National Endowment for the Arts

To Read or Not To Read

A Question of National Consequence

Executive Summary
Research Report #47

Executive Summary

November 2007

National Endowment for the Arts

1100 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20506-0001

Telephone: 202-682-5400

Produced by the Office of Research & Analysis

Sunil Iyengar, Director

Staff contributors: Sarah Sullivan, Bonnie Nichols, Tom Bradshaw,

and Kelli Rogowski

Special contributor: Mark Bauerlein

Editorial and publication assistance by Don Ball

Designed by Beth Schlenoff Design

Front Cover Photo: Getty Images

Printed in the United States of America

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

To read or not to read : a question of national consequence.

p. cm. — (Research report ; #47)

“Produced by the Office of Research & Analysis, National

Endowment for the Arts, Sunil Iyengar, director; editorial and

publication assistance by Don Ball.”

1. Books and reading—United States. 2.

Literature—Appreciation—United States. I. Iyengar, Sunil, 1973–

II. Ball, Don, 1964– III. National Endowment for the Arts.

Z1003.2.T6 2007

028’.9—dc22

2007042469

202-682-5496 Voice/TTY

(a device for individuals who are deaf or hearing-impaired)

Individuals who do not use conventional print materials

may contact the Arts Endowment’s Office for AccessAbility at

202-682-5532 to obtain this publication in an alternate format.

5is publication is available free of charge at www.arts.gov,

the Web site of the National Endowment for the Arts.
P

To Read or Not To Read gathers and collates the best national data available to

provide a reliable and comprehensive overview of American reading today.

While it incorporates some statistics from the National Endowment for the

Arts’ 2004 report, Reading at Risk, this new study contains vastly more data from

numerous sources. Although most of this information is publicly available, it has

never been assembled and analyzed as a whole. To our knowledge, To Read or Not

To Read is the most complete and up-to-date report of the nation’s reading trends

and—perhaps most important—their considerable consequences.

To Read or Not To Read relies on the most accurate data available, which consists

of large, national studies conducted on a regular basis by U.S. federal agencies, supplemented by academic, foundation, and business surveys. Reliable national statisticalresearch is expensive and time-consuming to conduct, especially when itrequires

accurate measurements of various subgroups (age or education level, for example)

within the overall population. Likewise,such research demandsformidable resources

and a commitment from an organization to collect the data consistently over many

years, which is the only valid way to measure both short and long-term trends. Few

organizations outside the federal government can manage such a painstaking task.

By comparison, most private-sector or media surveysinvolve quick and isolated polls

conducted with a minimal sample size.

When one assembles data from disparate sources, the results often present contradictions. iis is not the case with To Read or Not To Read. Here the results are

startling in their consistency. All of the data combine to tell the same story about

American reading.

ie story the data tell issimple, consistent, and alarming. Although there has been

measurable progress in recent years in reading ability at the elementary school level,

all progress appears to halt as children enter their teenage years. iere is a general

decline in reading among teenage and adult Americans. Most alarming, both reading

ability and the habit ofregularreading have greatly declined among college graduates.

iese negative trends have more than literary importance. Asthisreport makes clear,

the declines have demonstrable social, economic, cultural, and civic implications.

How does one summarize this disturbing story? As Americans, especially younger

Americans, read less, they read less well. Because they read less well, they have lower

levels of academic achievement. (ie shameful fact that nearly one-third of American teenagers drop out ofschool is deeply connected to declining literacy and reading

comprehension.) With lower levels of reading and writing ability, people do less well

in the job market. Poor reading skills correlate heavily with lack of employment,

lower wages, and fewer opportunities for advancement. Significantly worse reading

skills are found among prisoners than in the general adult population. And deficient

readers are less likely to become active in civic and cultural life, most notably in volunteerism and voting.

Strictly understood, the data in this report do not necessarily show cause and

effect. ie statistics merely indicate correlations. ie habit of daily reading, for

instance, overwhelmingly correlates with better reading skills and higher academic

To Read or Not To Read 3

Photo by Vance Jacobs
achievement. On the other hand, poor reading skills correlate with lower levels of

financial and job success. At the risk of being criticized by social scientists, I suggest

thatsince all the data demonstrate consistent and mostly linearrelationships between

reading and these positive results—and between poorreading and negative results—

reading has played a decisive factor. Whether or not people read, and indeed how

much and how often they read, affects their lives in crucial ways.

