March 8, 2010

Abstract

Home, school, and classroom are three different loci of learning that can operate

simultaneously to affect the development of the student reading ability. However, the

positive effects of these factors can only be optimized if home, school, and classroom

provide conducive environments for activities related to learning and reading

development. The effects of factors related to student, home, school, and teacher

characteristics on the reading ability of 4th grade students in Indonesia are examined.

Results of regression analysis on Indonesia’s PIRLS 2006 data involving 4,774

samples show that the gender of both student and teacher has significant effects on

student reading ability, in that female students outperform males. Parents’ economic

and cultural capital also significantly influence student performance, where parents

who are university graduates, like professionals and clerical workers, are more likely

to facilitate students’ reading competence. Unexpectedly, the financial capacity of the

family, the use of Bahasa Indonesia at home by children prior to schooling, and

school location do not demonstrate any significant effects on student reading ability.

Some sociological explanations and policy implications are proposed in this study.

Keywords: reading ability, student, Indonesia, school, sociology

i
Factors Affecting Reading Ability of the 4th Grade Students in Indonesia: A
Sociological Perspective
Introduction

This study examines the effects of factors related to student, home, school, and

teacher characteristics on reading ability of the 4th grade students in Indonesia. The 4th

graders are, according to Joncas (2007), in the process of becoming independent readers after

four years of formal instructions. It is therefore an appropriate stage for assessing their

reading ability in order to allow educators for further improvement through educational

interventions.

Home, school and classroom are three different loci of learning that can operate

together to generate effects on the development of the student reading ability. However, the

positive effects of these factors can only be optimized if home, school, and classroom have

conducive environments, which are equipped with supporting resources that are used in

activities related to learning development in general and reading in particular. In order to be

able to provide such resources, it is necessary to have economic and cultural resources at

home, school, and classroom. Therefore, for instance, a school that is located in an affluent

community and attended by students from this type of community tends to have better

teaching resources and well-qualified teachers. As a result, students are more likely to have

better learning outcomes, including reading ability. However, cultural and social specificity

of a country might also make a difference in terms of learning environment and its effects on

student attainment.

This study seeks answer “what factors related to student, home, and teacher

characteristics do significantly affect the 4th grader’s reading ability? And what sociological

explanations are possible to understand the underlying meanings behind these effects?” This

study is an exploratory study to one facet of educational process in Indonesia.

Background and Literature Review

 The Promise of Democracy

Reading ability has increasingly become a very important tool to access information

and knowledge through variety of media, such as internet and newspapers. Literacy is also

strongly associated with the development of a country. A high rate of literacy often becomes

one of the most significant indicators of a country development in general. Literacy has in

addition becomes an important form of communication skill that may locate someone in the

market place, a place where life chances are determined (Weber 2006), and social mobility is

enabled (Mitch 2005). It is furthermore a manifestation of the developmental and egalitarian

function of education (Carnoy and Levin 1986; and Bowels and Gintis 1976) in democratic

society. Thus, it is necessary to understand factors that might be associated with children

ability to read in order to be able to generate learning environment that can facilitate higher

reading attainment. This, in turn, allows policy makers to create an educational arrangement

that is capable of realizing a modernized and egalitarian society.

Indonesia since 70s has given a large scale effort to increase its people reading ability

across age groups. As a result, it has succeeded to increase its population literacy rate from 50

percent in 1970 (Jalal and Sardjunani 2007) to 98.7 percent in 2004 (Unesco 2007). There is

no need to problematize this literacy rate if this high percentage is socially taken for granted.

Within this high percentage there are disparities in terms of the level of reading skill

stemming from social class differences. The reading ability of the Indonesia’s fourth graders

is also still below the average at the global level (Québec 2007). The real challenge for the

government is how to maintain and transform this developmental achievement into an

egalitarian achievement by which, regardless of social and economic backgrounds, students

can gain relatively equal level of individual reading skill.

 Into Standardized Bahasa Indonesia

What does standardized Bahasa Indonesia literacy mean? At the global level, it means

catching up with modernization by which human beings have been divided in two types, i.e.,

literate and non-literate (McCarty 2005). At the national level, on the other hand, Bahasa

Indonesia was selected by the national elite in 1928 to become the unifying language of the

Indonesian people who possessed about 550 indigenous languages (Arka 2007); two decades

before Indonesia proclaimed its independence from foreign imperialism in 1945. Since then,

Bahasa Indonesia had been promoted to become the official language of the newly formed

nation-state to the present. This language-based unification, nevertheless, is often not

sensitive to the local languages. As a result, many of these languages have become

endangered and those who speak them have been devalued in the market. Both at the global

and national level, then, language competence may intersect with merit and privilege by

which social hierarchies are generated through education. Those who are capable of coping

with the designated standard would be counted as competent citizens, whereas those who do

not would be classified as disable ones (McCarty 2005).

