This study examines the implementation and effectiveness of the Accelerated Reader (AR) program in Liberty County elementary schools, highlighting the relationship between training, best practices, and student reading performance on criterion-referenced tests. Despite positive perceptions from teachers regarding AR's influence, the research found no statistically significant correlation between AR implementation and CRCT scores. Key findings suggest that while best practices are generally adopted, challenges such as resource availability and time constraints impede the program's full potential.

1. The Use of Accelerated Reader inThe Use of Accelerated Reader in
Elementary School: The Influence ofElementary School: The Influence of
Training and Association with CriterionTraining and Association with Criterion
Reference Competency Tests inReference Competency Tests in
ReadingReading
by: Jaime Rearleyby: Jaime Rearley
Ed.S. DefenseEd.S. Defense
Georgia Southern UniversityGeorgia Southern University
April 30, 2014April 30, 2014

2. BackgroundBackground
• The elementary (7) and middle (3) schools in Liberty County
use the program in conjunction with Star Reading. Reading
tends to be an area of strength for Liberty County’s elementary
schools.
• The Georgia Department of Education’s CRCT Statewide Score
System Summaries show between the years of 2011-2013 that
89.2% and up to 94.6% of the students in grades third through
fifth met or exceeded the standard in reading (“Georgia
Department of Education: School Report Cards,” n.d.).

3. Background (cont.)Background (cont.)
• The professional learning course taught the
best practices for using the software, such
as using the Zone of Proximal Development
to set individual reading goals and
scheduling daily guided reading time
(Rearley, 2011, 2012, 2013).
• This course was delivered to teachers at
five different schools over a three year
period in Liberty County, 2011-2013.

4. Problem StatementProblem Statement
• Purchasing access to Accelerated Reader is a large yearly
investment for Liberty County School System.
• Training has been conducted with various elementary school
teachers on how to properly implement the program, using
the best prescribed practices.
• Hundreds of elementary school students are affected by the
use of this program in Liberty County.
• The researcher wanted to learn how the program is being
implemented, the perception of its effectiveness, and the
conditions that facilitate or hinder its use.

5. LiteratureLiterature
ReviewReview
The research surroundingThe research surrounding
the effectiveness of AR isthe effectiveness of AR is
sometimes contradictory. Thesometimes contradictory. The
What Works ClearinghouseWhat Works Clearinghouse
found only two studies, Bullockfound only two studies, Bullock
(2005) and Nunnery and Ross(2005) and Nunnery and Ross
(2007), that met the Adolescent(2007), that met the Adolescent
Literacy Review Protocol.Literacy Review Protocol.
(Holstman, Little reader)

6. Literature Review (cont.)Literature Review (cont.)
• The method of implementation can have a positive or
negative impact.Thompson, Madhuri, and Taylor
(2008) found “reading programs that may have worked
effectively in one setting may fail in another setting if
they are used incorrectly” (p. 559).
• Watts (2004) believed AR had a negative effect on
students’ motivation to read.

7. Literature Review (cont.)Literature Review (cont.)
• There were some positive findings…
• Middle school students read less if AR was not in use according to
Pavonetti, Brimmer, and Cipielewski (2002).
• Topping and Sanders (2000) found students’ performance on the
Tennessee Value-Added Assessment System increased as the level of AR
use increased.
• A failing school in Kansas adopted the Reading Renaissance, the best
classroom practices of Accelerated Reader, and began achieving a
Standard of Excellence in reading (Pfeiffer, 2011).
• When Magnolia Consulting (2010) was hired by Renaissance Learning, Inc.
to conduct a mixed methods study on the effectiveness of using the AR best
practices, the instructional reading levels of the treatment students
appeared to increase during the study.

