Accelerated Reader

From WikEd

Jump to: navigation, search

Accelerated Reader (AR) is a daily progress-monitoring tool in wide use by primary and secondary schools for monitoring the practice of reading, and it is created by Renaissance Learning, Inc. Currently, there are two versions: a desktop version and a web-based version in Renaissance Place, the company's web software for Accelerated Reader and a number of other software products. Accelerated Reader helps to meet the requirements established by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001.

The tool is designed to work with students individually at their own zone of proximal development (ZPD). The tool also provides reports for teachers to track all students' reading levels as well as reading quantity. "Using the Accelerated Reader program, teachers and students can receive guidance and immediate feedback that pertains to their reading assignments." (Holmes & Brown, 2003).

Accelerated Reader Webpage

Contents

Descriptions, definitions, synonyms, organizer terms, types of

Accelerated Reader is a progress-monitoring tool that primarily determines whether or not a child has read a book. The software provides additional information to teachers regarding reading rates, amount of reading, and other variables related to reading. The tool is not intended to replace curriculum or teaching; it is intended to monitor progress, provide feedback on instruction and reading practice, and to inform instruction. Furthermore, Renaissance Learning, Inc. does not require or advocate the use of incentives with the assessment, although it is a common misperception.[1]

A number of other assessments are available to assess higher order thinking skills and vocabulary. Quizzes can be taken on fiction and non-fiction books, textbooks, supplemental material, and educational magazines. As of 2006, there are over 100,000 books in the Accelerated Reader database.

Quiz types

Reading Practice

"Reading Practice" quizzes assess whether or not students have read a book. To use this assessment, students first read an Accelerated Reader book (a book that has a related quiz in the Accelerated Reader database). Teachers monitor student reading, and once the child has finished the book, he or she takes a quiz on Accelerated Reader via computer. The quizzes are multiple choice with 5, 10, and 20 questions depending on the book's difficulty and length. The questions ask literal comprehension questions. Students must correctly answer a set number of questions in order to pass an exam, for which they are given a percentage of points associated with the book depending on their achievement on the quiz.

Recorded Voice

As of Accelerated Reader version 6.x, many of the company's quizzes are available in an optional "recorded voice" format for primary-level books, in which the quiz questions and answers are read to the student taking the quiz. These quizzes are designed to help emerging English readers take the quizzes without additional assistance.

Textbook Series and Magazines

Quizzes are also available on textbooks, supplemental materials, and magazines. Most are in the form of reading practice quizzes, although some are curriculum-based with multiple subjects. Magazine quizzes are available for old magazines as well as on a subscription basis for new magazines. The subscription quizzes include three of the Time for Kids series magazines, Cobblestone, and Kids Discover.

Vocabulary Practice

In addition to regular reading quizzes, the Renaissance Place version of Accelerated Reader includes quizzes designed to practice vocabulary. The quizzes use words from books, and should be taken after the book has been read. Bookmarks can be printed out that display the vocabulary words so that, as students read, they can refer to the bookmark for help. The quizzes keep track of words learned, and reviews are suggested every so often.

Literacy Skills

Literacy Skills quizzes assess 24 "higher order" thinking skills using material from specific books. These skills are somewhat tied to skills assessed on standardized, high-stakes tests.

Application in classrooms

Renaissance Learning provides three steps to help teachers guide students to appropriate books within their zone of proximal development (ZPD). This helps to personalize reading instruction and to intervene with struggling students.

The three steps are, as provided by Renaissance Learning:

  1. Student Reads a Book. The student reads a library or textbook selection. All types of student reading are monitored, including guided, paired, literature-based, and textbook reading.
  2. Student Takes a Quiz. AR offers more than 75,000 quizzes on library books and popular reading textbook series. Teachers can add additional tests to their banks by making their own for books that do not have tests prepared by Renaissance Learning. The quizzes provide assessment information to help you motivate reading, monitor progress, and target instruction to accelerate student reading growth.
  3. You Get Information. You get easy-to-read reports on the reading level and comprehension skills of each student to guide instruction and help the student select more reading materials.

