Here's something to lift up your heart, Natalie. In Princecroft Primary School in Wiltshire in England, a school I have visited many times, I have never seen a desk occupied by any child upwards from Year 2 that doesn't have a reading book on it. The school and its staff are relentless in their encouragment of the children to read. Everyone (including the teaching staff) reads and everyone shares their experience of reading. It's a joy to watch!
[By the bye, the school also runs an 'eleven before eleven' program in which children are given the opportunity to have experience of eleven important cultural experiences before they leave for secondary school. This includes a visit to the Roman Baths in Bath and a visit to the Jurassic Coast to explore for fossils.]
Thank you for linking your American Educator article. As friends outside of education have posted the NYT piece I appreciate being able to share your article. The topic is too important to give sound bite responses without context and research.
Thank you, also, for succinctly debunking the "height requirement" strawman dismissal of Mississippi students' improvement.
I'm a Mensa member. We are maybe more aware of the properties of IQ than most. While it's probably right to call it a test of the ability to take tests, it is indicative of abstract ability and seems to remain stable throughout ones lifetime regardless of further education or study. So while you might move the score a bit with outside influence, moving it a standard deviation is probably unlikely.
Recently I read that half of adults read at the 6th grade level or below. That's shocking and might or might not be true but in my time in business I usually ended up as the person through whom all outbound emails to clients needed to be filtered. Otherwise spelling, grammar and even coherent thought were in peril. So there's trouble out there for sure. My degree is in engineering, usually an education that leaves scant room for literature. But my Dad read a lot for pleasure and fiction titles were always around. My bet is reading starts at home. Maybe tutor the parents somehow.
I wonder whether, if half of adults read at such a low level, some of those might have graduated as teachers. It's probably easier for class prep if you can read a few paragraphs or perhaps pages than to internalize for open discussion a novel like To Kill a Mockingbird, much less any Dickens or Hemingway. To discuss them requires context as well; still more prep. If your comprehension skills are weak, smaller bites might be easier.
I'm not a fan but Harry Potter probably did more for reading then anything in recent times but probably only impacted the children in the "suburban norm" category. Several nephews devoured every release as soon as it could be had.
I totally agree with Cranky Frankie that reading starts at home, especially if we need to close the knowledge gap. But yes, how to tutor the parents? My iOS app Read Me A Story does just that. It enables kids at an early age to experience an emotional connection to reading since stories are read to them by those they know and love. If we are ever to realize the aspiration of becoming a nation of readers again, then starting early with the help of parents may be the only way to move the needle.
Great article!! Anecdotally, I asked my friend's 15 year-old son if he is required to read full novels in class. He said that they are rarely asked to read the same book as the rest of the class, perhaps once or twice per year. When they are assigned a novel, they are "tested" on completion through a group discussion with other kids. He admitted that it's really easy to BS the discussion and pretend like you read the book. They are never asked to write a paper or book report. I asked if he ever gets a "summer reading list" and he looked at me like I was crazy. (I recall dreading those lists of summer books....but eventually enjoyed a few of them!)
My second grader and fourth grader have never been asked to read an entire novel yet, instead they read short books and are given 4 multiple choice questions about the books through an "AR test." I'm trying to remedy this by reading lots of novels with them at home.
I hope we can turn this around in America because reading is such a wonderful and important pastime!
Reading whole novels is one of the things I'd love to do with my students but actually never do. "Lack of instructional time" is a formal phrasing that nails it.
I work in Italy and at-home reading is not an option. Students cheat on a regular basis, in class if they can, always at home. That was an issue even before the invention of LLMs. If I assign my students a chapter of a novel to read at home, I can at best expect them to read summaries downloaded from the internet.
I go into this in my post on that intervention, which is linked to in this post. But briefly: The researchers themselves weren't sure why this intervention produced such dramatic results. But when we're emotionally engaged in something, we remember it better. So my theory is that the students were able to get emotionally engaged in those novels, enabling them to remember the vocabulary better and maybe also the more complex syntax of written language that they were exposed to -- so that translated into those gains on standardized reading comprehension tests, which of course had nothing to do with the content of the novels the students had read.
According to the study, struggling readers in England (as in the US) are given brief texts to read and even then are expected to go at a fairly laborious pace, with the idea that that's necessary to improve their comprehension. The "brisk pace" in the study doesn't mean the reading is done quickly (and much of the reading is done by the teachers), but rather that they're not stopping every few sentences to answer comprehension questions. That enables them to follow the story and get wrapped up in it.
