Editors' Note: When this article was posted in Reading Online in November 1999, readers were invited to comment on it through a bulletin board feature that was discontinued when the journal was redesigned in July 2000. Following are the comments posted to that bulletin board.

Readers who would like the opportunity to comment on this or other articles in the journal are invited to post messages through Online Communities.

Post 1

Author: keith _topping
Date: 11-18-1999 07:00

Regarding Linda Labbo's commentary on my hypermedia item in Critical Issues, I thought the staff room scenario in particular was very powerful for teacher readers, and the whole piece an excellent encouragement for teachers to become more questioning and reflective.

The issues of how the software is actually presented and used in different classrooms and libraries, and what meanings the students themselves attach to it, certainly need further exploration.

I suppose Linda's question: "Does The Accelerated Reader program offer the best way to use computers in classrooms?" was perhaps over-rhetorical, since there is obviously no single best way.

Feelings about the Accelerated Reader are often strongly held, both positive and negative, and this topic has been discussed quite fervently in the past via listserves such as the Reading Teacher list and the NRC list.

Both Linda and myself would be most interested to hear through this Forum of real life experiences with the Accelerated Reader, both positive and negative, and what was learned from them.

Reply 1a

Author: Linda Labbo
Date: 11-19-1999 01:12

Regarding Keith Topping's posting about my response to his hypermedia item in Critical issues.

Responding to Keith's hypertextual document was a real joy and a real challenge. I agree with Keith that feelings about AR are often strongly held and it would be of benefit to the ROL readership for us engage in a discussion with those who wish to offer comments.

Teachers who can share insights about the use of AR in their own classrooms can add a great deal of contextualized insights to a discussion.

Reply 1b

Author: Robin_Kozub
Date: 11-24-1999 19:08

I believe that if the Accelerated Reader program is used in isolation, it is of little benefit to a child. It is imperative that a teacher uses the results of the program to guide his/her teaching. Only then can a student reach deeper comprehension, using their higher-order thinking skills. Many teachers at my school fail to use the program in any way other than letting the students take the reading tests. I also believe it is important for a teacher to facilitate and encourage students to select a wide variety of books. It is important that the AR program is complementary to a balanced reading program and not the end all of literary exposure for any student.

Reply 1c

Author: keith _topping
Date: 11-26-1999 11:22

Robin, I couldn't agree more. As I said in the item, the whole point of a Learning Information System is to provide useful information to have a formative effect on subsequent learning, but it is merely background noise and the whole point is lost if this feedback is not responded to mindfully. But I wonder how your colleagues might be persuaded of this. In fairness to the twin companies who offer the software and the associated training, we should note that the training does seek to embed AR within a whole-school reading development program. Perhaps other Forum contributors will share their experiences to stimulate our thinking about ways forward with this issues.

Reply 1d

Author: Bonnie Prohaska
Date: 12-02-1999 03:12

Before I enter into any discussion regarding AR, I would like to know if T.Paul is indeed Terry Paul, Judith Paul's husband? Can you tell me Mr. Paul's credentials in the area of Reading Instruction, experience as a researcher and about the work he has done, Can you also share information on Mr. Paul's past teaching experience or instructional expertise?

Also share Mr. Paul's vested interest in Accelerated Reader, Institute of Academic Learning, "Star" (excuse error in complete title)

What is your affiliation with any of these products and the company?

I noticed in the reference part of the article both you and Paul, T are listed as having done research together? Expand upon this please.

Bonnie Prohaska

Reply 1e

Author: Bonnie Prohaska
Date: 12-08-1999 00:55

Mr.Topping, hope you can reply to some of us, soon. Sorry this isn't a more popular topic. What training would you deem necessary for teachers to run AR. You made a statement about people not buying into their training program. I cannot imagine anyone having difficulty running multiple choice software. It is a text based program, stored on CD. They have never rewritten the program since it was created for the Apple II era. Let me define rewritten. Changed the program from text-based, multiple choice, three answer choice. Quick and dirty we call it. Back in the Apple II era AR may have seemed liked the best use of technology.

