A  Community  of  Readers:  Interviews  with    

Extensive  Reading    Scholars  &  Practitioners  

Edited  by  Michael  McCollister  

Contents    

Foreword    Acknowledgements    Introduction    The  Interviews  David  R.  Hill    Richard  Day  Paul  Nation  Rob  Waring  Mark  Helgesen  Tom  Robb  Junko  Yamanaka  Beniko  Mason  Willy  Renandya  Atsuko  Takase  Daniel  Stewart  Sy-­‐ying  Lee  Philip  Prowse  Jennifer  Bassett  Marcos  Benevides  Matthew  Claflin  Kris  Vicca  Wendy  Lambert    Online  Resources                                

Introduction  

Extensive  Reading  in  Asia  

Extensive  reading  is  an  approach  to  language  learning  that  has  taken  a  strong  foothold  in  many  parts  of  Asia  

over  the  last  twenty  years  or  so.  Japan,  which  accounts  for  more  than  half  of  all  graded  reader  sales  

worldwide,  is  currently  the  center  of  all  things  related  to  extensive  reading,  but  Korea  is  also  home  to  many  

ER  programs  and  much  ER  research.  Not  surprisingly,  the  Extensive  Reading  Foundation  (ERF)  chose  Kyoto,  

Japan,  as  the  place  in  which  to  hold  its  1st  World  Congress  with  over  400  attendees  from  over  20  countries  

joining  the  two  days  of  presentations  and  workshops  in  September,  2011.  Many  of  the  participants  in  this  

collection  of  interviews  presented  at  the  first  Congress;  David  R.  Hill,  in  fact,  delivered  the  opening  plenary.  

Equally  unsurprising  is  the  fact  that  Seoul,  South  Korea,  was  selected  to  host  the  2nd  World  Congress  in  

September,  2013.  Attendance  for  this  second  event  exceeded  600,  a  testament  to  the  organizational  

abilities  of  the  people  on  the  ground  as  well  as  to  the  ever-­‐expanding  interest  in  the  ER  approach.  Dr.  Paul  

Nation,  another  participant  in  this  current  volume,  delivered  one  of  the  plenary  talks  in  Seoul.  

 

A  key  factor  in  the  flourishing  of  the  ER  programs  throughout  these  two  countries  is  the  presence  of  local  

support  groups  to  assist  teachers  and  provide  them  an  arena  in  which  to  discuss,  debate,  and  publish  

research.  The  Extensive  Reading  Special  Interest  Group  (SIG)  sponsored  by  the  Japan  Association  for  

Language  Teaching  (JALT)  held  its  6th  annual  ER  seminar  in  June,  2013.  It  also  publishes  two  journals  focused  

exclusively  on  ER.  The  SIG’s  ER  Outreach  Grant  program  offers  financial  assistance  to  schools—both  

domestic  and  international—that  wish  to  implement  ER  programs  in  their  language  curriculums.  The  Korean  

English  Extensive  Reading  Association  (KEERA),  which  co-­‐hosted  the  2nd  World  Congress  along  with  the  ERF,  

offers  similar  assistance  to  ER  practitioners  in  Korea.  KEERA  also  hosts  an  annual  one-­‐day  ER  colloquium  as  

part  of  the  larger  KOTESOL  conference,  again  providing  local  teachers  an  opportunity  to  interact  with  

colleagues  and  share  fresh  ideas  and  research.  

 

And  this  research,  conducted  by  scholars  in  these  two  countries  and  others  around  the  ELT  world,  continues  

to  support  ER  as  an  effective  adjunct  to  regular  classroom  instruction  that  can  lead  to  real,  measurable  

growth  in  language  development.  Just  as  importantly,  it  is  an  approach  that  many  students  seem  to  both  

enjoy  and  embrace.  A  research  project  conducted  by  students  from  my  university’s  Department  of  

Marketing  during  the  2011-­‐12  academic  year  showed  that  the  ER  component  in  our  Freshman  English  

program  had  the  support  of  85%  of  students  interviewed.  So  if  the  benefits  of  extensive  reading  are  

supported  by  an  ever-­‐growing  body  of  research  as  well  as  by  an  overwhelming  percentage  of  the  student  

population,  one  has  to  wonder  why  extensive  reading  has  failed  to  garner  the  same  support  in  other  corners  

of  the  ELT  world  as  it  has  in  Japan,  Korea,  and  other  Asian  locales.  

