Page 198 - Šolsko polje, XXVIII, 2017, no. 5-6: Znanje, motivacija in pogoji učenja v luči mednarodnih primerjav TIMSS in PISA, ur. Barbara Japelj Pavešić in Klaudija Šterman Ivančič
P. 198
šolsko polje, letnik xxviii, številka 5–6
standard deviation apart while values of other predictors are similar and
that this accounts for approximately 10 percent of standard deviation in
mathematical literacy in the population of students. For scientific literacy,
the difference is 11.90 scale-points.
The results are in line with the research findings (Zorza, Marino,
Lemus, Mesas, 2013) indicating positive relationship between empathy
and academic achievement with the positive path between empathy (per-
spective taking and emphatic concern) through social competence to ac-
ademic achievement (empathic concern having stronger links to social
competence and academic achievement compared to perspective taking).
Even-though empathy in our study positively predicts achievement in lit-
eracy domains, pro-social behaviour, however, is a negative predictor of
all three domains. For reading literacy the regression coefficient of this
predictor is -9.27. Students, whose pro-social behaviour scale values are
one standard deviation apart while values of other predictors are simi-
lar, have a difference of reading literacy scores, on average, of 9.27 scale-
points; the scores of students reporting less pro-social behaviour being
higher. From the standardized regression coefficient, beta, it can be seen
that this amounts for approximately 10 percent of the standard deviation
of reading literacy in the population. For mathematical literacy, the differ-
ence in scores between such two groups is 11.26 score-points, representing
approximately 13 percent of the standard deviation of mathematical lit-
eracy scores in the population, and the difference for scientific literacy of
13.49 score-points representing approximately 14 percent of the standard
deviation of these literacy scores in the population. Similarly, as for read-
ing, pro-social behaviour is a negative predictor for mathematical and sci-
entific literacy achievements – students reporting less pro-social behav-
iour having higher literacy scores. This is contradictory to other research
findings (Caprara, Barbaranelli, Pastorelli, Bandura, & Zimbardo, 2000).
Students who report higher empathy show higher academic performance
and at the same time students who are less prone to pro-social behaviour
show lower academic performance. These findings, although contradic-
tory, show stability through all three domains and call for additional and
more in-depth research on the matter.
For reading literacy, one other predictor was seen to be significant;
the construct of sadness and worries. For students whose sadness and wor-
ries scale values are one standard deviation apart, the difference in read-
ing literacy achievement is, on average, 5.89 scale-points, whereas students
with higher sadness and worries values also have, on average, higher litera-
cy scores. The results are not congruent with the research showing higher
levels of anxiety being related to lower academic achievement (Mazzone,
196
standard deviation apart while values of other predictors are similar and
that this accounts for approximately 10 percent of standard deviation in
mathematical literacy in the population of students. For scientific literacy,
the difference is 11.90 scale-points.
The results are in line with the research findings (Zorza, Marino,
Lemus, Mesas, 2013) indicating positive relationship between empathy
and academic achievement with the positive path between empathy (per-
spective taking and emphatic concern) through social competence to ac-
ademic achievement (empathic concern having stronger links to social
competence and academic achievement compared to perspective taking).
Even-though empathy in our study positively predicts achievement in lit-
eracy domains, pro-social behaviour, however, is a negative predictor of
all three domains. For reading literacy the regression coefficient of this
predictor is -9.27. Students, whose pro-social behaviour scale values are
one standard deviation apart while values of other predictors are simi-
lar, have a difference of reading literacy scores, on average, of 9.27 scale-
points; the scores of students reporting less pro-social behaviour being
higher. From the standardized regression coefficient, beta, it can be seen
that this amounts for approximately 10 percent of the standard deviation
of reading literacy in the population. For mathematical literacy, the differ-
ence in scores between such two groups is 11.26 score-points, representing
approximately 13 percent of the standard deviation of mathematical lit-
eracy scores in the population, and the difference for scientific literacy of
13.49 score-points representing approximately 14 percent of the standard
deviation of these literacy scores in the population. Similarly, as for read-
ing, pro-social behaviour is a negative predictor for mathematical and sci-
entific literacy achievements – students reporting less pro-social behav-
iour having higher literacy scores. This is contradictory to other research
findings (Caprara, Barbaranelli, Pastorelli, Bandura, & Zimbardo, 2000).
Students who report higher empathy show higher academic performance
and at the same time students who are less prone to pro-social behaviour
show lower academic performance. These findings, although contradic-
tory, show stability through all three domains and call for additional and
more in-depth research on the matter.
For reading literacy, one other predictor was seen to be significant;
the construct of sadness and worries. For students whose sadness and wor-
ries scale values are one standard deviation apart, the difference in read-
ing literacy achievement is, on average, 5.89 scale-points, whereas students
with higher sadness and worries values also have, on average, higher litera-
cy scores. The results are not congruent with the research showing higher
levels of anxiety being related to lower academic achievement (Mazzone,
196
