The 18 Reasons Not to Use Accelerated Reader
Accelerated Reader TM
Accelerated Reader™ (AR) is a simple software concept that was at the right time (late 1980s) and right place (public schools during a transition from whole language to phonics instruction) that has simply grown into an educational monolith. From an economic standpoint, simple often is best and AR is a publisher’s dream come true. Renaissance Learning, Inc.(RLI) is publicly traded on the NASDAQ exchange under the ticker symbol RLRN and makes a bit more than pocket change off of its flagship product, AR. As is the case with many monoliths, detractors trying to chip away at its monopolistic control of library collections, computer labs, and school budgets are many. The second place challenger is Houghton Mifflin Harcourt’s (HMH) Reading Counts! (formerly Scholastic Reading Counts!). As one measure of popularity (as of January 2024), the AR program has about 22o,000 different books with quizzes, while HMH has about 43,000. Readers may be interested in my companion article, Reading Counts! Claims and Counterclaims.
Following are short summaries of the most common arguments made by researchers, teachers, parents, and students as to why using AR is counterproductive. Hence, The 18 Reasons Not to Use Accelerated Reader. But first, for the uninitiated, is a brief overview of the AR system.
What is Accelerated Reader?
From the Renaissance Learning website, A Parent’s Guide to Accelerated Reader™, we get a concise overview of this program: “AR is a computer program that helps teachers manage and monitor children’s independent reading practice. Your child picks a book at his own level and reads it at his own pace. When finished, your child takes a short quiz on the computer. (Passing the quiz is an indication that your child understood what was read.) AR gives both children and teachers feedback based on the quiz results, which the teacher then uses to help your child set goals and direct ongoing reading practice.”
How is the Student’s Reading Level Determined?
Renaissance Learning sells its STAR Reading™ test to partner with the AR program. The STAR test is a computer-based grades 1-12 reading assessment that adjusts levels of difficulty to student responses. Among other diagnostic information (such as percentile ranking and grade equivalency, the test establishes a Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) reading range for the student.
How are AR Books Selected?
Students are encouraged (or required by some teachers) to select books within their ZPD that also match their age/interest level. AR books have short multiple choice quizzes and have been assigned a readability level (ATOS). Renaissance Learning provides conversion scales to the Degrees of Reading Power (DRP) test and the Lexile Framework, so that teachers and librarians who use these readability formulae will still be able to use the AR program. Additionally, Renaissance Learning provides a search tool to find the ATOS level.
What are the Quizzes? What is the Student and Teacher Feedback?
AR quizzes are taken on computers, ostensibly under teacher or librarian supervision. The Reading Practice Quizzes consist of from 3–20 multiple choice questions (the number based upon book level and length), most of which are at the “recall” level. Students must score 80% or above on these short tests to pass and receive point credit for their readings. When students take AR quizzes, they enter information into a database that teachers can access via password. Additionally, Renaissance Learning has been expanding their range of quizzes. Of the 180,000 books, which have the Reading Practice Quizzes, 10,792 include audio files (in English and some in Spanish); 11,266 of the books have vocabulary-specific quizzes; and 869 have literacy skill quizzes.
Teachers have access to a plethora of individual and class reports, including progress monitoring, parent letters, and the TOPS Report (The Opportunity to Praise Students) reports quiz results after each quiz* is taken.
Both teachers, students, and parents have access to the following from the Renaissance Learning programs:
- Name of the book, the author, the number of pages in the book
- ATOS readability level (developed from word difficulty, word length, sentence length, and text length i.e., the number of words)
- Renaissance Learning has also “partnered with the creators of the Lexile Framework, MetaMetrics, Inc., to be able to bring Lexile Measures into” their programs.
- Percentage score earned by the student from the multiple choice quiz
- The number of points earned by students who pass the quiz. AR points are computed based on the difficulty of the book (ATOS readability level) and the length of the book (number of words).
*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. www.renlearn.com
What about the Reading Incentives?
“Renaissance Learning does not require or advocate the use of incentives with the assessment, although it is a common misperception.” However, most educators who use AR have found the program to be highly conducive to a rewards-based reading incentive program.
Criticisms
Book Selection
1. Using AR tends to limit reading selection to its own books. Teachers who use the AR program tend to limit students to AR selections because these have the quizzes to maintain accountability for the students’ independent reading. Although much is made by Renaissance Learning of the motivational benefits of allowing students free choice of reading materials, their selection is actually limited. Currently, AR has over 220,000 books in its database; however, that is but a fraction of the books available for juvenile and adolescent readers.
2. Using AR tends to limit reading selection to a narrow band of readability. A concerned mom recently blogs about her experience with her sixth grade daughter (Lady L) who happens to read a few years beyond her grade level:
I’m not trying to be a whining, complaining parent here. I’m simply trying to highlight a problem. At our public library, there are bookmarks in the youth department that list suggested books for students in each grade (K-12th). We picked up an 8th grade bookmark to get ideas for Lady L’s acceptable reading-leveled book. Found a book. Looked up the reading level and found that it was a 4.5 (not anywhere near the 8.7-10.7 my daughter needed).
3. Using AR tends to discriminate against small publishing companies and less popular authors. Additionally, valid concerns exist about the appropriateness of a private company effectively dictating the materials which children within the program may read. Although teachers may create custom quizzes for reading material not already in the Accelerated Reader system, the reality is that teachers will not have the time nor inclination to do so in order to assess whether an individual student has read a book that is not already in the system. Thus, the ability for a student to explore books which are neither currently commercially popular nor part of major book lists is severely restricted in reality by the Accelerated Reader program. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerated_Reader
In fact, many teachers limit students to reading only books that are in the AR database. Many teachers include the TOPS Report as a part of the students’ reading or English-language arts grade, thus mandating student participation in AR.
Students, thereby are limited to reading some, but not other, authors:
We had an author come and visit our school. His book was mainly for 3rd, 4th and 5th graders. The author did a great job talking about the writing process and then went into his newest book. Students were so excited about the book because of the way he described it. After he was done giving his presentation, he asked if there were any questions. The very first question that came up, “How many AR points is your book worth”. Depending on what answer he gave students would either still want to read it or for some the book wouldn’t be worth enough points and therefore not worth reading. http://www.brandonkblom.com/2016/04/why-we-are-moving-on-from-ar.html
4. Using AR tends to encourage some students to read books that most teachers and parents would consider inappropriate for certain age levels. Although Renaissance Learning is careful to throw the burden of book approval onto the shoulders of teachers and parents, students get more points for reading and passing quizzes on higher reading levels and longer books. Although an interest level is provided as is a brief synopsis/cautionary warning on the AR site, students often simply select books by the title, cover, availability, or point value. Thus, a fourth grader might wind up “reading” Salinger’s The Catcher in the Rye (4.7 ATOS readability level) and a sixth grader might plow through Camus’ The Stranger (6.2 ATOS readability level). Hardly appropriate reading material for these grade levels! Content is not considered in the AR point system and students are, of course, reading for those points.
