The Use of Accelerated Reader The Use of Accelerated Reader in Elementary School: The in Elementary School: The Influence of Training and Influence of Training and

Association with Criterion Association with Criterion Reference Competency Tests in Reference Competency Tests in

Reading Reading

by: Jaime Rearleyby: Jaime RearleyEd.S. DefenseEd.S. Defense

Georgia Southern UniversityGeorgia Southern UniversityApril 30, 2014April 30, 2014

BackgroundBackground• The elementary (7) and middle (3) schools in Liberty County use the program in conjunction with Star Reading. Reading tends to be an area of strength for Liberty County’s elementary schools.

• The Georgia Department of Education’s CRCT Statewide Score System Summaries show between the years of 2011-2013 that 89.2% and up to 94.6% of the students in grades third through fifth met or exceeded the standard in reading ( “Georgia Department of Education: School Report Cards,” n.d.).

Background (cont.)Background (cont.)

• The professional learning course taught the best practices for using the software, such as using the Zone of Proximal Development to set individual reading goals and scheduling daily guided reading time (Rearley, 2011, 2012, 2013).

• This course was delivered to teachers at five different schools over a three year period in Liberty County, 2011-2013.

Problem StatementProblem Statement

• Purchasing access to Accelerated Reader is a large yearly investment for Liberty County School System.

• Training has been conducted with various elementary school teachers on how to properly implement the program, using the best prescribed practices.

• Hundreds of elementary school students are affected by the use of this program in Liberty County.

• The researcher wanted to learn how the program is being implemented, the perception of its effectiveness, and the conditions that facilitate or hinder its use.

Literature Literature ReviewReview

The research The research surrounding the surrounding the effectiveness of AR is effectiveness of AR is sometimes contradictory. sometimes contradictory. The What Works The What Works Clearinghouse found only Clearinghouse found only two studies, Bullock two studies, Bullock (2005) and Nunnery and (2005) and Nunnery and Ross (2007), that met the Ross (2007), that met the Adolescent Literacy Review Adolescent Literacy Review Protocol. Protocol. (Holstman, Little reader)

Literature Review Literature Review (cont.)(cont.)

• The method of implementation can have a positive or negative impact.Thompson, Madhuri, and Taylor (2008) found “reading programs that may have worked effectively in one setting may fail in another setting if they are used incorrectly” (p. 559).

• Watts (2004) believed AR had a negative effect on students’ motivation to read.

Literature Review Literature Review (cont.)(cont.)

• There were some positive findings…

• Middle school students read less if AR was not in use according to Pavonetti, Brimmer, and Cipielewski (2002).

• Topping and Sanders (2000) found students’ performance on the Tennessee Value-Added Assessment System increased as the level of AR use increased.

• A failing school in Kansas adopted the Reading Renaissance, the best classroom practices of Accelerated Reader, and began achieving a Standard of Excellence in reading (Pfeiffer, 2011).

• When Magnolia Consulting (2010) was hired by Renaissance Learning, Inc. to conduct a mixed methods study on the effectiveness of using the AR best practices, the instructional reading levels of the treatment students appeared to increase during the study.

Research QuestionsResearch Questions• How have the AR best practices been implemented in the classroom?

• How do teachers associate the use of AR best practices with student performance on the CRCT?

• What has supported or hindered the use of the AR best practices in classrooms?

(Baxter, Reading aloud to children)

MethodsMethodsParticipantsParticipantsThirty-nine of forty-four eligible Thirty-nine of forty-four eligible elementary school teachers working elementary school teachers working in Liberty county were invited to in Liberty county were invited to participate in this study. To be participate in this study. To be eligible for the study the eligible for the study the teachers had to currently be teachers had to currently be teaching in a Liberty County teaching in a Liberty County elementary school and have elementary school and have successfully completed the the successfully completed the the professional learning course, professional learning course, Getting Result with AR between the Getting Result with AR between the years of 2011-2013, (Rearley, years of 2011-2013, (Rearley, 2011, 2012, 2013). Thirty-one 2011, 2012, 2013). Thirty-one teachers from five different teachers from five different public elementary schools in public elementary schools in Liberty County responded to the Liberty County responded to the questionnaire.questionnaire.

