The successful early acquisition of reading literacy represents a crucial learning process determining the further course of academic development (Stanovich, 2009). During this process, interactions between children and their proximal social environment are of utmost importance. Therefore, we introduce a systemic framework for the development of learning potential (e.g., Mudrak et al., 2019a, b; Ziegler and Stoeger, 2017) and explore the interactions between the social and motivational processes associated with reading literacy development in school-age children. We base our analysis on a representative Czech sample of fourth-grade pupils involved in the Progress in International Reading Literacy study (PIRLS, Martin et al., 2017). On the basis of the systemic framework, we hypothesized hierarchical relationships among family socioeconomic status, related developmental resources (including parental support, expectations, and reading resources), children's reading motivation (including reading engagement and reading confidence), and manifested learning outcomes (including school grades and reading competence). We implemented three structural equation models to test the hypothesized relationships. The first model tested the direct effect of developmental resources on reading competence. The second model included the motivational variables as mediators between resources and competence. The third model included school grades as mediators between resources and motivational variables. Our analyses indicated the good fit of the proposed models. The final model explained 37.8% of the variance in children's school grades and 46.5% of the variance in reading literacy test scores (compared to 34.8% in the first model). Moreover, parental socioeconomic status was strongly associated with parental expectations, which were associated with reading confidence, partially through the effect of parental expectations on children's school grades. Reading confidence was the main predictor of reading literacy within the model, followed by the direct effects of parental resources. The results illustrate complex processes through which the family environment affects the development of learning competencies such as reading literacy by providing children with the relevant social and material resources associated with their motivation and school outcomes. We discuss some of the reasons that these relationships may take place and consider their implications for educational practice.

Charles University Prague Czechia

Faculty of Arts Charles University Prague Czechia

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Alexander P. A. (2005). The path to competence: a lifespan developmental perspective on reading. J. Lit. Res. 37 413–436. 10.1207/s15548430jlr3704_1 DOI

Bakker A. B., Demerouti E. (2014). “Job demands–resources theory,” in Wellbeing: A Complete Reference Guide, eds Cooper C., Chen P., (Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell; ), 37–64.

Bandura A. (1997). Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York, NY: Freeman.

Bloom B. S. (1985). Developing Talent in Young People. New York, NY: Ballantine.

Buchmann C., Park H. (2009). Stratification and the formation of expectations in highly differentiated educational systems. Res. Soc. Stratif. Mobil. 27 245–267. 10.1016/j.rssm.2009.10.003 DOI

Ceci S. J. (1996). On Intelligence: A Bioecological Treatise on Intellectual Development. Harvard: First Harvard University Press.

Cobley S., McKenna J., Baker J., Wattie N. (2009). How pervasive are relative age effects in secondary school education? J. Educ. Psychol. 101 520–528. 10.1037/a0013845 DOI

Czech School Inspectorate (2017a). Koncepcni Ramec Setreni PIRLS 2016. Available at: https://www.csicr.cz/getattachment/66c0a59b-2aa0-4745-8538-3a9b570d2f74/ID_98_Koncepcni_ramec_PIRLS_2016.pdf (accessed June 9, 2019).

Czech School Inspectorate (2017b). Narodni Databaze PIRLS 2016. Available at: https://www.csicr.cz/Prave-menu/Mezinarodni-setreni/PIRLS/Datove-soubory-a-dotazniky/Ceska-skolni-inspekce-zverejnuje-narodni-databazi (accessed June 9, 2019).

DiPrete T. A., Eirich G. M. (2006). Cumulative advantage as a mechanism for inequality: a review of theoretical and empirical developments. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 32 271–297. 10.1146/annurev.soc.32.061604.123127 DOI

Dweck C. (2010). “The perils and promises of praise,” in Kaleidoskope, eds Ryan K., Cooper J. M., (Wadsworth: Belmont; ), 52–61.

Eccles J. S. (2005). “Subjective task value and the eccles et al. model of achievement related choices,” in Handbook of Competence and Motivation, eds Dweck C. S., Elliot A. J., (New York, NY: Guilford Press; ), 105–121.

Eccles J. (2009). Who am I and what am I going to do with my life? Personal and collective identities as motivators of action. Educ. Psychol. 44 78–89. 10.1080/00461520902832368 DOI

Elliot A. J., Dweck C. S., Yeager D. S. (eds) (2017). Handbook of Competence and Motivation: Theory and Application. New York, NY: Guilford Publications.