For my own amusement, I decided to use the ATOS Analyzer to compare two books: Madeleine L’Engle’s classic children’s tale and hit movie, A Wrinkle in Time, and Fyodor Dostoevsky’s decidedly-adult story, Crime and Punishment. For the former book I searched “a wrinkle in time grade level” and got these results: Scholastic 3-5, 6-8, Guided Reading Level W, and Book Source grades 3-5. I pretended to read Crime and Punishment as a senior in high school and passed the final only with the help of CliffsNotes® (I finally read it years later after earning my master’s degree as a reading specialist.)
I searched for excerpts for both books and copied text from the middle of each book at random. I followed the minimum word guidelines of the ATOS Analyzer and following were the admittedly non-scientific results: The 8.4 level for A Wrinkle in Time corresponds to a seventh-grade reading level, while the 5.7 level for Crime and Punishment corresponds to a fourth-grade level. Now, to be fair, the ATOS level for the entire A Wrinkle in Time is listed at 4.7, which would fall into the third-grade reading level, yet Accelerated Reading lists it interest level as Middle Grades (MG 4-8). Suffice it to say that the ATOS measure and AR readability levels cannot not take thematic maturity into consideration, nor are all sections of a book equal in terms of readability.
A Wrinkle in Time
Crime and Punishment
Reader Response
5. Using AR tends to induce a student mindset that “reading is a chore,” and “a job that has to be done.”
“As a teacher and a mom of 4, I do NOT like AR. As a parent, I watched my very smart 9 year old work the system. He continually read books very much below his ability NOT because he likes reading them, but because he could read them quickly and get points. Other books that he told me he really wanted to read, he didn’t either because they were longer and would take “too long to read” or they weren’t on the AR list. I finally told him to stop with the AR stuff, took him to the bookstore and spent an hour with him finding books he would enjoy. We have never looked back and I will fight wholeheartedly if anyone tries to tell any of my kids they ‘have’ to participate in AR.”
6. Using AR tends to replace the intrinsic rewards of reading with extrinsic rewards.
AR rewards children for doing something that is already pleasant for most children: self-selected reading. Substantial research shows that rewarding an intrinsically pleasant activity sends the message that the activity is not pleasant, and that nobody would do it without a bribe. AR might be convincing children that reading is not pleasant. No studies have been done to see if this is true.
Stephen Krashen Posted by Stephen Krashen on December 17, 2009 at 10:40pm http://englishcompanion.ning.com/profiles/blogs/does-accelerated-reader-work?xg_source=activity&id=2567740:BlogPost:161876&page=2#comments
Again, Renaissance Learning does not endorse prizes for points; however, its overall point system certainly is rewards-based. Of course most teachers know how to minimize extrinsic rewards and maintain an appropriate level of positive incentives for all learning, including independent reading, but certainly some of the following rewards can produce counterproductive results, especially for those children you cannot compete on the same level. Following is an excerpt from a post on the Elementary Librarian Community site:
Here are some AR reward ideas – things I’ve done in the past and a few things I’ve heard of others doing:
- A trip to a local park
- A trip to a local inflatable place
- Popcorn, soft drink, and movie party
- Ice cream sundae party (complete with fun toppings like gummy worms, marshmallows, various syrups, etc.)
- Pizza party
- Extra play time outside with bubbles and sidewalk chalk
- Sock hop in the gym
- Special lunch in the library
- Breakfast with the principal
Most of those ideas have minimal costs. I’ve done an AR store in the past, where students “purchase” items with their points, but I don’t recommend it. It’s very expensive to buy the gifts, time consuming, and stressful helping the students figure out how many points they’ve used and how many they have left.
7. Using AR tends to foster student and/or teacher competitiveness, which can push students to read books at their frustrational reading levels (without teacher support). In some situations, this competitiveness can lead to hard feelings or outright ostracism. Some students mock other students for not earning enough points, or “making us lose a class pizza party.” Here are two recent blog postings by moms who happen to be educators:
My son is a voracious reader, but AR had him in tears more than once. I had to encourage him to NOT participate in AR (which meant that his class didn’t get the stuffed cougar promised as a reward to the class with the most AR points!) in order to protect that love. He took a hit for his non-participation in school (he started reading books off the list and not getting points for them) but it preserved his love of reading. In my estimation, this love of reading will take him further in the long run. Stupid that he had to choose between school and what was best for his reading life. http://englishcompanion.ning.com/profiles/blogs/does-accelerated-reader-work?xg_source=activity&id=2567740:BlogPost:161876&page=5#comments
As an educator, it concerns me when I see students being punished with reading, as can be the case when I visit sites on a Friday afternoon, a day many grade levels offer students “Fun Friday” activities. Students who’ve completed their class and homework assignments for the week and have had no behavioral problems get to sign-in for fun activities. One teacher volunteers to monitor those who did not earn a Fun Friday, including students who did not meet their AR requirement for the week – and as a result, will be punished with staying in the non-FF room to read.
http://englishcompanion.ning.com/profiles/blogs/does-accelerated-reader-work?xg_source=activity
Note: Teacher comments regarding this section tend to be quite critical and can be summed up as “It’s not AR’s fault, but the teacher’s misuse of the program.” Again, most teachers would not, thankfully, punish those students who fail to meet their AR requirements, but we have to admit the AR system does provide the means for its misuse. Interestingly, parent and student comments tend to blame the program, more so than the teachers.
8. Using AR tends to turn off some students to independent reading. Countless posts on blogs point to the negative impact of this program on future reading. From my own survey of sixty blogs, using the “accelerated reading” search term, negative comments and/or associations with the AR program far outweigh positive ones. Of course there are those who credit AR for developing them into life-long readers; however, would other independent reading programs have accomplished the same mission? In Kelly Gallagher’s Readicide, he cites a few studies that demonstrate that after exiting an AR program, students actually read less than non-AR students. Plus, all instructional activities are reductive. Having students spend hours skimming books in class to prepare for AR test takes away from other instruction.
Donalyn Miller, author of the the Book Whisperer, claims that the
…use of Accelerated Reader may in some cases adversely affect students’ reading attitudes and their perceptions of their reading skills, particularly among low readers. Putman (2005) examined the relationships among students’ accrual of Accelerated Reader points, their reading self-efficacy beliefs, and the value they place on reading. Students who accumulated the most Accelerated Reader points showed increases in their reading self-efficacy. In contrast, students who fell in the mid-range of Accelerated Reader point accumulation showed decreases in both their reading self-efficacy and their value of reading. Finally, students who earned the fewest Accelerated Reader points showed the lowest levels of reading self-efficacy and value in reading of all three groups. Although use of reading management programs may encourage children who are successful readers, educators should be aware that program use may discourage less capable readers. These findings suggest that the Matthew effects described by Stanovich (1986) occur not only with reading achievement, but also with reading attitudes. More specifically, children with positive attitudes toward reading may read more and in turn develop even better attitudes toward reading. https://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/book_whisperer/2010/09/reading_rewarded_part_ii.html
9. Using AR tends to turn some students into cheaters. Many students skim read, read only book summaries, share books and answers with classmates, select books that have been made into movies that they have already seen, or use web cheat sites or forums to pass the quizzes without reading the books. Pervasive among many students seems to be the attitude that one has to learn how to beat the AR system, like one uses cheat sites and codes to beat video games. Both are on the computer and detached from human to human codes of conduct. Students who would never dream of cheating on a teacher-constructed test will cheat on AR because “it’s dumb” or “everyone does it.”