It’s too bad that the education discourse is driven by nostalgia. There’s always the assumption that it used to be better. That test scores used to be way higher. That kids used to read a bunch of full books in class. But there’s not much evidence for that beyond anecdotes. My own experience as an elderly millennial is that we read short stories/excerpts out of basal readers in grade school and in high school we read a novel per semester. Not really book-rich!
There is evidence that kids (and adults) are reading a lot less OUTSIDE of school. But if I had a phone, tablet, or video games when I was a kid, I probably wouldn’t have been reading books either.
I also find it funny that the people bemoaning the lack of books in classrooms today are the same ones who pushed out the relatively book-rich Units of Study curriculum and demonized balanced literacy programs that contained a large independent reading component.
Units of Study has serious problems, but you're absolutely right that it is book-rich. Unfortunately, we've thrown some of the babies out with the bath water. If you haven't read Maryanne Wolf's new paper (Maryanne Wolf Knows Her Proust and Her P.O.S.S.U.M. https://harriettjanetos.substack.com/p/maryanne-wolf-knows-her-proust-and?r=5spuf), you'll find how she embraces both structured literacy and balanced literacy.
“ I wonder whether, if half of adults read at such a low level, some of those might have graduated as teachers.” In Victoria, Australia that has certainly been the case. University primary teacher training courses have been known to take in students in approximately the lowest ranking 15-20% of high school graduates. We can draw the conclusion/s re classroom competencies without too much difficulty.
Regarding the observations re Rosenshine, minimally guided instruction etc much teacher PCK here is woeful, let alone any knowledge at all of the hugely revealing (and, to many, highly awkward) Project Follow Through findings, from decades ago.
"Here’s my question: Does it really matter in terms of literary exposure and confrontation with complex language and themes whether my students read Animal Farm or Anna Karenina, Letter from a Birmingham Jail or Les Misérables, Walden or War and Peace? As long as we commit to spending time with any voice that challenges us, isn’t that good enough?"
Briefer texts can certainly involve complex themes that can serve as a basis for rich discussion. They may also use complex vocabulary and sentence structure and help expand students' familiarity with those aspects of written language. I certainly don't think length should be the sole criterion.
Eventually, though, as students abilities grow, I think it could be beneficial to introduce them to some lengthier texts, especially novels. I know from experience (including recent experience) that an 800-page novel can look daunting, but if it's a good one, it can provide an immersion into another world over a period of time that a 200-page novel might not be able to offer. You discover that you're actually sorry to part company with that world when you come to the end of the book.
Not that I'm saying all students should read 800-page novels--just that reading a longer work can offer a different, and possibly more transportive, experience. I don't know of any research on that, but I think Maryanne Wolf's work points in that direction.
You’re speaking to the converted. From Of Mice and Mentors:
“When I was in high school, I read two of my favorite books, Jane Eyre and Gone with the Wind—which are much longer than your average novel and eight times longer than Of Mice and Men. Eight times! These books may have kept me enthralled, but we have to remember that we are teaching an entire class with a range of interests and abilities. Can we do the math when it comes to curricular choices and follow Jane Austen’s lead to let both sense and sensibility be our guides?”
“My two children offer a good illustration of this point. My younger son has a broad reading palette, reads widely, and appreciates writers as diverse as Evelyn Waugh and Percival Everett. By contrast, my older son is far more selective but has appreciated most of his required reading at school—books like One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, Huckleberry Finn, Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea, and The Great Gatsby—simply because, he points out, “stuff happens” in those books. A book with a plot that compels can propel the reader forward to its eagerly-anticipated conclusion, and he is unforgiving towards books that he believes don’t move. He wouldn’t say he has a lifelong love of reading—but he would definitely say he knows what he likes, and if you hand him books like Reginald Hill’s The Woodcutter, he would love them every bit as much as that one. He has set a higher bar than his brother and allows a “love” of other activities to compete with reading when it comes to how he allocates his time.”
Here's something to lift up your heart, Natalie. In Princecroft Primary School in Wiltshire in England, a school I have visited many times, I have never seen a desk occupied by any child upwards from Year 2 that doesn't have a reading book on it. The school and its staff are relentless in their encouragment of the children to read. Everyone (including the teaching staff) reads and everyone shares their experience of reading. It's a joy to watch!
[By the bye, the school also runs an 'eleven before eleven' program in which children are given the opportunity to have experience of eleven important cultural experiences before they leave for secondary school. This includes a visit to the Roman Baths in Bath and a visit to the Jurassic Coast to explore for fossils.]