The only multi-media part of it is the advertising and intro to the company that sells AR. It is a text-based program that was not rewritten but translated into readible files for the Mac and Windows environment. AR has been approached by a number of vendors to rewrite the program, add interactive features, include addition types of questions and etc. They have a money maker without entering into new partnerships or adding players. So they have chosen to to reinvest in marketing hype and they have been very successful.

The role of the educator is to remove the computer from the program and seriously evaluate the content. I agree with Linda when she questions whether AR it is the best choice given all the new programs and more engaging formats we have available today. AR is rarely chosen by teachers in a district but most often by administrators. Realizing we are time short and software evaluation is time consuming I would still encourage everyone to become educated by trying a demo version, seeking out objective reviews. Software programs should each be evaluated on their own merit. Do not assume one good one guarantees the credibility of another. We must be able to make choices about the materials we use with children the computer is no different.

Reply 1f

Author: joanna_cann
Date: 01-14-2000 18:30

Keith Topping and Linda Labbo have provided an excellent clear assessment of the Accelerated Reading Software. I think the key to this program is that it is a "freestanding computer-assisted assessment". It seems very clear to me that the authors let us know what The accelerated Reader is not. It is now meant to take the place of a balanced reading program. It is not an incentive program. This is a mean to have the students assessed individually. I cannot assess every student on every book that they read. It is important to see if students are comprehending what they are reading. A program which allows students to be assessed and motivates them to read can't be all that bad.

I am very interested in looking into this program further. Where is this program available?

Reply 1g

Author: Meredith Weiss
Date: 01-17-2000 08:47

My comments deal with your questions about the AR training. Our school just started using the AR program. We had three teachers trained with grant money. This program will not be effective if used by teachers who do not understand how to teach reading in the first place. I was not fortunate to be one of the teachers who recieved the training. But the teachers then came back to our school and held a number of sessions to train our staff. I heard them use many terms that lead me to believe the training was very beneficial. They came back talking about Vygotsky and the zone of proximal development. I never heard mention of this before AR training. Our teachers who had the training that AR did not replace reading instruction with the AR program but used it as a way to quickly assess comprehension throughout the year. Now they can base their instruction on assessments every week instead of yearly tests or observations only. As a result of AR being introduced into our building many more students are reading books on their levels which is so very important to improved reading ability!!!! The time students have been given to independantly read has greatly increased. And this independant reading time is focused. The students are also motivated. These are wonderful things that have taken place in our building that would not have taken place had our teachers not had the training and started using the AR program. Bonnie, I will be interested to hear your response.

Reply 1h

Author: keith _topping
Date: 01-17-2000 14:12

Bonnie, your comments are so full of misconceptions and errors that I really don't know where to start. Reading the piece again more carefully should answer at least some of your questions. Incidentally, I doubt that Andrea found the rather patronising and aggressive tone of your reply to her very helpful.

Reply 1i

Author: Bonnie Prohaska
Date: 01-18-2000 22:47

Keith, merely suggesting that someone preview a program before generalizing its effectiveness is a pretty okay suggestion. I wasn't being patronizing. Not having used a program but choosing to enter into dialog about it takes some guts This is a professional reading organization not a computer/technology professional organization so the dialog we have will obviously include multiple levels of users.

I would like you to please answer my previous questions. I will rephrase them and be very specific. Have ever been under contract or received any fees for work you have done with the company that owns Accelerated Reader? Or, have you done consulting for them on a pay per basis? In the resource section of your article the research is listed K.Topping and T.Paul. Is T.Paul the same Terry Paul that owns an interest in Accelerated Reader/Advantage Learning?

Reply 1j

Author: keith _topping
Date: 02-22-2000 13:34

Careful reading will show that any appropriate declarations of interest have been made, to the satisfaction of the reviewers and editors of the journals concerned.

