Key Stage 3 boys’ engagement in reading

1. Introduction

In this small-scale research project, I consider how best to engage Key Stage (KS3)

boys with reading for pleasure. I have chosen to focus on boys based on the

following consensus in the literature: boys tend to underachieve (compared to girls)

across all curriculum subjects (see section 3), but especially in English (see section

4). I have chosen to focus on KS3 boys in particular, because reading enjoyment

among children tends to decrease with age (see section 5).

I shall establish a positive correlation between (i) enjoyment of reading, (ii) a positive

academic self-concept for English, (iii) increased attainment in Literacy and (iv)

increased life chances. In other words, students will perform better in English if they

enjoy reading and if they believe they are good at it. I shall then investigate

strategies to engage KS3 boys with reading for pleasure. This is because I wish to

contribute to raising the future life chances of my students.

I organize this essay as follows. In section 2, I outline the basic definitions that will

ground the subsequent discussion. In section 3, I discuss boys’ underachievement

in general terms. In section 4, I consider boys’ underachievement in Literacy in

particular. In section 5, I consider the importance of reading. In section 6, I debunk

a common misconception about boys’ reading. In section 7, I consider various

approaches to the challenge of engaging KS3 boys with reading. In section 8, I

conclude my findings and discuss their implications for my study.

2. Basic definitions

In this section, I outline some basic definitions that will ground the subsequent

discussion.

2.1. Underachievement

In section 3, I argue that boys tend to underachieve across all subject areas

(compared to girls). Students who underachieve (i.e. low-achievers) may be

characterized by one of the following traits (when compared to high-achievers).

They may have vague and static learning goals; they may have a reduced repertoire

of learning strategies; they may compare themselves with others and they may give

up easily in the face of failure (Winstanley, 2016, 401).

2.2. Enjoyment

In section 4, I argue that boys tend not to enjoy reading as much as girls do. I

assume that students who enjoy reading will in all likelihood read more frequently

and they will read of their own accord. Accordingly, the term reading for pleasure

refers to ‘reading that we do of our own free will (Clark and Rumbold, 2009, 5).

2.4. Engagement

In section 5, I discuss strategies to better engage KS3 boys with reading. The

Concise Oxford English Dictionary defines engage as ‘to attract or involve

(someone’s interest or attention’) (OED, 2004, 472). I assume that students who are

more engaged in reading will be more likely to stay focused (i.e. on-task) during

reading sessions.

3. Boys’ underachievement

In this section, I discuss the issue of boys’ underachievement across all subject

areas. In section 3.1, I consider the basic facts. In section 3.2, I consider a possible

explanation.

3.1. The basic facts

There is a considerable degree of gender inequality in our society in terms of job

prospects and financial benefits, which seems to put boys and men at an advantage

(see e.g. Hartley and Sutton, 2013, 1716; Long, 2000, 171). Boys and men do not

appear to suffer from lack of opportunity or lack of social capital. It is therefore

surprising that boys are more likely than girls to engage in a variety of anti-social

behaviour. For example, boys are more likely than girls to become violent, to take

illegal drugs, to be expelled from school and even to commit suicide (Timimi, 2005,

13).

Moreover, boys tend to underachieve at school across all subject areas (Bromley,

2015; Hartley and Sutton, 2013, 1716). Evidence for this comes from the 2012 PISA

rankings, which show that boys account for six out of ten students who did not attain

the required baseline levels at the age of fifteen (OECD, 2012). In this context, a

student underachieves if he or she does not achieve grades that are broadly in line

with target grades, which are usually set upon entry to secondary school (or in the

sense of section 2.1).

It is clear that this is an issue of underachievement and not an issue of innate ability,

for two reasons. First, boys’ GCSE scores are surprisingly low even if we do take

into account their target levels upon admittance to secondary school (Gold, 1995).

Second, girls’ exam results have improved far more rapidly over the last twenty

years than boys’ results have (Sullivan, 2016, 273). These findings suggest that

secondary school presents additional challenges for boys but not for girls.

