116 The Reading Teacher, 62(2), pp. 116–125 © 2008 International Reading Association DOI:10.1598/RT.62.2.3 ISSN: 0034-0561 print / 1936-2714 online Teacher and Parent Scaffolding of Voluntary Summer Reading Thomas G. White, James S. Kim W e recently designed and implemented a voluntary summer reading program for third-, fourth-, and fifth-grade students that provided interesting books and encouraged oral and silent reading over the summer. One parent of a girl participating in the program said, “She does not read as often as I’d like her to. Your program has changed that. She enjoys receiving the books in the mail.” This comment suggests that the program was success- ful in engaging this girl with text over the summer. Engagement with text is the necessary first step if we want to improve reading skills when school is not in session, or prevent a decline in reading achievement that might otherwise occur. Voluntary reading typically means that students are given an opportunity to self-select texts and read silently on their own, often with little or no feedback provided. Most teachers in the United States believe that voluntary reading promotes reading skills includ- ing word recognition, fluency, and comprehension. Further, teachers regard wide reading as a major avenue to increased vocabulary, conceptual under- standing, and world knowledge. These often deeply held beliefs do not mesh, however, with the report of the National Reading Panel (NRP; National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, 2000). The NRP concluded that there is little evidence from research that “encouraging reading has a beneficial effect on reading achievement” (p. 3-28). The NRP based its conclusion regarding the ef- fectiveness of voluntary reading on a review of 14 experimental and quasi-experimental studies. The conclusion generated heated controversy among literacy scholars that focused on research methods. For example, Cunningham (2001) criticized the NRP for excluding correlational studies. Shanahan (2004) pointed out that correlational studies showing a posi- tive relationship between independent reading and reading achievement can be interpreted as show- ing that better readers read more. He defended the NRP, arguing that experimental studies are needed if we want to assert with confidence that independent reading will result in improved reading achievement What got lost in the debate about scientific evi- dence was the fact that the NRP assumed an agnostic position on the merits of voluntary reading, neither accepting nor rejecting it. The panel members sug- gested that the dearth of experimental evidence “does not mean that procedures that encourage stu- dents to read more could not be made to work—fu- ture studies should explore this possibility” (p. 3-28). Thus, the NRP left open the possibility that voluntary reading could be made more effective and encour- aged researchers to pursue the question of how. We have been pursuing the question of how to enhance the effects of voluntary reading for several years. In the process we developed what we call a “scaffolded” voluntary summer reading program and conducted two experiments to test its effectiveness. This article explains the motivation and rationale for the program, describes the experiments and the program, reports findings, and discusses conclusions about and practical implications of the findings. Voluntary reading of books over the summer can enhance the reading achievement of ethnic minority students and reduce skill loss over the summer break if the books closely match students’ reading levels and interests.