As a former school library media specialist, I’ve always been completely adverse to any type of book labeling programs such as Accelerated Reader or the Lexile Framework. If you aren’t familiar with these concepts, simply put, they are programs that label books as being at a certain reading level. Schools buy-in to a program like AR or Lexile and buy the book labels that come with them. Kids are tested and read only the books that are at their “level.” Libraries and schools often only purchase books that have been given an AR or Lexile number so kids know what books they can read. Schools also buy tests that AR and Lexile sell. They sell tests about each book, so that kids can take them and prove they’ve read the books. Excuse me if my writing seems stilted…I’m trying to write in an objective manner and I’m finding it to be difficult…. ;-)
Anyway, I ran into an article that described the British Columbia Teacher Librarian Association’s stance on what they call “book leveling” and it turns out that they agree with me; book leveling is messed up! This short article cites the reasons that book leveling is “messed up” but these savvy folks take this notion one step further and also suggest this practice is a form of censorship. What do you think? Do you agree with them?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree that, though well-intentioned, book leveling is not a good practice. As a public librarian I constantly encounter students that want to know "Where are the AR books?" "How many points is it?" These kids do not know how to choose a book for its content. They want to pick something off a list that is easy and has a high point value. Yes, these students may be reading, but they are not improving, building or expanding their reading habits. I have seen some of these tests...if you are even a little clever, you really don't even have to read the entire book to successfully pass a test.
ReplyDeleteAs a first grader my school librarian would not allow me to read books that were specified for someone at a higher grade level. At age 7 I was stuck quickly reading through books that were too easy, did not interest me and obviously were not building my literacy skills.
I don't think that labeling a book in and of itself is censoring but keeping a child from reading a book because of a label is definitely censorship.
Thankfully I have parents that encouraged me to read books that I chose at any difficulty. I am an avid reader to this day and read a variety of materials in various genres and difficulty.
As teachers and librarians we must encourage kids to read a variety of books. Yes, help them find books that are appropriate for their skill level so that they do not become frustrated, but also talk with them about their interests so they can discover the joy of reading fiction and nonfiction materials. I understand the initial intention of AR books but I think they have gained too much power over young readers and are beginning to censor readers by rigidly guiding their choices.
I had the same issue with a first-year middle school English teacher, so this issue is not just an elementary school one. She thought the book I had chosen for my first book report would be well over my head, but in all fairness to her, she gave me a chance to prove her wrong--which I did. She may have spoken to other teachers about this; Argos is a K-12 school and my sisters and I all had high reading scores, and this was well-known by most of the teachers there. She may have given me my shot based on what she'd heard from other teachers. But if that sort of information is not available, I think a teacher _should_ let a child choose to read a more challenging book if they want. If they're not able to do it, then they'll figure that out for themselves. And if they _do_ succeed--just imagine the feeling of accomplishment they will have!
ReplyDeleteThat teacher never questioned another book choice of mine again! :)
As I was reading this blog post, the comments, and the referenced article, I could not help but listen to the cynic in my brain that was whispering, "follow the money". While I'm having difficulty coming up with effective search terms, a quick look at the Wikipedia page for "Lexile" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexile) reveals a long list of agencies and for-profit companies that have a stake in the creation of materials and tests that are related to the Lexile framework.
ReplyDeleteIn other words, it looks like there is a lot of money to be made by pushing these kinds of labeling frameworks upon schools, parents, and young readers.
Working in an academic library, I am not familiar with the book leveling practice. From the sound of it, it does seem to be a form of censorship, particularly if teachers aren’t willing to allow students to read above their level. I am glad to hear that Cassaundra had a teacher who allowed her to read above her level.
ReplyDeleteLooking back, I read a lot of books that were far above my level and wrote reports about these materials that were positively received by my teachers. If I were to encounter a teacher who was unwilling to allow me to pick more difficult books, I would be angered and definitely consider it a form of censorship.
It is sad that such a practice could potentially result in students not challenging themselves and in turn not reading above their grade level.
Also, Anne’s comments indicate that students try to “game” the system and, as a result, are not concerned with content of the books. This may reduce the likelihood that they truly enjoy the experience and not become lifelong readers.
I agree with most librarians I know on the issue of labeling level of books. Labeling is helpful when you have a struggling reader who may not be comfortable coming to the desk and asking for books below grade level but requiring that students read only at grade level seems like another example of going overboard with a rule.
ReplyDeleteI would have been bored to tears as a child if my teachers and parents hadn't allowed me to read above my grade level.
