Text Complexity Defining Rigor through Research and the Common Core Standards

Common Core State Standards Our goals for today… Participants will… Take a glimpse at the past and a peek at the future Navigate the document Glance into the content strands Consider implications for your work Review resources and coming events 3

Common Core State Standards Define the knowledge and skills students need for college and career Developed voluntarily and cooperatively by states; more than 40 states have adopted Provide clear, consistent standards in English language arts/Literacy and mathematics Source: 4

Washington State’s Implementation Timeline Phase 1: Awareness and Understanding, Alignment, and Adoption Phase 2: Build Statewide Capacity, Collaboratively Develop and Align Resources and Materials Phase 3: Classroom Transitions Phase 4: Statewide Implementation through the Assessment System 5

Myths about CCSS Myth #3 The Common Core standards represent a modest change from current practice. “…several states conducted analyses that found considerable alignment between them and their current standards. Yet while the content of the two sets of standards is similar, the level of knowledge and skills the Common Core calls for is in many respects quite different from what current standards expect and what schools currently practice.” Five Myths About the Common Core State Standards By Robert Rothman

Text Complexity  “The Common Core Standards hinge on students encountering appropriately complex texts at each grade level in order to develop the mature language skills and the conceptual knowledge they need for success in school and life.”

“A survey by the National Association of Manufacturers, Anderson, and the Center for Workforce Success (2001) found that 80 percent of businesses had a moderate to serious shortage of qualified candidates, citing poor reading as a key concern.” “Another survey, published in 2000, found that 38 percent of job applicants taking employer-administered tests lacked the reading skills needed for the jobs for which they applied; this percentage had doubled in four years, not just because applicants lacked basic skills but also because the reading requirements for these jobs had increased so rapidly (Center for Workforce Prevention, 2002).” Career Readiness

“Based on 2005 ACT-tested high school graduates, it appears that only about half of our nation’s ACT-tested high school students are ready for college-level reading. Unfortunately, the percentage…is substantially smaller in some groups.” “Since 1999, readiness has declined – the current figure of 51 percent is the lowest of the past 12 years.” College Readiness

All students must be able to comprehend texts of steadily increasing complexity as they progress through school. What are the current realities in college and career readiness? ACT, INC. Report (2006) Key requirement for college and career readiness

As performance on one level increases, so does the performance on the other and to the same degree. Comprehension Level

As performance on one level increases, so does the performance on the other and to the same degree. Textual Elements

“Performance on complex texts is the clearest differentiator in reading between students who are more likely to be ready for college and those who are less likely to be ready.” Text Complexity

Summary of Findings: Literal and inferential questions No clear differentiator of readiness for college Textual elementsNo clear differentiator of readiness for college Performance with complex text Clear differentiator of readiness for college

Text Complexity Specifically, within reading standard #10 : Anchor Standard: R.CCR.10Read and comprehend complex literary and informational texts independently and proficiently. Example Grade-level Standard (6 th grade): RI.6.10By the end of the year, read and comprehend literary nonfiction in the grades 6-8 text complexity band proficiently, with scaffolding as needed at the high end of the range. 16

Guiding QuestionsSo… What do the Common Core State Standards mean by text complexity? What is a text complexity band? How do we ensure the texts our students are reading are in the appropriate text complexity band? 17

Overview of Text Complexity Text complexity is defined by: Qualitative 2.Qualitative measures – levels of meaning, structure, language conventionality and clarity, and knowledge demands often best measured by an attentive human reader. Quantitative 1.Quantitative measures – readability and other scores of text complexity often best measured by computer software. Reader and Task 3.Reader and Task considerations – background knowledge of reader, motivation, interests, and complexity generated by tasks assigned often best made by educators employing their professional judgment.

Where do we find texts in the appropriate text complexity band? Choose an excerpt of text from Appendix B: We could…. or… Use available resources to determine the text complexity of other materials on our own.