8. Research QuestionsResearch Questions
• How have the AR best
practices been implemented
in the classroom?
• How do teachers associate
the use of AR best practices
with student performance on
the CRCT?
• What has supported or
hindered the use of the AR
best practices in
classrooms?
(Baxter, Reading aloud to children)

9. MethodsMethods
ParticipantsParticipants
Thirty-nine of forty-four eligibleThirty-nine of forty-four eligible
elementary school teachers working inelementary school teachers working in
Liberty county were invited to participate inLiberty county were invited to participate in
this study. To be eligible for the study thethis study. To be eligible for the study the
teachers had to currently be teaching in ateachers had to currently be teaching in a
Liberty County elementary school andLiberty County elementary school and
have successfully completed the thehave successfully completed the the
professional learning course, Gettingprofessional learning course, Getting
Result with AR between the years of 2011-Result with AR between the years of 2011-
2013, (Rearley, 2011, 2012, 2013). Thirty-2013, (Rearley, 2011, 2012, 2013). Thirty-
one teachers from five different publicone teachers from five different public
elementary schools in Liberty Countyelementary schools in Liberty County
responded to the questionnaire.responded to the questionnaire.
(Prantham Books, Vision: A book in every child’s hand)

10. Methods (cont.)Methods (cont.)
•
Instrumentation
• The researcher developed an online questionnaire via
SurveyMonkey (1999) using open and closed-ended
questions.
• The questionnaire was based on a self-assessment rubric for
implementation of the best AR practices.

11. ProceduresProcedures
• TThe questionnaire was field tested.he questionnaire was field tested.
• Eligible participants were then invited viaEligible participants were then invited via
email and letter to respond to anemail and letter to respond to an
anonymous questionnaire during a twoanonymous questionnaire during a two
week window.week window.
• Reminder emails were sent every threeReminder emails were sent every three
days.days.
• The introduction of the questionnaireThe introduction of the questionnaire
explained that completion of theexplained that completion of the
questionnaire served as consent toquestionnaire served as consent to
participate in the study.participate in the study.

12. AnalysisAnalysis
How have the AR best practices been implemented in the
classroom?
•Each response in part II of the questionnaire was given a
weight. Rarely was one. Occasional was two. Frequently was
three.
•The weights were used to calculate the mean, mode.
median, and standard deviation for each question.

13. Analysis (cont.)Analysis (cont.)
How do teachers associate the use of AR best practices with student
performance on the CRCT?
•The researcher examined part III and part II to address this
question. Cross tabulation tables were constructed, using Microsoft
Excel (2007), and the Pearson’s r was calculated, using SPSS (IBM
Corporation, 2013), to investigate possible relationships.
•The researcher looked for trends between the teachers’ opinions
and the level of use of the AR program.

14. Analysis (cont.)Analysis (cont.)
What has supported or hindered the use of the AR best practices in
classrooms?
•
The researcher examined the relationship between the teachers’
motivation to implement AR, available resources, perceived support
for administration, and the level of skill.
•
The researcher analyzed the open-ended responses to questions in
part IV of the questionnaire and coded the data by hand, using
Microsoft Excel (2007) to identify trends and themes. Using Fowler’s
method, the researcher identified categories that emerged from
answers (1993).

15. ResultsResults
Table 1
Most Implemented Practices
Practice Rarely (0-1) Occasionally (2-3) Frequently (4-5)
Students are given access to
their school library or classroom
collection regular
0% 3.2% 96.8%
You use a student’s zone of
proximal development to set
individual reading goals for
each child
3.2% 3.2% 93.5%
Students are given 15 to 60
minutes of daily independent
reading practice time with
books that match students’
ability and interest level
0% 10% 90%
How have the AR best practices been implemented in
the classroom?

16. Results (cont.)Results (cont.)
Table 2
Most Implemented Practices
Practice Mean Median Mode
Standard
Deviation
Students are given access to their
school library or classroom
collection regular
2.96 3 3 0.17
You use a student’s zone of
proximal development to set
individual reading goals for each
child
2.90 3 3 0.39
Students are given 15 to 60
minutes of daily independent
reading practice time with books
that match students’ ability and
interest level
2.90 3 3 0.30

17. Results (cont.)Results (cont.)Table 3
Least Implemented
Practices
Practice Rarely (0-1) Occasionally (2-3) Frequently (4-5)
How frequently do you
communicate students’
progress in AR to parents?
25.8% 38.7% 35.5%
Students use a reading log 30% 33.3% 36.7%
You use AR BookFinder to
help students locate
differentiated reading
materials
32.3% 32.3% 35.5%
You assist students with
complex texts by scaffolding
when needed, for example
using graphic organizers
16.1% 38.7% 45.2%