In order to take Accelerated Reader tests without any reading at all, many students use sites such as Sparknotes to read chapter summaries. Other websites offer the answers to Accelerated Reader tests. Students regularly trade answers on yahoo.com. Renaissance Learning has filed lawsuits against some of the offending websites and successfully closed them down after a short time. An AR cheat site is currently the ninth Google™ listing on the first page for the “accelerated reader” search term.
AR is Reductive
10. Using AR tends to supplant portions of established reading programs. In my experience, teachers who use AR spend less time on direct reading instruction. Some teachers even consider AR to be solid reading instruction. However, AR does not teach reading; AR tests reading. The expectation of many teachers is that students are learning to read on their own or are dutifully practicing the reading strategies that their teachers have taught them.
Note: As an M.A. reading specialist, this is my biggest problem with AR. Teachers can teach reading to their students, Accelerated Reader tends to devolve the learning responsibility to children. The AR tests quiz students; the tests do not teach students. Now, I certainly value independent reading; however, there are plenty of options other than AR which don’t supplant reading instruction.
11. Using AR tends to train students to accumulate facts and trivia as they read in order to answer the recall questions. Teachers and reading specialists encourage students to establish the purpose for their reading. Setting the purpose helps the independent reader narrow down the self-monitoring of text to focus on those ends. With AR the purpose for reading is clear to most students: PASS THE READING PRACTICE QUIZZES WITH HIGH SCORES TO CONVERT TO THE MOST POINTS. Again, most all questions in the Reading Practice Quizzes are recall. Recall questions are designed to ascertain whether students read the book, not understand the book. Students receive few extrinsic “rewards” for higher order comprehension: making inferences, connections, interpretations, or conclusions as they read. Reading is reduced to a lower order thinking process. Students read to gain the gist of characterizations and plots. The Florida Center for Reading Research noted the lack of assessment of “inferential or critical thinking skills” as weaknesses of the software. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerated_Reader
Renaissance Learning has paid attention to this criticism, and now has 869 literacy skills quizzes; however, these quizzes cover less than 1% of the books that include the Reading Practice Quizzes.
12. Using AR tends to take up significant instructional time and teacher prep time. Students have to wait their turn to take quizzes on the classroom computers or the teacher has to march the class down to the library or computer lab to allow the students to do so.
The incentives schools develop with the AR program also take away from instructional time. One parent details her frustrations with the program:
When the librarian tallies up all of the people who have passed a book (not a goal, but just ONE book), everybody gets a chance to come to the library to select a prize (these are dollar store purchases to include child-like toys and snacks). The English teachers are asked to send the students when the coupons come (a disruption of classroom time). The reason for this is to send a clear message to the students who did not pass a book. It is to make them feel bad, I presume. Tell me how this fits into anything that looks like motivation. This includes students who took a quiz the day before coupons were made and distributed who now have to sit in class while all of their classmates go down to collect a prize.
AR recommends a minimum of 35 minutes per day of reading on its website. The National Reading Panel’s conclusion of programs that encouraged independent reading was “unable to find a positive relationship between programs and instruction that encourage large amounts of independent reading and improvements in reading achievement, including fluency.” p.12). The effects sizes for AR-style independent reading are only minimally positive.
The AR management system is extensive and time-consuming. With all the bells and whistles, it’s easy to understand why the teacher’s investment of prep time leads (for many) to using AR as a primary, rather than supplementary, means of reading practice within the assigned instructional reading block. Teachers know that technology takes time.
13. Using AR tends to reduce the amount of time that teachers spend doing the reading instruction in the “Big 5” recommended by the National Reading Panel: Phonemic Awareness, Phonics, Fluency, Vocabulary, and Comprehension.
14. Using AR tends to make reading into an isolated academic task. With each student reading a different book, the social nature of reading is minimized. Research on juvenile and adolescent readers emphasizes the importance of the book communities and class discussions in developing a love for reading. The focus on individual-only reading with AR results in fewer literature circles with small groups sharing the same book and discussing chapter by chapter, fewer online book clubs, fewer literacy centers, and fewer Socratic Seminars and literacy discussions. After all, students can’t collaborate on the Reading Practice Quizzes and discussing books would skew the quiz results. Ironically and unintentionally, some of the AR cheat sites devolve into book discussions.
15. Using AR tends to drain resources that could certainly be used for other educational priorities. The program is not cheap. While librarians are always (along with counselors, art, and music teachers, and reading specialists) the first on the budget chopping block, the pressure to build up the AR library collection always grows. For each $15 hardback purchase, there is an additional cost of close to $3 for the AR quiz (minimum purchases of 20). This amounts to a de facto 20% tax on library acquisitions. Another way to look at this is that a school library able to purchase 300 new books a year will only be able to purchase 250 because of the AR program. AR costs that library and those students 50 books per year. A typical elementary school of 500 students spends around $4000 per year on AR. Update 2024: These prices reflect data from quite a few years ago.
16. The STAR Test is hardly diagnostic in terms of the full spectrum of reading skills. Teachers have better assessments to guide their instructional decision-making–many are free.
17. Using AR tends to limit differentiated and individualized instruction. Students are not grouped by ability or skill deficits with AR. The teacher does not spend additional time with remedial students for AR. Students do not receive different instruction according to their abilities. Worse yet, many teachers wrongly perceive AR as differentiated instruction because all of their students are reading books at their own perceived reading levels. Again, there is no reading instruction in AR.
Research Base
18. Although a plethora of research studies involving AR are cited on the Renaissance Learning website, few of the AR studies meet the strict research criteria of the Institute of Education Services What Works Clearinghouse. Noodle around the What Works Clearinghouse site and see other programs with much higher gains. Stephen Krashen, educational researcher, stated, “Despite the popularity of AR, we must conclude that there is no real evidence supporting it, no real evidence that the additional tests and rewards add anything to the power of simply supplying access to high quality and interesting reading material and providing time for children to read them.”
Author’s Summary
There simply are far superior and effective independent reading programs for beginning and older, struggling readers. Additionally, plenty of other independent reading plans or programs work well without the excess baggage of the AR program detailed above. Click here to learn How to Develop a Free Schoolwide Reading Program. Is there life for a school after AR? Check out this article, written by two elementary principals who have lived to tell the tale.
What About AR’s Competitor? HMH (formerly Scholastic) Reading Counts!