Thank you for linking your American Educator article. As friends outside of education have posted the NYT piece I appreciate being able to share your article. The topic is too important to give sound bite responses without context and research.
Thank you, also, for succinctly debunking the "height requirement" strawman dismissal of Mississippi students' improvement.
Amen, sister! It's a problem.
I'm a Mensa member. We are maybe more aware of the properties of IQ than most. While it's probably right to call it a test of the ability to take tests, it is indicative of abstract ability and seems to remain stable throughout ones lifetime regardless of further education or study. So while you might move the score a bit with outside influence, moving it a standard deviation is probably unlikely.
Recently I read that half of adults read at the 6th grade level or below. That's shocking and might or might not be true but in my time in business I usually ended up as the person through whom all outbound emails to clients needed to be filtered. Otherwise spelling, grammar and even coherent thought were in peril. So there's trouble out there for sure. My degree is in engineering, usually an education that leaves scant room for literature. But my Dad read a lot for pleasure and fiction titles were always around. My bet is reading starts at home. Maybe tutor the parents somehow.
I wonder whether, if half of adults read at such a low level, some of those might have graduated as teachers. It's probably easier for class prep if you can read a few paragraphs or perhaps pages than to internalize for open discussion a novel like To Kill a Mockingbird, much less any Dickens or Hemingway. To discuss them requires context as well; still more prep. If your comprehension skills are weak, smaller bites might be easier.
I'm not a fan but Harry Potter probably did more for reading then anything in recent times but probably only impacted the children in the "suburban norm" category. Several nephews devoured every release as soon as it could be had.
Absolutely correct about teaching books well requiring more prep time for teachers than excerpts. That about says it all.
I totally agree with Cranky Frankie that reading starts at home, especially if we need to close the knowledge gap. But yes, how to tutor the parents? My iOS app Read Me A Story does just that. It enables kids at an early age to experience an emotional connection to reading since stories are read to them by those they know and love. If we are ever to realize the aspiration of becoming a nation of readers again, then starting early with the help of parents may be the only way to move the needle.
Great article!! Anecdotally, I asked my friend's 15 year-old son if he is required to read full novels in class. He said that they are rarely asked to read the same book as the rest of the class, perhaps once or twice per year. When they are assigned a novel, they are "tested" on completion through a group discussion with other kids. He admitted that it's really easy to BS the discussion and pretend like you read the book. They are never asked to write a paper or book report. I asked if he ever gets a "summer reading list" and he looked at me like I was crazy. (I recall dreading those lists of summer books....but eventually enjoyed a few of them!)
My second grader and fourth grader have never been asked to read an entire novel yet, instead they read short books and are given 4 multiple choice questions about the books through an "AR test." I'm trying to remedy this by reading lots of novels with them at home.
I hope we can turn this around in America because reading is such a wonderful and important pastime!
Reading whole novels is one of the things I'd love to do with my students but actually never do. "Lack of instructional time" is a formal phrasing that nails it.
I work in Italy and at-home reading is not an option. Students cheat on a regular basis, in class if they can, always at home. That was an issue even before the invention of LLMs. If I assign my students a chapter of a novel to read at home, I can at best expect them to read summaries downloaded from the internet.
I haven't found a workaround yet.
addendum: I work in high school and my curriculum is vast to the point of being encyclopedic
You mentioned that in a successful intervention program whole books were read at a fairly brisk pace. What might be the benefit here?
I go into this in my post on that intervention, which is linked to in this post. But briefly: The researchers themselves weren't sure why this intervention produced such dramatic results. But when we're emotionally engaged in something, we remember it better. So my theory is that the students were able to get emotionally engaged in those novels, enabling them to remember the vocabulary better and maybe also the more complex syntax of written language that they were exposed to -- so that translated into those gains on standardized reading comprehension tests, which of course had nothing to do with the content of the novels the students had read.
Yes I can see that . . . but I was wondering about the necessity for/ importance of "a fairly brisk pace."
According to the study, struggling readers in England (as in the US) are given brief texts to read and even then are expected to go at a fairly laborious pace, with the idea that that's necessary to improve their comprehension. The "brisk pace" in the study doesn't mean the reading is done quickly (and much of the reading is done by the teachers), but rather that they're not stopping every few sentences to answer comprehension questions. That enables them to follow the story and get wrapped up in it.