18. Results (cont.)Results (cont.)
Table 4
Least Implemented
Practices
Practice Mean Median Mode
Standard
Deviation
How frequently do you
communicate students’ progress
in AR to parents?
2.09 2 2 0.78
Students use a reading log 2.25 3 3 0.89
You use AR BookFinder to help
students locate differentiated
reading materials
2.03 2 3 0.83
You assist students with complex
texts by scaffolding when needed,
for example using graphic
organizers
2.29 2 3 0.73

19. Results (cont.)Results (cont.)
Table 5
How have the AR best practices been implemented in the
classroom?
Guided IndpendentGuided Indpendent
ReadingReading
DifferentiateDifferentiate
Reading PractieReading Practie
Focus on ReadingFocus on Reading
ComprehensionComprehension
ManagementManagement
StrategiesStrategies
sub-group
mean
2.76 2.65 2.53 2.33

20. Results (cont.)Results (cont.)
•
Table 6
The use of AR had a positive influence on students’ reading CRCT
Scores cross tabulated with count of students given 15-60 minutes of
daily independent reading practice time with books that match students’
ability and interest level
Row Labels Frequently Occasionally Blank Grand Total
Moderate Disagreement 3.33% 0.00% 0.00% 3.33%
Somewhat Agree 16.67% 3.33% 0.00% 20.00%
Agree 30.00% 6.67% 0.00% 36.67%
Strongly Agree 26.67% 0.00% 0.00% 13.33%
Note. Four teachers selected not to respond to the question, the use of AR had a positive
influence on the students’ reading CRCT scores. While, one teacher selected not to respond
to the question, students are given 15 to 60 minutes of daily independent reading practice
time with books that match the students’ ability and interest level.
How do teachers associate the use of AR best practices with
student performance on the CRCT?

21. Results (cont.)Results (cont.)•
Table 7
Correlations and Descriptive Statistics for Positive Influence on CRCT,
Daily Reading Practice, Individual Reading Goals, Locating Books
using the ZPD
1 2 3 4 5
Positive Influence
on CRCT
—-
Daily Reading
Practice
0.15 —-
Individual
Reading Goals
0.20 -0.08 —-
Locating Books
using the ZPD
-0.02 0.02 .45* —-
Part II Composite 0.28 .51* 0.22 .37* —-
M 3.96 2.90 2.90 2.71 2.53
SD 0.85 0.31 0.39 0.59 0.22
Note. n = 27 for Positive Influence, n = 30 for Daily Reading Practice, n = 31 for Individual Reading
Goals, n = 31 for Locating Books using the ZPD, n= 31 for Part II Composite
* p < .05.

22. Results (cont.)
Item
Strongly
Disagree
Moderately
Disagree
Somewhat
Agree
Agree
Strongly
Agree
Mean Median Mode
My school
administration is
supportive of the
implementation of AR
10% 0% 0% 30% 60% 4.3 5 5
My students have
access to a variety of
books on their
reading level
3.2% 0% 9.7% 25.8% 61.3% 4.4 5 5
I feel motivated to
include the use of AR
in my classroom
0% 6.5% 3.2% 32.3% 58.1% 4.4 5 5
Table 8
Selected Responses to Part III

23. Results (cont.)
Item
Strongly
Disagree
Moderately
Disagree
Somewhat
Agree
Agree
Strongly
Agree
Mean Median Mode
I need more
instruction on how to
implement AR
effectively
48.3% 31% 17.2% 3.4% 0% 1.7 2 1
My students have
access to enough
computers or iPads
to participate in AR
16.1% 25.8% 16.1% 12.9% 29% 3.1 3 5
There is not enough
technical assistance
available to support
the use of AR
19.4% 25.8% 22.6% 16.1% 16.1% 2.8 3 2
Table 9
Selected Responses to Part III

24. Results (cont.)
Figure 1.The most common conditions facilitating the implementation of
the best practices of the AR program.
What has supported the use of AR best practices in the
classrooms?

25. Results (cont.)
Figure 2.The most common conditions hindering the implementation of best practices of
the AR program.
How have the AR best practices been implemented in the
classroom?

