the near-side
pack and places it, flat side next the mule, well up on the saddle,
lapping the upper edge well over the upper edge of the off-side
pack. No. 1, with his back to the mule's shoulder, takes the end of
the front part of the sling-rope, passes it from the outside through
the loop, and pulls it down with the right hand; he now grasps the
rear end of the sling-rope with the left hand, and ties the ends
together in a square bow-knot, the packs high up.
No. 1 calls out, "Settle"; No. 1 and No. 2 each grasps his side of
the cargo by the lower corners, lifts upward and outward, settling
the upper edges well together and balancing the load. If the packs
are tied too high they are easily lowered, but if tied too low they
must be lifted and placed as in the first trial.
Fig. 24.

Fig. 25.
Fig. 26.

Fig. 27.
 Fig. 28.

Fig. 29.
While Nos. 1 and 2 are tying and placing the cargo, No. 3 takes
the lash-rope, throws the free end to the rear of the mule,
convenient to No. 2, and places the cincha end in front of No. 1. No.
1 grasps the rope with the right hand, three feet from the cincha,
and passes the hook end of the cincha under the mule to No. 2, who
takes the hook (H, Fig. 24) in the left hand; No. 1 with the left hand
grasps the rope three feet above the right, raises the rope and lays it
between the side-packs from rear to front (P P′), pulling it to the
front until a long enough loop (A) is formed to pass over the cargo
and fasten in the cincha-hook (H). The right hand, back down, holds
the cincha end of the rope, the loop (A) falling outward over the
right forearm; the left hand, back up, holding the other part of the
rope between the loop and the middle of the packs; No. 1 now
throws the loop (A) over the pack, then lets the part in the left hand
drop on the mule's neck, thus forming another loop (A′, Fig. 25); No.
2 passes the rope through the hook, pulls the cincha end of the rope
till the hook is drawn up so that, when tightened, the hook shall be
near the lower edge of the off pad. No. 1 now grasps the rope at G,
Fig. 26, and tucks a loop from rear to front, under the part AA, Fig.
26, over the centre of the near-side pack (G, Fig. 27); No. 2 passes
the free end of the rope under the part EE, Fig. 27, and throws it
over on the near side of the mule's neck; No. 1 draws the tucked
loop forward and forces the rope under the corners and lower edge
of the near pad and hauls it taut from above the rear corner; No. 2
grasps the rope at I, Fig. 27, with the left hand, and at K with the
right hand, and passes the rope under the corners and lower edge
of off pad (KL, Fig. 28) and hauls taut at the front corner, No. 1
taking in the slack at the free end of the rope.
The lash is now ready for the final tightening. No. 2 removes the
blind, leads the mule forward a few steps, No. 1 in rear at the same
time looking to see if the packs are properly adjusted. The mule is
again blinded. The object of the final tightening is to lash the load
firmly to the saddle; pulling all the parts of the lash-rope taut, and
taking up the slack, commencing at the cincha; and continuing the
process from part to part, until the slack is taken up at the free end
of the lash-rope. While No. 2 is pulling the parts taut, No. 1 takes up
the slack or steadies the cargo, or vice versa; the pulling is done in
such manner as not to shake the cargo out of position.
No. 2 grasps the lash-rope above where it leaves the hook and
below the edge of the pad, right hand below left, places left knee
against rear corner of pad; No. 1 grasps with the right hand the
same part of the rope where it comes over the pack on the near
side, and with the left hand at G, Fig. 28, places his right shoulder
against the pack to steady it; he then says, "Pull." No. 2 tightens by
steady pulls and, without letting the rope slip back through the
hook, gives the slack to No. 1, who takes it up by steady pulls. When
No. 2 thinks the cincha is sufficiently drawn, he says, "Enough." No.
1 holds solid with the right hand, slips the left down to where the
rope passes over the front edge of the pad, and holds solid; the
right hand then grasps the continuation of the rope at rear corner of
pad and pulls taut; then with both hands, placing his right knee
against rear corner of pad, pulls the rope well home, No. 2 taking up
the slack by grasping the rope (I, Fig. 28) where it comes over the
rear end of off-side pack, with both hands. No. 1 steps to the front
and steadies the pack; No. 2 then pulls taut the parts on his side,
taking up the slack; this draws the part of the lash-rope AA, Fig. 28,
well back at the middle of the pack; he then with the left hand at
the rear corner of pad (K) pulls taut, and holds solid, while with right
hand at front corner of pad (L) he takes up slack; he then, with both
hands at, and placing his knee against, the front corner of the pad,
pulls well taut, No. 1 taking up the slack on his side, and then pulls
solid, drawing the part EE, Fig. 28, of the rope coming out from the
hook well forward at the middle of the pack, then carries the free
end under the corners and end of pad, draws taut and ties the end
fast by a half-hitch near cincha end of lash-rope. If the rope should
be long enough to reach over the load, after passing under the
corners, it is passed over and made fast on the off side by tying
around both parts of the lash-rope above the hook and drawing
them well together.
To tighten the lash rope on the load it is necessary to take up and
pass the slack as in the final tightening.
To slacken the rope on the load it is necessary to begin to slacken
from the free end, and carry the slack by reversing the process of
tightening.
 When the pack-cover is used, it is placed over the cargo before
putting on the lash-rope.
When the side-packs are of unequal bulk or weight, the larger or
heavier should be placed on the near side; it should then lap over
the off-side pack until the packs balance.
Top Packs, i. e., small packages placed in the middle between
the side packs, should be avoided.
When the sling-rope is half-hitched into the saddle-yokes the load
is made more secure, but there is great danger of injury to the
mule's back.
On the full-rigged saddle the canvas cincha is attached to the
saddle by the "spider"; the side packs are laid on the saddle as
before, held by the sling-straps and secured by the cargo-cincha.
The lash-and sling-ropes are then dispensed with, but the use of the
lash-and sling-ropes gives greater security to the cargo and greater
comfort to the mule.

