Accepted manuscript submitted on August 20, 2001
            In 1981, an article, "Recreational Reading: Do We Practice What is Preached?" appeared in the May issue of The Reading Teacher (Mangieri & Corboy, 1981).  It reported data from a survey administered to 571 elementary school educators who worked in three states during 1979-1980.  This sample represented urban, suburban, and rural areas of the United States, and school districts that served majority and minority populations which encompassed the full range of socio-economic levels.  This study sought to determine elementary teachers' knowledge of (1) current children's literature, (2) children's books in six literary genres, and (3) activities that they could be used to promote students' recreational reading.  We decided to replicate the 1981 study to determine the level of knowledge possessed by today's teachers concerning children's literature and methods of increasing students' reading for pleasure.  We did so to place the update the database about contemporary literacy practices.

 Since the 1981 recreational reading article appeared, several significant events have occurred which could have increased or decreased teachers' use of children's literature and classroom recreational reading activities.  For example, many school districts have provided funds to create classroom libraries.  In New York City,  300 books for each elementary classroom were purchased to augment centralized school libraries (New York Times, January 7, 2001, page 16A).  Since the publication of A Nation At Risk (Anderson, et al., 1986), the practice of reading children's literature aloud has been endorsed as one of the most important activities that educators can perform to enhance students' achievement and desires for pleasurable reading.  

During this same time period, however, in response to the plethora of state-mandated, criterion-referenced high stakes literacy tests, many teachers have been asked to spend more time teaching isolated skills and strategies than in 1981.  In addition, parents and teachers reported that today's students spend less time in leisure reading activities at home and school than when they were children (Godley & Mahiri, 1998).  The number of children's books published each year increased significantly during the last quarter century.  Have teachers' knowledge of quality children's literature kept pace?   Have computers and other forms of technology reduced or increased teachers' knowledge of current selections of children's literature?  Has the growing volume of information to be included in elementary content disciplines increased or decreased the amount of time that teachers allocate to recreational reading activities at school?  The purpose of this article was to address these questions.

Theoretical Background

            During the past twenty-five years, several studies demonstrated the benefits of providing more opportunities at school for students to read for pleasure and to develop their recreational, self-selected literacy habits.  To illustrate, students who spent more time in recreational reading activities (a) scored higher on comprehension tests in grades 2, 4, 8, and 12; (b) had significantly higher grade point averages, and (c) developed more sophisticated writing styles than peers who did not engage in recreational reading (Block, 2001a; Gallik, l999).  Researchers also documented the effects of recreational reading on vocabulary development.  Students who had opportunities to read recreationally over extended periods of time learned significantly more words, without direct instruction, than control subjects, due to the former group's numerous experiences of decoding unknown words during recreational reading (Krashen, 1993; Burgess, 1984).   

Moreover, Smith and Joyner (1990) reported that students who engaged in on-going recreational literacy activities during school hours selected to read books out-of-school more frequently, and significantly increased their independent reading levels on informal reading inventories.  Even when elementary students were allowed to read only fifteen minutes a day, they significantly increased their reading abilities.  Average and below average readers experienced the greatest gains (Collins, l980; Taylor, Frye & Maruyama, 1990; Wiesendanger & Bader, 1989).  

            During the past twenty-five years, researchers have also examined the effects of various methods used to increase the amount of time students spent in recreational reading.  These methods included:

á      sustained silent reading periods  (Burgess, l987; Collins, l980; Halpern, l981;  West, l995; Dymock, 2000; dully, 1989);

á      daily recreational reading with a buddy (Block & Dellamura 2000/2001; Libsch & Breslow, l996; Barron, l990);

á      reading to children daily (Morrow, 1986; Morrow, l991; Langford & Allen, l983);

á      incorporating children's books into content area lessons (Pressley, Wharton-McDonald, Allington, Block, and Morrow, 2001; Nell, 2000);

á      sharing and discussing books read (Wissowson, Moore & Dixon, 1999; Smith & Joyner, l990);

