Hi everyone,
The article on Accelerated Reader (AR) that Professor Stearns posted below shows what many other studies are finding: this program does not work. The topic is of particular interest to me, because for AED 663, the research methods class, I am currently working on a synthesis of related studies. My topic is the role of choice and independent reading programs on adolescent literacy motivation. Some of the studies I have read discuss AR.
The first issue I would like to bring up is intrinsic motivation, which not a type of motivation that is built by this program. In the article, the authors write “Although the creators of AR claim that the
program will “get students excited about books” (Renaissance Learning, 2005), both Persinger (2001) and Brisco (2003) questioned whether AR creates lifelong lovers of reading or students who are merely addicted to earning points and prizes.” Rewards are a form of extrinsic motivation, which has been shown to be less successful in motivating students. I would like to share an excerpt from my 663 article that I think will help everyone understand what causes motivation.
“Maslow’s hierarchy has led to more theories of motivation, including a theory by Leonard, Beauvais, and Scholl (1995), who examine motivational sources. They present five sources: 1) Instrumental (offer of a reward or punishment), 2) Intrinsic Process Motivation (enjoyment), 3) Goal Internalization (personal goals or ideals), 4) External self concept- based (ideal self is determined from expectations of others, 5) Internal self concept- based (ideal self determined by conception of ideal self) (Scholl 2002). Again, we will see the relevance of these sources for motivation in research studies of motivation to read. Internal sources of motivation (2, 3, 5) were shown to be the most effective in motivating students in the studies by Battraw (2002), Ivey & Broaddus (2000), Kasten & Wilfong (2005, 2007), Strommen & Mates (2004), and Worthy et al (1998). The external influences (1, 4), particularly a system of rewards and punishments were shown to be ineffective in the studies by Battraw (2002), Ivey & Broaddus (2001), Kasten & Wilfong (2005), Warrican (2006), and Worthy et al. (1998).
In the studies that I have read, students are motivated when they are allowed to choose from a wide variety of materials. The article Prof. Stearns shared with us points out that the AR program does not always suggest approptiate books, and the schools are not equipped with diverse selections.
This program also takes away the social aspect of reading and learning, which is another important factor in motivation. Students should feel that reading will make them part of a larger group of readers. The best way to effectively do that is by sustaining conversations about reading with their peers.
In order to be motivated, students also need to feel like they can be successful in their endeavors. I have read studies that report students crying with frusteration after reading a book and being unable to answer AR’s tricky questions. The same problem was reported in this article. Students should be given choices of creative and authentic ways of responding to texts. They need to feel like there is a larger purpose for discussing the book, like a book review/recommendation/advertisement. Nancie Atwell suggests book letters. All of these ideas are better than the tests. It might mean more work for the teacher to grade these assessments, but I think the extra work is worth it for the student’s sake.
Allison