Language (i.e., Bahasa Indonesia) acquisition and competence has then been

constructed to support some, while depriving others. Most likely those who have lower socio-

economic position will be excluded or ought to have extra perseverance to learn Bahasa

Indonesia to compete in job market. Otherwise, they will be labeled illiterate, even though

they speak and write in their own local languages. Thus, it is not only about how demanding

it is to communicate with people in a language that they understand as Brock-Utne (2008)

argued, but also about privileges enjoyed by the Bahasa Indonesia speakers. It is worth noting

that schooling, accessed more by the have, plays the most significant role in transmitting

Bahasa Indonesia to the Indonesian citizens.

 This study within its exploratory question tries to problematize the Indonesian state’s

promise of democracy for its citizens through knowledge distribution in the form of equal

reading ability. Some sociological understanding on factors affecting children reading ability

will be capitalized to generate several policy implications. Many factors at different levels of

social domains may contribute to the development of this ability, but this study will only

examine several factors associated with student, home, school and teacher characteristics.

This explicitly expresses its limitation. However, it is optimistic to reveal some significant

insights into the questions it raises and objectives it pursues.

Educational Literature

Studies conducted on children reading ability showed that cultural capital, such as

parents’ education and occupation, had a significant role in supporting children ability to read

(Myrberg and Rosén 2008; and Mullis and Martin 2007). Parents who have higher level of

education and occupation can provide inspiring environment for their children to read by

becoming a role model for them. On the other hand, this group of parents is more likely to

have enough economic capacity to provide their children with educational resources, such as

home library. Parents can also engage children in earlier home literacy activities. Stephenson

and Georgiou (2008) argued that letter knowledge was one of the most obvious indicators of

children reading skill. This type of knowledge can be developed by engaging children in their

early age in shared book reading activities. Its effect can be maximized through more specific

activities, such as teaching letter names, sounds and printing. Other research reported that

children, on the other hand, had their own agency to develop their own literacy. Tse et al.

(2006) reported that attitude and self-concept of students in China and Hong Kong made a

difference in their reading achievement, where girls outperformed boys on these attributes.

Students in their fourth year of formal schooling are transitioning from “learning to

read” to “reading to learn” (Mullis and Martin 2007:1) Thus, school experiences at this point,
not to undermine the enrichment effect of home environment, can play important roles.

School factors such as school environment and resources can contribute to the acquisition of

reading literacy.

Within classroom context, Perry, Hutchinson, and Thauberger (2007) argued that it

was very crucial for teachers to design literacy tasks that would allow students to be self-

regulated and independent learners. Such learners have a capacity to become more motivated

to learn because they tend to behave in a way that will optimize their learning processes and

products. In general, classroom activities are likely to have a more direct impact on students

reading development. Therefore, choosing effective and productive instructional approaches

and materials is necessary.

In terms of student gender, Klecker (2006) found that differences in reading ability by

gender were consistent across grade level, where female reading achievement was higher

than male’s. Chiu and Chang (2006) argued that this discrepancy was the function of female

peer influence, where girls inclined to have more peers. Brozo (2005), on the other hand,

provided three reasons behind this variation. First, television and other popular electronic

media have genderized the way boys and girls behave and interact. Girls are assumed to

spend more time with the traditional print resouces. Second, school environemnt has been

feminized, where female teachers dominate teaching jobs at schools. Third, it is related to

student engagement in teaching process. Girls in general are more engaged and interested in

reading materials. With respect to the difference between rural and urban students, Zhang

(2006) reported that urban children in Sub-Saharan Africa outperformed their rural

counterparts due to their inferior learning experiences and school resources.

Method

Data

Data used in this study is Indonesia’s data obtained from the Progress in International

Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS) 2006.1 There were 4774 Indonesia’s fourth graders from

168 schools participated in this study.

Hypotheses

It is hypothesized that student reading ability is influenced by factors related to

student, school, teacher and home characteristics. While student related variables include

three variables, i.e., sex, age, and the use of Bahasa Indonesia before schooling, teacher

related variables comprise of four variables, i.e., sex, age, part or full time teachers, and

teachers’ usage of different teaching resources in their teaching. School related variables

include only one variable, i.e., school location (rural, sub-urban, and urban), whereas home

related variables consist of four variables, i.e., things owned at home, level of family

financial capacity, parents’ occupation, and parents’ education.

It is expected that the effect of the economic and cultural resources of parents and

teachers can provide us with findings where social class (Myrberg and Rosén 2008; Mullis et

al. 2007; and Bourdieu and Thompson 1991) and gender (Chiu and Chang 2006; Klecker

2006; and Brozo 2005) matter for student reading competence. Teacher effect, on the other

hand, is anticipated to highlight some structure of power relation within school organization

that might affect student learning outcome (Perry at. al 2007).

Variables

Dependent Variable: Student Reading Ability

Student reading ability is used to represent reading literacy of the fourth graders.

PIRLS defined reading literacy as

1
PIRLS is an international study of reading literacy among fourth grade students conducted by the International
Association for Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA).
 “The ability to understand and use those written language forms required by society
and/or valued by the individual. Young readers can construct meaning from a variety
of texts. They read to learn, to participate in communities of readers in school and
everyday life, and for enjoyment” (Kennedy and Sainsbury 2007:11).

