Letter from the OKLA Chair

Letter from Rebecca Marie Farley Chair, Oklahoma Literacy Association

Greetings, OKLA!!!

I hope the school year is wrapping up nicely for you where you serve the literacy community, from working with young children all the way to working with adults! I also hope you get to enjoy at least a few good books during the warmer weather and longer daylight time of the year.

What an exciting spring we were able to have with an in-person OKLA Conference full of networking and learning. I want to personally thank all those who worked toward the success of the conference and those who attended. I want to make you aware of another growth opportunity coming this summer. A virtual OKLA Leadership Conference is currently in the planning stages and tentatively set for July 2022. Dr. Linda McElroy, USAO, is securing speakers and will publicize information as it becomes available. Continue to check for updates at oklahomaliteracy.org and in the OKLA Facebook Group.

I encourage you to keep in touch through the Facebook group and share with others important research and professional development opportunities that you are sponsoring or participating in this summer. We are stronger working together to provide excellence in all things literacy.

In the last few years, we have witnessed many challenges and overcome many

obstacles to facilitate learning and a love of reading through a pandemic, quarantine, isolation, shutdowns, supply and demand issues, teacher shortage, funding deficiencies, ever changing laws and regulations, etc., but now we are rising toward the bright future of promoting literacy for all Oklahomans. I encourage you to continue to work together to provide outstanding literacy education to all of those in the state of Oklahoma and beyond.

It has been my great pleasure to serve as the chair of this prestigious group that promotes literacy development for all. I thank you for that opportunity and joy! Dr. Eileen Richardson will begin her tenure as OKLA Chair beginning July 1, 2022. I know that you will continue to support her as you have greatly supported me in all things OKLA. Sharon Morgan, OKC Public Schools, will become OKLA ChairElect and is already busy at work securing location, dates, and speakers for the 2023 OKLA Conference. Liz Willner will continue as Treasurer and Stacy Goodwin will continue as Secretary.

Sincerely,

Rebecca Marie Farley

Timothy Rasinski

Invited Article

Teaching the Art and Science of Foundational Reading—Phonics to Fluency

Over the past several years an approach to reading instruction has emerged called the Science of Reading (SOR) (Shanahan, 2021). Science of Reading advocates argue that there is now sufficient scientific knowledge about how people read and how people learn to read that instruction in teaching reading should be guided by this science. The genesis for this approach can be traced back to the National Reading Panel (2000), a group of literacy experts who were assigned the task of identifying the science-verified components of reading that are necessary for children to become proficient readers. Nearly every teacher of reading has since become familiar with those components—phonemic awareness, phonics or word decoding, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension. The concept of the SOR, however, may pose a challenge when it comes to turning the SOR into actionable reading instruction. The Science of Reading is based, to a large extent, on scientific research into the competencies that must be mastered in order to achieve proficiency in reading. However, SOR does not provide much direction into how those competencies should be taught to students (Shanahan, 2021). Very often the implication for instruction is that the SOR competency be taught using approaches that are direct, systematic, and, for students who are struggling, intensive. How does such instruction actually play out in classrooms? What seems to be the result is instruction that may be direct and systematic but involves teachers in reading instructional scripts, students engaged in drill-like activities that do not appear to resemble actual reading, and when permitted to read given “decodable” texts that appear to more resemble passages designed to give students practice in reading certain phonics elements than authentic stories or texts that readers can find enjoyable and take satisfaction in. Take, for instance, the competency of reading fluency. First, scientific research has demonstrated that reading speed as measured by the number of words read correctly on a leveled reading passage is a valid measure of one aspect of fluency called automaticity in word recognition. Studies at various grade levels have found a strong correlation between speed of reading (oral reading fluency—ORF) and overall reading proficiency (Rasinski et al., 2011). Scientific research has also found that assisted reading and repeated reading are valid and effective ways for improving reading fluency, as well as word recognition and comprehension (Rasinski, 2010). Assisted reading occurs when a reader reads a text while simultaneously listening to a fluent reading of the same text. That listening could be from a more fluent reading partner such as a teacher or parent sitting next to the student or even listening to a pre-recorded version of the text. Repeated reading, as the name implies, involves repeated practice of a text until the student is able to read the text at a normal level of fluency. Research has demonstrated

that when students engage in repeated and assisted reading, not only do they improve their performance on the texts practiced, but there is also a generalized improvement on new passages not previously read. These scientific findings—how fluency-automaticity is measured and how fluency can be developed—has led to the development of SOR instructional programs that aim directly to increase reading speed through assisted and repeated reading. Fluency instruction becomes a daily routine in which students engage in assisted and repeated reading for the expressed purpose of reading the text faster with every reading. Indeed, students are assessed regularly, in some cases weekly, in order to check increases in their reading speed. My response to this approach to instruction is that it may be based on science, but to what extent is it based on reality? How often do people at any age practice reading texts for the main purpose of reading the texts fast? Not often. Renowned literacy researcher S. Jay Samuels (2007) has argued that such instruction changes the nature of reading instruction to something akin to “barking at print.” Moreover, the research into fluency instruction approaches such as these do show improvements in students’ reading speed which is then offered as scientific support for the instruction. However, the research on the extent to which such instruction leads to improvement in comprehension and overall reading proficiency and satisfaction is limited at best.

Additionally, this approach to teaching fluency neglects another scientifically validated part of fluency—prosody. Prosody involves oral reading with a level of expression that reflects the meaning of the text (Rasinski, 2010). Some have termed prosody the melody of reading. Research has shown that readers who read with good phrasing and expression are more proficient in comprehension in overall reading than readers who read without expression and in a word-by-word staccato style (Rasinski et al., 2011). How is it that young readers can develop their prosodic or expressive reading when the focus on their fluency instruction is on reading as fast as they can? It seems that a focus on speed and a focus on meaningful expression are in opposition to one another. Literacy scholar Tim Shanahan has argued that in addition to the Science of Reading we need a Science of Reading Instruction (Shanahan, 2021). We need to know more than the key competencies and elements involved in proficient reading; we need scientific research to show us instructional approaches to teach these competencies and produce the desired outcomes— proficiency in the individual competency AND in overall reading proficiency.

Toward an Art and Science of Reading Instruction

I would take Shanahan’s argument a bit further to suggest that we also need scientifically verified approaches to instruction that are also authentic, aesthetic, and that give teachers freedom to use their creativity in designing such instruction, as opposed to following some script or routine. This is what I and my colleagues (Paige, et al., 2021; Young et al., 2022) have come to call the Art and Science of Teaching Reading.

Although it may be easier to define a science of reading instruction than it is an art of reading instruction, I feel that there are three characteristics or principles that make reading instruction artful (Young et al., 2022). First is authenticity—reading instruction should look like reading and reading related activities that are done in real life—outside the classroom. We want students to make the connections between what they are doing in their classroom with what they see happening beyond the classroom walls. If students are unable to make such connections, they are not likely to see the relevance of what they are learning. To what extent do students, or anyone for that matter, see phonics drills or reading speed for fluency activities happening in their lives outside of school? Probably not much, and it is not inappropriate for them to ask why they need to engage in such activities in school if they have little or no relevance outside their classrooms.

The second principle of artistic instruction is aesthetics. By aesthetics I refer to the work of Louise Rosenblatt (1978) who argued that reading should be both efferent and aesthetic. At the risk of oversimplifying, efferent reading is essentially reading to learn or to educate the mind. Aesthetic reading, on the other hand, is reading for beauty or to touch the heart. It seems that reading instruction and reading in schools themselves have become increasingly focused on the efferent dimension of reading. The increased focus on informational texts is evidence of this movement. While I acknowledge the importance of efferent reading, I also see the need for reading to be aesthetic. How many of us have had our hearts touched by a favorite song, perhaps a heartfelt poem, or inspiring story. The same type of texts that bring us to tears need also to be shared with students.

Children need the same opportunities to have their hearts touched by inspiring words, poetry, songs, famous speeches (e.g., “Gettysburg Address,” “I Have a Dream”) and other such texts. These types of texts, however, seem to have been less emphasized in many current reading programs and classrooms. Artful reading instruction says we need to find ways to bring these into our classrooms and share with students.

Third, artistic instruction is defined by creativity. Currently, in many science-oriented reading instruction approaches teachers are taught to teach in very prescribed ways with little room for individuality or creativity. While the science of reading should provide guidance to the overall aims and approaches to reading instruction, artfulness should allow teachers freedom to use their creativity to deliver that instruction in ways that meet the individual needs of students. Moreover, artful instruction should also allow students freedom to express themselves in creative ways themselves. Take for example, the instruction in phonics and word decoding. One scientifically validated approach to such instruction is termed word building (McCandliss et al., 2003). In this approach students are guided in building a series of words by changing, adding, or subtracting one or two letters from the previously made word. An example is to start with the word dog and from there build the following words: dot, pot, pet, pen, pin, pit, hit, hot. The words can be made by manipulating letter tiles and/or having students write the words. Research has shown that

doing this on a regular basis improves students’ phonemic awareness, word decoding, and comprehension. The word building activity is game-like in that it involves manipulation of letters to make words much as one would do in playing word games such as Scrabble, Words with Friends, or, more recently, Wordle. Being the lexophile (word lover) that I am, I decided to take this scientific approach and turn it into a game; the results are daily word ladders (Rasinski, 2005a, 2005b, 2008). A word ladder is a form of word building with the added features of providing students with meaning related clues and making the first and last words go together in some way. For example, here is an example of a word ladder, starting with the word at the top and working down.

1. Dog Change 1 letter in dog to make what you do with a shovel. 2. Dig Change 1 letter in dig to make a farm animal that oinks and gives us pork. 3. Pig Change 1 letter in pig to make a hole in the ground. 4. Pit Change 1 letter in pit to make what you do in a chair. 5. Sit Change 1 letter in sit to make what a baseball player does with a bat.

6. Hit Change 1 letter in hit to make something you wear on your head when the weather is bad.

7. Hat Add 1 letter to hat to make a word that means to have an informal talk or conversation with someone.

8. Chat Take away 1 letter from chat to make an animal that dogs typically do not like.

9. Cat

In going from dog to cat teachers can guide students in learning and reinforcing the decoding structure, spelling, and meaning to 9 words. Moreover, students find enjoyment in finding out what the last word in the ladder is. Science tells us that word ladders (word building) does produce positive results in reading related competencies. Art tells us that students take enjoyment and satisfaction from playing with and learning about words and language.

Art and Science of Teaching Reading Fluency

Teachers need to be both artists and scientists in their instruction. How can this happen? Let’s take the critical competency of reading fluency—both scientifically and artfully. Research and reviews of research have demonstrated the importance of reading fluency in developing proficient readers (Rasinski et al., 2011).

