Davidian 1

Richard Davidian

Dr. Jan Rieman

English 1103

November 10, 2010

All Books, All Quizzes; All Worth It?

Moving from school to school can be a trying experience. Changes like that often lead to

new standards and procedures. When I started to attend a different school system, I was

introduced to the Accelerated Reader program. The Accelerated Reader program, used in

grades Kindergarten through twelve, is a supplementary reading program in which students

select a book to read and then take a computerized quiz on the book. The purpose is to monitor

how well students are advancing in their reading skills (What Works Clearinghouse 1). Looking

back at all of the books, quizzes, and time put into meet requirements of the program, I began to

question its effectiveness. Is implementing the Accelerated Reader program a wise course of

action for schools to take? This can be deduced by taking a look at the pros and cons of the

structured literary curriculum.

There are many valuable aspects of using Accelerated Reader. The whole program

itself costs anywhere between $2,000 to $10,000 for a whole school, depending on school size

and implemented components (WWC 3). It is safe to conclude that for a moderately populated

school with an average amount of included program features, the AR program would not be so

expensive as a whole. Roger Johnson, a distinguished author who holds a Ph.D in psychology,

wrote that approximately one out of every three school in the United States has adopted the

program (88). Considering that statistic, it is hard to ignore the possibility of the program being

hugely beneficial. In fact, based on a study of students in an urban, inner-city setting, students
 Davidian 2

had gains in reading skill from .73 to 2.24 years on the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test

(91). Gail Thompson et al., professors who teach at a university in California, also have tales of

success. “In a study at a private K-8 Catholic school in Brooklyn, the librarian noticed increased

library circulation when the school began using AR” (551). Tenth-grade students in Florida were

also documented to have positive results from AR. Their grades on reading portions of

standardized tests increased by 4% to 7% (552). Obviously, with clear evidence of participants in

the program gaining skills in reading, a crucially positive aspect of the program is clear; it works.

It does what it is designed to do, which is to track and improve the reading levels of students, and

in some cases motivate students to read more recreationally. I vividly remember feeling

accomplished after completing a book and its corresponding quiz. I’m sure that I would lack

some reading skills that I have today had I not taken part in the program. At least I think I am

sure.

According to me, having success in ‘some cases’ is not satisfactory. That is why this

section of negative outcomes of the AR program may have a little more gravity. Not all studies

have shown that the AR program really works. According to the What Works Clearinghouse, a

trusted source of scientific evidence for what works in education, there were two eligible studies

that met evidential standards. “Based on the two studies, the WWC found no discernible effects

in reading fluency and comprehension for adolescent learners” (5). One may think that just a

couple cases of sub-par results cannot prove anything against the bulletproof outcomes of the AR

program. After digging a little deeper, I found that there are many less-than-satisfactory features

on the program. Participants in focus groups had four major complaints. The amount of reading

required is unrealistic, students do not like being forced to read, the book selections are

displeasing, and course grades are tied to performance on AR quizzes (Thompson 554). Being a
 Davidian 3

student who was forced to take part in the AR program, I can agree. I distinctly remember

numerous times when the librarian in middle school would not allow me to check out a certain

book because its reading level was not in my “reading zone.” My class grades were sometimes

diminished by poor performance on reading quizzes. This type of forced academic literary

assignments discouraged me from doing other reading. Sara Luck, an elementary school teacher,

evaluated ten different studies of middle schools across three districts regarding the AR program.

The studies assessed the effect that Accelerated Reader has on the amount of recreational

reading that students do. It was observed that the program did not hold any positive effects on

motivation to read, and in 2 districts, the effects were actually negative (6). That’s right, some

students had much less willingness to read recreationally as they were using the AR program.

From experience, I can vouch for this result. After all of the readings that were required to be

completed in school, I had little motivation left to read books on my own. I was under the

impression that my work had already been cut out for me.

I will bring into focus one example from my personal life. Throughout the time I was a

part of the AR program, I was friends with a boy named Nicholas Salvador. English was his

second language, although he spoke it fluently. Nicholas always accumulated some massive

amount of Accelerated Reader points from completing numerous book quizzes. He also read a

plethora of books unrelated to the program. His love for reading showed the most positive effect

of the AR program. He met the goals that were set, and went beyond. He acquired reading skills

far beyond any other students. So how was he so positively impacted by Accelerated Reader? I

believe that the answer is because he simply found a love for reading.

I am slightly displeased to not be able to conclude this essay with a solid answer to my

question based on my compiled research. Does the Accelerated Reader program have a positive
 Davidian 4

effect on students? It all depends on the students’ attitudes. Those who disagree with the

requirements of the program and those who severely lack motivation to read will have no

beneficial outcomes of participating in the program. Students who read joyfully and are

enthusiastic about the program with likely have flourishing reading skills. Some kids who only

run as far as the finish line, such as myself, have few positive outcomes form the program. The

Accelerated Reader program works much like a garden; if more seeds are planted, then more

crops will grow. If more effort is made to participate in the program, then more literary prowess

will be acquired.

Works Cited
 Davidian 5

Johnson, Roger A. "The Effects of the Accelerated Reader Program on the Reading

Comprehension of Pupils in Grades Three, Four, and Five." Reading Matrix 3.3

(2003): 87-96. www.readingmatrix.com. Web. 4 Nov. 2010.

Luck, Sara A. "Accelerated Reader: The Controversy Continues--A Literature Review of the

Effectiveness of Accelerated Reader in Increasing Reading Achievement and Student

Motivation." Illinois Reading Council Journal 38.2 (2010): 3-9. Web. 5 Oct. 2010.

Thompson, Gail, Marga Madhuri, and Deborah Taylor. “How the Accelerated Read Program Can

Become Counterproductive for High School Students.” Journal of Adolescent &

Adult Literacy 51.7 (2008): 550-560. Web. 6 Oct. 2010

What Works Clearinghouse, (ED). "Accelerated Reader[TM]. What Works Clearinghouse

Intervention Report." What Works Clearinghouse (2010): Web. 4 Nov. 2010.