PIRLS 2006 framework defines two major aspects of students’ reading literacy, i.e.,

purposes for reading and processes of comprehension.

“Reading for literary experience and reading to acquire and use information are two
major purposes that account for the majority of reading experiences of young
children. Readers make meaning of texts in a variety of ways, depending not only on
the purpose for reading, but also on the difficulty of the text and the reader’s prior
knowledge. Therefore, there is a need to look at four processes of comprehension:
focus on and retrieve explicitly stated information; make straightforward inferences;
interpret and integrate ideas and information; and examine and evaluate content,
language, and textual elements. These processes are the basis for developing
comprehension questions in the reading assessment” (Kennedy and Sainsbury
2007:12).

In this study, the total standardized scores of students (see Table 1) available in

PIRLS 2006 database are used as a dependent variable in the analysis, representing student

reading ability (min. 31.73; max. 87.84).

Independent Variables

There are 11 explanatory variables (see Table 1) that would be examined in the model

of this study. Three of them are related to the student characteristics, four to teacher or

classroom characteristics, one to school characteristics, and three to home characteristics.

Student Related Variable: Student characteristics include student sex, age and

language used at home before schooling.

Table 1: Variable Description
No. Category Variable Obs. Mean Std. Dev. Min. Max.

DEPENDENT
1 Reading Student Reading Ability 477
50.11 9.99 31.73 87.84
4
INDEPENDENT
STUDENT
2 Sex Female Student 477
0.50 0 1
4
3 Age Student Age 477
10.33 1.04 6.58 14.92
4
Student Age Squared 477
107.63 19.43 43.34 222.51
4
Student Age Missing Values 0.3 % 477
0.00 0 1
4
3 Language Language before School/Indonesian 477
0.62 0 1
4
Language before School/other than 477
0.25 0 1
Indonesian 4
Language before School/Missing 13 % 477
4 0.13 0 1
SCHOOL
4 Location School Location Area/Rural 477
0.16 0 1
4
School Location Area/Suburban 477
0.15 0 1
4
School Location Area/Urban 477
0.67 0 1
4
School Location Area/Missing 1% 477
4 0.01 0 1
HOME
5 Resource Things at Home 477
6.26 1.07 4 8
4
Things at Home/Missing 8 % 477
0.08 0 1
4
6 Economy Well off Family Financially/Very 477
0.22 0 1
4
Well off Family Financially/Average 477
0.52 0 1
4
Well off Family Financially/Not Very Well 477
0.20 0 1
4
Well off Family Financially/Missing 5% 477
4 0.05 0 1
7 Parents' Parents' Highest Education Level/University 477
0.07 0 1
Education 4
Parents' Highest Education Level/Post- 477
Secondary 4 0.04 0 1
Parents' Highest Education Level/Upper- 477
Secondary 4 0.24 0 1
Parents' Highest Education Level/Lower- 477
Secondary 4 0.18 0 1
Parents' Highest Education Level/No 477
Schooling 4 0.41 0 1
Parents' Highest Education Level/Missing6% 477
4 0.06 0 1

continued
Table 1 continued

No. Category Variable Obs. Mean Std. Dev. Min. Max.

8 Parents' Parents' Highest Occupation Level/Professional 477 0.05 0 1
Occupation 4
Parents' Highest Occupation Level/Small 477 0.08 0 1
Business 4
Parents' Highest Occupation Level/Clerical 477 0.12 0 1
4
Parents' Highest Occupation Level/Skilled 477 0.30 0 1
Worker 4
Parents' Highest Occupation Level/General 477 0.21 0 1
Labor 4
Parents' Highest Occupation Level/Not Work 477 0.06 0 1
outside Home for Pay 4
Parents' Highest Occupation Level/Not 477 0.03 0 1
Applicable 4
Parents' Highest Occupation Level/Missing 477 0.16 0 1
16% 4
TEACHER
9 Age Age of Teachers/29 or less 477 0.12 0 1
4
Age of Teachers/Between 30 and 39 477 0.29 0 1
4
Age of Teachers/Between 40 and 59 477 0.58 0 1
4
Age of Teachers/Missing 0.9% 477 0.01 0 1
4
10 Sex Sex of Teachers/Female 477 0.58 0 1
4
Sex of Teachers/Male 477 0.42 0 1
4
Sex of Teachers/Missing 0.1% 477 0.00 0 1
4
11 Work Part or Full Time Work/Full 477 0.70 0 1
4
Part or Full Time Work/Part 477 0.28 0 1
4
Part or Full Time Work/Missing 2% 477 0.02 0 1
4
12 School Using School Resources by Teachers 477 7.68 1.41 3 11
Resource 4
Usage Using School Resources by Teachers/Missing 477 0.04 0 1
4% 4

- Sex: A dichotomous variable where female is used as the main category

and male is set to be a reference category.

- Age: As age (min. 6.58; max. 14.92) turns out in the preliminary analysis

to become a curvilinear variable, an age squared variable is created in

order to indentify a point where age starts having a negative behavior on

student reading ability.

