Reading in secondary school

[Campaspe]

Just a bit of a question really. I was chatting to my niece, who's in Year 9, about reading. She really hates books and reading, and we were talking about this in general, and what might help her to like reading more. DN told me that in her school, she is not allowed to choose her own books, but has to select from a range called "accelerated readers". If any child in her class deviate from this - perhaps because they have come across a book they really want to read - they are not allowed to read it in school, and have to select one from this accelerated books range. After reading each of these books, they have to complete some sort of quiz before they can get another one.

Now, it could have been the way DN was describing it, but this seems like a surefire way to kill off any nascent interest in reading in anyone, let alone a teenager who has already decided she hates books. Surely teachers are desperate to fire up enthusiasm for reading, and take as a starting point their pupils' interests and desires, then lead them gently onto different, and maybe more challenging fare (in personal reading, at least)? Surely, this isn't how reading is promoted in secondary education these days? Set texts and tests on them will always exist, and I understand that, but my goodness, if children can't be free readers by year 7, something is going badly wrong with English teaching.

Tell me it ain't so!

Doesn't happen at DD's secondary school. She is in Y7.

They have a set text for English which they read as a class - sometimes silently in clas, sometimes as homework and sometimes out loud in turn in class.

They also have a reading session once a fortnight but they chose their own books for this - they cn take them in from home, take in their Kindles or e-readers or chose from the school library.

Doesn't happen at dh's school. They have set texts and free reading can be any book they like.

DD1 has books pressed upon her by the school librarians. Whose recommendations she adores far more than mine

Dd can choose any book from the library or bing her own in -they have a scheduled reading lesson once a week

If she really hates books and reading, might she be on a supplementary reading programme? I think it sounds fine, if she hates the book then she can read another one at home.

Pleased to hear it. Maybe DN has got the wrong end of the stick. What are "accelerated readers" anyway? Also, DN tells me that no pupils are allowed to use their Kindles in school. Again, unless it's for reasons of security, this strikes me as a bit petty. She also tells me - and again, it's only the word of a 13 year old here - that every school day begins with everyone doing 15 minutes of reading. Sounds great - but she tells me the teachers don't bother to enforce, and allow quiet chatting instead.

If all this is the case, it's a shame for DN. My DD is a long way off secondary, but I am really hoping she will be encouraged to read widely, freely, and will encounter teachers who are passionate to the point of eccentricity about books (all of which was my experience in a very ordinary comp.). It makes me feel quite sad to think that maybe teachers are so worn down, or teenagers so disaffected, that this is not routinely the case. Ah well, rant over.

Why don't you google it and find out what AR really is?

Kids have a test which ascertains their reading ability. They are then given an upper and lower AR book level and pick a book within these levels. There are LOTS of books to choose from. Then they are tested to see if they actually understood the book, nuances, vocabulary etc.

It is a scheme to develop reading skills, not to make all kids avid readers. At secondary there will be loads of kids who are poor readers - encouraging them to read Tolkein isn't going to improve their reading skills as they just won't get most of the book. Conversely getting strong readers to read Jacqueline Wilson isn't going to develop their reading either.

Their reading ability should be tested once or twice a year, and should improve so they can begin to access harder books as they get better.

There shouldn't be any reason why kids can't read other stuff as well although reading outside their level won't be beneficial in terms of reading skills - which have a very strong correlation with academic achievement.

My year 7 ds uses accelerated reading, I think it's good.

No kindles sounds fine, they'd end up broken or possibly stolen. Plus you'd get some kid who'd downloaded 50 shades passing it round.....

Thanks Titchy, that's interesting to know. I did have a google, and got directed to a site called Renaissance learning. It was a bit dry, but I had a look through. Couldn't see a list of books used. Do they just level any book, or are the books specially written as part of a scheme?

Does it work? Do most children like it? Do all schools use it?

I can see it's a structured way of getting children reading, but I do wonder if it is effective in encouraging enthusiasm for books and, I dunno, I can't help but feel that choosing books should be based on a bit more than your reading level IYSWIM.

Cor, it's a sure-fire way to make you hate books, innit.

And you're dead right about passing round 50 Shades on the Kindle...but didn't earlier generations do the same with Forever, Shirley Conran, Harold Robbins etc (I am dating myself a bit here). I think reading naughty things is one of the joys of being a teenager after all!

The range of books covered by AR is huge. They use a computer program to "level" books, everything from diary of a wimpy kid to Great Expectations. I'm very surprised not convinced she can't find anything.

Crikey, you can't compare 50 shades with Forever!!

Most books have been given a level yes. The range kids are given covers several years of ability - e.g. ds' range is 5.6 - 13.5 (very roughly equating to books with a reading age between year 5 and year 13 - so quite a large selection of books to choose from!)

Don't forget its purpose is to develop reading skills, not to develop a love of reading, that would be a happy secondary outcome if it happens.

Google AR book finder - takes you to a site where you can put in a book and gives you the level.

DD's school has a system that sounds similar. They use it for the kids who come up to the school with a L3 or below in reading (I think).

It works as follows (as far as I understand it):
There are a vast range of (real) books which are suitable in plot and content for secondary school kids but are simpler in language suitable for less able readers. These books are banded (a bit like in infant school), so they get a book at their 'correct' reading level.
When they have read a book there is an online quiz to check they have understood it correctly. They get points for every book they read (have to get above 80% on the quiz), and bonus points for getting 100%.
When they have scored a certain total at one level, they move up to the next.
There are prizes and celebrations for reaching targets.

I understand that it works very well at getting the less keen / able students better at reading as it provides them with interesting books at an appropriate level for them.

Also good for strong readers - stops them becoming complacent (and then finding their reading level has dropped), just reading easy vampire stuff and encourages them to try Dickens and Hardy for example.

But if you're a good reader, why not luxuriate in the odd vampire? The idea that Dickens or Hardy should be tackled because they are Good For You is wrong on so many levels. I still think that reading isn't about levels. It's about the primal, incredible power and pleasure of reading and being able to immerse yourself in literature.

Hardy is in fact rather terrific, IMO. Even Dickens has his moments of terrific-ness though they tend to coexist with the less terrific (most acutely in Bleak House). Jane Austen, by all means. Charlotte Bronte, bring it on. But there's more to literature than the 19th century canon (and I speak as someone who specialised in 19th century literature back in the days when I had academic pretensions).

If I'd had to spend my teenage years being accelerated and assessed the joy of books would have withered and died. And I quite probably wouldn't have gone on to do an English degree.

Nothing wrong with the odd vampire if that's your cup of tea, but reading nowt else means your reading skills will get worse, and this isn't generally a good thing when it comes to exams.

There is such a huge range of books it isn't possible you'd not be able to find something you like!

And to labour the point again, it's not a scheme to develop reading for pleasure!

I can't see the point of a scheme which gives such a huge range of levels though - such as the read anthing suitable for Y5-Y13 for example just seems ridiculous to me. I can imagine a 2 year range as being useful. but 8 years???

Book finder is here:

www.arbookfind.co.uk/default.aspx

Agree with titchy - it's there to improve reading skills not to foster a love of reading. I know on mumsnet it's anathema to admit that some children will never have an innate love of reading - but they do still need to learn reading skills.

For example my ds has read both all quiet on the western front and a Meg Cabot book on the scheme.

Using that link, I typed in the three books that my dcs (8,11,14) are reading and they were all there. Most books seem to be on it.

I'd be amazed if she really couldn't find anything that she likes.