3.2. A possible explanation

There is evidence to suggest that boys (compared to girls) do not always cope well

with the norms and rules of school life (Long, 2000, 176; Timimi, 2005, 14). Boys

tend to present higher levels of behavioural difficulties than girls do and they receive

twice as much verbal criticism as girls do (Long, 2000, 176). It is, however, not just

teachers who notice a difference in boys’ and girls’ behaviour: the students

themselves are aware of the gender differences from a young age. For instance,

children of both genders (by the age of eight) believe that boys are less focused, less

able and less successful than girls are (Sullivan (2016, 274).

It is clear that there is a stereotype according to which boys underachieve at school

compared to girls. It is also clear that young children accept this stereotype. In

addition, young children accept the meta-stereotype according to which their

teachers share the same stereotype (Hartley and Sutton, 2013, 1721). We

understand a meta-stereotype to refer to the belief that others share the same

stereotype as we do. Regardless of whether or not boys actually underachieve,

students and teachers both expect them to.

This may become a self-fulfilling prophecy (Sullivan, 2016, 274). If teachers expect

their male students to misbehave more than their female students, they are more

likely to notice this and are, therefore, more likely to correct instances of it. This may

result in boys resigning themselves to being unsuccessful (Hartley and Sutton 2010).

We now have a situation where many boys do not value academic success (it is

viewed as ‘unmanly’; Salisbury and Jackson, 1996, 3). We can understand this

trend in terms of stereotype threat.

In the case of school, it has been shown (see e.g. Hartley and Sutton, 2013, 1724)

that teachers’ expectations of boys’ underachievement ensure that these students do

in fact underachieve. This is because boys have ‘negative perceptions of their own

abilities’ and so ‘view future academic achievement as unlikely’ and ‘give up quickly’

as a result (Pisecco et. al., 2001, 450-451). This is an example of stereotype threat.

4. The gender gap in Literacy

In this section, I consider the issue of boys’ underachievement in literature in

particular. In section 4.1, I consider the basic facts. In section 4.2, I consider three

possible explanations.

4.1. The basic facts

English is the curriculum subject where boys’ underachievement is most apparent

(DCSF, 2009). This is a global trend in the sense that girls outperform boys in many

countries. In fact, the gender gap in Literacy (in favour of girls) is higher in certain

high-performing countries than in low-performing countries. In these high-performing

countries, boys account for almost all of the underachievement (OECD, 2014).

This is not just a trend that we observe across different countries; the gender gap in

Literacy increases with age, with girls outperforming boys on all National Curriculum

tests. At the age of seven, boys are trailing girls in reading levels by 7%. At the age

of eleven, this disparity grows to 8%. At the age of fourteen, the gap is 12%. At

GCSE level, the gap between boys and girls achieving A* to C in English GCSE is

14 percentage points (NLT, 2012b). The Commission concluded that ‘something we

are doing as a society is making boys more likely to fail at reading’ (NLT, 2012a).

Boys are more likely than girls to think that reading is boring and difficult. They are

also less likely than girls are to read outside school (DfE, 2012, 18). 43% of boys

and 58% of girls enjoy reading (Clark and Douglas, 2011). Moreover, this gender

gap is increasing. In 2005, 11% more girls than boys enjoyed reading. By 2009, this

gap had increased to 15% (DfE, 2012, 18).

4.2. Possible explanations

There are three possible explanations for the gender gap. First, children ‘perceive

the act of reading itself as a gendered form of behaviour’ (Daly, 2014, 80). At school,

students have to read in a quiet environment; they have to sit still and focus on a

single activity for a prolonged period of time. It can be argued that these conditions

favour girls rather than boys. In other words, school reading sessions appear to

‘conform to stereotypical feminine behaviour’ (ibid, 2014, 80).

Second, it is possible that boys and girls have different ideas of what reading is for.

Boys take a pragmatic approach to the school environment. They tend to believe

that English lessons should simply afford them basic life skills. For this reason, they

are less likely to want to invest time in reading (especially fiction), which is not

directly linked to life skills (Daly, 2014, 80). Moreover, the genres that we tend to

associate with boys (e.g. graphic novels and nonfiction) are not well represented in

the school curriculum.

Third, it is possible that children’s home environments perpetuate the gendered

reading stereotypes (see NLT, 2012a). For example, mothers are more likely than

fathers are to ‘support and role-model’ reading for their children (Bromley, 2015).

