This action research analysis aims to shed light on the reading motivations between two student populations: An “honors” English freshman class and a “standard” English junior class. The analysis uses the Survey of Adolescent Reading Attitudes (SARA), a peer-reviewed student motivation scale, as its primary instrument to gauge student opinion. Using the results of this survey, coupled with classroom observations and prior standardized test scores, this author hopes to better understand his students’ identities toward reading — along with reinforcing positive behaviors and combatting negative habits.
Purpose
From low-stakes reading activities like sustained silent reading (SSR) time to high-stakes standardized reading tests, reading tendencies play an outsized role in numerous aspects of students’ lives. The action research analysis employs a peer-reviewed student motivation scale (SARA) to identify positive, teachable, reading behaviors for all students. The instrument may also be used to pinpoint negative behaviors that increase reading hesitancies. These findings can guide the teacher and his students — both freshman and junior classes — toward potential strategies that will improve the likelihood of positive reading identity outcomes, like stronger literacy skills and increased reading self-efficacy.
Problem Statement
The author of this action research analysis has taught the honors English freshman class and standard English junior class for the last two years, and it is apparent that the two populations have, collectively, diverging reading identities. The honors students are, broadly speaking, confident and self-efficient when reading for pleasure and reading in class. The juniors, meanwhile, often struggle to find purpose when reading for pleasure and usually see reading in class as merely another task to complete. This reading-hesitant identity is evident during sustained silent reading (SSR) times, when many more juniors than freshmen distract themselves from reading with their phones or other classwork. Standardized reading scores for juniors are often lower than the freshmen, as well.
The reading-hesitant identity ultimately, and unfortunately, leads to a cascading effect: Students who do not identify as readers will read less, which, in turn, leads to a host of unideal outcomes: Stunted vocabularies, fewer available comprehension strategies, a reduced desire to build literacy skills in general, and so on. As their teacher, the author wishes to identify and reverse these trends, recognizing, as De Naeghel et al. (2014) posited, that “teachers’ activities to promote their students’ volitional or autonomous reading motivation are of importance for achieving equal opportunities for all children, as teachers reach the majority of children independent of their socioeconomic background” (p. 84). Through the action research analysis, the author will gain insights on why students both succeed and struggle with reading. From these findings, potential strategies can be exercised then to assist reading-hesitant students.
Research Questions
- What are the positive/negative behavioral patterns of students who exhibit stronger/weaker reading identities?
- How do racial/SOGI/cultural backgrounds affect student reading identities, if at all?
- How do students build on positive behavioral patterns and reduce detrimental behavioral patterns to become stronger readers?
Literature Review
Davis et al. (2018) published the most recent, comprehensive review of reading comprehension and the field’s instruments. The researchers used Guthrie and Wigfield’s reading motivation definition, defined as the “individual’s personal goals, values, and beliefs with regard to the topics, processes, and outcomes of reading” (as quoted in Davis, et al., p. 122). Using this guiding definition, while also acknowledging reading as a complex, multifaceted collection of processes, the researchers successfully identified and analyzed 16 reading motivation studies that used self-reporting scales. Davis et al.’s analysis assessed reliability and validity for each instrument, along with a brief critique of the corresponding study’s strengths and weaknesses.
Of the 16 studies, there were six that Davis et al. labeled as secondary/adult (p. 158). From this list, the author of this action research analysis selected the most applicable, reliable instrument: The Survey of Adolescent Reading Attitudes (SARA). SARA stands out above the other instruments because it was designed for teachers to deploy efficiently within the classroom setting, it scores highly on reliability and validity, its scope is specific to reading attitudes, and its contents are fully accessible online.
Conradi et al. (2013) designed SARA under the guiding philosophy that reading identities are built upon on attitudes, and attitudes are malleable. The researchers further recognized that educators need an efficient tool to collect and gauge students’ beliefs, hence the creation of SARA. They posited that “adding this survey to a classroom repertoire leads to a more comprehensive assessment of students and to instructional planning that is more likely to foster positive attitudes” (p. 573). Additionally, by administering SARA, educators are drawing open the curtains on the reading process for students, acknowledging that good reading tendencies are collections of learned behaviors; every strong reader has had to develop the skillsets he/she/they use when decoding texts.
