1Widening Teachers’ Reading Repertoires: Moving beyond a Popular Childhood Canon Teresa Cremin, Sarah Jane Mukherjee, Juli- Anna Aerila, Merja Kauppinen, Mari Siipola, Johanna Lähteelä Children’s literature is widely used in schools, but do teachers have sufficiently rich repertoires of relevant, diverse, and contemporary children’s texts to nurture recreational reading? Introduction International evidence indicates that those young people who choose to read, and do so frequently, are likely to ben- efit academically, personally, and socially. Recreational reading is strongly associated with enhanced vocabulary, reading comprehension, and psychological well- being (Clark & Teravainen- Goff,  2018; McQuillan,  2019; Torppa et  al.,  2020). Through reading and discussing literature, young people explore their identities and others’ life worlds (Ivey & Johnston,  2013; Koopman & Hakemulder,  2015). Furthermore, in classrooms that nurture volitional read- ing, children develop a sense of belonging and community (Cremin et  al.,  2014; Ng,  2018). Appropriately then, read- ing for pleasure is recognized by the International Literacy Association as the right of every child and a matter of social justice (ILA, 2018). To realize this right, we argue teachers need to develop the three Rs of reading for pleasure: responsibility, rigor, and relevance. They need to recognize their professional responsibility to be knowledgeable reading partners with rich repertoires of personally relevant, contemporary, and diverse children’s texts (Cremin et  al.,  2009, 2022; Hartsfield & Kimmel, 2020). They need to ensure there is rigor in their planned reading for pleasure pedagogy and be able to support each child’s capacity to make wise and appropriate choices that motivate further reading. As Guthrie, McRae, and Klauda observe, students value the opinions of “trusted others” (Guthrie et  al.,  2007, p.306). However, teachers’ subject knowledge of children’s texts is not addressed fully within preservice education or professional development; too often it remains an optional specialism (Simpson, 2016), and national policy documen- tation tends to take such knowledge for granted. Moreover, children’s literature is frequently presented as a utilitarian resource in education, used instrumentally to teach the skills of reading. This sidelines not only the part literature plays in nurturing the will—the desire to read—but also its contribution to developing as a reader. Literature’s potential to create imaginatively satisfy- ing experiences often leaves children wanting more, thus motivating readers and impacting upon the frequency with which they read recreationally. Enhancing reading volume, Allington (2014) argues, is a key to develop young people’s fluency and comprehension. Research with 15- year- olds indicates the presence of a “fiction effect”—evident in a stronger relationship between reading fiction and success- ful reading outcomes compared to other text types (Jerrim TEACHING AND LEARNING IN ACTION The Reading Teacher  Vol. 0  No. 0  pp. 1–9 This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. © 2024 The Authors. The Reading Teacher published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International Literacy Association.doi:10.1002/trtr.2294 Teresa Cremin is a Professor of Education (Literacy) in The Open University Milton Keynes MK7 6AA, Milton Keynes, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland; email teresa.cremin@open.ac.uk. Sarah Jane Mukherjee is a Honorary Associate in the Open University Milton Keynes MK7 6AA, Milton Keynes, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland; email sarahjane.mukherjee@open.ac.uk. Juli- Anna Aerila is a Senior Lecturer in the University of Turku, Turku 20014, Finland; email julaer@utu.fi. Merja Kauppinen is a Senior Lecturer in the University of Jyväskylä, Jyvaskyla 40014, Finland; email merja.a.kauppinen@jyu.fi. Mari Siipola is a PhD student in the University of Turku, Turku, Finland; email mari.siipola@utu.fi. Johanna Lähteelä is a PhD student in the University of Turku, Turku 20014, Finland; email jomalah@utu.fi. 2TEACHING AND LEARNING IN ACTION The Reading Teacher  Vol. 0  No. 0  Month 0000 literacyworldwide.org & Moss, 2019). The authors of this OECD data analysis sug- gest that literary language encourages deep reading and sustained engagement which lead to enhanced reading skills. This aligns with a study of Finnish 10- year- olds, that shows recreational fiction reading (compared to reading comics, magazines, and newspapers) more effectively sup- ports comprehension (Leino et al., 2017). Research addition- ally indicates that literature contributes to enhanced knowledge and language skills (Mar & Rain,  2015), prompts personal resonances (Kuzmičová & Cremin, 2021), is associated with well- being (Clark & Teravainen- Goff,  2018), and is perceived to be a potent tool to help address educational inequities (Simpson & Cremin, 2022). Thus, to sup- port readers in the round, and nurture the will and the skills of reading, teach- ers need secure knowledge of literary texts. So in our study of English and Finnish preservice teachers as readers, we sought to understand more about their knowledge of children’s literature. However, in both countries elementary children’s attitudes and desire to read are low compared to their skills. In the last PIRLS, only 23% (Finnish) and 29% (English) children reported liking reading very much compared to the international median (IM) of 46%, while 30% and 24%, respectively, reported that they did not like it at all, compared to an IM of 18% (Mullis et  al.,  2023). To discern preservice teachers’ landscapes of children’s literature at the start of their training, we