A QUALITATIVE E-DELPHI STUDY

A Consensus Review of Strategies and Techniques Using Best Practices to Increase
Summer Reading Growth:
A QUALITATIVE E-DELPHI STUDY
by
Gretchen Carter
Copyright 2021
A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
Doctor of Educational Leadership
University of Phoenix
Commented [TB1]: Please fill this in
Commented [GS2R1]: Filled in
1
Introduction
Summer reading growth is essential for students to sustain skills and knowledge
acquired during the previous academic season. Students experience a loss in
mathematics, but economically disadvantaged students face a more considerable loss in
reading (Bowers & Schwarz, 2017). The academic achievement gap is a significant
problem in the United States. Summer learning loss adds to the academic achievement
gap (Seawright, 2017). Summer learning loss occurs at a traditional middle school in the
southwestern United States (Beach et al., 2018). Comprehension is a significant part of
the learning curve. According to research, children who engage in summer reading
initiatives enhance their reading comprehension and, therefore, perform better in
academic subjects than those who do not engage in such an initiative (Bowers &
Schwarz, 2017). The Southwest school district provides limited resources for literacy
development throughout the summer. However, the case under study still experiences
summer learning loss among its students, even with the emphasis placed on literacy.
Chapter one provides the background and implications of academic summer
school reading programs for elementary school students. The emphasis will be on a
summer curriculum hosted by a Southwest school district. The subject of summer reading
programs and the impact on tutorial performance in reading is mentioned as relevant to
the planned study. The problem, providing the premise for the study, the statement of
purpose, guiding analysis questions, and the study’s nature are discussed in this chapter.
The chapter concludes with an announcement of significance and a presentation of
relevant terms.
Background of the Problem
2
Educators have noticed that children from low socioeconomic backgrounds
experience significant gaps in learning during the summer months compared to their
peers. Furthermore, the gaps will only widen over time (Campbell et al., 2019). The
summer reading setback accounts for about 80% of the reading achievement difference,
contributing to this disparity (Campbell et al., 2019).
Children learn at the same rate during the school year. As a group, the reading
achievement of low-socioeconomic students typically declines during the summer
vacation period, while the reading achievement of children from more economically
advantaged families holds steady or increases modestly. Extended vacations from formal
education take students away from the classroom’s regular learning blueprint and into a
period when they are less likely to participate in official literacy programs (Chin et al.,
2020).
Parents reading with their children, plus the availability and use of educational
resources, are all part of a healthy home literacy environment. Different degrees of
parental participation in a home learning environment and a child’s lack of participation
in texts during a prolonged vacation might help evaluate probable variables leading to
summer learning setbacks (Chin et al., 2020). Reading declines in early elementary
grades show that, despite significant reading gains established in kindergarten and first
grade, the summer session between first and second grade is particularly problematic for
students who do not have opportunities to engage with reading during summer recess
(Seawright, 2017).
The lasting impact of low reading abilities in early grades is associated with low,
middle, and high school achievement. Thus, literacy loss must be considered (Beach et
3
al., 2018). Comprehensive information for parents through a user-friendly guide is the
most appropriate method to address this issue.
Summer reading loss is well documented and is more persistent among students
from low socioeconomic backgrounds who are already at risk of academic failure (de
Groot, 2021). Declines in academic achievement during summer break are more
prevalent and consistent for students from low socioeconomic backgrounds than students
from middle and higher social classes (Campbell et al., 2019). Over time, the breach
amplifies and leads to an achievement gap among students from disadvantaged
socioeconomic backgrounds. The summer reading loss issue has caused policymakers,
school districts, and other stakeholders throughout the United States to debate formal
year-round education for elementary and middle school students (Seawright, 2017).
In a typical school calendar, summer break for students averages 12 weeks (about
three months); this equates to a significant time when the educational process is
interrupted. During this time away from the structure and reinforcements of the regular
school day, home and family variables have influenced reading growth or regression in
young students (Campbell et al., 2019). For example, in a 12-week layoff, early learners
who lack access to print with limited opportunity to read the text at their independent
levels will often experience regression in fluency and comprehension skills (Hillier,
2021). Such regression is often seen in students from disadvantaged homes (McDaniel et
al., 2017).
Many parents from higher socioeconomic backgrounds provide reading
enrichment and continuous learning for their children during the summer (Beach et al.,
2018). Students who only continuously learn throughout the summer could lose up to
4
three months of reading progress, setting them further behind for the upcoming academic
school year (Campbell et al., 2019). Summer vacation inequalities in educational
opportunities and outcomes lead to uneven learning gains (Seawright, 2017). Limited
book access, difficulties in self-selecting books, the school calendar, socioeconomic
status, and the amount of information retained over the summer are all reasons for student
reading digressions (Capotosto, 2019). Further investigation is needed to explore
strategies to keep students engaged in reading growth throughout the summer to prevent
reading growth loss in the Southwest rural, low-socioeconomic school district.
There is no consensus in the research literature regarding the most useful
strategies and techniques to use to increase summer reading growth (Capotosto, 2019). In
addition, there are no available research studies regarding effective practices to increase
summer reading growth. The study addresses the gap in literature and aims to determine
effective practices for closing the academic achievement gap that occurs during the
summer within this school district.
Problem Statement
Proponents of the faucet theory believe literacy gaps occur during the summer
(McDaniel et al., 2017). During the summer break, students, on average, lose between a
month and three months of school-year learning and about 25 to 30 percent of schoolyear learning (Alexander et al., 2016; Atteberry & McEachin, 2016). Despite continued
efforts to close the achievement gap over the past decades, considerable disparities
remain. On average, summer vacations produce an annual achievement gap of
approximately three months between wealthy and poor students, biasing students from
more economically advantaged families (Alexander et al., 2001). Higher-income students
Commented [TB3]: Wait, you have no problem statement
in your problem statement section. Honestly, I would move
all of this to the background of the problem as that was short
and this is what was missing. Then see dissertation
alignment guide to write a small section here that includes
your problem statement in the context of your design and
that is cited in current literature showing best industry
practices have not been identified.
Commented [GS4R3]: section moved to the background
Commented [GS5R3]: added the problem statement
5
have the advantage of continued learning through vacation experiences and summer
programming (Morgan et al., 2019).
The loss of reading skills over the summer has been documented and is more
prevalent among students from poor socioeconomic backgrounds who are already at risk
of academic failure (Laurie et al., 2019). An academic analyst examined thirteen
epidemiological studies involving approximately 40,000 schoolchildren and discovered
that, on average, the reading competency status of pupils from lower-income households
declined significantly during the summer season. In contrast, the reading competency
levels of schoolchildren from middle-income households were enhanced (Capotosto,
2019).
The availability of reading materials has long been recognized as a factor in
differential reading development since students from low-income families frequently lack
access to a home library and therefore do not have the required study material. Primary
school reading slides reveal that despite massive reading improvements in preschool and
kindergarten, summer activity between first and second grade is incredibly stressful for
children, especially for children who do not have ways to be involved in reading
throughout summer break (Nicholson & Tiru, 2019). Because poor reading in early
elementary is related to lower high school attainment, the long-term consequences of
literacy decline must be acknowledged (McDaniel et al., 2017). Moreover, since no
effective practices and strategies are available to close the summer learning loss gap
completely, an e-Delphi study is being conducted.
To avoid bias, the team must remain consistent. As part of the district assessment
process, a team composed of building principals and literacy coaches analyzes the
6
students’ data. Teachers and administrators will identify students involved in the summer
school program.
Purpose of the Study
Using an e-Delphi study, a panel of education professionals will elicit consensus
about strategies and techniques to increase summer reading growth in a rural, lowsocioeconomic-status southwest school district. The school district is a small, highpoverty school district in southwest Mississippi. Ultimately, this study aims to determine
the most effective steps to solve the summer learning loss problem. Consequently, this
thorough literature review is being conducted as suggested (Volley, 2020).
Understanding the research on summer reading loss is imperative when
identifying ways to close the achievement gap (Volley, 2020). Later, through thorough
analysis, suitable parameters to close this issue of summer study loss will be established
along with strategies for effective implementation. Identifying the predictors of
successful reading can improve students’ academic achievement (Seawright, 2017).
Population and Sample
The study population and the sample should meet the expertise requirements,
including practical communication skills, education and experience on the issues,
capacity and compliance to participate, and enough time to complete the e-Delphi study
(Volley, 2020). The sample population will consist of district-level administrators,
literacy coaches, instructional coaches, interventionists, and the curriculum director.
The sample for this study will be selected based on the following criteria: years in
public school education with at least a minimum of ten years of experience as either a
state or national board-certified teacher in reading, English, language arts, or English as a
Commented [TB6]: This section still needs some work for
clarity. I’m having to search and think through what you are
saying to understand and am still not 100% sure I am clear
on your intentions. Be very clear and organized with your
writing and do not repeat information in different ways.
Commented [GS7R6]: Revised to clarify.
7
Second Language. Sample adequacy in qualitative inquiry pertains to the suitability of
the sample configuration and size (Nicholson & Tiru, 2019). According to the sample
size guidelines, 15 to 20 interviews are sufficient. The more valuable the data collected
from each participant, the fewer participants are required (Nodeland & Morris, 2018).
The e-Delphi study will consist of a sample size of 12 to 15, which should provide
satisfactory results (Nodeland & Morris, 2018). The minimum number of participants
depends on the study design (Beach & Traga Philippakos, 2020). To achieve data
saturation, a predetermined sample size of 12–15 education experts within the rural
Southwest school district will be interviewed. If consensus cannot be achieved among the
15 participants, the researcher will investigate beyond this number if necessary
(Sampson, 2019).
Significance of the Study
The overall findings of a preliminary review literature review indicated a
continued concern for the learning gap that occurs during summer break and the
implications for struggling learners (Garst & Ozier, 2015; Katzir et al., 2013; Pitcock &
Seidel, 2015; Whittingham & Rickman, 2015; Zvoch & Stevens, 2016). As this topic has
persisted, increased research has focused on how summer slide disproportionately affects
students from low-income homes (Allington et al., 2010; Blanton, 2015; Garst & Ozier,
2015; McGill-Franzen, Ward & Cahill, 2016; Suitts, 2015; Vale et al., 2013; Zvoch &
Stevens, 2015).
The adverse outcomes of summer reading loss are noteworthy. Summer reading
loss affects students throughout their academic careers. Students who cannot read at
grade level in third grade are less likely to graduate by age 18 than those who perform at
Commented [TB8]: Still needs more depth, review
dissertation alignment guide and also ensure it is aligned to
your design
Commented [GS9R8]: added: The adverse outcomes of
summer reading loss are noteworthy. Summer reading loss
impacts students throughout their academic careers. Students
who cannot read on grade level in the third grade are less
likely to graduate by age 18 than those who read at or above
grade level (Hernandez, 2012). The lasting implications of
descending literacy rates extend to placement in high school
classes, high school dropout rates, and college attendance
(Smith, 2011).
The results are even astounding for children who grow up
and live in destitution. According to Alexander, Entwisle &
Olsen (2007), children from disadvantaged backgrounds
experienced significant gaps in learning during the summer
months compared to their counterparts, and the gaps only
continued to widen over time. Studies have shown that
reading gaps widen each year between first and sixth grade if
students are not supplied adequate intervention (O’Connell,
2020). Identifying the potential benefits of summer reading
programs between the first and second grade year will
provide guidance about how sufficiently to help students at
risk for low reading achievement.
8
or above grade level (Hernandez, 2012). The lasting implications of descending literacy
rates extend to placement in high school classes, high school dropout rates, and college
attendance (Smith, 2011).
The results are even greater for children who grow up and live in poverty.
According to Alexander, Entwisle & Olsen (2007), children from disadvantaged
backgrounds experienced significant gaps in learning during the summer months
compared to their counterparts, and the gaps have continued to widen over time. Studies
have shown that reading gaps widen each year between first and sixth grade if students
are not provided with adequate intervention (O’Connell, 2020). To improve the
performance of students at risk of low reading achievement, it would be helpful to
identify the potential benefits of summer reading programs between the first and second
grade years.
The significance of this proposed study lies in its ability to provide district leaders
with guidance regarding whether summer enrichment programs can contribute to
reducing summer reading loss among at-risk middle school students from one academic
year to the next. Reaching a consensus regarding effective practices will be the
foundation for developing the most effective strategies for program development. The
ongoing study will identify different domains to help mitigate summer reading growth
loss by interviewing education experts. Curriculum directors and school district leaders
may benefit from this research by creating a common framework for designing summer
reading programs (O’Connell, 2020).
Nature of the Study
9
Qualitative research allows for ground theory designs to be created based on
experiences that allow researchers to organize their research. Qualitative research
explains how to apply instruments and collect data (Volley, 2020), while quantitative data
provides figures to support the study’s broad general conclusions. Qualitative data
provides the description and scope required for understanding their implications.
Understanding the disparities between these methodologies is critical to getting the
highest outcomes from them in the questionnaires (Olsen et al., 2019).
A qualitative method was chosen to explore techniques and strategies to reduce
summer reading loss. Qualitative research is helpful when it comes to understanding
experts’ perspectives and is exploratory (Himmel, 2012). The use of qualitative research
instead of quantitative research allows gathering different viewpoints. The qualitative
method was chosen because data could be collected through spoken or written
communication from participants (Cooper & Schindler, 2006). It is recommended to use
qualitative methods when it is not necessary to generalize the results and to investigate
the question “why?” (Savenye & Robinson, 2005).
Research Design
In comparison to other qualitative approaches, the Delphi method emphasizes
organized and anonymized interaction among individuals with competence on a specific
subject to reach consensus in sectors such as practice, organizational decision-making,
and policy (Pinho et al., 2020). Even though there are methodological guidelines in the
literature for utilizing the Delphi technique with quantitative data, there is much less
direction for those who want to use the Delphi technique with only qualitative data. Due
to its reliance on questionnaires and digital information gathering, the Delphi technique is
10
appropriate for developing practice theory in public and organizational settings, which
assists in maintaining study costs as low as possible (Sampson, 2020).
By analyzing themes and patterns among participants, the goal is to reach a
consensus regarding effective practices for increasing summer reading growth throughout
the summer months in a rural school district in southwest Mississippi. Since the current
E-Delphi method relies on examining an issue to understand that multiple viewpoints are
incorporated and valued (Beach & Traga Philippakos, 2020). By asking experts to
respond several times to a particular problem, the Delphi method allows the researcher to
reach a consensus about an issue (Sampson, 2020). For this reason, it is better suited than
other available research methodologies. Along with this, the E-Delphi research design is
suitable because the problem can be visibly defined using a panel of education
professionals to forecast the future of mitigating summer reading loss, as mentioned by
(Schmitt et al., 2019).
The panel of education experts will be contacted via Survey Monkey, an internet
program, to solicit and obtain consensus from a panel of education experts. Researchers
will use qualitative data analysis software instead of manual analysis to efficiently and
effectively organize the data collected in research today (Sampson, 2020). NVivo is
computer-assisted qualitative data analysis software used to determine themes. With the
help of this software, data groups can be sorted, sorted, and marked in text to form
descriptions (Schmitt et al., 2019).
A diverse group will share knowledge and opinions on strategies and techniques
to increase summer reading growth. The e-Delphi method provides versatility in
educational research (Sampson, 2020). In addition, the e-Delphi process allows education
11
expert panels to provide solutions to a problem when there is a lack of literature (Schmitt
et al., 2019).
The e-Delphi design for reducing summer reading loss will be subject to the
research questions, participation of the education expert panel, and feedback from the
panel. For effective communication related to the rounds of questioning, Survey Monkey
will be used to gain the education expert panel’s participation and the board’s feedback to
access survey forms online. These forms will be customized for this study. A user profile
is created, which includes a password and a user address. The format used for the three
rounds of questioning is online emailing. By using this tool, SurveyMonkey will always
be informed of the link to the survey.
In contrast to other qualitative research designs, such as ethnography, which
presents a past perspective, and case studies, which provide a contemporary viewpoint, eDelphi offers a future view (O’Connell, 2020). Ethnography gathers observations,
interviews, and documentary evidence to produce detailed and comprehensive accounts
of different social phenomena. For this qualitative study, Delphi research is the most
appropriate method, since it includes surveys for data collection, rounds of research
questioning based on the pilot study, as well as designing revised strategies and changes
to mitigate summer reading loss.
