University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

A "stacked for success" sustained silent reading program for high school English language development (ELD) students: its impact on reading comprehension, attitudes toward reading, frequency of o...

(USC Thesis Other)

A "stacked for success" sustained silent reading program for high school English language development (ELD) students: its impact on reading comprehension, attitudes toward reading, frequency of o...

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content INFORMATION TO USERS
This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI
films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some
thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may
be from any type of computer printer.
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the
copy submitted. Broken o r indistinct print, colored or poor quality
illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard m argins,
and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete
manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if
unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate
the deletion.
Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by
sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and
continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each
original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in
reduced form at the back of the book.
Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced
xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6” x 9” black and white
photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations
appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly
to order.
A Bell & Howell information Company
300 North ZeeD Road. Ann Arbor. M l 48106-1346 USA
313/761-4700 800/521-0600

A "STACKED FOR SUCCESS" SUSTAINED SILENT READING
PROGRAM FOR HIGH SCHOOL ENGLISH LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT
(ELD) STUDENTS: ITS IMPACT ON READING COMPREHENSION,
ATTITUDES TOWARD READING, FREQUENCY OF OUTSIDE READING,
AND RANGE OF READING SOURCES
by
Jan ice Louise Pilgreen
A Dissertation P resented to the
FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirem ents for th e Degree
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
(Education)
Decem ber 1994
Copyright 1994 Jan ic e Louise Pilgreen
UMI Number: 9621723
Copyright 1994 by
Pilgreen, Janice Louise
All rights reserved.
UMI Microform 9621723
Copyright 1996, by UMI Company. All rights reserved.
This microform edition is protected against unauthorized
copying under Title 17, United States Code.
UMI
300 North Zeeb Road
Ann Arbor, MI 48103
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY PARK
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90007
This dissertation, written by
under the direction of h e x Dissertation
Committee, and approved by all its members,
has been presented to and accepted by The
Graduate School, in partial fulfillment of re
quirements for the degree of
Janice _ L . JPilgreen
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Dean of Graduate Studies
Date
DISSERTATION COMMITTEE
ii
DEDICATION
This dissertation is dedicated to the following people:
first and forem ost, my husband, Dr. Martin Pilgreen, and my daughter,
Lindsey Ann Pilgreen, without w hose love, support, and patience I could
never have carried through with such an extended effort and m et a
lifetime goal;
and, my classroom instructional aide and friend, S andra M endoza, who
sensitively (and frequently) picked up the p ieces for m e when my life a s
a doctoral student, mother, wife, and full-time teacher w as challenging.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
iii
T h e conceptualization, im plem entation, and com pletion of this
study would not have been possible without the help of my dissertation
com m ittee, for whom I am im m ensely grateful. T h ese people have
p e rse v e re d with m e through th eo retical and practical difficulties,
su g g e ste d c h a n g e s in num erous drafts, an d provided insight w hen I
needed it most. A posthum ous thank-you to the late Dr. Timothy Asch for
bearing with me at a time that w as p erh ap s the m ost challenging of his
own life. His w ise p erceptions about th e difficulties of m easuring
attitudes, his comm itm ent to doing the b est for children in education, and
his in sisten ce that I becom e ten acio u s in determ ining w hat m otivates
children to read w ere invaluable to me. I also ex p ress my appreciation to
Dr. R obert R u ed a for offering his co n tin u o u s support and technical
expertise related to th e initially overw helm ing issu e s of research design
and statistical pro ced u res and for providing practical and constructive
advice related to future research endeavors. And, I am indebted to my
c h a irp e rs o n and m entor, Dr. S te p h e n K rash en , for being th e
quintessential role m odel, for his g e n e ro u s giving of professional tim e
and guidance, and for showing m e both th e challenges and rew ards of
scholarly dedication. I am thankful to him for leading m e through the
m aze th at is the doctoral student's path and for giving m e a m ore finely-
tuned s e n s e of purpose in the world of research and teaching.
Finally, my sincere thanks to my colleague, Barry Gribbons, who
shared with me his informed and professional view s about the strengths
and w e a k n e sse s of statistical m easurem ent and devoted m any hours of
critical analysis a ssistan ce to th e study.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
P ag e
DEDICATION ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS iii
LIST OF TABLES vi
LIST OF FIGURES vii
ABSTRACT viii
CHAPTER
1. INTRODUCTION 1
B ackground 1
T h e Problem Situation 8
Definitions of Term s 19
T h e Pilot Study 20
O bjectives of the 1993-94 Study 28
2. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 33
Eight Com m on Factors in Successful
R eading Program s 33
Factor 1: A ccess 37
Factor 2: Appeal 41
Factor 3: Conducive Environm ent 46
Factor 4: E n co u rag em en t 51
Factor 5: Staff Training 57
Factor 6: N on-A ccountability 60
Factor 7: Follow-Up Activities 64
Factor 8: Distributed Time to R ead 67
Six Trends Identified From the Literature 71
3. METHODOLOGY 78
R esearch Design 78
P articipants 83
Instrum entation 85
D ata Collection P rocedures 93
M ethods of Analysis 97
Assum ptions, Limitations, and Delimitations 98
4. RESULTS
R esearch Q uestions and Results, Including
Descriptives and Statistical A nalyses:
R esearch Q uestion One
R esearch Q uestion Two
R esearch Q uestion T hree
R esearch Q uestion Four
R esearch Q uestion Five
R esearch Q uestion Six
Additional Findings
5. D ISC U SSIO N
Major Findings
A chievem ent in Reading C om prehension
D evelopm ent of Positive Attitudes
Toward Reading
Increase in Frequency of O utside
P leasu re Reading
U se of a Wider R ange of Pleasure
R eading S ources
R elationship Betw een "Frequency of
O utside P leasure Reading" and
R eading C om prehension
Relationship Betw een U se of a "Wider
R ange of P leasure Reading Sources"
and R eading C om prehension
Sum m ary of Major Findings
Additional Findings
Additional Limitations
Educational Im plications
R ecom m endations for Future R esearch
REFERENCES
APPEND ICES
Appendix A: 1992-93 Pilot Study Student P retest/
P o sttest Q uestionnaire
Appendix B: 1992-93 Pilot Study R esults
Appendix C: Trends in the Survey of Free R eading
S tu d ie s
Appendix D: E stes Attitude S cale (EAS)
Appendix E: 1993-94 S tudent P retest/P osttest
Q uestionnaires
101
101
101
104
108
114
121
122
122
127
127
127
131
134
137
141
142
144
144
145
147
148
150
159
160
163
167
193
196
Table 1:
Table 2:
Table 3:
Table 4:
Table 5:
Table 6:
Table 7:
Table 8:
Table 9:
Table 10:
Table 11:
LIST OF TABLES
Pretest, Posttest, and Gain Score M eans and
Standard Deviations for the SDRT
G rade Equivalency G ains on the SDRT
Pretest, Posttest, and Gain Score M eans and
Standard Deviations for th e EAS
Pretest, Posttest, and Gain Score M eans for
S ep arate Item s on the EAS:
Experim ental School
Pretest, Posttest, and Gain Score M eans for
S ep arate Item s on the EAS:
C om parison School
Pretest, Posttest, and Gain Score M eans and
Standard D eviations for S tudent
Q uestionnaire: Frequency of Outside
P leasu re R eading
Pretest and Posttest T otals of S tudents for
Each "Frequency of O utside Reading"
C ategory
Pretest, Posttest, and G ain Score M eans and
Standard D eviations for S tudent
Q uestionnaire: Wider R ange of P leasure
R eading S o u rc es
N um bers of Total R eading S ources for Each
School by C ategory
P ercen tag es of R eading Sources for Each
School by C ategory
Pretest, Posttest, and G ain Score M eans and
Standard Deviations for the SDRT,
ELD Level 4
Page
102
102
105
106
107
110
111
115
116
120
125
LIST OF FIGURES
V
P age
Figure 1 : Frequency of O utside Reading: Pretest,
Experim ental School 112
Figure 2: Frequency of O utside Reading: Posttest,
Experim ental School 112
Figure 3: Frequency of O utside Reading: Pretest,
C om parison School 113
Figure 4: Frequency of O utside Reading: Posttest,
C om parison School 113
Figure 5: R ange of Reading Sources: Pretest,
Experim ental G roup 118
Figure 6: R ange of Reading S ources: Posttest,
Experim ental G roup 118
Figure 7. R ange of Reading Sources: Pretest,
C om parison G roup 119
Figure 8: R ange of Reading S ources: Posttest,
C om parison G roup 119
viii
ABSTRACT
The major purpose of this study w as to evaluate the effectiveness
of a "stacked for su ccess" in-school S ustained Silent R eading (SSR)
program for high school English L anguage D evelopm ent (ELD) students.
A review of the literature indicated that there are eight factors which may
contribute to th e s u c c e ss of free reading program s: a c c e s s to books,
book appeal, a conducive environm ent, en co u rag em en t to read, staff
training in SSR , follow-up activities, non-accountability for w hat is read,
and distributed tim e to read.
By im plem enting th e eight facto rs in an experim ental school
program , a "stacked for su c ce ss" SSR program w as developed. The
goals w ere to determ ine w hat impact such a program would have on th e
stu d en ts' (a) reading com prehension; (b) attitu d es toward reading; (c)
frequency of outside pleasure reading; and (d) ran g e of so u rc e s used to
provide reading m aterials.
Two hundred and forty-eight stu d en ts participated in th e study,
o n e hundred a n d thirty-one of w hom w ere in th e experim ental SSR
program and o n e hundred and se v en te en from th e com parison group.
The com parison group experienced a w eaker version of the "stacked for
success" SSR m odel; their program, entitled a "sem i-stacked for success"
SSR program, included only six of th e identified factors and w ere limited
in the im plem entation of two of th o se factors, a s well.
S tu d e n ts w ere from two co m p arab le high sc h o o ls in a Los
A ngeles county urban a re a unified school district. They w ere from 58
language groups and w ere all in Level 3, an interm ediate level of English
L anguage Development. They w ere pretested and posttested using three
instrum ents: a standardized test, an attitude survey, and a questionnaire.
The instructional period w as four m onths, from S eptem ber 1993 to
Ja n u ary 1994. R esults of the study, b a sed on M anovas, indicated that
th ere w ere statistically significant differences betw een th e two groups, in
favor of the experim ental group, on all four variables: th ere w ere
in cre ase s in reading com prehension, positive attitudes toward reading,
frequency of outside pleasure reading, and wider use of reading sources.
T he differences in reading com prehension, however, w ere sm aller than
the differences for the other th ree affective variables.
Im plications which can b e draw n from the stu d y include the
following: "Stacked for su ccess" SSR program s (1) h a v e the potential
for increasing reading com prehension, developing positive attitu d es
toward reading, increasing frequency of o u tsid e p lea su re reading, and
encouraging the u se of a w ider range of reading so u rc e s; (2) are
enjoyable for students; (3) are appropriate for high school ELD students;
and (3) offer stu d e n ts ad m ittan ce into a com m unity of read e rs--th e
Literacy Club. In short, "stacked for su c ce ss" SSR program s provide
students with an av en u e for engaging in a pleasurable an d academ ically
rew arding "habit."
Future investigations of th e efficacy of SSR program s should focus
on longer-term p ro g ra m s a n d should look tow ard isolating the
contributions that e ach of th e eight facto rs m akes to a "stacked for
success" SSR program .
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
This chapter will include the following five com ponents related to
the study: (1) background; (2) the problem situation; (3) definitions of
terms; (4) the pilot study; and (5) objectives.
SSR has been around for as long as people have been
reading. Whenever a person selects something to read
for his/her own purpose, spends more than a few minutes
reading it and comprehending whatever he/she wants,
SSR is occurring. (Manning-Dowd, 1985, p. 1)
In-school free reading program s a re not a new idea. In fact, they
have b e e n in existence since the advent of "Individualized Reading" in
the 1950's and 60's, and have been labeled in a w ide variety of ways;
S u s ta in e d Silent R eading (SSR ), U ninterrupted S u stain e d Silent
Reading (USSR), F ree Voluntary Reading (FVR), Self-Selected Reading,
High Intensity P ractice (HIP), Drop Everything a n d Read (DEAR),
S ustained Quiet R eading Time (SQUIRT), and simply "free reading."
W hile som e of the com ponents of th e se program s vary, w hat they
all have in com m on is a "pure" or "modified" elem ent of Sustained Silent
Reading. As Petrimoulx (1988) notes, Hunt (1967) is credited with the
idea of SS R and McCracken (1971) with its application. The objective of
SSR is "to d ev elo p each stu d e n t's ability to re a d silently without
interruption for a relatively long period of time" (M cC racken, 1971).
There a re six "rules" for SSR , and they include th e following; (1) the
stu d en ts read self-selected m aterials silently; (2) th e teacher m odels by
Background
reading silently at th e sam e time; (3) one book, m agazine, or new spaper
is selected by each student for the time period; (4) a timer is se t for a
prescribed, uninterrupted time period, (5) no reports or records are kept;
and (6) th e whole class, departm ent, or school participates.
USSR, referring to Uninterrupted S ustained Silent Reading (Hunt,
1967), is the sa m e a s SSR; but the extra letter h a s typically been
dropped in current program s in order to elim inate any possibility of
negative connotations associated with the acronym .
F re e Voluntary R eading refers to any in-school program w here
part of th e school d a y is set a sid e for reading (K rashen, 1993). Two
types of FVR a re S S R and S elf-S elected R eading. Typically, the
difference betw een th e s e p ro g ram s is th a t S elf-S elected R eading
in c o rp o ra te s s o m e a c c o u n ta b ility m e a s u r e s su c h a s having
stu d en t/teach er c o n fe re n c e s w here the stu d e n ts do "retells" or other
sharing activities. T h e c o n feren ces can b e devoted to skill building,
record-keeping of books read, and discussion of their content. Often, the
purpose of the conference is for the teacher to a s s e s s w hether or not the
student is com prehending the m aterials (s)h e is reading. With SSR
th ere is no accountability. Book reports, quizzes, w orksheets, and
com prehension ch eck s a re avoided in favor of simply allowing students
to enjoy w hat they hav e read.
S o m e Self-Selected R eading program s today a re rem iniscent of
the "Individualized R eading" (som etim es called "Personalized Reading")
program s in the elem en tary sc h o o ls in th e 1950's and 1960's. In
"Individualized R eading," quiet reading tim e is first provided, and then
reading c o n fe re n c e s o ccur b etw een the te a c h e r an d the stu d en ts.
G roups a re then organized to d iscu ss com m on in terests or to tackle
com m on reading problem s identified by the teach er during the reading
conference (typically a "skills lesson"). Children a re encouraged to do
activities b ased on what they have read (e.g., m aking draw ings, writing
questions to be answ ered by another student, or having a discussion by
th o se who have read the sa m e book). Finally, a record is kept of each
stu d e n t's pro b lem s, in te re sts, and s c o re s on sta n d a rd iz e d te s ts
(G reaney, 1970). In this kind of program, SSR "rules" two, four, and five
a re violated: th ere is an em phasis on accountability, or monitoring and
recording the individual p ro g re ss of e a c h student, including his/her
stren g th s and w e a k n e sse s in skill developm ent; also, it is som etim es
necessary for the teach er to conference with one student while the others
a re reading, so th e "modeling" and "silent, uninterrupted" a sp e c ts of the
program a re lost.
HIP, or High Intensity Practice, is a term unique to Oliver's studies
(1970, 1973, 1976) and includes SSR, SSW (S ustained Silent Writing),
and SSA (Self-Selected Activities). SSR includes th e usual com ponents
identified by M cCracken (1971), while SSW requires th at th e stu d en ts
write for a given length of time. They m ay write w hatever they wish and
do not have to show their work to the teacher. The SSA period perm its
th e stu d en ts to e n g a g e in "any activity th at involves active resp o n se to
w o rd s-re a d in g , writing, studying, or doing c o n ten t a re a classw ork"
(Oliver, 1970, p. 70.)
Finally, DEAR (D rop Everything an d R ea d ) a n d SQ UIRT
(S ustained Quiet R eading Time) are simply other term s for SSR (Clary,
1991). S SR can b e im plem ented on any scale: in single classroom s, in
one school, or throughout an entire district, w here students, teach ers,
adm inistrators, and classified staff m em bers stop w hat they a re doing
and read at a particular tim e for a specified length of tim e (Moore, Jones,
and Miller, 1980).
W hatever term is u sed for it, "free reading" h a s gained renew ed
attention a s a prom ising instructional com ponent in school program s,
particularly since the 1970's. In som e ca se s, it forms part of the regular
language arts program , and in others it represents the entire program or
is supplem entary to the regular program.
As it is possible to s e e from the descriptions of different kinds of
free reading program s (particularly HIP, Individualized R eading, and
Self-Selected R eading), th e program s vary greatly, and m any activities
b esid es silent reading m ay occur during the reading period (Taylor et al,
1990).
Promoting Reading A chievem ent
T here are two prim ary re a so n s why schools have been interested
in developing free reading program s at various levels of involvement. A
significant m otivation h a s b een th at schools have hoped to s e e an
in crease in stu d en ts' reading achievem ent. T he circular question h as
been w hether read ers are m ore proficient b e c au se they read so m uch or
w hether they read so m uch b e c a u s e they a re b etter re a d e rs (Mork,
1972). Originally, w hen free reading w as incorporated into program s, the
em phasis w as upon allowing stu d en ts the opportunity to have th e "drill"
Of F ree Reading P rogram s
or "practice" n e c e ssa ry in learning to read, a tim e during which the
stu d en t could apply and transfer th e isolated skills learned during the
regular instructional reading period (Jenkins, 1957; Lawson, 1968;
Oliver; 1970; M cCracken, 1971).
How ever, with the m ovem ent tow ard w hole lan g u ag e in the
1 9 8 0 's and 1990's, the notion that th e m ore o n e read s, the b etter a
r e a d e r o n e b e c o m e s, h a s g a in e d a p p e a l. As S ad o sk i (1980)
sum m arizes it, "Students who read ten d to becom e better readers, and
th e best w ay to develop reading ability is not through a s se s s m e n t or
isolated skills drill, but by reading" (p. 154). This view of reading--with
its highly personalized, "meaning-m aking" e m p h a s is-h a s been stre sse d
by Smith (1988a): "The purposeful nature of reading is central, not simply
b e c a u s e o n e norm ally re a d s for a re a so n . . . but b e c a u se th e
u n d e rsta n d in g which a re a d e r m u st bring to reading can only b e
m anifested through the rea d e r's own intentions" (p. 3). T he role of th e
reading teacher, he believes, is "to e n su re that the learner h as ad eq u ate
dem onstrations of reading being u sed for evident m eaningful p u rp o ses
and to help children to fulfill th o se p u rp o ses them selves" (p. 207).
B ased on a similar theoretical position, K rashen's (1988) research
indicates that in-school free reading program s show outstanding results
in prom oting th e d e v e lo p m en t of read in g c o m p reh en sio n . H is
hypothesis, that genuine reading for m eaning is far m ore valuable than
workbook exercises, e c h o es Smith (1986) and G oodm an's (1982) belief
th a t people learn to read by reading. Arguing that F ree Voluntary
R eading is th e "missing ingredient in first language language arts, a s
well a s in in term ed iate se co n d an d foreign lan g u a g e instruction,"
K rashen (1993) highlights th e value of in-school fre e reading program s
for stu d en ts from any lan g u ag e backgrounds (p. 1). He m aintains that
while FVR m ay not produce the h ig h est levels of com petence, it will
provide a foundation so that higher levels of proficiency may b e reached.
Without FVR, th e s e advanced levels a re very difficult to attain.
Finally, te a c h e rs, p are n ts, a n d a d m in istra to rs h a v e been
con cern ed that students d o not achieve in reading b e cau se th ey have
not b eco m e independent learn ers a n d in d ep e n d e n t re a d e rs (Oliver,
1970; Allington, 1975; and Sadoski, 1980). Oliver (1970) n o te s that in
order for children to be p repared to re a d for enjoym ent and information,
they m ust learn to be independent in book selections, purpose(s) for
reading, and p ractice in th e application of reading skills. T h is kind of
in d ep en d en ce of purpose a n d practice can only b e accom plished by
surrendering so m e control to the learn er. T herefore, tea c h e rs need to
provide learn ers with opportunities to re a d under conditions in which
they a re in control of their selections, their p u rp o se s, and th eir own
d e m a n d s for m eaning. He states, "The learner sh o u ld have a right to
read under his conditions. He should h a v e time to re a d in school" (p. 69).
T he acad em ic results of free reading program s are im pressive.
Both in-school fre e reading studies and out-of-school self-reported free
voluntary reading studies sh o w that m ore rea d in g results in better
reading com prehension (K rashen, 1993). This finding is given further
support by Elley's study of tw enty-seven countries, in which a steady
trend upw ard in a c h iev em en t w as s e e n in th e populations which
en g ag ed in the g rea test am ount of voluntary reading.
QeveJoping_P_ositive. Motivation to..Read
A se co n d im p etu s for th e im plem entation of free reading
program s h a s been th e perceived lack of stu d e n t m otivation to read.
D e sp ite te a c h e r e n c o u ra g e m e n t, m any te a c h e rs , p a re n ts, a n d
adm inistators are concerned that stu d en ts do not read m uch outside of
school (M oore, Jo n e s, and Miller, 1980; Pfau, 1967; W atkins an d
Edw ards, 1992). Young people m ay not have a quiet p lac e to read or
have adult role m odels to help them foster a d e sire to read. Junior high
and high school stu d e n ts often h a v e additional d e m a n d s m ade upon
them due to organized sports, peer group activities, hom ework, part-time
em ploym ent, and dating; and th e s e activities all tend to d e c e a se th e
am ount of leisure tim e th e students have in w hich to p u rsu e their own
reading (Cline and Kretke, 1980). T hese stu d e n ts "need to be guided
into a situation w here reading is resp ected , q u iet is expected, and th e
students s e e each other and their tea c h e rs in a productive and enjoyable
reading environm ent" (Cline and Kretke, 1980, p. 504). Free reading
program s provide just su ch a situation.
As B arbe and Abbott (1975) explain it, school program s m ust
"produce not only rea d e rs but also children who will grow into adulthood
loving books and constantly enriching their lives and th e lives of o th ers
by what they have found on the printed page" (p. 20). B ecau se reading
is "intrinsically rew arding," and a s such "functions a s its own b e s t
m otivational device" (Everett, 1987, p. 2), fre e reading allows for th e
opportunity of developing the book reading habit, which is a positive
long-term effect. R esearch has show n that children w ho participate in
su ch program s do more outside free reading th an children in com parable
p ro g ram s (K rashen, 1993). In fact, G re a n ey and C lark 's (1975)
longitudinal study indicates that a s much a s six y ears later, students who
had participated in a free reading program w ere reading m ore books
than the participants from th e com parison group.
N um erous studies, m any of which will be d isc u sse d in C hapter
Two, have d ealt with the question of how much free reading program s
actually contribute to the fostering of positive attitudes tow ard reading.
R esults have b een lacking, d u e in large part to th e frequent om ission of
inferential statistics in th e rese a rc h designs; but in g en eral, findings
reported in free reading stu d ies indicate that positive attitudes tow ards
reading and growth in a variety of reading interests occur a s a result of
th e s e program s (Sadoski, 1980).
In short, the c a se for free reading is a good one if a major goal of
schools is to "develop children who do read, a s well a s children who can
read" (Allington, 1975).
T he Problem Situation
Area of Concern
There is am ple evidence to indicate that stu d en ts who read often
a re th e stu d en ts who read well. A positive correlation exists betw een
volum e of reading and achievem ent levels (Elley, 1992). However, in the
educational system , th e re is often little opportunity for stu d e n ts to
develop the reading habit. As Pfau (1967) reveals, "Schools have been
relatively unsuccessful in educating th e child, w ho later b eco m e s the
adult reading population, to read widely and willingly" (p.34). As early
a s 1932, Parr, in a study of college read ers, found th at th o se who
n e e d ed reading help were w hose who had done little or no recreational
reading a s a child. In keeping with this trend, in 1992, an experim ent
with successful USC graduate stu d e n ts show ed that m ost of them had
e n g ag ed in "light reading" (comic books, popular novels, m agazines, and
new spapers) a s children (Russikoff and Pilgreen, 1994).
It is clear that if schools a re to develop read ers who read widely
and willingly, time m ust be provided irL_schools for students to becom e
hooked on the "reading habit" (G reaney and Clarke, 1975, p. 113). From
th e existing literature, it is known that in-school free reading program s
hav e the "potential to improve both attitude and achievem ent" (Moore,
Jo n e s, and Miller, 1980, p. 446). O nce stu d en ts are engaged in pleasure
reading in school, th ere is a g rea ter ch an ce that they will also do more
p leasu re reading outside of school. Accordingly, a s they begin to read,
they becom e better readers.
In-school free reading program s vary widely, both in term s of their
m ethodology and their su ccess rates. Until now, little attention h a s been
paid to the factors, or variables, which the m ore successful studies have
incorporated into their program s. A review of literature which surveyed
32 free reading stu d ies indicated that eight characteristics ("factors")
a p p e a r to b e im portant in developing a program th at h a s the g rea test
possibility for helping students to (1) im prove reading com prehension
and (2) develop m ore positive attitudes tow ard reading. A free reading
program which incorporates all eight of th e s e factors can be defined a s a
"stacked for success" SSR program . T he factors include the following:
a c c e s s to books, book appeal, a conducive environm ent, encouragem ent
10
to read, staff training, non-accountability for w hat is read, follow-up
activities, and "distributed" time to read.
Purpose of lh e Study
The major purpose of this study w as to evalu ate the effectiveness
of a "stacked for su ccess" in-school S u stain ed S ilent R eading (SSR)
program for high school ELD students. B ased on th e assum ption that an
attractive m odel of this kind could induce learners to enjoy reading, and
therefore to read more, the goal of the study w as to determ ine w hether or
not stu d e n ts would (a) in crease their reading com prehension and (b)
develop m ore positive attitudes toward reading.
Significance o f the Study
This study w as significant b e c a u se it utilized a sam ple of high
school ELD students. Little research on free reading program s has been
d o n e with high school ELD students, an d this study attem pted to fill in
th e se g ap s to som e degree. S ince m any high school students are nearly
at th e end of their formal education p erio d -an d b e c a u se others will need
th e ability to read well for c o lle g e -th e y a re a t th e optim al sta g e to
becom e "hooked" on reading.
This study w a s also im portant b e c a u s e it rep re sen te d one of a
very few "stacked for success" SSR program s to b e carried out thus far.
Most of the earlier studies incorporated six or fewer of the factors.
11
The_ELD_Gap
O n e of the largest g a p s in the research h a s been the failure to
include a large p e rc en tag e of ELD sa m p le s in th e studies. With the
growing Limited English Proficient (LEP) population in the United States,
schools a re challenged with th e question of how b e s t to e d u c ate these
learners. In the survey of the 3 2 studies (Chapter Two), only se v en were
identified which focused on L2 learners. Yet, the resu lts of th e s e seven
studies w ere quite positive, in general, and su g g e st that free reading
program s m ay b e particularly appropriate and effective for second
language acquirers.
M angubhai an d Elley (1982) have pointed out that "while reading
is w idely e n c o u ra g e d in first lan g u ag e acquisition for a variety of
reasons, its role h a s been repeatedly played down in ESL" (p. 151). This
is, they believe, b e c a u s e reading is seldom reg ard ed a s a m e a n s of
extending children's grasp of th e language; exposure to unfamiliar words
and stru c tu re s is thought to confuse th e learners, to c a u se erro rs in
interpretation, and to distort th e pronunciation of new words. They
suggest th at this perspective is quite narrow, asserting that reading has a
positive, constructive role to play in L2 acquisition. Unlike the oral-first
ap p ro ach , which restric ts L2 ac q u irers' lan g u a g e growth "without
justification," extensive reading allows stu d en ts to p ro g ress naturally and
quickly (M angubhai a n d Elley, 1982, p. 152).
Sim ilarly, K ra sh en (1 9 8 7 ) c o n c lu d e s th at se c o n d lan g u a g e
students acquire lan g u ag e in only one w ay--by understanding m essa g e s
12
or by receiving "com prehensible input" in a low anxiety environm ent.
T his is, he arg u es, precisely what free reading provides. Not only can
te a c h e rs m ake sure that large am ounts of reading material are available
which are com prehensible, but also the students, free of accountability
p re ssu re s, can relax. As A zabdaftari (1992) points out, "E ngaged in
extensive reading, the student rea d s com fortably and without having a
feeling of conscious strain so that he can concentrate on the m e ssa g e
without being aw are of the code" (p. 10).
Also, K rash en (1993) rep o rts th a t w hen se co n d la n g u a g e
acquirers read for pleasure, they develop th e com petence they need to
m ove from the beginning "ordinary conversational" level to higher levels
of literacy. In W hat is Interm ediate N atural A pproach ? (1995) he
rem arks that for all of its virtues, the Natural A pproach that is used in
beginning ELD instruction h a s its limits; Natural A pproach stu d en ts are
not ab le to u s e their seco n d lan g u ag e for m ore dem anding p u rp o se s
such a s reading th e classics, engaging in th e serious study of literature,
u sin g the la n g u a g e for international b u s in e s s , or for a d v a n c e d
sch o larsh ip . F re e reading is o n e w ay of extending th e principles
underlying the Natural Approach to the interm ediate level. It can help to
bridge the gap betw een e a sie r and m ore difficult reading m aterials. By
com bining free reading with the usual kinds of a ssig n ed reading in a
literature-based language a rts class, stu d en ts have th e ideal opportunity
to develop seco n d language literacy.
T he ty p e of input th a t is receiv ed through free read in g is
qualitatively different, then, from w hat an L2 acquirer receives through
u su a l daily c o n ta c t with th e lan g u ag e. T his m ay result from "the
13
possibility th a t through th e reading m aterials provided, learners can
explore a w ider range of topics an d situations, with the accom panying
linguistic e le m en ts, th a n w as av ailab le to them in their everyday
interaction" (Hafiz and Tudor, 1989, p. 9).
Not surprisingly, in a project designed to investigate the language
acquisition background of students in the intensive English Program in
Hong Kong, re se a rc h e rs G radm an and H anania (1992) found that the
o n e background factor th at show ed the strongest relationship with level
of proficiency (a s determ ined by TOEFL, T est of English a s a Foreign
L anguage, sco res) w as outside reading: the extent to which students
had read o u tsid e class, for information or pleasure.
R eading: A facilitator of other language com petencies.
In addition to providing opportunities for L2 acq u irers to read
better, free reading is a lso a facilitator of overall language developm ent.
In fact, K rashen (1985) a s se rts that th e evidence strongly su g g ests that
"reading e x p o su re may b e the prim ary m e a n s of developing reading
co m p reh en sio n , writing style, and m ore sophisticated vocabulary and
gram m ar" (p. 90). In Elley and M angubhai's (1983) tw o-year study on
Fijian prim ary schools, by the end of the first year, th e free reading
experim ental group had m ade su b stan tial im provem ent in receptive
skills; by th e e n d of th e second year, how ever, this im provem ent had
extended to all asp ects of the su b jects' L2 abilities, including both oral
an d written production. A s Elley (1991) a sse rts, this kind of sp read of
effect from read in g co m p eten ce to other lan g u a g e skills is a "m ost
striking finding" (p. 404).
Aside from the developm ent of related lan g u ag e com petencies
through reading, th ere is evidence that transfer of language ability takes
place betw een or among languages. Indeed, Elley (1991) notes that in
the Fiji and T em pe studies, this transfer effect occurred. Similarly, The
Schon et al (1985) experim ent show ed that ev en though a Spanish
reading group did not m ake statistically significant gains in Spanish
reading, a s com p ared to th e com parison group, th ere w as a trend for
them to perform better on th e Spanish reading te sts. Vet, within the
experim ental group, gains in English and Spanish reading abilities were
positively correlated, suggesting that th ere w as also a transfer in reading
skills acro ss the two languages.
Finally, fre e reading h a s the potential to ch an g e second language
acquirers' conceptions about th e reading process, a s a whole. As Cho
and K rashen (1994) point out, many L2 acquirers do not believe that
reading will help them . They believe, instead, that language acquisition
is th e result of th e conscious learning of rules and output practice with
error correction, rather than th e result of com prehensible input. B ased on
this view, they c o m e to see reading as "hard work," which entails word-by
word decoding of different texts.
Additionally, it is som etim es difficult for second language acquirers
to find the right tex ts (Cho and Krashen, 1994). In m any ELD cla sse s, the
input m ^y well b e com prehensible but not very interesting. An optimal
free reading program , one which is "stacked for success," could expose
stu d en ts to a variety of light reading options which would satisfy their
15
craving for m aterial that is both com prehensible and enjoyable. By
engaging in free reading, it is possible that second lan g u ag e acquirers
will com e to view reading not a s a task, but rather, a s a pleasant activity
that will lead to language acquisition.
Implications.
In short, th e b en efits of free read in g for ELD stu d e n ts are
num erous. It is clear th a t research stu d ie s n eed to focus on this
population in investigations of free reading program effectiveness.
Most free reading stu d ies have focused upon elem entary school
learners. Of th e secondary studies that do exist, the larg est percentage
deal with middle school or junior high school sam ples of learners. In the
review of 32 studies, it w a s found th at only five w ere conducted a t the
high school level. (Significantly, only o n e of th e s e d e a lt with ELD
students.)
Much h a s been written about th e special n e e d s of adolescents.
High school stu d en ts are torn by the d em an d s of school, home, friends,
o u tsid e jobs, extracurricular activities, and num erous o th er p ressu res.
Moffitt and W artella (1992) report that certain kinds of leisure activities
rem ain consistently popular with teen ag ers. In particular, socializing with
friends and participating in sports rem ain th e favorite leisure pursuits of
a d o le sc e n ts a s determ ined from th e earliest attem pts to record youth
16
leisure activities to the m ost recent adolescent research. It is no wonder
th at read in g for p lea su re is often th e activity which ra te s a s least
important on their list of priorities. In fact, W iscont (1990) notes that her
W isconsin study results show ed th at the higher the g rad e level that
students a re in, the less they do voluntary reading (p. 31).
A nother reason why the reading habit d o e s not d evelop is that
when stu d en ts reach the secondary level of schooling, read ers often find
a split betw een w hat they a re asked to read in school and w hat they
enjoy reading. This can se t up w hat C arlsen and Sherrill (1988) term
"an adversarial relationship betw een th e young p erso n s and th e school
and m ay even result in the students feeling a s e n se of inadequacy about
their own reading tastes" (p. 20). M any teach ers insist that high school
students read what a re considered to b e the "classics," leaving students
no other options (such a s "light reading") that might spark their interest to
pursue reading further.
A potent influence on high school students' reading habits is their
p eer group. Som e students, influenced by the need to keep up socially
with a particular friend or group of p eers, m ake their choices according to
th a t group (C arlsen an d Sherrill, 1988). Gallo (1968) highlights this
particularly powerful form of p eer p re ssu re in his survey of g rad e 11,
remarking that "what students have to say to each other about th e books
they read h a s far m ore influence on future reading than any other person
or any other device" (p. 536). If ad o lescen ts feel dependent upon group
choices, th ey will not se ek out reading choices th at m atch their own
in terests or need s. If their p e e r group d o e s not view reading a s an
acceptable acitivity, they will not read a t all.
1 7
Benefits, of _jn-school fre e j-e ad in g Jo rle e n ag e rs.
Provided that high school stu d en ts can b e offered "stacked for
su c ce ss" in-school free reading program s, tre n d s can b e reversed.
C arlsen and Sherrill (1988) recognize that m any high school students,
having g ained interests in particular subject a re a s , can be directed to
books th at give them information on th e se su b jects. S om etim es a
student will be intrigued by the w orks of a particular author (usually a
popular one) and, given the guidance to find th e books written by that
author and th e opportunity to read them , will voraciously read everything
written by th at individual. Others, having been previously adm onished to
rea d only "good literature" (otherw ise known a s "the classics") will
discover a g e n re (rom ance, adventure, mystery) and, spurred on by the
privilege of "self-selecting" books of interest, will read everything
available in a particular category. Given a supportive, non-threatening
en v iro n m en t which offers a c c e s s to ap p e alin g reading m aterials,
students can surprisingly easily b ecom e transform ed into bookworms.
Books can also offer tee n a g e rs a way to "fill their personal needs"
through identification with c h a ra c te rs in their reading (C arlsen and
Sherrill, 1988, p. 84). R eed (1988) acknow ledges th at early ad olescence
is often a lonely and frustrating tim e for young adults attem pting to
establish a personal identity, a s well a s to d e v elo p relationships with
their peers. S he identifies "Young Adult Books" a s a source of reading
