Running head: IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINED SILENT READING
Implementing Sustained Silent Reading to Produce Gains in
Reading Achievement and Reading Attitude
Kathryn R. Ganz
Vanderbilt University
Match 1, 2012
1
IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINED SILENT READING
2
Abstract
Sustained Silent Reading (SSR), an independent voluntary reading program, has been
implemented in classrooms for over sixty years, however its effectiveness in improving reading
achievement and reading attitude has been challenged by teachers and researchers; most notably,
the National Reading Panel (2000). Research studies, metaanalyses, theory, and professional
accounts of SSR reviewed in this paper show student gains in both reading achievement and
reading attitude, however a consensus on how to design and implement a successful SSR
program was an issue throughout the literature. The successfully implemented programs were
analyzed to develop recommendations and guidelines for designing and implementing a SSR
program appropriate for students in Kindergarten through 12th grade. Findings suggest successful
programs provide a quiet, uninterrupted, and comfortable environment, access to books in the
classroom, freedom of book selection, teacher modeling and an absence of evaluative activities,
with additional options recommended based on student age.
IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINED SILENT READING
3
Too often in education, we focus on accountability, assessment, and skill based
instruction; cutting out time for students to authentically practice their skills. In 1971,
McCracken recognized the need for the practice of reading stating: “In our press for
achievement, the importance of practice in reading silently has been overlooked. Our students
are over taught and under practiced” (p.583). Reading, like any developing skill, must be
learned, practiced and generalized to a variety of authentic experiences. Sustained Silent Reading
(SSR) is a strong method to use in the classroom to help students practice this important skill. To
investigate this topic, I have researched the history and development of SSR, theories of learning
that support the use of SSR, studies that have evaluated at the effectiveness of SSR in
comparison to other practices, teacher and researcher designed models, as well as reviews of the
literature on SSR. Through review of these sources I have compiled and compared the successful
program designs establishing a set of key factors and guiding principles to consider when
creating a SSR program. Based on the studies reporting gains in reading achievement and
reading attitude, it is evident that SSR is an effective program when purposefully designed and
implemented.
For the purpose of this literature review, the term “reading achievement” refers to
vocabulary knowledge, reading comprehension, reading accuracy, and fluency. Each program
used different measures to establish achievement gains, some focusing on only one of these
aspects of achievement, however across the studies these four categories were assessed. The term
“reading attitude” refers to a student’s positive or negative feelings about reading as well as his
or her motivation to engage in reading. To measure this, students were interviewed about their
feelings towards reading in and out of school, feelings about going to the library, concepts of the
IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINED SILENT READING
4
importance of reading as well as measuring the time students spent engaged in reading. This was
done both through informal interviews as well as through reading attitude inventories.
During my courses this past fall in the Reading Education program, I learned a great deal
about different theories and models of reading. After learning about the contradictory findings of
the National Reading Panel Report on Fluency, which did not recommend the practice of SSR, I
wanted to dig deeper into the concept of independent reading to determine its effects on reading
achievement and reading attitude (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public
Health Service, National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Child Health and Human
Development, 2000). While in EDUC 3390, I researched the history and effectiveness of SSR,
and found there to be large variations in the designs of models used in studies. Because of the
variation, it is difficult to compare studies without knowing if the inclusion or exclusion of
certain factors affects the overall success of SSR. While my initial research showed that SSR is
an effective reading program that increases reading attitude and reading achievement, the
extension included in this paper provides research-based recommendations for effective
implementation. To make these recommendations I have revisited studies, teacher implemented
programs, and metaanalyses of SSR to categorize factors included in the various models.
The History and Development of Sustained Silent Reading
SSR and similar models of silent independent reading have been studied and
implemented for over sixty years (Pilgreen, 2000, Forward by Krashen). McCracken (1971)
developed one of the earliest models of SSR based on the 1960s Uninterrupted Sustained Silent
Reading (USSR), developed by Dr. Lyman C. Hunt, Jr., Professor at the University of Vermont.
This program’s goal was to meet the objective of developing a student’s ability to read silently
without any interruption for a long period of time. Shortly after, in the 1970s, Robert McCracken
IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINED SILENT READING
5
took away the U, and changed the acronym to SSR in order to decrease the negative attention the
name was commanding. McCracken’s model held the same objective as Hunt’s. He defined SSR
as “the drill of silent reading” (1971, p.521), going on to say that it should be considered the
practice of reading and not the complete reading program. This concept will be revisited later in
the paper.
For effective initiation of this model, McCracken (1971) presents six guidelines:
1. Each student must read silently.
2. The teacher models by reading silently at the same time, and does not allow for
interruptions.
3. The students select one text and reads for the entire time.
4. A timer is set so that students do not watch the clock.
5. Students do not have to keep records or report on their reading.
6. Starting out with larger groups is most effective (p.522)
Following these guidelines, McCracken (1971) found that a sustained power of reading could be
achieved almost immediately. After six months of practice in SSR, his research showed that the
students made gains in reading achievement as well as reading attitude (p.582).
Since these early studies of SSR, many different names and models have been created in
order to increase student reading and see gains in student achievement and attitude as
McCracken did. Additional sustained silent reading programs include: Free Voluntary Reading
(FVR), High Intensity Practice (HIP), Sustained Quiet Reading Time (SQUIRT), Positive
Outcomes While Enjoying Reading (POWER), Fun Reading Every Day (FRED), Drop
Everything and Read (DEAR), Daily Independent Reading Time (DIRT), and Motivation in
IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINED SILENT READING
6
Middle School (MIMS) (DeBenedicts, 2007; Pilgreen, 2000, p.1). For the purpose of this
literature review, I will refer to the practice as SSR.
Since the original claims of student reading growth due to SSR, research has been
conducted on the program in comparison to skills based instruction. In 2000, a National Reading
Panel was formed to complete a report on the five main areas of literacy, which included
phonemic awareness, phonics, oral reading fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension. Within the
fluency subgroup, the panel conducted a metaanalysis of fourteen studies fitting specific criteria,
and concluded that the research did not support SSR as a statistically significant model to use in
school (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services et al., 2000). This finding surprised
many teachers, principals and researchers, creating a need to trace the rationale for removing
SSR from classroom practices. With this need, skeptics often met difficulty in finding answers to
questions as they were continually passed to higher establishments (Edmondson & Shannon,
2002, p. 453). That same year, Pilgreen (2000) wrote The Handbook for SSR, reevaluating SSR
with two goals in mind. First, to increase reading achievement, and second, to increase reading
attitude, just as McCracken (1971) had done in the 70s.
