Integrating Technology

Into Literacy Instruction:

The Accelerated Reader
Program
Kimberly Smith
RDG 5350
July 23, 2015

Do programs such as Accelerated

Reader Meet the Following Goals?

Aid Teachers by reducing

workload?
Identify Student Reading Level?
Provide Assessments of Reading
Skills?
Encourage Reading?

What is Accelerated Reader

(AR)?
Selected books are leveled by Renaissance Learning
and the corresponding comprehension tests are
created for each book
Students take the STAR test (if their school has
purchased the program) to determine their reading
level
Students then read a book from their identified level,
a higher level, or a lower level
After reading, they take the corresponding computer
test to earn points
New forms of AR available online and as Applications

Pros:
Allows students to
determine if a book is in
their reading range
Teachers can keep track of
students reading
Tests basic comprehension
Extrinsic Motivator Point
system built into the
program is often utilized
to give students
opportunities to earn
rewards from their
teacher/school

Cons:

Very expensive for the

school must buy
books from AR list,
corresponding tests,
and have computers
to run the programs
New books take time
to receive their level
and tests
Students may restrict
themselves to AR
texts only because
other books wont
earn points

How do we determine the

success of Accelerated Reader?
By Asking Three Questions:
1. What are the effects on reading
scores?
2. What are the effects on students
reading attitude that used
Accelerated Reader?
3. How is Accelerated Reader being
used in the classroom?

Effects on Reading Scores

Three Studies Concentrated on Reading Scores:
1. Melton (2004), followed two groups of fifth graders, one
that used AR and one that did not
Used a pre-test, post-test format using the Terra Nova
standardized reading achievement test
Results:
There was no significant increase in scores for those
using AR when compared to the other group.
Those who did NOT use AR showed a significant
increase in reading achievement growth when
compared to students who had participated in the
Accelerated Reader program for a year (Melton, 2004,
p.23).

2. Cuddeback (2002), a study by a Summer

school teacher of AR use with her Emergent
Readers in her class
12 students that did not pass the reading
benchmark for promotion from first grade
to second grade
Students attended 4 days a week for 4
hours a day
Students used AR for 30 to 40 minutes a
day except the 4th day each week, on the
4th day they wrote about their favorite AR
book that week
All students received direct instruction and
scaffolding
First two weeks read at their level only
Second two weeks had their choice to read

Assessment:
Took a survey of attitudes at the end of the
4 weeks
Used questions during writing to determine
literal comprehension of reading
Higher level comprehension came from 2 of
the 4 questions regarding story grammar
elements
Results:
100% put AR as their top 2 choices of
Favorite Summer School Activity
First two week all but two maintained or
improved their reading levels
Second two weeks five decreased but still
were in an ok range according to their IRIs
(Informal Reading Inventories)

3. McGlinn (2002), This study followed 10 ESL students in

fourth and fifth grades in a rural school in Western North
Carolina
Teacher conferences 3 times a week, first conference
teachers determined their reading level
Read 45-90 minutes a day with self selected books
Class chart for rewards
Assessments:
Monthly tests
Anecdotal Records
STAR test at the end to determine final reading level
Results:
5 out of 10 showed increase in average level, other 5
did not gain any levels or showed a decrease in
accuracy with higher levels
4 out of 10 didnt show progress researcher
reported this was due to learning disabilities, lack of
English oral proficiency and attention to guidance
Final student wasnt able to take the test due to a

AR Effects on Reading
Attitude
The AR program claims it Build(s) a
lifelong love of reading and learning
(Renaissance Learning, Inc., 2012, p.
iv).
Three studies followed how students felt
about reading after using AR:
1. McGlinn (2002), anecdotal records
showed an increase in reading habits
and attitudes towards reading

2. Putman (2005, p.24), asked Did students who accumulated

differing amounts of AR points demonstrate different levels of selfefficacy? Did a relationship exist between the number of points
accumulated and students value of reading?
38 Fourth grade students from 5 classes
Over 14 weeks
School utilized an Incentive System based on reading points,
all reading related prizes
Assessment:
Pre-test, Post-test survey
Reading Survey part of Motivation to Read Profile (MRP) which
determines self-concept concerning reading and the
individuals value of reading
Results:
No significant changes in value of reading
Highest scores had highest self-efficacy
Medium group showed a decrease in self-efficacy
Lowest scores had a slight decrease in self-efficacy
So having the points program may have shown some increase for
those that were already highly motivated but had a negative
impact on those who did not perform well on the AR tests.

