View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Personalized Expert Guidance of Students' Book Choices in Primary and Secondary Education

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Personalized Expert Guidance of Students' Book Choices in Primary and Secondary Education
Language: English
Authors: Sande, Lisa van der (ORCID 0000-0003-0048-1169), Wildeman, Ilona (ORCID 0000-0002-0145-9759), Bus, Adriana G. (ORCID 0000-0002-2836-176X), van Steensel, Roel (ORCID 0000-0001-5682-3354)
Source: Reading Psychology. 2022 43(5-6):380-404.
Availability: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 25
Publication Date: 2022
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Tests/Questionnaires
Education Level: Junior High Schools
Middle Schools
Secondary Education
Elementary Education
Descriptors: Independent Reading, Silent Reading, Reading Material Selection, Books, Preferences, Reading Attitudes, Prevocational Education, Middle School Students, Elementary School Students, Reading Motivation, Guidance, Librarians, Reading Achievement, Foreign Countries
Geographic Terms: Netherlands
DOI: 10.1080/02702711.2022.2113944
ISSN: 0270-2711
1521-0685
Abstract: In many schools, independent silent reading of self-selected books is used to promote reading. However, self-selection may be insufficient to counter negative reading experiences, particularly when students choose books not attuned to their reading level and interest. Two studies experimentally tested whether personalized expert guidance when selecting books could prevent a reading attitude decline. Study 1 focused on readers in prevocational secondary education (Grades 7 and 8; N = 136). Study 2 included younger readers from primary education (Grades 4-6, N = 99). Students in the experimental condition met with a librarian to discuss book choices every two weeks for three months. In both studies, the intervention stabilized the reading attitude decline, although, in Study 1, only for more advanced readers. In Study 2, reading comprehension of the most proficient readers also improved. This indicates that guidance in selecting books can preserve students' reading attitude and increase reading proficiency growth.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2023
Accession Number: EJ1370408
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwHZ88BGwlLQD-1MNTSmSkaJAAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDHvpTmZ1lDg0X8dQ9gIBEICBmzHlogqe1RDC9tIB4e3-IfJAxfBxfZcPOIp74uWsl44ypEGNTXKuTLSeW1QgXmYIqJGybydwwGmGwRqvKhLVAohsoQ2IbhnhvOT5Y3lEHFC9auZAie0IdxLjqccPoNXwLrvS9_og2EOWO3EoBPE2eIjTEX4PUcrVj1xF1IjwnzLQkb8gq0gf7Ge7rTioRtTHw8o5RBUuCC--H7m1
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0159736253;bcw01jul.22;2022Oct20.03:07;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0159736253-1">Personalized Expert Guidance of Students' Book Choices in Primary and Secondary Education </title> <p>In many schools, independent silent reading of self-selected books is used to promote reading. However, self-selection may be insufficient to counter negative reading experiences, particularly when students choose books not attuned to their reading level and interest. Two studies experimentally tested whether personalized expert guidance when selecting books could prevent a reading attitude decline. Study 1 focused on readers in prevocational secondary education (Grades 7 and 8; N = 136). Study 2 included younger readers from primary education (Grades 4–6, N = 99). Students in the experimental condition met with a librarian to discuss book choices every two weeks for three months. In both studies, the intervention stabilized the reading attitude decline, although, in Study 1, only for more advanced readers. In Study 2, reading comprehension of the most proficient readers also improved. This indicates that guidance in selecting books can preserve students' reading attitude and increase reading proficiency growth.</p> <p>In the upper half of primary school, students' interest in reading books and other long stretches of text begins to decline—a decline that continues into secondary education (e.g., Gottfried, Fleming, & Gottfried, [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref1">10</reflink>]; Gunobgunob-Mirasol, 2020; Kelley & Decker, [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref2">17</reflink>]; McKenna, Conradi, Lawrence, Jang, & Meyer, [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref3">27</reflink>]; McKenna, Kear, & Ellsworth, [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref4">28</reflink>]). Reading attitude declines and growth in achievement levels off, especially for students from age 10 to 15 (e.g., Mullis, Martin, Foy, & Drucker, [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref5">35</reflink>]). These effects, referred to by Chall as the "fourth-grade slump" (Chall & Jacobs, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref6">4</reflink>]), can result from frustrating reading experiences that often occur in this stage of reading development. Unlike the first three years of education, in which students read simple texts about familiar topics, by Grade 4, students read more varied, complex, and linguistically and cognitively challenging texts. Texts may contain words that are hard to decode and new words and ideas beyond students' current repertoire and knowledge of the world. Reading texts that are not fine-tuned to students' abilities and interests without sufficient guidance from teachers while reading the texts may trigger negative reading experiences that can explain the decline in reading attitude and skills (Locher, Becker, & Pfost, [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref7">23</reflink>]; Snow & Moje, [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref8">43</reflink>]).</p> <p>To promote sufficient practice in reading, understanding, and learning from increasingly demanding texts, many Dutch schools have enriched their school libraries (Nielen & Bus, [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref9">38</reflink>]) and schedule Independent Silent Reading (ISR) time in which students independently read self-selected books (Garan & DeVoogd, [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref10">9</reflink>]; Krashen, [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref11">21</reflink>]; Manning, Lewis, & Lewis, [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref12">25</reflink>]). Although the impact of such ways of increasing reading time seems evident, research so far has failed to prove the efficacy of scheduling time for reading (e.g., National Reading Panel, [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref13">36</reflink>], Yoon, [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref14">53</reflink>]). To explain this lack of effects, we hypothesize that, contrary to what is commonly assumed, ISR in schools can easily become a source of negative experiences, particularly when students are expected to self--select books. Self-selection is an important element of ISR because it is assumed to trigger a sense of autonomy that enhances reading motivation (Krashen & McQuillan, [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref15">22</reflink>]; Ryan & Deci, [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref16">42</reflink>]). However, research has shown that many students struggle to select books that match their skills and interests, thus, causing negative reading experiences (c.f., Kragler, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref17">19</reflink>]; Merga, [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref18">30</reflink>]; Merga & Roni, [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref19">32</reflink>]).</p> <p>Especially particular subsamples, such as students growing up in less literate families, are in danger of selecting books that do not fit their skills and interests, making them particularly prone to negative experiences during ISR (Strommen & Mates, [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref20">48</reflink>]). These students are less inclined to talk about books with their parents or to visit libraries and bookstores (Baker, [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref21">2</reflink>]; Kraaykamp, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref22">18</reflink>]). Therefore, they may be less familiar with book titles, which can result in difficulties in finding appropriate books, despite the presence of varied reading materials in school (Hibbard & Franklin, [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref23">13</reflink>]; Mackey, [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref24">24</reflink>]). When choosing books for ISR, these students may rely on superficial selection strategies, based, for example, on physical features such as cover or length, and, consequently, do not succeed in finding books that are attuned to their skills and interests (Hopper, [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref25">15</reflink>]; Merga, [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref26">29</reflink>]; Merga & Roni, [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref27">32</reflink>]; Mohr, [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref28">33</reflink>]). Reading texts during ISR can then become a frustrating endeavor, resulting in discouraging reading experiences, leading to a decreased reading attitude (Locher et al., [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref29">23</reflink>]).</p> <p>Assuming that an accumulation of negative experiences with reading could partly explain the decline in reading attitude from Grade 4 onward, we may be able to reduce the decrease in attitude by taking away one of the main barriers for positive reading practice: finding books that match students' skills and interests (Fulmer & Frijters, [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref30">8</reflink>]; Locher et al., [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref31">23</reflink>]; Margolis & McCabe, [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref32">26</reflink>]). We hypothesize that helping students find appropriate books can turn ISR into a mainly positive experience and reduce the reading attitude decline. We additionally expect that such a favorable change could encourage a virtuous cycle (Mol & Bus, [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref33">34</reflink>]): as a result of positive reading experiences, students' reading attitude improves, which, in turn, may expand reading activities, leading to a growth in familiarity with book titles and better reading proficiency. We may, thus, also prevent additional emotional barriers for new text reading attempts (Bishop, [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref34">3</reflink>]; Nielen, Mol, Sikkema-de Jong, & Bus, [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref35">39</reflink>]).