There were other places within the article that left me scratching my head including a note that the most struggling readers did not qualify for this program at all (WTW?). But the bottom line is this: what is having the impact claimed by the people who promote and sell Read 180?I suspect it is a case similar to Accelerated Reader. The program makes extravagant claims about improved test scores but cannot point to anything that proves it is the quiz and not all the other elements that improve scores. What about Read 180?
In the case of this article, it seems as though Read 180 is being used for RtI. So, what is it that improves test scores and how much of each element accounts for what percentage of improvement? Is it the independent reading that elevates scores? Or is it the whole group or small group instruction? Is it the quizzing or testing done on the computers?
Today, I have read hundreds (if not thousands) of words as I pored over a dozen or so picture books. I selected the books myself. I carved out the time to read. I wrote a little something about each of them along the way and posted it to Facebook. Do programs lead readers to do this? I doubt it. Lifelong readers, those Donalyn Miller calls "wild readers" are not made by programs nor programmatic instruction (class sets of books, prescribed projects). Those readers are schooltime readers. Some of them might break free eventually and become wild readers, lifelong readers. But I worry about the larger percentage who never read another book after the last one required is done.