Evidence of effectiveness

A number of studies have been conducted regarding the effectiveness of using Accelerated Reader in the classroom. Check out the company's webpage for a searchable list of research or go to ERIC to find other studies. Links to both are available at the end of this article.

Vollands, Topping, and Evans (1999) used a quasi-experimental research design and found that after short-term exposure to the Accelerated Reader (less than six months), participants scored 17 points higher on average than non-participants.

Goodman’s (1999) results showed that the implementation of Accelerated Reader led to increased participation and interest from the parents, community organizations, and the local public libraries. This led to increased funding, more parental participation and engagement, and more book donations over twelve months than in the previous decade combined.

Howard (1999) showed overall dramatic improvements in reading scores of elementary students. Scores rose 17%, 19%, and 23% of third, fourth, and fifth grade students, respectively, that were at or above their suggested reading level to 57%, 52%, and 41% after a year of Accelerated Reader usage. These advances are remarkable; however, a closer examination of her results show that the readers with the fewest literacy skills barely improved at all and highly motivated readers with strong skills went up several levels over nine months, improving the overall averages but not, perhaps, fulfilling the goals of the system.

Sadusky and Brem (2002) found that, after using Accelerated Reader for five years, a school that used the software regularly gained 13 percentile ranks in reading on the SAT 9, while the control school made no gain over the same period. This increase held for both Title I eligible and non-eligible students in the school with Accelerated Reader. The authors do note that when ethnicity is taken into account gains were higher for white students than for minority students.

In a controlled evaluation, Holmes and Brown (2003) found that two schools using the School Renaissance program achieved significantly higher standardized test scores when compared with two contrast schools that were using the Renaissance program in a very limited way. Because so many schools in the United States are using Accelerated Reader, it was difficult for the authors of this study to find two schools in Georgia that were not already using Accelerated Reader. The authors noted:

"In all nine comparisons involving standardized test scores in reading, language arts, and mathematics, the Renaissance schools' children outperformed the contrast school's children. It can only be concluded that the Renaissance program was highly effective in raising the performance of these elementary students." (Holmes & Brown, 2003).

Samuels and Wu (2003) found that, after six months, third- and fifth-grade students that used Accelerated Reader demonstrated twice the gain in reading comprehension as those that did not use Accelerated Reader. The comparison students completed book reports, relaying that delayed feedback through book reports is not as useful as the immediate feedback provided by Accelerated Reader.

Ross, Nunnery, and Goldfeder (2004) studied 1,665 students and 76 teachers (grades K-6) from 11 schools in Memphis, TN. Many of the students were eligible for free or reduced-price lunch. Teachers were randomly assigned to use Accelerated Reader or to continue regular curriculum without the software. Students in classrooms with Accelerated Reader demonstrated gains. Additionally, many of the teachers responded positively to the software and highly supported the software. Many also indicated that they would continue to use the software.

In another study, Nunnery, Ross, and McDonald (2006) used a hierarchical linear model to assess the reading achievement of students in grades 3-6. This model incorporated the effects of individual, classroom, and school variables that impact reading achievement. Regardless, those in Accelerated Reader classrooms still outperformed students in control classrooms.

Critics and their rationale

Chenowith (2001) found several challenges faced by those using Accelerated Reader. The first challenge he found was that students who used Accelerated Reader did read more than non-participants while actively engaged in use of the system. Their reading dropped lower than non-participants within one month of cessation of use, however. The suggestion was that some aspect of the system (feedback from quizzes, associating reading with school only) was keeping students from viewing reading as equally pleasurable and educational.