á      once a week replacing regular reading instruction with free reading of trade books (Strickland, l99l; Morrow, l991);

á      increasing parents' knowledge of the importance of recreational reading (Pressley, Wharton-McDonald, Allington, Block and Morrow, 2001; Block, in press; Block, 2001b);

á      teachers' modeling of the pleasures that they receive from  pleasureable reading pursuits (Strickland, 1991; Kraschen, l993); 

á      cross-age tutoring (Block & Dellamura, 2000/2001; Baumann, l995);

á      continuously making new, currently-published books available to students ( Barron, 1990, Pressley, Allington, Wharton, McDonald, Block &Morrow, 2001).

á      exposing students to a wide variety of genre in classroom-based and school-wide libraries (Barron, 1990; Nell, 2000). 

These practices increased the amount of time that students spend reading significantly, and the amount of time that students spent in recreational reading was a predictor of students' academic success (Gallik, 1999).  Other investigators focused upon the amount of time that teachers and students allotted to reading for pleasure.  These data were not as positive (Halpern, l981; Dwyer & Reed, l989).  The time spent in sustained silent reading in school has declined over the past two decades, as has students' interest in   reading for pleasure (West, l995; Morrow & Weinstein, l986).  Equally important are data that recreational reading habits and appreciation for a wide variety of genre must be acquired early in children's lives (Block, 2001b; Widdowson, Moore & Dixon, l999).  For instance, today's primary children often received as few as 3.6 minutes a day of exposure of literacy genre beyond fiction or textbooks (Nell, 2000).  Further, the number of college bound seniors who report reading no books during their last year of high school has doubled since 1976 (Godley & Mahiri, l998).

Further, students' positive attitudes towards literacy are declining continuously as they progress from kindergarten through grade 5 (Kush & Watkins, 1996; Morrow, 1986).  Teachers' attempts to alter these reductions by allowing students to visit the school library more frequently have failed (Morrow, 1996).  Similarly, principals, teachers, and parents cited that the promotion of recreational reading was a lower priority in daily classroom schedules than comprehension instruction, word recognition skills, and study skills programs (Morrow, 1986).  Silent reading experience may increase an individual's ability to engage in sustained attention and concentration, which are necessary for many types of academic and professional success (Block & Mangieri, l996).  Based on these data, as new literacy challenges emerge in the 21^st century a need exists to examine teacher's knowledge concerning children's literature and recreational reading.

            In this study we replicated the procedures and methods followed in the 1981 study.  We administered a survey to 549 elementary school teachers in Georgia, Missouri, New York, and Texas, while they were engaged in professional development activities, during the 1999-2000 school year.  These educators were chosen because their school district profiles were comparable to the sample selected in the 1981 investigation.  Of the 549 surveys that were distributed, 514 were fully and accurately completed by the teachers who took part in the present study.  This rate of successful completion was 93%.  Educators responded to the same three questions that were administered to the educators who took part in the 1981 study.  Specifically, elementary teachers were to:

1.     List three children's books written in the past five years.

2.     Name a children's book written in the past seven years in each of the following areas:

a.     Fiction

b.     Biography

c.     Poetry

d.     Fantasy/science fiction

e.     Picture books

f.      Mystery/adventure

3.     Identify three or more activities that they used to promote recreational reading on the part of their students.

We allowed participants to spend as much time as required to answer these questions.  The average number of minutes spent in completing the survey was 23 minutes as compared to 18 minutes in the 1981 study.  For both the original and current studies, the criterion used to determine the correctness of answers to questions #1 and #2 was the appearance of a cited title in the annual compilations of Books in Print during the designated years.  In order for a teacher's answer to be judged correct, the title had to either be an exact match of books listed in annual compilations of Books in Print during the designated years, or all words cited by the teacher had to be derivatives of the original words in that book's title. 

