An extensive review of the literature reflecting current philosophy and practice reveals strong support for the use of humor as a learning tool for various education and training settings (Vance, 1987). Humor can decrease anxiety and stress, improve self-esteem, increase motivation and higher perceived quality of life (Berk, 1998). In the classroom humor also increases comprehension, cognitive retention, and motivation to learn (Berk, 1998).

The first humor writing course at the Scripps School of Journalism at Ohio University has become such a smash hit that students register a year in advance to occupy one of the 20 allotted spots (Holt & Willard-Holt, 1995). A Teacher’s Guide on Political Cartoons is published by the Newsweek Education Program (Bandlow & Yehl, 1990) for use in middle schools. A Political Satire and Cartooning curriculum guide for elementary teachers is widely distributed (Holt & Willard-Holt, 1995). Humorology: A Curriculum and Resource Guide is offered as a guide for study in any grade level (Brown & Gibbs, 1990). All of these are examples of the increasing importance being placed on humor in the school setting.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the effects of humor in the classroom. It will address the effects of humor on retention, recall, motivation, and stress in a classroom setting. It will also discuss humor as a teaching tool, including examples and strategies.

Humor’s role in learning has been well studied. In fact, many studies claim that humor facilitates learning through its impact on attention and memory. When amusement is relevant to the task, there is a positive effect on recall. Derks, Gardner, and Argawal (1998) reported an early study on humor published in 1936 by Heim that found that 62 percent of material laughed at was remembered, but only 8 percent of material that did not elicit laughter was recalled. They also reported that humor appears to be "arousing." In fact, the authors reported a study saying that arousal increases attention, improves simple processing strategies such as rehearsal, and benefits memory in short retention intervals. Further, the authors postulate that humor may lead to the selection of material for processing while arousal might increase the intensity of that processing. The purpose of their study was to identify whether individuals recalled innocent and/or tendentious humorous material over non-humorous material. Tendentious humor is a word first used by Freud, and serves two purposes, according to the authors, either a hostile joke serving the purpose of aggression, or an obscene joke, sexual in nature and serving the purpose of exposure.

The Derks et al. (1998) study consisted of three separate parts: the pilot study, experiment 1A and 1B, and experiment 2. In the pilot study, nine subjects were shown 40 sentences: 10 humorous and tendentious, 10 humorous and non-tendentious, 10 non-humorous and tendentious, and 10 non-humorous and 10 non-tendentious. Each sentence was shown for 6 seconds, and subjects were asked to recall as many sentences as possible. Results indicate that humorous sentences were better remembered than non-humorous sentences, and sexual and aggressive sentences were better remembered than non-sexual or non-aggressive sentences.

Experiment 1A and 1B consisted of 22 and 48 undergraduate students respectively. Each student in 1A was given a shuffled deck of index cards with a sentence or joke on it. Each participant received 10 examples of each condition. Each card was studied for 10 seconds. The participants were then asked to recall, on paper, the sentences they could remember. Each participant in 1B was given a notebook with 20 sentence/jokes of one of the four types on each page. Each page was studied for 10 seconds, and participants were asked to write down all the materials they could recall. Results indicate that humor slightly improved recall, as more humorous items were remembered; tendency (sexual and aggressive statements) also improved recall. Non-tendentious humor was least well remembered.

In Experiment 2, 48 undergraduates participated. This time, 40 cartoons were used, instead of sentences. All four conditions were represented with five funny and five not funny cartoons. All cartoons were prepared with a second-meaningful, not-funny caption. Half of the participants were instructed to judge the "amusement" of each item. The other half were instructed to judge "how difficult the material was to comprehend." After completing judgments, participants were asked to remember all the cartoons they could with "a brief description of the picture and the gist of the cartoon." Results indicate that pictures with more sexual overtones resulted in a significant improvement in recall. Humor had no significant effect in this experiment.

