Who let the dogs in? Reading to Dogs in Schools, Benefits and Barriers

Author: Dr Jill Steel
Creator of Paws and Learn
Reading to Dogs (RTD) in classrooms may at first seem unconventional, yet research in favour of the practice is growing. RTD programmes, intended to support wellbeing and reading, are undoubtedly becoming more popular across schools in the UK and abroad, with demand often exceeding supply. It’s true that RTD is something of a novelty…but with contemporary educational policy calling for new and innovative ways to address children’s falling wellbeing and attainment (Scottish Government, 2016, 2019), RTD just might fit this bill. But what is meant by RTD? Could dogs really make impactful reading companions? If so, how? Are there any barriers to the practice?
Well, in its simplest form RTD is where a registered dog, selected for this purpose, is placed next to a child who reads to it. In some programmes the dog acts as a catalyst for additional complementary activities (Steel, 2023a; University of Edinburgh, 2022).
Proponents of RTD are highly positive about the practice. They cite broad ranging benefits to wellbeing (increased calm, improved mood and enjoyment, increased empathy and positive social interactions, better behaviour and an enhanced learning environment) and reading affect (reduced reading anxiety, increased reading confidence and improved attitudes towards books/reading) (Brelsford et al., 2017; Hall et al., 2016; Steel, 2022, 2023a, 2023b). These important emotional factors, often overlooked in reading tuition, are where RTD may be most impactful; indeed, advantages are believed to arise from the non-critical acceptance, comforting listening and unconditional positive regard bestowed on the child by the dog. As wellbeing and reading affect improve, it is hoped that reading engagement and frequency will increase, and in time reading skill.
But let’s be clear, there are concerns about the practice of RTD in schools. To start with, while RTD research findings are largely positive, many studies lack scientific rigour. Further issues are an over-inflation of benefits in the media and concerns that educators with a particular personal affinity for dogs may not be wholly objective about RTD.
Risk, not surprisingly, is considered the greatest barrier to RTD. Risks to children, such as allergies, phobias, bites and hygiene are widely recognised. But another significant risk for children rarely referred to is the ethical issue of withdrawing a dog at the end of an RTD program, when a child may have developed an attachment to the dog, and whose reading and wellbeing could regress on the dog’s departure (Steel, 2022).
So, while physical risks to children are generally well considered, it is concerning that risks to staff and dogs are often ignored (Steel et al., 2021). School staff may have also allergies, phobias etc., and the idea of a dog in their classroom may be very unappealing and worrying to them. Dogs too, are sentient beings with welfare needs, and facilitators should recognise that busy, noisy classrooms could be very stressful for them (Townsend and Gee, 2021). Increased paperwork and workload, and time in the school week, are further concerns for school staff.
One way to mitigate all these barriers is through online RTD (Steel, 2024) which has benefits to both reading/wellbeing outcomes and classroom practicality (Steel, 2023a) with minimal risk. This approach is in its infancy but has potential to grow.
So, lets recap the main points. RTD in schools shows considerable promise in supporting wellbeing and reading affect. These emotional factors can be critical to reading success by increasing reading frequency, and skills in time. But before embarking on any RTD programme, schools should ensure they have a full understanding of the barriers, as well as the benefits, and reflect carefully on whether including dogs in schools is genuinely a positive idea for all concerned.
References
Brelsford, V. L., Meints, K., Gee, N. R., & Pfeffer, K. (2017). Animal-assisted interventions in the classroom — a systematic review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. MDPI AG. https://doi.org/10.3390
Hall, S. S., Gee, N. R., & Mills, D. S. (2016). Children Reading to Dogs: A Systematic Review of the Literature. PloS one, 11(2), e0149759. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0149759
Scottish Government. (2016). National improvement framework for Scottish education: achieving excellence and equity. https://www.gov.scot/publications/national-improvement-framework-scottish-education-2016-evidence-report/
Scottish Government. (2019). National Improvement Framework and Improvement Plan: 2020. https://www.gov.scot/publications/2019-national-improvement-framework-improvement-plan/
Steel, J. (2022). Children’s wellbeing and reading engagement: the impact of reading to dogs in a Scottish Primary 1 classroom. Education 3-13, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2022.2100442
Steel, J. (2023a). Reading to Dogs in schools: a controlled feasibility study of an online Reading to Dogs intervention. International Journal of Educational Research, 117, 102117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2022.102117
Steel, J. (2023b). Reading to Dogs as a form of animal‐assisted education: are positive outcomes supported by quality research? Literacy. https://doi.org/10.1111/lit.12345
Steel, J. (2024). Paws and Learn®. https://www.pawsandlearn.co.uk
Steel, J., Williams, J. M., & McGeown, S. (2021). Reading to dogs in schools: an exploratory study of teacher perspectives. Educational Research, 63(3), 279-301. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2021.1956989
Townsend, L., & Gee, N. R. (2021). Recognizing and Mitigating Canine Stress during Animal Assisted Interventions. Veterinary Sciences, 8(11), 254. https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci8110254
University of Edinburgh. (2022). Paws and Learn [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wcqHkOpqbJk&t=146s
Acknowledgement
With gratitude to the University of Edinburgh’s Principal’s Career Development Scholarship which funded this research.
Comments are closed
Comments to this thread have been closed by the post author or by an administrator.