</p> <p>Several studies experimented with ways to provide additional support in choosing books during ISR (Kelley & Clausen-Grace, [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref36">16</reflink>]; Reutzel, Jones, Fawson, & Smith, [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref37">41</reflink>]; Weber, [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref38">51</reflink>]; Wutz & Wedwick, [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref39">52</reflink>]). This support took various forms. For instance, in <emph>Scaffolded Silent Reading</emph> teachers guide students' book selection by arranging the library to find books on their reading level more easily and teach students selection strategies (Reutzel et al., [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref40">41</reflink>]). In R<sups>5</sups> (read, relax, reflect, respond, rap), teachers log students' book choices and, depending on their progress in reading, support those students who seem to have trouble finding appropriate books (Kelley & Clausen-Grace, [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref41">16</reflink>]). In BOOKMATCH (Wutz & Wedwick, [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref42">52</reflink>]), students fill out a book selection form to decide whether the book they just selected is appropriate. All studies indicated that guidance is effective in promoting students' reading attitude and proficiency. Still, in all cases, students themselves were left responsible for finding appropriate books. Even though this may have improved their book selection, it may not have resulted in the most optimal prevention of negative reading experiences.</p> <p>In this study, we built on such interventions. To be sure that the support is fine-tuned to students' reading skills and interests, we involved experts in children's literature—librarians—to help students select books. We expected this support would increase the chance that students have optimal reading experiences that would benefit their reading attitude, familiarity with book titles, and reading achievement.</p> <hd id="AN0159736253-2">The Current Study</hd> <p>Assuming that reading books not fitting students' skills and interests causes negative reading experiences (Fulmer & Frijters, [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref43">8</reflink>]; Locher et al., [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref44">23</reflink>]; Margolis & McCabe, [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref45">26</reflink>]), we examine whether personalized guidance in book selection reduces the reading attitude decline and furthers students' reading development. Students met with a librarian in biweekly meetings to discuss their experiences with the book they were currently reading or had just finished and to receive suggestions for a new book attuned to students' reading level and interests. We aimed to answer the following research questions:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> Does personalized expert guidance in selecting books for ISR influence students' reading attitude, and, consequently, their familiarity with book titles and reading comprehension?</item> <p></p> <item> Do the effects of book selection guidance vary with students' initial levels of reading attitude, familiarity with book titles, and reading comprehension?</item> </ulist> <p>We expected that more reluctant readers would benefit more than typical readers from expert guidance because particularly those readers have problems selecting books matching their reading level and interests (Hairrell, Edmonds, Vaughn, & Simmons, [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref46">12</reflink>]; Kragler, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref47">19</reflink>]; Merga, [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref48">31</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0159736253-3">Study 1: Supporting Book Choices in Prevocational Secondary Education</hd> <p>Study 1 focused on students in Grades 7 and 8 of prevocational education, the lowest Dutch secondary education level. Because students in prevocational education mostly have a low reading proficiency (Feskens, Kuhlmeier, & Limpens, [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref49">7</reflink>]) and limited interest in reading (DUO Onderwijsonderzoek, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref50">6</reflink>]), they may benefit from guidance in selecting appropriate books for ISR (Hairrell et al., [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref51">12</reflink>]; Merga, [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref52">31</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0159736253-4">Materials and Methods</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0159736253-5">Design</hd> <p>Stratified for school, we randomly assigned each participant to the experimental or control condition. Students in the experimental condition met with a librarian every two weeks to discuss the selection of a new book while the control group self-selected books for reading during ISR. Pre- and post-tests included group-wise administration of questionnaires evaluating reading attitude and familiarity with book titles and a reading comprehension test.</p> <hd id="AN0159736253-6">Participants</hd> <p>The sample included 82 Grade 7 students and 54 Grade 8 students, and more girls (<emph>n</emph> = 78) than boys (<emph>n</emph> = 58). The participants' average age was 13.42 years (<emph>SD</emph> = 0.82; range: 11.83–15.18). In all six schools (14 classes), the libraries were well-equipped and schools offered ISR on average for 35 min per week. The number of students willing to participate in the intervention ranged per school from 9 to 33. Because the librarians of the public library, employed at the school for a few hours per week, normally were mainly responsible for managing and updating the school library collection, each librarian had only limited time available and could guide a maximum of 10 students. Consequently, the control group (<emph>n</emph> = 83) was larger than the experimental group (<emph>n</emph> = 53).</p> <hd id="AN0159736253-7">Intervention</hd> <p>Individual meetings between students and librarians took place on school days, each meeting lasting approximately 10 min. To structure the conversations, the researchers provided a checklist with questions about the book that the student was currently reading, such as "Do you like the book?" and "Do you find the book easy or difficult?" (see Appendix for the complete checklist). Guided by students' responses, librarians suggested one or more new books attuned to students' reading level and interests. Librarians were careful to maintain students' sense of autonomy by presenting their advice as a suggestion and not as a prescription, as this may be counterproductive and reduce motivation (Merga & Roni, [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref53">32</reflink>]; Ryan & Deci, [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref54">42</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0159736253-8">Measures</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0159736253-9">Reading attitude</hd> <p>The Reading Attitude Scale (Aarnoutse, [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref55">1</reflink>]) contained 27 questions with a yes or no answer, among which: "Do you often read in leisure time?" and "Do you find reading boring?" After recoding negatively formulated items, we calculated a sum score (Cronbach's <emph>α</emph> pre-test =.93, post-test =.94). In previous studies, scores on the Reading Attitude Scale were found to be significantly correlated with scores on a title recognition list and reading comprehension (Nielen & Bus, [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref56">38</reflink>]). Research also shows that reluctant readers, unfamiliar with age-appropriate book titles, had significantly lower scores on this questionnaire than enthusiastic readers (Nielen et al., [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref57">39</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0159736253-10">Title recognition</hd> <p>A title recognition list containing 34 titles of existing children's books, mixed with 16 fake titles, was used to assess familiarity with books (Stanovich & West, [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref58">47</reflink>]). To account for varying reading levels, the list included books appropriate for students in primary education (9–12 years) and books for adolescents. Students checked the titles they knew and students' scores were the percentage of (correctly) checked existing titles minus the percentage of (incorrectly) checked fake titles.</p> <p>To prevent a testing effect, we developed two versions (A and B). Half of the students received version A at pre-test and version B at post-test and half vice versa. Both versions had acceptable reliabilities (Cronbach's <emph>α</emph> version A: pre-test =.83, post-test =.76, version B: pre-test =.88, post-test =.85). Version B appeared to include significantly fewer well-known books than version A, <emph>t</emph>(<reflink idref="bib133" id="ref59">133</reflink>) = −2.20, <emph>p</emph> =.030. Therefore, pre-test and post-test scores on version B were increased with the difference between the average scores on version A and B at pre-test (4.36), so that the mean of both versions at pre-test was the same.