It appears from the results of Derks et al.’s (1998) study, that humor can improve memory by attracting attention to a stimulus. In this study, humorous statements were better remembered than non-funny ones; however, the effect was relatively weak. Tendentiousness, especially sexuality, had a greater impact on recall. The effect was on attention as well as arousal, and is said to lead to deeper processing and greater impact. Further, the combination of humor and tendency can lead to still better memory. However, such material may not be appropriate for the classroom.

Perhaps humor does not directly cause deeper levels of processing, yet it serves to enhance recall by attracting attention to a stimulus that may not have been "attention-getting." In Jeannie Ormrod’s (1995) Human Learning textbook, she discusses the concept of attention. She says, "if we want to move information from the sensory register into the working memory, it appears that, at least in most cases, we must pay attention to it." Further, she asserts that information that an individual pays attention to advances to working memory, whereas information that is not attended to may be lost from the memory system.

There is no doubt that humor in the classroom draws attention, which then proceeds to the working memory. The results of the study reflect the fact that humor is attention getting, and leads to greater recall. Yet it is important to point out the applicability in the classroom. Using humor will increase students’ attention, which forms the foundation for recall. "An inattentive learner’s exposure to humor may increase the learner’s vigilance or attentive behavior, which, in turn, facilitates the acquisition of subsequently presented information (Vance, 1987).

Motivation has been described as a process that includes specific directive and stimulating properties (Gorham, 1990, Brophy, 1983; Wlodkowski, 1978). This can lead students to arousal and instigative behaviors, give direction and purpose to their behaviors, allow behaviors to persist, and lead to choices of preferred behaviors (Ames, 1986; Dweck, 1986; Weiner, 1979). The ability to motivate students allows teachers to be active agents within the educational environment and, therefore, capable of stimulating the development of student motivation toward learning. But how can teachers help their students become motivated? One factor that may often be overlooked is the use of humor. While appropriate humor has been shown to have a positive effect on classroom climate and increase student comprehension and retention, its effects on motivation have not been investigated thoroughly (Stuart & Rosenfeld, 1994; Kelley and Gorham, 1988). However, while humor has not specifically been examined in this context, it has been utilized as part of the conceptualization of teacher immediacy, which has been shown to modify student motivation.

Richmond, Gorham, & McCroskey (1987) explain that immediacy is a communication variable that impacts the perception of physical and psychological closeness. In the classroom, researchers have examined teacher immediacy levels, and have found that teacher immediacy is positively correlated to students' affective learning (Anderson, 1979). Gorham (1990) also found that students' perceptions of teacher immediacy and students' state motivation levels were positively correlated. State motivation refers to motivation a student experiences toward a particular class, task, or content area at a particular time (Frymier, 1994). Frymier (1994) developed a model of immediacy in the classroom, which explains that immediacy arouses students, gets their attention, which enhances motivation, which in turn increases learning. The degree to which a teacher uses humor in the classroom is one of the factors that make up teacher immediacy. As a result of being a part of the measure of teacher immediacy, humor contributes to the enhanced motivation teacher immediacy can cause. However, while humor does contribute to enhanced student motivation as a part of teacher immediacy, it is unclear as to how much humor individually affects student motivation. The impact of humor on student motivation to learn needs to be specifically addressed by researchers to determine the extent to which teachers can motivate students through the use of humor in the classroom.

Humor is an excellent tool teachers can use to succeed in the classroom. A teacher can use humor to alleviate stress, improve communication, and diffuse conflict (Wallinger, 1997). Humor in the classroom can often be used to defuse hostility and to encourage cooperation and learning.

Humor can give students pleasure in many ways. Morale can be improved, because humor suggests things are not so bad. Social integration and solidarity among students is increased, and it encourages catharsis during stressful situations. Humor also grants a sense of freedom and optimism that encourages creativity (Wallinger, 1997). Humor is a socially acceptable way to express aggression and tension, relieve us of stress, and help us escape from daily pressures.

If humor is effectively used, it can reinforce or dissolve the boundaries of a group. Rules of a class can be reinforced through humor. Humor can also break down the boundaries of a group into which one would like to be accepted or ease tensions between groups (Barecca, 1991).

Humor allows students and teachers to express underlying issues and conflicts that cannot be expressed directly. Humor can also defuse tension. It brings problems back to a manageable size so those involved can find solutions more easily (Crawford, 1994).