TO UNLOAD CARGO.

Only two men, Nos. 1 and 2, are necessary; they work as when
loading.
The mule is placed with head toward the centre of where the
cargoes are piled. No. 1 puts on the blind; No. 2 unfastens the free
end of the lash-rope; then Nos. 1 and 2 slacken the rope; No. 2 with
the left hand removes the part under the end and corners of the pad
on the off side and unhooks the cincha with the right hand; No. 1
removes the part under the ends and corners of the pad on the near
side, gathers the parts of the rope together on his side with both
hands, coiling it, and lays the rope on the ground where he intends
to place the cargo, the cincha and free end exposed on the side
opposite where the rigging is to be placed; No. 1 unties the sling-
rope, casts it loose, takes his side pack and places it on the lash-
rope across the line of cargo; No. 2 at the same time takes his pack
and lays it on top of near side pack, and then, holding the sling-rope
at centre loop, doubles it and places it on top of load, loop exposed,
for convenience when required.
The second load is placed end to end with the first and on the
side next to where the rigging is to be placed; the end of the lash-
rope is coiled and placed on top of the last sling-rope, and is used
for tying the mule when reloading.
The saddle-cinchas should be slackened and the mules allowed to
cool before removing the saddles.

TO UNSADDLE.

Unfasten the latigo and throw the end across the top of saddle;
fold the cincha with latigo inside and place across top of saddle;
push the saddle back, remove crupper from under dock, double it
forward, with crupper above cincha on top of saddle, and remove
saddle; the saddles are placed in line, resting on the ends of pads.
 CHAPTER III.
The Mule. Description. Diseases. Treatment.
The mule has the advantage of the horse in better withstanding
neglect, bad treatment, poor feed, and hard usage.
The pack-mule should be active, short-coupled, short-legged,
small-boned, square-built, with manifest powers of endurance, and
should weigh from 800 to 1000 pounds. Army Regulations state that
"mules purchased for the army by the Quartermaster's Department
should conform to the following conditions: They should be strong,
stout, compact, sound, and kind; free from defects in every
particular; from four to nine years old; from 850 to 1200 pounds in
weight; from 14 to 16 hands high, and suitable in all respects for the
transportation service of the army. If for draught purposes, they are
to be well broken to harness; if for pack purposes, they need not be
broken, and the standard of height may be reduced to 13½ hands, if
the animal be in other respects suitable.
"Every animal will be branded with the letters U. S. on the left
fore shoulder on the day he is received. A complete descriptive list
will be made of each animal at the time of purchase, which will
accompany him wherever he may be transferred."
Under ordinary circumstances none but gentle, well-broken mules
from four to eight years old should be purchased.
New mules should be handled with the greatest patience, care,
and kindness until they become thoroughly accustomed to the new
service required of them. All violence must be avoided, for mules are
naturally timid and easily startled, and for this reason men of good
temper should be employed in breaking them; any rough treatment
is sure to lead to delay in the training and may cause irretrievable
harm.
 Age.—Ordinary limit 15 to 16 years; many live to 20, some to 30,
years. From 8 to 12 he is in his prime.
Age is told by teeth, as with horses.
Sex.—Females are generally to be preferred to males for
mountain-batteries, being, as a rule, more docile and better shaped.
Pace.—A battery-mule can walk four miles an hour. The average
transport-mule walks a little over three miles an hour. A mule's pace
is slow down but quick up hill. Mules show fatigue in their gait by
drooping the head; the neck becomes horizontal and the ears droop
back; the ordinary carriage of the latter is erect and forward; when
the mule begins to fan them, he is probably tired.
Condition.—They should be kept in hard condition—not fat.
Watering.—They will ordinarily refuse hard or bad water; and
sometimes decline to drink merely from fancy, and will water from a
bucket when not from the stream. By throwing a handful of grass
into the bucket of water, they may generally be induced to drink.
They may be watered on the march, even when hot, if kept in
