Motivational Reading Programs

This National Leadership Grant for Research Project is titled: Investigating Self-Determination Variables in Summer Reading Program Participants. This project will expand research beyond that done on reading and information in school libraries, to that of public libraries in the context of summer reading programs (SRPs). The study will explore the relationship between free voluntary reading (FVR) and middle school age participants' perceived confidence in information skills. The study will also explore the degree to which extrinsic rewards related to literacy (bookmarks, free books etc.) are likely to have an effect on intrinsic motivation to read. Data will be collected from 12 summer reading programs in the public library systems of New York State (Onondaga County) and Ohio (Cuyahoga).

First and foremost, this project involves two library systems in NYS and Ohio. In New York State, the librarians and staff of the Onondaga County Public Library System are participating in the research while in Ohio the librarians and staff of the Cuyahoga County Public Library system are taking part both in a pilot study and in the main study. Without these individuals and their directors, this research would not be possible.
Dr. Marilyn Arnone Principal Investigator, is Associate Research Professor and Associate Professor of Practice at Syracuse University's School of Information Studies and co-Director at the University's Center for Digital Literacy. She has served as principal investigator and co-principal investigator on many federal grants including national leadership grants from IMLS.
	Dr. Ruth Small, co-Principal Investigator, is Laura J. & L. Douglas Professor and Director of the School Media Program in the School of Information Studies and Founding Director of the Center for Digital Literacy at Syracuse University. She has received the AASL's Highsmith Research Award and the ALA's Carroll Preston Baber Research Award for her research on motivation and information literacy.
Dr. Stephen Krashen is a linguist, educational researcher, and professor emeritus at the University of Southern California. He has received the Mildenberger Award for his book on second language acquisition and learning and in 2005 was inducted into the International Reading Association's Reading Hall of Fame. He will be providing input for planning and development of the intrinsic motivation to read instrument, interview protocol development and writing articles.
Mr. Thomas Hardy is President/Owner of Data Momentum in Ithaca, NY and will provide consulting on technical services for needed programming. His company will provide substantial organizational support.
Erin Bennett is a Master's Level student in the Library School Media program at Syracuse University. She will be editing the website and helping with communication between the research team.

Who is involved in the PAC (Project Advisory Committee)?

The Project Advisory Committee consists of experts in the area of youth services, motivation, and public library administration. They will provide feedback regarding the project's progress and on the refinement/addition of new measures to the study. These experts include, Elizabeth Dailey, Executive Director, Onondaga County Public Library System; Dr. Edward Deci, Professor of Psychology and Gowen Professor in the Social Sciences, University of Rochester, and co-founder of Self-Determination Theory; Dr. Celia Huffman, Cuyahoga Public Library System; Dr. Marcelle Haddix, Assistant Professor, Reading & Language Arts Education at Syracuse University; Barbara Macikas, Executive Director, Public Library Association; and Nicole Politi, Youth Services Librarian, The Ocean County Public Library. We are also fortunate to have Amanda Travis and Julia Boxler join the team from Onondada County and Cuyahoga County, respectively.

Accelerated Reader on the outset looks like a great program. It is a web-based educational program designed to fit within existing classroom routines, to support independent and close reading skills. It can be used in whole group and small group activities, and independently as a center or station. It offers a personalized reading experience, and allow students the opportunity to read a wide range of fiction and non-fiction articles across the curriculum. AR provides comprehensive data to give insight into student performance, which allows teachers to tailor instruction and monitor progress. AR claims huge success and growth for student users, and claims to be one of the most heavily researched educational programs in the world (Renaissance Learning, 2016). If all AR’s claims are true, why are there many opponents of this program?

Mark Pennington offers 18 reasons not to use Accelerated Reader (2010). A summary of his findings gives us the following criticisms:

Narrow selection of books to choose from that may be inappropriate based on the readers’ age and/or reading level
Forcing a reader response that creates the mindset that reading is a chore, replaces intrinsic rewards with extrinsic rewards, and turns students off of independent reading
Use of the AR system results in students attempting to ‘beat the system’ and find cheats to get quiz answers
AR reduces reading instruction and time spent reading books, while taking up significant instructional time
AR has significant costs that take away from funds which should be put towards library resources.