invited partici- pants from eight universities to recommend six authors, illustrators, or poets for children. We shared the results so their education lecturers could build on these, enabling the future teachers to develop as informed reading role models. In what follows, we examine this concept and teachers’ subject knowledge of texts, before turning to the study’s research methods. Teachers as Reading Role Models It has long been argued that teachers who share their enthu- siasm for reading enhance children’s engagement as read- ers. Studies from the United States (Applegate et al., 2014; Commeyras et  al.,  2003), the United Kingdom (Cremin et  al.,  2014), Australia, (Merga,  2016; Simpson,  2016), Belgium (Vansteelandt et al., 2017), Finland (Kauppinen & Aerila, 2019), and Spain (Granado, 2014) all underscore the significance of teachers as reading role models. Research also suggests that teacher readers are more likely to use pedagogical strategies that are accepted as effec- tive in fostering children’s recreational reading (McKool & Gespass, 2009). These include rich text access, choice, reading aloud, time to read, informal text talks, and rec- ommendations in social reading environments (Cremin et al., 2014; Fisher & Frey, 2018). Responsible teacher read- ers get to know children as readers in order to help them choose per- sonally and emotionally relevant texts aligned with their interests (McGeown et al., 2020; Ng, 2018). However, research also reveals that teachers are not as well positioned as they might be to nurture recreational reading. There are multiple reasons for this. While personally, teachers may value the satisfaction that reading literature and other texts offers, professionally, some do not recognize children’s recre- ational reading as their responsi- bility (Garces- Bacsal et al., 2018), and view reading primarily as proficiency (Hempel- Jorgensen et  al., 2018). In accountable edu- cation systems in which the standards agenda takes precedence, balancing reading instruction and reading for pleasure remain a challenge and can result in an impoverished reading for pleasure pedagogy that is activity- oriented, lacking an appropriate degree of rigor and attention to detail, and constraining learner engagement (Hempel- Jorgensen et  al., 2018). Additionally, studies highlight that teachers’ knowledge of children’s literary texts is limited. Teachers’ Subject Knowledge of Children’s Literature Data from practicing and preservice teachers indicate that there are reasons to be concerned about practitioners’ liter- ary subject knowledge; scant interest in reading extended prose is recorded and little time is set aside for it (Applegate & Applegate, 2004; Rimensberger, 2014; Skaar et al., 2018). Drawing on Norwegian data, it is argued that a “downward trend” exists in the profession’s capability to develop a love of reading in the young (Skaar et al., 2018, p. 320). In the United Kingdom, research persistently reports that teachers’ repertoires of children’s literature are inadequate. Reliance on popular authors and texts from teachers’ childhoods has been evidenced in three studies PAUSE AND PONDER ■ Do you think your repertoire of children’s literature is wide enough to nurture all your students as readers? ■ Thinking about the children’s books you have read or shared recently, how many were published in the last 5 years? ■ To what extent do you offer tailored book recommendations to individuals, building on your knowledge of texts and of each child as a reader, while still enabling choice? ■ What strategies do you employ to ensure children see you as a fellow reader and reading role model? 19362714, 0, D ow nloaded from https://ila.onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1002/trtr.2294 by U niversity of Turku, W iley O nline Library on [25/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on W iley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License 3TEACHING AND LEARNING IN ACTION The Reading Teacher  Vol. 0  No. 0  Month 0000 literacyworldwide.org which respectively drew on: elementary teachers (n:1200; Cremin, Bearne, et al., 2008; Cremin, Mottram, et al., 2008), elementary and high school teachers (n:2362; Clark & Teravainen,  2015), and over 150 Scottish preservice teachers (Farrar, 2021). Notwithstanding the broad times- pan of these surveys (2008–2021), Roald Dahl was pre- eminent, followed by J.K. Rowling and Jacqueline Wilson; all three were noted within the top four authors in each study. A survey of read- alouds chosen by UK teachers during lockdown again affirms a degree of “Dahl depen- dency” (CLPE, 2021). In the United States, through examining 1099 ele- mentary teachers’ read- aloud choices, Conradi- Smith et  al.  (2022) found that the fiction selected or set was extremely dated. After removing classics (e.g., The Swiss Family Robinson, 1812) from the analysis, the mean pub- lication date was 1995. The most popular books were Wonder (Palacio, 2012), Because of Winn Dixie (DiCamillo, 2000), and Charlotte’s Web (White, 1952). While the texts, which were principally chosen for instructional purposes, may represent a subset of teachers’ knowledge of books deemed suitable to study, they reflect neither racial diver- sity nor contemporary societal concerns (Conradi- Smith et al., 2022). This underscores our argument that knowing modern and diverse texts of relevance to today’s children is a professional responsibility which deserves increased attention. The Study To understand preservice teachers’ identities and prac- tices as readers, researchers from Finland and England designed online questionnaires with six shared questions for comparison. Both quantitative and qualitative informa- tion about the