Moreover, parents are more likely to take girls than boys to the library. Girls also

receive more books as gifts than boys do (ibid, 2015). Clark and Rumbold (2009)

remind us that parental involvement is a ‘powerful force’ in shaping children’s future

reading habits. A recent survey for Reading Connects found that 84% of students

were taught to read by their mothers (ibid, 2009).

5. The importance of reading

In this section, I consider the importance of reading in general and the importance of

reading in the classroom setting in particular. In general, levels of reading ability

rose over the first ten years of the National Literacy Strategy, although levels of

reading enjoyment fell over the same period (Claxton, 2008, 19). Younger children

tend to read for pleasure more than older children do, although the number of

children reading for pleasure in general is decreasing. More specifically, girls tend to

enjoy reading more than boys do and this gender gap is increasing.

These findings are important for several reasons. First, there is a positive correlation

between reading frequency and reading enjoyment (Clark and Douglas, 2011, 8). In

other words, students are likely to gain an increased appreciation of reading by

reading more often. Second, there is a positive correlation between reading

enjoyment and reading attainment levels (ibid, 2011, 8). In other words, students are

more likely to perform well on reading tests if they enjoy reading. Third, there is a

clear link between reading enjoyment, reading attainment and future life chances

(Clark and Douglas, 2011, 8; DfE, 2012, 3; OECD, 2002).

Reading has been shown to increase not only our vocabulary but also our general

knowledge (Cunningham and Stanovich, 1998). It is an ‘important gateway’ to

various types of development: personal, social, economic and civic (Clark and

Rumbold, 2009, 5; Holden, 2004). In order to function well in our society, individuals

need to ‘acquire an ever-widening repertoire of communication skills’ (Daly, 2014,

70). Reading can help with this by developing our ‘concepts of citizenship,

civilisation and identity’ (ibid, 2014, 70).

6. A misconception

There is some anecdotal evidence to suggest that boys will be more engaged with

reading if they were encouraged to read macho books containing violence, blood

and gore. Gold (1995) mentions one headteacher who bought lots of violent

adventure books (i.e. plots that mirrored the students’ favourite computer games).

The teacher reported that his male students became more enthusiastic about

reading and, as a result, achieved similar results to the girls on their next set of

reading tests.

The above anecdote plays to a common misconception about boys’ reading habits.

If this were true, the solution to the issue of boys’ underachievement in reading

would be simply for schools to invest in gory fiction. The problem is that ‘boy-friendly’

curricula do not work; rather, they exacerbate gender stereotypes (DCSF, 2009a;

Kyriacou, 1997, 68). For instance, it would be misguided for a school to combat

boys’ underachievement in reading solely by sourcing stereotypically boy-friendly

texts. In this scenario, the school would unwittingly ‘confirm sexist assumptions’ (ibid,

1997, 68). This would contribute to the stereotype threat that I introduced in section

2.2.

Teachers’ gender stereotypes have an adverse effect on boys’ reading self-concepts

and a positive effect on girls’ reading self-concepts (Retelsdorf et. al., 2005, 191). In

other words, teachers may assume that boys will struggle more with reading than

girls. The result is a discrepancy between boys’ reading self-concepts and their

actual reading ability. It is possible for a school to raise its boys’ reading

performance by combatting gender stereotypes (Hartley and Sutton, 2013, 1726; see

Quinn and Spencer, 2001). This is, however, only possible through a whole-school

approach (DCSF, 2009a).

It is clear that schools may reinforce gender differences and stereotypes. For

instance, staff and students ‘consistently’ associate certain traits to one gender

rather than the other (DCSF, 2009a). These traits are often related to perceived

competence and self-concepts (both terms refer to students’ perceptions of their own

strengths, weaknesses and identity). Crucially, a teenager’s self-concepts are

hierarchical, meaning that perceived competencies in individual subject areas will

come together to form a ‘global academic self-concept’ (Bee and Boyd, 2003, 173);

Pisecco et. al., 2001)

7. Steps forward

In this section, I turn my attention more directly to the challenge of engaging KS3

boys with reading for pleasure. I discuss possible school and classroom strategies

to improve the engagement of KS3 boys with reading for pleasure.