that can m ake them feel le ss alone, while encouraging them to develop
m ore m atu re reading interests. A uthors of su c h books ca n help
te e n a g e rs d e a l with difficult tim es in life b e c a u s e th ey "becom e
18
anonym ous m entors who a re able to sp eak to early ad o lescen ts a s no
adult on the s c e n e can" (p. 22).
Finally, fre e reading program s c a n utilize "peer group imitation"
pressures, rather than working against them (Sadoski, 1980, p. 154). A
"stacked for su c c e ss" program is, in e s se n c e , a "Literacy Club," where
ev ery student is im m ediately adm itted (Smith, 1988b, pp. 11-12).
S tu d en ts m ust b e shown th e pleasures of a free reading program and
know that it is safe; "participation is possible without evaluation, and
collaboration is alw ays available" (Smith, 1988b, pp. 11-12). As a result,
stu d en ts will influence other students to join the Club. The first wave of
p eer accep tan ce will g e n e ra te other w aves, and th e cycle will continue.
As stu d en ts find reading m aterials th a t speak to their own n e e d s and
interests, they m ay becom e less d e p e n d en t upon others' opinions and
perh ap s even wish to share their new "finds" with their classm ates.
Implications.
High school students need to b e "hooked" by the reading habit if
they a re ever to becom e ad u lt readers. T he long-term aim is reading for
pleasure, which, it is hoped, "will e n h a n ce self-confidence and th e ability
to read independently, a skill which is of far-reaching value long after the
ending of formal language learning at school" (H erm es, 1987, p. 12).
Many tee n a g e rs a re close to ending th eir formal language learning at
school. They m u st be e n co u rag ed to read now, for very little time
rem ains in which to make reading a part of their ad u lt lives. Thus, free
reading program s, which a re "one w ay of supporting lifetime literacy"
(S anacore, 1992, pp. 474-75), have a very im portant role in th e high
19
school curriculum --a role that h a s been seriously underplayed in the
research so far. Additional studies, particularly th o se which utilize ELD
high school student sam ples, n e e d to be conducted.
Definitions of Term s
The term s used in either th e 1992-93 Pilot Study and/or th e 1993-
1994 Study included th e following:
1. ELD refers to English L anguage Developm ent, originally known as
ESL (English a s a S econd Language) prior to the changing of th e term in
1994.
2. L2 acquirers a re th o se w ho are acquiring a se c o n d language, as
opposed to their primary, or first, language.
3. A sta c k e d for s u c c e s s SSR program is defined a s a program that
incorporates all eight of the facto rs identified a s b ein g com ponents in
successful free reading program s. (These com ponents are d iscu ssed in
detail in C hapter Two.) The basic core of th e class is a fifteen to twenty-
m inute SSR period, followed by other book-based sharing activities for
the rem ainder of the period.
4. A sem i-stacked for su ccess S S R program is defined a s a program that
is similar to a "stacked for su ccess" SSR program. It incorporates th e six
factors identified a s being the "m ost often" included in successful SSR
program s but allows for factor im plem entation with a lesser d e g re e of
fidelity.
5. A conventional ELD program is defined a s a "skills plus literature"
program , w here stu d e n ts are not given opportunities for SSR in class.
D istrict-adopted anthologies and c la ss s e ts of short sto ries and novels
2 0
a re used. Most work is done on a w hole-class b asis or in groups, where
students often read aloud, and all readings a re "assigned." T he basic
curriculum for each ELD level follow s district curriculum com m ittee
guidelines. Assigned gram m ar and writing activities form a part of this
program , and accountability m ea su res are frequently im plem ented.
6. Reading com prehension is defined a s the ability to understand what
is read at a prescribed level of difficulty (known a s readability level).
7. Positive attitude toward reading is defined a s (a) liking to rea d and (b)
valuing reading as an important activity.
8. P erceived reading im provem ent refers to students' self-reported
opinions ab o u t having in creased th eir reading com prehension abilities
o ver time. T his includes the belief th at o n e ca n read m o re difficult
m aterials th an w as possible at a previous point in time.
9. O utside P le a sure R eading refers to self-selected reading th at is done
by choice in any outside-of-classroom situation.
10. Ran g e of pleasure reading s o u rc e s refers to the u se of various
s o u rc e s in o rd er to lo cate reading m aterials (e.g ., classro o m library,
school library, public library, bookstore, friend's house, book club, etc.).
11. Interm ediate ELD (Level 3) refers to the second highest level of ELD
offered in th e district in th e study. S tu d en ts a t this level a re capable of
taking m ost regular elective c la s s e s and sh eltered acad em ic classes
su ch a s science, history, and econom ics.
The Pilot Study
A Pilot Study w as do n e in th e fall of the 1992-93 school year to
ascertain w hether a "stacked for su c ce ss" free reading program for high
21
school ELD students would enable them to m eet the following objectives:
in cre asin g read in g c o m p reh en sio n and dev elo p in g m ore positive
attitudes toward reading. R esults of the Pilot Study lent support to this
study's re se a rc h hypotheses, which a re stated in a later section on
O bjectives.
R e se arch Q uestions
In a study of interm ediate (Level 3) high school ELD students:
1. Will th e students in a "stacked for success" SSR program m ake higher
than "expected" gains in reading equivalency sco re s on the SDRT Brown
(Form G P re and Form H Post) at the end of one sem ester? "Higher than
expected" is m ore than one m onth's growth for one month of instruction.
2. Will th e stu d en ts in a "stacked for su c ce ss" S SR program show a
greater enjoym ent of reading at th e end of o n e sem e ste r than th ey did at
th e beginning of the sem ester?
3. Will the students in a "stacked for success" SSR program feel that their
reading com prehension has improved by th e end of o n e sem ester?
4. Will th e students in a "stacked for su ccess" SSR program indicate that
th ey are engaging in outside p leasu re reading m ore frequently outside of
c la ss a t th e end of o n e sem ester than th ey did at th e beginning of the
s e m e s te r?
5. Will th e stu d en ts in a "stacked for su c cess" SSR program utilize a
wider ran g e of so u rc e s for locating reading m aterials at the e n d of one
sem ester th an they did at the beginning of th e sem ester?
2 2
6. Will the students in a "stacked for success" SSR program indicate that
they enjoy th e in-class SSR tim e more a t the end of one se m e ste r than
they did at th e beginning of the sem ester?
7. Will th e students in a "stacked for su ccess" SSR program be satisfied
with the S S R time provided in class at th e end of o n e sem ester, or will
they want to increase it/ d e c re a se it?
Design
The design of th is pilot study w as a combination of the One-Group
Posttest-O nly Design a s described by Cook and Cam pbell (1979) and
th e O ne-G roup P re te st-P o stte st D esign a s d e sc rib e d by Isa a c and
Michael (1981). T h e sam ple w as co m p o sed of five intact Level 3
c la sse s. T h e e n tire group w a s given the s a m e tre a tm e n t: they
participated in a "stacked for success" SS R program.
Participants
A g ro u p of 125 high school interm ediate (Level 3) ELD high
school s tu d e n ts w ere involved in this o n e -s e m e s te r 1992-1993 Pilot
Study. T he students w ere from o n e high school in a Los A ngeles county
urban a re a unified school district. The stu d en ts cam e from a w ide variety
of lan g u ag e groups, with Arm enian, S p an ish a n d K orean being the
largest.
All of th e stu d e n ts in Level 3 participated in the study. The
researcher w a s the te a c h e r of th e class, a s well a s th e research er in the
present study.
2 3
Instrumentation
Stanford Diagnostic R eading T est (SDRT)
T he Brown SDRT, C om prehension Subtest, P retest Form G and
P osttest Form H (Psychological Corporation, 1985), w as used to answ er
Pilot R esearch Q uestion 1 (developm ent of reading com prehension).
T his q u e stio n n a ire w as a re se a rc h e r-c o n stru c te d instrum ent
com prised of 12 item s related to students' reading habits and interests
(see Appendix A). Item 6 w as used to answ er Pilot R esearch Question 2
(g reater enjoym ent of reading). It provided four p o ssib le re sp o n se
choices: 1) not at all; 2) a little; 3) som e; and 4) a lot.
Item 10 w as used to answ er Pilot R esearch Q uestion 3 (perceived
reading co m p reh en sio n im provem ent). It provided th re e p o ssib le
response choices: 1) not much; 2) som e; and 3) a lot.
Item 5 w as u sed to answ er Pilot R esearch Q uestion 4 (increased
frequency of o u tside p le a su re reading). It provided th re e possible
response choices: 1) never; 2) som etim es; and 3) often.
Item 7 w as u sed to answ er Pilot R esearch Q uestion 5 (use of a
wider ra n g e of reading so u rces). It provided five p o ssib le resp o n se
choices: 1) classroom ; 2) hom e; 3) library, 4) store/ book club; 6 and (5)
relatives/friends.
Item 8 w as u sed to answ er Pilot R esearch Q uestion 6 (enjoym ent
of the SSR program). It provided four possible resp o n se choices: 1) not
at all; 2) a little; 3) som e; and 4) a lot.
2 4
Item 9 w as used to answ er Pilot R esearch Question 7 (satisfaction
with SSR tim e period). It provided three possible response choices: 1)
too long; 2) just right; and 3) not long enough.
Q ataC ollectionP rocedures
S ta nford Diagnostic R eading T esM S D B I)
T he SDRT w as adm inistered separately to each of the five c la sse s
at the experim ental school. It w as given twice by the sam e proctor (the
researcher) (pretest in S eptem ber 1992 and posttest in Ja n u ary 1993).
Both adm inistrations required 40 m inutes of testing time, and th e test
conditions for each c la ss w ere identical. Directions w ere read aloud from
the SDRT Administration Manual.
S tudent P re -Post Q ue stionnaire 1992 -93
This questionnaire w as adm inistered separately to each of th e five
c la s s e s at th e experim ental school. It w a s given twice (p retest in
S eptem ber 1992 and posttest in Ja n u ary 1993). T he questionnaire took
approxim ately 15 m inutes to adm inister. Each item w as read aloud by
th e proctor, and stu d en ts had their own copies, a s well, on which they
m arked th eir an sw ers. An a ttem p t w as m ad e to answ er stu d e n ts'
questions in a m anner that w as consistent from c la ss to class.
Analysis/Results
2 5
P airedX -T ests
Paired T -tests w ere used to answ er Pilot R esearch Q uestion 1
(developm ent of reading com prehension). T his gain w as statistically
significant at the p < .001 level for th e sam ple, and gains for every c la ss
w ere statistically significant at or beyond the .001 level for every class.
Using the SDRT Norms M anual, it w a s determ ined that th e students had
gained an av erag e of 15 m onths in 16 w eeks, or nearly o n e month for
every w eek in the program. (See Appendix B, Table B1.)
C o rrelated C b i^ S q u areJk n aly ses
In order to an sw e r Pilot R e se a rc h Q u estio n s 2 and 4, two
co rre la ted ch i-sq u are a n a ly s e s w e re perform ed, using p retest an d
posttest sco res from the Student Pre/P ost Q uestionnaire 1992-93.
For Pilot R esearch Question 2 (greater enjoym ent of reading),
results w ere statistically significant a t the p < .001 level. (S e e Appendix
B, Table B2.) Students clearly liked pleasure reading better after the one-
se m ester SSR program.
For Pilot R esearch Question 4 (increased frequency of outside
p leasu re reading), results w ere statistically significant a t the p < 001
level. (S e e Appendix B, T able B3.) After th e program , students w ere
engaging in pleasure reading more outside of th e classroom . This finding
w as also supported by a record of classroom library book checkouts.
T h ese checkouts d e c re a se d over th e sem ester, a s stu d en ts found o th er
sou rces for locating their SSR books.
2 6
Frequency. Distribution
No inferential statistics were u se d to analyze the an sw ers to Pilot
R esearch Q uestions 3, 5, 6, and 7. (Except for th e data for Pilot R esearch
Q uestion 5, no pretest information w as available.)
For Pilot R esearch Question 3 (perceived reading com prehension
improvement), 62.5% of th e students felt they h ad improved "a lot" after
the o n e -se m e ste r program ; 37% felt th ey had im proved "som e"; and
1.5% felt that they had improved "not much." (See Appendix B, Table B4.)
For R esearch Q uestion 5 (u se of a w ider ran g e of reading
sources), p ercen tag es could not be com puted b e c a u s e stu d en ts w ere
ask ed to ch o o se more th an one answ er; som e tren d s could be seen,
how ever. S tudents, in g en eral, w ere less d e p e n d e n t on classroom
library collections at the en d of th e study : th e num ber of students
bringing books from h o m e doubled; the n u m b er of stu d e n ts who
checked out books from th e library doubled; the num ber of students who
borrow ed books from friends tripled; a n d the num ber of stu d en ts who
bought books from a bookstore or book club alm o st quadrupled. (S ee
Appendix B, Table B5.)
For Pilot R esearch Question 6 (enjoym ent of SSR), 56.8% of the
students felt that they enjoyed SSR "a lot"; 37.6% felt that th ey enjoyed it
"som e"; and 5.6% felt that they enjoyed it "a little." (See Appendix B,
Table B6.)
Finally, for Pilot R esearch Q uestion 7 (satisfaction with daily SSR
time), 30.4% of th e students felt that th e SSR tim e in class w a s "not long
enough"; 66.4% felt that it w a s "just right"; and 3.2% felt that it w as "too
long." (S ee Appendix B, T able B7.)
2 7
Discussion
T he results of the study were, overall, quite favorable. R esults of
this four-month program led the research er to conclude that an in-school
free reading program had the potential to help ELD high school students
to develop m ore positive attitudes toward reading and to in crease their
reading com prehension. While it w as tem pting to suspect that the SSR
program during this se m e ste r w as responsible for this g ro u p 's "trend
toward improvement," th ere w as no com parison group and therefore no
a ssu ra n c e that growth w as a result of the treatm ent. It b ecam e clear that
an o th er study n e e d ed to b e d o n e from which m ore definitive results
could be attained.
T he Pilot Study w as effective in identifying research questions that
w ere viable for a one-group study. Its evaluation led to th e revision of
som e questions for the new Study and the developm ent of others that
app eared to be m ore relevant for a two-group study.
After the Pilot Study w as carried out, c h a n g es w ere m ade in the
R e se a rc h Q uestions for the new Study. R esearch Q u estio n s 1-4, in
general, mirrored Pilot Q uestions 1, 2, 4, and 5. Pilot Q uestions 3, 6, and
7 w ere dropped after th e Pilot for two re a so n s: In th e c a s e of Pilot
Q u estio n 3, it w a s d eterm in ed th a t s tu d e n ts' "perceived read in g
improvement" w as a sep ara te construct that w as outside of th e dom ain of
the intended study. Pilot Q uestions 6 and 7 w ere omitted b e c a u se they
w ere irrelevant for the new design since the com parison group would not
be participating in an S S R program and th erefo re could not be
questioned on their enjoym ent of SSR and th e appropriate am ount of
time th at should b e devoted to it.
2 8
Objectives of the 1993-1994 Study
The general objectives of th e 1993-1994 Study w ere to determ ine
w hether a "stacked for success" S S R program could help high school
ELD stu d en ts to (1) in crease th eir reading com prehension and (2)
d evelop positive attitudes toward reading. Two sub-objectives w ere to
identify any relationships that m ight exist betw een (a) frequency of
o u tsid e reading and com prehension and (b) u se of a w ider range of
o utside sources of pleasure reading and com prehension.
R esearchJQ uestions
Six R esearch Q uestions w ere developed for the 1993-94 study.
R esearch Q uestion 1 ad d ressed th e objective of reading com prehension
(Objective One). R esearch Q uestions 2-4 w ere related to th e objective
co n cern in g th e d ev elo p m en t of positive a ttitu d e s tow ard reading
(O bjective Two). Question 2 tap p e d the constructs of enjoym ent and
value of reading. Q uestions 3 and 4 w ere related to enjoym ent and value
of reading a s they were represented by students' behavior: frequency of
outside pleasure reading and the seeking out of a wider range of sources
of reading m aterials. New R esearch Q uestions 5 and 6 w ere added to
the study since it app eared after th e Pilot th at there could be possible
rela tio n sh ip s b e tw e en freq u en cy of o u tsid e p le a su re reading and
reading com prehension, a s well a s betw een the u se of a wider range of
s o u rc e s and read in g co m p reh en sio n (sub-objectives). Thus, in the
1993-94 study of interm ediate (Level 3) ELD high school students, the
final R esearch Q uestions included th e following:
29
1. Will the students in a "stacked for success" SSR program have higher
p o s tte s t results in reading co m p reh en sio n than th e stu d en ts in a
conventional ELD program ?
2. Will the students in a "stacked for success" SSR program have higher
p osttest results in "positive attitudes tow ard reading" th an the stu d en ts in
a conventional ELD program ?
3. Will the students in a "stacked for success" SSR program have higher
p o stte st results in "frequency of o u tside pleasure reading" th an th e
stu d en ts in a conventional ELD program ?
4. Will the students in a "stacked for success" SSR program have higher
p o stte st results in "wider ra n g e of p leasu re reading sources" than the
stu d en ts in a conventional ELD program ?
5. Is there a relationship betw een the "frequency of o u tsid e p lea su re
reading" and reading com prehension?
6. Is there a relationship betw een the u se of a "wider ran g e of p leasu re
reading sources" an d reading com prehension?
H ypotheses
1. It w as hypothesized that th e students in the "stacked for su c ce ss"
program would h a v e higher p osttest resu lts in reading com prehension
than th e students in the conventional ELD program .
Rationale: Based on the results of the pilot study, and given the
theoretical assumption that more reading leads to better reading, i t was
expected that the experimental group would achieve higher posttest
results in reading comprehension than the students in the conventional
ELD program.
3 0
2. It w as hypothesized that the stu d en ts in th e "stacked for success"
program would have higher posttest results in "positive attitudes toward
reading" than the students in the conventional ELD program.
Rationale: Based on the results of the pilot study, and since i t is believed
that once students are in an optimal free reading program, they will
become "hooked on books," i t was expected that the students in the
experimental group would increasingly come to a) value reading and b)
find i t to be enjoyable.
3. It w as hypothesized that the stu d en ts in th e "stacked for success"
program would have higher p o stte st results in "frequency of outside
pleasure reading" than the students in the conventional ELD program.
Rationale: Based on the results of the pilot study, and on the assumption
that once students have begun to find that in-class reading is
pleasurable, they w i l l want to continue reading, i t was expected that they
would do more pleasure reading during their "outside” leisure time.
4. It w as hypothesized that the stu d e n ts in th e "stacked for success"
program would have higher posttest results in "wider range of pleasure
reading sources" than the students in the conventional ELD program.
Rationale: Based on the results of the pilot study, and because access to
books can be sought in so many ways, i t was expected that once
students had engaged in the reading habit, they would want to pursue
reading materials that continued to appeal to them. Since the classroom
library would not offer a wide enough range of sources as the program
progressed, i t was believed that students would seek out additional
sources of materials.
31
5. It w as hypothesized that th ere would b e a positive relationship
b etw een stu d en ts' "frequency of o u tsid e p le a su re reading" and their
reading com prehension.
Rationale A: I t was anticipated that students who engaged in outside
pleasure reading would learn t o read better because they read more
than students who simply read during school hours. Therefore, those
who read more frequently than others would increase their reading
comprehension to a greater degree.
Rationale B: I t was anticipated that students engaged in SSR would (a)
increase their outside pleasure reading (as discussed in Hypothesis 3)
and (b) gain in reading comprehension (as discussed in Hypothesis 1 ) .
While (a) may not cause ( b ) , there might s t i l l exist a positive relationship
between them due to the SSR having an influence on both.
6. It w a s h ypothesized th a t there would be a positive relationship
betw een students' u se of "wider range of pleasure reading sources" and
their reading com prehension.
Rationale A: I t was anticipated that students who chose reading
materials from a wider range of sources would increase their reading
comprehension to a greater degree. Since they would have been
exposed to various types of reading genres and styles (a wider variety of
comprehensible input and linguistic elements), their reading
comprehension would increase.
Rationale B: I t was anticipated that students engaged i n SSR would (a)
u ti lize a wider range of reading sources (as discussed in Hypothesis 4)
and (b) gain in reading comprehension (as discussed i n Hypothesis 1 ) .
While ( a ) may not cause ( b ) , there might s t i l l exist a positive relationship
between them due to the SSR having an influence on both.
CHAPTER TWO
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
3 3
This chapter will include th e following two com ponents related to
the study: (1) an analysis of th e com m on factors identified in the
literature that may contribute to th e s u c c e ss of free reading program s;
and (2) six trends that em erge from this analysis.
Eight Com m on Factors in Successful
Free R eading Program s
In attem pting to d escribe an optimal free reading program th at
would e n a b le high school ELD stu d en ts to achieve g a in s in reading
com prehension and develop positive attitudes tow ards reading, it w a s
n ecessary to survey th e free reading studies that already existed. T he
goals of this survey w ere threefold: to identify the studies w hose d esig n s
included growth in reading co m p reh en sio n and the d ev elo p m en t of
positive attitudes tow ards reading a s d e p en d en t variables; to categorize
th e stu d ie s a s "successful" or "unsuccessful" related to th e s e two
objectives; and to determ ine th e com m on factors th at th e su ccessful
studies incorporated into their program s.
T he review of thirty-two re se a rc h stu d ie s (which included 41
se p a ra te experim ental groups) on free reading program s indicated th at
there w ere eight factors which w ere com m on to the successful studies;
(1) a c c e s s to books, (2) book appeal, (3) conducive environm ent, (4)
encourgem ent to read, (5) staff training, (6) non-accountability for w hat
3 4
w as read, (7) follow-up activities, and (8) am ount of "distributed" time
spent free reading.
For the purposes of this chapter, e a ch factor will be defined and a
description of how it w as incorporated into the successful program s will
b e provided. "Successful" program s will b e divided into th ree sep ara te
categories: (1) The first category is "reading com prehension," referred to
a s C-SS (com prehension-statistically significant) throughout th e text and
within th e appendices. An experim ental group th a t w as identified a s
successful in C-SS participated in a rese a rc h d e sig n that included a
com parison group and included te sts of statistical significance. (2) The
second category is "positive attitude toward reading," referred to a s A-SS
(attitude-statistically significant). An ex p erim en tal group th a t w as
identified a s successful in A-SS participated in a research design that
included a c o m p a riso n g ro u p a n d included te s ts of sta tistic a l
significance. (3) T he third category re p re sen ts a much le ss rigorous
c o n cep t of "success": "positive attitude toward reading observed,"
referred to a s A-OBS (attitude observed). Experim ental groups th at w ere
identified a s successful in A-OBS participated in research d esig n s where
"positive attitude toward reading" w as a variable of concern but w as not
e v a lu a te d using a n y statistical p ro ce d u re s. In fact, th re e of th e
exp erim en tal groups th at w ere c o n sid e red to b e su ccessfu l in this
category did not utilize designs which included com parison groups at all
(Kaminsky, 1992; W iscont, 1990; and Farrell, 1982); so the results of
th e s e experim ents could not b e considered a s definitive a s th e results
from the o th er studies which did have com parison groups.
T he rationale for including the third categ o ry of "successful
program s" is that a large num ber (54%) of the 41 experim ental groups
reported growth in students' positive attitudes tow ards reading, yet only
seven of th e se g ro u p s participated in rese a rc h d e sig n s which (a)
included com p ariso n groups a n d (b) conducted te s ts of statistical
significance. Given a construct such a s positive attitude toward reading,
which is hard to operationalize and to evaluate statistically, descriptive
ob serv atio n s of b eh av io rs m ust som etim es suffice; yet th ey can be
important in docum enting im portant trends. At the conclusion of the A-
OBS studies, experim ental g ro u p s reported such behaviors a s th e se ;
students ch o se to do free reading when given other choices of activities;
there w as an increase in the num ber of books borrowed from the school
library; students dem onstrated a reluctance to put books down when the
bell rang; stu d en ts u se d a b ro ad er range of so u rces for their reading
m aterials; th ere w a s in increase in th e num ber of stu d en ts doing free
reading in study hall; there w as an in crease in the ran g e of topics
selected for free reading; and m any other similar behavioral trends. As
Sum m ers and M cClelland (1982 ) explain it, free reading program s can
have a "catalytic effect" in term s of developing student interest in reading,
an effect which "m ay ultimately b e of far g reater im portance then any
precisely m easured statistical outcom es" (p. 108).
R esults of th e 32 program s (41 experim ental groups) by level
(elem entary, m iddle school/junior high, high school, and college)
show ed th at ten experim ental g ro u p s w ere successful in C-SS; sev en
w ere successful in A-SS; and fifteen w ere successful in RA-OBS. An
overview of all of th e s e studies is provided in Appendix C, Table C1. It
3 6
should be noted that w here groups w ere not considered to be successful,
this m ea n s that, with only one exception, there w e re no significant
differences found betw een th e experim ental and th e com parison groups.
In short, in th e se ca se s, th e experim ental groups did the sam e a s the
com parison groups. The only exception is the L aw son study, in which
th e re w ere statistically significant d ifferen ces b e tw e e n two of th e
exp erim ental g ro u p s a n d th e co m p ariso n g ro u p , in favor of th e
com parison group. Som e discussion on th ese particular results will be
provided in the second section of th is chapter dealing with tre n d s that
can be identified from the literature.
Of the 41 experim ental groups th a t were included in the survey,
fourteen of the groups w ere com pletely unsuccessful in any of th e th ree
categories. Tw elve of the groups w ere considered u nsuccessful in the
a re a s of C-SS and A-SS. T hat is, w here C-SS and/or A-SS achievem ent
w as looked for, no differences could b e found betw een the experim ental
and com parison groups. Two groups w ere com pletely unsuccessful in
the a re a of A-OBS; w here A-OBS w as looked for, no student behaviors
could be observed at the com pletion of the studies th a t would indicate
positive attitudes toward reading. M ore will be said a b o u t th e se studies
later, a s well.
Each of th e following eight factors is introduced in the context of
th e stu d ie s th at in co rp o rated them . T h e com plete an aly sis of th e
experim ental groups by factors is represented in A ppendix C, Table C2.
3 7
Factor One:. A ccess
Definition
O ne factor which is fundam ental in fre e reading program s is
a c c e s s to books. M cCracken and M cCracken (1978) h av e concluded
that "a m ajor obstacle to th e successful implem entation of SSR [or any
free reading program ] is th e lack of a d e q u a te reading m aterials for
students" (p. 78). Providing a "book flood," or w hat Fader (1967) term s
"saturation" is th e key to th e beginning of an effective free reading
program (p. 57).
Work by th o se in terested in such program s sh o w s that th e re
should b e "boosts" in at least three are a s: school and public libraries,
classroom libraries, and student personal book collections.
Clearly, libraries provide a crucial m e a n s of a c c e s s to reading
m aterials. Krashen (1993) points out th at a c c e s s to libraries affects how
much children read. The g reater num ber of books which a re available,
and the longer the libraries stay open, will determ ine just how good this
a c c e ss will be. In a national survey in Fiji of children's reading, several
school factors show ed correlations with reading scores. M ost im portant
w as th e size of the school library (Elley, 1984). Thus, "enriching the print
environm ent by m ea n s of a school library resu lts in m ore reading,"
K rashen reports (1993, p. 34). It's also im portant for books to b e
"physically close" to the students, which is the c a s e when students u se
the school library. T hey m ust be able to get to the books easily w hen
they d ecid e to read (Clary, 1991).
However, m any rese a rc h e rs a s se rt that th e school library should
not be th e sole so u rc e of new books; d o n atio n s from p a re n ts,
3 8
bookstores, publishing com panies, and comm unity service clubs can be
used to assim ilate classroom library collections which are rich in num ber
an d variety (Moore, Jo n e s, and Miller, 1980; Gam brell, 1978; Jenkins,
1957). Oliver (1975) advises using peer-produced m aterials, a s well.
C o n ten t a re a s c la ssro o m s m ust h av e "starter sh elv es," at least, a
collection of item s that relate to c la s s topics and stu d en ts' in terests
(Clary, 1991).
Other so u rces of a c c e ss to books are publishers' book clubs, book
stores, and Book Fairs. By purchasing books, students can add to their
own personal collections and have m any alternatives for sharing with
friends. C arlsen and Sherrill (1988) point out that "that which is precious
an d valuable is that which w e w ant to own" (p. 148); if stu d e n ts
acknow ledge th e value of reading, th ey will w ant to own their own
books. Book clubs provide a monthly opportunity for students to add new
boo k s to their personal collections, a s well a s a built-in a v e n u e to
"advertise" new titles w hen they arrive during class. O'M asta and Wolf
(1991) recom m end having school Book F airs which a re strategically
planned to o ccur during each year so th at stu d en ts can hav e timely
a c c e s s to additional books.
T heT H em entof ^Access in Successful Free. R eading Program s
Of the ten experim ental groups which w ere successful in C -SS, all
ten (100%) paid specific attention to the idea of a c c e ss. (S ee Appendix
C, Table C3.) Of th ese groups, several simply report that a large num ber
of books w ere incorporated into the program s (Holt and O Tuel, 1989;
Hafiz and Tudor, 1989). Hafiz and T udor's (1989) group also allowed
stu d en ts to tak e the books home. Manning and M anning's (1984) E2
group w as a sk e d to self-select books of their choice from classroom
library collections. Other rese a rc h e rs are m ore specific and state child-
to-book ratios. A ranha(1985) supplied each child with 1.5 books, on the
a v e ra g e , and th en the books w ere routinely e x h a n g e d am ong the
children. Lai (1993) in d icates th at for his E1 and E2 experim ental
groups, there w ere 40 books for a c la ss of 20 read ers (two books per
child, on the average) and that th ese books w ere also rotated. In Elley's
(1991) research, the Niue study afforded one c la ss of children 48 reading
books (about 1.5 per child), followed by the addition of blown-up books
with large texts to be used with groups; while his Singapore study offered
th e experim ental group 60 books per class (two per student), and an
additional 150-200 books for independent reading (three to four books
per child). In Lai's 1983 study with M angubhai, the two experim ental
c la s s e s w ere given five lots of fifty, at intervals of four-to-five w eeks (250
books each, or m ore than 8 per child).
Of the se v en experim ental groups which w ere successful in A-SS,
all se v en (100% ) highlighted a c c e s s to books. (S e e Appendix C, Table
C4). Two of th e s e groups (Aranha, 1985, and Manning and M annings'
E2 group, 1984) w ere included in the discussion in the earlier section on
s u c c e s s in C -S S . How ever, M anning and M anning's E3 group also
offered stu d en ts help in m aking p lan s for further re a d in g -a n d thus in
attaining the n e c essa ry m aterials. Four of the groups provided extensive
c la ssro o m library re so u rc e s. In G re a n e y 's (1970) experim ent, the
re se a rc h e r collected 400 books from the city library (averaging 11 per
child), and the pupils them selves h oused them in the classroom used for
4 0
read in g . Holt an d O 'Tuel (1989) offered rec re atio n a l read in g ,
periodicals, and stories; Pfau (1967) had 100 trade books, e a sy read ers
and literature books for each class; and Cline and Kretke (1980) ensured
that each teacher had a "starter set" of books to lend to students. In this
latter group, students w ere also given opportunities to visit the school
library, to buy books from a book club, and to ex ch an g e popular titles
with each other.
Of the fifteen experim ental groups which w ere considered to be
su ccessfu l in A-OBS, all fifteen (100%) included a c c e s s a s a key
concern. (S ee A ppendix C, T able C5.) Of th ese, th e Elley (1991)
groups in Niue and S ingapore h av e been d iscussed previously in term s
of a c c e ss to books. Several research ers, in particular, concentrated on
providing large am ounts of re so u rc e s for classroom collections. Oliver
(1976) replaced th e u su al "basals" with a selection of recreational
reading books for the classroom . Kaminsky (1992) en su red th at there
w ere th ree to five titles per child, and that half of them w ere recycled
every thirty days. In addition, stu d en ts could take the books hom e. They
also applied for their own library c a rd s and took at least o n e field trip to
the city library. Jenkins (1957) offered "books and m ore books" (p. 88),
for the classroom library, including books borrowed from city and county
library collections, a s well a s th o se from teacher and student collections.
Petrim oulx provided 80-100 popular m agazines and re a d e rs for only
se v en stu d en ts, and D avis and L ucas offered a wide ran g e of 700
m aterials per Reading C enter for approxim ately 140 students in each.
O ther re se a rc h e rs focused on providing a c c e s s for stu d e n ts to
school libraries. Law son (1968), Farrell (1982), and W iscont (1990) all
41
helped students to take advantage of school library book collections, and
Lawson added th e "plus" of one autom atic library period per w eek per
class. Fader (1976) gave students two paperbacks at the beginning of
the school year and allowed them to trade them in for o th ers. "Book
borrowing" w as scheduled twice a w eek for each student. S tu d en ts were
also provided with additional periodicals two to th ree tim es a w eek in
their English and social stu d ies c la sse s in this group.
In som e c a se s, w h ere school collections w ere not sufficient,
s tu d e n ts w ere further h e lp e d to lo c a te books through com m unity
libraries, to order selected books through inter-library loan system s, or to
purchase books through book clubs.
Factor Two: Appeal
Definition
Another factor which is often considered in free reading program s
is that of "book appeal." A crucial elem ent of ap p e al (and o n e which is
inherent in any free reading program) is self-selection, or the opportunity
for stu d en ts to c h o o se w hat they wish to read. O ther iss u e s include
providing a wide variety of so u rces and types of m aterials, different levels
of readability and length, a n d treating th e d ispersem ent of b o o k s a s a
sales cam paign, w here "advertising" to generate interest is em phasized.
With respect to providing opportunities for learn ers to self-select,
Everett (1987) m aintains that, especially by th e m iddle school years,
children have definite opinions about th e types of books they like to read,
and frequently, ad u lts s e e m u n ab le to identify th e se h ig h -ap p eal
m aterials. Highlighting this idea, sh e n o te s that only 3 out of 24 books
recom m ended in 1980 by th e critics in th e School Library Journal and
Booklist for 6th-8th grad ers received favorable recom m endations by the
students them selves. Other re se a rc h e rs have contributed to this idea,
noting th at learners' sp o n tan eo u s interests need to be reflected in the
m aterials that are presented (Hafiz and Tudor, 1989; Fader, 1967, Clary,
1991; Van Jura, 1984), and that s te p s such a s surveying children's
interests should b e taken before reading m aterials a re selected (Hafiz
and Tudor, 1989; Clary, 1991). Of utm ost im portance is that teach ers
find books that m atch learn ers' perceived p referen ces, not w hat the
tea c h e rs im agine th e students want to read and that "considerations of
literary m erit a re b e s t treated with caution in this respect" (Hafiz and
Tudor, 1989, p. 10). As Van Ju ra (1984) claim s,"The key point is to
accept th e students' reading choices" (p. 541).
In order to offer students enough choices, a free reading program
should incorporate a wide variety of m aterials (Gambrell, 1978; Fader,
1967; C arlsen and Sherrill, 1988). F requently-m entioned additions to
such program s (asid e from th e usual h a rd b ack s an d anthologies) are
paperbacks, or w hat Fader (1967) aptly term s "invitations to possession"
(p. 80); periodicals; picture books; story books; tradebooks; and
m agazines. A popular source is what K rashen (1993) refers to a s "light
reading," which in clu d e s com ic b o o k s and te e n ro m an ces. He
c h a ra c te riz e s light reading a s th e "m ost powerful w ay of encouraging
children to read" (p. 48). C arlsen an d Sherrill (1988) refer to light
reading a s "subliterature" (p. 87), including the n on-classics and "hot
stuff," and ag ree th at it h a s th e power to "hook" stu d en ts on reading.
W hat reading program s m ust endeavor to do, they propose, is to have a
4 3
larg e variety of choices "in order to avoid the d e p re ssin g co n trast
betw een w hat a p p e a rs a s exciting hom e reading and th e dull reading
fare of school" ( p. 37).
Different levels of readability and length should also be
considered in th e selection of reading m aterials (Gambrell, 1978). Hafiz
and Tudor (1989) m aintain th at shorter books place le ss strain on
learners' concentration and a re more likely to be picked up and read at
odd m om ents. They note that students derive a feeling of achievem ent
from completing a book in a couple of days. Since reading levels in each
c la ss will vary, easier, a s well a s m ore difficult works, should be available
to m eet all stu d en ts' n e e d s. Ironically, som etim es a good rea d e r will
c h o o se an "easy" book, and a less cap ab le read er will c h o o se a m ore
difficult one. As Barbe and Abbott (1975) indicate, it is "not n ecessary to
read material at any exact level" (p. 54). It is acceptable to read above or
below one's reading level, if w hat is being read is being enjoyed.
Finally, book appeal ca n be e n h an ced by m aking su re that the
a p p e a ra n c e of th e reading m aterials is attractive and enticing. F ader
(1967) a sse rts th at "it is the responsibility of e ach teach er of every c la ss
to m ake the h o u se of literacy attractive" (p. 65). Posters can be put up to
"sell" student book favorites, skits can be perform ed b a s e d on popular
book plots at assem blies, public a d d re ss announcem ents can d eclare
th e top ten favorites of th e m onth, and te a c h e rs can read aloud to
stu d en ts. S uch activities a re im portant interest-developers for all a g e
levels (Gambrell, 1978; Morrow, 1982; Hafiz and Tudor, 1989; and Petre,
1971).
4 4
T he .Element of-A ppeal in Successful F ree Reading Program s
Of the ten experim ental groups which w ere successful in C-SS,
nine (90%) included book appeal in their free reading program s. (S ee