For question #3, the correctness of respondents' answers were measured through a comparison of cited items to a compilation of recreational reading activities conveyed in the literature by literacy authorities. To be correct, the content of an answer had to appear in the most widely used literacy methods textbooks (e.g. Burns & Roe, 2001; Block, 2001c; Tompkins, 2001).  For a teacher's response to be judged correct, an exact match of words was not necessary.  The content had to be consistent with the purpose of the activity advocated by contemporary literacy authorities.

            When teachers turned in their surveys, we interviewed those who stated three or more recreational reading activities in response to question 3.  We asked interviewees to suggest methods by which the profession could increase educators' use of recreational reading activities and recent selections of children's literature in elementary classrooms.

Results

            With regard to question #1, in the 1981 investigation, only 9% of the respondents could name three children's books published in the past five years.  Seventy-one percent of the respondents could not identify even a single book.

            In the current study, 36% of the participants named correctly three children's books written in the past five years.  As shown in Table 1, this increase of 27% relative to elementary teachers' knowledge gain is significant.  However, 17% of the investigation's population was unable to cite even one book.  This deficit percentage was more than expected, as almost 1 of 5 elementary teachers today could not recommend recently published literature to their children.

            For question #2, data from the 1981 and 2001 studies are depicted in Table 2.  Elementary teachers' knowledge today of recently published selections of children's literature in all six categories was greater than peers' knowledge in 1981.  The differences in knowledge levels ranged from 18% to 39% higher for each of the six genres by today's educators when compared to peers in 1981.

            With regard to questions 3, of the 571 participants in the 1981 investigation, only 11% could name three activities that promoted children's recreational reading.  In the present study, sixty-five different responses were given by participants that were considered to be correct.  Twenty percent (20%) of current teachers correctly identified three such activities. 

Similarly, when the percentage of educators in the original 1981 investigation who could cite more than one recreational reading activity was compared to peers in the 1999-2000 study, a slightly higher proportion of today's educators could identify an activity that could be used to promote reading for pleasure (68% compared to the previous 50%).  These growths in a positive direction are encouraging, yet diminished when cast against a twenty-year period of professional development advancements.  The specific activities that promote reading for pleasure cited by today's educators, kindergarten through grade 5, are shown in the sidebars.

Discussion

            When we initiated this study, we sought to determine the knowledge of elementary educators concerning recently published children's books as well as their knowledge of practices that promote students' desires to read.  We also wished to see how these figures compared to the ones in the study published in 1981. 

            On each of the three questions, current participants outperformed their 1981 counterparts.  For question #1, four times (36%) as many teachers today could successfully name three children's books written in the past five years than peers in l98l.

            Today's educators' responses to question #2 were equally positive, when compared to those in the prior study.  In all six genres, the current group of educators knew more titles than the 1981 study's participants.  The percentages by which they outperformed their prior sample ranged from 18% to 39%.  Similarly, in response to question #3, more current teachers could identify three activities that promote recreational reading on the part of children than the 1981 participants.  Also, more of the present group of educators could cite more than one of the aforementioned activities than their prior counterparts were able to do.

            While the percentages of correct responses to all three questions exceeded those of the prior study, the percentages of elementary school teachers who are knowledgeable about children's literature published within the last five years, as well as activities that promote recreational reading for students are still relatively low.  More teachers (36%) were able to name three current children's books titles when compared to the 1981 study participants.  However, 64% of the sample could not name three recently published books, and 11% of these professionals could not identify a single title.

            In the 1981 article (Mangieri & Corboy, 1981), it was said: ÒWhen one considers the vast number of children's books produced annually, the inability of most respondents to name three of these materials was disheartening.  For whatever the reason(s), these educators simply were not staying abreast of recently published children's books.Ó  Regrettably, the words written then are still true today for many teachers.

            In like vein, even though significant gains were shown in current teachers' knowledge of specific titles in each of the six designated genre (Question #2), the percentages of educators who could name a children's book that has been written in the past seven years was still low.  In only a single category, fiction, did the percentage of teachers exceed 50% (56%).  In addition, eleven percent of the respondents in the current study could not cite a single book in any of the six genres.  Another 18% of the participants were able to identify correctly a book in only one of the six genres.