 - Use of Bahasa Indonesia: Language of testing is Bahasa Indonesia. Under

the assumption that student who use Bahasa Indonesia at home might

outperform those who do not use it, a variable whether students use

Bahasa at home before schooling or not is included.

School Related Variable:

- School Location: School location is the only school related variable

included in the analysis. It is assumed that students from urban and

suburban schools have better reading ability compared to those who are in

rural schools. This is constructed as a dummy variable where suburban

school category is assigned to become the reference category.

Home Related Variable: Home related variables include things owned at

home, level of family financial capacity, parents’ occupation level, and parents’

education level. All variables in this section, except ‘things owned at home’ (min. 4;

max. 8), are constructed to become dummy variables.

- Things Owned at Home: This continuous variable indicates facilities

owned at home that might generate a well equipped learning environment

for children to develop reading ability, such as computer, study room,

book, cell phone and daily newspaper.

- Level of Family Financial Capacity: This dummy variable indicates the

level of student family’s financial wellness where ‘not well off’ category is

set to become the reference category.

- Parents’ Occupation Level: This dummy variable represents parents’

occupation level where ‘never work outside home’ is set to become the

reference category.
 - Parents’ Education Level: This dummy variable represents parents’

education level where ‘no schooling’ category is set to become the

reference category.

Teacher Related Variable: Teacher related variables include teacher age,

sex, type of work, and the usage of teaching resources by teachers. In this section, the

usage of teaching resources by teachers at school is the only continuous variable.

Others are categorical and constructed to become dummy variables in the analysis.

- Teacher Age: Teacher age variable is grouped to become three categories

(i.e., 29 or less, between 30 and 39, and between 40 and 59). ‘Between 40-

59’ is set to become the reference category.

- Teacher Sex: This is a dichotomous variable where female is used as the

main category and male is set to be the reference category.

- Teacher Work Type: Teacher work type is divided in two categories, i.e.,

part time and full time. ‘Part time’ category is set to become the reference

category.

- Teacher’s Use of School Resources: This variable is constructed to

become a continuous variable (min. 3; max. 11).

In order to avoid confusion in the data interpretation, each missing value

category is included in the analysis. The percentage of missing values in each single

variable varies from about 0.1 to 16 percent.

Analysis Procedure

Multiple regression analysis is applied to examine variables that might have

effects on students’ reading ability. This method is selected because student reading

ability in this study is constructed as a continuous variable predicted by more than one

explanatory variables, both categorical (e.g., sex, parents’ occupation category) and
continuous (e.g., things owned at home). This statistical procedure assumes the

normality and linearity of the data used, homoscedasticity, and sample randomness

(see Agresti and Finlay 2009: 448).

Findings and Discussions

Student Related Variable

Gender and Public Schooling Matter

The results (Table 2) show that gender of students has a significant effect on

the 4th grade student reading ability. Females on average outperform their male

counterparts in reading test by 1.907 (se 0.262; p < .001) points. This is consistent

with other findings, such as Ziming and Xiaobin (2008) and Klecker’s (2006) reports.

Chiu and Chang (2006) argue that gender based differences in reading ability might

be a function of female peers. Female students in general tend to have more friends

than male students. Through friendship networks, they are involved more in engaging

learning activities. Others, like Brozo (2005), argue that female teacher domination in

school and classroom environment might lie behind this discrepancy. Female teacher

domination attracts female students more to participate in reading activities than male

students. Another factor, according to Brozo, is media, where female students might

have less interest in spending times watching television and other electronic

resources. As a result, they are more immersed in non-electronic learning materials,

such as school textbooks and newspapers. Interestingly, this gender based difference,

as Brozo (2005) argues, does not occur so much in science or math achievement

across countries as in reading literacy. This might be related to the subject interest of
Table 2: Regression Results of the Grade 4th Student Reading Ability

Independent Variables Model A Model C

Student Characteristics
Sex (Male= 0)
Female Student 1.910 (.261)*** 1.907 (0.262)***
Age
Student Age 6.411 (2.025)** 6.380 (2.026)**
Student Age Squared, Peak Value = 9.82 -.327 (.094)** -.325 (.094)**
Student Age/Missing Values 0.3 % -2.980 (2.320) -3.035 (2.320)
Language before School (Omitted = Other than Indonesian)
Language before School/Indonesian - .387 (.325)
Language before School/Missing 13 % - .487 (.457)

School Characteristics
Location (Suburban= 0)
School Location Area/Rural 2.050 (.477)*** 2.064 (.478)***
School Location Area/Urban -1.773 (.390)*** -1.760 (.392)***
School Location Area/Missing 1% 3.945 (1.214)** 3.841 (1.215)**

Home Characteristics
Things at Home(Continuous 0-5)
Things at Home - .667 (.125)*** - .666 (.125)***
Things at Home/Missing Values 8 % -2.963 (.475)*** -2.983 (.475)***

Financial Level (Not Very Well off= 0)