Appendix C, Table C3.) (It should be noted that all of th e experim ental
g ro u p s in the thirty-two stu d ie s included self-selection a s a criterion, so
th e issu e of self-selection will henceforth be considered a "given" with
resp e c t to the issu e of book appeal.) Of th e se nine successful studies,
A ranha (1985), Elley and M angubhai's (1993) E1 and E2 groups, and
Holt and O'Tuel's (1989) group stressed the im portance of having a wide
variety of non-conventional (e.g., b asal) m aterials, both in term s of
co n te n t and readability ra n g e s, th at would suit the in te rests of their
learners. Additionally, attractive book display w as a com ponent of th e
Elley and M angubhai (1983) study. Lai (1993 ) and Hafiz and Tudor
(1989) used books that w ere designed to be interesting, ch o sen for their
"ap p ro p riaten ess" for their ELD populations in term s of co n ten t and
readability. Elley's (1991) studies in Niue and Singapore included high-
in te rest illustrated story b o o k s (which incorporated natural language,
local them es, and an elem ent of excitem ent or humor), and a num ber of
"blown-up" books, or what a re comm only referred to a s Big Books, w here
stu d en ts in a group can all read along a t the sam e time.
Of the se v en g ro u p s that w ere successful in A-SS, five (71%)
included book appeal a s a n essential concern. (S e e Appendix C, Table
C 4.) The A ranha (1985) an d Holt and O'Tuel studies w ere d iscussed
earlier in the section on C -S S . The other three groups provided w hat
th ey considered to be appealing m aterials. Pfau (1967) offered a variety
of boo k s within th e students' reading ra n g e s (preprim er-4.0); Cline and
4 5
K retke's (1980) "starter set" included a wide ottering ot paperbacks, but
stu d en ts w ere asked to bring in any other kinds ot reading m aterials that
they w ished, and G reaney (1970) provided a wide range ot m aterials and
e n c o u ra g e d th e children to "advertise" their tavorites by putting up
N oticeboards w here they could display book reviews, posters, cartoons,
and crossw ords inspired by their reading.
Ot the fifteen experim ental groups that w ere successful in A-OBS,
elev en (73%) s tre sse d ap p e al a s a vital concern. (S e e A ppendix C,
T a b le C5.) Elley's 1991 N iue and S in g ap o re g ro u p s h a v e b een
d isc u sse d earlier in the C -SS section. S om e rese a rc h e rs concentrated
on providing a wide variety of non-conventional m aterials: Oliver's
(1976) E1 and E2 groups w ere offered a selection of recreational reading
b ooks that w ere considered "satisfying" (p. 227), a s o p p o sed to th e
typical b asal an thologies u se d in reading groups; Petrim oulx (1988)
o ffered m a g a z in e s, n e w sp a p e rs, p am p h le ts, an d atypical school
m a te ria ls, including com ic books; an d E verett (1987) provided
n e w s p a p e rs , o th er p erio d icals, an d "recreatio n al type" m aterials
generally not used in the regular classroom s.
O ther rese a rc h e rs focused on allowing students to have a voice
in th e p u rch a se and/or arra n g e m e n t of m aterials: Kam insky (1992)
a sk ed students to help select recreational reading m aterials funded by a
special grant and allowed stu d en ts to keep so m e of them , thereby adding
the additional appeal of private ow nership; Jen k in s (1957) arranged for
children and te a c h e rs together to work out an invitingly arranged display
of tradebooks, new spapers, and other printed m aterials, and Davis and
L ucas (1971) encouraged stu d e n ts to read any type, kind or quantity of
4 6
reading m aterial (except textbooks), helping them to se t up a wire
spinner for paperbacks and to attach book pockets to bulletin b o ard s to
advertise favorites.
Two o th e r re s e a rc h e rs u se d an ev en stro n g e r "advertising"
approach: Farrell (1982), having used Young Adult Lists, the librarian's
expertise, and a list of her own personally favorite books to select initial
classroom library m aterials, put th e se choices on a cart and delivered
"thumbnail sketches" of each to gen erate student interest. Fader (1976),
believing strongly in "diffusion," the responsibility of e a ch te a c h e r to
m ake books appealing to students, began with the selection of 1200
b o o k s from th e P a p e rb o u n d B ooks in P rint list an d te a c h e r
recom m endations, but en d ed with the circulation and recirculation of the
500 top titles that the boys liked and actually read. T he school also
ad o p ted th e u s e of "fam iliar reading m ate ria ls im ported from th e
nonschool world in which learning w as never forced upon [the students]"
(p. 98). Thus, new spapers and m agazines with content m atter relevant to
every course in the curriculum w ere used freely, a s well. All hardbound
books and anthologies w ere replaced with paperbacks.
Factor Three - C onducive Environm ent
Definition
A good deal of attention h as been paid to the idea of providing an
environm ent that is conducive to free reading. It se e m s logical that when
re a d e rs a re in com fortable, quiet surroundings, th ey will be m ore
motivated to start reading and to sustain it.
4 7
In term s of comfort, the student m ust feel physically, a s well a s
em otionally, at e a s e . T he physical c h a ra c te ristic s of th e reading
environm ent are significant in promoting this feeling. Morrow (1982) h as
docum ented that young children u se library corners m ore when pillows,
e a sy chairs, and c a rp e ts are part of the reading environm ent. Other
rese a rc h e rs have su g g ested adding students' art work, colorful posters,
book jackets, and m obiles (Gambrell, 1971; Clary, 1991). Clary (1991)
recom m ends providing th e te a c h e r with a footstool, lam p, plants, and
pictures for a "homey" atm osphere. She m aintains that with comfortable
sp o ts to read, not only will students feel relaxed, but also "an atm osphere
that shouts th e im portance of reading" will b e established (p. 343).
Part of putting students at e a s e com es from creating a structure for
reading so th at stu d e n ts know w hat to ex p ect during free reading
periods. As G reaney (1970) recognizes, often it takes so m e time for the
program s to get going, and th ere m ay be "minor chaos" a t first; but the
students shortly becom e accustom ed to the various procedures involved.
Also, part of any free reading progam is "self-pacing," which m ean s that
stu d en ts read at rates which a re com fortable for them (Sartain, 1960;
G reaney, 1970). W ithout the n ecessity to com pete with other read ers,
th e reading tim e can b e a relaxing an d enjoyable ex p e rien c e for
learners.
Finally, a s W iscont (1990) points out, "Many young people lack a
quiet place to read" (p. 10). Often, free reading time in school is their only
e s c a p e from th e distractions of th e outside world. M cC racken's (1971)
stu d en ts said they liked SSR "b ec a u se it is quiet," with m any indicating
th at it w as the only quiet time in their entire d ay (p. 582). The need for
4 8
uninterrupted tim e is essential, if stu d en ts are to e n g a g e in the reading
p ro cess for increasingly longer sustained periods of time.
Of co u rse, libraries and m ost classroom s a re clearly p lac e s
w here students can find such quiet time; but in som e classroom s, there
a re study carrells, bean bag pillows, cloakroom s, and reading corners
(B arbe and Abbott, 1975), or what Gam brell (1978) term s "great nooks
a n d crannies" (p.331). It is im portant to note that for som e students,
especially th o s e sensitive to stimuli, th e s e other kinds of locations may
b e necessary (Barbe and Abbott, 1975).
With both elem ents of comfort and quiet "in place," free reading
periods can offer students a m uch-needed and quite valuable "20 m inute
vacation" (Jones, 1978, p. 102).
T h e Element of C onducive E nvironm ents in S uccessful Free R eading
P rogram s
Of the ten experim ental groups which w ere successful in C -SS, all
ten (100%) included attention to developing an environm ent that w as
conducive to reading. (S e e A ppendix C, T able C3.) Eight of th e s e
g ro u p s simply observed th e silent an d uninterrupted elem en ts of SSR
within the reg u la r classro o m environm ent (Aranha, 1985; Elley and
M angubhai, 1983 (E1 an d E2); Elley 1991 (Niue and S ingapore); Holt
an d OTuel (1989); and Lai 1993 (E1 and E2).
However, Manning an d M anning (1984) added another elem ent of
com fort to their E2 (peer interaction) group, that of relaxing with friends;
stu d e n ts interacted with e a c h other ab o u t their books after each SSR
period in a risk-free, low anxiety context. Students could thus feel the
4 9
kind of satisfaction that com es from participating in an activity that they
could enjoy with their p eers. Hafiz a n d Tudor (1989) a d d e d to th e
concept of a conducive environm ent in another way. They h a d students
m eet at one research er's place of work every d a y after school. Away
from a n acad em ic setting, stu d e n ts w ere in a m ore "tension-free
environm ent," a relaxed atm osphere in which th ey were free to derive
w hat th e authors term ed "a m axim um of p lea su re from th e reading
m aterials available to them" (p. 7).
Of the sev en experim ental g ro u p s that w ere successful in A-SS,
seven (100%) included the developm ent of a conducive environm ent a s
an im portant concern. (S ee Appendix C, Table C4.) Aranha (1985) and
Holt an d O'Tuel (1989) groups, a s well a s M anning and M anning's
(1984) E3 group, have already been d isc u sse d with re sp e c t to this
factor. Two groups (Pfau, 1967 and M anning and Manning, 1984, E2)
utilized th e regular "quiet" classroom environm ent. Two o th er groups
used classroom environm ents, a s well, but with additions: G reaney
(1970) put "Do Not Disturb" signs on th e classroom doors and ignored
a ttem p ts a t interruptions by th e s tu d e n ts until th e a tte m p ts finally
su b sid e d : sim ilarly, C line and K retke (1980) s tre s s e d th e "no
interruption" rule strongly and set a bell tim er so th at students would not
be distracted by thinking about when SS R would b e over.
Of the fifteen experim ental groups that w ere successful in A-OBS,
all fifteen (100%) highlighted the inclusion of a conducive environm ent in
their program s. (S ee Appendix C, Table C5.) Two of these g ro u p s (Elley
1991, N iue and S ingapore) have previously b e e n d isc u sse d in th e
section on C-SS.
5 0
Eleven of th e se successful groups concentrated on providing quiet
classroom atm ospheres for reading: Kaminsky, 1992; Lawson, 1968 (E1,
E2, E3); E verett,1987; Fader, 1976; Petrimoulx, 1988; Farrell, 1982;
Jen k in s 1957; and Oliver 1976 (E1 and E2). However, th re e of th e se
groups offered so m e "extras"; Farrell (1982) n o tes that though the
classroom w as "traditional," it w as large and brightly w indow ed, giving
students a feeling of o p en n ess, rather than the usual closed-in classroom
feeling. Similarly, Jen k in s (1957) added the special feature of allowing
students to sit with their friends. (This is rem iniscent of the cam araderie
achieved in M anning and M anning's (1982) E2 p e e r interaction group.)
G reaney's (1976) E1 and E2 groups also placed em p h asis on quiet and
a lack of interruptions. SSR rules w ere strictly enforced, silent reading
periods becam e system atically longer, and a tim er w as u se d to ensure
that stu d en ts' interest would be focused on their books, rather than on
the time.
Finally, two re s e a rc h e rs provided alternative se ttin g s for their
students. W iscont (1990) offered students opportunities to read in the
Media C enter, which approxim ated a library-like atm osphere; and Davis
and L ucas (1971) se t up Reading C enters, which w ere se p a ra te from the
regular classroom s and w here th e SSR took place. S tudents w ere not
allowed to u se th e c e n te rs a s S tudy Halls for doing hom ework, thereby
giving them the s e n s e that this w as a place for pleasure, not a work
place.
51
Factor Four - Encouragem ent
Definition
E n co u rag em en t to read c o m e s from having a staff th a t is
com m itted to the value of reading and to th e id ea of free reading
program s. T hose who provide tim e for recreational reading "are likely to
be in stru m en tal in m otivating children to s e e k en jo y m e n t from
recreational reading" (Everett, 1987, p. 3). The larger the num ber of staff
m em bers who believe in free reading, the greater the ch an ce is that such
support will help to m ake the program effective.
Staff m em bers can portray their en th u siasm for reading in a
num ber of ways. Simply telling children to read m ay have an im pact on
the am ount of reading done, a rg u e s K rashen (1993). A key elem ent
which is an effective tool for encouraging children to read is modeling.
R esearch ers have expounded upon the need for all adults in the room to
read w hen the students a re reading. In this way, children s e e and se n se
that reading is being valued (Gambrell, 1978; Mork, 1972; M cCracken
and McCracken, 1978; Cardanelli, 1992; Clary, 1991). Many stu d en ts do
not have good m odels at hom e, note Carlsen and Sherrill (1988): 'T h ere
is little doubt that children imitate th e interests of the adults around them.
The child who d o e s not s e e parents or siblings reading is cut off from one
of th e stimuli that c re a te s a reader" (p.143). Sm ith (1988a) further
supports this position with his assertion that "children will e n d eav o r to
understand and en g a g e in anything they se e adults doing, provided the
ad u lts d em o n stra te enjoym ent and satisfaction in doing it" (p. 201).
Another w ay th at staff m em bers ca n encourage stu d en ts to read is by
sharing their own personal reading interests with the students. Gam brell
(1978) relates that when children se e books that th e teach er is reading,
they want to read the sam e ones--and often will even ask to borrow them
w hen the teach er is finished. This chain of activities rep re sen ts w hat
P etre (1977) term s a "ripple effect," w here a teach er's enthusiasm for a
literary work can spark stud ents' interest" (p. 311). Notably, w hat th e
tea c h e r d o e s after silent reading a lso h e lp s to d e fin e -a n d m ake
v aluable-silent reading for children (M cCracken and M cCracken, 1978).
S haring books through follow-up d isc u ssio n s am ong stu d e n ts an d
teacher(s) can becom e a popular activity. M cCracken and M cCracken
(1978) tell th e story of o n e social stu d ie s tea c h e r who b eg an e a ch
morning by silently reading the new spaper for five to fifteen m inutes. He
then com m ented aloud to the c la ss ab o u t w hat he had read, and th e
c la s s e n g a g e d in a d isc u ssio n . His s tu d e n ts sta rte d bringing th e
new spaper to class, and soon the whole c la ss w as reading n ew sp ap ers
to begin the morning.
It is also important to consider bringing parents and adm inistrators
into the act of encouraging stu d en ts to read. Som e suggestions have
been m ade about w ays in which the principal of the school can becom e
involved (Davis, 1992; M aynes, 1981). Davis (1992) rem arks that am ong
th e various w ays a principal can e x e rc ise leadership in th e a re a of
reading skills, acting a s a reading role m odel is one of the m ost effective.
S h e recounts the c a s e of a principal in Illinois who g o e s to a different
classroom every day and se le c ts a student; the student th en brings a
favorite book to the office and rea d s from it to the principal. T he principal
listens, d isc u sse s the reading with the child, and then m odels reading
53
from th e student's book. T he child returns to c la ss wearing a badge that
says, "I read to the principal today."
Similarly, parents can support in-school free reading program s by
encouraging their children to select a n d obtain books of interest for the
program --and by encouraging the continuance of reading at hom e. O ne
school in C hicago set a sid e a 20-m inute SSR period at school and
a d d e d a 20-m inute m inimum recreatio n al read in g period at hom e.
P a re n ts filled o u t a "P arent Pledge" to provide th e time (V andevier,
1992).
Finally, p e e r encouragem ent, especially for older children, is often
a very powerful m otivating factor. Not only do adults serv e a s role
m odels, but school friends have a large impact on w hether or not reading
b e c o m e s a so cially -accep tab le activity. T his kind of "p eer group
imitation" can b e very influential in getting stu d en ts to learn to read for
pleasu re (Sadoski, 1980, p. 154).
The Elem ent of E ncouragem ent in Successful F ree Reading Program s
Of the ten experim ental g ro u p s which w ere successful in C-SS,
nine (90%) included en co u rag em en t a s a factor in their free reading
program s. (S e e A ppendix C, T able C3.) Two groups s tre s se d th e
significance of te a c h e r m odeling a s a way of show ing that reading is
p leasurable and worthwhile (Aranha, 1985; Elley and M angubhai's E1
and E2, 1983). Two other groups (Elley 1991, Niue and Singapore), in
addition to Elley and M angubhai (1983, E1 a n d E2), ex p erien ced
e n c o u rag em en t in the form of "interactive reading activities" betw een
te a c h e rs and students. (More will b e m entioned about this in the section
5 4
on Factor Seven-Follow Up Activities.) T hese research ers detail the high
involvem ent of te a c h e rs with th e stu d e n ts in sh arin g books and
discussing them in their free reading program s. In th e s e groups, th ere
w as opportunity for individual children, or sm all groups of children, to
have special tim e with their teacher after the reading period (or during it,
in th e c a s e of th e S h a red Books program , originally develo p ed by
Holdaway, 1979, in which students read along with the tea c h e r until they
could read independently).
Two o th e r g ro u p s e x p e rien c e d e n c o u ra g e m e n t from o th e r
so u rces. M anning and M anning's (1984) E2 peer interaction group
received support from their p e e rs through stu d en t-stu d en t ex ch an g es,
and Hafiz and T udor's (1989) group w as well-supported by th e parents of
the students in the program s. T h ese parents encouraged students to (1)
go to the reading program after school e a c h day and to (2) continue
reading at hom e a s much a s possible.
Finally, Lai's (1993 ) E1 And E2 sum m er g ro u p s w ere given
rew ards for reading, a s well a s being invited to a book exhibition, w here
they could e a ch p u rch ase a thirty-dollar book from a collection of story
books, non-fiction books, and picture books.
Of the seven experim ental groups which w ere successful in A-SS,
six (86% ) included e n c o u ra g e m e n t a s an im portant factor. (S e e
Appendix C, T able C4.) The A ranha (1985) an d M anning and M anning
(1984) E2 g ro u p s have already been d iscu ssed in the section on C -SS.
T hree of the other groups provided student-teacher tim e and "feedback"
after th e SSR periods. In M anning and M anning's (1984) E3 group,
stu d e n ts participated in co n feren ces with th e tea c h e r a t least o n ce a
5 5
w eek in order to d isc u ss the book(s) the student w as reading. In
G rean ey 's (1970) group, te a c h e rs read aloud to the experim ental group
after the free reading period, and then d iscussions took place on the
individual books that stu d en ts had been reading independently, a s well
a s on the c la s s books that th e te a c h e r had read aloud to the group.
Similarly, P fau's (1967) group w as given opportunities to "extend" their
b o o k s with th e te a c h e r and in g ro u p s through v a rio u s form s of
comm unication "in order to gain th e p leasure often needed to develop a
desire for further reading" (p. 37).
Last, Cline and K retke's (1980) staff tem pted stu d en ts to becom e
e n g ag ed in w hat they touted a s th e "privileged activity" of free reading
and em phasized the value of bringing m ore books from hom e, buying
them , exchanging them, and using th e library (p. 504).
Of the fifteen experim ental groups that w ere successful in A-OBS,
fourteen (93%) included th e factor of encouragem ent. (S e e Appendix C,
T able C5). T he two Elley (1991) g ro u p s in S ingapore an d Niue hav e
been previously m entioned in the discussion on C-SS.
For m any of th e s e groups, te a c h e r and staff m odeling w a s a
prim ary consideration a s a form of encouragem ent (Oliver, 1976, E1 and
E2; Farrell, 1982; Everett, 1987; an d W iscont, 1990). How ever, th e
W iscont e n c o u ra g e m e n t factor m ay h av e b een so m ew h at lim ited,
according to the research ers, since so m e of the te a c h e rs did not read
recreatio n al m aterials during S S R ; in stead , th ey re a d c la ssro o m
teaching m aterials. How ever, the M edia C enter specialist in that group
helped to provide additional encouragem ent to students by acting a s a
reso u rce person; sh e m ad e recom m endations to suit students' interests
5 6
and helped to attain the children's self-selected books from other
so u rces when they were not available at th e school site.
P eer encouragem ent to read also operated in th e Lawson (1968,
E1, E2, E3) and Jenkins (1957) groups. A social elem ent w as p resen t in
both: In the Lawson groups, students w ere allowed to sit by their friends
during SSR and th en to h a v e opportunities to s h a re with them , "to
chuckle with them over funny parts" (p. 88). In the Jenkins groups, the act
of p e e r support, of seeing c la ssm a te s read, w as considered "a strong
incentive to act accordingly" (p. 501).
Finally, in th ree groups, students received personal attention and
the en co u rag em en t to read from other adult sources. In the D avis and
L ucas (1971) group, a special "reading counselor" w a s provided with
whom students could schedule book conferences up to twice a w eek at
firs t-a n d then m ore often later, a s they wished. T he stu d en ts in the
K am insky (1992) study also received hom e-based encouragem ent: the
p a re n ts w ere involved in th e d evelopm ent of th e program , an d the
te a c h e r sent h om e new sletters asking them to p u rch a se free reading
books for the stu d e n ts and offering id e a s about w ay s in which the
p a re n ts could support the stu d e n ts at hom e in their reading endeavors.
S tu d e n ts also received pencils, stickers, and sta m p s throughout the
project and d isc u sse d the v alu e of reading for enjoym ent with their
tea c h e r and parents. Finally, the Fader (1976) students received all-staff
support within th e "English in Every Classroom " program , w here students
w ere given am ple opportunities for free reading in every content a re a
with th e "first goal" being "pleasure and enthusiasm " for reading (p. 107).
5 7
Factor Five -JBtaft Training
Definition
Staff training is another a sp e c t of free reading program -planning
th at may be taken into consideration. As G reaney (1970) points out,
although m any au th o rs sp eak of individualized reading, not all a re
talking about the sam e thing, and it is "highly im probable that any two
su ch reading program s will be identical" (p. 21). Since individualized
reading re p re se n ts only o n e kind of free reading program , th e sam e
could be said of free reading program s, in general.
W hen staff m em b ers u n d erstan d th e philosophy underlying a
teaching m ethod which they are implementing, it is m ore likely that they
will be com m itted m ore fully to th e im plem entation process. G anz and
Theofield (1974) observe that re se a rc h e rs should find faculty m em bers
w ho "feel a s strongly a s they do that SSR should be started and are
willing to tak e their lumps to m ake it happen" (p. 614). Thus, the tim e and
effort spent on organizing and carrying out the program becom es a high
priority item, including the training of staff m em bers in the theoretical
underpinnings, a s well a s th e practical application, of the m ethod(s) or
approach(es) used in the free reading program , th e ste p s n eed ed to be
tak en in order to establish the program , and other im plem entational and
evaluative a sp e c ts of the process.
It b e a rs em phasizing that th e entire staff should be involved,
particularly if th e free reading program is being developed on a school-
w ide basis, an d ideally, even if it is not. As K rashen (1993) advises,
te a c h e rs n e e d to un d erstan d th at creating such an environm ent for
stu d e n ts will m ake their jo b s e a sie r, not harder, and will give m ore
5 8
satisfying results. He adds, "A dm inistrators n e e d to know th a t when
teach ers are reading to students, and when te a c h e rs are relaxing with a
good book during sustained silent reading se ssio n s, tea ch ers a re doing
their job” (p. 85).
Of the ten experim ental groups which w ere successful in C-SS, six
(60%) incorporated staff training p ro ced u res into their d e sig n s. (S ee
Appendix C, Table C3.) In all of th e se c a se s, inservices or information
w as provided for the staff m em bers who w ere participating in th e studies.
For the te a c h e rs in th e E2 group (S hared Book Approach), Elley and
M angubhai (1983) brought in an advisor from New Zealand to carry out a
three-day w orkshop sin ce the m ethod w as new to all of the teach ers.
The advisor also visited schools to give a brief dem onstration lesson in
each one. For the E1 G roup (SSR only), Elley an d M angubhai (1983)
did not give te a c h e rs a special course; however, th ey w ere provided with
a se t of n o te s outlining S ustained Silent R eading m ethodology; the
experim enters then d isc u sse d th e m ethod with th e te a c h e rs during an
early visit to the schools. Elley (1991) also provided inservice training to
the te a c h e rs who u sed the Shared Book (FiaFia) program in Niue and
the REAP program in S ingapore, both of which incorporated varying
am ounts of SSR , a s well a s other kinds of activities. For the Niue group,
a tw o-w eek inservice co u rse w as given; and for th e S ingapore group,
teach er inservice w as undertaken by a team of officials from th e Ministry
and th e Institute of Education, mainly by u se of tape-slide presentations,
printed guideline notes, and classroom visits. Finally, the M anning and
5 9
M anning (1984) E2 (P e er Interaction) group and th e Holt and O'Tuel
(1989) group w ere given training in the instructional practices th at they
w ould be using. The latter group had dem o n stratio n and p ractice
sessio n s, a s well.
Of the seven experim ental groups that were successful in A-SS,
four (57%) included staff training a s a com ponent. (S e e A ppendix C,
T able C4). T he Holt and O'Tuel (1989) and the M anning and M anning
(1984) E2 g ro u p s have alread y b een d isc u sse d in th e C-SS section.
Manning and Manning (1984) also provided training for their te a c h e rs in
th e E3 m odel, the S tu d e n t-T e a c h e r C onference group, w h e re the
te a c h e rs w ere asked to interact with the students about the books they
had read during SSR tim e. In the Pfau (1967) study, all tea c h e rs in the
exp erim ental c la ssro o m s w ere trained in ap p ro p riate recreatio n al
read in g (S S R ) tec h n iq u e s; additionally, th e re s e a rc h e r m aintained
sufficient co n ta c t with th e experim ental classro o m s to determ ine that
interest in th e program w a s sustained and that consistent u se w a s being
m ad e of both m aterials an d techniques.
Of the fifteen experim ental groups that w ere successful in A-OBS,
th re e (20%) highlighted th e issu e of staff training. (S e e A ppendix C,
T able C5.) Two of th e se groups (Elley 1991, Niue and Singapore) have
b een discussed earlier. In the rem aining group (Jenkins 1957), te a c h e rs
referred to th e literature and studied w hat had been written a b o u t the
philosophy a n d im plem entation of se lf-se lec ted read in g p ro g ram s.
B ased on th is information, they determ ined how to a rra n g e for a large
collection of m aterials with a w ide ran g e of difficulty lev e ls and
6 0
developed w ays of introducing such a program to the pupils and the
parents.
Factor Six - N on-Accountability
Definition
O ne "rule" of SSR, according to M cCracken (1971), is that after the
free reading period there should be no reports or records of any kind;
"nothing is required initially, or the reluctant rea d e rs do not participate"
(p. 522). Adding to this idea, he m aintains that poor readers c a n m ake
m istakes without worrying since no one w atches them or will catch them
making pronunciation errors during silent reading; therefore, th ey cannot
b e e m b a rra sse d , sh a m e d or ridiculed for failing to d e m o n stra te
com petence. In the sam e vein, he holds that "even th e able re a d e rs are
relieved b e cau se they don't have to prove that they a re bright every time
they read som ething" (p. 582). Other re se a rc h e rs h av e taken a similar
position on the issu e of accountability in free reading studies, a s well
(Oliver, 1970; Gambrell, 1978; Moore, Jo n e s, and Miller, 1980).
W hat "non-accountability" parallels is a form of K rashen's (1985)
"supplem entation," or procedures designed to aid com prehension for the
second language acquirer: providing for a "low affective filter." S tudents
cannot acquire a language if they are anxious or afraid. Similarly, when
they a re held accountable for w hat th ey read, they cannot co n cen trate
simply on th e pleasure of reading. Gallo (1968) points out th at young
people h a v e m any re a s o n s for reading, and th e chief re a so n is for
pleasure: "Without a doubt, m ost stu d e n ts read primarily for enjoym ent,
and a book c e a s e s to be worth reading a s soon a s it c e a s e s to be
61
enjoyable" (p. 535). Oliver (1976) reports that when there is an ab sen ce
of any required perform ance level, it re d u c e s the frustration of the
attem pts of learners to read m ore difficult books. He b a s e s this position
on his observation that the stu d en ts in his HIP program had learned to
select m ore difficult books a s th e program progressed.
In term s of th e usual kinds of accountability m e a su re s used to
g a u g e rea d in g c o m p re h en sio n , m any a d v o c a te s of free reading
program s a g re e that book reports, logs and notebooks, and oral retells
are not reco m m en d ed a s a ssig n e d activities after th e free reading
periods b e c a u s e th ey send m e ssa g e s to stu d en ts that th e teach er d o es
not "trust" them to be com prehending w hat they are re a d in g -o r to be, in
fact, truly reading at all. Gallo (1968) asserts, 'T h ere is very little d ebate
among stu d e n ts w hen it com es to deciding w hether or not they like book
reports. T h ey do not" (p. 536). Similarly, C arlsen and Sherrill (1988)
believe th a t books reports do "more to kill young p eo p le's interest in
reading th a n to prom ote it" and actually becom e "a so u rce of irritation,
ranging from mild to violent dislike" (pp. 154-155). T hey add that other
activities th at are d esp ised by stu d en ts include the literary notebook and
oral p resen tatio n s, ev en when th e p resen tatio n s a re about books the
students actually enjoy reading. Suggesting th at this m ay be, in part,
b ecau se stu d e n ts becom e im patient and baffled by the search for "the
m eaning" in a literary work, th e s e authors highlight the s e n se of anxiety
and w o rth lessn ess students feel when their own ["incorrect"] re sp o n se s
to a piece of writing seem "never enough" (p. 155).
In short, m ea su res that m ake students "accountable" for what they
have re a d -w h ic h serv e to judge or evaluate their perform ance--are not
6 2
recom m ended a s integral com ponents of free reading program s. This
d o e s not m e a n that stu d e n ts should not p articipate in "follow-up
activities" w hich are non-evaluative (to be defined further an d discussed
in the next section).
P rogram s
Of th e ten experim ental g ro u p s which w ere su ccessful in C-SS,
eig h t (80%) co n sid ered non-accountability to b e an im portant factor.
(S e e Appendix C, Table C3.) In four of th ese groups, no m ention w as
m a d e of a n y activities th at would qualify a s m aking th e stu d e n ts
accountable for what th e y had read (Elley, 1991, Niue an d Singapore;
M anning an d Manning, 1984, E2; and Elley and M angubhai, 1983, E2);
no n -accountability w a s implied. However, th e o th er four gro u p s'
rese a rc h e rs specifically d iscu ssed this factor in their program s. A ranha
(1985) pinpointed the id ea of giving children a ch an ce to read books of
their choice in "a non-evaluative atm osphere" (p. 215). Hafiz and Tudor
(1989) initiated "the reading of large am ounts of m aterial for personal
p leasu re a n d interest a n d without th e addition of productive task s or
follow up lan g u ag e work" (p. 4). In Elley and M angubhai's (1983) E1, or
p u re SSR, group, no book rep o rts w ere required a n d no written
exercises w e re perform ed. The research ers n o te that the children w ere
"reading for enjoym ent a n d practice" (p. 58). Finally, Holt and O'Tuel
(1989) listed no m eth o d s of evaluation a n d , further, excluded all
textbooks from the reading m aterials from SSR in order to focus on th e
pleasure-oriented aspect of reading.
6 3
Of the seven experim ental groups th at w ere successful in A-SS,
seven (100%) focused upon th e necessity for non-accountability in free
reading program s. (S e e A ppendix C, Table C4.) The A ranha (1985),
Holt an d O'Tuel (1989), and M anning and M anning (1984) E2 groups
have already been d iscu ssed in th e C-SS section. Of th e other four,
Pfau's (1967) group and M anning and M anning's (1984) E2 group did
not include specifically evaluative m easu res in their program s; instead,
non-accountability w as implied. T he last two groups that w ere successful
in th is ca te g o ry e m p h a s iz e d n o n -acco u n tab ility ; th e re w as no
com pulsion to com plete a book o r to be obliged to do som e activity each
time a book w as finished in the G rean ey (1970) study; and no reports or
records w ere required on th e m aterial that w a s read in th e Cline and
Kretke (1980) study.
Of the fifteen experim ental groups that w ere successful in A-OBS,
th irteen (87%) highlighted th e non-accountability facto r a s being
significant. (See Appendix C, T ab le C5). T he Elley (1991) Niue and
S in g ap o re groups h a v e alread y b een d isc u sse d in th e C -S S section.
Nine of th e groups d ealt with non-evaluation through implication. No
accountability m e a s u re s w ere included in th e s e g ro u p s' program s;
Jen k in s (1957); K am insky (1992); Lawson (1968) E1, E2, E3; Oliver
(1976) E1 and E2; Davis and L ucas (1971); and Fader (1976). Two of the
groups' rese a rc h e rs d isc u ss th e elem ent of non-accountability directly:
W iscont (1990) n o tes that stu d en ts w ere not required to keep records or
reports about their reading, and th e teacher did not test stu d en ts on the
content b e c au se th e em phasis w a s on reading for p leasure. Similarly,
6 4
Everett (1982) em p h a size s that reading w as "not subject to tea ch er-
im posed evaluative criteria" (p. 4).
Eactoi. S even Follow-up J^clivities
This definition is crucial b e c a u s e follow-up activities m ust be
carefully distinguished from accountability m easu res. Clary (1991), in
discussing accountability, rem arks that stu d en ts should not be forced to
write book reports and not have to sh a re "every book in any way" (p.
343). However, she m aintains that w hen learners do share, they should
have a variety of choices-from designing co stu m es to creating ad s, art
projects, dram a, booktaiks, and oral reading scripts.
T here is much ag reem en t th at interactive, or sharing activities,
which follow free reading periods can be positive contributions to reading
program s (M cC racken, 1971; Elley, 1991; C arlsen and Sherrill, 1988;
P etre, 1971). M cCracken (1971) m aintains that on ce stu d en ts have
becom e accu sto m ed to ind ep en d en t reading, the tea c h e r should then
enco u rag e re sp o n se s from them . If th e te a c h e rs th em selv es talk about
w hat they h av e read and "share their delight" with students, pupils begin
to do the s a m e (p. 407). In a M aryland study, stu d en ts req u ested two
additions to their free reading program ; m ore tim e to read an d an
opportunity to d iscu ss their books with o th ers who had read the sa m e
o n e s (Petre, 1971). It h a s been su g g ested that this is b e c a u se books
produce intellectual constructs in the minds of the read ers which can be
better understood and appreciated by the read ers if they a re externalized
6 5
by talking with others. For this reason, stu d e n ts have a "need to talk
about their reading" (Carlsen and Sherrill, 1988, p. 88).
Aside from opportunities to read and to share, creative activities
can help to foster enthusiasm for reading (M oore, J o n e s , and Miller,
1980). T h e s e activities can include th e d e v e lo p m en t of stu d en t-
produced n ew sp ap ers with "book recom m endation" sections, book and
author luncheons, student-produced stories and plays, and other various
projects. Sm ith (1988b) h as suggested that students should en gage in
"enterprises," or problem s that they genuinely w ant to solve, problem s
that naturally entail reading, writing and discussing. W hen reading ta k e s
place in such authentic contexts, it beco m es an enjoyable m eans to an
end, rather than a task.
In sum m ary, follow-up activities that stu d e n ts e n g a g e in after free
read in g can b e m otivating and ch a llen g in g b e c a u s e they offer
opportunities for interaction with o th ers and for creative extensions of
id eas developed during reading. However, they should not be utilized a s
m e a s u re s of accountability. As M cC racken a n d M cC racken (1978)
assert, "As a teaching corollary, we su g g est th at tea ch ers require nothing
of children after SSR th a t they do not do th e m se lv e s willingly an d
naturally" (p. 407).
T h e E lem ent of Follow-Up Activities in S u c c e ssfu l F re e R eading
P ro g ram s
Of the ten experim ental groups which w ere successful in C-SS, six
(60%) included foilow-up activities a s integral p arts of their free reading
program s. (S e e Appendix C, Table C3.) T h e se groups offered students
6 6
w ays to extend their interests in their books and strengthen their SSR
program s by becom ing "planners, perform ers, and critics" (W iscont,
1990, p. 33). Elley’s (1983) E2 p e e r interaction group e n g a g e d in role
playing, a s well a s doing art work and writing. M ost important, the origin
of the activities w as alw ays determ ined by the story; new learning took
place "at th e point of interest" (p. 58). Similarly, Elley's (1991) Niue and
Singapore groups drew and wrote about story them es, did sh ared book
reading, constructed group m urals related to their books, m ad e their own
Blown-Up Books and perform ed a s actors an d m im es; all of th e se
activities w ere designed to "help stu d en ts becom e independent readers
of the stories" (p. 38). In the S ingapore group, Elley (1991) also added
som e elem en ts of th e L anguage Experience A pproach (w here students
dictate their own sto ries to the teach er, who w rites them d o w n -a n d then
students read their own texts). M anning and M anning's (1984) E2 group
participated in sm all group and paired d iscu ssio n s, a s w ell a s oral
reading in pairs, puppetry, and dram atization of their self-selected books.
Finally, Lai (1993) offered his E1 and E2 g ro u p s literatu re-b ased
actitivities after S SR (reading p a s s a g e s , p o em s, and funny stories);
however, they w ere not a s interconnected with the books th e students
had self-selected a s th o se that w ere provided in the other studies.
Of th e seven experim ental g ro u p s which w ere successful in A-SS,
four (57%) em phasized the incorporation of follow-up activities into their
program s. (S ee Appendix C, Table C4.) M anning's (1984) E2 group h a s
been previously d isc u s s e d in th e C -SS sectio n . In h is E3 group
(S tudent-T eacher C o n feren ces), stu d e n ts had book d isc u ssio n s and
m ade p la n s for additional reading. Pfau (1967), too, provided for
6 7
d iscu ssio n but a d d e d opportunities for each stu d e n t to e n g a g e in
interpretive activities a s w ays of "extending his[her] book through various
form s of comm unication" (p. 37). Finally, G reaney (1970) offered group
discussion opportunities when several students had read the sa m e book;
the students also m ade draw ings of incidents in their books.
Of the fifteen experim ental groups which w ere considered to be
successful in A-OBS, seven (47% ) included follow-up activities a s a key
com ponent. (See Appendix C, Table C5.) The Elley (1991) Niue and
S ingapore groups hav e previously been d iscu ssed in C-SS. Law son's
(1968) E1, E2, a n d E3 g ro u p s had a w eekly 30-m inute book-sharing
period involving th e entire c la ss. Je n k in s' (1957) group carried out
scien ce experim ents, which resulted from ideas g lean ed from students'
reading, adding dram atizations and p u p p e t show s. S h e n o te s that in
th e se w ays, "great variety in w ays of sharing individual in terests and
achievem ent in reading" w as created (p. 85). Finally, a s well a s having
s tu d e n ts e n g a g e in p e e r re a d -a lo u d s and o th e r u su al sharing
en terp rises, Kam insky (1992) em bellished her follow-up program with