A number of studies, however, have demonstrated the long-term impact of using Accelerated Reader. For instance, Sadusky and Brem (2002) studied students who used Accelerated Reader for five years. The researchers Ross and Nunnery have written a number of articles tracking the growth of a large sample of schools in Memphis, TN over a number of years that also use the software (e.g. Ross, Nunnery, & Goldfeder, 2004).

The second challenge mentioned by Chenowith (2001) was that librarians frequently reported that the software limited choice of books for students. If a book was not on the Accelerated Reader list, they were unable to encourage students to read it. Likewise, if a book had a high point value, children were struggling through books that they didn’t find interesting or relevant. Nowadays, however, Accelerated Reader covers over 100,000 books (as of early 2006).

Little research has been done on the efficacy of Accelerated Reader at the high school level. A recent study of a small group of students at an underperforming high school (Thompson, Madhuri, and Taylor) revealed negative perceptions of the program. One complaint was that Accelerated Reader does not offer enough multicultural choices for students. Other students complained that Accelerated Reader does not offer an appealing selection of choices for higher level readers. Lastly, many students felt that their desire to read for pleasure was greatly decreased after Accelerated Reader became a requirement for their English classes( 2008). The authors of this study acknowledge that their sample size was small and that more research is needed. They have concluded that great care must be taken when choosing a reading program and that considering student input may result in greater success for the program.

Many researchers criticize the use of incentives with Accelerated Reader, although it is an aspect not sanctioned by the publisher, Renaissance Learning.[2] Regardless, the studies below criticize the users of Accelerated Reader for the use of incentives, as if the company promoted this use.

Carter (1996) and Pavonetti, Brimmer, and Cipielewski (2002) performed additional research that yielded concerns or challenges. Carter (1996) found through interviews with 850 children that Accelerated Reader’s reward system encouraged children to read for the wrong reasons with over 70% of respondents stating that they wouldn’t read if they didn’t get the incentives and prizes. His primary concern was that many respondents (approximately 12%) said that they used to read for fun until they realized that they could get rewards and now they don’t read at home because they don’t get "anything out of it."

Pavonetti, Brimmer, and Cipielewski (2002) performed qualitative (observation, interviews) and quantitative research (statistical analyses) on a seventh-grade class to determine whether their elementary school exposure to Accelerated Reader had a positive impact on their reading abilities and habits. The goal was to determine whether or not the claim that Accelerated Reader produces or creates lifelong readers was found to be invalid in this study. Indeed, the former participants read on average 10 hours less a week than non-participants.

Finally, Krashen (2003) has done much informal research and content-analysis on published research of these systems. His primary concern was that every positive research study on Accelerated Reader was either sponsored by or in some way connected with Renaissance Learning. However, at least 10 studies, if not more, have been published in peer-reviewed journals. These journals assess the quality of research and publish only research that meets the highest of standards.

Krashen (2003) also made the point that most studies designed to evaluate Accelerated Reader compare students who used Accelerated Reader with students who did not. Some of these studies do not show which aspect of Accelerated Reader caused the gains. In addition, very few evaluations used a comparison group that was also engaged in recreational reading, but not Accelerated Reader. Samuels and Wu (2003), however, studied two groups of students: those that used Accelerated Reader for feedback and those that used traditional book reports for feedback. Students who received the immediate feedback provided by Accelerated Reader performed better on the Group Reading Assessment and Diagnostic Evaluation (GRADE) than students who received delayed feedback from book reports.

Signed "life experiences", testimonies and stories

Please add your comments at the end of section and either sign your name using four ~ or some other identification (e.g., "anonymous user").

