Dear Google, You Should Have Talked to Me First

This was written by Jen Marten who has been a teacher for 25 years. She is a National Board Certified Teacher, and is currently working on her PhD in Curriculum and Instruction. She blogs here and tweets here. This post was originally found here.

by Jen Marten

Dear Google,

I wish you’d talked to teachers like me before you made that $40 million investment in Renaissance Learning.

I’ve seen the damage Accelerated Reader can do.

I witnessed it for the first time when I tutored a struggling 5th grader…eighteen years ago.

He hated to read.

He hated being locked into a level.

He hated the points associated with the books.

But more importantly, he was humiliated when he didn’t earn enough points to join in the monthly party or get to ‘buy’ things with those points at a school store full of junky prizes.

I’ve seen kids run their fingers along the binding of a book, a book they REALLY wanted read, but then hear them say, “But it’s not an AR book,” or “It’s not my level.”

I’ve watched them scramble to read the backs of books or beg a friend for answers so they can get enough points for the grading period.

And I watched it slowly start to unravel S’s love of reading. It’s why I gave her permission to practice a little civil disobedience and Stop Reading for Points.

You see, Google, I’m a reader, and one of the things I’ve loved about teaching is connecting kids with books.

Books that spark their interest.

Books that make them think.

Books that pull on emotions they didn’t know they had.

Books that teach them empathy.

Books that make them laugh and cry.

Books that make them angry at the injustice.

Books that they come back and ask to borrow…five and six years after they leave my class.

Do you know what Accelerated Reader and programs like it are doing to readers these days?

I’ve heard of teachers being reprimanded for not leveling all their classroom books.

I know of school libraries where children have to show the librarian a card with their reading level on it before they can check out books.

I know of kids excited about books being told, “No! That’s not at your level. You can’t check it out. You can’t read it.”

I know of kids who struggle to read in the first place, having to spend an afternoon reading while their classmates who read get a pizza party or a movie or some other special prize.

I know of kids who never pick up a book unless it’s required because the joy of reading has been sucked out of them by leveled reading programs.

I’ve read about teachers who see what I see. Those who lament the Lex-Aisle.

Those who pull from their own memories of AR and how it ruined a great book.

And parents who see their children afraid to read.

Imagine, Google, if you limited your employees the way Accelerated Reader limits our students. How would that impact the creativity of your 20% time?

Oh, I read the Ed Week article that called this investment innovative, but there is NOTHING innovative about Accelerated Reader and their levels and basic comprehension quizzes.

It’s a sad commentary on the state of education in the U.S. when a move like this is praised.

To say I’m disappointed that Google views education through such a narrow lens is an understatement. For a company that has been built on innovation to invest millions into a program that levels books, awards points for low-level knowledge and comprehension, and creates bad data is a travesty.

And you call this personalized learning? What’s personalized about letting a computer system match kids with books?

You’re missing the point about what reading instruction should be, and you are helping to systematically destroy the joy in books.

If you had taken the time to talk to teachers like me, here’s some of the things we would’ve suggested you spend that $40 million on.
Books, lots and lots of books. Ones that aren’t leveled.
Children’s librarians in public libraries across the country.
Picture books, novels, non-fiction, series (many a reluctant reader has been hooked by a series like Captain Underpants or Goosebumps).
Full-time librarians in schools, especially those in high poverty areas where they seem to always get cut.
Um, books. Books kids can take home to keep because we know having books in the home is one of the best ways to increase literacy. (bit.ly/1fGubAj)
Free Little Libraries - take a book, return a book, gather in your neighborhood
More books! So many great authors and genres out there!
e-readers for schools and public libraries to use and loan out.
A Google library of free e-books.
Did I mention books?

I could go on, but I think you get the idea.

If you need a little more research, check out this list I’ve compiled about the downside of reading for rewards.

You really should’ve talked to me first. I could’ve saved you $40 million.

Regifted Reading

This was written by Stephen Krashen who is professor emeritus at the University of Southern California. This article first appeared here. Stephen Krashen's website is here, he blogs here and he tweets here.

by Stephen Krashen

here is overwhelming evidence that those who live in poverty have little access to books at home, in schools, and in public and school libraries, and that the lack of access to books impacts literacy development and also results in less knowledge of the world. Research, in fact, strongly suggests that lack of access to books is the major reason for the literacy “achievement gap,” the difference in reading ability between children coming from higher- and lower-income families.