Fluency has been described as the necessary bridge from word decoding to comprehension. Automatic word recognition is that part of fluency that connects to word decoding or phonics. It is not sufficient for readers to be able to decode words accurately; they need to be able to decode words effortlessly or automatically. The theory behind automaticity suggests that readers have a limited amount of attention or cognitive resources to apply to the act of reading. If they have to use too much of these resources for word decoding (think of readers who read in an excessively slow and halting manner), they will have less available for comprehension, the goal of reading. As a result, comprehension suffers. However, when word decoding is automatic (think reading that is relatively quick and smooth), readers do not have to employ much of their cognitive resources for word decoding. Those freed-up resources can be devoted to making sense of the text and, as a consequence, comprehension is facilitated. Reading fluency is complicated by a second component—prosody or expression in reading. When reading orally (or silently for that matter) readers use their expression to reflect the meaning of the text. They add dramatic pauses in their reading, they change the tone, the speed, the volume, and the phrasing of the text to reflect the meaning of the text. Prosody, then, is the part of the fluency bridge that connects to comprehension. For in order to read with appropriate expression, a reader needs to be developing and monitoring the meaning of the text while reading. Scientific research has demonstrated that readers who read with high levels of automaticity, as measured by words read correctly per minute, have higher levels of comprehension than readers who demonstrate lower levels of automaticity in their reading. Scientific research has also demonstrated that higher levels of expression or prosody in oral reading is reflected in higher levels of comprehension. In sum, readers who are fluent, who read with good levels of automaticity and prosody, tend to be proficient readers (Rasinski et al., 2011). That’s science! But how do we actually put this scientific knowledge into authentic instructional practice. Too often, the simple solution is to focus on the outcome measures for fluency. If we measure the automaticity component of reading fluency by measuring reading speed, then instruction in fluency becomes focused on having students engage in repeated readings of a text to increase their reading speed. We see this in instructional activities that include timed readings in which students are encouraged to read faster than the day before. How is such practice a measure of real life—authenticity? Where in real life do readers practice their reading in order to increase reading speed? I would answer—“not often.” Moreover, when readers are focused on ever faster reading, how are they able to work on prosodic reading—reading with a level of phrasing and expression that reflects the meaning of the text? It appears that in such an instructional scenario the components of fluency, automaticity and prosody, are incompatible. Let’s take another look at instruction in fluency—artful instruction (Paige, et al., 2021; Young et al., 2022)! Scientific research (Rasinski et al., 2011) tells us that two approaches for

developing fluency are repeated readings and assisted readings. Repeated reading is having students read a text multiple times until they are able to read the text at a level of fluency that approaches that of a proficient reader. In assisted reading, less fluent readers read a text while simultaneously hearing a fluent reading or rendering of the text. That fluent reading can be made by another person (parent, teacher, classroom volunteer), a group of others as in choral reading, or an audio recording of the text made previously. Another, and more artful way, of considering repeated and assisted reading is to think of it as rehearsal. In rehearsal, actors practice (repeated and assisted reading) a text for the purpose of eventually performing the text for an audience. The repeated and assisted practice is not aimed at reading fast but at providing a performance that is sufficiently prosodic to be meaningful and satisfying to an audience. Thus, in this artful form of fluency instruction automaticity is developed by the repeated and assisted rehearsal of text, and prosody is developed by the focus of the repeated and assisted rehearsal that is aimed at delivering a performance that is meaningful and through which expressive interpretation of the text enhances and amplifies the intended meaning. Of course, this leads to an artful question—are there certain texts that are meant to be read/performed orally and expressively for an audience (Young & Nageldinger, 2017)? While informational and narrative texts could certainly be read with expression, they would not be my first choice. Texts such as poetry, song lyrics, speeches, and readers theater scripts are more conducive to rehearsal and performance. If you’ve ever been in a play, recited a poem at a poetry café, or given a speech to an audience my guess is that you rehearsed it. Moreover, your rehearsal wasn’t aimed at reading fast but at reading in such a way as to deliver meaning to those who would be listening to your performance. This notion of rehearsal and performance is a more artful approach to reading fluency instruction. It is authentic in that this type of activity happens in the real world—think theater performances. It is aesthetic in that the texts being performed are those that have the ability to garner an emotional reaction from those performing or listening to the performance (all of us have a certain song or poem that brought us to tears; many of us have attended theatrical plays or listened to a speech that evoked an emotion response). And this approach to fluency instruction offers opportunities for creativity. Teachers and students can write their own poems, songs, or scripts based on material they have previously read or on their own experiences. Moreover, students rehearsing and performing such material have creative license to interpret the texts in various ways through their oral performances. But, equally important, is this notion of rehearsal and performance scientific? Is there evidence that rehearsing and performing in this artful way lead to improved reading? The answer to that question is yes. An ever growing body of research published in peer-reviewed journals has shown that rehearsal and performance leads to improvements in fluency (both automaticity and prosody) as well as reading comprehension and overall reading proficiency (Young & Rasinski, 2009; Young & Rasinski, 2018; Young et al., 2019; Zimmerman et al., 2019). Moreover, the research has demonstrated that this artistic approach to fluency is also

motivating and satisfying for students involved in such instruction. As one student said after being involved in a readers theater program, “I never thought I could be a star, but I was the best reader today” (Martinez et al., 1999).

Teaching Reading Must be Scientific and Artful

Teaching reading is hard work. A good teacher must be both scientist and artist. Science has already weighed in on what students must develop in order to become proficient readers— phonemic awareness, phonics, vocabulary, fluency and comprehension. The artistic challenge to teachers is to develop instruction that achieves the scientific goals in ways that are aesthetic, authentic, and creative. Rather than hobbling teachers with “scientifically based approaches” that require strict adherence to a curriculum developed by outsiders without regard for individual teaching styles and students’ instructional needs, teachers must be given the professional support AND the artistic freedom to create such instruction. Teaching reading must be considered more than a skill, it must also be recognized as an art.

References

Martinez, M., Roser, N., & Strecker, S. (1999). “I never thought I could be a star”: A Readers Theatre ticket to reading fluency. The Reading Teacher, 52, 326-334. McCandliss, B., Beck, I., Sandak, R., & Perfetti, C. (2003). Focusing attention on decoding for children with poor reading skills: Design and preliminary tests of the word building intervention. Scientific Studies in Reading, 7, 75-104. National Reading Panel. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching children to read. Report of the subgroups. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health.

Paige, D. D., Young, C., Rasinski, T. V., Rupley, W. H., Nichols, W. D., & Valerio, M. (2021). Teaching reading is more than a science: It’s also an art. Reading Research Quarterly, 56(1), S339-S350. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.388 Rasinski, T. (2005a). Daily Word Ladders-Grades 2-4. Scholastic. Rasinski, T. (2005b). Daily Word Ladders- Grades 4-6. Scholastic. Rasinski, T. (2008). Daily Word Ladders- Grades 1-2. Scholastic. Rasinski, T. V. (2010). The fluent reader: Oral and silent reading strategies for building word recognition, fluency, and comprehension (2nd ed.). Scholastic. Rasinski, T. V., Reutzel, C. R., Chard, D. & Linan-Thompson, S. (2011). Reading Fluency. In M. L. Kamil, P. D. Pearson, B. Moje, & P. Afflerbach E (Eds.), Handbook of Reading Research, Volume IV (pp. 286-319). Routledge.

Rosenblatt, L. M. (1978). The Reader, the Text, and the Poem: The Transactional Theory of the Literary Work. Southern Illinois University Press. Samuels, S. J. (2007). The DIBELS tests: Is speed of barking at print what we mean by fluency? Reading Research Quarterly, 42, 563-566. Shanahan, T. (2021, Nov 6). What is the Science of Reading? Shanahan on Literacy. https://www.shanahanonliteracy.com/blog/what-is-the-science-of-reading1#sthash.HzLZUTFg.dpbs Young, C., & Rasinski, T. (2009). Implementing readers theatre as an approach to classroom fluency instruction. The Reading Teacher, 63(1), 4–13. Young, C., & Rasinski, T. (2018). Readers Theatre: effects on word recognition automaticity and reading prosody. Journal of Research in Reading, 41, 475-485. Young, C., Durham, P., Miller, M., Rasinski, T., & Lane, F. (2019). Improving reading comprehension with readers theater. Journal of Educational Research, 112:5, 615-626, doi: 10.1080/00220671.2019.1649240

Young, C., & Nageldinger, J. (2017). Considering the context and texts for fluency: Performance, readers theater, and poetry. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 7(1), 47-56. Retrieved from https://www.iejee.com/index.php/IEJEE/article/view/63 Young, C., Paige, D., & Rasinski, T. (2022). Artfully Teaching the Science of Reading. Routledge. Zimmerman, B. S., Rasinksi, T. V., Kruse, S. D., Was, C. A., Rawson, K. A., Dunlosky, J., & Nikbakht, E. (2019). Enhancing outcomes for struggling readers: Empirical analysis of the fluency development lesson, Reading Psychology, 40(1), 70-94. doi: 10.1080/02702711.2018.1555365

Dr. Timothy Raskinski is a renowned Professor of Literacy Education at Kent State University and formerly director of its Reading and Writing Development Center. He is past president of the Association of Literacy Educators and Researchers, a member of the International Reading Hall of Fame, and one of the top two percent of scientists worldwide. He can be reached at trasinsk@kent.edu.

Dana Oliver

The Becoming of Teachers as Passionate Readers: What Makes the Difference?

Introduction & Pertinent Background

Teachers should be readers who engage in personal reading, are highly involved in their students’ literary experiences, and are able to recommend high quality children’s books to students (International Literacy Association, 2018a). The development of teachers who serve as literacy partners to K-12 students begins in the teacher preparation program (International Literacy Association, 2018b). Yet research demonstrates preservice teachers often do not enter their programs with regular habits of reading and may express open avoidance or little enthusiasm for leisure reading (Applegate et al., 2014). Researchers have also identified instances wherein preservice teachers report positive attitudes towards reading and yet do not engage in the actual activity of leisure reading (Davis-Duerr, 2010; Kennedy, 2014; Lancellot, 2017; Rimensberger, 2014; Skaar et al., 2018; Walker- Dalhouse et al., 2011). Preservice teachers who do not engage in personal reading may try to present a positive attitude toward leisure reading, but their ultimate ability to model a love of reading, recommend books to children, and select appropriate reading strategies in their future classroom may be limited (Benevides & Peterson, 2010). “The danger lies in learners seeing behind the surface attitudes” (Rimensberger, 2014, p. 6). Teachers’ preconceived notions of reading in their personal lives, as either being enjoyable and meaningful or unimportant, are easily identifiable by students and impact the behaviors and perceptions of their students (Applegate et al., 2014). Data indicates students who engage in and enjoy leisure reading also experience higher levels of reading achievement (Benevides & Peterson, 2010; Burgess & Jones, 2010; Mullis et al., 2012; Whitten, Labby, & Sullivan, 2016). It is, therefore, crucial for teacher educators to work to create in preservice teachers a genuine passion and habit with leisure reading which can be perceived by and passed on to their future students (Applegate et al., 2014). To make meaning of leisure reading dispositions and the forces which may facilitate those dispositions, Lancellot (2017) stated additional research is needed “to further examine the ways in which teachers have an influence on their students’ attitudes, beliefs, and values of reading” and to “ensure teacher candidates are intrinsically motivated to read” (p. 176). In response to this call, I offer the following synopsis of my dissertation study (Oliver, 2020).

Problem, Purpose, and Research Questions

The problem addressed in this study is a lack of consistency in preservice teachers’ attitudes, values, and beliefs about leisure reading and their current engagement in leisure reading (Davis-Duerr, 2010; Kennedy, 2014; Lancellot, 2017; Rimensberger, 2014; Skaar et al.,

2018; Walker- Dalhouse et al., 2011). To fully investigate and encapsulate all aspects related to understanding the phenomenon of leisure reading, this study utilized the term disposition to better understand not only the actions of preservice teachers but also the underlying attitudes, values, and beliefs which guide the behaviors. The researcher gleaned a definition from across the literature to recognize leisure reading dispositions as a conceptual process wherein repetitive forces aid in developing attitudes, values, and beliefs which influence the likelihood of recurring participation in reading for pleasure among preservice teachers. The purpose of this study was to describe factors facilitating the leisure reading dispositions in elementary preservice teachers in a rural southern university in the United States. Research has affirmed coursework in educator preparatory programs has the capability of positively impacting dispositions (Applegate & Applegate, 2004; Applegate et al., 2014; Kennedy, 2014; Kindle & Schmidt, 2011; Pet, 2012). Since dispositions are impressionable, a better understanding of preservice teachers’ lived experiences related to the development of leisure reading dispositions was necessary. The following questions guided the researcher in eliciting descriptions of lived experiences preservice teachers report contributed to the process of developing attitudes, values, beliefs, and behaviors regarding leisure reading. In addition to eliciting descriptions of participants’ experiences, the research questions sought to discover how the preservice teachers experienced the forces facilitating described dispositions.

Overarching Research Question: What forces facilitate leisure reading dispositions in preservice teachers in an elementary teaching program? Secondary Research Questions: Who or what influences the forces facilitating leisure reading dispositions? How are the forces facilitating leisure reading dispositions experienced? What are the perceptions of leisure reading that emerge from the preservice teachers’ lived experiences?