"media-like" activities. Students designed their own book covers to "sell"
book choices to others, and th ey read current events to their classm ates,
using m icrophones.
Factor Eight - Distributed Time to Read
Definition
It h a s been pointed out th at "a rea d e r is not m erely a person who
can read but a p erso n who d o e s read" (Sadoski, 1980, p. 155). U nless
stu d en ts a re provided with tim e to read in school, such reading m ay not
6 8
o ccu r (H eathington,1979; C arlsen an d Sherrill, 1988; W iscont, 1990;
Cline and Kretke, 1980). T eenagers, in particular, have so m any other
d e m a n d s m ade on their tim e--classw ork, homework, religious activities,
sp o rts events, social organizations, an d just "socializing"- that it is not
surprising that reading often com es at th e bottom of their priority list.
Although it is evident that stu d e n ts m ust b e given in-school free
reading time, th e re is not com plete agreem ent about how much time they
need. It is generally recom m ended th at teach ers begin their free reading
program s by starting with a "realistic" am ount of tim e (Mork, 1972). Many
SSR proponents advocate starting with small increm ents of time (as low
a s 3-10 m inutes for very young children) and moving toward a planned,
gradual increase in the length of the period (as high a s 40-60 m inutes for
o ld er stu d en ts) (Allington, 1975; M cC racken, 1971; Botel, 1977;
G am brell, 1978; M anning-Dowd, 1985; and M oore, J o n e s and Miller,
1980).
Aside from providing tim e to read, a second important issue is the
offering of frequent and routine opportunities to do free reading in order
to e n su re that students develop the "habit" of silent reading (Mork, 1972,
p. 441). If sch o o ls can accom plish this, then "the habit of reading will
becom e part of our students' lifestyles" (Sanacore, 1992, p. 470).
In term s of frequency, m ost rese a rc h e rs advocate daily se ssio n s of
SSR (Allington, 1975; Gambrell, 1978; G anz and Theofield, 1974; Petre,
1977; and M cCracken, 1971). Others, like Jo n e s (1978) feel that two or
three tim es a w eek is sufficient; the point, however, is that for reading to
beco m e an habitual activity, it must b e done on a frequent, "regular and
su stain ed " b a s is (Sadoski, 1980 p. 154.) SSR program s should,
6 9
therefore, offer stu d e n ts "distributed" tim e free reading program s, or
program s w here they read on a regular b asis at least twice or several
tim es a week. This is in contrast to a "m assed" time approach, where
stu d en ts typically read for longer am ounts of tim e per reading occasion
on a less frequent (e.g., weekly or bi-monthly) basis.
Of th e ten experim ental groups which w ere successful in C-SS,
ten (100%) offered students "distributed" tim e to read. "Distributed" time
is defined a s opportunities for free reading at a minimum of twice-a-week
frequency. (S ee Appendix C, Table C3.) Eight of th e se groups offered
daily free reading time: Lai's (1993) E1 and E2 groups had 75 minutes:
Hafiz and Tudor's (1989) group had 60 m inutes; Manning and M anning's
(1984) E2 group had 30 m inutes; Elley and M angubhai's (1983) E1
group had 25 m inutes, and their E2 group had 15 m inutes; and the Elley
(1991) Niue and Singapore groups had "daily" time, though num bers of
m inutes w ere not reported in their studies.
Two of the groups did not offer daily time, but did provide free
reading m ore than o n ce a week, which classifies them a s "distributed"
time program s nevertheless. T h ese a re Holt and O’ Tuel’s (1989) group,
which had 20 m inutes of reading th ree tim es a w eek; and A ranha's
(1985) group, which had 20 m inutes of reading twice a week.
Of th e sev en experim ental groups th at w ere successful in A-SS,
se v en (100% ) w ere involved in "distributed" tim e program s. (S e e
Appendix C, Table C4.) A ranha's (1985) group, M anning and M anning's
(1984) E2 group, and Holt and O 'Tuel’s group have previously been
70
d iscussed in the C -SS section. The other three g ro u p s offered slightly
varied am ounts of tim e on a daily basis, with the exception of Cline and
Kretke's (1980) group which did read daily, but did not report the num ber
of m inutes. G re a n ey 's (1970) group had 20 m inutes; M anning and
M anning's (1984) E3 group had 28 m inutes; and P fa u 's (1967) group
had 30 m inutes.
Of th e fifteen experim ental groups which w ere successful in A-
OBS, fourteen (93% ) participated in "distributed" tim e free reading
program s. (S e e A ppendix C, T able C5.) The Elley (1991) Niue and
S ingapore groups h av e been d iscu ssed in the C -SS section. Eight of
the groups offered specific daily am ounts of free reading time; L aw son's
(1968) E1, E2, and E3 groups had 15, 30, and 22 m inutes, respectively;
Oliver's (1976) E1 group had 20 minutes; Davis and L ucas' (1971) group
had 25 m inutes; E verett's (1987) group had 15 m inutes; Farrell's (1982)
group had 21 m inutes; and Petrimoulx's (1988) group had ten m inutes.
Finally, O liver's (1976) E2 group had 30 m inutes of reading tw ice a
w eek.
Two groups, Jen k in s (1957) and F ader (1976) offered daily time
but did not report specific num bers of m inutes. Similarly, W iscont (1990)
offered daily tim e to half of the experim ental group an d non-daily (but
still distributed) tim e to the other but did not report total num ber of
m inutes read.
71
Six Trends T hat Can Be Identified From the Literature
Trend-One
T he m ost general pattern that e m erg es from the re su lts of the
studies is that free reading program s offer stu d e n ts potentially more
benefits in the developm ent of reading com prehension a n d positive
attitudes tow ards reading th an conventional reading program s do. From
Table C1 (S ee Appendix C), th e num bers of g ro u p s that w ere tested for
su c ce ss in the th ree categ o ries can b e seen. In th e area of C-SS, 33
groups w ere evaluated: 10 out-perform ed the com parison g ro u p s, 21
show ed no differences, and 2 w ere outperform ed by the com parison
group and one experim ental group.
T he Individualized G roup and th e Experim ental B g ro u p s in the
Law son study (which w a s c o m p o se d of four groups in all) w ere
outperform ed in C -SS by th e com parison group a n d one experim ental
group, Experim ental A. The reaso n s for th ese findings are unclear, since
the two g ro u p s th at did th e b e st w e re quite different. O ne, th e
"conventional" or com parison group, included only basal instruction and
no SSR a t all; th e other, th e Experim ental A M ethod, provided 30
m inutes of basal instruction p er day an d 15 m inutes of SSR . Similarly,
the lack of s u c c e s s of th e other two experim ental groups can n o t be
entirely accounted for, except to note th at the bias of the au th o r appears
to be tow ard system atic instruction, rath er than fre e reading, and this
attitude could possibly have influenced th e te a c h e rs in the study. The
group in the Experim ental B m ethod h ad system atic instruction for 15
m inutes per day and SSR for 30; an d the Individualized G roup had
7 2
personalized (but still system atic) instruction based on their self-selected
books. In no c a s e did stu d en ts simply have SSR , and it can n o t be
determ ined how m uch instructional tim e w as actually devoted to skills
teaching and how m uch to free reading. Nor can it be determ ined to what
e x te n t th e te a c h e rs in the five sc h o o ls involved believed in the
philosophy of SSR . At no school w as th ere a mixture of m ethods. It
could be, for exam ple, that the tea c h e rs in charge of th e Experim ental A
m ethod at o n e school (which did a s well a s the com parison group) w ere
com m itted to th e concept of free reading, while th o se involved in the
other m ethods w ere not. In any c a se , a study su ch a s this b e a rs
cautious interpretation, particularly since it rep resen ts the only exam ple
in th e entire 32-study survey w here the finding of significant differences
favored the com parison group over experim ental groups.
In the a re a of A-SS, 14 groups w ere evaluated: 7 out-perform ed
the com parison groups, and 7 show ed no differences.
In th e a re a of A-OBS, 17 w ere evaluated (though adm ittedly
through subjective m easurem ent p rocedures in all c a s e s and within the
context of non-rigorous d e sig n s, in four groups): 15 show ed that
stu d en ts had positive attitudes tow ards reading after th e study, and 2 did
not show any indications of positive attitudes.
In short, free reading program s offer opportunities for growth in
reading com prehension and th e developm ent of positive attitudes toward
reading that, in general, are ju st a s good as, and in m any c a se s, are
better than, conventional program s.
73
T re n d lw o
The seco n d trend th at is highlighted in th e literature is that
successful free reading program s have common com ponents. B ased on
an inductive pro cess of exam ining e a ch study in detail and isolating the
factors present within it, it becom es evident that th ere are eight factors
which are com m on to successful program s.
An a n aly sis of th e su ccessful experim ental groups by factors
m akes it possible to com pute the p ercen tag es of g ro u p s in each category
(C -SS, A-SS, and A-OBS) th at included the factors. (S ee A ppendix C,
T able C6.) T he highest p erc e n ta g e s of groups c a n be found in th ese
factor colum ns: a c c e ss, appeal, environm ent, e n co u rag em en t, non
accountability, and "distributed time" to read. The low est p ercen tag es of
groups included staff training and follow-up activities.
It is im portant to note that while th e se factors contribute in som e
w ay to the s u c c e s s of free reading program s, the extent to which each
factor m akes a contribution is not p o ssib le to determ ine, sim ply on the
b a sis of this review.
In order to se e this trend m ore clearly, how ever, "ratings" w ere
assig n ed to e a ch percentage. (See Appendix C, T able C7). A rating of 1
indicates that th e factor w as one of th e "most often" included in a group
for a particular category of su ccess. A 2 indicates that it w as included
"next m ost often," and a 3 indicates that it w as included "least often."
Interestingly, re g a rd le ss of w hich category (or com bination of
categories) a re highlighted, th e sam e pattern em erg es: In g en eral, the
fa c to rs "m ost often" included in su c c e ssfu l s tu d ie s w ere a c c e s s ,
environm ent, and "distributed" time to read ; the factors "next m ost often"
7 4
included in successful studies w e re appeal, enco u rag em en t, and n o n
accountability; and finally, the fa c to rs "least often" included were staff
training a n d follow-up activities. T h e s e results mirror th e findings from
T able C6: th e sam e "top six" fac to rs are rep eated : a c c e s s , appeal,
environm ent, encouragem ent, non-accountability, and "distributed" tim e
to read. T h e only variations in T able C7 are in th e areas of A-SS, which
h a d a rating of 1 in non-accountability, and A-OBS, which had a rating of
2 in "distributed" time to read. Certainly, this evidence is too limited to
su g g est th at non-accountability plays a greater role in A-SS than it d o e s
in the other categories of success a n d that distributed time plays a lesser
role in A-OBS than it d o e s in the o th e r categories of su ccess. However,
with much additional research, this pattern might be borne out.
T rend Three
A third trend in th e literature is that "unsuccessful" program s tend
to have a low er p e rc e n ta g e of t h e eight fa c to rs th an "successful"
program s d o . In order to contrast successful with unsuccessful studies,
th e successful studies listed in T a b le s C3 (C -SS), C4 (A-SS), and C 5
(A-OBS) w e re used, along with th e u nsuccessful studies in Table G8.
From the n u m b ers in th e "total fo r each factor" rows, it w as th en
calculated th a t the successful groups included a n average of 6.5 of th e
e ig h t factors in their stu d ies, but th e unsuccessful groups included a
low er average of 4.5 of th e eight facto rs in their studies.
Further, contrasts by percentages, as show n in Table C9, indicate
th a t the unsuccessful program s included a low er percentage of factors
th a n the successful program s in seven of the eight factor a re a s. (The o n e
7 5
factor area in which the unsuccessful program s m atched th e successful
program s w a s in "environm ent ") Additionally, c o n tra sts by "ratings"
show that four of the six factor ratings w ere lower in the unsuccessful
g ro u p s by o n e rating e ach : a c c e s s , ap p e al, e n co u rag em en t, and
"distributed" tim e to read. Notably, all of th e se factors except "appeal"
w ere identified earlier a s being included "m ost often" in successful
program s.
A nother trend th a t can be identified from the literature is that
program duration may b e an im portant factor in free reading program
su ccess, not simply the total num ber num ber of hours that students read.
(S e e Appendix C, Table C 10 for information on how m uch tim e groups
s p e n t reading, how frequently th ey read, an d th e duration of their
program s.) In Appendix C, Table C11, ranges in total hours of reading
an d durations of program s are illustrated. Interestingly, the ran g es for
e a ch category of su c ce ss a re similar, and they illustrate that it is possible
to s e e gains in program s that provide relatively few hours of reading (as
few a s four for A-OBS and a s few a s ten for C -SS and A-SS) and fairly
sh o rt durations of program s (as short a s three w eek s for A-OBS and as
sh o rt a s four w eeks for C -SS an d 10 w eek s for A-SS). Even the
u nsuccessful g ro u p s show the sa m e kind of ran g e for total hours of
read in g a s th e su c ce ssfu l groups; how ever, th eir lo n g est running
program w as only 36 w eek s long, a s opposed to th e 108 w eek program s
in th e successful group categories.
7 6
By tabulating the p erc e n ta g e s of groups that en g ag ed in "short
term" v ersu s "long-term" program s, it becom es clear that m ore groups
that w ere successful w ere long-term, particularly in th e two categories of
C -SS an d A-SS, w here statistical significance w a s ach iev ed . (S e e
Appendix C, Table C12.) In addition, out of 14 groups th at w ere
unsuccessful, only three, or 21% , w ere long-term. This finding is similar
to W iesendanger and Birlem's (1984) conclusion from a review of eight
SSR stu d ies: th e stu d ie s th at w ere six m onths or longer show ed
significant g a in s in read in g co m p reh en sio n . S a d o sk y (1980) h a s
pointed out that "the developm ent of reading achievem ent, attitudes,
preferences, and habits tak e s tim e and evolves in a slow, yet predictable
way" (pp. 155-56), which is, he notes, why the real g ain s available
through free reading p ro g ram s a re m ost probably long-term g ain s
recognized after long p erio ds of tim e (years, rath er than m onths or
w eeks). K rashen (1985) c o n c u rs by saying th at it is re a so n a b le to
su p p o se th at young re a d e rs n eed som e "settling in" tim e-tim e to find
interesting books and beco m e accustom ed to p le a su re reading for a
certain tim e each day. He h a s determ ined that the effect of free reading
program s is stronger w hen treatm ents last at least se v en m onths.
Trend Five
In te rm s of tim e to rea d , th e "distributed" tim e p ro g ra m s
experienced g reater s u c c e s s than the "m assed" tim e program s. (S ee
Appendix C, Table 12C.) All of th e groups that w ere successful in C-SS
and A-SS offered distributed tim e to their students. All but o n e group in
th e su c c e ss category of A-OBS offered distributed tim e to read; and all
7 7
but two in the totally unsuccessful category offered distributed time, as
well. In short, only 3 out of 41 experim ental g ro u p s experienced a
"m assed" tim e approach. Thus, while the direction of the findings is in
favor of offering "distributed" time to read, there is limited evidence from
the literature in this review, based on th e small num ber of "m assed" time
to rea d studies, to support such a conclusion strongly. P e rh ap s the
re s e a rc h e rs support G am brell's (1978) assertion that offering frequent
an d regular free reading tim e in order to establish the reading habit is
simply a "com m onsense notion" (p. 838).
Trend Six
The last trend that can be identified is that the ELD studies were,
overall, very successful, which leads to the inference that free voluntary
reading program s ap p e ar to be potentially valuable for ELD students.
(S e e Appendix C, Table C13.) In the category of C-SS, eight out of ten
g ro u p s w ere successful. In the category of A-SS, o n e out of one group
w a s successful; and in th e category of A-OBS, four out of four groups
w ere su ccessful. In other w ords, out of th e 15 attem pts that the ELD
g ro u p s m ade to reach their stated re se a rc h goals, 13 attem pts w ere
successful. Only one of th e ELD g roups, Lai's (1993) E3 group, w as
classified a s "totally unsuccessful," an d th e research er himself attributed
this result to a particularly low level of interest in the program am ong the
stu d e n ts at th e outset; h e described th e group a s being com posed of
le ss ab le re a d e rs who w ere "noticeably le ss motivated" than the E1 and
E2 g ro u p s (Lai, 1993, p. 92).
CHAPTER THREE
METHODOLOGY
78
This chapter will include the following six com ponents related to
the study: (1) rese a rc h design; (2) participants; (3) instrum entation, (4)
data collection procedures; (5) m ethods of analysis; an d (6) assum ptions,
limitations, and delimitations.
R esearch Design
InieodedD esign
T he design for this study w as a quasi-experim ental, nonequivalent
control group d esig n a s described by C ook and C am pbell (1979): The
U ntreated Control G roup Design with P re te st and P osttest. T here were
two g ro u p s, an experim ental group and a com parison group. The
su b jects w ere not assigned to groups at random but w ere part of intact
c la sse s. A treatm en t w as given to the experim ental group, an d the
results of both g ro u p s were th en analyzed for statistical differences in
order to conclude if th e treatm ent w as effective. This design w as chosen
b e c au se , if followed faithfully, it insured ag a in st m istaking the effects of
history, m aturation, testing, and instrum entation for the m ain-effects of the
treatm ent.
T h e experim ental group w a s to b e involved in a "stacked for
su c cess" SSR program . Though a definition of a "stacked for success"
SSR program w as provided in C hapter O ne, it is n e c e ssa ry at this point
to d e scrib e m ore specifically exactly how th e eight required com ponents
w ere im plem ented in the experim ental gro u p 's program : (1) A ccess to
7 9
books w as provided by purchasing an additional 250 books for the in-
c la ss collection (which already included 230 books), though stu d en ts
could select books from any other so u rces they w ished, including the
school library, the public library, their hom es, stores, and book clubs. (It
m ust b e noted, how ever, that th e school library w a s only open th ree
periods a day and rarely at snack or lunch tim es.) (2) Book appeal w as
incorporated by surveying stu d en ts about their reading interests before
the new books w ere purchased and by helping stu d en ts to locate books
by favorite authors or on special topics a s th e sem e ste r progressed. As
students becam e interested in specific se ries or genres, additional books
w ere purchased, giving students a m easu re of "personalized" attention
and m aintaining th eir interest levels. All reading m aterials w ere self
selected. (3) A conducive environm ent w as established by providing a
physically com fortable a re a for reading. All of the SSR "rules" for quiet
an d u n in terru p ted p e rio d s of tim e to re a d w e re o b se rv e d . (4)
theoretical re a so n s w hy free reading w a s im portant to their literacy
developm ent; (b) asking them to read w hen they w ere not reading; (c)
modeling th e reading p ro cess a s th e stu d en ts read, and (d) personally
helping students to find books w hen they could not initially get "hooked."
(5) Staff training w a s a lread y un d ertak en since S S R p ro ce d u re s
represented a prim ary interest of the researcher, who w as the teacher of
th e experim ental group. (6) T h ere w ere no accountability m e a su re s
following th e SSR period. (7) Follow-up activities w ere developed on a
w eekly or bi-w eekly b a sis, w h e re s tu d e n ts could ex ten d th eir
involvem ent with th e individual books they had b e e n reading through
w as offered by (a) informing stu d en ts of the
8 0
sharing activities with other stu d en ts. (8) T im eJta ie a d silently w as
offered daily for 15-20 m inutes (representing a "distributed tim e to read"
approach).
At th e end of th e 1992-93 school y e a r and during the sum m er
school program of 1993, the com parison group w as determ ined to b e
following a conventional ELD program . It w as predicted, therefore, that it
would continue to im plem ent the sa m e kind of program in th e fall of 1993.
It was, therefore, a good candidate a s a com parison group for the study.
The teachers from both the experim ental and com parison schools
w ere all "veteran" te a c h e rs who had been teaching for at least ten years.
All of them had reputations as being effective teach ers in the district.
R evised Design
In la te S ep tem b er of 1993, approxim ately two w e e k s after th e
study b eg an , it becam e clear that th e com parison group, d u e to specific
effects of history, began to initiate an instructional program similar to th at
of the experim ental group. A well-known expert in education had b e e n
invited by th e school district involved in the study to provide an inservice
p re se n ta tio n on la n g u a g e acquisition an d th e im portance of fre e
voluntary reading. M ost of the staff m em bers from both th e experim ental
a n d the com parison schools attended this lecture, which occurred on th e
first day of th e 1993-1994 school year. The principals of e ach school in
th e district held site-based staff m eetings the d ay following th e inservice,
in which th e y urged te a c h e rs to consider the advantages of implementing
fre e voluntary reading program s.
It also becam e known that several te a c h e rs at the com parison
school had becom e advocates ot SSR during the previous school year,
but th e ELD D epartm ent had not im plem ented any type of formal
program . T he district, of which the experim ental and com parison schools
w ere a part, had been encouraging te a c h e rs to investigate w ays of
increasing reading com prehension for ELD stu d en ts at all g rade levels.
S o m e of the com parison group te a c h e rs had been considering the idea
of a d ep artm en t-b ased SSR program (sim ilar to the o n e which the
experim ental school had piloted during th e 1992-1993 school year).
Much cross-talk about SSR had taken place in the spring of 1993 during
C urriculum S tu d y C om m ittee m e e tin g s, curriculum d e v e lo p m en t
m eetings, and other more informal m eetings w here te a c h e rs from all of
the secondary schools w ere present. Therefore, w hen the guest sp eak er
d isc u sse d the benefits of free voluntary reading, th e com parison group
te a c h e rs were already open to the idea of it.
Upon further investigation later in S ep tem b er of 1993, b a sed on
classroom observations and interviews with the Level 3 tea ch ers from the
com parison school, it b ecam e clear th a t th e com parison group w a s
beginning to implem ent an SSR program that contained at least six of the
eight factors n e e d ed for a "stacked for s u c c e ss” program : (1) A ccess to
books w as provided by allowing students to utilize m aterials from existing
classroom collections and to visit the school library, which w as open five
periods a day and had just purchased a large num ber of "easy reading"
books through C hapter I funds. (2) Book a p peal w as incorporated by
allow ing s tu d e n ts to re a d any k in d s of m ate ria ls (m a g a z in e s,
n e w sp a p e rs, books, etc.) and to se lf-se lec t th e s e m aterials. (3) A
8 2
conducive_5iivir.Q ninenl w as e sta b lish e d by providing a physically
com fortable a re a for reading. All of th e SSR "rules" for quiet and
uninterrupted periods of time to read w ere observed. (4) E ncouragem ent
tQ_read w a s offered by asking stu d en ts to read w hen they w ere not
reading an d telling them that reading w as "important." (5) There w ere no
accountability m e a su re s following the S S R period. (6) Time to read
silently w a s offered daily for 15-20 m inutes (representing a "distributed
time to read" approach).
W hile this program w as clearly a departure from the conventional
ELD program that th e com parison school had followed in earlier years, it
did not rep resen t a pure "stacked for su ccess" SSR program , but rather a
w eaker version of it. Two factors, follow-up activities and staff training,
were entirely m issing. Additionally, two o th ers that w ere included w ere
im plem ented in a limited fashion: (1) Though the factor of "access" w as
included in the program , m any teach ers in th e com parison school would
not allow students to tak e hom e any of th e books th at they had begun
reading during the fre e voluntary reading period in school; therefore,
th ese stu d e n ts lost a c c e s s to their current reading books for outside
pleasure reading p urposes. (2) Second, en co u rag em en t w as restricted
in two specific ways: Though tea c h e rs verbally encouraged students to
read, th ey often did not "model" the reading process, so a crucial type of
support w a s not present. In addition, though the tea ch ers urged students
to read, th ey did not sh a re with students th e theoretical reaso n s why they
should participate in S SR , a s th e experim ental group tea c h e r did.
During the first month of school, staff m em bers of the com parison
group school had "rallied forces" and begun to im plem ent this program
8 3
a s a result of district and peer encouragem ent and the lecture they had
attended. T he experim ental school, on the other hand, had initated its
"stacked for success" SSR program from the first day of the sem ester; the
tre a tm e n t w a s approxim ately two w e e k s longer in the experim ental
school than in the com parison school. W hat occurred, therefore, is that
th e quasi-experim ental design that w as intended b ecam e m ore of a
"natural" experim ent, with the experim ental school having a "stronger"
treatm en t (in term s of having a full four-m onth program an d all eight
facto rs in operation) and the com parision school having a "weaker"
treatm ent (in term s of having a three 1/2 month program and six factors in
operation, two of which had se v ere limitations).
In effect, th e com parison school program could be defined as a
"sem i-stacked for success" program . C onsequently, four of th e original
rese a rc h q u estio n s had to be revised. W here th e term "conventional
ELD program" w as included in R esearch Q uestions 1-4, the term "semi
stacked for s u c c e s s SSR program" replaced it.
Participants
The sa m p le for the study w as draw n from th e high school ELD
stu d en t com ponent of a Los A ngeles county urban a re a unified school
district. 41% of the students in the district at the secondary level (junior
high and high school) w ere ELD students, while 51% of the district, a s a
whole, w ere ELD students. Though th ere w ere 58 different language
g ro u p s, A rm enian, S panish, and K orean w ere th e largest. T he high
school students in this district ranged in ag e from 14 to 19.
T he sam ple w as taken from two com parable high schools in the
district. Only interm ediate (Level 3) ELD stu d e n ts w ere included
b e c a u se the Level 1 and Level 2 program s in the district typically focused
m ore heavily on oral language acquisition and less on reading than the
Level 3 programs. All students in Level 3 participated with the exception
of th e ninth g ra d e rs at the com parison school, since th e experim ental
sch ool did not h a v e ninth g ra d e rs. E quivalency of sa m p le s w as
a ssu m e d for two reasons: (1) T he background of th e students in both
high sch o o ls w as similar. Both sam ples cam e from a wide variety of
lan g u ag e groups an d were from approxim ately the sa m e SE S levels, a s
estim ated by th e num bers of stu d en ts in e a ch school receiving AFDC
(Aid to Families with D ependent Children). Som e of th e students w ere
born in the USA a n d were orally fluent, but had not attained Cognitive
A cadem ic L an g u ag e Proficiency (CALP). S om e w ere born in other
countries. Of th e se , som e w ere literate in their primary languages, and
som e h ad undergone interrupted school experiences. (2) Also, the
seco n d a ry students in the district were placed in ELD levels b a sed on
their perform ance on a District Placem ent Test; therefore, even th o se
com ing to the high schools from the junior high schools w ere placed in
Level 3 based on th e sam e criteria. T h o se arriving new to the district
also took the sam e test.
For the experim ental group, all of th e Level 3 c la sse s (five classes,
n=131) w ere included; for th e com parison group, all of the Level 3
c la s s e s with the exception of th e ninth g ra d e rs (seven c la sse s, n = 117),
w ere included. It w a s felt th a t th e num bers of stu d en ts in each group
would b e sufficient to carry out a viable study, even with the high rate of
8 5
tran sien cy which w a s characteristic of th e stu d en ts in the district, in
general. The experim ental high school w as a three-year school, while
the com parison high school w as a four-year school. T he experim ental
school, overall, had approxim ately 2100 students, while the com parison
school h ad 2800 students.
It should b e noted th at b e c a u se of th e p re se n c e of th e ninth
g ra d e rs at the com parison school, th e re s e a rc h e r co n sid ered the
possibility of an interaction betw een selection factors differentiating the
experim ental and com parison groups and natural c h a n g e s (maturation)
characteristics of th e s e groups. B e c a u se such an interaction would
rep resen t a threat to the internal validity of the study, the ninth g rad ers
w ere elim inated from the study. Fortunately, the sam ple size for the
com parison group rem ained large enough to carry out the study without
sacrificing the reliability of the findings.
Approval w a s given at both th e district and school levels to
conduct this research . The S u p erin ten d en t and th e principals of the
com parison and experim ental sch o o ls w ere in full ag reem en t th at the
study should be d o n e. Developing effective reading program s for ELD
stu d en ts w as considered to be a priority of the high school C hapter I
program s in the district; and this study rep resen ted a potentially useful
m ethod of providing information to them .
Instrumentation
Stanford Diagnostic R ea ding Test (SDRT)
T h e Brown SDRT, C om prehension Subtest, P retest Form G and
P osttest Form H (Psychological Corporation, 1975), w as used to answ er
86
R esearch Q uestion 1 (developm ent of reading com prehension) and, in
part, to answ er R esearch Q uestions 5 an d 6 in attem pting to establish
relationships, if any, (a) betw een frequency of outside read in g and
com prehension a n d (b) b etw een ra n g e of o u tsid e p leasu re reading
so u rces and com prehension.
T h e co n ten t validity of this te st w a s ev alu ated through careful
exam ination of th e test c o n te n t to d eterm in e w hether it adequately
m easured the fundam ental skills n e c essa ry for successful p ro g ress in the
reading p ro ce ss. In th is c a se , th e o b jectiv es m e a su red by the
C om prehension S ubtest vvere identified to d e term in e w h eth er they
m atched the objectives of th e district's reading curriculum. S in ce the
o b je c tiv e s for th is s u b te s t in c lu d e d lite ra l c o m p re h e n s io n
(com prehending explicitly s ta te d m ea n in g s a n d details in reading
p a s s a g e s ), inferential c o m p re h e n s io n (draw ing c o n c lu sio n s and
generalizations from explicitly and implicitly stated m eanings in reading
p a ssa g e s), textual reading (com prehending p a s s a g e s that a re typical of
m aterial found in g rad e-ap p ro p riate textbooks), functional reading
(com prehension of printed m aterial th a t is typically en co u n tered in
ev ery d ay life), a n d recreational read in g (com prehension of printed
m aterial that is typically re a d for p leasu re), which are the objectives
identified for interm ediate ELD c la s s e s a s specified in th e District
Curriculum G uidelines, th ey w ere found to m atch the objectives of the
two schools' reading program s. T herefore, it w a s determ ined that the
SDRT had content validity.
T he publishers of the SDRT u se d the K uder-R ichardson Formula
#20 (KR 20) to calculate reliability coefficients. T h e reliability coefficient
87
for Pretest Form G, C om prehension Subtest, w as .95; and the reliability
coefficient for P osttest Form H, Com prehension Subtest, w as .93.
For this particular sam ple of participants, the Cronbach Alpha, as
recom m ended by C ronbach (1971) w a s used by th e re se a rc h e r to
establish internal consistency reliability. The reliability coefficient for
P retest Form G, C om prehension S ubtest, w as .86; and the reliability
coefficient for P osttest Form H, Com prehension Subtest, w as .89.
ELD Exit T est
The ELD Exit Test, R eading S ubtest, w as u se d , along with the
SDRT P osttest Form H, to establish concurrent validity for the SDRT. It
w as thought that using another m easure th at tested sim ilar constructs of
reading com prehension would b e helpful in ascertaining the value of the
SDRT results. T he ELD Exit T est w as developed in 1991-92 by the
district involved in this study a s a m e a su re for determ ining if ELD
stu d en ts w ere ready to "exit" to the next ELD level. It contained four
subtests: reading, writing, gram m ar, and speaking. T he Reading S u b te st
of the ELD Exit T est included questions related to literal com prehension
(com prehending explicitly s ta te d m e a n in g s and d e ta ils in read in g
p a s s a g e s ), inferential c o m p re h e n sio n (draw ing c o n c lu sio n s and
generalizations from explicitly and implicitly stated m eanings in reading
p a ssa g e s), and recreational reading (com prehension of printed m aterial
that is typically read for pleasure).
T he R eading S ubtest w a s given to all ELD Level 3 students shortly
after th e SD RT p o stte st w a s ad m in istered for th is study. It w a s
re a so n a b le to a s su m e that sin ce the reading item s contained in th e
8 8
SDRT w ere similar to the item s on the ELD Exit Test, there would be a
positive relationship betw een th e two tests. S tudents w ere given a
possible score of 1-60 on the SDRT posttest and a possible score of 1-25
on th e ELD Exit Test.
A P earson Product-M om ent Correlation Coefficient w as calculated
to identify the relationship betw een the SDRT posttest and th e R eading
S u b test of the ELD Exit test. T he first analysis yielded a correlation
coefficient of .4876, based on a sam ple size of 214. Significance w as
found (p = .000). However, a scatterplot w as developed b ased on th ese
scores, which show ed two outliers. With the removal of the outliers, the
correlation coefficient becam e .5311, b a sed on a sam ple size of 212.
Again, significance w as found ( p = .000). It could be said, then, that 28%
of the variance in the SDRT could b e accounted for by the ELD Exit test.
(Note: given this fairly low percentage, it would behoove th e district to
reevaluate the u se of the ELD Exit T est a s a m easure which purports to
test th e sam e constructs a s the SDRT.)
E stes Attitude S cales (EAS)
T he EAS, S eco n d ary Form (E stes et al, 1975), w a s used to
answ er R esearch Q uestion 2 (developm ent of positive attitudes tow ards
reading). Only one form w as used for the pretest and posttest, since no
alternate form exists. (S ee Appendix D.)
In term s of content validity, te st item s for the EAS w ere initially
identified by its a u th o rs through a general review of th e attitudinal
literature. T h ese authors identified verbal indicators found by previous
re se a rc h e rs to indicate attitudes tow ard school subjects. T e a ch e rs and
8 9
stu d e n ts w ere asked to provide sta te m e n ts th a t they believed would
discrim inate respondents with positive attitudes toward school subjects
(including reading) from th o se with negative attitudes. An item pool
containing several hundred verbal sta te m e n ts w a s constructed. T he
content validity of each statem ent in th e item pool w as carefully a sse sse d
by th e "intuitive rational m ethod" described by H a se and Goldberg (1967)
to determ ine its probable relevance to the underlying attitude of interest.
Item s judged to have high face validity from the point of view of potential
re sp o n d e n ts w ere se le c te d for trial adm inistration. From the trial
adm inistration, item s which discrim inated m ost highly betw een high-
scoring and low-scoring su b jects on each s c a le w ere se lected for
refinem ent, an d eventually a 15-item Likert s c a le w as produced to
m easu re attitudes toward reading.
However, the researcher of this study m ade th e decision not to u se
th e EAS in its entirety for this study. (S e e Appendix D.) After tea ch ers
from both sch o o ls reported that ELD students w ere having difficulties
u n d erstan d in g som e of th e s ta te m e n ts during both th e p retest an d
p o sttest adm inistrations, the more problem atic item s were dropped from
th e scale. Item s 2, 13, and 14 w ere omitted b e c a u se th e items w ere
determ ined to be culturally-biased. Given the 58 different lan g u ag e
g ro u p s at th e experim ental and com parison schools, th e term s and
c o n c ep ts in th e s e item s w ere som etim es am biguous and therefore had
v arious interpretations. Item 2 ("Spending allow ance on books is a
w a ste of g o o d money") contained th e word "allow ance," a term with
which m any of the ELD stu d en ts w ere not familiar. Item 13 ("Some part
of sum m er vacation should be s e t a s id e for reading") violated so m e
9 0
stu d en ts' expectations that sum m ers should be a tim e to work to support
their families and did not therefore autom atically relate to their ideas of
how "valuable" or "enjoyable" reading was. Item 14 ("Books m ake good
presents") p osed a special difficulty b ecau se, depending upon students'
cultural p erspectives about gift-giving, the id ea of a book a s a present
varied; this co n cep t w as not simply tied into the student's evaluations of
the a c t of reading a s w orthwhile/pleasurable or not.
Also, item s num ber 7, 8, and 9 w ere omitted d u e to their ambiguity:
Item 7 ("Books aren 't usually good enough to finish") w as especially
confusing for students; they couldn't determ ine if "books" referred to the
o n e s they chose or to "all" books in the world. Item 8 ("Reading becom es
boring after a b o u t an hour") w a s problem atic for th e sa m e reason.
S tu d e n ts said th a t alm ost everything they did b e c am e boring after an
hour; even if th e y enjoyed reading, they w ouldn't necessarily ch o o se to
do it for more th an an hour at a time. Item 9 ("Most books are too long
and dull") w as q uestionable b e c a u se stu d e n ts noted that if th ey self
se le c te d their ow n books, they didn't feel that "most" of them w ere too
long an d boring. If they didn't self-select their books, oftentim es the
books did fit this description.
Finally, item num ber 12 ("Reading is som ething I can do without")
w as om itted b e c a u s e it w a s difficult for ELD stu d e n ts to understand
b e c a u s e of its syntactical structure. (Had th e item been worded "I don't
need to read," it might have yielded m ore usable results.)
In judging th e EAS a s an instrum ent for u se in th e proposed study,
it w a s d e te rm in e d that th e rem aining e ig h t item s contained the
ap propriate c o n te n t to re p re se n t a stu d e n t's "positive attitude toward
91
reading" since they m atched the operational definition that had been
established, which com bined students' enjoym ent of reading and their
valuing of it a s an important activity.
In term s of internal reliability, Alpha reliability coefficients for two
sam ples, Sam ple A and Sam ple B (as part of a wider testing program )
for the attitude scale w ere com puted by authors E stes et al, using the
m ethod described by Cam pbell and Stanley (1963). T he coefficients for
the reading survey ranged from .93 for Sam ple A to .87 for Sam ple B.
For this particular sam ple of participants, and using only the eight
item "reduced version" of the EAS a s described above, th e C ronbach
Alpha, a s recom m ended by C ronbach ( 1971), w as u se d to establish
internal consistency reliability. T he reliability coefficient for the pretest
w as .72; and th e reliability coefficient for th e posttest w a s .73. It is
important to note here that according to G ay (1980), while a coefficient of
at least .90 is n ecessary for determining internal consistency reliability for
stan d ard ized ach iev em en t te s ts and aptitude tests, "attitude s c a le
reliabilities usually fall in the sixties to eighties range, with m ost being in