Well off Family Financially/Very - -.229 (.427)
Well off Family Financially/Average - .418 (.352)
Well off Family Financially/Missing 5% - -.347 (.685)

Parents' Education Level (No Schooling= 0)

Parents' Highest Education Level/University 7.380 (.651)*** 7.387 (.659)***
Parents' Highest Education Level/Post-Secondary 4.092 (.740)*** 4.074 (.743)***
Parents' Highest Education Level/Upper-Secondary 2.846 (.372)*** 2.789 (.377)***
Parents' Highest Education Level/Lower-Secondary 1.590 (.372)*** 1.549 (.374)***
Parents' Highest Education Level/Missing 6% -.488 (.603) -.379 (.628)

Parents' Highest Occupation Level (Never Work outside Home for Pay=
0)
Parents' Highest Occupation Level/Professional 2.408 (.864)** 2.353 (.864)**
Parents' Highest Occupation Level/Small Business .805 (.692) .796 (.693)
Parents' Highest Occupation Level/Clerical 2.255 (.667)** 2.224 (.668)**
Parents' Highest Occupation Level/Skilled Worker -.326 (.569) -.379 (.570)
Parents' Highest Occupation Level/General Labor .199 (.587) .150 (.590)
Parents' Highest Occupation Level/Not Applicable 1.211 (.926) 1.172 (.927)
Parents' Highest Occupation Level/Missing 16% -.268 (.619) -.201 (.622)
(continued)

Table 2 continued
 Teacher Characteristics
Age (Between 40-59= 0)
Age of Teachers/29 or less -1.346 (.428)** -1.311 (.431)**
Age of Teachers/Between 30 and 39 1.732 (.303)*** 1.748 (.305)***
Age of Teachers/Missing 0.9% 1.007 (1.553) .979 (1.559)

Sex (Male= 0)
Sex of Teachers/Female 1.209 (.280)*** 1.205 (.281)***
Sex of Teachers/Missing 0.1% 4.110 (3.424) 4.328 (3.433)
Work Type (Part Time= 0 )
Part or Full Time Work/Full -.634 (.304)* -.636 (.305)*
Part or Full Time Work/Missing 2% -1.175 (.897) -1.185 (.897)
Using School Resources (Continuous = 0-10)
Using School Resources by Teachers .852 (.095)*** .848 (.095)***
Using School Resources by Teachers/Missing 4% -.831 (.651) -.900 (.653)

Constant 18.958 18.631

R-Squared .205 .206
N 4774 4774
*p < .05 **p< .01 *** p< .001 (two-tailed tests)

Note: Numbers in parentheses are standard errors. Missing values are not interpreted. N = 4774
the students, where male students have similar inclination toward math and science

with their female counterparts. Another possibility is a biological factor, where girls

in terms of age tend to gain communication skills, including reading ability, earlier

compared to boys. Mechtenberg (2009) differently argue that gender based difference

in student achievement, including reading, is related to the biased grading exercised

by teachers. Grading expectation may influence student attitude and preference

toward certain subjects.

Age also shows a significant effect on reading ability. However, this effect

turns to become negative among the 4th grade students who are more than 9.82 year

old. The estimated age of effect change was calculated using the following equation x

= = 6.380/2(-.325) = 9.82. This finding might be explained by the fact that

older students are more likely to come from the repeater group, taken into account

that most students in Indonesia start attending primary school when they are 6 year

old. They will normally reach the 4th grade when they are 9 year old. Thus, the 4th

graders who are more than 10 year old are mainly repeaters. Students who have a
reading problem often have difficulties to access other subjects, especially math and

sciences. Furthermore, students who have such issues are mainly from less

advantaged families, both in economic and cultural resources. Their parents cannot

provide them with supportive learning environment, let alone learning resources at

home.

The use of Bahasa Indonesia (language of testing) at home by children prior to

attending school does not prove any significant effects on student reading ability. This

implies the ability of public schooling in Indonesia to equalize students’ reading

literacy as its use at home does not bring about a differential effect. This also conveys

the importance of educational governance (Unesco 2008). This finding might be

explicated by the fact that the 168 schools involved in the study were public schools

that received relatively equal amount of resources and financial supports from the

government. They are also run on the same model of schooling governance. As a

result, prior exposure of some students to Bahasa Indonesia at home does not cause

any variation as far as reading ability is concerned.

This national language equalization might benefit all students regardless of

their social and economic conditions because it may allow them as far as Bahasa

Indonesia skill is concerned to have equal life chance in the future. However, this

equalizing effect is also more likely to decrease student appreciation toward their

local languages. In addition, mastering Bahasa Indonesia is not the only factor that

will determine their market position in the future. Social class and economic system

will in the course of their life experiences have crucial effects. Furthermore, tested

reading ability only consists of student competence to apprehend texts that is

receptive in nature. It does not, following Saussure (1966) and Chomsky’s (1965)

definition of language, incorporate the whole system of signs as a life skill required
by society. This type of language testing excludes the ability to creatively generate

ideas in writing and express them orally from consideration. Writing and oral skills

are of the essence to build social networking and to gain market chances. Such

creative skills are highly predetermined by a set of student social, historical and

political conditions (Bourdieu and Thompson 1991) in which they live.