Pilgreen’s (2000) model is commonly cited when discussing, implementing, and
researching SSR as well as other variations of the model. For this reason, it is important to
identify the eight factors that make up Pilgreen’s SSR model.
1. Access: Students should have access to a vide variety and selection of reading materials,
including magazines, newspapers, books, comics and other reading materials.
2. Appeal: Reading materials should be interesting to the students, and students should select
the materials that they want to read.
3. Conducive Environment: SSR should occur in a comfortable, quiet and uninterrupted place.
IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINED SILENT READING
7
4. Encouragement: Teachers should encourage students to read through modeling good reading
practices, being involved in sharing and discussing books, acting as a resource for book
selection, involving a child’s home with the SSR practices. Staff, administration and parents
can also provide these kinds of encouragement.
5. Staff Training: School staff should be trained in SSR so that they can also participate in
modeling and encouragement.
6. Nonaccountability: No reports or records of books read should be kept. The focus should be
on pleasure reading rather than assessment.
7. Follow up Activities: After reading students can be encouraged to share in interactive ways
with peers or the whole class.
8. Distributed Time to Read: Ideally, students will have SSR daily, but it should at least occur
twice a week for 15 to 30 minutes (pp. 32-36).
Acquiring information from studies as well as classroom experience, teachers and researchers
have developed new ways to implement SSR, using many of Pilgreen’s eight factors (Akmal,
2002; Kelley, Clausen-Grace & Nicki, 2006; Reutzel, Johnes, Fawson, & Smith, 2008). The
models of SSR employed by many of the studies looked at in this paper follow a similar
structure; with the main features typically being nonaccountability, access, encouragement
through teacher modeling, and an uninterrupted conducive environment.
Theoretical Support for Sustained Silent Reading
One reason that SSR has been, and continues to be studied, is the support it receives from
many accepted theories of reading. In Goodman’s (1994) transitive sociopsycholinguistic view
of reading, he describes learning occurring through authentic uses of language, possessing the
perspective that students learn by doing. Adams’ (2004) model of reading includes a meaning
IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINED SILENT READING
8
processor that applies the context in which a word is placed to build an understanding of that
word. As readers have more encounters with a word in different contexts they develop a greater
comprehension of the word. Supported by research (Nagy, Anderson, & Herman, 1987), Adams
attributes much of the vocabulary a person acquires to the amount of reading they do (p.1232).
Cunningham and Stanovich (1998) apply the biblical term “Matthew effects” to reading
achievement in their article on the importance of reading. This term represents the idea of the
rich-get-richer and the poor-get-poorer. When applied to reading, this term means that poor
readers read less because of the difficulty they experience when reading and strong readers read
more because of their success, ability to comprehend, and enjoyment of the text. Supporting this
theory, the National Reading Panel found hundreds of studies reporting extensive correlation
between good readers and high amounts of reading and poor readers and low amounts of reading
(U.S. Department of Health and Human Services et al., 2000, p. 3-21). In effective instruction, a
line can be drawn between theory and practice. Based on these examples of learning theories,
SSR has a strong theoretical foundation.
The Effects of Sustained Silent Reading on Reading Achievement
While theory is important, practice must also be backed by research. Much of the existing
research on SSR and similar models have studied the effects of SSR on reading achievement in
order to determine a rationale for this type of program. In most of the studies, researchers
compared student achievement in word recognition, comprehension and fluency after
involvement in an SSR program with students who did not engage in SSR. Overall, the results
have been mixed. While many studies report achievement gains (Davis, 1988; Elley, 1992; Holt
& O’Tule, 1989; Kornelly & Smith, 1993) other studies did not find that SSR had a statistically
significant impact on reading achievement (Cline & Kretke, 1980; Collins, 1980). Despite a lack
IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINED SILENT READING
9
of statistical significance, it is important to note that students involved in SSR often achieved
equal amounts of growth, if not more, than students engaged in only traditional reading skill
instruction.
A possible explanation for the nonstatistically significant results found in two of the
studies may be that the students have already approached their ceiling of reading achievement.
Davis (1988) looked at both a high ability reading group and a medium ability reading group and
found that only the medium ability group showed statistically significant gains. In a similar study
to evaluate the long term effects of SSR, Cline and Kretke (1980) reported only slight gains in
achievement for the experimental group engaged in SSR, which was made up already high
achieving students. Supporting the hypothesis that students nearing their ceiling of reading
achievement show smaller gains, Holt and O’Tule (1989) studied the effects of SSR on seventh,
and eighth grade student that were reading two years below grade level and found that students
engaged in SSR had significant growth in vocabulary, comprehension and reading attitude. The
issue of initial reading ability is not a factor that the National Reading Panel (2000) took into
account when reviewing the same studies. Cunningham (2001) critiques the National Reading
Panel for selecting these studies that tested the effectiveness of SSR without ensuring that the
students involved needed treatment to improve reading abilities beyond where they initially were
reading (p.333). Given this oversight, the National Reading Panel statement that a schools are
not recommended to adopt programs that encourage more reading to improve reading
achievement, such as SSR, should be questioned.
The Effects of Sustained Silent Reading on Reading Attitude
Developing a positive attitude towards reading is important for many reasons. Students
who read a variety of materials for pleasure and show positive attitudes towards reading are
IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINED SILENT READING
10
typically better readers regardless of their family background (Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development; UNESCO Institute for Statistics, 2007, p. 15). As we grow and
develop, much of what we learn is acquired through reading, and developing a joy for reading at
a young age will help students grow into skilled, lifelong readers (Garan, 2008, p. 336). Avid
readers can open a book and learn information, experience new places, and imagine different
lives. Additionally, there are many competitive forces at play for children’s attention during
leisure time, especially in our rapidly advancing technological world. Children must develop
motivation through enjoying and value of reading in order to compete with other modes of
entertainment such as TV and video games.
Many of the studies assessing the effects of SSR on reading achievement also assess its
effects on reading attitude. For some of the studies reporting no significant growth in reading
achievement, there was a clear significant growth in student attitudes towards reading (Cline &
Kretke, 1980). Other studies showed growth in both achievement and attitude (Holt & O’Tule,
1989; Kornelly & Smith, 1993), and further studies looking solely at attitude towards reading
found statistically significant results (Chua, 2008; McCracken, 1971; Yoon, 2002). Overall, there
is a consensus throughout the research that SSR has a statistically significant positive effect on
students’ attitudes about reading.