Theoretical Framework

Affect theory (Deleuze, 1968; Massumi, 1995; Tomkins, 1962) was chosen for use in the study as it allows for consideration of a wide breadth of possible forces which may facilitate leisure reading disposition. Affect is understood by Tomkins (1962), Deleuze (1968), and Massumi (1995) to be a distinct precursory, unconscious experience separate from and yet resulting in an emotional experience or expression. The combined research on affect, although each slightly unique, allows for the conceptualization of a cyclic process essential to understanding the effects of various forces on the becoming of individuals. Unique to this study was looking at how the affects engaging in various exchanges, internal or external, social or otherwise, add to the becoming, or development, of preservice teachers’ leisure reading dispositions.

Synthesis of the Literature

Understanding leisure reading dispositions necessitates reviewing the existing literature to determine what forces may already be identified as contributing to the dispositional development of all students, including preservice teachers. When dispositions are analyzed within the context of literacy, and specifically leisure reading, the literature reviewed exposed numerous forces impacting the development of leisure reading dispositions. These forces were themed into two overarching categories: barriers to positive leisure reading dispositions and springboards for positive leisure reading dispositions. The analysis of literature conveying barriers to positive literacy dispositions largely reveals that potential readers relate struggles with time management (Burgess & Jones, 2010; Granado & Puig, 2015; Kennedy, 2014; Lancellot, 2017; Skaar et al., 2018), negative school experiences (Applegate et al., 2014; Granado & Puig, 2015; Kennedy, 2014; Lancellot, 2017; Skaar et al., 2018), and wide access to alternative forms of immediate entertainment (Burgess & Jones, 2010; Huang et al., 2014; Skaar et al., 2018). The study of literature conveying either a positive regard for pleasure reading, a tendency for pleasure reading, or both, revealed overlays which were categorized into the themes positive encounters in the home (Applegate et al., 2014; Benevides & Peterson, 2010; Granado & Puig, 2015; Lancellot, 2017; Stocks, 2011; Walker-Dalhouse et al., 2011), experiences with teachers as literacy leaders (Applegate et al., 2014; Granado & Puig, 2015; Huang et al., 2014), and intrinsic rewards (Applegate et al., 2014; Granado & Puig, 2015; Howard, 2011; Lancellot, 2017; Skaar et al., 2018). Integrating the cognitive and affective domains of literacy learning surfaced in the literature review as including multiple strategies with significant impacts on leisure reading dispositions (Darling-Hammond & Adamson, 2014; Davidson, 2010; Fisher et al., 2016; Fisher et al., 2018; Kunter et al., 2011; McConnell & Kraft, 2011; Rodrigo et al., 2014). Specific strategies suggested for building positive preservice teacher dispositions while in teacher preparation programs included providing opportunities for developing awareness of self as a reader and reflection on professional and personal goals (Berndt, 2015; DeBiase, 2017; Dengler, 2018; Kennedy, 2014; Kindle & Schmidt, 2011; Stocks, 2011) as well as development of activities connecting reading to personal lives (Applegate et al., 2014; Kennedy, 2014; Skaar et al., 2018).

Methodology

The paradigm followed during the study was qualitative inquiry. The qualitative research paradigm is used when researchers intend to understand how people interpret and make meaning of their experiences (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The specific methodology deriving from the problem and research questions was phenomenology. Phenomenology was an appropriate choice for studying leisure reading dispositions because the approach focuses on collecting rich descriptions of the participants’ experiences through one-on-one interviews (Creswell & Poth, 2018).

A purposeful sampling strategy guided the selection of participants (Patton, 2015). Participants were invited to participate in the study if they met the following criteria: (a) they expressed having had experiences related to leisure reading which influenced their attitudes, values, beliefs, and behaviors with leisure reading; (b) were elementary majors in the university’s education program; (c) were in their student teaching semester; and (d) they had completed all literacy education courses at the specific university where the study was taking place.

The recorded interviews were transcribed, and statements which revealed participants’ experiences with the phenomenon were separated from the original transcript to more clearly see the experiences directly related to the development of the leisure reading disposition (Moustakas, 1994). The researcher then utilized the statements to write textual descriptions of what the participants experienced as well as structural descriptions to explain how they experienced it (Creswell & Poth, 2018). After writing a textural-structural description for each participant, a composite summary of textural and structural descriptions then portrayed the essence and meaning of the phenomenon of leisure reading dispositions (Moustakas, 1994).

Increasing Validity

Qualitative studies such as this ethically requires that the researcher avoid bias to the extent possible using specific validity strategies (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Credibility was achieved through with the following strategies: triangulation (Creswell & Poth, 2018), adequate engagement in data collection (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016), and reflective meditation (Moustakas, 1994), epoche, (Moustakas, 1994) and researcher’s reflexivity (Merriam and Tisdell 2016). Reflective meditation, epoche, and researcher’s reflexivity help the researcher set aside all presuppositions, prejudices, and prior experiences with the phenomenon so that it is looked at with an openness which accepts the truth of only what is reported about the phenomenon by the participants. The three types of data utilized to achieve triangulation of data sources were interview transcriptions, field notes, and correspondences from member checks. To achieve credibility through transferability, rich depictions of the context, setting, and participants were included for readers to decide whether the study conclusions were applicable within their contexts (Creswell & Poth, 2018; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).

Analysis Procedures and Descriptions Table

The data analysis processes described by Moustakas (1994) guided the researcher to identify invariant constituents, statements representing phenomenon-related experiences. An example of an invariant constituent from Participant 1 is, “I also grew up watching my parents read heavily.” This invariant constituent, statement, represents a phenomenon-related experience, something the participant stated relates to her leisure reading attitudes, values, beliefs, and behaviors. The statements, invariant constituents, were used to write textural descriptions depicting what was experienced by each participant. The textural descriptions were organized

into core textural themes for each participant. Participant 1’s statement shared previously was bundled within the textural theme Communities of Influence. Each participant’s textural descriptions and core textural themes were essential to the process of imaginative variation which allowed the researcher to glean possible underlying dynamics contributing to the development of leisure reading dispositions (Moustakas, 1994). The process of imaginative variation was used to envision and write structural descriptions which relate how the dispositions came to be. For example, Participant 1’s statements related to experiences and emotions felt while with other readers or non-readers were bundled within the core textural theme Communities of Influence. The core textural theme and textural description were taken into account in developing the structural description which pinpoints connections with reading models as a force facilitating the leisure reading disposition of Participant 1. In the last data analysis steps, the researcher developed textural-structural descriptions which explicate the overall essence of each participants’ leisure reading disposition, and a composite description for the group was developed to include the overarching findings of the study. The core textural themes and a synthesized structural description depicting how the disposition came to be is included in Table 1. A composite description and overarching themes will follow Table 1.

Table 1 Core Textural Themes and Structural Descriptions

Participants Core Textural Themes (What was Experienced) Structural Description (How Developed)

Participant 1: Adysen a) Communities of Influence

b) Perceptions of Accessibility

c) Purpose Set for Reading

d) Personal Feelings about Reading and Teaching ● Love for and connections with reading models are the main facilitating force.

Early connections with family spur reading engagement until negative peer influences halt reading engagement in middle school. Positive connections with reading models during college and adulthood revitalize a lost love of reading. Awareness of the importance of leisure reading stimulates problem solving regarding issues which currently constrain time for reading.

Participant 2: Catherine a) Exposure to Literacy

Leaders

b) Perceptions of Accessibility

c) Purpose for Reading

Participant 3: Wendy a) Preferred Learning Style

b) Environments Encountered

c) Engagement with Various

Book Genres

d) Fluctuating Feelings about Reading and Teaching

Participant 4: Leanne a) Communities of Influence

b) Perceptions of Accessibility

c) Purpose Set for Reading

d) Personal Feelings about

Reading ● Most influenced by feelings of freedom, power, excitement, pride, and connection. A belief in the importance of freedom of choice is influenced by negative and restricted reading experiences in daughter’s life. Continued enjoyment in reading and connection with others who enjoy reading nourishes a passion that seeks to overcome obstacles which constrain available time for leisure reading.

● Resentment, resistance, and a lack of confidence have created significant barriers to her disposition. Feelings of resentment and regret are connected to a perceived lack of attention on reading development during early childhood.

Resistance to reading coupled with a lack of confidence contribute to fluctuating feelings towards reading generated during positive experiences in unrestricted and visually engaging reading environments ● Early connections with family members and friends helped to generate a positive disposition towards leisure reading that continued until negative peer influences and perceptions of accessibility interrupted reading engagement during middle school. Connections with readers in high school and college rekindle a love and appreciation for leisure reading but continued time constraints and skills needed to access books hinder engagement.

Participant 5: Hannah a) Restricted Reading Environments

b) Unrestricted Reading

Environments

c) Communities of Influence ● Feelings of closeness and enjoyment of literature established by mother in early childhood are derailed by anguish and despair in K-12 restricted reading environments, specifically related to

Accelerated Reader and assigned readings in high school. Unrestricted reading environments in college and adulthood reestablish curiosity ultimately reigniting a love of literature and desire to share literature with others.

Participant 6: Kendra a) Unrestricted and

Encouraging Reading

Environments

b) Restricted Reading Environments

c) Perceived Time Constraints

d) Personal Purpose and Desire to Prioritize Reading ● Feelings of persistent delight in literature modeled by her mother build determination to read despite obstacles related to limited access to books through book leveling systems in school and perceived access to time for reading in adulthood. Personal desire and enjoyment of reading give positive vitality to her reading disposition.

Participant 7: Marley a) Unrestricted and Stress-free

Reading Environments b) Restricted Reading

Experiences c) Project-Based Literacy

Assignments

● Emotional anxieties faced in Accelerated Reader program unraveled a foundational appreciation and love for leisure reading established during early childhood. Emotions and experiences throughout her years as a young adult helped to revive her interest and engagement in reading for pleasure. Note. Column one lists the seven preservice teachers involved in the study. Column two represents the core textural themes describing what was experienced by preservice teachers. Column three represents the synthesized structural descriptions relating how each disposition came to be developed throughout the lives of participants. Reprinted from Oliver, D. R. (2020). A phenomenological inquiry: Discovering forces facilitating leisure reading dispositions of elementary preservice teachers (28001828) [Doctoral dissertation, Southwestern College] ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global: The Humanities and Social Science Collection.

Composite Description as Key Findings

The last step in Moustakas’ (1994) steps of data analysis required the researcher utilize the individual textural-structural descriptions to develop a composite description of essences “representing the group as a whole” (p. 121). The composite description characterizes the complete essence of the phenomenon. It is the “intuitive integration of the fundamental textural

and structural descriptions into a unified statement of the essences of the experience of the phenomenon as a whole” (Moustakas, 1994, p. 100). The essence of leisure reading dispositions included in this study is best described through the emergence of four overarching themes which are presented here as 4 key findings of the study:

Finding 1. Elementary preservice teachers’ leisure reading dispositions are susceptible to the communities of people who influence them.

Finding 2. Elementary preservice teachers’ leisure reading dispositions are inherently linked to the purposes they hold for reading.

Finding 3. Elementary preservice teachers’ leisure reading dispositions are a reflection of the view they hold of themselves as a reader.

Finding 4. Elementary preservice teachers’ leisure reading dispositions are susceptible to perceptions of freedom and accessibility.

Finding One: Elementary preservice teachers’ leisure reading dispositions are susceptible to the communities of people who influence them.

Communities of people who influenced the participants included family members, peers, teachers from elementary, middle, and high school levels, as well as college professors. Prior to entering school, the home environment was able to lay a foundational love of reading. All participants told stories that illustrated various in-home routines they had with their mothers, siblings, and grandparents. Adysen illustrates an example of these crucial routines as she recalled,

I remember every single night before I went to bed, my mom would always say, “Go pick a book out of the bookshelf, come in here, and we'll read it.” So, we'd always sit down every night, old brown rocking chair, I'm feeling nostalgic now thinking of it, and we'd read two or three books before bed.

The relationships built with literacy leaders in school were also important to inspiring positive leisure reading dispositions. Catherine illustrated the power of a teacher to broaden the reading engagement of students as she recounted the effect of her experiences in Mr. Patton’s sixth-grade classroom as he read Matilda (Dahl, 1988):

It just encouraged me, even more, to seek out books that I might not normally have chosen and to try them and find new things and read outside of my series that I was so in love with. And learning that there's this whole big world of authors, and the world of books is so much bigger than what you know, what I had been trying. Although I had read lots of books, I had kind of saddled myself to series because I liked the consistency. I liked the comfort of that. . . So, it helped me to become more open-minded when I would go to the library, like “Let me try this over here. No, it's not a series, but it will be okay.” And, more often than not, I ended up loving whatever I chose.

