Why Sustained Silent Reading Does Not Work

Children in a Lao primary school on their kickoff solar day of a Sustained Silent Reading program. This village, in Kasi district of Laos, was the site of the nation'due south commencement SSR program.

Sustained silent reading (SSR) is a form of school-based recreational reading, or gratis voluntary reading, where students read silently in a designated time period every 24-hour interval, with the underlying assumption being that students acquire to read by reading constantly. While classroom implementation of SSR is fairly widespread, some detractors note that the data showcasing SSR'southward effectiveness is shaky at best, and that SSR alone does non craft proficient readers. Despite this, many maintain that successful models of SSR typically let students to select their ain books and do not require testing for comprehension or book reports. Schools have implemented SSR under a variety of names, such equally "Drop Everything and Read (Beloved)", "Free Uninterrupted Reading (FUR)", or "Uninterrupted sustained silent reading (USSR)".

Value of Sustained silent reading [edit]

Advocates' perspective [edit]

According to advocates such as educational researcher Stephen Krashen, SSR has been shown to lead to gains in several literacy domains.^[1] Krashen looked at a large number of studies to run across what conclusions were supported by empirical prove. He found that with respect to reading comprehension, SSR is successful; 51 of 54 studies found that students in an SSR plan scored every bit well as, or better than, other students in this regard. It is most successful when used for longer periods of time.^[2]

Furthermore, SSR was shown to create a reading addiction. Several years afterwards participating in a program, students reported more reading.^[3] One report found that a unmarried SSR session was enough to alter attitudes about reading. Long-term furnishings of SSR include better vocabularies, amend writing skills, ameliorate spelling, and greater knowledge of literature, science, and "practical noesis."^[4]

Several studies noted that children in poor neighborhoods had less admission to books at home and in libraries, and often the books available to them were non books that they wanted to read.^[5] Prize-winning books were frequently not especially popular with children. Comic books, on the other manus, are ofttimes non bachelor in libraries, but are pop with many boys, and reading comics was found to increase reading of other books.^[6] 3 boosted studies showed that providing rewards for reading did non improve reading development. Krashen believes this is because the presence of a reward suggests that an activity is work, and makes it less appealing.^[vii] In two other studies, teachers noted fewer discipline problems when an SSR program was being used.^[viii]

Detractors' perspective

While many critics note that SSR is beneficial to students because it gets them in the habit of reading, some note that SSR alone may non be enough to increase pupil reading comprehension and fluency rates. One recurring theme in professional critiques of SSR is the prevalence of "fake reading". One written report, published in 2010, noted after observing ane classroom during SSR that roughly 77% of the class was off-task during SSR time. Additionally, in that location was a 71% correlation between students who viewed reading favorably and students who were reading during SSR, and vice versa.^[9] These statistics suggest that almost students who like reading stay on task during SSR, and most students who exercise not share their enthusiasm are off-task. There was no testify to suggest that SSR was helping to create new readers in the classroom.

While some proponents of SSR believe that it's detractors are simply against free reading time for students, many critiques of SSR actually involve supplementing SSR with other reading activities. In 2002, J.C. Marshall posited that SSR, in addition to read-alouds, writing exercises, and increased overall reading time, made for an environment much more than conducive to a positive reading atmosphere.^[10]

Similarly, Reutzel et al. proposed that Scaffolded Silent Reading (ScSR) and Guided Repeated Oral Reading (GROR) are really much more than effective methods of independent reading. ScSR and GROR share many commonalities with SSR, simply additionally feature a more easily-on approach from instructors, who actively play a role in book selection, encourage the reading of diverse texts, monitor pupil progress, hold book conferences, provide feedback, and agree their students accountable. When implemented in the classroom, students utilizing ScSR and GROR both committed less reading errors, demonstrated more expressive reading qualities, and increased their thought unit recollect over the course of a twelvemonth.^[11]

National Reading Panel assay of sustained silent reading studies [edit]

While much of the criticism of SSR has come from independent research, there has also been some exception taken with the National Reading Panel (NRP) and their research into SSR. In 2000, the NRP meta-analyzed all quasi-experimental and experimental studies of SSR and plant their effects to exist positive. Some have challenged this claim. The panel likewise noted that the absenteeism of quantitative prove was not evidence against the practise in itself. They recommended further study of SSR.

Jim Trelease, educator and author of The Read-Aloud Handbook, is one of many reading advocates who has disputed the impartiality of these findings. He points out that the NRP included merely fourteen research tests in their summary, out of 54 studies he identified that might have been used. In ten of the studies used past NRP, SSR students performed the same as other students, and in 4 studies, SSR students did amend.^[12]

However, some argue the NRP is not impartial at all. In fact, the NRP only included studies that were verifiable and with scientifically apparent designs. The NRP had rigorous guidelines for the studies it would include. For example, the NRP did not include studies without control groups. The fact that the NRP only analyzed 14 SSR studies, shows that the other studies were non scientifically apparent.