motion afterward. Where there are leeches in a stream, be careful
not to water too close to the bank.
Feeding.—The government allowance for a mule is 14 pounds of
hay and 9 pounds of oats, corn, or barley per day. In special cases
of hard service or exposure the Quartermaster-General may
authorize the grain ration to be increased not to exceed 3 pounds
when recommended by the Chief Quartermaster of the Department
or of an army in the field. One hundred pounds of straw per month
is allowed for bedding.
It is a mistake to suppose that all mules require the same amount
of food. The officer should notice each animal, and determine the
increase or decrease in the regular ration to keep him in proper
condition. A mule will eat as much as a horse of the same size; he
will eat almost anything to keep from starving.
 Salt, in a lump, or ground with feed, should be given whenever it
can be had. It is obtained on requisition (Form 41) from the
Subsistence Department, each animal being allowed 2 ounces per
week; or 12 ounces per month if deemed necessary by the
commanding officer.
Vinegar is similarly obtained for sanitary purposes, at the rate of
2 gallons per week per 100 animals.
Soft Food, bran-mashes, should be given at least once a week if
possible.
Animals should be grazed whenever the opportunity occurs.
Care.—Grooming should be carried out as with horses, but need
not be so elaborate. Manes are usually hogged; tails are cut, but not
in hot weather during the fly season. The hair on the mule's heels
should never be cut; nor should the mud, in the winter season, be
washed off, but allowed to dry on the animal's legs, and then rubbed
off with hay or straw.
Feet.—Keep in the natural state as nearly as possible. Mules
suffer from standing on wet ground; but in dry climates, or in stables
with modern floors, care should be taken that their feet get sufficient
moisture, by wetting them or standing the animal a short time where
this result will be obtained.
Shoeing.—The hot shoe must never be applied to the foot under
any circumstances. Give the ground-surface a level bearing. Let the
frog come to the ground; if it projects beyond the shoe, so much the
better; never under any circumstances cut it away. Never put a knife
to the sole of the foot. Let the shoes be as light as possible, without
calks if avoidable, exactly the shape of the animal's foot; secure with
two nails on each side, an inch apart, and one in the toe.
The Putnam hot-forged nail is excellent.
Harnessing.—Meddle as little as possible with a mule's ears, as
they are exceedingly sensitive. With care the mule can be easily
bridled; but once struck on the head or pulled by the ear, there will
be trouble ever after.
Pit the bridle carefully; see that the crown-piece is not too tight;
that the bit fits easily in the mouth; that the corners of the mouth
are not drawn up: otherwise the animal's mouth will become sore.
The throat-latch must be loose.
See that the other parts of the harness fit properly and do not rub
or gall the animal.
To harness a vicious mule, put the noose of a lariat over his head,
taking care that it does not choke him; place him on the near side of
a wagon; carry the end of the lariat between the spokes and around
the felloe of the front wheel; walk back with it to the hind wheel,
keeping it taut; pass the end between the spokes and around the
felloe of that wheel, and pull the mule close to the wagon.
Take care to have the lariat as high as the mule's breast in front
and the flank in rear.
Breaking.—Gentleness and patience are essential.
First let the animal smell the saddle, etc. (an old one if possible).
Then saddle carefully, girthing up gradually; when the mule will walk
quietly about saddled, the rest of the harness may be added by
degrees, particular care being taken in first putting on the crupper.
When quite used to harness, accustom the mule to the sight of the
load—at first bags of sand, about 80 pounds each. Load with these,
the weight being increased if necessary.
Battery-mules should follow the battery, barebacked, from their
first arrival, and get used to the sights and sounds; and when
broken to saddle and load, should go laden. They should be trained
first on easy and then on difficult ground; also to cross shallow
ditches and obstacles without hesitation, at first saddled, afterwards
loaded. In leading a mule the rein should always be loose. A trained
mule should lead. Avoid using the whip.