(Prantham Books, Vision: A book in every child’s hand)

Methods (cont.)Methods (cont.)

• Instrumentation

• The researcher developed an online questionnaire via SurveyMonkey (1999) using open and closed-ended questions.

• The questionnaire was based on a self-assessment rubric for implementation of the best AR practices.

ProceduresProcedures• TThe questionnaire was field tested.he questionnaire was field tested.• Eligible participants were then Eligible participants were then invited via email and letter to invited via email and letter to respond to an anonymous respond to an anonymous questionnaire during a two week questionnaire during a two week window. window.

• Reminder emails were sent every Reminder emails were sent every three days.three days.

• The introduction of the The introduction of the questionnaire explained that questionnaire explained that completion of the questionnaire completion of the questionnaire served as consent to participate in served as consent to participate in the study.the study.

AnalysisAnalysis

How have the AR best practices been implemented in the classroom?

•Each response in part II of the questionnaire was given a weight. Rarely was one. Occasional was two. Frequently was three.

•The weights were used to calculate the mean, mode. median, and standard deviation for each question.

Analysis (cont.)Analysis (cont.)

How do teachers associate the use of AR best practices with student performance on the CRCT?

•The researcher examined part III and part II to address this question. Cross tabulation tables were constructed, using Microsoft Excel (2007), and the Pearson’s r was calculated, using SPSS (IBM Corporation, 2013), to investigate possible relationships.

•The researcher looked for trends between the teachers’ opinions and the level of use of the AR program.

Analysis (cont.)Analysis (cont.)

What has supported or hindered the use of the AR best practices in classrooms?

•The researcher examined the relationship between the teachers’ motivation to implement AR, available resources, perceived support for administration, and the level of skill.

•The researcher analyzed the open-ended responses to questions in part IV of the questionnaire and coded the data by hand, using Microsoft Excel (2007) to identify trends and themes. Using Fowler’s method, the researcher identified categories that emerged from answers (1993).

ResultsResults

Table 1Most Implemented Practices

PracticeRarely (0-1)

Occasionally (2-3)

Frequently (4-5)

Students are given access to their school library or classroom collection regular

0% 3.2% 96.8%

You use a student’s zone of proximal development to set individual reading goals for each child

3.2% 3.2% 93.5%

Students are given 15 to 60 minutes of daily independent reading practice time with books that match students’ ability and interest level

0% 10% 90%

How have the AR best practices been implemented in the classroom?

Results (cont.)Results (cont.)Table 2Most Implemented Practices

Practice Mean Median ModeStandard Deviation

Students are given access to their school library or classroom collection regular

2.96 3 3 0.17

You use a student’s zone of proximal development to set individual reading goals for each child

2.90 3 3 0.39

Students are given 15 to 60 minutes of daily independent reading practice time with books that match students’ ability and interest level

2.90 3 3 0.30

Results (cont.)Results (cont.)Table 3Least Implemented

Practices

PracticeRarely (0-1)

Occasionally (2-3)

Frequently (4-5)

How frequently do you communicate students’ progress in AR to parents?

25.8% 38.7% 35.5%

Students use a reading log

30% 33.3% 36.7%

You use AR BookFinder to help students locate differentiated reading materials

32.3% 32.3% 35.5%

You assist students with complex texts by scaffolding when needed, for example using graphic organizers

16.1% 38.7% 45.2%

Results (cont.)Results (cont.)Table 4Least Implemented

Practices

Practice Mean Median ModeStandard Deviation

How frequently do you communicate students’ progress in AR to parents?

2.09 2 2 0.78

Students use a reading log

2.25 3 3 0.89

You use AR BookFinder to help students locate differentiated reading materials

2.03 2 3 0.83

You assist students with complex texts by scaffolding when needed, for example using graphic organizers

2.29 2 3 0.73

Results (cont.)Results (cont.)Table 5How have the AR best practices been implemented in the classroom?

