COGNITIVE, AFFECTIVE, AND DEMOGRAPHIC PREDICTORS OF READING
COMPREHENSION SCORES ON THE POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION
READINESS TEST AMONG ENGLISH FOR ACADEMIC PURPOSES PROGRAM
GRADUATES
Ildiko Barsony
Florida International University
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS) estimated that the
foreign-born population was nearly 40 million people, or 13% of the total U.S. population
in 2010. Over half of the foreign-born population lived in four states: California, New
York, Texas, and Florida (Grieco et. al, 2012).
The 28 colleges of Florida College System (FCS) enroll nearly half a million
students, and over 13 % of the total student population of FCS attends Miami Dade
College (Florida Department of Education, 2011). Miami Dade College (MDC) is not
only the largest college in the Florida College System but also the largest community
college by enrollment in the United States (National Center for Education Statistics,
2010). MDC has a diverse student population. In Fall 2011, 71% of the student
population was Hispanic, 18% Black non-Hispanic, and 8% White non-Hispanic. Nonnative speakers of English constituted 50% of the student population (MDC, 2012b). For
the purposes of course placement, non-native speakers are those students who graduate
from a non-English speaking high school, take ESOL during their eleventh or twelfth
grade years at any English speaking high school, or earn a GED in Spanish. These
students must demonstrate proficiency in the English language before they can take the
regular college placement test. To demonstrate English proficiency, students may take the
TOEFL test or COMPASS-ESL, a placement test measuring their English language skills
(MDC, 2012a). If they do not demonstrate academic proficiency in English, they are
placed in the English for Academic Purposes program. The program consists of reading,
speech and listening, writing, and grammar courses as well as mandatory writing and
2
speech labs. Their placement test scores determine which one of the six levels students
may begin their studies. If a student starts at level one, he or she will take two years to
complete the program provided he or she takes a full load of 14 credits each term,
including the summer.
Upon completion of the EAP course sequence, students must take the Florida
College Entry-Level Placement Test (CPT) or, since the 2010-2011 academic year, the
Postsecondary Education Readiness Test (P.E.R.T.) if they intend to continue their
studies at MDC. A fairly large percentage of EAP program graduates do not take the
placement test because earning an associate’s degree is not their primary purpose
[INSERT CITATION HERE]. Those students who do take the placement test are
expected to do well and be able to register for Freshmen Composition I based on their
reading and writing placement test scores. Unfortunately, the placement test, especially
its reading component is often challenging for them. While the percentage of students
exempt from further remediation in reading has risen from 45.1 % in Fall 2007 to 52.8 %
in Fall 2010, about half of EAP program graduates who take the placement test are still
directed to take further remediation in reading (Rodriguez, 2010; Rodriguez, 2011).
Statement of Purpose [WHY]
It could take up to two years for an EAP Level 1 student to complete the EAP
program, but completion of the program does not guarantee entry to college level
courses. EAP program graduates are required to take a college placement test, CPT or
P.E.R.T, and the placement test redirects about half of the EAP program graduates to the
College Prep Reading program for further remediation each term. This study aims to
3
identify the various cognitive, affective, and demographic variables that may predict
performance on the reading comprehension component of the P.E.R.T. Its findings may
be instrumental in identifying potential at-risk groups of students, for whom early
intervention strategies can be designed and implemented to reduce the risk of failure.
[From IR, get graduation rates for students who test into CP vs. students who go to
college level after EAP] Findings of this study may also be used to guide efforts to
improve the effectiveness of the EAP program for the general EAP student population by
incorporating the predictors that may not be addressed adequately by current course
competencies but may highly correlate with reading comprehension scores. Furthermore,
the findings could inform attempts to improve the EAP program at other institutions with
similar EAP student populations.
Statement of the Problem [WHAT]
This study will examine the variables and combination of variables that can
independently or acting together could predict the P.E.R.T. reading comprehension scores
of EAP program graduates. I have divided the variables into three categories: affective,
cognitive, and demographic variables. The 6 affective variables I examine in this study
are language anxiety, foreign language reading anxiety, test anxiety, perceived scholastic
competence, perceived intellectual ability, and motivation. The 4 cognitive variables are
academic achievement, first language (L1) literacy, English proficiency, and knowledge
of American culture. The 5 demographic variables considered are sex, age, semester
course load, work load, and use of English outside of school. First, Pearson productmoment correlation coefficients will be calculated to describe the relationship between
4
reading comprehension scores and each predictor variable independently. Then, all
possible subsets multiple regression will be used to identify a combination of variables
that best predicts achievement of the reading portion of the P.E.R.T. [note: this is what
Onwuegbuzie et al. did. I need help with factor analysis & discriminant analysis (?)].
Assumptions of the Study
General Research Hypotheses
It is hypothesized that certain variables, when examined independently, will