Today's students face a myriad of social problems. Humor can help to heal conflict among students and groups with differing views. Also, it can alleviate uneasiness in an embarrassing moment and assist students out of difficult situations (Wallinger, 1997).

Humor can also help to relieve stress. Students can release nervous energy through laughter. Many people have compared humor's biological impact on the human body to that of physical exercise. It causes the brain to focus on something different and raises the heart and respiration rates. Exercise enhances one's sense of well-being; humor and laughter improve one's outlook on life (Wallinger, 1997). Laughter helps our bodies release endorphins, which are natural pain killers. Some evidence has shown that humor and laughter have value as healers of illness and disease (Wallinger, 1997). Humor also allows individuals to handle stress effectively by helping them to view problems more objectively (Wallinger, 1997).

The reality of a difficult situation does not change, but the way someone reacts to it can. By laughing at particular ridiculous behaviors, we learn to help ourselves. Humor helps reinforce the absurdity of rigid, inflexible behavior and misunderstanding and helps us remember that everyone makes mistakes (Wallinger, 1997). Humor also decreases stress by reducing the seriousness of some problems. It can help to dilute hostility. Also, laughter can distort and confuse things so that they do not seem as important (Wallinger, 1997).

Since the research on humor show there to be many psychological and physiological benefits, it would seem that using humor in the classroom would be a great way to facilitate learning. Humor's universal appeal makes it a perfect teaching strategy. It's appeal stems from the fact that it is applicable to any age group, culture, or subject matter. Not only can it be used to bridge the gap between diverse student populations, but it can also motivate students to learn and encourage intersubjective interchange.

"Humor consists in bringing together certain incongruities which arise naturally from situation or character conduct " (Cleary, 1982). When children's author, Beverly Cleary asked children to define humor she got a variety of responses, some in the form of examples of television shows and other genres. By far, the most common definition given by children was, "Humor is what makes you laugh." Cleary describes the "partnership"

between her child self and adult self that makes her children's books so humorous. She states that the feeling of "being two ages at one time is delightful." It is the opinion of the present authors that this feeling can and should be generalized to teachers and teaching.

In a study of spontaneously occurring humorous events, Bergen (1992) found

that the "amount of humor children express in school varied greatly depending on classroom situation and teacher." Some of the kindergarten and first grade classrooms were so structured that there was little opportunity for free interactions and play, or opportunities for expressing humor. Gentile & McMillan (1978) also note that humor is often "overlooked or viewed as being 'out of place' in the standard curriculum." In

contrast, Bergen noted that other classrooms "overflowed with examples" of

spontaneous and facilitated humor. There are ways to build upon children's naturally developing interest in humor that facilitate the learning process. To begin with, teachers must be "models of playfulness" and demonstrate a sense of humor. They should be willing to try new behaviors, not be afraid to laugh at their own mistakes, be open to children's "fanciful" ideas, and convey the sense that learning can be fun. From these examples, Bergen developed four major strategies: performance strategy, indirect facilitation strategy, eliciting strategy, and respondent strategy.

The performance strategy involves the teacher as a model of humor within her/his direct instructional role. This can be done during lecture situations for older students in order to maintain their attention. For younger children this can be accomplished through the following specific strategies.

Indirect facilitation can be accomplished by selecting learning materials such as tapes, books, or movies of silly songs or stories that foster opportunities for expression of humor and through the allotment of class time for the use of these materials. Providing opportunities for informal interaction among children is also essential. Gentile & McMillan (1978) note that among older students, laughter is generally reserved to the

"hallways, gymnasiums, playgrounds, restrooms, and cafeterias." While these places are generally believed to be acceptable places to show humorous emotions, returning to the classroom is usually a signal to "straighten up."

Besides providing opportunities for naturally occurring humor though interaction, teachers can also directly elicit expressions of humor. Students can be asked to share jokes, riddles, and humorous experiences. Teachers can also directly assign tasks such as writing a funny story (Bergen, 1992). This is especially important for children or young adults who rarely demonstrate their humorous side (Klesius, Laframboise, & Gaier, 1998).

