Reading a Lot Makes You a Better Reader — But Slowly, and It's Not the Best Use of School Time
In this video, Dr. Justin Baeder discusses why independent reading alone is an inefficient way to build reading skills compared to direct instruction.
Key Takeaways
- Reading volume helps, but slowly - Extensive reading does build skills, but the gains are gradual and insufficient for struggling readers
- Direct instruction is more efficient - Teaching reading skills explicitly produces faster and larger gains than simply giving students time to read
- School time is precious - With limited instructional hours, schools should prioritize the most effective approaches, not just the most intuitive ones
Transcript
Does reading a lot make you a better reader?
The answer seems to me to be obviously yes.
But in my last video, I said that the research base on independent reading in class is pretty weak.
There's not good evidence that having kids read a lot in class makes them better readers.
And I think the distinction here is how we use class time, right?
I think if you read a lot over time, you will become a better reader.
If you get older, you will become a better reader.
But if you don't read a lot as you get older, you will get better slower than if you do read a lot.
And what we're comparing in class is we're comparing deliberate instruction and deliberate practice in reading to just reading.
So I think when I cited that Tim Shanahan article that talks about how sustained silent reading or independent reading is like not a great use of class time, not a research-based practice.
it's in the sense that we could be doing something better with that time.
And again, I don't want to discourage anybody from reading and I don't want to dismiss the obvious observation that kids do get better at reading with more reading, right?
Like my kids were not taught to read at an eighth grade level you know, ever before they became eighth grade level readers.
Like they reached that grade level by reading a lot on their own at a much earlier age.
And I think that's a very common experience for us as educators.
And I think where this trips us up is that we think that our experience and our kids' experience applies to everyone.
But what Tim points out in his article is that often when we assign independent reading and we say it's drop everything and read time, it's SSR time.
What we're forgetting is that not all the kids are actually reading during that time, right?
They're not necessarily making use of that time as we would.
And we have this perspective as people who love reading and want everybody else to love reading that makes us think that that time is going to be used well.
And I think there probably are a lot of kids in any given class who would use that time well, but they're not going to be the struggling readers.
They're not going to be the kids who we want to practice for hours at home.
And it would be a good thing if they would read for hours at home, but we don't have hours and hours to work with during the school day.
And we've got to use that time wisely.
And if we can get kids to read outside of class time, great.
I think that is unambiguously going to benefit them.
I think you do get better as a reader when by reading.
It's just not as fast as other things you could be doing with that time, like getting good instruction.
Let me know what you think, and let me know how you're reconciling these issues.