In these studies, students’ increased attitude towards reading was seen through their
increased voluntary reading time, greater interest in books they were reading, and the verbal
praise they had for reading and for SSR in particular. Cline and Kretke (1980) found that
students engaged in SSR felt happier about going to the school library, more positive about
reading a book they chose, better about doing assigned reading, and more positive about the
importance of reading. Kornelly and Smith (1993) report that some students who claimed to hate
IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINED SILENT READING
11
reading initially, stated that they made time for reading at home after involvement in the USSR
program. Chua (2008) found as the year progressed, students became more engaged during the
SSR period as reported by themselves and their peers. She also reports that students found
reading books more pleasurable and enjoyable at the end of the yearlong program.
Summary of the Effects of SSR on Reading Achievement and Reading Attitude
All of the studies reviewed reported that engagement in SSR produced as effective,
slightly more effective, or significantly more effective results in reading achievement than
comparison programs. Even in the cases where only equal or slightly higher academic gains were
achieved, the positive results in reading attitude for the students engaged in SSR make it an
effective practice overall. In a survey of 1,765 students conducted by Ivey and Broaddus (2001)
on which reading activities students enjoyed most in the class, the most common response was
free reading time, showing that SSR not only influences a positive reading attitude, but also that
students enjoy engaging in it. This is an argument that has been suggested in response to the
National Reading Panel conclusion that SSR is not proven to be an effective classroom practice
(Krashen, 2001).
Issues and Concerns about SSR and Available Research
Reviewing the research on SSR, there are clear issues with reliability of the results. One
concern is the length of time SSR was implemented for in each study order to draw conclusions.
Krashen (2001) notes that the National Reading Panel did not include any studies lasting longer
than one year. It is not clear how long the program needs to be implemented to see significant
results, however there have been studies that show increased achievement and attitude gains over
time (Chua, 2008; DeBenedicts, 2007). Also, the differences in the population of students being
IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINED SILENT READING
12
studied could have had an influence on the results based on their initial reading ability at the start
of the SSR program (Davis, 1988; Krashen, 2001).
Additional concerns are found when drawing conclusions because of the possibility that
the evidence is simply correlational. The National Reading Panel suggested a possible
explanation for the correlation between high reading levels and high reading ability is that good
readers elect to read more (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services et al., 2000).
Because correlation does not equal causation (Paris, 2005), results must be interpreted with
caution.
Over the past ten years, the findings of The National Reading Panel, which determined
the results of their SSR study to be inconclusive based on a lack of statistically significant
evidence of reading achievement gains, have been a looming concern. Because of this report,
many teachers, principals and parents questioned the use of SSR in schools, while other teachers
and researchers refuted the National Reading Panel, as well as the International Reading
Association (IRA), which accepted this report, providing counter arguments to the findings
(Edmondson & Shannon, 2002; Garan, 2008; Krashen, 2001). In response, Timothy Shanahan
(2006), President of the IRA at the time, claimed that he had been misquoted to think that
reading is not important for kids. On the contrary, Shanahan has a strong belief in the importance
of reading, and reminds those concerned that there was simply not enough evidence to claim that
SSR produces higher reading achievement than reading instruction, pointing to the need for
further research on this topic. Despite the National Reading Panel conclusion, there is a strong
foundation for the importance of spending time engaged in reading.
With this knowledge, it is important to address the issue of program design and
implementation. Because of the variety of models, and the fact that “classrooms are not
IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINED SILENT READING
13
laboratories” and all conditions cannot be controlled (Garan, 2008, p.337), it is likely that
teachers implemented SSR with some variability in these studies. While most of the studies
looked at included some of the major factors that make up SSR as defined by Pilgreen (2000),
the models were not exactly the same. Some studies included boundaries on student reading
materials or had teacher guidance in book selection (Cline & Kretke, 1980, Trudel, 2008).
Another study did not specify characteristics of the SSR model implemented (Collins, 1980).
Some teachers had issues with following the nonaccountability rule, and found a decline in
thoughtfulness of reading, realizing that their students were simply skimming their books for the
required amount of time (Lee-Daniels & Murray, 2000). It has also been found that many
teachers claim to, but do not actually engage in reading during the SSR period, which is an
important modeling aspect of this method (Loh, 2009). There have been many successful cases
of modifying SSR to be more meaningful and effective for a specific classroom (Kelley,
Clausen-Grace & Nikki, 2006; Reutzel et al. 2008), however, variations on SSR are often due to
inconsistent implementation (Loh, 2009). To address some of these concerns I will describe the
different ways successful SSR programs have implemented various theoretical and research
based practices into their programs with regard to student age and program purpose.
Designing and Implementing an Effective Sustained Silent Reading Program
As described above, there have been many studies conducted to evaluate the
effectiveness of SSR and other independent reading programs, however there are few studies that
have evaluated what makes a SSR program effective (Wiesendanger, Braun & Perry, 2009).
Because of the inconsistent methods, there is an unclear understanding among teachers about
how to effectively implement a SSR program, as Douglas Fisher (2004), a teacher and director of
professional development in San Diego, established when interviewing and surveying teachers in
IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINED SILENT READING
14
which he taught. Reviewing SSR studies, teacher designed and implemented programs, teacher
interviews, as well as modifications to SSR, I have compiled a list of recommendations for how
to establish a SSR program that will promote reading achievement and positive reading attitude
in a school setting. In determining these factors, I have selected the most commonly
implemented practices used in successful programs. Through analyzing the various programs, I
found seven categories to consider: environment, frequency and duration, access to books, book
selection, accountability, teacher roles and student roles. For some categories, student age plays a
large role in determining effective factors to implement based on developmental needs, while
other factors have been successful and important across all age levels. When necessary,
recommendations have been divided into Kindergarten through 3rd grade, 4th through 8th grade,
and 9th through 12th grade distinctions.
Before planning, it is important to establish two things, first; the age group of the
students that will be engaged in the program, and second; the desired outcome of the program.
