When Sisyphus was in First Grade or One-Minute Reading Homework 

Tim Shanahan

Parent question:

What does the research say about students and “one-minute reads” for homework. My son is expected to read the same passage every night for a week, and we mark how many words he reads per minute. We get a new passage weekly. Although I understand WPM as an assessment measure of fluency, what positive and negative effects does this practice have on students? I notice he reads as quickly as possible and hates the task. I fear this is not encouraging appropriate speed and accuracy to support comprehension while also possibly taking away his want to read. Therefore, I’m curious what the research says or what your opinion is on this practice. Thank you.

Shanahan responds:

I’m a big fan of getting parents involved in their children’s literacy development. I know that isn’t always possible, but it really can help – and kids are usually happy for their parents’ participation. We likely leave achievement points on the table by not asking for parent involvement.

I’m a big fan of oral reading practice to build reading fluency, too. Research, again, is very clear that practicing oral reading – including oral reading to parents can improve reading achievement. In fact, some of the most intriguing studies of fluency teaching focused on parental efforts (Senechal & Young, 2008).

However, what you describe is less like worthwhile fluency work and more like practice for the classroom fluency tests. It is possible that something good might come of this, though it is just as likely that it will steer your son away from being a better reader.

Some studies show that when time rather than reading comprehension is emphasized in oral reading practice students read differently (Valencia, et al., 2017). They try to perform rather than to understand – not the right direction if you want junior to become a good reader. Encouraging parents to listen to their children read each night is a great idea. Having mom or dad timing that is silly –more about trying to juice the test scores rather than making kids better readers.

Another problem with the scheme is the amount of repetition. It isn’t hurtful, just wasteful. Originally, there were two basic approaches to fluency practice: either reading a text repeatedly – no matter how many times – until some accuracy criterion was reached or reading the text a specified number of times. Research suggests that all or most of the improvement that kids are likely to make comes from reading a text 2-3 times (Kuhn, 2005). That means at least two of those nights you are spinning your wheels.

There is also research saying that there is no reason for the repetition. According to that research, it is the amount of reading practice, not the amount of repeated reading practice that matters (Norton, 2012; O’Connor, et al., 2007). I must admit I still think repeated reading has value, but when it comes to parents listening to their children, I would encourage more reading and less repetition.

The one-minute idea is the tip off that this is test practice rather than teaching, and that the teacher is not really interested in improving the kids’ fluency as much as trying affect higher scores on the classroom screener.

READ MORE...