How to use this Page

Whenever one person grabs a book and curls up in bed or on the sofa, the rest of the family inevitably follow. ... So we chose our favorites individually and then agreed on one shared family favorite.

Add a Comment

Those of you who have children at secondary school, or are teachers or librarians, may have come across a new(ish) scheme called Accelerated Reader.

Administered in the UK by Rennaissance Learning, Accelerated Reader is a system that grades books, suggests appropriate reading levels and then monitors pupils' reading by giving them a multiple choice quiz on the book they've just read. The system analyses the quiz responses to show teachers whether the pupil has read the book, and what aspects of it they found difficult (e.g., vocabulary, or higher level comprehension).


If they fly through a couple of quizes, they are rewarded with a higher reading band. They can also collect points according to how long the book was that they read - leading to a total score of words read, and the accolade of 'word millionaire' when they get to the magic 1,000,000 words. They are however expected to stay within their bands - books read outside them, although allowed, do not count for rewards and incentives. For a slower reader, expected to progress at a certain number of books per term, or for a competitive reader, determined to get to the millionaire mark first, this more or less prohibits reading outside the given bands.

According to the National Literacy Trust, the use of Accelerated Reader in schools does actually get more pupils reading, and increases the proportion of pupils in the difficult teenage years who say they enjoy reading, will admit to a favourite book, and read widely across genres.

My daughter's school has just started using the scheme and the number of pupils taking books out of the school library has tripled compared with the same time last year. It's hard to argue with that kind of boost to pupils' interest in books and there really does seem to be a noticeable encouragement to read through the motivation of online quizes and rewards, particularly for boys.

What interests me, though, is the banding structure and the rationale behind it. AR uses a computer programme which scans the books and then analyses them for vocabulary and syntax (proportion of complex sentences). The range of banding for the books in a secondary school library is roughly from about 3 to about 11 or 12 for the very hardest books (for a rough idea of what these mean - R.L. Stine's Goosebumps books are about 3; Dostoevsky's The Brothers Karamazov has an AR level of 11.1 )

AR level 3.0

AR level 11.1

More complex sentences and more advanced vocabulary result in a higher banding: and this more or less seems to work in terms of what one thinks of as appropriate progression - nobody is capable of reading Karamazov before they're capable of reading Goosebumps.

But there are two things I think are seriously problematic with the underlying assumptions of this scheme.

The first is a prescription that I think is wrong-headed: that we progress in reading in a straight line - that when we are capable of reading Dostoevsky, we are 'beyond' R.L. Stine. In fact, I think there are plenty of people who might go back and forth between the two and get different pleasures out of each. AR schemes do talk about letting pupils read 'below' their level as occasional 'comfort reads' - but this is presented as a kind of reversion. It's a bit like the idea that we all sometimes need to watch crap telly and eat donuts. It won't enrich our lives but it will give us some 'down-time'. For me, the idea that you are 'slumming it' by reading the 'easier' book is a pernicious one. The lower-level books are not just donuts, they may have all sorts of fabulous and enriching things to say to us as readers - they just do it in a different, though not necessarily less crafted or effective, way.

The second assumption is that the 'straight line' of reading progression is entirely about syntax and vocabulary. And this is where the truly jaw-dropping anomalies of AR banding become apparent. Using the AR website to check the relative banding of books for her, I was amazed to discover that Alan Garner's Owl Service is banded at 3.7. By contrast, Dav Pilkey's Captain Underpants is 4.3. And Captain Underpants and the Revolting Radioacive Robo-Boxers (presumably because of the number of multi-syllable words) is a whopping 5.3.

AR level 4.3

AR level 3.7

Bear in mind that the AR scheme suggests pupils are given relatively narrow bands to choose from - my daughter was started on 4.5–4.9. She was too high for The Owl Service, although she couldn't yet read The Weirdstone of Brisingamen, at 6.3. If she waited to be able to read the Weirdstone, however, she would be too high to read its sequel, The Moon of Gomrath, which is 5.4.

Philip Reeve's Here Lies Arthur (a fabulous retelling of the Arthur legend from the point of view of a young girl co-opted into helping the bard Merlin, who is presented as a kind of early 'spin-doctor') is 5.6, so she'd reach that well before she was able to read Reeves' knockabout books for younger readers, the Buster Bayliss series (Custardfinger is rated 6.3).

Meanwhile, she is lucky that her favourite author, Marcus Sedgwick, uses relatively simple sentences, as that means that many of his books are in her range (My Swordhand is Singing, a complex tale of vampires set in medieval Eastern Europe, is 4.9). However, she's missed out on his Floodland, which is 3.9, and it won't be long before she's progressed to the point where all of Sedgwick's novels will have to be 'comfort reads', as Kevin-Crossley Holland's magnificent Arthur books already are (4.2–4.3). Never mind - because she can always stretch herself with Daisy Meadows; Kate the Royal Wedding Fairy is 5.4.

AR level 5.4

AR level 5.0

I could go on - but here is one final one to ponder. Debi Gliori's Pure Dead Brilliant is a whopping 7.5. This means you won't be able to progress to it till you are too high for The Lord of The Rings (6.1), and in fact you'd be in the same ball-park band as The Silmarillion at 7.9.

The computer analysis used to grade AR books clearly doesn't read them - it processes them as strings of words. The more important aspects of books - the ideas, the plot twists, the characters, the emotions, the metaphorical language - all of this is entirely missed. Yet this is most of what makes a book enjoyable, memorable, heart-breaking, what touches or thrills you as a reader. I am immensely saddened by the idea that whole swathes of teenagers are going to flick past The Owl Service and fail to pick it off the shelf of the school library because it has a black sticker on it (easy) rather than green or purple (harder, higher, more worthy).