Guided Guided Indpendent Indpendent ReadingReading

Differentiate Differentiate Reading Reading PractiePractie

Focus on Focus on Reading Reading ComprehensionComprehension

Management Management StrategiesStrategies

sub-group mean

2.76 2.65 2.53 2.33

Results (cont.)Results (cont.)

• Table 6The use of AR had a positive influence on students’ reading CRCT Scores cross tabulated with count of students given 15-60 minutes of daily independent reading practice time with books that match students’ ability and interest level

Row Labels Frequently Occasionally BlankGrand Total

Moderate Disagreement 3.33% 0.00% 0.00% 3.33%

Somewhat Agree 16.67% 3.33% 0.00% 20.00%

Agree 30.00% 6.67% 0.00% 36.67%

Strongly Agree 26.67% 0.00% 0.00% 13.33%

Note. Four teachers selected not to respond to the question, the use of AR had a positive influence on the students’ reading CRCT scores. While, one teacher selected not to respond to the question, students are given 15 to 60 minutes of daily independent reading practice time with books that match the students’ ability and interest level.

How do teachers associate the use of AR best practices with student performance on the CRCT?

Results (cont.)Results (cont.)• Table 7

Correlations and Descriptive Statistics for Positive Influence on CRCT, Daily Reading Practice, Individual Reading Goals, Locating Books using the ZPD

1 2 3 4 5

Positive Influence on CRCT

—-

Daily Reading Practice

0.15 —-

Individual Reading Goals

0.20 -0.08 —-

Locating Books using the ZPD

-0.02 0.02 .45* —-

Part II Composite

0.28 .51* 0.22 .37* —-

M 3.96 2.90 2.90 2.71 2.53

SD 0.85 0.31 0.39 0.59 0.22

Note. n = 27 for Positive Influence, n = 30 for Daily Reading Practice, n = 31 for Individual Reading Goals, n = 31 for Locating Books using the ZPD, n= 31 for Part II Composite * p < .05.

Results (cont.)

ItemStrongly Disagree

Moderately

Disagree

Somewhat Agree

AgreeStrongly Agree

Mean Median Mode

My school administration is supportive of the implementation of AR

10% 0% 0% 30% 60% 4.3 5 5

My students have access to a variety of books on their reading level

3.2% 0% 9.7% 25.8% 61.3% 4.4 5 5

I feel motivated to include the use of AR in my classroom

0% 6.5% 3.2% 32.3% 58.1% 4.4 5 5

Table 8Selected Responses to Part III

Results (cont.)

Item

Strongly

Disagree

Moderately

Disagree

Somewhat Agree

AgreeStrongly Agree

Mean Median Mode

I need more instruction on how to implement AR effectively

48.3% 31% 17.2% 3.4% 0% 1.7 2 1

My students have access to enough computers or iPads to participate in AR

16.1% 25.8% 16.1% 12.9% 29% 3.1 3 5

There is not enough technical assistance available to support the use of AR

19.4% 25.8% 22.6% 16.1% 16.1% 2.8 3 2

Table 9Selected Responses to Part III

Results (cont.)Results (cont.)

Figure 1.The most common conditions facilitating the implementation of the best practices of the AR program.

What has supported the use of AR best practices in the classrooms?

Results (cont.)Results (cont.)

Figure 2.The most common conditions hindering the implementation of best practices of the AR program.

How have the AR best practices been implemented in the classroom?

DiscussionDiscussionHow have the AR best practices been implemented in the classroom?

•The independent guided reading practices was the most implemented sub-group.

•Frequent access to books•Daily reading time •Individual reading goals

Discussion (cont.)

Discussion (cont.)How do teachers associate the use of the AR

best practices with student performance on the CRCT?

•Teachers tended to have a positive opinion of AR.

•There was not a statistically significant relationship existed between the implementation AR and the perception of AR’s influence on the CRCT.

•It appeared that teachers valued the reading practice, but may not attribute AR to successful performance on the CRCT.

Discussion (cont.)

Discussion (cont.)What has supported or hindered use of AR

best practices in classrooms?