7.1. The library

To begin, the school library has a crucial role to play in encouraging all students (and

not just boys) to read and to enjoy reading. The National Literacy Trust has several

recommendations for what constitutes good practice for libraries. Libraries should

create ‘environmental reading settings’ like dens or reading circles. Libraries should

create non-fiction displays that link to their stock as well as ‘validate’ a range of

different genres. Moreover, libraries should arrange visits from male authors to

serve as role-models (NLT, 2012b).

The National Literacy Trust also has a recommendation for the branding of the

school library. It is possible to describe the school library as a ‘retail space’, which

provides customers with what they want (NLT, 2012b). This recommendation makes

sense, especially since boys typically have a more pragmatic outlook on school than

girls do (see section 3.2). This branding approach could be accompanied by English

lessons that focus on how to select an appropriate book from the library. It could

also be accompanied by technology that engages boys.

It is also important for teachers (of all subjects) to have an awareness of students’

reading habits and preferences. In particular, teachers ought to know which texts

are appropriate for boys. It is also a good idea for teachers to become suitable role-

models by engaging in reading themselves (Bromley, 2015).

7.2. The classroom

To begin, a potential barrier to students’ engagement with reading in the classroom

is the silent reading starter. Many teachers expect their students to read silently for

five minutes or so at the start of each lesson, so that they settle down. It is clear that

students benefit from having time to read, although presenting the activity in this way

make the reading appear ‘fairly dispensable when the lesson proper begins’ (Daly

2014, 77). It is not enough simply to relegate reading to the first five minutes of an

English lesson; we must ensure that reading becomes a sustained activity (ibid,

2014, 77).

There are a couple of general strategies that teachers can adopt in the classroom.

First, Literacy-related rewards have been shown to be effective (e.g. books or book

vouchers; Clark and Rumbold, 2006; DfE, 2012, 6). Second, it is important to vary

the focus when teaching a set text. This is because girls often prefer character

studies and personal responses, whereas boys often prefer events and plot

development. Boys also tend to enjoy analytical ways of writing about literature

(Daly, 2014, 80).

Daly (2014, 81) identifies three types of reading activity that could take place in a

classroom: (i) whole-class reading, (ii) group reading, and (iii) individual reading.

First, whole-class reading offers the chance to highlight the social and historical

context of text. Second, group reading activities can prepare students for whole-

class reading or provide an opportunity for discussion (ibid, 2014, 79). For instance,

each group could read an example of a given genre. Third, students could keep a

reading diary or blog as part of an individual reading project (ibid, 2014, 77).

In addition, the National Literacy Trust recommends reading competitions (to cater

for the competitive nature of certain boys) (NLT, 2012b). Daly (2014, 77-78)

suggests creative projects such as designing book covers, posters or film

adaptations. She also suggests that students contribute to a class literary magazine.

Creative projects such as these will help boys to relate their reading to their lives

outside school. Moreover, rebranding the school library will help boys to make the

link between reading enjoyment, reading attainment and future life prospects.

8. Conclusion

Boys underachieve at school and this is probably due to the phenomenon of

stereotype threat (see section 3). Boys’ underachievement is most apparent in

Literacy and this is probably for three reasons: (i) the school environment suits girls

more than it suits boys; (ii) boys do not typically make the link between reading

attainment and increased life prospects, and (iii) the home environment may

perpetuate stereotypes of boys’ underachievement (see section 4). It is vital for

students to develop an interest in reading because this will improve their

performance in other areas of English, their performance in other curriculum areas,

as well as their life prospects (see section 5).

It is relatively easy to find examples in the literature of things to avoid when

attempting to engage boys with reading. It is best to avoid so-called boy-friendly

curricula because these will only serve to highlight (and exacerbate) the problem

(see section 6). It is also best to avoid stand-alone reading starters that are not

accompanied by more sustained reading activities (see section 7).

In terms of strategies to adopt, there are two main recommendations that emerge

from this brief review of the literature. The first is to make effective use of school

libraries as interactive, business-like settings. The second is to introduce sustained

reading activities into the classroom (i.e. whole-class, group and individual activities).

Teachers and curriculum designers may consider a move towards project work that

places set texts firmly within their socio-cultural contexts. These are whole-school

strategies; I am also interested in more specific strategies that will not necessarily

counteract the required Schemes of Work. As such, my research question is: How

do I engage Key Stage (KS3) boys with reading for pleasure?

