Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

[Phys-L] Re: Reading level



After reading the below, I add to my vocab suggestion another dictionary
that is quite complete - the words in the first. The words in the
larger dict. would be keyed, e.g. technical, and psychological. The
keying could be determined by a factor analysis of such authors as H.
James, Shakespeare, and Hemingway. for the Wm T's problem -- etc. etc.

bc

William Thomas wrote:

We use the Lexile (www.lexile.com <http://www.lexile.com>) reading me=
asure
at our school. One should be very careful with all reading level meas=
ures
that they are not used incorrectly.
The lexile score gives us a very quick answer for this question:
"Can a student reading at this lexile level understand text at this =
lexile
level?" In other words, if the material I am asking them to read in c=
lass is
lexiled at 1250 and the student can read at a lexile level of 900, th=
ere is
no chance that they are going to understand the material no matter ho=
w many
times I tell them to read it. Indeed in this situation, the more read=
ing you
request of a student when the material is more than a couple of hundr=
ed
points above their ability, the higher the level of frustration for t=
he
student, and the less productive the exercise.
On the other hand, Hemingway lexiles very low compared to technical
manuals. Does this mean that just because the student can read at 125=
0 they
will understand a Hemingway novel that is written at 1000? Of course =
not.
Lexiles are useful to make sure we align the reading with our studen=
t's
abilities, and give us realistic goals for stretching and improving a
students reading without turning them off due to frustration or unrea=
listic
expectations.
Telling a student with a 900 lexile level to just read more slowly o=
r more
often when the text is too far above their reading level is like yell=
ing at
a person who doesn't speak English in the hope that more volume will =
make
them understand you.
William Thomas

On 11/2/05, John SOHL <jsohl@weber.edu> wrote:

I have been interested in these reading level measurements for a wh=

ile.

My son is now in the 6th grade and we've been carefully monitoring =

his

reading level for years. BC's readability scores post listed the
equations that are used to determine the "grade level" of the mater=

ial

and it is easy to see that it is based purely on sentence structure=

and

word length. *No conceptual understanding is needed.*

Out of curiosity, I pasted in a section from one of my optics labs =

into

the Gunning Fog Index calculator and got 8.87. Yet, I feel comforta=

ble

claiming that an average ninth grader is not going to understand
"ASE=3DAmplified Spontaneous Emission" even though they can read th=

e

words.

One place where I saw this flaw (before I figured out the equations
used for the calculations but was already suspicious) was when my t=

hen

4th grade son brought home a book rated at the upper end of fourth =

grade

- Phantom of the Opera. I figured that sure, he could read it, but
would he understand the complex interplays of emotions and contexts=

?

Probably not. I figured that we'd wait until high school to read th=

at.

On the other hand, a ninth grade rated version of "Swiss Family
Robinson" was easily read by him and pretty well understood when he=

was

only in 5th grade.

The above text rated 8.25 - don't try to get your young children to
read it... :-)

I'll bet that Hake's posting could be rewritten to get a score of 8=

to

10 and be no more understandable to the non-specialist reader.

John
P.S. I very much enjoy the detail in Hake's postings and am thankfu=

l

for the references.
P.P.S. It is interesting to look at the "significant" figures in th=

e

online Fog Index analysis. All values have 1 to 3 sig figs except t=

he

average number of words per sentence which has an absurd 10 signifi=

cant

figures listed. (Maybe OK for a population but certainly not for a
sample!)


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
John E. Sohl, Ph.D.
Professor of Physics
Weber State University
2508 University Circle
Ogden, UT 84408-2508

voice: (801) 626-7907, fax: (801) 626-7445
e-mail: jsohl@weber.edu
web: http://physics.weber.edu/sohl/



_______________________________________________
Phys-L mailing list
Phys-L@electron.physics.buffalo.edu
https://www.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l