•The main stress felt by teachers was a lack of resources.•Other common concerns dealt with a lack of time and staff.•Teachers mentioned the media centers’ positive incentives 33 times and felt the positive incentives motivated students to read.•The second most common support mentioned was the use of individual reading goals.

LimitationsLimitations• A serious limitation is the that the questionnaire had no guidance for validity.

• The time between the completion of the training and the research study may have impacted how the participants responded on the questionnaire.

• A potential bias for the trainer/ researcher may have influenced the responders.

• All participants were volunteers. It is possible that the teachers that selected not to volunteer may have had negative opinions and selected not to share them. This would impact the internal validity.

• The results of this study may only be applied to the Liberty County due to the specific nature of the course and conditions. This may impact the external validity.

ConclusionConclusion

How have AR best practices been implemented in the classrooms?

•The researcher found the teachers in Liberty County have a positive opinion of AR.•The implementation varies from very high to minimal depending on the best practice in question.

ConclusionConclusionHow do teachers associate the use of the best practices with student performance on the CRCT?

•A statistically significant relationship does not appear to exist between the perceived impact of AR on the CRCT and the implemented AR best practices.•Teachers identified more conditions that facilitated the implementation of the AR program and less hinderances.•The need for additional training appeared to be very low.

ConclusionConclusionWhat has supported or hindered the use of AR best practices in the classroom?

•Teachers identified more conditions that facilitated the implementation of the AR program and less hindrances.•Teachers completing the training appeared to be confident in their implementation of the program and motivated to implement the program.

Recommendations

Recommendations• School and system level administration may

benefit from the data collected during this study. An executive summary of the study findings should be made available to both stakeholders.

• The value placed on the incentives programs and the book collections available in the media centers needs to be made available to building level and system level administrators.

Recommendations (cont.)

Recommendations (cont.)

• The perception of the teachers and the use of the program was positive in most cases.

• Training has left a positive impact on the teachers. It would beneficial to teachers at other schools and at the middle schools.

• The need for updated and more reliable technology must be considered in future budgeting for the schools and district. New equipment is needed.

SourcesSources

Baxter, J. (Photographer). (2005, February 23). Reading aloud to children [Web Photo]. Retrieved from https://www.flickr.com/photos/judybaxter/5484879/in/photolist-u7sT-97uoyF-7ysSqb-4avnSd-4VoQ4Q-4VjB4x-5aCog5-9v1F5L-8Dm48r-dtroJc-zMjJQ-dzbQJR-cvBCfW-4VkawM-4RJMgs-4VmmA2-4RJMYN-dU4kxX-83T9eu-5j2qXw-5iX95P-5iX96k-aTTXxi-4REBuB-4REBLK-4Vmm8r-4REB5v-8QZsxN-8uQ9sa-617vfm-6dd8YS-5kRRTA-9sd7k4-4VrvTW-4VrvRo-9guaJE-4VrvZJ-68mAXC-68hpcM-68mB8G-68mBaC-68mAYo-fYuAwf-8FMPPw-8FMPPh-8FMPPJ-8FMPPq-7FuTmD-gaNSpX-b4Ac92

Bullock, J.C. (2005). Effects of Accelerated Reader on the reading performance of third, fourth, fifith-grade students in one wester Oregon elementary school (Doctor dissertation, University of Oregon). Dissertation Abstracts International, 66(07A), 56-2529.

Fowler, F. (1993). Survey research methods. (2nd ed., Vol. 1). London, England: Sage Publishing, Inc.

Georgia Department of Education: School report cards [Website]. (n.d.). Retrieved September 6, 2013, from http://www.gadoe.org/Curriculum-Instruction-and-Assessment/Assessment/Pages/CRCT-Statewide-Scores.aspx

Holstman, M. (Photographer). (2010, January 25). Little reader [Print Photo]. Retrieved from https://www.flickr.com/photos/holtsman/4305510994/in/photolist-u7sT-97uoyF-7ysSqb-4avnSd-4VoQ4Q-4VjB4x-5aCog5-9v1F5L-8Dm48r-dtroJc-zMjJQ-dzbQJR-cvBCfW-4VkawM-4RJMgs-4VmmA2-4RJMYN-dU4kxX-83T9eu-5j2qXw-5iX95P-5iX96k-aTTXxi-4REBuB-4REBLK-4Vmm8r-4REB5v-8QZsxN-8uQ9sa-617vfm-6dd8YS-5kRRTA-9sd7k4-4VrvTW-4VrvRo-9guaJE-4VrvZJ-68mAXC-68hpcM-68mB8G-68mBaC-68mAYo-fYuAwf-8FMPPw-8FMPPh-8FMPPJ-8FMPPq-7FuTmD-gaNSpX-b4Ac92/

IBM Corp. Released 2013. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 22.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.

