The results of the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS) 2016 were released last week. Of the 50 countries/territories studied, Hong Kong once again was rated among the top three. In terms of scores, Hong Kong's scores showed an insignificant decline but Russia's and Singapore's scores improved. As a result Hong Kong fell to the third place.

The study was for students at Primary 4, and covered two kinds of reading contents: literary and informational. Internationally, scores for literary reading attainment are often lower than those for informational reading attainment, and Hong Kong is no exception. But the gap between literary performance and informational performance appears to be noticeably poorer for Hong Kong children. For example, in Russia, the gap is five points; for Singapore, the gap is four points; for Hong Kong, the gap is 14 points. Interestingly, for the United States, the gap is minus 14 points, implying that in the US, students actually do better in literary reading comprehension. To me, literary reading comprehension requires imagination, and particularly ability for emotional communication; on the other hand, informational reading comprehension is much more mechanical and factual. The large gap between literary reading attainment and informational reading attainment reflects poorly on Hong Kong's educational system, and reminds our educators that reading is not just to distill facts and information from an article, but also to enrich our emotions and our understanding about others, and that this cannot be achieved without imagination.

What is even more worrying, however, is that while Hong Kong children appear to do pretty well in reading attainment, many are not really interested in reading. As much as 21 percent of students surveyed indicate that they do not like reading - much higher than the international average of 16 percent. This stands in sharp contrast with only 10 percent of Russian children who made this indication. Russia is seldom taken to be a leader in education, but it is actually head and shoulders above the rest.

It is reported that the Singapore government had made a major effort in organizing and promoting reading activities. On the other hand, Russians have a tradition of parents reading with their children every evening. Singapore seems to be quite successful in elevating Singaporean children's reading skills but much less successful in enhancing their reading interests. Indeed Hong Kong children appear keener on reading than Singaporean children. Russia, on the other hand, did not depend on the government's push. Russians just have a great tradition that enhances children's interest in reading. Educators in Hong Kong know well that having parents spend time reading with their children will not only enhance children's interest in reading, but will also enhance parent-child relations and the wellbeing of the family. Unfortunately long working hours and heavy school work have made this great activity a luxury that only well-to-do families can afford - they send their children to international schools which do not press their students so hard.

Professor Tse Shek-kam of the University of Hong Kong, who was a principal investigator in the PIRLS study, warned that parents should avoid pushing children too hard and destroy their interest in learning. Too many parents want their children to win at the starting line, but in pushing them very hard, children could lose at the finishing line.

As a veteran educator myself, I am aware that interest and motivation is everything in the learning process. Once children are genuinely interested and motivated to learn, they will learn. Only when they are motivated, parents and teachers can help their learning process. When they are not motivated, and when they have lost the interest to learn, tutoring and more drills will not help much, if at all. An interesting result of the PIRLS study is that children who regularly attend tutoring sessions actually do worse than those who do not in reading. The former on average got a reading score of 563, as compared with that of the latter at 582.

It is of course possible that those who need tutoring are weaker students in the first place, and that is why parents hire tutors to help out. Still, absent interest and motivation, the tutoring is not going to work miracles.

Some commentators try to argue, from the result that those who attend schools in which Putonghua was used in teaching Chinese language score somewhat lower than those who attend schools in which the mother tongue, namely Cantonese, was used. Such a conclusion is really out of place. First, the difference in the score is negligible (569 versus 571). The conclusion should rather be using Putonghua as the medium of instruction does not reduce reading attainment. But there is something gained: which is their Putonghua skills. Children will not lose their Cantonese language, but they will be better able to communicate in Putonghua, which is the language used by the vast majority of Chinese and is fast becoming an international language too - since people from the United States to Korea to Africa are keen on learning the language.

(HK Edition 12/12/2017 page7)