Determining Text Complexity A Four-step Process: 20 Quantitative Qualitative Reader and Task 4.Recommend placement in the appropriate text complexity band. 3.Reflect upon the reader and task considerations. 2.Analyze the qualitative measures of the text. 1.Determine the quantitative measures of the text.

21 Measures such as: Word length Word frequency Word difficulty Sentence length Text length Text cohesion Step 1: Quantitative Measures

22 The Quantitative Measures Ranges for Text Complexity This chart outlines the suggested ranges for each of the text complexity bands using: Current Lexile Text Levels & “Stretched” Lexile Levels Gr. BandCurrent LexileStretched Lexile K - 1N/A 2 – – – – – 8860 – – – – CCR1070 –

Step 1: Quantitative Measures 23 Let’s imagine we want to see where a text falls on the quantitative measures “leg” of the text complexity triangle, using the Lexile text measures. For illustrative purposes, let’s choose Harper Lee’s 1960 novel To Kill a Mockingbird.

Step 1: Quantitative Measures Finding a Lexile Measure for Text: / / 24

Step 1: Quantitative Measures 25

Step 1: Quantitative Measures 26

Step 1: Quantitative Measures 27 For texts not in the Lexile database, consider using the Lexile Analyzer: Registration is required (free) Allows user to receive an “estimated” Lexile score Accommodates texts up to 1000 words in length Texts of any length can be evaluated using the Professional Lexile Analyzer— educators can upgrade to this tool for free by requesting access

Step 1: Quantitative Measures Additional Resources for Lexile Measures: Overview video “What Does the Lexile Measure Mean?” leMeasureMean.pdf leMeasureMean.pdf “Lexile Measures and the Common Core State Standards” ATOS Text Analyzer

Step 1: Quantitative Measures 29 Lexile Text Measure: ATOS Book Level 870L 5.6 In which of the text complexity bands would this novel fall?

Text Complexity Grade Bands Suggested Lexile Range Suggested ATOS Book Level Range** K-1100L – 500L*1.0 – L – 790L2.0 – L – 980L3.0 – L – 1155L4.0 – L – 1305L4.6 – CCR1215L – 1355L4.8 – 12.0 Quantitative Measures Ranges for Text Complexity Grade Bands Kansas Common Core Standards * The K-1 suggested Lexile range was not identified by the Common Core State Standards and was added by Kansas. ** Taken from Accelerated Reader and the Common Core State Standards, available at the following URL:

Step 1: Quantitative Measures 31 Remember, however, that the quantitative measures is only the first of three “legs” of the text complexity triangle. Our final recommendation may be validated, influenced, or even over- ruled by our examination of qualitative measures and the reader and task considerations.

32 Step 2: Qualitative Measures Measures such as: Levels of meaning Levels of purpose Structure Organization Language conventionality Language clarity Prior knowledge demands

Step 2: Qualitative Measures 33 The Qualitative Measures Rubrics for Literary and Informational Text : The rubric for literary text and the rubric for informational text allow educators to evaluate the important elements of text that are often missed by computer software that tends to focus on more easily measured factors.

Step 2: Qualitative Measures Because the factors for literary texts are different from information texts, these two rubrics contain different content. However, the formatting of each document is exactly the same. And because these factors represent continua rather than discrete stages or levels, numeric values are not associated with these rubrics. Instead, four points along each continuum are identified: high, middle high, middle low, and low.

Step 2: Qualitative Measures So… How is the rubric used? And how would To Kill a Mockingbird fair when analyzed through the lens of the Literary Text Rubric?

Step 2: Qualitative Measures 36

Step 2: Qualitative Measures Lexile Text Measure: ATOS Book Level: 870L 5.6 From examining the quantitative measures, we knew: But after reflecting upon the qualitative measures, we believed:

Step 2: Qualitative Measures 38 Quantitative Qualitative Reader and Task Our initial placement of To Kill a Mockingbird into a text complexity band changed when we examined the qualitative measures. Remember, however, that we have completed only the first two legs of the text complexity triangle. The reader and task considerations still remain.