VETERINARY TREATMENT.
 This treatment is about the same as for horses; common ailments
are strangles, cold, sore mouth, poll-evil, fistulous withers, galls and
sitfasts, thrush, colic, cramp, mange, grease. Where backs show the
least sign of softness it is well to rub in salt and water. The same
precaution should be taken with young mules about the part where
the crupper is liable to chafe the dock, daily for a week before
working.
Strangles.—This is a specific fever of young animals, usually
attended with swellings and inflammations; an abscess generally
forms between the bones of the lower jaw or elsewhere in groups of
lymphatic glands; there are cough, difficulty of swallowing, discharge
at the nostrils, and general prostration.
Treatment.—Give light bran-mashes, plenty of common salt, and
keep the animal in a warm dry stable, with plenty of pure air.
Encourage the ulcer; apply Gombault's balsam, if at hand, three
times a day to induce suppuration, or, when it has come sufficiently
to a head and appears soft enough to lance, do so, being careful to
avoid the glands and veins. Tonics, three times a day, such as 20
grains of quinine, or 1 ounce ground gentian, or a teaspoonful
powdered sulphate of iron.
Cold.—This disease seldom attacks mature mules in camp. Young
stock on first being stabled, or stock out of hot, badly ventilated
stables, on exposure may contract colds. The animal appears out of
condition, with slight fever, eyes dull, cough and nasal discharge.
Treatment.—Remove to airy box-stall; clothe and bandage; apply
ammonia liniment to the throat if there be a cough; steam the
nostrils. Open the bowels by injection of tepid soap-suds, or give
one third of a dose of oil; feed soft food; give quinine 10-grain
doses.
Sore Mouth.—There are few diseases to which the mule's teeth
are subject after the permanent teeth are developed. If the gums
are swollen from the cutting of teeth, a light stroke of the lancet
over the gums at a point where the teeth are forcing their way
through, and a little regard to the animal's diet, will be all that is
necessary. Mules suffer from injury to the tongue and sore mouth,
caused by bad treatment. With a sponge apply to the sore parts a
light decoction of white-oak bark; give nourishing gruels or bran-
mashes; keep the bit out of the mouth until healed.
The Eye.—Occasionally mules' eyes become inflamed and sore.
Apply warm or, if not obtainable, cold water and remove the cause.
(See Ophthalmia, Vet. Notes.)
Poll-evil.—Mules are quite subject to this disease. It begins with
an ulcer or sore at the junction of the head and neck, and from its
position, more than from any other cause, it is difficult to heal.
Treatment.—When the swelling first appears, use hot
fomentations. If these are not at hand, use cold water frequently,
and keep the bridle and halter from the parts. If ulceration
nevertheless takes place, the seton must be skilfully applied.
Fistula.—Fistula of withers is due to bruises, bad-fitting saddle or
harness, or rolling on hard substances. It generally first appears as a
swelling, then inflammation sets in and a tumor begins to form.
Treatment.—The fistula in its first stages may be driven away by
frequent applications of cold water. Should the swelling continue,
use warm fomentations, poultices, and stimulating embrocations.
When in proper condition it should be opened, and kept so until all
of the matter has escaped and the wound shows signs of healing.
The bowels should be opened by means of a cathartic of aloes.
Galls and Sitfasts.—One of the best remedies for saddle-gall is
to remove the saddle pressure as much as possible, and bathe the
back frequently with salt and cold water.
If this does not succeed the trouble will continue, and a root will
form at the centre of the gall, the edges of which will be clear, the
sitfast holding only by the root. In this case take a pair of pincers
and pull it out. This done, bathe frequently with cold water. A little
soothing oil, or grease free from salt, may be rubbed lightly on the
parts as they begin to heal. One of the best remedies for galls is to
cleanse the wound and blow into it a mixture of one part of
iodoform to three parts of sulphur: if it be necessary to use the
animal, cover the part with old-fashioned sticking-plaster.
Thrush.—Treatment.—Cut away the parts of the frog that seem
to be destroyed; cleanse daily with castile soap, and apply muriatic
acid, or a little tar mixed with salt on oakum or tow.
Colic.—The mule is quite subject to this complaint. Too much
cold water or changes of grain will produce it.
The animal swells up, pants, looks around at his sides, paws,
sweats above the eyes and on the flanks, becomes very restless,
lying down and suddenly springing to his feet, lies down again, etc.
Treatment.—Drench with one ounce of chloral-hydrate in a half
pint of water or two ounces of sulphuric ether and two ounces of
tincture of opium in half pint of linseed oil, repeating the dose an
hour afterwards if not relieved; or 2 oz. oil of turpentine, 1 oz. tinct.
opium given in 12 oz. linseed oil or a pint of thick gruel. The belly
should be well hand-rubbed and the animal walked about. Inject
warm soap-suds.
Cramp.—Treatment.—A good hand-rubbing.
Mange.—Treatment.—Rub the animal with a mixture of hog's
lard and sulphur, two pints of the latter to one pint of the former;
cover with blanket; two days later wash clean with soft soap and
water; blanket for a few days to avoid cold. Feed bran-mashes,
plenty of salt and water.
Grease.—This is a diseased state of the skin of the legs, and
more especially the hind ones. In the early stages it consists of an
inflammation of the sweat-glands, followed by an offensive oily
discharge. The principal cause is uncleanliness, or by washing the
legs with cold water and not properly drying them afterwards.
Treatment.—Without cleanliness medical remedies are worthless.
Apply poultices; leave them on half a day. Boiled turnips, carrots,
bread and milk, or bran and hot water are all good. Apply
Gombault's balsam, one part to four parts of glycerine, once every
two days in chronic cases. Or clean the parts well with castile soap
and warm water, and use an ointment made of powdered charcoal
two ounces, lard or tallow four ounces, sulphur two ounces, mix
thoroughly and rub in well by hand. Or gunpowder and lard or
tallow, equal parts, is good; or dress with carbolized oil or oxide of
zinc ointment.
Glanders.—A highly infectious and contagious disease of the
lungs; incurable, and communicable to man.
The three characteristic signs are: 1. A peculiar transparent,
glutinous, and continuous discharge, usually from one nostril, which
discharge, moreover, accumulates and entangles all kinds of filth, so
that it is unlikely to escape observation. 2. Ulceration of the mucous
membranes of the nostril: the process of ulceration much resembles
the erosion of metals, there being first an oxidation and afterwards a
breach of the surface, the patch having irregular margins and
showing no disposition to heal, but, on the contrary, to spread. 3. An
enlargement of the submaxillary gland in the channel formed
between the lower jaw-bones, such enlargement being firmly
attached to the bone and immovable. It further manifests no
disposition to suppurate and form an abscess, but, on the contrary,
remains unaltered so long as the animal is allowed to live.
Treatment.—On any one of the above-enumerated symptoms
being reported, at once isolate the animal; have bedding destroyed,
and carefully remove all clothing, stable utensils, etc., from the
vicinity of other animals pending decision of a veterinary surgeon.
Place a steady man in charge, and warn him of personal risk.
When assured an animal has glanders, have it shot at once, and
burn all bedding, clothing, etc.
 CHAPTER IV.
Mountain-artillery. General Instructions. Supply of Ammunition. Care and Preservation of Harness.
Instructions for Drivers, etc. Marches. Camps. Weights and Dimensions of Foreign Mountain-artillery.