All of the data suggest how powerfully reading transforms the lives of individuals—whatever their social circumstances. Regular reading not only boosts the likelihood of an individual’s academic and economic success—factsthat are not especially

surprising—but it also seems to awaken a person’s social and civic sense. Reading

correlates with almost every measurement of positive personal and social behavior

surveyed. It is reassuring, though hardly amazing, that readers attend more concerts

and theater than non-readers, but it is surprising that they exercise more and play

more sports—no matter what their educational level. ie cold statistics confirm

something that mostreaders know but have mostly been reluctant to declare asfact—

books change lives for the better.

Some people will inevitably criticize To Read or Not To Read as a negative report—

understating the good works ofschools, colleges, libraries, and publishers. Certainly,

the trendsreported here are negative.iere is, alas, no factual case to support general

growth in reading or reading comprehension in America. But there is another way

of viewing this data that is hardly negative about reading.

To Read or Not To Read confirms—without any serious qualification—the central

importance of reading for a prosperous, free society. ie data here demonstrate that

reading is an irreplaceable activity in developing productive and active adults as well

as healthy communities. Whatever the benefits of newer electronic media, they provide no measurable substitute forthe intellectual and personal development initiated

and sustained by frequent reading.

To Read or Not To Read is not an elegy for the bygone days of print culture, but

instead is a call to action—not only for parents, teachers, librarians, writers, and publishers, but also for politicians, businessleaders, economists, and social activists. ie

general decline in reading is not merely a cultural issue, though it has enormous consequences for literature and the other arts. It is a serious national problem. If, at the

current pace, America continues to lose the habit of regular reading, the nation will

suffer substantial economic, social, and civic setbacks.

As with Reading at Risk, we issue this report not to dictate any specific remedial

policies, but to initiate a serious discussion. It is no longer reasonable to debate

whether the problem exists. It is now time to become more committed to solving it

or face the consequences. ie nation needs to focus more attention and resources

on an activity both fundamental and irreplaceable for democracy.

Dana Gioia

Chairman, National Endowment for the Arts

4 To Read or Not To Read
E S

I

n 2004, the National Endowment forthe Arts published Reading at Risk: A Survey

of Literary Reading in America. iis detailed study showed that Americans in

almost every demographic group were reading fiction, poetry, and drama—and

booksin general—atsignificantly lowerratesthan 10 or 20 years earlier. ie declines

were steepest among young adults.

More recent findings attest to the diminished role of voluntary reading in American life. iese new statistics come from a variety of reliable sources, including large,

nationally representative studies conducted by other federal agencies. Brought

together here for the first time, the data prompt three unsettling conclusions:

• Americans are spending less time reading.

• Reading comprehension skills are eroding.

• These declines have serious civic, social, cultural, and economic implications.

A. A A R L

Teens and young adults read less often and for shorter amounts of time when compared with other age groups and with Americans of the past.

1. Young adults are reading fewer books in general.

• Nearly half of all Americans ages 18 to 24 read no books for pleasure.

• ie percentage of 18- to 44-year-olds who read a book fell 7 points from 1992

to 2002.

2. Reading is declining as an activity among teenagers.

• Less than one-third of 13-year-olds are daily readers.

• ie percentage of 17-year-olds who read nothing at all for pleasure has

doubled over a 20-year period. Yet the amount they read for school or homework (15 or fewer pages daily for 62% of students) has stayed the same.

To Read or Not To Read 5

Percentage of Young Americans Who Read a Book Not Required for Work or School

Age group 1992 2002 Change Rate of decline

18–24 59% 52% -7 pp -12%

25–34 64% 59% -5 pp -8%

35–44 66% 59% -7 pp -11%

All adults (18 and over) 61% 57% -4 pp -7%

pp = percentage points

Source: National Endowment for the Arts
• Voluntary reading rates diminish from childhood to late adolescence.

3. College attendance no longer guarantees active reading habits.

• Although reading tracks closely with education level, the percentage of college

graduates who read literature has declined.

• 65% of college freshmen read for pleasure for less than an hour per week or not

at all.

• ie percentage of non-readers among these students has nearly doubled—

climbing 18 points since they graduated from high school.