In this companion article, I summarize the Reading Counts! (RC) program and provide comparisons to Accelerated Reader™. Additionally, I analyze three of the RC program claims and offer counterclaims for educators to consider before purchasing this independent reading management system.
*****
You may be interested in the author’s reading intervention programs for Tier 2 and 3 reading intervention for students ages 8-adult a two free resources.
The Science of Reading Intervention Program
The Science of Reading Intervention Program: Word Recognition includes explicit, scripted, sounds to print instruction and practice with the 5 Daily Google Slide Activities every grades 4-adult reading intervention student needs: 1. Phonemic Awareness and Morphology 2. Blending, Segmenting, and Spelling 3. Sounds and Spellings (including handwriting) 4. Heart Words Practice 5. Sam and Friends Phonics Books (decodables). Plus, digital and printable sound wall cards, speech articulation songs, sounds to print games, and morphology walls. Print versions are available for all activities. First Half of the Year Program (55 minutes-per-day, 18 weeks)
The Science of Reading Intervention Program: Language Comprehension resources are designed for students who have completed the word recognition program or have demonstrated basic mastery of the alphabetic code and can read with some degree of fluency. The program features the 5 Weekly Language Comprehension Activities: 1. Background Knowledge Mentor Texts 2. Academic Language, Greek and Latin Morphology, Figures of Speech, Connotations, Multiple Meaning Words 3. Syntax in Reading 4. Reading Comprehension Strategies 5. Literacy Knowledge (Narrative and Expository). Second Half of the Year Program (30 minutes-per-day, 18 weeks)
The Science of Reading Intervention Program: Assessment-based Instruction provides diagnostically-based “second chance” instructional resources. The program includes 13 comprehensive assessments and matching instructional resources to fill in the yet-to-be-mastered gaps in phonemic awareness, alphabetic awareness, phonics, fluency (with YouTube modeled readings), Heart Words and Phonics Games, spelling patterns, grammar, usage, and mechanics, syllabication and morphology, executive function shills. Second Half of the Year Program (25 minutes-per-day, 18 weeks)
The Science of Reading Intervention Program BUNDLE includes all 3 program components for the comprehensive, state-of-the-art (and science) grades 4-adult full-year program. Scripted, easy-to-teach, no prep, no need for time-consuming (albeit valuable) LETRS training or O-G certification… Learn as you teach and get results NOW for your students. Print to speech with plenty of speech to print instructional components.
Click the SCIENCE OF READING INTERVENTION PROGRAM RESOURCES for detailed program description, sample lessons, and video overviews. Click the links to get these ready-to-use resources, developed by a teacher (Mark Pennington, MA reading specialist) for teachers and their students.
Get the SCRIP Comprehension Cues FREE Resource:
Get the Diagnostic ELA and Reading Assessments FREE Resource:
*****
I HATE AR
i hate ar too and im in 4th grade
Wow! Most of the comments here are criticizing how the program is being implemented, not the program itself. While AR is the only program that I have any experience with, it has been used reasonably, appropriately, and effectively at our school. My experience includes many hours volunteering in the school library and with helping younger students with STAR and AR testing. Comments suggest quotas in classes. That is not the AR program. My kids set their own goals and have them approved by their teachers. My 3rd graders’ classmates always reach their goals because they read aloud in class, interacting in group discussions. (Exactly the opposite of one of the arguments.). When they finish the book, they can take the AR test. I have been amazed at watching the progress of these students, many I have several years of reading experience with. I have witnessed the limitations that some parents get frustrated with. My son just read 3 thick books written by a local author. No tests! But he reads enough other material that is more widely read, or I can easily speak to his teacher or the librarian about adjusting his goal. Because of my volunteer time, the librarian even trusts me to write test questions for that series. It took a long time to get my son reading fiction. As a younger child he favored non-fiction, which tend to be low point values. So his goal was adjusted accordingly. We have incentives for reaching the goal, no matter how many points the goal may be. Are there stupid questions? Yes. (Don’t try the Foot Book’s test. I have seen many students do poorly on that one.) Give feedback! Is the system perfect? Definite no. None will be. But make sure your complaints are really about the program, not how it’s implemented.
It’s been so long ago that I wrote this still-relevant article, that I decided to re-read to check your criticisms.
Clearly, 14 of the 18 reasons not to use AR are programmatic. Only 4 of them would be classified as implementation issues.
I’m afraid you also shed light on the weakness of your own rebuttal in saying that you are not familiar with other methods of implementing an effective independent reading program. Even un-salted Saltines taste wonderful to a hungry child; however, we have much more nutritious and tasty food to offer our children without all of the downsides.
I am shocked reading some of these experiences with AR. I love AR, but we use it as a STARTING POINT to support students’ reading. It is not an end in itself, or self fulfilling ‘system’. Yes there are points, certificates and rewards but only a few students are really motivated by these. We use it as a support, guiding students taking the first steps in choosing their own books, we group by stage, author and by genre so students can develop their own reading tastes. As far as quizzing goes, the skills needed, reflecting, summarising, connecting – BEFORE they quiz- ensures they are developing the higher order skills. Dedicated bookmarks according to level also reinforce the skills used at each level. The high achieving students can read and quiz on the classics with the resulting high point scores being celebrated in assemblies. Many of our students are immigrants and this is a fine system to enable them to navigate the wide choice of reading material available. I only hope we do not go the way of US schools with this push for measurable success meaning points are more important than reading, although I fear we are.
As a 25 year teacher, I have used several different reading programs. My success with AR has been consistent. It is a program that, when used properly by a trained teacher that uses common sense, will definitely stimulate reading for many students. The bottom line is that AR is simply a TOOL to assist teachers in developing readers. It does not replace teaching and instruction; I use it to assist in understanding my students as readers. I want the students to read–I am a life-long lover of reading and I want to see as many of my students do the same as possible. AR is one of the best means of tracking student progress on the market today. And with over 100 students to keep track of, I need all the help I can get. When used correctly, it is a wonderful supplemental reading tool.
What about helping teachers to close reading gaps?How about building self-steem in case of students that never opened a book before,they understood the system,they cared about the whole group achieving a goal and went for that.
I am a very proud Master classroom teacher for two consecutive years,and I have seen so much growth in my student’s scores,vocabulary,writing ,and personality skills.
It is easy to complain,but let us know what would be the other choice if a teacher is only able to offer students give daily instructional hours.
Some comments are very valid,specially from the ones mentioned in this article.
Lidia,
Glad to provide those free, classroom-proven resources for establishing a successful independent reading program: https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/blog/reading/free-independent-reading-resources/
Lidia,
Happy to provide the free, classroom-proven resources for a successful independent reading program that you requested: https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/blog/reading/free-independent-reading-resources/
Great article. Agree whole-heartedly with everything. My son had a horrible experience with AR reading while in elementary school and now my grandchildren are having some of the same experiences. Teachers are becoming lazy in our society today and AR is an easy way to say they are “teaching” our children to read. We need to re-evaluate our reading programs and update what worked yesterday!!