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS.

A mountain-battery should be self-reliant, and, as far as possible, independent of

assistance beyond that of the usual escort furnished for its protection, and in the highest
state of efficiency to take the field at a moment's notice.
It should be taken at least once a week for a march of ten or fifteen miles over the most
difficult ground in its vicinity. Platoons completely equipped should be sent out separately
once a week.
Every opportunity must be taken for instruction of officers and men in the many devices
and methods of obtaining cover, protection from the weather, construction of huts, kitchens,
ovens, latrines, etc., and the tactical use and care of the battery.
Mountain-batteries are organized by platoons; each being complete in itself and capable of
being detached from the battery at a moment's notice. Therefore the whole of the
equipment, stores, camp-equipage, and baggage belonging to each platoon should remain at
all times under immediate charge of the chief of platoon.
In like manner chiefs of section should have charge of their respective sections, receiving
their orders from their chiefs of platoon.
The baggage-mules form part of the section, and should be picketed with the ordnance-
mules of the section and be under the same supervision.
A set of heliographs and signal apparatus should be carried and used.
A mountain-battery must be able to climb and keep with infantry.
As the number of guns engaged is always small, concentration of fire is especially
desirable, even when the ground does not admit of concentration of guns.
Mountain warfare involves frequent exposure to sudden attacks. Guns should therefore
always have a strong infantry escort; but the fact of having an escort should not prevent the
commander from having a lookout posted on his exposed flank.
Choice of positions and taking advantage of ground are exceptionally difficult, and need
special training, quickness, and constant practice.
It is not always easy to secure a ready supply of ammunition. Firing should therefore be
confined, as a rule, to the most effective ranges. It is a waste of ammunition to fire at long
ranges.
Only as many ammunition-mules as are immediately required should be brought up to the
battery; the remainder, with relief-mules, etc., should be kept under cover in rear.
Care must be taken to equalize the loads of ammunition-mules.
 The position of the battery in the column, when there is a probability of being attacked,
should never be too far to the front, but sufficiently so to come into action as soon as the
advanced guard is engaged.
It should march after the second company of the main body if the advanced guard
consists of only one company, or after the first company if only two companies are in the
advanced guard.
The battery ought never to be broken up unless under exceptional circumstances, such as
there being insufficient space for the guns in line. In such cases the chiefs of platoon should
keep up communication with the battery commander, who directs the fire generally.
This breaking up of the battery does not refer to small isolated columns to which platoons
only may be attached.
Placed in position sufficiently far to the front to support the troops with which it is co-
operating, without endangering the guns, any further change of position, excepting at the
critical moment of pursuit or retreat, should not be made without some very strong reason. If
a second position becomes necessary, the battery commander should first assure himself that
he can reach it in time to carry out his idea, and without the liability of experiencing heavy
loss.
Before coming into action the battery is divided into two lines, viz., the first line, consisting
of the six guns and the twelve ammunition-mules, and the second line, consisting of the
remaining ammunition-mules and spare material-mules of the battery.
The Supply of Ammunition is kept up as follows: In action the boxes of the first
ammunition-mules are unloaded and placed in rear of the guns, or, if the ground permits, in
rear of the flanks of the battery.
The unloaded mules are placed under cover near the remaining ammunition-mules of the
first line, fifty or sixty yards in rear of the line.
The second line, under the first sergeant, is three or four hundred yards in rear of the first
line and under cover.
The first ammunition-boxes unloaded have their contents distributed, by the non-
commissioned officer in charge, to the proper cannoneers of each gun detachment; and as
soon as the contents of half the boxes have been fired three of the second ammunition-mules
are sent to the front and their boxes removed; then, reloaded with empty boxes, they are
sent to their position under cover.
To Supply the First Line from the Second Line.—The first sergeant tells off six
ammunition-mules to be in readiness to move to the front, under a non-commissioned officer,
when required.
As soon as the battery opens fire these mules are sent forward to the first line and remain
there under cover. As soon as the first six ammunition-mules laden with empty boxes are
assembled under cover they are sent back, under a non-commissioned officer, to the second
line.

CARE AND PRESERVATION OF HARNESS.

