Warren T.

Jackson Elementary
1st Grade Accelerated Reader Program

Program Evaluation
Group 2: Katie Ingram,
TaMisha Kimble, and Stephanie Stone

ITEC 8435
Fall 2009
Georgia Southern University

1
 Table of Contents
Executive Summary………………………………………………………………… 3

Introduction …………………………………………………………………………. 5

Focus of the Evaluation ……………………………………………………………. 7

Brief Overview of Evaluation Plan and Procedures …………………………….. 10

Presentation of Evaluation Results ……………………………………………….. 11

Conclusions and Recommendations …………………………………………...… 15

Appendices …………………………………………………………………………...18

2
 Executive Summary
This evaluation is to show that the Accelerated Reader Program is effective for all

students that participate in the program. Accelerated Reader is the most successful

and most popular reading program around. The students evaluated for this report are

first grade students. This report will inform you on how the program works. There is

detailed information to inform you on when and where students will have the opportunity

to take the quizzes. There are computers set up in each class with the adequate

software for students to take quizzes. Students will have the opportunity to take quizzes

throughout the day and they may access the software from their homes. This report will

show through STAR reading pre and post tests how AR improves students desire to

read, in turn, increasing their reading comprehension level.

There were several data sources used to help guide this evaluation. Parents were

surveyed before the evaluation and at the conclusion of this evaluation to see if they

have noticed in changes in their child’s reading habits and whether there is any

improvement. Data was also collected from AR goal history report. This report gives

goals for each student. The points earned by the student, their percentages accrued

and goal percentages are calculated on the report. Data from the STAR reading

assessment are used to help with data collection. Each student should show

improvement as far as reading ability and comprehension. This information can be

monitored by individual testing and teacher monitoring. Teachers should have

documentation of student’s improvements due to the AR program.

3
The evaluation findings prove that the program is working. There is data to show that

the students participating in the program are making great progress toward their goal.

By the end of the school year each student should make major progress in fluency and

comprehension due to the AR program. Students should develop lifelong reading

habits that will help them succeed in every subject area.

4
 Introduction
This report is focusing on first grade students during the 2009-2010 school year.  The

report will show that the AR program is working to help increase their fluency and

comprehension levels.  These students should show an increase in reading abilities,

vocabulary knowledge, comprehension levels, and that reading helps learners in all

domains.  These students are encouraged to read more. Teachers will find different

ways to monitor whether or not the students are doing what is required. In effort to

achieve No Child Left Behind schools across America feel it is necessary to use AR to

help boost student achievement. The administration, the board of education, teachers,

parents, and students are combining to increase students reading levels. Everyone

involved understands that reading makes students lifelong learners. This report is

aimed to show that the program is effective and it works. The students are achieving

their goals and their grades are increasing.  Each first grade teacher has at least six

working computers in their class to make the quizzes accessible for all students.  The

data collected is added to the report to help confirm accuracy. 

Purpose of the Evaluation

The purpose of this evaluation is to show that the AR program is effective for all

students that are using the program. This report will show that the program increases

students desire to read, increases students comprehension of reading materials, helps

with fluency, motivate students to read whether at school or not, and produce lifelong

readers.

5
Audience for the Evaluation Report

This report is designed to for the use of the stakeholders which may include the

members of the board of education, principals of the school, the teachers, and the

media specialist. The report will also benefit the parents, students, and even the

program designers.

Limitations to the Evaluation

The limitations on this evaluation are very limited. The fact that the evaluation was

done quickly and could have been extended for a few more days would be considered a

major limitation. The time frame was short, but we feel the evaluation is adequate.

There are also some students that did not fully participate in the program. The fact that

some students and some parents did not fully do their parts could deter this evaluation. 

Overview of Report Contents

The information in this report is as accurate as possible.  This information is up-to-date

and is on file in this school system.  The data is accessible to administrators and

teachers.  The parents and students have a copy or can obtain a copy of the data for

their knowledge.  The content of this report has been revised and data has been

checked multiple times to make sure the information is reported accurately. 