I also agree that the AR tests are written poorly and stunt any reading for the pure enjoyment of it which as we all know is the only way to keep people reading. No one likes reading when they HAVE to. At least no one I know.
So happy I can post it here for someone to see! I HATE the whole Lexile thing! Oh my goodness! I'm always telling parents, who, of course, get very hung up on their child's scores that honestly, as long as their child is reading and enjoying it, it's okay to read books outside their level at times! I realize they are required, for school, to read books in their levels but I feel such a loathing of this practice by the kids and I worry that they'll be burnt out on reading so soon because they aren't enjoying it. In most of my experience, teachers allow students to read above but not below their level. However, I find that so many of the kids in my area have a high Lexile but they're so young that the books written at their interest level are not high enough in Lexile levels. :( This disappoints the kids, me, and while I'm unsure how big this leveled reading system is, I worry that it could get to the authors/publishers as well and make them start writing books from that perspective, churning out books that will get a high Lexile instead. And often, we'll get children with such high Lexiles that most of the books are in the adult section and non-fiction, like a handbook on science or something. Yeah, give a kid that and see what happens!
ReplyDeleteI agree with Anne that keeping a child from reading a book based on these levels is a form of censorship. Patrons, I think, are often frustrated with us as a public library, because we don't have books pulled out in levels but I explain that this is just one type of program that not all schools adhere to and certainly not all publishers and that the process of going back and retroactively adding a level to every book would be extremely time-consuming. :) But I do show them how to use lexile.com and usually I also show them how to use Novelist so that there's at least some hope they can cross-reference and find books that their child is interested in and falls within their Lexile. :(
While I agree that AR is better than the "Book It" program that was popular when I was in school, it is still a large step down from optimal. Students still Google plot lines for AR tests and as another student mentioned, students pick easy books with high point values. The goal for these students is the prizes at the end of the game, not reading. Reading is still skewed in their minds as a means to an end.
ReplyDeleteNevertheless, I can’t imagine a system that forces children to read for prizes to work effectively. Hopefully, at least a handful of children find a book that they enjoy during these programs; if that’s the case, is it worth it? Perhaps.
As for the rating system, I agree that is completely ridiculous and I can imagine the opposite effect taking place then those that have already been mentioned. Consider the avid reader who is ridiculed for reading more advanced books and everyone know it’s more advanced by the cover. On the other hand, I am sure this makes teachers and librarians jobs much easier. The job of recommending books is: “what reading level are you?” rather than: “tell me about the last good book you read.” Oh wait…
Ahhh the Book It program! Most of my friends remember that program fondly for the Pizza Hut pizzas. However, if I remember that program correctly, we just had to read a certain number of books, not particular ones? I could be wrong, though. That was many moons ago. :)
ReplyDeleteI could easily see where this could be considered censorship, because basically you aren't allowing a student access to certain books, basing it on reading level. Personally, I have a hard time with the "level" system at schools. I agree that this really just comes down to the money, sadly. If you buy this, then you also need to buy this and this and this. It's sad.
If you read ten books then you would receive a coupon for a free Pizza Hut pizza. I read an article that criticized the program in a previous class, which stated that the result of Book It was "obese children who hated to read." Yep, that pretty much sums it up.
ReplyDeleteHaha, I loved the Bookit program! It was definitely good for poor kids who liked to read. That was honestly the only time I ever got pizza. I was skinny back then. If someone gave me pizza for reading novels now though - that would be amazing.
ReplyDeleteYes we could read any books, within reason. I believe that in my school our teachers would ask us questions about the book and if they thought we hadn't read it thoroughly enough we would not get our sticker.
As far as Lexile levels go, can I add my voice to the piling on? As a used bookseller they were a nightmare - I had no children and did not know what type of system they used to decide who gets what level, yet parents would always ask me about them. I tried to organize the children's section into approximate grade levels, but even that was incredibly iffy.
I remember in high school I had a friend who was a big reader but worked full time in addition to going to school and as a result was not the best student. For a book report one semester he said he wanted to do War and Peace, by Tolstoy. His teacher told him that he was not smart enough to read that and that he should do it on Animal Farm instead. He pretended it didn't bother him but I knew he was really hurt by it. I also knew he wanted to do War and Peace because he had already read it and he really liked Tolstoy. My suspicion, especially after getting to know her as an adult, is that that teacher had never read it and didn't want to.
That was a long and sad story, but that's what I think of when I think of reading levels. She didn't really know his abilities - she didn't have the capacity to, as he didn't fit into her box. Lexile levels, and other reading levels that regulate robotically what a child can read are the same.