Institute of Education Sciences (2008). What works clearinghouse intervention report. Retrieved November 2, 2011, from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/intervention_reports/wwc_accelreader_101408.pdf

Krathwohl, D. (1998). Methods of educational & social science research: An integrated approach. New York: Longman.

Magnolia Consulting. (2010). A final report for the evaluation of Renaissance Learning ’s Accelerated Reader program. Charlottesville, VA: Author.

Microsoft. (2007). Microsoft Excel [Computer software]. Redmond, Washington: Microsoft.

SourcesSourcesMorgan, D.L. (1997). Focus groups as qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Morrow, L.M. (1996). Motivating reading and writing diverse classrooms (NCTE Research Rep. No. 28) Urbana, IL: national Council on Teachers of English.

Nunnery, J.A., & Ross, S.M. (2007). The effects of the School Renaissance program on student achievement in reading and mathematics. Research in the Schools, 14(1), 40-59.

Pavonetti, L. M., Brimmer, K. M., & Cipielewski, J. F. (2002). Accelerated Reader: What are the lasting effects on the reading habits of middle school students exposed to Accelerated Reader in elementary grades? Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 46(4), 300. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Pfeiffer, C. (2011). Achieving a standard of reading excellence in Kansas. Knowledge Quest, 39(4), 60-67. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Pratham Books. (2008, September 15). Vision: A book in every child’s hand. {Print Photo]. Retrieved from https://www.flickr.com/photos/prathambooks/3291764099/in/photolist-9hrRxn-aTTW96-61T9Mr-61Spg8-61Spa2-61SskF-7ysSqb-aMqTii-61Sqvi-61WBwS-61WBbh-61SqKK-61WBod-61WAPo-61WCWb-61SrC8-61Sr7r-61Sq4X-61WB6m-61WCYN-61Spna-61WCZN-61SpZF-61Ssbr-61WDnG-61WBqJ-61WCnU-61WA8w-61WBjd-61SqQ2-61WCMj-61WAWN-61WBn3-61SpoT-61SqFM-61Sr2M-61SqBT-61Ssug-61WCzh-61Sq46-61SqkT-61SqMc-61WD6U-61WDdS-61WAYS-61WD7Y-61WDjA-61SrPe-61WASJ-61SppV/

Renaissance Learning, Inc. (2007). Getting results with Accelerated Reader. Wisconsin Rapids, WI: Renaissance Learning.

Renaissance Learning, Inc. (2013a). Renaissance Place [Software]. Retrieved from https://hosted123.renlearn.com/55673/default.aspx

Renaissance Learning, Inc. (2013b). Accelerated Reader implementation progression. Wisconsin Rapids, WI: Author.

Renaissance Learning, Inc. (2013c). Renaissance Place: District administrator dashboard [Data file]. Retrieved from https://hosted123.renlearn.com/dashboardclientsvc/SurveyMonkey (1999). Date Retrieved November 3, 2013 from https://www.surveymonkey.com

Thompson, G., Madhuri, M., & Taylor, D. (2008). How the Accelerated Reader program can become counterproductive for high school students. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 51(7), 550-560. doi:10.1598/JAAL.51.7.3

Topping, K. J., & Sanders, W. L. (2000). Teacher effectiveness and computer assessment of reading: Relating value-added and learning information systems data. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 11(3), 305–337.

Watts, B. (2004). Accelerated Reader: Its motivational effects on advanced adolescent readers. Masters Abstracts International, 43(02), 386. (UMI No. 1423331)