Ericsson K. A., Hoffman R. R., Kozbelt A., Williams A. M. (eds) (2018). The Cambridge Handbook Of Expertise And Expert Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ericsson K. A., Nandagopal K., Roring R. W. (2009). “An expert performance approach to study of giftedness,” in International Handbook on Giftedness, ed. Shavinina L. V., (Heidelberg: Springer; ), 129–154.

Garn A. C., Matthews M. S., Jolly J. L. (2012). Parents’ role in the academic motivation of students with gifts and talents. Psychol. Sch. 49 656–667. 10.1002/pits.21626 DOI

Greger D. (2012). When PISA does not matter? The case of the czech republic and germany. Hum. Aff. 22 31–42.

Hart B., Risley T. R. (1995). Meaningful Differences in the Everyday Experience of Young American Children. Baltimore, MD: Paul H Brookes Publishing.

Hu L. T., Bentler P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct. Equ. Model. 6 1–55. 10.1080/10705519909540118 DOI

International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (2019). Progress in International Reading Literacy Study. Available at: https://www.iea.nl/studies/iea/pirls (accessed May 10, 2019).

Jessurun J. H., Shearer C. B., Weggeman M. C. D. P. (2016). A universal model of giftedness–an adaptation of the munich model. High Abil. Stud. 27 113–128. 10.1080/13598139.2015.1108184 DOI

LePine J. A., Podsakoff N. P., LePine M. A. (2005). A meta-analytic test of the challenge stressor–hindrance stressor framework: an explanation for inconsistent relationships among stressors and performance. Acad. Manag. J. 48 764–775. 10.5465/amj.2005.18803921 DOI

MacCallum R. C., Browne M. W., Sugawara H. M. (1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychol. Methods 1 130–149. 10.1037/1082-989x.1.2.130 DOI

Marsh H. W., Hau K. T., Wen Z. (2004). In search of golden rules: comment on hypothesis-testing approaches to setting cutoff values for fit indexes and dangers in overgeneralizing Hu and Bentler’s (1999) findings. Struct. Equ. Model. 11 320–341. 10.1207/s15328007sem1103_2 DOI

Martin M. O., Mullis I. V., Hooper M. (2017). Methods and Procedures in PIRLS 2016. Amsterdam: International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement.

Mateju P., Straková J. (2005). The role of the family and the school in the reproduction of educational inequalities in the post-communist Czech republic. Br. J. Sociol. Educ. 26 17–40. 10.1080/0142569042000292699 DOI

Merton R. K. (1988). The matthew effect in science, II: cumulative advantage and the symbolism of intellectual property. ISIS 79 606–623. 10.1021/acs.jproteome.7b00824 PubMed DOI

Monks F. J., Mason E. J. (1993). “Developmental theories and giftedness,” in International Handbook of Research and Development of Giftedness and Talent, eds Heller K. A., Monks F. J., Passow A. H. (Oxford: Pergamon; ), 89–101.

Morawska A., Sanders M. R. (2009). Parenting gifted and talented children: conceptual and empirical foundation. Gift. Child Q. 53 1–11.

Mudrak J. (2011). He was born that way: parental constructions of giftedness. High Abil. Stud. 22 199–217. 10.1080/13598139.2011.622941 DOI

Mudrak J., Zabrodska K. (2015). Childhood giftedness, adolescent agency: a systemic multiple-case study. Gift. Child Q. 59 55–70. 10.1177/0016986214559602 DOI

Mudrak J., Zabrodska K., Machovcova K. (2019a). Cumulative advantage or job crafting? Organizational and psychological conditions of the development of research excellence in early career researchers. Cesk. Psychol. 63 445–465.

Mudrak J., Zabrodska K., Machovcova K. (2019b). Psychological constructions of learning potential and a systemic approach to the development of excellence. High Abil. Stud. 1–32. 10.1080/13598139.2019.1607722 DOI

Nisbett R. E., Aronson J., Blair C., Dickens W., Flynn J., Halpern D. F., et al. (2012). Intelligence: new findings and theoretical developments. Am. Psychol. 67 130–159. 10.1037/a0026699 PubMed DOI

Rigney D. (2010). The Matthew Effect: How Advantage Begets Further Advantage. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.

Rimm S. B. (2003). “Underachievement: a national epidemic,” in Handbook of Gifted Education, 3rd Edn, eds Colangelo N., Davis G. A., (New York, NY: Pearson Education; ), 424–443.

