Article Review

Ivey, G. and Broaddus, K. (2001). Just plain reading: a survey of what makes
students want to read in middle school classrooms. Reading Research
Quarterly. 36(4), 350-377.
I chose to do my article review on Ivey and Broadduss study of middle
school reading because it is incredibly relevant to my life right now. Ive
noticed that I have kids in my classes that love reading and some that
absolutely abhor it. I was interested in reading this article in the hopes that it
would give me ideas on how to get my kids interested in reading, or at least
help me understand why some kids seem to have such an aversion to it. Ivey
and Broaddus seemed to be searching for the same answers I was. In an
attempt to have students shed light on some of the features of middle
school reading instruction that foster their engagement with reading, Ivey &
Broaddus (2001, p. 353) posed the following research questions: What
counts most for students in middle school reading instruction? How does that
compare with what is happening in middle school classrooms? (p. 350)
Having noticed the reluctance of middle school students to engage in
reading, Ivey and Broaddus took the position that the tensions between
middle school students and school reading can be mainly attributed to the
mismatch between what students need and the instruction they likely
receive rather than to fixed characteristics that define students (p. 353). In
other words, the problem was not necessarily that the students were being
hostile to reading in general, but that the students reading interests varied
greatly from the options (or lack thereof) they were presented with in the

classroom. Common Core and teacher-directed reading limits the opportunity

for students to choose reading material that fits them. One of the essential
elements of 21st century teaching is relevance; the material must have
relevance for the student in order to foster engagement.
Rather than drawing on particular educational theories, Ivey and
Broaddus refer to three overarching themes of middle school reading
instruction. The first was that middle schools rarely take into consideration
the developmental and personal differences between students (p. 353). The
second was evidence of a mismatch between what students want to learn
and the content requirements of schools (p. 353). Finally, they referred to
the fact that young adolescents may not be able to reconcile school reading
and writing with their out-of-school reading and writing (p. 353). All three of
these themes refer back to the big picture of relevance. If the instructional
material the students receive in the classroom has absolutely no bearing
once they leave that classroom, the teacher loses the opportunity for
engagement. In order to gain more insight of this mismatch, Ivey and
Broaddus took the problem directly to those affected most: the students.
The participants in the study were 6th grade students, 1,765 in total,
from 23 different middle schools located in an urban area in the
northeastern United States and a rural/small-city area in the mid-Atlantic (p.
356). The dispersal of students across gender was almost exactly even, with
51% boys and 49% girls, and 44% of the students were from mixed-ability
classrooms. Of these initial 1,765 students, 31 were interviewed personally

to reach an even deeper understanding of the issue. In order to collect their

data, Ivey and Broaddus administered a survey consisting of open-ended
response items and short-answer items in addition to checklist items (p.
356).
Three main areas of interest were addressed by this data: what
students valued most in their reading or language arts classes, what
students said motivated them to read; and how middle school classrooms
measured up (p. 359). A majority of students valued free-reading time and
teacher read-aloud time in the classroom. Students were more motivated to
read when they were given choices: the opportunity to select ones own
reading material is empowering to an adolescent reader. On the topic of
middle school classrooms, many students expressed disappointment with the
amount and appeal of reading material available to them. My own students
have said to me, while standing in front of a 6-foot-tall bookcase (filled with
books), you dont have any good books. When I look at those shelves
myself, I cant even tell them theyre wrong. Most of the books on my
shelves, I dont recognize. The ones I do recognize are old, and even though I
(and likely many teachers) consider them classics still worth reading, they
dont fit our audience.
The survey and interview answers that Ivey and Broaddus received
cemented the presuppositions of a mismatch between student interests and
reading instruction, but it also provided new insight: while teachers usually
look at in-class reading time as an opportunity to improve student reading

skills, the students view it a little differently. In class reading, both in

silent/individual time and teacher read-aloud, students saw a way to make
more sense of the text at hand, since time set aside freed them to
concentrate, comprehend, and reflect without being disturbed or distracted
by some other task (p. 367). What I take from these conclusions is the
following: first, students dont hate readingthey hate being told what they
have to read; and second, students dont just want to be better technical
readers, they want to be better at comprehending what they read. All of this
goes back to that important term relevance. There doesnt have to be
disconnection between middle school students and middle school instruction.
We can make that connection by providing relevant reading materials that
the students have been able to help select and that fit into their lives outside
the classroom. Thats what the Common Core and 21st century teaching are
all about.