The impact of a teacher does not stop in the K-12 school district. Adysen, Catherine,

Wendy, and Hannah also referred to the influence of a college professor. Wendy noted the positive influence of her Introduction to Literature professor. Adysen recalled her Children’s Literature professor was the “only person in college that really pushed for that [leisure reading].” Just as teachers can influence dispositions positively, they also have the ability to make negative impacts, even if they are unintentional. This is best captured as Adysen explained,

I feel like I had good reading teachers my sixth and seventh-grade year, but they didn't facilitate a love of reading. They didn't push very heavily for leisure reading. It was more of lessons and content and not really setting aside time to leisure read in class or pushing for us to read outside of class, like in elementary school. . . They didn't push for it. . . That aspect that kind of hurts students as well, not pushing that.

The impact of peers was also a significant influencing factor for all participants. When asked who Wendy felt influenced her disposition the most during her years in school, she stated, “Teachers and your peers, especially your peers. I feel like I learned a lot from my peers, sometimes more than I can learn from teachers, just because they can explain in a total different way for me to understand.” Often, peers were noted by participants as being able to have a positive influence, but Adysen and Leanne also noted middle school peers did not view reading as something popular to do. Adysen even noted that she was made fun of for being seen reading. She explained, “I think, kind of, that might have influenced me in a way of getting away from reading because I thought, ‘Well, nobody else is doing it, so I'm not going to. Um, it's not cool to read.’” This finding reveals the importance of communities of influencers and demonstrates the power of families, peers, and teachers to facilitate dispositions in both positive and negative ways.

Finding Two: Elementary preservice teachers’ leisure reading dispositions are inherently linked to the purposes they hold for reading.

All participating preservice teachers related being driven to read for various purposes. Purposes for reading that continue to impact them today are largely intrinsic in nature and most commonly revolve around the desire to connect with others and advance their own life satisfaction. Kendra, Hannah, Catherine, and Wendy all shared stories that illustrate this finding. Wendy related, “When I do that [leisure read], I do feel more calm, more centered and can just let go of things that I am keeping.” Hannah stated, “It's like a stress reliever too, because, even on my most stressful days, I just want to go home and kick my feet up and read. I don't want to do anything else.” Kendra and Catherine relied on books to pass time during moments of trial, like the absence of a father or during family disagreements. Kendra stated, “Reading was usually how I handled my emotions. Instead of lashing out or crying or something, I'd just usually read a book, and I was just happy reading a book.” Hannah also related the experience of enjoying the escape books can offer now as an adult: “I just get into my own universe about whatever's going on in my book. Again, I'm reading the Unwind series, and I just started the last book, so my mind's always on like [the characters] Risa and whatever Connor's doing and what's going to

happen with Cam.” All participants discussed the value of connecting with others through shared reading experiences. Hannah, like Catherine and Kendra, continues to share reading experiences with her mother. Leanne further illustrated the joy sharing in literature brought her as a young child in elementary school:

One time, me and one of my friends tried to make a little book club, but nobody else joined. So, we just did it ourselves. [laughing] We read the same book, and then we would wait for each other to get on the next chapter or whatever. But I don't know. That was fun.

Hannah summarized one purpose for reading as the need for connecting with others when she stated, “I want to tell people all the time about the latest book that I've read.” Adysen, Hannah, Leanne, Catherine, and Marley also shared they read for the purpose of extending learning related to their work in the classroom. As K-12 students, participants related they were sometimes driven to read through the extrinsic rewards they received. Adysen and Leanne stated they both enjoyed reading for incentives. Catherine recalled “pride” at being “recognized” for turning in reading logs as teachers would place a sticker on the wall each time she turned in a reading log. Alternatively, Hannah revealed the way she experienced the lack of receiving rewards as punishment, “It almost made it feel like a punishment that I wasn't reading well enough.” The use of a technology-based independent reading motivation and management program called Accelerated Reader (Renaissance, n.d.) was discussed by six of the seven participants. While three participants related they equated joy with the receiving of rewards associated with earning point goals set within the Accelerated Reader program, all three of these participants experienced significant decreases in reading behaviors as they entered middle and high school, thus indicating the reward may only have been effective in the short term. Two different participants related significant hardships and emotional turmoil experienced while trying to attain rewards tied to leisure reading. Overall, the lasting purposes held for reading in this group of participants were largely intrinsic. Participants read to connect with others and to advance life satisfaction. While six of the seven participants experienced schools with reading incentives, the success of these incentives was not consistent and was not found to have positive effects on engagement in reading beyond the time frame associated with the reward initiative in place.

Finding Three: Elementary preservice teachers’ leisure reading dispositions are a reflection of the view they hold of themselves as a reader.

The participants in this study often behaved according to the view they held of themselves as a reader. Six of the seven participants who developed positive views of self in early childhood enjoyed positive attitudes, values, beliefs, and behaviors throughout early childhood. Early in life, Wendy’s experiences influenced a self-view which communicated reading was not something she enjoyed doing. She has never adopted a view of herself as a

person who prioritizes reading for pleasure. Kendra and Catherine, two of the six participants who developed strong and positive views of self in early childhood, were largely able to retain a positive leisure reading disposition throughout their life with only ever encountering slight and brief struggles to manage time within the constraints of daily life obligations. Two additional participants, Adysen and Leanne, who enjoyed positive early childhood dispositions and views of self, had their views and dispositions reversed during their middle school years. Adysen identified herself as a strong reader in elementary school. She knew she “was on a higher level than most other students.” Adysen read widely and often in both early childhood and elementary school. It was not until the negative influences of friends in middle school and encountering less access to books in her middle school library that Adysen began to lose interest in leisure reading, identify as a nonreader, and quit reading entirely. Once in the college course Children’s Literature, a requirement for her education degree, Adysen reignited her interest and easily began to engage in reading for pleasure once again. She continues to engage and strives to better herself as a reader and model today. Leanne’s positive view of self as a reader took a turn in middle school as well. When Leanne’s peers began to see leisure reading in a negative light, she developed a view of self as a nonreader and correspondingly lost engagement in reading. Marley and Hannah also seemed to live up to the images created of themselves as readers. Marley and Hannah, two of the six participants who began life with positive views of self and dispositions, ultimately saw their views of self and dispositions shift as they encountered experiences with Accelerated Reader. Hannah stated that, through her experiences with Accelerated Reader, she began to view herself as “a terrible reader.” Throughout her years of elementary, middle, and high school this self-perception persisted, and, by high school, Hannah began to engage in cheating through the use of SparkNotes, an online reference website providing website visitors with summaries of books. This experience only brought about further negative feelings which propelled a lack of engagement in leisure reading. Hannah explained that cheating in this manner was, “really embarrassing for myself. Too, whenever I think about it, in high school, I was a straight-A student and to think that I was a straight-A student who was, like [long pause], I felt like I was cheating on that time, too. . . So, knowing that I'm a straight-A student, knowing that I'm capable, and then knowing I wasn't pushing myself. It was a lot of being really hard on myself.” Once Hannah entered college, she encountered an environment that encouraged her to reconsider her beliefs about herself and reading. In time, Hannah was able to rebuild a positive disposition. With a renewed positive view of herself as a reader, Hannah began to engage in reading more consistently for the purpose of enjoyment. Marley also began with a positive view of self and disposition in early childhood but was thrown off course by experiences in Accelerated Reader. As she struggled to meet her goals in the time set, she developed a less confident view of self as a reader. She perceived herself a slow reader who struggled to meet expectations of her teachers. She associated stress and anxiety with leisure reading, and, once she was free of the requirement to read for Accelerated Reader, she quit engaging in leisure reading altogether.

For both Hannah and Marley, their positive self view and positive disposition in early childhood was derailed and replaced with a negative view resulting in a negative disposition until positive experiences were again able to restore their view of self and ultimately rebuild their disposition. The researcher also carefully analyzed whether it was the beliefs about oneself that influenced the behavior or beliefs about leisure reading influencing behaviors. Hannah stated when discussing her deteriorating disposition,

I want to say it started in third grade that reading was put on me, and those AR [Accelerated Reader] goals kind of became an issue and then the older I got, the more I thought, “I'm a terrible reader. What's the point in even reading? This isn't fun anymore. I don't want to do it.”

In this excerpt, it seems that the belief of oneself, “I’m a terrible reader,” predicates the belief about leisure reading, “this isn’t fun anymore,” and finally influences the behavior, “I don’t want to do it.” This study, therefore, adds further clarity for understanding the degree to which Accelerated Reader can potentially influence students’ views of themselves and ultimately their leisure reading dispositions. Altogether the views participants held of themselves proved to have direct implications for their leisure reading behaviors.

Finding Four: Elementary preservice teachers’ leisure reading dispositions are susceptible to perceptions of freedom and accessibility.

Freedom to select reading material of interest as well as accessibility to reading, in a physical sense and in regard to time for reading, was repeatedly noted to be of importance throughout the participant interviews. Books were available and read to each participant within the home environment prior to formally beginning school. However, once entering school, Hannah, Kendra, Marley, and Leanne related perceived limitations to physical access to books due to the restrictions placed on them within the leveling system of Accelerated Reader. This limitation resulted in feelings of “annoyance” for both Kendra and Leanne. Although Leanne stated she felt she had a good variety of books she liked in her level, there would be times where,

Your friend would be reading, and she’d tell me about it. I'd be like, “Oh, I really want I read that,” but it'd be too high or too low, and I wouldn't be able to test on it. And then it would just kind of be “Well, I'll read that during the summer.” . . . but then summer would come, and I’d forget . . . [I felt] annoyed because I wanted to read different books, but I felt like I was kind of steered in a different direction when I could have read fun books.

Neither Marley nor Hannah wanted to engage in leisure reading for most of their time in K- 12 schools and directly related this to their experience with Accelerated Reader (AR). Marley stated, “I think when I started getting deep into the AR program was when I started to not like reading as much.” She explained how the leveling system influenced her: “We had a range of what we could read. So, we can only go down this low on this level. You could have went a little

higher, but you can't go lower.” The restricted reading experiences in the Accelerated Reader program had detrimental effects on Marley’s reading disposition:

It made me not want to leisure read at all. It didn't make me view it as leisure reading at all. Once I got in seventh grade and got out of the AR thing from sixth grade and down, I didn't read unless I had to for English, and I didn't start reading again probably till college.

After sixth-grade, Marley never again went to the library to check out a library book. Hannah felt punished by the reward system in place with Accelerated Reader, but the leveling system also affected her behaviors with leisure reading. She explained,

They had a dot system, and on your library card, they would put the color of dots that you were allowed to read. And I remember I was like a dark green and that was like mid-level. The highest level in our elementary library, the fifth, sixth-grade library, was hot pink. And there were so many hot, hot pink books that I really wanted to read, but I was told I wasn't allowed to because my library card didn't show that I could read those because the level was too high . . . it was like they set my own bar for me.

While Catherine’s own public-school experience did not include limited access to books, she did discuss the anger and frustration she feels as a parent who has a daughter limited by the leveling system of Accelerated Reader. She related how her daughter refused to read books unless they are first checked to ensure they are “in her level” because the daughter feels reading outside of the level is a waste of time, as reading books outside of her range will not earn her any points at school. Catherine stated,

That's not the relationship I want my child to have with books. And so where I went out of my way to find books and find stories and read and went out of my way to find time to read those books and explore those stories, my daughter now goes out of her way to try to avoid those books, and avoid those stories, and avoid those adventures because times are different. Her circumstances are so vastly different than the ones that I experienced, and she doesn't have those liberties that I had and the encouragement that I had. She's being encouraged to read, which I was also, but only if it fits inside this box and that's not how my child works. I can't speak for every child, but it frustrates her and to the point where she gives up.