th e seventies" (p. 192). T herefore, th e coefficients for the red u ced
version of the EAS can be considered acceptable.
1993-94 S ludent-P retesL Q uestionnaite
And 1993-94 Student PosttesLQ uestionnaire
The 1993-94 S tudent P re te st Q uestionnaire a n d the 1993-94
S tudent P osttest Q uestionnaire w ere developed by the research er of the
study. (S ee A ppendix E.) T h e se m e a s u re s w ere u s e d to an sw e r
R esearch Q uestions 3 and 4, a s well a s R esearch Q uestions 5 and 6, in
9 2
part. R elated to R esearch Q uestion 3 (increased freq u en cy of o u tsid e
p leasu re reading), resp o n d en ts were a s k e d to identify how often they
read at home or outside of c la s s just for p leasure (Item num ber 7 o n the
S tudent Pretest Q u estio n n aire and item number 5 o n the S tu d e n t
P o sttest Q uestionnaire). S tu d e n ts could choose o n e of four p o ssib le
answ ers: (1) never; (2) som etim es; (3) often; and (4) every day. The
an sw ers to this question provided data th a t could b e used to identify
tre n d s in frequency of o u tsid e p le a su re reading behavior for th e
experim ental and com parison groups in both the p re te s t and p o stte st
situations.
T h e sam e Q u e stio n n a ire s w ere u se d to a n s w e r R e s e a rc h
Q uestion 4 (wider range of p lea su re read in g sources). R esp o n d en ts
who indicated that th ey read for pleasure w ere asked to indicate w h e re
they usually got th e ir reading m aterials, o r their sou rces of free reading
books (Item num ber 10 on th e Student P re te st Q uestionnaire and Item
num ber 8 on th e Student P o stte st Q uestionnaire). S tu d en ts could
ch o o se m ore than o n e a n sw e r from th e following possibilities: (1)
classroom library; (2) bookstore; (3) hom e; (4) school library; (5) public
library; (6) friend or relative; a n d (7) book club. T he answ ers to this
question provided d a ta that could be used to identify tre n d s in behavior
in th e u s e of a w ider ran g e of s o u rc e s for the ex perim ental a n d
com parison groups in both th e p retest and posttest situations.
T he Q uestionnaires w ere also used, in part, to a n sw e r R e se a rc h
Q u estio n s 5 and 6 in attem pting to esta b lish relationships, if any,
betw een (a) frequency of o u tsid e reading and com prehension a n d (b)
range of outside p lea su re reading sources and com prehension. Item 7
9 3
on th e Student P retest Q uestionnaire an d Item 5 on the Student Posttest
Questionnaire, a s described previously, determ ined trends in behavior in
frequency of o u tsid e p leasure reading for both groups. Item 10 on the
S tu d e n t P re te st Q uestionnaire and Item 8 on th e S tudent P o sttest
Q uestionnaire, a s described previously, determ ined trends in behavior in
use of wider ra n g e s of p leasure reading sources for both groups in both
the pretest and posttest situations. T h e results of the SDRT w ere then
used to provide d a ta to identify possible correlations betw een the two
targ eted behaviors (frequency of o u tsid e reading and wider range of
p leasu re reading sources) an d reading com prehension.
D ata Collection Procedures
Stanford Diagnostic Reading T est (SDRT)
The SDRT w as adm inistered sep arately to e ach class, five c la sse s
at th e experim ental school an d seven c la s s e s at th e com parison school.
It w a s given tw ice in e a ch school by the sa m e proctor (p retest in
S ep tem b er 1993 and p o stte st in J a n u a ry 1994). T he proctor m ade
a rra n g em en ts with the participating te a c h e rs to give the 40-m inute
p re te st and th e 40-m inute p o sttest during regularly-scheduled c la ss
time. The te a c h e rs were p rese n t during the testing, which ap p eared to
m ake the students m ore comfortable.
For both th e experim ental and th e com parison schools, the test
w as adm inistered se p arately in each c la ss. All te s t conditions w ere
identical: environm ents w ere similar; directions w ere read aloud from a
re v ise d "test a d m in istra tio n " m an u al th at w a s rew ritten to be
co m p re h en sib le for ELD stu d e n ts; a n d stu d e n ts' q u e stio n s w ere
94
anticipated and answ ered in the sam e m anner for each class. Students
w ere informed th at the testing w as part of the regular overall district
testing program , but it w as stressed that it w as im portant for them to do
their best on it. The environm ent in all testing situations w as comfortable
and quiet.
T hough only four m onths p a s s e d b e tw e en p retestin g and
posttesting, since alternate form s w ere u sed , it w a s determ ined to be
unlikely that a possible interaction betw een pretesting and treatm ent
would occur.
T he ELD Exit Test w a s used to attem pt to establish concurrent
validity for the SDRT. All ELD students w ere given th e ELD Exit test at
the end of the first sem ester in order to determ ine w hether or not they had
the n e c essa ry proficiency to m ove to ELD Level 4. T he Reading S ubtest
of th e ELD Exit T e st w as adm inistered to stu d e n ts in their regular
classroom s. Both the experim ental school and the com parison school
gave th e te st during the sam e week.
S tu d e n ts w ere given 40 m inutes (the sa m e am ount of tim e
provided for the SDRT Com prehension S ubtest) to read a five-page story
and to an sw er th e 25 q u e stio n s th at follow ed. No other specific
directions w ere n e c e ssa ry ex cep t that te a c h e rs could not read w ords
from th e reading selection or in the test questions for stu d en ts during the
te st (the sa m e conditions th at prevailed for th e SDRT). Efforts w ere
m ade to do "m ake-up testing" within a couple of days for those who w ere
a b sen t during th e adm inistration of the ELD Exit T est. In th e se c a se s,
9 5
which w ere few, students were pulled out of their c la sse s and given the
test in the school library.
E stes Attitude Scales (EAS)
T he EAS w as adm inistered separately to each class, five c la sse s
at the experim ental school and sev en cla sse s a t the com parison school.
It w as given twice in e a c h school (pretest in S e p tem b er 1993 and
posttest in January 1994). T he proctor who adm inistered th e SDRT could
not go to all 12 c la sse s to adm inister the EAS. Therefore, th e teach ers of
each c la ss adm inistered the EAS pretesting an d posttesting. The EAS
took approxim ately 30 m inutes to adm inister, sin ce th ere w ere several
inappropriate or am b ig u o u s item s (as noted in th e Instrum entation
section) and therefore, th ere w ere many stu d en t q u estio n s about their
m eanings. (As indicated earlier, th e s e items w ere later om itted from the
final questionnaire results.) Each item w as rea d aloud by the teacher,
and stu d e n ts w ere given a s m uch time a s th e y n e e d ed to respond.
Students also had copies of the written items. Every effort w as m ade to
give all te a c h e rs the sa m e instructions (written and oral) so that th e
adm inistration of th e EAS would b e the sa m e a c ro ss th e 12 c la sse s.
However, it is im portant to note th at the extent to which th e te a c h e rs
helped the students to understand the statem ents on the EAS m ay have
varied som ew hat from tea c h e r to teacher, depending on how much the
te a c h e rs valued the potential information th a t th ey would eventually
glean from th e use of the instrument.
In o rd er to c o u n te r the possibility th a t th e attitudinal p rete st
m easu res might alert stu d en ts to th e nature of th e study and focus their
96
attention on reading improvement, in training te a c h e rs to adm inister the
pretest forms, much em phasis was placed on treating these activities a s
part of the regular "back-to-school" stu d e n t information regime. It w as
thought that if students saw the questionnaires a s part of the personal
information th ey normally provided to their new te a c h e rs in the fall, they
would not be aw are of the fact that they w ere in a study.
1-993-94 -Sludent_EietesLQuestioDaaite
Again, th e SDRT proctor could not go to e a ch class separately to
give them th e 1993-94 S tu d en t P retest Q uestionnaire and the 1993-94
S tud ent P o stte st Q uestionnaire. Each classroom te a c h e r adm inistered
th e questionnaires within th e sam e th re e days a s th e EAS w a s given,
pre and post. However, th e proctor did review th e questions with the
te a c h e rs before the adm inistration in o rd er to be su re that directions
could be explained to the stu d en ts in a standardized way. Both oral and
written directions w ere given.
Directions to the te a c h e rs included telling th e students th at their
re sp o n se s would have no effect on th eir grades in their ELD c la sse s.
Fortunately, th e re w ere only two adm inistrations of th e questionnaires,
a n d they w ere four m onths apart. S tudents w ere informed th at the
inform ation from the q u e stio n n a ires w ould be u s e d to d e v ise m ore
effective ELD program s in th e future (which was, in fact, the p u rp o se of
th e study) an d th at it w ould a ssist th eir te a c h e rs in providing an
appropriate curriculum for them .
97
Of c o u rse , it w as acknow ledged that stu d e n ts' fluctuations in
m oods, p ersonal variations in adm inistration of th e questionnaire, and
s tu d e n ts’ "guessing" on som e of the questions (or simply not taking the
Q uestionnaire seriously) might affect th e validity of th e results.
Methods of Analysis
Manova_Melhod
For R e s e a rc h Q u e s tio n s 1 -4 , (d e v e lo p m e n t of read in g
c o m p re h e n sio n , developm ent of positive a ttitu d e s tow ards reading,
in c re a se d frequency of o u tsid e p le a su re reading, and w ider range of
p le a s u re read in g sources), the M anova M ethod w as em ployed, a s
reco m m en d ed by O'Brien an d K aiser (1985). T his p ro ced u re w as
c h o s e n in fav o r of the m ixed-m odel ANOVA, which often violates
distributional a ssu m p tio n s (particularly related to the n e c e ssity for
eq u ality in th e variance/co-variance m atrix) for a design of this type,
according to th e s e authors; when su c h a ssu m p tio n s are violated, the
"research er w ho uses a mixed-model approach to analyze d a ta is testing
h y p o th eses using a Type I error rate th a t exceeds th e stated a lp h a level
of th e tests" (p. 317). However, the au th o rs assert th a t tests b a sed on the
MANOVA M ethod are free of th ese kinds of distributional assum ptions
a n d offer a straightforw ard w ay to deal with w hat is actually a type of
re p e a te d m e a s u re s (pretest/posttest) d esig n . T h e M anovas w ere run
using gain s c o re s calculated from the p retest an d posttest information
related to each R esearch Question.
Four se p a ra te procedures were run due to th e limitation of having
m issing data; so m e participants had s c o re s for every m easure, but many
98
others did not. T hese g a p s w ere due to student a b se n c e s on the day(s)
that the m ea su res w ere given or to normal attrition patterns. To run the
d a ta in o n e M anova for only th o se participants with "com plete" d a ta
related to all four research q u estio n s would h av e (a) low ered the "n"
considerably for the entire sam ple and (b) elim inated a large num ber of
potentially representative resp o n se s for each d e p e n d en t variable under
consideration. Therefore, for each individual research question for which
a MANOVA M ethod w as utilized, th o se stu d e n ts with com plete d a ta
related only to the specific q u estio n w ere included. As an initial
screening factor, how ever, only th o se stu d en ts with both pretest and
posttest sc o re s for the SDRT w ere considered to be part of the overall
study.
Correlations
To an sw er R esearch Q uestions 5 and 6, two P e arso n Product-
M oment Correlation Coeffcients w ere calculated on the b asis of posttest
scores, a s described by Hinkle, W iersma, and J u rs (1988). In this way, it
could be d eterm in ed if th ere w ere any relatio n sh ip s betw een (a)
"frequency of o utside reading" and reading co m p reh en sio n and (b)
"wider range of pleasure reading sources" and reading com prehension.
Assumptions, Limitations, and Delimitations
Assumptions
1. It w as assu m e d that th e m easurem ent instrum ents for this study w ere
both valid and reliable.
2. It w as a ssu m ed that th e M anova contrast variables had a multivariate
normal distribution.
99
3. It w as assum ed that th e ELD te a c h e rs from both schools who were
involved in the study would continue to im plem ent their m ethodologies
with a high d eg ree of fidelity.
4. It w as assu m ed th at the ELD Level 3 stu d en ts had b een correctly
screen ed through u se of th e District Placem ent T e st and w e re placed
appropriately in the ELD Level 3 program .
5. It w as assum ed that th e District Placem ent T est w a s valid.
6. It w as assu m ed that reactive m e a su re s would not occur a n d that the
m anipulation of the subjects would not confound th e findings.
Limitations
1. A high transiency rate w a s characteristic of th e se two schools. Mortality
p e rc e n ta g e s for stu d e n ts in the sa m p le m ay h a v e affected results
som ew hat.
2. Though efforts to avoid reactive m ea su res were taken, the instrum ents
used w ere not unobtrusive in nature, in general. B ecause m uch of the
d a ta th a t w a s g a th e re d w as b a s e d on self-rep o rt, th e r e w ere
opportunities for students to respond m ore subjectively than w a s desired.
3. B ecause random ization w as not em ployed, th e re w as no a ssu ra n c e
that the two groups w ere th e sam e to begin with.
4. With resp ect to R esearch Q uestions 5 and 6, only the p re se n c e of
relationships betw een (a) "frequency of outside reading" an d reading
com prehension and (b) "wider range of pleasure reading so u rces" and
reading com prehension could be established by using Pearson Product
M oment Correlations. W ithout doing a path analysis, it w as not possible
to determ ine a model that would account for patterns of causation.
Delimitations
1. The study w as delimited to two multi-ethnic high schools in one urban
Southern California school district.
2. The study w as delimited to two groups of interm ediate Level 3 ELD
students (totaling 248 students), o n e group from each high school.
3. The study focused upon the developm ent of reading com prehension
and the en h an cem en t of positive attitudes toward reading. No other
a re a s of language developm ent (e.g., speaking, writing, listening) w ere
m ea su red .
4. T he study w as only conducted for a o n e-sem ester period of time due
to the changing of students' schedules for sem ester two. Som e students
m oved to Level 4; o th e rs w ere reclassified FEP (Fluent English
Proficient); and many transferred to other schools.
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS
101
T his chapter will include th e following two com ponents related to
the study: (1) a listing of both the original and revised research questions
and the results of e a ch research question in term s of (a) descriptives and
(b) inferential statistical analyses; and (2) additional findings.
R esearch Q uestions and R esults
ResearcfLQ uestion O ne
R ese a rc h Q uestion one w as "Will the stu d e n ts in a stacked for
s u c c e s s " SSR p ro g ram h a v e h ig h er p o s tte s t re s u lts in read in g
com prehension than th e students in a conventional ELD program ? In the
revised version, th e w ords conventional ELD program w ere replaced
with the w ords "sem i-stacked for success" SSR program .
R esults
An analysis of th e raw d a ta for each group indicated that th ere
w ere differences betw een the two groups. Table 1 show s th ese results
by school in term s of p retest m eans, posttest m eans, gain score m eans,
and standard deviations. The experim ental group's m ean pretest sc o re s
w ere 3.05 raw score points below the com parison group's. In term s of
m ean p o stte st scores, th e experim ental group's w ere 1.38 raw score
points low er than th e com parison group's. Finally, th e experim ental
group's m ean gain sc o re s w ere 1.67 raw sco re points higher than the
102
com parison group's. Each question w as valued a s one raw score point,
with 60 representing th e total possible num ber of points.
TABLE 1
Pretest, Posttest, and G ain Score
M eans and Standard Deviations for the SDRT
Var N P re (SD) Post (SD) Gain (SD)
1 131 26.66 (8.79) 35.37 (8.87) 8.71 (5.86)
2 117 29.71 (8.71) 36.75 (9.73) 7.04 (5.68)
N o tes
Var =
SD =
school: 1= experim ental and 2 = com parison
standard deviation
In addition to reporting m ean scores, it is appropriate to identify the
grade equivalency in c re a se s in o rd er to determ ine how th ey com pare
with the results of the 1992-93 Pilot Study (Pilgreen and K rashen, 1993).
T hese results are show n in Table 2.
TABLE 2
G rade Equivalency G ains on th e SDRT
Var N Pre Post Gain
1 131 2.9 3.9 1.0
2 117 3.1 4.1 1.0
3 125 3.7 5.3 1.5
N otes. Var = school: 1=experimental; 2 = com parison;
3=Pilot Study experim ental
103
C ontrasting th e 1992-93 Pilot S tudy experim ental group (see
Appendix B, Table B1), with this study's two groups, it can be s e e n that
th e Pilot S tudy g ro u p m a d e the g r e a te s t grow th in rea d in g
com prehension, b a se d on th e criterion of grade equivalency scores.
The Pilot G roup m ade 15 m onths of growth in four instructional m onths,
while this study's experim ental an d com parison groups m ade 10 m onths
of growth in the sam e am ount of time. T he Pilot Group, however, started
with a higher pretest score m ean of 3.7, a s o pposed to this study's
experim ental group, with a p re te st s c o re m ean of 2.9, an d the
com parison group, with a pretest score m ean of 3.1.
M anova.
The M anova th a t w as run on th e SDRT d a ta for th is study
indicated th at there w ere differences betw een the tw o groups, which
w ere significant in favor of the experim ental group. [F (1,246) = 5.15, p <
.05.].
Effect Size,
An effect size of 0.29 w as calculated on the gain sco res for the two
groups, which can b e in terp reted a s a m odest result. T hus, the
differen ces betw een th e g ro u p s, while significant, w a s not large.
C o m p u tatio n s w ere d o n e by su b tractin g th e m e a n gain of the
com parison group from the m ean gain of the experim ental group, divided
by the pooled standard deviation.
104
R esearch Q u estio n Two
R esearch Q uestion Two w as "Will th e stu d en ts in a sta c k e d for
s u c c e ss" SSR program h av e higher p o stte st re s u lts in rea d in g in
"positive attitudes tow ard reading" than th e students in a conventional
ELD p rogram ? In th e revised version, th e words c onvention a l ELD
program w ere replaced with th e words "sem i-stacked for succes s " SSR
progam .
R esults
D escriplives.
Tw o sets of descriptives w ere tablulated for th is question: (1)
p rete st m ea n s, p o s tte s t m e a n s , gain s c o re m e a n s , and s ta n d a rd
deviations for each school for th e Estes Attitude S u rv ey (see A ppendix
D); and (2) a frequency distribution indicating p retest means, p o s tte s t
m eans, a n d gain s c o re m e a n s for e a c h of the e ig h t sep arate EAS
questions for both schools.
It c a n be se e n from T able 3 that th e experim ental group's m ean
pretest s c o re s were 0.48 raw s c o re points below the com parison g ro u p 's.
In term s of m ean p o sttest sco res, the experimental g ro u p 's were 1.25 raw
sco re p o in ts higher than th e c o m p ariso n g ro u p 's. Finally, the
experim ental group's m ean g a in sco res w ere 2.01 raw score p o in ts
higher th a n the com parison group's. E ach question w a s valued a s 1-5
raw sco re points, with a 1 indicating a low level of positive attitude to w ard
reading, a n d a 5 indicating a high level. T he total possible n u m b er of
points w a s 40.
105
TABLE 3
Pretest, Posttest, and Gain Score
M eans and Standard Deviations tor the EAS
VAR N Pre (SD) N Post (SD) N Gain (SD)
1 119 28.58 (5.79) 119 31.32 (4.97) 108 2.54 (5.05)
2 105 29.06 (5.25) 99 30.07 (5.06) 88 0.53 (4.35)
N otes.
Var = school: 1= experim ental and 2 = com parison
SD = standard deviation
A frequency distribution w as also constructed based on answ ers
to the eight se p arate item s on th e EAS in order to identify th e items on
which stu d e n ts m ade th e g rea test in c re a se s or d e c re a se s. Table 4
show s th e results for th e experim ental school. S tudents in this group
w ent up on all items, except item 6 (Reading is rewarding to me), where
they stayed th e sam e. T hey went up considerably (in the range of half a
category) on five items: 1 (Reading is for learning but not for enjoyment),
4 (Books a re a bore), 5 (Watching TV is better than reading), 11 (Books
should only b e read w hen they a re assigned), and 15 (R eading is dull);
but went up le ss (0.09) and 0.18 per category) on two items, 3 (Reading
is a good w ay to spend spare time) and 10 (There are m any books which
I hope to read), respectively.
106
TABLE 4
Pretest, Posttest, and Gain Score M eans for S ep arate
Item s on the EAS - Experimental School
Variable Pre Mean Post Mean Gain M ean
1. 3.24 3.72 0.48
3. 3.78 3.87 0.09
4. 3.56 4.03 0.47
5. 2.70 3.22 0.52
6. 3.98 3.98 0.00
10. 3.94 4.12 0.18
11. 3.70 4.28 0.58
15. 3.67 4.09 0.42
Notes. Variable = item num ber on th e EAS:
I) Reading is for learning but not for enjoyment
3) Reading is a good way to spend spare time.
4) Books are a bore.
5) Watching TV is better than reading.
6) Reading is rewarding to me
10) There are many books which I hope to read.
I I ) Books should only be read when they are assigned.
15) Reading is dull.
Score represents a possible range of 1-5, with a 1 representing least
positive attitude toward reading and a 5 representing the most positive.
For th e com parison group, th e re w ere g a in s on six item s and
d e c re a s e s on two. (S e e Table 5.) G ains w e re highest for item 1
(Reading is for learning but not for enjoym ent, 0.36) and slightly lower (in
th e range of 0.22-0.29) for item s 3 (Reading is a good w ay to spend
sp are time), 5 (W atching TV is better than reading), and 15 (Reading is
1 07
dull). Next w ere le ss substantial gains in item s 10 (T here are m any
books which I hope to read) and 4 (Books are a bore), (0.16 and 0.02,
respectively); and finally, d e c re a s e s of equal m agnitude (-0.10) in item s
6 (Reading is rewarding to me) an d 11 (Books should only be read w hen
th ey are assigned).
TABLE 5
Pretest, Posttest, and Gain Score m eans for S eparate
Items on th e EAS - Com parison School
Variable Pre Mean Post Mean Gain Mean
1. 3.48 3.84 0.36
3. 3.77 3.99 0.22
4. 3.78 3.80 0.02
5. 2.82 3.05 0.23
6. 3.71 3.61 -0.10
10. 3.75 3.91 0.16
11. 3.98 3.88 -0.10
15. 3.75 4 .04 0.29
Moles* Variable = item num ber on the EAS:
1)
Reading is for learning but not for enjoyment
3) Reading is a good way to spend spare time.
4) Books are a bore.
5) Watching TV is better than reading.
6) Reading is rewarding to me
10) There are many books which I hope to read.
11)
Books should only be read when they are assigned
15) Reading is dull.
Score represents a possible range of 1-5, with a 1 representing least
positive attitude toward reading and a 5 representing the most positive.
108
In sum m ary, there w as a trend tor the experim ental group to do
better than the com parison group on the EAS. The experim ental group
show ed m ean gains on seven out of eight items, had higher m ean gains
than th e com parison group on seven out of eight items, and show ed no
d e c re a s e s on any item. In contrast, the com parison group show ed m ean
g a in s on six out of eight item s, had higher m ean g a in s than th e
com parison group on one out of eight item s, and show ed d e c re a se s on
two items.
M anova.
T he M anova that w as run on the SDRT d a ta indicated that there
w ere differences betw een the two groups, which w ere significant in favor
of the experim ental group [F (1, 194) = 8.63, p <.05].
Effect Size.
An effect size of 0.42 w as calculated on the gain sco res for the two
groups, which can be interpreted a s a substantial result. Com putations
w ere d o n e by subtracting th e m ean gain of the com parison group from
the m ean gain of the experim ental group, divided by the pooled standard
deviation.
R esearch Q uestion T hree w as "Will the stu d en ts in a "stacked for
su c c e ss" SSR program hav e higher p o stte st resu lts in "frequency of
o u tsid e p leasu re reading" th an the stu d e n ts in a conventional ELD
109
program ? In the revised version, the w ords conventional ELD_program
w ere replaced with the words "sem i-stackedfoL success"_S S R program .
R esults
D escriptives.
Two s e ts of descriptives w ere tabulated for th is question: (1)
p retest m eans, p o stte st m ean s, gain sco re m ea n s, and stan d ard
deviations for each school for the Student P retest/P osttest Q uestionnaire
item s (s e e A ppendix E) related to "frequency of o utside p lea su re
reading"; and (2) a frequency distribution indicating the p rete st and
posttest categ o ries of "outside reading frequency" for each group: (1)
never; (2) som etim es; (3) often, and (4) every day.
T able 6 in d icates that th e experim ental g ro u p 's m ean pretest
scores w ere 0.36 raw score points below the com parison group's. In
term s of m ean p o sttest scores, the experim ental gro u p 's were 0.03 raw
sc o re p o in ts h ig h er th an th e co m p a riso n g ro u p ’s. Finally, the
experim ental g ro u p 's m ean gain sc o re s w ere 0.41 raw score points
higher th an the com parison group's. Each question w a s valued a s 1-4
raw sc o re points, with a 1 indicating a low frequency of outside pleasure
reading, and a 4 indicating a high level. T he total possible w as a score
of 4.
110
TABLE 6
P retest, Posttest, and Gain Score
M eans an d Standard Deviations for Q uestionnaire:
Frequency of O utside Pleasure Reading
Var N P re lS D ) N P osf(S D ) N Gain” (SD)
1 117 2.34 (7 0 ) 1 1 9 2.77 (7 6 ) 107 0 .3 9 ( 7 5 )
2. 105 2.70 (.83) 1 0 2 2.74 ( 80) 92 -0.02 ( 85)
Notes*
Var = school: 1= experim ental and 2 = com parison
SD = standard deviation
A nother way to view the tre n d s in stu d e n ts' o u tsid e p lea su re
reading habits is to co m p are the num bers of stu d en ts in e a c h school by
frequency categories (s e e Table 7). The experim ental group show ed a
m arked trend to do o u tsid e reading more often while th e com parison
group m aintained a fairly stable configuration from the p re te st to th e
posttest. Viewing c o lu m n s 1, 2, 3, and 4 from p rete st to p o stte st
situations, it is clear th at th e experim ental group's choices of "never" and
"som etim es" for o u tsid e reading d e c re a se d considerably, while their
choices of "often" an d "everyday" increased a great d e a l. For th e
com parison group, th ere w ere slight d e c re a ses in "never," "som etim es,"
and "everyday," and a slight increase for "often."
111
TABLE 7
Pretest and P osttest Totals of Students for
Each "Frequency of Outside Reading" Category
V ariable N 1 2 3 4
1 Pre 117 5 77 25 10
1 P ost 119 1 4 8 47 2 3
2 Pre 105 3 4 7 33 2 2
2 P ost 102 2 4 3 37 2 0
Notes.
Categories: 1, never; 2, som etim es; 3, often; and
4, every day
Var = school; 1=experi mental and 2 = com parison
Figures 1-4 (histogram s of pretest and posttest results from each
group) m ore clearly illustrate th e s e patterns. Figure 1 is a frequency
distribution of the experim ental group's ch o ices of c a te g o rie s for the
pretest; Figure 2 rep re sen ts th e experim ental gro u p 's ch o ices for the
p osttest; Figure 3 re p re sen ts th e com parison gro u p 's ch o ices for the
pretest; an d Figure 4 rep resen ts th e com parison group's choices for the
posttest. The trend for the experim ental group to read m ore frequently at
the end of the stu d y is reflected here, a s is the com parison g ro u p 's
tendency to remain fairly stable from the p retest to posttest situation.
112
Figure 1
Frequency of Outside Reading: Pretest, Experimental School
I 40.
u
30.
3 3.5 4.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 4 5
n e v e r sometimes o ften everyday
Figure 2
Frequency of Outside Reading: Posttest. Experimental School
50i‘ ■ i ■ --------- ----------
45'
40'
35.
30
§ 25. ________
O I . ■ ■ ■ I — .
° 20 .
15'
10
5-
OU : ■ i ^ = -i---------- - .— ---------- 1.
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
n e v e r sometimes o ften everyday
113
Figure 3
Frequency of Outside Readme: Pretest. Comparison School
4 S'
c
S
O
C J
1 1.5 3 3.5 4.S 2 2.5 4 5
n e v e r sometimes often everyday
Figure 4
Frequency of Outside Reading: Posttest, Comparison School
45'
40-
(3 20'
4.5 3.5 3 4 5 1.5 2.S 2 1
n e v e r sometimes often everyday
114
M artova
The M anova th at w a s run on the S tu d e n t P re te st-P o stte st
Q uestionnaire d ata on "frequency of outside p leasu re reading" indicated
that th ere w e re d iffe re n c es betw een the two g ro u p s, w hich w ere
significant in favor of the experim ental group [F (1, 197) = 13.33, p <
.05].
EffecLSize.
An effect size of 0.52 w as calculated on the gain scores for th e two
groups, which can be interpreted a s a substantial result. Com putations
w ere done by subtracting th e m ean gain of the com parison group from
the m ean gain of the experim ental group, divided by the pooled standard
deviation.
R esearch Question Four w as "Will the stu d e n ts in a "stacked for
success" SSR program h a v e higher posttest results in "wider ran g e of
p leasu re read in g sources" than th e students in a conventional ELD
program ? In th e revised version, the words conventional ELD program
w ere replaced with the w ords "sem i-stacked for su ccess" SSR program .
R esults
Two s e ts of descrip tiv es w ere tabulated for this question: (1)
p re te st m ea n s, p o sttest m e a n s, g ain score m e a n s, and sta n d ard
115
deviations for each school for the Student Pretest/Posttest Q uestionnaire
item s (se e Appendix E) related to "wider range of pleasure reading
sources"; and (2) a frequency distribution indicating th e pretest-posttest
configurations of the seven reading so u rc e s in order to identify tre n d s in
stud ents' choices.
Table 8 show s that th e experim ental group's m ean pretest sc o re s
w ere 0.52 raw score points below the com parison group's. In te rm s of
m ean posttest sco res, th e experim ental group's w ere 0.16 raw sco re
points higher than the com parison group's. Finally, the experim ental
gro u p 's m ean gain sco res w ere 0.64 raw score points higher th an the
com parison group's. Each question w a s valued a s 1 raw score point,
with a 1 indicating that a student c h o s e only o n e so u rce for o u tsid e
pleasu re reading and a 7 indicating that (s)he ch o se all seven so u rces.
Therefore, each student's total possible w as 7 points.
TABLE 8
Pretest, Posttest, and G ain Score M eans and Standard Deviations for
Questionnaire; W ider R ange of Pleasure Reading S ources
Var N Pre (SD) N Post (SD) N Gain (SD)
1 117 1.54 (.80) 1 1 9 2.27 (.98) 107 .73 (1.05)
2. 105 2.06 (1.04) 102 2.11 (1.24) 92 .09 (1.23)
N otes.
Var = school: 1= experim ental and 2 = com parison
SD = standard deviation
116
Table 9 indicates the num bers of total reading sources for each
school by category (with each category representing a specific so u rc e of
reading m aterials). It is im portant to note that stu d en ts were allow ed to
c h o o se up to s e v e n sources. Therefore, the n um bers do not merely
rep resen t one choice per student. It is c le a r that the experim ental school
stu d en ts used a narrower ran g e of sources at the beginning of th e study
than th e com parison school stu d e n ts did; yet the experim ental school
stu d e n ts increased their total num ber of so u rces by alm ost 33% (from
178-270), while th e com parison school sta y e d approxim ately th e sam e
(from 216-215). T hus, students in the experim ental group used a wider
range of reading so u rces at th e end of th e study th a n the com parison
group students did.
TABLE 9
Numbers of Total R eading Sources for Each School By C ategory
Variable N 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 T R es
1 PRE 117 43
16
55 9 32 19 4 (178)
1 PO S 119 75
23
4 6 14 42 2 7 43 (270)
2 PRE 105 33 23
57 31 45 2 6 1 (216)
2 PO S 102 37 27 45 3 6 42 2 3 5 (215)
Notes.
Var = school. 1 = experim ental a n d 2 = com parison
PRE s pretest; PO S = posttest
1=classroom ; 2=bookstore; 3= hom e; 4=school library; 5=public library;
6=friend/relative; 7=book club
TR es=Total R esp o n se s
117
It w a s also of interest to analyze th e tre n d s a sso c ia te d with
students’ choices of so u rces for book selections. As identified in Table 9,
from p retest to p o stte st for the experim ental school, th e re w as an
in crease in every o n e of the seven categories of sou rces except number
3 (using books from hom e), which dropped slightly. The m ost substantial
in cre ase s for this group w ere in num bers 1 (classroom ) and 7 (book
club). For th e com parison school, there w ere m odest in c re a se s in
categ o ries 1 (classroom ), 2 (book store), 4 (school library), and 7 (book
club); while th ere w ere similar d e c re a se s in num bers 5 (public libraries)
and 6 (friends/relatives) and a larger increase in num ber 3 (home).
Figures 5-8 (histogram s of pretest and posttest results from each
group) m ore clearly illustrate th e s e patterns. Figure 5 is a frequency
distribution of th e experim ental g roup's ch o ices of c a te g o rie s for the
pretest; Figure 6 re p re se n ts the experim ental gro u p 's c h o ic e s for the
p o sttest; Figure 7 re p re se n ts th e com parison g roup's c h o ic e s for the
pretest; and Figure 8 rep resen ts the com parison group's c h o ices for the
posttest. T he trend for th e experim ental group to u se a w ider range of
reading so u rc e s at th e end of th e study is reflected here, a s is the
com parison gro u p 's ten d en cy to rem ain fairly stab le from th e pretest to
posttest situation.
118
Figure 5
Range of Reading Sources: Pretest, Experimental Group
60
50
40
i 30
o
o
20
10.
0-
class
2 3
store
4 ,5 6 7 .8
home s®*00' public friend/ book
_______ library library relative c*ub
Figure 6
Range of Reading Sources: Posttest, Experimental Group
80s
70-
60'
50'
c
3 40'
u
3&
20'
10-
O '
1 2 3
class store home
4 school ^ public ^ f r ie n d / book ®
library library relative club
119
60
50
40
| 30.
u
20
10
Figure 7
Range of Readme Sources: Pretest. Comparison Group
1 2 3 4gchool Spublic 6 friend/ hook ®
class store hom e library library relative club
Figure 8
Range of Reading Sources: Posttest, Comparison Group
50
45
40|
35
30|
25.
20
15.
10
5'
1 2 3 ^school 5 p u ijij^ f(jel(|7 book ®
class store home library library relative club
120
A nother way of viewing th e s e patterns is to re p re se n t them by
percentages. (See T ab le 10.) In this way, differences betw een students'
ten d en cies to choose o n e source over another ca n be seen m ore clearly.
Using th e criteria of a change in five or m o re p e rc en tag e points a s
representing a "major shift," it is clear that th e experim ental group m ade
two shifts: Source 3 (books from home) rep resen ted 31% o f the total
so u rces u sed at th e beginning of th e study but only 17% a t the end;
similarly, item 7 (book clubs) represented 2% of th e total s o u rc e s used a t
the beginning of the stu d y but 16% at the end. The com parison group
did not experience a n y major shifts in percen tag es (more th a n 5%) from
pretest to posttest on a n y sources.
TABLE 10
P ercen tag es of R eading Sources for Each School
By Category
Variable
1 2 3 4 5 6 Z
1PR E 2 4 9 31 5 18 11 2
1 P O S 2 8 8.5 1 7 5 15.5 10 16
2 PRE 15 11 26 14.5 21 12 .5
2 PO S 17 12.5 21 17 19.5 11
2
M otes.
Var = school: 1= experim ental; 2 = com parison
PR E = pretest; P O S = posttest
1=classroom ; 2=bookstore; 3=hom e; 4*school library; 5=public
library; 6= friend/relative; 7=book club
121
Manova.
T he M anova th a t w as run on th e S tu d en t P re te s t-P o s tte s t
Q u estio n n aire d a ta on "wider ra n g e of p lea su re reading so u rces"
indicated th at there w ere differences betw een the two groups, which
w ere significant in favor of the experim ental group [F (1,197) = 16.28, p
< 05].
EflecLSize.
An effect size of 0.57 w as calculated on the gain scores for the two
groups, which can be interpreted a s a substantial result. C om putations
w ere done by subtracting the m ean gain of the com parison group from
th e m ean gain of the experim ental group, divided by the pooled standard
deviation.
R esearch Question Five w as "Is th ere a relationship betw een the
"frequency of outside p lea su re reading" and reading com prehension
develo p m en t?"
R esults
C orrelation
A P earso n Product-M oment Correlation Coefficient w as calculated
on the posttest scores for both groups to s e e if there w as any relationship
betw een "frequency of outside p lea su re reading" and the SDRT. T he
correlation coefficient w a s .0902, b a se d on a sam ple size of 236. No
significance w as found (p = .167).
122
A scatterplot w as developed to determ ine if th e re might be a
curvilinear relationship betw een the two sets of scores; there w as none.
R e se a rc tiQ u e stio n S ix
R esearch Q uestion Six w as "Is there a relationship betw een a
"wider range of pleasure reading sources" and reading com prehension
d ev elo p m en t?
R esults
CoirelatiarL
A P earso n Product-M oment Correlation Coefficient w as calculated
on th e posttest sco res of both groups to se e if th ere w as any relationship
betw een "frequency of o u tsid e p leasu re reading" and th e SDRT. The
correlation coefficient w as .0806 b a se d on a sam ple size of 236. No
significance w as found (p = .217).
A scatterp lo t w as developed to determ ine if th e re might be a
curvilinear relationship betw een the two sets of scores; there w as none.
Additional Findings
S e p a ra la _ £ a m p le
Though th e study did not include stu d en ts other than those who
w ere in ELD Level 3, th e students in Level 4 (one ELD "developm ent"
level higher than the group in the study) w ere pretested and posttested
a s part of a district-wide a sse ssm e n t program.
The SDRT, Blue Level, Forms G and H w ere used. The content
validity of this te st w as evaluated through careful exam ination of the test
123
content to determ ine w hether it adequately m easured the fundam ental
skills n ecessary for successful progress in the reading process. In this
c a se , th e objectives m easu red by the C om prehension S u b test w ere
identified to determ in e w hether they m atched the ob jectiv es of the
district's reading curriculum. Since the objectives for this subtest included
literal com prehension (com prehending explicitly stated m eanings and
d etails in read in g p a s s a g e s ), inferential c o m p re h en sio n (draw ing
conclusions and g e n e ra liz a tio n s from explicitly and implicitly stated
m ean in g s in rea d in g p a s s a g e s ), textual reading (co m p reh en d in g
p a s s a g e s th at a re typical of m aterial found in g ra d e -a p p ro p ria te
textbooks), functional reading (com prehension of printed m aterial that is
typically e n c o u n te re d in e v ery d ay life), and rec re atio n a l reading
(com prehension of printed m aterial that is typically read for pleasure),
which a re the o b jectiv es identified for interm ediate ELD c la s s e s a s
specified in the District Curriculum Guidelines, they w ere found to match
the objectives of th e two schools' reading program s. Therefore, it w as
determ ined that the SDRT had content validity.
T he test p ublishers (Psychological Corporation, 1984) used the
Kuder-Richardson Form ula #20 (KR 20) to calculate internal consistency
reliability coefficients. The reliability coefficient for the pretest, Form G,
C om prehension S u b te st, w a s .92; and for th e p o stte st, Form H,
C om prehension S ubtest, it w as also .92. For this particular sam ple of
participants, th e C ronbach Coefficient A lpha w as u se d to estim ate
internal reliability consistency; it w as .87 for the p retest and .83 for the
posttest.
124
It is important to note th e s e test results b e c au se th e Level 4
teachers in the experim ental school w ere asked by their administration to
carry out a "stacked for success" S SR program. However, the Level 4
teach ers at the com parison school w ere not directed to do so by their
adm inistration (though it w as strongly su g g e ste d ) and w ere not in
com plete philosophical ag reem en t with the Level 3 te a c h e rs who w ere
carrying out a "sem i-stacked for su c cess" SSR program there.
Interviews with te a c h e rs at both schools indicated th a t three out of
th e four Level 4 te a c h e rs (com prising six sections) at the experim ental
school w e re im plem enting a "sta c k ed for su c c e ss" program . T h e
exception w a s one te a c h e r (com prising three sections), w ho provided a
"sem i-stacked for su c c e s s " SSR program : th e re w ere no follow-up
activities in her classroom , and s h e did not entirely "buy into" the SSR
philosophy, even though staff training had been provided. In addition,
a c c e s s and e n c o u rag em en t w ere limited. T he teach er c h o s e not to
p u rch ase classroom library books w hen offered the m o n ey from th e
district, a sk e d students to bring th eir own books, did n o t model th e
reading, an d w as unable to assist th e students with getting appropriate
books, in general.
At th e com parison school, two of th e five te a c h e rs at th e
com parison school (com prising four sections) w ere not implementing any
free reading program at all; one (com prising o n e section) provided a
"sem i-stacked for su c ce ss" SSR program with six factors (sh e took a
o n c e a w eek "distributed time" a p p ro ach and did not provide follow-up
activities); an d the other two (com prising three sections) provided "semi
12 5
stacked for success" program s similar to the program in ELD Level 3 that
w as ongoing at the sa m e school.
Results
D escriptives .
A nalysis of the raw data for each group indicated that there w ere
differences betw een th e two groups. T able 11 show s th ese results by
school in term s of p retest m eans, posttest m eans, gain score m eans, and
stan d ard deviations. The experim ental group's m ean p rete st sc o re s
w ere 1.66 raw score points below the com parison group's. In term s of
m ean p o stte st scores, th e experim ental group's w ere 0.02 raw score
points low er than th e com parison group's. Finally, the experim ental
group's m ean gain sc o re s were 1.52 raw score points higher than the
com parison group's.
TABLE 11
Pretest, Posttest, and Gain Score
M eans and Standard Deviations for the SDRT, ELD Level 4
Var N Pre (SD) N Post (SD) N Gain (SD)
1 2 5 4 3 1 .1 7 (8 .5 4 )2 5 4 36.25 (7.57) 254 5.07 (6.68)
2 172 3 2 .8 3 (9 .5 8 )1 7 2 36.37 (7.68) 1 72 3.55 (6.18)
Molaa.
Var = school: 1= experim ental and 2 = com parison
SD = standard deviation
126
M anova.
The M anova that w a s run on th e SDRT d a ta for ELD Level 4
indicated that th ere w ere differences betw een th e two groups, which
w ere significant in favor of th e experim ental group [F (1, 424) = 5.69 , p
< .05.]. (As in the ELD Level 3 stu d y , the ninth g rad ers w ere not
included.)
Effect S ize.
An effect size of 0.24 w as calculated on the gain scores for the two
g roups, which can be interpreted a s a m odest result. T hus, the
differences betw een the tw o groups, w hile significant, w ere not large.
C o m p u tatio n s w ere d o n e by su b tra c tin g th e m ean gain of the
com parison group from th e m ean gain of the experim ental group, divided
by the pooled standard deviation.
127
CHAPTER FIVE
DISCUSSION
This chapter will include the following five com ponents related to
th e study: (1) major findings; (2) additional findings; (3) limitations; (4)
educational implications; and (5) recom m endations for future research.
The first hypothesis w as that students in a "stacked for success"
S S R p ro g ra m w ould h av e h ig h e r p o s tte s t re s u lts in read in g
com prehension than th e students in th e "sem i-stacked for su ccess" SSR
program. T his hypothesis w as b a sed on the theoretical assum ption that
m ore reading leads to better reading. If stu d e n ts in a "stacked for
success" program enjoy th e program and participate fully in it, they will
begin to develop the reading "habit.” It w as expected th at th ey would
read m ore a n d in crease their reading com prehension. T his hypothesis
w a s su p p o rte d by th e findings; th e re w ere significant d ifferen ces
betw een th e two groups in favor of th e experim ental group. However,
th e effect size of 0.29 indicates that th e s e differences were m odest.
O ne limitation of this study (a s identified in C hapter Three) w as
that it w as only a four-month program. Had it been carried out for at least
seven m onths (or ideally, a full school year or longer), and th u s qualified
a s a "long-term program," it is possible that the differences betw een the
two groups might have b e e n greater in reading com prehension.
Major Findings
It is important to note that the com parison school did not include
two fac to rs which th e experim ental school did include: "follow-up
activities"'and "staff training." The lack of follow-up activities m ay have
influenced students' am ount of reading. As defined in C hapter Two,
follow -up activities typically include a large co m p o n en t of p eer
interaction, which Johnson (1981) h as suggested m ay be one of th e most
im portant variables in educational su c ce ss. S tudents sh a re w hat they
have re a d with e a c h o th er, e x ten d in g their u n d e rsta n d in g and
enjoym ent, and creating a s e n se of the classroom reading com m unity-
what Sm ith term s the Literacy Club (1988b). Without opportunities to do
such activities, stu d e n ts m ay not have had a g reat enough im petus to
read a s m uch as they could. Second, the lack of staff training m ay also
have had an influence on how much students read. The tea c h e rs at the
co m p ariso n school h ad a tte n d e d th e 1993 fall inservice, which
fam iliarlized them with th e underlying philosophy of free voluntary
reading and its benefits for students, but did not have any additional
training which e m p h a siz e d "procedure": u n le ss te a c h e rs follow ed
M cC racken's (1971) original "rules" for SSR , such a s self-selection of
books (including students' options to ch an g e books when they w ere not
interesting) and uninterrupted time, it is possible th at students' tim e to
read w as not provided in the m ost favorable context. In such a c a se , the
quality of the reading experience, a s well a s the am ount read, would not
have b e e n optim al".
In addition, th e two factors which w ere "limited" in the com parison
group's study m ay have influenced th e am ount of reading th a t the
students did. By limiting "access" to books to reading in class an d not
129
encouraging students to take the classroom books hom e, several results
could have occurred: (a) less reading m ay have been done outside of
class b e cau se the students did not have th e books with them at hom e; (b)
the stu d en ts m ay not have b e e n a s e n g a g e d in their SSR books since
they could not tak e them hom e a t night to continue th e storylines that they
w ere following in class; and (c) stu d e n ts could hav e been given the
m e s s a g e that reading is som ething th a t o n e d o e s in school, not
som ething that o n e does in real life--so they m ay not have taken it
seriously or devoted full attention to it. Also, by limiting "encouragem ent
to read," which occurred b e c a u s e te a c h e rs did not model the reading
p ro c e ss during S S R time w hen the stu d e n ts read, students m ay also
have b e e n led to believe th a t reading w as not a s im portant a s the
te a c h e rs purported it to be; after all, the tea ch ers didn't do it them selves.
In short, stu d e n ts in the com parison group m ay not have b e e n a s
m otivated to develop the habit a s stu d e n ts in th e experim ental group,
and th ey may have actually d o n e less reading.
It must also be acknow ledged th a t the com parison group may
have had a slightly shorter program (approxim ately two weeks) than the
experim ental group since the com parison group te a c h e rs took so m e time
in S eptem ber to organize for th e Level 3 SSR program.
A nother iss u e which is not often part of th e usual statistical
p ro c e d u re s for re se a rc h stu d ie s, but which is generally of prim ary
concern to school districts is students' g a in s a s they relate to "expected
growth." E ducators want to know if stu d en ts' sc o re s on standardized
te s ts m atch with w hat a "normal" prediction would b e for the students'
a g e an d grade, or if their perform ance is b etter or w orse th an this
130
prediction. Typically, w hen stu d e n ts gain o n e m onth of reading
com prehension for one month of instruction, it is thought that students are
progressing "normally." T h ese gains a re represented in term s of G rade
Equivalency (G.E.) scores. With respect to the GE sc o re s for the two
groups in this study, it should be noted th at although th ere w ere
significant d iffe re n c e s b e tw e en th e e x p erim en tal g roup and th e
com parison group in reading co m p reh en sio n a s indicated by th e
M anova, their G rad e Equivalency gains for the four-m onth instructional
period w ere exactly the s a m e -te n m onths. This is b ecau se, though the
experim ental group averaged alm ost a two-point raw score increase over
the com parison group, a s raw sc o re s approach the middle of th e range in
the "norms" chart, greater g rade equivalency in creases are se e n per raw
score point. S in ce th e com parison group started higher and ended
higher, their m ore m odest a v erag e growth w as rep resen ted num erically
(in term s of G.E.) exactly the sa m e a s the experim ental group.
A final point about G rad e Equivalency s c o re s should be m ade
about th e results of this study a s com pared to th e results of the Pilot
Study. T he two groups in this study m ade 10 m onths of growth, while the
Pilot S tudy group m ad e 15 m onths of growth in th e sam e instructional
time period. T here a re two variables which m ay account for the better
perform ance of the Pilot Study group: one is that its pretest sco res w ere
higher th a n the 1993-94 g ro u p s' p rete st sc o re s, and th e s e sc o re s
approached the m iddle of the norm s range faster than the sc o re s of the
new study's groups (a s explained above); th e seco n d is th at the Pilot
Study group represented what adm inistrators and te a c h e rs characterized
131
a s an exceptionally motivated and highly academ ic ELD Level 3 group, a
generalization that w as not applied to the 1993-94 groups.
T he se c o n d h y p o th esis w as th a t stu d en ts in a "stacked for
su ccess" SSR program would have higher posttest results in "positive
attitu d es tow ard reading" th a n the stu d e n ts in a "sem i-stacked for
su ccess" SSR program . T his hypothesis w as b a se d on th e belief that
o n ce students a re in an optimal free reading program , they will becom e
"hooked on books." Therefore, it w as expected th at the stu d en ts in the
experim ental group would increasingly (a) come to value reading and (b)
find it to be enjoyable. This hypothesis w as supported by the findings;
th ere w ere significant differences betw een the experim ental group and
th e com parison group, a s determ ined by th e Manova. With an effect size
of 0.42, it can be said that th e differences between th e two groups on this
v a ria b le w e re m o re s u b s ta n tia l th a n th ey w e re for read in g
com prehension.
On th e E ste s Attitude S c a le s (EAS), th e experim ental group
started out lower than the com parison group and en d ed higher. Based
on the frequency distribution, it is clear th at the experim ental school went
up the m ost on five items which indicated that they viewed reading a s a
pleasan t experience: Items 1 and 11 together ("Reading is for learning
but not for enjoym ent" and "Books should only be read w hen assigned")
rep resen t the trend to se e reading a s fun and a "choice," rather than a s
simply school-related. Items 4 and 15 ("Books are a bore" and "Reading
is dull") support this trend, sin ce students increasingly cam e to feel that
1 3 2
reading w a s not a boring, but rather a pleasurable, activity. Finally, item
5 ("W atching TV is better than reading") sh o w s that stu d e n ts actually
cam e to s e e reading a s a form of entertainm ent.
The experim ental group w ent up less on item s 3 and 10 ("Reading
is a good w ay to spend spare time" and "There are m any books which I
ho p e to read"). T hese findings could be interpreted by acknow ledging
th at students did not m ake a com plete shift to seein g reading a s a "habit."
Both of th e s e s ta te m e n ts re p re s e n t a view point th a t involves a
com m itm ent to future, long-range reading activities. P erh ap s the program
w a s not long enough to instill this kind of perspective yet. In addition,
"sp a re tim e" activities often carry the connotation of being social in
nature. Moffitt and W artella (1992) have pointed out th at th e "favorite
ad o lescen t leisure pursuits are socialization activities (e.g., being with
friends or sports)" and th at reading for pleasure ranks lower than any of
th e s e pursuits (p. 14). Students m ay not have developed their enjoym ent
of reading to th e extent that they would be willing to read, rather than to
participate in social activities.
The only item on which stu d en ts did not increase at all w as item 6
("Reading is rewarding to me"). It is possible th at the term "rewarding"
w a s interpreted differently by the students th an it w as intended by th e
authors. It could have represented a type of long-term satisfaction (e.g.,
reading will g e t me a good job, will help me to e a rn money, will help m e
in college) th a t the stu d en ts had not yet acknow ledged to b e results of
increasing th e reading habit, rather than sim ply a short-term s e n se of
"pleasure." T his explanation w ould acco u n t for the lack of m atch
betw een this item and th e other item s on which th e students m ade gains.
133
For the com parison group, th e highest g a in s w ere in item 1
("Reading is for learning but not for enjoym ent"), followed by items 3
("Reading is a good way to spend sp are time"), 5 ("Watching TV is better
than reading"), and 15, ("Reading is dull"), respectively. As w as true for
the experim ental group, th e s e gains indicate that som e stu d en ts saw
reading a s p lea su rab le and not just a s a school-related activity. In
addition, this group w as m ore willing to list reading a s a "sp are time
activity" than the experim ental group. P erh ap s this is b e cau se students
in the com parison group w ere doing m ore o utside reading than the
experim ental group at the beginning of the study; and though they w ere
outperform ed by th e experim ental g roup in th e posttest, th e group
included so m e stu d e n ts w ho had a lre ad y e sta b lish e d th e o u tside
pleasure reading habit.
The com parison group gained le ss in item s 10 and 4 ("There are
m any books which I hope to read" and "Books a re a bore"). Clearly, the
reading "habit" w as not established firmly with this group, either, since
th e se item s indicate that stu d en ts w ere not m aking future p lan s about
their reading activities and did not solidly comm it to the position that
books are enjoyable.
Finally, for the com parison group, th ere w ere d e c re a s e s in two
items: 6 ("R eading is rew arding to me") and 11 ("Books should only be
read w hen assigned'). As it w as for th e experim ental group, item 6 w as
problem atic: th e word "rewarding" m ay have implied a long-term result
(perhaps even a financial one) that the students had not yet visualized a s
a possible outcom e of the reading habit, rather th an som ething which
could simply b e enjoyable, such a s SSR . Also, th e fact that th e score for
134
item 11 d e c re a sed along with item 6 show s that som e students m ay have
s e e n the SSR tim e in school a s part of a school-assigned activity and not
a s a pleasurable (or rewarding) benefit at all.
The om ission of the two factors of "follow-up activities" and "staff
training" in th e com parison g ro u p 's program m ay have le sse n e d
stu d e n ts' p ro g re ss in developing "positive attitudes tow ards reading."
W ithout opportunities for p e e r interactions about books, it would have
b e e n more difficult to sustain students' enthusiasm and to g en erate spin
off effects in interests and id ea s from one student to another. Similarly, if
all conditions for SSR w ere not met, or if te a c h e rs did n ot fully
understand or support the underlying prem ises of SS R (which m ay have
b e e n the c a s e since the te a c h e rs did not h av e specific staff training),
stu d en ts' attitudes would have been adversely affected.
Also, th e two factors which w ere "limited" in th e com parison
group's study, "access" and "encouragem ent," m ay h av e influenced the
ex ten t to which they developed more "positive attitudes toward reading."
Not having a c c e s s to classroom books for outside p leasu re reading at
hom e might contribute to students' feeling that reading is solely a school
activity; and not seeing te a c h e rs model the reading p ro ce ss would send
th e m essag e to students that reading w as not a s inherently pleasurable
or beneficial a s it w as pronounced to be.
Increase in Frequency of O utside P leasure Reading
The third hypothesis w a s that stu d en ts in a "stacked for success"
S SR program w ould have higher posttest results in "frequency of outside
p leasu re reading" than the students in a "sem i-stacked for success" SSR
135
program . This hypothesis w as b ased on the prem ise that once students
h a v e begun to find that in-class reading is pleasurable, they will want to
continue reading at home. Therefore, it w as expected that they would do
m ore pleasure reading during their outside leisure tim e. This hypothesis
w a s supported by th e findings; th e re w ere significant d ifferen ces
betw een the two groups. With an effect size of 0.52, it can be said that
th e differences betw een th e two g ro u p s on this variable w ere slightly
larger than th ey w ere for th e developm ent of "positive attitudes toward
reading" and m uch m ore su b stan tial than th ey w ere for reading
co m p reh en sio n .
On the S tudent P re te st-P o stte st Q uestionnaire for "frequency of
outside p leasure reading," th e experim ental group started out lower than
th e com parison group and ended higher. Ratings w ere assigned on the
b a s is of reported "frequency of outside pleasure reading" patterns; (1)
never; (2) som etim es; (3) often; and (4) every day. However, on the
av erag e, the experim ental group show ed a m arked trend in m ovem ent
from the lower e n d of th e "som etim es" category to the upper end of it
(tow ard the "often" category), while the com parison group show ed only a
slight m ovem ent within th e upper ran g e of the "som etim es" category
(toward the "often" category). By isolating categories 3 and 4 (the m ost
"frequent" read in g categories), it ca n be se en th a t only 30% of the
stu d en ts in th e experim ental group w ere reading "often" and "every day"
a t th e beginning of the study, while alm ost 60% of them w ere choosing
th e s e two categ o ries at the end. For th e com parison group, about 52% of
th e students c h o s e categ o ries 3 and 4 at the beginning, and 55% chose
them at the end of the study.
136
In sum m ary, the trend w as for the experim ental group to read more
frequently at th e end of the study than they did at the beginning, yet the
tendency w as for the com parison group to rem ain fairly stable from the
beginning to the end of the study.
Again, the omission of the two factors of "follow-up activities" and
"staff training" in the com parison group m ay have had a negative impact
on stu d en ts' "frequency of outside p lea su re reading" p attern s in that
group. B ecause the factors w ere not im plem ented, students' motivational
levels within th e program m ay have b een lower than they would have
b e e n if the factors had b e e n included. It is possible that follow-up
activities which offered stu d e n t-stu d e n t interactions ab o u t popular
reading m aterials might have provided a form of p eer encouragem ent for
stu d en ts to do outside p leasu re reading. In addition, tea c h e r training in
SSR procedures would have em phasized th e need for tea ch ers to guide
stu d e n ts in self-selection of books so th at stu d en ts would c h o o se to
continue their in-class reading at hom e.
It se em s m ore likely, however, that the two limited factors in the
com parison group program , "access" and "encouragem ent," m ay have
negatively affected the potential of that group to m ake g ain s in "frequency
of outside p leasu re reading." Certainly, th e "access" factor w as crucial.
T h o se stu d en ts who w ere alread y reading outside of c la ss probably
continued to do so; but th o se who w ere not doing outside reading w ere
not given a m ajor im petus to start it: books to take hom e. Also, the
limited "encouragem ent" factor m ay h av e played a part in lowering
students' motivation to seek out books that they could take hom e, even
though the library at the com parison school w as a far better source for its
137
stu d e n ts than th e library at the experim ental school. T he com parison
school library w as open all day and staffed with a full-time librarian. The
experim ental school library w as o p e n only th re e periods a day and w as
staffed with a part-tim e librarian. If students had been given stronger
en c o u ra g e m e n t to do outside read in g , p e rh a p s the stu d e n ts in the
com parison school would have utilized the llibrary m ore often, rather
than using classroom books which th ey could not take hom e. In addition,
b e c a u se the tea c h e rs did not m odel th e reading process, students w ere
not encouraged to se e it a s a worthwhile activity that should be extended
from the classroom into an "outside" reading situation.
The fourth hypothesis w as that students in a "stacked" for success"
SSR program would have higher p o stte st resu lts in "wider ran g e of
p le a su re reading sources" than th e stu d e n ts in a "sem i-stacked for
su ccess" SSR program . This hypothesis w as b a se d on the concept that
a c c e s s to books can be sought in m any different w ays and that students
who have becom e engaged in the pleasure reading pro cess will w ant to
continue to obtain m aterials th at ap p eal to them . S ince classroom
collections a re limited in scope, it w a s believed that th e students in an
optim al reading program would se e k out additional so u rces of m aterials
to supplem ent classroom offerings. This hypothesis w as supported by
the findings; there w ere significant differences betw een th e experim ental
group and the com parison group. T h e effect size that w as calculated
w as 0.57, which indicates that the differences bew een the two groups on
this variable w ere slightly larger th an they w ere for the developm ent of
138
"positive attitudes tow ard reading" and "frequency of o u tsid e pleasure
reading," but m uch m ore su b stan tial th a n th ey w ere for reading
co m prehension.
The experim ental group started out low er than th e com parison
group and ended higher. Raw sc o re in creases (based on o n e point tor
every s o u rc e used by the total group of stu d en ts) show that th e
experim ental group increased their use of s o u rc e s in all a re a s except
num ber 3, th e home. This is a logical result sin ce the factor of "access" to
books plays a m ajor role in a "stacked for su c cess" S S R program .
Students found re so u rc e s at school and through other ch an n els that
would offer them a g reater selection than w hat they had in their hom es.
T he com parison group m ade in c re a se s in four sou rces a n d d e c re a se s
in three. T he d e c re a s e s were in u s e s of the hom e, the public library, and
friends and relatives. T hese d e c re a s e s a re u n d erstan d ab le, however,
since classro o m book collections and a very good school library book
collection w ere available to them.
A clear picture of the p attern s of both groups e m e rg e s when the
so u rc e s a re listed a s p e rc e n ta g e s of total g ro u p choices. While the
com parison group m a d e no real shifts from p rete st to posttest, th e
experim ental group u se d the "home" source 14% less at th e end of the
study than th ey did a t th e beginning and the book club so u rce 14% m ore
at the end of the study than they did at the beginning. T his m ovem ent
m akes s e n s e within th e context of th e study: stu d en ts relied upon hom e
sources at th e outset until they could find books th at they liked in class (a
settling-in period occurred): a s th ey d e v elo p ed in te rests in specific
authors and genres, th ey then u se d book c lu b s more, from whom they
139
ordered about 125 dollars per m onth worth of "series" books such as
S w eet Valley High, Nancy Drew, th e Hardy Boys, and C hristopher Pike
thrillers. T he book club offered additional selections from se rie s that
stu d en ts b ecam e interested in during c la ss and could not continue to
obtain from c la ss collections or the school library.
The question is w hether or not stu d en ts used a wider range of
p leasure reading so u rces b e c au se they w ere interested in reading. The
stud ents from th e experim ental school did u se a wider range of sources,
while the stu d en ts from th e com parison school did not. However, a s
discu ssed earlier, this m ay be attributed to the better library facilities at
the com parison school. Both groups had a c c e s s to approxim ately the
sa m e kinds of c la ss book collections.
It would seem that if stu d en ts in the com parison group had truly
been "hooked" on reading that their u se of so u rces such a s bookstores,
libraries, frien d s/relativ es, an d book clu b s would h a v e in c re a se d
dram atically, sin ce th e s e a re th e so u rc e s th at would have provided
b o o k s th at th ey could tak e h om e (a s o p p o se d to th e classro o m
collections).
In sum m ary, the trend w as for the experim ental group to u se a
w ider variety of so u rc e s at the en d of the study than they did at the
beginning, w hile th e com p ariso n group m aintained a fairly sta b le
configuration from the start to the finish.
The om ission of the two factors of "follow-up activities" and "staff
training" in th e com p ariso n g ro u p 's program m ay h a v e le s s e n e d
students' progress in using a "wider range of pleasure reading sources."
Certainly, p eer interaction about books is one dynam ic m ethod of having
1 40
students sh a re their so u rces with others. When interest is generated in a
new source (e.g., a book club, a particular store in town that caters to
certain a d o lescen t reading interests; a nearby public library, etc.), the
effect can be far-reaching in a high school, particularly if th e source
seem s to b e "accepted" or "in." In addition, te a c h e r training in SSR
philosophy helps to m ake tea ch ers aw are of the im portance of their roles
in helping students to find books that they like. Self-selection d o es not
imply that students "sink or swim" in finding m atch es for their interests;
the teach er m ust provide suggestions for genres, titles, and so u rc e s of
provocative reading m aterials and should help to identify a v e n u e s of
a c c e ss for students, a s well. Therefore, had the follow-up activities and
staff training factors b een included, th e com parison group's gains in
"wider range of pleasure reading sources" might have been greater.
It s e e m s plausible, how ever, th at the two limited factors in the
com parison group program , "access" and "encouragem ent" m ay have
had a g reater impact on the potential of that group to m ake g ain s in using
a "wider ran g e of reading sources." B ecau se th e com parison school
provided a c c e s s to classroom reading m aterials, th e students u sed th ese
m aterials; yet, b e c au se th ey w ere not urged to ta k e the books home,
stu d e n ts did not u se them for o u tsid e p lea su re reading p u rp o ses.
Second, sin ce the enco u rag em en t factor w as limited a s well, students
w ere not "pushed" to seek out additional sources th at would supply them
with m aterials for o u tsid e p le a su re reading. W hile this group did
increase their u se of their school library, the increase for this so u rce w as
no more substantial than for any other--and certainly not a s g rea t a s one
141
would predict if stu d e n ts w ere se rio u s about pursuing th e outside
pleasure reading habit.
Relationship Between„!!Etequency_of_Qutside .Pleasure
Reading" and R eading Com prehension
A fifth hypothesis w as that th ere would be a positive relationship
b e tw e en "freq u en cy of o u tsid e p le a s u re rea d in g " a n d reading
com prehension. T here w ere two possible rationales for this hypothesis:
The first o n e w as predicated on the assum ption th a t students who did
outside p leasu re reading (in addition to the in-class 20 m inutes of SSR,
which w as a "given" for both groups) would learn to read better because
they read m ore than students who simply read during class. Therefore,
th o se w ho read m ore freq u en tly w ould in c re a s e their reading
com prehension to a greater d eg ree than those who read less frequently.
T he se c o n d rationale w as that stu d e n ts e n g a g ed in SSR would (a)
in c re a se th eir o u tsid e p le a su re read in g and (b) gain in reading
com prehension. While (a) m ay not c a u se (b), th e re might still exist a
positive relationship betw een them d u e to the influence of SSR on both.
T he h y p o th esis w as not supported by th e findings. No significant
correlation w a s found for th e two groups betw een th e two constructs of
"frequency of outside reading" and reading com prehension.
For this study, the correlation w as positive, but extremely modest,
indicating th at the two constructs w ere relatively independent. However,
b ased on th e first rationale that m ore reading lead s to better reading, it
could be anticipated that there would be a greater positive correlation in
a longer-term program . (As indicated in th e review of the literature,
14 2
longer-term program s ot seven m onths or m ore have higher su c c e ss
ra te s in term s of reading com prehension developm ent, in general.)
W atkins an d E dw ards (1992) note, how ever, th at while it is not
u n reaso n ab le to conclude that th ere is a "robust association" betw een
out-of-school reading and current reading achievem ent, th e s e kinds of
asso ciatio n al d a ta do not perm it conclu sio n s regarding th e c a u sa l
relationships of other variables, including preexisting reading skills and
intellectual ability, with reading achievem ent (p. 240). Thus, without a
path analysis model, no claims can be m ade about causation.
With respect to the second rationale, that SSR would lead to (a)
in c re a s e d o u tsid e p le a s u re rea d in g an d (b) in c re a s e d reading
com prehension and th at (a) and (b) might b e indirectly related, it is
p o ssib le th a t a longer program would h av e resu lted in a higher
correlation. However, again there is no way to determ ine from this study
to what extent SSR m ay have causally influenced each variable or what
other m ediating variables may have been present.
Relationship Between Use of a Wider R ange
Of P leasure Re a ding Source s a nd Reading Com prehension
A sixth hypothesis w as that there would be a positive relationship
betw een u se of a "wider range of p leasu re reading sources" and the
d ev elo p m en t of reading com prehension. T h ere w ere two possible
rationales for this hypothesis: th e first one em erged from the belief that
stu d en ts who a re ex p o sed to various types of reading m aterials (e.g.,
g en res, styles) will in c re a se their reading com prehension m ore than
stu d e n ts who utilize a "narrow er" range of reading so u rc e s. Since
143
m ea su res of reading com prehension tend to include different types of
reading m aterials, students w ho use a wider range of so u rc e s have the
potential to do better than th o se who do not. The second rationale w as
that students en g ag ed in SSR would (a) utilize a wider range of reading
so u rc e s and (b) gain in reading com prehension. While (a) might not
c a u se (b), there might still exist a positive relationship betw een them due
to the influence of SSR on both. This hypothesis w as not supported by
the findings. No significant correlation w as found for the two groups
betw een the two constructs of "wider range of p leasure reading sources"
and the developm ent of reading com prehension.
For this study, the correlation w as positive, but extrem ely modest,
indicating that the two constructs were relatively independent. Again, it
is possible that th ere might b e a stronger correlation in a longer-term
program . However, it is also possible that th e rationale is faulty: perhaps
stu d en ts begin to g e t "hooked" on reading by using a narrow range of
so u rces at the beginning (e.g., comic books, m agazines, s e rie s books)
and branch out to wider so u rces much later. If the "reading m ore leads to
better reading" prem ise is true, better reading would follow from use of a
narrow range of sources, at least in the early stag es of the reading habit.
A path analysis would be n e c e ssa ry to determ ine such cau sal patterns.
With respect to the second rationale, that SSR would lead to (a) a "wider
ra n g e of p le a s u re reading so u rc e s" a n d (b) in c re a s e d reading
com prehension and that (a) and (b) might be indirectly related, it is again
p o ssib le th at a longer program would have resu lted in a higher
correlation. However, there is no w ay to determ ine from this study to what
144
extent SS R may hav e causally influenced each variable or w hat other
m ediating variables m ay have been present.
Sum m ary of Major Findings
1. T he first major finding w as that a "stacked for su ccess" SSR program
re su lte d in significant d iffe re n c e s b e tw e e n g ro u p s for rea d in g
com prehension, "positive attitudes toward reading," "frequency of outside
p le a su re reading," and u se of a "wider ran g e of p leasu re reading
sources." Though g ain s w ere small for reading com prehension, they
were substantial for th e other m easures.
2. No significant relationships w ere found betw een (a) "frequency of
outside p leasure reading" and reading com prehension and (b) u se of a
"wider ran g e of p leasu re reading sources" an d reading com prehension.
While th e correlations were positive, they w ere modest.
Additional Findings
Achievem ent in Reading C om prehension for ELD Level 4
T h o u g h th e sa m p le s of s tu d e n ts in ELD Level 4 in th e
experim ental and com parison schools w ere not intended to be part of the
study, their results w ere included b ecau se th ey supported the trend in the
Level 3 study for th e students in the "stacked for success" SSR program
to do b e tte r than th e students who were n ot in a "stacked for su c cess"
SSR program . Unfortunately, a s described in C hapter Four, it cannot be
said th a t th e experim ental school program w as a p u re "stacked for
su c cess" program ; neither can it be said th a t the com parison group
program w a s entirely a "sem i-stacked for s u c c e s s ” program , for so m e
145
te a c h e rs in that school did no SSR and o th ers carried out modified
versions. The generalization that can be m ade, however, is that the
experim ental school carried out a much stronger version of an optimal
SSR program than the com parison school did: the experim ental school
program represented a 67% "stacked for su ccess" SSR program and a
33% "sem i-stacked for success" program , while the com parison school
program represented a a 50% "sem i-stacked for success" program and a
50% totally non-SSR program.
R esults of this study w ere significant, in favor of the experim ental
group; but the effect size of 0.24 indicates that the differences w ere not
substantial. They w ere, in fact, similar to th e effect size of 0.29 calculated
for the Level 3 sam ples.
W ithout having more objective information about the Level 4 ELD
program s, it is difficult to m ake generalizations about the resu lts from
th ese sam ples. Information w as glean ed from sporadic observations and
from te a c h e r interviews and questionnaires. W hat can be said on the
basis of such limited d a ta is that SSR program s which a re m ore purely
"stacked for su ccess" offer g rea ter benefits for stu d en ts in term s of
reading com prehension than th o se which a re not.
Additional Limitations
In addition to the limitations listed at the end of C hapter Three, the
following limitations can now be added:
1. In th e Level 3 study, for R esearch Q uestions Two ("positive attitudes
toward reading"), T h ree ("frequency of o utside p leasu re reading"), and
Four ("w ider range of p leasu re reading sources"), th e experim ental
146
group's pretest sc o re s w ere lower than the com parison group's scores,
but their posttest sco res w ere higher than the com parison group's scores.
It is possible that statistical regression effects m ay have b een p resent in
the study.
2. In the Level 3 study, it is possible that ceiling effects w ere operating for
the com parison group, particularly with resp ect to R esearch Q uestions
T hree ("frequency of outside pleasure reading") and Four ("wider range
of p leasu re reading sources"). O ver 80% of th e stu d en ts w ere in the
"som etim es" and often" categories for "frequency of o utside reading" in
the pretest situation. Similarly, on the average, students in this group in
the pretest situation w ere already using two so u rc e s for their reading
m aterials in term s of "wide range of pleasure reading." In a four-month
instructional period, th e re m ay not have b e e n a larg e m argin for
im provem ent.
3. In the Level 3 study, the stu d en ts in the experim ental group w ere
considered to be le s s m otivated and w ell-prepared academ ically than
the stu d en ts who preced ed them . T eachers in the experim ental school
reported having difficulty in sparking s tu d e n ts' en th u sia sm a n d in
encouraging them to work at increasingly m ore challenging task s a s they
m oved through th e ELD curriculum. Their p rete st sco res, which w ere
eight m onths lower in G.E. than the previous y e a r's Pilot Study group's
scores, support this generalization.
4. T here w as limited control over th e ELD Level 4 program s, particularly
in the com parison school. Much of the information about SSR program
factors and im plem entation w as b a sed on te a c h e r report, rather than on
14 7
system atic observation. The interpretation of results from this d ata m ust
be m ade cautiously.
Educational Implications
1. "Stacked for success" SSR program s have the potential for increasing
reading com prehension, developing positive attitudes tow ard reading,
increasing frequency of outside pleasure reading, and encouraging the
u se of a wider range of p leasu re reading sou rces. Given the g reater
effect siz e s for the three affective d ependent variables than for reading
c o m p re h en sio n in this study, it m ay b e h y p o th esiz ed th at th e
developm ent of positive attitudes toward reading (including frequency of
o u tsid e reading an d u s e of a w ider ran g e of so u rc e s) p re c e d e s
achievem ent in com prehension. In effect, getting "hooked" on reading
m ay take som e time; it is possible, then, that substantial gains in reading
com prehension will follow within th e context of longer-term program s. If
this is true, then the creation of "stacked for success" SSR program s is a s
im portant in term s of prom oting stu d e n ts' positive a ttitu d es tow ard
reading a s it is in term s of helping them to achieve academ ic growth. As
S a n a c o re (1992) sta te s, "In d ep en d en t reading m otivates a love of
reading a s it supports the habit of reading" (p. 475).
2. "Stacked for success" SSR program s a re pleasurable for students. In
th is study, stu d e n ts' positive a ttitu d e s tow ard read in g in c re a se d
significantly; it s e e m s logical th at schools should consider developing
enjoyable SSR program s which a re a s good a s, and in m any c a s e s
better than, skills-based program s in term s of reading achievem ent.
W hat school adm inistrators an d te a c h e rs m ust "get beyond" is the
148
perspective that children a re "merely enjoying them selves, rather than
learning" (Elley, 1991, p. 403).
3. "Stacked for success" SSR program s a re appropriate for high school
ELD students. Not only do they provide L2 students with com prehensible
input, but they allow them to acquire lan g u ag e at their own pace and
through the u se of m aterials that interest them . Given the encouraging
results of this study, it can be claim ed th at such a program offers ELD
stu d e n ts an a v e n u e for in creasin g m otivation an d developing the
linguistic c o m p eten ce that is n e c e s s a ry for ach iev em en t in reading
com p reh en sio n .
4. "Stacked for success" SSR program s offer students invitations into
th e "Literacy Club" (Smith, 1988b). By participating in a program that
offers opportunities for th e developm ent of positive attitudes tow ard
reading and achievem ent in reading, stu d en ts receive th e m essa g e that
they a re "readers" and that being part of a com m unity of re a d e rs is
w orthw hile and im portant (Sm ith, 1988b). As Sm ith rem arks, "The
teach er's role is to ensure that the club exists and that every child is in it"
(p. 12). After all, students a re only in the SSR program for a short time,
but they are in the Literacy Club forever.
Recom m endations for Future R esearch
1. T here is a need for longer-term SSR studies.
2. A g ap that now exists in the literature is the necessity to u se multiple
re g re ssio n p ro ced u res with th e eight fac to rs in o rd er to s e e w hat
contribution each factor m akes to th e overall program . While a "trend"
em e rg ed in this study (in term s of facto rs "m ost often" included in
149
successful studies) m ore information is n eed ed to m ake valid assertions
about individual factor im portance.
3. Future research should focus on possible correlations betw een (a)
"frequency of outside reading" and reading com prehension and (b) u se
of a "wider ran g e of outside p leasu re reading sources" and reading
com prehension, particularly within the context of longer-term program s.
Further, path a n a y sis m odels should b e used in order to determ ine
sources of causation.
REFERENCES
151
Allington, R. (1975). Sustained approaches to reading and writing.
Language Arts, 52 (6), 813-815.