Research Questions
It has been documented that students lose academic growth achieved during the
school year during the summer break (Beach & Traga Philippakos, 2020). The research
questions guiding this study’s foundation are the prevalence of summer reading loss
among students not exposed to or encouraged to read at home or in summer programs.
12
SQ1: What is the consensus of opinion from a panel of professionals in education
regarding issues with summer reading loss across the summer?
SQ2: What is the consensus of opinion among a panel of education professionals
regarding mitigating strategies needed to improve summer reading loss and closing the
achievement gap?
Conceptual Framework
The Conceptual Framework of this dissertation represents how the author will
explore the problem and is affiliated with qualitative research (Laureate Education,
2016). The theoretical basis for this study is social learning theory and faucet theory.
Some scholars advocate incorporating existing theories into the design of a conceptual
framework (O’Connell, 2020). First, the author identifies this study’s conceptual
framework, which will be used to complete a program evaluation (Ayers, 2011).
The conceptual framework helps understand what government interventions were
taken and how external partners participated in the programs (Hall, 2022). Program
mediators and program components will measure the summer programs and their impact
on children’s learning curves. Social learning theory informs the study by explaining
human behavior through continuous reciprocal interaction between cognitive, behavioral,
and environmental influences. Social learning theory frames this study by explaining how
children imitate modeled behavior by observing others, the environment, and the mass
media (Sampson, 2020). At the same time, the faucet theory informs the study by
providing insight into how children access learning and reading materials during the
academic year.
Faucet Theory
13
Faucet theory, developed by Entwisle, Alexander, and Olson (1997), is the
assumption that during the academic school year, the faucet of resources flows for all
children; during the summer break, the faucet of resources is turned off (Rozelle &
Mackenzie, 2011). Faucet’s theory, as it relates to education, rests upon two chief
assumptions: 1) When children are in session, all children can access the curriculum and
receive instruction. However, during the summer recess, the learning resources are turned
off, and 2) The number of resources available to a middle-class child compared to a low
socioeconomic child may contribute to other summer learning loss gaps (Borman,
Benson, & Overman, 2005; Gershenson, 2013; Miller, 2007; Rozelle & Mackenzie,
2011; Zvoch & Stevens, 2013). For example, a typical 12-week summer produces a loss
of 2.5 months of previous learning in mathematics (Entwisle et al., 2001). By exploring
options to minimize the summer learning loss during the summer break, teachers and
administrators will close the gaps created each summer.
According to the faucet theory, students from low socioeconomic backgrounds
have limited opportunities to participate in academic activities during the summer break.
The limitations are caused by the ability to access books and other resources to support
learning and enhance reading skills when school is not in session. Students from mid-tohigh socioeconomic status often have readily available opportunities to access books,
resources, and learning experiences that reinforce their learning during the summer break.
A longitudinal investigation by Downey et al. (2004) revealed that economically
disadvantaged children have a summer learning loss of about 2.5 months greater than
non-economically underprivileged children.
14
The balanced school calendar proponents use Faucet Theory to support their
position (Entwisle, Alexander, & Olson, 2001). In 1997, Entwisle et al. Added to this
body of research and found similar patterns in a larger sample. Entwisle et al. (2001)
termed this phenomenon faucet theory, which describes the effects of summer vacations
and out-of-school time on students. Faucet theory depicts the school year as a time when
the faucet of resources and instruction flows but during the summer months the faucet is
turned off. For many students, summer is a time when resources are scarce.
According to the theory, children from low socioeconomic families perform
poorly academically compared to middle-class and wealthy families while focusing on
differences in schools and home environments (Beach & Traga Philippakos, 2020).
Students have access to quality programs, educators, support, and enrichment during
school. However, when students are not in school during the summer months, the flow of
resources is turned off, leaving economically disadvantaged students particularly
vulnerable to summer learning loss (Sampson, 2020).
In addition, U.S. (United States) students living in poverty regress over the
summer break in the skills and knowledge gained during the school year. To ensure that
summer learning is equitable for all students, researchers developed a program that is
enriched, literacy-focused, and focused on teaching, using the faucet theory (O’Connell,
2020). As a result, the school turned on the faucet of resources, and students’ literacy
growth was encouraged during the summer months (O’Connell, 2020).
The “faucet theory” can explain seasonal patterns. Once school had been in
session, the asset faucet had been turned on for every student, and everyone acquired it
equitably; when the education system was not in session, the asset faucet had been turned
15
off. During the summers, families from low socioeconomic backgrounds were unable to
compensate for the assets provided by the school, and their children’s accomplishments
plateaued or even declined. On the other hand, middle-class family members could
compensate for the school’s assets to a considerable extent, allowing their children’s pace
of growth, albeit at a slower rate (Sampson, 2020).
Social Learning Theory
Several scholars based their research on Albert Bandura’s social learning theory
from a societal context to understand how social learning theory can manifest in a
specific format in higher education (Sampson, 2020). Social learning theory (SLT)
consists of four steps: attention, retention, reproduction, and motivation (Beach & Traga
Philippakos, 2020). Social learning theory defines the dynamics of a relationship between
the model and the observer. Anyone’s behavior directly results from cognitive processes
and the environment through societal circumstances and events. For example, children
observe actions in their environment and mimic the actions that contribute to reading
growth lost during the summer (Sampson, 2020).
Social modeling and illustrations are highly effective educational tools. When
children see the benefits of an activity, they are more likely to perform that activity
themselves. If they see adverse consequences, they are more likely to refrain from
engaging in that behavior. Distinctive, new, and diverse situations frequently pique
students’ interests and make them stand out (Olsen et al., 2019). Students are more
inclined to listen if they notice certain students paying close attention.
To facilitate the learning process, teachers employ punishment and reward
systems. Social learning theory has a solid foundation in promoting self-efficacy through
16
constructive feedback. Children who receive positive reinforcement have general
confidence in themselves and their abilities; it stands out in their minds, and they want to
repeat this behavior (Nicholson & Tiru, 2019).
Definition of Terms
The systematic approach is used for the literature searches and the documentation.
It is an efficient and complete procedure for literature searches (Bramer, de Jonge,
Rethlefsen, Mast &Kleijnen, 2018). The keyword searches included areas relevant to the
subject and related discussion topics. Areas of inquiry specific to summer reading loss
expanded the search. The significant examination categories were: (a) achievement gap,
(b) economically disadvantaged, (c) Faucet Theory, (d) learning loss, (e) socioeconomic
status (SES), (f) summer reading loss, (g) summer slide, summer setback, or summer
drift, and (h) Title 1 campus.
The literature searches relevant to the study encompassed: summer reading
initiatives, family cooperation in summer reading, social approach theory to increase
summer reading practices, and programs to improve summer reading. The resources
utilized were from journals, magazines, resource books, and dissertations available on the
Internet and at several universities and public libraries. The University of Phoenix online
library provided resources through EBSCOhost, ProQuest, and ProQuest dissertation and
thesis. Google Scholar, a commercial search engine, was used to locate peer review
articles that were not available at the University of Phoenix or other online libraries.
For this study, the following terms are pertinent:
17
Achievement Gap. There is a statistically significant disparity in academic achievement
between students grouped according to their race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and
gender (Laurie, 2022).
Economically Disadvantaged. A student qualified for free or reduced-price meals under
the National School Lunch and Child Nutrition Program (2015-2016 PEIMS Data
Standards). For free meals, the income eligibility for a family of four is an annual salary
of $31,980. As of 2017, the income eligibility for reduced meals for a family of four is
$45,510 (United States Department of Agriculture, 2017).
Faucet Theory. It describes the phenomenon of a lack of resources for children from
economically disadvantaged homes (Nicholson & Tiru, 2019).
Learning loss. Specific or general loss of knowledge and skills or reversals in academic
progress, most commonly due to extended gaps or discontinuities in a student’s education
(Beach & Traga Philippakos, 2020).
Socioeconomic status (SES). Measures of social group prestige, typically based on
income and education (Nicholson & Tiru, 2019).
Summer reading loss. Children’s reading development deteriorates during summer
vacation when children are absent from the classroom and do not engage in formal
literacy programs (Chin et al., 2020).
Summer slide, summer setback, or summer drift. Describes learning loss that occurs
during breaks from school (Hillier, 2021).
Title 1 campus. The purpose of this study is to identify Title 1 schools that have at least
40% of their students from economically disadvantaged backgrounds (TEA, 2015).
Assumptions, Limitations, and Delimitations
Commented [TB10]: Every definition needs cited, they
are not bold
Commented [GS11R10]: added citation
18
Assumptions
The first assumption is that all participants will answer honestly. Therefore,
participants’ honesty is assumed when answering survey questions about strategies and
techniques to increase summer reading growth. Furthermore, the measurement instruments
used in this study are valid and reliable.
Furthermore, the meaning of this study is rooted in the participants’ experiences and
has limited generalizability. The findings have limited generalizability as they can only be
applied to a particular demographic and instance (Hillier, 2021). All the students in the
sample are representative of the total population of middle school students that attend a
rural, low-socioeconomic school in the Southwest. In addition, this study describes the
faucet theory, the belief that interruptions of learning and insufficient resources result in a
loss of academic skills and affect all students (Boulay & McChesney, 2021).
Considering the participants will not know the names of the other panel members
because of electronic questionnaires, the pressure of groupthink will not be present.
However, the format loses the positive aspects of group interaction (Jordan, 2010).
Consequently, the first possible limitation of this research is the openness of the
participants’ opinions and their inability to reach a consensus. Another potential limitation
of the study is that the participants may not represent the population (McDaniel et al.,
2017).
An expert panel of education professionals serving as district leaders in the targeted
school will conduct this qualitative study using the e-Delphi method. These professionals
meet expertise requirements, including practical communication skills, familiarity with and
knowledge of the issues, capacity, willingness to participate, and enough time to join the
19
e-Delphi study (Hillier, 2021). The selection of 12–15 participants is based on expertise
and experience in cloud computing security and is restricted to security strategies that focus
on data security and privacy.
Participants with a minimum of ten years of experience as state or national boardcertified in reading, English, language arts, or English as a Second Language qualify for
the study (McDaniel et al., 2017). As part of this study, a detailed description of the
participants’ backgrounds and the research process will be provided, ensuring that the
findings are transferrable. As a result, one can obtain information that will assist the study’s
outcome. In addition, the research results may be applicable and transferable to other
districts within the named region. A detailed description of the participants, methodology,
and results will help the reader assess the potential for transferability (Nicholson & Tiru,
2019).
Limitations
The research objectives might have been framed from a broad perspective. Due to
the lack of extensive experience in primary data collection in current research, the way data
is collected can have flaws. The sample size was chosen at the researcher’s discretion based
on the research question. If the sample size had been larger, it could have led to better
quantitative results than qualitative ones.
Literature review always holds a prominent place in research and needs to be
detailed. It helps to identify and explain the scope of the study and benefits from reflecting
on work done so far in the area. In addition, defining research objectives allows targeted
efforts to be made. However, if the topic is developing and research is still being conducted,
it is difficult to find the latest literature.
20
Moreover, the current research is based on old studies and will need to rely on
derived information that will need to be revised. The scope of discussion is also one of the
limitations of current research. One must observe trends for years and have the experience
to be proficient in conversation. His wisdom is that the researcher lacks both aspects and
conducts his research with guidance from mentors. In this way, the investigation may be
compromised at various levels due to the work of scholars.
Delimitations
A delimitation is a condition or parameter imposed to limit a study’s scope
(Bloomberg & Volpe, 2019). For example, the research is limited to the reading loss
suffered by students during summer break. The deceleration of academic growth is
affected by multiple factors, and reading loss is one of them. In the present study, the
research aim is to identify summer reading loss as one of the causes of slow academic
progress. The study does not cover parental intervention, equal opportunities for
education, discrimination based on caste, color, race, religion, the efficiency of teachers,
the effectiveness of the education system, parents’ income level, or the economic
environment in the country. To stay focused and obtain results, the scope of the research
was narrowed to only summer reading loss.
The study focuses on the theoretical background, the study’s objectives, its research
questions, and a few variables with a small sample size. Therefore, a particular sampling
technique is selected to help present the results more clearly and elaborately. Available
resources, local post-pandemic circumstances, permission considerations, ethical issues,
and time constraints support this technique. Social theory is part of the research because
reading cannot be practiced alone, and there is a need for a mentor, teacher, or guide to
Commented [TB12]: Ensure using 2nd level headings
where appropriate
Commented [GS13R12]: 2nd level headings inserted.
21
help children with reading. As learning is incorporated into a societal framework, social
theory is also an essential aspect of education.
Chapter Summary
Children from low socioeconomic backgrounds experience reading regression
during summer break. As a result, it takes weeks or months to regain those skills lost
when students return the following fall session. However, while high-poverty students
work tirelessly to regain lost skills, their peers who did not experience learning loss
continue to move along in the curriculum (Petty et al., 2017).
The phenomenon of summer learning loss was examined in a qualitative study.
The “faucet theory” explains the summer learning loss phenomenon. According to this
philosophy, when the faucet is turned on, it indicates that school is in session. During this
time, students from all socioeconomic backgrounds have comparable literacy gains.
However, when the faucet is turned off during summer break, students from higher
income levels continue to gain reading proficiency, while high-poverty students do not
make similar gains (Alexander et al., 2001).
Students who read over the summer have a more prominent chance of preserving
their reading skills. In addition, higher-income students have a more significant
advantage over high-poverty students. While higher-income students are exposed to rich
literacy learning experiences, lower-income students are included in the learning process.
The study’s results may assist administrators and school leaders in deciding whether
summer enrichment programs reduce summer reading growth loss in at-risk middle
school students from one academic year to the next.
22
Chapter 2 will discuss the contemporary literature relevant to this dissertation
research study. During the evaluation of the study, two strategies surfaced: home-based
and school based. Furthermore, self-learning has been proven to be the best method for
increasing literacy. Students are given a goal of reading nine books. If they achieve it,
they will receive a certificate of achievement. The research findings highlight the
possibility of minimizing the incidence of summer reading decline through the READS
approach.
23
Chapter 2
Literature Review
The lack of summer reading practices among students is explained in Chapter 1,
and the ways for its improvement are discussed. The conceptual framework based on the
social learning theory and the faucet theory will be further reviewed to address the survey
questions asked to help reduce summer reading loss. An in-depth literature review is
required to examine the alleviation of the problem and gather the necessary knowledge. A
literature review will be used to develop the chapter discussed below. An understanding
of keyword searches, which are effective for a research design, can be gained from this
document.
Chapter 2 is to describe the research on summer reading initiatives and the
impact on summer reading loss and achievement for high-poverty students. Additionally,
this chapter also addresses the purpose of summer reading initiatives, such as: preventing
summer reading loss and narrowing the achievement gap, the characteristics of effective
summer reading initiatives, in addition to that, the diverse types of Summer Reading
Programs also known as Summer Reading Programs (SRPs), such as library programs,
summer school, access to books and summer camps, were also reviewed. Finally, the
chapter provides insight into how summer reading initiatives impact student achievement
for high-poverty students. Additionally, it also focuses on the innovative approaches that
can be considered to address and mitigate the issues that arise about summer reading loss
in students below the poverty line.
Title Searches and Documentation
Commented [TB14]: You have some good information in
here overall but it will need reorganized a bit. Remember
you start with historical content which lays the foundation
and is older than 5 years and then the next is current content
which is within 5 years, each sections have subsections like
you have here. Also apply all feedback regarding grammar to
this section as well. Be sure you are clearly moving from
broad to narrow as the subsections emerge, you should even
have 3rd level headings as needed within each section.
Commented [GS15R14]: Re-organized sections to start
with historical content
Commented [TB16]: Needs more info like search engines,
ect. See dissertation alignment guide.
Commented [GS17R16]: search engine added
Commented [GS18R16]: table inserted. data in progress
24
A systematic approach is used to conduct literature searches and document the
findings. The method used by Bramer, de Jonge, Rethlefsen, Mast & Kleijnen enables
efficient and complete literature searches (Bramer, de Jonge, Rethlefsen, Mast &
Kleijnen, 2018). In addition, this approach adds several words to the search process to
obtain the most relevant results about the topic. The keywords used for this purpose are
summer reading, summer reading loss, summer reading initiatives, family cooperation in
summer reading, social approach theory to increase summer reading practices, and
summer reading programs.