You missed a real important one: most teachers/schools have kids take quizzes without the book. This adds another variable: a readers MEMORY. This leads to kids reading lower than their true instructional ability and is contradictory to all standardized testing in reading comprehension. At the very minimum, students should be encouraged to take the book and look back for answers where they may have forgotten a detail they read.
Jack Jarvis
Fresno, CA
Nice catch. Good readers go back to the text to clarify and verify. Self-monitoring of independent text is so critical to developing flexible, empowered readers. The approach to independent reading I recommend instead of AR involves daily discussions of the reading via student-parent discussions for younger readers and book clubs/literacy circles for older readers. This approach reinforces going in and out of the text. The Common Core approach to reading instruction (close reading, etc.) should provide the death nell to AR, I would think. I do hope we can salvage quality independent reading, however.
This is an interesting article. My daughter presents a counterpoint to the points that were made. When she started 4th grade and we found out about the AR points program we offered her a reward if she could make it to 800 AR points by the end of the year. The goal for 4th graders was 50 points. My daughter was not a big reader prior to this past year. But she was very incented by the reward–if she made her goal she could have two multi-person sleepovers. So she stuck with it and diligently read. We bought her a Kindle and kept it stocked with books. By the end of the year she had over 1,050 points and, now, even with school being over she continues to read voraciously–she had read two books in the past three days.
So, at least in our daughter’s case, the AR point system seems to have worked very well.
I think it reminds me of one of the premises of the book, Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother–about an Asian mother who is extremely strict and force feeds academic excellence down her children’s throats–namely, why you are not good at something it tends to be not very fun, but if you invest the time and effort to become good at something then it becomes much more fun. Even though reading should provide its own intrinsic rewards, for some children external motivators, such as AR point goals, can provide the necessary impetus to develop a love for reading that will be self-sustaining after AR points go away.
I found this website while desperately searching for books my 7th grader might like to read that are on grade level. While AR may not be the greatest program for avid readers, it was amazing for my child. Never one to read independently and who hates to read, her first elementary school used AR – with a rewards system – and she was constantly reading to get the rewards. Her vocabulary and comprehension improved dramatically. Since transferring schools in second grade (and now in 7th grade), her reading level, vocabulary, and comprehension have declined each year. She went from a student who was scoring in the 97th percentile in second grade to one who was scoring in the 78th in 6th grade. Now is when her school starts sorting the kids by ability, and she was placed in one of the lowest English classes because of her vocabulary (this despite the fact that she has managed to pull no less than a 97 percent in any class ever and was invited to take algebra two years early). She has tons of books at home and will only read the first 3-4 pages before declaring that reading is boring. I looked through the above link for a “successful independent reading program” and cracked up – my daughter would never finish anything in such a loosey goosey program. While AR may not be for everyone, it helped my daughter and I truly miss it.
I ran across this while doing some research for a colleague into the ways that AR misuse can harm student morale and independent reading. I agree with others who say that it’s all about HOW AR is used.
As an elementary school student, I loved AR. I still have my first ever AR t-shirt, and I remember my first ever AR book (Stone Soup). The program was used 100% as an incentive. There were no requirements, no class-wide rewards or “only the top ## of scorers get this prize” prizes. Everything was t-shirts, treasure chests, and pizza parties. No teacher pushed you to do AR, and you weren’t required to read at a specific level–the higher point values of books were incentive enough. Some of us took part in friendly rivalry, but there was no real pressure on the student to participate in the program or else let down their teachers/peers. I went back to work at the elementary school I attended for a few years, and that is still how the program works. Students read for fun and take the tests for fun. No requirements, no peer pressure.
However, when I went to middle school, AR became my worst enemy. The school implemented a program that required students to take the STAR test each year, then grouped you into classes with students who performed similarly on the STAR test. We were expected to sit and read something “on or above reading level” (12.9+ for me) in silence for 40 minutes. We were also expected to get a certain number of points each nine weeks, or we would fail the class. That’s right, the WHOLE CLASS was nothing but taking AR tests. I hated it, and learned to hate reading. I RAILED against it, protested it, wrote angry articles in the school paper, and was eventually granted (along with my fellow 12.9+ers) the opportunity to take an extra elective class–2 years later.
My experiences with AR were truly at the opposite ends of the spectrum, and that was entirely due to how the program was used/implemented.
@Debbie Harper-Wingle
Teachers are not becoming lazy, and are not using AR out of a desire to circumvent actual teaching practice. They are often being required to use the program because of bogus claims that students’ reading levels improve due to the program. The current accountability model through which education policy (even at the local level) is dictated exacerbates the problem. Blaming “lazy teachers” for requirements dictated to them and beyond their control is lazy thinking and adds nothing to the serious discourse surrounding largely reform-driven or NCLB-driven policy dictates and their place in our children’s education.
I would not characterize teachers as lazy; however, many teachers (especially newbies and secondary teachers) are given AR or other canned “reading fixes” and don’t have the requisite instructional reading background to understand what kids really need to become skillful readers. Remember that most teacher training programs only include one or two reading methods courses.
Veteran teachers learn to look at other assessment-based reading resources, such as my own Teaching Reading Strategies. Shameless plug from the author of this article!
I am an 8th grade student and completely agree with everything said here. I love to read to read thick books but it recently broke my heart to get no points for reading “Gone With the Wind.” I’m not saying this because I’m mad, it’s because the ar test for this book seemed more like a history test instead of what happened in the book. This reading system has ruined my appreciation for reading and may have probably caused me to turn into a cheater.
My principal heavily monitors our students progress and using it as an evaluation of his/her teachers if student pass goals that he/she has set. At the beginning of the year she had the goals at 45 minutes of reading a day at 85% comprehension for ALL students. I am a veteran teacher and it killed me to spend so much of my day “reading to self” when what the low level readers needed was reading instruction. He/She has lowered the goals now to 30 minutes a day, but for some this is still too high. I don’t have enough time in the day to really teach reading to all the levels in my classroom and still give them enough time to reach their AR goals. I allow and encourage my students to look back for answers in the book. That is what good readers do. I personally think AR could be a good tool for some students to monitor homework, but the stress it creates with my principal hanging over us like big brother is so so so awful. The school climate is one where you are not allowed to disagree with the principal yet the way he/she runs her school is not good for teachers or kids. It is so sad. Kids get stuck at a level all year and never really progress. It is so sad.
How silly of your principal to see AR as a comprehensive reading program. Suggest you give my 13 free reading diagnostic assessments on my http://www.penningtonpublishing.com site and ask him what he would do with the results.
I really disagree with this article. Truthfully, I am incredibly saddened that my district cut AR because it was so expensive. I had used AR to build an (in my opinion) amazing classroom reading program. When teachers, administrators, and districts understand how to use the data from AR to create a more rigorous and challenging reading program, it is amazing what students do! I have seen such growth with my students over the years, and because I took the time to familiarize myself with the program I know how to avoid cheating, challenge my students, teach students how to choose books at their level, monitor their progress to set goals, and it really doesn’t take more than 20 minutes a day out of my instructional time. And YES, I still have time for read aloud and students can take quizzes on the books I read. 90% of the time, students have a much higher listening comprehension so it gives my lower readers the opportunity to be successful on quizzes on books that may be way above their independent reading level. So I hope that people don’t read this article and think there are truly 18 reasons why it should be avoided!
I really dislike this program. My grand daughter feels reading is a chore now. She is not a bad reader but is a slow reader. She never gets her points and cries. It makes her feel stupid. She has to stay in and read on Fridays while other students get to go play. She is a nice little girl. Never gives anyone at school problems. She is liked by other students but this is causing her stress.
I cannot believe the ignorance of these 18 issues.
1.AR continues to grow its library of quizes…100,000 books AND growing. I have never had a student choose a book that was not in the data base…unless it was recently published. And then Ren Learn encourages you to let them know of books that may need quizes.
2. Fiction tends to lend itself to lower readability…teachers and parents to be aware of this. However, after being assessed through STAR, the program gives every student a ZPD…which Vygotsky identified as the fastest way to increase learning and basically says that students should read below,at AND above their independent level. That blogger should do some research because there is nothing bad that can come from reading below your reading level and if her gifted child was reading above grade level, she should know that the most highly regarded literature tends to be 4-5 grade “readability” and that it’s the themes and figurative language…which is not measured by any index…that make literature powerful. She should know that readability is based on sentence length and syllables/sentence. Hemingway was notorious for using short sentences in his writing…yet he is easily recognized as one of the greatest American authors ever. This argument is clearly based on the perception of a parent that feels as if her “advanced reader” needs to read books within this lexile range and not based on text complexity.
3. Seriously? This doesn’t even merit a response.
4. See 2
5. AR often uses rewards as motivation for reluctant readers.
6.If 6=true Than 5 needs to be removed. If 5=true than 6 needs to be removed they cannot coexist.
7.?????? Has anyone looked into this one parent and one teacher complaint? In what situation would this student be pushed to tears…we have already established that AR is based on ZPD which allows for students to choose books 1-2 grade levels +/- independent level. How is that going to frustrate a student?
8. How about this…if you are going to claim to do research, you post concrete data as apposed to generalizations like “a majority” that would not fly in any sort of accredited research program.
9. Not relevant….students have watched To Kill a Mockingbird for decades. Should we stop having students reading this classic?
10. Generalization. A majority of teachers/schools use AR as a supplemental/additional program…not a replacement. If parents have an issue with the way their school, they should bring those concerns to the school and not to some sort of anonymous “concern”
11. Accelerated Reading has been proven successful as a supplemental reading program…an addition to a core program. AR quizes are meant to assess whether a student read and comprehended a text…a text that was read independently without formal instruction….on a student’s free time. This directly counteracts #8,and 5. This argument says that the quizes are too easy. So, how does the program “induce a student mindset that “reading is a chore.” How can your research claim that the assessments are too easy and there are too many opportunities to “cheat”. And then say they there are too many demands on the students.
12. Testing is so easy these days. I see that this page was published in 2010, but you need to pull it down, or update it. This process takes very little time to test with technology today.
13. Jim Trelease: During his time working for the Springfield Daily News, now the Springfield Republican, Trelease began weekly volunteer visits to community classrooms to talk to children about journalism and art as possible careers. Trelease noticed that many of the students in these classrooms did not read much for pleasure, but the students who did most often came from classrooms where teachers read aloud daily and incorporated Sustained Silent Reading (SSR) into the daily class routine. I’m not sure how much credibilityh we should place in a journalist doing educational “research”… His entire study is based upon the concept that students need to be read to. This is a concrete idea, but the AR program would not prevent this in a classroom that uses the program effectively…especially in elementary schools, would never remove the read aloud because of the AR program…in fact, if the teacher understands AR, S/HE would continue a read aloud and encourage students to pay attention so they can pass the test and get the points and invite conversation about the book.
14.”Using AR tends to make reading into an isolated academic task. With each student reading a different book, the social nature of reading is minimized. Research on juvenile and adolescent readers emphasizes the importance of the book communities in developing a love for reading.” Voracious readers actually prefer reading on their own and choosing a novel they enjoy. There is research that supports students reading on groups, but it’s pretty easy to choose a set of novels for a group of students to read together.
15. Schools have a variety of funds to choose from to purchase library books, which a majority of the high interest books are on the AR list anyway. Additionally, the annual cost is approximately $5500 per year…clearly not
enough to cut a $60,000 instructional position from the budget. In Florida, all instructional personnel count for $60,000 against our budget.
16.STAR does not claim to be a standards based assessment…it gauges reading levels on a series of passages with low-level comprehension questions. It’s meant to only establish an independent reading level. In my 4 years of using the program, I have not had any major discrepancies between what STAR reports and my other diagnostic tools have reported. If an initial diagnostic comes back with questionable data, a teacher should know to speak to the student privately and explain that the results do not match what is expected, so I want you to retake it tomorrow. That is true for any assessment.
17. “Using AR tends to limit differentiated instruction. Students are not grouped by ability or skill deficits with AR. The teacher does not spend additional time with remedial students for AR. Students do not receive different instruction according to their abilities. Worse yet, many teachers wrongly perceive AR as differentiated instruction because all of their students are reading books at their own reading levels. Again, there is no reading instruction in AR.” None of this is based on fact. Differentiated instruction is based on 3 factors. 1. Using different levels of materials. 2. Using different assessments(products). 3. Adjusting time for the task. Therefore, using texts that are specifically leveled for students meets the criteria of differentiated instruction.
18. this is outdated research AND was based on AR usage in grades K-3.
Dan,
Thank you for your responses. I re-read my article as I haven’t done so for a few years and don’t see the need to update. The arguments still seem sound to me. I hear your passion for independent reading in your post and I share that same passion, but let’s talk expertise and research.
1. Expertise: I have my MA as a reading specialist and served as a district reading specialist for years. I have published numerous curricula in the reading field for my own Pennington Publishing and for other publishing houses. I served on the California Reading Association Secondary Council and am a frequent presenter at conferences. I’ve also supervised reading programs at both elementary and secondary sites at which some teachers have used Accelerated Reader. So, I do know some of what I speak. Your expertise in the reading field?
2. Research: Here we have some real disagreements.Re: #2 Vygotsky was a psychologist/learning theorist, not a reading specialist. His ZPD was resurrected twenty or so years ago, but frankly, I have not read any recent scholarly articles in the reading field citing this man who died in 1934. Irrespective, no reading specialist I know, nor Vygotsky, has ever advocated children reading below their reading level (whatever we use to determine that quite arbitrary term). It does matter what our students read. As an aside, your assertion that most of literature is at the fourth or fifth grade reading level is incorrect by any measure. Also, your explanation of readability formulae shows some misunderstanding of how the STAR assessment actually works.