39 Considerations such as: Motivation Knowledge and experience Purpose for reading Complexity of task assigned regarding text Complexity of questions asked regarding text Step 3:Reader and Task Considerations

“Texts can be difficult or easy, depending on factors inherent in the text, on the relationship between the text and the knowledge abilities of the reader, and on the activities in which the reader is engaged…When too many of these factors are not matched to a reader’s knowledge and experience, the text may be too difficult for optimal comprehension to occur.” Step 3:Reader and Task Considerations

41 Questions for Professional Reflection on Reader and Task Considerations : The questions provided in this resource are meant to spur teacher thought and reflection upon the text, students, and any tasks associated with the text.

Step 3:Reader and Task Considerations 42 The questions included here are largely open- ended questions without single, correct answers, but help educators to think through the implications of using a particular text in the classroom.

Step 3:Reader and Task Considerations 43 Based upon our examination of the Reader and Task Considerations, we have completed the third leg of the text complexity model and are now ready to recommend a final placement within a text complexity band.

Step 4: Recommended Placement 44 Step 4: Recommended Placement After reflecting upon all three legs of the text complexity model, we can make a final recommendation for placement of a text and begin to document our thinking for future reference.

Step 4: Recommended Placement 45 Lexile Text Measure: ATOS Book Level: 870L 5.6

Step 4: Recommended Placement 46 Based upon all the information—all three legs of the model—the final recommendation for To Kill a Mockingbird is….

Step 4: Recommended Placement 47 In this instance, Appendix B confirms our evaluation of the novel. To Kill a Mockingbird is placed within the grade 9-10 text complexity band.

Step 4: Recommended Placement 48 Template for Text Complexity Analysis and Recommended Placement Form : The one-page template provides an opportunity to record the thinking involved in recommending the placement of a specific text into a text complexity band. Keeping a record of such analysis and thinking might be useful documentation in the case that any questions arise in the future.

49

Additional Ideas for Extending the Utility of the Text Complexity Model 51 Involving students in analyzing text complexity Involving educators in selecting common, appropriately complex texts to be used for explicit instruction at each grade level

Determining Text Complexity A Four-step Process: 52 Quantitative Qualitative Reader and Task 4.Recommend placement in the appropriate text complexity band. 3.Reflect upon the reader and task considerations. 2.Analyze the qualitative measures of the text. 1.Determine the quantitative measures of the text.

Tim Shanahan “Reading educators have long argued for matching books to kids by difficulty level. We have claimed that it is essential that students work at their instructional levels. The driving force behind informal reading inventories, basal readers, leveled books, guided reading, and low readability/high- interest textbooks has been the fear of placing kids in texts that will be too hard to allow learning… Truth be told, there is little research supporting matching kids with books, and there are even studies suggesting that teaching children from frustration level texts can lead to more learning than from instructional level ones. Reason for Concern Based on such evidence, the common core requires that students spend most of their time reading texts that they are likely to struggle with.” Common Core Standards: Are We Going to Lower the Fences or Teach Kids to Climb? Thursday, October 13, 2011

Tim Shanahan “To succeed, we will need to…strive to identify what makes a book hard and then to provide the scaffolding and motivation that would sustain students’ efforts to learn from such challenging texts.” Common Core Standards: Are We Going to Lower the Fences or Teach Kids to Climb? Thursday, October 13, 2011

Acknowledgements Kansas State Department of Education Vermont State Department of Education

Research Base  ACT, INC. Report (2006)  Common Core State Standards (2010)  National Reading Panel Report (2000)  Publishers’ Criteria for the Common Core State Standards in English Language Arts and Literacy Grades K-2 and Grades 3-12 (2011)  RAND Report: Reading for Understanding: Toward an R&D Program in Reading Comprehension (Snow, 2002)  Reading in the Disciplines: The Challenge of Adolescent Literacy (Lee & Spratley, 2010)