participants’ views, knowledge, memories, recommendations, and pedagogical practices for reading for pleasure was sought. In this paper, we draw on one question, drawn from Cremin, Bearne, et  al. (2008) and Cremin, Mottram, et  al. (2008), that asks participants to name six author/illustrator/poets that children would be likely to enjoy. We highlighted children’s enjoyment, to avoid participants drawing on what they might perceive to be “classic” or “good” literature. In England, 168 preservice teachers on a Postgraduate Certificate in Education for primary teaching participated. They were studying at three universities based in large cit- ies, two in the South and one in the Southwest. Each uni- versity posted information and an invitation to take part on their online student forum at the start of the future teach- ers first year of study in autumn 2020. In Finland, 185 pre- service teachers from five universities participated, they were studying to be primary teachers or early childhood educators in Central or Southwest Finland. The survey was completed during the autumn terms, 2020 and 2021. Participants received the online link through the Teacher Student Union of Finland or via lecturers who were research- ers in the study. While we do not claim our small- scale survey findings are generalizable, we argue that alongside differences there are marked commonalities; it is likely that similar results and trends may be found in other contexts. In both countries, participation was completely vol- untary, it was not part of course requirements and was undertaken in participants’ own time on their own devices with informed consent. The questionnaire was hosted on the Qualtrics platform in England and on Webropol in Finland. It allowed participants to withdraw at any time and to decline to answer any question. No identifying information was collected. Connections and potential relationships between the various strands of the research noted previously were examined. This paper, however, only focuses upon the authors, illustrators, and poets (hereafter author- artists) whose work the English and Finnish preservice teachers believed children would be likely to enjoy, their recommen- dations were viewed as a proxy for their knowledge of chil- dren’s writers. In what follows, we explore these and note that they coalesce around a small cadre of author- artists, whose commonalities we consider. Finally, we discuss the implications, for both teacher education and profes- sional development and the value of developing Reading Teachers (Commeyras et  al.,  2003; Cremin et  al.,  2022) who, read widely, wisely, and reflectively in order to develop a love of reading in the young. Such teachers, we posit, effectively deploy the three Rs of reading for pleasure: responsibility, rigor, and relevance. Findings: Narrow Repertoires that Lack Diversities The preservice teachers were invited to recommend six author- artists that children would enjoy. Participants were free to name authors, illustrators/picture fiction creators, and poets. With 353 preservice teachers, there were a pos- sible 2118 responses; however, the total number named was only 1473. Worryingly, over half of the English (52%) and 10% of the Finnish participants seemed unable to offer a single recommendation, they left the response blank, despite completing the survey. However, 40% of the English trainee teachers recommended six author- artists, 47% of the Finnish. Six English and 49 Finnish participants recommended a book not an author- artist. Strikingly, in both countries, the recommendations made, coalesced around a limited number of author- artists. Overall, the data reflect a very narrow range in 19362714, 0, D ow nloaded from https://ila.onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1002/trtr.2294 by U niversity of Turku, W iley O nline Library on [25/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on W iley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License 4TEACHING AND LEARNING IN ACTION The Reading Teacher  Vol. 0  No. 0  Month 0000 literacyworldwide.org various ways including genre, nationality, gender, and the number of writers of color. See Figures 1 and 2 for a word cloud of the author- artists who received ten or more men- tions in each country. These represent two thirds of the data in both countries. In England, nearly half of the preservice teachers who made recommendations named Roald Dahl, with around a third naming David Walliams, Julia Donaldson, and Jacqueline Wilson. In Finland, nearly half of the respon- dents recommended Mauri Kunnas, Sinikka and Tiina Nopola, J.K. Rowling, and Timo Parvela, while a third sug- gested Tove Jansson. The dominance of the top four in England and the top five in Finland, alongside Roald Dahl and J.K. Rowling in both countries, places firmly in the wings authors who were mentioned far less frequently. Details of the most recommended authors- artists who received more than ten mentions are shown in Table  1. It is notable that in the English data, the major- ity are British, except for Eric Carle and Dr. Seuss who are from the United States. This enhanced awareness of writers from one’s own country is evident in the Finnish data too, demonstrating a strong reliance on domestic authors. However, J.K. Rowling and Roald Dahl from the United Kingdom and Jeff Kinney from the United States were also recommended, indicating that the work of some author- artists successfully transcends country borders. In terms of text genres, the most frequently recom- mended list is dominated by the writers of narrative texts, most, but not all, of which are illustrated. Their books span early childhood to the end of elementary school and include books for babies and