Reply 1k

Author: Bonnie Prohaska
Date: 05-04-2000 02:56

Careful reading will show that any appropriate declarations of interest have been made, to the satisfaction of the reviewers and editors of the journals concerned.

Then, obviously, you will be willing to share the few simple answers to my direct questions with regard to the horse.

Reply 1l

Author: keith _topping
Date: 02-22-2000 13:49

The discussion in this Forum has so far involved only four people in addition to the authors - who knows how representative they are of the community at large? Yet IRA report that the Topping and Labbo items have had several hundred hits per month. Feelings about AR are often strongly held. However, it is obviously important that contributions to the Forum are balanced and collegiate in tone, otherwise potential contributors are likely to be deterred from participating.

Reply 1m

Author: Bonnie_Prohaska
Date: 05-04-2000 04:45

I suppose my last response could be blamed on the time I am writing this but that really isn't the reason.

I apologize to Keith for ending the sentence with the word horse which makes no sense. My only reference to a horse came seconds earlier when I saw Martha Dillner's picture on the first web page. I attended Martha's institute at the IRA convention and she showed this picture along with her riding a horse in a Quicktime clip. I have thought about this for a very long time. I have no clue what I may have trapped in my brain.

Bonnie Prohaska

Reply 1m

Author: Patti_Fennema
Date: 06-20-2000 11:49

I have used AR for about 10 years. First reaction when I heard about it - thought it was boring and the kids wouldn't go for it. Couldn't have been more wrong. It is a small part of my reading program. Students select books in their zone of proximal development for SSR. The AR tests let me know if they finished the books and understood the main ideas. As they master reading levels, they move up in difficulty. This is very motivating for them. No rewards, no incentives needed. Used for ability groups both above and below level. Most enjoyed by below level groups I think because they are finally reading something they can understand and master. Results?? My below level 8th graders consistently score two and a half grade levels up or more from their previous year's reading level. I stress it is only a part of the entire reading program and tied in with SSR.

Post 2

Author: Andrea_Bachman
Date: 12-06-1999 16:31

I have not had the opportunity to use Accelerated Reader in my classroom. I do, however, know teachers who use it. I have concidered asking my principal to investigate with me the advantages and disadvantages of using the program. I see many advantages to the program. I believe that teaching to all levels of learners is one of the most difficult things about teaching. AR seems to offer something for all reading levels. Often, I see the high level readers as being the most over-looked group. With AR those students could continue to read books that challenge them. I can see where this could become a problem if the students start to compare books. The teacher would have to foster a classroom where this does not happen. I believe that the more we can encourage children to read, the better they will be in the long run. Accelerated Reader seems to offer a great deal of support for teachers in this area. I know every program has advantages and disadvantages. I would not count on any program to be the answer to all our question reguarding teaching reading. AR does seem to be a well thought out program which could enhance any reading program.

Reply 2a

Author: Bonnie Prohaska
Date: 12-08-1999 00:27

Andrea, one can never see advantages to a program without using it. Basing your information on other people's use is not a strong argument for using a program. Teaching to all levels of learners is very different from leveling books and providing 10 multiple choice literal questions per title.

What kind of support does AR "seem" to offer in support of teachers? If you have never used it, how could you write, "AR does seem to be a well thought out program which could enhance any reading program."

The best we can do for ourselves is to become well informed, test, draw conclusions, question. I am glad you are online and engage in dialog regarding technology issues. This is the intent of the phorum. Wish we had more responses from other members.

I will end my response with something to think about. I think AR is about as scary as Writing To Read was in the late 80's and early 90's.

Reply 2b

Author: Jo Ann_Lo Bianco
Date: 03-06-2000 16:31

Don't be scared, Bonnie. We are in our fourth year of Reading Reniassance (using AR as our reading program), and have improved our school's reading scores each year. We have three state awards for improved scores and literally hundreds of "success stories" about our own students. I am experienced in the program from both the perspective of a remedial reading teacher and a principal. We love books and reading at this school as never before. Let the naysayers and doubters go on and on, but in the meantime children are missing out on a glorious opportunity.