3. Pavonetti (2002), 7th Graders from 3 districts

Given the Title Recognition Test to determine
familiarity with books
Results:
No differences between those who used AR in
Elementary School or didnt
Reading levels computed for each district
showed no differences between use of AR or
not
Individual district scores had mixed results:
Exurban no statistical difference but trend
was in favor of no AR program usage
District 2 showed significant scores in
favor of NO AR usage
District 3 had AR in their Middle Schools
and scores favored schools that used it in
Elementary School

AR in the Classroom
So what does AR use look like in the
classroom?
One pilot study surveyed Teacher usage of the AR
program. (Groce, 2005)
67 Teachers responded from 2 districts
Looking at four areas:
1. Assessment
2. Aesthetics and text
interaction
3. Motivation
4. Book selection.

Results:
1% used the Comprehension tests always, and
half frequently to mostly
The tests only test for a lower level of
comprehension and leaves out higher order
comprehension
70% used project-related activities some of
the time or more
So the tests were not the only means of
showing comprehension that teachers
utilized
Over half the teachers and schools recognized
AR points in some way
The use of points as a motivator as shown
earlier may work against student
motivation
50% encourage reading AR books all of the

Possible Flaws in These

Studies:

Many of these studies were with small groups

Many did not have a control group
Needed longer periods to follow the groups
Group statistics was not sufficient (i.e. did the
teachers utilize the AR programs? For Teacher
survey what grades did they teach?)
Were AR points part of student grades?
Scaffolding from the teachers may have
skewed results

Conclusion
Accelerated Reader is a tool that needs
to be taught to be used properly.
Performance Points may not aid in
student perceptions of reading. (It may
actually harm some students.)
Utilizing just the program is not
sufficient.
It is only as good as the teacher.

Further Questions
AR has been updated and now includes math
versions and online applications, how has this
affected the effectiveness of the program?
Is there a way for teachers to create their own
questions for students to answer about each book?
How useful are the results of tests for teachers?
How do students do in regards to other online tests
if they are already familiar with taking AR tests?
Do adults that utilized the AR program find
themselves reading more than others in their
generation?

References
Cuddeback, M. J., & Ceprano, M. A. (2002). The Use of Accelerated Reader with Emergent
Readers. Reading Improvement, 39(2), 89-96.
Groce, R. D., & Groce, E. C. (2005). Deconstructing the Accelerated Reader Program.
Reading Horizons, 46(1), 17-30.
McGlinn, J. M., & Parrish, A. (2002). Accelerating ESL Students' Reading Progress With
Accelerated Reader. Reading Horizons, 42(3), 175-89.
Melton, C.M. SmothMelton, C. M., Smothers, B. C., Anderson, E., Fulton, R., Replogle, W. H.,
& Thomas, L. (2004). A Study of the Effects of the Accelerated Reader Program on Fifth
Grade Students Reading Achievement Growth. Reading Improvement. 41 (1). 18.
Pavonetti, L. M., Brimmer, K. M., & Cipielewski, J. F. (2003). 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),
300-11.
Putman, S. M. (2005). Computer-Based Reading Technology in the Classroom: The Affective
Influence of Performance Contingent Point Accumulation on 4th Grade Students.
Reading Research And Instruction, 45(1), 19-38.
Renaissance Learning, Inc. (2012). NGA Center-CCSSO Standards Alignment: 2010
Common Core State Standards, Kindergarten English Language Arts & Literacy in
History/Social Studies through Grades 11-12 English Language Arts. Retrieved from http
://doc.renlearn.com/KMNet/R00551940193D5E0.pdf