From the collected data, Conradi et al. suggested multiple strategies for educators using SARA. First, teachers should identify students’ strengths and weaknesses from the assessed attitudes, both on an individual level and from a whole-class perspective. From there, the authors posited that teachers may build on high scoring (i.e.: positive attitudes) subscales, encouraging students to continue fostering reading tendencies they already enjoy (p. 572). Conradi et al. also recommended that educators not avoid low scoring subscales; instead, teachers may use this data to discuss with individual students and/or the class the more negative attitudes and find opportunities to scaffold and foster more positive moments within these subscales.
In a follow-up study that positioned itself to test and verify Conradi et al.’s findings, Baki (2018) largely confirmed the original report’s conclusions. From her own application of SARA to a random sampling of 349 middle school students, it can be surmised that “reading attitude is directly, positively and significantly predicted by reading motivation” (p. 27). In turn, higher reading motivation within students cultivates stronger reading tendencies and identities. This positive-feedback loop reinforces itself as these fundamental beliefs continue building upon one another.
Baki also found criticisms and limitations of SARA and other self-reporting surveys. She argued that, while it is clearly established that there is a gender gap between girls (who report higher reading attitudes) and boys, a more current “research model needs to be tested with new variables to be added” (p. 28). Identities are hugely complex structures; additional variables, including demographic inquiries on ethnicity and socioeconomic statuses, ought to be further studied to gain a more nuanced view of student attitudes. Additionally, SARA is nearly a decade old at this point, and some of the survey questions seem antiquated due to the increasingly all-encompassing technological era in which we reside. For example, the omniscience of the internet and Google has all but made using physical dictionaries and encyclopedias obsolete. The survey prompt that asks about students’ comfortability to using these books may appear outdated.
Research Methodology/Design
SARA offers teachers clear, descriptive data that comes directly from students. Its brevity (18 items) and easy-to-understand design (using clear Likert-scales) builds accessibility for all students, who answer the questions independently. From the findings, the teacher can observe student tendencies and hesitancies, along with drawing general (though not correlated) patterns from the surveyed populations. Furthermore, this author will use formative SSR logs to assess student reading progress throughout the week, along with students’ past standardized reading scores for a summative view of reading capabilities.
Data Collection
The three data sets used for this action research plan are the SARA results, SSR reading logs, and standardized reading test results. SARA was administered at the beginning of the year to all students (prior to this assignment) via Google Form. The quantitative results can be observed at an individual or whole-class level. Further demographic information includes racial/SOGI/cultural identity questions. The SARA results will assist in answering all three research questions to some extent. Students self-reporting their demographic information and reading tendencies and hesitancies cuts to the heart of the reading identity and behavioral inquiries that this action research plan hopes to answer.
The SSR logs have been collected weekly since the start of the year. They are graded on a qualitative, individual basis for completion points. Class averages also can be viewed from the teacher gradebook. These logs offer an insight on what students are reading independently, along with how (in)effectively they are building reading routines. In essence, the SSR logs help answer the research questions from a qualitative standpoint with students showing, not telling, their reading tendencies and hesitancies.
Lastly, standardized reading test results are collected at the beginning of the year via the MAP test. These quantitative results measure reading fluency, comprehension, and foundational language skills. These scores can also be observed individually or from a whole-class level. The scores offer further guidance for the action research plan. While these reading scores cannot be casually connected to the SARA and SSR logs, the MAP test still helps answer the research questions and provides needed, standardized contextual data. In total, these three data sets give the author a more thorough understanding of how his students read, their attitudes toward reading, and how they view themselves as readers.
Data Analysis
In the SARA, which assesses students on a 1-6 Likert scale on reading attitudes, the 28 freshmen scored a collective 4.73 out of 6, with a standard deviation of .56. Using the same scale, the 64 juniors averaged a 3.86 out of 6, with a standard deviation of .81. Using a two-sample unpaired T-test, it was determined that the two-tailed P-value is less than 0.0001, signifying a difference that is extremely statistically significant. Of the top 10 individual averages, eight of the places were taken by freshmen. On the other end, the bottom 31 averages were all taken by junior students. Two freshman reported averages of nearly perfect sixes; four juniors had averages that were below 1.5.