 

One  of  my  goals  in  undertaking  this  project  was  to  acknowledge  the  critical  role  played  by  these  local  

organizations  in  coordinating  and  disseminating  information  related  to  the  theory  and  practice  of  extensive  

reading.  There  are  undoubtedly  ER  practitioners  in  disparate  settings  around  the  globe  who  have  

implemented  successful  ER  programs  and  have  positive  stories  and  research  to  share,  yet  lack  the  local  

conduit  to  interact  and  debate  with  local  colleagues.  Therefore,  establishing  professional  academic  

organizations  similar  to  those  in  Japan  and  Korea—and,  ideally,  directly  affiliated  with  the  Extensive  Reading  

Foundation—would  seem  to  be  an  invaluable  first  step  in  bolstering  awareness  and  support  for  ER.  

 

A  second,  more  immediate  goal  is  to  provide  information—in  layman’s  terms—about  the  ER  approach:  its  

basic  principles,  information  about  setting  up  a  program,  the  role  of  assessment  within  a  program,  as  well  as  

current  and  future  trends  in  the  field.  The  colleagues  who  agreed  to  participate  in  this  project  have  a  wealth  

of  both  classroom  and  research  experience  to  draw  upon.  Some  have  years  of  experience,  others  decades,  

and  one,  in  the  case  of  David  Hill,  has  close  to  half  a  century  of  expertise  to  share.  Hopefully  after  reading  

these  interviews,  colleagues  both  here  in  Taiwan  and  around  the  world  will  feel  better  informed  as  well  as  

better  equipped  to  introduce  an  ER  program  into  their  own  classes  or  their  institution’s  language  

curriculum.  

 

Principles  of  Extensive  Reading  

Richard  Day  and  Julian  Bamford’s  excellent  book,  Extensive  Reading  in  the  Second  Language  Classroom  

(1998),  remains  the  most  thorough  introduction  to  ER  theory  and  practice.  In  it,  the  authors  lay  out  the  

fundamental  principles  of  the  ER  approach.  Of  these,  three  seem  of  paramount  importance:  

1. Students  read  as  much  as  possible,  perhaps  in  and  definitely  out  of  the  classroom.  

2. A  variety  of  materials  on  a  wide  range  of  topics  is  available  so  as  to  encourage  reading  for  different  

reasons  and  in  different  ways.  

3. Students  select  what  they  want  to  read  and  have  the  freedom  to  stop  reading  material  that  fails  to  

interest  them  (italics  by  authors).  

So,  in  an  ER  program,  students  do  lots  of  reading,  ideally  at  least  one  graded  reader  per  week.  Less  is  

acceptable,  but  more  is  actually  preferred.  Students  are  encouraged  to  start  with  relatively  easy  material  

that  they  can  digest  with  little  or  no  need  of  dictionary  assistance.  Having  no  more  than  two  to  three  

unknown  words  per  page  is  considered  optimal.  Under  these  conditions,  students  can  truly  become  

immersed  in  their  reading  experience:  no  need  for  translating  material  back  into  L1,  little  or  no  need  to  

backtrack  and  re-­‐read  confusing  passages,  and  hopefully  little  temptation  to  give  up  due  to  linguistic  

difficulties.  The  idea  is  to  ramp  up  language  input  so  students  get  massive  exposure  to  the  vocabulary,  

grammar,  and  structures  they  have  practiced  in  their  textbooks  and  have  been  taught  in  the  classroom,  but  

under  more  natural  and  stress-­‐free  conditions.    

 

Day  and  Bamford’s  second  and  third  principles  seem  based  just  as  much  on  human  nature  as  they  do  on  

educational  theory.  Most  ER  practitioners  use  graded  readers  as  the  staple  of  their  ER  library,  but  children’s  

books,  young  adult  readers,  and  other  ‘graded’  material  can  be  employed  as  well.  The  emphasis,  though,  

needs  to  be  on  variety.  All  students  have  different  tastes,  backgrounds  and  interests,  so  the  ER  library  must  

be  composed  of  an  equally  varied  and  robust  collection  of  materials.  The  editors  of  the  major  graded  reader  

series  have  done  an  admirable  job  of  building  this  variety  into  their  individual  series  by  publishing  titles  in  

many  different  genres:  adventure  stories,  detective  stories,  science  fiction  stories,  ghost  stories  and  tales  of  

the  supernatural,  romances,  as  well  as  a  spattering  of  re-­‐told  classic  fiction.  One  series,  Cambridge  English  

Readers,  is  unique  in  that  it  offers  a  similar  array  of  genres,  but  all  the  stories  are  original  works  of  fiction.  