Table 1 provides an overview of the literature according to the publication year.
Table 1
Overview of References According to Source and Publication Year

Publication Year	Peer-Reviewed Articles	Books	Websites
Pre-2015	28	2	3
2016	12
2017	12	2
2018	10
2019	9	4
2020	6	1
2021	3	1
Total

Historical Content
The historical content of the literature review defined the concept of the loss of
summer reading. It is an important aspect to grow the literacy in children and indulge
25
them in healthy practices (Mraz & Rasinski, 2007). Under this area of relevant searches,
the audience can learn about the effects of reading activities and their achievements
(Kim, 2007). The subsections are narrowed down to the lower socio-economic groups,
which are not blessed with the facilities of summer reading.
Summer reading is a setback for such groups due to a lack of knowledge and
available materials (Allington et al., 2010). The search is further narrowed down to the
ethnic group divisions, which results in an achievement gap for the children. In addition,
the whites and the mixed race are discriminated which reduces the chance of summer
reading among them (Kim, 2004).
Reading and Leisure
According to the research study conducted by Allington et al., the most critical
components of a summer reading program included access to a minimum of 12 books
that were self-selected by students. The authors believed that the students would be
inspired to read the books if they had the choice to pick them (Allington et al., 2010). The
findings illustrate that “providing easy access to self-selected books for summer reading
over successive years does limit summer reading setbacks” (Allington et al., 2010, p.
422).
It is essential to have the students select their books; however, guidance must be
provided to assure that the selected books are ones that the children can read
independently. For example, in the Kim and White study (2011), the students selected
their books and did not improve their reading levels after taking part in the program.
A conceivable explanation is that many children chose books that were of self- interest.
67% of the children picked books with a mean readability level compatible with their
Commented [TB19]: Must follow the dissertation
alignment guide, missing headings and subheadings, then
confused if this should be a second level heading in the
historical section?
Commented [GS20R19]: Added to the introduction,
Titles Searches and Documentation, historical and current
contents sections, added conceptual framework literature,
methodology literature, research design literature,
conclusion, chapter summary, and 2nd level headers.
Commented [TB21]: These would all be second level
headings
Commented [TB22]: I won’t point out all the pronouns but
do a find/search or review to eliminate them.
26
independent reading level. Unfortunately, other studies have found that struggling readers
are likely to select books they cannot read, leading to frustration, failing to gain reading
level, vocabulary, or reading rate (Donovan et al., 2000).
Summer Reading Loss
Summer reading loss has been of great concern throughout public education for
decades. It has been identified as the culprit in lowering reading achievement levels
(Whittingham & Rickman, 2015). Summer reading loss is characterized as the decline in
children’s reading growth that can ensue during the summer months when children are no
longer partaking in formal literacy programs or summer enrichment exercises associated
with children from advantaged households (Vale et al., 2013).
Allington and McGill-Franzen (2003a) suggested that summer reading loss
happens when the reading proficiency of high-poverty students drops while middle-highincome students experience growth. Duncan (2012) regarded summer learning loss as the
passage of losing information, such as the skills and knowledge students gain during the
school year. The average summer break induces an annual achievement gap of 3 months
between advantaged and disadvantaged students (Vale et al., 2013).
Evans (2005) implied that the contrast between reading development and
achievement among students from advantaged and disadvantaged dwellings is
interconnected to the family’s home and community environment, available resources,
and limited or rich experiences. The achievement gap ensues regardless of each group’s
academic gains during the scholastic year. To experience gains instead of reading loss
over the summer, high-poverty students must partake in academic experiences like those
of their advantaged peers (Edmonds et al., 2005).
Commented [TB23]: formatting
Commented [GS24R23]: formatting corrected.
Commented [TB25]: You must follow the headings for
chapter 2 so this section should be the historical context. See
the dissertation alignment guide.
Commented [GS26R25]: re-organized headers to follow
Commented [TB27]: cite
Commented [GS28R27]: cited
27
The summer presents a notable change for high-poverty students, resulting in a
scarcity of access to educational resources, which leads to opportunity gaps between
advantaged and disadvantaged students. One of the climatic areas influenced by family
income is educational outcomes. Without help, high-poverty students must rely on their
families and communities to supply support throughout the summer (Alexander et al.,
2001).
Summer Programs
Edmonds et al. (2009) presented that evidence-based summer reading programs
have been implemented throughout various communities and school districts to address
the summer learning loss deficits within high-poverty communities that occur over the
summer. Summer reading programs stimulate students to read more and enthral them in a
fun learning experience through reading (Krashen & Shin, 2004). Nonetheless, literacy
skills diminish over the summer, especially for high-poverty students. Therefore,
providing inviting learning experiences that address reading deficiencies and eliminate
summer reading loss (Edmonds et al., 2009) is critical.
Summer Reading Programs (SRPs) are interventions many school districts use to
reduce summer reading loss. Policymakers have embraced two summer interventions,
classroom-based and home-based interventions. A classroom teacher to target skill
deficiencies incorporates classroom-based instructional strategies. Home-based
interventions are cost-efficient interventions provided within the home to help mitigate
summer reading loss among high-poverty students (Kim & Quinn, 2013; McCombs et al.,
2011).
Role of Government
Commented [TB29]: Need three sentences, update
throughout
Commented [GS30R29]: added another sentence
28
Kim et al. (2016) reflected the needs of high-poverty schools looking for
intervention from policymakers. The intervention in the form of a program, which can be
applied at the end of the school year until school opens for the next session, will
encourage home-based summer reading routines. In addition, programs such as Reading
Recovery and Success for All can help develop reading habits at a large scale right from
the beginning.
There is a drop in reading skills performance in the elementary and middle grades due to
families’ low income. Therefore, the need for developing a program, which can cater to the
requirements of summer reading and school plans, should be developed so that quality
literacy learning opportunities can be given to children. Some teachers used project-based
learning, small group, educational games, hands-on, and collaborative groups during
summer school, which were their standard practices during the regular academic school
year (Almus & Dogan, 2016).Public and Neighborhood Library Interventions
Public and neighborhood Summer Reading Programs are one solution to combat
summer learning loss. Balsen and Moore (2010) suggested that children benefit from
SRPs that combine elements of youth development and academic achievement to address
summer reading loss effectively. Tucker and Moreillon (2015) also mentioned that public
libraries could extend their support by giving access to children after school and during
the holidays. As a result, literacy will be maintained year-round, and an appreciation for
books will be developed.
It is required that public librarians promote summer reading programs in school,
thus encouraging students to register on time. It can expand its reach to daycare centers,
nannies, other day and night camps, and locations where students prefer to spend time
29
after school by recognizing children’s efforts using public library services and improving
their reading skills. Public libraries, in a joint effort with school libraries, can organize
book festivals inviting authors to sign copies and share the stories from the book and
other events to attract children, parents, and teachers.
Digitizing Reading Habits
Incorporating technology such as digital storytelling, online reference sources,
and video-sharing devices are further examples of engaging activities that can help
mitigate summer reading loss (Laverick, 2014). For instance, in a six-week summer
program, using video cameras and audio recorders improved reading proficiency as
measured in both formal and informal benchmark assessments. Furthermore, reading
professionals who responded to study questionnaires reported that students paid attention
more during instruction, were able to set attainable self-goals and felt more of a sense of
ownership toward their learning when using technology (Laverick, 2014).
Studies on using digital readers have found that students improved their reading
comprehension and increased motivation. Cuevas et al. (2012) found that students that
used computer reading modules surpassed those who used textbooks for reading
comprehension and reading basis with the help of cognitive tools from the computer
reading package. The digital reading setting provides students with reading exercises that
are individualized, convenient, and productive for diverse learners.
The digital learning environment provides readers with the tools they need to
build strategic reading skills (Rose & Dalton, 2009). Digital readers help students connect
literacy activities in the classroom and outside the school environment (Larson, 2009).
Reading digital text promotes self-esteem, motivation, collaboration, and social
30
interaction (Bromley, 2010). Readers can deliver feedback on the text as they read by
inserting comments. Digital reading broadens students’ reading experiences (Verezub et
al., 2008). Students engage in various reading strategies when reading digital text.
Anderson (2003) saw that students gain more interest in reading meanwhile, find ways to
seek more information through various support tools.
Motivation for Reading
According to Lindley et al. (2016), reading lists are essential for the child because
it helps to identify what kind of reading experiences, they gained from them. There has
been a spotlight on this practice since the days when people used to visit public libraries.
The summer reading season is an excellent opportunity to foster a love of reading.
However, children lose touch with it during summer vacation, which leads to a loss of
skills. Lindley et al. As noted, (2016), summer learning loss, which breaks the chain of
cumulative gains due to barriers, is regular schooling hours, either due to vacations,
dropouts, or leaves.
Children tend to forget during this time; they do not continue following
instructions and require intervention when they return to school. A school calendar
structure or paying attention at home may be to blame for this. Reading comprehension is
the centra area of decline for all school students. For low-income households, this rate is
even higher. In high-income and middle-income groups, children lose one month of
reading skill time, while low-income groups lose two months of equivalent reading time.
Inequality exists within the education system and among the schools that accept students.
Environmental Support
31
Children in different income groups kept pace with their studies but needed to
demonstrate adequate reading skills. Due to fewer opportunities, lower-income groups
have a reduced ability to grow academically. Parents in higher-income groups are more
considerate and provide more resources to their children’s education (Lindley et al.
(2016)
Parents in higher-income groups also prefer to give personal attention to the areas
where their child needs improvement and supply supplement learning and regular
schooling (Mraz et al., 2007). Reading materials are essential to enhance reading skills.
High-poverty schools are selected randomly for book grants, which helps them show a
significant increase in the children’s reading skills. Socioeconomic status also affects the
learning patterns of children in their homes.
In low-income groups, their home environment could be more conducive due to
language issues, less educated parents, or more prominent families. Lindley et al. (2016)
suggested that to increase reading motivation among students, one must understand the
environment inside and outside the school. Earlier, children could choose between what
they wanted to read and whatnot, but as time progressed, they were told to read
something specific that might or might not interest them.
As per the National Reading Panel report of 2000, reading improves and becomes
more vigorous as children spend more hours on it. However, the research found that the
ability to select good books decreases as the student moves to a higher grade. As a result,
reading habits are negatively affected. To keep them motivated, it is necessary to let them
choose the book’s length and title themselves and keep guiding them regarding how
Commented [TB31]: Citations?
Commented [GS32R31]: added citations: Lindley et al.
(2016) and (Mraz et al.,2007)
32
books should be selected. In addition, mentoring allows students to gain sensitivity to the
topic and learn valuable lessons.
Student-based Reading Skills Promotion
The numbers of enrollments were higher in summer reading camps because no
child wanted to be kept. More than 90% of students met the assessment criteria and
cleared alternative assessments with passing scores. As a result, they proved they were
eligible for promotion to fourth grade. In 2015, the Mississippi Department of Education
changed assessments and introduced revised mandates. Third-grade students attended
fewer reading camps in 2015 due to reasonable cause exemptions based on their
performance.
In 2016 and 2017, these numbers significantly changed as only a few students
were promoted to fourth grade. Based on the results of this study, the Mississippi
Department of Education’s efforts to encourage summer reading were successful. Many
children and their families understand the importance of summer reading camps.
Therefore, the department approved the MKAS to assess the third grader’s progress.
The policies also considered the teaching practices that can ensure highperformance output among children. It was a limitation to convince policymakers, as
collecting evidence and numbers needed time and money. In addition, research in this
field must supply valid data to the legislators. In third grade, the failure rate was high; as
a result, the need to amend the assessment policy was needed. It led to the popularity of
summer reading, allowing teachers to intervene in the process.
Innovative Strategies to Prevent Summer Reading Loss
33
Tucker and Moreillon (2015) mentioned a partnership between the public library,
university course, and school library as an opportunity to overcome summer reading loss.
It is known that when students begin to read independently, they improve their reading
ability and stay prepared for the next grade. The public library is an excellent means of
accessing books when the school library is shut down due to holidays. Many programs
are run with the collaboration of public and school libraries.
It helps to reach children in significant numbers, thus helping them with books in
areas where such libraries are absent or found at a distance. Tucker and Moreillon (2015)
shared that some librarians from schools and public libraries gathered to generate
feedback from others about the library and its availability in the areas where their
students live. It helped them to collaborate their efforts with the intention of summer
reading.
The study found that summer reading loss can be reduced, and progress can be
made if a goal is established. In addition, these collaborations can provide support for
children who are poor or do not have enough resources. Children in kindergarten and first
grade have benefited from the program as it has impacted low-income groups. Parents
also realized the importance of summer reading and the readiness of children for the
following year.
Kerry et al. (2003) reported that summer learning loss is more pronounced in
children from low-income families as school is the only place for them to gain skills and
education. Therefore, they suggested supplying summer camps and arranging various
holiday activities to resolve this issue of summer inequalities. Mraz et al. (2007) reported
a significant difference in the achievement gap between high-socioeconomic and low
34
socioeconomic students. The findings concluded that the difference in socioeconomic
status is a substantial reason for summer reading loss.
Alexander et al. (2007) reported that a substantial academic achievement gap
exists between the wealthy and underprivileged children and between the children of
racial and ethnic minority families and majority classes. Moreover, this gap widens
during summer break. The gap develops because disadvantaged children, due to school
breaks and no access to any summer camp or activity class, do not learn anything new or
revise their earlier facts during the summer. At the same time, wealthy students can easily
afford different activity classes, summer camps, and tuition classes and develop their
knowledge and skills. Alexander et al. (2007) mentioned that these gaps affected the later
schooling outcomes of children. The authors suggested that sustained interventions like
high-quality summer programs and activity classes for students of all socioeconomic
groups should be arranged at the school or community level to prevent the achievement
gap and summer learning loss.
In their study, Bell et al. (2007) reported that the center for summer learning
examined different summer program models and defined nine characteristics of an
effective summer program. These are the proactive approach toward summer learning,
advanced planning, accelerating learning, youth development, staff development,
leadership, strategic partnerships, evaluation, and commitment to improving program
sustainability and cost-effectiveness. Bell reported that implementing these programs can
effectively minimize summer reading loss.
Due to numerous factors, including lack of funding, planning, personnel, and
resources, school leaders need help addressing this challenge year after year. Based on
35
the above reviews and analyses, the conclusion has been reached that summer learning
loss is a problem for students that must be minimized or eliminated by implementing the
suggested methodologies or strategies. Thus, the investigator hopes that, through this
research, school leaders will become better equipped to improve reading achievement by
eliminating summer slides.
Current Content
The current content on summer reading is improved, aiming to provide an
opportunity for each student. Virtual reading is introduced for such purposes (Washburn
et al., 2021). Reading using virtual materials could be accessed and availed by all,
reducing the negative impacts on socioeconomic status.
However, here, the sub-sections include the side effects of using technology such
as computers for summer reading (Pindiprolu & Marks, 2020). Students are primarily
diverted in the process, which the family can address. Family reading events motivate
children to adopt summer reading practices (Borman & Yang, 2019). The sub-section of
the searches is narrowed down to the social theory approach to summer reading loss,
which can be addressed through several community programs (Hogg, 2018).
Reading and Leisure
Further, chapter two stresses summer leisure and connects it with books proven to
be instrumental in alluring the audience towards the activity and making it an inseparable
part of their lifestyle. Finally, this chapter will take the reader on a tour of the complexities
of life, which diverts the mind toward reading. It will take them to resorts, libraries, rivers,
parks, forests, and public places so that they view the world from a new perspective
(Harrington-Lueker, 2018). It also gives them fascinating stories so that people collect a
36
wide variety of experiences, such as the national movement of New York, Catholic circles,
and the powerful Chautauqua movement.
In this chapter, we explore summer reading as a respectable activity, which is
essential for culture and a means of self-improvement. The Nineteenth century was a period
when reading related to social identity changed the consumer culture of America. The
middle class started responding to their surroundings and changes and accepted reading as
a part of summer leisure. Harrington-Lueker (2018) described the history of summer
reading. The only thing that needs to be added to the book is the play scripts. Literature is
an extraordinary example of how print culture leads to reading culture in New York.
Slaughter (2019) presented a qualitative literature analysis for eighth graders.
Through this multicultural approach, teachers are responsible for exposing students to a
broad range of information to develop their interests and knowledge. The US (United
States) curriculum is white-centric, which promotes monoculturalism. In addition, white
teachers are not interested in teaching other colored students. The educational system and
colorblind approaches have impacted the cultural knowledge of the teaching community.