            What makes these data important was that the six genres included in this and the prior investigation emanated from children's literature and language arts authorities that have long maintained that these genres are necessary components of a balanced literacy program (e.g., Barron, 1990; Huck, et al., 2001).  These findings suggest than many respondents did not have knowledge of recently published books and did not know current works that compose important parts of a children's literature program.

Moreover, two patterns emerged from these data.  It appeared that a bi-modal distribution existed in our profession.  Eighty-eight percent of current teachers could be placed at opposite ends of the spectrum of knowledge concerning recreational reading activities and children's literature.  Current teachers were either (a) very knowledgeable about recently published children's literature and diverse activities that can be utilized to develop life-long leisure reading habits for their students, or (b) not knowledgeable regarding recent children's literature titles, especially outside of the fiction genre.  Teachers in the latter group were also most often unable to list any recreational reading activities. 

            Finally, although literacy research has demonstrated the merits of recreational reading for decades, we can raise questions as to its actual implementation.  Seventeen percent of current educators could not name even one activity that promoted recreational reading on the part of children (item #3).  An additional 33% of these respondents were able to cite only one.  Kindergarten through second grade teachers most frequently cited, in order of frequency, (1) SSR and discussion of books read; (2) reading aloud by teachers, parents, or students; and, (3) self-selected partner/buddy reading for pleasure.  The three activities (in order of frequency) cited by teachers at grade 3-5 were (1) SSR, (2) discussions of books read; and (3) reading incentive programs.

Concluding Comments

            Few would argue that one of the major goals of literacy instruction is to create lifelong readers.  For some children, this love of reading develops innately.  In other children, it is nurtured in the home.  While for still others, it results from pleasurable and diverse experiences with a cadre of enjoyable books and recreational reading activities in elementary classrooms. 

            When we questioned many of those teachers who cited three or more responses to question 3 in our study, one finding emerged consistently.  Teachers who had a high knowledge of children's literature and recreational reading activities were lifelong readers themselves.  They reported to provide their students with a rich and wide array of pleasurable experiences with books, and to engage students in books of diverse content, styles, and formats.  These teachers reported to routinely (1) offer numerous opportunities for children to read books of choice silently, (2) provide incentives to read at home, and (3) ask for pupils' responses to books read during recreational reading activities during class time.  They reported that they did so in spite of the pressures to prepare for state-mandated literacy assessments. 

            Today's educators also agreed that it was important to develop students' basic literacy skills.  Along the way though, they recommended that we, as a profession, not forget to include a healthy dose of children's books and recreational reading activities in daily classroom instruction.  They suggested that we accomplish these objectives through new types of professional development sessions.  One suggestion was to provide teachers, at the district-wide level, with opportunities to bring their favorite, recently published selection of children's literature to inservice professional development meetings to share with other teachers.  At these meetings, grade-level teacher teams could discuss methods that they used to increase the time that students spend reading books recreationally at school. 

Presently, while time has been allocated in many schools for teachers to hold book clubs concerning professional books that they read, none of the campuses in our study provided time for education to share their favorite, recently published children's books in similar book club meetings.  Teachers were not provided professional development time to update their knowledge concerning recently published children's literature and how these books could be used to increase students' desire to read for pleasure. 

We enacted one of the study's recommendations to provide time for teachers to meet together to discuss how to use current selections of children's literature during the 2000-2001 school year.   In four school districts in Missouri, New Jersey and Texas, 347 teachers conducted 45-minute, book sharings of six recently published children's books that they had read and used with their students to promote recreational reading.  Following those professional development sessions, principals observed their teachers literacy instructional periods three times during the six-week grading period  following the sessions, which occurred from September 2000 through February 2001.  During that time period, 75% of the teachers who attended the book sharing sessions used the books discussed in their classrooms.  Teachers who did not attend these professional development sessions were not observed using current selections of children's literature or the activities for recreational reading.  By contrast, teachers who participated in this professional book sharings created two hours in their classroom schedules (during the first two-weeks following the professional development sessions) to engage students in recreational reading activities.  These activities had never been used by these teachers prior to the professional training session, as determined by self-report data and observations of administrators and researchers.