The 42 students who identified as female from both freshman and junior classes averaged a 4.29 out of 6, with a standard deviation of .71. This compares to a 3.78 out of 6 for 40 self-reporting male students in both freshman and junior classes, with a standard deviation of .89. Using the same two-sample unpaired T-test, the two-tailed P-value is .0056, signifying a difference that is very statistically significant. The 10 students who identify as non-binary, other, or prefer not to say from both classes scored a 4.65 out of 6, with a standard deviation of .76. The two-sample unpaired T-test found a P-value of .15 between this group and female students, signifying little statistical significance, but a .0052 between this group and male students, suggesting a very statistically significant difference. Of the top 10 individual score averages, seven were taken by female, non-binary/other/prefer not to say. The bottom six averages were all taken by junior boys.
The 65 students who identified as Caucasian across both freshman and junior classes averaged a 4.17 out of 6, with a standard deviation of .85. The 28 nonwhite students averaged a 4.0 out of 6, with a standard deviation of .834. The two-sampled unpaired T-test found a P-value of .36, which is not considered to be statistically significant. Lastly, the 86 students who identified English as their only language across both freshman and junior classes averaged a 4.16 out of 6, with a standard deviation of .81. The seven polylingual students (six bilingual students and one trilingual student) across both freshman and junior classes averaged a 3.6 out of 6, with a standard deviation of 1.19. The two-sampled unpaired T-test found a P-value of .09, which is not quite statistically significant.
SSR logs and MAP test scores have offered additional, if not as dramatic, information on students’ reading tendencies, though through different avenues. Both freshmen and juniors are reading independently and recording through the logs, highlighting pages read, the title of the book they are reading, and a brief summary of what they read. The class averages so far on the SSR logs are similar: Freshmen averaged a 4.8 out of 5, and the juniors scored a 4.75. These are qualitative measurements, checking for completion, routine-building, and overarching progress on the books. Scores will likely continue diverging as the school year continues. Furthermore, the MAP test scores show freshmen reading levels to be, on average, above grade level, whereas the juniors are slightly below grade level.
Future Action Plan and Force Field Analysis
With this confidence in the data, the author can firstly confirm the initial hypothesis: The freshmen clearly self-report stronger, more positive attitudes toward reading than the juniors.
The primary issue identified before administering the survey and collecting data was that juniors in a “standard” English class had, broadly speaking, more reading hesitancies than an “honors” freshman class. It was predicted that this attitude on reading would manifest itself in the data sets, and it did. The SARA results indicate almost a full point difference between the grades. Also revealed by SARA was a clear gender gap between higher-rating non-binary/other/prefer-not-to-say and female students versus male students.
Less clear from the survey were the other demographic criterion tested. Reported ethnicity and language-usage did not reveal clear statistically significant differences. White students only scored .17 higher than nonwhite students. Polylingual students had a larger difference in mean (.5 points less than monolingual students) the data was not conclusive, most likely because of the small subset of the sample (only seven students). Lastly, SSR logs and MAP scores have shed further light on reading quality and contextualizing scores, respectively, but the data is limited to that.
The goal of the future action plan, then, will focus on targeting reading-hesitant students, specifically the most vulnerable subset of the student population: Juniors who identify as male.
| Goals of Action Plan: Build better reading habits among all students. Increase reading attitude scores of junior boys to reduce the identified gaps. Increase overall reading attitude scores of all students. Objectives: 1: Students will identify the habits of strong readers, recognizing the importance of building these positive behaviors throughout the semester. 2 & 3: Students will self-analyze their strengths and weaknesses, working on building effective reading strategies throughout the semester. | |
| Driving Forces | Restraining Forces |
| The teacher needs to make clear that there are clear differences in reading attitudes depending on class and gender, along with the expectation that by the end of the semester, it is hoped that the gaps will be reduced and general attitudes toward reading are increased. The teacher should support students in these endeavors by explicitly discussing the habits of strong readers (those who reported higher scores via the SARA). The teacher can also identify general strengths of the survey (e.g.: most students enjoy reading and writing texts and social media posts) and weak points (e.g.: researching topics for a scholarly project). The teacher may also show students, in particular, the junior boys, evidence within the literature that shows how common this issue is within the country’s public schools, and what effective tools and strategies have been implemented to begin making amends. This will alleviate concerns that the lower-scoring students are anomalies or deficient in any way, along with showing that this is not a fixed problem. The teacher can emphasize that building strong reading behaviors and attitudes is essential in creating lifelong readers, which is a primary, if too implicit, goal of English teachers. The teacher can offer further discussion and time for reflection on what it means to be a strong reader, and why building literacies skills is essential for all students, regardless of where life takes them. |
The data clarifies what the subsequent steps ought to entail, as written in the action plan. All students have room for improvement in terms of strengthening their reading attitudes and, subsequently, their reading identities. The teacher could further emphasize this by showing students his own SARA average. Everyone has the capability to grow in their reading tendencies, and it must be a goal to identify strong strategies to implement throughout the remainder of the semester. This could start with identifying areas in which students have relatively stronger reading attitudes, like using their smartphones and social media. The teacher can recognize, celebrate, and build on these strengths before finding areas of weakness, like reading scientific reports for a project. In all, every student should be able to recognize, by the end of the semester, their own reading habit, tendencies, and hesitancies, along with strategies to strengthen their reading identities.