6 To Read or Not To Read

Percentage of Students Reading for Fun

Age 13 Age 17

Reading frequency 1984 2004 Change 1984 2004 Change

Never or hardly ever read 8% 13% +5 pp 9% 19% +10 pp

Read almost every day 35% 30% -5 pp 31% 22% -9 pp

pp = percentage points

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics

Percentage Who Read Almost Every Day for Fun

1984 1999 2004

9-year-olds 53% 54% 54%

13-year-olds 35% 28% 30%

17-year-olds 31% 25% 22%

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics

Percentage Who Read a Book the Previous Day (Outside School or Work)

In 2004

For at least 5 minutes For at least 30 minutes

8- to 10-year-olds 63% 40%

11- to 14-year-olds 44% 27%

15- to 18-year-olds 34% 26%

Source: The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, Generation M: Media in the Lives of 8-18 Year-Olds (#7251), 2005

Percentage of Literary Readers Among College Graduates

Change Rate of decline

1982 1992 2002 1982–2002 1982–2002

82% 75% 67% -15 pp -18%

pp = percentage points

Source: National Endowment for the Arts
• By the time they become college seniors, one in three students read nothing at

all for pleasure in a given week.

4.Teens and young adults spend less time reading than people of other age groups.

• Americans between 15 and 34 years of age devote less leisure time than older

age groups to reading anything at all.

• 15- to 24-year-olds spend only 7–10 minutes per day on voluntary reading—

about 60% less time than the average American.

To Read or Not To Read 7

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

21%

39% 

26% 26%

Total

None

Less than 1 hour

As high school seniors 

in 2004

As college freshmen

in 2005

Reading per week:

Percentage of U.S. College Freshmen Who Read Little or Nothing for Pleasure

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

21%

35% 

28% 28%

Total

None

Less than 1 hour 

As high school seniors

(mainly pre-2002)

As college seniors 

in 2005

Reading per week:

Percentage of U.S. College Seniors Who Read Little or Nothing for Pleasure

Source: University of California, Los Angeles, Higher Education Research Institute

Source: University of California, Los Angeles, Higher Education Research Institute
i U.S. Census Bureau, Computer

and Internet Use in the United

States, 1997 and 2003, and

Pew/Internet & American Life

Project, Home Broadband

Adoption 2007.

• By contrast, 15- to 24-year-olds spend 2 to 21⁄2 hours per day watching TV. iis

activity consumes the most leisure time for men and women of all ages.

• Literary reading declined significantly in a period of rising Internet use. From

1997–2003, home Internet use soared 53 percentage points among 18- to 24-

year-olds. By another estimate, the percentage of 18- to 29-year-olds with a

home broadband connection climbed 25 points from 2005 to 2007.

i

5. Even when reading does occur, it competes with other media. 6is multitasking suggests less focused engagement with a text.

• 58% of middle and high school students use other media while reading.

• Students report using media during 35% of their weekly reading time.

• 20% of their reading time is shared by TV-watching, video/computer gameplaying, instant messaging, e-mailing or Web surfing.

8 To Read or Not To Read

Percentage Using Other Media While Reading

7th-12th Graders in 2003–2004

% who use other media while reading

Most of the time 28%

Some of the time 30%

Most/some 58%

Little of the time 26%

Never 16%

Little/never 42%

Source: The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, Media Multitasking Among Youth: Prevalence, Predictors

and Pairings (# 7592), 2006

Average Time Spent Reading in 2006

Hours/minutes spent reading

Weekdays Weekends

and holidays

Total, 15 years and over :20 :26

15 to 24 years :07 :10

25 to 34 years :09 :11

35 to 44 years :12 :16

45 to 54 years :17 :24

55 to 64 years :30 :39

65 years and over :50 1:07

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics

Percentage of 18- to 24-Year-Olds Reading Literature

1982 1992 2002

Percentage reading literature 60% 53% 43%

Change from 1982 # -7 pp -17 pp

Rate of decline from 1982 # -12% -28%

pp = percentage points

Source: National Endowment for the Arts
ii For the purpose of this analysis,

“family” or “household” is used

instead of the Bureau of Labor

Statistics’ technical term “consumer unit.” In addition to families

and households, a consumer unit

may describe “a person living

alone or sharing a household with

others or living as a roomer in a

private home or lodging house or

in permanent living quarters in a

hotel or motel, but who is financially independent.”

iii Albert N. Greco and Robert M.

