Terrazzo Presentation

Online book clubs for preteens and teens

Cassandra M. Scharber, Ann Melrose, Jody Wurl

What is the hypothesis for this study and was it tested properly?

The implied hypothesis:"Public library online book clubs are sites of possibility – a medium through which libraries can readily encourage literate practices in younger generations." (p 176)

The introduction sets the stage for this hypothesis by discussing the potential of online book clubs as "sites of possibility" for promoting literacy, specifically through public libraries, and aims to motivate similar initiatives in other libraries.

Strengths:

Based on the methodology described in the study, it seems that the hypothesis was tested properly, but with certain limitations that should be considered. .

Longitudinal Evolution:

The study tested online book clubs across multiple years (2005–2008), adjusting the technology and format (e.g., email-based, blog-based, Moodle). This iterative approach allowed for refinement of the methodology and ensured the testing reflected real-world conditions.

Participant Engagement and Feedback:

The study gathered data from participants (pre- and post-club surveys, interviews) and parents. This qualitative and quantitative feedback provided insights into user experiences, preferences, and the success of the online book club in fostering engagement.

Diverse Data Sources:

The inclusion of librarian insights, parent interviews, and participant surveys offered a well-rounded view of the program’s success. The real-time chat feature was highlighted as a particularly effective tool for engagement, which supports the hypothesis about fostering literacy and connection.

Conclusion: The hypothesis was tested properly in terms of exploring engagement, logistical barriers, and participant satisfaction. However, more robust data collection methods (e.g., larger sample sizes and literacy impact measurements) could strengthen the findings. As it stands, the study provides meaningful insights but might not fully establish the effectiveness of online book clubs in promoting literacy.

Limitations:

Sample Size:

The number of participants in the book clubs was relatively small, particularly in the early years (e.g., 4–17 active members per club). While their enthusiasm was notable, larger sample sizes would provide stronger evidence.

Facilitator Role:

The librarian facilitator expressed uncertainty about their role (teacher, moderator, or peer), which might have influenced the dynamics of the book club. A clearer understanding of this role could have led to more consistent outcomes.

Measurement of Literacy Impact:

While engagement and enjoyment were well-documented, the study did not deeply explore measurable improvements in literacy skills (e.g., reading comprehension or writing ability), which could be a critical part of testing the hypothesis.