?

Log in

No account? Create an account
 
 
10 November 2015 @ 09:48 am
Number Drama  
Act I

Any episode of Band Stand (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Bandstand for those of you too young to remember Dick Clark's show) had a "Rate the Record" segment. Audience members Listened to a new song and then had the chance to assign it a rating, "Well, I guess I'd give it an 82. I liked the song but it was kinda hard to dance to."

Act II

The Dead Poet's Society scene where Robin Williams comments on the Introduction to Poetry for the textbook: "Excrement! That's what I think of Mr. J. Evans Pritchard! We're not laying pipe! We're talking about poetry. How can you describe poetry like American Bandstand? 'I like Byron, I give him a 42 but I can't dance to it!'"

Act III

On to Amadeus (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086879/). Salieri is telling Mozart that the reason his latest work has failed is that it has too many notes.

I hope you have enjoyed this little drama. Numbers are not the way we should be evaluating or assessing art. And yet. And yet. The Lexile Police march on. Reading levels determine placement of books in the hands of readers.

As a bit of a thought experiment, I entered the titles of the National Book Award longlist titles for Young People's Literature. Here are the results. I am listing the books from lowest level and Lexile to the highest.

Nimona 3.1 350 L
X: A Novel 4.0 HL580L
Simon vs, the Homo Sapiens Agenda 4.4 HL640L
Walk the Earth a Stranger 4.8 740 L
Bone Gap 4.9 HL810L
The Thing about Jellyfish 5.0 740L
Challenger Deep 5.5 HL800LMost Dangerous (no RL avail) 890L
Symphony for the City of the Dead (no RL avail) 990L
This Side of Wild 6.6 1210L

Additional information that might demonstrate how fallacious this whole numbers system is include the grade ranges for these Lexile numbers:

300 K-1
500 2-3
600 2-5
700 2-5
800 4-5
900 6-9
1200 CCR (college and career ready)


The grade ranges and Lexile levels are meaningless to someone like me who has actually READ the books. And they should be rendered useless to everyone. These numbers do not even give me a clue about potential readership. I would not hand Nimona to a 3rd grader nor Bone Gap to a 5th grader. And I do think the Paulsen book (This Side of Wild) is accessible to a much younger audience.

Why do we not rise up and with a single voice declare that this emperor has no clothes?
 
 
Current Location: office
Current Mood: angryangry
 
 
 
Sherry BorgrenSherryTeach on November 11th, 2015 08:56 pm (UTC)
Read 180 FB feed and lexiles
First of all, I wish I could get my Mac to stop turning "lexiles" into "exiles," but in any event, I commented on a post from Read 180 in my FB feed about how we should encourage our students to do better on the SRI because even a few point difference in score could influence the books they were allowed to read. I indignantly commented that this was ridiculous. As I frequently comment on the Read 180 FB threads, those Scholastic folks probably rue the day when I subscribed.

So while I am more or less forced to follow the Read 180 model (the three rotations), my students can read anything in my classroom library. I have two rules for book selection: 1. Do you understand it? 2. Does it meet a need (which we talk about a lot at the beginning of the year). I am grateful that my district gives me this professional judgment.