Because children's humor is a "naturally occurring phenomenon" the best encouragement is just being responsive. Teachers should express enjoyment and encourage elaboration. They should also play along and act surprised when appropriate (Bergen, 1992).

From a developmental perspective, the literature suggests that the relationship of cognition and humor shows that the type of humor children enjoy demonstrates their stage of thinking (Bergen, 1992). This progression begins with finding humor in incongruous actions, which Cleary (1982) refers to as "topsy turveys". As the child develops, the

incongruities are also discovered in language through plays on words and multiple meanings eventually becoming more complex and realistic (Klesius et al., 1998), demanding higher level thinking skills and greater insight (Gentile & McMillan, 1978). In one unpublished study referenced by Gentile & McMillan, a correlation between insight and humor turned out to be .88. This strong correlation means either that personalities with marked insight are also high in humor or that raters were unable to distinguish between the two qualities.

Cleary (1982) narrates this point through observation, reflection, and insight into her own children's growth. She noted that although her infant children loved the word play involved in nursery rhymes and incongruous actions and games, they were very serious when it came to books. Despite their mother's best attempts to amuse, even as preschoolers they found nothing to laugh about in response to books. Finally, one day, they did laugh at the words of Beady Bear, a wind-up bear who had run down and fallen over with his feet in the air. "Who's there?" While the words themselves were not so humorous, the children appeared to find the incongruous event of talking while being upside down humorous. Upon further observation and reflection, a pattern began to emerge. The children appeared to find something humorous when they had "grown." In

other words the sense of nonsense in a story had to be far enough removed from the child's own embarrassing experiences that they no longer felt ashamed or inferior. Cleary further states that from what she has observed, children "enjoy feeling superior to their younger selves" and may resolve some of the dilemmas of past childhood experiences through their perceptions of others’ humorous experiences, including those in books.

Although not empirically documented, Cleary's (1982) observations might have potential implications for children who cannot resolve these dilemmas and "grow." Are they the ones who laugh at acts of cruelty done to others, remain emotionally immature, are unable to imagine themselves in another person's place, and become desensitized because they cannot distance themselves from their past imperfections? Are they unable to laugh at

themselves because they have not grown? Is growth the "essence of humor that children enjoy" in realistic stories? Gentile & McMillan (1978) add further to the importance of fostering insight and comprehension that affords individuals a "purer and more amusing view of themselves and their surroundings." For, "out of the overflow of good humor and comedy comes a healthy sense of proportion or sanity. People who have balanced their

personal qualities and fondest values readily perceive their incongruities and absurdities." They can laugh at themselves.

A review of the literature with regard to the applications of humor in primary and intermediate level classrooms is heavily saturated with links to reading and reading instruction. Because learning to read effectively is such an important skill, a great deal of emphasis is placed upon acquiring reading skills early on. In addition, Gentile & McMillan (1978) note:

Bergen (1992) reports that in her study of kindergarten and first grade children, the three types of naturally occurring events that "most often elicited children's laughter or smiles" all centered around incongruity: discovering incongruous events, performing incongruous events themselves, and describing impossible events or actions. Other frequent types of humor that were noted were sound play, reproduction or embellishment of a story or song pattern, multiple word meanings, playing action jokes, telling riddles and telling pre-riddles in the form of riddles but with no point.

Some examples of "topsy turveys" (Cleary, 1982) in the literature include size reversals as in Clifford, animals having human flaws and problems as in Dog Breath, and bungling adults as in The Berenstein Bears. While illustrations further amplify humorous events or characters in many selections, in some cases illustrations are the main focus and chief source of humor with a secondary accompanying story line as in Animals Definitely

Should Not Wear Clothing and The Three Javelinas. There are also humorous wordless books such as Frog Goes to Dinner that "capitalize on delightfully funny expressions of characters and depictions of unexpected actions" (Klesius et al., 1998).