Accelerated Reader is beloved of Ofsted, because it produces quantifiable results and signs of 'progress'. It certainly seems to be getting more pupils reading, and excited about getting their rewards and stickers - but it's encouraging at the same time a very quantitative approach to what reading is, and how we should do it. According to the National Literacy Trust survey, an extra 7% of pupils using the scheme are prepared to say they enjoy reading compared with those that don't use it. I wonder if that's an achievement worth celebrating if 100% of those pupils now think of reading as a goal-oriented activity with 'difficult' vocabulary being the measure of value?



Cecilia Busby writes fantasy adventures for children aged 7-12 as C.J. Busby. Her latest book, Dragon Amber, was published in September by Templar.


www.cjbusby.co.uk

@ceciliabusby

"Great fun - made me chortle!" (Diana Wynne Jones on Frogspell)

"A rift-hoping romp with great wit, charm and pace" (Frances Hardinge on Deep Amber)

Add a Comment

Trolls.  They only exist in fairytales, don't they?  Trip trap trip trap go the three Billy Goats Gruff over the Troll's bridge.  The youngest goat is allowed to pass by saying that his middle brother is bigger and more tasty.  The middle brother is allowed to pass by saying that his older brother is biggest and yummiest.  And what does the older brother do? Why he tosses the Troll over the side of the bridge with his great big horns and watches him smash on the rocks below, making the bridge safe forever.

If only it were as easy to get rid of trolls on the internet.  In case you don't know what an internet troll is, here's a basic definition:

"In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking other users into a desired emotional response."

Internet trolls are clever.  Sometimes they use what seem like reasonable arguments to draw people in.  Often they act 'hurt and wounded'.  Always they have an agenda, whether it be garnering publicity, provoking other people into online fights, or just plain old nastiness.  What they love best is to be fed more material (ie comments) for them to get their sharp, cruel teeth into.  They are vindictive, destructive, and a part of internet life I absolutely abhor.

I have been 'trolled' on this very blog.  I won't say where or when, but it was one of the most upsetting experiences I've ever had - and the worst bit was feeling so totally helpless when it all kicked off.  Luckily we managed to shut it down quite quickly, but not before some damage had been done and feelings badly hurt.  My mistake was to 'feed the troll' by trying to be reasonable, polite and patient with his comments for far too long.  This was a mistake.  I've learned from it.

So why am I writing this post now?  Because in the last month two authors have spoken out about their own experiences of being trolled and cyberbullied.  One is Cassandra Clare, and you can read her account of what happened to her HERE.  If you don't know what cyberbullying is, here's another basic definition:

Cyberbullying is "the use of the Internet and related technologies to harm other people, in a deliberate, repeated, and hostile manner." Cyberbullying methods include "communications that seek to intimidate, control, manipulate, put down, falsely discredit, or humiliate the recipient. The actions are deliberate, repeated, and hostile behavior intended to harm another." I would include "passive-aggressive behaviour" along with "hostile".

The other person who has been trolled and cyberbullied very recently is Debi Gliori.  Her piece about the campaign against her and her newest picture-book, The Tobermory Cat is HERE.

To be honest, both these stories make me angry, mostly because I hate any sort of bullying with a passion.  I'm glad Cassandra and Debi were brave enough to come out and expose their tormentors, though, because too many people are scared to come forward and say something.

This is what bullying does.  It isolates, makes you feel alone and frightened, is a small, insidious whisper in the brain, telling you that no one is on your side, that everyone hates you, and if you tell, everyone will hate you more. Cyberbullying is trolling whipped up into a campaign.  It's much easier to hide behind a keyboard than to physically bully someone.  You can even do it across borders, across continents.

No author should have to suffer it.  No child should have to suffer it (though too many do, and die because of it, as in the recent case of Amanda Todd's suicide).  Not one single human being deserves to be bullied or cyberbullied. Ever. Full stop.

Although I maintain that 'feeding the trolls' is not a good idea (and by 'feeding' I mean engaging with them on a longterm basis), I also believe that we should stand up in public and support, reasonably, politely and firmly, those who have been trolled or cyberbullied.  Many of us have done so in Debi's case.  Nicola Morgan has written an excellent piece on the ins and outs of intellectual property law HERE, and now the Guardian has also picked the story up.

If all of us stand together and keep saying no to each cyberbully and troll as we come across them, then maybe we, like the eldest Billy Goat Gruff, can use our horns to throw them down onto the rocks under the internet bridge and defeat them one by one.  Unfortunately trolls and their cyberbully cousins are very resilient.  I fear it'll be a long job, but I, for one, will keep on trying. I couldn't live with myself otherwise.

Lucy's latest series Greek Beasts and Heroes is out now from Orion Children's Books and her new picture books, Bear's Best Friend, will be published by Bloomsbury in March 2013
Lucy's Website
Lucy's Scribble City Central Blog (A UK Top 10 Children's Literature Blog)
Join Lucy's Facebook Fanpage
Follow Lucy on Twitter

Display Comments Add a Comment

It’s always handy to have a few activity sheets up one’s metaphorical sleeve when it comes to the summer holidays and so once again I’ve sought out some great free resources created by children’s authors and illustrators for us all to enjoy.

Click on the relevant image or coloured link to be taken to activity sheets you can download.

Debi Gliori has created an entire fun pack you can download

. It includes a wordsearch, a mask to make, colouring in and more.

On Neal Layton’s site you can find Emily B activity sheets and an Oscar and Arabella colouring Sheet

Illustrator Claire Sells has two colouring-in sheets (a fairy, and some dinosaurs) for a quick and easy 5-minute activity.

If you loved Maudie Smith’s Opal Moonbaby, you won’t want to miss out on her Mingle Maker

3 Comments on 1st set of free activity sheets from authors and illustrators – Summer 2012, last added: 8/5/2012