And  books  are  written  for  language  learners  at  all  levels  of  proficiency.  Most  graded  reader  series  are  

divided  into  6–7  levels,  from  CEFR  pre-­‐A1  up  to  B2/C1  proficiency,  so  any  individual  series  allows  students  

plenty  of  room  to  expand  their  reading  comfort  zone  as  they  make  their  way  through  their  ER  program.  

 

The  key  point  here,  however,  is  not  that  the  publishers  build  this  variety  of  genres  and  proficiency  levels  

into  their  graded  reader  collections,  but  that  teachers  allow  their  students  to  take  advantage  of  this  variety  

and  linguistic  variation.  As  Day  and  Bamford  make  clear  in  their  3rd  point  cited  above,  it  is  crucial  that  we  

give  our  students  the  power  to  choose.  Decisions  about  what  is  to  be  read  in  an  ER  program  should  lie  with  

the  student,  not  with  the  teacher.  Being  told  to  read  something  because  it  is  good  for  improving  your  

language  skills—or  that  it  is  simply  a  required  part  of  the  course—can  throw  up  immediate  motivational  

roadblocks.  Again,  it  is  human  nature  to  resist  things  that  are  foisted  upon  us.  But  allow  students  to  browse  

a  local  bookstore—or  better  yet,  the  well-­‐stocked  ER  collection  in  the  school  library—and  it  quickly  becomes  

apparent  that  most  can  find  reading  material  that  appeals  to  their  individual  interests.  Better  still,  allow  

students  to  recommend  previously-­‐read  titles  to  their  classmates.  This  kind  of  student-­‐to-­‐student  

interaction  can  be  very  motivating  and  informative;  it  can  also  provide  the  teacher  with  a  better  sense  of  

what  kind  of  material  is  attractive  to  contemporary  students.  

 

To  briefly  re-­‐cap,  extensive  reading  is  not  so  much  about  introducing  new  material,  grammar,  and  

vocabulary  to  students  as  it  is  about  consolidating,  reinforcing,  and  building  fluency  with  language  that  has  

already  been  studied  in  the  classroom.  This  is  not  to  say  that  nothing  “new”  will  be  learned  by  the  reader;  

students  will  certainly  encounter  new  usages  of  previously-­‐learned  grammar  and  new  meanings  of  “old”  

words,  but  by  and  large  ER  is  about  deepening  and  stretching  students’  understanding  of  the  language.  Rob  

Waring,  in  a  presentation  entitled  Why  Extensive  Reading  Doubles  Your  Students’  Vocabulary  delivered  at  

the  Korean  Association  of  Primary  English  Education  International  Conference  in  2011  (and  currently  

available  on  Youtube),  uses  an  analogy  about  cars  and  driving  lessons  to  elucidate  the  role  of  ER  in  a  

well-­‐designed  language  program.  The  classroom  experience  with  teacher  and  textbook  is  akin  to  learning  

the  nuts  and  bolts  of  the  car  and  engine:  how  it  works,  the  function  of  the  individual  parts,  rules  of  the  road,  

etc.  Extensive  reading,  in  contrast,  is  like  taking  a  leisurely  Sunday  afternoon  drive.  So  first  comes  the  

learning  and  the  studying,  and  then  comes  the  practicing  of  what  has  been  learned.  Both  parts  are  equally  

vital  to  the  overall  learning  process.  

 

While  the  publication  of  Day  and  Bamford’s  landmark  book  was  certainly  a  pivotal  event  in  the  development  

of  ER,  the  book  was  more  likely  than  not  a  reaction  to  the  rapid  growth  of  ER  programs  in  the  1990s  as  

opposed  to  the  cause  of  this  growth.  It  was  the  first  volume  to  clearly  lay  out  the  theories  and  practice  of  

extensive  reading  and  make  a  cogent  appeal  for  the  adoption  of  ER  into  language  curriculums  throughout  

the  ELT  world.  However,  perhaps  the  most  powerful  explanation  for  the  rise  of  extensive  reading  programs  