As discussed in the first half of this paper, SSR is an effective program that increases student
reading achievement as well as reading attitude. Within these two categories, students can
develop increased word recognition, comprehension, fluency, as well as motivation to read,
enjoyment in reading for pleasure, development of book selection strategies, and self regulation
and metacognitive strategies. While engaging in SSR will benefit students in all of these areas,
there are certain factors that can be included to focus on some more than others.
First, note that in 1971, McCracken insightfully said that SSR should be a part of the
reading instruction program, not the whole thing (p. 521). The supporting research that I have
found implements SSR as part of the school day in addition to some amount of literacy
instruction. In a study evaluating successful recreational reading programs, Wiesendanger et al.
IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINED SILENT READING
15
(2009) interviewed teachers on the aspects of their SSR program that they found to be most
important. Of the 90 teachers interviewed, 91% shared the idea that independent reading should
be only one aspect of the classroom literacy program, and other skills including decoding and
comprehension strategies must be taught as well. Unfortunately, the debate over SSR has been
positioned in a way that makes people feel a need to determine if they think the practice is
effective or not effective to use in the classroom compared to other instructional strategies.
Successful implementation requires teachers to think as McCracken (1971) did, considering SSR
to be a part rather than a whole program.
Frequency and Duration
The SSR time should last for 10-30 minutes, five days a week. The program should start
gradually with short amounts of time (1-5 minutes), building to longer amounts of time (Kaisen,
1987; Collins, 1980; Anderson, 2002; Collins, 1980). The full length of the daily SSR time will
depend on the teacher’s individual students. To determine the amount of time that should be
spent on SSR, Wu and Samuels (2004) conducted a study that found amount of time spent on
reading to be positively correlated with reading achievement, aligning with the “Matthew Effect”
theory of reading suggested by Cunningham and Stanovich (1998). Wu and Samuels also found
that time spent on reading should take student age and reading ability into consideration to make
sure students are only reading for a length they can independently focus on reading for. For older
students, SSR time may last as long as 45 minutes (Anderson, 2002; Davis, 1988; Wu &
Samuels, 2004), while for younger students, the program may only last 10 to 15 minutes per day.
Teachers interviewed by Wiesendanger et al (2009) suggest that when working with students
engaged in longer amounts of reading time, students are more likely to show gains in reading
attitude if the time is divided into shorter daily sessions rather than fewer longer ones.
IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINED SILENT READING
16
Consistency in what time the reading occurs in the day does not show to have much affect on the
effectiveness of the program, however, younger students may benefit from expecting a regular
routine (Collins, 1980; Kaisen, 1987; Wiesendanger et al., 2009). A common element in
successful programs was the inclusion of a signal for the beginning and end of each session to
help students get used to the routine as well as prevent any clock watching. The use of a signal
was effective in SSR programs across all grade levels (Anderson, 2002; Chua, 2008; Cline &
Kretke, 1980; Manning & Manning, 1984; McCracken, 1971; Pegg & Bartelheim, 2011; Siah &
Kwak, 2010).
Environment
Providing a comfortable and quiet environment is important across all age levels.
Students need to be able to focus on reading without being interrupted by the many distractions
that occur throughout the day. The value of having a quiet time of the day should not be
underestimated. When surveying thousands of students engaged in SSR, McCracken (1971)
found that students enjoyed SSR because it was the only quiet time they had in their day.
Similarly, Ivey and Broaddus (2001) collected student responses and found that students liked
this time because; as one student shared “I like it because it’s quiet and because you get to just
think and you don’t have to answer questions” (p. 360). In order to create this quiet and focused
environment, many of the programs required that students read silently, remain in one spot for
the entire time, do not talk to other students, and do not get up to use the restroom, get a drink, or
a new book (Anderson, 2000; Kornelly & Smith, 2001; McCracken, 1971; Pegg & Bartelheim,
2011). To make sure students do not get up during the SSR time, it is important to allow them
time to take care of personal matters before SSR time begins, as well as to instruct them to take
more than one book to their place if they will finish what they are reading during the allotted
IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINED SILENT READING
17
time. Establishing these rules may take some time, however, the environment will be much more
conducive to focused reading once they are in place.
In terms of the physical environment, it is recommended that students be in a comfortable
setting. Morrow (1985) suggests that in order to increase voluntary reading in the elementary and
middle school classrooms, there must be an attractive area with comfortable seating surrounded
by accessible books. When possible, teachers should arrange these comfortable environments
that allow students to move to a new position or location for SSR time (Wiesendanger et al.,
2009), however in older grades these kinds of spaces are not always available. While having the
comfort of a pillow or couch is relaxing, it is not necessary for effective implementation of SSR.
Many programs have been successful in middle and high school classrooms with students sitting
at their desks as long as the students are not distracted or overcrowded by those sitting around
them (Davis, 1988; Chua, 2008; Cline & Kretke, 1980; Gardiner, 2005; Holt & O’Tule (1989);
Kornelly & Smith, 1993).
Access to Books
The display of and access to great reading materials will also enhance the reading
environment (Pilgreen, 2000). In the studies I reviewed however, only programs implemented in
grades Kindergarten through 3rd grade had classroom libraries or discussed student access to
books (Anderson, 2002; Kaisen, 1987; McCracken, 1971; Pilgreen, 2002; Reutzel et al., 2008),
while the older grades expected students to bring books from home or the school library. In
addition to the option of bringing books from home, students should be in book rich classrooms
to increase facilitation of finding interesting books (Gambrell et al., 1996).
Access not only means having books available, but also means that the books are easily
accessible to students and arranged in an attractive and easy to browse way (Wiesendanger et al.,
IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINED SILENT READING
18
2009). Additionally, successful programs included teacher book talks (Reutzel et al., 2008;
Kelley & Clausen-Grace, 2006; Wiesendanger et al., 2009) and read alouds (Kaisen, 1987; Pegg
& Bartelheim, 1971; Kelley & Clausen-Grace, 2006), making these books accessible to students
to promote enthusiasm and interest in reading them.
