Presentation on theme: "SUMMER READING MAXIMIZED: THINK PEOPLE, NOT PRIZES Kim Becnel, Robin Moeller, & Nita Matzen Appalachian State University."— Presentation transcript:
SUMMER READING MAXIMIZED: THINK PEOPLE, NOT PRIZES Kim Becnel, Robin Moeller, & Nita Matzen Appalachian State University
Current Research Summer Slide Summer slide greatly contributes to the achievement gap between learners of different socio-economic backgrounds both in the short term and the long term (Alexander, Entwistle, & Olsen, 2007). Heyns (1978) found that while students of all socio-economic groups progressed at a similar rate during the school year, disadvantaged students lost considerably more learning than their peers over the summer months. Similarly, Cooper, Nye, Linsey, et al. (1996), found that while most students see decreases in their learning over the summer equivalent to one month, disadvantaged students see a loss of up to three months of learning. Anderson, Wilson, and Fielding (1988) conducted a study that illustrated that the most accurate predictor of reading improvement is time devoted to reading independently. Similarly, in a review of hundreds of studies, Cunningham (2001) concludes that reading fluency, comprehension, and vocabulary all increase as time spent reading increases.
One-Two Punch: Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivators. Let’s have a closer look... Can SRP help beat summer slide?
Let’s Talk Motivation Comes from inside the individual Pursuing an activity for its own sake or the enjoyment it provides Comes from outside the individual Can be punishments or rewards IntrinsicExtrinsic How do public libraries influence/use intrinsic and extrinsic motivators?
Current Research Extrinsic Motivators Researchers who have examined the use of such external motivators to encourage children to read have noted that they either have no impact or a negative impact on children’s motivation to read. Reflecting on the use of external motivation to encourage reading in a classroom, Smith and Westberg (2011) noted, “Independent reading became a competitive endeavor” (5). When extrinsic motivators have proven to be successful, they are in the form of literacy incentives, in which books are given away as prizes for reaching a goal (Kutsch, 2012; Marinak, 2007; McGaha & Igo, 2012).
Current Research Intrinsic Motivators Intrinsic motivation has a much more positive impact on recreational reading than extrinsic motivators. Intrinsically motivated children read often, work toward becoming better readers, and value reading or belonging to a community of readers. Appealing to a child’s interest and providing them with a variety of choice are much more powerful reading motivation tools than implementing the use of extrinsic motivators such as treats and toys. (De Naeghel, Van Keer, Vansteenkiste, & Rosseel, 2012; Huang, 2012; Neugebauer, 2013; Strommen & Mates, 2004)
Current Research Intrinsic Motivation Research regarding gender and reading motivation (De Naeghel, Van Keer, Vansteenkiste, & Rosseel, 2012; McGeown, Goodwin, Henderson, & Wright, 2012; Putnam, 2007; Shaulskiy, Capps, Justice, & Anderman, 2014 ) has found that girls experience more intrinsic motivation for reading than boys. Studies have also noted the positive impact that a teacher can have on the motivation for students to read (Strommen & Mates, 2004; Williams & Hall, 2010). This finding suggests that librarians may also have a similar effect on the motivation for children to read.
So how do we know if SRP motivates kids to read?
Measuring Success Number of books read Number of hours or minutes read Parent questionnaires/surveys Number of children who sign up and/or complete Circulation statistics Some programs trying to test students who participate to see if reading improves
Problems with these Measures Self-selection bias. Would these children be reading anyway? The real questions, then, have to do with whether SRP is motivating children to read and how we might attract those children who do not generally read and/or participate in these types of activities. How do we find out how SRP is impacting reading and why children elect to participate or not?
Our Research 3 sets of focus groups in North Carolina schools Fourth graders Divided into students who had particpated in a summer reading program and students who had not participated 30-45 minute group interviews with a standard set of predetermined questions
Research Questions Our study was designed to answer these questions: What are the reading habits and motivational forces of students who participate in public library summer reading programs? What are the reading habits and motivational forces of students who do not participate in public library summer reading programs? What would motivate the students who do not participate to take part?