during  the  period  was  a  corresponding  rise  in  the  proliferation  and  acceptance  of  Stephen  Krashen’s  

theories  on  second  language  acquisition.  Krashen’s  input  hypothesis,  first  published  in  1977,  posited  that  

language  is  acquired  only  when  the  learner  understands  messages  in  the  target  language,  and  so  if  input  is  

controlled—or,  as  it  is  now  more  familiarly  known,  comprehensible—real  language  acquisition  can  take  

place.  In  Principles  and  Practice  in  Second  Language  Acquisition  (1982),  Krashen  writes,  “We  acquire  by  

understanding  language  that  contains  structure  a  bit  beyond  our  current  level  of  competence  (i  +  1).  This  is  

done  with  the  help  of  context  or  extra-­‐linguistic  information.”  This,  it  seems  to  me,  is  the  real  theoretical  

underpinning  for  ER  programs,  for  in  a  well-­‐designed  and  implemented  ER  program,  students  are  reading  at  

an  appropriate  level—a  comfort  zone—that  is  right  at,  or  perhaps  ever  so  slightly  above  their  current  level  

of  language  proficiency.  They  read  plenty  of  material—get  plenty  of  comprehensible  input—at  that  level  

until  they  feel  ready  to  move  up  to  slightly  more  challenging  material.  ER  is  meant  to  be  a  bridge  to  

authentic,  perhaps  academic  texts.  Krashen’s  name  and  his  hypotheses  are  mentioned  frequently  in  the  

upcoming  interviews,  having  served  as  a  mentor,  a  collaborator,  and  an  inspiration  to  many  of  the  

participants  in  this  collection.  

 

So  in  the  foreground  of  current  ER  development  are  figures  like  Stephen  Krashen,  Richard  Day  and  Julian  

Bamford,  but  the  background  is  just  as  populated  with  equally  important  seminal  figures.  One  of  the  

participants  in  this  project,  Paul  Nation,  was  already  employing  the  principles  of  ER  when  he  and  a  

co-­‐worker  published  two  graded  readers  using  a  controlled  vocabulary  in  the  late  1970s  and  early  1980s;  

now  out  of  print,  he  has  made  them  available  for  free  on  his  website.  Philip  Prowse  and  Jennifer  Bassett  

both  talk  about  introducing  ER  in  Egypt  and  Greece  in  the  early  1970s  and,  as  you  will  read  in  his  interview,  

David  Hill  was  using  graded  readers  while  teaching  in  Uganda  in  the  early  1960s.  And  in  his  interview,  Paul  

Nation  cites  Michael  West  as  an  early  inspiration.  West  published  A  General  Service  List  of  English  Words  in  

1953;  this  volume  identified  the  2,000  most  frequently  occurring  words  in  the  English  language,  and  the  

list—though  now  out  of  print—is  still  used  to  some  extent  by  publishers  when  designing  words  lists  for  their  

reader  series.  But  even  before  the  publication  of  the  GSL,  West,  an  Educational  Service  officer  in  India  in  the  

1920s,  was  writing  his  own  graded  readers—based  on  word  frequency  lists  he  helped  to  develop—to  use  

with  his  students  in  India  and  Bangladesh.  In  his  New  Method  Readers  series,  published  in  1926,  West  had  

already  begun,  “making  reading  materials  more  accessible  to  his  students  through  vocabulary  control”  

(Gilner,  2011).  So  the  ER  programs  in  place  today  are  really  modern  interpretations  of  an  approach  to  

reading  that  is  now  almost  a  century  old.  

 

Benefits  of  Extensive  Reading  

As  already  noted,  extensive  reading  allows  students  to  practice  and  consolidate  much  of  the  material  they  

may  have  previously  learned  from  course  books  in  their  language  classes.  But  research  has  shown  that  there  

are  some  more  specific  and  tangible  benefits  to  be  gained  than  mere  consolidation  alone.  In  the  

introduction  to  their  companion  volume  Extensive  Reading  Activities  for  Teaching  Language  (2004),  Day  and  

Bamford  write:  

Good  things  happen  to  students  who  read  a  great  deal  in  the  new  language.  Research  studies  

show  they  become  better  and  more  confident  readers,  they  write  better,  their  listening  and  

speaking  abilities  improve,  and  their  vocabularies  get  richer.  In  addition,  they  develop  positive  

attitudes  toward  and  increased  motivation  to  study  the  new  language.  