26. Discussion
How have the AR best practices been implemented in
the classroom?
• The independent guided reading practices was the
most implemented sub-group.
• Frequent access to books
• Daily reading time
• Individual reading goals

27. Discussion (cont.)
How do teachers associate the use of the AR best
practices with student performance on the CRCT?
• Teachers tended to have a positive opinion of AR.
• There was not a statistically significant relationship
existed between the implementation AR and the
perception of AR’s influence on the CRCT.
• It appeared that teachers valued the reading practice,
but may not attribute AR to successful performance on
the CRCT.

28. Discussion (cont.)
What has supported or hindered use of AR best
practices in classrooms?
•The main stress felt by teachers was a lack of
resources.
•Other common concerns dealt with a lack of time
and staff.
•Teachers mentioned the media centers’ positive
incentives 33 times and felt the positive incentives
motivated students to read.
•The second most common support mentioned was
the use of individual reading goals.

29. Limitations
• A serious limitation is the that the questionnaire had no
guidance for validity.
• The time between the completion of the training and the
research study may have impacted how the participants
responded on the questionnaire.
• A potential bias for the trainer/ researcher may have
influenced the responders.
• All participants were volunteers. It is possible that the
teachers that selected not to volunteer may have had
negative opinions and selected not to share them. This
would impact the internal validity.
• The results of this study may only be applied to the
Liberty County due to the specific nature of the course
and conditions. This may impact the external validity.

30. Conclusion
How have AR best practices been implemented in the
classrooms?
•The researcher found the teachers in Liberty County have a
positive opinion of AR.
•The implementation varies from very high to minimal
depending on the best practice in question.

31. Conclusion
How do teachers associate the use of the best practices
with student performance on the CRCT?
•A statistically significant relationship does not appear to exist
between the perceived impact of AR on the CRCT and the
implemented AR best practices.
•Teachers identified more conditions that facilitated the
implementation of the AR program and less hinderances.
•The need for additional training appeared to be very low.

32. Conclusion
What has supported or hindered the use of AR best
practices in the classroom?
•Teachers identified more conditions that facilitated the
implementation of the AR program and less hindrances.
•Teachers completing the training appeared to be confident in
their implementation of the program and motivated to
implement the program.

33. Recommendations
• School and system level administration may benefit from
the data collected during this study. An executive
summary of the study findings should be made available
to both stakeholders.
• The value placed on the incentives programs and the
book collections available in the media centers needs to
be made available to building level and system level
administrators.

34. Recommendations
(cont.)
• The perception of the teachers and the use of the
program was positive in most cases.
• Training has left a positive impact on the teachers.
It would beneficial to teachers at other schools and
at the middle schools.
• The need for updated and more reliable technology
must be considered in future budgeting for the
schools and district. New equipment is needed.

35. SourcesSources
Baxter, J. (Photographer). (2005, February 23). Reading aloud to children [Web Photo]. Retrieved from
https://www.flickr.com/photos/judybaxter/5484879/in/photolist-u7sT-97uoyF-7ysSqb-4avnSd-4VoQ4Q-4VjB4x-5aCog5-9v1F5L-8Dm48r-dtroJc-zMjJQ-dzbQJR-cvBCfW-4VkawM
Bullock, J.C. (2005). Effects of Accelerated Reader on the reading performance of third, fourth, fifith-grade students in one wester Oregon elementary school (Doctor
dissertation, University of Oregon). Dissertation Abstracts International, 66(07A), 56-2529.
Fowler, F. (1993). Survey research methods. (2nd ed., Vol. 1). London, England: Sage Publishing, Inc.
Georgia Department of Education: School report cards [Website]. (n.d.). Retrieved September 6, 2013, from http://www.gadoe.org/Curriculum-Instruction-and-
Assessment/Assessment/Pages/CRCT-Statewide-Scores.aspx
Holstman, M. (Photographer). (2010, January 25). Little reader [Print Photo]. Retrieved from https://www.flickr.com/photos/holtsman/4305510994/in/photolist-u7sT-
97uoyF-7ysSqb-4avnSd-4VoQ4Q-4VjB4x-5aCog5-9v1F5L-8Dm48r-dtroJc-zMjJQ-dzbQJR-cvBCfW-4VkawM-4RJMgs-4VmmA2-4RJMYN-dU4kxX-83T9eu-
5j2qXw-5iX95P-5iX96k-aTTXxi-4REBuB-4REBLK-4Vmm8r-4REB5v-8QZsxN-8uQ9sa-617vfm-6dd8YS-5kRRTA-9sd7k4-4VrvTW-4VrvRo-9guaJE-4VrvZJ-
68mAXC-68hpcM-68mB8G-68mBaC-68mAYo-fYuAwf-8FMPPw-8FMPPh-8FMPPJ-8FMPPq-7FuTmD-gaNSpX-b4Ac92/
IBM Corp. Released 2013. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 22.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.
Institute of Education Sciences (2008). What works clearinghouse intervention report. Retrieved November 2, 2011, from
http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/intervention_reports/wwc_accelreader_101408.pdf
Krathwohl, D. (1998). Methods of educational & social science research: An integrated approach. New York: Longman.
Magnolia Consulting. (2010). A final report for the evaluation of Renaissance Learning’s Accelerated Reader program. Charlottesville, VA: Author.
Microsoft. (2007). Microsoft Excel [Computer software]. Redmond, Washington: Microsoft.