"I have just finished my first year teaching and was basically forced into using the AR program as the rest of my school all used it. While I did see some flaws in it, there were a lot of beneficial aspects. The students loved the idea of "moving up" to the next higher reading color and focused more on comprehension strategies as they read because they knew they would be taking a test after reading. However, there wasn't any higher level thinking questioning involved in the test. Also, as a first year teacher, it was hard because I didn't have enough "AR" books for the students to have as big of a selection as I would have liked. Overall, I think it is a fairly good program for an independent reading program, as long as children are also given time to read for pleasure, not to take a test." -- Annie Craig, 2nd Grade Teacher

"As a student in the K-12 library science program, with hopes to be a school librarian upon graduation, I have a special interest in getting kids to read. However, I think there are some major flaws with the AR program. Children no longer understand what it is like to read for fun. I know I have heard directly from kids that they do not want to spend their time reading anything if they can't take an AR quiz for the book upon completion. The intrinsic motivation kids used to have to read is taken away when AR programs are in place. I do agree that it is great that kids are reading, but if we aren't teaching kids to love reading, they will never become lifelong readers." -- L. Weinstein

"Renaissance Learning's Accelerated Reader program is just twelve years old and it is already being used in over half the schools in the country (Renaissance Learning, 2005). It's used in the middle school where I teach, and I'm sure that it's used in many of your classrooms as well. The fantastic thing about Accelerated Reader is that students can read at their own level, and teachers are better able to give students the individual attention that readers, especially beginning and struggling readers, desperately need." -- anonymous user

"What I dislike about the Accelerated Reader program is that it takes the teacher out of the picture a little bit. When professionals begin discussing the use of technology in education, they often come to the point when they ask a very pertinent question. At what point is the technology teaching the student, rather than the teacher? Are we using technology to take teachers out of education? When used correctly, I think that Accelerated Reader is a wonderful program that helps both the teacher and the student, but the program also has the capability of being misused by both teachers and students. In short, a lazy and/or burnt-out teacher will simply use the Accelerated Reader program without truly giving reading instruction to their students." -- Stacy Borkgren

"While I'm not a reading teacher, I have heard of Accelerated Reader before (in fact, they have a similar program to teach math, but I don't like it because it's so rote based). Although I don't know about the criticism below, I think any program that allows students so much more independent reading time definitely could be a very good thing for both students and teachers. It's an interesting form of data collection; there's been much in NSDC's professional development recommendations regarding p.d. needs to be more data-driven, and that teachers need to do more data collection in the normal course of classroom activities. I can definitely see how this program would help both teachers and students feel better about themselves and reading. It might be a very good way for someone to teach reading who doesn't have much background knowledge about it, especially. My one concern is how students would feel taking computerized tests all the time. It might be hard for students with test anxiety (since english/language arts seems to be the most test-free discipline usually), but then again perhaps the frequent nature of the quizzes would help students to see there was not much to be afraid of." -- Emily Cox

"I think the Accelerated Reader program is a great thing to have in classrooms, but it should not be the only type of reading instruction students get. Teachers need to keep a close eye that students are reading and not just trying to guess on the quizzes." -- Sandra Davila

"I also think that the Accelerated Reader program is a great thing. The elementary students involved in this program at my school are enthusiastic about reading. It is great to see!!" -- Chris Royer

"Accelerated Reader when used appropriately is a great way to supplement your reading program. I have been teaching for ten years and over the years I found some teacher's who use AR as their only reading program. This can be a problem. First, a good reading program should encompass many forms of exposing children to reading, not just reading and then taking a comprehensive test. There should be independent reading, literature circles, reading aloud, choral reading and of course reading at home. Accelerated Reader has only one way to assess the reader's reading skills (comprehension). There are many other ways children need to be assessed for reading. The worst thing are the schools that give out prizes for reading points. The elementary school that my daughter attended in Cleveland, Tennessee actually had this store set up and at the end of each semester the kids got to go down and buy a bunch of plastic toys and other novelties. It was crazy. Some students came back with bags of toys, even boom boxes in extreme cases. Then there were those who were lucky to get a pencil topper. Some students would read a bunch of books below their level just to rack up the points so they could shop in the store. A good teacher would monitor the level the student is reading at, but not all do. My daughter earned a lot of points in her four years at this school, but she was not exposed to character, theme, plot, sequencing and other elements of reading.The Accelerated Reader Program should be part of a reading program not the reading program." -- V. Munds

