Why Text Complexity Matters

1. Why Text Complexity Matters

2. SUPPORTING DISTRICTS WITH DETERMINING TEXT COMPLEXITY Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts and Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects

3. Understand the three part model of text complexity and the final step of placing texts in grade bands. Discuss how this understanding can be shared in a district/school to facilitate the placement and shifts of texts. OBJECTIVES

4. Complexity of texts students are expected to read is way below what is required to achieve college and career readiness: • High school textbooks have declined in all subject areas over several decades • Average length of sentences in K-8 textbooks has declined from 20 to 14 words The “CRISIS” OF Text Complexity CCSSO Text Complexity

5. Vocabulary demands have declined, e.g., 8th grade textbooks = former 5th grade texts; 12th grade anthologies = former 7th grade texts • Too many students are reading at too low a level (<50% of graduates can read sufficiently complex texts) Is This really A Crisis? CCSSO Text Complexity

6. The chief difference between students who succeed and students who struggle in introductory college courses is NOT: • Question type (main idea, word meanings, details) • Question level (higher order vs. lower order; literal vs. inferential) The complexity of what students can read is greatest predictor of success in college (ACT study) Is This really A Crisis?

7. In 2006, ACT, Inc., released a report called Reading Between the Lines that showed which skills differentiated those students who equaled or exceeded the benchmark score (21 out of 36) in the reading section of the ACT college admissions ACT, Inc., report

8. The most important implication of this study: “What students could read, in terms of its complexity, was at least as important as what they could do with what they read.” ACT, Inc., report CCSS Appendix A. p. 2

9. Building knowledge through content-rich nonfiction and informational texts • Reading and writing grounded in evidence from text • Regular practice and instruction with complex texts and its academic vocabulary CCSS Instructional Shifts

10. All students must be exposed to grade level text complexity regardless of their reading ability CCSS Instructional Shifts CCSS, Appendix A

11. Read - Alouds Independent Reading Shared Reading Close reading of a passage Multiple exposures Reading for different purposes Reading for extended periods of time What does “exposED” To grade level text complexity MEAN ?

12. All – Introduction (p.1) Group 1 – Text Complexity and the CCSS (p. 2-3) Group 2 – Quantitative Information (p. 3 & 4) Group 3 – Qualitative Measures (p. 4 & 5) Group 4 – Readers and Tasks (p.5) All – How To Use The Three Forms Of Information: The Text Complexity Multi-index (p.5 & 6) All – Conclusions and Recommendations (p.7) Hiebert Jigsaw Handout 1

13. Three-Part Model for Measuring Text Complexity

14. Text Complexity Model • Text complexity is defined by: Quantitative measures – readability and other scores of text complexity often best measured by computer software. Kansas Department of Education

15. Text Complexity Model • Text complexity is defined by: Qualitative measures – levels of meaning, structure, language conventionality and clarity, and knowledge demands often best measured by an attentive human reader. Kansas Department of Education

16. Text Complexity Model • Text complexity is defined by: 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. Kansas Department of Education

17. A CLOSER LOOK Quantitative Measures

18. Sentence and word length • Frequency of unfamiliar words • Word frequency • Number of syllables in words Quantitative measures

19. Sentence length and vocabulary/word frequency • Fire Cat – names of characters appear frequently, challenging words are minimal • Sarah Plain and Tall - challenging words appear once or twice in a chapter Quantitative measures • Elfrieda H. Hiebert – The Common Core State Standards and Text Complexity

20. Joe took Pickles to the Chief, who was sitting at his desk. “Oh!” said the Chief. “I know this young cat. He is the one who chases little cats.” “How do you know?” asked Joe. The Chief answered, “A Fire Chief knows many things.” Just then the telephone began to ring. Fire Cat • Elfrieda H. Hiebert – The Common Core State Standards and Text Complexity

21. “Every-single-day,” I told him for the second time this week. For the twentieth time this month. The hundredth time this year? And the past few years? Sarah Plain and Tall • Elfrieda H. Hiebert – The Common Core State Standards and Text Complexity

22. Proposed Common Scale

23. General Rule: Use any one of the quantitative analyzer tools to place text into a complexity band level. For decisions about whether to place a text at the upper, lower, or middle of a band, use qualitative analysis. (For drama and poetry, use qualitative measures.) Implications for Educators

