Independent reading: The relationship of challenge, non‐fiction and gender to achievement
Abstract
To explore whether different balances of fiction/non‐fiction reading and challenge might help explain differences in reading achievement between genders, data on 45,670 pupils who independently read over 3 million books were analysed. Moderate (rather than high or low) levels of challenge were positively associated with achievement gain, but non‐fiction read was generally more challenging than fiction. Non‐fiction reading was negatively correlated with successful comprehension and reading achievement gain. Overall, boys appeared to read less than girls, and proportionately more non‐fiction, but this less carefully—especially in the higher grades—and had lower reading achievement. Differences between classrooms in promoting successful comprehension of non‐fiction were evident, suggesting intervention could improve achievement. Implications for research and practice are explored.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The higher attrition in the expository non-fiction condition may be a consequence of the expository non-fiction books failing to match participants' personal preferences as well as the narrative books.
“This pattern may be a consequence of the expository non-fiction books failing to match participants' personal preferences as well as the narrative books (e.g.Harkrader & Moore, 1997;Summers, 2013;Topping et al., 2008).”
From The effects of reading narrative fiction on social and moral cognition (2021) · cites this paper as Topping et al., 2008
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 38 · Cited by 78
- Authors
- Topping, K. J., Samuels, J., & Paul, T.
- Affiliations
- University of Dundee (GB)
- University of Minnesota (US)
- Corresponding author
- Topping, K. J.
- ORCID
- Topping, K. J.
- Venue
- British Educational Research Journal
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2008-08
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 505-524
- ISSN
- 0141-1926 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-3518
- OpenAlex
- W2170728702
- Cited by
- 78
- References
- 38
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 4.34
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- British Educational Research Journal (publishedVersion)
- Discovery Research Portal (University of Dundee) (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Literacy and Educational Practices
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
- Social Sciences › Education › School Choice and Performance
- Keywords
- independent reading, reading achievement, gender differences, fiction and non-fiction, reading challenge, comprehension, reading intervention
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review