"Accelerated Reader concerns me as a parent and an educator. As a parent I want my children reading. I do not want them to have to pick books from a particular list. I do not want them to have to be tied to a book at a specific grade level. I have seen both parents and teachers pigeon hole students into books and reading levels based on Accelerated Reader. I do believe it has and will help some children. The love of reading must be developed intrinsically and based on lots of good modeling. I think that Accelerated reader should be used as an occasional supplement to guide teaching. Too many times I have seen teachers, schools and parents use it to teach reading." -- C. Yeoman

"We use the Accelerated Reader program. It is an excellent approach to help kids understand what they are reading. It gives the student more lead-way to become engaged in the reading process." -- C. Graham

"I have some real concerns with the Accelerated Reader Program. Specifically, as a librarian, I saw some serious errors in judgment and assigning of reading levels to texts. Not only were individual titles within a series seemingly randomly chosen by AR (volumes 4 and 7 of a series but none of the others), there were also texts that were absolutely inappropriate for the age of the reader. The Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger was offered as a 6th grade reader with high point value. The high points would make it an even more desirable choice. I do find it ironic that librarians are criticized for offering children a variety of books (including the challenging ones) and a balanced collection but a school will offer Salinger to sixth graders because a purchased software program suggests it." -- April Spisak

"As an elementary teacher I have found the Accelerated Reader program a helpful tool for me to use in the block of my reading instrution dedicated to individual reading and student choice. Because research shows that children improve in reading when they are given time to read in reading class, I have made independent reading an important part of my reading curriculum. Students are given the opportunity to read books that appeal to them and that are written in their reading range (ZPD). Because I have so many students and they are reading a variety of books and authors, it would be hard for me to track their comprehension success or difficulties on my own. I feel that Accelerated Reader helps me to collect data about my students reading comprehension. With that being said, I am aware of the problems when using this program. When teachers only rely on Accelerated Reader or over-emphasize reading from an Accelerated Reader list, problems occur. Accelerated Reader can be an important tool in the hands of a competent teacher who knows its strengths,weaknesses, and limitations.I believe it is a mistake for a teacher to use Accelerated Reader as the entire reading curriculum for his or her class, but it can play a very important role as one of the pieces of a good reading program." -- anonymous user

"When I first started teaching at our school the Accelerated Reader Program was part of the reading program. The number of tests each quarter each student was to accomplish was discussed with the teacher and the accomplishment of this task resulted in 1/4 of the students grade. I teach in the Junior High and about two years after my arrival the program was left only in the elementary and even there it was not allowed to be part of the grade. The elementary still use the program but do not incorporate the passing of a determined number of tests into the score. I think what has happened in our district is the extreme swinging of pendulums. At first we were using it to an extreme, 1/4 of the grade and now in Junior High, not at all. The program has its good points and I felt at least for sixth grade it could be used in some format. Just goes to show that like all programs we need to find the happy middle." -- anonymous user

"As a student who has been through several accelerated reading programs I have experienced both the good and the bad. Personally, I agree with some of the previous posters. I found that the reading programs that I went through rather stifling in the choice of literature. Also, like previous posters, I felt that the books chosen were often "beyond the scope" of the reader. Themes and elements in some books could not be fully appreciated and the books ended up being treated more as assignments instead of literary pieces. While I like the idea of an accelerated reader program to offer students that are able more chances to read advanced literature, I think the proper execution is lacking in many schools." -- Matt Munley

"As a child, I was part of an accelerated reading program and I think it thoroughly benefited my desire and ability to read. It allowed me a rewarding outlet to read interesting books and pushed me to choose more difficult texts and increase my own skills. In many ways, it made being a good reader ok and acceptable." -- E. W.