Please prove #18 to be incorrect. Research is not outdated until proven so. Search the What Works Clearinghouse and you won’t find any studies proving a statistically significant correlation between AR use and improved measures of reading comprehension with control groups of other independent reading programs and no independent reading programs.
On a personal note, I have no huge ax to grind with AR. I wrote the article to share my experience, and like many publishers, to promote my related products. I sell no competing products, by the way.
I have supervised no-cost independent reading programs at many elementary and secondary sites with excellent success. My take is “Why use AR when you don’t need to?” Stephen Krashen’s Free Voluntary Reading, Donalyn Miller’s The Book Whisperer, and my own independent reading plans (just Google my name + independent reading) offer better independent reading programs at no cost without the collateral damage (See all of the comments to this post) brought about the use and abuse of Accelerated Reader.
What about the children who suffer at the hands of this program? How can my child ever hope to get her name on the classroom display board of 100 pointers when her books are worth 0.5 points. How about we consider the children?
?@Lidia
The only thing I like about AR is the reading levels. It gives a clear idea what books are on grade level without having to use complicated methods. My kids didn’t have to do AR thank goodness and the one who had the option came home in tears because it asked what color someone’s shirt was and she said mommy I didn’t memorize the pictures!!! How utterly stupid!!! I do get frustrated when I come across a great book and it isn’t an AR book so I don’t know the reading level etc.
@Michael I agree. My daughter started taking on huge novels to score major AR points, when she had the large rewards dangled in front of her. The teeny 3 book weekly goal was meaningless… she’d pick three .5 pt easy books. But with the big reward, she started reading 3-4 chapter books a week.
As a school librarian who is also a lead admin for the AR scheme, I disagree wholeheartedly with many of your points. The incentives that the AR scheme offers in ways of points, prizes etc are very useful in encouraging struggling and reluctant readers to have a go. We are finding that these rewards become less and less important as their confidence in reading grows, and they begin to enjoy reading for itself. I don’t think extrinsic rewards necessarily replace intrinsic rewards. In fact, many able and voracious readers are now being rewarded for their independent reading. We differentiate the way we reward students in order to cater for different readers; word counts celebrate the students reading longer novels whereas number of books read celebrates the students reading lower ability, shorter books. The points are also relative to book level and length, so students are rewarded equally throughout the scheme. We have reading lessons every week where students come to the library and read for an hour. For many students this is a highly enjoyable hour and teaches them that reading for pleasure is important. We also try to listen to every student read in this hour so we can keep track of their ability. For many students this is the only opportunity to read with an adult, and many are not encouraged to read at home. It is all very well for you to say that reading at home would be an alternative but this simply isn’t the case for many disadvantaged students. There are always at least 3 members of staff in these lessons and we monitor which books students are reading, making sure they are challenging themselves but also using the ZPD as a guide – if they are desperate to read a certain book outside of their ZPD we encourage them to do so. You accused teachers of becoming lazy, but you have taken no consideration whatsoever of how schools choose to implement these kinds of schemes.
I am a school librarian, and am sickened by the emphasis on “levels” and “points” that pervades my school. (Though, in our case, it is Reading Counts and not Accelerated Reader). Many children are so fixated on the level-related sticker on the spine of the book that they pay little or no attention to the book itself. In spite of my efforts to give the children free choice in selecting at least some of their books, there are teachers who forbid them to get anything that isn’t “on their level” (by which is meant the Lexile(r) level). This means that a child who is enjoying, for example, the Magic Tree House books can read only some of them, because they are not all on the same “level.” It leads to children coming back to the library to turn in books they have just checked out because because they aren’t “on their level” or have no tests. One boy brought back a book he had taken home and said his mother had told him to turn it in because he wouldn’t get any points for it. Another girl said that seeing My Weird School books make her sad, because she used to love reading them but is forbidden by her teacher to get them because they are “below her level.” Children who are fascinated by particular subjects and therefore could probably get a great deal of information out of difficult books about those subjects are told that they can’t get them because of their “levels” or because they have no tests. We are not teaching the children to be independent readers, able to open a book and decide whether it suits their needs, but rather turning them into mindless little drones who do nothing but look for a “level” which neither they nor, probably, their teachers, even understand. “Did you enjoy that book?” I ask, with an eye to talking about what kinds of books a child likes so I can steer him toward some he might enjoy. “I got two points!” is the irrelevant answer. Children bring books up to check out and rather than saying things like, “Wow, this looks like a good book because I love dogs” or “I know this is a good author,” I hear, “It’s got five points!” “I’m going to get a skinny chapter book so I can finish it fast and get a point.”
Goodness only knows what this silly program is costing in money every year, money that could be spent on more books on different topics. Worse, it’s costing the children a love of reading for its own sake and their independent decision-making ability.
@Mark Pennington Good readers also re-read books they enjoyed; but with AR or RC, why bother? After all, you won’t get points for reading the same book. I was telling the children in the library that a good book is worth reading over and over. Their teacher (first grade) broke in to tell me proudly that the children have to read their books three times before taking the tests. Then, if a child doesn’t pass the test, he must take the book home and read it again and again until he does pass the test.
Seriously.
Accelerated Reader works if you are a vigilant teacher who maximises student interest areas using AR reading levels as a “ball park” and their own observation of the way each child is reading as a necessary component to encouraging proficiency. Maximum motivation is central, so monitoring for a degree of challenge but high interest is paramount. Resource lists you develop really help with the reluctant readers. At the higher end, adult fiction tends to be at the 6.5 level, so the AR reading level becomes meaningless and restricting; proficient readers need to be free to draw on classical and quality fiction that is age appropriate and will develop vocabulary. That means going beyond AR and using other resource lists.
The structure AR offers is very valuable as a monitoring tool as well as a means to communicate with parents. I used it for 14 years, had great results and loved it.
My son is being punished for failing AR tests. He is given an automatic D on his book report if he doesn’t pass the AR test. Even if his book report is given an ‘A’, he is automatically dropped down to a D. Not only has AR discouraged his reading, but now he despises doing book reports. Does anyone know my rights as a parent regarding AR?
Although I find much to be troubling about the AR program, the teacher is certainly misusing the program as a punitive carrot.
Wyoming County in WV forces AR on everyone (Except Pre-K and High School) Its graded on everyone with A B C D and F on grade cards. If you don’t pass AR, You will fail the grade level. I think that the program should be optional and not forced.
@Mark Pennington
My problem with AR is similar to the Common Core Lexile issue and is referenced in arguments #2 and #4 of your article. How Avi’s “Nothing But the Truth” and Lee’s “To Kill a Mockingbird”, just two examples of many, are rated as low as they are is a mystery to me. Both books are award winners and involve complex themes. Avi’s book is on a 3.6 AR level, and Lee’s is in the 800 lexile band. Avi’s 3.6 level does not reflect the skill involved in reading a documentary style, narrator-less novel, and Lee’s 800 lexile is not reflective of the mature theme of the novel, aside from the fact that it was written for adults. Determining reading appropriateness by computer-generated algorithms and “teaching” through computer quizzes is fodder for the next best-selling dystopian YA novel (or by AR/lexile standards, perhaps grade 3).