</p> <hd id="AN0159736253-11">Reading comprehension</hd> <p>To assess reading comprehension, we used the "SALT-Reading" consisting of factual and inferential comprehension questions about brief texts varying in genre (narrative, expository, argumentative, instructive) (Van Steensel, Oostdam, & Van Gelderen, [<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref60">49</reflink>]). To prevent a testing effect, we divided the test into two parts, each containing 37 questions. Each version contained multiple-choice questions and open-ended questions (respectively, seven and four in version A and B). Answers to the open-ended questions were double-coded by two independent coders. Two items had low inter-rater reliability and were not used for calculating total scores. Total scores were the percentage of questions answered correctly (Cronbach's <emph>α</emph> version A: pre-test =.80, post-test =.82, version B: pre-test =.83, post-test =.81). Because the scores on both versions significantly differed, <emph>t</emph>(<reflink idref="bib102" id="ref61">102</reflink>) = −4.71, <emph>p</emph> <.001, we added 15.40 (the difference between the two averages at pre-test) to pre-test and post-test scores on version A so that both versions had the same mean at pre-test.</p> <hd id="AN0159736253-12">Procedure</hd> <p>The university's Ethical Review Board approved the study. In the school year 2017–2018, six schools and their part-time librarians agreed to participate. Students were encouraged to participate by the possibility of winning a cinema ticket raffled among the participants in each school. The students' parents received information about the study and a form that enabled them to refuse their child's participation. Both the questionnaire and the reading comprehension test were administered to entire classes in 50-min class sessions. The sessions were introduced by the second author or a trained research assistant, and teachers were present to maintain order. At the start, librarians received instruction by phone about the checklist. Halfway through the intervention, we contacted them again to monitor implementation and hear their experiences. Based on the completed checklists, we collected information about the number of meetings and the number of selected books.</p> <hd id="AN0159736253-13">Analyses</hd> <p>As the data were hierarchically structured (students in classes in schools), we used Huber-White corrections of standard errors to account for this dependency. Using the Complex Sample General Linear Model (CSGLM) in SPSS, reading attitude, title recognition, and reading comprehension were regressed on pre-test scores, gender, reading comprehension at pre-test, condition (experimental vs. control), and interactions between the covariates and condition. We entered reading comprehension at pre-test and the interaction of reading comprehension at pre-test × condition in all analyses because the intervention's effectiveness might depend on students' reading level.</p> <p>Missing items on reading comprehension were considered incorrect. Following the SALT-Reading procedures (Van Steensel et al., [<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref62">49</reflink>]), we coded the test as missing if more than three consecutive items were lacking. Missing items on reading attitude and title recognition were imputed using the EM-procedure in SPSS. Students with missing scores on an entire test or questionnaire were excluded from the analysis. For analyses of reading attitude, title recognition, and reading comprehension, the groups included 95, 95, and 88 students.</p> <p>The analyses concerned the intent-to-treat group. As four experimental students did not have any meetings with their librarian, we also conducted the analyses without these students.</p> <hd id="AN0159736253-14">Results</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0159736253-15">Implementation</hd> <p>The students had zero (<emph>n</emph> = 4), three (<emph>n</emph> = 7), four (<emph>n</emph> = 8), five (<emph>n</emph> = 15), or six meetings (<emph>n</emph> = 19) with the librarian. According to the librarians, especially struggling readers had difficulties talking about books they enjoyed, which made it hard to suggest books. One librarian believed that these students need more meetings to make the intervention work. Librarians mostly selected a few books they considered appropriate, from which students made their choice. The number of books read during the intervention period ranged from zero to seven (<emph>M</emph> = 3.35; <emph>SD</emph> = 1.56). Sometimes no new books were advised, because students had not yet finished their current book. Fourteen students (28.6%) selected a maximum of two new books. The number of books was related to students' scores on the reading comprehension test: the 50% highest-scoring students selected on average 4.06 new books, while the 50% lowest-scoring students selected 3.05 new books, <emph>t</emph>(<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref63">28</reflink>) = −1.92, <emph>p</emph> =.033 (one-sided).</p> <hd id="AN0159736253-16">Reading Attitude</hd> <p>At pre-test, experimental and control students did not significantly differ in reading attitude, <emph>t</emph>(<reflink idref="bib133" id="ref64">133</reflink>) = 0.65, <emph>p</emph> =.515. Post-test scores for reading attitude were lower than pre-test scores (see Table 1), indicating that reading attitude declined. Reading attitude at pre-test was a significant predictor of reading attitude at post-test (Table 2). Although there was no significant main effect of the intervention, there was a significant interaction effect of intervention × reading level at pre-test. Students who scored relatively high on reading comprehension (pre-test) benefited from the intervention and outperformed the control group, while students with relatively low scores on reading comprehension lagged behind the control group (Figure 1). The intervention effect for students with high reading comprehension scores at pre-test equaled Cohen's <emph>d</emph> = 0.25.</p> <p>Graph: Figure 1. Interaction effect of reading comprehension pretest scores and experimental condition on reading attitude.</p> <p>Table 1. Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlations in Study 1 (<emph>N</emph><subs>total</subs> = 104–135; <emph>N</emph><subs>experimental group</subs> = 40–53; <emph>N</emph><subs>control group</subs> = 64–82).</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><td /><td>Total sample</td><td>Experimental group</td><td>Control group</td><td char=".">1</td><td char=".">2</td><td char=".">3</td><td char=".">4</td><td char=".">5</td><td char=".">6</td></tr><tr><td /><td><italic>M</italic> (<italic>SD</italic>)</td><td><italic>M</italic> (<italic>SD</italic>)</td><td><italic>M</italic> (<italic>SD</italic>)</td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td>Pre-test</td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td char=".">1. Reading attitude</td><td char=".">11.51 (7.65)</td><td char=".">10.97 (7.85)</td><td char=".">11.85 (7.55)</td><td>–</td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td char=".">2. Title recognition</td><td char=".">11.87 (11.48)</td><td char=".">11.27 (13.63)</td><td char=".">12.26 (9.91)</td><td char=".">−.02</td><td>–</td><td /><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td char=".">3. Reading comprehension</td><td char=".">64.20 (16.60)</td><td char=".">63.07 (17.49)</td><td char=".">64.91 (16.11)</td><td char=".">.28**</td><td char=".">.35***</td><td>–</td><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>Post-test</td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td char=".">4. Reading attitude</td><td char=".">11.25 (8.02)</td><td char=".">11.16 (8.57)</td><td char=".">11.30 (7.74)</td><td char=".">.78***</td><td char=".">−.06</td><td char=".">.31**</td><td>–</td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td char=".">5. Title recognition</td><td char=".">13.33 (11.46)</td><td char=".">12.05 (14.02)</td><td char=".">14.07 (9.71)</td><td char=".">.08</td><td char=".">.48***</td><td char=".">.37***</td><td char=".">.06</td><td>–</td><td /></tr><tr><td char=".">6. Reading comprehension</td><td char=".">66.58 (17.01)</td><td char=".">62.33 (16.83)</td><td char=".">69.13 (16.17)</td><td char=".">.37***</td><td char=".">.25**</td><td char=".">.69***</td><td char=".">.41***</td><td char=".">.36***</td><td>–</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>1 **<emph>p</emph> <.01.</p> <p>2 ***<emph>p</emph> <.001.</p> <p>Table 2. Results of the Regression Analyses in Study 1.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><td>Parameter</td><td>Reading attitude</td><td>Title recognition</td><td>Reading comprehension</td></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td>Intercept</td><td char=".">10.90 (0.94)</td><td char=".">12.11 (2.44)</td><td char=".">64.74 (2.82)</td></tr><tr><td>Pre-test score</td><td char=".">0.82 (0.09)***</td><td char=".">0.30 (0.12)*</td><td char=".">0.79 (0.12)***</td></tr><tr><td>Reading comprehension</td><td char=".">−0.04 (0.05)</td><td char=".">0.17 (0.08)</td><td /></tr><tr><td>Gender (0 = boy)</td><td char=".">−0.71 (1.24)</td><td char=".">4.58 (2.95)</td><td char=".">6.02 (2.72)*</td></tr><tr><td>Condition (0 = control group)</td><td char=".">−1.99 (1.85)</td><td char=".">−1.51 (3.87)</td><td char=".">−2.18 (3.23)</td></tr><tr><td>Pre-test × condition</td><td char=".">−0.18 (0.13)</td><td char=".">0.07 (0.25)</td><td char=".">−0.07 (0.15)</td></tr><tr><td>Reading comprehension × condition</td><td char=".">0.18 (0.06)**</td><td char=".">0.07 (0.13)</td><td /></tr><tr><td>Gender × condition</td><td char=".">4.65 (2.33)</td><td char=".">−1.88 (4.91)</td><td char=".">−6.99 (3.75)</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <ulist> <item>3 <emph>Note.</emph> Standard errors are presented in parentheses.</item> <item>4 *<emph>p</emph> <.05.</item> <item>5 **<emph>p</emph> <.01.</item> <item>6 ***<emph>p</emph> <.001.</item> </ulist> <hd id="AN0159736253-17">Title Recognition</hd> <p>At pre-test, experimental and control students did not significantly differ on the title recognition list, <emph>t</emph>(<reflink idref="bib133" id="ref65">133</reflink>) = 0.54, <emph>p</emph> =.588. Students' pre-test scores significantly predicted their post-test scores (Table 2). Neither the main effect of the intervention nor the interactions of the covariates and the intervention were significant.</p> <hd id="AN0159736253-18">Reading Comprehension</hd> <p>At pre-test, experimental and control students did not significantly differ in reading comprehension, <emph>t</emph>(<reflink idref="bib102" id="ref66">102</reflink>) = 0.55, <emph>p</emph> =.586. In addition to an effect of pre-test scores on reading comprehension, there was an effect of gender (Table 2): girls outperformed boys. Condition had no significant effect on reading comprehension. Additionally, the interactions of the covariates and condition were not significant.