Of the teachers interviewed by Wiesendanger et al. (2009) 100% stressed the importance
of establishing classroom libraries that include a wide variety of reading materials. A survey
conducted by Ivey and Broaddus (2001), indicated that students have interest in over twenty
different genres and types of print, the most popular being magazines, adventure books,
mysteries, scary stories, joke books and informational books on animals. Additionally,
Cunningham and Stanovich (1998) found that of printed texts; scientific abstracts, newspapers,
and popular magazines are comprised of a significantly higher number of rare words than trade
books, suggesting that exposure to a variety of textual sources provides students with a wider
range of vocabulary. Creating a classroom library following these recommendations can be
costly. To address this issue, Fisher (2004) suggests that schools hold a book drive to build a
book room in which teachers can borrow books from to fill their classroom library. He also
suggests teachers apply to grants that provide money for classroom improvement. Pilgreen
(2000) suggests that teachers implement a program where they rotate reading materials
throughout the year so that students have a larger selection to choose from. She also recommends
that teachers help students take advantage of the school and local library by teaching them how
to find and check out books, providing access to a much larger selection.
Book Selection
Across all studies book choice is an important aspect of the SSR program. Choice
provides students with a great deal of motivation by allowing them to select books that interest
IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINED SILENT READING
19
them (Gambrell, 1996). In a phenomenological study, Flowerday and Schraw (2000) collected
data showing teachers concur that student choice increases interest, autonomy, ownership,
creativity, engagement, self-regulation and strategy use when engaged in academic activities
(p.641). The effective implementation of choice in a SSR program looks different depending on
the age of the students.
For Kindergarten through 3rd grade programs, book selection should be scaffolded.
According to Vygotskian theory, children learn and develop new skills within a Zone of
Proximal Development, in which they build knowledge through the interaction with a more
knowledgeable partner (Beliavsky, 2006). Selecting books that are both interesting and at the
appropriate reading level is a skill, and younger students need instruction in learning how to
make these choices. Through minilessons, modeling, and book conferences, teachers can work
with students to help them determine if a book is at their independent level as well as teach some
previewing strategies to determine the interest level of the book (Pegg & Bartell, 2011; Reutzel
et al., 2008; Trudel, 2007). One way to scaffold book instruction is through leveling classroom
books by color, allowing students to easily recognize which books will be at their independent
level of reading. Of the studies that worked with early elementary age students there were a
variety of levels of scaffolding, however all of the models came down to allowing students to
select their own reading materials.
In the middle grades students begin to develop increased autonomy, allowing book
selection becomes a little more independent (Alexander, 2006). Students may still benefit from
book selection instruction if they continue to struggle with selecting independent and interesting
books (Akmal, 2002; Kelley & Clausen-Grace, 2006). Rather than whole group instruction, this
tends to be successful in one on one conferences. One program design chose to limit the choice
IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINED SILENT READING
20
of reading materials to novels and storybooks (Siah & Kwak, 2010) while the others did not
specify any particular text or genre to be read. Choosing to allow students read from a variety of
genres and authentic texts including trade books, magazines, periodicals, comic books, and
newspapers provides students will a wide range of choice to access a wide range of interests
(Pilgreen, 2000).
At the high school level, students have developed autonomy and self-regulation skills and
should be expected to independently select appropriate books without instruction or scaffolding
(Alexander, 2006). Most of the SSR programs designed for this age range have limited choice of
materials to books only, restricting textbooks, magazines, comics, and newspapers during the
SSR time (Cline & Kretke, 1980; Kornelly & Smith, 1993). As addressed in the access section,
the findings of Cunningham and Stanovich (1998) on the amount of rare words in newspapers
and magazines, as well as the knowledge that students have a wide range of interests, supports
the recommendation that students be allowed to select from a wide range of reading materials
beyond hard and soft cover books. Limiting students to books will also limit their interest and
their exposure to new words.
Accountability
As I discuss accountability, I define it as the act of holding a student responsible for his
or her action, in this case, reading. Often, in the literature and in SSR studies, the term
accountability has also taken on the meaning of assessment or evaluation. Both McCracken
(1971) and Pilgreen (2000) designed seminal SSR models that have influenced many SSR
programs and use the term nonaccountability in this way. In McCracken’s original design of the
SSR program, he insisted that students should not be held accountable for their reading, defining
accountability as book reports and records, or other required forms of response that would cause
IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINED SILENT READING
21
students to feel that they were being evaluated. Pilgreen states that nonaccountability allows
students to read for pleasure without being held down by assessments and evaluations (p.15).
The purpose of nonaccountability in both of these programs is to allow students to focus on
reading for pleasure and at their own pace without the pressure of being judged or graded on
their performance. Yoon (2002) found that high accountability of reading might cause struggling
and reluctant readers to shut down, and never experience the pleasure of reading. In interviewing
students, McCracken (1971) found that students enjoyed the SSR time because it provided them
with the freedom to read without worrying about making mistakes or proving their reading
ability to others. As a comparison, Schmidt (2008) looked at the Accelerated Reader program
(AR), in which students read independently to prepare for taking a quiz on the book to gain
points. In this study, Schmidt found that AR decreased student’s positive attitude towards
reading, causing them to focus on the assessments, which tested student’s literal knowledge of
the book. This form of accountability goes directly against the goal of reading for pleasure that
McCracken and Pilgreen set out to establish during the SSR time.
Since McCracken’s initial design, nonaccountability has remained a key word in program
designs, however, what many programs mean by this term is that students are not to be evaluated
based on their reading performance. For successful implementation of a reading program, it is
important that teachers are able monitor student growth and progress, as well as the effectiveness
of the overall program. Various forms of follow up activities have been implemented that do not
focus on evaluating students, but rather provide students with an outlet for response as well as
self-regulation and reflective strategies.
Based on the research, programs implemented in Kindergarten through 3rd grade should
not require students to keep a record of their reading amounts or complete book reports after
IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINED SILENT READING
22
finishing. During these early years, students are still working on their reading skills and
strategies, and will benefit more from reading for enjoyment without the pressure of completing
follow up activities.
In middle school, students may be held accountable for their reading during SSR time.
This can be in the form of student/teacher goal setting for reading specific numbers of pages
determined during conferences. These goals must be reasonable, but push the student to focus on
reading each day for the entire SSR time (Akmal, 2002; Manning & Manning, 1984). Few
studies include book reports in their design, however one (Akmal, 2002) suggests that students
complete book reports of a flexible format. Other programs encouraged students to reflect on
their reading through journal writing (Kelley & Clausen-Grace, 2006; Siah & Kwak, 2010), peer
sharing, or class sharing (Kelley & Clausen-Grace, 2006; Manning & Manning, 1984). Reutzel
et al. (2008) designed an independent reading program in which students were presented with a
menu of response options including a variety of creative projects, such as creating a wanted
poster on one of the characters. These forms of reflection and follow up activities to reading
should only be implemented once students have established the SSR routine and recognized the
focus on reading for enjoyment rather than for assessment.