All harness should be periodically taken to pieces and thoroughly examined. It should be
oiled with neat's-foot oil two or three times a year, and kept soft and pliable. Good castile
soap and water should be used for washing harness, and the dressing furnished by the
Ordnance Department. This dressing is applied with a woollen cloth, left on until the next
day, and then thoroughly wiped off with a woollen cloth.
It is made as follows (ingredients for two gallons): 1 gal. neat's-foot oil, 2 lbs. bayberry
tallow, 2 lbs. beeswax, 2 lbs. beef tallow. Place in a pan over a moderate fire and let the
above ingredients remain one hour, until thoroughly dissolved; then add 2 quarts of castor oil
and stir well until the mass comes to a boil, so that the ingredients may become thoroughly
mixed; after which add 1 oz. lamp-black and stir well for ten minutes; then strain the liquid
while hot through a cotton cloth to remove sediment of beeswax, tallow, and lamp-black, and
put aside to cool.
Colgate's black harness-soap and Frank Miller's harness-soap, No. 2½, are excellent for
cleaning harness and keeping it soft.
Blacking for Harness and Bridle Leather.—A decoction of iron-rust and vinegar,
applied to the grain side of the leather after it has been stained. In staining, apply with a hair
brush, a solution of logwood, sal-soda, and soft water.
Iron parts when rusted should be cleaned with kerosene, wiped dry, and then have applied
a light coating of asphaltum paint; allow it to dry and then apply a second coat.
In the field there will not usually be much time or many materials for cleaning harness.
Rust should be cleaned off ironwork with sand and then it should be oiled. Leather work
should be kept soft and pliable. First remove the mud and dried sweat with as little water as
possible and then work in a little oil or soft soap.

INSTRUCTIONS FOR DRIVERS, ETC.

The carriage-mule is always the leader when packing, or on the near side in draught. This
mule should therefore be the most tractable and intelligent.
The mule-driver is at the left of and near the head of his mule.
If the leader is well trained and intelligent it is better to let him have his head, the driver
taking place abreast the saddle.
In saddling, the driver should make sure that the hair lies fair on the mule's back under
the blanket; that the blanket is properly folded; that the saddle is securely girthed, and the
load evenly balanced and firmly lashed.
When on a march, as soon as it is time to feed in the morning, rub off the animal's back
until the hair lies smooth; place the blanket well forward on the withers and draw it back until
in proper position. Saddle, drawing the cincha half tight, and feed. After feeding, and when
ready to pack, draw up the cincha.
During packing and unpacking the driver should never leave the mule's head.
The pads should cover the mule from donkey-mark on wither nearly to hip-joint. Large
pads cause less rocking of the load than small and give larger bearing surfaces; by
distributing the load over a large surface of the back, the animal is enabled to carry it easier
and with less chance of galls.
Pads properly stuffed show no creases in the lining, feel smooth, firm, elastic, and not too
hard, and have no hard knots.
 Stuffing should be of wool, well cleaned, and unravelled before use.
Avoid giving hard work on new stuffed pads, if possible; otherwise do not stuff pads too
tight, but add daily as stuffing settles down. Pads must be quilted for about one and a half
inches along the upper edge to keep the spine clear of pressure; also where girths cause
friction. They should be beaten and brushed, but the stuffing should be seldom interfered
with when once settled down. When hard it must be pricked up with an awl.
Injuries to mules from bad saddlery arise from uneven pressure in stuffing; stuffing
working to front or rear, or getting hard or knotted; pads not properly quilted; badly made
repairs; or extraneous substances getting between the pad and the mule's skin.
Surcingles should lie flat over and should not be tighter than the cincha. Breast-pieces and
breeching should hang from their bearing-straps at such a height as not to impede the free
action of the limbs or the breathing. The breast-piece should not hang on the point of the
shoulder, but its top edge should reach to where the neck joins the body.
In going up or down hill the saddle and load should be kept in place by adjusting the
breast-and breech-straps without halting.
The breast-strap should be tightened in ascents, slackened on the level and in descents.
Breeching should always be tightened in going down hill, when it and not the crupper
should take the strain. Hip-straps should bring it about in line with its point of attachment to
the saddle. If too high it may slip up under the tail when the strain comes on it.
The crupper should not be tighter than is necessary to keep the saddle from shifting
forward. The dock of the crupper must at all times be kept soft, smooth, and pliable.
Breast-straps and crupper should be removed when the animal is fed and watered.
The leading-bit is to touch the corners of the mouth, but should be low enough not to
wrinkle them; leading rein buckled to near side of the bit.

MARCHES.