Aranha, M. (1985). Sustained silent reading g o e s East. T he H eading
Teacher, 39 (2), 214-217.
Azabdaftari, B. (1992). The_coocepLei extensive_readingjn the lig iito l
L1-L2 hypothesis. Paper presented at the Twenty-Sixth Annual
Meeting of the T eachers of English to S p eak ers of Other
Languages, Vancouver, British Columbia, C anada. (ERIC
Docum ent Reproduction Service No. ED 250 864)
Barbe, W„ and Abbott, J. (1975).
Nyack, New York: Parker Publishing Com pany, Inc.
Bintz, W. (1993). R esistant read ers in secondary education: Som e
insights and implications. Journal of R eading, 36 (8), 604-615.
Botel, M. (1977). A com prehensive reading comm unication a rts plan.
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania D epartm ent of
Education.
Cam pbell, D., and Stanley, J. (1963). Experimental and quasi-
experim ental desig n s for re s e a rch. Chicago, Illinois: Rand
McNally College Publishing Com pany.
Cardarelli, A. (1992). T eachers under cover: Promoting the personal
reading of teachers. The R eading T eacher, 45 (9), 664-668.
Carlsen, G., and Sherrill, A. (1988). Voices of readers: How we com e to
love books. Urbana, Illinois: National Council of T each ers of
English.
Cho, K. S., and Krashen, S. (1994). Acquisition of vocabulary from the
Sw eet Valley Kids series; Adult ESL acquisition. Journal of
Beading, 3Z (8), 662-667.
Clary, L. (1991). Getting adolescents to read. Journal of R eading, 34
(5), 340-345.
Cline, R., and Kretke, G. (1980). An evaluation of long-term SSR in the
ju n io r high school. Journal of R eading, 23 (6), 503-506.
Collier, V. (1987). Age and rate of acquisition of second language for
academ ic purposes. TESQL Quarterly, 21 (4), 617-641.
1 5 2
Collins, C. (1980). Sustained silent reading periods: Effect on teachers'
behaviors and students' achievem ent. The_Elemej3tary_Scho.oL
Journal, 81 (2), 109-114.
Cook, T., and Campbell, D. (1979).
Houghton Mifflin Com pany.
Cron bach, Lee J. (1971).
New York: Harper and Brothers.
Boston, M assachusetts:
Jestin g (3rd Ed.).
Davis, L. (1992). Principals serv e well a s reading role models.
Curriculum Review, 32 (3), 18.
Davis, F., and Lucas, J. (1971). An experim ent in individualized reading.
The Reading T eacher, 24 (8), 737-743, 747.
Elley, W. (1984). Exploring th e reading difficulties of second language
learners in Fiji. In J.C. Alderson and A. H. Urquart (Eds.), Reading
in a second language (pp. 281-301). New York: Longman.
Elley, W. (1991). Acquiring literacy in a second language: The effect of
book-based program s. Lang uag e L earning, 41 (3), 375-411.
Germ any: T he International Association for the Evaluation of
Educational Achievem ent.
Elley, W., and M angubhai, F. (1983). The im pact of reading on second
language learning. R eading R esearch Q uarterly, IS (1), 53-67.
Eskey, D., and G rabe, W. (1988). Interactive m odels for second
language reading: P erspectives on instruction. In M. H. Long and
J. C. R ichards (Eds.), Interactive ap p ro ach es to second language
reading (pp. 223-238). Cam bridge, M assachusetts: Cam bridge
University P ress.
Estes, T., Johnstone, J., and Richards, H. (1975). The Estes Attitude
Scales. Charlottesville, Virginia: Virginia R esearch A ssociates,
Ltd.
Evans, H., and Towner, J. (1975). Sustained silent reading: D oes it
increase skills? The R eading T each er. 29 (2), 155-156.
153
Everett, I. (1987). RecreationaLreading^effects_onj'eading
com prehension achievem ent. M.A. thesis. New Jersey. Kern
College of New Jersey. (ERIC D ocum ent Reproduction Service
No. ED 283 123)
Fader, D. (1976) The new hooked on books. New York: Berkeley
Medallion Book, Berkeley Publishing Com pany.
Farrell, E. (1982). SSR a s the core of a junior high school reading
program. Journal of R eading, 1 (26), 48-51.
Gallo, D. (1968). Free reading and book reports: An informal survey of
grade eleven. Journal of R eading, 11 (7), 532-538.
Gambrell, L. (1978). Getting started with sustained silent reading and
keeping it going. The Reading T each er, 32 (3), 328-331.
G anz, P., and Theofield, M. (1974). S uggestions for starting SSR.
Journal of Reading, 12 (8), 614-616.
Gay, L. R. (1980). Educational evaluation and m easurem ent:
C om petencies for analysis and application. Colum bus, Ohio:
C harles E. Merrill Publishing Com pany.
Goodm an, K. (1982). Lang uag e a n d literacy: The selected writings of
Kenneth S. G oodm an, (Vols. 1-2). Edited by F. Gollasch. London:
R outledge and Kegan Paul.
G radm an, H., and H anania, E. (1992). The relative im portance of
reading for language learning program s. In J. Harris (Eds.), Quilt
and Quill: Achieving and m aintaining quality in language
teaching and learning (pp. 431-441). Hong Kong: Education
Departm ent, Institute of L anguage in Education.
G reaney, V. (1970). A com parison of individualized and basal reader
ap p ro ach es to reading instruction. T he Irish Journal of Education,
4 (1), 19-29.
G reaney, V., and Clarke, M. (1975). A longitudinal study of the effects of
two reading m ethods on leisure-time reading habits. In D. Moyle
(Ed.), Reading: W hat of the future? (pp. 107-114). London:
United Kingdom R eading Association.
Hafiz, F., and Tudor, I. (1989). Extensive reading and the developm ent
of language skills. English L anguage Teaching Journal, 4 3 (1 ),
4-13.
154
Hase, H. D., and Goldberg, L. R. (1967). Com parative validity of different
strategies of constructing personality inventory scales.
Psychological J3uJletin, 67, 231-248.
Heathington, B. (1979). W hat to do about reading motivation and the
middle school. Joum aLoL R eading, 22 (8 ) , 709-713.
Henerson, M., Morris, L., an d Fitz-Gibbon, C. (1987). How to m easure
attitudes. Newbury Park, California: S ag e Publications, Inc.
P aper presented at th e Twenty-First Annual Meeting of the
International Association of T each ers of English a s a Foreign
Language, W estende, Belgium. (ERIC Docum ent Reproduction
Service No. ED 287 298)
Hinkle, D., W iersma, W., and Jurs, S. (1988).
behavioral scien ces (2nd Ed.). Boston, M assachusetts:
Houghton-Mifflin Com pany.
Ho Id away, D. (1979).
W ales: Ashton Scholastic.
Sydney, New South
Holt, S., and O'Tuel, F. (1989). The effect of sustained silent reading
and writing on achievem ent and attitudes of seventh and eighth
g rade students reading two y ears below grade level. Reading
Improvement, 26 (4), 290-297.
Hunt, L. (1967). Evaluation through teacher-pupil conferences. In T.C.
Barrett (Ed.), T he evaluation of children’s reading achievem ent
(pp. 111-126). Newark, Delaware: International Reading
A ssociation.
Hunt, L. (1970). The effect of self-selection, interest, and motivation upon
independent, instructional, and frustrational levels. T he Reading
Ie a c h e r, 24 (2), 146-51, 158.
Isaac, S., and Michael, W. (1981). Handbook in research and
evaluation (2nd ed.). S an Diego, California: EdITS Publishers.
Jenkins, M. (1957). Self-selection in reading. The Reading T each er, 11
(2), 84-90.
Johnson, D.W. (1981). Student-student interaction: The neglected
variable in education. Educational R esearcher, 1Q_(1), 5-10.
Jones, C. (1978). 20 m inute vacations. Journal of R eading, 22 (2), 102.
155
Kaminsky, D. (1992). Improving interm ediate g rad e level ESL students'
attitudes toward recreational reading. Ed.D. Practicum. Florida:
Nova University. (ERIC D ocum ent Reproduction Service No. ED
347 509)
K rashen, S. (1985.) Inquiries and Insights. Menlo Park, California:
Alemany P ress.
K rashen, S. (1987). Encouraging free reading. In M. D ouglas (Ed.),
Fifty-First Yearbook of the Clarem ont R eading C onference (pp.
1-10). Clarem ont, California: Clarem ont G raduate School.
K rashen, S. (1988). Do we learn to read by reading? The relationship
betw een free reading and reading ability. In D. Tannen (Ed ),
Linguistics in context: C onnecting observation and understanding
(pp. 269-298). Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex.
K rashen, S. (1993). T he power of reading. Englewood, Colorado:
Libraries Unlimited.
K rashen, S. (1995). W hat is interm ediate natural approach? In P.
Hashem ipour, R. M aldenado, and M. Van N aerssen (Eds.),
Festschrift in-honor of Tracy D. Terrell (pp. 92-105). New York:
McGraw Hill.
Lai, F. (1993). The effect of a sum m er reader c o u rse on reading and
writing skills. System , 21 (1), 87-100.
Lawson, H. (1968). Effects of free reading on th e reading achievem ent
of sixth-grade pupils. In J. A. Figurel (Ed.), Forging a h e a d in
reading (pp. 501-504). Newark, Delaware: International
R eading Association.
M angubhai, F., and Elley, W. (1982). The role of reading in promoting
ESL. Language, Learning, and Com m unication, 1 (2), 151-160.
M anning, G., and Manning, M. (1984). W hat m odels of recreational
reading m ake a difference? Reading W orld, 23 (4), 375-380.
Manning-Dowd, A. (1985). T he effectiveness of S S R : A review of the
research . Information Analysis (Report No. C S 008 607). (ERIC
Docum ent Reproduction Service No. ED 276 970)
M aynes, F. (1981). Uninterrupted sustained silent reading. R eading
R esearch Quarterly, 12 (1), 159-160.
1 5 6
M cCracken, R. (1971). Initiating sustained silent reading. Joum aL ot
Reading, 14 (8), 521-524, 582-583.
M cCracken, R., and McCracken, M. (1978). Modeling is th e key to
sustained silent reading. T he Reading T eacher, 31 (4), 406-408.
Minton, M. (1980). The effect of sustained silent reading upon
com prehension and attitudes among ninth graders. Journal of
Beading, 23 (6), 498-502.
Moffitt, M., and Wartella, E. (1992). Youth and reading: A survey of
leisure reading pursuits of fem ale and m ale adolescents. B eading
R esearch and Instruction, 3 1 (2), 1-17.
Moore, C., Jo n es, C„ and Miller, D. (1980). W hat we know after a d e c ad e
of sustained silent reading. T he R eading T eacher, 33 (4), 445-
450.
Mork, T. (1972). Sustained silent reading in th e classroom . The Reading
Ie a c h e r, 25 (5), 438-441.
Morrow, L. (1982). Relationships betw een literature program s, library
corner designs, and children's u se of literature. Journal of
O'Brien, R., and Kaiser, M. (1985). MANOVA m ethod for analyzing
repeated m easu res designs: An extensive primer. Psychological
Bulletin, 9Z (2), 316-333.
Oliver, M. (1970). High intensity practice: The right to enjoy reading.
Education, 91 (1), 69-71.
Oliver, M. (1973). The effect of high intensity practice on reading com pre
hension. Reading Im provem ent. 10 (2), 16-18.
Oliver, M. (1976). The effect of high intensity practice on reading
achievem ent. R eading Im provem ent, 1 3 (4), 226-228.
O'M asta, G., and Wolf, J. (1991). Encouraging independent reading
through th e Reading Millionaires' Project. The R eading T eacher,
44 (9), 656-662.
Parr, F.W. (1932). Factors associated with poor reading ability of adults.
School and Society, 35, 626.
Petre, R. (1971). Reading breaks m ake it in Maryland. Journal of
Beading* 15 (3), 191-194.
157
Petre, R. (1977). On the job reading for teacher. Joum aLoLR eading, 20
(4), 310-311.
P aper presented at th e 22nd Annual Meeting of th e T eachers of
English to S p eak ers of Other L anguages, Chicago, Illinois. (ERIC
Docum ent Reproduction Service No. ED 301 068)
Pfau, D. (1967). Effects of planned recreational reading program s. The
R eading Teacher, 21 (1), 34-39.
Pilgreen, J., and Krashen, S. (1993). S ustained silent reading with
English a s a second language high school students: Impact on
reading com prehension, reading frequency, and reading
enjoym ent. School Library Media Quarterly, 22 (1), 21-23.
Psychological Corporation. (1985). The Stanford D iagnostic Reading
l e s t (3rd ed.). S an Antonio, T exas: Harcourt B race Jovanovich.
Reed, A. (1988). Com ics to classics: A parent’ s guide to books for teen s
and p re te e n s. Newark, Delaware: International Reading
A ssociation.
Russikoff, K., and Pilgreen, J. (1994). Shaking the tre e of "forbidden
fruit": A study of light reading. R eading Im provem ent, 31 (2), 122-
123.
Sadoski, M. (1980). Ten y ears of uninterrupted sustained silent reading.
R eading Im provem ent, 12 (2), 153-156.
Sanacore, J. (1992). Encouraging the lifetime reading habit. Journal of
Reading, 35 (6), 474-477.
Sartain, H. (1960). The Roseville experim ent with individualized reading.
T he R eading T each er, 13, 277-281.
Schon, I., Hopkins, K., and Vojir, C. (1984). The effects of Spanish
reading em phasis on the English and Spanish reading abilities of
Hispanic high school students. Bilingual Review , 11 (1), 33-39.
Schon, I., Hopkins, K., and Vojir, C. (1985). T he effects of special
reading tim e in Spanish on the reading abilities and attitudes of
H ispanic junior high school students. Journal of Psycholinguistic
R esearch, 14 (1), 57-65.
1 5 8
Smith, F. (1976). Learning to read by reading. Language Arts, 53, 297-
299, 322. Reprinted in Smith, F. (1983). E ssaysJnloJileracy.
Exeter: H einem ann Educational Books.
Smith, F. (1988a). U nderstanding reading. Hillsdale, New Jersey :
Law rence Erlbaum A ssociates, Inc.
Smith, F. (1988b). Joining the literacy club: Further e ssa y s into
education. Portsm outh, New H am pshire: H einem ann Educational
Books.
Sperzel, E. (1948). T he effect of com ic books on vocabulary growth and
reading com prehension. Elem entary English, 25 (2), 109-113.
Sum m ers, E., and McClelland, V. (1982). A field-based evaluation of
sustained silent reading in interm ediate grades. The Alberta
Journal of Educational R e se a rc h , 28 (2), 100-112.
Taylor, B., Frye, P., and M aruyam a, G. (1990). Time spent reading and
reading growth. Am erican Educational R esearch Journal, 27 (2),
351-362.
Vandevier, R. (1992). P arents tak e the pledge to keep their children
reading at hom e. Curriculum Review, 32 (4), 19.
Van Jura, S. (1984). S econdary students at risk: Two giant ste p s toward
independence in reading. Journal of R eading, 2Z (6), 540-543.
Watkins, M., and Edw ards, V. (1992). Extracurricular reading and
reading achievem ent: The rich stay rich and the poor don't read.
R eading Improvement, 29, 236-242.
W iesendanger, K. A., an d Birlem, E. D. (1984). The effectiveness of SSR :
An overview of th e research. Reading Horizons, 24, 197-201.
Wiscont, J. (1990). A study of the sustained silent reading program for
interm ediate g rad e students in the Pulaski, W isconsin School
District. M.S. T hesis. O shkosh, W isconsin: University of
W isconsin. (ERIC D ocum ent Reproduction Service No. ED 323
520)
Wolf, A., and Mikulecky, L. (1978). Effects of USSR and of reading skills
instruction on c h a n g e s in secondary school students' reading
attitudes and achievem ent. In S. D. Pearson and J. H anson (Eds.),
27th Yearbook of th e National Reading Conference (pp. 226-
228). Clem son, South C arolina: National Reading C onference.
APPENDICES
Appendix A
1992-93 Pilot Study Student
Pretest/Posttest Q uestionnaire
Student Pretest/Posttest Questionnaire 1992-93
Name____________________ Teacher______________ Period
1. Have you ever taken a reading c la ss before? y es no
2. W here did you attend school last sem ester?
3. What ESL level w ere you in last sem ester? _________
4. W hen did you first com e to this c la ss? (date)
5. Do you read at home or outside of cla ss?
1) never 2) som etim es 3) often
6. Do you enjoy reading?
1) not at all 2) a little 3) som e 4) a lot
7. Where do you usually get the books you read in
c la s s ?
1) classroom 2) hom e 3) school/public library
4) book store/book club 5) relatives/friends
162
The Posttest form included the following questions, as well:
8. How do you like the SSR time we have in class?
1) not at all 2) a little 3) som e 4) a lot
9. The SSR tim e in cla ss (15-20 minutes) is:
1) too long 2) just right 3) not long enough
10. My reading has improved this sem ester:
1) not much 2) som e 3) a lot
11. My favorite things to read are:
12. My favorite author is:
Appendix B
1992-93 Pilot Study Results
1992-93 Pilot Study Results
(Note. For all tables, n=125)
Table B1
Gains on the Stanford Diagnostic
Reading Test
Raw Score
M ean M ean
Standard
Deviation
pretest 3 3 .6 1 2 3 .7 4 2 2 .359
posttest 4 2 .2 4 6 5.271 3 .0 4 4
(t =10.916, df = 124, p < .001)
Table B2
Enjoyment of Reading
not at all a little some a lot
pretest 0 3 3 5 9 3 3
posttest 0 5 6 2 5 8
(Chisquare = 27.574, df = 2, p < .001)
165
Table B3
Frequency of Outside Reading
never sometimes often
p retest 1 0 9 0 2 5
posttest 2 7 2 5 1
(Chisquare = 27.574, df = 2, p < .001)
Table B4
Perceived Reading Improvement
not much some a lot
posttest 2 4 6 7 7
Table B5
Range of Reading Sources
class home library store/ friends/
club relatives
p r e t e s t 1 0 0 1 2 3 0 8 6
p o s t t e s t 5 5 2 3 6 0 31 18
Ijfolfi- Students could choose more than on e source.
166
Table B6
Levels of SSR Enjoyment
p o s tte s t
noL_at_ all
0
a little
7
some aJoi
4 7 71
Satisfaction
Table B7
with Daily SSR Time
too long just right
not long, enough
p o s tte s t 4 8 3 3 8
Appendix C
T rends in the Survey of Free Reading Studies
168
TABLE C1
Results of 32 Free Reading Programs
Notes
C-SS refers to reading com p rehension , sta tistica lly sign ifican t;
A-SS refers to p ositive attitude toward reading, statistically
s ig n if ic a n t
A-OBS indicates that p ositive attitude toward reading w as
ob served through n o n -sta tistic a lly m easured in d icators.
NA means that this variable was not part o f the research design
o b je ctiv e(s) for the given experim ental group.
ELD indicates that the given experim ental group was com posed o f
E nglish Language D ev elo p m en t students.
LOSS in dicates that sta tistica lly significant d ifferences w ere
found in favor o f the com parison group.
An asterisk* in dicates that Spanish reading com p rehension and
p ositive attitude toward S panish reading w ere the dependent
v a r ia b le s .
Elementary Level Studies:
iLE. ELD OR (ASS A-SS A-OBS
1. Aranha 19 8 5 YES 4 YES YES NA
2. C ollins 1 9 8 0 NO 2 - 6 NO NO NA
3. Elley &
M a n g u b h a i:
E l (SSR) 1983 YES 4 - 5 YES NA NA
E 2 (S h a r e d ) 1983 YES 4 - 5 YES NA NA
4. Elley
( N iu e ) 1991 YES 3 YES NA YES
5. Elley
( S in g a p o r e ) 1991 YES 1 YES NA YES
6. Evans &
T o w n e r 1975 NO 4 NO NA NA
7. Greaney 1970 NO 6 NA YES NA
169
Elementary Level Studies, continued:
Stud}- ilR ELD GE OSS AzSS A-ODS
8. Jenkins 1957 NO 2 NA NA YES
9. Kaminsky 1992 YES 4 - 6 NA NA YES
10. Lawson:
El (Ex.A) 1968 NO 6 NO NA YES
E2 (Ex. B) 1968 NO 6 LOSS NA YES
E3 (Ind.) 1968 NO 6 LOSS NA YES
11.
&
M anning
Manning:
El (SSR) 1984 NO 4 NO NO NA
E 2 (P ce r) 1984 NO 4 YES YES NA
E3 (ConO 1984 NO 4 NO YES NA
12. Mavnes 1981 NO 2 -6 NA NA NO
13. Oliver 1973 NO 4 - 6 NO NA NA
14. Oliver: -
E l (SSR 1976 NO 4 - 6 NO NA YES
d a ily )
E2 (SSR 1976 NO 4 -6 NO NA YES
15.
b i- w e e k ly )
Pfau 1967 NO 1 NO YES NA
16. Sperzel:
E l (SSR) 1948 NO 5 NO NA NA
E2 (SSR + 1948 NO 5 NO NA NA
17.
word lists)
W iscont 1990 NO 4 - 6 NA NA YES
17 0
TABLE Cl CONTIMT.D
Middle School/Junior High Level Studies:
S tu d y
YE. ELD OR (LSS
18. Cline &
K r e tk e 1980 ND JH ND YES
19. D avis &
L u c a s 1971 NO 7 - 8 NO NA
20. Everett 1987 ND 8 NO NA
21. Farrell 1982 ND 8 NA NA
22. Holt &
O'Tuel 1989 ND 7 - 8 YES YES
23. Lai:
E l (sum
E2 (sum
E3 (sum
1)
2)
3)
1993
1993
1993
YES
YES
YES
7 - 9
7 - 9
7 - 9
YES
YES
ND
NA
NA
NA
*24. Schon
et al 1985 ND 7 - 8 ND ND
25. Sum m ers
& M cC lelland 1982 ND 5 - 7 ND NO
26. W olf &
M ik u le c k y 1978 NO 7 ND ND
Senior High Level Studies:
S lu d j: Y E ELD GR C-SS
AzSS
27. H afiz &
T u dor 1989 YES HS YES N A
28. M inton 1980 ND 9 NA N A
A-QBS
NA
YES
YES
YES
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
A-J2RS
NA
ND
171
TABLE C l. CONTINU ED
Senior High Level Studies, continued:
Siudy YE. ELD QR (ASS AASS A-.QBS
*29. Sch on
et al
(T e m p e ) 1984 ND 9 - 1 2 ND ND NA
*30. Sch on
ct al
( C h a n d le r ) 1984 ND 1 0 -1 2 ND NO NA
31. Fader 1976 ND US NA NA YES
C ollege Level Studies:
S io d y Y E ELD OR C-SS A -S S A-OBS
32. P etrim ou lx 1988 YES O X ND N A YES
172
TABLE C2
Factors A ddressed in Each Experimental Group
N ates.
ACC = Access; ,\P P = appeal, LNY = conducive environm ent,
ENC = encouragement; SXR= staff training, NACC= non
accountability; FPL = follow -up activities; and DT1MH = distributed
tim e to read.
An X indicates that the researcher(s) addressed a given factor in
the. experimental group. NO indicates that the factor was NOT
a d d r esse d .
Elementary Level Studies:
GROUP ACT A P P FNV LNC S IR NACC FOI. PT1M F
1 Aranha 1985 X X X X NO X NO X
2.C ollin s 1980 X NO X NO NO X NO X
3. Elley &
M angubhai 1983:
E l (SSR) X X X X X X NO X
E2 (Shared) X X X X X X X X
4. Elley 1991
( N iu e ) X X X X X X X X
5. Elley 1991
( S in g a p o r e ) X X X X X X X X
6. Evans & NO
Towner 1975
ND X X NO X NO X
7. Greaney 1970 X X X X NO X X X
8. Jenkins 1957 X X X X X X X X
9. K am insky 1992 X X X X NO X X NO
E lem entary Level Studies, continued:
CIRQUE ACT APE EXA ENC S IR NACC l-'QL DTIME
10. Lawson 1968:
E l (Ex. A) X ND X X ND X X X
E2 (Ex. B) X ND X X ND X X X
E3 (Ind.) X ND X X ND
x
X X
11.M anning &
M anning 1984:
E l (SSR) X ND X X X X ND X
E2 (Peer) X ND X X X X X X
E3 (Conf) X ND X X X X X X
12. M ayncs 1981 X ND X ND ND X ND X
13. O liver 1973 X X X X NO X ND X
14. O liver 1976:
E l (SSR
d a ily )
X X X X ND X ND X
E2 (SSR
b i- w e e k ly )
X X X X ND X NO X
15. Pfau 1967 X X X X X X X X
16. Sperzel 1948:
E l (SSR) X X X ND ND X ND X
E2(SSR +
w ord lists)
X X X NO NO ND ND X
17AViscont 1990 X ND X X ND X ND X
TA DLD.C2X0NTiXLED
Middle School and Junior High Level Studies:
174
QRQLT AOC ALT LXY liNC S IR NACC ID L DT1M
18. C line &
Kretke 1980 X X x X ND X ND X
19. D avis &
Lucas 1971 X X X X ND X ND X
2 0 .Everett 1987 X X X X ND X ND X
2 1 .Farrell 1982 X X X X ND ND ND X
22. Holt &
O T uel 1989 X X X ND X X ND X
23. Lai 1993:
E l (sum 1) X X X X NO ND X X
E2 (sum 2) X X X X ND ND X X
E3 (sum 3) X X X X ND ND X X
24. Sch on
et al 1985 X X X ND ND X ND NO
25. Summers &
M cC lelland 1982 X ND X X X X NO X
26. W olf & X ND X ND ND X ND ND
M iku lecky 1978
1 7 5
TABIJiC2XQNIINLED
Senior High Level Studies:
GROUP ACT A P I’ ENA ENC SXR NACC I QL DIL\1E
27. Fader 1976 X X X X ND X ND X
28. Hafiz &
Tudor 1989
X X X X ND X ND X
2 9 .\lin to n 1980 X ND ND X X X ND X
30.Schon et al
(Tempc) 1984
( S p a n is h )
31. Schon et al
(C handler) 1984
( S p a n is h )
X X X ND ND X NO X
X X X ND ND X ND X
College Level Studies:
GROUP ACC A P P ENA ENC S IR NACC FOI. DTi M E
3 2 .P e tr im o u lx
1988 X X X ND ND ND ND X
176
TABLE C3
Factors Included in the Groups that Made Statistically
Significant Growth in Comprehension
XiiLci).
X indicates that a given factor
program. XQ indicates that the
was included in the experim ental
factor was not included.
group's
ACC = A ccess; APP = appeal; ENV = conducive environment;
ENC = encouragem ent; STR = staff training; NACC = non-accountability;
FOL = follow -u p activities; and DTIME = distributed time to read
GROUP ACC APP ENV ENC STR NACC EQL □TIME
A ranha 85 X X X X NO X NO X
Elley &
M angubhai 83:
E1 (SSR ) X X X X X X NO X
E2 (Shared) X X X X X X X X
Elley 91
(N iue)
X X X X X X X X
Elley 91
(S in g ap o re) X X X X X X X X
M anning 84:
E 2(P eer) X NO X X X X X X
Holt & O'Tuel 89 X X X NO X X NO X
Lai 93:
E1 (sum 1) X X X X NO NO X X
E2 (sum 2) X X X X NO NO X X
Hafiz &Tudor 89 X X X X NO X NO X
Total for
E ach Factor: 10 9 10 9 6 8 6 10
177
TABLE C4
Factors Included in the Groups that Made Statistically
Significant Growth in Positive Attitude Toward Reading
Notes.
X indicates that a given factor was included in the experimental
program. NO indicates that the factor was not included.
ACC = Access; APP = appeal; ENV = conducive environment; ENC =
encouragement; STR = staff training; NACC = non-accountability
FOE = follow-up activities; and DTIME = distributed time to read.
group's
GHOUP ACC APP ENV ENC S IB NACC FQL DTIME
A ranha 85 X X X X NO X NO X
G rean ey 70
M anning &
Manning 84:
X X X X NO X X X
E2 (SSR) X NO X X X X X X
E3 (Peer) X NO X X X X X X
Pfau 67 X X X X X X X X
C line & Kretke 80 X X X X NO X NO X
Holt & O'Tuel 89 X X X NO X X NO X
Total for
E ach Factor: 7 5 7 6 4 7 4 7
178
TABLE C5
Factors Included in the Groups That M ade "Observed
Growth" in Positive Attitude Toward Reading
Notes.
X indicates that a given factor was included in the experimental group's
program. NO indicates that the factor was not included.
ACC = Access; APP = appeal; ENV = conducive environment; ENC =
encouragement; STR = staff training; NACC = non-accountability;
FOL = follow-up activities; and DTIME = distributed time to read.
GROUP ACC APP ENV ENC S IR NACC FOL DTIME
Elley 91
(Niue)
X X X X X X X X
Elley 91
(S in g ap o re)
X X X X X X X X
Jen k in s 57 X X X X X X X X
Kaminsky 92
Lawson 68:
X X X X NO X X NO
E1 (Ex. A) X NO X X NO X X X
E2 (Ex. B) X NO X X NO X X X
E3 (Ind.)
Oliver 76:
X NO X X NO X X X
E1 (SSR
daily)
X X X X NO X NO X
E2 (SSR
bi-weekly)
X X X X NO X NO X
W iscont 90 X NO X X NO X NO X
D avis/Lucas 71 X X X X NO X NO X
Everett 87 X X X X NO X NO X
Farrell 82 X X X X NO NO NO X
Table C5, Continued
ENV ENC STR NACC FOL DTIME
X X
GROUP
Fader 76
Petrimoulx 88
Total for
Each Factor:
ACC APP
X X
X X
15 11
X NO
15 14
NO X
NO NO
3 13
NO X
NO X
7 14
TABLE C6:
P ercentages of Experimental G roups that Included the
Identified Factors for Each Category of S u ccess
1 8 0
XoiJLS.
C ^ S S . refers to reading comprehension, statistically significant;
A-SS refers to positive attitude toward reading, statistically significant
AAOBS indicates that positive attitude toward reading was observed
through non-statistically measured indicators.
ArSS & A-OBS refers to a combination of these two categories.
ACC = Access; APP = appeal; ENV = conducive environment; ENC’ =
encouragement, STR = staff training; NACC = non-accountability;
FOL = follow-up activities; and DTIME = distributed time to read.
CATEGORY ACC APP ENV ENC STR NACC FOL DTIME
C-SS 1 0 0 9 0 100 9 0 6 0 8 0 6 0 100
A-SS 1 0 0 71 1 0 0 8 6 5 7 100 5 7 100
C-SS &
A-SS 1 0 0 8 2 1 0 0 8 8 5 9 88 5 9 100
A-OBS 1 0 0 8 0 100 9 3 2 0 87 47 93
A - S S &
A - O B S 1 0 0 77 1 0 0 91 3 2 91 5 0 9 5
181
TABLE C7:
Factor P ercentages Translated into Rating Levels
For Each Category of S u c c e ss
N otes.
1) 95-100% (most often)
2) 70-94% (next most often)
3) I3clow 70% (least often)
CASS refers to reading comprehension, statistically significant;
A-SS refers to positive attitude toward reading, statistically significant
AAQBS indicates that positive attitude toward reading was observed
through non-statistically measured indicators.
CrSS & A-_SS and A-SS & A-OBS refer to combinations of categories.
CATEGORY ACC APP ENV ENC STR NACC EQL DTIME
C-SS 2 2 3 2 3
A-SS 2 2 3 3
C-SS &
A-SS 2 2 3 2 3
A-OBS 2 2 3 2 3 2
A - S S &
A - O B S 2 2 3 2 3
1 8 2
TABLE C8:
Factors Included in the Groups that Were
Unsuccessful in All Three Categories
Xoieji.
X indicates that a given factor was included in the experimental group's
program. NO indicates that the factor was not included
ACC = Access; APP = appeal; ENV = conducive environment;
ENC = encouragement; STR = staff training; NACC = non-accountability;
FOL = follow-up activities; and DTIME = distributed time to read
GROUP ACE API’ ENV ENC SIR NACC POL DTIME
Collins 1980 X ND X ND ND X ND X
Evans &
Towner 1975 ND ND X X ND X ND X
Manning &
Manning 1984.
El (SSR) X ND X X X X ND X
Maynes 1981 X ND X ND ND X NX) X
Oliver 1973 X X X X NO X ND X
Sperzel 1948:
El (SSR) X X X ND ND X NX) X
E2 (SSR +
word lists)
X X X ND ND NX) N X ) X
Lai 1993:
E3 (sum 3) X X X X ND ND X X
Schon et al 1985 X X X ND ND X NO NO
Summer &
McClelland 1982 X ND X X X X ND X
Tabic _C&. Continued
GRQLP ,\QC A I T liXX ENC S IR NACC FOL DTIME
Wolf &
Mikulecky 1978 X ND X ND ND X NO NO
Minton 1980 X ND ND X X X NX) X
Schon el al 1984
(T e m p c ) X X X ND ND X ND X
Schon et al 1984
(C h a n d le r ) X X X ND NX) X NX) X
Total for
Each Factor: 11 7 12 5 2 10 1 10
184
TABLE C9
Com parison ol Factor P ercen tag es and Ratings in
Successful and Unsuccessful Experimental Groups
Notes.
S u ccessful (SUC) refers to the experim ental groups that were successful
in achieving statistically significant reading com prehension, statistically
signifcant positive attitude toward reading, or observed positive attitude
toward reading. W here groups w ere successful in m ore than one area,
they w ere counted the com bined num ber of times.
Unsuccessful (UN) refers to the experim ental groups that w ere not
successful in achieving statistically significant reading com prehension,
statistically significant positive attitude toward reading, or observed
positive attitude toward reading.
Ratings: 1) 95-100% (most often); (2) 70-94% (next m ost often);
(3) Below 70% (least often)
ACC = Access; APP = appeal; ENV = conducive environment;
PNC = encouragement; STR = staff training; NACC = non-accountability;
FOL = follow-up activities; and DTIME = distributed time to read
Percentages
CATEGORY ACC ARE ENV ENC SIR NACC FOL DTIME
S U C 100 78 100 9 0 40 87 53 97
UN 92 58 100 4 2 17 83 8 83
Ratings
CATEGORY ACC APR ENV ENC SIR NACC FOL DTIME
S U C 1 2 1 2 3 2 3 1
UN 2 3 1 3 3 2 3 2
1 85
TABLE C10
Time Spent Reading and Program Duration
Notes.
Time in column two refers to the actual amount of SSR, or free reading
time, done in class without con sid erin g additional or follow -u p
a c tiv itie s.
Frequency in column three refers to how often students read.
Duration in column four refers to the length of the program.
Hrs. in column six refers to the total number of hours o f reading for the
duration of the program.
Part A includes studies where full information is given. Part R includes
studies where the total reading time must be estim ated due to either (1)
gradually increased SSR time or (2) the inclusion o f follow-up activities
with SSR time. Where SSR time is included with activities (1A), the
actual free reading time was estimated to be half o f the total on-task
time. Part C includes studies which did not provide complete enough in
formation to make valid estimates about the total number of hours read.
D in column three refers to distributed reading time, or at least 2X week.
M in column three refers to massed reading time, or time given only
once per week.
XC refers to teacher-student conference time, as part o f the included
a c tiv itie s.
1 year refers to a school year of 9 months.
Part A:
Full Information Given Tim e Duration Hrs,
1. Evans & Towner 1975 20 min. d a ily
(D)
10 weeks 17
2. Everett 1978 15 min. d a ily
(D)
3 weeks 4
3. Hafiz & Tudor 1989 60 min. daily 12 weeks 6 0
(D )
4. Holt & OTuel 1989 20 min. 3 X /w e e k 10 weeks 10
(D)
186
TABLE CIO. COXTIM T D
Part A, con tin u ed :
Iiull Information G iven T im e frequency Duration Hrs,
5. Kaminsky 1992 40 min.
6. Lai 1993:
El (sum 1) 75 min.
E2 (sum 2) 75 min.
E3 (sum 3) 75 min.
7. Vlaynes 1981 45 min.
8. Minton 1980 15 min.
9. Petrimoulx 1988 10 min.
10. Schon 1984 12 min.
(T em p e)
11. Schon 1984 12 min.
(C h a n d le r )
12. Schon 1985 45 min.
13. Sperzel 1948 30 min.
14. Wolf &
Mikulecky 1978 40 min.
IX /w ee k 13 weeks 9
(M )
d a ilv
(D ) '
d a ilv
(D ) '
d a ily
(D )
4 X /w e e k
(D )
daily
(D )
d a ily
(D )
d a ily
(D )
d a ilv
(D ) '
1 X /w ee k
( M )
d a ily
(D )
4 weeks 25
4 weeks 25
4 weeks
16 weeks
18 weeks
15 weeks
16 weeks
28 weeks
3 4 weeks
25
4 8
13
16
28
26
6 weeks 15
IX w eek 9 weeks
( VI)
1 8 7
Part B:
Estim ated Information
15. Aranha 1985
16. Collins 1980
17. Davis & I.ucas 1971
18. Elley &
Mangubhai 1983
El (SSR)
E2 (Shared)
19. Farrell 1982
20. Greaney 1970
21. Lawson 1968
El (Ex. A)
E2 (Ex. B)
E3 (Ind.)
Time Erequency Duration His.
10-30 min. 2 X w e e k 32 weeks 21
AV 20 min. (D)
10-25 min. d a ily 15 weeks 21
AV 17 min. (D)
50 min. d a ily 36 weeks 75
IA ( D) (1 year)
AV 25 min.
20-30 min. daily 34 weeks 71
AV 25 min. (D)
20-30 min. daily 34 weeks 43
IA (D)
AV 15 min.
42 min. d a ily 32 weeks 56
IA (D)
AV 21 min.
40 min. d a ily 32 weeks 53
IA (D)
AV 20 min.
15 min. d a ily 12 weeks 15
(D)
30 min. d a ily 12 weeks 30
(D)
45 min. d a ily 12 weeks 22
IA (D)
AV 22 min.
Part B, continued:
Estimated^ Information Time frequency
22. Manning &
Manning 1984
El (SSR) 30 min. d a ily
(D)
E2 (Peer) 30 min. d a ily
IA (D)
AV 15 min.
113 (ConO 30 min. d a ilv
1A (TC 10 (D ) '
m i n w k )
AV 28 min.
23. Oliver 1973 10-30 min. d a ily
AV 20 min. (D)
24. Oliver 1976:
El (SSR daily) 10-30 min. daily
1A (D)
AV 20 min.
E2 (SSR 10-45 min. 2 X w e c k
b i- w e e k ly ) 1A (D)
AV 30 min.
25. Pfau 1967 30 min. d a ily
1A (D)
AV 15 min.
Duration
36 weeks
(1 year)
36 weeks
(1 year)
36 weeks
(1 year)
4 weeks
12 weeks
12 weeks
72 weeks
(2 years)
26. Summers &
McClelland 1982 20-25 min. 4 - 5 X /w c e k 20 weeks
AV 22 min. AV 4.5X
189
TABLL CIO. COXTLNLLD
Part C:
Inc___Lnlormation G±v cn rim e Frequency Duration H
27. Cline & Kretkc 1980 ? min. daily 108 weeks
•>
(D) (3 years)
28. Elley 1991 ? min. daily 36 weeks
* >
( N iu e ) (D) ( 1 year)
29. B ley 1991 ? min. d a ily 108 weeks
■)
( S in g a p o r e ) (D) (3 years)
30. Fader 1976 ? min. d a ily 36 weeks
■ >
(D) (1 year)
31. Jenkins 1957 ? min. d a ily 36 weeks
■)
(D) (1 year)
32. NViscont 1990 ? min. 1 2 daily;
•> • >
1/2 non-D
(D /M ? )
1 9 0
TABLE C 11
R anges in Total Hours of Reading and Duration of
Program s for All C ategories of G roups
Note.
C-SS means reading comprehension, statistically significant; A-SS
means positive attitude toward reading, statistically significant; A-OHS
means "observed growth" in positive attitude toward reading. IlnSnc
refers to a group that did not achieve success in any one of the above
ca te g o r ie s.
Category No. of
Studies of Reading
C-SS 10 10 hours-71 hours 4 weeks-108 weeks
A-SS 7 10 hours-90 hours 10 weeks-108 weeks
A-OBS 15 4 hours-75 hours 3 weeks-108 weeks
U n S u c 14 6 hours-90 hours 4 weeks-36 weeks
191
TABLE C12
Percentages of C ategories of Experimental G roups
Identified a s Participating in Long-Term and Distributed-Time Program s
Notes.
C-SS means reading comprehension, statistically significant; A-SS
means positive attitude toward reading, statistically significant; A-OBS
means" observed growth" in positive attitude toward reading; UnSuc
refers to a group that did not achieve success in any one o f the above
ca tg o r ic s.
A long-term program is one which last seven months or longer;
a distributed time program is one in which students do free reading
at least twice a week; a short-term program is one which lasts fewer
than seven months; a massed time program is one in which students
do free reading at a frequency that is fewer than two times per week.
No. of
Studies
Long Term Distributed
C-SS 10 60% 100%
A-SS 86% 100%
A-OBS 15 40% 93%
U n S u c 14 2 1 % 86%
192
TABLE C13
Results of ELD Studies by C ategories of S uccess
NiiiesL
C-SS means comprehension, statistically significant; A-SS means
positive attitude toward reading, statistically significant; A-OHS means
"observed growth" in positive attitude toward reading. A + indicates
that the group was successful in the identified category NA means
that this category was not part of the research design objective(s) for
the given experimental group.
GROUP C-SS A.-.SS A.-OBS
A ranha 85 + + NA
Elley &
M angubhai 83
E1 (SSR) + NA NA
E2 (Shared) + NA NA
Elley 91
(N iue) + NA +
Elley 91
(S in g ap o re) + NA +
Kam insky 92 NA NA +
Lai 93:
E1 (sum 1) + NA NA
E2 (sum 2) + NA NA
E3 (sum 3) NO NA NA
Hafiz &
T udor 89 + NA NA
Petrimoulx 88 NO NA +
Total Attempted:
Total Achieved:
10
8
1
1
4
4
Appendix D
E stes Attitude S cales (EAS)
194
The Estes Attitude Scales
(Perm ission h a s been given by authors T. Estes, J. Johnstone, and H.
R ichards to u se the instrum ent tor th e study. Published by Virginia
R esearch A ssociates Ltd., Charlottesville, Virginia 22902)
Directions to Students: This is a scale to m easure how you feel about
co u rses taught in school. On the bottom of this page, you will find som e
sta tem en ts about reading. R ead e ach statem ent an d d ecide how you
feel about it. R ate each statem ent on a scale from 1 to 5, a s follows:
5 will mean "I strongly agree"
4 will mean "I agree”
3 will mean "I cannot decide"
2 will mean "I disagree"
1 will mean "I strongly disagree"
Use the separate answ er sheet in indicate your feelin g toward
each statem ent. Show your answers by circlin g a number for
each on e. P lea se be as honest as p o ssib le in rating each
statem ent. Y our ratings w ill not affect your grade in any
co u r se.
The Reading Attitude Scale
1. Reading is for learning but not for enjoym ent.
2 . Spending allow ance on books is a w aste o f good
m o n e y .
3 . Reading is a good way to spend spare time.
4 . B ooks are a bore.
5 . W atching T .V . is better than reading.
6 . Reading is rewarding to me.
7 . B ooks aren't usually good enough to finish.
8 . Reading becom es boring after about an hour.
9. M ost books are too long and dull.
10. There are m any books w hich I hope to read.
1 1. B ook s should only be read when they are assigned.
12. Reading is som ething I can do without.
13. Som e part o f summer vacation should be set aside
for reading.
14. B ook s make good presents.
15. Reading is dull.
195
Estes Attitude Scale Answer Sheet
N am e
Strongly Agree
Agree
I . 5 4
2. 5 4
3 . 5 4
4 . 5 4
5. 5 4
6. 5 4
7. 5 4
8. 5 4
9. 5 4
10. 5 4
I I . 5 4
12. 5 4
13. 5 4
14. 5 4
15. 5 4
D a t e _____________ G ra d e __________
Cannot Disagree Strongly
Decide Disagree
3 2 1
3 2 1
3 2 1
3 2 1
3 2 1
3 2 1
3 2 1
3 2 1
3 2 1
3 2 1
3 2 1
3 2 1
3 2 1
3 2 1
3 2 1
Appendix E
1993-94 Student P retest/Posttest Q uestionnaires
1 9 7
Student Pretest Questionnaire 1993-94
Name____________ Period____ Teacher__________________
School_______________________Date______________________
1. H ave you ever taken a reading class before? y e s no
2. W here did you attend school last sem e ste r? _______________
3. W hat ESL level w ere you in last sem e ste r? _______________
4. W hen did you first com e to this cla ss? (date) ________________
5. Who is your ESL reading teacher now ? _______________
6. W hat g rade are you in? 9 10 11 12
7. How often do you read at home or outside of cla ss just
for pleasure? Reading for pleasure m eans just for
enjoym ent. (Choose only one answer.)
1) never 2) som etim es 3) often 4) every day
8. TODAY or YESTERDAY, just for pleasure, I read:
(You may choose more than one answer.)
1) nothing 2) a m agazine 3) a newspaper
4) a com ic book 5) a book/ part 6) som ething else
of a book
9 DURING THE LAST WEEK, just for pleasure I read:
(You may ch o o se more than one answer.)
1) nothing 2) a m agazine 3) a new spaper
4) a com ic book 5) a book or part 6) som ething else
of a book
19 8
10. If you read for pleasure, where do you usually get
materials? (You may ch o o se more than one answer.)
1) classroom 2) book store 3) hom e 4) school
library
5) public library 6) triend/relative 7) book club
11. Have you read any reading materials TODAY or
YESTERDAY that you didnt get_irom _a_classroom ?
(C hoose only one answer.)
1) no 2) yes, one thing 3) yes, m ore than o n e thing
12. Have you read any reading materials DURING THE
LAST WEEK that you didn't get from a c la ssroom?
(C hoose only one answer.)
1) no 2) yes, one thing 3) yes, m ore than o n e thing
13. Do any of your adult relatives who live with you read for
pleasure? (C hoose only one answer.)
1) n ev er 2) som etim es 3) often 4) every day
14. If an adult relative in your home reads for pleasure, in
what language(s) does this person read? (C hoose only
one answer.)
1) English 2) O ther________________ 3) English and O ther____
15. How many boohs or reading materials do you think there
are in your hom e? (C hoose only one answer.)
1) n o n e 2) 1-10 3 )1 1 -2 0 4 )2 1 -3 0 5) More than 30
199
Student Posttest Questionnaire 1993-94
Name__________________Per._____Teacher_______________
School__________________________ Date__________________
1. W hen did you first com e to this cla ss? (date) _______________
2. W ho is your ESL reading teach er now? _______________
3. W hat grade are you in? 9 10 11 12
4. W hat ESL level will you be in next sem ester? L e v e l__________
5. How often do you read at home or outside of class just
for pleasure? Reading for pleasure means just for
enjoyment. (C hoose only one answer.)
1) never 2) som etim es 3) often 4) every day
6. TODAY OR YESTERDAY, just for pleasure, I read:
(You may ch oose more than one answer.)
1) nothing 2) a m agazine 3) a new spaper
4) a comic book 5) a book or part 6) som ething else
of a book
7. DURING THE LAST WEEK, just for pleasure I read:
(You may ch oose more than one answer.)
1) nothing 2) a m agazine 3) a new spaper
4) a comic book 5) a book/ part 6) som ething else
of a book
2 0 0
8. If you read for pleasure, where do you usually get your
books? (You may ch o o se more than one answer.)
1) classroom 2) book store 3) hom e 4) school
library
5) public library 6) friend/relative 7) book club
9. Have you read any reading materials TODAY OR
YESTERDAY that you d id n 'tg et fr o m a c la ssr o o m ?
(C hoose only one answer.)
1) no 2) yes, one thing 3) yes, m ore than one thing
10. Have you read any reading materials DURING THE
LAST WEEK that you didn't get from a classroom ?
(C hoose only one answer.)
1) no 2) yes, one thing 3) yes, m ore than one thing
11. Do you feel that your reading has improved (gotten
better) during this past sem ester?
(C hoose only one answer.)
1) no, not at all 2) yes, som e 3) yes, a lot
12. [If you marked yes (#2 or #3) to the question that you Just
answered, please answer the next question.
In what way(s) do you feel you can read better? (You
may ch oose more than one answer by circling the
letters.)
1) I can understand the textbooks better in my other classes.
2) I can read books (or other m aterials) for pleasure more easily.
3) I feel m ore capable of doing well on reading tests.
4) I am m ore capable of translating reading for my parents.
5) Other: __________________________________________________