In high school students often have heavy loads of reading for class, and this time to read
for pleasure should be focused on such. Students in high school should not be held accountable
for reading through reports or required number of pages, however they should be encouraged to
reflect on their reading through written responses in a journal or peer sharing (Chua, 2008). They
may also keep a book log to keep track of the reading they have accomplished (Kornelly &
Smith, 1993).
IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINED SILENT READING
23
Nonaccountability is a difficult aspect of SSR for teachers, and many feel uneasy about
students engaging in an activity that does not have a measurable outcome (Fisher, 2004). The
suggestions listed in this section should provide some alternatives to the traditional
understanding of accountability and provide teachers with some ways to measure student
engagement and growth. In the next section, I will discuss additional roles of the teacher that will
also allow teachers to have a better understanding of the status of the class during SSR time.
Teacher Roles
Throughout the various SSR programs, teachers take on many different roles. McCracken
(1971) included teacher modeling as an important aspect of the program, and later went on to
state that SSR would not work without teacher modeling (1978). Methe & Hintze (2003)
conducted a study on the effects of teacher modeling, and found that student’s on task reading
behavior positively correlated with teacher modeling. When students see teachers reading, the
value of reading becomes more transparent (Loh, 2009). This modeling should be explicit
through the sharing of reading experiences and personal descriptions of how reading has
enriched his or her life (Gambrell, 1996). Like many factors originally intended to be a part of
SSR, the concept of teacher modeling, and the role of the teacher during this time has changed.
Most programs still include modeling as an important aspect; however modeling is often only
one of the teacher’s roles during this time (Anderson, 2002; Akmal, 2002; Cline & Kretke, 1980;
Chua, 2008; Gardiner, 2005; Kaisen, 1987; Trudel, 2007). Other roles include providing
feedback to students, reading aloud prior to the SSR time, giving book talks, instructing on how
to select books, monitoring the class, and conferencing with students.
Inclusion of student-teacher conferences is also common in program designs (Akmal,
2000; Manning & Manning, 1984; Reutzel et al, 2008; Siah & Kwak, 2002; Trudel, 2007). These
IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINED SILENT READING
24
conferences typically occur with elementary and middle school students, and last between five
and ten minutes. Akmal (2000) included conferences in which the teacher focused on developing
student academic and non-academic self-concept. Teachers opened the discussion to talk about
the student’s emotional state, moving onto reading efforts and student progress in meeting their
reading goals, discussing book selection, and finally opening up the conversation to anything
else the student desired to talk about. Kelley and Clausen-Grace (2006) designed a program
called R5, which also included conferencing focused on discussing student’s reading strategies
and plans. Occasionally, the conferences included the teacher modeling a specific strategy or
reading aloud to the students (Trudel, 2007). For the most part, conferences included in SSR
programs focus on student reading strategies, monitoring student progress, aiding book selection,
and offering an outlet for book reflection.
In addition to modeling and conferencing, teachers can provide students with feedback and
encouragement in order to improve student’s self-perception as a reader. A student’s selfefficacy is strongly influenced by feedback from parents, teachers and peers in academic settings
(Paris & Cunningham, 1996). Pilgreen (2000) included encouragement as an important trait of
SSR, which she describes as adult modeling, book recommendations, and positive reinforcement.
Other programs that include teacher feedback base the feedback mainly on procedural aspects of
the program, letting students know how the SSR time is running and what changes might need to
be made to improve the reading time (Anderson, 2002; Reutzel et al, 2008; Trudel. 2007). These
programs focus on younger students in early elementary grades, since the procedure of
participating in an SSR program may be new and unfamiliar to students.
The importance of teacher modeling remains strong through all of the teacher roles
included in studies, however some programs put more emphasis on complete independent silent
IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINED SILENT READING
25
reading for all, while others put more emphasis on the teacher holding an active role, purposely
modeling specific strategies to students as well as discussing books and reading strategies with
students. Deciding what role to take in the classroom depends on the kinds of support that the
students need.
Student Roles
One of the most beneficial aspects of the SSR program is the autonomy that students gain
through engaging in and developing a habit of independent reading. There are also benefits of
engaging in social interactions around books, as well as development of self-regulation
strategies. In many programs, the students only role is to pick a book and read for the entire time,
however in other programs students also engage in peer book sharing, class book sharing, buddy
modeling, goal setting, and book response. As discussed in the accountability section, these roles
should be encouraged, and implemented in a way that does not seek to evaluate students.
Manning and Manning (1984) conducted a study looking at three different SSR models.
One model followed McCracken’s 1971 design, a second model included peer sharing of books
(oral reading in pairs, small group or one on one discussions, and dramatizations), and a third
model included individual student teacher conferences about books as well as reading plans. The
results of the study showed that the students engaged in the peer interaction model made
significantly higher gains in reading attitude and reading achievement than the students in the
other two models, suggesting that inclusion of peer interactions is a positive factor. Additionally,
this study showed that the role of students engaged in a one on one teacher conference was
effective in producing significantly higher gains in reading attitude. The National Reading Panel
(2000) also reviewed this study, and concluded that while the original model did not make large
IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINED SILENT READING
26
gains in reading achievement, the two models that included these variations showed student
gains in reading achievement (p. 3-26).
The role of goal setting, in which students determine a number of pages they will attempt
to read in a week, gives students ownership of their own learning (Wiesendanger et al., 2009).
Through goal setting, students develop self-regulation skills, and can track their progress and
challenge themselves at comfortable levels. An additional role may also include engaging in selfselected and flexible follow up activities as described in the accountability section.
Summary and Implications
The seven categories described above should serve as a resource for planning and
implementing a successful SSR program. Some factors, including providing a quiet,
uninterrupted, and comfortable environment, access to books in the classroom, freedom of book
selection, teacher modeling, and an absence of evaluative activities, are necessary to include. The
remaining factors are recommended to provide teachers with options based on their students’ age
and needs. There is not one correct way to design and implement SSR and teachers should not
feel restricted to follow one specific model, however there are many aspects that help and hinder
the experience for students as well as the desired outcomes. A chart included in the appendix
serves as a user friendly resource for teachers as they craft their own SSR program.