Catherine’s own experiences with freedom of choice make observing her daughter’s current struggles with a leveled book system even harder. As a child, Catherine recalled, “It made me feel a little bit powerful that I had the freedom to choose what I was curious about and what I was interested in.” Kendra, Hannah, and Wendy related feelings of resentment towards situations wherein they were forced to read materials they were uninterested in. For example, Kendra stated, “I hated being told, ‘You have to read this.’” In addition to restrictions on reading and perceived lack of freedom to choose, participants related their struggles accessing time for

reading at various points in their lived experiences. During elementary school, both Hannah and Marley related they felt immense pressure to read at rates beyond their ability in order to reach Accelerated Reader point goals. Marley described her struggle to read within the time constraints needed to achieve her point goal:

Maybe just the goals were too high. Like if it [the point goal] could have just been set for [Drop Everything and Read] DEAR time, which I know you have to read at home, but they were just too much. Maybe they just made my goals too high, where it made me stress out. I felt like I had to read all weekend.

Once Marley, Leanne, Wendy, and Adysen reached middle school, time to read became limited. Marley illustrates the common struggle, “I played basketball. So, I never really had time to just, you know, feel the need to wanna sit down and read.” Catherine explained the workrelated struggle common also to Kendra and Leanne:

I was so overwhelmed by adulting, if you will, that I took 14 hours of classes and I worked 35 hours a week. So I didn't, I would leave class, change my clothes, get in my car, drive to work, work until 11:00 o'clock at night, drive back to the dorms, do homework until I couldn't keep my eyes open anymore, get up and do it all again the next day. And so, yeah, it was really kind of sad for me because there was a lot going on in my life at the time, and I would have loved nothing more than to have grabbed a book and sat in my dorm room and read the day away but it wasn't an option at that time.

Six of the seven participants expressed a continued struggle to make time for leisure reading. Marley, Leanne, and Catherine discussed the value of now having access to audiobooks which make accessing time to reading easier as they are able to engage in reading while working on additional tasks like working or driving. Kendra related she has learned to balance her time to incorporate reading more regularly. Her method for balancing reveals the place reading takes in her current life: “If I'm really into a book, I'll put off sleep, or laundry, or something else that needs to be done so I can finish it.” Adysen related her personal efforts to make more time for reading as she described, “I still feel like I have a lot of work to do on being a better reader and setting aside time for it, but I feel like, if I do just a little bit each day, it'll make me grow more.” Overall, access to perceived quality texts, the freedom and power to select books according to their will, and the desire to read despite complex issues related to time constraints were evident throughout study interviews.

Overview of the Findings as Related to the Research Questions

The overarching research question to be answered through the inquiry process was, “What forces facilitate leisure reading dispositions in preservice teachers in an elementary teaching program?” The summary of findings revealed elementary preservice teachers were susceptible to the communities of people who influence them, the purposes they hold for leisure reading, their view of self as a reader, and their perceptions of freedom and accessibility.

The initial secondary research question addressed was, “Who or what influences the forces facilitating leisure reading dispositions?” Of all the secondary research questions, this one was the most difficult to discern. This difficulty became clear as the researcher sought to discover who or what influenced the communities which influenced participants in the study. From the transcripts, no evidence was found to identify who or what influenced the parents that served as strong reading models for their children. However, there were occasionally parental choices that were influenced by identifiable sources. For instance, Leanne’s mother often drove them to a nearby town to visit the library. Leanne related this was due to the limited supply of books available within the public library in which the family lived. In elementary school, Hannah was punished by her parents, made to spend the evening of her brother's birthday celebration alone reading in her room because a teacher had called home to alert parents that Hannah had not met an Accelerated Reader goal. This event caused Hannah great despair, and she admitted to hating reading after the event, never again meeting an Accelerated Reader goal. When Marley was asked to reflect on who or what she felt influenced her negative experiences with Accelerated Reader she similarly stated, “Probably just my reading teacher that I had from fourth grade to sixth grade. Just because she was kind of in charge of it.” Alternatively, when Catherine was asked who or what she perceived influenced her daughter's negative experiences with Accelerated Reader she stated, “I don't know who makes the decision to use the programs. I don't know if that comes from the district or the state. But the teacher is responsible for executing the program to the guidelines that they're given.” This quote opens up a broader question of who or what may be truly mandating the use of the program that was noted by six of the seven participants as facilitating at least some negative influence on their disposition. When considering who or what influences the views readers hold of themselves it seemed the best indication came from Hannah who stated, “The teachers and students just kind of had that grip on my mind that, ‘Hannah, you can’t do this.’” The notion that it is the communities of people who surrounded the participants which influenced their view of self was further supported by Catherine’s assertion that she felt “recognized” for her ability at school, and Leanne’s story of the teacher who made a lasting impact on her through providing her with encouragement and compliments related to reading. The influencer of perceived access to time was clearer. The addition of homework experienced in the secondary and higher education courses as well as extra-curricular activities and the need to engage in work to maintain a living wage were largely attributed to lack of access to time for reading. The next secondary research question was, “How are the forces facilitating leisure reading dispositions experienced?” The emotions experienced with communities of influence depended largely upon the level of encouragement for reading being provided by the people involved. When participants encountered people of influence that were encouraging, they often felt emotions of joy and love. This was evident throughout the commentary of six of the seven participants who had joyful reading experiences with their mothers in early childhood, and also by Wendy when she finally began to associate “joy” with reading in her favored high school

teacher's classroom. When Adysen encountered teachers in middle school she perceived as not pushing her to read, she stated that it “hurt students.” When she visited the library only to find books she did not perceive as engaging, as well as when she was ridiculed by peers for reading, she felt “disappointment.” When allowed access to time for reading around the room during DEAR time, all participants related feelings of enjoyment. When perceived access to time and books was limited in elementary school through her experiences with Accelerated Reader, Marley described her emotions as “stressful.” Catherine described the emotions she witnesses in her daughter as “anxious, nervous, and scared.” Hannah described the influence of Accelerated Reader as making her feel “ashamed,” “upset and discouraged,” as well as “embarrassed” and “defeated.” Wendy and Leanne noted how their feelings and emotions could transform during a reading experience. While at first, they related they might be resistant to reading, the story and the ability to talk about the book with their peers often had the potential to shift their emotions to feelings of excitement and enjoyment. When participants' views of self as a reader were positively influenced and they began to see themselves with more positive regard, they were also more likely to experience leisure reading with emotions of happiness and joy. Ultimately, emotions describing experiences of participants were more likely to be positive when opportunities to share literature were present and encouragement, freedom, and access to time were perceived. The last secondary research question was, “What are the perceptions of leisure reading that emerge from the preservice teachers’ lived experience?” The perception of leisure reading that emerged from the totality of the lived experiences of participants is that leisure reading is joyful, exciting, and adds value to your life when experienced under specific conditions. The conditions revealed as necessary included: involvement with communities of people who encourage them and share in their reading experiences, maintaining an intrinsic purpose for reading and positive view of oneself as a reader, and freedom to select materials of personal interest with access to time for engagement.

Implications for Policies and Practices

The insights and findings that emerge from his study have tremendous potential to positively influence the development of leisure reading dispositions of students in K-20 educational systems. The following section outlines recommendations K-12 school districts, institutions of higher education, and educator preparatory programs should consider as they engage in decision making actions which contribute to the leisure reading dispositions of students in their care. Recommendations are organized in relation to each of the key findings.

Key Finding One Recommendations

K-12 school districts, institutions of higher education, and educator preparatory programs should be intentional in designing environments which allow for positive communities of influence to flourish. This includes ensuring opportunities for teachers and students to discuss

books in the classroom and further creating opportunities which allow students to recommend books to one another and engage in reading the same books when desired. This research provides explicit evidence of the effectiveness and importance of including a children’s literature course within the preparatory programs completed by preservice teachers. Courses outside of children’s literature were also mentioned as influential. Three participants related the way book readings and discussion in other courses, including one general education course and three additional required education courses, stimulated their interest and engagement in reading for pleasure. Due to this testimony, it is recommended that professors throughout higher education incorporate discussions of text which allow students to demonstrate their understandings and enjoyment in the literature assigned to them.

Key Finding Two Recommendations

K-12 school districts, institutions of higher education, and educator preparatory programs should be intentional in helping students establish and maintain intrinsic purposes for reading. This study revealed reading rewards and incentive programs did not make lasting impacts on reading dispositions, while the more intrinsically related purposes for reading surfaced as longlasting and continually available outlets to motivate engagement throughout the lifetime. Moreover, when students feared denial in engagement in school wide parties and field trips, significant and negative affectual consequences were experienced. The negative effects of reward systems should encourage schools to address resulting implications for the disregard of students’ affectual and emotional well-being as well as their obligation to maintain confidentiality of students’ academic information.

Key Finding Three Recommendations

K-12 school districts, institutions of higher education, and educator preparatory programs should be intentional in engaging students in reflective activities and discussion which guide students in becoming aware of the views they hold of themselves as readers and further capitalize on transitional opportunities. Due to the commentaries in this study which demonstrated participants’ ability to reflect on their behaviors and ultimate influence in the classroom, it is especially critical that literacy education instructors intentionally engage preservice teachers in the process of reflecting on their experiences and articulating their attitudes, values, and beliefs about leisure reading so that dispositional change can occur as needed. Students should be guided to articulate connections between their experiences and their current dispositions, envision desired dispositions, as well as communicate an understanding of how their dispositions will influence others or future students. Transitional opportunities which this research revealed hold potential for affecting positive change at any level included providing choice in reading assignments, implementation of project-based literacy assignments, and opportunities for discussion of text which allows for personal connections between the text and

students’ lives to be revealed.

Key Finding Four Recommendations

K-12 school districts, institutions of higher education, and educator preparatory programs should make intentional efforts to address issues constraining perceived time for reading as well as ensure students have physical access to and freedom to choose books of interest to them. Categorizing students according to reading scores which are clearly communicated to others through the color labeling and book leveling system of Accelerated Reader was demonstrated to have negative effects on six of the seven participants’ leisure reading dispositions. Helping students and teachers to learn specific methods for determining the appropriate difficulty of books independently, without a labeled leveling system, could hold better potential for assisting readers in selecting appropriate texts beyond the school library and into adulthood. Discussing with students the readability of the text in conjunction with the book’s potential for satisfying the students’ purpose for reading, to escape or to learn for example, may further build the skills students will need in order to engage in reading independently of the school context and into adulthood. Allow time for in school reading and engage readers in brainstorming how to access time outside of school for leisure reading. Institutions of higher education should be conscientious of the transition of students coming from high schools and students new to the institution in general. It should not be assumed that students are familiar with utilizing library catalogs or classification systems. Intentional efforts should be made by institution faculty and library staff to demonstrate library use related processes to incoming students.

Conclusion

The purpose of this study was to describe factors facilitating the leisure reading dispositions of preservice elementary teachers just prior to graduating from their preparatory program. Although the purpose of the study was achieved, potential for change lies with the ability of stakeholders to take action. The prospects of knowledge without action are merely desires unfulfilled. While we may desire classrooms headed by passionate readers, without actionable change resistance to leisure reading among our students and teachers may persist. Freedom of choice and implications of extrinsic rewards were key areas that surfaced in this research and continue to be brought up in conversations with other teachers and leaders at conferences I’ve attended, the parents with whom I’ve spoken informally, and the future teachers who walk in the hallways and inhabit the classrooms of our higher education institutions. Eliminating leveled libraries, allowing choice, and reevaluating reward systems may not be easy places to start but they are crucial areas to begin immediately evaluating. When Leanne was asked if she felt the rewards associated with Accelerated Reader had any impact on her current leisure reading disposition she stated,

Yeah, I guess, I'm kind of a type of person where I have to, I need to know that there's a

reason why I'm doing it sometimes. So, like if I'm studying for something, I'm like, “Okay, I'm going to get through this page, and then I'm going to eat a gummy bear,” or something like that. I kind of have to reward myself in that sense, too.

This statement was troubling to the researcher, suggesting the need to better understand the long- term effects of reading rewards offered to children when they are establishing tendencies which will guide their behaviors throughout adulthood. Through this research it has been further shown that students are influenced by the reading attitudes, values, beliefs, and behaviors of their teachers. We cannot build teachers as readers through an endless supply of gummy bears or pizza or popsicles. It must be through the development of the intrinsic rewards of community and connection with characters, stories, and other readers which we build not only the readers in our k-12 classrooms, but the readers that become our teachers. It may only be through the concurrent consideration of these findings, implications, recommendations, and corresponding action steps of stakeholders that positive dispositional development in students and future teachers comes to fruition.