In warm climates march early to avoid the heat. Mules travel well at night. Men and
animals should have food before marching.
Officers and non-commissioned officers superintend loading; at which all should be expert.
When the battery is loaded and formed, always inspect carefully to see that the work has
been properly done. A habit of prompt loading is most important. One hour should be ample
time between reveille and starting on the road.
In moving off, drivers must move promptly, and use the leading-rein with a very light
hand. Mules move best with loose reins.
If avoidable, do not carry sick men on bareback or blanketed mules, as the animals get
galled.
The distance between mules on good roads is one yard. In passing obstacles or difficult
ground, distances must be increased as needed. Every mule should have his head.
Cannoneers should help to steady the loads. Occasionally it may be advisable to unload in
passing obstacles.
 Cannoneers should keep near their respective mules and not straggle; and must assist the
drivers in watching and adjusting loads.
The driver must constantly watch his mule and load, and at once call attention to signs of
uneasiness or anything requiring adjustment, if he cannot adjust it himself.
When a load becomes disarranged the mule must be fallen out and the load put to rights;
the driver regains his place at the first opportunity.
Distances must be regained gradually, not by rushing: at an amble if absolutely necessary.
The pace should be regular and constant, smart, not hurried, about four miles an hour
unless with other troops; in no case so fast as to cause trotting in rear. Forcing the pace or
dragging it, many halts and checks without unloading or giving time for feeding and watering,
are ruinous.
When a laden mule falls, keep his head down; cast off the straps and remove the load;
unsaddle if necessary.
Always form battery advanced and rear guards of properly armed men.
It is sometimes convenient to have pioneer-tools with the advanced guard.
The sick transport marches with the rear-guard, whose special duty it is to keep every
fraction of the battery ahead of it.
March on as broad a front as possible; but frequent changes are harassing.
When feasible, considerable distance between platoons makes marching easier.
Officers should constantly move along their commands, checking irregularities, regulating
the pace, and supervising every detail as regards men, mules, and loads, while avoiding
harassing interference. This is especially important with pack-animals.
An officer should be in charge of the baggage if possible. In crossing fords some men
should see to the loads, as the high action of the mules in passing through water is liable to
unsteady them. Occasions may occur when the mule may be obliged to swim, and in such
cases the saddle must be removed, and any attempt to guide the mule should be made by
the slightest touch possible; pulling at the head is to be avoided. A mule swimming can be
most easily turned by splashing the water against the side of the face opposite the direction
required.
Keep to the spurs of hills in going up and generally in going down hill. Sometimes a short
cut may be found down a ravine.
At the beginning of a march check the pace a little; make an early halt, so that men can
fall out and adjust anything requiring it.
Occasional halts should be made afterwards. Short halts are best for pack-animals. At
every halt non-commissioned officers and drivers inspect their animals and attend to any
signs of galling or uneasiness. The rear closes up to its proper distance before halting.
On hill roads mules should be stood level across the road, heads outward from the hillside.
If the path be too narrow for this, drivers must stand at their mules' heads to prevent the risk
of a tumble down the hillside in attempts to graze. Mules are apt to roll when halted.
In marches with other troops, on halting always find out how long the halt is to be, and if
time permits remove loads if practicable.
 Advantage may be taken of long halts to water, and feed if advisable and means are at
hand. A feed of grain should always be carried in the nose-bags if possible.
On long marches opportunities to feed and water should be sought for.
When halted allow the men to stray from their mules as little as possible. Disarrangement
of loads and possible accidents are thereby avoided.
As pack-mules require very tight girthing, they should remain girthed as short a time as
possible. Gun-and carriage-mules are the tightest girthed.
Their loads may be shifted to the relief-mules at the half-way halt, these mules not being
tightly girthed until on the point of loading. Girths of the relieved mules should be slackened
gradually, as sudden loosing of the girths causes swellings.

CAMPS.

