Abstract
This study examined the print exposure of teacher candidates (N = 195) in relation to their GPAs, achievement in reading and writing on the SAT, and their self-ratings of their own early (K to Grade 5) reading experiences. Participants came from undergraduate and Masters programs in varied certification areas and from two different universities. Print exposure measures included author recognition tests for both fiction and nonfiction; a questionnaire about participants’ current voluntary reading habits for books, magazines, newspapers, and digital print media; and favorite authors/books questions. Exploratory factor analysis suggested four factors underlying the different print exposure measures: (1) fiction book reading volume; (2) current magazine and newspaper reading; (3) nonfiction book reading volume and (4) current book reading habits for enjoyment. Only fiction and nonfiction book reading volume related positively to participants’ achievement, in writing as well as reading, and to their early reading experience ratings. A subgroup of participants who had taken a specific reading methods course involving structured language content, and who had positive early reading experience self-ratings, had higher performance in the course than did participants with mixed or negative self-ratings, although the two groups did not differ in overall GPA. Findings support the view that different measures of print exposure tap somewhat different aspects of print exposure, with differing relationships to varied indicators of achievement. Results also support concerns about the reading volume and print exposure of some teacher candidates.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Acheson, D. J., Wells, J. B., & MacDonald, M. C. (2008). New and updated tests of print exposure and reading abilities in college students. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 278–289.
Allen, L., Cipielewski, J., & Stanovich, K. E. (1992). Multiple indicators of children’s reading habits and attitudes: Construct validity and cognitive correlates. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 489–503.
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.
Applegate, A. J., & Applegate, M. D. (2004). The Peter Effect: Reading habits and attitudes of preservice teachers. The Reading Teacher, 57(6), 554–563.
Berninger, V. W., Abbott, R. D., Jones, J., Gould, L., Anderson-Youngstrom, M., Shimada, S., et al. (2006). Early development of language by hand: Composing, reading, listening, and speaking connections; three letter-writing modes; and fast mapping in spelling. Developmental Neuropsychology, 29, 61–92.
Brady, S., Gillis, M., Smith, T., Lavalette, M., Liss-Bronstein, L., Lowe, E., et al. (2009). First grade teachers’ knowledge of phonological awareness and code concepts: Examining gains from an intensive form of professional development. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 22, 425–455.
Cipielewski, J., & Stanovich, K. E. (1992). Predicting growth in reading ability from children’s exposure to print. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 54, 74–89.
Clinton, V. (2019). Reading from paper compared to screens: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Research in Reading, 42, 288–325.
Cunningham, A. E., Perry, K. E., Stanovich, K. E., & Stanovich, P. J. (2004). Disciplinary knowledge of K-3 teachers and their knowledge calibration in the domain of early literacy. Annals of Dyslexia, 54, 139–167.
Cunningham, A. E., & Stanovich, K. E. (1991). Tracking the unique effects of print exposure in children: Associations with vocabulary, general knowledge, and spelling. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 264–274.
Cunningham, A. E., & Stanovich, K. E. (1997). Early reading acquisition and its relation to reading experience and ability ten years later. Developmental Psychology, 33, 934–945.
Delgado, P., Vargas, C., Ackerman, R., & Salmerón, L. (2018). Don’t throw away your printed books: A meta-analysis on the effects of reading media on reading comprehension. Educational Research Review, 25, 23–38.
Foorman, B., Beyler, N., Borradaile, K., Coyne, M., Denton, C. A., Dimino, J., et al. (2016). Foundational skills to support reading for understanding in kindergarten through 3rd grade (NCEE 2016-4008). U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance. Retrieved from https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/practiceguides. Accessed 01 Dec 2019.
Graham, S., Bollinger, A., Booth Olson, C., D’Aoust, C., MacArthur, C., McCutchen, D., & Olinghouse, N. (2012). Teaching elementary school students to be effective writers: A practice guide (NCEE 2012-4058). U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance. Retrieved from https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/practiceguides. Accessed 01 Dec 2019.
Graham, S., & Hebert, M. A. (2010). Writing to read: Evidence for how writing can improve reading. A Carnegie Corporation Time to Act Report. Retrieved from https://all4ed.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/WritingToRead.pdf. Accessed 01 Dec 2019.
Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., Metsala, J. L., & Cox, K. E. (1999). Motivational and cognitive predictors of text comprehension and reading amount. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3, 231–256.
Hayes, D. P., & Ahrens, M. (1988). Vocabulary simplification for children: A special case of ‘motherese’. Journal of Child Language, 15, 395–410.
Huang, S., Capps, M., Blacklock, J., & Garza, M. (2014). Reading habits of college students in the United States. Reading Psychology, 35, 437–467.
