Nothing is more satisfying that watching a baby master the art of walking. Demonstration of a persistence that screams, I think I can! I think I can! The precise moment they can be considered truly bipedal. Videos that will inevitably make an appearance at the 21st. For the now toddler, the sweet freedom of running. There’s plenty of running for the parents as well.
In the months and years to come, parents will be heard comparing the exact moment this milestone was reached.
“My Jimmy walked at 10 months!”
“Sally didn’t walk at all. The moment she was on her feet she was running.”
“Abby didn’t walk on her feet until 14 months. Although, she did walk on her knees from her first birthday.” This was my daughter. We just figured she was scared of heights.
The point is…we compare children with each other from the moment they are born.
During a discussion with my university peers on using output measures as tools for purchasing decisions (26th April, 2021), the topic turned to strategies to promote reading engagement. It caused me to pause and re-examine my philosophical stance on the benefits and challenges of competition to promote reading.
I work at a P-12 independent school. The Junior School uses Accelerated Reader as their reading program (well worth a look – although you might need a few pennies in your pocket). Our role is to support teaching staff by maintaining a broad and appealing collection of books, with easily identified numerical book levels assigned by the program. If you aren’t familiar with AR, the basic premise is that students undertake a comprehension test online, are given a reading Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD), read a book within that ZPD range and then complete a short quiz. Teachers use a range of statistics to measure reading progress, preferences and engagement.
I’ve used AR as a classroom teacher and, for past 18 months, as a teacher librarian. One of the measures collected by the program is Word Count – the number of words students have read after successfully completing quizzes. In previous years, students were inspired to read (hopefully) through competition between classes using word counts. As a teacher, I found this problematic. Reading became a competition rather than a pleasurable pursuit. It didn’t create reading engagement. It created competition engagement (and led to lots of cheating). It also weakened the strength of the data collected.
Competition across classes is tough for students and teachers. You can never assume that every class has an equal distribution of avid readers. I’ve had classes that are naturally engaged, and those with a large number of reluctant readers – even in the face of attractive extrinsic motivators! As much as I tried to inspire the reluctant readers, competition across classes just served to set up an “us and them” environment – which resulted in disengagement from the actual purpose of the initiative – getting kids reading because they enjoy it.
Stepping into a TL role, I still use the word count measure. However, I use this statistic within a class so students can try and better their previous word count, in collaboration with each other. Our mantra is that every word counts! There is no reference to how many words other classes have read. I teach them each fortnight and we make a huge deal out of seeing if they’ve added to their work count. Drum rolls and everything!
I’m finding that all readers in the class are motivated to add to the count, whatever their reading range. It has been far more motivating to strive to better themselves, rather than compete against others. And my favourite…it also allows the foundational readers (who often don’t feel useful in these situations) to understand that their reading mattered.
I’m not suggesting that competition doesn’t work ever. It is just my experience that a class trying to beat itself generates an authentic response to reading.
Like a brand new toddler, I will gingerly step down from my soapbox while repeating the mantra I’d like my students to hold dear, I think I can! I think I can!
Reference
ShippingINSIGHT (n.d.). The Little Engine That Could. [Image]. https://www.shippinginsight.com/2019/05/22/the-little-engine-that-could/