It has been seen that multiculturalism makes children culturally aware and increases
their competency in different fields. However, the colorblind approach leads the cultural
narrative in a single direction and encourages racial discrimination. Children’s educational
setup has been negatively affected, causing alarm in colored communities. Slaughter
(2019) suggested that it is essential to understand how teachers address the problem of
multiculturalism in their classes and what they feel personally about it.
Summer Reading Loss
37
According to Kim (2021), the summer reading is also affected due to the ethnic
achievement gap. Many students from families earning low income and holding minority
places in society suffer reading losses. If the Faucet Theory is considered, then school
days help turn on the educational resources, resulting in remarkable learning gains for
students from different economic and social backgrounds.
The number of books and the hours spent reading are also affected by summer
reading, which can be counted as an achievement. Policymakers have developed many
strategies to encourage students to develop reading habits independently and access
quality books. The traditional summer programs are a boon for children who want to
improve their reading skills.
For students, summer is a season to calm down and enjoy since there is no school
in summer. The concept of summer school breaks was started because schools become
uninhabitable for students in most places due to high summer heat. However, these
summer breaks relax students and create a significant gap in their studies and learning
processes. It is reported from various surveys that due to these summer breaks; an
average student loses around 17–34% of their earlier learning skills during the summer
holidays as they get disconnected from their studies. Although these breaks are common
for all the students, they still affect the students of low-socioeconomic status most.
Summer reading loss is a critical factor to the achievement gap between students from
advantaged and disadvantaged homes (Becnel et al., 2017). These differences arise
because students of high-income families can afford to join various summer activity
classes and camps to nourish their skills.
38
In contrast, students from low–income classes cannot afford them. A significant
achievement gap exists between students of different socioeconomic backgrounds.
Summer reading or learning loss is responsible for this difference. Some people
questioned the existence of summer reading loss and wondered if it genuinely existed, so
to confirm its existence, various investigations were conducted. These studies concluded
that summer reading loss is a significant issue of concern for schools across the globe and
is a documented reality for many students.
In this literature review, different studies on the investigation of summer learning
loss and the possible ways to minimize it are thoroughly reviewed and discussed. For
instance, Campbell et al. (2019) investigated 5113 class four students to examine their
reading developments during the summer. Their investigations found that achievement
gains occurred during summer in the students in the lowest two quartiles; however,
limited reading growth was achieved in the same students throughout the academic year.
While, for students in the upper two quartiles, reading loss and limited growth were
reported during summer, compared to the continuous reading growth all through the
academic year. These findings confirmed that reading loss affects the student’s growth
during the summer.
Similarly, Slade et al. (2017) mentioned that summer learning loss is a wellknown phenomenon in North America. After an extended school break in North America,
the authors analyzed the results of early grade reading assessments for students. Slade et
al. (2017) reported a significant decrease in students’ reading skills and academic
performance. However, there was no gender-based discrimination concerning summer
39
reading loss. They calculated significant average reductions of 0.38 standard deviations
during the summer holidays or the transition break between the two grades.
Kuhfeld et al. (2019) analyzed the data of 3.4 million students and reported that
summer learning loss is responsible for the drop in performance of students between the
spring and fall seasons. The authors propose that the school year be lengthened to prevent
the most significant loss of students’ study time during the summer. In addition, students
must have access to specific summer reading programs. Faith et al. (2019) studied 235
students in the socioeconomically disadvantaged area, 120 in Grade 2 and 115 in Grade
3, to investigate summer reading loss. Before and after the summer holidays, the
researchers examined the participants’ reading skills, word comprehension, and reading
comprehension. The study found a significant difference in children’s reading
performance in different economic classes. Students should be encouraged to read books
at home during the summer break and record their reading on a digital platform during
the summer break.
Kromydas et al. (2022) performed a questionnaire-based linear and logistic
regression analysis to investigate the effect of summer holidays on inequalities in
children and their mental health. Children aged 7 to 14 were studied. It was concluded
that mental health inequalities among children worsen during the school summer
holidays. In addition, Broekman et al. (2021) examined the summer slide in students’
academic skills during the summer holidays by analyzing the arithmetic testing of 932
third graders. Again, a substantial summer learning loss was observed, with a 0.26
standard deviation decline in students’ academic performance post-summer compared to
pre-summer.
40
Summer Programs
Schools also encourage students to keep reading journals. Students mention the titles of
the books they read during their summer vacations, and schools reward them by selecting
books and keeping a journal. Recognizing the efforts of summer readers and rewarding
them encourages them to improve their reading skills. In addition, some reading
programs are designed to promote inside and outside reading so students can transition to
independent reading.
These practices improved fluency and understanding of the language.
Accessibility to books is another factor that ensures the success of the strategies, as
mentioned earlier. The research conducted by Kim (2021) reflects that ethnic
membership in society is highly responsible for the summer reading effectiveness in
ethnic groups. The other factor considered was that when the school opened, the summer
reading habits of students were discussed with them.
In addition, parental surveys and reading frequencies were part of the analysis.
Students explored strategies such as drafting reports, publishing their work on online
platforms or in school magazines, and doing projects requested by teachers at middle
school students. A statement by Kim (2021) proposed that teachers should be rewarded
for instilling a reading habit by sharing books and activities that develop interest.
Students can be motivated to participate in writing activities related to their summer
reading to reverse the summer dip. Within these programs, students are given access to
books to practice communication skills and develop a love and passion for reading (Small
et al., 2017).
41
When the session ends, students should keep involved in the writing activity,
which will give students a chance to read books somewhere between 10 and 12. Any
ethnic gap in schooling systems towards children should be addressed through diverse
reading literature made available to them. Kim (2021) feels the need for a detailed
experiment to collect evidence on the effectiveness of summer reading on a larger scale.
Borman et al. (2021) mentioned that students typically lose one month of reading
practice if summer reading initiatives are not taken. It affects their reading skills and
knowledge reached out of it. It has been found that students from low-income groups
primarily suffer as they do not get access to enjoy reading books, nor do they get
guidance during holidays about the same.
African American and Latino students face more losses. The widened income gap
is a piece of considerable evidence for loss. It has also been said by Borman et al. (2021)
that children show a slow learning trajectory in reading and math subjects. Due to
summer vacations and low income, children from these groups are left with limited or no
access to resources. In addition, interventions are also stressed across the summer to
significantly help with learning.
Interventions
Two strategies have floated to the surface during the review of the article –
school-based and home-based. The school-based intervention guides that the activities
designed by teachers for students and given in school are school-based interventions.
Home-based activities such as writing a review or creating a new story can be given
during holidays or as homework. These are also cost-effective strategies because it
depends on the quality and quantity of the books the student reads (Borman et al., 2021).
42
In addition, self-learning has always been proven as a method for literacy growth.
Intrinsically motivated students see reading activities as positive and rewarding
(Schaffner & ng (Schaffner & Schiefele, 2016). A new and unique program offers
reading grants to students in grades 2-9, so they can read new books without purchasing
them. The program is compatible with both school- and home-based interventions.
Policymakers have stressed that the atmosphere at school and home has distinct features
which create a differentiated impact on the reading skills and growth of the child
(Borman et al., 2021).1).
A target of reading nine books is given to the student; if they meet it, they get a
certificate of accomplishment. Schools also have taken the initiative to introduce 150
titles to students every year according to the class and make them aware of the sample
books available in the school. School’ officials also invite parents, caretakers, and
guardians to attend the event and get equipped with the information. By engaging in this
activity, you can develop a more informed conscience, develop reading habits, and
improve your language skills.
Hence, they can perform the activity with an elevated level of motivation and
even refer others for the same. Borman et al. (2021) also said that many children lost
reading hours due to the pandemic, and these initiatives helped keep their practice on
track. These programs can also help parents and children to plan their reading exercises
so that transportation issues can be resolved, and a better reading community can be
developed.
Role of Government
43
Kim et al. (2021) mentioned a reading intervention, READS (Reading Enhances
Achievement During Summer), introduced to increase students’ reading performance and
measure the effects of reading comprehension. The study was divided into two parts: As
a first step, children should be given books that are interesting to them as well as those
that are at their level; as a second step, teachers should create comprehension plans and
those that can be implemented at the end of the school year. The author also found that
earlier evidence about READS supported that it is suitable for short-term learning.
Besides this, it is also necessary to involve and educate parents about summer reading to
help their children with reading activities (Kim et al., 2021).
The findings discussed in the research point toward the positivity of reducing the
impact of summer reading loss through the READS strategy. It is a hybrid form of
intervention that depends on the initiatives taken by the child and the support provided by
the parents during summertime. The reading instructions are given in school and the time
parents spend practicing those instructions help build a comprehension routine and better
understand the child’s title.
READS strategy
The child’s interest is identified, and books are suggested to them. It facilitates the
child’s ability to comprehend information and empowers them to read independently
without assistance from the teacher. In addition, once parents understand the
comprehension routine, it will be easy for them to support their child. Families will
actively take part and use the books suggested by the school as a part of the READS
program (Kim et al., 2021).
44
However, specific dimensions can help extend the future study scope. For
instance: a more significant sample of high poverty schools in the geographical area,
taking tests after summer holidays so that the effectiveness of intervention can be
measured, and at last, creating evidence of the outcomes so that efforts of the family and
the lessons taken by the student can be linked.
It is required that these initiatives be taken at a large scale so that low-cost means
can be developed, and literacy reforms can be introduced in the country’s educational
system. The disadvantaged schools can be counted on par with these interventions as
children who do not have access to such programs can get one and gain the outcomes.
Harrington-Lueker (2018), author of the book Books for Idle Hours: NineteenthCentury Publishing and the Rise of Summer Reading’, refers to the rise of summer
reading in the nineteenth century when tourism was commercialized. The print culture
was at the top, and its description concerning summer reading let readers explore how
middle-class consumers used to spend leisure time while reading. However, paper books
were their companions as they used to provide insights into marketing strategies and
social developments.
The next chapter depicts the diametrical posturing about concerns and acceptance,
exploring consumers’ tastes so that summer reading can be made famous. The concepts of
sinfulness, morality, and legality force the publishing houses to reduce their margins and
reposition the books as a leading commodity for leisure experiences. Chapter 3 explores
various emotions, which gave rise to different genres and became an inspiration for the
readers.
Teachers’ Methodologies
45
It is essential to know teachers’ methodologies because only their teaching
methods are used to assess students’ growth. Students will put more effort into
developing and improving their competencies, such as reading, when they feel connected
to the issue. Unfortunately, compared to Caucasians, African American and Latino
children suffer a significant lack of resources and access to quality education,
discouraging them from improving their reading during summertime. The impact of these
changes has resulted in the need for multicultural training and cultural inclusion in public
and private schools.
Until the teachers are competent enough to handle multicultural issues and
supporters of multiculturalism, they will not be able to incorporate and deliver linguistic
and cultural capital to their students. Exposing children to culturally rich literature is vital
to developing respect for different religions, values, diversities, and cultures. To create
global citizens, it is crucial to increase sensitivity towards society and inclusivity
(Slaughter, 2019). The teaching community should be trained to create unique materials
highlighting multiculturalism because limited resources are available for reference.
Furthermore, social discrimination continues to limit academic success. Schools
need to be aware of their actions and take a stand concerning racial issues since their indepth understanding of racism will enable teachers to identify vulnerable students.
Schools can extend their support and develop competence in areas lacking during the
holidays, such as reading.
In the US (United States), programs such as Common Core State Standards, No
Child Left Behind, and Race to the Top did not recognize the importance of
multiculturalism. Despite spending millions of dollars on such programs, the purpose was
46
not met because it could not address the educational needs in totality. Slaughter (2019)
found that teachers, their backgrounds, availability of resources, and access to public
libraries are a few reasons why summer reading does not get a reasonable success rate.
Therefore, societal stereotypes must be removed so that generalizations of the middle
class can be made to promote summer reading.
Role of the Library
The article focuses on the summer program started by the Norwegian Library and
found that nearly one-fifth of children in the region read for pleasure during their summer
holidays. In addition, it was highlighted by Hareide et. al (2020) that progress in an
International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS) for 4th and 5th class students and
International Student Assessment (PISA) for the age of 15 years brought the data to the
surface that girls are better readers than boys.
It has also been found that irrespective of gender, reading is a preferred hobby
during free time and is considered one of the essential factors for reading performance
(Hareide et al., 2020). Therefore, a Norwegian Library created a program known as
Sommers. It included all national libraries if the country to infuse a stimulation in
children between 6 and 12 years of age to opt for reading as a pleasure activity. Any type
of reading is beneficial to improve reading skills, but free reading is more impactful.
In the beginning, students were asked to note down the titles of the book they read
and were rewarded with prizes for this effort. It included gamification, digital rewards,
and storytelling to solve the problems in the world. Gamification was designed to ask
students to create their virtual IDs and complete some tasks in games and quizzes.
Students were rewarded with digital trophies and points. Hareide et al. (2020) mentioned
47
that some experts were against the idea of rewarding free reading, but it proved to be
crucial for children under Sommers.
Since the digitalization of libraries, the number of subscriptions has increased. It
was also found by Hareide et al. (2020) that teachers were also encouraging their students
to participate in the program by helping them be aware of its features. The result of the
study reflected that reading improves competency. When children read more, they
develop better reading skills. Therefore, it has been essential to encourage students to
read irrespective of whether they are multilingual or monolingual. Moreover, there is a
need to feel joy while reading, and students should be trained to find happiness in the
piece they are reading.
Motivation for Reading
Developments in the education arena have led to many changes in understanding
students’ motivations during reading instruction. As a result, teachers have pondered
finding new ways to appeal to students with exciting materials and new perspectives on
old concepts. However, the critical element of improving learners’ reading skills is
motivation.
Different concepts can be part of intrinsic or extrinsic motivation to highlight
reasons for reading. For example, intrinsic motivation may come from initiatives or selfinterest in reading, while extrinsic motivation comes from reward systems (Hareide et al.,
2020). The campaign was a victory and gained popularity in various parts of the world. It
led boys to participate actively, and different communities worldwide found that children
are becoming better readers with time. In addition, Gamification played a significant role
in attracting boys to the world of summer reading and shifted them to read for pleasure.
48
Importance of Reading
Reading is essential at every stage of life, whether for a student or a collegegoer.
Inculcating the habit of reading in the first stages of life has its benefits. Strategic
practices must successfully develop literacy skills to deal with complex text with
confidence and fluency. According to Davakos (2018), students need to learn to
understand, synthesize, evaluate, and interpret information from the beginning to use
available information in their ideas.
Summer camps are the best setup, which helps the student to develop strong
literacy skills. Several workshops related to reading equip them with strategies and make
them practice various exercises, helping them be successful readers overall. The literature
focuses on middle-grade students and how their reading goals are achieved. Reading
workshops work on the concept of thinking guided by print, which helps them understand
the context of the vocabulary used in the text and go smoothly through the process.
These workshops are instructional sessions within an organized framework,
improving reading achievement and the literacy dimension of language. In addition, the
reading workshops also aim to improve children’s communication skills by engaging
them in different reading and writing activities. By the end of the third grade, language
proficiency develops up to a particular accepted stage. Therefore, in future grades, this is
helpful in high academic performance.
Impact of Reading
Davakos (2018) observed children who do not have proficiency by the end of the
third grade are more vulnerable to school dropouts. There are different studies conducted
for summer reading and reflected effective strategies, which provided results, but a
49
Reading Workshop is a program that can help in overcoming reading loss. The reading
skills act as a foundation because challenges and exposure to information increase during
higher studies, which require high quality of comprehension so that desired results can be
gained. Davakos (2018) mentioned that while designing such workshops, it is essential to
conduct action research so teachers and students can be involved. It will enhance their
respective learning and lead to the development of relevant reading modules. Davakos
(2018) followed a four-stage process – planning, action, developing, and reflection.
It was also found that collaborators must interact because it helps to understand
the perception on Reading Workshops in summer schools and examine their reasons.
Change is a constant process; through discussion, if age-old traditions can be challenged,
reading can help transform them. However, literature added a new dimension to current
research due to the lack of time this study has scope for extensive research in the future.