In  their  earlier  volume,  Extensive  Reading  in  the  Second  Language  Classroom,  the  authors  devote  one  

chapter  to  looking  at  some  early  ER  programs  in  both  EFL  settings  (Fiji,  Japan,  Pakistan,  Singapore,  and  Hong  

Kong)  and  ESL  settings  (USA  and  England)  and  reviewing  the  findings.  All  programs  produced  positive  results;  

in  addition  to  gains  in  areas  highlighted  above  like  reading,  writing,  vocabulary,  listening,  and  speaking,  they  

also  cite  gains  in  spelling  and  overall  linguistic  competence.  But  the  area  receiving  the  most  attention  would  

appear  to  be  gains  in  affect,  or  attitude.  I  don’t  think  this  finding  can  be  overemphasized.  In  Taiwan,  as  

probably  in  most  of  Asia  and  elsewhere,  many  students  lose  interest  in  English  language  learning  at  an  early  

age  and  never  fully  recover.  They  tire  of  complex  grammar  rules  and  endless  vocabulary  lists  and  reading  

and  listening  exercises  that  demand  more  than  their  linguistic  abilities  allow.  My  son,  now  in  sixth  grade  at  a  

local  elementary  school  here  in  Taiwan,  estimates  that  up  to  80%  of  his  classmates  have  already  tuned  out  

their  English  lessons.  At  the  university  level,  the  situation  is  better,  but  perhaps  only  slightly.  An  alternative  

approach  to  language  instruction  would  seem  to  be  worthy  of  consideration:  hopefully,  extensive  reading  

has  a  role  to  play  in  any  potential  new  approach.  If  there  is  any  one  idea  that  unites  all  the  participants  in  

this  project  it  is  their  common  desire  to  present  their  language  students  with  something  new  and  fresh—  

but  more  importantly,  effective  and  motivating—in  the  classroom.  

 

The  Interviews  

The  interviews  collected  in  this  volume  were  conducted  via  email  over  several  months  during  the  first  half  of  

2013.  My  first  mail  explained  the  project  and  the  rationale  behind  it  and  asked  if  these  selected  individuals  

would  be  willing  to  participate.  I  was  fully  prepared  to  be  rejected  by  many  and  put  on  hold,  so  to  speak,  by  

others,  knowing  that  these  were  all  busy  educators  who  were  no  doubt  heavily  involved  with  their  own  

projects  and  teaching  duties.  To  my  delight—and  amazement—no  one  said  no.  I  then  forwarded  a  

questionnaire  containing  15  questions  along  with  the  instructions  that  not  all  of  my  queries  needed  to  be  

answered;  again,  most  participants  provided  responses  to  all  questions.  The  questionnaire  forwarded  to  

Philip  Prowse  and  Jennifer  Bassett  was  adjusted  ever  so  slightly  to  take  advantage  of  their  background  in  the  

composing  and  publishing  sides  of  the  graded  reader  business.  Participants  then  returned  the  

questionnaires  to  me  when  completed,  after  which  I  did  some  minor  editing  and  perhaps  asked  for  a  

clarification  here  or  a  slight  re-­‐write  there.  The  questionnaires  were  then  returned  to  each  participant  for  a  

final  review,  so  the  final  responses  are  as  each  participant  intended  for  them  to  be  presented.  Any  attached  

references  or  notes  have  been  left  in  place,  so  interested  parties  can  read  further  if  they  so  desire.  

 

What  I  hope  emerges  from  reading  these  interviews  is  a  clearer  sense  of  extensive  reading,  both  in  theory  

and  in  practice.  There  are  a  number  of  generally  accepted  guiding  principles,  but  few  fixed  or  prescribed  

rules.  Practitioners  in  different  academic  settings  are  implementing  ER  in  somewhat  different  ways,  

depending  on  variables  such  as  curricular  goals,  available  time  and  scheduling,  funding  and  the  like  that  vary  

from  institution  to  institution.  For  example,  the  ER  program  introduced  by  Matthew  Claflin  and  Tom  Robb  at  

Kyoto  Sangyo  University  in  Japan  seems  quite  similar  to  the  program  introduced  by  Kris  Vicca  and  Wendy  

Lambert  at  Feng  Chia  University  in  Taiwan,  but  it  is  noticeably  different  from  the  approach  taken  by  Beniko  