@Tonya I’m not sure how the program is being implemented, but the reference to the “100-pointers” makes no sense to me. AR is an individualized program. One student may meet his or her goal with 10 points in a given time frame while another may need 20 points. It all depends on each individual student’s reading ability. If I read at a lower level than you, my books may each count for fewer points, but my overall goal will be lower. If you read at a higher level, your goal may be higher but each of your books is worth more points. Nothing is more individualized than AR! What should be on the chart is each student’s percentage of goal achieved, not points.
I am a University Professor who recently moved the family across the country and my daughters are now in a school with AR reading. My oldest daughter went from a straight A student in a pre-ivy league school that absolutely LOVED reading to completely refusing to read!! In fact, she used to love reading so much that I would catch her reading all night long! Now we are fighting with her to get her to read even the most simple book – and she will state that “she hates reading now”!!! In my opinion AR reading has done irreparable damage to my daughter’s sense of wonder and excitement over reading! In fact, I would absolutely avoid ANY school that uses the AR reading system! My daughter tested grades above her class at the beginning of this school year….but after several months of the AR reading program she is now tests well below her class level!! The entire system is very counter productive!!! I can not believe that this system was “sold” to so many schools as a good way to test/teach reading!! Someone has definitely been sold a “bill of goods”!!! As a Professor, I will tell you that this program will absolutely kill your child’s sense of excitement for reading and as a parent, I will passionately fight this system with every fiber in my being!!
So sorry for your daughter. Here’s hoping she re-discovers her love of reading.
Wondering if there are any longer term looks at AR…I am a community college librarian who regularly deals with students who aren’t readers. And yes, the schools in our county are very into AR programs, improperly managed as defined by professionals on both sides of the argument. And at the end of day, I feel sorry for students who have no idea how relaxing, how much fun, how awesome reading for pleasure can be.
Would be interesting to see a longitudnal study on reader attitudes for those who have had, say, 3-5 years of AR and those who have not. Tough to control the variables, however.
The point is, as you the librarian know, we can develop solid, no cost independent reading programs that work.
How does AR compare with the Scholastic Reading Counts program? That is what my school uses, and they seem very similar. Right now my principal is considering getting rid of the Reading Counts program due to cost, and I’m excited at the prospect of building my own program that will intrinsically motivate my students and hold them accountable for choosing a book they enjoy and sticking with it. Thank you for sharing your research, Mark. I am excited do delve deeper into it this summer and to share ideas that will work with other teachers in my building.
You can do it! Your own program will be so much effective.
For those of you who are educators screaming at the author of this post for offending you and your use of AR, perhaps you should just take a second and listen. I believe this to be constructive feedback that should be used to help improve the educational experience of every child in a district using an AR program. There are some common themes here. As a parent of 3rd and 5th grade students that recently transferred from a very good school to a mediocre district in another state, I can say successful AR most definitely depends on the way it is projected on the students. We are having a terrible experience. I have two over-achieving students as demonstrated by multiple factors. My kids loved reading two years ago when we moved, since their participation in an AR program, their interest in reading has declined, they view it as a chore and they stress constantly about the level of their books and whether they will make the ‘AR Mystery trip’ or not. My daughter has come home crying for the past three weeks worried if she will make the trip or not. They are not reading for enjoyment, infact, since we moved they dispise it. I suppose the success of the program depends on how you define success. For me, it is not about levels or tests or whether they make a trip that is supposed to be incentive. (But clearly is not incentive because of the pressure the kids feel to make it) it is simply whether they are inclined to pick up a book, any book regardless of ‘level’ or capacity and simply sit down and read. I can undoubtedly say mine will not. Two years ago, yes. I believe AR has failed my children, put undue stress on them and is a distraction from their education. Too much emphasis is placed on this program in our district and I feel strongly that it is taking away from other areas. And shame on the educators who aren’t willing to listen to the constructive criticism and foolishly take these comments personally.
Are causes too much strees.
I meant accelerated reader
I am beginning a fight to have AR changed at my child’s school because it is being handled inappropriately. I am so angry at this moment. Let me shed some light. My daughter, in 3rd grade, has learning disabilities. She has never made her AR goal because she spends her time doing her work or her homework. She works her tail off to make her grade. No extra time is left for AR. Our school offers parties and trips for those that meets their AR goal. Yes, your read that correctly. Parties and trips!! This quarter, they get to go on a Dolphin Cruise. Imagine that? Now how appropriate is it for all those children with disabilities that are pulled out of class for extra resources or that struggle so to make grades and never meet the AR goal to sit at school and watch the other children go off on these parties and excursions for AR? Wouldn’t you hate AR?
How crazy! Of course, that insanity is not the fault of AR but it does stem from any incentives-based system gone awry. Contact the local chapter of the ACLU and mention that the application of the program is in violation of the American Disabilities Act. A quick letter should do the trick.
Very well written article. I’m a retired educator and a grandmother. My granddaughters are now in school are I’m learning more about the AR program since it hadn’t been used when my own children were in school. My oldest granddaughter just finished second grade and loves to read. Her reading comprehension is great. She reads chapter books. She recently had a lovely conversation with someone about Anne of Green Gables. However, she doesn’t take the quizzes. At the end of the year parent/teacher conference her parents were told that when she goes into third grade she HAS to take the quizzes because it’ll be part of her grade. Now my question is, if AR is designed to encourage reading for pleasure and to improve reading comprehension why would kids like my granddaughter have to be graded on the books she reads? She already loves reading and her comprehension is great. She’s just not a quiz taker. If she enjoyed reading a book and can discuss it with someone she just met, I’d say she most likely comprehended the story. But the quiz might show the opposite (it might not since she just doesn’t take quizzes, just busy-work time wasters in her opinion). Why can’t a teacher say “I know she loves to read and understands what she reads so she really doesn’t need AR” and be done with it? What a lot of people tend to forget is a test is really a tool for the teacher so that he can see where the students are lacking understanding and need more instruction. If a student fails to get an 80% on her AR tests does the teacher spend more time teaching reading comprehension? Probably not. Now that I’m retired I’ve been doing some substituting and the more I learn about AR and how it’s implemented in different schools, the less I like it.
Cogent comment about the purpose of tests. The AR tests do not inform instruction. The tests in my Teaching Reading Strategies program include 13 diagnostic assessments with corresponding workshops and individualized worksheets and formative assessments to specifically inform instruction.
I’ve asked to see the test results all year because my daughter keeps failing the quizzes even though we read the book together and ask questions. She knows the books .. I dont know why she isn’t doing well on quizzes. The school tells me they cannot print tests to send home. How can they validate her grade then? How can I help pinpoint problems areas? I’m requesting to opt-out next year.