Klesius et al. (1998) further notes that preschool and primary level students also find humor in plays on words such as phonological plays involving rhyme, alliteration, assonance, onomatopoeia, and nonsense words as found in Dr. Seuss books. As children develop into their later primary years they begin to develop more of an appreciation for multiple meanings and semantic word play such as that found in the phrase "draw the curtains" from Amelia Bedelia. These humorous plays on words can be found in a

variety of literary forms such as riddles and jokes. Children's sophistication in understanding resolutions in jokes depends on their ability to detect hidden meanings in verbally ambiguous content. Joke books such as 101 Wacky Pet Jokes foster learning by promoting social interactions and repeated reading, thus potentially leading to improved

automaticity in reading.

According to Klesius et al. (1998), intermediate level students continue to enjoy many of the same types of humor and humorous literature written for younger children. Their appreciation for humor becomes more focused in linguistic humor including literal interpretations and realistic fiction as they become more sophisticated. A popular and useful theme is literature set in or around humorous classrooms or school events such as in The Gym Teacher from the Black Lagoon, The Flunking of Joshua T. Bates, and There's

a Boy in the Girls' Bathroom. Adaptations of familiar stories such as The True Story of the Three Pigs and The Principal’s New Clothes while enjoyable and motivating on their own, also provide models for students to use to write their own adaptation.

Researchers have identified additional variables that may increase or diminish the comic appeal of literature: Being part of an audience when humorous literature is shared and jokes that challenge the individual's intellectual capabilities thus allowing for "growth" (Klesius et al., 1998). On the other hand, as illustrated by Cleary (1982), humorous

selections may not appeal to children if they relate too closely to their own problems.

Specific tips for teachers include trying out a variety of types of humor, observing and talking about student reactions, allowing time for read-alouds and sharing, and sharing of their own enjoyment of humor (Klesius et al., 1998). Bergen (1992) further adds that teachers can learn a great deal about the sophistication of a child's knowledge by becoming aware of what they perceive as funny. They can also nurture the development of higher order thinking processes and mastery of basic skills by encouraging humor. Other suggestions for ways to use humorous literature are suggested by Klesius et al. and are included in Figure 1 of this paper.

Humor would also seem to be a good strategy for college courses since students perceive some course content as very boring, very difficult, or excessively anxiety-producing (Berk, 1998). Using humor as a teaching tool might seem to be an effective way to lessen perceptions of boredom and anxiety. Berk (1998) gives a review of the research and states that the benefits of humor in college teaching include: reduction of tension, boredom, stress, and anxiety; improving attitude toward subject; increasing comprehension, cognitive retention, interest, and task performance; increasing motivation to learn and satisfaction with learning; and promoting creativity and divergent thinking. However, the research on the effects of humor as an actual teaching tool in college classrooms is limited because humor in college classrooms has rarely been implemented systematically. Rather, humor occurs more often spontaneously instead of being used intentionally to achieve specific learning outcomes (Bryant, Crane, Comisky, & Zillman as cited by Berk, 1998).

Berk (1998) was interested in studying the different strategies for using humor as a teaching tool to reduce anxiety, improve ability to learn, and make it possible for students to perform at their best on problems and exams. From data collected from low-risk humor techniques used in undergraduate and graduate statistics courses, Berk was able to examine the effectiveness of these tools for facilitating learning. He studied ten strategies. The first strategy was humorous material on syllabi. An example of this would be prerequisites. If a course had no "real" ones, humorous ones could be used such as Sesame Street or Barney. If there were real prerequisites, these should be listed first, followed by humorous ones. The next strategy is descriptors, cautions, and warnings on the covers of handouts. An example of this would be writing such warnings

as "DO NOT fold, mutilate, or spindle" or "Close cover before striking" on the front cover of the handout, under the appropriate heading. The next strategy is using opening jokes. Berk gives these reasons for opening class with humor: a) to motivate students to be on time or they will miss the joke, b) to serve as a release valve for the stress, tension, and anxiety that students may bring to class, and c) to trigger a "fun" attitude to learning. Such opening jokes can include stand-up jokes, top-10 lists, or cartoons.