The population in most need of an intervention on reading attitudes is the junior students who identify as male. These young men have the most ground to make up in terms of attitudes and, to a lesser extent, standardized reading test scores. It would do the teacher well to explicitly target this population with strategies to increase reading attitudes, identifying extrinsic and intrinsic motivators to help these students better understand the importance of fostering positive reading attitudes and identities. Extrinsically, the teacher could offer these students the simple facts that English classes often reward students who read; additionally, all junior students take the ACT in the spring, and building better reading habits now would be beneficial prior to taking this exam. It would be the teacher’s sincerest hope, though, that students learn to love to read because of the act of reading itself. Intrinsic motivators are often stronger than their extrinsic counterparts, and if teachers are to truly build lifelong readers, they will need to give all students the time, space, and strategies to build their reading identities.
Lastly, the teacher and students would benefit from revisiting the SARA later in the semester to check for progress. Attitudes, behaviors, and identities are fluid, and checks like these are not meant to be the end-all; however, these snapshots will allow the teacher and students time to reflect on their growth as readers, or lack thereof. While it is the hope that all students grow in some capacity, especially the male junior population, averages should be considered when looking at the larger picture.
In terms of driving and resisting forces, the teacher is in a strong position to create change within his classroom. The tailwinds are strong: The students read every day, SSR has been implemented across the school, and the teacher has clear data to show to the students of their collective strengths and weaknesses. This is not to say it will be easy. The strongest of headwinds would be the lack of time the teacher has with these students, something largely out of his control. What the teacher can control is how he uses his time in the classroom, recognizing that talking about and building strong reading attitudes may take some time initially, but it will pay dividends in future weeks and months if done well.
Potential Evaluation Data Sources for Future Action Plan
The teacher should start the future action plan in earnest by sharing the collected data thus far with students. Highlighting the successes will help even the most hesitant of students realize that they are not starting from zero. From there, the teacher should plan to teach reading strategies and give feedback on how to implement such habits into one’s repertoire, the hope being that these learned habits will grow into reading routines and will help strengthen attitudes, behaviors, and reading identities. Close monitoring is a must, which can be done by collecting qualitative measurements, like the weekly SSR logs. At the end of the semester, the students will be given their respective standardized reading tests to check for overall growth, along with the SARA to see how reading behaviors have changed, if at all.
Conclusions, Discussion, and Summary
With an effective action research plan in place, data collection and analysis can take place. Using SARA data, SSR logs, and standardized test scores, the author can begin looking for general patterns of strong reading tendencies and those that cause reading hesitancies. The literature review paints a clear picture: Reading is a learned process, and attitudes toward it can reliably be collected and assessed. Above all, the collected and analyzed data is poised to be shared with students and colleagues after review, highlighting strengths and helping clarify areas of improvement.
References
Baki, J. (2018). The effect of reading motivations of 6th, 7th and 8th grade students on reading attitudes: A structural equation modeling. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences. 10(1), 17-38, doi.org/10.15345/iojes.2018.01.002
Conradi, K., Jang, B.G., Bryant, C., Craft, A., McKenna, M. C. (2013). Measuring adolescents’ attitudes toward reading: A classroom survey. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 56(7), 565-576. doi.org/10.1002/JAAL.183
Davis, M. H., Tonks, S. M., Hock, M., Wang, W., Rodriguez, A. (2018). A review of reading motivational scales. Reading Psychology, 39(2), 121-187. doi.org/10.1080/02702711.2017.1400482
Naeghela, J. D., Kerra, H. V., Vanderlindea, R. (2014). Strategies for promoting autonomous reading motivation: A multiple case study research in primary education. Frontline Learning Research, 3(1), 83-102.
education elation 