Home Related Variable

Financial Capacity and Facilities are Important, but Not Enough

Controlling for parents’ occupation and education, financial capacity does not

establish any significant effects on student reading ability. More importantly, things at

home, such as computer and study room, are negatively correlated to the reading

ability. Given that a basic test of multicollinearity analysis had been conducted prior

to the main analysis, the absence of financial capacity effect and the occurrence of

negative correlation of ‘things at home’ (- .666 at p < .001) to the reading ability

might indicate an issue of suppressor effect (see Lancaster 1999). This statistical issue

might exist among financial capacity, things at home, and parents’ occupation and

education. Nonetheless, this result might imply that financial capacity is not the only

mechanism that mediates between parents’ occupation and education and the children

learning development, including reading ability. In other words, when parents have

higher financial capacity and provide children with enough facilities at home by virtue

of their occupation and education level, it is not necessarily that this capacity will help

children develop their reading ability. Parents should have certain strategies to bridge

between economic capacity and learning activities to support children reading ability.

Children can then develop interests in learning and reading resources.

Students whose parents have university, post-secondary, upper-secondary, and

lower-secondary education perform better in reading test compared to those whose

parents have no schooling by 7.387 (se .659; p < .001), 4.074 (se .743; p < .001),

2.789 (se .377; p < .001) and 1.549 (se .374; p < .001) points respectively. This

parents’ education effect on student reading achievement is consistent with some

findings, such as Myrberg and Rosén (2008) who reported that parents’ education had

significant effects on student reading ability. Interestingly, this effect is strongly

predominant among students whose parents are university graduates.

Similarly, parents’ occupation level shows a significant effect on student

reading ability. Students whose parents are professionals and clerical workers are

found to have better reading ability compared to students whose parents are small

business owners, skilled workers, general labors, and others. While students whose

parents are professionals and clerical outperform those whose parents never work

outside home for pay by 2.35 (se .864; p < .01) and 2.22 (se .668; p < .01) points

respectively, students whose parents are small business owners, skilled-workers,

general labor, and others are not significantly different from them (i.e., students

whose parents never work outside home for pay). Apart from their better economic

and cultural resources, these types of students have better parental attention and

aspiration in education. Even though professional parents spend more time outside

home, they have economic ability to hire someone to take care of their children and to

send them to better pre-school programs. On the other hand, clerical staff is more

likely to have less economic and cultural resources compared to the professional, but

have more time to spend for their children at home due to their stable work patterns. It

is important to note that most clerical jobs in Indonesia are in public sectors and are

mainly occupied by secondary school and college graduates.

 School Related Variable

Social Class and Aspiration Make a Difference

It is interesting that rural students on average outperform their suburban (2.064

at p < .001) and urban (-1.706 at p < .001) counterparts in reading ability. This finding

is not consistent with other studies, such as Zhang (2006) and Webber et. al (2003)

reports. They found that urban students often had higher reading ability than rural

students due to their greater exposure to media, reading resources, and learning

technologies. This is also not in line with the fact that most parents with college

degrees live in urban and suburban areas.

In order to understand this finding, it is necessary to view it from within the

specific context of Indonesia. Rural children in Indonesia relatively have more

attention to their school reading materials because these are the only learning

resources available for them. On the other hand, rural children who manage to go to

school are more likely to come from families that have higher aspiration to perform

social class and education mobility (see Agnew 1983). Rural parents view education

as the only way to help their children perform class mobility in the future. Therefore,

parents who manage to facilitate their children to finish secondary school are more

likely to have their children to move to the city to undertake college education. It is

worth noting that college and university are mainly founded in main provincial cities

and there are not any colleges located in rural areas. On the contrary, parents who

cannot envisage any possibilities to provide financial supports for their children will

not let them to start schooling. If they let them go to school, they will not be

supportive enough. Thus, those children who can reach fourth grade in rural schools

are actually aspired and somehow selected children.

 It might be argued that this is also true for poor urban children. However, poor

and less educated parents in the urban areas are interested to send their children to the

primary schools to obtain only a minimum ability to read, write, and count. These

skills are necessary for them to survive in the city. Unlike urban children, rural

children can survive without being able to read, write and count by becoming illiterate

farmers. In addition, not being able to have higher education for rural parents does not

necessarily mean that they are poor. Their livelihood is somehow determined by how

many acres of land they have, not on how high their education level is. Thus, sending

kids to school for them is a way to anticipate economic life change from agriculture to

other forms of fields. Thus, schooling for urban and rural parents has different

meaning.