Wharton, Book Industry TRENDS

2007 (New York, N.Y.: Book

Industry Study Group, 2007),

various pages.

6. American families are spending less on books than at almost any other time

in the past two decades.

• Although nominal spending on books grew from 1985 to 2005, average annual

household spending on books dropped 14% when adjusted for inflation.

ii

• Over the same period, spending on reading materials dipped 7 percentage

points as a share of average household entertainment spending.

• Amid year-to-year fluctuations, consumer book sales peaked at 1.6 billion

units sold in 2000. From 2000 to 2006, however, they declined by 6%, or

100 million units.

iii

• ie number of books in a home is a significant predictor of academic

achievement.

To Read or Not To Read 9

$26

$28

$30

$32

$34

$36

1985 1989 1993 1997 2001 2005

Average Annual Spending on Books, by Consumer Unit

Adjusted for Inflation

The Consumer Price Index, 1982–1984 (less food and energy), was used to adjust for inflation.

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics

Percentage of Time Spent Reading While Using Other Media

7th- to 12th-Graders in 2003–2004

Percentage of reading time

Reading while:

Watching TV 11%

Listening to music 10%

Doing homework on the computer 3%

Playing videogames 3%

Playing computer games 2%

Using the computer (other) 2%

Instant messaging 2%

E-mailing 1%

Surfing websites 1%

Using any of the above media 35%

Source: The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, Media Multitasking Among Youth: Prevalence, Predictors

and Pairings (# 7592), 2006
B. A A R L W

As Americans read less, their reading skills worsen, especially among teenagers and

young males. By contrast, the average reading score of 9-year-olds has improved.

1. Reading scores for 17-year-olds are down.

• 17-year-old average reading scores began a slow downward trend in 1992.

• For more than 30 years, this age group has failed to sustain improvements in

reading scores.

• Reading test scores for 9-year-olds—who show no declines in voluntary

reading—are at an all-time high.

• ie disparity in reading skills improvement between 9-year-olds and 17-yearolds may reflect broader differences in the academic and social climate of

those age groups.

10 To Read or Not To Read

Average Test Scores by Number of Household Books, Grade 12 (2005–2006)

Average Average Average

science score civics score history score*

Reported number of

books at home

More than 100 161 167 305

26–100 147 150 289

11–25 132 134 275

0–10 122 123 265

* Science and civics scores range from 0 to 300. History scores range from 0 to 500.

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics

10

-6

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1999 2004

Reported as differences from 1984 reading scores.

Age 17

Age 9

Trend in Average Reading Scores for Students Ages 17 and 9

Test years occurred at irregular intervals.

Trend analysis based on data from the U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.
iv For 12th-graders, “Proficient”

corresponds with a reading score

of 302 or greater (out of 500).

2. Among high school seniors, the average score has declined for virtually all

levels of reading.

• Little more than one-third of high school seniors now read proficiently.

iv

• From 1992 to 2005, the average score declined for the bottom 90% of readers.

Only for the very best readers of 2005, the score held steady.

• ie reading gap is widening between males and females.

To Read or Not To Read 11

Average 12th-Grade Reading Scores by Gender

1992 2005

Female 297 292

Male 287 279

Male-female gap -10 -13

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics

Change in 12th-Grade Reading Scores, by Percentile: 1992 and 2005

Percentile 1992 2005 Change

90th 333 333 0

75th 315 313 -2

50th 294 288 -6

25th 271 262 -9

10th 249 235 -14

All score changes from 1992 are statistically significant.

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics

Percentage of 12th-Graders Reading at or Above the Proficient Level

1992 2005 Change Rate of decline

40% 35% -5 pp -13%

pp = percentage points

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics
v For adults, “Proficient” corresponds with a prose literacy score

of 340 or greater (out of 500).

vi Exceptions are adults still in

high school and those with a GED

or high school equivalency. In

both cases, score changes from

1992 to 2003 were not statistically

significant.

3. Reading proficiency rates are stagnant or declining in adults of both genders

and all education levels.

• ie percentage of men who read at a Proficient level has declined. For women,

the share of Proficient readers has stayed the same.

v

• Average reading scores have declined in adults of virtually all education levels.

vi

• Even among college graduates, reading proficiency has declined at a 20%–23%

rate.

4. Reading for pleasure correlates strongly with academic achievement.

• Voluntary readers are better readers and writers than non-readers.

