Appendix B: Reference Tables and Figures

Table B.1: Standard deviations and percentiles for Year 5 students in 2001 and 2005/2006, by ethnic grouping

Notes
Standard errors are in parentheses.
The 2001 data for Asian and Pasifika students (in italics) should be interpreted with caution due to the high level of uncertainty/variability, as indicated by the size of the standard errors.
* All Year 5 students, including students in Other ethnic groups.

Table B.2: Mean effect sizes in the reading literacy scores for Year 5 students in 2001 and 2005/2006, by ethnic grouping

Notes
d < 0.35: difference between means is small
0.35 ≤ d ≤ 0.75: difference between means is of medium size
d > 0.75: difference between means is large
An effect size of +1.0 indicates that the average score for the comparison group is one standard deviation below the reference group; if it is −1.0 then the reference group average score is one standard deviation below the comparison group.

Table B.3: Standard deviations and percentiles for Year 5 students in 2001 and 2005/2006, by gender

Note
Standard errors appear in parentheses.

Table B.4: Mean differences between Year 5 girls’ and boys’ reading literacy scores in 2005/2006, by ethnic grouping

Notes
Standard errors appear in parentheses.
* All Year 5 students, including students in Other ethnic groups.

Table B.5: Percentage of students reaching the PIRLS international reading benchmarks in 2001, by gender and ethnic grouping

Notes
Standard errors appear in parentheses.
* All Year 5 students, including students in Other ethnic groups.

Table B.6A: Odds ratio for the Year 5 lower-achievers group in 2005/2006

Note
The odds ratio was significant when p < 0.05.

Table B.6B: Odds ratios for the Year 5 lower-achievers group in 2005/2006, by gender and ethnic grouping

Notes
The odds ratio was significant when p ≤ 0.05.
^† Not significant

Table B.7: Absolute mean differences between Year 5 girls’ and boys’ achievement in the purposes for reading and the processes of comprehension in 2005/2006, by ethnic grouping

Notes
Interpretation: Pākehā/European girls scored an average of 23 scale points higher than their male counterparts on the interpreting, integrating, and evaluating process. Pasifika girls scored an average of 19 scale score points higher than their male counterparts on informational reading. Standard errors of the differences appear in parentheses.
^† Not statistically significant.
* All Year 5 students, including students in Other ethnic groups.

Table B.8: Year 5 students’ mean scores for reading for literary purposes in 2001 and 2005/2006, by gender and ethnic grouping

Notes
Standard errors appear in parentheses. Because results are rounded some figures may appear inconsistent.
None of the changes between 2001 and 2005/2006 were statistically significant.
Year 5 students’ performance in 2005 was significantly better on informational reading than on literary reading. In 2001 Year 5 students’ performance was significantly better on literary reading than on informational reading.
* All Year 5 students, including students in Other ethnic groups. The mean for Other ethnic groups in 2005 was 531 (8.8). The grouping was too small to report achievement in 2001.

Table B.9: Year 5 students’ mean scores for reading for informational purposes in 2001 and 2005/2006, by gender and ethnic grouping

Notes
Standard errors appear in parentheses. Because results are rounded some figures may appear inconsistent.
None of the changes between 2001 and 2005/2006 were statistically significant.
Year 5 students’ performance in 2005 was significantly better on informational reading than on literary reading. In 2001 Year 5 students’ performance was significantly better on literary reading than on informational reading.
* All Year 5 students, including students in Other ethnic groups. The mean for Other ethnic groups in 2005 was 541 (10.4). The grouping was too small to report achievement in 2001

Table B.10: Year 5 students’ mean scores for the retrieving and straightforward inferencing processes in 2001 and 2005/2006, by gender and ethnic grouping

Notes
Standard errors appear in parentheses. Because results are rounded some figures may appear inconsistent.
The differences between 2001 and 2005/2006 were not statistically significant.
As was the case in 2001, Year 5 students’ performance in 2005 was relatively better on interpreting, integrating and evaluating processes than on retrieving and making straightforward inferences.
* All Year 5 students, including students in Other ethnic groups. The mean for Other ethnic groups in 2005 was 531 (8.8). The grouping was too small to report achievement in 2001.

Table B.11: Year 5 students’ mean achievement scores for interpreting, integrating, and evaluating processes in 2001 and 2005/2006, by gender and ethnic grouping

Notes
Standard errors appear in parentheses. Because results are rounded some figures may appear inconsistent.
The differences between 2001 and 2005/2006 were not statistically significant.
As was the case in 2001, Year 5 students’ performance in 2005 was relatively better on interpreting, integrating and evaluating processes than on retrieving and making straightforward inferences.
* All Year 5 students, including students in Other ethnic groups. The mean for Other ethnic groups in 2005 was 544 (8.6). The grouping was too small to report achievement in 2001.

Table B.12: Mean reading literacy scores for Year 5 students who were assessed in English in 2005/06, by frequency with which they spoke English in the home

Notes
Standard errors appear in parentheses. Because results are rounded, some figures may appear inconsistent.
^† All Year 5 students assessed in English.
* Difference between means statistically significant at the 5 percent level.

Table B.13: Year 5 students’ reports of the number of books in the home in 2005/2006, by ethnic grouping

Note
Also see Figure B.2 for an illustration of the relationship with reading achievement.

Table B.14: Mean reading literacy scores for Year 5 students in 2001, by school decile band*

Notes
Standard errors appear in parentheses.
Tilde (~): insufficient data to report achievement for the 2 percent of students attending independent schools.
* State and state-integrated schools only. The information for high decile schools differs slightly from that reported by Caygill and Chamberlain (2004). For this table, the data for the very small sample of independent schools which had deciles assigned to them were omitted from the calculations.

Table B.15: Standard deviations and percentiles for Year 5 students in 2001 and 2005/2006, by school decile band*

Notes
Standard errors appear in parentheses. Due to the large variability, as indicated by the standard errors, the percentiles in italics should be noted with caution.
* State and state-integrated schools only.
^† Includes students in independent schools.

Table B.16: Percentage of Year 5 students reaching PIRLS international reading benchmarks in 2001, by school decile band*

Notes
Standard errors appear in parentheses.
* State and state-integrated schools only.
^† Includes students in independent schools.

Figure B.1: Relationship between Year 5 students’ reading literacy achievement and parents’ reports of household income in 2005/2006, by ethnic grouping

Note
The cell size for Pasifika students was too small in the category ‘more than $100,000’ to include their reading achievement.

Figure B.2: Relationship between Year 5 students’ reports on the number of books in the home and their reading literacy achievement, by ethnic grouping