Teacher Related Variable

Gender and Power Relation at Work Place

Teachers’ sex, age, and the use of learning resources at school show

significant effects on student reading ability. Interestingly, students taught by female

teachers are found outperforming those whose teachers are males by 1.205 (se .281; p

< .001) points. This is in accord with the initial finding suggesting that female

students’ reading achievement exceeds their male counterparts’ as a consequence of

their feminized school environment (Brozo 2005). Similarly, teachers’ age indicates a

significant effect on student reading ability. Students taught by teachers who are

between 30 and 39 year old have better reading ability by 1.748 (se .305; p <.001)

points compared to those whose teachers are between 40 and 59 year old. Similarly,

they are better at reading from those whose teachers are less than 30 year old. This

can be understood based on the culture of teaching job in Indonesia. Often, teachers

who are less than 30 year old lack experiences, but they have higher career
orientation. On the contrary, teachers who are between 40 and 59 year old often have

more experiences, but less enthusiastic in career orientation. They somehow feel that

they do not need to work harder anymore because they have reached career stability.

Only teachers who are between 30 and 39 year old are more likely to combine both

experiences and strong career orientation. Therefore, this group of teachers can make

a difference in student reading ability.

These teacher-related results are not in agreement with Myrberg’s (2007)

finding for Sweden case in PIRLS 2001. She concluded that there were no significant

effects of teacher experience, age, gender, in-service training or cooperation on

student reading ability that could be established. This is not surprising because

Sweden has different community characteristics. For instance, gender differentiation

in Sweden is not anymore, to some extent, an issue in school environment. Both male

and female students can participate in learning process as effective as possible,

regardless of their teacher gender. Also, Sweden might have strong teacher education

training by which teacher expertise is comparable regardless of their teaching or in-

service experiences.

Surprisingly, students who are taught by full time teachers have lower reading

attainment compared to those who are taught by part time teachers by -.636 (se .305;

p <.05) points. Here, it is suggested that this finding is corresponding to the teaching

job culture as well as reward bureaucracy in Indonesia. Teachers who have

established their career as long serving teachers incline to become less motivated to

perform as effective as possible. They are less competitive because they do not worry

about losing job. Government bureaucracy provides job security for those who have

obtained civil servant status and served as teachers for a long period of time. On the

other hand, students whose teachers use more teaching resources in classroom have
better reading ability by .848 (se .095 ; p < .001) points compared to those whose

teachers use them less. This might be explained by the assumption that the more

resources to read, the more practices students can have. More importantly, the more

efffective teachers use them, the more likely students become engaged in learning

processes.

Conclusions

The results of the analysis show that the gender of both student and teacher

has significant effects on student reading ability, where female students outperform

males as a consequence of gendered social interaction in their learning environment at

school (Chiu and Chang 2006; and Brozo 2005). Economic and cultural capital also

demonstrates significant effects on reading ability. As with students whose parents are

professionals and clerical staff, students whose parents are university graduates are

more competent at reading. Unexpectedly, the use of Bahasa Indonesia (the language

of testing) at home by children prior to attending school does not establish any

significant effects on student reading ability. Public schooling then demonstrates

relative success at equalizing student reading ability. Similarly, the level of the

student’s family financial capacity does not indicate any influence on reading ability,

when controlled for parents’ education and occupation level. However, this finding

should be read carefully because financial capacity might have a suppressor effect on

reading ability. Furthermore, urban students and those who are taught by full time

teachers or either younger or older teachers are surprisingly less competent in reading.

This signifies the effects of work cultures and power relations among teacher groups

in work places on reading activities.

Some policy implications are suggested based on these findings. Unhealthy

work culture created by the government bureaucracy tends to have negative effects on
student learning as a result of the work style it brings about. Consequently, some

explanatory factors that are initially suggested to facilitate egalitarian learning

development such as gender, school geographical location, and teacher age and job

status appear to bring about counterproductive effects. It is also crucial for the

educational policy makers to pay attention to the condition of local languages that

might be affected by the use of Bahasa Indonesia as the only language of instruction.

Furthermore, it is very important to create a school system that might be able to dilute

the differential effect of social class. Finally, it is desirable to instill mobility

aspirations among students because either social class or aspiration can each make a

difference in terms of reading ability. By realizing such an egalitarian achievement in

reading literacy, participatory democracy is made feasible for young Indonesian

citizens.