            Moreover, some of the educators that we interviewed in our study stated that they could accomplish the goals of this article by attending children's author sessions at annual state, regional, and international meetings of the International Reading Association.  Many participants also professed that they have found that the fastest ways to fall in love with and invent exciting ways to use current literature in recreational reading activities was to literally hold new children's literature selections in their hands.  As they read these books, new ideas emerged as to how these books could be used to enhance the recreational reading experiences that they planned for their students.  One method of placing books in teachers' hands (and subsequently of enhancing their students' use of current children's literature) is by committing to visit the children's section at bookstores or libraries at least once a year. 

We have developed a method of doing so that has become a pleasurable and habitual professional activity in our lives.  Each year we compose a holiday gift-giving list, and we select one person on the list to receive a book as a present.  On the day that we purchase this loved one's gift, we allocate time to bestow a prize upon ourselves as well.  We spend one-half to a full hour every holiday season seated in a child's chair in the bookstore's youth division, enthralled in the reading and perusal of this year's newest selections of children's literature.

            Participants in our student proposed two additional methods to build colleagues knowledge of current children literature and recreational reading activities.  The first was created by Ms. Frankie Beard, Director of Literacy and former fifth grade teacher.  She developed the Òone-minute pass around.Ó  Each year she brings the most recently published children's literature to the opening-of-school professional development session for elementary literacy teachers in her district.  She distributes one book to every member in the room.  Each teacher has one minute to read and scan that book, noting ideas as to when it could be used with content to be addressed that year.  At the end of that minute, each book is passed to the left and teachers have the opportunity to hold in their hands, and become familiar with, 30 recently published selections in 30 minutes.  Ms. Beardon has also used the Òone-minute pass aroundÓ with reluctant fifth grade readers on the first day of school. 

Several participants offered another suggestion.  It was to hold grade-level teams' children-literature Author Chairs.   At monthly team meetings, a selected teacher read a recently published, high quality selection of children's literature to members of their group and presents ways that the book can be used at their grade level to foster a love of reading.  If a different genre was shared each month, by the end of each school year, teachers at that grade level would have knowledge of several books in nine varied genre, and methods of using these books to promote children's recreational reading. 

Teachers in our study also suggested that librarians be scheduled to attend classes regularly to read selections of recently published books to students.  As librarians read, teachers could hear new selections of children's literature simultaneously with their students.  Librarians could also route books to teachers, and if schools focus on a specific genre on particular months, recently published books in that genre could be displayed atop the library's bookcases and tables for each 30-day period.  In this way, teachers could peruse new titles easily in the library as they assisted their students to select and read a wide variety of genre recreationally.

            In closing, this study attested to the lack of attention that recreational reading is receiving in our schools today.  In most classrooms, the proportion of time and priority that teachers placed upon the promotion of voluntary reading is not significantly higher than it was twenty years ago (Mangieri & Corboy, 1981; Morrow, 1986).  Because recreational reading and the use of high quality literature has demonstrated to increase student achievement and develop avid literacy users, we should revisit the amount of time and level of effort that we are investing in reaching that goal each day, each week, and each year of our students' schooling experiences.  We can begin today, and we must.

Table 1

Percentage of Respondents Who could Name Three Children's Books Published within the Last Five Years

Educators Who Named Three or More Books               Educators Who Could Not Name A Single

Published  Within the Last Five Years                           Book Published Within the Last Five Years

9%	71%
36%	17%

1981 Study advancements advancement

2001

Study

Percentage of Respondents

 Who Named a Children's Book Written

 in the Past Seven Years in a Designated Category.

Fiction                                                 21%                                                     56%

Biography                                           2%                                                       41%

Poetry                                                 3%                                                       27%

Fantasy/Science Fiction                      9%                                                       48%

Picture Books                                     19%                                                     37%

Mystery/Adventure                           8%                                                       38%

References

Anderson, R. C., Hiebert, E. H., Scott, J. A. & Wilkerson, I. A. (l985).  Becoming

 a nation of readers:  The report of the Commission on Reading.   Washington, DC:  National Institute of Education.

