Re: Does anyone have a response to this?

Okie Media Specialist

Posted on 10/03/11

More | Report Post

My honest opinion: If schools/classrooms used the success
rates (% correct of comprehension on quizzes-check a student
TOPS report the for the school year section) rather than points
the parent would more than likely not object to the use of the
program. Students will progress better/faster
(fluency/vocabulary will increase as well as their zpd moving
upward) if their success rates are at 85% or higher based on
selecting books within their zpd range using Star Reading
Assessment. Points are just part of the total program. Points
tell a teacher (and student) they are reading their 30 or 35
minutes (or however minutes) per day according the the AR
calculator. Found at: http://argoals.renlearn.com/Default.aspx

I hope the parent was satisfied with the answer you gave them.

Okie Media Specialist

On 9/01/11, Marie wrote:
> This is part of an email a parent sent me who disputes the
> effectiveness of AR. I have used it for years in my
> classroom and have found it to be very successful. How
> would you respond to this?
> "...In AR, students are given mindless multiple-choice
> quizzes after they finish each book, and if they pass these
> quizzes, they are awarded points. Earn enough points and
> they progress to higher-level books in the program.In AR,
> the good news is that students read a lot of books.The bad
> news? Students can only read books found on the AR list. If
> a good book is not on the list, students are not allowed to
> read it. Students choose books for high point value, rather
> than for their level ofinterest. The reward system sends
> the message that the reason students should read is not to
> enjoy reading but to earn points.
> Students are taught to read for the wrong reasons.
> Chenowith (2001) found that although students did a
> significant amount of reading in the program, their reading
> dropped lower than nonparticipants within one month of
> exiting AR.Without the points, their motivation
> significantly decreased. Pavonetti, Brimmer, and
> Cipielewski (2002/2003) found that once students left AR
> they read on average ten hours a week less than
> nonparticipants. The program had short-term success but
> actually set young readers back in the long run."
>
>
>
>

Posts on this thread, including this one