Results Much smaller number of participants (n=8) in the sample than non-participants (n=26) Readers versus Non-Readers When asked about summer leisure activities, 3 participants mentioned reading and 12 non participants mentioned reading
Non-Participants Did Not Sign Up for SRP Because Too busy doing other things—4 Didn’t know about it—3 I’m already a good reader—2 Parents may not allow me—1
Non-Participants and Library Visits To get books—3 Because I like to read—2 To read in the quiet—1 Because I like the library—1 Boredom—1 To use the computer—1 No time; other obligations—8 My parents can’t or won’t take me—2 Lost my library card—2 Issues or problems going on in my life—1 I don’t like to read—1 Reasons for visiting the libraryReasons for not visiting the library
Participants and SRP Parents made me—2 Boredom—2 Because I like to read—1 To improve reading—1 Because I’ve done it before—1 Prizes—5 Reading enjoyment—4 Book selection/access—3 Choice of reading—3 Vocabulary improvement—2 Free books—1 Really nice staff—1 Why did you sign up?What did you like about SRP?
What would motivate you to read more? Learning new things— 4 Prizes—2 Books I like—1 Prizes/Treats—9 Books I like—8 Money—2 A good place/time to read alone—2 Learning new things—2 ParticipantsNon-participants
Conclusions and Take-Aways Advertising and marketing are crucial. Aim at parents as well as children—choose messages accordingly. Don’t worry if you can’t afford big prizes. Small works too. Literacy-related prizes are great. Emphasize library collections, readers’ advisory, and special programs/events even more than prizes. Work on developing relationships between library staff and young patrons.
References Becker, M., McElvany, N., & McElvany, M. (2010). Intrinsic and extrinsic reading motivation as predictors of reading literacy: A longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(4), 773-785. De Naeghel, J., Van Keer, H., Vansteenkiste, M., & Rosseel, Y. (2012). The relation between elementary students’ recreational and academic reading motivation, reading frequency, engagement and comprehension: A self- determination theory perspective. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(4), 1006-1021. Huang, S. (2012). A mixed method study of the effectiveness of the Accelerated Reader Program on middle school students’ reading achievement and motivation. Reading Horizons. 51(3), 229-246. Justice, L.M., Piasta, S.B., Capps, J.L., Levitt, S.R. & Columbus Metropolitan Library. (2013). Library-based summer reading clubs: Who participates and why? The Library Quarterly: Information, Community, Policy, 83(4), 321-340. Konheim-Kalkstein, Y. L., & van den Broek, P. (2008). The effect of incentives on cognitive processing of text. Discourse Processes: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 45(2), 180-194. Kutsch, D. (2012). Summer reading dilemma solved! The Reading Teacher, 65(8), 550. Marinak, B. A.(2007). Insights about third-grade children’s motivation to read. College Reading Association Yearbook, (28), 54-65. McGaha, J.M. & Igo, L.B. (2012). Assessing high school students’ reading motivation in a voluntary summer reading program. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 55(5), 417-427. McGeown, S., Goodwin, H., Henderson, N., & Wright, P. (2012). Gender differences in reading motivation: Does sex or gender identity provide a better account? Journal of Research in Reading, 35(3), 328-336.
References McGeown, S. P., Norgate, R., & Warhurst, A. (2012). Exploring intrinsic and extrinsic reading motivation among very good and very poor readers. Educational Research, 54(3), 309-322. doi: 10.1080/00131881.2012.710089 Neugebauer, S.R. (2013). A daily diary study of reading motivation inside and outside of school: A dynamic approach to motivation to read. Learning and Indvidual Differences, 24, 152-159. Pappas, D.N., Skinner, C.H., & Skinner, A.L. (2010). Supplementing accelerated reading with classwide interdependent group-oriented contingencies. Psychology in the Schools, 47(9), 887-902. Putnam, S. (2007). Does the accumulation of points really equate to higher motivation to read?. College Reading Association Yearbook, 28, 79-94. Schiefele, U., Schaffner, E., Moller, J., & Wigfield, A. (2012). Dimensions of reading motivations and their relation to reading behavior and competence. Reading Research Quarterly, 47(4), 427-463. Shaulskiy, S. L., Capps, J.L. Justice, L.M. & Anderman, L.H. (2014). Motivational attributes of children and teenagers who participate in summer reading clubs. The Journal of Research on Libraries and Young Adults. Available at http://www.yalsa.ala.org/jrlya/2014/05/motivational-attributes-of-children-and- teenagers-who-participate-in-summer-reading-clubs/ Smith, A. F., & Westberg, K. L. (2011). Student attitudes toward Accelerated Reader: "Thanks for asking!". Current Issues In Education, 14(2), 1-7. Strommen, L.T. & Mates, B.F. (2004). Learning to love reading: Interviews with older children and teens. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 48(3), 188-200. Williams, L., & Hall, K. (2010). Exploring students' reading attitudes. Journal of Reading Education, 35(2), 35-41.