"I had the unfortunate experience of working (early field placement) in a school that was obsessed with the use of Accelerated Reader. They had received a grant for their previous work with the program. What I saw was the aftermath. They were set on renewing the grant funds and therefore I got to see the ugly side of this program magnified. Students were forced to meet goals that were often unrealistic and produced an arena of stress throughout the building for students and teachers. Students, who had initially loved reading and working on the computer, now seemed to look at it as a job. It was an overused token system that they ended up using to grade student and teacher success. This is not the purpose of the program and the rote tests were often inaccurate judges of comprehension and understanding." -- Karrie Kearney

"It seems as if most people have a strong feeling about Accelerated Reader one way or the other. I have a surprisingly more moderate opinion. I have used AR in my classroom to a limited extent. I tested my students to find their "level" and gave them each a note card that showed them what level books to check out from the library. Our school library placed colored dots on the books to identify levels. When our class visited the library, I insisted that they pick out one AR book and could check out a second book of their choosing. The one AR book was used for independent reading so that my students would have at least one new book at their level each week. I had my students take an AR test approximately once in a two week time span. I considered the tests one of many ways to assess my students comprehension. I felt the tests, while not completely conclusive, did provide some valuable information to me as a teacher. I allowed students to take more AR tests if they were interested, but did not force them to. I looked at the program as a supplement or support piece to my overall reading program, not a major component of it. I feel that too often teachers look to "canned" programs to teach their children how to read instead of their own instruction. I do not feel that too much emphasis should be placed on any one program over best practices in reading instruction." -- Amanda Payton

"Upon working in Champaign Community Unit#4 Schools I was unfamiliar with the resourcefulness of AR in the classroom. As a second grade teacher I have learned that AR serves as a wonderful positive reinforcement for beginning readers who are learning to comprehend text. I will never forget the excitement upon my students' faces when they were able to pass quizzes on books that they had chosen in the classroom or from the library. I believe that AR is a great way to help students develop an understanding of their reading abilities independent of the teachers' reading instruction. While using AR students are able to find books that are 'just right' for them, and challenge themselves to become even better readers." -- C. Hatchett

I have Accelerated Reader in my classroom, but I don't use it very regularly. I know of some teachers who use it as their whole reading curriculum. This can be a supplement to a reading curriculum, but not the whole thing. It is one great way to include technology in your reading program and most students enjoy taking the tests on the books they have read. E. Kilroy

I use Accelerated Reading in my Fourth grade Reading class. The students are excited by the incentive program. The problem that I have found with the Accelerated Reading program is the Star Reading component. Star reading is the test- mostly vocabulary and contexts clues- to place the student in the right zpd level to choose their book to read. The test results sometime place the students in a zpd that doesn't get the student's true reading level in that they are placed either too high or too low. Sometimes the teacher has to intervene and place the student at the right level so the student can succeed in Accelerated Reading. -Ann Harty

I think that, while the Accelerated Reader program on the surface looks like a good idea, it in fact has too many drawbacks. I believe that it can cause a drop in students' desire to read for pleasure. I think that the reward system is part of that problem, but I also see students choosing Accelerated Reader books because of their point value or reading level (some teachers actually won't let a student read a book "outside" their reading level) and being concerned about passing the quiz instead of relaxing and simply enjoying a good book. Some teachers have made it part of the student's grade, which really puts the pressure on to just read AR books. I also see students not reading wonderful literature because they are "not on the list". Beyond that, our District Librarian is pressured to buy only AR books. Libraries need to be more than that. - Pam Olivito

I dislike AR because it does not promote higher level thinking. In one of our schools here, we have an AR "store" several times a year where kids can spend their points like cash. The problem is that students in classes where teachers make time for AR earn lots of points and can buy more or bigger items than students in classes where teachers aren't as dedicated. Students get frustrated by this inequity.