References

Agnew, Robert S. 1983. "Social Class and Success Goals: An Examination of

Relative and Absolute Aspirations." The Sociological Quarterly 24:435-452.
Agresti, A. and B. Finlay. 2009. Statistical Methods for the Social Sciences. New
Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Arka, I Wayan. 2007. "Local Autonomy, Local Capacity Building and Support for
Minority Languages: Field Experiences from Indonesia " in International
Conference on Austronesian Endangered Language Documentation.
Providence University, Taiwan.
Brock-Utne, Birgit. 2008. "Language and Democracy in Africa." in D. B. Holsinger
and W. J. Jacob, Inequality in Education: Comparative and International
Perspectives (pp. 172-189). Hong Kong: Comparative Education Research
Centre.
Brozo, William G. 2005. "Gender and reading literacy." Reading Today 22:18.
Bowles, Samuel and Herbert Gintis. 1976. Schooling in Capitalist America:
Educational Reform and the Contradictions of Economic Life. New York:
Basic Books.
Bourdieu, Pierre and John B. Thompson. 1991. Language and Symbolic Power.
Cambridge: Polity Press.
Carnoy, Martin and Henry M. Levin. 1986. "Educational Reform and Class Conflict."
Journal of Education 168:35-46.
Chiu, M. Ming and C. McBride-Chang. 2006. "Gender, Context, and Reading: A
Comparison of Students in 43 Countries." Scientific Studies of Reading
10:331-362.
Chomsky, Noam. 1965. Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Mass.: MIT Press.
Jalal, F. and N. Sardjunani. 2007. "Increasing Literacy in Indonesia." Unesco.
Joncas, Marc. 2007. "PIRLS 2006 Sample Design." Pp. 35-48 in PIRLS 2006
Technical Report, edited by M. O. Martin, I. V. S. Mullis, and A. M. Kennedy.
Boston: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center.
Kennedy, Ann M. and Marian Sainsbury. 2007. "Developing the PIRLS 2006
Reading Assessment and Scoring Guides." Pp. 9-22 in Progress on
International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS) 2006: Technical Report, edited
by M. O. Martin, I. V. S. Mullis, and A. M. Kennedy. Boston: TIMSS &
PIRLS International Study Center.
Klecker, Beverly M. 2006. "The Gender Gap in NAEP Fourth-, Eighth-, and Twelfth-
Grade Reading Scores Across Years." Reading Improvement 43:50-56.
Lancaster, Brian P. 1999. "Defining and Interpreting Suppressor Effects: Advantages
and Limitations." in The Annual Meeting of the Southwest Educational
Research Association. San Antonio, TX: EDRS.
McCarty, Teresa L. 2005. "Language, Literacy, and Power in Schooling." New York:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Mechtenberg, L. 2009. "Cheap Talk in the Classroom: How Biased Grading at School
Explains Gender Differences in Achievements, Career Choices and Wages."
The Review of Economic Studies 76:1431.
Mullis, Ina V.S. and Michael O. Martin. 2007. "Overview of PIRLS 2006." Pp. 1-8 in
Progress in International Literacy Study (PIRLS) 2006: Technical Report,
edited by M. O. Martin, I. V. S. Mullis, and A. M. Kennedy. Boston: TIMSS
& PIRLS International Study Center.
Myrberg, E. 2007. "The Effect of Formal Teacher Education on Reading
Achievement of 3rd-Grade Students in Public and Independent Schools in
Sweden." Educational Studies 33:145-162.
Myrberg, E. and M. Rosén. 2008. "A Path Model with Mediating Factors of Parents'
Education on Students' Reading Achievement in Seven Countries."
Educational Research & Evaluation 4:507-520.
Perry, N. E., L. Hutchinson, and C. Thauberger. 2007. "Mentoring Student Teachers
to Design and Implement Literacy Tasks that Support Self-regulated Reading
and Writing." Reading & Writing Quarterly:27-50.
Québec, Gouvernement du. 2007. "Progress in International Reading Literacy Study
(PIRLS) 2006: Results for 10-year-old Students in Québec." Ministère de
l’Éducation, du Loisir et du Sport.
Saussure, Ferdinand de. 1966. Course in General Linguistics, translated by W.
Baskin. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Stephenson, K. A. and G. K. Georgiou. 2008. "Effects of Home Literacy, Parents’
Beliefs, and Children’s Task-focused Behavior on Emergent Literacy and
Word Reading Skills." Scientific Studies of Readings 72:24-50.
Tse, Shek Kam, Raymond Y.J. Lam, Joseph W.I. Lam, Yiu Man Chan, and Elizabeth
K.Y. Loh. 2006. "Attitudes and attainment: A comparison of Hong Kong,
Singapore and English students’ reading." Research in Education 76:74-87.
Unesco. 2008. "Education for All Global Monitoring Report 2009: Overcoming
Inequality: Why Governance Matters." edited by E. R. Team. Paris: Unesco
Publishing.
Unesco. 2007. "Indonesia-Unesco Country Programming Document 2008-2011."
Unesco. Retrieved on May 12, 2009 from
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0015/001547/154799E.pdf
Weber, M. 2006. Class, Status, Party. In D. B. Grusky, & S. Szelenyi, Inequality:
Classic Readings in Race, Class, and Gender (pp. 35-53). Colorado:
Westview Press.
Webber, Maryanne, François Nault, Luc Albert, Lynn Barr-Telford, Frederic
Borgatta, Eleanor Bouliane, Marc Lachance, and Raynald Lortie. 2003.
"Understanding the Rural-Urban Reading Gap." Pp. 9-18 in Education
Quarterly Review, vol. 9: Statistics Canada.
Zhang, Yanhong. 2006. "Urban-Rural Literacy Gaps in Sub-Saharan Africa: The
Roles of Socioeconomic Status and School Quality." Comparative Education
Review 50:581-602.
Ziming, Liu and Huang Xiaobin. 2008. "Gender Differences in the Online Reading
Environment." Journal of Documentation 64:616.