Response to the claim that reading an extra 4.7 minutes a day, using Accelerated Reader, helps struggling readers catch up. Based on ten million children using Accelerated Reader.
Comment published at http://hechingerreport.org/mining-online-data-on-struggling-readers-who-catch-up/ in response to “Mining online data on struggling readers: A tiny difference in daily reading habits is associated with giant improvements.”
Prof. Duke's observation that better readers will naturally read more might be correct, but we have strong evidence that time spent reading per se is an excellent predictor of reading achievement. This includes studies of sustained silent reading in which adding a few minutes a day does increase proficiency significantly.
In these studies, students were not reading in preparation for accelerated reading-type tests. There was no or very little accountability.
The finding that reading more complex tests results in better reading does not mean we should force students to read harder books: A study done in 1958 (!!!) showed that as students mature, they select more complex books and select from a wider vaieity of genres (LaBrant, 1958).
Sources:
SSR research: Krashen, S. (2004). The power of reading. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann and Santa Barbara: Libraries Unlimited (second edition).
Krashen, S. (2011). Free Voluntary Reading. Westport: Libraries Unlimited.
Nakanishi, T. 2014. A meta-analysis of extensive reading research. TESOL Quarterly 49(1), 6-37.
Accelerated reading tests not necessary: Krashen, S. 2003. The (lack of) experimental evidence supporting the use of accelerated reader. Journal of Children’s Literature 29 (2): 9, 16-30. (available at www.sdkrashen.com)
1958 study: LaBrant, L. (1958). An evaluation of free reading. In Research in the three R’s, ed. C. Hunnicutt and W. Iverson. New York: Harper and Brothers, pp. 154-161.
Original article:
Comment published at http://hechingerreport.org/mining-online-data-on-struggling-readers-who-catch-up/ in response to “Mining online data on struggling readers: A tiny difference in daily reading habits is associated with giant improvements.”
Prof. Duke's observation that better readers will naturally read more might be correct, but we have strong evidence that time spent reading per se is an excellent predictor of reading achievement. This includes studies of sustained silent reading in which adding a few minutes a day does increase proficiency significantly.
In these studies, students were not reading in preparation for accelerated reading-type tests. There was no or very little accountability.
The finding that reading more complex tests results in better reading does not mean we should force students to read harder books: A study done in 1958 (!!!) showed that as students mature, they select more complex books and select from a wider vaieity of genres (LaBrant, 1958).
Sources:
SSR research: Krashen, S. (2004). The power of reading. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann and Santa Barbara: Libraries Unlimited (second edition).
Krashen, S. (2011). Free Voluntary Reading. Westport: Libraries Unlimited.
Nakanishi, T. 2014. A meta-analysis of extensive reading research. TESOL Quarterly 49(1), 6-37.
Accelerated reading tests not necessary: Krashen, S. 2003. The (lack of) experimental evidence supporting the use of accelerated reader. Journal of Children’s Literature 29 (2): 9, 16-30. (available at www.sdkrashen.com)
1958 study: LaBrant, L. (1958). An evaluation of free reading. In Research in the three R’s, ed. C. Hunnicutt and W. Iverson. New York: Harper and Brothers, pp. 154-161.
Original article:
Mining online data on struggling readers who
catch up: A tiny difference in daily reading
habits is associated with giant improvements
By Jill Barshay
What’s the difference between kids who remain at the bottom of the class
and those who surge ahead to the top half?
It might be as little as 4.7
minutes, in the case of reading.
According to a November 2015
report on almost 10 million U.S. schoolchildren who practice reading using an
online software program called Accelerated Reader, a shockingly small amount of
additional daily reading separated the weak students who stay at the bottom
from those who catch up over the course of a school year.
The analysis of struggling
readers was part of an annual report, called What Kids
Are Reading, produced by Renaissance Learning, the maker of
Accelerated Reader. The report also noted which books are the most popular at
each grade level, and attempted to gain insight into how kids
become better readers as they progress from first grade through 12th. Real
student data was used, but the children’s identities were kept anonymous in the
research analysis. (Findings from the first report and an explanation of
the report’s limitations can be found in a piece I wrote last year here).
In this year’s report,
Renaissance Learning found that roughly 200,000 of the 1.4 million fifth
graders in its student database began the 2014-15 school year reading at a
very low level, among the bottom quarter of fifth graders nationally. Most of
them finished the school year in this unfortunate category. But 28 percent of
these students somehow got out of the bottom quarter by year’s end. And a
smaller subset of those students — five percent of the 200,000 — did something
spectacular: in less than a year, they were reading as well as the top 50
percent of fifth graders.
The computer doesn’t know everything that affected them, but it does
know that these spectacular students read an average of 19 minutes a day on the
software. By contrast, the kids who remained at the bottom read only 14.3
minutes a day. Over the course of fifth grade, the catcher-uppers read 341,174
words. That’s 200,000 more words that those who remained strugglers.
“I wouldn’t say to a group of
educators, ‘Hey, all you’ve got to do is five more minutes,’ but five more
minutes is really helpful,” said Eric Stickney, director of educational
research at Renaissance Learning. “But if they’re just sticking with low-level
books that aren’t expanding their vocabulary, and not really understanding what
they’re reading, five extra minutes isn’t going to be helpful.”
There were two other
differences, too. The kids who caught up were choosing to read more challenging
texts. (Accelerated Reader allows students to select their own books and
articles from a list). And they had higher comprehension, answering 80 percent
of the multiple-choice questions after each book correctly, compared with a 72
percent correct rate among those who remained at the bottom.
Stickney suspects that the
students who are making these leaps are receiving extra help at school from
talented teachers, and not just reading more on software.
Indeed, at least one expert in
early literacy development, particularly among children living in poverty, says
we cannot tell from this study whether the extra five minutes a day is causing
kids to make dramatic improvements. In an e-mailed comment, University of
Michigan Professor Nell Duke explained that stronger readers
spend more time reading. So we don’t know if extra reading practice causes
growth, or if students naturally want to read a few minutes more a day after
they become better readers. “It is possible that some other factor, such
as increased parental involvement, caused both,” the reading growth, and the
desire to read more, she wrote.
Stickney also noticed in his
data that it was possible to make this extraordinary one-year leap from
bottom quarter to top half even as late as eighth grade. Again, we don’t
anything about this subset of students. It’s plausible, for example, that some
of these leapers hail from well-educated immigrant families and were
already strong readers in their native languages. But it’s also possible that
some of these leapers suddenly had a breakthrough after years of struggle.
Even the eighth graders who
made the impressive jump aren’t reading very much, though; the report
finds interest in reading rapidly deteriorates after elementary school. The
eighth graders who leapt from the bottom to the top read for only 16 minutes a
day, three minutes less than the motivated fifth-grade leapers. Eighth
graders who remained in the bottom quarter read less than 10 minutes a day,
four minutes less than bottom students in fifth grade. But the word
difference was enormous. In that small amount of time, the eighth-grade leapers
read almost 500,000 words — 300,000 more than those who remained at the bottom.
The more exposure to words, the more kids build their vocabularies, and the
more they understand.
Teachers typically recommend 20
to 30 minutes of reading practice a night. One data mining lesson here is that
you can get away with a lot less and still make extraordinary gains.
I am interested in teaching the cultural practice of reading for pleasure. I teach newcomer refugees escaping violence in Central America. I am open to all suggestions of how to make reading in Spanish happen, make it joyful, make it cool, and find leveled Spanish readers appropriate to this 14-18 year old population who have never read for enjoyment and have not heard of such a cultural practice.
ReplyDelete