Reply 2c

Author: linda_McInerny
Date: 03-07-2000 14:01

I have been using Accelerated Reader in my classroom for 5 years. I have received model classroom certification for the last three years. AR is only part of an effective reading program. It is a useful and superior tool for monitoring reading practice. I teach in a sheltered English classroom that is usually about 20% second language learnesr. I use a multisensory phonic program, book disscussions and literarcy circles and explict instruction along with AR. ARlis an essential part of my reading program, but it is not a complete reading program. Reading success requires monitoring, intervention, and planned explict instruction to be effective.

Reply 2d

Author: Ahna_Nelson
Date: 03-10-2000 10:25

I am an education major at Miami University in Oxford, Ohio. Obviously, I have not had the opportunity to have my own classroom, but I do have some experience with Accelerated Reader. During my methods classes, my cooperating teacher used the Accelerated Reader book list to monitor SSR. I thought is was an OK way to monitor books, but I have mixed feelings about Accelerated Reader. Accelerated Reader seems to go against the most important thing that I have been learning when teaching language arts, personal connection. The tests that the students have to take are based solely on facts from the book. I realize that it is impossible for a computer program to grade essays about personal connections to a book, but I don't think students will get anything out of reading unless they make those connections. Ten years from now they might not remember the main character's name in Farewell to Arms, but they will probably remember the connection they made with the book. Objective tests are something I have been fighting with myself about for the last couple of months. I haven't decided either way whether I think objective tests are good or bad, but it is something I will continue to think about as I work towards being assigned my own classroom full of real, live students. For those teachers that are happy using objective tests, Accelerated Reader is a great program for testing students over books. As a future language arts teacher, I need to decide what I think is most important.

Reply 2e

Author: Linda Labbo
Date: 03-14-2000 20:23

As a preservice teacher, Ahna Nelson raises some interesting issues about the relationship between objective tests and reading comprehension of literature. There's nothing wrong with asking children to respond to questions about stories, it's the nature of the questions that are important.

Thanks for your comments, Ahna.

Reply 2f

Author: keith _topping
Date: 03-24-2000 12:25

Ahna makes some good points. I'm glad she was brave enough to contribute - not easy while acknowledging the limitations on your practical experience. I hope that no teacher would rely on multiple-choice literal questions of reading comprehension as a way of exploring a child's intimate and idiosyncratic personal connection with a favorite text. That tool is clearly not fit for that purpose. However, I don't see how the busy practitioner can find the time to make that individualized exploration with respect to every book that every student reads, particularly if the volume of books read is greatly increased. I guess it's a question of striking the right balance between breadth and depth. Linda McInerny's point echoes the main theme of my lead statement on AR - "it is not a complete reading program" (of course, you would expect good sense from someone of Scottish extraction). The danger is that in some places AR is assumed to be "a complete reading program", and AR implementation is then substituted for the many other aspects of reading teaching which are essential, rather than complementing them. As Linda McI lucidly expresses it "reading success requires monitoring, intervention, and planned explicit instruction to be effective". While AR might be a "useful and superior tool for monitoring reading practice" in thoughtful and reflective hands (e.g., Linda's), used un-intelligently it seems likely to be at best ineffective. Thank you for your valuable contributions, folks.

Post 3

Author: Charlanne_Cooper
Date: 03-09-2000 13:32

The AR program and the techniques given with Reading Reanissance are tools in the hands of practicing teachers. The two articles by Keith Topping and Linda Labbo criticize strengths and weaknesses of using AR with Reading Reanissance techniques. My point is, that the quality of instruction, and implementation of a program, rests with the practicing teacher, not the tool. Maybe for the first time in education, AR provides opportunities to strategize how to best meet individual reading strengths and weaknesses. Definately, it provides the much needed reading practice time with accountability. I am a model classroom teacher, and this AR tool with the Reading Renaissance techniques has made my teaching more refined and effective. Nothing can take the place of good teaching and I welcome good tools that will assist in that endeavor.

Go back to the article