Edwards- Reading Improvement

Jake Edwards
Feb. 17, 2009
Engl. 6973: Dr. Jolliffe
Journal Review: Reading Improvement

Reading Improvement is an academic journal published by Project Innovation, Inc. — a private organization that operates out of Mobile, AL. The journal is published quarterly, and it focuses on aspects of “improving” reading, specifically in academic spheres. Reading Improvement is a printed journal that remains in publication; however, it is accessible through the web via Ebsco. Currently, there are 45 volumes of the journal, and it is paginated by volume.

The journal focuses on different aspects of reading improvement. According to the abstract, the journal favors “manuscripts that give promist (sic)[1] to better understanding the teaching of reading and for improving the reading process” (www.projectinnovation.biz/ri.html). Each issue usually consists of between four and five peer-reviewed articles. the articles focused on parental influence in reading, achievement gaps in classroom reading, and designing strategies for understanding meaning. The average length of each article is about ten (10) pages, and many of the articles include graphics in the form of charts and graphs.

The journal publishes articles written primarily by PhD level researchers, but the articles are intended for an audience of K-12 teachers and curriculum specialists. This audience, which Stephen North refers to as “Practitioners,” stands to benefit from various case studies that comprise a body of lore for teachers to reference. Two of these articles were reflective pieces written by practicing teachers. Several of the articles, however, were quantitative descriptive analyses written by what North calls “Experimentalists.” These articles are written in a more scientific structure that are usually broken down into “Literature Review,” “Methodology,” and “Data Analysis” sub-headings. The studies rely on previous research and empirical data.

Reading Improvement poses several concerns. First, practitioners don’t generally read academic journals. North is largely correct when he states that “practitioners know that the best course is usually to stat with the tried and true” (37). K-12 teachers have precious little time to read academic journals; many of them are simply trying to “stay afloat” in the “survival stage.” As a result, many of the articles from fellow practitioners get lost amid the more scientific-written articles. It seems as if the journal is directed more towards curriculum specialists than teachers. However, this leads to the second problem: curriculum instructors are bound to departmental benchmarks that vary from state to state. Curriculum specialists may be attracted to the quantitative data in the research studies, but the gap between practitioner and theorist remains. Specialists may be hesitant to put too much faith in a study that reflects only a small sample of specific students (i.e. ethnographic study, samples, case studies). Finally, the title of the journal alone draws the question “what constitutes reading improvement?” Some of the articles clarified that improvement constituted bridging learning gaps, benefits of small group instruction vs. whole class instruction, and “Psychometric Properties and Correlates of the Robert Morris Attention Scale.” Each of these articles identified what the reading “problem” was and how to go about identifying or alleviating the “problem.” But some of the articles never fully explain the criteria upon which reading assessment is based. Instead, the writers seem to presume that students are deficient in reading skills without ever offering an explanation. Reading Improvement a relevant source of information for college-level academics, but it could be written more clearly for its intended audience.

[1] I found it interesting that a journal dedicated to correcting problems with reading would have a typo- misspelling on the website.