Someday, e-books might be available at a reasonable cost for everybody. But until this happens, I would like to suggest one way we can help close the access-to-books gap. It requires no special funding from the government or the Gates Foundation, no paperwork, and no sacrifice. In fact, we can do it in a way that benefits everybody.

Most middle-class people have extra books in their homes, books they would like to give away. We often do this by donating to Goodwill-type organizations, but there is a problem: there is no way we can ensure that the books get to those who really need or want them.

An organization called BookMooch, founded by John Buckman, has solved this problem. Bookmooch (BookMooch.com) is a book swap club. You list the books you want to give away. Another BookMooch member can claim one of these books. You then send the book to the person and pay the postage (media mail). When you do this, you get one point. You can then use this point to claim somebody else’s book, and they pay the postage. You can thus get books you want for only the cost of postage. (You get more points for mailing to another country and pay more points when ordering books from another country.) There is no cost to join or use BookMooch.

And now the interesting part: Bookmooch lists charities you can donate your points to if you have some left over. Those of us BookMooch users who have built up huge book collections always have a surplus of points. Bookmooch supplies a list of “worthy causes”: they include school libraries, classroom libraries, public libraries, and prison libraries.

Bookmooch members exchange about 2,000 books a day and donate about 2% of their points to charities, about 10,000 books a year. As of 2012, BookMooch had about 25,000 active members. If BookMooch had 2.5 million active members, this ­­would mean that the charities would get about a million books a year, assuming that 2% of members’ points are donated. If BookMooch members get a little more generous and donate even a mere four points a year, with a million members this would mean ten million books given to libraries and therefore available to those who really need them but cannot get them elsewhere.

The crucial fact is that the BookMooch charity libraries can order precisely the books they want: they can select ANY of the half-million books listed on BookMooch.

There are about 50 million people living at or under the poverty line right now, 50 million people who can’t afford books and who are dependent on libraries. An extra million books a year will not completely close the access-to-books gap, but it will be a big help, especially because they will be the books these libraries need for their members.

And now the advantage to you: you get to clean up your home library. As your children and grandchildren get older, you can give away all those wonderful children’s books to libraries so that children in poverty can enjoy them just as much as the children in your family did. You can give away that extra copy of that Jane Austin novel that has been on your shelf for ten years, or that popular romance or spy novel that you know you don’t want to reread.

You also will have the satisfaction of knowing that your book will go to somebody who wants that particular book and that you have made a donation to a real charity.

Finally, as a BookMooch member, you will have access to many books you might want or need at very, very low cost.

PS: I got on BookMooch because I read light fiction in other languages, mostly in German and French. Other bookswap groups I looked at are not international. Bookmooch keeps me well supplied. This is particularly important for foreign language teachers who are not native speakers of the languages they teach — light fiction is an easy, pleasant way not only to keep their competence but actually improve when native speakers are not around (and even when they are).

Here's what learning how to read looks like

Free voluntary reading. We learn to read by reading. Self-selected reading for pleasure (0:53) is a major factor in literacy development. No book reports. No chapter quizzes. No vocabulary lists. The best teachers find their students interests and then they help their students find books that match those interests. Did you see the look on that old man's face (0:18) when he looked up at his son's poster in the book store's window? That's the look teachers look for. Where there is interest, achievement follows. The best teachers look for that look on their students' faces and then artfully guide them to books that they might never have found on their own.

Phonics for a purpose. All wars are ultimately destructive and the war between phonics and whole language is no exception. A child who is good at phonics is good at decoding symbols and their sounds. In my daughter's grade 1 class, I remember when a little girl announced to the class that the T-H brothers are bad boys because they make you stick out your tongue like this, and then she showed us. It's true that you cannot read an alphabetic language without using and learning phonics, but reading is more than decoding. Phonics is a means to an end -- the end being reading. Did you notice that while the old man was learning the alphabet (0:20) that he simultaneously began to use the alphabet in a game of scrabble (0:30) with his peers, played a practical joke (1:01) and hit on his wife (1:12)? Stephen Krashen reminds us: "I am not saying, 'If it feels good, it’s good for you', but if we’re doing it right, it should feel good. If we’re doing literacy and language development right, teachers and students should be having a pretty good time. If there's pain, something's really wrong." Krashen reminds us that "There is a difference between extensive systematic phonics (teaching all rules to all children in a strict order) and basic phonics, teaching the rules that are straightforward and that actually help make texts more comprehensible." For more on this check out Stephen Krashen's website.

Belonging to a literacy club. When children aspire to be members of the literacy club, we can learn to read and write. The best way to inspire children to join the literacy club is for them to see the people they think the most of in their life reading and writing. The old man wants to join the literacy club because his son is a member -- their relationship inspires an interest. When teachers and parents allow reading and writing to needlessly sour our relationships with students, we convince children that they are not members of the literacy club. Children will reject us before we can reject them which leads them to say "I'm not a member of the literacy club, but that's okay, I wouldn't want to be a member anyways".

Just-in-time feedback. Students should experience their successes and failures not as reward and punishment but as information. Students need their teachers and parents to be less like referees and more like coaches. They don't need to be ranked and sorted -- they need feedback that will help them learn. What if we mostly taught grammar and spelling to children while they are editing and revising their own writing? Assessment is not a spreadsheet -- it's a conversation that needs to happen between the student and the teacher. The old man gets feedback (0:33, 0:35, 0:40, 0:46) he needs from his teachers and his peers so that he can learn to read. No testsandgrades required.

Reading to, for and with children. In his wonderful book The Book of Learning and Forgetting, Frank Smith writes: "Reading to children usually goes through three clear stages... First you are reading for the child, who is perhaps sitting in front of you, looking at your mouth as the words come out. Then the child is beside you, sitting in your lap or looking over your shoulder, looking at the book, not at you. You're no longer reading to or for the child but reading with the child. And finally comes that most frustrating moment in many parents' lives when they haven't got to the end of the page and the child turns it over. As British educator Margaret Meek would say, children at that point are no longer relying on a nearby adult for reading; they have trusted themselves to authors. And as Margaret Meek has also commented, it is a tragedy when many "reading teachers" stand between children and the authors who will teach them to read."

Poverty Matters. We shouldn't need research to tell us that poverty places children at a disadvantage in the classroom but if you were unsure, that is exactly what the research confirms. We know that children living in poverty have fewer books at home. They have fewer libraries and bookstores in their communities and their schools often have inferior libraries. The old man had to make a number of visits to the library (0:35, 0:42, 0:57 and 1:03)  and purchases at bookstores (0:05 and 1:08). Literacy requires affluence and opportunity and poor children get less of both.

These are your kids on books

Rewarding Reading, Ruining Readers

I've received a number of comments and emails in response to my post where I detailed how an incentive reading plan is undermining my daughter's motivation to read for its own sake.

Here are a couple points that I would like to address:

1. Unfortunately there will be a significant number of homes where there is no parent support or modelling for a love of reading, and even more unfortunate, no shared reading times either. In these circumstances "Book Bucks" and other extrinsic rewards might be the only chance the teacher has to foster a very young child to start reading.

Firstly, why do so many assume that kids with little parent/home support need extrinsic rewards to be motivated to learn? Regardless of the quality or quantity of parental involvement, our long-term goal for all children should remain a love for books not rewards. Not only does it make little sense to distract children who already have a love for books with rewards -- but it might make even less sense to entice reluctant readers to read by telling them reading is something one would not want to do unless bribed (or threatened). If we want to inspire children to have a love for reading, shouldn't our schools focus on a culture of reading rather than a culture of rewards?

2. Some parents and teachers can't get children to read without some kind of incentive program.

That some children will only read when bribed or threatened is as unfortunate as it is predictable, but I don't see this as an argument for more rewards and punishments -- rather, I see this as an indictment of such programs. If children become acclimated to reading only when extrinsically induced, should we really be surprised that they refuse to read when the rewards and punishments are removed? In fact, this might be one of the best arguments against trying to entice reluctant readers with rewards and then weaning them off -- which is really nothing more than the ol' bait and switch.

3. How will it affect your child if you opt them out of the school's rewards program?

When schools employ reward systems, they put progressive parents in a difficult spot. Because the only way anyone can experience the absence of a reward is as a punishment, it is very likely that when parents opt their children out, their children will experience this as a punishment. This doesn't make opting out impossible, but it certainly makes doing the right thing challenging for parents and their children.