The fourth strategy is skits/dramatizations. The purpose here is to find a character or characters with whom the students can relate, and develop a short skit based on character(s) that can lead into the presentation. The funny part is the parody. Examples of shows or movies include, Home Improvement, X-Files, or Masterpiece Theater. The next strategy is spontaneous humor which has three subcategories: a) responses to students' questions (ad-libs), responses to professor's mistakes (i.e. "self-downs"), and responses to interruptions (i.e. equipment breakdown). The sixth strategy is humorous questions. An example of this is presenting students with serious questions such as "How many of you think this is the correct answer?" and then following up with punchline questions such as "How many of you don't care?" and "How many of you want to go back to bed?" The purpose here is to refocus students’ attention and compel them to become involved.

The next strategy is humorous examples. This may be a hypothetical or an ironic twist to a standard, serious example. The next strategy is humorous problem sets. These are similar to humorous examples and can supplement typically "serious" textbook problems. The purpose here is to test students' abilities to apply methods and concepts taught in class to new (humorous) problem situations. The ninth strategy is Jeopardy!-type reviews for exams. The steps here are to a) list content to be covered, b) conduct the review by presenting the answers in Jeopardy!-type style boxes on an overhead projector as students write the "questions" on a prepared response sheet, and c) conclude with

Final Jeopardy! using the television show procedure and theme music. The purpose: a fun and humorous way to review material. The tenth, and final strategy is humorous material on exams. The humorous material can be in the title, the directions, the test items, or the last page. For example, in the directions, humor can replace the mundane rules with rules like "DO NOT begin the test until you are told to do so or you can be hurt."

Undergraduates and graduates used three subscales to rate each of these ten learning strategies' effectiveness. These subscales are: reducing anxiety, ability to learn, and perform your best. The results are shown in Table 1.

____________________________________

Insert Table 1 about here.

____________________________________

In his discussion of these findings, Berk gives a note of caution regarding humor strategies as teaching tools. A reason students rated all these strategies as "very effective" or "extremely effective" could be that students simply want to be entertained. Since the study did not focus on this, the validity of this statement cannot be confirmed. It is something, however, that professors should be aware of since they want students to learn and not just come to class for laughs. Although preliminary, this research shows that humor, when applied systematically and with specific strategies, can decrease tension and anxiety and increase active learning. As Berk states, students cannot laugh and snore

simultaneously.

Berk states seven conclusions about humor as an effective teaching tool in an instructional context:

In conclusion, humor can be an effective tool in the classroom for improving such things as retention, recall, motivation, and active learning. It can also decrease tension, anxiety, and stress, while improving morale, social integration and creativity. However, humor is not for everyone or every class. Unless closely related to the material to be learned it is quite possible that integrated humor could distract the learner from the surrounding material to be learned (Vance, 1987). Attempts by learners to pleasurably repeat or commit humorous jokes to memory would likely prolong such distracting effects and further impair the acquisition of the information being delivered (Vance, 1987).

Although humor increases recall, its increase is significant only for those items based on humorous examples (Kaplan & Pascoe, 1977). Therefore, when planing a course, the main concepts should be delineated, and the humor related to these concepts, intending to make them clearer, should be interjected in the appropriate places (Ziv, 1998).

Not all teachers should be encouraged to use humor. Some, because of their personality, believe that humor may present a danger or are embarrassed by it, in which case they had better not use it at all (Ziv, 1998). So, even though this paper has stressed the positive effects humor can have in the classroom, there are some instances when humor is not appropriate; therefore, the present authors feel it necessary to warn against trying to use humor if one is not comfortable with it or if it cannot be related to the material being taught. This paper has shown that when used appropriately, humor can and should be used in the classroom and can provide many benefits.

References

Ames, R. (1986). Effective motivation: The contribution of the learning environment. In R.S. Feldman (Ed.), The Social Psychology of Education: Current Research and Theory, (pp. 235-256). Cambridge: Cambridge University.

Andersen, J.F. (1979). Teacher immediacy as a predictor of teaching

effectiveness. Communication Yearbook, 3, 543-559.

Bandlow, R.F. & Yehl, J.K. (1990). Political Cartoons. New York: Newsweek Education Department.

Barecca, R. (1991). Laughing all the way to the bank: Humor and strategies

for success. In They used to call me snow white...but I drifted: Women's strategic use of humor. New York: Penguin.

Bergen, D. (1992). Using humor to facilitate learning. Childhood Education, 69 (2), 105-106.

Berk, R. (1998). Student ratings of 10 strategies for using humor in college teaching. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 7(3), 71-92.

Brophy, J. (1983). Conceptualizing student motivation. Educational Psychologist, 18, 200-215.

Brown, J.D. & Gibbs, G.K. (1990). Humorology: A Curriculum and Resource Guide. Monroe, New York: Trillium Press.

Cleary, B. (1982). The laughter of children. The Horn Book Magazine, 58, 555-564.

Crawford, C.B. (1994, May). Strategic humor in leadership: Practical suggestions for appropriate use. Paper presented at the meeting of the Kansas Leadership Forum, Salina Kansas.

Derks, P., Gardner, J.B., and Agarwal, R. (1998). Recall of innocent and tendentious humorous material. Humor, 11(1), 5-19.

Dweck, C.C. (1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American

Psychologist, 41, 1040-1048.

Frymier, A.B. (1994). A model of immediacy in the classroom. Communication

Quarterly, 42, 133-144.

Gentile, L., & McMillan, M. (1978). Humor and the reading program. Journal of Reading, 21, 343-349.

Gorham J. (1990). The relationship between verbal teacher immediacy behaviors

and student learning. Communication Education, 37, 40-53.

Holt, D.G. & Willard-Holt, C. (1995). An exploration of the relationship between humor and giftedness in students. Humor, 8(3), 257-271.

Kaplan, R.K. & Pascoe, G.C. (1977). Humorous lectures and humorous examples: Some effects upon comprehension and retention. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 61-65.

Kelley, W. (1985). Laughter and Learning: Humor in the Classroom. Maine:

J. Weston Walch.

Kelley, D.H. & Gorham, J. (1988). Effects of immediacy on recall information.

Communication Education, 37, 198-207.

Klesius, J., Laframboise, K., & Gaier, M. (1998). Humorous literature: Motivation for reluctant readers. Reading Research and Instruction, 37(4), 253-261.

Loomans, D. & Kolberg, K. (1993). The Laughing Classroom: Everyone's Guide to Teaching With Humor and Play. HJ Kramer Inc.: Tiburon, California.

Ormrod, J.E. (1995). Human Learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Merril Prentice Hall.

Richmond, V.P., Gorham, J.S., & McCroskey, J.C. (1987). The relationship

between selected immediacy behaviors and cognitive learning. In M. McLaughlin (Ed.), Communication Yearbook 10, (pp. 574-590). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Stopsky, F. (1992). Humor in the Classroom: A New Approach to Critical

Thinking. Massachusetts: Discovery Enterprises, Ltd.

Stuart, W.D., & Rosenfeld, L.B. (1994). Student perceptions of teacher humor

and classroom climate. Communication Research Reports, 12, 192-199.

Vance, C.M. (1987). A comparative study on the use of humor in the design of instruction. Instructional Science, 16, 79-100.

Wallinger, L.M. (1997). Don't smile before Christmas: The role of humor in

education. NASSP Bulletin, 81, 27-34.

Weiner, B. (1979). A theory of motivation for some classroom experiences.

Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 3-25.

Wlodkowski, R.J. (1978). Motivation and Teaching. Washington, D. C.:

National Education Association.

Ziv, A. (1998). Teaching and learning with humor: Experiment and replication. Journal of Experimental Education, 57, 5-15.

Figure 1

5. Record humorous selections on tape for children to listen to and read along.

13. Write tall tales particular to your geographic region, including animals and landmarks that are familiar to your students.
1. If your school has a morning closed-circuit television show, encourage your students to develop a show feature, such as "Joke of the Day" or "Riddle of the Week."

Figure 2

Selected Examples of Humorous Literature taken from Appendix of Klesius (1998)

Authors noted for humorous selections have an asterisk after their name and one example of their work is included.