The stakeholders are pleased with the program. The teachers and parents can see

positive results from each child that reads at least one book a week. The students are

6
motivated to set goals to help motivate them on how many points they will receive and

move up from there. The higher level the book, the more points students receive.

The AR program used by these students is Renaissance Learning which personalizes

reading practice based on student reading levels. This program is a little pricier than

some of the other programs, but it pays for itself. The quizzes are generated with

questions based on the books content and results can be seen through individual

student diagnostic reports.

7
 Focus of the Evaluation
The Accelerated Reader is a progress-monitoring system that promotes guided

independent reading practice. Accelerated Reader provides quick and accurate

assessments of whether students have read and understood trade books they have

selected and textbook passages that have been assigned to them. It assigns point

values for each AR Reading Practice Quiz taken. Point values are a factor of book level

and performance on quizzes. Points accumulate during the school year and are a way

to monitor students’ reading volume. The system tracks student performance on AR

quizzes over time.

This evaluation will investigate the question: How is student participation in the

Accelerated Reader Program related to growth in the comprehension in first grade

students? The Accelerated Reader program in this first grade class is administered

throughout the day. Students have time during the day to take tests on AR books they

read at home and school. Each classroom has six student computers which are used

for taking Accelerated Reader tests. Students may only take tests at school but parents

may log in at any time to monitor their progress. Conducting this evaluation will help

teachers, media specialists, parents, and administrators decide if this program is

effective and how to steer it in a more productive direction if necessary.

In the beginning of the year students take the Star Test. The STAR Reading computer-

adaptive reading tests and database is an achievement level progress-monitoring

assessment that provides teachers with accurate reading scores for students in grades

8
K-12 in a matter of ten minutes. The individualized results of the STAR Test are taken

into account when students are assigned book levels and goals for point earnings.

The STAR test is administered in August, December, and May.

9
 Brief Overview of Evaluation
In order to evaluate the effect of First Grade Accelerated Reader participation and

increased reading comprehension, information was obtained from student AR reports

and STAR tests.

In order to determine if students are effectively using the Accelerated Reader program,

quantitative data was collected from the class AR diagnostic reports. The diagnostic

report summarizes student performance on Reading Practice quizzes, shows progress

towards goals and identifies possible problems. Students should earn at least 1.5

points with an 85% or greater average each week. The pre and post STAR test scores

reflect the positive effect that AR has on student reading comprehension.

The STAR pre test data was reviewed to document the students reading levels

(Appendix A). The data descriptors allows teachers, administrators, and media

specialists to determine what levels they should be reading on, grade equivalence,

reading ability compared to others of the same grade level, instructional reading level,

and reading fluency (Appendix B). The Accelerated Reader goal report is based on the

STAR pre test (Appendix C). The STAR post tests show that all students reading levels

have increased since pre test (Appendix D). In all data, 21 first graders reading levels

were assessed.

10
 Presentation of Evaluation Results

Students were given a pre test using the STAR system prior to beginning the

Accelerated Reader (AR) program.

