Why students don't read more: lack of access to books, not "inattention to targeting"

I claimed that the major barrier to reading is lack of access to books. Stenner agrees that this is a problem, but claims that many educators feel that "inattention to targeting is the single best explanation for why students don't read more than they do" (p. 42). As I understand it, this is the hypothesis that students do not read more because they are unable to find books at their reading level.

I disagree. There is overwhelming evidence for the "access hypothesis" and none at all for the "targeting hypothesis" as a cause of non-reading. The evidence for the access hypothesis consists of the following:

1. Many studies have shown a strong relationship between poverty and reading scores. Consistent with the access hypothesis are studies showing that children from low income families have very little access to books.

Duke (2000) reported that the first grade children she studied from high income families attended schools that had better classroom libraries, with more books on display and more time for interacting with books. She concluded that "schools themselves may contribute to relatively lower levels of literacy and other kinds of achievement among low-SES classrooms" (p. 464).

Neuman and Celano (2001) reported that children who lived in middle income neighborhoods had more places to buy books and a much wider variety of books to choose from in stores, had access to better school libraries with more books and with better staffing, and had access to better public libraries. The public libraries in the middle income areas they studied were open in the evening; those in the low income areas were not. Neuman and Celano concluded that " ... children in middle-income neighborhoods were likely to be deluged with a wide variety of reading materials. However, children from poor neighborhoods would have to aggressively and persistently seek them out" (p. 15).

2. Given access to interesting reading material, nearly all children will read.

Those with more access to books read more. Children who live closer to public libraries read more over the summer (Heyns, 1978), school libraries with better collections and more hours open to students show higher circulation (House and Montmarquette, 1984), and kindergarten children with access to better library corners make more use of books during free time (Morrow and Weinstein, 1982). In addition, increasing access to books results in more interest in reading: Ramos (Ramos and Krashen, 1998) noted a profound increase in books and reading after only one trip to a public library among second graders who previously had little exposure to books.

More access is related to superior performance on tests of reading comprehension (Krashen, 1993). This result confirms that the kind of reading that results from access to books, free voluntary reading, really counts; it has an effect on literacy competence. Of special interest are studiies showing consistent positive relationships between school library quality (in terms of quantity of books and staffing) and performance on tests of reading comprehension (see the work of Lance, McQuillan, and others, summarized in Krashen, 2001b). Better libraries mean more access to books, and more help from librarians in finding books, which means more reading, which in turn results in better reading.

2