preschool children (e.g., Carle and Havukainen and Toivonen), picture books (e.g., Donaldson and Kunnas), illustrated novels (e.g., Kinney and Noronen), and novels for younger (e.g., Dahl and Lindgren) and older children (e.g., Rowling and Jansson). Significantly, of the 20 author- artists on the most mentioned list, 14 have pro- duced series as well as stand- alone stories. The complete absence of graphic novelists in this list and in the whole dataset is notable, and few author- artists who create visual narratives for older readers were men- tioned. Additionally, just two poets were noted in the most mentioned list (Rosen and Kunnas). In the complete data- set, only eight different poets and one information book creator were mentioned. The full range of genres remains completely unacknowledged. Furthermore, scant writers of color or from other cul- tures were named, or even writers writing about other cul- tures. In the Finnish data, only one author- artist of color was recommended. In the English, 31 participants named author- artists of color; the most frequently mentioned were Malorie Blackman (n- 9) and Onjali Q Raúf (n- 6). In relation to gender, 58% (English) and 59% (Finnish) of the educators’ recommended male author- artists; White male writers prevailed. In sum, extremely narrow repertoires that markedly lack diversity are evident, in the most mentioned list and the data overall. Findings: Commonalities among the most Frequently Recommended Author- Artists Examining the list of the most well- known authors named, several commonalities can be discerned. For example, all are highly productive with publishing careers that span several decades. Nine of the twenty most men- tioned, including Enid Blyton, Eric Carle, Roald Dahl, Dr. Seuss, Tove Jansson, Kirsi Kunnas, Astrid Lindgren, Sinikka Nopola, and Beatrix Potter are no longer alive, but their work, some of which might well be deemed “clas- sics,” continues to sell widely. Dr. Seuss’s first book, The Pocketbook of Boners, was published in 1931, Roald Dahl’s The Gremlins in 1942, although his popularity rose with the publication of James and the Giant Peach in 1961. In Figure 1 The English most Frequently Recommended Authors Figure 2 The Finnish most Frequently Recommended Authors 19362714, 0, D ow nloaded from https://ila.onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1002/trtr.2294 by U niversity of Turku, W iley O nline Library on [25/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on W iley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License 5TEACHING AND LEARNING IN ACTION The Reading Teacher  Vol. 0  No. 0  Month 0000 literacyworldwide.org Finland, Kirsi Kunnas’ original work for children Tiitiäisen satupuu (The Tumpkin’s Story Tree) was printed in 1957. While the sales of individual titles vary, the authors on the most mentioned list have not been out of print since their first books were published. The longevity of most of these author- artists’ best- selling titles, many of which are series fiction, means that they were available in schools and libraries when the pre- service teachers were children. Indeed, in responding to an earlier question about a favorite book as a child, 40% of the English and 30.5% of the Finnish participants recom- mended one written by an author- artist on the most men- tioned list. Potent texts, first encountered in childhood, Waller (2019, p.265) argues, often retain persistent “affec- tive traces” which are likely to be underscored by long- standing commitments to characters in well- loved series. Some childhood books, such as Beatrix Potter’s animal tales or Tove Jansson’s Moonmin stories, may even have been passed down from generation to generation in fami- lies, securing their place in individuals’ memories through relational connections. The popularity of the most mentioned author- artists is also fueled by the adaptations and transformations of their work, reshaped as TV animations (The Gruffalo by Donaldson and Twelve Presents to Santa by Kunnas), TV series (The Story of Tracy Beaker by Wilson and Pippi Longstocking by Lindren), and as plays (War Horse by Morpurgo and Maukka and Väykkä [Bicycling to the Moon] by Parvela). Translated into Finnish, the Harry Potter films speak for themselves as an international cultural phenomenon, which most of the preservice teachers will have experienced, even if they have not read the books. Additionally, associated merchandise, such as stationery, lunchboxes, soft toys, and clothing promote the characters and texts, alongside websites, video games, and oppor- tunities to literally inhabit their fictional worlds (Beatrix Potter World in Cumbria, England and Moomin World in Naantali, Finland). In these ways, adolescent readers, now training to be teachers, are likely to have experienced and re- experienced these narratives, potentially leading to increased character affiliation and enhanced satisfaction in the texts (Gabriel & Young, 2011). The cult of celebrity authors (e.g., David Walliams and J.K. Rowling), supported by sustained and targeted marketing, and publishers’ gift offers of reduced price box sets, will also have amplified the memorability of particular writers and their books. Arguably, the commonalities among these author- artists indicate the presence of an informal group of writers of renown, in both England and Finland. It is not enough, however, merely to appreciate the enduring popu- larity or reification of such groups; educational implica- tions need to be considered. Conclusion and Implications The findings show that future teachers from both these countries are entering their preservice education with very limited knowledge of children’s author- artists; they draw on an extremely