STAR Pre-Test Data

Student Test GP SS GE PR PR NCE IRL ORF

Date Level
1 8/18/09 1.00 306 2.6 94 91-96 82.7 2.6 83
2 8/18/09 1.00 94 1.3 65 39-72 58.1 PP 27
3 8/18/09 1.00 321 2.7 95 92-97 84.6 2.7 86
4 8/18/09 1.00 160 1.7 79 73-85 67.0 1.0 43
5 8/18/09 1.00 64 0.6 20 10-34 32.3 PP 9
6 8/18/09 1.00 67 0.7 29 15-41 38.3 PP 12
7 8/18/09 1.00 276 2.4 92 88-95 79.6 2.3 75
8 8/18/09 1.00 42 0.0 1 1-3 1.0 PP 0
9 8/18/09 1.00 239 2.2 89 85-92 75.8 1.9 65
10 8/18/09 1.00 131 1.5 74 67-80 63.5 P 37
11 8/18/09 1.00 77 0.9 49 39-56 49.5 PP 19
12 8/18/09 1.00 237 2.2 89 85-92 75.8 1.8 64
13 8/18/09 1.00 59 0.4 10 3-24 23.0 PP 5
14 8/18/09 1.00 60 0.4 10 3-26 23.0 PP 6
15 8/18/09 1.00 69 0.8 34 20-45 41.3 PP 13
16 8/18/09 1.00 68 0.7 0 0-0 0.0 PP 12
17 8/18/09 1.00 252 2.3 90 85-94 77.0 2.0 68
18 8/18/09 1.00 64 0.6 20 10-34 32.3 PP 9
19 8/18/09 1.00 62 0.5 15 6-29 28.2 PP 8
20 8/18/09 1.00 137 1.7 81 75-86 68.5 1.1 47
21 8/18/09 1.00 87 1.2 60 43-68 55.3 PP 25

Students are then given an individual goal for the AR program based upon their scores

from the STAR test. This goal is appropriate for each individual student for them to be

successful at their independent reading level. The AR program then keeps track of their

goal and points earned toward their goal. If students meet at least 50% of their goal,

they are considered to be effectively participating in the AR program. 

11
Goal Report 

 Studen Points Points % of

t Goal Earned Goal
1 72.0 27.2 37.8
2 54.0 52.3 96.9
3 73.0 81.4 111.5
4 58.0 22.1 38.1
5 50.0 14.2 28.4
6 50.0 19.6 39.2
7 68.0 33.3 49.0
8 50.0 9.9 19.8
9 66.0 44.4 67.3
10 56.0 62.8 112.1
11 50.0 23.4 46.8
12 66.0 32.3 48.9
13 50.0 20.3 40.6
14 50.0 12.3 24.6
15 50.0 15.9 27.6
16 50.0 9.8 19.6
17 67.0 27.1 40.4
18 50.0 27.6 55.2
19 50.0 33.7 67.4
20 58.0 33.4 57.5
21 53.0 29.4 55.5

* Eight out of 21 students (38%) are considered to be effectively using the AR program.

12
After a period of approximately four months, students are given another test, post test,

using the STAR system. Scores from the pre test and post test are then compared to

see if there has been any growth in the students’ reading levels and whether or not their

goals will be increased for the AR program.

STAR Post-Test Data

 Studen Test GP SS GE PR PR NCE IRL ORF

t Date Level
1 12/1/09 1.30 434 3.7 98 97-99 93.3 3.6 142
2 12/1/09 1.30 353 3.0 95 91-97 84.6 3.0 92
3 12/1/09 1.30 392 3.4 97 95-98 89.6 3.3 108
4 12/1/09 1.30 227 2.1 83 77-87 70.1 1.7 62
5 12/1/09 1.30 92 1.3 52 14-61 51.1 PP 9
6 12/1/09 1.30 105 1.4 58 25-65 54.2 PP 12
7 12/1/09 1.30 321 2.7 93 90-95 81.1 2.7 86
8 12/1/09 1.30 79 0.9 33 20-43 40.7 PP 0
9 12/1/09 1.30 339 2.8 94 91-97 82.7 2.9 89
10 12/1/09 1.30 253 2.3 86 81-91 72.8 2.0 69
11 12/1/09 1.30 254 2.3 87 81-91 73.7 2.0 69
12 12/1/09 1.30 290 2.5 91 86-94 78.2 2.4 80
13 12/1/09 1.30 112 1.5 60 35-67 55.3 PP 32
14 12/1/09 1.30 114 1.5 61 38-67 55.9 PP 33
15 12/1/09 1.30 82 1.0 38 25-49 43.6 PP 22
16 12/1/09 1.30 70 0.8 14 7-25 27.2 PP 14
17 12/1/09 1.30 296 2.6 91 86-94 78.2 2.5 81
18 12/1/09 1.30 124 1.5 64 51-71 57.5 PP 35
19 12/1/09 1.30 103 1.4 59 24-65 54.8 PP 30
20 12/1/09 1.30 225 2.1 83 76-87 70.1 1.7 61
21 12/1/09 1.30 87 1.2 60 43-68 55.3 PP 25