In the full group of 54 studies, SSR students performed better in 25, worse in 3, and the same in 24. SSR students scored worse merely in short-term studies of less than seven months. In studies that lasted one year or longer, SSR students did better in viii of x, and there was no difference in the other two. The NRP plant that most of the SSR studies were not valid or verifiable. Many studies were only correlational. Thus, simply xiv studies actually followed guidelines that could make them statistically meaning. Of these studies, SSR was found ineffective.

"Where practice these negative SSR feelings come from?" Trelease asks. "Perhaps from the wonderful folks who make all those workbooks, textbooks, and score sheets that wouldn't be bought and used in class during the time students were lounging around reading books, magazines, and newspapers and getting and so good at reading they might demand even fewer of those sheets next twelvemonth." In that location is some support for this charge: A blog titled "Why Sustained Silent Reading (SSR) Doesn't Work" is posted by the publisher of four workbooks that sell for $89.99 each.^[13]

Sustained silent reading practices [edit]

A range of practices have been associated with SSR, and some advocates suggest that teacher models of reading behavior (i.eastward., teachers read while the students read), a long-term commitment to SSR, availability of multiple level, high-interest texts, and a sense of reading community are particularly relevant.

Gratis voluntary reading (FVR) [edit]

Complimentary voluntary reading (FVR) or recreation reading, related to the comprehension hypothesis, is an educational theory that says many student gains in reading tin can exist encouraged by giving them time to read what they want without too many evaluative measures. Sustained silent reading is a method of implementing recreational and FVR theory.

Other names for SSR [edit]

Uninterrupted sustained silent reading (USSR) was the predecessor to SSR in many ways. In the 1970s and 1980s, this specific method of reading education was commonplace in many schools around the U.s.. The prevailing thought process backside USSR was that it would non simply create amend readers, but also increase students' comfort levels as they navigated indexes, table of content sections, and even unabridged libraries citation.^[14]

There are several notable organizations, acronyms, and celebrations that capture the essence of Sustained Silent Reading. Drop Everything and Read (DEAR) is an acronym meant to encourage young students to read for at to the lowest degree half an hour every 24-hour interval. In the United States, some educators gloat "DEAR Solar day" every twelvemonth on the 12th of April.citation Some specific institutions such as libraries and schools may even celebrate "DEAR Day" during the entire calendar month of Apr.

Come across also [edit]

• Extensive reading
• Reading
• Learning to read
• Phonics

References [edit]

1. ^ Krashen, Stephen. "False Claims Virtually Phonemic Awareness, Phonics, Skills vs. Whole Linguistic communication, and Recreational Reading". No Child Left. Retrieved xvi June 2011.
2. ^ Krashen, Southward. 2007. "Extensive reading in English equally a foreign language by adolescents and young adults: A meta-analysis." International Journal of Strange Language Teaching 3(two): 23-29.
3. ^ Greaney, 5., and G. Clarke. 1973. "A longitudinal written report of the effects of two reading methods on leisure-fourth dimension reading habits." In Reading: What of the time to come? ed. D. Moyle. London: Great britain Reading Clan, pp. 107-14, cited in Free Voluntary Reading by Stephen Krashen.
4. ^ Krashen, Stephen D., 2011. Costless Voluntary Reading. Santa Barbara: Libraries Unlimited, chapter one.
5. ^ Worthy, J., M. Moorman, and M. Turner. 1999. What Johnny likes to read is hard to find in school. Reading Research Quarterly 34(10): 12-27.
6. ^ Ujiie, J., and S. Krashen. 1996. Is comic book reading harmful? Comic book reading, school achievement, and pleasance reading amid seventh graders. California Schoolhouse Library Association Journal xix(two): 27-28.
7. ^ Krashen, Stephen D., 2011. Gratis Voluntary Reading. Santa Barbara: Libraries Unlimited, chapter one.
8. ^ Krashen, Stephen D., 2011. Gratis Voluntary Reading. Santa Barbara: Libraries Unlimited, chapter 1.
9. ^ Cipiti, Ashley Faye (2010). Condense the Nonsense: On-job versus Off-task Sustained Silent Reading equally Related to Reading Motivation (Thesis). Bowling Green State University.
10. ^ Marshall, J.C. (2002). Are They Really Reading? Expanding SSR in the Centre Grades. Portland, Maine: Stenhouse Publishers. ISBN1571103376.
11. ^ Reutzel, Ray; et al. (2008). "Scaffolded Silent Reading: A Complement to Guided Repeated Oral Reading That Works!". The Reading Teacher. 62: 202 – via Enquiry Gate.
12. ^ Trelease, Jim, The Read-Aloud Handbook Penguin Books, 2006. E-book version, no page reference available.
13. ^ http://penningtonpublishing.com/blog/reading/why-sustained-silent-reading-ssr-doesn't-piece of work/ accessed August 12, 2013.
14. ^ Berglund, Roberta L.; Johns, Jerry L. (1983). "A Primer on Uninterrupted Sustained Silent Reading". The Reading Instructor. 36 (6): 534–539. ISSN 0034-0561.

barneslonts1937.blogspot.com

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustained_silent_reading

Share this post