In terms of motivational reading programs, AR rates books with a points system, where books of higher difficulty are assigned more points. Not surprisingly, there is no mention of this on Renaissance Learning’s slick AR website. While AR does not provide prizes, the system is clearly designed to provide a way for teachers to reward students based on the points they earn. Content is not considered in the points system, so students may either read content intended for older students, which has higher difficulty, to earn more points, or may conversely read easy materials very quickly to earn more points (Pennington, 2010). Gary Stager writes in an ironic article for the Huffington Post that with AR, “quantity of books crammed is prized over the quality of books read or the literary experience enjoyed” (2012).

The end goal of every motivational speech is to not try and comfort you, but give you the drive once more to resolve the situation at hand to become stronger and better where you have left off. You may also see inspirational speeches for more examples of these kinds of speeches. Motivation to read is only one piece of the reading puzzle but it is a necessary piece, especially if we, as parents and/or teachers, want students to develop a habit of reading that will benefit them throughout their lives. Book Adventure is an interactive reading assessment, management, and rewards program.Book Adventure is much more than just our 17,000+ book quizzes! Since not all students learn the same, Book Adventure strives to be inclusive of the different student learning styles and offers a variety of alternative assessment options for those students who might not be great test-takers.

The replacement of the intrinsic rewards of reading, such as a satisfying experience and sense of accomplishment, with extrinsic rewards, such as prizes, sends the message that reading is not a pleasant activity, and students should not do it without a reward (Krashen, 2011, p.45). Limiting choice by forcing students to choose books from their AR level makes reading into an unenjoyable chore. Blogger Mark Barnes recounts his son’s question: “I hate being told what I have to read. Why can’t I pick what I like?” (2014). If reading is to be reduced to a chore done only for points, the motivation is surely lost and students do not continue reading after the chore is completed. “Rewarding reading with prizes cheapens it, and undermines students’ chance to appreciate the experience of reading for the possibilities that it brings to their life” (Miller, 2009, p. 151). If the goal of reading instruction in schools is to develop students with strong reading skills and a reading lifestyle, programs such as Accelerated Reader do nothing to foster a love of reading.

Motivational Reading Programs 2019

So why has the US embraced AR, with over 27 000 schools using the program? AR provides hard data for schools that are forced to provide numerical evidence of student learning. Stager writes that “while Accelerated Reader suggests that it inspires literacy habits, its primary customer is the bureaucrat impressed by the marketing slogan, “Advanced Technology for Data-Driven Schools.” Krashen writes that “our first priority should be to make sure that high-interest reading material is easily available to students, and that students have a time and place to read… Instead, we rush off to purchase a more expensive, complex package that may have long term harmful effects” (2003).

References:

Barnes, M. (2014). Accelerated reader: Brilliant or insane? Retrieved from http://www.brilliant-insane.com/2014/09/accelerated-reader-brilliant-insane.html

Krashen, S. (2003). The (lack of) experimental evidence supporting the use of Accelerated Reader. Journal of Children’s Literature, 29(2), 16-30. Retrieved from http://www.sdkrashen.com/content/articles/does_accelerated_reader_work.pdf

Krashen, S. (2011). Free voluntary reading. Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited.

Miller, D. (2009). The book whisperer: Awakening the inner reader in every child. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Pennington, Mark (2010, 24 January). The 18 reasons not to use Accelerated Reader. Retrieved from http://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/reading/the-18-reasons-not-to-use-accelerated-reader/

Renaissance Learning. (2016). Accelerated reader 360: The most comprehensive K12 reading practice solution. Retrieved from http://doc.renlearn.com/KMNet/R0057844FB630C58.pdf.

Stager, G. (2012, 10 June). Mission accomplished! Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gary-stager/mission-accomplished_5_b_1408896.html

Connect on Twitter:

Gary Stager @garystager

Stephen Krashen @skrashen

Mark Barnes @mbarnes19

Motivational Reading For The Day

Donalyn Miller @donalynbooks