Mason  with  her  students  at  Japan’s  Shitennoji  University.  In  the  Kyoto  Sangyo  and  Feng  Chia  programs,  

students’  ER  work  is  generally  done  outside  of  the  classroom  and  is  meant  to  serve  as  a  complement  to  a  

student’s  in-­‐class  work.  Students’  reading  is  also  carefully  monitored  and  assessed.  For  Beniko  Mason’s  

students—as  well  as  for  the  students  of  Junko  Yamanaka,  Atsuko  Takase,  and  Syying  Lee,  whose  approaches  

to  ER  seem  nearly  identical—extensive  reading  is  the  primary  source  of  language  input.  There  are  no  course  

books,  and  this  reading  input  is  occasionally  supplemented/complemented  by  in-­‐class  extensive  listening  

work.  No  follow-­‐up  activities  are  brought  into  the  classroom  and  students  are  not  directly  tested  or  

assessed  on  their  ER  work.  The  Kyoto  Sangyo  and  Feng  Chia  programs  have  been  implemented  in  required,  

school-­‐wide  programs;  Beniko  Mason,  I  believe,  introduces  ER  to  students  in  an  elective  reading  course.  

Both  approaches,  I  would  argue,  are  legitimate,  effective  and  workable  interpretations  of  ER  theory.  

Matthew  Claflin  even  admits  that  given  a  more  ideal  environment—smaller  classes,  an  opportunity  to  

better  know  your  students,  etc.—that  a  teacher  may  consider  employing  an  approach  “closer  to  the  ‘purer’  

ER.”  Which  approach  will  work  best  at  any  individual  institution  can  only  be  decided  by  the  language  faculty  

on-­‐site  at  these  schools.  

 

Final  Thoughts  

Some  have  written  that  perhaps  the  best  way  to  measure  the  success  of  an  extensive  reading  program  is  

not  through  a  comprehension  quiz  or  a  book  report  or  an  interview,  but  whether  after  finishing  one  book  a  

student  enthusiastically  picks  up  another.  We  hope  to  get  our  students—as  many  as  we  can—hooked  on  

reading  as  a  lifetime  habit.  Similarly,  the  success  of  this  project  will  ultimately  be  measured  by  how  many  

readers  are  inspired  to  search  for  more  information  on  extensive  reading.  Perhaps  presumptively,  I  have  

included  a  page  of  online  resources  at  the  end  of  this  volume.  Better  still  would  be  to  engage  colleagues  at  

your  institution  in  a  discussion  about  the  benefits  of  ER  and  the  feasibility  of  implementing  an  ER  program.    

I  am  confident  that  with  a  little  more  investigation  and  a  little  perseverance  in  talks  with  colleagues  and  

administrators,  extensive  reading  may  soon  become  an  integral  and  enjoyable  component  of  many  EFL  

curriculums.  

 

 

Michael  McCollister  Feng  Chia  University  August,  2013  

 

 

References  

Bamford,  J.  and  Day,  R.R.  (2004).  Extensive  Reading  Activities  for  Teaching  Language.  Cambridge:    Cambridge  University  Press.  

Day,  R.  R.  and  Bamford,  J.  (1998).  Extensive  Reading  in  the  Second  Language  Classroom.  Cambridge:  Cambridge  University  Press.  

Gilner,  L.  (2011).  A  primer  on  the  General  Service  List.  Reading  in  a  Foreign  Language,  23  (1),  65-­‐83.  Krashen,  S.D.  (1977).  Principles  and  Practice  in  Second  Language  Acquisition.  Oxford:  Permagon.        

Rob  Waring  

 

       Dr.  Rob  Waring  teaches  at  Notre  Dame  Seishin  University  in  Okayama,  Japan.  He  is  an  acknowledged  expert  in  extensive  reading  and  second  language  vocabulary  acquisition  and  lectures  and  publishes  widely  on  these  subjects.  He  is  on  the  Executive  Board  of  the  Extensive  Reading  Foundation  and  is  also  author  and  series  editor  of  the  Foundations  Reading  Library,  the  Footprint  Reading  Library,  and  the  Page  Turners  Reading  Library  published  by  Cengage  Learning.                              