narrow range of well- known writers. The con- tribution of these author- artists to children’s reading is not England: Most frequently mentioned Finland: Most frequently mentioned Author- artist N (%) Publication years Author- artist N (%) Publication years Roald Dahl 81 (48) 1961–1991 Mauri Kunnas 76 (49) 1979 to present David Walliams 53 (31.5) 2008 to present Sinikka & Tiina Nopola 74 (48) 1989–2021 Julia Donaldson 53 (31.5) 1976 to present J. K. Rowling (translated 1998) 70 (45.5) 1997 to present Jacqueline Wilson 50 (30) 1969 to present Timo Parvela 69 (45) 1995 to present Michael Morpurgo 36 (21) 1974 to present Tove Jansson 49 (32) 1933–1993 J.K. Rowling 35 (21) 1997 to present Aino Havukainen & Sami Toivonen 43 (28) 1997 to present Michael Rosen 24 (14) 1979 to present Astrid Lindgren 43 (28) 1946–1990 Dr. Seuss 23 (14) 1931–1982 Paula Noronen 20 (13) 2007 to present Enid Blyton 14 (8) 1922–1975 Kirsi Kunnas 16 (10) 1956–2021 Eric Carle 14 (8) 1967–1997 Jeff Kinney 12 (8) 2007 to present Beatrix Potter 13 (8) 1901–1930 Roald Dahl 11 (7) 1961–1991 Table 1 The most Frequently Recommended Authors, Illustrators, and Poets 19362714, 0, D ow nloaded from https://ila.onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1002/trtr.2294 by U niversity of Turku, W iley O nline Library on [25/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on W iley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License 6TEACHING AND LEARNING IN ACTION The Reading Teacher  Vol. 0  No. 0  Month 0000 literacyworldwide.org being questioned, undeniably they have a valuable role to play. However, we argue that the findings collectively reveal the presence of a popular childhood canon with similar characteristics. It is shaped by the longevity of authors’ pub- lishing careers, high productivity, childhood affiliation with fictional characters (across texts and illustrations), mul- tiple cultural transformations, and intense marketing. Such an informal childhood canon may well be present in other countries. Neither the English nor the Finnish canon encom- pass poetry, non- fiction, or graphic novels; no attention is given to different genres. Significantly and more worryingly, writers of color and texts from a wider range of cultures are almost absent. A narrow range of domestic, mainly male author- artists who write in their mother tongue predominate, alongside a few internationally renowned writers. These findings align with earlier research into trainee, elementary, and high school teachers’ knowledge and use of children’s texts (Cremin, Bearne, et  al., 2008; Cremin, Mottram, et  al., 2008; Clark & Teravainen, 2015; Farrar, 2021; Conradi- Smith et al., 2022). Placed alongside these studies, the data high- light the need for a renewed focus on the diversity of teach- ers’ textual repertoires. In many countries, however, the prescribed competences for preservice education pay scant attention to professional knowledge of children’s texts. This represents a concern, since sole reliance on a pop- ular childhood canon is both limited and limiting; it is likely to constrain the development of children’s own repertoires and pleasure in reading, and to restrict professional prac- tice. Text breadth and diversity are of critical importance and all texts, including those from within a canon, need to be examined thoughtfully for their relevance. If teachers recognize the presence and influence of a popular child- hood canon in their repertoires and are supported to take responsibility for rigorously reviewing the breadth and rel- evance of this, then potential limitations can be avoided. Widening Repertoires Young people’s “access to quality books that reflect their current lives, backgrounds, literacies, and multiplicity of cultures is a basic human right” (Bennett et al., 2021, p.785) and a matter of social justice (OECD, 2021). Without a well- read and highly discerning education profession, the poten- tial of children’s texts to enhance children’s social and emotional understanding, broaden perspectives and help address educational inequities will remain untapped. The situation is exacerbated by the fact that there is a long way to go before children’s books positively represent all ethnic- ities and (dis)abilities, linguistic diversity, gender equality, and are LGBTQ- inclusive (CLPE, 2022; Crisp et al., 2016). With increased awareness of this agenda, however, educators can be supported to read wisely and reflectively, deploy a principled approach to selecting children’s books, and pay attention to potential tokenism as representation of diversity, through, for example, features such as “wall- papering” or limited “hair cueing” as the only indication that the character is from an ethnic minority background (CLPE, 2019). Support for reading that is deliberately inclu- sive in nature, which eschews pre- emptive censorship of scary, “rude,” or controversial books (Ivey & Johnston, 2018; Hartsfield & Kimmel, 2020), and encompasses reading out of one’s comfort zone, is urgently needed in all forms of teacher education. Nonetheless, it is challenging in preservice education courses to raise the profile of children’s texts, ensuring a range of genres—literature, nonfiction, newspapers, mag- azines, and comics—in print and digital formats are read. Qualified professionals also find it hard to make the time for this purportedly leisure pursuit. Educators deserve help to critically explore the contemporary relevance of their repertoires, the potential presence of a childhood canon and to widen their knowledge of female authors, and children’s texts reflecting realities and diversities. Opportunities for educators to consider their own identi- ties as readers and reading role models are