Accelerated Reader #2

Cuddeback, M.; Ceprano, M. (2002). The use of Accelerated Reader with emergent
readers. Reading Improvement, 39, 99-96.

The purpose of this study (Cuddleback & Ceprano, 2002) was to ascertain if Accelerated Reader (AR) helps the reading development of young emergent readers’ comprehension. The subjects who received the AR treatment were 12 of 36 students from a rural high-need school. These students, after completing first grade, had not met the district’s benchmark for promotion. The students receiving the AR treatment were randomly assigned to one of three different summer school classes. The summer school program ran for a four-week period, with the children attending four days a week for 4 hours a day. The 12 students received the AR treatment for periods of 30-40 minutes a day the first three days in the week, and the last day of the week the children wrote about their favorite AR book. The students were expected to read books within their reading zone (level 1.0-1.9 during the first two weeks, levels up to 2.9 during the second four weeks), and to take an AR test daily. A motivational bulletin board in the classroom encouraged students to read and accumulate points, and prizes were given to students each week based on the number of points they had earned. To help determine specific benefits of AR on attitudes, the children took a short survey with a multiple choice format at the end of the four week period. Ten of the twelve children maintained or improved their comprehension. The class mean increased by approximately 2% in reading comprehension. The survey results indicated that using AR in summer school helped them become better readers. The authors concluded that AR contributed to children’s reading comprehension improvement when used in conjunction with other teaching procedures, and that it can be a motivating program.

Limitations of this study are that it was conducted over a short period of time and that a small sample of at-risk readers participated. A longer period of observation and a larger sample would yield results that would be considered more reliable.