Washburn et al. (2021) believed that summer camps are places where educators
are always busy. The pandemic made them even busier. Summer Reading Camp (SRC) is
a partnership between community-school and universities, which runs a 4–5-week
program to help middle school students from 5 to 8 grade. These students need extra
support for reading at a foundational level. It is an intervention in school, where small
groups are created, and students’ individual needs are catered to.
Supplemental Reading Program
An evidence-based program known as Sound Partners is followed, which is
explicit and systematic and, at the same time, helps design the foundational program to
deliver the required skill set helpful in reading. Washburn et al. (2021) mentioned that it
involves various instructions such as feedback and opportunities to practice and review
50
those multiple times. It is all done in a virtual space to increase student engagement.
Support to families is also given through technology.
Until 2020, SRC was offline and did not get a chance to explore this side. After
several hits and trials during the pandemic, a schedule with structure was developed for
the virtual platform. It was a 1:1 session with 13 instructors involved in the program
initially. Washburn et al. (2021) found that it allowed them to stay in touch with their
families. Through this method, we communicated with families and students and helped
them feel involved.
Under the program, troubleshooting classes were conducted to clarify any doubts
about technology use. The families even shared what communication mode they prefer to
get updates and information. It was also found by Washburn et al. (2021) found that a
positive environment plays a crucial role. Creating it and supporting it until the session
ends has positive outcomes. Nevertheless, this is only possible if service providers and
users communicate effectively.
Reading Assessment and Feedback
The feedback mechanism is that thing that kept the students and families going
with the programs because it helped in taking corrective and performance-oriented steps
so that differences can be created in a virtual environment. The daily activities were
logged so that it could be checked whether goals were met or not. The way reading
programs are conducted and the materials used to deliver the instruction are also essential
because it discusses the effectiveness of implementation.
Sound Partners’ process and learning sequence are predictable due to its
systematic structure. The navigation from one file to another during Zoom sessions led to
51
losing learning time, and thus the focus was shifted to Google slides. The program
delivered reading accuracy among students and increased their oral fluency with all these
efforts. It was also found that Face-to-Face (F2F) reading instructions still hold immense
value and have their share in virtual learning and growth. These programs have
significantly changed and are still delivering what they promised by virtual intervention.
These software developers are encouraging all stakeholders to contribute to making a
difference in the reading capability of children.
In the literature discussed here, the authors highlight the aspects of foreign
language learning that students do during their summer holidays. The authors also
highlighted how reading could help them. It is believed by Kostikovaet al. (2020) that
since globalization has integrated the education system and subjects such as technology,
trade, and finance, the use of the English language in communication is constantly
growing. It is one of the most authoritative languages in the entire world.
Student-based Reading Skills Promotion
An investigative study conducted by Daniels (2022) among students of Florida
helped to understand the importance of summer reading as one of the measures to
promote third graders to fourth graders. In the assessments, the students must achieve
level 2 out of 5 to show they are proficient enough to get promoted. In addition, this
study considered factors such as the socioeconomic condition of the student, gender, and
native English speakers. Researchers have felt that third grade is a milestone in language
proficiency, and they should be achieved through proficient reading skills as it will serve
them in their academic accomplishments.
52
Children who do not have proficient reading skills still are under stress to avoid
retention. During the school year, three diagnostic assessments are conducted at the
beginning, mid-year, and portfolio assessments. Unfortunately, many students faced
difficulty passing the assessments, and thus they were kept. Daniels (2022) also
interacted with the principals of schools to better understand assessments and retention as
a strategy.
Innovative Strategies to Prevent Summer Reading Loss
Daniels (2022) concluded that a retention strategy is also essential to improving
reading skills among third-grade students. The principals of schools consider academic
achievements and summer reading camps as practical means of intervention. Similarly,
these strategies revealed that socioeconomic conditions and gender have no significant
impact on summer reading.
To improve students’ academic performance during the summer and minimize the
summer learning loss, various strategies, and methodologies were designed, like
engaging kids in summertime reading, educational games, math games, science activities,
summer camps, and activities classes. In addition, different researchers suggested ways to
minimize summer learning loss via their surveys and implemented research
methodologies. For example, Shinwell et al. (2017), after investigating the summer
learning loss in seventy-seven primary school children between 5 and 10 years of age,
suggested that by arranging summer camps and holiday clubs, proper educational
activities can be provided to the children and the significant drop in educational
performance can be alleviated.
53
Donnelly et al. (2019) analyzed the reading growth curve of thirty-one children
aged 6-12 during the intensive summer intervention program and recorded changes in
their oral reading fluency and comprehension assessment ability. They found that these
programs help improve their reading and writing skills and help minimize the summer
learning loss.
Public and Neighborhood Library Interventions
In America, the biggest concern after school closes is reading loss, which creates
an achievement gap for students. Campbell et. al (2019) conducted a study on fourthgrade students who had poor academic performance; they improved after summer reading
camps. On the contrary, they also observed that some experts question the efficiency of
the education system, which runs throughout the year and keeps the focus on summer
reading to improve efficiency.
The researcher believes that summer reading loss equals one month of schooling.
The reading loss increases as the child moves to a higher grade. When the American
students are compared to international students, it has been found that scores of American
students in reading skills are on the lower side. When the data from 2007 to 2011 were
studied at the national level, it was noted that no improvement was observed in the
reading skills of fourth-grade children.
Closing the Reading Loss Gap
To make children competitive and create a knowledge-based economy, it is
required to fill the achievement gaps. The schools need to take aggressive intervention in
this direction through curriculum-based intervention. As Campbell et al. (2019)
mentioned, reading achievement is defined by the learning made by the student during
54
summer. It also considers skills development when the student is not going to school.
Students with low socioeconomic backgrounds suffered significant reading loss though
their growth during regular schooling was equivalent to that of the high socioeconomic
group.
A child may be impacted by this loss in their decision to attend high school or
college. Parental intervention for children of low socioeconomic status, such as taking
their children to public libraries, reading with them during the night, and taking an
interest in their titles, helps combat summer reading loss. Apart from that, parents who
checked on their child’s homework regularly, and helped them with reading activities,
displayed learned behavioral skills and did not experience summer reading loss.
Personal Characteristics in Reading Loss
The personal characteristics of students are also crucial for their studies. Campbell
et al. (2019) believed that gender, race, culture, and ethnicity are also responsible for
changes in learning patterns. For example, until second grade, children learn to read, but
after that, they read to learn (Campbell et al., 2019). Therefore, reading has long-term
implications and is responsible for academic success. Studies also showed that no
significant differences were observed based on gender, but research supports that female
have proficient reading skills compared to boys.
As the age grew, females got better in reading skills, which shows a downward
trend. The ways to measure summer reading skills are different from different experts.
They consider factors such as fluency, grammar, comprehension, and spelling. In the
American education system, understanding the development pattern of elementary school
students is essential for teachers because it will help them plan their lessons accordingly.
55
The international gap between quality and achievement can only be filled when students
reach the quartile reading level.
The literary source produced by Gordon and Lu (2021) gave a new dimension to
the research as it highlighted the perspective of a student who does not like to read. Other
literature believes those students not interested in reading are low achievers, have low
intelligence levels, and have poor reading skills. It results in low retention power, poor
vocabulary, disrupted fluency, and poor comprehension skills.
It is also presented that those children who do not want to read have low
confidence in themselves and cannot work hard in the area which needs improvement.
The study is about how these readers look at themselves. It is about their choices for
reading and whether they have any limitations. Literary reading includes books and refers
to newspapers, magazines, blogs, and non-fiction genres.
Most teenagers read for fun, but the number of such teens is low. They feel that
reading for pleasure tends to do better in academics, although they are infrequent and
scoreless than frequent readers. According to Gordon and Lu (2021), some activities,
which are more fun than reading, keep the young occupied. Therefore, a downward trend
in free voluntary ready or pleasure reading is observed.
Digitizing Reading Habits
As digital technologies are rising, digital books can attract attention because they
can help create an engaging environment. They have visual and exciting activities, which
can contribute to creating a new culture of reading among them. However, little research
has been conducted in this direction and adolescents’ preferences as readers.
56
Interestingly, Gordon and Lu (2021) studied web-based reading programs and the
behaviors of adolescents. The program was designed by the teachers and librarians of the
school. They want to make children opt for summer reading programs and shift their
mental frame towards research. Therefore, the students were encouraged to speak about
what they read, why they read, and what kept them engaged.
It was found that students who disliked books liked to read comic books or
manga, love stories, and other titles related to relationships and romance (Gordon & Lu,
2021). Unfortunately, many are unaware of manga even today. It was found that students’
interest could be found in the book they chose to read, and they should be given the
freedom to read as per their choice so that reading habits can be sustained for a long time.
Roe (2019) shared experiences from his own life on summer reading and how he
developed a love for reading during school days. First, his teacher used to share quotes by
great writers encouraging students to read about them. Later, he opted for a journal
editor, helping authors reach people interested in reading them. Finally, he promotes
reading under Heath Promotion Practices and shares that 2019 issues were about
storytelling and stories.
The various strategies help engage storytelling sessions, attract readers, and
motivate them to pick the book later. Once the reader is well versed with a story, he can
take the audience to any part of the world and introduce them to diverse cultures. The
audience can travel to picturesque landscapes, mountains, rivers, beaches, and woods.
It is another way of supporting summer reading as readers feel pride in sharing
what they read. They take pride in improving their presentation skills and gestures to
connect with their audience. It is believed by Roe (2019) that with the help of digital
57
technologies, this art can be refined, and constructive feedback can be achieved. Critical
social issues and their solutions can also be communicated to the community. The
healthcare interventions and the awareness program are the best examples of storytelling,
motivating the audience to pick up the manuals or books and read about the problem in
detail.
Roe (2019) also mentioned that books with photo voices are compelling. He
directed research on summer reading in the healthcare domain. The reason for this is that
individuals, whether they are patients, nurses, or physicians, should be aware of best
practices in health care. They must be mindful of the sources from which they can obtain
them. Taking these precautions helps prevent emergencies and allows us to care for our
patients promptly.
Knowledge of the nursing section is essential as it helps guide the patient through
the treatment process and helps them stay calm. In addition, it helps doctors upgrade their
skills and learn to work on new equipment to adopt the best medical practices and remain
in touch with research advances. The author also picked some summer reading lists in the
health domain, which can interest readers and help them choose from an eclectic mix of
new and classic titles, voices and perspectives, topics, and possibilities (Roe, 2019).
Von Hippel (2019) highlighted that schools divide poor and wealthy children due
to ill practices in the education system. Poor children revolve around a circular
curriculum track, while more affluent children get opportunities to try different learning
sources. It has a detrimental effect on their intellectual development and is equally
responsible for causing the achievement gap to widen. Von Hippel (2019) also said that
58
every researcher has a different view of summer reading loss, which needs to be more
consistent with convincingly describing the patterns.
In the replicate study, Von Hippel (2019) found that parents, teachers, and
scholars emphasize standardized test scores and accept the skills level accordingly. On
the other hand, these scores can be misleading as they cannot reflect the child’s true
potential. It is surprising to know how a set of questions having answers in right or wrong
can decide the performance. Von Hippel (2019) also used an example that a new
questions paper was created with ten questions, which were equally hard to try.
Therefore, the education system made it 40% for wealthy children and 30% for
poor children passing grades. The Californian Achievement Test changed how these
assessments were taken and analyzed. He even criticized that system because it produced
opposite results once the measuring parameters were changed. He stressed that summer
learning loss could be more severe than we think.
It is quite natural that during vacations, the learning among children will be slow
irrespective of how advantaged or disadvantaged they are. He suggested that rather than
relying on modern testing mechanisms, it is required to capitalize on the available
opportunity. Summer reading programs were successful for poor children, but low
attendance was a significant cause of their failure. Therefore, it is required to change the
approach the school takes in the form of a yearly calendar, which they follow.
Rather than giving one month or three-month holidays at a stretch, it is good to
distribute them over different regional seasons. It will cut the long breaks short and not
create a significant loss of reading and learning hours. In addition, some schools have
59
extended school calendars where they create extra schooling hours and are considered
high-performing charter schools in the region.
Summer Reading Programs have been used to combat summer reading loss and
the impact of reading during the summer (Petty et al., 2017). Summer school is a form of
intervention used across the summer to decrease summer reading loss. The research on
summer reading is a qualitative study for which several articles were reviewed and
available to the scholar as resourceful literature. It is the right fit for the research because
it focuses on collecting data through communication and open-ended conversations. The
focus is more on why rather than what. The focus groups from schools, libraries, income
groups, and teachers were considered to get the data.
Various programs used by schools are used to improve summer reading loss.
These programs help collect numeric data estimates on students who eagerly took part,
how the improvement was checked, the implications of such actions, and how it will
positively affect their academic performance.
Conceptual Framework Literature
The social learning approach promotes increased observation, attention, retention,
and reproduction of knowledge. It is through this process that materials are converted into
knowledge (Wong et al., 2019). However, the faucet theory will support the flow of
knowledge at each time of the year by offering materials for all students (Pitcock, 2018).
The literature was also helpful in understanding how theory could be applied and
bringing the conceptual framework to life. Below are the conceptual frameworks shown
in the figures.
Figure 1
Commented [TB33]: I think this comes before the
methodology section?
Commented [GS34R33]: Moved
60
Study’s Constructs Related to Faucet Theory
In this study, theoretical and conceptual frameworks are discussed in their
essence. Conceptual and theoretical frameworks are aspects that often overlook the basics
of research. However, it is not easy to distinguish whether a theory or framework is right
or wrong. Therefore, it is crucial to decide how they can be applied to a research study
and be described as the results of a study.
The Conceptual Framework helps understand what government interventions
were taken and how external partners took part in the programs (Hall, 2022). Program
mediators and program components will measure the summer programs and their impact
on children’s learning curve.
Summer activities and school intervention by giving reading goals as summer
holiday homework helped parents get involved and take help from public libraries or
neighborhoods to ensure that their children read and build fluency and vocabulary with
the language.
Entwisle’s Faucet Theory
Entwisle et al. (2000) explain the phenomenon of summer learning loss as
students’ opportunities to learn during the academic year, so the faucet of resources is
turned on, and during the summer break, the faucet of resources is turned off. The Faucet
Theory presented that students from low socioeconomic backgrounds have restricted
opportunities to engage in learning across the summer break. The limitations are caused
by the ability to access books and other resources to sustain learning and enrich reading
skills when the academic year is not in session.
61
Due to the flux of resources, the achievement gap is widened for the most
susceptible population. According to Downey et al. (2004) longitudinal study,
economically disadvantaged children have a summer learning loss that is about 2.5
months greater than non-economically disadvantaged children. The faucet theory guided
the present study to investigate if providing students from low socioeconomic status with
access to resources reduced the summer setback and could help decrease the
Achievement Gap.
Bandura’s Social Learning Theory
Social Learning Theory SLT embodies the importance of human learning
(Bandura, 1971, 1977). Bandura asserted that humans learn by observing, modeling, and
emulating others’ behaviors, efforts, and emotions. The approach of modeling can
influence another’s learning abilities. Social Learning Theory draws upon the
environment and other facets to improve learning, with social modeling experiences
acting as a situational stimulant in human interaction. The observational learning theory
became known in the famous yet controversial Bobo doll experiment as a “theory of
psychological processes central to human behavior” (American Psychological
Association, 2016, p. 432).
Observational learning became a sensation that distinguished paramount factors in
the modeling process—engagement, retention, duplication, and
motivation/reinforcement—as the driving powers behind active learning. Reading
motivation is considered a significant determinant of student reading. When using these
pieces, an individual can model the behavior of another successfully. Kavanagh (2019)
linked intrinsic motivation and self-concept to reading and reading achievement.
62
Learning is a collaborative exertion in mentation, and the complete process amounts to
bridging behaviorist theories in classical and operant conditioning (Bandura, 1977, 2002).
Social learning is influenced by concepts of information processing and regulative
capacities (Cubas et al., 2015). The degree to which students appreciate reading is also a
factor in their reading behavior.
Methodology Literature
Despite the extensive literature on summer reading loss, there is a need for more
literature on strategies and techniques to mitigate it. The literature addressed mitigation
solutions for specific risks and vulnerabilities that result in security breaches but did not
address cloud provider privacy and data security mitigation strategies. This study fills a
gap in the literature by gathering techniques and strategies for reducing summer reading
loss from educators. It also discusses concerns among educators regarding strategies for
reducing reading growth loss during the summer months in southwest Mississippi.
Research Design Literature
Delphi Technique
The Delphi technique was conceived by Olaf Helmer and his associates in the
1950s while engaged in defense research (Yousuf, 2007). Delphi techniques are used to
gather opinions from experts on a specific subject and make judgments on complex
issues (Yousuf, 2007). As part of the Delphi process, expert opinions were solicited via
paper and pencil questionnaires with feedback controlled by other experts’ opinions (Hsu
& Sandford, 2012). Through the feedback process, the experts reevaluated their original
opinions (McKenna et al., 2011).
E-Delphi Technique
Commented [TB35]: Continue developing the
methodology and design sections by following the CDG.
Methodology a review of the methods that have been used
thus far in the literature surrounding your topic. Then the
design section is an in depth justification of your design from
several authors seminal views.
Commented [GS36R35]: added: Despite the extensive
literature on summer reading loss, there is a need for more
literature on strategies and techniques to mitigate it. The
literature addressed mitigation solutions for specific risks
and vulnerabilities that result in security breaches but did not
address cloud provider privacy and data security mitigation
strategies. This study fills a gap in the literature by gathering
techniques and strategies for reducing summer reading loss
from educators. It also discusses concerns among educators
regarding strategies for reducing reading growth loss during
the summer months in southwest Mississippi.
63
The availability and popularity of internet-based tools are a means for migrating
the limitations of Delphi, expanding its application, and maximizing its advantages
(Donohoe, Stellefson, & Tennant, 2012). The e-Delphi technique reflects efforts to
automate the Delphi process and capitalize on its methodological advantages (Donohoe et
al., 2012). Because e-Delphi is an internet-based platform, it allows for better control and
facilitation of communications between the researcher and the expert panel (Donohoe et
al., 2012). In addition, the e-Delphi technique reduces the time between feedback and
questionnaires while increasing expert responsiveness (Hsu & Sandford, 2012).
Participating in an e-Delphi study provides panel experts with an occasion to
express their opinions and knowledge (Chin et al., 2020). In addition, the e-Delphi study
enables panel members to revise their ideas and thoughts after examining responses to
align with the group’s ideas (Beach et al. 2020). Last, the e-Delphi method of research
will include small groups of children, and their information will be gathered through the
questionnaires generated about their reading practices. The study will also identify the
risk areas; solutions can be explored through leadership skills to mitigate those (Kelleher
et al., 2020).
Conclusions
The loss of reading practices in the children during the summer holidays creates a
lack of knowledge and literacy (Kim, 2007). In addition, an achievement gap is observed
within the ethnic groups of the same institution (Kim, 2004). Several study approaches
could help identify the exact problem and mitigate them. For example, a lack of materials
can be provided through access to the library throughout the year. In addition, inculcating
Commented [TB37]: Use 7th ed apa for 3 or more sources
Commented [GS38R37]: corrected
Commented [GS39R37]: (Beach et al. 2020)
Commented [TB40]: Needs more elaboration
Commented [GS41R40]: added: Delphi Technique
The Delphi technique was conceived by Olaf Helmer and his
associates in the 1950s while engaged in defense research
(Yousuf, 2007). Delphi techniques are used to gather
opinions from experts on a specific subject and make
judgments on complex issues (Yousuf, 2007). As part of the
Delphi process, expert opinions were solicited via paper and
pencil questionnaires with feedback controlled by other
experts’ opinions (Hsu & Sandford, 2012). Through the
feedback process, the experts reevaluated their original
opinions (McKenna et al., 2011).
E-Delphi Technique
The availability and popularity of internet-based tools are a
means for migrating the limitations of Delphi, expanding its
application, and maximizing its advantages (Donohoe,
Stellefson, & Tennant, 2012). The e-Delphi technique
reflects efforts to automate the Delphi process and capitalize
on its methodological advantages (Donohoe et al., 2012).
Because e-Delphi is an internet-based platform, it allows for
better control and facilitation of communications between
the researcher and the expert panel (Donohoe et al., 2012). In
addition, the e-Delphi technique reduces the time between
feedback and questionnaires while increasing expert
responsiveness (Hsu & Sandford, 2012).
64
family reading programs could also help mitigate the loss of summer reading (Borman &
Yang, 2019).
The reasons for the loss in summer reading must be primarily gathered through an
experimental e-Delphi methodology, which will help to mitigate the problem and keep
the practice of reading in the summer holidays as well (Hall et al., 2018).
Greater attention is being placed on the effect of summer learning loss. While
there is a growing research base on the subject, there is not much analysis on specific
strategies to reduce or end summer learning loss. Based on the reviewed literature, most,
if not all, professionals consent that summer learning loss is a problem. There have been
several current studies on specific strategies; however, the results have not set precise
parameters on what works and does not.
Chapter Summary
Chapter 2 reviewed the literature on effectively addressing summer learning loss
(Hogg, 2018). The terms used in the literature search relevant to the study were summer
reading, summer reading loss, summer reading initiatives, family cooperation in summer
reading, and summer reading programs. A framework based on faucet theory and social
approach theory was used in this study to increase summer reading practices. In Chapter
3, the e-Delphi methodology is described based on the literature review in Chapter 2.
Research methods, research designs, demographics, sample sizes, data collection, data
analysis, informal consent, confidentiality, validity, and reliability will be discussed in
Chapter 3.
Commented [GS42]: revised chapter summary: Chapter 2
reviewed the literature on effectively addressing summer
learning loss (Hogg, 2018). The terms used in the literature
search relevant to the study were summer reading, summer
reading loss, summer reading initiatives, family cooperation
in summer reading, and summer reading programs. A
framework based on faucet theory and social approach
theory was used in this study to increase summer reading
practices. In Chapter 3, the e-Delphi methodology is
described based on the literature review in Chapter 2.
Research methods, research designs, demographics, sample
sizes, data collection, data analysis, informal consent,
confidentiality, validity, and reliability will be discussed in
Chapter 3.
65
Chapter 3
Research Methodology
The Qualitative e-Delphi is a method used to gather and integrate expert opinions
on a specific topic using an online survey and qualitative data analysis techniques. The
method is based on the traditional Delphi method, a consensus-seeking technique used to
gather opinions from a group of experts. The Qualitative e-Delphi method is typically
used in healthcare, education, and social sciences. It involves several online surveys
where experts are asked to provide their opinions on a specific topic. The surveys often
include open-ended questions, allowing experts to provide detailed and nuanced
responses.
The e-Delphi approach can be used in summer reading growth to gather and
integrate expert opinions on various aspects of summer reading programs and
interventions. In this approach, experts in education, child development, and literacy
could be surveyed to gather their opinions on the most effective strategies for promoting
summer reading growth in children (Kernan et al., 2022). The first round of the e-Delphi
survey could include open-ended questions asking experts to describe the most critical
factors contributing to summer reading growth and the most effective interventions for
promoting it. Then, in the second round, experts could be asked to rank or rate the
importance of the factors and interventions identified in the first round.
Research Method and Design Appropriateness
The qualitative research method aims to understand human behavior, experience,
and social phenomena by collecting and analyzing non-numerical data such as text,
images, audio, and video. It is often used in sociology, anthropology, psychology, and
66
education and is beneficial for studying complex, context-dependent phenomena that
cannot be easily quantified or measured. The main characteristic of qualitative research is
that it is interpretive, meaning that researchers aim to understand the meaning and context
of the data rather than just describing it. Also, qualitative research is often based on small
sample size, and it is impossible to generalize the findings to a larger population.
Qualitative research allows researchers to explore and understand human
behavior, experience, and social phenomena in a way impossible with quantitative
methods. It provides a rich and detailed understanding of the participants’ context,
meaning, and experiences (Dattaet al. 2021). In this research, researchers observe people
in natural settings to understand how they behave and interact in a specific context.
Researchers bring a small group of people together to discuss a specific topic and
to gather their collective perspectives. It includes analysis of written or spoken data, such
as transcripts of interviews, to identify patterns and themes. Finally, researchers immerse
themselves in a particular culture or community to understand the group’s customs,
beliefs, and practices.
Qualitative research allows for the study of under-researched or underrepresented
groups. Qualitative research is beneficial for studying under-researched or
underrepresented groups, such as marginalized communities, people with disabilities, or
individuals who are not easily accessible. Qualitative research is often used to generate
hypotheses and theories that can be tested quantitatively. It allows researchers to identify
patterns and themes in the data that can be used to develop more specific and testable
hypotheses. It can be used to evaluate and improve programs and interventions.
Qualitative research can be used to evaluate and improve programs and interventions by
67
providing detailed information about the experiences and perspectives of the participants.
The Qualitative e-Delphi method has several advantages over traditional Delphi
methods, as it allows for a more significant number of experts to participate and a more
detailed and nuanced analysis of the responses. It also allows for more flexibility in the
survey design and allows experts to participate from any location, which can save time
and money. The responses would be analyzed qualitatively to identify patterns and
themes. The analysis results would guide the next round of surveys and move closer to a
consensus on the most effective strategies for promoting summer reading growth.
Research Questions/Hypotheses
Research Questions
1. How does participation in a summer reading program affect reading
comprehension and fluency among students in grades K 12?
2. What factors influence students’ decision to participate in summer reading
programs and how do these factors affect reading growth?
3. To what extent do summer reading programs improve reading achievement
among socioeconomically disadvantaged students?
4. How do different types of summer reading interventions, such as online programs
or book clubs, impact reading growth among students?
5. How does the length of the summer vacation affect reading growth, and how can
summer reading programs be designed to mitigate this effect?
Hypotheses
1. The e-Delphi approach will increase the participation rate of experts in the study,
as it allows for flexibility in terms of time and location for completing the
68
surveys.
2. The e-Delphi approach will reduce the cost and time required for conducting the
study, as it eliminates the need for in-person meetings or travel.
3. The e-Delphi approach will provide a detailed and comprehensive understanding
of the research topic, as it allows for multiple rounds of feedback and refinement
of the survey questions.
Population and Sample
Population and sample are essential concepts in qualitative research because they
determine the scope and generalizability of the findings. The importance of population
and sample in qualitative research is that they determine the scope and generalizability of
the findings. A well-defined population and a representative sample increase the chances
that the findings can be generalized to other similar individuals or groups.
In qualitative research, the sample size is often small, and the findings need to be
more generalizable to a larger population. However, the small sample size allows for a
more in-depth exploration of the experiences and perspectives of the participants (FinkHafneret al. 2019). The population and sample are essential in qualitative research
because they determine the scope and generalizability of the findings and allow
researchers to select the group of participants that are relevant and suitable to the research
question.
The e-Delphi approach is a method that can be used to gather expert opinions on a
specific topic or issue, such as summer reading growth. The approach typically involves
several questionnaires, where experts are asked to provide their opinions on a set of
69
predetermined topics. For example, experts could be asked to provide their opinions on
the following:
1. The most effective strategies for encouraging summer reading among
students.
2. The challenges students face when trying to maintain reading skills during the
summer. The role of parents and caregivers in promoting summer reading.
3. The impact of summer reading programs on student achievement.
4. The best practices for implementing summer reading programs.
The e-Delphi approach is helpful for summer reading growth because it allows
researchers to gather experts’ opinions from different backgrounds and perspectives. By
gathering expert opinions, researchers can identify the best strategies for encouraging
summer reading growth and improving the effectiveness of summer reading programs.
The e-Delphi approach is also helpful because it can be done remotely, allowing
researchers to gather expert opinions worldwide. This can increase the diversity of
perspectives and improve the generalizability of the findings. Furthermore, e-Delphi is a
method for achieving consensus. It is not aimed at generating new knowledge but rather
verifying existing knowledge or reaching a consensus among experts.
The population size required for a qualitative research study on summer reading
growth will depend on the research question and design. Generally, a qualitative study’s
population size is typically smaller than a quantitative study. This is because the sample
size in a qualitative study is often small, and the findings need to be more generalizable
to a larger population.
70
However, the small sample size allows for a more in-depth exploration of the
experiences and perspectives of the participants. The population size is expected to be 51,
of which 31 will be students, 17 will be teaching staff, and three will be from the
administration. The research question is to explore students’ experiences in a specific
summer reading program. Therefore, the sample size should be large enough to provide a
representative sample of the population but small enough to allow for an in-depth
exploration of the experiences and perspectives of the participants.
In summary, the population size required for a qualitative research study on
summer reading growth will vary depending on the research question and research
design. However, it is typically smaller than for a quantitative study. Therefore, the
sample size should be large enough to provide a representative sample of the population
but small enough to allow for an in-depth exploration of the experiences and perspectives
of the participants.
Informed Consent and Confidentiality
Informed consent is the process of obtaining agreement from participants to take
part in a research study. It involves providing participants with information about the
study, including the purpose, procedures, risks and benefits, and their rights as
participants. Participants must fully understand the information provided and voluntarily
agree to participate in the study before being included in the research.
Confidentiality is the protection of personal information shared by participants
during the research (Głuszek, 2021). It involves ensuring that participants’ identities and
personal information are kept private and not shared with others without their consent.
71
This can include protecting participants’ names, contact information, and other
information that could be used to identify them.
In qualitative research, informed consent and confidentiality are essential because
participants often share sensitive and personal information. In addition, qualitative
research often relies on in-depth interviews or focus groups, which can require
participants to share their thoughts, feelings, and experiences. Therefore, it is essential
that participants understand how their information will be used, who will have access to
it, and what measures will be taken to protect it. Researchers should also consider the
potential risks of confidentiality breaches, such as participants being stigmatized or
harmed in their community due to the research. To mitigate these risks, researchers can
use pseudonyms or other forms of data protection, such as data encryption,
anonymization, and minimization.
To ensure consent and confidentiality, researchers should provide participants
with clear and detailed information about the study, including the purpose, procedures,
risks and benefits, and their rights as participants. This information should be provided in
a language that is easy for participants to understand. It includes obtaining written
consent from participants, which can be in the form of a signature on a consent form.
This records that participants have been informed and voluntarily agreed to
participate in the study. Researchers should allow participants to ask questions and clarify
any concerns they may have before providing consent. It requires using pseudonyms to
protect the identity of participants. This involves giving participants a fake name or code
used instead of their real name in all research materials.
72
Researchers should minimize the collection identifying information, such as
names, addresses, and contact information (Romero-Collado, 2021). In the research, the
data should be stored in a secure location and use appropriate measures, such as data
encryption, data anonymization, and data minimization, to protect the confidentiality of
the data. Researchers should obtain permission from participants before sharing data with
others. Finally, it should debrief participants after the study, explaining how the
information will be used, who will have access to it, and what measures will be taken to
protect it.
Instrumentation
The e-Delphi approach is a qualitative research method that uses several rounds of
online surveys to gather expert opinions on a topic. It is a way to obtain responses from
participants by providing an online platform for them to share their thoughts and ideas.
The first step in the e-Delphi approach is to identify a group of knowledgeable experts
about the topic being studied.
These experts can be selected based on their professional qualifications, experience,
or publications in the field. The next step is to develop a questionnaire that will be used to
gather opinions from the experts. The questionnaire should be designed to elicit detailed
information about the topic and should be pilot-tested to ensure that it is straightforward to
understand. The next round of the e-Delphi process involves sending the questionnaire to
the experts and collecting their responses. The experts are given a set time to complete and
return the questionnaire. The researcher analyzes the responses from the first round of the
e-Delphi process, looking for patterns and themes in the data.
Based on this analysis, the researcher may revise the questionnaire before sending
73
it out for the next round. The e-Delphi process is similar to the first round but with an
improved questionnaire. The researcher sends the questionnaire to the experts again and
collects their responses. Once a consensus is reached, the researcher prepares a final report
summarizing the findings of the e-Delphi process (Hong et al. 2019). The e-Delphi
approach allows for obtaining responses from participants more efficiently and effectively
than the traditional Delphi method, which is mainly conducted through mailing and
telephone calls.
Field Test
Field test in qualitative research refers to testing a research instrument, such as an
interview guide or observation protocol, in the field before conducting the main study.
This allows researchers to identify any issues or problems with the instrument and make
necessary adjustments before collecting data from the study participants. Field testing
also allows researchers to understand how participants may respond to the research
instrument, which can inform data analysis and interpretation.
The observation protocol in qualitative research is a set of detailed instructions
and guidelines for observing and recording the behavior and interactions of study
participants. It is used to ensure that data is collected consistently and systematically. It
can include information such as the location and time of the observation, the behavior or
interactions that should be observed, and the methods and techniques used to record the
data.
An observation protocol is often used in ethnographic research, where the
researcher observes and records participants’ behavior in their natural environment, such
as in a community or organization (Aghayari et al., 2022). It may also be used in other
74
types of qualitative research, such as case studies or action research, where the researcher
observes and records participants’ behavior in a specific setting or context. The
observation protocol is also used to get the data in the field test before the leading
research; that is how the researchers can check the suitability of their research design and
make any necessary adjustments.
The e-Delphi approach is a method for gathering and synthesizing the opinions
and perspectives of experts on a specific topic or issue. It is typically used to identify and
prioritize critical issues, develop consensus on best practices, or predict future trends. An
interview guide in an e-Delphi approach is used to ensure that all experts are asked the
same questions in the same order and with the same level of detail.
This allows for the comparison and synthesis of responses across experts and
helps to identify patterns and themes in the data. The interview guide in an e-Delphi
approach is usually developed and refined through several rounds of iteration, where
experts provide feedback and suggestions on the questions and prompts. This is done to
ensure that the questions are clear and relevant to the experts and that they can provide
informative and meaningful responses.
Validity and Reliability
Validity and reliability are two essential concepts in research that refer to the
quality and trustworthiness of the data collected, and the results obtained. Validity refers
to the extent to which a research study measures what it is supposed to measure. It
assesses whether the research instrument, like a survey or interview guide, accurately
measures the concept or variable it is intended to measure. Reliability refers to the
consistency and stability of a research study’s results. It assesses whether the research
75
instrument produces consistent results for the same person on multiple occasions or for
different people.
Validity and reliability are essential for ensuring the quality and trustworthiness
of research data and results. A research study with high Validity and reliability is more
likely to produce accurate and reliable results that can be generalized to other populations
or contexts. To ensure Validity and reliability, researchers use different strategies such as
pilot testing the research instrument, using established and validated measurement tools,
and following established protocols for data collection and analysis (Fregonara & Coscia,
2019). Additionally, researchers often report validity and reliability measures in their
published research to provide transparency and allow other researchers to evaluate the
quality of their work.
Validity and reliability are also important concepts in the e-Delphi approach,
which is a method for gathering and synthesizing the opinions and perspectives of experts
on a specific topic or issue. Validity in the e-Delphi approach refers to the extent to
which the e-Delphi process accurately measures and represents the opinions and
perspectives of the experts. To ensure Validity in the e-Delphi approach, researchers
should carefully select a representative sample of experts, use clear and relevant
questions in the interview guide, and provide anonymity for experts to ensure honest and
unbiased responses.
Reliability in the e-Delphi approach refers to the consistency and stability of the
results across rounds and experts. To ensure reliability in the e-Delphi approach,
researchers should use a consistent data collection and analysis process across rounds and
use the same questions and prompts in each round. Additionally, the anonymity of the
76
experts should be maintained throughout the process to minimize any potential bias. It is
important to note that, like any research approach, e-Delphi has its own set of limitations.
For example, e-Delphi relies on self-reported data, which may be subject to bias, and it is
not a substitute for other forms of data collection and analysis.
Data Collection
Interviews are a method of collecting data by asking open-ended questions to
individuals or groups to gather information about their experiences, perspectives, and
opinions on a specific topic or issue. Interviews can be conducted in person, over the
phone, or via videoconferencing. They can be structured, semi-structured, or
unstructured, depending on the research question and the level of control the researcher
wishes to have over the interview process.
It is important to note that in qualitative research, the researcher plays a more
active role in the data collection process and is often involved in interpreting the data.
Additionally, the data collected in qualitative research is usually more affluent and more
detailed than the data collected in quantitative research (Wolf & Delao, 2021). Data
collection in the e-Delphi approach typically involves multiple rounds of online surveys
or interviews with experts on a specific topic or issue.
In the first round, experts are invited to participate in the study and are provided
with an online survey or interview guide. This guide typically includes open-ended and
closed-ended questions designed to gather information about the experts’ opinions,
perceptions, and knowledge on the topic of interest. Experts are asked to provide their
responses anonymously. After the first round, the responses are analyzed and
summarized to identify common themes, patterns, and areas of agreement and
77
disagreement among the experts. These findings are then used to develop a new set of
questions or prompts for the next round.
In the second round, the experts are provided with the summary of the first-round
findings and are asked to review and provide feedback on these findings. They are also
asked to provide updated opinions and perspectives on the topic of interest. This process
is typically repeated for several rounds until a consensus or agreement is reached among
the experts. The number of rounds will depend on the research question and aim of the
study, but usually, three rounds are enough.
Data from each round is collected and analyzed, and the results are used to inform
the development of subsequent rounds. The final round of data collection is used to
gather the experts’ final opinions and perspectives on the topic of interest. In addition to
online surveys, e-Delphi can be conducted through other electronic means such as email,
instant messaging, or videoconferencing.
Data Collection
Interviews are a method of collecting data by asking open-ended questions to
individuals or groups to gather information about their experiences, perspectives, and
opinions on a specific topic or issue. Interviews can be conducted in person, over the
phone, or via videoconferencing. They can be structured, semi-structured, or
unstructured, depending on the research question and the level of control the researcher
wishes to have over the interview process.
It is important to note that in qualitative research, the researcher plays a more
active role in the data collection process and is often involved in interpreting the data.
Additionally, the data collected in qualitative research is usually more affluent and more
78
detailed than the data collected in quantitative research (Wolf & Delao, 2021). Data
collection in the e-Delphi approach typically involves multiple rounds of online surveys
or interviews with experts on a specific topic or issue.
In the first round, experts are invited to participate in the study and are provided
with an online survey or interview guide. This guide typically includes open-ended and
closed-ended questions designed to gather information about the experts’ opinions,
perceptions, and knowledge on the topic of interest. Experts are asked to provide their
responses anonymously. After the first round, the responses are analyzed and
summarized to identify common themes, patterns, and areas of agreement and
disagreement among the experts. These findings are then used to develop a new set of
questions or prompts for the next round.
In the second round, the experts are provided with the summary of the first round
findings and are asked to review and provide feedback on these findings. They are also
asked to provide updated opinions and perspectives on the topic of interest. This process
is typically repeated for a number of rounds until a consensus or agreement is reached
among the experts. The number of rounds will depend on the research question and aim
of the study, but usually, three rounds are enough.
Data from each round is collected and analyzed, and the results are used to inform
the development of subsequent rounds. The final round of data collection is used to
gather the experts’ final opinions and perspectives on the topic of interest. In addition to
online surveys, e-Delphi can be conducted through other electronic means such as email,
instant messaging, or videoconferencing.
Data Analysis
79
Data analysis in the e-Delphi approach typically involves several stages, including
data preparation, coding and categorization, interpretation, and synthesis. Data
preparation involves cleaning and formatting the data for analysis. This may include
removing duplicate responses, correcting errors, and ensuring that the data is in a format
that can be easily analyzed. Data coding and categorization involve labeling and grouping
the data into meaningful categories. This is typically done by identifying common
themes, patterns, and areas of agreement and disagreement among the experts’ responses.
Researchers may use manual coding or software programs to assist with this process.
Data interpretation involves making sense of the data and identifying the main
findings and insights. This stage involves reviewing the data and identifying the key
themes, patterns, and areas of agreement and disagreement among the experts. Data
synthesis is the final stage of data analysis in the e-Delphi approach (Birley &Hogard,
2020). It involves combining the findings and insights from the previous stages to
develop a consensus or agreement among the experts on the topic of interest. This is
typically done by comparing the responses across rounds and identifying areas of
agreement and disagreement. The results of the study are then presented in a report or
publication.
Chapter Summary
The e-Delphi approach can be used in qualitative research to gather and
synthesize expert opinions or perspectives on a specific topic. This approach involves
using an online survey platform to conduct a series of rounds in which experts are asked
to provide their opinions on research questions or statements. The responses from each
round are then analyzed and used to refine the survey questions for the next round until a
80
consensus is reached among the experts. In qualitative research, the e-Delphi approach
can gather and analyze expert opinions on various topics, such as best practices in a
particular field, ethical issues, or emerging trends. In addition, the approach can validate
or triangulate findings from other qualitative methods, such as interviews or observation.
81
References
Aghayari, J., Valmohammadi, C., & Alborzi, M. (2022). Research Article Explaining the
Effective Factors on Digital Transformation Strategies in the Telecom Industry of
Iran Using the Delphi Method.
Alexander, K. L., Entwisle, D. R., & Olson, L. S. (2001). Schools, achievement, and
inequality: A seasonal perspective. Educational Evaluation and Policy
Analysis,23(2), 171-191.
Allington, R.L. & McGill-Franzen, A. (2003). The Impact of Summer Setback on the
Reading Achievement Gap. Phi Delta Kappan, 85, 68-75
Allington, R. L., McGill-Franzen, A., Camilli, G., Williams, L., Graff, J., Zeig, J., …&
Nowak, R. (2010). Addressing summer reading setback among economically
disadvantaged elementary students. Reading Psychology, 31(5), 411-427
Alexander, K. L., Entwisle, D. R., & Olson, L. S. (2007b). Summer learning and its
implications: Insights from the beginning of school study. New Directions for
Youth Development, 2007(114), 11-32. doi:10.1002/yd.210
Alexander, K., Entwisle, D., & Olson, L. (2014). Lasting consequences of the summer
learning gap. Sociological Review, 72(2), 167-180.
https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240707200202.
Almus, K., & Dogan, B. (2016). A study of summer school enrichment program in high
poverty urban public charter school. Reading Improvement, 53(1), 1.
82
Amankwaa, L. (2016). Creating protocols for trustworthiness in qualitative research.
Journal of Cultural Diversity, 23(3), 121-127.
Anney, V. N. (2014). Ensuring the quality of the findings of qualitative research:
Looking at trustworthiness criteria. Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational
Research and Policy Studies. (JETERAPS), 5 (2), 272-281.
Atteberry, A., & McEachin, A. (2016). School’s out: Summer learning loss across grade
levels and school contexts in the United States today. In Alexander, K., Pitcock,
S., & Boulay, M. (Eds). Summer learning and summer learning loss, pp35-54.
New York: Teachers College Press
Balsen, K., & Moore, D. (2010, January). The importance of summer reading: Public
library summer reading programs and learning. (Issue Brief No. 1). Retrieved
from http://www.nysl.nysed.gov/libdev/summer/brief01.pdf
Bandura, A. (1969). Social-learning theory of identificatory processes. In D. A. Goslin
(Ed.), Handbook of socialization theory and research (pp. 213-262). Chicago:
Rand McNally
Bandura, A. (1971). Social Learning Theory. General Learning Corporation.
http://www.jku.at/org/content/e54521/e54528/e54529/e178059/Bandura_SocialLe
arningTheory_ger.pdf
Bandura, A. (1977). Social Learning Theory. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
83
Baskarada, S. (2013). Qualitative case study guidelines. Australian Government
Department of Defense. Retrieved from
file:///C:/Users/E00235104/Downloads/ADA594462.pdf
Baxter, P., & Jack, S. (2008). Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and
implementation for novice researchers. The Qualitative Report 13(4), 544-559.
Becnel, K., Moeller, R. A., & Matzen, N. J. (2017). “Somebody signed me up”: North
Carolina fourth graders’ perceptions of summer reading programs. Children and
Libraries, 15(3), 3. doi:10.5860/cal.15.3.3
Bell, SR, and Carrillo, N. Characteristics of effective summer learning programs in
practice. New Dir Youth Dev. 2007 Summer (114):45-63. doi: 10.1002/yd.212.
PMID: 17623412.
Birley, N. R., &Hogard, E. (2020). The potential contribution of the Delphi technique to
the study of professional identity. In Professional Identity in the Caring
Professions (pp. 332-353). Routledge.
Blanton, M. V. (2015). Keys to reducing summer regression: The reader, routine, and
relationship. Journal of Organizational and Educational Leadership, 1(1), 1-22.
Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.gardner-webb.edu/joel/vol1/iss1/2
Borman, G., Benson, J., &Overman, L. (2005). Families, schools, and summer learning.
The Elementary School Journal, 106(2), 131-150. https://doi.org/10.1086/499195.
Borman, G. D., & Yang, H. (2019).2019 Impacts of the Kids Read Now Summer
Reading Program-A Quasi-Experimental Impact Study. Online Submission
84
Bramer, W. M., de Jonge, G. B., Rethlefsen, M. L., Mast, F., & Kleijnen, J. (2018). A
systematic approach to searching: an efficient and complete method to develop
literature searches. Journal of the Medical Library Association: JMLA, 106(4),
531
Briniker, E., & McNabb, D. (2006, Dec). Dialectical inquiry: A structured qualitative
research method. The Qualitative Report, 11(4), 643-664
Bromley, K. (2010). Picture a world without pens, pencils, and paper. Journal of College
Reading and Learning. 41(1). Retrieved from http://www.crla.net
Campbell, L.O., Sutter, C.C., & Lambie, G.W. (2019). An investigation of the summer
learning effect on fourth grade students’ reading scores. Reading Psychology,
40(5), 465-490.https://doi.org/10.1080/02702711.2019.1629516.
Capotosto, L. (2019). Scaffolding choice, increasing access: A summer initiative to
promote middle school students’ book reading. Reading Horizons, 58(5), 71-85.
Christakis, N. A., & Fowler, J. H. (2013). Social contagion theory: Examining dynamic
social networks and human behavior. Statistics in Medicine, 32(4), 556-577.
DOI:10.1002/sim.5408
Cooper, D. R., & Schindler, P. (2006). Business research methods. (9th ed.). Boston,
MA: McGraw Hill Irwin.
Creswell, J. (2015). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating
quantitative and qualitative research. Lincoln, Nebraska: Pearson Education, Inc.
85
Cubas, M. R., Rodrigues da Costa, E. C., Malucelli, A., Izumi Nichiata, L. Y., & Santos
Enembreck, F. (2015). Components of social learning theory in a tool for teaching
Nursing. Revista Brasileira De Enfermagem, 68(5), 623-629. doi:10.1590/0034-
7167.2015680520i
Dalkey, N., &Helmer, O. (1963). An experimental application of the Delphi Method to
the use of experts. Santa Monica, CA: The RAND Corporation.
Daniels, V. A. (2022). An Investigation of Summer Reading Performance and Principals’
Perspectives on Retention and Assessment of Third Graders
Datta, R., Datta, K., Routh, D., Bhatia, J. K., Yadav, A. K., Singhal, A., &Dalal, S. S.
(2021). Development of a portfolio framework for implementation of an
outcomes-based healthcare professional education curriculum using a modified eDelphi method. medical journal armed forces india, 77, S49-S56.
Davakos, M. J., (2018) The impact of reading workshops on third graders in a summer
reading campRetrieved from
https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=6084&context=etd
Davison, P. (2013). The e-Delphi technique in doctoral research: considerations and
rationale. Review of Higher Education and Self-Learning, 6(22), 53-65.
Donnelly, Patrick M., Huber Elizabeth, Yeatman Jason D, Intensive Summer Intervention
Drives Linear Growth of Reading Skill in Struggling Reader, Frontiers in
Psychology, Vol.10, 2019, doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01900
86
Donohoe, H., Stellefson, M., & Tennant, B. (2012). Advantages and limitations of the eDelphi technique: implications for health education researchers. American
Journal of Health Education, 43(1), 38-46.
https://doi.org/10.1080/19325037.2012.10599216
Edmonds, E., O’Donoghue, C., Spano, S., & Algozzine, R. (2009). Learning When
School is Out. The Journal of Educational Research, 102(3), 213-221.
Entwisle, D. R., Alexander, K. L., & Olson, L. S. (2000). Summer learning and home
environment. In R. D. Kahlenberg (Ed.), A nation at risk (pp. 9-30). New York:
The Century Foundation Press.
Evans, R. (2005). Reframing the achievement gap. Phi Delta Kappan, 86(8), 582–589.
DOI:10.1177/003172170508600806
Faith, Linda & Nordström, Thomas & Anderson, Ulrika & Gustafson, Stefan. (2019).
Summer reading loss. Nordic Journal of Literacy Research. 5. 10-23.
Fink-Hafner, D., Dagen, T., Doušak, M., Novak, M., & Hafner-Fink, M. (2019). Delphi
method: strengths and weaknesses. Advances in Methodology and
Statistics, 16(2), 1-19.
Fiore, C. D. (2005). Fiore’s summer library reading program handbook. New York: NealSchumann
Fregonara, E., &Coscia, C. (2019). Multi criteria analyses, life cycle approaches and
Delphi Method: a methodological proposal to assess design scenarios. Valori E
Valutazioni, (23).
87
Garst, B., & Ozier, L. (2015). Enhancing youth outcomes and organizational practices
through the camp-based reading program. Journal of Experimental Education,
38(4), 324-338. doi:10.1177/1053825915578914
Gaya, H., & Smith, E. (2016). Developing a qualitative single case study in the strategic
management realm: An appropriate research design? International Journal of
Business Management and Economic Research, 7(2), 529-538.
Gershenson, S. (2013). Do summertime-use gaps vary by socioeconomic status?
American Educational Research Journal, 50(6), 1219-1248.
doi:10.3102/0002831213502516
Głuszek, E. (2021). Use of the e-Delphi method to validate the corporate reputation
management maturity model (CR3M). Sustainability, 13(21), 12019.
Gordon, C., & Lu, Y. L. (2021). “I Hate to Read-Or Do I?” Low-Achievers and Their
Reading. In IASL Annual Conference Proceedings
Gray, C., &Macblain, S. (2015). Learning theories in childhood. (2nd ed.). Sage.
Hall, D. A., Smith, H., Heffernan, E., Fackrell, K., & Core Outcome Measures in
Tinnitus International Delphi (COMiT’ID) Research Steering Group. (2018).
Recruiting and retaining participants in e-Delphi surveys for core outcome set
development: evaluating the COMiT’ID study. PLoS one, 13(7), e0201378
Hareide, L., Tveter, E., & Lied, S. I. (2020). Children’s Summer reading in Norway:
Insights gained from the gamified library-initiated reading campaign Sommerles.
no. Nordic Journal of Literacy Research, 6(3)
88
Harrington-Lueker, D. (2018) Books for Idle Hours: Nineteenth-Century Publishing and
the Rise of Summer Reading US: University of Massachusetts Press
Hernandez, D. J. (2012). Double jeopardy: How third grade reading skills and poverty
influence high school graduation. Retrieved from
http://www.aecf.org/resources/double-jeopardy/
Heyns, B. (1978). Summer learning and the effects of schooling/Barbara Heyns; with a
foreword by Christopher S. Jencks. New York: Academic Press, c1978.
Himmel, M. A. (2012). Qualitative analysis of cloud computing risks and framework for
the rationalization and mitigation of cloud risks (Doctoral Dissertation).
Retrieved from ProQuest Central; ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global (UMI
No.3520142).
Hong, Q. N., Pluye, P., Fàbregues, S., Bartlett, G., Boardman, F., Cargo, M., … & Vedel,
I. (2019). Improving the content validity of the mixed methods appraisal tool: a
modified e-Delphi study. Journal of clinical epidemiology, 111, 49-59.
Hillier, C. (2021). A Seasonal Comparison of the Effectiveness of Parent Engagement on
Student Literacy Achievement.Canadian Journal of Education/Revue canadienne
de l’éducation, 44(2), 496-529.
Hsu, C., & Sanford, B.A. (2007). The Delphi technique: Making sense of
consensus. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 12(10), 1-9.
Hsu, C. C., & Sandford, B. A. (2012). The Delphi technique: Use, considerations, and
applications in the conventional, policy, and on-line environments. In C. Silva
89
(Ed.), Online research methods in urban and planning studies (pp. 73-192).
https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-0074-4.ch011
Jesson, R., McNaughton, S., & Kolose, T. (2014). Investigating the summer learning
effect in low SES (Socioeconomic status) schools. Australian Journal of
Language and Literacy, 37(1), 45-54.
Jordan, E. A. (2010). The semiconductor industry and emerging technologies: A study
using a modified e-Delphi method (Doctoral Dissertation). Retrieved from
ProQuest Central; ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global (UMI No.3442759).
Katzir, T., Alyssa, G., Aryeh, B., Donnelley, K., & Wolf, M. (2013). Intensity vs.
duration: Comparing the effects of a fluency-based reading intervention program
in after-school vs. summer school settings. Journal of Education and Training
Studies, 1(2), 61-73. doi:10.11114/jets.1i2.143
Kavanagh, L. (2019). Relations between children’s reading motivation, activity, and
performance at the endo of primary school. Journal of Research in Reading, 42(3-
4), 562-582.
Kelleher, A. B., Sweeney, C., Foley, T., Hally, R. M., Meehan, E., Savage, E., …&
Cornally, N. (2020). An e-Delphi study to identify priority areas for education on
advance care planning in COPD (Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease)
management. Respiratory care, 65(3), 347-354
Kernan, L. M., Dryden, E. M., Nearing, K., Kennedy, M. A., Hung, W., Moo, L., &
Pimentel, C. B. (2022). Integrating CFIR-ERIC and e-Delphi methods to increase
telegeriatrics uptake. The Gerontologist.
90
Kerry, Trevor & Davies, Brent. (2003). Summer Learning Loss: The Evidence and a
Possible Solution. Support for Learning. 13. 118 – 122. 10.1111/1467-
9604.00072.
Kim, J. (2004). Summer reading and the ethnic achievement gap. Journal of education
for students placed at risk, 9(2), 169-188
Kim, J. S. (2007). The effects of a voluntary summer reading intervention on reading
activities and reading achievement. Journal of educational psychology, 99(3),
505
Kim, J. (2021). Summer reading and the ethnic achievement gap. In Closing the
Achievement Gap, 169-188
Kim, J. S., Guryan, J., White, T. G., Quinn, D. M., Capotosto, L., & Kingston, H. C.
(2016). Delayed effects of a low-cost and large-scale summer reading intervention
on elementary school children’s reading comprehension. Journal of Research on
Educational Effectiveness, 9(sup1), 1-22
Kim, J. S., & Quinn, D. M. (2013). The effects of summer reading on low-income
children’s literacy achievement from kindergarten to grade 8. Review of
Educational Research, 83(3), 386-431. doi:10.3102/0034654313483906
Kim, J. S., & White, T. G. (2011). Solving the problem of summer reading loss. Phi Delta
Kappan, 92, 64-67. Retrieved from http://8great.org/solving-theproblem-ofsummer-reading-loss.pdf
91
Kirkland, L.D. (2008). Changing the Faces of Summer Programs. Childhood Education,
96-101.
Kostikova, I., Honcharova, O., Vorozhbit-Horbatiuk, V., Soloshenko-Zadniprovska, N.,
Marmaza, O., & Lushchyk, Y. (2020). The Impact of Summer Reading on Young
Learners’ Foreign Language Acquisition. Journal of Educational and Social
Research, 10(2), 5
Krashen, S., & Shin, F. (2004). Summer reading and the potential contribution of the
public library in improving reading for children of poverty. Public Library
Quarterly, 23(3/4), 99-109.
Kromydas, T, Campbell, M., Chambers, S., Boon, MH, Pearce, A., Wells, V., Craig, P.
The effect of school summer holidays on inequalities in children and young
people’s mental health and cognitive ability in the UK using data from the
millennium cohort study. BMC Public Health. 2022 Jan 22;22 (1):154. doi:
10.1186/s12889-022-12540-2. PMID: 35065629; PMCID: PMC8782677.
Kuhfeld, M. Surprising new evidence on summer learning loss. Phi Delta Kappan.
2019;101(1):25-29. doi:10.1177/0031721719871560
Larson, L. C. (2009). e-Reading and e-Responding: New tools for the next generation of
readers. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 53(3), 255-258. Retrieved from
http://www.wiley.com
Laurie, O. Campbell, Claudia, C. Sutter & Glenn, W. Lambie (2019) An Investigation of
92
the Summer Learning Effect on Fourth Grade Students’ Reading Scores,
Reading Psychology, 40:5, 465-490, DOI: 10.1080/02702711.2019.1629516
Laverick, D. M. (2014). Supporting striving readers through technology-based
instruction. Reading improvement, 51(1), 11-19.
Leefatt, S. (2015). The key to equality: Why we must prioritize summer learning to
narrow the socioeconomic achievement gap. Brigham Young University
Education and Law Journal, 2015(2), 9th ser., 549-584.
Lindley, S., Giles, R. M., &Tunks, K. (2016). Summer reading lists: Research and
Recommendations. Texas Journal of Literacy Education, 4(1), 37-45.
Manuti, A., Pastore, S., Scardigno, A. F., Giancaspro, M. L., & Morciano, D. (2015).
Formal and informal learning in the workplace: A research review. International
Journal of Training and Development,19,1–17. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijtd.12044
Maxwell, J. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
McCombs, J. S., Augustine, C. H., Schwartz, H. L., Bodilly, S. J., McInnis, B., Lichter,
D. S., Cross, A. B. (2011). Making summer count: How summer programs can
boost children’s learning. Arlington, VA: The RAND Corporation.
McDaniel, S. C., McLeod, R., Carter, C. L., & Robinson, C. (2017). Supplemental
summer literacy instruction: Implications for preventing summer reading loss.
Reading Psychology, 38(7), 673-686.
93
McGill-Franzen, A., Ward, N., & Cahill, M. (2016). Summers: Some are reading, some
are not! It matters. The Reading Teacher, 69(6), 585-596. doi:10.1002/trtr.1461
Miller, B. M. (2007). The learning season: The untapped power of summer to advance
student achievement. Quincy, MA: Nellie Mae Education Foundation.
Mraz, M., & Rasinski, T. V. (2007). Summer reading loss. The Reading Teacher, 60(8),
784-789 National Center for Education Statistics. (n.d.).
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/statereform/tab5_1.asp
https://doi.org/10.1080/02702711.2017.1333070.
O’Connell, K. M. (2020). Making summer learning equitable for students in a rural, title I
school district: Turning on the faucet of resources. The Interactive Journal of
Global Leadership, 1(1), 1-32.
Pedersen, J. (2015). Summer versus school: The possibilities of the year-round school.
Rowman & Littlefield.
Petty, T. M., Smith, N. L., & Kern, A. H. (2017). Engaging students through a summer
literacy experience. The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin: International Journal for
Professional Educators, 83(5), 49-54.
Pitcock, S., & Seidel, B. (2015). Accelerating Student Success. Standard, 15(1), 4-10.
Rasinski, T.V. (2007). Summer Reading Loss. The Reading Teacher, 784-789.
Reason, P. (1994). Three approaches to participative inquiry. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S.
Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Roe, K. (2019). Summer Reading! Health Promotion Practice, 20(4), 473-475
94
Romero-Collado, A. (2021). Essential elements to elaborate a study with the (e) Delphi
method. Enfermeríaintensiva, 32, 100-4.
Rose, D., & Dalton, B. (2009). Learning to read in the digital age. Mind, Brain, and
Education, 3(2), 74-83. doi:10.1111/j.1751-228X.2009. 01057.x
Rozelle, J. J., & Makenzie, A. H. (2011) Biology experiences in the summer: Keeping the
faucet flowing for all students. The American Biology Teacher, 73(8),449-452.
Savenye, W.C., & Robinson, R.S. (2005). Using qualitative research methods in higher
education. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 16(2), 65-95.
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02961475
Seawright, M. (2017). The effects of a summer reading program on reading achievement
and reading motivation (Publication No. 10264389) [Doctoral dissertation,
University of South Carolina]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.
Schaffner, E., & Schiefele, U. (2016). The contribution of intrinsic and extrinsic reading
motivation to the development of reading competence over summer vacation.
Reading Psychology, 37, 917-941. doi:10.1080/02702711.2015.1133465
Shields, C., & Oberg, S. (2000). Year-round schooling: Promises and pitfalls. Scarecrow
Press Skulmoski, G., Hartman, F., &Krahn, J. (2007). The Delphi method for
graduate research. Journal of Information Technology Education, 6, 1-21.
Retrieved from http://www.jite.org/documents/Vol6/JITEv6p001-
021Skulmoski212.pdf.
Shinwell, J. Defeyter MA. Investigation of Summer Learning Loss in the UK
95
-Implications for Holiday Club Provision. Front Public Health. 2017 Oct 6;
5:270. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2017.00270. PMID: 29057221; PMCID:
PMC5635200.
Skulmoski, G. J., Hartman, F. T., &Krahn, J. (2007). The E-Delphi method for graduate
Research. Journal of Information Technology Education, 6(2), 1-27.
https://doi.org/10.28945/199
Slade TS, Piper B, Kaunda Z, King S, Ibrahim H. Is ‘summer’ reading loss universal?
Using ongoing literacy assessment in Malawi to estimate the loss from gradetransition breaks. Research in Comparative and International Education.
2017;12(4):461-485. doi:10.1177/1745499917740657
Slaughter, R. A. (2019) Summer Reading Lists in Private Middle Schools: Qualitative
Content Analysis of Multicultural Fiction US: Widener University
Small, R. V., Arnone, M. P., & Bennett, E. (2017). A hook and a book. Children and
Libraries, 7-15.
Smith, L. (2011, December 2011). The Resourceful School. Educational Leadership,
69(4), 60-63. Retrieved from
http://www.ascd.org/publications/educationalleadership/dec11/vol69/num04/toc.a
spx
Suitts, S. (2015). A new majority research bulletin: Low-income students now a majority
in the nation’s public schools. Atlanta: Southern Education Foundation
96
Summer Learning Loss: How Families Can Help. (2017). ReadyRosie. Retrieved from
https://www.readyrosie.com/summer-learning-loss/
The Glossary of Educational Reform. 2013. Learning loss. Retrieved from
https://www.edglossary.org/learning-loss/
Tiruchittampalam, S., Nicholson, T., Levin, J. R., &Ferron, J. M. (2018). The effects of
preliteracy knowledge, schooling, and summer vacation on literacy
Acquisition. Journal of Educational Research, 111(1), 28-
42.https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2016.1190911.
United States Department of Agriculture. (2017, April 10). USDA. Retrieved from
USDA Food and Nutrition: retrieved from:
http://www.gpo.gov/fdysy/pkg/FR-2017-04- 10/pdf/2017-07043.pdf
Whittingham, J., & Rickman, W. A. (2015). Book talking: Avoiding summer drift.
Knowledge Quest, 43(5), 18-21. Zvoch, K., & Stevens, J. (2016). Identification of
summer school effects by comparing the ins and out-of-school growth rates of
struggling early readers. The Elementary School Journal, 3, 433-456.
Wolf, L. A., &Delao, A. M. (2021). Establishing research priorities for the emergency
severity index using a modified Delphi approach. Journal of Emergency Nursing,
47(1), 50-57.
Vale, C., Weaven, M., Davies, A., Hooley, N., Davidson, K., & Loton, D. (2013).
Growth in literacy and numeracy achievement: Evidence and explanations of a
97
Summer slowdown in low socio-economic schools. The Australian Educational
Researcher, 40(1), 1-25. doi:10.1007/s13384-012-0065-9
Verezub, E., Grossi, V., Howard, K., & Watkins, P. (2008). Building e-based literacy for
vocational education and training students. Australasian Journal of Educational
Technology, 24(3), 326-338. Retrieved from
http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet.html
Volley, R. (2020). Summer reading loss: A program evaluation on the impact of a
summer school program on reducing summer reading loss in high-poverty
middle school students in an urban school district (Publication No. 27835075)
[Doctoral dissertation, Gardner-Webb University]. ProQuest Dissertations and
Theses Global.
Whittingham, J., & Rickman, W. A. (2015). Book talking avoiding summer drift.
Knowledge Quest, 43(5), 18-21.
Witteven, A. (2018). Jump-start summer: Program ideas, from ska story time to outdoor
treasure hunts. School Library Journal, 34-37.
Yin, R. (2014). Case study research design and methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Yousuf, M. I. (2007). Using experts’ opinions through Delphi technique. Practical
assessment, research & evaluation, 12(4), 1-8.
Zvoch, K. & Stevens, J. J. (2013). Summer school effects in a randomized field trial.
Early Childhood Quarterly, 28(1s.
98
99
Appendix A
Title
[Start section text here] [Note: If including permission or consent documents, you
must remove all personal information including phone numbers and email addresses.]
AUTHOR BIOGRAPHY
[optional]
[Start section text here]
https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=6084&context=etd