Nerd Alert: I'm Perplexed By Lexiles and How They Are Used By Some to Police the Reading of Others

While earning my doctorate I was introduced to the branding of texts through lexiles and the alleged complexity ascribed pieces of work do to algorithms and word measurements. I do think there's a need to label pieces of work and to match student proficiencies with challenging text that are right in step with their reading abilities.

Last night, I found myself looking for what others have had to say. Carolyn Miller wrote,

Reading leveling systems like Lexile, DRA, and Guided Reading provide teachers and librarians with one measure for making book recommendations and supporting students as they self-select books, but children shouldn't wear their reading levels like a badge and become defined by them. 

Do we teach children how to preview and evaluate books for themselves or teach them that reading and book selection belong to school and we can't trust them with it? (Guess My Lexile, July 25, 2012, Education Week Teacher)

I learned yesterday that decisions are being made on what texts are appropriate and inappropriate for young readers based on their supposed difficulty. Many YA novels are excluded from curriculum because the stories seem to easy (it's interesting, too, because those banning such reading opportunities probably don't know that Fahrenheit 451, a canonical classic, shares a similar lexile and should be banned - how ironic!).

Personally, I feel we should be encouraging students to read everything. I do agree, however, that before students can gravitate to the classics they need to build motivational muscle through pleasurable reading experiences. I've had numerous sections of college freshmen who do textual lineages with me and they outline all the books they didn't read in high school, but were assigned. They claim they are non-readers, they hate English classes, and don't understand why it is important. Yet, when I get to know them (and learn they did very well on AP English Exams by gaming the test), I soon find out that they are readers and critical thinkers, but they are not reading what is assigned. In their minds, English and reading is an exercise in approaching texts that mean nothing to them but that should be read to jump through a hoop. They cheat.

My thinking is that students should be taught to be lifelong readers and this only comes through providing texts that are relevant to them and that catch their interests. My English major encourages me to believe that critical thinking with complex texts is important, but I also argue that reading for pleasure is also paramount.

I guess it comes down to the question, "What is the purpose of school?" I, for one, think it is encouraging literacy to be much more than the lexiles proclaim. One of the exercises I did with juniors in Kentucky was have them bring in their favorite children's book. They analyzed them from a young adult perspective and learned that their favorites were actually much more intense, profound, and complicated than they ever realized. Why? Because they were thinking more critically as growing, independent minds.

I don't think books should be removed from curriculum because some label their complexity due to a mathematical formula. Rather, an intellectual student will bring complexity to all the texts they read. We should be training young people to become the intellectuals they were born to be - that means questioning everything, including what some claim as superior or inferior texts.

Aw, man. What are we doing to kids?