Conclusion
When designed and implemented with purpose and consistency, Sustained Silent Reading
is an effective program to include as part of the literacy block in Kindergarten through 12th grade
classrooms. The literature reviewed shows that SSR improves student attitude toward
independent reading (Chua, 2008; Cline & Kretke, 1980; Holt & O’Tule, 1989; Kornelly &
Smith, 1993; McCracken, 1971; Yoon, 2002), as well as increases their reading achievement in
IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINED SILENT READING
27
vocabulary, comprehension and fluency (Davis, 1988; Elley, 1992; Holt & O’Tule, 1989;
Kornelly & Smith, 1993). Providing students with practice to develop their reading skills as well
as their habits of engaging in reading for pleasure will help to instill a life long love of learning
(Garan, 2008). A lack of consistency in the models of SSR employed by teachers and researchers
is a concern that has been addressed through analysis and comparison of the various models in
relation to relevant research and theories of learning. Based on these findings, a flexible model of
SSR has been suggested in order to increase both reading achievement and reading attitude in
students. These findings consider the frequency and duration, environment, access to books,
book selection, accountability, teacher roles and student roles within the program. Recognizing
the developmental range of students between Kindergarten and 12th grade, recommendations
look different depending on the age of participants in the program. While many stakeholders in
education remain concerned about the effectiveness of SSR based on the findings of the National
Reading Panel (2000), the research in this literature review clearly shows that SSR is an effective
and enjoyable practice for improving reading achievement and reading attitude. Following the
provided guidelines with consideration of both the age of students and desired outcome will help
teachers develop a successful SSR program.
IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINED SILENT READING
28
Appendix
4th-8th Grade
9th-12th Grade
Frequency &
Duration
Kindergarten – 3rd
Grade
 Daily SSR
 Start 1 minute, build
gradually to 10-15
minutes


Daily SSR
Start 5 minutes,
build gradually to
15-25 minutes

Environment


Comfortable, quiet
and uninterrupted
Students remain in
one spot
Create comfortable
reading areas in
room to allow for
change of position
Wide selection of
reading materials
provided in
classroom library
Attractively
arranged and easily
accessible
Books introduced
through book talks
and read alouds
Access to and
instruction in using
school and public
library
Free choice from
wide range of
reading materials
Scaffold book
selection in
conferences



Access to
Books




Book Selection


Comfortable, quiet
and uninterrupted
Students remain in
one spot
Create comfortable
reading areas in
room to allow for a
change of position
Wide selection of
reading materials
provided in
classroom library
Attractively
arranged and easily
accessible
Books introduced
through book talks
and read alouds
Access to and
instruction in using
school and public
library
Free choice from
wide range of
reading materials
Scaffold selection of
interesting and
appropriate level
texts through mini
lessons, modeling,
conferencing and
color coding books
by level















Start 5 minutes,
build gradually to 45
minutes 3 days a
week or 25 minutes
5 days a week
Comfortable, quiet
and uninterrupted
Students remain in
one spot
Make sure students
are not over
crowded if sitting at
tables and desks
Wide selection of
books in classroom
Access to local and
school library
Encouragement to
bring own reading
material
Independent free
choice from wide
range of reading
materials
Monitor for
appropriateness of
reading material
IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINED SILENT READING
Accountability



Teacher Roles



No record keeping
or book reports
Focus on developing
habit of reading for
pleasure
Goal setting for 2nd
and 3rd grade

Model Reading
Provide
encouragement and
feedback on SSR
performance.
Student-teacher
conferencing: 5-10
minutes – discuss
reading strategies,
metacognition, book
selection, book
response and
reflection





Student teacher goal
setting
Record keeping
Follow up activities:
Flexible and self
selected book
response,
metacognitive
reflection, journal
writing, class
sharing, peer
sharing
Model Reading
Provide
encouragement for
independent reading
Student-teacher
conferencing: 5-10
minutes – discuss
reading strategies,
metacognition, book
selection, book
response and
reflection
o Independent
o Independent
Reading
Reading
o Peer book sharing
o Peer book sharing
o Budding modeling
o Buddy modeling
o Class book sharing
o Class book sharing
nd rd
o Goal setting (2 /3
o Goal setting
grade)
o Flexible book
o Optional book
response
response
*Factors written in italic are options to consider
Student Roles
29




No reports or
records
Encourage written
or oral responses,
peer or class
sharing and book
talks
Model Reading
Provide
encouragement for
independent reading
o Independent
Reading
o Optional peer book
sharing
o Optional class book
sharing
o Optional book
response
IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINED SILENT READING
30
References
Adams. (2004). Modeling the connections between word recognition and reading. In R. B.
Ruddell & N.J. Unrau (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (5th ed., pp
1219-1243). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Akmal, T. T. (2002). Ecological approaches to sustained silent reading: conferencing,
contracting and relating to middle school students, The clearing house, 75(3),154-157.
Alexander, P.A. (2006). Psychology in learning and instruction. Columbus, OH: Pearson Merill
Prentice Hall.
Anderson, C. (2000). Sustained silent reading: Try it, you’ll like it! The reading teacher, 54(3).
258-259.
Beliavsky, N. (2006). Revisiting Vygotsky and Gardiner: Realizing human potential, The journal
of aesthetic education, 40(2), 1-11.
Chua, S.P. (2008). The effects of the sustained silent reading program on cultivating students’
habits and attitudes in reading books for leisure, Clearing house 81(4), 180-184.
Cline, R. K., & Kretke, G.L. (1980). An evaluation of long-term SSR in the junior high school,
Journal of reading, 23(6), 503-506.
Collins, C. (1980). Sustained silent reading periods: Effect on teachers’ behaviors and students’
achievement. The elementary school journal, 81(2), 108-114.
Cunningham, A. E.,& Stanovich, K. E. (1998). What reading does for the mind. American
Educator, 22(1-2), 8-15.
Cunningham, J. W. (2001). National reading panel report. Reading research quarterly, 36(3).
326-335.
IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINED SILENT READING
31
Davis, Zephaniah T. (1988). A comparison of the effectiveness of sustained silent reading and
directed reading activity on students’ reading achievement, The high school journal,
71(1), 46-48.
DeBenedicts, D. & Fisher, D. (2007). Sustained silent reading, making adoptions, Voices from
the middle 14(3), 29-37.