Barron, B. G. (1990).  Make Room for Children's Literature.  Reading Improvement, 27(4), 282-83.

Baumann, N. L. (1995).  Reading Millionaires Ð It Works!  The Reading Teacher, 48(8), 730-2.

Block, C. C. (in press).  Improving Thinking Abilities Through Reading Instruction.  In Costa, A. (Ed.). Developing Minds:  Third Edition.  Alexandria, VA:  Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Block, C. C. (2001a).  It Isn't Scripted Lessons but Personalized Instruction that Makes A Difference for Students Who Begin School Without The Precursors for Literacy Success.  National Reading Conference Yearbook, 49, 110-122.

Block, C. C. (2001b).  Missy Allen.  In Pressley, M., Wharton-McDonald, R., Allington, R., Block, C., Morrow, L. Lessons from First Grade Teachers.  NY: Guilford, pp. 112-135.

Block, C.C. (2001C).  Teaching the Language Arts, Third Edition. Boston, MA: Allyn &Bacon.

Block, C. C. & Dellamura. R. (2000/2001).  Better Book Buddies.  The Reading Teacher,54(4), 365-370.

Block, C. C. & Mangieri, J. N. (l996).  Reason to Read:  Thinking Strategies for Life Through Literature:  Volumes 1, 2, and 3.  Boston, MA:  Pearson.

Burgess, A. (1987).  A Clockwork Orange.  New York: W.W. Norton.

Burns, P. & Roe, A (2001).  Teaching Elementary Language Arts, Fifth Edition.        Boston, MA:  Houghton Mifflin.

Collins, C. (1980).  Sustained silent reading periods:  Effects on teacher's behaviors and students' achievement. The Elementary School Journal, 81(3), 109-117.

Dully, M. (l989).  The relation between sustained silent reading to reading achievement and attitude of the at-risk student.  (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 312 631).

Dwyer, E. & Reed, V. (l989).  Effects of sustained silent reading on attitudes toward reading.  Reading Horizons, 29(6), 283-293.

Dymock, S. J. (2000).  The effect of sustained silent reading on reading comprehension:  A review of the research.  Paper presented at the National Reading Conference Annual Meeting.  Scottsdale, AZ. December.

Gallik, J. D. (1999). Do They Read for Pleasure?   Recreational Habits of College Students. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy. 42(6), 480 - 488.

Godley, A. & Mahiri, J. (l998).  Rewriting identify:  Social meanings of literacy and revisions of self.  Reading Research Quarterly, 33 (4), 429-442.

Halpern, H. (l98l).  An attitude survey of uninterrupted sustained silent reading.  Reading Horizon, 21(6), 272-279.

Huck, C.S., Hepler, S. Hickman, J. Kiefer, B.Z. (2001).Children's Literature is the Elementary School. Seventh Edition. NY: McGraw Hill

Kraschen, S. (1993).  The Power of Reading: Insights from the research. Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimites.

Kush, J. C. & Watkins, M. W. (1996). Long-Term Stability of Children's

Attitudes toward Reading. Journal of Educational Research, 89(5), 315-19.

            Langford, J. C., & Allen, E. G. (l983).  The effects of U. S. S. R. on students' attitudes and achievement.  Reading Horizon, 23(3), 194-200.

Libsch, M.K. & Breslow, M. (1996).  Trends in non-assigned reading by high school seniors.  NASSP Bulletin, 80, 111-116.

Mangieri, J. N. & Corboy, M. (1981). Recreational Reading: Do We Practice What Is Preached? The Reading Teacher, 24(8), 923-25.

Morrow, L. M. (1986). Attitudes of Teachers, Principals, and Parents toward Promoting Voluntary Reading in the Elementary School. Reading Research &

Instruction, 25 (2), 116-30.