13
 Summary

   GP SS GE PR NCE IRL ORF

 
Pretest 0.95 138 1.6 55 52.8 P 34
Mean
Posttes 1.30 209 2.0 77 65.3 1.5 58
t Mean
Change +0.35 +71 +0.4 +22 +12.5 +1.2 +24

 *An examination of the summary report concludes a positive trend in all reading areas
is shown between the pre-test and post-test for all 21 students.

Stakeholder Perceptions

Stakeholders in this evaluation have shown an overwhelming positive response to the

AR program.  When interviewed, stakeholders in all areas, from administration to

parents, had positive comments about the AR program.  They have seen the positive

trends in all reading areas to include vocabulary, comprehension, reading levels,

stamina, and fluency, and conclude that the AR program is working effectively when all

students participate to the fullest extent of the program.  The only negative comments

came from teachers who feel that due to the limited number of computers in the

classroom as well as time restraints during the day can cause some students to not use

the program to its maximum potential. 

14
 Conclusion and Recommendations

Based upon the evaluation data of the effectiveness of the AR program on all students,

this evaluation study concludes:

Program Strengths:

·      Vocabulary increases

·      Reading levels increase

·      Fluency levels in reading increase

·      Reading comprehension is increased

·      Stamina is increased

Program Weaknesses:

·      Time restraints during the day

·      Lack of computers available

·      Some students do not fully participate in the program

Recommendations:

·     Set a specific testing time in daily schedule

·     Sign up for a designated time to take tests in the computer lab or media

center (if available)

·     Utilize parent volunteers to help with “traffic flow” on and off computers for

tests

15
 ·     Allow students extra time when finished with work to take a test

·     Utilize buddy system to help motivate students who are not fully

participating

·     Create a reward system to motivate students who are not fully

participating

Therefore, it is the recommendation of the evaluation study that the positive impact and

effectiveness of the AR program on all students shows cause to continue the use of the

program in schools that currently use it.  If possible, the effectiveness would be

increased if students who were not fully participating be able to have a buddy to help

remind them to read and take a test.  It may also be beneficial to incorporate some sort

of reward system in order to motivate students to fully participate.  It is also

recommended that a set time in daily schedules may help to more students to

participate.  In conjunction, a set time in a computer lab or media center, if possible,

where there are more computers to access may also help in participation levels. 

Finally, it is recommended that possible use of parent volunteers to help with the flow of

“traffic” on and off the computers may allow for more timely use and afford more

students the opportunity to take full advantage of the AR program.

16
 References

Renaissance Learning. 2009.Renaissance learning. Retrieved December 2, 2009 from

https://hosted115.renlearn.com/51385/.