AR is also expensive. Between the tests and the cost of the program, particularly if you use the online version, it seems that money could be better spent on other reading programs. However, for teachers/parents who like AR bu can't afford it, there is a free program online from Sylvan that actually has more features than AR. It's called Book Adventure. Check it out at www.bookadventure.com. - Susan Sheahan

I actually used accelerated reader back in the eighties when I was in grade school. Taking tests on those green computer screens added a whole new dimension to my reading, and really gave me some excitement to reading the books I was assigned. I credit that program as one of many factors that have made me a lifelong reader (and English teacher, incidentally). - Michael Geraghty

I have used the Accelerated Reader program as a second grade teacher. The program has been motivating for some students but has caused issues as well. Students become very competitive. Students are so worried about getting good scores on the tests, they look in the book for answers. Some are even so competitive that they try to log in as other students to see how many points the others have acquired. In a way, I feel it takes the joy out of reading and causes unnecessary competition. M. Flessner


I have mixed feelings about AR. I didn't like it at all as a parent. My daughter was not aloud to take out AR books that were beyond her reading level. My daughter did not like that someone else had so much control over what she was reading. I wasn't happy about it either. What ended up happening was that my daughter read what she wanted to read and then would take out easy books that would take her an hour or less to read just to meet her quarterly AR requirements. As a teacher in training, I believe there are situations where an AR program would be beneficial. I recently received my MLS. I don't have my own library yet, however, I have been a TA in one library that uses AR and one that does not. I saw more reader's advisory and book talking in the school that did not use AR. I think AR is a tremendous help to classroom teachers, however, and I would definitely recommend it in a school that did not have a full time librarian or where the librarian is too busy with instruction to develop programs that engage kids in reading for fun. Otherwise, I would advocate for a library program that includes book clubs, book talks, readers advisory, before and after school hours, after school programs, etc. M. Torrise

Cheating is a major issue with AR at the middle school level. I have spoken with several educators in my region and they see the same issue. Students will take tests for others, students will tell others questions that are on the tests, they watch the movie instead of reading, they scan pages and attempt the test, they take tests over subjects they think they know instead of reading the book, they have people tell them about the book they read and then attempt taking the test themselves,etc. This does not promote life-long readers, it just shows them there is a short cut to accomplishing things. The questions that are asked are usually poor, there are no higher level thinking questions, basically comprehension questions are all that are asked so other reading skills are not assessed, etc. Students of mine who did AR in another middle school class tell me how much of a joke it is. They laugh when telling me all the ways they found to get out of reading. They all know how to get around it. They say they want to read books they like and to read them because they are interested, not because they are made to read them. They say they do try to get their points because they want prizes. What will happen to their reading when the prizes are gone??? YOU ARE NOT CREATING LIFE-LONG READERS WHEN YOU HAVE TO GIVE PRIZES TO GET THEM TO READ. - - Reading teacher who wants to move on past AR

In my first year of teaching, all teachers were required to use the AR program in their reading curriculum at my school, not district wide. I found that by the end of the year, my students were choosing books for the point value and not for pleasure. AR interferes with what I would like to think is a big part of reading - enjoyment. My students didn't make choices based on their favorite genre, author, illustrations or any other criteria that we teach them is the correct way to find a book to read. At the first to third grade level (that I have taught or currently teach) I feel it is imperative that we show students the love of reading, not that it is another way to score points (isn't that similar to all of the video games they play?).

In the current school year, my school has a different principal, who does not require us to utilize the AR program. I have not insisted my students take advantage of this and some don't. There are always the competitive students who still think there will be a prize for the amount of points gained, but I only offer lunch with me, if they read a certain amount of books. This is not for the amount of points or the percentage points they achieve on these tests, just for plain reading. This has been received well by my students and they write in their journals about their reading, in a sense, they are responsible for their reading and seem to enjoy it. I'm afraid that if we stop giving our students choices for reading and other subjects, we will no longer allow them to think outside of the box and the level of creativity will lessen as time goes on. D.LePla