Morrow, L. M. & Weinstein, C. (1986). Encouraging Voluntary Reading: The Impact of a Literature Program on Children's Use of Library Centers.  Reading Research Quarterly, 21 (3), 330-46.

Morrow, L. M. (l991).  Promoting voluntary reading.  In J. Flood, J. M. Jensen, D. Lapp & J. R. Squire (Eds.).  Handbook of research on teaching the English language arts.  NY:  Macmillan, 681-690.

Nell, A. (2000).  3.6 Minutes a Day of Nonfictional Reading.  Reading Research

Quarterly, 35(4), 376-399.

Pressley M., Wharton-McDonald, R., Allington, R., Block, C., Morrow, L. (in press). Lessons From First Grade Teachers. NY: Guilford.

Smith, L. L., & Joyner, C. R. (1990).  Comparing Recreational Reading Levels with Reading Levels from an Informal Reading Inventory. Reading Horizons, 30(4), 293-99.

Strickland, D. (1991). Cooperative, Collaborative Learning for

Children and Teachers (Emerging Readers and Writers). The Reading Teacher, 44(8), 600-02.

Taylor, B., Frye, M., & Maruyama, K. (1990).  Time spent reading and reading growth.  American Educational Research Journal, 27(5), 351-362.

Tompkins, G (2001).  Literacy for the 21st Century.  Columbus, OH: Merrill Education/Prentice Hall

West, K. M. (l995).  Silent reading:  What the research says.  Unpublished masters' thesis.  Denton, TX:  Texas Women's University.

Widdowson, D. A., Moore, A. W., & Dixon, R. S. (l999). Engaging in recreational reading.  In G. B. Thompson & T. Nicholson (Eds.).  Learning to read:  Beyond phonics and whole language.  NY:  Teachers College Press, p. 215-226.Wiesendanger, K. D., & Bader, L. (1989). SSR: Its Effects on Students' Reading Habits after They Complete the Program.  Reading Horizons, 29(3), 162-66.

DEAR, SSR, NIBS (Nose In Books Silent Reading)	52
Family reading, Parents Read as Model, Bedtime Stories	43
Book Ð It	29
Library time	28
Teacher gives exciting introduction to books/ Teacher models that reading is pleasurable	28
Book Buddies, and Partner Reading	24
Book sharing, Group Share Time, Author's Chair	21
Choice and Variety in Reading Tasks	20
Computer / interactive books	16
Discussion /Teacher Read Alouds	16
Listening Centers	16
Acting out the parts of stories	12
Book bags	12
Guided reading	12
Incentive charts for home reading	12
Incentives	12
Book Mobile	8
Book Pets and Reading to a stuffed animal	8
Book Raffle	8
Books on tape	8
Field trip to a book store	8
Puppet shows	7
Story Cards	7
Class activities / games	4
Classroom read around	4
Contests	4
Contracts	4
Free time to read while others finishing their work	4
Homework activity sheets	4
Making new book covers	4
Reading Newspapers, and/ or the ÒFunniesÓ Section	4
Poems	4
ÒRead BookÓ Series	4
Book Clubs or Reading Clubs	3
Reading score cards	2
Rereading	1

* We want to express our gratitude to Ms. Celina Goss, Graduate Assistant, Texas Christian University for the tabulation of data in  Sidebars.

Recreational Reading Activities Cited by 84 First Grade Teachers

DEAR, SSR, & Silent Reading		50
Book buddies, and Partner Reading		43
Incentives and Stickers		31
Book Sharing and Teacher Read Alouds		26
Discussion		20
PJ party/ Read-in / book party/Book Brunch		17
Accelerated Reading Program		14
Reading and Listening		12
Library time		10
Students interests and topic choice		10
Author of the Month / Author studies		8
Book swap		8
Contracts		8
Family reading		7
Reading Newspapers & Writing  Headlines		7
Book Clubs		6
Books on tape		6
Book reports		5
Book-It Club		5
Contests and Raffles		5
Parents read as role models		5
Bookmobile		4
Computer books		4
Folktales