It’s too bad that the education discourse is driven by nostalgia. There’s always the assumption that it used to be better. That test scores used to be way higher. That kids used to read a bunch of full books in class. But there’s not much evidence for that beyond anecdotes. My own experience as an elderly millennial is that we read short stories/excerpts out of basal readers in grade school and in high school we read a novel per semester. Not really book-rich!
There is evidence that kids (and adults) are reading a lot less OUTSIDE of school. But if I had a phone, tablet, or video games when I was a kid, I probably wouldn’t have been reading books either.
I also find it funny that the people bemoaning the lack of books in classrooms today are the same ones who pushed out the relatively book-rich Units of Study curriculum and demonized balanced literacy programs that contained a large independent reading component.
Cue Tim Robinson hot dog sketch.
Units of Study has serious problems, but you're absolutely right that it is book-rich. Unfortunately, we've thrown some of the babies out with the bath water. If you haven't read Maryanne Wolf's new paper (Maryanne Wolf Knows Her Proust and Her P.O.S.S.U.M. https://harriettjanetos.substack.com/p/maryanne-wolf-knows-her-proust-and?r=5spuf), you'll find how she embraces both structured literacy and balanced literacy.
“ I wonder whether, if half of adults read at such a low level, some of those might have graduated as teachers.” In Victoria, Australia that has certainly been the case. University primary teacher training courses have been known to take in students in approximately the lowest ranking 15-20% of high school graduates. We can draw the conclusion/s re classroom competencies without too much difficulty.
Regarding the observations re Rosenshine, minimally guided instruction etc much teacher PCK here is woeful, let alone any knowledge at all of the hugely revealing (and, to many, highly awkward) Project Follow Through findings, from decades ago.
"Here’s my question: Does it really matter in terms of literary exposure and confrontation with complex language and themes whether my students read Animal Farm or Anna Karenina, Letter from a Birmingham Jail or Les Misérables, Walden or War and Peace? As long as we commit to spending time with any voice that challenges us, isn’t that good enough?"
Of Mice and Mentors: Best Laid Plans (https://harriettjanetos.substack.com/p/of-mice-and-mentors-best-laid-plans?r=5spuf)
Briefer texts can certainly involve complex themes that can serve as a basis for rich discussion. They may also use complex vocabulary and sentence structure and help expand students' familiarity with those aspects of written language. I certainly don't think length should be the sole criterion.
Eventually, though, as students abilities grow, I think it could be beneficial to introduce them to some lengthier texts, especially novels. I know from experience (including recent experience) that an 800-page novel can look daunting, but if it's a good one, it can provide an immersion into another world over a period of time that a 200-page novel might not be able to offer. You discover that you're actually sorry to part company with that world when you come to the end of the book.
Not that I'm saying all students should read 800-page novels--just that reading a longer work can offer a different, and possibly more transportive, experience. I don't know of any research on that, but I think Maryanne Wolf's work points in that direction.
You’re speaking to the converted. From Of Mice and Mentors:
“When I was in high school, I read two of my favorite books, Jane Eyre and Gone with the Wind—which are much longer than your average novel and eight times longer than Of Mice and Men. Eight times! These books may have kept me enthralled, but we have to remember that we are teaching an entire class with a range of interests and abilities. Can we do the math when it comes to curricular choices and follow Jane Austen’s lead to let both sense and sensibility be our guides?”
And this from Can We Inspire a Love of Reading?
(https://open.substack.com/pub/harriettjanetos/p/can-we-inspire-a-love-of-reading?r=5spuf&utm_medium=ios)
“My two children offer a good illustration of this point. My younger son has a broad reading palette, reads widely, and appreciates writers as diverse as Evelyn Waugh and Percival Everett. By contrast, my older son is far more selective but has appreciated most of his required reading at school—books like One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, Huckleberry Finn, Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea, and The Great Gatsby—simply because, he points out, “stuff happens” in those books. A book with a plot that compels can propel the reader forward to its eagerly-anticipated conclusion, and he is unforgiving towards books that he believes don’t move. He wouldn’t say he has a lifelong love of reading—but he would definitely say he knows what he likes, and if you hand him books like Reginald Hill’s The Woodcutter, he would love them every bit as much as that one. He has set a higher bar than his brother and allows a “love” of other activities to compete with reading when it comes to how he allocates his time.”
Here's the view from my classroom: I absolutely agree that we should be teaching whole texts, but I don't think there's anything wrong with using length as one criterion for selection. See Of Mice and Mentors: Best Laid Plans (https://harriettjanetos.substack.com/p/of-mice-and-mentors-best-laid-plans?r=5spuf).