Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The print exposure of teacher candidates in relation to their achievement and self-ratings of early reading experiences

  • Published:
Reading and Writing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Applegate, A. J., & Applegate, M. D. (2004). The Peter Effect: Reading habits and attitudes of preservice teachers. The Reading Teacher, 57(6), 554–563.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clinton, V. (2019). Reading from paper compared to screens: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Research in Reading, 42, 288–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, D. P., & Ahrens, M. (1988). Vocabulary simplification for children: A special case of ‘motherese’. Journal of Child Language, 15, 395–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang, S., Capps, M., Blacklock, J., & Garza, M. (2014). Reading habits of college students in the United States. Reading Psychology, 35, 437–467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kozak, S., & Martin-Chang, S. (2019). Preservice teacher knowledge, print exposure, and planning for instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 54, 323–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, J. F. (2009). Summer reading: Predicting adolescent word learning from aptitude, time spent reading, and text type. Reading Psychology, 30, 445–465.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mar, R. A., & Rain, M. (2015). Narrative fiction and expository nonfiction differentially predict verbal ability. Scientific Studies of Reading, 19, 419–433.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scarborough, H. S., & Dobrich, W. (1994). On the efficacy of reading to preschoolers. Developmental Review, 14, 245–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spear-Swerling, L., & Brucker, P. (2004). Preparing novice teachers to develop basic reading and spelling skills in children. Annals of Dyslexia, 54, 332–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 36–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stanovich, K. E. (2000). Progress in understanding reading: Scientific foundations and new frontiers. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1989). Exposure to print and orthographic processing. Reading Research Quarterly, 24, 402–433.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolf, M. (2018). Reader, come home: The reading brain in a digital world. New York, NY: HarperCollins.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

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

  1. Department of Special Education, Southern Connecticut State University, 501 Crescent Street, New Haven, CT, 06515, USA

    Louise Spear-Swerling & Yan Wei

  2. Neag School of Education, University of Connecticut, Storrs, USA

    Hannah Dostal & Brittney Hernandez

Authors
  1. Louise Spear-Swerling
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yan Wei
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hannah Dostal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Brittney Hernandez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Louise Spear-Swerling.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

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

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-020-10035-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation