I would like to go way out on a limb and make a radical declaration. I am a big fan of reading, books and improving literacy. I even think these things are good for children.
That's why I quickly clicked on the article, "American High School Students Are Reading Books At 5th-Grade-Appropriate Levels", in this fine publication. Boy, was I scared. We as a nation must crush the Finns!
The report is more catastrophic news heaped upon what we are increasingly led to believe is a disastrous public education system minutes away from a meltdown. Parents, kids, teachers, policy-makers and concerned citizens have reason for alarm. There are signs of anti-intellectualism and ignorance everywhere.
However, Renaissance Learning, Inc., the company that commissioned the study has much to celebrate. Their business plan has performed flawlessly!
Allow me to explain. Renaissance Learning's flagship product is a software package called Accelerated Reader. The company claims that AR (as it is called in thousands of classrooms around the world) is "the world's most widely used reading software."
Even if you are silly enough to believe that computers can teach someone to read, AR doesn't even pretend to do so. Accelerated Reader turns reading into game show that rewards speed and facile understanding. Children read actual books and then go to a computer running the AR software where they take a short multiple-choice comprehension quiz about that book -- if the quiz exists and the school owns it.
Based on the difficulty of the book as determined by an algorithm that likely measures word length to determine reading level and the number of correct answers, the student is awarded points. Kids love points, except for the weaker readers in the class who will now be humiliated when their cumulative AR points are hung on the wall or when schools factor AR points into report card grades. Some kids just like to read without feeling rushed. They might even wish to read the book again -- a behavior that wastes time and will cost them AR points.
Clever kids, even those with less reading ability, quickly realize that one way to accumulate points is volume, volume, volume. Read easier books and lots of them so you can quickly take as many AR quizzes as possible with minimal challenge. This competitive race is likely to discourage weaker readers while proficient readers may find the joy and power of reading reduced to vocabulary words and computer-generated comprehension quizzes.
But that's not all!
Schools with limited library or technology budgets need to spend precious resources on Accelerated Reader. Teachers are prone to "leave reading up to the machine" since reading is no longer a social affair where you share, discuss and analyze a text, but a way to beat your friends in a solo competition. If you are a precocious kid and a voracious reader, Accelerated Reader is likely to have a prophylactic effect on your interest in reading. Here are a few scenarios to consider.
AR gets motivation wrong.
It assumes that the reason kids don't read is that they need to be bribed into doing so with extrinsic awards. Alfie Kohn explores these issues in "A Closer Look at Reading Incentive Programs" and "How to Create Nonreaders."
AR gets motivation wrong when it uses readability as the basis for text selection. What does it mean when a study says that 11th grade students are reading 5th grade books? Perhaps the 5th grade books are complex, beautiful, interesting or d) all of the above? If readability is king, how do you explain all of the 7 year-olds who read the Harry Potter series when AR indicates that they are at a readability level from grade 5 through 7? Should we prohibit first graders from reading about the Ankylosaurus because the word is too long according to an algorithm?
Quantity of books crammed is prized over the quality of books read or the literary experience enjoyed. AR admits to not assessing higher-order thinking skills, but rather whether a kid read a book or not. This can't help but erode trust between teachers and students or contribute to cheating by passing a quiz without having read the book.
One of the world's most esteemed literacy scholars, Dr. Stephen Krashen, has written extensively about in a number of articles, including: "Accelerated Reader. "Accelerated Reader: Once Again, Evidence Lacking" and "Does Accelerated Reader Work? The (Lack of ) Experimental Evidence Supporting the Use of Accelerated Reader."
Every parent and educator wants children to develop superb literacy skills. They also value reading for pleasure and information frequently throughout their lives. However, Dr. Rebecca Constantino, founder of the incredible school library conjuring non-profit, Access Books, has research to prove that the greatest predictor of literacy is access to high-interest reading material -- any kind of text. This evidence flies in the face of the AR approach. Reading is not a contact sport!
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."
Data is to reading as oil is to ________
Follow Gary Stager on Twitter: www.twitter.com/garystager
Question - Why would anyone post the scores of their students? Here, where we use AR, if students want to share that information they are certainly welcome too - but it is not public knowledge. What is public knowledge are the names of those students who earn certificates. This student acheivement is celebrated - and other students know that they have the ability and support to acheive these same goals.