17
 Appendix A

STAR Pre-Test Data

 Studen Test GP SS GE PR PR NCE IRL ORF

t Date Level
1 8/18/09 1.00 306 2.6 94 91-96 82.7 2.6 83
2 8/18/09 1.00 94 1.3 65 39-72 58.1 PP 27
3 8/18/09 1.00 321 2.7 95 92-97 84.6 2.7 86
4 8/18/09 1.00 160 1.7 79 73-85 67.0 1.0 43
5 8/18/09 1.00 64 0.6 20 10-34 32.3 PP 9
6 8/18/09 1.00 67 0.7 29 15-41 38.3 PP 12
7 8/18/09 1.00 276 2.4 92 88-95 79.6 2.3 75
8 8/18/09 1.00 42 0.0 1 1-3 1.0 PP 0
9 8/18/09 1.00 239 2.2 89 85-92 75.8 1.9 65
10 8/18/09 1.00 131 1.5 74 67-80 63.5 P 37
11 8/18/09 1.00 77 0.9 49 39-56 49.5 PP 19
12 8/18/09 1.00 237 2.2 89 85-92 75.8 1.8 64
13 8/18/09 1.00 59 0.4 10 3-24 23.0 PP 5
14 8/18/09 1.00 60 0.4 10 3-26 23.0 PP 6
15 8/18/09 1.00 69 0.8 34 20-45 41.3 PP 13
16 8/18/09 1.00 68 0.7 0 0-0 0.0 PP 12
17 8/18/09 1.00 252 2.3 90 85-94 77.0 2.0 68
18 8/18/09 1.00 64 0.6 20 10-34 32.3 PP 9
19 8/18/09 1.00 62 0.5 15 6-29 28.2 PP 8
20 8/18/09 1.00 137 1.7 81 75-86 68.5 1.1 47
21 8/18/09 1.00 87 1.2 60 43-68 55.3 PP 25

18
 Appendix B
Definitions
March 2009 Reproducible Form © 2009 Renaissance Learning, Inc. Page 1 of 2

STAR Reading scores represent how students performed on the test compared with the
performance of a nationally representative sample of students, called the norms group.
These scores present a snapshot of achievement at a specific point in time. As with any
test, it is important to remember that many factors can affect a student’s test scores.
STAR Reading test scores give only one picture of how a student is doing in school.

Scaled score (SS) is useful for comparing student performance over time and across
grades. A scaled score is calculated based on the difficulty of questions and the number
of correct responses. Because the same range is used for all students, scaled scores
can be used to compare student performance across grade levels. STAR Reading
scaled scores range from 0 to 1400. All norm-referenced scores are derived from the
scaled score.

Percentile rank (PR) is a norm-referenced score that provides a measure of a student’s

reading ability compared to other students in the same grade nationally. The percentile
rank score, which ranges from 1 to 99, indicates the percentage of other students
nationally who obtained scores equal to or lower than the score of a particular student.
For example, a student with a percentile rank score of 85 performed as well as or better
than 85 percent of other students in the same grade.

Percentile rank range (PR Range) indicates the statistical variability in a student’s
percentile rank score. For example, a student with a percentile rank range of 32–59 is
likely to score within that range if the STAR Reading test is taken again within a short
time (i.e., four to six weeks).

Normal curve equivalent (NCE) is a norm-referenced score that is similar to percentile

rank, but is based on an equal interval scale. This means the difference between any
two successive scores on the NCE scale has the same meaning throughout the scale.
NCEs are useful in making comparisons between different achievement tests and for
statistical computations—for example, determining an average score for a group of
students. NCE scores range from 1 to 99 and are mostly used for research.

Grade equivalent (GE) is a norm-referenced score that represents how a student’s test
performance compares with other students nationally. For example, a fifth-grade
student with a GE score of 7.6 performed as well as a typical seventh-grader after the
sixth month of the school year. This score doesn’t necessarily mean that the student is
capable of reading seventh-grade material—it only indicates that the student’s reading
skills are well above average for the fifth grade.

19
Grade placement (GP) is a numeric representation of a student’s grade level, based on
the specific month in which a student takes a STAR Reading test. STAR Reading
considers the standard school year to run from September through June and assigns
increment values of 0.0 through 0.9 to these months. The software automatically
assigns grade placements using a student’s grade level and the month in which a STAR
Reading test was taken. GP is important because PR and NCE values are based not
only on the Scaled Score but also on the grade placement of the student at the time of
the test.