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Implementation of literature circles in a rural high school English class: One teacher's journey of changing student attitudes toward reading

PDF

The Nature Of Assisted Performance With Learning Handicapped Students During Language Arts

PDF

Comparing the effects of teacher-directed homework and student-centered homework on return rate and homework attitude of minority learning-disabled students

PDF

Access to print and formal instruction in reading acquisition

PDF

A multicultural curriculum's relationship to attitudes of prejudice and stereotyping in 5th and 6th-grade students

PDF

Auroville: Problems in language communication. Is Suggestopedia the solution?

PDF

Case method pedagogy: An impetus for reflective thinking during student teaching.

PDF

A cross-cultural validation of the reading hypothesis: The relationship of pleasure reading to writing proficiency and academic achievement among Taiwanese senior high school students

PDF

Administrative staffing patterns in comprehensive high schools

PDF

A regression analysis of certificated salary items in a collective agreement and the budgetary impact on district financial certification

PDF

Comprehensive high school restructuring: Utilizing school-based management and curricular reforms to increase student achievement

PDF

A correlational study of feminist/womanist identity development and depression in women

PDF

A study of teacher beliefs on the efficacy of block scheduling

PDF

A correlation of concepts found in German expressionist art, music, and literature

PDF

Consequences of heritage language loss and maintenance and factors that affect heritage language development: Voices from second-generation Korean-American adults

PDF

A cross-case analysis of the change process in twelve California high schools

PDF

Attitudes of honors and non-honors high school students about weighted grading, grade point averaging, class ranking, and access to honors courses

PDF

A comparative study of the family processes of youth of Mexican descent who have dropped out of high school and those who have remained in school

PDF

Analyzing the cost effectiveness of using parents and community volunteers to improve students' language arts test scores

PDF

Analysis of Saudi Arabian middle and high school science teachers' conceptions of the nature of science

Asset Metadata

Creator Pilgreen, Janice Louise (author)

Core Title A "stacked for success" sustained silent reading program for high school English language development (ELD) students: its impact on reading comprehension, attitudes toward reading, frequency of o...

Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Degree Program Education

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag education, curriculum and instruction,education, reading,Education, Secondary,OAI-PMH Harvest

Language English

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Advisor [illegible] (committee chair), [illegible], Timothy (committee member), Rueda, Robert (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c17-72516

Unique identifier UC11354407

Identifier 9621723.pdf (filename),usctheses-c17-72516 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier 9621723.pdf

Dmrecord 72516

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Pilgreen, Janice Louise

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA