The article "Readability Versus Leveling" by Edward Fry discusses the difference between readability and leveling when it comes to the relation to grade levels. Fry tells of how readability is defined as "the ease of comprehension because of style of writing." Leveling is defined as "selecting books to match the competencies of a reader or writer." Fry explains how readability is found by using formulas. In the classroom, readability is thought of as an objective numerical scored gained by applying the formula. Leveling is not objective, it takes subject factors of judgment into account.
Readability dates back to the 1920s and the "McGuffy Readers." "McGruffy Readers" gave books a numerical grading, the more complex the books are, the higher numbers they will have. As it progressed, the numbers evolved into grade levels. One system used is the Reading Recovery System. It requires teachers to find books with closely spread difficulty to that one grade level with have books with more one degree of difficulty for that one grade. Some other systems give whole-grade designations to books. Thses systems and formulas are for grades 1-4 mostly.
The formulas used to measure readability and leveling use different parts of reading, speaking and writing. Readability uses syntactic difficulty, measured by sentence length, and sematic difficulty, meased by word length. Word length is measured by syllables or numbers of letters in the words. Leveling is measured by more than just two parts. What measures leveling is content, illustrations, length, curriculum, langugage structure, judgment and format. Readability is objective and can be assessed by a computer. Unlike leveling, witch is not objective. The scores of these formulas can be translated into grade levels. However, Fry does explain that there are limitations to these formulas. He gives the examples of how motivation and appropriateness cannot be assessed.
Readabliltiy and leveling have two different ranges. Readability formulas range like grade levels, 1-12. Leveling formulas range from kindergarden to 6th grade. Readability, unlike leveling, is used outside the classroom. It is used for many different works. Some examples are military training manuals, plain language laws, and newspaper articles.
Fry dicussed how to find the right readability level. He said there is a need to find reading materials with the right reading level for instuction that makes the most sense. If the reading level is too hard, it may discourage someone from reading and understanding it. On the other hand, if it is too simple, the reader could get bored with its simplicity. Fry said one of the most important things for a teacher is to select the correct level for her student to learn reading effectively.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
I completely believe in readability levels. My 9 year old is currently involved in a program that works like this; if, while they are reading they find a word they don't know they have to make note of it..and as they read further they cannot go past five words they don't know. Finding five words they don't know means the book is beyond their reading level and they must choose another book. If they find only three words then they are required to look those words up in order to continue the reading of that book.
This article fits in well with the current trends in teaching reading to various grade levels.
Fry makes great points concerning finding the adequate level books for the intended reader.
I think the idea of readability levels is a bit crazy. I understand that there are different levels to writing, but to be able to judge the readability of something at an exact numerical value does not seem possible.
It also takes away the creativity of writing and gives it a cold mathematical value. To me, writing is a subject where one can be creative. The idea of readability levels can tell a writer whether they are right or wrong, and I do not agree with that.
I don't think I like readability or leveling. I can understand the thought behind it, but it seems as though taking an entire book away from a student just because he happens to find a few words he doesn't know really deprives him of experience. I would rather have that student use context clues or a good dictionary to figure out what those words mean. He would learn more AND get to read the book of his choice.
For me readability is something I am not totally sold on. To be completely honest, there are times when I read something and find or come across a word that I do not know the meaning of. Does that mean that I shouldn't be reading that particular article or book? No, it does not which is why I am not a big fan of readability. I also believe that writing should involve and does involve a level of creativity. Therefore, if a numerical value is placed on someones level of readability, to me, prohibits their ability to be creative. In closing, I am not a fan of readability levels because people are not perfect and there will be times when someone does not know a word and that does not mean they cannot read or have difficulty reading.
I agree with the concepts of readability and leveling. I observe in a second-grade classroom, and the readability levels are really helpful there. At this age, students don't really know what they are capable of reading yet. I've seen students pick up books that are way too hard for them. They end up not knowing most of the words, so they can't understand or enjoy the book they have chosen. Readability levels can be used to help push students in the right direction. If a student is interested in a book about dinosaurs, the teacher can help him/her find a book that is at the right reading level. Sure, there will probably be some words that the student doesn't know, but they can use context clues to figure them out, or even stop to look them up. If one out of every three words in the book is too difficult for the student, he/she is not going to get anything out of it.
I am with those of you who are wondering about the effectiveness of determining reading level with some type of formula. It is hard for me to accept that something like this is possible. However, anyone I have talked to who actually uses this sort of thing to determine appropriate reading material for their classroom, child, etc. has told me that this is very effective.
However, I still have not used this for my own classroom. I still haven't gotten the opportunity to pick any of the material that they are supposed to read.
all through school my teachers used readibility levels. It was a program called accelerated reader. In this program the student was to read a book and take a test. The test would then suggest a reading level that you should be at. It was always exciting to see how many grade levels you were ahead of your actual grade. I think reading levels are a great system because they encourage everyone to read at a level they can understand.
I don't like the idea of readability at all. Not knowing a few words doesn't seem like any reason to stop reading a book. That's how people learn words they don't know. If there's three, five, or ten unknown words, that's that many more words a student would know if they just looked them up. When I was in grade school, I was always reading books beyond my level. I think that is what made me become a more skilled reader, not any kind of mathematical formula. I'm not saying students should read books so far beyond their understanding that they're completely lost, but stretching their capabilities a little bit seems good, rather than bad.
I understand that readability and its intentions are good but I don't think it can be figured out that simply. I think that we should always encourage our students to work harder and for some reading a harder book may be the push they need. I don't think that we can level readers and their books by words that are harder to understand...maybe the book is just interesting to a person and no matter how many times they have to look something up in the dictionary they can't put the book down because it is of interest to them.
Readability honestly feels like a contrived method used to enhance a potentially worthless article. A written work can offer no substance or merit, but if it scores high on a readability scale, it's already assumed to be a work of higher education, and is given respect that otherwise would not be warranted. Purer, more well written articles that score a low readability may be tossed by the wayside, based off of this arbitrary scale that determines how advanced a work can be. I disagree with the labeling of written work, as a well written, thoughtful article does not need to use archaic or technical vocabulary in order to be considered scholarly.
I think readability or leveling can be helpful. But the criteria might be a little intense. For the example that Pam posted, if there are thousands of words in the book and i don't know 5. I personally would still consider that book in my level. But if it was a short book that had less then a hundred words then this order of leveling might work. But like all ideas they have their ups and downs and might work in some cases where they won't in others. But I wouldn't count Readability completely out.
I really dont understand the whole idea of the Readability levels. I have never used the readability scale for anything.Personally, I dont believe that the readability levels are accurate. I dont believe that a persons writing should be based off of the levels of readability that Fry has produced.
I agree in readability levels. The classroom that I am in now uses readability levels and it really seems to help the students. I am not saying that a child shouldn't try to read a book that may be a little advanced for their reading skills, but if they come up on numerous words that they don't know then they should either get help from an adult or choose a book that is more suitable for their reading level.
Post a Comment