Agreed, but if a district has limited funds and independent reading WITHOUT AR is as likely to raise reading scores as AR, they might want to spend their money differently.
On 9/3/07 2:39 PM, "Diane Strickland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I agree that this article doesn't give an argument supporting the use of the > program. The original poster brought up the use of literal level questions. > I think the independent research they cite to defend their use of > literal-level questions is very interesting (and not just as related to AR). > > Krashen seems to criticize AR mainly because their is little research to > support its use--not because it has been _proven_ to be ineffective or > harmful. > > --------------------- > > He says, "Despite the popularity of AR, we must conclude that there is no > real evidence supporting it, no real evidence that the additional tests and > rewards add anything to the power of simply supplying access to high quality > and interesting reading material and providing time for children to read > them. This survey thus comes to the same conclusions as a previous review > (McQuillan, 1997). > > This is not to say that I have proven that AR is ineffective. I have only > concluded that data > supporting it does not exist. Although McLoyd's results suggests that > rewards actually inhibit reading, we must withhold judgment until additional > controlled studies confirm this. What we > can conclude, however, is that the enthusiasm for AR is not supported by > research. Before > purchasing AR, and submitting students to tests, a more prudent policy might > be to ensure that > high-interest reading material is easily available to students, and that > students have time to read > and a place to read." > > Accelerated Reader: Does it Work? If So, Why? > Stephen Krashen > School Libraries in Canada, Volume 22 Number 2, 2002 > > -------------------- > My school uses AR but doesn't have a system in which the students trade > points for trinkets or prizes of any kind. It is used by teachers to track > students' reading. Students are recognized for reaching their reading goals > and certain point levels. I wonder if recognition has the same effect on > students as giving a prize. ???... > > > On 9/3/07, ljackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Basically, I feel this is saying it is tough to teach and assess higher >> level thinking skills and I can't see that as a argument for supporting >> use >> of a program that does not. No surprise, either, that the research cited >> by >> Renaissance supports their program. Stephen Krashen has much to say about >> AR and cites plenty of research to suggest it is just not valid. >> >> Lori >> > _______________________________________________ > Mosaic mailing list > [email protected] > To unsubscribe or modify your membership please go to > http://literacyworkshop.org/mailman/options/mosaic_literacyworkshop.org. > > Search the MOSAIC archives at http://snipurl.com/MosaicArchive. > -- Lori Jackson District Literacy Coach & Mentor Todd County School District Box 87 Mission SD 57555 http:www.tcsdk12.org ph. 605.856.2211 Literacies for All Summer Institute July 17-20. 2008 Tucson, Arizona _______________________________________________ Mosaic mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe or modify your membership please go to http://literacyworkshop.org/mailman/options/mosaic_literacyworkshop.org. Search the MOSAIC archives at http://snipurl.com/MosaicArchive.