</p> <hd id="AN0159736253-19">Additional Analyses</hd> <p>Four students in the experimental condition did not have any meetings with the librarians. Excluding these students from the analyses did not change the outcomes.</p> <hd id="AN0159736253-20">Discussion</hd> <p>In prevocational secondary education, personalized expert guidance diminished the decrease in reading attitude that was apparent in the sample as a whole, although not all students benefited. Personalized guidance of book selection positively affected reading attitude compared to self-selection of books. However, contrary to our expectation that particularly struggling readers would benefit from guidance in selecting books, the effect on reading attitude was limited to students who were relatively advanced in reading. Possibly, the poor reading skills of struggling readers precluded an initial interest in reading (Soemer & Schiefele, [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref67">44</reflink>]; Spichtig, Pascoe, Ferrara, & Vorstius, [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref68">45</reflink>]), and thus, hampered the implementation of the intervention. This hypothesis is supported by the observation that the least proficient readers only read few books during the intervention, while more proficient readers were able to read more books in the intervention period. Consequently, the proficient readers likely had more meaningful discussions with the librarians, thus, receiving more guidance in selecting new books. This study did not reveal any effects of the intervention on the more distal measures of familiarity with book titles and reading comprehension.</p> <hd id="AN0159736253-21">Study 2: Supporting Book Choices in Primary Education</hd> <p>Study 2 allows testing the intervention's impact when students read more books because more time is available for ISR. In all participating primary schools, ISR took place daily. We focused on students in Grades 4–6 because, for many students, this period marks the onset of the decline in reading attitude and proficiency (Chall & Jacobs, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref69">4</reflink>]; Gottfried et al., [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref70">10</reflink>]; McKenna et al., [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref71">28</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0159736253-22">Materials and Methods</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0159736253-23">Design</hd> <p>In each school, an equal number of students was randomly assigned to the experimental or the control group, stratified for grade and gender. Before and after the three-month intervention period, students filled out questionnaires to assess their reading attitude and title recognition; they also completed a reading comprehension test.</p> <hd id="AN0159736253-24">Participants</hd> <p>One hundred twelve students from 27 classes in nine schools participated. In similar schools, on average 99 min per week were reserved for ISR (Van der Sande, Wildeman, Bus, & Van Steensel, [<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref72">50</reflink>]). Due to the limited time availability of librarians, we had to constrain the number of participants per school, ranging from 10 to 15. One school dropped out because the librarian did not have any meetings with the students. Hence, the final sample consisted of 99 students from eight schools (experimental group: <emph>n</emph> = 49; control group: <emph>n</emph> = 50), of whom 40 were in Grade 4, 36 in Grade 5, and 23 in Grade 6. On average, students were 10.41 years old (<emph>SD</emph> = 0.87; range: 8.79–12.37) and the sample included about as many boys (<emph>n</emph> = 50) as girls (<emph>n</emph> = 49).</p> <hd id="AN0159736253-25">Intervention</hd> <p>The intervention was the same as in Study 1: Students in the experimental condition met once every two weeks with a librarian to discuss new books while students in the control group self-selected books.</p> <hd id="AN0159736253-26">Measures</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0159736253-27">Reading attitude</hd> <p>Students rated 24 pictures and 16 Dutch words on a 6-point Likert-scale, ranging from 1 (<emph>not attractive at all</emph>) to 6 (<emph>very attractive</emph>) (Nielen et al., [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref73">40</reflink>]). Half of the pictures and words were related to reading, while the other half were neutral. The reading and neutral pictures were matched on the color and size of the objects and in depicting people or animals (Figure 2). The reading and neutral words had a similar length (e.g., "book" and "door"). The average score of the neutral items (Cronbach's <emph>α</emph> pre-test =.81, post-test =.86) was subtracted from the average score of the reading items (Cronbach's <emph>α</emph> pre-test =.94, post-test =.96). A validation study, including over 1200 students, showed that readers from Grades 4 to 8 rarely reading books scored significantly lower on this measure than students regularly reading books (Nielen et al., [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref74">39</reflink>]).</p> <p>PHOTO (COLOR): Figure 2. Example of a reading picture and matched neutral picture in the Picture Evaluation Task.</p> <hd id="AN0159736253-28">Title recognition</hd> <p>We used a title recognition list as an indicator of familiarity with books (see Study 1). To prevent a testing effect, we developed two versions. Half of the students made version A at pre-test and version B at post-test and the other half vice versa. Both contained 34 existing titles, appropriate for the students' age range, and 16 fake titles (Cronbach's <emph>α</emph> version A: pre-test =.87, post-test =.84, version B: pre-test =.84, post-test =.81). The difference between the two versions at pre-test indicated that version A included fewer well-known books than version B, <emph>t</emph>(<reflink idref="bib92" id="ref75">92</reflink>) = 2.12, <emph>p</emph> =.037. We added the average difference between version A and B at pre-test (6.91) to the pre-test and post-test scores on version A, so that both versions had the same mean at pre-test.</p> <hd id="AN0159736253-29">Reading comprehension</hd> <p>We used a standardized reading comprehension test (De Vos, [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref76">5</reflink>]), containing multiple-choice questions about short, age-appropriate texts. The questions concern inferencing (e.g., deriving word meanings), integration of information (e.g., stating the main idea of a text), and comprehension of text structure (e.g., placing events in chronological order). To prevent a testing effect, we divided the test into two parts (version A and B). Both versions were comparable in the amount of text and the number of questions asked, ranging from 17 to 21. Total scores were based on the percentage of questions answered correctly (Cronbach's <emph>α</emph> pre-test =.69 and post-test =.68). The average scores on version A and B differed for none of the grades, indicating equal difficulty.</p> <hd id="AN0159736253-30">Procedure</hd> <p>The study, conducted in the school year 2017–2018, was approved by the university's Ethical Review Board. Nine schools and their librarians agreed to participate. Parents were asked for their informed consent. The reading attitude questionnaire, title recognition list, and reading comprehension test were administered groupwise. After a brief instruction by the first author or a trained research assistant, students completed the questionnaires and test while teachers were present to maintain order. It took students about 60 min to complete all instruments. Halfway through the intervention, we contacted the librarians to monitor implementation.</p> <hd id="AN0159736253-31">Analyses</hd> <p>We used the same procedure as in Study 1 to answer the research questions. Using CSGLM with Huber-White corrections for school, reading attitude, title recognition, and reading comprehension were regressed on pre-test scores, gender, reading comprehension at pre-test, condition (experimental vs. control), and interactions between the covariates and condition.</p> <p>For missing items on reading attitude and title recognition, we used the EM-procedure in SPSS. Students with missing scores on the comprehension test or a questionnaire were excluded from the specific analysis. Analyses targeting reading attitude, title recognition, and reading comprehension included 92, 92, and 94 students.</p> <hd id="AN0159736253-32">Results</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0159736253-33">Implementation</hd> <p>The students had four (<emph>n</emph> = 4), five (<emph>n</emph> = 28) or six meetings (<emph>n</emph> = 17) with the librarians. The librarians' reports were mainly positive: most students liked to talk about their books. The librarians noticed large differences in reading level and interest, which, they suggested, highlights the importance of personalized guidance. Some students were inclined to read the same books as their classmates, even though these books were too hard for them. The meetings with the librarians helped these students realize which books were more appropriate and to select better matching books. One librarian, however, mentioned that two of her students, reluctant readers, did not like to talk about books and were less open to advice. The number of selected books during the intervention period (<emph>M</emph> = 4.35; <emph>SD</emph> = 1.84) was not dependent on students' reading proficiency. The number of students who selected a maximum of two new books (<emph>n</emph> = 5; 10.2%) was lower than in prevocational secondary education (28.6%).</p> <hd id="AN0159736253-34">Reading Attitude</hd> <p>At pre-test, students in the experimental and control group did not significantly differ in reading attitude, <emph>t</emph>(<reflink idref="bib92" id="ref77">92</reflink>) = −0.57, <emph>p</emph> =.570. Reading attitude at post-test was lower than at pre-test (see Table 3), indicating that, on average, students' reading attitude decreased. Regression analysis revealed significant main effects of pre-test scores and gender on reading attitude at post-test. Girls had a more positive reading attitude than boys. The condition's effect was significant and positive (Cohen's <emph>d</emph> = 0.44): experimental students had a more positive reading attitude than control students (Table 4). The positive interaction between pre-test and condition indicated that students who had a more positive reading attitude at pre-test benefited more from the intervention than students with a less positive attitude (Figure 3).