Latest AR Research Review

Join Teachers.Net

Chatboards

Recent Groups

Accelerated Reader

MEMBERS

2 Members

+ Join Group

Pinned Posts

ALLAll Teachers

Teachers.Net LIVE CHAT Support group - Tues eve!

Featured Jobs

Full-timeMontessori Teacher

Maple Ridge, British Columbia, Canada

TemporaryTeachers, rural schools

Peace River North School District

Full-timeHead Teacher: 2nd/3rd Grades – Mills College Children’s School

Mills College

Teaching Jobs on Teachers.Net

Featured Job special only $39!

https://teachers.net/jobs

Become a Teachers.Net sponsor!

Accelerated Reader Chatboard

Latest AR Research Review

by Mark Pennington

Nov 7, 2010

According to the United States Department of Education Institute for Educational Sciences (IES What Works Clearinghouse, August 2010), "Accelerated Reader™ was found to have no discernible effects on reading fluency or comprehension for adolescent learners." Here is the link for your review: [link removed]

Comment

(11)

report post

view previous comments

not mark Don't worry, after this post I won't keep bothering you. Mark's post gave information. Sorry you feel it will bring out the AR is EVIL people. I feel knowledge is power, whether it is for or against what you do. You can look at the research, if you have an open mind, and read it. You can then use further knowledge and research to build you case as ...See MoreDon't worry, after this post I won't keep bothering you. Mark's post gave information. Sorry you feel it will bring out the AR is EVIL people. I feel knowledge is power, whether it is for or against what you do. You can look at the research, if you have an open mind, and read it. You can then use further knowledge and research to build you case as to why you disagree with it. Mark did not say you needed to agree, just what the new research stated and where it was posted.

I'm sure he was unaware that he was treading on your toes by sharing information. He was unaware that any information except for positive information backing up whatever the teachers here do is unacceptable. I'm sure he knows now that this isn't a forum that is interested in children, just doing what they are told. If the true interest was in children you would be investigating anything to do with a program you implement.

As for lemmings, you said it yourself, this board is just for those who are mandated to use AR. As I said, lemmings - no discussion as to why you use AR. No one to say, maybe there might be something better or maybe that research didn't do things the way we do, but to continue to be lemmings who refuse to explore and think.

No one said it had to make you change your mind. Actually, it may be an opportunity to build a defense when some tries to use the research. Instead of being ignorant to it, you could have a conversation and look as if you know all aspects of AR and research. But that would require people like Mark, sharing this because obviously you aren't looking for anything other than just doing as you are told.

On 11/07/10, One of the Lemmings wrote: > You can find research to agree with whatever side you want, no matter > the issue. Research is not the issue. > > There are plenty of us who work in schools where were are using the AR > program. Whether we like it or not is a non-issue. That's just how > it is. > > We come here to share ideas on using the program. > > All "research sharing" does is bring out the "AR is EVIL" people to > spar with the "AR is GREAT" people. In the end, all that does is lose > the people who are coming here to use what they are mandated to > do . . . which is use the program.

Nov 7, 2010

report post

A Parent Wow, very nice post !! If the teachers would open their eyes and ears and listen to what some parents (those that take the time to learn about what their child is doing at school as well as learning about the programs that are used)have to say about AR and how it is run in SOME schools, maybe some children could benefit from improving the process. ...See MoreWow, very nice post !! If the teachers would open their eyes and ears and listen to what some parents (those that take the time to learn about what their child is doing at school as well as learning about the programs that are used)have to say about AR and how it is run in SOME schools, maybe some children could benefit from improving the process. It seems like the "teachers" on here think that only they have a right to this board and that their knowledge is the supreme authority on any given subject. It may be true that their school is mandated to do things a certain way, but that does not mean one should keep themselves unarmed to change or improvement.

On 11/07/10, not mark wrote: > Don't worry, after this post I won't keep bothering you. > Mark's post gave information. Sorry you feel it will bring out the AR is > EVIL people. I feel knowledge is power, whether it is for or against > what you do. You can look at the research, if you have an open mind, and > read it. You can then use further knowledge and research to build you > case as to why you disagree with it. Mark did not say you needed to > agree, just what the new research stated and where it was posted. > > I'm sure he was unaware that he was treading on your toes by sharing > information. He was unaware that any information except for positive > information backing up whatever the teachers here do is unacceptable. I'm > sure he knows now that this isn't a forum that is interested in children, > just doing what they are told. If the true interest was in children you > would be investigating anything to do with a program you implement. > > As for lemmings, you said it yourself, this board is just for those who > are mandated to use AR. As I said, lemmings - no discussion as to why > you use AR. No one to say, maybe there might be something better or > maybe that research didn't do things the way we do, but to continue to be > lemmings who refuse to explore and think. > > No one said it had to make you change your mind. Actually, it may be an > opportunity to build a defense when some tries to use the research. > Instead of being ignorant to it, you could have a conversation and look > as if you know all aspects of AR and research. But that would require > people like Mark, sharing this because obviously you aren't looking for > anything other than just doing as you are told. > > > On 11/07/10, One of the Lemmings wrote: >> You can find research to agree with whatever side you want, no matter >> the issue. Research is not the issue. >> >> There are plenty of us who work in schools where were are using the AR >> program. Whether we like it or not is a non-issue. That's just how >> it is. >> >> We come here to share ideas on using the program. >> >> All "research sharing" does is bring out the "AR is EVIL" people to >> spar with the "AR is GREAT" people. In the end, all that does is lose >> the people who are coming here to use what they are mandated to >> do . . . which is use the program.

Nov 8, 2010

report post

*roll eyes* Well, it seems like teachers SHOULD have a right to be on a TEACHERS board to discuss TEACHER things without PARENTS butting in and telling us how to do our jobs.

On 11/08/10, A Parent wrote: > It seems like the "teachers" on here think that only they have a right to this board and that their knowledge is the supreme authority on any g...See More

Nov 9, 2010

report post

if you really cared If you really cared about having just teachers post you would go to a board that required registration. On 11/09/10, *roll eyes* wrote: > Well, it seems like teachers SHOULD have a right to be on > a TEACHERS board to discuss TEACHER things without PARENTS > butting in and telling us how to do our jobs. > > On 11/08/10, A Parent wrot...See More

Nov 12, 2010

report post

A Parent It seems that if TEACHERS are truely interested in TEACHING and if it's all about the kids, then why shouldn't they LISTEN to the Parents?

Then again , they don't listen to renlearn's recommendations on how to run the AR program, so why would the teachers listen to the parents?

On 11/09/10, *roll eyes* wrote: > Well, it seems ...See More

Nov 12, 2010

report post