 Q:  Can  you  remember  when  and  how  you  first  heard  about  or  became  involved  with  extensive  reading?    It  was  about  25  years  ago  on  my  first  teacher  training  course.  At  the  time  I  thought  ‘what  a  waste  of  time  just  sitting  in  class  reading…  they  should  be  studying  something!’  Little  did  I  know  how  my  opinions  would  change  dramatically  in  the  next  few  years.    Q:  Under  what  circumstances  did  you  first  introduce  ER  into  one  of  your  courses?    It  was  at  the  British  Council  in  Kyoto,  Japan  in  1991.  There  was  a  small  and  largely  unused  library  there,  so  during  one  of  the  summer  intensive  courses  I  suggested  the  students  read  a  book  over  the  weekend  and  we  discuss  them  on  Monday.  I  was  very  pleased  to  see  they  all  did  it  and  more  importantly  they  enjoyed  the  reading.    Q:  Can  you  remember  your  students’  first  reaction  to  ER?  Positive?  Negative?  Quizzical?    They  enjoyed  the  reading  but  some  of  them  mentioned  it  was  hard  to  read  such  long  texts.  I  then  realized  the  importance  of  making  sure  teachers  introduce  ER  to  students  properly  by  explaining  the  level,  how  to  select  books  well  and  so  on.  I  spent  a  long  time  researching  ER  and  watching  what  people  did.    Q:  Can  you  remember  one  early,  enlightening  “Eureka”  moment  when  you  became  thoroughly  convinced  that  ER  would  be  indispensable  to  your  approach  to  language  teaching?    It  wasn’t  a  single  moment,  but  I  remember  seeing  a  teenager  on  the  train  reading  his  graded  reader.  He  was  so  engrossed  in  it  that  he  missed  his  stop.  He  realized  he  was  at  his  station  and  got  up  and  ran  to  the  door,  but  it  closed  before  he  got  out.  He  just  put  his  bags  down  and  started  reading  again.  I  then  realized  how  powerful  the  right  text  can  be  for  learning.    Q:  In  what  way(s)  has  your  approach  to  ER  as  a  supplement  to  regular  classroom  instruction  evolved  over  the  years?    Early  in  my  career  I  saw  it  as  a  supplement,  but  now  I  don’t.  I  try  to  stress  in  my  writings  and  presentations  that  it  is  a  complement  to  other  activities  and  indeed  an  integral—even  indispensable—part  of  language  learning.  Seeing  ER  as  a  supplement  elevates  ‘study’  as  the  norm,  reducing  meaningful  reading  to  a  lesser  status,  and  thus  when  time  or  other  resources  seem  to  demand  more,  it  can  become  a  candidate  for  omission.    Q:  Could  you  introduce  a  typical  ER  program  in  one  of  your  recent  courses?  Required  books  or  pages?  Follow-­‐up  activities?    At  the  beginning  of  each  year  in  my  Oral  Communication  first  year  university  course,  I  go  through  the  usual  getting  to  know  you  and  orientation  activities  and  only  later  do  I  introduce  ER.  This  is  because  firstly  I  don’t  

want  to  overload  them  in  their  new  surroundings  and  secondly,  I  want  them  to  become  familiar  with  the  intensive  reading  as  taught  by  the  Japanese  teachers  in  the  university.  Contrasting  ER  with  the  intensive  reading  makes  the  comparison  more  striking  for  them.  They  already  know  that  one  type  of  reading  is  for  ‘study’  so  I  don't  need  to  do  this.  Then  I  introduce  them  to  one  easy  graded  reader  which  we  go  through  as  a  class  together  chapter  by  chapter  over  a  few  classes.  They  soon  realize  that  this  type  of  reading  is  for  somewhat  natural  but  meaningful  fluent  practice.  I  then  introduce  them  to  our  library  and  train  them  to  choose  books  carefully  and  well.  (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HgzFsmsVq2c:  a  video  introduction  to  Notre  Dame  Seishin  University’s  Extensive  Reading  Library).    Q:  If  someone  is  interested  in  setting  up  an  ER  program  at  his/her  school  or  in  his/her  class,  what  are  two  or  three  of  the  most  important  “Do’s”  and  “Don’ts”  that  you  would  recommend?    DO  get  everyone  involved,  because  if  it  becomes  your  thing  and  not  a  school  thing,  then  when  you  leave  the  school,  the  program  may  collapse.  If  you  develop  the  program  as  part  of  the  standard  curriculum,  then  it  cannot  be  victimized  for  cuts  and  will  continue  regardless.    DO  think  big,  but  act  small  at  the  start.  Start  with  systems  for  book  management,  assessment  etc.  that  can  grow  as  the  program  grows.  Then  you  won’t  need  painful  adjustments  later.    DON’T  spend  all  the  money  you  get  for  books  straight  away.  This  will  leave  you  no  room  for  adjusting  your  library  later.  If  you  buy  the  wrong  books  and  have  spent  your  money,  the  program  may  be  in  danger.    DON’T  miss  a  chance  to  explain  ER  to  teachers  who  believe  you  are  doing  the  wrong  thing  by  asking  your  students  to  ‘just  read’.  