Instructional reading level (IRL) is a criterion-referenced score that indicates the

highest reading level at which a student is at least 80 percent proficient at recognizing
words and understanding material with instructional assistance. For example, a
seventh-grade student with a score of 8.0 reads eighth-grade words with 80 percent
accuracy or better. IRL scores are Pre-Primer (PP), Primer (P), grades 1.0 through
12.9, and Post-High School (PHS).

Estimated oral reading fluency (Est. ORF) is an estimate of a student’s ability to read
words quickly and accurately in order to comprehend text efficiently. Students with oral
reading fluency demonstrate accurate decoding, automatic word recognition, and
appropriate use of the rhythmic aspects of language (e.g., intonation, phrasing, pitch,
and emphasis). Est. ORF is reported in correct words per minute, and is based on a
known relationship between STAR Reading performance and oral reading fluency.

20
 Appendix C
Goal Report 

Studen Points Points % of

t Goal Earned Goal
1 72.0 27.2 37.8
2 54.0 52.3 96.9
3 73.0 81.4 111.5
4 58.0 22.1 38.1
5 50.0 14.2 28.4
6 50.0 19.6 39.2
7 68.0 33.3 49.0
8 50.0 9.9 19.8
9 66.0 44.4 67.3
10 56.0 62.8 112.1
11 50.0 23.4 46.8
12 66.0 32.3 48.9
13 50.0 20.3 40.6
14 50.0 12.3 24.6
15 50.0 15.9 27.6
16 50.0 9.8 19.6
17 67.0 27.1 40.4
18 50.0 27.6 55.2
19 50.0 33.7 67.4
20 58.0 33.4 57.5
21 53.0 29.4 55.5

21
 Appendix D
STAR Post-Test Data

 Studen Test GP SS GE PR PR NCE IRL ORF

t Date Level
1 12/1/09 1.30 434 3.7 98 97-99 93.3 3.6 142
2 12/1/09 1.30 353 3.0 95 91-97 84.6 3.0 92
3 12/1/09 1.30 392 3.4 97 95-98 89.6 3.3 108
4 12/1/09 1.30 227 2.1 83 77-87 70.1 1.7 62
5 12/1/09 1.30 92 1.3 52 14-61 51.1 PP 9
6 12/1/09 1.30 105 1.4 58 25-65 54.2 PP 12
7 12/1/09 1.30 321 2.7 93 90-95 81.1 2.7 86
8 12/1/09 1.30 79 0.9 33 20-43 40.7 PP 0
9 12/1/09 1.30 339 2.8 94 91-97 82.7 2.9 89
10 12/1/09 1.30 253 2.3 86 81-91 72.8 2.0 69
11 12/1/09 1.30 254 2.3 87 81-91 73.7 2.0 69
12 12/1/09 1.30 290 2.5 91 86-94 78.2 2.4 80
13 12/1/09 1.30 112 1.5 60 35-67 55.3 PP 32
14 12/1/09 1.30 114 1.5 61 38-67 55.9 PP 33
15 12/1/09 1.30 82 1.0 38 25-49 43.6 PP 22
16 12/1/09 1.30 70 0.8 14 7-25 27.2 PP 14
17 12/1/09 1.30 296 2.6 91 86-94 78.2 2.5 81
18 12/1/09 1.30 124 1.5 64 51-71 57.5 PP 35
19 12/1/09 1.30 103 1.4 59 24-65 54.8 PP 30
20 12/1/09 1.30 225 2.1 83 76-87 70.1 1.7 61
21 12/1/09 1.30 87 1.2 60 43-68 55.3 PP 25

  

22
 Appendix E
STAR Pre/Post Test Summary Report

   GP SS GE PR NCE IRL ORF

 
Pretest 0.95 138 1.6 55 52.8 P 34
Mean
Posttes 1.30 209 2.0 77 65.3 1.5 58
t Mean
Change +0.35 +71 +0.4 +22 +12.5 +1.2 +24

 *Numbers based on 21 students in class.

23