In fact - the use of AR levels the playing field for those students who might find reading a challenge. They can test on books that more closely reflect their reading abilities. And, in fact, many of our challenged readers enjoy watching their progress as their points add up. It is not unusual to be stopped in the hallway as a student wants to share with me how many points they have.
Of course "the greatest predictor of literacy is access to high interest reading material." It doesn't follow that because we use AR our students don't have this access. However, this access means nothing if students chose not to read. AR provides an incentive for those children who are not avid readers - those students who need just a little nudge in the right direction.
Finally, a few figures
About 200 students in grades 3 - 5 have taken 6,887 tests this year
There are 64 tests on books about Thomas Edison.
Thank you
RL is now, basically, forcing schools to switch to the online version of AR, the cost of which has is much much higher than the locally based version. My school cannot afford to switch and the old local server-based program will not be supported by RL anymore, the tests are more than doubling in price, and newer tests will not be available for the local based program after July. So . . . I will finally be able to get rid of the funds-sucking, mind-numbing, ineffective AR!!! YAY!!!!!!
In 9th grade I attended a school that used AR. At that time I was on a Leon Uris kick and read four of his books during my first quarter. None of his books had tests so I was unable to get the 15 points I needed for the quarter to pass english. I ended up reading War and Peace in two days so I could take a test. I recieved 119 points or something like that for War and Peace and didn't have to read again for two years, theoretically.
I ended up selling the answers to the War and Peace AR quiz for 20 bucks to 6 different students before the teachers caught on and disallowed the book.
I used Accelerated Reader when it was the magic bullet du jour. (It's since been replaced with a few other programs that initially work, then...don't.)
It's all in how you use it.
It was never used for grades. Scores were not posted for public humiliation. And students were never bribed, er, rewarded for points, trading them for worthless tchatchkies.
Students were told they were only competing against themselves. They were encouraged to read book at their level or above. They were also encouraged to read books even if they weren't in the test bank. I had many books in class and gave them 30-60 min. a day to read (we were on block schedule and self-contained).
AR, like any other program doesn't replace a real flesh and blood teacher and it is all in how you use it. AR has been abused but then so can other programs that basically do the same thing.
I read the article and the minute I say Renaissance Learning I identified the bias involved.
BTW, no one reads at a 12th grade reading level. Not adults. Not college students. It's as artificial as the other software for-profits are marketing to public education.
Intelligence comes in many forms, and learning is a process that - while it needs some prodding and some direction - often best percolates and bubbles to the surface on its own.
AR - and other programs - trivialize true learning. And that is a shame.
I remember when my daughter, 7 at the time, placed on the second tier of the school library's leader board. She explained that she had made a tactical error by reading multiple complex books out of the same series instead of aiming a grade or two lower. "Kiddie books - thats how you make the winners circle". She vowed to rectify that mistake the next semester.
This attitude was ingrained, despite parental attempts (and to be fair teacher attempts) to dislodge it until HUNGER GAMES. "I really like these kinds of books! why did i stop reading them?" When i mentioned AR (she had switched to a non-AR school a year ago), her reaction: "That is just silly. I would rather read good books."
only lost two years...
Yet, programs like these are a symptom of the bigger issue of standardized testing and an emphasis on putting a number of all things. When will we learn that not all learning can be scored or placed on a bubble sheet?
If used properly it was helpful in supporting and supplementing the math book. Students competed against themselves, not others.
And when students completed standards way ahead of the class I didn't reward them with more busy work. I let them choose. I had a few students that finished the math book and AM in March. I gave them the opportunity to coach in class, do assignments for other classes, or move on to the math book for the next grade level. Two students opted to move on and I arranged for them to audit a 7th grade math class.
No students should be held back if they have the ability to work at a faster pace. This is a weakness of the current public school grade system and especially NCLB and RttT. There are really no options for students that are either way ahead or way behind grade level.
I am thankful my parents modeled reading for enjoyment and self-interest; if it were left up to my teachers using AR I would surely despise reading today as so many students out there do.