References

Applegate, A. J., & Applegate, M. D. (2004). The peter effect: Reading habits and attitudes of preservice teachers. Reading Teacher, 57(6), 554-563. Applegate, A. J., Applegate, M. D., Mercantini, M. A., McGeehan, C. M., Cobb, J. B., DeBoy, J. R., . . . Lewinski, K. E. (2014). The peter effect revisited: Reading habits and attitudes of college students. Literacy Research and Instruction, 53(3), 188. Benevides, T., & Peterson, S. S. (2010). Literacy attitudes, habits and achievements of future teachers. Journal of Education for Teaching, 36(3), 291. doi:10.1080/02607476.2010.497375 Berndt, R. M. (2015). Finding themselves in the "finding place": Exploring preservice teachers' professional identities and visions of teaching literacy across the curriculum. (Dissertation). ProQuest Central; ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global: The Humanities and Social Sciences Collection database. (1717897905) Burgess, S. R., & Jones, K. K. (2010). Reading and media habits of college students varying by sex and remedial status. College Student Journal, 44(2), 492-508. Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches (4 ed.). Sage Publications. Dahl, Roald. (1988). Matilda. Scholastic. Darling-Hammond, L., & Adamson, F. (2014). Beyond the bubble test: How performance assessments support 21st century learning. Jossey-Bass. Davidson, K. (2010). The integration of cognitive and sociocultural theories of literacy development: Why? How? Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 56(3), 246-256. Davis-Duerr, J. (2010). Qualitative and quantitative inquiry into the affective domain of

preservice teachers enrolled in children's literature courses. (Dissertation). ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global: The Humanities and Social Sciences Collection database. (758440138) DeBiase, J. (2017). Development of dispositions in preservice teachers. (Dissertation). ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global: The Humanities and Social Sciences Collection database. (1994223727) Deleuze, G. (1968). Différence et répétition: par Gilles Deleuze. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. Dengler, K. (2018). Aliterate pre-service teachers' reading histories: An exploratory multiple case study. (10826225 Dissertation). ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global: The Humanities and Social Sciences Collection database. (2061061820) Fisher, D., Frey, N., & Hattie, J. (2016). Visible learning for literacy: Implementing the practices that work best to accelerate student learning. Corwin Literacy. Fisher, D., Frey, N., Quaglia, R. J., Smith, D., & Lande, L. L. (2018). Engagement by design: Creating learning environments where students thrive. Corwin Literacy. Granado, C., & Puig, M. (2015). Reading identity of preservice teachers as component of their teacher identity. A study of their reading autobiographies. OCNOS, 13, 41-60. doi:10.18239/ocnos_2015.13.03 Howard, V. (2011). The importance of pleasure reading in the lives of young teens: Selfidentification, self-construction and self-awareness. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 43(1), 46-55. doi:10.1177/0961000610390992 Huang, S., Capps, M., Blacklock, J., & Garza, M. (2014). Reading habits of college students in the United States. Reading Psychology, 35(5), 437-467. doi:10.1080/02702711.2012.739593 International Literacy Association. (2018a). The case for children's rights to read. http://literacyworldwide.org/rightstoread International Literacy Association. (2018b). Transforming literacy teacher preparation: Practice makes possible. https://literacyworldwide.org/get-resources/position- statements Kennedy, A. L. S. (2014). Reading habits and attitudes of pre-service teachers: A case study. (3580314 Dissertation). ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global: The Humanities and Social Sciences Collection database. (1529705626) Kindle, K. J., & Schmidt, C. M. (2011). Outside in and inside out: Using a case study assignment in a reading methods course. Teacher Education Quarterly, 38(3), 133-149. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23479621 Kunter, M., Frenzel, A., Nagy, G., Baumert, J., & Pekrun, R. (2011). Teacher enthusiasm: Dimensionality and context specificity. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36(4), 289-301. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2011.07.001 Lancellot, M. (2017). Academic and recreational reading motivation of teacher candidates. (10687927 Dissertation). ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global: The Humanities and Social Sciences Collection database. (2001546569)

Massumi, B. (1995). The autonomy of affect. Cultural Critique (31), 83. doi:10.2307/1354446 McConnell, D. A., & Kraft, K. J. V. D. H. (2011). Affective domain and student learning in the geosciences. Journal of Geoscience Education, 59(3), 106-110. doi:10.5408/1.3604828 Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (4 ed.). Jossey-Bass. Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Foy, P., & Drucker, K. T. (2012). PIRLS 2011 International Results in Reading. (978-1-889938-65-3). Boston, MA: International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement, Boston College, Timss Pirls International Study Center. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED544362 Oliver, D. R. (2020). A phenomenological inquiry: Discovering forces facilitating leisure reading dispositions of elementary preservice teachers (28001828) [Doctoral dissertation, Southwestern College] ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global: The Humanities and Social Science Collection. Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (4 ed.). SAGE. Pet, S. R. (2012). Why "how" matters: Exploring how preservice English teachers experience reading "for pleasure" and "with an eye toward teaching" and how they conceptualize teaching literature. (Dissertation). ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global: The Humanities and Social Sciences Collection database. (1369906817) Renaissance (n.d.) Renaissance Accelerated Reader. Retrieved April 15, 2022 from: https://www.renaissance.com/products/acceleratedreader/evidence/?int_content=int_web&productName=star+math&int_source=rli&int_ medium=website&int_campaign=Parentpages&utm_source=rli&utm_medium=email& utm_campaign=FMM_CMP_05993&utm_content=GGR19&mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTkRVd0 5tTXdOMk0wWmpaaSIsInQiOiJxNnhwQThTclBmYnJDcmZJU09oRzlvdDhrQnNKe Ed1SXd4OGg1emhpUDhFSXFZcjBFODJ3TElHZlhEXC9FTFdpTGZla2lFd1ZSRVp5 K2hjOVBja1ZXVGZoemNSZ04yMFlRVXpXTDg3RkxVQXV2VGVydnBzc2k3ck9k OEtGSUlPVVMifQ%3D%3D Rimensberger, N. (2014). Reading is very important, but...: Taking stock of South African student teachers' reading habits. Reading & Writing, 5(1), 1-9. Rodrigo, V., Greenberg, D., & Segal, D. (2014). Changes in reading habits by low literate adults through extensive reading. Reading in a Foreign Language, 26(1), 73-91. https://eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=EJ1031313 Skaar, H., Elvebakk, L., & Nilssen, J. H. (2018). Literature in decline? Differences in preservice and in-service primary school teachers' reading experiences. Teaching & Teacher Education, 69, 312-323. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2017.10.019 Stocks, G. L. (2011). Prospective teachers of reading: Personal literacies of first generation and continuing generation students. (3459164 Dissertation). ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global: The Humanities and Social Sciences Collection database. (873898224)

Tomkins, S. S. (1962). Affect, imagery, consciousness: The positive affects (Vol. I). Springer Publishing Co. Walker-Dalhouse, D., Sibley, C. H., Derick Dalhouse, A., Nagwabi, R. C., & Selzler, K. (2011). Reading engagement of preservice teachers: Impact of a reading-aloud initiative. Journal of Reading Education, 37(1), 33-39. Whitten, C., Labby, S., & Sullivan, S. L. (2016). The impact of pleasure reading on academic success. Journal of Multidisciplinary Graduate Research, 2, 48-64. https://www.shsu.edu/academics/education/journal-of-multidisciplinary-graduateresearch/documents/2016/WhittenJournalFinal.pdf

Dr. Dana Oliver is an assistant professor and Reading Specialist Program Director at Southwestern Oklahoma State University. She serves as the Chair of the Oklahoma Higher Education Reading Council, on the Board of the Oklahoma Literacy Association, and ILA’s Concern for Affect in Reading Education Special Interest Group. Recently, Dr. Oliver’s dissertation, from which this article was developed, received the Distinguished Dissertation Award from the Association of Teacher Educators of Kansas. Dr. Oliver is also a recent recipient of the Oklahoma DaVinci Institute Fellowship Award. She can be reached at dana.oliver@swosu.edu.

Holly Rice

e-Books vs Print What’s the Difference?

It is safe to say we are inundated with technology. No matter what age, you cannot avoid the changes taking place in technology today. From tablets to Chromebooks used in the classrooms to cable television converting to internet in our homes, it seems you cannot dodge the change in technology. Technology is ever evolving, and you have no choice but to get onboard or to be left behind, or so it appears. We know as educators it is a must to stay on top of change, whether we want it or not. As teachers we sometimes blindly follow the trend because that is what we are instructed to do, but not without resignation and the thought of how we know that this change is for the better. It takes years of research and the collection of data to conclude that change may or may not be for the best. All the while, our students are the ones that could quite possibly be missing the boat. For example, there still remains the age-old debate in teaching reading as to what approach is best, whole language or phonics? Most can agree or find middle ground that there is a place for both and that both have unique characteristics in terms of helping a child learn to read (teachnology, 2022). There is also the matter of pen and paper versus typing. Neuroscientists have concluded that writing and reading what we have written with a pen or pencil rather than typing taps into the brain networks creating a much deeper learning experience (Terada et al., 2021). For the past ten plus years, another ongoing debatable topic is the matter of e-books versus traditional print. The questions remain, is one better than the other and is there a place for both?

Why Traditional Print?

Recent studies have shown students continue to prefer traditional print over digital screens (Baron et al., 2017; Barshay, 2019; Davidovitch et al., 2016; Kurata et al., 2017; Mizrachi, 2015). Research also suggests reading outcomes are influenced by the medium used, and currently, print supersedes digital in impact (Lenhard et al., 2017; Mangen et al., 2013; Singer & Alexander, 2017), but the margin is lessening. In a 2021 meta-analysis comparison of digital versus print in children’s learning outcomes, lower comprehension scores were associated with e-books, but with story-congruent enhancements, digital books out-performed traditional print. In the same study it was also found that adults’ mediation while reading print books to children was more effective to student comprehension than enhancements in digital books read by children independently (Furenes et al., 2021). Reading print books is associated with reading comprehension more than any other materials (McGeown et al., 2016), and reading digital texts is different than reading from a book. Reading from a digital book requires more concentration

(Fesel et al., 2018), and teachers reported students focused more on the device being used rather than the content being read (Schugar et al., 2013). Children of all ages, from toddlers and preschool to college age students, are more likely to comprehend more when they are engaged by reading printed material than reading from e-books and/or a screen (Barshay, 2019; Delgado et al., 2018; Munzer et al., 2019; Pew Research Center, 2018).

Why E-Books?

E-books include multimodal features such as sounds, animations, videos and narrations that traditional print does not offer. E-books also provide interactivity and convenience, not to mention the benefits of engaging readers and offering differentiated instruction (Schugar, et al., 2013). Although these added features are beneficial, they can also distract from what is being read. Research shows that e-books with digital enhancements that relate to the story can have positive learning outcomes, but digital enhancements that are not related to the story narrative can have a negative effect (Christ et al., 2019). For example, some e-books have games embedded in the story apps, distracting from the story content and resulting in poorer reading comprehension (Munzer, et al., 2019; Parish-Morris et al., 2013). E-books also provide specific language promoting features, such as embedded dictionaries that provide word definitions and follow story context. These features were found to enhance children’s vocabulary (Korat et al., 2019). In addition to vocabulary development, a previous study conducted with children at risk for learning disabilities, ranging in ages from five to seven years old, found independent reading of a digital book was more beneficial in the development of their vocabulary than a print book read by an adult (Shamir et al., 2012). Furthermore, automated reading on a computer for vocabulary development for children at risk for disabilities was also found just as effective as an adult reading a traditional print book aloud to students (Segers et al., 2006). Lastly, one of the most important contributions of e-books is that e-books are deemed more convenient and diverse, allowing teachers and students to easily access thousands of e-book materials from their mobile devices (Schugar et. al., 2013) at anytime and anywhere.