I am a second year teacher in school who loves AR, but I happen to think that we incorporate it very well. Our student population is such that most do not have access to books, and most do not read outside of class. Our Language Arts department decided to do away with homework this year, and instead assign students to read a book of their choice for 30 minutes a night. At first, it was very hard to get them to actually do this, but we worked very hard at teaching students how to choose books they like. We stocked our classroom libraries, did book talks, and now books are passed around like crazy. When it comes to AR, students are assigned a point value to achieve for a grade based on their ZPD (which Renaissance Learning can test) and the fact that students should be reading 30 minutes each night. We also have a competition between classes and grade levels of who can read the most words. Sixth grade's goal is to read 6 million words by the end of the year; 7th to read 7 million, and 8th to read 8 million. The results are staggering for students whose reading levels are drastically below grade level. -Sarah Becker

References and other links of interest

Carter, B. (1996). Hold the applause. School Library Journal, 42, 22-25.

Goodman, G. (1999). The Reading Renaissance/Accelerated Reader Program: Pinal County School-to-Work Evaluation Report. (ERIC Document, ED427299).

Holmes, C.T., & Brown, C.L. (2003). "A Controlled Evaluation of a Total School Improvement Process, School Renaissance." Technical Report. Athens, GA: University of Georgia.

Howard, C. (1999). An Evaluation of the Accelerated Reader Program in Grades Three, Four, and Five on Reading Vocabulary, Comprehension, and Attitude in an Urban Southeastern School District in Virginia. (ERIC Document, ED465987).

Kerns, G. (2003). Letter to the Editor. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 47, 1, 4-7.

Krashen, S. (2003). The (Lack of) Experimental Evidence Supporting the Use of Accelerated Reader. Journal of Children’s Literature, 29, 2, 16-30.

Nunnery, J.A., Ross, S.M., & McDonald, A. (2006). A randomized experimental evaluation of the impact of Accelerated Reader/Reading Renaissance implementation on reading achievement in grades 3-6. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 11, 1, 1-18.

Pavonetti, L., K. Brimmer, and J. Cipielewski. (2002). Accelerated Reader: What are the Lasting Effects on the Reading Habits of Middle School Students Exposed to Accelerated Reader in Elementary Grades? Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 46, 4, 300-311.

Ross, S.M., Nunnery, J., & Goldfeder, E. (2004). A randomized experiment on the effects of Accelerated Reader/Reading Renaissance in an urban school district: Final evaulation report. Memphis, TN: Unverisity of Memphis, Center for Research in Educational Policy.

Sadusky, L.A., & Brem, S.K. (2002). "The Integration of Renaissance Programs into an Urban Title I Elementary School, and its Effect on School-wide Improvement." Technical Report. Tempe, AZ: Arizona State University.

Samuels, S.J., & Wu, Y. (2003). The effects of immediate feedback on reading achievement. Manuscript sumbitted for publication, University of Minnesota.

Samuels, S.J., & Wu, Y. (2004). How the amount of time spent on independent reading affects reading achievement: A response to the National Reading Panel. Unpublished manuscript, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Department of Educational Psychology.

Smith, S. and Piele, P. (1997). School Leadership: Handbook for Excellence. University of Oregon: Clearinghouse on Education Management.

Snow, C.E., M.S. Burns, and P. Griffin. (1998). Preventing Reading Failure in Young Children. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

Tardrew, S. (2003). Letter to the Editor. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 47, 1, 4-7.

Thompson, G., Madhuri, M., and Taylor, D. (2008). "How the Accelerated Reader Program Can Be Counterproductive for High School Students". Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 51,7, 550-560.

Vollands, S., K. Topping, and R. Evans. (1999). Computer-assisted Assessment of Practice at Reading: A Large Scale Survey Using Accelerated Reader Data. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 15, 3, 213-232.

External links

Retrieved from "http://wik.ed.uiuc.edu/index.php/Accelerated_Reader"
Personal tools