 Q:  Based  on  observations  or  discussions,  what  is  the  biggest  mistake  that  teachers  new  to  ER  tend  to  make?    Starting  the  ER  program  too  fast  and  too  enthusiastically.  Many  new  to  ER  try  to  ‘sell’  ER  to  students  as  if  it’s  the  best  thing  since  sliced  bread.  It’s  far  better  to  introduce  it  as  if  it  is  all  part  of  the  natural  way  people  learn  languages.  They  can  easily  understand  that  children  learn  to  read  in  their  mother  tongue  by  reading  naturally  and  that’s  what  they  need  to  do  in  the  second  language.  In  this  way  the  students  are  more  likely  to  accept  it.    Q:  Could  you  introduce  your  approach  to  the  role  of  assessment  in  your  ER  program?  Purists  seem  to  feel  that  there  is  no  role  for  quizzes  or  reports.  Do  you  agree?    Assessment  within  an  ER  framework  is  fine.  Assessment  decisions  should  be  based  on  educational  needs  not  on  some  pronouncement  about  abstract  idealized  learners  living  in  a  vacuum.  The  world  created  different  cars  for  different  needs.      Q:  How  do  you  measure  student  progress;  that  is,  how  do  you  prove  to  yourself  and  to  school  

administrators  that  students  truly  benefit  from  their  ER  reading?    Student  engagement.  I  assess  the  success  by  the  end  of  term  reports  about  how  students  feel  about  their  reading.  They  typically  say  they  enjoy  it  but  some  say  it’s  hard  to  find  time.    Q:  What  arguments  do  you  feel  would  be  most  effective  in  persuading  reluctant  school  administrators  about  the  benefits  of  instituting  an  ER  program?    It  depends  on  the  person.  Some  are  motivated  by  the  parents’  perceptions  and  reactions,  others  by  authority  figures,  others  by  pride  and  school  status,  and  some  by  the  ego  of  the  individual  (i.e.  someone  who  wants  to  take  credit  for  something),  and  so  on.  Each  person  would  react  differently  to  a  presentation,  a  demonstration  for  example,  and  it  would  depend  on  who  did  it.  The  trick  is  to  find  out  what  makes  a  difference  for  that  person.  This  is  why  we  should  not  rush  into  ER  programs  without  careful  planning.      Q:  Could  you  briefly  introduce  your  research  interests  as  they  relate  to  ER?    I’m  particularly  interested  in  vocabulary  uptake  from  ER—individual  words,  multi-­‐word  units,  collocation  and  colligation.  I’m  currently  building  a  website  to  collect  data  on  what  vocabulary  meaning  senses  (not  just  words)  students  ostensibly  know  in  their  reading  in  order  to  build  a  knowledge  based  wordlist  which  will  be  accessible  for  free.  It  will  have  thousands  of  free  texts  to  read.  (www.er-­‐central.com)    Q:  Could  you  introduce  some  research  areas  that  young  scholars  who  wish  to  focus  on  ER  could  contemplate  exploring?    Extensive  Listening  is  still  basically  under-­‐researched.  Most  of  what  we  know  about  ER  comes  from  reading  and  the  canon  of  ER  studies  needs  replicating  for  listening.  I’d  also  spend  time  trying  to  understand  how  students  develop  a  ‘sense’  of  language  from  ER.  It’s  incredibly  difficult  and  I  think  mainly  because  we  don't  yet  have  the  assessment  tools  to  research  this  fully.    Q:  Any  thoughts  on  what  is  next  on  the  horizon  for  ER?    Digital  materials  available  for  free  to  anyone  any  time.    Q:  Any  final  pearls  of  wisdom  to  leave  us  with?    Remember  you  are  planting  seeds  for  life  long  readers  and  learners,  not  just  getting  them  to  read  this  term.