Considerations for e-Books in the Classroom

Although we think most students are “experts” with technology, not all students are literate in using the devices needed to access e-books, and not all students have had the same opportunities to work with these devices in their homes or schools. The first consideration for teachers using e-books in the classroom is to consider teaching students to become familiar with the technology being used. Technology varies from school to school; some schools provide iPads, while others may use Chromebooks. Teachers cannot assume that students’ prior experiences with the use of technology will prepare the student to use an e-book effectively without orienting students to how the basic functions of these devices work (Schugar et al., 2013). Students need explicit teaching and modeling in navigating e-books on their specific device.

Teachers interested in using both e-books and traditional print in the classroom to teach comprehension can also support students through targeted instruction by scaffolding their reading experience. During this process, it is important for teachers to emphasize how the strategies taught across both formats are similar and different. For example, when teaching vocabulary, there are many ways to infer a meaning from unknown vocabulary words when using traditional print. One way to infer the meaning of a word by using print is to examine the context of the word in the text and to use pictures to gain clues about the meaning of the word. Many interactive e-books are similar in that they offer interactive features such as sound and animations to also help students uncover the meanings of the words (Schugar et al., 2013). Most print-based reading skills are transferable to e-books. Inferring, predicting, retelling or summarizing a story are all reading strategies that work well with both formats. However, students again may need explicit instruction to implement the strategies in the e-book environment. In teaching students how to transfer their print-based reading skills while using interactive e-books, it is also important to note that students should not become over reliant on ebook features such as the dictionary and the “read to me features.” If students become over reliant on these features, the reading process itself could become disrupted. Therefore, it is recommended that teachers introduce these features, but to advise students to be careful to not over-use while reading e-books (Schugar et al., 2013).

Conclusion

The ongoing debate of digital versus print may continue for some time, at least until more research is done. In time, as with any argument, hopefully a common ground can be found for the use of both digital and print. Maybe it is not a question as to which one is better than the other, but rather how they can both be utilized in the classroom effectively. Neither one, digital or print, can replace a good teacher and any reading is good for children, no matter the medium. Ultimately, when digital and print books are comparable, kids best comprehend the print version, but when enhancements like motion and sound enrich the story content, e-books are generally more appealing and at an advantage. In addition, the new and improved designs of e-books offer tools that allow readers to annotate, highlight words, answer embedded questions, and share thoughts with other readers. As children become more accustomed to e-books, might the print book advantages decline? Nevertheless, at this time, reading from paper appears to be more efficient, but it looks as if digital books have a promising future.

References

Baron, N., Calixte, R., & Haravewala, M. (2017). The persistence of print among university students: An exploratory study. Telematics and Informatics, 34, 590–604.

Barshay, J. (2019). Evidence increases for reading on paper instead of screens. The Hechinger Report. https://hechingerreport.org/evidence-increases-for-reading-on-paper-instead-ofscreens/ Christ, T., Wang, X. C., Chiu, M. M., Cho, H. (2019). Kindergartener’s meaning-making with multimodal app books: The relations amongst reader characteristics, app book characteristics, and comprehension outcomes. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 47, 357–372. Davidovitch, N., Yavich, R., & Druckman, E. (2016). Don’t throw out the paper and pens yet: On the reading habits of students. Journal of Educational Research, 12(4). Delgado, P., Vargas, C., Ackerman, R., & Salmeron, L. (2018). Don’t throw away your printed books: A meta-analysis on the effects of reading media on comprehension. Educational Research Review, 25, 23–28. Fesel, S., Segers, E., & Verhoeven, L. (2018). Individual variation in children’s reading comprehension across digital text types. Journal of Research in Reading, 41(1), 106–121. Furenes, M., Kurcirkova, N., & Bus, A. (2021). A comparison of children’s reading on paper versus screen: A Meta Analysis. Review of Educational Research, 91(4). Korat, O., Graister, T., & Altman, C. (2019). Contribution of Reading and e-book with a dictionary to Word learning: Comparison of kindergarteners with and without SLI. Journal of Communication Disorders, 79, 11-12. Kurata, K., Ishita, E., Miyata, Y., & Minami, Y. (2017). Print or digital? Reading behavior and preferences in Japan. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 68, 884–894. Lenhard, W., Schroeders, U., & Lenhard, A. (2017). Equivalence of screen versus print reading comprehension depends on task complexity and proficiency. Discourse Processes, 54, 427–445. Mangen, A., Walgermo, B., & Brennick, K. (2013). Reading linear texts on paper versus computer screens: Effects on reading comprehension. International Journal of Educational Research, 58, 61–68. McGeown, S., Osborne, C., Warhurst, A., Norgate, R., & Duncan, L. (2016). Understanding children’s reading activities: Reading motivation, skill and child characteristics as predictors. Journal of Research in Reading, 39(1), 109–125. Mizrachi, D. (2015). Undergraduates’ academic reading format preferences and behaviors. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 41, 301–311. Munzer, T. G., Miller, A. L., Weeks, H. M., Kaciroti, N., Radesky, J. (2019). Differences in parent-toddler interactions with electronic versus print books. Pediatrics, 143(4). Parish-Morris, J., Mahajan, N., Hirsh-Pasek, K., Golinkoff, R. M., Collins, M. F. (2013). Once upon a time: Parent-child dialogue and storybook reading in the electronic era. Mind Brain and Education, 7(3), 200–211.

Pew Research Center. (2018). Nearly one in five Americans now listen to audiobooks. http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/03/08/nearly-one-in-five-americans-nowlisten-to-audiobooks/. Schugar, H., Smith, C., & Schugar, J. (2013). Teaching with interactive picture e-books in grades k-6. The Reading Teacher, 66(8), 615-624. Segers, E., Nooigen, M., & de Mor, J. (2006). Computer vocabulary training in kindergarten with children with special needs. International Journal of Rehabilitation Research, 29, 343345. Shamir, A. & Baruch, D. (2012). Educational e-books: a support for vocabulary and early math for children at risk for learning disabilities. Educational Media International, 49(1). Singer, L., & Alexandria, P. (2017). Reading across mediums: Effect of reading digital and print texts on comprehension and calibration. The Journal of Experimental Education, 85, 155–172. teachnology. (2022). Whole language versus phonics instruction. What is the difference? https://www.teach-nology.com/themes/lang_arts/phonics/wholevsphonics.html Terada, Y., Merrill, S. & Gonser, S. (2021). The 10 most significant education studies of 2021. Edutopia. https://www.edutopia.org/article/10-most-significant-education-studies2021?utm_content=linkpos1&utm_campaign=weekly-2021-12-15&utm_source

Holly Rice is Associate Professor of Education at Cameron University. Before working at the collegiate level, she worked as an early childhood special education teacher. She teaches special education courses at both the undergraduate and graduate level. Her research interests include parents of children with disabilities and special education preservice teachers. She can be reached at hrice@cameron.edu.

Teacher to Teacher

Nicole Pearce and Jill M. Davis

Cultivating Social Justice During Interactive Read-alouds Focusing on Multiple perspectives

Social and emotional learning (SEL) embodies an essential component of learning and development and fosters the ability to build and apply fundamental skills including healthy identities, emotional competence, goal setting, empathy, relationships, and responsibility (CASEL, 2022). Although often neglected due to emphasis on academics, SEL continues throughout the lifespan. For example, Erik Erikson (1982) stated that a person progresses through eight stages of development beginning at birth and continuing through the geriatric years. Each stage presents a central crisis consisting of antagonistic social-emotional forces pulling in opposite directions in which most need support for social and emotional success. The goal of any curriculum should be more than mastery of academic outcomes. Children need social and emotional competence for success with challenging academic content and learning experiences. A comprehensive curriculum integrating academics and the learning domains bolsters young children’s overall well-being and optimal outcomes (NAEYC, 2020). A key component to children’s success in the classroom and beyond includes social emotional development. The effects of the COVID pandemic on children’s mental health creates an even greater need to promote social emotional learning in the classroom (Moses, et al, 2021). Children build social emotional skills as they are immersed in many new experiences. Interactions with adults and peers promote understanding of culturally relevant roles and standards of their society and help them gain skills such as perspective taking, empathy, sympathy, friendships, conflict resolution, self-concept, and self-esteem (Vygotsky, 1978). This article presents a framework for integrating social emotional learning into literacy (see Figure 1).

Figure 1: Conceptual Framework

Social justice comprises a valuable tool for supporting SEL by cultivating autonomy and advocacy. Fostering social justice through authentic situations and real-world challenges ensures children feel empowered with opportunities to make choices, pose questions, seek answers, and be accountable (Kesler et al., 2020). Social justice influences new ways to collaboratively think about and make changes to injustices to improve the world (Table 1; Ares, 2011; Soja, 2010; Taylor, 2018; Valenzuela et al., 2015).

Table 1: Fostering Social Justice for Authentic SEL

Social justice topics Learning and development

● Awareness for injustices in the world

● Ability to understand the difference

between fair and unfair

● Ability to differentiate fact from

opinion to discern the truth

● Ability to see things from multiple

perspectives

● Understanding that change is possible

● Knowledge of how to advocate against

these injustices ● higher-order thinking, critical thinking,

problem solving, innovation, and creativity

● awareness for injustices in the world

● understanding that change is possible

● knowledge of how to advocate against these

injustices

● ability to see things from multiple

perspectives

● ability to differentiate fact from opinion to

discern the truth

● ability to understand the difference between

fair and unfair

Young children have difficulty taking the perspective of others (Borke, 1975). Piaget and Inhelder (1956) conducted an experiment later coined as the Three Mountain Task. The experiment demonstrated children begin to see the world through another person’s perspective between age four and age eight. Therefore, the early childhood years present an opportune time to foster children’s ability to see multiple perspectives. One component of social justice includes the ability to see things from multiple perspectives, specifically, the ability to differentiate

between fact and opinion to determine what is true and to examine diverse points. Thus, learning experiences that explore the perspectives of others in the literacy curriculum can be valuable in supporting understanding of social justice topics. Critical literacy is a framework for reading and analyzing texts (Vasquez et al., 2019). It is based on the work of Freire (1970) and the idea that readers are active participants in the literacy process, and that they construct understandings of the text based on previous knowledge, experiences, beliefs, and ideologies. Because one’s perspective shapes the way they understand what they read, there is no such thing as neutral texts (Vazquez, 2010). What a person reads is influenced by their individual perspective. However, it is not enough for children to only look at books from their own perspectives. They must also be able to take the perspectives of others and use this while examining what they read. This examination of texts through multiple perspectives is a key tenet of critical literacy. Adults need to provide a safe space to foster children’s ability to see multiple perspectives to facilitate learning. This safeguards against a child who has a different perspective based on background knowledge or experience from merely agreeing with the majority out of peer pressure, whether real or imagined (Levine & Resnick, 1993). Interactive read-alouds can provide a springboard for multiple social justice topics, especially the ability to see things from multiple perspectives. Interactive read-alouds create a vessel for collaborative learning experiences with social justice topics such as multiple perspectives in which children coconstruct meaning with teacher guidance (Hoffman, 2011; Kesler, et al., 2020). Interactive read-alouds utilizing high-quality literature from diverse genres and authors cultivate learning and development across the components of literacy (listening, speaking, reading, and writing), academic disciplines, and learning domains (Britt, et al., 2016; Fisher et al., 2004; Piper, et al., 2017). Children can engage in discussions about the text, co-constructing understandings and extending these understandings through multiple modes of learning (Fountas & Pinnell 2001; McClure & Fullerton 2017; Sipe, 2008). An interactive read-aloud is a multistep process (Fountas and Pinnell, 2020):

1. Before the read-aloud: introduction of the book to activate interest and prior knowledge 2. During the read-aloud: stopping at certain points for children to respond to questions and share their thinking 3. After the read-aloud: intentional questions posed to guide children to main points and key understandings of the text along with a follow up activity and revisiting the text to extend thinking and understanding

Perspective taking emerges as children learn about themselves and their world through interactions (Piaget, 1951). Interactive read-alouds not only promote interactions between children and the teacher, but also between children and the characters through text-to-self connections. Kesler et al. (2020) in I Hear You: Teaching Social Justice in Interactive ReadAloud provide strategies and a template to plan interactive read-alouds to teach social justice.