Edmondson, J., Shannon, P. (2002). The will of the people, The reading teacher 55(5), 452-454.
Elley, W.B. (1992). How in the world do students read? IEA study of reading literacy.
International association for the evaluation of educational achievement. (Research
Report No. 92-9121-002-3). Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov:80/PDFS/ED360613.pdf
Fisher, D. (2004). Setting the “opportunity to read” standard: Resuscitating the SSR program in
an urban high school. Journal of adolescent and adult literacy, 48(2). 138-150.
Flowerday, T. & Schraw, G. (2000). Teacher beliefs about instructional choice: A
phenomenological study, Journal of Educational Psychology 92(4), 634-645.
Gambrell, L. B. (1996) Creating classroom cultures that foster reading motivation. The reading
teacher, 50(1), 14-25.
Gambrell, L. B., Palmer, B. M., Codling, R. M., Mazzoni, S. (1996). Assessing motivation to
read. The reading teacher, 49, 518-433.
Garan, M. E, DeVoogd, G. (2008). The benefits of sustained silent reading: Scientific research
and common sense coverage. Reading Teacher 62(4), 336-334.
Gardiner, S. (2005). A skill for life. Educational leadership, 63(2). 67-70.
Goodman, K. S. (1994). Reading, writing, and written texts: A transactional
sociopsycholinguistic view: In R. B. Ruddell, M. R. Ruddell & H. Singer (Eds.),
IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINED SILENT READING
32
Theoretical models and processes of reading (4th ed., pp. 1093-1130). Newark, DE:
International Reading Association.
Holt, B. S. & O’Tule, F. S. (1989). The effect of sustained silent reading and writing on
achievement and attitudes of seventh and eighth grade students reading two years below
grade level. Reading improvement, 26(4), 290-297.
Ivey, G. & Broaddus, K. (2001). A survey of what makes students want to read in middle school
classrooms. Reading research quarterly, 36(4). 350-377.
Kaisen, J. (1987). SSR/booktime: kindergarten and 1st grade sustained silent reading. The
reading teacher, 40. 532-536.
Kelley, M., & Clausen-Grace, N. (Oct. 2006). R5: the sustained silent reading makeover that
transformed readers. The reading teacher, 60(6). 148-156.
Kornelly, D. & Smith, L. (1993). Bring back the USSR. School library journal, 39(4) p. 48.
Krashen, S. (2000). Forward. In J. L. Pilgreen, The SSR handbook, How to organize and manage
a sustained silent reading program. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Publishers, Inc.
Krashen, S. (2001). More smoke and mirrors: A critique of the National Reading Panel report on
fluency, Phi Delta Kappan, 119-123
Lee-Daniels, S. L & Murray, B. A. (2000). DEAR me: what does it take to get children reading?
The reading teacher 54(2).
Loh, J. K. K. (2009). Teacher modeling: Its impact on an extensive reading program. Reading in
a foreign language, 21(2), 93-118.
Manning, G. L., & Manning, M. (1984). What models of recreational reading make a difference?
Reading world, 23(4). 375-380.
McCracken, R. A. (1971). Initiating sustained silent reading, Journal of reading, 14(8), 521-583.
IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINED SILENT READING
33
McCracken, R. A., & McCracken, M. J. (1978). Modeling is the key to Sustained Silent Reading.
The Reading Teacher, 31, 406–408
Methe, S. A., & Hintze, J. M. (2003). Evaluating teacher modeling as a strategy to increase
student reading behavior. School Psychology Review, 32(4), 617–624.
Morrow, (1985). Developing young voluntary readers: The home-the child-the school. Reading
research quarterly, 25(1), 1-8.
Nagy, W.E., Anderson, R.C. & Herman, P.A. (1987). Learning word meanings from context
during normal reading, American educational research journal, 24(2), 237-270
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development; UNESCO Institute for Statistics.
(2003). Literacy skill for the world of tomorrow. (Publication No. 5381). Retrieved from
http://www.uis.unesco.org/Library/Documents/pisa03-en.pdf
Paris, S. G., & Cunningham, A. E. (1996). Children becoming students. In D. Berliner, & R.
Calfee, Handbook of Educational Psychology (pp. 117-147). New York, NY: Simon &
Schuster Macmillan.
Paris, S. G. (2005). Reinterpreting the development of reading skills, Reading research
quarterly, 40(2), 184-202.
Pilgreen, J. L. (2000). The SSR handbook, How to organize and manage a sustained silent
reading program. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Publishers, Inc.
Pegg, L. A. & Bartelheim, F. J. (2011). Effects of daily read-alouds on students’ sustained silent
reading. Current issues in education, 14(2). 1-8.
Reutzel, D.R, Johnes, C. D., Fawson, P. C., & Smith, J. A. (2008). Scaffolded silent reading that
works. The reading teacher, 62(3), 294-207.
IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINED SILENT READING
34
Rosenblatt, L. (1994). Continuing the conversation: A clarification, Research in the Teaching of
English, 29(3), 349-354.
Schmidt, R. (2008). Really reading: What does accelerated reader teach adults and children?
Language arts, 85(3). 202-211.
Shanahan, T. (2006). Does he really think kids shouldn’t read? Reading today, 23(6),12.
Siah, P, Kwok, W. (2010). The value of reading and the effectiveness of sustained silent reading,
The clearing house, 83, 168-174.
Trudel, H. (2008). Making data driven decisions: Silent reading, Reading teacher, 61(4).
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National Institutes of
Health, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2000). Reports of
the National Reading Panel: Teaching children to read, report of the subgroups. (NIH
Publication No. 00-4754) Retrieved from
http://www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/nrp/upload/ch3.pdf
Wiesendanger, K., Braun, G. & Perry, J. (2009). Recreational reading: Useful tips for successful
implementation. Reading horizons, 49(4). 269-284.
Wu, Y., & Samuels, S. J. (2004). How the amount of time spent on independent reading affects
reading achievement: A response to the National Reading Panel. Manuscript submitted
for publication, Department of Educational Psychology, University of Minnesota.
Retrieved from http://www.tc.umn.edu/~samue001/web%20pdf/time_spent_on_reading.
Pdf
Yoon, J. (2002). Three decades of sustained silent reading: A meta-analytic review of the effects
of SSR on attitude toward reading. Reading improvement, 39(4).186-195.