</p> <p>Graph: Figure 3. Interaction effect of reading attitude pretest scores and experimental condition on reading attitude.</p> <p>Table 3 Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlations in Study 2 (<emph>N</emph><subs>total</subs> = 48–49; <emph>N</emph><subs>experimental group</subs> = 45–49; <emph>N</emph><subs>control group</subs> = 94–97).</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><td /><td>Total sample</td><td>Experimental group</td><td>Control group</td><td char=".">1</td><td char=".">2</td><td char=".">3</td><td char=".">4</td><td char=".">5</td><td char=".">6</td></tr><tr><td /><td><italic>M</italic> (<italic>SD</italic>)</td><td><italic>M</italic> (<italic>SD</italic>)</td><td><italic>M</italic> (<italic>SD</italic>)</td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td>Pre-test</td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td char=".">1. Reading attitude</td><td char=".">0.50 (0.97)</td><td char=".">0.55 (0.99)</td><td char=".">0.44 (0.96)</td><td>–</td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td char=".">2. Title recognition</td><td char=".">21.46 (15.72)</td><td char=".">21.50 (15.76)</td><td char=".">21.42 (15.85)</td><td char=".">.15</td><td>–</td><td /><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td char=".">3. Reading comprehension</td><td char=".">66.35 (18.81)</td><td char=".">66.71 (19.69)</td><td char=".">65.97 (18.05)</td><td char=".">.29**</td><td char=".">.35***</td><td>–</td><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>Post-test</td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td char=".">4. Reading attitude</td><td char=".">0.38 (1.04)</td><td char=".">0.51 (1.16)</td><td char=".">0.25 (0.89)</td><td char=".">.77***</td><td char=".">.04</td><td char=".">.31**</td><td>–</td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td char=".">5. Title recognition</td><td char=".">25.02 (14.26)</td><td char=".">24.91 (14.60)</td><td char=".">25.12 (14.05)</td><td char=".">.31**</td><td char=".">.45***</td><td char=".">.28**</td><td char=".">.13</td><td>–</td><td /></tr><tr><td char=".">6. Reading comprehension</td><td char=".">68.05 (18.58)</td><td char=".">66.23 (21.02)</td><td char=".">69.87 (15.78)</td><td char=".">.23*</td><td char=".">.30**</td><td char=".">.42***</td><td char=".">.25*</td><td char=".">.22*</td><td>–</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <ulist> <item>7 *<emph>p</emph> <.05.</item> <item>8 **<emph>p</emph> <.01.</item> <item>9 ***<emph>p</emph> <.001.</item> </ulist> <p>Table 4. Results of the Regression Analyses in Study 2.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><td>Parameter</td><td>Reading attitude</td><td>Title recognition</td><td>Reading comprehension</td></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td>Intercept</td><td char=".">0.42 (0.14)</td><td char=".">26.61 (2.61)</td><td char=".">66.36 (2.13)</td></tr><tr><td>Pre-test score</td><td char=".">0.48 (0.07)***</td><td char=".">0.35 (0.14)*</td><td char=".">0.09 (0.11)</td></tr><tr><td>Reading comprehension</td><td char=".">0.01 (0.01)</td><td char=".">0.09 (0.08)</td><td /></tr><tr><td>Gender (0 = boy)</td><td char=".">0.44 (0.13)*</td><td char=".">−2.73 (4.25)</td><td char=".">9.79 (1.87)***</td></tr><tr><td>Condition (0 = control group)</td><td char=".">0.46 (0.19)*</td><td char=".">−3.55 (2.16)</td><td char=".">0.75 (2.34)</td></tr><tr><td>Pre-test × condition</td><td char=".">0.47 (0.15)*</td><td char=".">0.11 (0.23)</td><td char=".">0.58 (0.17)*</td></tr><tr><td>Reading comprehension × condition</td><td char=".">0.00 (0.01)</td><td char=".">−0.05 (0.13)</td><td /></tr><tr><td>Gender × condition</td><td char=".">−0.54 (0.32)</td><td char=".">6.83 (4.95)</td><td char=".">−11.94 (3.08)**</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <ulist> <item>10 <emph>Note.</emph> Standard errors are presented in parentheses.</item> <item>11 *<emph>p</emph> <.05.</item> <item>12 **<emph>p</emph> <.01.</item> <item>13 ***<emph>p</emph> <.001.</item> </ulist> <hd id="AN0159736253-35">Title Recognition</hd> <p>At pre-test, students in the experimental and control group did not significantly differ in title recognition, <emph>t</emph>(<reflink idref="bib92" id="ref78">92</reflink>) = −0.03, <emph>p</emph> =.977. Apart from a positive effect of pre-test scores on title recognition at post-test, none of the main effects or interactions between condition and covariates were significant (Table 4).</p> <hd id="AN0159736253-36">Reading Comprehension</hd> <p>At pre-test, students in the experimental and control group did not significantly differ in reading comprehension, <emph>t</emph>(<reflink idref="bib94" id="ref79">94</reflink>) = −0.19, <emph>p</emph> =.849. The regression revealed a main effect of gender (Table 4): girls outperformed boys. The intervention did not have a main effect on reading comprehension, but there were significant interaction effects. The interaction of reading comprehension pre-test scores and condition was positive. Only students who scored high on reading comprehension at pre-test benefited from the intervention, while students who scored low did not. The negative interaction effect of gender and condition indicates a negative effect on girls' reading comprehension, but not for boys.</p> <hd id="AN0159736253-37">Discussion</hd> <p>Students' reading attitude declined from pre-test to post-test, but there was less decline with personalized guidance. Students who had a more positive reading attitude at the start benefited most from the intervention. Likewise, personalized guidance improved reading comprehension, but only for more proficient readers. The findings suggest that personalized guidance in selecting books, more than complete autonomy, can reduce the decline in reading attitude and, as a result, promote reading development. There is no obvious explanation for the finding that the intervention harmed reading comprehension for girls. There was no support for the assumption that students read more often due to the intervention, thereby increasing their familiarity with books.</p> <hd id="AN0159736253-38">General Discussion</hd> <p>Our study indicates that prevention of negative reading experiences by supporting book selection can reduce the declining interest in reading that is often visible in students from Grade 4 onward. In both Study 1 and Study 2, guiding students in finding appropriate books for ISR affected reading attitude: without guidance, reading attitude decreased, but attitude stabilized when students received support in book selection. Thus, for students in the upper half of primary school and beyond, ISR without measures that guarantee positive reading experiences may be insufficient to promote reading (Kelley & Clausen-Grace, [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref80">16</reflink>]; Reutzel et al., [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref81">41</reflink>]).</p> <p>The interaction effects between pre-test scores and condition revealed that more advanced students benefited most from guidance in selecting books. The most plausible reason for this is that these students received more substantial support, simply because they read more books: advanced readers were ready to start a new book more often than reluctant readers, making their meetings with the librarian more meaningful. Additionally, an initial positive attitude toward reading likely made these students more susceptible to the librarians' advice. Particularly for students with reading deficits—struggling readers in prevocational education—guidance appeared to have no effects. As ISR formed a minor part in the prevocational education curriculum, these students read only a few books during the intervention period. Consequently, the intervention likely had too little substance. The librarians' comments corroborate this conclusion: they suggested that a longer intervention period might be necessary for this group of students.</p> <p>Of the effects we found, those on reading attitude were most pronounced, and they occurred in both age groups. Only the younger students improved in reading comprehension. Within this group, the more advanced students showed progress in reading proficiency, probably because this group was the only one with enough practice during the intervention to enable progress. Neither of the two studies revealed effects on familiarity with book titles, probably because this instrument was not sensitive enough to assess expanding reading activity in the short term.</p> <hd id="AN0159736253-39">Theoretical Implications</hd> <p>A phenomenon that is known as the fourth-grade slump, already signaled halfway through the twentieth century (Chall & Jacobs, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref82">4</reflink>]; Hildreth, [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref83">14</reflink>]), continues to be valid: when students have passed the initial stages of reading acquisition and their reading development becomes increasingly dependent on their self-initiated reading activities, their reading attitude tends to decline and their reading proficiency levels off (Nielen, [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref84">37</reflink>]; Snow & Moje, [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref85">43</reflink>]). Investments in the availability of books in schools and the increased time reserved for ISR alone do not counter this negative trend.</p> <p>Krashen's ([<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref86">21</reflink>]) theory that students' reading development is promoted by increased practice appears to be corroborated: if we succeed in making students practice reading without experiencing frustration, this promotes students' reading attitude and, due to more practice, their reading proficiency. Krashen's assumption that this mechanism is elicited by simply providing access to books and encouraging autonomous reading was not supported: without an intervention that removes important barriers for practicing reading, such as inappropriate book choices, students' reading attitude declined. Our findings, in other words, suggest a conditional effect of ISR on reading development, which may explain the heterogeneous results that are found in studies on ISR effects (e.g., National Reading Panel, [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref87">36</reflink>]; Yoon, [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref88">53</reflink>]).