Again, expanding the focus of learning beyond academics to include social emotional learning ensures children’s success in the classroom and beyond. During these interactive read-alouds children actively and collaboratively engage in SEL building knowledge of social justice through engaging and meaningful learning opportunities. The following three examples provide ideas to support children’s understanding of multiple perspectives through an interactive read-aloud. They All Saw a Cat by Brendan Wenzel (2016) demonstrates how perspective shapes what we see. Before reading, the teacher can activate prior knowledge by passing out magnified images of different parts of a cat to small groups of students. Pictures that zoom in on the eyes, nose, tongue, paws, and ears can be found through an image search on an internet browser. The teacher can invite the groups to guess what they are seeing before revealing they are different parts of a cat. This opening activity can lead to a discussion about how our perspectives might be different, even if we are looking at the same thing. The teacher can then introduce the book by telling the children, “In this book, a cat walks through the world with its whiskers, ears, and paws. Although the cat is the same, the illustrations change depending on who is looking at him. Let’s read to see who is looking at the cat and what their perspective is.” During the reading, the teacher can ask questions such as “Why do you think the page is illustrated this way?” to explore issues related to perspective. On the first page, the child sees a cat with large, gazing eyes, a smiling face, and a curled down tail rubbing against the child’s legs. This is very different than when the dog sees a skinny, scared-looking creature who is slinking away. The discussion can continue with the other animals, which include a fox, fish, mouse, bee, bird, flea, snake, skunk, worm, and bat. After reviewing who saw the cat, the book ends with an illustration of the cat's own perception as he looks at himself in a small puddle of water.

After the read-aloud, the teacher can engage the students in thought provoking questions such as:

1. Why do you think the author wrote this story? 2. Which characters liked the cat? 3. How do you know what the characters thought of the cat? 4. Do you like the cat? 5. How does your perspective of the cat differ from one of the characters in the story?

Students can then create a collaborative book on a chosen object like in They All Saw a Cat with each student illustrating that objective from a specific perspective. For example, a car would look different from the perspective of the person driving it, a bicyclist riding next to it, an insect about to be hit by it, or a turtle crossing the road. Students will engage in research, as well as problem-solving and critical thinking skills, to find a creative and innovative way to convey their perspective through illustrations. Underlying social justice issues of fairness, such as who is benefited by the car (the driver) versus who is harmed (the insect) can be explored, as well as

who has the power and who has the disadvantage. Duck! Rabbit! by Amy Krouse Rosenthal (2009) presents an ambiguous image through a classic optical illusion that could be a duck or a rabbit. This book offers a humorous look at how one picture could be two different things depending on the reader’s perspective. Before reading, the teacher can show the illustration on the cover while reading the title of the book. Asking the children open-ended questions such as “What do you notice?” and “Why do you think the author decided to use this as the title of the book?” can begin a discussion on how one picture might elicit different perspectives. In this picture book, two off-screen narrators argue over what animal the image represents while providing evidence of why the picture is a duck (“See there’s his bill.”) or a rabbit (“Those are his ears, silly.”). The evidence offered during the book leads each narrator to agree it could be the opposite animal of what they originally thought. During the read aloud, there is ample opportunity to discuss how each narrator’s perspective is shown, such as the caption bubbles. Questions posed to activate thinking about perspectives could include:

1. In this story, why were the two people disagreeing? 2. Why do people disagree? 3. What disagreement have you had with one of your friends? 4. What feelings did you experience during this disagreement? 5. When you have a different opinion than someone, did you try to figure out why the person sees things differently than you? 6. How does listening carefully to a different perspective show respect for that person? 7. Did you change your opinion when the other person shared their reasons for their different perspective?

The final pages present a new image in which one narrator sees an anteater while the other sees a brachiosaurus posing the question, “What will happen next?” The children typically respond, “They will fight about what animal it is.” After reading the story, the teacher can lead children in a discussion about constructive ways to resolve differences in perspectives. A followup activity is to engage children in a debate where they can express their perspective of what animal is on the last page and provide evidence as support just like the narrators using the debate structure:

1) Introduction 2) Support your idea with 3-4 points, (why you believe in the topic you are debating) 3) Rebuttal (statement about why the opposing side’s claim is flawed or wrong).

This debate has the potential to include four components of literacy (listening, speaking, reading, and writing). However, it can also be differentiated to include only some, if that meets the needs

of the individual learners in the class. Bud, Not Buddy by Christopher Paul Curtis (2004) tells the story of a 10-year-old African American boy, Bud Calloway, who runs away from a toxic foster family to search for his real father during the Great Depression era. Many topics such as economics, history, geography, citizenship, culture, and friendships are supported as students explore what life was like during the 1930's for a young African American boy through the main character's eyes. Students can make connections from text-to-self by comparing what life was like for Bud to their own lives in the present time. Teachers can ask questions, such as “How would you feel if you were Bud?” and “What might you do in this situation?” to support these connections. The following questions evoke children to consider multiple perspectives by identifying the character’s perspective and providing evidence from the text. Then, children can decide if they agree or disagree and support with a reason.

1. Why does Bud think six is a tough age? 2. How do you think Bud feels about Todd lying? 3. How does Bud feel about being locked in the shed? 4. How do you think Bud feels as he leaves the Amos house with his suitcase? 5. What do you think Bud’s mother meant when she told him, “When one door closes, don’t worry, because another door opens?” 6. How do the people in line feel about the rich, white family in the picture that hangs over the mission building? 7. According to Bud, what does the phrase, “Haven’t you heard?” usually mean? How do you think Bud feels when he hears that Ms. Hill has moved away? Explain why you think he feels this way. 8. Why do you think the white people in Hooverville won’t accept help from others? 9. Why does Bud think ideas are like trees? 10. According to Bud’s rule number 87, what does it really mean when adults tell you they need help with a problem? 11. Why does Bud think it’s different to lie to a kid than to lie to an adult? 12. How do you think Bud feels when he realizes that Herman E. Calloway is very old? 13. How do you think Bud feels when Jimmy invites him to come to the Sweet Pea to eat?

What makes you say that? 14. How does Bud feel about the band members? 15. Why do you think that Herman E. Calloway doesn’t like Bud? 16. What does Bud consider more important, the suitcase or the items inside the suitcase? 17. Why was Bud having so much fun doing chores? 18. Describe two emotions that Bud feels when he learns that Herman E. Calloway is his grandfather. Explain why Bud has these two feelings. 19. Why does Bud say that the squeaks and squawks of his saxophone were the closing of one door and the opening of another door?

As a post-reading activity, students could also interview grandparents and greatgrandparents about what life was like during the era of the book’s setting, the Great Depression. These interviews can explore their experiences in terms of the economy, culture, and society. Graphic organizers like a Venn Diagram could depict the similarities and differences of what life is like for the student today and Bud during the Great Depression. In conclusion, SEL continues throughout the lifespan and embodies an essential component of learning and development including healthy identities, emotional competence, goal setting, empathy, relationships, and responsibility (CASEL, 2022). Social justice encompasses understanding multiple perspectives which embodies a crucial component of SEL. Critical literacy evokes the idea that neutral texts do not exist, and readers are active participants in the literacy process constructing understandings of the text based on previous knowledge, experiences, beliefs, and ideologies. What a person reads is influenced by their individual perspective. Integrating SEL into the academic standards through interactive read-alouds focusing on the social justice topic of multiple perspective bolsters young children’s overall well-being and optimal outcomes.

Social Justice Resources

7 ideas for social justice lesson plans: https://www.rebekahgienapp.com/social-justice-lessonplans/

Using Inquiry to Teach Social Justice in the Classroom: https://www.learningbyinquiry.com/using-inquiry-to-teach-social-justice-in-the-classroom/

Resource to find children’s books addressing social justice topics: https://www.adl.org/education-and-resources/resources-for-educators-parents-families/childrensliterature#.VwQW3_krLcs

References

Ares, N. (2011). Multidimensionality of cultural practices: Implications for culturally relevant science education. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 6(2), 381–388. Britt, S., Wilkins, J., Davis, J. & Bowlin, A. (2016). The benefits of interactive read-alouds to address social-emotional learning in classrooms for young children. Journal of Character Education, 12(2), 43-57. Borke, H. (1975). Piaget's mountains revisited: Changes in the egocentric landscape. Developmental Psychology, 11(2), 240. CASEL. (2022). What is social and emotional learning? What is SEL? - Casel Schoolguide. Retrieved January 31, 2022, from https://schoolguide.casel.org/what-is-sel/what-is-sel/

Derman-Sparks, L. (n.d.). Guide for selecting anti-bias children’s books. Social Justice Books: A Teaching for Change Project. Curtis, C. P. (2004). Bud, not Buddy. Laurel Leaf. Erikson, E. H. (1982). The Life Cycle Completed. W.W. Northan & Company. Fisher, D., Flood, J., Lapp, D., and Frey, N. (2004). Interactive read‐alouds: Is there a common set of implementation practices? The Reading Teacher, 58(1), 8-17. Fountas, I. C. & Pinnell, G. S. (2020) Fountas and Pinnell Literacy blog. Retrieved from http://fpblog.fountasandpinnell.com/what-is-interactive-read-aloud Fountas, I. C. & Pinnell, G. S. (2001). Guided Reading. Heinemann. Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Continuum. Hoffman, J. L. (2011). Co-constructing meaning: Interactive literary discussions in kindergarten read-alouds. The Reading Teacher, 65, 183–194. Kesler, T., Mills, M. & Reilly, M (2020). I hear you: Teaching social justice in interactive readaloud. Language Arts, 97 (4). Levine, J. M., & Resnick, L. B. (1993). Social Foundations of Cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 44, 585-612. McClure, E. L., & Fullerton, S. K. (2017). Instructional interactions: Supporting students’ reading development through interactive read‐alouds of informational texts. The Reading Teacher, 71(1), 51-59. Moses, A., Powers, S., & Reschke, K. (2021). Social and emotional development: For our youngest learners and beyond. Young Children, 76(1). NAEYC (National Association for the Education of Young Children). 2020. Developmentally appropriate practice: A position statement of the National Association for the Education of Young Children. NAEYC. Piaget, J. (1951). Play, dreams, and imitation in childhood. Norton Press. Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. (1956). The child's concept of space. Norton Press. Piper, R. E., Pittman, R. T., & Vice, T. A. (2017). Using multicultural children’s literature to address social issues: The power of interactive read aloud. The Reading Teacher, 71(5), 569-577. Rosenthal, A. K., & Lichtenheld, T. (2009). Duck! Rabbit!. Chronicle Books. Sipe, L. R. (2008). Storytime: Young children’s literary understanding in the classroom. Teachers College Press. Soja, E. W. (2010). Seeking spatial justice. University of Minnesota Press. https://socialjusticebooks.org/guidefor-selecting-anti-bias-childrens-books/ Taylor, K. (2018). The role of public education in place remaking: From a retrospective walk through my hometown to a call to action.pdf. Cognition and Instruction, 36(3), 188–198. Valenzuela, A., Zamora, E., & Rubio, B. (2015). Academia Cuauhtli and the eagle: “Danza Mexica” and the epistemology of the circle. Voices in Urban Education, 41, 46–56. Vasquez, V. M. (2010). Getting beyond “I like the book”: Creating space for critical literacy in the K-6 classroom. International Literacy Association.

Vasquez, V. M., Janks, H., & Comber, B. (2019). Critical literacy as a way of being and doing. Language Arts, 96(5), 300-311. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. Wenzel, B. (2016). They all saw a cat. Chronicle Books.

Dr. Nicole Pearce taught pre-kindergarten through 6th grade in Arkansas and Oklahoma public schools. Her last four years in a Reggio inspired school enhanced her beliefs in focusing on whole child learning and development for optimal student outcomes. She received her Ph.D. in Instructional Leadership and Academic Curriculum with an emphasis in Early Childhood from the University of Oklahoma. She began her career as a professor at Texas A&M-Commerce in Fall 2015 and can be reached at nicole.pearce@tamuc.edu.

Dr. Jill M. Davis is an Associate Professor in the Department of Curriculum and Instruction at the University of Central Oklahoma in Edmond, OK. She works with students majoring in early childhood and elementary education. Her research focuses on social justice issues, including advocacy and diversity in children’s literature, as well as math education in the early years. She can be reached at jdavis131@uco.edu.