• Children and teenagers who read for pleasure on a daily or weekly basis score

better on reading tests than infrequent readers.

• Frequent readers also score better on writing tests than non-readers or

infrequent readers.

12 To Read or Not To Read

Percentage of Adults Proficient in Reading Prose, by Gender

1992 2003 Change Rate of decline

Female 14% 14% 0 pp 0%

Male 16% 13% -3 pp -19%

Both genders 15% 13% -2 pp -13%

pp = percentage points

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics

Average Prose Literacy Scores of Adults, by Highest Level of Educational

Attainment: 1992 and 2003

Education level: 1992 2003 Change

Less than/some high school 216 207 -9

High school graduate 268 262 -6

Vocational/trade/business school 278 268 -10

Some college 292 287 -5

Associate’s/2-year degree 306 298 -8

Bachelor’s degree 325 314 -11

Graduate study/degree 340 327 -13

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics

Percentage of College Graduates Proficient in Reading Prose

1992 2003 Change Rate of decline

Bachelor’s degree 40% 31% -9 pp -23%

Graduate study/degree 51% 41% -10 pp -20%

pp = percentage points

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics
To Read or Not To Read 13

Almost every day

Once or twice a week

Once or twice a month

Never or hardly ever

302

292

285

274

Almost every day

Once or twice a week

Once or twice a month

Never or hardly ever

165

154

149

136

Average Reading Scores by Frequency of Reading for Fun

Grade 12 in 2005

Average Writing Scores by Frequency of Reading for Fun

Grade 12 in 2002

Reading scores range from 0 to 500.

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics

Writing scores range from 0 to 300.

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics
vii Statistics Canada and OECD,

Learning a Living: First Results of

the Adult Literacy and Life Skills

Survey, 2005, 145.

viii ie National Commission on

Writing, Writing: A Ticket to

Work...or a Ticket Out: A Survey of

Business Leaders, 2004, 29, and

Writing: A Powerful Message from

State Government, 2005, 32.

C. T D  R H C, S,  E

I

Advanced readers accrue personal, professional, and social advantages. Deficient

readers run higher risks of failure in all three areas.

1. Employers now rank reading and writing as top deficiencies in new hires.

• 38% of employers find high school graduates “deficient” in reading comprehension, while 63% rate this basic skill “very important.”

• “Written communications” tops the list of applied skills found lacking in high

school and college graduates alike.

• One in five U.S. workers read at a lower skill level than their job requires.

vii

• Remedial writing courses are estimated to cost more than $3.1 billion for large

corporate employers and $221 million for state employers.

viii

14 To Read or Not To Read

Percentage of Employers Who Rate High School Graduates as Deficient

in Basic Skills

Writing in English 72%

Foreign languages 62%

Mathematics 54%

History/geography 46%

Government/economics 46%

Science 45%

Reading comprehension 38%

Humanities/arts 31%

English language 21%

Source: The Conference Board, Are They Really Ready to Work?, 2006

Percentage of Employers Who Rate Job Entrants as Deficient in Applied Skills

High school graduates deficient in: College graduates deficient in:

Written communication 81% Written communication 28%

Leadership 73% Leadership 24%

Professionalism/work ethic 70% Professionalism/work ethic 19%

Critical thinking/problem solving 70% Creativity/innovation 17%

Lifelong learning/self direction 58% Lifelong learning/self-direction 14%

Source: The Conference Board, Are They Really Ready to Work?, 2006

Rated Very Important by Employers

Percentage of employers who rate the following basic skills as “very important” for high school graduates:

Reading comprehension 63%

English language 62%

Writing in English 49%

Mathematics 30%

Foreign languages 11%

Source: The Conference Board, Are They Really Ready to Work?, 2006
2. Good readers generally have more financially rewarding jobs.

• More than 60% of employed Proficient readers have jobs in management, or in

the business, financial, professional, and related sectors.

• Only 18% of Basic readers are employed in those fields.

• Proficient readers are 2.5 times as likely as Basic readers to be earning $850 or

more a week.

3. Less advanced readers report fewer opportunities for career growth.

• 38% of Basic readers said their reading level limited their job prospects.

• ie percentage of Below-Basic readers who reported this experience was 1.8

times greater.

• Only 4% of Proficient readers reported this experience.