4. If parents express their concerns for incentive programs, how will that affect their relationship with the teacher?

The only way to guarantee not to rupture the parent-teacher relationship is to remain silent -- that is to say, go along to get along. But then what kind of relationship is built on submissive silence? It is likely that the most progressive teachers will see an informed parent who plays an active role in their child's education as an ally; and yet, it's very likely that the most unimpressive teachers will see these parents as nothing more than problems to be dismissed.

If you want to read about how a school nurtures a culture of reading around reading (not rewards), check out principal Chris Wejr's school in his post Creating the Conditions: A Love of Reading.

I would also suggest you read Alfie Kohn's How to Create Non-Readers: Reflections on Motivation, Learning and Sharing Power.

"Daddy, I want a book buck!"

Most nights before bed, Kayley and I read together. Because she's 5, I typically do the majority of the reading to her; however, she's learning to read by looking at the pictures and watching and listening to me read. She's also starting to identify a couple words like her name. And even more importantly, Kayley already loves to read.

When I ask her if she wants to read with me, she almost always says, "yes", and when I ask her why she wants to read with me, she almost always says "because its fun!"

From the beginning, we've worked really hard to inspire a love for reading with Kayley by stocking our house full of books, modelling reading for our own enjoyment and reading to and with her almost every day, especially before bed.

But something changed.

Last night I asked, "Kayley do you want to read before bed time?"

She said, "Yes," and added, "I want a book buck."

I asked, "What's a book buck?"

She said, "If I read 5 books, I get 5 book bucks at school."

I asked, "Why do you want book bucks?"

"Because I get toys."

I decided to let this go for the moment, so we could read the book she brought from school. While I read, I could tell that she really enjoyed it. She got excited during the exciting parts and nervous during the nervous parts. We both smiled and laughed while we made our way through the book.

When we were done, I asked, "Did you like that book?"

"Yes!"

"Why did you like it?"

"Because I'm going to get a book buck! Did you like it, daddy?"

"Yes."

"Why did you like it, dad?"

"I liked it because it was fun and we spent time together reading."

"Dad, I'm going to get a book buck, and I'll get one for you, too."

She went to bed.

I didn't.

Instead, I spent the rest of the evening writing this and thinking. Here's what I thought about:

• Before Kayley went to school she said she read because she liked to read with me and it was fun, but now she says she likes to read because she wants book bucks. I'm not okay that book bucks and toys are competing for my daughter's motivation for reading with me.

• There are two kinds of motivation: intrinsic and extrinsic; and these two kinds of motivation tend to be inversely related. Grow someone's extrinsic motivation and watch their intrinsic motivation wither away and vice versa.

• Some claim that incentive programs can help get kids interested in reading, but even if that we're true, Kayley is already interested in reading and there is evidence that the book bucks are actually having a negative effect.

• Motivation matters. There is a big difference between wanting to read a book because the characters are cool and you can't wait to turn the page versus wanting to read a book because you can't wait to get your hands on a reward or avoid a punishment.
• We have worked really hard to inspire a love for reading with Kayley. We have the best of intentions for her.

• The school really wants to encourage parents to play an active role in helping their children read so they use incentive programs like "book bucks". They have the best of intentions for students.

• However, despite our mutual best intentions, I think it's pretty clear that there's a problem here. Does Kayley still love to read with me. Yes. Is her love for reading instantly destroyed. Of course not. However, reading for its own sake has been something that we've worked on for 5 years but now she's distracted by book bucks and toys. Is this good for Kayley?

• If the school's incentive plan undermines a child's intrinsic desire to go on reading for the sake of reading, what should a parent do?

What would you do?

My brother reads but he doesn't think he is a reader

If you were to ask my brother Jeff if he reads, he would tell you that he doesn't.

But this is a lie. However, it's not my brother that is lying -- it's school that has lied to him.

School has beaten my brother down into believing that reading means novels. My brother hated school and he hates novels. But he voraciously reads online about politics. My brother is a reader, but school's narrow definition of reading has convinced him that he is not.

How is this a good thing?

We spend far too much time narrowing our definition for what children can read when really it doesn't matter what kids read, just so long as they read.

Books I am reading

Here are the books Amazon just shipped me. It feels like Christmas.

The Truth About Dibels

The Myths of Standardized Tests

The Students Are Watching

Why School?

The Myth of the Normal Curve