Abstract
In this study, we examined students’ access to text, defined as the number of texts freely available to children in their classrooms. From 60 elementary classrooms across five states, we catalogued the books in first, third and fifth grades in both high- and low-achieving schools (based on state-wide reading test scores) to create a database of more than 50,000 books. From this database, we concluded that the number of books per classroom varied significantly within and between states. However, the quantity of texts available to students did not appear to be related to variations in test scores; 54 of the 60 classrooms surpassed the recommended number of books per child based on previous research; two of the six classrooms that did not were in high-achieving schools. Our conclusion is that classroom libraries can provide children with necessary access to print, but access alone does little to explain differences between states in standardised test scores.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Allington, R. L. (2002). What I’ve learned about effective reading instruction from a decade of studying exemplary elementary classroom teachers. Phi Delta Kappan, 83(10), 740–747.
Allington, R. L. (2009). If they don’t read much… 30 years later. In E. H. Hiebert (Ed.), Reading more, reading better (pp. 30–54). New York: The Guildford Press.
Anderson, R. C., Wilson, P. T., & Fielding, L. G. (1988). Growth in reading and how children spend their time outside of school. Reading Research Quarterly, 23, 285–303.
Crisp, T., Knezek, S. M., Quinn, M., Bingham, G. E., Girardeau, K., & Starks, F. (2016). What’s on our bookshelves? The diversity of children’s literature in early childhood classroom libraries. Journal of Children’s Literature, 42(2), 29–42.
DeWalt, K. M., & DeWalt, B. R. (2011). Participant observation: A guide for fieldworkers (2nd ed.). Lanham, MD: Rowan & Littlefield.
Dreher, M. J., & Kletzien, S. B. (2016). Have recommended book lists changed to reflect current expectations for informational text in K-3 classrooms? Reading Psychology, 37(3), 371–391. https://doi.org/10.1080/02702711.2015.1055871.
Duke, N. K. (2000). For the rich it’s richer: Print experiences and environments offered to children in very low- and very high-socioeconic status first-grade classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 37(2), 441–478.
Durik, A. M., Vida, M., & Eccles, J. S. (2006). Task values and ability beliefs as predictors of high school literacy choices: A developmental analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(2), 382–393.
Eccles, J. S. (2005). Subjective task values and the Eccles et al. model of achievement related choices. In A. J. Elliot & C. S. Dweck (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 105–121). New York: Guilford.
Fractor, J. S., Woodruff, M. C., Martinez, M. G., & Teale, W. H. (1993). Let’s not miss opportunities to promote voluntary reading: Classroom libraries in the elementary school. The Reading Teacher, 46(6), 476–484.
Gambrell, L. B. (2011). Seven rules of engagement: What’s most important to know about motivation to read. The Reading Teacher, 65(3), 172–178. https://doi.org/10.1002/TRTR.01024.
Guthrie, J. T., Schafer, W. D., & Huang, C. W. (2001). Benefits of opportunity to read and balanced instruction on the NAEP. The Journal of Educational Research, 94(3), 145–162.
International Reading Association. (2000). Providing books and other print materials for classroom and school libraries: A position statement of the International Reading Association. Newark, DE. Retrieved from https://www.literacyworldwide.org/docs/default-source/where-we-stand/providing-books-position-statement.pdf?sfvrsn=e44ea18e_6.
Krashen, S. (2011). Free voluntary reading. Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited.
McQuillan, J. (1998). The literacy crisis: False claims and real solutions. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
McTague, B., & Abrams, B. (2011). Access to books: A scaffolded program creates readers. Reading Improvement, 48(1), 3–14.
Michigan Department of Education. (2016). Free and reduced-price lunch counts state summary: Fall 2015. Lansing, MI: Centre for Educational Performance and Information.
National Assessment of Educational Progress. (2015). 2015 reading assessment. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Centre for Education Statistics.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2015). The Nation’s Report Card: Reading. Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences, US Department of Education.
National Council of Teachers of English. (2017). Statement on classroom libraries. Retrieved from http://www2.ncte.org/statement/classroom-libraries/.
National Governors Association. (2010). Common core state standards for English language arts & literacy in history/social studies, science, & technical studies. Washington, DC: National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School.
New York State Education Department. (2011). New York state P-12 common core learning standards for English language arts & literacy. Retrieved from http://www.p12.nysed.gov/ciai/common_core_standards/pdfdocs/p12_common_core_learning_standards_ela.pdf.
Nystrand, M. (2006). Research on the role of classroom discourse as it affects reading comprehension. Research in the Teaching of English, 40(4), 392–412.
Pfost, M., Hattie, J., Dorfler, T., & Artelt, C. (2014). Individual differences in reading development: A review of 25 years of empirical research on Matthew effects in reading. Review of Educational Research, 84(2), 203–244. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654313509492.
Powell, W. R. (1966). Classroom libraries: Their frequency of use. Elementary English, 43(4), 395–397.
Pytash, K. (2012). Ain’t nothing wrong with reading books: Creating a classroom library at an alternative school. Young Adult Library Services, 10, 31–35.
Rice, T. R. (2016). Revised Alabama course of study: English language arts. Montgomery, AL: Alabama Department of Education.
Rosenblatt, L. M. (1969). Toward a transactional theory of reading. Journal of Reading Behavior, 1, 31–51.
Rosenblatt, L. M. (2004). The transactional theory of reading and writing. In R. B. Ruddell & N. J. Unrau (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (pp. 1363–1398). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Stack, M. H., Moorefield-Lang, H., & Barksdale, M. A. (2015). ABLE: An instrument for assessing elementary students’ perceptions of access to books, beliefs, and literacy environment. Reading Psychology, 36, 499–518.
United States Census Bureau. (2017). Quick facts, population estimates 2017. Retrieved from https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/widget_census.php.
Wu, Y., & Samuels, S. J. (2004, May). How the amount of time spent on independent reading affects reading achievement. Paper presented at the annual convention of the International Reading Association, Reno, Nevada.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hodges, T.S., Wright, K.L., Roberts, K.L. et al. Equity in access? The number of the books available in grade 1, 3 and 5 classroom libraries. Learning Environ Res 22, 427–441 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-019-09283-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-019-09283-0