On reaching camp halt the battery, in line, in rear of the ground to be occupied, facing to
the front. Indicate the positions for material, etc. The battery is then marched to the site of
the gun-park and the guns formed action front, the stores and boxes being piled in rear of
each gun. If possible make a foundation of stones, etc., for the piles of boxes to rest on, dig
a trench around it, and cover the pile with a paulin firmly secured.
The men's tents are on either flank, the mules being picketed between the lines of tents.
The officers' tents are on a line perpendicular to the men's tents, and about twenty-five yards
from the end ones, and face inward. The guard-tents are near the flank guns.
After unloading, girths are loosened a little, and are allowed to remain so for fifteen
minutes.
If the animals are warm they should be walked around until cool, and may then be
watered. As a rule all watering should be superintended by an officer, and no man should be
allowed to take more than two mules to water at the same time.
When the mules are put on the picket-line, remove bridles and wipe bits, loosen cincha a
little, and place breeching over saddle, and take off breast-strap if one be used. Sponge
nostrils and eyes, rub heads with dry wisp, and feed hay or grass. Saddles are only removed
by order; and when removed the men must examine shoulders, withers, sides, and docks,
and report the result. Backs should be rubbed off until the hair lies smooth.
The saddles are placed on end behind the line, pads facing sun or wind to dry. When dry
they should be carefully brushed, beaten if necessary, and all hair removed.
At afternoon stables mules are groomed, watered if necessary, and fed, and the grain for
the next morning served out and the outfit arranged for use. In grooming never use a
currycomb on the animal's back.
Saddles, back up, are on one paulin spread out between every two mules, with bridles,
etc. The other paulin is then placed over the saddles and over the ends of the first paulin,
which are turned up, and a strap is passed around it and buckled about two feet above the
ground. In wet weather the ground on which the saddles are placed should be raised.
Grooming is the same as with horses; but mules hardly need the elaborate grooming
usually bestowed on horses.
 The mule's blanket is used for his covering at night, and in hot weather is folded up square
on his back and secured there as a protection against the sun.
Gunners will require their detachments of cannoneers to clean up guns, etc., after a
march.
All men for mountain-batteries should be picked men.
Troop "B," Fourth Cavalry, while in Arizona kept on hand ready to start on a scouting
expedition with its pack-train: flour 500 lbs., hard bread 50 lbs., bacon 350 lbs., sugar 75 lbs.,
coffee 60 lbs., beans 50 lbs., salt 25 lbs., baking-powder 20 lbs.; 6 camp-kettles, 40 lbs.; 2
mess-boxes, 150 lbs.; 20 mess-pans, 10 lbs.; 1 axe, 1 spade, small coffee-mill, 2 butcher-
knives, 2 long forks, 2 long spoons, 3 or 4 tin plates, 3 frying-pans, soap, pepper, matches,
and a few farrier's remedies. The baking-pans were circular, 12 inches in diameter at top and
9 at bottom.
The Rule for Making Bread was as follows: Dig a trench a little over a foot wide, a foot
deep, and 12 feet long. Build a fire near it. Then mix 40 quart-cups of flour with salt, baking-
powder and water in a mess-box; divide dough in ten equal parts and place each in a small
mess-pan. Cover bottom of trench with a layer of coals 3 inches; then place on layer the pans
of dough and cover same with larger pans so as to protect from dirt, etc. Fill trench and
cover tops and sides of pans with coals. Leave for 1¼ hours. Each loaf will make four rations.

TABLE OF MOUNTAIN-ARTILLERY.

Austria. England. France. Italy. Russia. Spain. Switzerland.

7 pdr. 7 pdr.
7 cm. 80 mm. 2.5 in. 8 cm.
Jointed of 75 mm.
Model Model 7 cm. Model Model
Model 200 Model 1877.
1875. 1878. 1892. 1874.
1879. lbs.
Gun.
steel compress'd
Material steel steel steel steel steel steel
bronze bronze
Weight,
197 400 200 231.5 215 194 225 231.5
lbs.
Calibre,
2.6 2.5 3.0 3.15 2.95 2.5 3.09 2.95
ins.
Total
3.28 5.87 3.41 3.94 3.28 3.31 3.31 3.20
length, ft.
System of Wedge. Muzzle- Muzzle- Interrupted- Interrupted- Interrupted- Wedge.
Broadwell screw de Wedge. screw de screw Broadwell
obturation ring.
loading loading
Bange. Bange. steel cup. ring.
Carriage.
Weight,
without
150 324 206 322 198 325 240 205
wheels,
lbs.
Weight,
complete 440 936 550 661 551 683 684 673
with gun
Width of
27.5 36 27 26.8 27.9 32.8 34.4 29.9
track, ins.
Diam. of
wheels, 37.4 36 36 37 37.6 40.8 35.4 ----
ins.
Service
charge, 0.77 1.5 0.75 0.88 0.66 0.81 0.88 0.88
lbs.
Shell,
Common.
Weight
6.4 7 7.31 12.3 9.43 8.8 8.54 9.26
(full), lbs.
Bursting-
charge, 3.37 4 6.5 5.27 4.96 4.22 7.04 3.52
oz.
Shrapnel.
Weight
6.9 7 7 13.90 9.26 8.9 10.3 9.48
(full), lbs.
Bursting-
charge, 1.3 0.5 0.5 2.82 1.76 1.05 0.35 1.94
oz.
Number
65 100 42 120 109 100 90 112
of bullets
Initial
velocity, f. 979 1440 950 843 840 932 95 899
s.
No. of
Rounds.
Per gun[1] 32 96 90 70 74 96 100 20
Per
448 864 810 840 1704 1536 600 600
battery[2]
No. of
Animals.
94
Per
67 220 184 Algeria 148 206 81 83
battery
150
No. of
Personnel.
Per 111 287 245 160 286 306 197 170
battery Algeria
 242
No. of
Guns.
Per battery 4 6 6 6 6 8 6 6
Welcome to Our Bookstore - The Ultimate Destination for Book Lovers
Are you passionate about books and eager to explore new worlds of
knowledge? At our website, we offer a vast collection of books that
cater to every interest and age group. From classic literature to
specialized publications, self-help books, and children’s stories, we
have it all! Each book is a gateway to new adventures, helping you
expand your knowledge and nourish your soul
Experience Convenient and Enjoyable Book Shopping Our website is more
than just an online bookstore—it’s a bridge connecting readers to the
timeless values of culture and wisdom. With a sleek and user-friendly
interface and a smart search system, you can find your favorite books
quickly and easily. Enjoy special promotions, fast home delivery, and
a seamless shopping experience that saves you time and enhances your
love for reading.
Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and
personal growth!

ebookgate.com