correlate with P.E.R.T. reading comprehension scores. When examined altogether, there
will be a combination of variables that best predicts P.E.R.T. reading comprehension
scores. [It is also hypothesized that when examined together, cognitive variables will
predict reading comprehension scores better than demographic variables. Affective
variables are also hypothesized to predict reading comprehension scores better than
demographic variables. When comparing the predictive power of cognitive and affective
variables, it is expected that cognitive variables will fare better. ]
Significance of the Study
The findings of this study could be used to improve students’ preparation before
they attempt to take the placement test. As a possible outcome, students might be able to
shorten the time they spend in developmental education or may even be able to skip the
College Prep program. This study will make a contribution to one of the implementation
goals of MDC3, the Miami Dade College-specific Completion by Design initiative, which
is to "[d]esign an English for Academic Purposes (EAP) and Developmental Education
5
curriculum that will serve as a more efficient "on ramp" to college-level programs of
study" (MDC3 Newsletter).
Currently, there is limited literature on the factors affecting second language (L2)
reading comprehension in a target language environment. Various factors that predict
foreign language achievement have been investigated over the years; however, Gardner et
al. (1997) stated that "there is a lack of research examining the relationships among all
those variables simultaneously" (p. 344). [STILL TRUE?]
[Gardner et al. (1997): multiple factors L2 acquisition]—university students
enrolled in introductory French in Canada
[Onwuegbuzie et al. (2000). Multiple factors L2 acquisition]—variety of foreign
language courses in the United States
[Jiang (2011): factors predicting ESL reading comprehension]—Chinese
university students enrolled in English courses in China
Delimitations
This study will be delimited to EAP Level 6 students at Miami Dade College. It is
also delimited to examining variables that predict performance on the Postsecondary
Education Readiness Test and no other college placement tests. Finally, performance on
the reading component of the Postsecondary Education Readiness test is considered,
while performance on the writing and mathematics component is not.
Definitions and Operational Terms
Criterion Variable
6
Reading Comprehension. Reading comprehension is measured by students’
scores on the reading subtest of the Postsecondary Education Readiness Test (P.E.R.T.).
P.E.R.T. Placement is the Florida college placement test that determines students’ college
readiness in reading, writing, and mathematics. The modifier “Placement” is used to
differentiate this test from the P.E.R.T. Diagnostic, which is offered to students who test
below the college-level cut scores in any of the three areas to further narrow the skill
areas in need of remediation. The P.E.R.T. Placement is a computer adaptive test
(C.A.T.) with 25 operational items that will be the basis of the student's placement score
and five (5) field test items which are designed to continuously enhance the operational
test bank. Currently, the scaled scores on the P.E.R.T. Placement range from 50-150. The
current course placement score ranges in reading are 50-83 for Lower Level
Developmental Education, 84-103 for Higher Level Developmental Education, and 104150 for Freshman Composition Skills I (ENC 1101) (Florida Department of Education,
n.d.).
Affective Predictor Variables
Language Anxiety. I will borrow the definition of Language Anxiety, or Foreign
Language Anxiety, from Horwitz, Horwitz, & Cope (1986) to describe it as the situationspecific anxiety that is responsible for students’ negative emotional reactions to language
learning and measure it using the Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale (FCLAS)
developed by these authos.
Foreign Language Reading Anxiety. I will use the Foreign Language Reading
Anxiety Scale (FLRAS) developed by Saito, Horwitz, & Garza (1999).
7
Test anxiety. Borrowing from Zeidner (1998), Chapell et al. (2005) define test
anxiety as “the set of phenomenological, physiological, and behavioral responses that
accompany concern about possible negative consequences or failure on an exam or
similar evaluative situation (p. 268). According to Horwitz, Horwitz, and Cope (1986),
“test anxiety refers to a type of performance anxiety stemming from a fear of failure” (p.
127) and is related to foreign language anxiety along with communication apprehension
and fear of negative evaluation. Test anxiety will be measured either by the (either one)

Test Anxiety Inventory (TAI)—Spielberger (1980)

Worry-Emotionality Questionnaire (WEQ)—Morris, Davis, & Hutchings
(1981)

Reactions to Tests (RTA)—Sarason (1984)

???—Friedman and Bendas-Jacob (1997)
Perceived scholastic competence.
Perceived intellectual ability.
Motivation.
Cognitive Predictor Variables
Academic achievement. Academic achievement will be measured by students’
Grade Point Averages (GPA). GPA will be retrieved from students’ academic records
(or) students will answer the self-report scale developed by Dornbusch et al. (1987) and
used in Chapell et al. (2005).
8
First language (L1) literacy. First language (L1) or native language literacy
refers to students’ reading and writing skills in their native language. It will be measured
by the number of years of formal education students have had in the native language.
English proficiency. English proficiency will be measured by the number of
years of formal education students have had in English either in the native country or in
the United States.
Knowledge of American culture.
Demographic Predictor Variables
Sex.
Age.
Semester course load.
Work load.
Use of English outside of school.
9
Summary
10