Transcript Text Complexity

One More Peek at the Smarter Balanced
Assessment System
http://www.smarterbalanced.org/
2
Ripe Figs
 Read through the
passage. Then use what
you know to answer the
questions.
 Find the others with
the same book cover
as you and discuss
your responses.
Text Complexity
Defining Rigor through Research and the
Common Core Standards
Outcomes
 Define text complexity and describe why it
matters
 Practice reading complex text and using textbased evidence in discussion
 Evaluate text complexity of a non-fiction
passage
 Identify implications for our work as school
and district leaders
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
Protocol – part 1
 Read Appendix A, pages 2, 3 and top half of 4
 Identify a passage that you feel has
implications for your work
 Identify a back up passage
Three Levels of Text Protocol
Form a group of three people
2. Identify a time keeper and a facilitator
3. One person has up to three minutes to:
1.
Level 1- read aloud the passage they selected
Level 2 – tell about what he/she thinks about
the passage
Level 3 – Tell about the implications for their
work
4. The group responds for up to two minutes
5. Repeat steps 3 and 4 until everyone has shared
their passage.
Break
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vo0Cazxj_yc
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.”
Career Readiness
“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).”
College 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.”
Key requirement for college and career 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)
Comprehension Level
As performance on one level increases, so does the performance on the other and
to the same degree.
Textual Elements
As performance on one level increases, so does the performance on the other and to
the same degree.
Text Complexity
“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.”
Summary of Findings:
Literal and inferential questions No clear differentiator of
readiness for college
Textual elements
No clear differentiator of
readiness for college
Performance with complex text
Clear differentiator of readiness
for college
Hunt Institute Video Segment 2
 The balance between Informational and
Literary Texts in K-5

Turn to your elbow partner and discuss what
the implications might be. What new things
might be required of students?
Overview of Text Complexity
Text complexity is defined by:
1. Quantitative measures – readability and
other scores of text complexity often best
measured by computer software.
2. Qualitative measures – levels of meaning,
structure, language conventionality and
clarity, and knowledge demands often best
measured by an attentive human reader.
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.
Reader and Task
Where do we find texts in the appropriate
text complexity band?
We could...
Use available resources
to determine the text
complexity of other
materials on our own.
Choose an excerpt of
text from Appendix B:
or…

Determining Text Complexity
A Four-step Process:
1. Determine the quantitative
measures of the text.
2. Analyze the qualitative
measures of the text.
3. Reflect upon the reader and
task considerations.
4. Recommend placement in the
appropriate text complexity
band.
22
Reader and Task
Step 1: Quantitative Measures
Step 1: Quantitative Measures
Measures such as:
• Word length
• Word frequency
• Word difficulty
• Sentence length
• Text length
• Text cohesion
23
Lexiles
The Quantitative Measures
Ranges for Text Complexity
24
Gr. Band
Old Lexile
Lexile Rangle
Aligned to the CC
Standards
K-1
N/A
N/A
2–3
450 - 725
450 – 790
4–5
645 - 845
770 – 980
6–8
860 – 1010
955 – 1155
9 – 10
960 - -1115
1080 – 1305
11 - CCR
1070 – 1220
1215 - 1355
Step 1: Quantitative Measures
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.
25
Step 1: Quantitative Measures
 Finding a Lexile Measure for Text:
26
http://www.lexile.com/findabook/
Step 1: Quantitative Measures
27
Kansas Common Core Standards
Quantitative Measures Ranges for
Text Complexity Grade Bands
Text Complexity
Grade Bands
Suggested
Lexile Range
Suggested ATOS
Book Level Range**
K-1
100L – 500L*
1.0 – 2.5
2-3
450L – 790L
2.0 – 4.0
4-5
770L – 980L
3.0 – 5.7
6-8
955L – 1155L
4.0 – 8.0
9-10
1080L – 1305L
4.6 – 10.0
11-CCR
1215L – 1355L
4.8 – 12.0
* 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:
http://doc.renlearn.com/KMNet/R004572117GKC46B.pdf
Step 1: Quantitative Measures
Lexile Text
Measure:
ATOS Book
Level
29
870L
5.6
Step 1: Quantitative Measures
For texts not in the Lexile database, consider using the Lexile
Analyzer: http://www.lexile.com/analyzer/
• Registration is required (free)
http://www.lexile.com/account/register/
• 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
http://www.lexile.com/account/profile/acces
s/
30
Step 2: Qualitative Measures
Measures such as:
• Levels of meaning
• Levels of purpose
• Structure
• Organization
• Language
conventionality
• Language clarity
• Prior knowledge
demands
31
Step 2: Qualitative Measures
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.
32
Partner Share
 How do the demands for text complexity
increase from low to high?
Step 2: Qualitative
Measures
34
Step 2: Qualitative Measures
From examining the quantitative measures, we knew:
Lexile Text Measure:
870L
ATOS Book Level:
5.6
But after reflecting upon the qualitative measures, we believed:
Step 3:Reader and
Task Considerations
Considerations such as:
• Motivation
• Knowledge and
experience
• Purpose for reading
• Complexity of task
assigned regarding
text
• Complexity of questions
asked regarding text
36
Step
3:Reader
and
Reader & Task
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
The questions included
here are largely openended questions without
single, correct answers,
but help educators to
think through the
implications of using a
particular text in the
classroom.
38
Step 4:
Recommended Placement
Based upon all the information—all three
legs of the model—the final
recommendation for To Kill a Mockingbird
is….
40
Step 4:
Recommended Placement
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.
41
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
Step 4:
Recommended Placement
Template for Text Complexity
Analysis and Recommended
Placement Form:
43
Appendix B: Text Exemplars
 Go to pages 4-13 in Appendix B. Locate
where to find Informational Text exemplars
for your grade level/content area.
 Then, take a look at those exemplars.
Hunt Institute Video Segment 3
Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and
Technical Subjects
 Peruse through pages 60-66 of your ELA
CCSS.


What are your observations?
What are the implications for Social Studies
and Science Teachers?
Wrap Up
1. Exit Slip – Readiness to Implement Survey
2. Clock Hours Feedback Form
3. Clock Hours
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)