To Read or Not To Read 15

Percentage of Full-Time Workers by Weekly Earnings and Reading Level in 2003

$850–$1,149 $1,150–$1,449 $1,450–$1,949 $1,950 or more Total earning $850

or more

Proficient 20% 13% 13% 12% 58%

Basic 12% 5% 2% 4% 23%

Below Basic 7% 3% 1% 2% 13%

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics

Percentage Employed in Management and Professional Occupations, by Reading

Level in 2003

Management, business Professional Total in either job

and financial and related category

Proficient 19% 42% 61%

Basic 8% 10% 18%

Below Basic 3% 4% 7%

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics

Percentage of Adults Who Said Their Reading Skills Limited Their Job

Opportunities, by Reading Level in 2003

A little Some A lot Total

Proficient 2% 1% 1% 4%

Basic 14% 15% 9% 38%

Below Basic 13% 22% 35% 70%

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics
ix National Endowment for the

Arts, 5e Arts and Civic Engagement: Involved in Arts, Involved in

Life, 2006.

x Ibid.

4. Good readers play a crucial role in enriching our cultural and civic life.

• Literary readers are more than 3 times as likely as non-readers to visit

museums, attend plays or concerts, and create artworks of their own.

• iey are also more likely to play sports, attend sporting events, or do outdoor

activities.

• 18- to 34-year-olds, whose reading rates are the lowest for any adult age group

under 65, show declines in cultural and civic participation.

ix

5. Good readers make good citizens.

• Literary readers are more than twice as likely as non-readers to volunteer or do

charity work.

x

• Adults who read well are more likely to volunteer than Basic and Below-Basic

readers.

16 To Read or Not To Read

Percentage of Adults Who Volunteered, by Reading Level in 2003

Less than Once a week Total who

once a week or more volunteered

Proficient 32% 25% 57%

Basic 16% 15% 31%

Below Basic 8% 10% 18%

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics

Percentage of Literary Readers Who Volunteered in 2002

Literary readers Non-readers Gap between groups

43% 16% -27 pp

pp = percentage points

Source: National Endowment for the Arts

Participation Rates for Literary Readers in 2002

Literary readers Non-readers Gap between groups

Visit art museums 43% 12% -31 pp

Attend plays or musicals 36% 10% -26 pp

Attend jazz or classical concerts 29% 9% -20 pp

Create photographs, paintings, or writings 32% 10% -22 pp

Attend sporting events 44% 27% -17 pp

Play sports 38% 24% -14 pp

Exercise 72% 40% -32 pp

Do outdoor activities 41% 22% -19 pp

pp = percentage points

Source: National Endowment for the Arts
xi Editorial Projects in Education,

Diplomas Count 2007: Ready for

What? Preparing Students for

College, Careers, and Life after

High School, Executive Summary.

• 84% of Proficient readers voted in the 2000 presidential election, compared

with 53% of Below-Basic readers.

6. Deficient readers are far more likely than skilled readers to be high school

dropouts.

• Half of America’s Below-Basic readers failed to complete high school—a

percentage gain of 5 points since 1992.

• One-third of readers at the Basic level dropped out of high school.

• For high school dropouts, the average reading score is 55 points lower than for

high school graduates—and the gap has grown since 1992.

• iis fact is especially troubling in light of recent estimates that only 70% of

high school students earn a diploma on time.

xi

To Read or Not To Read 17

Percentage of Adults Who Voted in the 2000 Presidential Election, by 2003

Reading Level

Proficient 84%

Basic 62%

Below Basic 53%

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics

Percentage of Adults at or Below “Basic” Prose Reading Level Who Did Not

Complete High School: 1992, 2003

Prose reading level

Below Basic Basic

1992 2003 Change 1992 2003 Change

45% 50% +5 pp 38% 33% -5 pp

pp = percentage points

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics

Average Prose Reading Scores for Adult High School Graduates and Those Who

Did Not Complete High School: 1992, 2003

Prose reading score

Highest level of education 1992 2003 Change

Less than/some high school 216 207 -9

High school graduate 268 262 -6

Gap between groups -52 -55

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics
xii U.S. Department of Education,

National Center for Education

Statistics, Literacy Behind Bars:

Results from the 2003 National

Assessment of Adult Literacy

Prison Survey, 2007, 77.