International Dyslexia Association. (2018). Knowledge and practice standards for teachers of reading, 2nd edition. Retrieved from https://dyslexiaida.org/knowledge-and-practices/. Accessed 15 Feb 2020.
International Reading Association. (2014). Leisure reading [Position statement]. Retrieved from http://literacyworldwide.org/docs/default-source/where-we-stand/leisure-reading-position-statement.pdf. Accessed 15 Feb 2020.
Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39, 31–36.
Kozak, S., & Martin-Chang, S. (2019). Preservice teacher knowledge, print exposure, and planning for instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 54, 323–338.
Lawrence, J. F. (2009). Summer reading: Predicting adolescent word learning from aptitude, time spent reading, and text type. Reading Psychology, 30, 445–465.
Mar, R. A., & Rain, M. (2015). Narrative fiction and expository nonfiction differentially predict verbal ability. Scientific Studies of Reading, 19, 419–433.
Martin-Chang, S. L., & Gould, O. N. (2008). Revisiting print exposure: Exploring differential links to vocabulary, comprehension and reading rate. Journal of Research in Reading, 31, 273–284.
Moats, L. C. (1999). Teaching reading IS rocket science: What expert teachers of reading should know and be able to do. Retrieved from https://www.aft.org/sites/default/files/reading_rocketscience_2004.pdf. Accessed 15 Feb 2020.
Mokhtari, K., Reichard, C., & Gardner, A. (2009). The impact of Internet and television use on the reading habits and practices of college students. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 92, 609–619.
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, 267–296.
Nathanson, S., Pruslow, J., & Levitt, R. (2008). The reading habits and literacy attitudes of inservice and prospective teachers: Results of a questionnaire study. Journal of Teacher Education, 59, 313–321.
National Endowment for the Arts. (2007). To read or not to read: A question of national consequence (Research Report #47). Retrieved from https://www.arts.gov/publications/read-or-not-read-question-national-consequence-0. Accessed 01 Dec 2019.
National Endowment for the Arts. (2009). Reading on the rise: A new chapter in American literacy. Retrieved from https://www.arts.gov/publications/reading-rise-new-chapter-american-literacy. Accessed 15 Feb 2020.
National Endowment for the Arts. (2019). U.S. patterns of arts participation: A full report from the 2017 Survey of Public Participation in the Arts. Retrieved from https://www.arts.gov/publications/state-level-estimates-arts-participation-patterns-2017-2018. Accessed 15 Feb 2020.
Osana, H. P., Lacroix, G. L., Tucker, B. J., Idan, E., & Jabbour, G. W. (2007). The impact of print exposure quality and inference construction on syllogistic reasoning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 888–902.
Scarborough, H. S., & Dobrich, W. (1994). On the efficacy of reading to preschoolers. Developmental Review, 14, 245–302.
Singer, L., & Alexander, P. (2017). Reading on paper and digitally: What the past decades of empirical research reveal. Review of Educational Research, 87, 1007–1041.
Snow, C. E., Griffin, P., & Burns, M. S. (2005). Knowledge to support the teaching of reading: Preparing teachers for a changing world. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Sparks, R. L., Patton, J., & Murdoch, A. (2014). Early reading success and its relationship to reading achievement and reading volume: Replication of ‘10 years later’. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 27, 189–211.
Spear-Swerling, L., & Brucker, P. (2004). Preparing novice teachers to develop basic reading and spelling skills in children. Annals of Dyslexia, 54, 332–364.
Spear-Swerling, L., & Brucker, P. (2006). Teacher-education students’ reading abilities and their knowledge about word structure. Teacher Education and Special Education, 29, 113–123.
Spear-Swerling, L., Brucker, P., & Alfano, M. (2010). Relationships between sixth-graders’ reading comprehension and two different measures of print exposure. Reading & Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 23, 73–96.
Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 36–406.
Stanovich, K. E. (2000). Progress in understanding reading: Scientific foundations and new frontiers. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1989). Exposure to print and orthographic processing. Reading Research Quarterly, 24, 402–433.
Wolf, M. (2018). Reader, come home: The reading brain in a digital world. New York, NY: HarperCollins.
Zhang, S. Z., Georgiou, G. K., Xu, J., Liu, J. M., Li, M., & Shu, H. (2018). Different measures of print exposure predict different aspects of vocabulary. Reading Research Quarterly, 53, 443–454.
Acknowledgements
The authors received no external funding for this work. We would like to thank the teacher candidates who participated in this study, as well as three anonymous reviewers and the editor, for their helpful comments on a previous draft of this manuscript.
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
Spear-Swerling, L., Wei, Y., Dostal, H. et al. The print exposure of teacher candidates in relation to their achievement and self-ratings of early reading experiences. Read Writ 33, 2097–2119 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-020-10035-3
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-020-10035-3