Topsy Turveys

Barrett, J.*. (1970). Animals should definitely not wear clothes. New York: Macmillan.

Barrett, J. (1970) Animals should definitely not act like people. New York: Athenaeum.

Berenstein, S., & Berenstein, J. (1964). The Bike Lesson. New York: Random House.

Bridwell, N.* (1963). Clifford, the big red dog. New York: Scholastic.

Cowley, J.* (1987). Quack, quack, quack!! San Diego, CA: The Wright Group.

Day, A. (1993). Carl goes to daycare. New York: Farrar, Straus, & Giroux.

Meddaugh, S. (1992). Martha speaks. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Monsell, M. (1988). Underwear. Morton Grove, IL: Albert Whitman.

Most, B. (1990). The cow that went oi nk. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

Noble, T. H. (1989). Jimmy's boa and the big splash birthday bash. New York: Trumpet.

Pilkey, D. (1994). Dog breath. New York: Blue Sky Press.

Pinkwater, D. (1980). The Wugglie Norple story. New York: Trumpet.

Schwartz, A. (1982). Bea and Mr. Jones. Scarsdale, NY: Bradbury Press.

Weisner, D. (1991). Tuesday. New York: Clarion Books.

Noodlehead Topsy Turveys

Allard, H., & Marshall, J. (1981). The stupids die. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Birdseye, T. (1994). A regular flood of mishaps. New York: Holiday House.

Denim, S. (1994). The dumb bunnies. New York: The Blue Sky Press.

Macauley, D. (1987). Why the chicken crossed the road. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Robinette, R. (1989). The Robin family. Boston, Houghton Mifflin.

Willis, J. (1991). Earth weather as explained by Professor Xargle. New York: Dutton.

Wood, Audrey.* (1985). King Bridgood's in the bathtub. New York: Harcourt Brace.

Word Plays

Hepworth, C. (1991). Antics: An alphabetical anthology. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons.

Lyon, G. (1991). The outside inn. New York: Orchard Books.

Pomerantz, C. (1987). How many trucks can a two truck tow? New York: Random House.

Shaw, N.* (1986). Sheep in a jeep. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Van Laan, N.* (1990). Possum com a-knockin'. New York: Trumpet.

Linguistic Humor, Jokes, and Riddles

Berger, M. (1991). 101 wacky state jokes. New York: Scholastic.

Gelman, R. (1987). More spaghetti, I say. New York: Scholastic.

Gwynne, F.* (1976). A chocolate moose for dinner. New York: Prentice-Hall.

Hirsch, P. (1980). 101 pet jokes. New York: Scholastic Inc.

Hirsch, P. (1988). 101 dinosaur jokes. New York: Scholastic Inc.

Mayer, M. (1993). Little critter's joke book. New York: Golden Books.

Parish, P.* (1981). Amelia Bedelia and the baby. New York: Greenwillow Books.

Terban, Marvin.* (1991). Hey, hay! A wagonload of funny homonym riddles. New York: Clarion.

Humor at School

Allard, H., & Marshall, J.* (1977). Miss Nelson is missing. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Allard, H., & Marshall J. (1985). Miss Nelson is back. . Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Allard H., & Marshall, J. (1987). Miss Nelson has a field day. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Coville, Bruce.* (1989). My teacher is an alien. New York: Pocket Books.

Sachaar, L. (1978). Sideways stories from Wayside School. New York: Avon Books.

Shreve, Susan. (1984). The flunking of Joshua T. Bates. New York: Scholastic.

Teague, M. (1991). Frog medicine. New York: Scholastic.

Thaler, M.* (1989). The teacher from the black lagoon. Jared Lee (illus.). New York: Scholastic Inc.

Thaler, M.* (1993). The principal from the black lagoon. Jared Lee (illus.). New York: Scholastic Inc.

Thaler, M.* (1994). The gym teacher from the black lagoon. Jared Lee

(illus.). New York: Scholastic Inc.

Table 1

EE = Extremely Effective, VE = Very Effective