</p> <p>Our finding of a negative overall trend in reading attitude supports the hypothesis that students are prone to have negative reading experiences (Locher et al., [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref89">23</reflink>]; Nielen et al., [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref90">39</reflink>]). Our findings corroborate the theory that negative experiences are caused by widespread problems such as students' failure to select books that match their interests and reading level (Kragler, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref91">19</reflink>]; Merga, [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref92">29</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref93">30</reflink>]; Merga & Roni, [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref94">32</reflink>]). We assume that when this often happens and negative reading experiences build-up, their reading attitude decreases, which may likely level off students' reading development. If such frustrating experiences accumulate over several years, students may even develop an emotional resistance toward reading (Nielen et al., [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref95">39</reflink>]).</p> <p>The current findings also indicate that it is possible to give reading development a positive spin and ensure that students have more positive reading experiences which may stimulate an upward-moving reading cycle, leading to a more positive reading attitude, more practice, and higher reading proficiency (Mol & Bus, [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref96">34</reflink>]; Snow & Moje, [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref97">43</reflink>]; Stanovich, [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref98">46</reflink>]). A small and rather inexpensive intervention involving incidental personal guidance in choosing books appeared to enhance students' reading development. We could show that personalized support in book selection has positive consequences for reading attitude and, to some extent, for reading achievement.</p> <hd id="AN0159736253-40">Limitations</hd> <p>It appears that our intervention was too short to be able to identify effects on title recognition. On average, students were not able to read more than three to four books in total. We might have found more effects on title recognition if we had, for instance, expanded the intervention period from three to six months (Krashen, [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref99">20</reflink>]).</p> <p>We did not study whether students' book choices aligned with the librarians' suggestions or students' satisfaction with these books. Assessment of their reading behavior (concentration, distraction) would have been a useful supplement to ascertain their positive reading experiences. Furthermore, the intervention effects may not be fully attributable to the quality of the librarians' advice but also to the fact that students have a chance to discuss books with a more knowledgeable other. For a critical test of this hypothesis we would need an additional experimental condition: discussing books without the intention to advise new books.</p> <p>The RCTs were not designed to test the effects of the number of sessions, quality of the meetings, and students' satisfaction with the librarians' recommendations. We aimed to maximize the uniformity of the intervention for each student. Although alongside the number of sessions, we did not systematically collect information about the quality of the meetings with the librarians and the extent to which students accepted recommendations, the general impression is that we were quite successful, which makes it impossible to explore correlations between these variables and the outcome measures. As a source for new hypotheses, however, it might be interesting to explore correlations between these variables or even systematically test variability in implementation and outcome measures, for instance by assessing the effects of different dosages of the intervention.</p> <p>Finally, there was a substantial difference in the time scheduled by schools for ISR: about half an hour per week in Study 1 and about 100 min per week in Study 2, which may additionally explain the minor effects in Study 1. To provide a stronger test for the hypothesis that personalized support is effective for older students in prevocational education, more effort should be made to increase reading time in future studies.</p> <hd id="AN0159736253-41">Conclusion</hd> <p>We conclude that simply providing time for independent reading at school does not stop the decrease in students' reading attitude in the upper half of primary school and beyond. Guiding students' book selection appears to counter students' waning interest in reading and promote their further reading development, although no effects were found for struggling readers in prevocational secondary education. The guidance that contributes to an optimal match between student and book likely leads to an accumulation of positive book reading experiences. We found that a small-scale but well-chosen intervention substantially impacts students' reading: the intervention, including at most six 10-min meetings spread over three months, proved beneficial for reading attitude and reading achievement. We employed librarians to help students find appropriate books and personalize book choices. It might be possible to achieve the same with digital technology: by using reading analytics, it may be possible to monitor students' book choices and subsequent reading behavior. Connecting such diagnostics with databases of children's and youth literature might guide the selection of books adapted to students' interest and reading proficiency.</p> <hd id="AN0159736253-42">Disclosure Statement</hd> <p>No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.</p> <hd id="AN0159736253-43">Data Availability Statement</hd> <p>The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.</p> <hd id="AN0159736253-44">Appendix: Checklist to Support Students' Book Choices</hd> <p>Date of the meeting:............................................................................................................................................................................</p> <p>What is the last book you read or which book are you reading currently?</p> <p>.......................................................................................................................................................................................................</p> <p>Did you finish the book?</p> <p>o Yes</p> <p>o No</p> <p>Why/why not?</p> <p>.......................................................................................................................................................................................................</p> <p>If a student is still reading a book: Do you intend to finish the book?</p> <p>o Yes, I want to finish the book.</p> <p>o I'm not sure whether I want to finish the book.</p> <p>o No, I don't want to finish the book.</p> <p>Why/why not/why don't you know?</p> <p>.......................................................................................................................................................................................................</p> <p>How much do you like the book?</p> <p>o Like very much</p> <p>o Like</p> <p>o Neither like nor dislike</p> <p>o Dislike</p> <p>o Dislike very much</p> <p>Why do you find this?</p> <p>.......................................................................................................................................................................................................</p> <p>Do you find the book easy or difficult?</p> <p>o Very difficult</p> <p>o Quite difficult</p> <p>o Neutral</p> <p>o Quite easy</p> <p>o Very easy</p> <p>Why do you find this?</p> <p>.......................................................................................................................................................................................................</p> <p>Do you already know which book you want to read next?</p> <p>o Yes *</p> <p>o No → choose a new book together with the student</p> <p>* If this is a book from a series or genre that the student reads very often, you may suggest a different book which is also attuned to a student's reading level and interests.</p> <p>Which book did you choose and why?</p> <p>.......................................................................................................................................................................................................</p> <p>Any additional remarks:</p> <p>.......................................................................................................................................................................................................</p> <ref id="AN0159736253-45"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref55" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Aarnoutse, C. A. J. (1990). Woordenschattest en Leesattitudeschaal [Vocabulary test and Reading attitude scale]. Lisse, the Netherlands : Swetz & Zeitlinger.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref21" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Baker, L. (2003). The role of parents in motivating struggling readers. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 19 (1), 87 – 106. doi: 10.1080/10573560308207</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref34" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Bishop, S. J. (2009). Trait anxiety and impoverished prefrontal control of attention. Nature Neuroscience, 12 (1), 92 – 98. doi: 10.1038/mn.2242</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref6" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Chall, J. S., & Jacobs, V. A. (2003). The classic study on poor children's fourth-grade slump. American Educator, 27 (1), 14 – 15.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref76" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> De Vos, T. (2011). Schoolvaardigheidstoets Begrijpend Lezen [School achievementtest Reading Comprehension]. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Boom testuitgevers.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref50" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> DUO Onderwijsonderzoek. (2017). De leesmotivatie van Nederlandse kinderen en jongeren [Reading motivation of Dutch children and adolescents]. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Stichting Lezen.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref49" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Feskens, R., Kuhlmeier, H., & Limpens, G. (2016). Resultaten PISA 2015 in vogelvlucht. Praktische kennis en vaardigheden van 15-jarigen [Results PISA 2015 in a nutshell. Practical knowledge and skills of 15 year old students]. Arnhem, the Netherlands: Cito.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref30" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Fulmer, S. M., & Frijters, J. C. (2011). Motivation during an excessively challenging reading task: The buffering role of relative topic interest. The Journal of Experimental Education, 79 (2), 185 – 208. doi: 10.1080/002200973.2010.481503</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref10" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Garan, E. M., & Devoogd, G. (2008). The benefits of sustained silent reading: Scientific research and common sense converge. The Reading Teacher, 62 (4), 336 – 344. doi: 10.1598/RT.62.4.6</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gottfried, A. E., Fleming, J. S., & Gottfried, A. W. (2001). Continuity of academic intrinsic motivation from childhood through late adolescence: A longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93 (1), 3 – 13. doi: 10.1037//0022-0663.93.1.3</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gunobgunob-Mirasol, R. (2020). A survey of Grade 5 and 6 pupils' attitudes toward reading. Reading Psychology, 41 (3), 229 – 239. doi: 10.1080/02702711.2020.1768982</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hairrell, A., Edmonds, M., Vaughn, S., & Simmons, D. (2010). Independent silent reading for struggling readers: Pitfalls and potential. In E. H. Hiebert & D. R. Reutzel (Eds.), Revisiting silent reading: New directions for teachers and researchers (pp. 275 – 289). Santa Cruz, CA: TextProject, Inc.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hibbard, L., & Franklin, T. (2015). Libraries in online elementary schools: A mixed-methods study. TechTrends, 59 (3), 85 – 91. doi: 10.1007/s11528-015-0857-7</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hildreth, G. (1947). Reading in the middle and upper grades. In G. Hildreth & P. L. Boynton (Eds.), Cumberland education series. Learning the three R's (pp. 256 – 291). Michigan: Educational Publishers, Inc.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hopper, R. (2005). What are teenagers reading? Adolescent fiction reading habits and reading choices. Literacy (Formerly Reading), 39 (3), 113 – 120. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9345.2005.00409.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kelley, M. J., & Clausen-Grace, N. (2006). R 5 : The sustained silent reading makeover that transformed readers. The Reading Teacher, 60 (2), 148 – 156. doi: 10.1598/RT.60.2.5</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kelley, M. J., & Decker, E. O. (2009). The current state of motivation to read among middle school students. Reading Psychology, 30 (5), 466 – 485. doi: 10.1080/02702710902733535</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kraaykamp, G. (2003). Literacy socialization and reading preferences. Effects of parents, the library, and the school. Poetics, 31 (3 – 4), 235 – 257. doi: 10.1016/S0304-422X(03)00033-0</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kragler, S. (2000). Choosing books for reading: An analysis of three types of readers. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 14 (2), 133 – 141. doi: 10.1080/02568540009594758</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Krashen, S. (2001). More smoke and mirrors: A critique of the National Reading Panel Report on Fluency. Phi Delta Kappan, 83 (2), 119 – 123. doi: 10.1177/003172170108300208</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Krashen, S. (2006). Free reading. School Library Journal, 52 (9), 42 – 45.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Krashen, S., & McQuillan, J. (2007). Late intervention. Educational Leadership, 65 (2), 68 – 73.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Locher, F. M., Becker, S., & Pfost, M. (2019). The relation between students' intrinsic reading motivation and book reading in recreational and school contexts. AERA Open, 5 (2), 233285841985204 – 233285841985214. doi: 10.1177/2332858419852041</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mackey, M. (2014). Learning to choose: The hidden art of the enthusiastic reader. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 57 (7), 521 – 526. doi: 10.1002/jaal.290</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Manning, M., Lewis, M., & Lewis, M. (2010). Sustained silent reading. An update of the research. In E. H. Hiebert & D. R. Reutzel (Eds.), Revisiting silent reading: New directions for teachers and researchers (pp. 112 – 128). Santa Cruz, CA: TextProject, Inc.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Margolis, H., & McCabe, P. P. (2004). Self-efficacy: A key to improving the motivation of struggling learners. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues, and Ideas, 77 (6), 241 – 249. doi: 10.3200/THCS.77.6241-249</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> McKenna, M. C., Conradi, K., Lawrence, C., Jang, B. G., & Meyer, J. P. (2012). Reading attitudes of middle school students: Results of a U.S. survey. Reading Research Quarterly, 47 (3), 283 – 306. doi: 10.1002/RRQ.021</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> McKenna, M. C., Kear, D. J., & Ellsworth, R. A. (1995). Children's attitudes toward reading: A national survey. Reading Research Quarterly, 30 (4), 934 – 956. doi: 10.2307/748205</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Merga, M. K. M. (2016). What would make them read more? Insights from Western Australian adolescents. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 36 (3), 409 – 424. doi: 10.1080/02188791.2014.961898</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Merga, M. K. M. (2018). Silent reading and discussion of self- selected books in the contemporary classroom. English in Australia, 53, 70 – 82. https://assets.cdn.thewebconsole.com/S3WEB4306/images/2018-EinA-53-1-COMPLETE-REDUCED.pdf#page=73</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Merga, M. K. M. (2019). How do librarians in schools support struggling readers? English in Education, 53 (2), 145 – 160. doi: 10.1080/04250494.2018.1558030</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Merga, M. K. M., & Roni, S. M. (2017). Choosing strategies of children and the impact of age and gender on library use: Insights for librarians. Journal of Library Administration, 57 (6), 607 – 630. doi: 10.1080/01930826.2017.1340774</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mohr, K. (2006). Children's choices for recreational reading: A three-part investigation of selection preferences, rationales, and processes. Journal of Literacy Research, 38 (1), 81 – 104. doi: 10.1207/s15548430jlr38014</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mol, S. E., & Bus, A. G. (2011). To read or not to read: A meta-analysis of print exposure from infancy to early adulthood. Psychological Bulletin, 137 (2), 267 – 296. doi: 10.1080/10409280701838603</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Foy, P., & Drucker, K. T. (2012). PIRLS 2011 international results in reading. Chestnut Hill, MA: International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nielen, T. M. J. (2016). Alliteracy: Causes and solutions (Doctoral dissertation). University of Leiden. <ulink href="http://openaccess.leidenuniv.nl/handle/1887/37530">http://openaccess.leidenuniv.nl/handle/1887/37530</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nielen, T. M. J., & Bus, A. G. (2015). Enriched school libraries: A boost to academic achievement. AERA Open, 1 (4), 233285841561941 – 233285841561911. doi: 10.1177/2332858415619417</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nielen, T. M. J., Mol, S. E., Sikkema-de Jong, M. T., & Bus, A. G. (2016). Attentional bias toward reading in reluctant readers. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 46, 263 – 271. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2015.11.004</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nielen, T. M. J., Smith, G. G., Sikkema-de Jong, M. T., Drobisz, J., Van Horne, B., & Bus, A. G. (2018). Digital guidance for susceptible readers: Effects on fifth graders' reading motivation and incidental vocabulary learning. Journal of Educational Computing, 56 (1), 48 – 73. doi: 10.1177/0735633117708283</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Reutzel, D. R., Jones, C. D., Fawson, P. C., & Smith, J. A. (2008). Scaffolded Silent Reading: A complement to Guided Repeated Oral Reading that works!. The Reading Teacher, 62 (3), 194 – 207. doi: 10.1598/RT.62.3.2</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25 (1), 54 – 67. doi: 10.1006/ceps.1999.1020</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Snow, C., & Moje, E. (2010). Why is everyone talking about adolescent literacy? Phi Delta Kappan, 91 (6), 66 – 69. doi: 10.1177/003172171009100616</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Soemer, A., & Schiefele, U. (2018). Reading amount as a mediator between intrinsic reading motivation and reading comprehension in the early elementary grades. Learning and Individual Differences, 67, 1 – 11. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2018.06.006</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Spichtig, A. N., Pascoe, J. P., Ferrara, J. D., & Vorstius, C. (2017). A comparison of eye movement measures across reading efficiency quartile groups in elementary, middle, and high school students in the U.S. Journal of Eye Movement Research, 10 (4), 1 – 17. doi: 10.16910/jemr.10.4.5</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences in individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21 (4), 360 – 407. doi: 10.1598/rrq.21.4.1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1989). Exposure to print and orthographic processing. Reading Research Quarterly, 24 (4), 402 – 433. doi: 10.2307/747605</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Strommen, L. T., & Mates, B. F. (2004). Learning to love reading: Interviews with older children and teens. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 48 (3), 188 – 200. doi: 10.1598/JAAL.48.3.1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Van Steensel, R., Oostdam, R., & Van Gelderen, A. (2013). Assessing reading comprehension in adolescent low achievers: Subskills identification and task specificity. Language Testing, 30 (1), 3 – 21. doi: 10.1177/0265532212440950</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Van der Sand, L., Wildeman, I., Bus, A. G., & Van Steensel, R. (2019). Lezen stimuleren via vrij lezen, boekgesprekken en appberichten: Effecten van leesbevorderingsactiviteiten in het basisonderwijs en vmbo. [Stimulate reading by independent silent reading, book conversations, and app messages: Effects of reading promotion activities in primary education and prevocational secondary education]. Utrecht, the Netherlands : Eburon.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Weber, S. (2018). How teachers can guide library book selection to maximize the value of independent reading time. The Language and Literacy Spectrum, 28 (1), 1 – 17.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wutz, J., & Wedwick, L. (2005). BOOKMATCH: Scaffolding book selection for independent reading. The Reading Teacher, 59 (1), 16 – 32. doi: 10.1598/RT.59.1.3</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Yoon, J. C. (2002). Three decades of sustained silent reading: A meta-analytic review of the effects of SSR on attitude toward reading. Reading Improvement, 39 (4), 186 – 195.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Lisa van der Sande; Ilona Wildeman; Adriana G. Bus and Roel van Steensel</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib53" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib48" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref24"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref25"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref26"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref28"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref32"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref33"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref35"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref36"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref37"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib51" firstref="ref38"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib52" firstref="ref39"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref46"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref48"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib47" firstref="ref58"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib133" firstref="ref59"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl36" bibid="bib49" firstref="ref60"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl37" bibid="bib102" firstref="ref61"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl38" bibid="bib44" firstref="ref67"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl39" bibid="bib45" firstref="ref68"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl40" bibid="bib50" firstref="ref72"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl41" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref73"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl42" bibid="bib92" firstref="ref75"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl43" bibid="bib94" firstref="ref79"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl44" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref83"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl45" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref84"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl46" bibid="bib46" firstref="ref98"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl47" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref99"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1370408
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Personalized Expert Guidance of Students' Book Choices in Primary and Secondary Education
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Sande%2C+Lisa+van+der%22">Sande, Lisa van der</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0048-1169">0000-0003-0048-1169</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Wildeman%2C+Ilona%22">Wildeman, Ilona</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0145-9759">0000-0002-0145-9759</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Bus%2C+Adriana+G%2E%22">Bus, Adriana G.</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2836-176X">0000-0002-2836-176X</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22van+Steensel%2C+Roel%22">van Steensel, Roel</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5682-3354">0000-0001-5682-3354</externalLink>)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Reading+Psychology%22"><i>Reading Psychology</i></searchLink>. 2022 43(5-6):380-404.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 25
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2022
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research<br />Tests/Questionnaires
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Junior+High+Schools%22">Junior High Schools</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Middle+Schools%22">Middle Schools</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Secondary+Education%22">Secondary Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Elementary+Education%22">Elementary Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Independent+Reading%22">Independent Reading</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Silent+Reading%22">Silent Reading</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Reading+Material+Selection%22">Reading Material Selection</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Books%22">Books</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Preferences%22">Preferences</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Reading+Attitudes%22">Reading Attitudes</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Prevocational+Education%22">Prevocational Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Middle+School+Students%22">Middle School Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Elementary+School+Students%22">Elementary School Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Reading+Motivation%22">Reading Motivation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Guidance%22">Guidance</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Librarians%22">Librarians</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Reading+Achievement%22">Reading Achievement</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Foreign+Countries%22">Foreign Countries</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Netherlands%22">Netherlands</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1080/02702711.2022.2113944
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 0270-2711<br />1521-0685
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: In many schools, independent silent reading of self-selected books is used to promote reading. However, self-selection may be insufficient to counter negative reading experiences, particularly when students choose books not attuned to their reading level and interest. Two studies experimentally tested whether personalized expert guidance when selecting books could prevent a reading attitude decline. Study 1 focused on readers in prevocational secondary education (Grades 7 and 8; N = 136). Study 2 included younger readers from primary education (Grades 4-6, N = 99). Students in the experimental condition met with a librarian to discuss book choices every two weeks for three months. In both studies, the intervention stabilized the reading attitude decline, although, in Study 1, only for more advanced readers. In Study 2, reading comprehension of the most proficient readers also improved. This indicates that guidance in selecting books can preserve students' reading attitude and increase reading proficiency growth.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2023
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1370408
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1370408
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1080/02702711.2022.2113944
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 25
        StartPage: 380
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Independent Reading
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Silent Reading
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Reading Material Selection
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Books
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Preferences
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Reading Attitudes
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Prevocational Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Middle School Students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Elementary School Students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Reading Motivation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Guidance
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Librarians
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Reading Achievement
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Foreign Countries
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Netherlands
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Personalized Expert Guidance of Students' Book Choices in Primary and Secondary Education
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Sande, Lisa van der
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Wildeman, Ilona
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Bus, Adriana G.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: van Steensel, Roel
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2022
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 0270-2711
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 1521-0685
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 43
            – Type: issue
              Value: 5-6
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Reading Psychology
              Type: main
ResultId 1