36. SourcesSources
Morgan, D.L. (1997). Focus groups as qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Morrow, L.M. (1996). Motivating reading and writing diverse classrooms (NCTE Research Rep. No. 28) Urbana, IL: national Council on Teachers of English.
Nunnery, J.A., & Ross, S.M. (2007). The effects of the School Renaissance program on student achievement in reading and mathematics. Research in the Schools, 14(1),
40-59.
Pavonetti, L. M., Brimmer, K. M., & Cipielewski, J. F. (2002). Accelerated Reader: What are the lasting effects on the reading habits of middle school students exposed to
Accelerated Reader in elementary grades? Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 46(4), 300. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
Pfeiffer, C. (2011). Achieving a standard of reading excellence in Kansas. Knowledge Quest, 39(4), 60-67. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
Pratham Books. (2008, September 15). Vision: A book in every child’s hand. {Print Photo]. Retrieved from
https://www.flickr.com/photos/prathambooks/3291764099/in/photolist-9hrRxn-aTTW96-61T9Mr-61Spg8-61Spa2-61SskF-7ysSqb-aMqTii-61Sqvi-61WBwS-
61WBbh-61SqKK-61WBod-61WAPo-61WCWb-61SrC8-61Sr7r-61Sq4X-61WB6m-61WCYN-61Spna-61WCZN-61SpZF-61Ssbr-61WDnG-61WBqJ-61WCnU-
61WA8w-61WBjd-61SqQ2-61WCMj-61WAWN-61WBn3-61SpoT-61SqFM-61Sr2M-61SqBT-61Ssug-61WCzh-61Sq46-61SqkT-61SqMc-61WD6U-61WDdS-
61WAYS-61WD7Y-61WDjA-61SrPe-61WASJ-61SppV/
Renaissance Learning, Inc. (2007). Getting results with Accelerated Reader. Wisconsin Rapids, WI: Renaissance Learning.
Renaissance Learning, Inc. (2013a). Renaissance Place [Software]. Retrieved from https://hosted123.renlearn.com/55673/default.aspx
Renaissance Learning, Inc. (2013b). Accelerated Reader implementation progression. Wisconsin Rapids, WI: Author.
Renaissance Learning, Inc. (2013c). Renaissance Place: District administrator dashboard [Data file]. Retrieved from https://hosted123.renlearn.com/dashboardclientsvc/
SurveyMonkey (1999). Date Retrieved November 3, 2013 from https://www.surveymonkey.com
Thompson, G., Madhuri, M., & Taylor, D. (2008). How the Accelerated Reader program can become counterproductive for high school students. Journal of Adolescent &
Adult Literacy, 51(7), 550-560. doi:10.1598/JAAL.51.7.3
Topping, K. J., & Sanders, W. L. (2000). Teacher effectiveness and computer assessment of reading: Relating value-added and learning information systems data. School
Effectiveness and School Improvement, 11(3), 305–337.
Watts, B. (2004). Accelerated Reader: Its motivational effects on advanced adolescent readers. Masters Abstracts International, 43(02), 386. (UMI No. 1423331)