7. Deficient readers are more likely than skilled readers to be out ofthe workforce.

• More than half of Below-Basic readers are not in the workforce.

• 44% of Basic readers lack a full-time or part-time job—twice the percentage of

Proficient readers in that category.

8. Poor reading skills are endemic in the prison population.

• 56% of adult prisoners read at or below the Basic level.

• Adult prisoners have an average prose reading score of 257—18 points lower

than non-prisoners.

• Only 3% of adult prisoners read at a Proficient level.

• Low reading scores persist in prisoners nearing the end of their term, when

they are expected to return to family, society, and a more productive life.

xii

18 To Read or Not To Read

Percentage of Adult Prisoners and Household Populations by 2003 Reading Level

Prose reading level Household Prison Gap

Below Basic 14% 16% *+2 pp

Basic 29% 40% +11 pp

Intermediate 44% 41% *-3 pp

Proficient 13% 3% -10 pp

* = not statistically significant

pp = percentage points

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics

Percentage of Adults Employed Full-Time or Part-Time, by 2003 Reading Level

Proficient 78%

Basic 56%

Below Basic 45%

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics
Conclusion

Self-reported data on individual behavioral patterns, combined with national test

scores from the Department of Education and other sources, suggest three distinct

trends: a historical decline in voluntary reading rates among teenagers and young

adults; a gradual worsening of reading skills among older teens; and declining proficiency in adult readers.

ie Department of Education’s extensive data on voluntary reading patterns and

prose reading scores yield a fourth observation: frequency of reading for pleasure

correlates strongly with better test scores in reading and writing. Frequent readers

are thus more likely than infrequent or non-readers to demonstrate academic

achievement in those subjects.

From the diversity of data sources in this report, other themes emerge. Analyses

of voluntary reading and reading ability, and the social characteristics of advanced

and deficient readers, identify several discrepancies at a national level:

• Less reading for pleasure in late adolescence than in younger age groups

• Declines in reading test scores among 17-year-olds and high school seniors in

contrast to younger age groups and lower grade levels

• Among high school seniors, a wider rift in the reading scores of advanced and

deficient readers

• A male-female gap in reading proclivity and achievement levels

• A sharp divide in the reading skills of incarcerated adults versus non-prisoners

• Greater academic, professional, and civic benefits associated with high levels of

leisure reading and reading comprehension

Longitudinalstudies are needed to confirm and monitor the effects of these differences overtime. Future research also could explore factorssuch asincome, ethnicity,

region, and race, and how they might alter the relationship between voluntary reading, reading test scores, and other outcomes. Critically, further studies should weigh

the relative effectiveness and costs and benefits of programsto fosterlifelong reading

and skills development. For instance, such research could trace the effects of electronic media and “screen reading” on the development of readersin early childhood.

Recent studies of American time-use and consumer expenditure patterns highlight a series of choices lurking in the question “To read or not to read?” ie future

of reading rests on the daily decisions Americans will continue to make when confronted with an expanding menu of leisure goods and activities. ie import of these

national findings, however, is that reading frequently is a behavior to be cultivated

with the same zeal as academic achievement, financial orjob performance, and global

competitiveness.

Technical Note

iis report presents some of the most reliable and currently available statistics on

American reading rates, literacy, and reader characteristics. No attempt has been

made to explore methods for reading instruction, or to delve into racial, ethnic, or

income traits of voluntary readers, though age, gender, and education are discussed

at various pointsin the analyses. ie majority of the data stem from large, nationally

representative studies completed after the 2004 publication of the NEA’s Reading at

Risk report. Unless a footnote is provided,sourcesfor all data in this Executive SumTo Read or Not To Read 19
mary are given with each accompanying chart or table. All adult reading scores and

proficiency rates refer to the Department of Education’s prose literacy category.

Caution should be used in comparing results from the several studies cited in this

publication, asthe studies use different methodologies,survey populations,response

rates, and standard errors associated with the estimates, and the studies often were

designed to serve differentresearch aims. No definite causalrelationship can be made

between voluntary reading and reading proficiency, or between voluntary reading,

reading proficiency, and the reader characteristics noted in the report. Finally, except

where book reading orliterary reading rates are specifically mentioned, allreferences

to voluntary reading are intended to cover all types of reading materials.

Office of Research & Analysis

National Endowment for the Arts

20 To Read or Not To Read