also invalu- able (Commeyras et al., 2003; Cremin et al., 2022). Developing as Reading Teachers: Fostering a Love of Reading How teachers both view themselves and are seen by children as readers is important since their personal and professional engagement enables them to model the value, pleasure, and satisfaction they find in reading, and to induct children into such pleasures (Kauppinen & Aerila, 2019). Young people are acutely aware of their teachers’ attitudes to reading, shown through their affec- tive engagement in reading aloud and the opportuni- ties seized to blether about books (Cremin et  al.,  2022; Merga,  2016). Informal reader to reader discussion impacts positively on children’s own knowledge of texts and authors, their desire to read, and capacity to exercise discrimination and choice as readers (Cremin et al., 2014; Moses & Kelly, 2018). So, teachers should take seriously the professional responsibility to widen their reading repertoires of chil- dren’s texts beyond a childhood canon and deploy a rig- orous reading for pleasure pedagogy (Brandt et al., 2021; Cremin et al., 2014). Such a pedagogy, responsive to the needs and interests of the children, is dependent upon knowledge of relevant texts and of each unique child reader, it encompasses careful planning, monitoring, and evaluation of the impact of particular practices on chil- dren’s motivation to read. With help, novice teachers can 19362714, 0, D ow nloaded from https://ila.onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1002/trtr.2294 by U niversity of Turku, W iley O nline Library on [25/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on W iley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License 7TEACHING AND LEARNING IN ACTION The Reading Teacher  Vol. 0  No. 0  Month 0000 literacyworldwide.org come to appreciate the potency of the three Rs of reading for pleasure and take appropriate action. By also considering the social, affective, and relational nature of reading, preservice teachers can be further sup- ported to develop into the Reading Teachers of tomorrow. These enhanced educators are “reading role models [who] reflect upon the relationship between being a reader in their personal lives and being a teacher of reading in their professional lives and adjust their work with children to make the experience of reading more authentic and more relevant” (Cremin, 2022, p.3). Positioned as fellow readers, Reading Teachers (capital R, capital T) can support chil- dren’s choice- led recreational reading, and widen access to texts of relevance that are aligned to students’ cultural identities. While libraries are essential and community reading programs can enhance access (Shin et al., 2020), the role of classroom teachers in mediating pertinent, per- sonally relevant texts in motivating ways remains vital. In order to develop Reading Teachers and advance the profession’s capacity to nurture children’s reading for plea- sure, The Open University in the United Kingdom has been working in partnership with 36 universities and hundreds of schools over the last 6 years. Many of their strategies can be used and applied elsewhere to broaden educa- tors’ knowledge beyond a popular childhood canon. These include, for example, the creation of Teacher Reading Groups, facilitated nationally by The Open University and the UK Literacy Association and led locally by volunteers (lecturers and teachers), and the development of Student Reading for Pleasure Ambassadors. The latter are preser- vice teachers who are supported to take responsibility for widening their own and their peers’ knowledge and prac- tice. Alongside this, preservice teachers in partner institu- tions are invited to undertake challenges (e.g., shadowing book awards) and practice- based assignments (e.g., run- ning school book clubs), and publish their examples of research- informed practice on the dedicated website. Rigorous monitoring of the consequences for their peers and for children’s recreational reading is required and cul- turally relevant texts which reflect diversities are prioritized throughout. Additionally, a diagnostic tool to discern pre- service teachers’ knowledge, attitudes, and identities as readers is in development, to enable formative assess- ment and responsive planning. Responsibility, Rigor, and Relevance: The Three Rs of Reading for Pleasure Responsibility, rigor, and relevance represent the three Rs of reading for pleasure and are, we argue, key character- istics of Reading Teachers. It is not just a professional responsibility for preservice and practicing teachers to develop a rich and constantly updated knowledge of chil- dren’s literature and other texts, it is a moral and social one. In the context of developing as a Reading Teacher, such responsibility is more of an ethical stance than a matter of accountability, one which recognizes teaching as a relational practice and knowledge of individual child readers as critical. Reading Teachers also develop rigor- ous reading for pleasure pedagogy that is planned, moni- tored, and evaluated. It is not left to chance. Furthermore, to raise readers who can and do choose to read in their own time, Reading Teachers ensure the texts available have maximum relevance to their students’ social, emo- tional and cultural lives. Young readers deserve Reading Teachers who recog- nize that their repertoires may be shaped by the popular canons of childhood and who work to widen these, encom- passing both texts that are “old and gold” and those that are “new, diverse and bold.” R E F E R E N C E S Allington, R. L. (2014). How reading volume affects both Reading flu- ency and Reading achievement. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 7(1), 13–26. Applegate, A., Applegate, M. D., Mercantini, M. A., McGeehan, C. M., Cobb, J. B., DeBoy, J. R., Modla, V. B., & Lewinski, K. E. (2014). The peter effect revisited. Literacy Research and Instruction, 53(3), 188–204. Applegate, A. J., & Applegate, M. D. (2004). The Peter effect: Reading habits and attitudes of preservice teachers. The Reading Teacher, 57(6), 554–563. Bennett, S. V., Alberton Gunn, A., & Peterson, B. J. (2021). Access to multicultural Children’s literature during COVID- 19. The Reading Teacher, 74(6), 785–796. Brandt, L., Sharp, A. C., & Gardner, D. S. (2021). Examination of teacher practices on student motivation for reading. The Reading Teacher, 74(6), 723–732. Clark, C., & Teravainen, A. (2015). Teachers and literacy: Their percep- tions, understanding, confidence and awareness. National Literacy Trust. https:// liter acytr ust. org. uk/ resea rch- servi ces/ resea rch- repor ts/ teach ers- and- liter acy- 2015- their - perce ption s- under stand ing- confi dence - and- aware ness/ TAKE ACTION! 1. Read reflectively outside your comfort zone. 2. Seek out awards given to racially diverse authors. 3. Work in partnership with librarians to widen your own and children’s reading repertoires. 4. Invite children to set you a reading challenge. 5. Share your home reading habits, enabling children to explore theirs too. 19362714, 0, D ow nloaded from https://ila.onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1002/trtr.2294 by U niversity of Turku, W iley O nline Library on [25/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on W iley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License 8TEACHING AND LEARNING IN ACTION The Reading Teacher  Vol. 0  No. 0  Month 0000 literacyworldwide.org Clark, C., & Teravainen- Goff, A. (2018). Mental wellbeing, reading and writing: national literacy trust. https:// liter acytr ust. org. uk/ resea rch- servi ces/ resea rch- repor ts/ menta l- wellb eing- readi ng- and- writi ng/ CLPE. (2019). Reflecting realities 2019. CLPE. CLPE. (2021). Reading for Pleasure in 2020. https:// clpe. org. uk/ resea rch/ clpe- readi ng- pleas ure- 2020 CLPE. (2022). Reflecting realities: A survey of ethnic representation in UK children’s literature 2017–2022. CLPE. Commeyras, M., Bisplinhoff, B. S., & Olson, J. (2003). Teach- ers as readers: Perspectives on the importance of reading in teachers’ classrooms and lives, Newark, International Reading Association. Conradi- Smith, K., Young, C. A., & Yatzeck, J. C. (2022). What are teachers reading and why? Literacy Research and Instruction, 61(4), 383–401. Cremin, T. (2022). Reading teachers in T. Cremin, H., Hendry, L. Rodri- guez Leon and N. Kucirkova Reading teachers: Nurturing reading for pleasure (pp. 1–13). Routledge. Cremin, T., Bearne, E., Mottram, M., & Goodwin, P. (2008). Primary teachers as readers. English in Education, 42(1), 8–23. Cremin, T., Hendry, H., Rodriguez Leon, L., & Kucirkova, N. (Eds.). (2022). Reading teachers: nurturing reading for pleasure. Routledge. Cremin, T., Mottram, M., Bearne, E., & Goodwin, P. (2008). Exploring teachers' knowledge of children's literature. Cambridge Journal of Education, 38(4), 449–464. Cremin, T., Mottram, M., Collins, F., Powell, S., & Safford, K. (2009). Teachers as readers: Building communities of readers. Literacy, 43(1), 11–19. Cremin, T., Mottram, M., Powell, S., Collins, R., & Safford, K. (2014). Building communities of engaged readers: Reading for pleasure. Routledge. Crisp, T., Knezek, S. M., Quinn, M., Bingham, G. E., Girardeau, K., & Starks, F. (2016). What’s on our bookshelves? The diversity of chil- dren’s literature in early childhood classroom libraries. Journal of Children’s Literature, 42(2), 29–42. Farrar, J. (2021). “I don’t really have a reason to read Children’s lit- erature”: Enquiring into student teachers’ knowledge of children’s literature. Journal of Literacy Education, 4, 6–25. Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2018). Raise reading volume through access, choice, discussion, and book talks. The Reading Teacher, 72(1), 89–97. Gabriel, S., & Young, A. F. (2011). Becoming a vampire without being bitten: The narrative collective- assimilation hypothesis. Psycho- logical Science, 22(8), 990–994. Garces- Bacsal, R., Tupas, R., Kaur, S., Paculdar, A., & Baja, E. (2018). Reading for pleasure: Whose job is it to build lifelong readers in the classroom? Literacy, 5(2), 95–102. Granado, C. (2014). Teachers as readers: A study of the reading habits of future teachers. Cultura y Educación, 26(1), 44–70. Guthrie, J. T., McRae, A., & Klauda, S. L. (2007). Contributions of concept- oriented reading instruction to knowledge about inter- ventions for motivations in reading. Educational Psychologist, 42, 237–250. Hartsfield, D., & Kimmel, S. (2020). Supporting the Right to Read: Prin- ciples for selecting children’s books. The Reading Teacher, 74(4), 419–427. Hempel-Jorgensen, A., Cremin, T., Harris, D., & Chamberlain, L. (2018). Pedagogy for reading for pleasure in low socio-economic primary schools: Beyond ‘pedagogy of poverty’? Literacy, 52(2), 86–94. International Literacy Association. (2018). The Case for Children’s Rights to Read. Available at: https:// liter acywo rldwi de. org/ docs/ defau lt- source/ resou rce- docum ents/ the- case- for- child rens- right s- to- read. pdf Ivey, G., & Johnston, P. (2018). Engaging disturbing books. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 62(2), 143–150. Ivey, G., & Johnston, P. H. (2013). Engaged reading as a collabora- tive transformative practice. Journal of Literacy Research, 47(3), 297–327. Jerrim, J., & Moss, G. (2019). The link between fiction and teenagers’ reading skills: International evidence from the OECD PISA study. British Educational Research Journal, 45(1), 181–200. Kauppinen, M., & Aerila, J.