References

Bee, H. and Boyd, D. (2003) The developing child, 10th edition. Boston, MA: Pearson.

Bromley, M. (2015) Narrowing the gender gap: Literacy. SecEd. Available from

http://www.sec-ed.co.uk/ [accessed 26 April 2017]

Clark, C. and Douglas, J. (2011) Young peoples’ reading and writing: An in-depth

study focusing on enjoyment, behaviour, attitudes and attainment. National Literacy

Trust. Available from www.literacytrust.org.uk [accessed 29 April 2017]

Clark, C. and Rumbold, K. (2009) Reading for pleasure: A research overview.

National Literacy Trust. Available from www.literacytrust.org.uk [accessed 29 April

2017]

Cunningham, AE. and Stanovich, KE. (1998) What reading does for the mind.

American educator / American Federation of Teachers. Spring, 1-8.

Daly, C. (2014) Reading. In: J, Davison. and C, Daly (eds.) Learning to teach English

in the secondary school: A companion to school experience, 4th edition. Oxon:

Routledge, 69-90.

Department for Children, Schools and Families (2009a). Gender issues in schools -

What works to improve achievement for boys and girls. Available from

http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/9094/1/00601-2009BKT-EN.pdf [accessed 26 April 2017]

Department for Children, Schools and Families (2009b) Gender and education -

Mythbusters. Available from http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ [accessed 26

April 2017]

Department for Education (2012) Research evidence on reading for pleasure:

Education standards research team. Available from

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/28428

6/reading_for_pleasure.pdf [accessed 29 April 2017]

Gold, K (1995) Hard times for Britain’s lost boys. New Scientist. 145. p. 12-13.

Hartley, BL. and Sutton, RM. (2013) A stereotype threat account of

boys’ academic underachievement. Child Development, 84 1716–1733.

Holden, J. (2004) Creative Reading: Young people, reading and public libraries.

London: Demos.

Kyriacou, C. (1997) Effective teaching in schools: Theory and practice, 2nd edition.

Cheltenham: Nelson Thornes.

Long, M. (2000) The psychology of education. London: RoutledgeFalmer

National Literacy Trust (2012a) Boys’ reading commission. Available from

https://www.literacytrust.org.uk/assets/0001/4056/Boys_Commission_Report.pdf

[accessed 26 April 2017]

National Literacy Trust (2012b) Boys’ reading commission 2012: A review of existing

research conducted to underpin the Commission. Available from

http://www.literacytrust.org.uk/ [accessed 26 April 2017]

OECD. (2012) Closing the gender gap: Act now. Available from

https://www.oecd.org/gender/Executive%20Summary.pdf [accessed 26 April 2017]

OECD. (2014) PISA 2012 results in focus. Available from

https://www.oecd.org/pisa/keyfindings/pisa-2012-results-overview.pdf [accessed 26

April 2017]

Pisecco, S., Wristers, K., Swank, P., Silva, PA. and Baker, DB. (2001) The effect of

academic self-concept on ADHD and antisocial behaviours in early adolescence.

Journal of learning disabilities, 34(5) 450-461.

Quinn, DM. and Spencer, SJ. (2001) The interference of stereotype threat with

women’s generation of mathematical problem-solving strategies. Journal of social

issues, 57(1) 55-71.

Retelsdorf, J., Schwartz, K. and Asbrock, F. (2015) “Michael can’t read!” Teachers’

gender stereotypes and boys’ reading self-concept. Journal of Educational

Psychology, 107(1) 186-194.

Salisbury, J. and Jackson, D. (1996) Challenging macho values. London: Falmer

Press.

Soames, C. and Stevenson, A. (eds) (2014) Concise Oxford English Dictionary, 11th

edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Sullivan, S. (2016) Responding to diversity. In: S, Capel., M, Leask. and S, Younie

(eds.) Learning to teach in the secondary school: A companion to school experience,

7th edition. Oxon: Routledge, 270-284.

Winstanley, C. (2016) Closing the achievement gap: Personalising learning. In: S,

Capel., M, Leask. and S, Younie (eds.) Learning to teach in the secondary school: A

companion to school experience, 7th edition. Oxon: Routledge, 270-284.