24. A CLOSER LOOK Qualitative Measures

25. Levels of meaning or purpose • Structure • Language conventionality and clarity • Knowledge demands Qualitative measures • Elfrieda H. Hiebert – The Common Core State Standards and Text Complexity

26. Levels of meaning or purpose • Stage 1: Single level of meaning (often supported by illustrations); explicitly stated purpose • Stage 3: More than one level of meaning • Stage 5: Multiple levels require drawing extensively on reading/experiences from other sources; implicit purpose, may be hidden or obscure Qualitative measures Elfrieda H. Hiebert – The Common Core State Standards and Text Complexity

27. Structure • Stage 1: Texts follow structure of common genres (simple narrative) • Stage 3: Texts include less common genres (e.g., autobiography, cause-effect expository) • Stage 5: Traits specific to a content-area discipline or use of unique chronologies/perspectives Qualitative measures Elfrieda H. Hiebert – The Common Core State Standards and Text Complexity

28. Language conventionality and clarity • Stage 1: Literal • Stage 3: Figurative; some irony/sarcasm • Stage 5: Literary: high level of figurative, metaphorical language (e.g., Hemingway) Qualitative measures Elfrieda H. Hiebert – The Common Core State Standards and Text Complexity

29. There were mists over the river and clouds on the mountain and the trucks splashed mud on the road and the troops were muddy and wet in their capes; their rifles were wet and under their capes the two leather cartridge-boxes on the front of the belts, gray leather boxes heavy with the packs of clips of thin, long 6.5 mm. cartridges, bulged forward under the capes so that the men, passing on the road, marched as though they were six months gone with child. Hemingway, Ernest. A Farewell to Arms. CCSS, Appendix B, p. 150

30. Knowledge demands (literary text) • Stage 1: Simple theme; everyday knowledge and familiarity with genre conventions required; low intertextuality (few if any references/allusions to other texts) • Stage 3: Complex ideas interwoven • Stage 5: Interconnected theme; cultural and literary knowledge useful; high intertextuality (many references/allusions to other texts) Qualitative measures Elfrieda H. Hiebert – The Common Core State Standards and Text Complexity; CCSS, Appendix A

31. In our building there are two dogs: the whippet belonging to the Meurisses who looks like a skeleton covered over with beige leather hide, and a ginger cocker spaniel who belongs to Diane Badoise, an anorexic blond woman who wears Burberry raincoats and who is the daughter of a very la-di-da lawyer. The Whippet is called Athena and the cocker Neptune. Just in case you don’t yet understand what sort of place I live in… Barbery, Muriel. The Elegance of the Hedgehog

32. Knowledge demands (chiefly informational texts) • Stage 1: Everyday knowledge and familiarity with genre conventions required; low intertextuality(few if any references to/citations of other texts) • Stage 3: Complex knowledge and familiarity with genre conventions • Stage 5: Extensive, perhaps specialized discipline-specific content knowledge required; high intertextuality(many references to/citations of other texts) Qualitative measures Elfrieda H. Hiebert – The Common Core State Standards and Text Complexity; CCSS, Appendix A

33. A CLOSER LOOK Reader and task considerations

34. Reasoning skills/strategic planning • Motivation and engagement • Knowledge and experience • Purpose for reading • Complexity of associated tasks • Skills and strategies Reader and Task Considerations

35. Complexity of task assigned regarding text Complexity of questions asked regarding text Differences between literary texts and informational texts Reader and Task Considerations

36. A CLOSER LOOK Determining text complexity

37. Step 1: Quantitative measures Lexile Text Measure: 870L ATOS Book Level: 5.6 In which of the text complexity bands would this novel fall? Kansas State Department of Education

38. Quantitative Measures Ranges for Text Complexity Grade Bands * 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 Kansas State Department of Education

39. 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. Step 1: quantitative measures Kansas State Department of Education

40. Measures such as: • Levels of meaning • Levels of purpose • Structure • Organization • Language conventionality • Language clarity • Prior knowledge demands Step 2: qualitative measures Kansas State Department of Education

41. 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 Kansas State Department of Education

42. 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 Kansas State Department of Education

43. 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

44. x x x x x x x x x

45. Step 2: qualitative measures Lexile Text Measure: 870L ATOS Book Level: 5.6 But after reflecting upon the qualitative measures, we believed:

46. 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. Step 2: qualitative measures

47. 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

48. 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

49. 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

50. 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 3: Reader and Task