- A. (2019). Luokanopettajien lukijuus ja sen merkitys oppilaiden lukuinnon kasvattamisessa ja kirjallisuude- nopetuksen kehittämisessä. [The readership of classteachers and its meaning in enhancing student’s pleasure of reading and devel- oping literacy education]. In M. Rautiainen & M. Tarnanen (Eds.), Tutkimuksesta luokkahuoneisiin. [From research to classrooms] (pp. 144–153). Suomen Ainedidaktinen Seura. Koopman, E. M., & Hakemulder, F. (2015). Effects of literature on empathy and self- reflection: A theoretical- empirical framework. Journal of Literary Theory, 9, 111–179. Kuzmičová, A., & Cremin, T. (2021). Different fiction genres take chil- dren’s memories to different places. Cambridge Journal of Educa- tion, 52(1), 37–53. Leino, K., Nissinen, K., Puhakka, E., & Rautopuro, J. (2017). Readings skills are created together: International survey on reading PIRLS 2016. Finnish Institute for Educational Research. Mar, R. A., & Rain, M. (2015). Narrative fiction and expository nonfic- tion differentially predict verbal ability. Scientific Studies of Read- ing, 19, 419–433. McGeown, S., Bonsall, J., Andries, V., Howarth, D., Wilkinson, K., & Sabeti, S. (2020). Growing up a reader: Exploring children’s percep- tions of ‘a reader’. Educational Research, 62(2), 216–228. McKool, S., & Gespass, S. (2009). Does Johnny’s Reading teacher love to read? Literacy Research and Instruction, 48(3), 264–276. McQuillan, J. (2019). The Inefficiency of Vocabulary Instruction. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 11(4), 309–318. Merga, M. K. (2016). “I don’t know if she likes reading”: Are teachers perceived to be keen readers, and how is this determined? English in Education, 50(3), 255–269. Moses, L., & Kelly, L. (2018). We’re a little loud. That’s because we like to read!’: Developing positive views of reading in a diverse, urban first grade. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 18(3), 307–337. Mullis, I. V. S., von Davier, M., Foy, P., Fishbein, B., Reynolds, K. A., & Wry, E. (2023). PIRLS 2021 international results in Reading. Boston College. Ng, C. (2018). Using student voice to promote reading engagement for economically disadvantaged students. Journal of Research in Reading, 41(4), 700–715. OECD. (2021). 21st- century readers: Developing literacy skills in a digi- tal world. France, OECD Publishing. Rimensberger, N. (2014). Reading is very important, but…: Taking stock of South African student teachers’ reading habits. Reading & Writing- Journal of the Reading Association of South Africa, 5(1), 1–9. Shin, J., Sailors, M., McClung, N., Hoffman, J. V., Pearson, P. D., Kaam- bankadzanja, D., & Mwale, L. (2020). Access to local books: The effects of read Malawi. Literacy, 54(3), 74–90. Simpson, A. (2016). The use of children’s literature in teaching: A study of politics and professionalism within teacher education. Routledge. Simpson, A., & Cremin, T. (2022). Responsible Reading: Children’s lit- erature and social justice. Education in Science, 12, 264. Skaar, H., Elvebakk, L., & Nilssen, J. (2018). Literature in decline? Differences in pre- service and in- service primary school teachers’ reading experiences. Teaching and Teacher Education, 69, 312–323. Torppa, M., Niemi, P., Vasalampi, K., Lerkkanen, M., Tolvanen, A. A., & Poikkeus, A. (2020). Leisure reading and reading comprehen- sion support each other—A longitudinal study. Child Development, 91(3), 876–900. Vansteelandt, I., Mol, S., Caelen, D., Landuyt, I., & Mommaerts, M. (2017). Attitude profiles explain differences in pre- service teach- ers’ reading behavior and competence beliefs. Learning and Indi- vidual Differences, 54, 109–115. Waller, A. (2019). Rereading childhood books. Bloomsbury. 19362714, 0, D ow nloaded from https://ila.onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1002/trtr.2294 by U niversity of Turku, W iley O nline Library on [25/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on W iley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License 9TEACHING AND LEARNING IN ACTION The Reading Teacher  Vol. 0  No. 0  Month 0000 literacyworldwide.org L I T E R AT U R E C I T E D Dahl, R. (1942). The gremlins. Random House. Dahl, R. (1961). James and the Giant peach. Alfred A. Knopf, Inc. DiCamillo, K. (2000). Because of Winn Dixie. Walker Books. Donaldson, J. (1999). The Gruffalo. Macmillan Children’s Books. Kunnas, K. (1956). Tiitiäisen satupuu. Wsoy. Kunnas, M. (1987). 12 Lahjaa Joulupukille. Random House. Lindren, A. (1945). Pippi Långstrump. Rabén & Sjögren. Morpurgo, M. (1982). War horse. Kaye & Ward. Palacio, R. J. (2012). Wonder. Corgi Children’s. Parvela, T. (2016). Maukka and Väykkä. Gecko Press. Seuss. (1931). The pocketbook of boners. The Viking Press. White, E. B. (1952). Charlotte’s web. Harper & Brothers. Wilson, J. (1991). The story of Tracy beaker. Doubleday. Wyss, J. D. (1812). The Swiss family Robinson. Johann Rudolph Wyss. MORE TO EXPLORE ■ https:// ourfp. org/ findi ng/ teach ers- knowl edge- of- child rens- liter ature - and- other - texts/ (Ideas to develop knowledge of texts). ■ https:// teach ersre ading chall enge. org. uk/ ■ https:// ila- onlin elibr ary- wiley - com. libez proxy. open. ac. uk/ doi/ pdfdi rect/ 10. 1002/ trtr. 1954 (The Reading Teacher; article on text selection). ■ https:// www. youtu be. com/ watch?v= GBFYH AB_ xl0& t= 113s(Interview with a Reading Teacher). 19362714, 0, D ow nloaded from https://ila.onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1002/trtr.2294 by U niversity of Turku, W iley O nline Library on [25/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on W iley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License