Rimm S. B., Lowe B. (1988). Family environments of underachieving gifted students. Gift. Child Q. 32 353–359. 10.1177/001698628803200404 DOI

Rosenthal R., Jacobson L. (1968). Pygmalion in the classroom. Urban Rev. 3 16–20. 10.1007/bf02322211 DOI

Rosseel Y. (2012). lavaan: an R package for structural equation modeling. J. Stat. Softw. 48 1–36. 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01521 PubMed DOI PMC

Schunk D. H., DiBenedetto M. K. (2014). “Academic self-efficacy,” in Educational Psychology Handbook Series. Handbook of Positive Psychology in Schools, eds Furlong M. J., Gilman R., Huebner E. S., (New York, NY: Routledge; ), 115–130.

Schunk D. H., Pajares F. (2005). “Competence perceptions and academic functioning,” in Handbook of Competence and Motivation, eds Dweck C. S., Elliot A. J., (New York, NY: Guilford Press; ), 85–104.

Soper D. S. (2019). A-Priori Sample Size Calculator for Structural Equation Models [Software]. Available at: http://www.danielsoper.com/statcalc (accessed November 5, 2019).

Speirs Neumeister K. (2004). Factors influencing the development of perfectionism in gifted college students. Gift. Child Q. 48 259–274. 10.1177/001698620404800402 DOI

Speirs Neumeister K., Finch H. (2006). Perfectionism in high-ability students: relational precursors and influences on achievement motivation. Gift. Child Q. 50 238–250.

Stanovich K. E. (2009). Matthew effects in reading: some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. J. Educ. 189 23–55. 10.1177/0022057409189001-204 DOI

Sternberg R. J. (2015). Successful intelligence: a model for testing intelligence beyond IQ tests. Eur. J. Educ. Psychol. 8 76–84. 10.1016/j.ejeps.2015.09.004 DOI

Sternberg R. J., Grigorenko E. L. (2007). Teaching for Successful Intelligence: To Increase Student Learning and Achievement. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin press.

Steuer G., Dresel M. (2015). A constructive error climate as an element of effective learning environments. Psychol. Test Assess. Model. 57 262–275.

Straková J. (2007). The impact of the structure of the education system on the development of educational inequalities in the Czech Republic. Sociol. Èasopis Czech Sociol. Rev. 43 589–610.

Turkheimer E., Haley A., Waldron M., D‘Onofrio B., Gottesman I. I. (2003). Socioeconomic status modifies heritability of IQ in young children. Psychol. Sci. 14 623–628. 10.1046/j.0956-7976.2003.psci_1475.x PubMed DOI

Vladut A., Vialle W., Ziegler A. (2015). Learning resources within the Actiotope: a validation study of the QELC (Questionnaire of Educational and Learning Capital). Psychol. Test Assess. Model. 57 40–56.

Wang M. T., Degol J. (2013). Motivational pathways to STEM career choices: Using expectancy–Value perspective to understand individual and gender differences in STEM fields. Dev. Rev. 33 304–340. 10.1016/j.dr.2013.08.001 PubMed DOI PMC

Wigfield A., Eccles J. S. (2000). Expectancy–value theory of achievement motivation. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 25 68–81. 10.1006/ceps.1999.1015 PubMed DOI

Wigfield A., Eccles J. S. (2002). Development of Achievement Motivation. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

Yeager D. S., Dweck C. S. (2012). Mindsets that promote resilience: when students believe that personal characteristics can be developed. Educ. Psychol 47 302–314. 10.1080/00461520.2012.722805 DOI

Ziegler A., Chandler K. L., Vialle W., Stoeger H. (2017). Exogenous and endogenous learning resources in the Actiotope Model of Giftedness and its significance for gifted education. J. Educ. Gift. 40 310–333. 10.1177/0162353217734376 DOI

Ziegler A., Phillipson S. N. (2012). Towards a systemic theory of gifted education. High Abil. Stud. 23 3–30. 10.1080/13598139.2012.679085 DOI

Ziegler A., Stoeger H. (2017). Systemic gifted education: a theoretical introduction. Gift. Child Q. 61 183–193. 10.1177/0016986217705713 DOI

Ziegler A., Stoeger H., Balestrini D., Phillipson S. N., Phillipson S. (2014). Systemic Gifted Education. The Handbook of Secondary Gifted Education. Austin, TX: Prufrock.

Ziegler A., Vialle W., Wimmer B. (2013). “The actiotope model of giftedness: a short introduction to some central theoretical assumptions,” in Exceptionality in East Asia, eds Phillipson S. N., Stoeger H., Ziegler A., (London: Routledge; ), 1–17.