The Effect of Altered Lexile Levels of Informational Text on Reading Comprehension
Keywords:
reading comprehension, Lexile, leveled texts, elementary educationAbstract
We examined how using five different simplified texts on the same subject would affect reading comprehension. 335 students in grades four through eight read one of five texts retrieved from Newsela.com and then completed a comprehension test. Results from a 3-way ANOVA showed no significant interaction among grade, reading level and text condition. Pairwise comparisons showed that below-level readers’ scores improved only with extremely lower levels of text and on-level and above-level readers’ scores did not significantly change regardless of text level. Regression analysis showed no statistically significant contribution of text level to overall comprehension scores. The findings of this study have implications for choosing leveled texts for reading instruction.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
References
Amendum, S.J., Conradi, K., & Hiebert, E. H. (2018). Does text complexity matter in the elementary grades? A research synthesis of text difficulty and elementary students’ reading fluency and comprehension. Educational Psychology Review, 30(1), 121-151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-017-9398-2
Amplify Education, Inc. (2020). Amplify Core Knowledge Language Arts CKLA. Brooklyn, NY: Author.
Arya, D. J., Hiebert, E. H., & Pearson, P. D. (2011). The effects of syntactic and lexical complexity on the comprehension of elementary science texts. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 4(1), 107-125.
Beck, I. L., & McKeown, M. G. (1985). Teaching vocabulary: Making the instruction fit the goal. Educational Perspectives, 23(1), 11-15.
Chall, J. S. (1996). Stages of reading development (2nd ed.). Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace.
Clay, M. M., & Cazden, C. B. (1999). A Vygotskian interpretation of reading recovery. In P. Lloyd & C. Fernyhough (Eds.) Lev Vygotsky: Critical assessments, Volume III: The zone of proximal development (pp. 354-70). New York: Routledge.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Crossley, S. A., & McNamara, D. S. (2016). Text-based recall and extra-textual generations resulting from simplified and authentic texts. Reading in a Foreign Language, 28(1), 1-19. http://hdl.handle.net/10125/66713
Crossley, S. A., Yang, H. S., & McNamara, D. S. (2014). What's so simple about simplified texts? A computational and psycholinguistic investigation of text comprehension and text processing. Reading in a Foreign Language, 26(1), 92-113. http://hdl.handle.net/10125/66686
Duke, N. K. (2000). 3.6 minutes per day: The scarcity of informational texts in first grade. Reading Research Quarterly, 35(2), 202-224. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.35.2.1
Elleman, A. M., & Oslund, E. L. (2019). Reading comprehension research: Implications for practice and policy. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 6(1), 3-11. https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732218816339
Fountas, I. C., & Pinnell, G. S. (2014). The F&P Text Level Gradient revision to recommended grade-levels. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Retrieved from https://www.fountasandpinnell.com/shared/resources/FP_FPL_Whitepaper_The-FP-Text-Level-Gradient_v2014-06.pdf
Gough, P. & Tunmer, W. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7, 6–10.
Hiebert, E. H. (2014). The forgotten reading proficiency: Stamina in silent reading. In E.H. Hiebert (Ed.), Stamina, Silent Reading, & the Common Core State Standards. Santa Cruz, CA: Text Project.
Hiebert, E. H. (2018, November 28-December 1). Vocabulary and topic familiarity: Variable or static across text levels? Literacy Research Association Annual Conference, Indian Wells, CA. https://www.literacyresearchassociation.org/assets/LRA-2018%20Conf%20PROGRAM.pdf
Hiebert, E. H., & Mesmer, H. A. E. (2013). Upping the ante of text complexity in the Common Core State Standards: Examining its potential impact on young readers. Educational Researcher, 42(1), 44-51. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X12459802
Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. (2020). Into Reading. Boston, MA; Author.
Lawshe, C. (1975). A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel Psychology, 28(4), 563-575. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1975.tb01393.x.
Li, D., Beecher, C., & Cho, B. Y. (2018). Examining the reading of informational text in 4th grade class and its relation with students' reading performance. Reading Psychology, 39(1), 1-28. https://doi.org/10.1080/02702711.2017.1361493
Lupo, S. M., Tortorelli, L., Invernizzi, M., Ryoo, J. H., & Strong, J. Z. (2019). An exploration of text difficulty and knowledge support on adolescents' comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 54(4), 457-479. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.247
McNamara, D. S., Ozuru, Y., & Floyd, R. G. (2011). Comprehension challenges in the fourth grade: The roles of text cohesion, text genre, and readers' prior knowledge. International electronic journal of elementary education, 4(1), 229-257.
Mesmer, H. A., Cunningham, J. W., & Hiebert, E. H. (2012). Toward a theoretical model of text complexity for the early grades: Learning from the past, anticipating the future. Reading Research Quarterly, 47(3), 235-258. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.019
Metametrix. (2021). The Lexile Framework for Reading: Matching readers with texts. https://lexile.com/
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common Core State Standards for English language arts and literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. Washington, DC: Authors.
National Reading Panel (U.S.) & National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (U.S.). (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching children to read: an evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.
Netburn, D. (2018). Scientists build a robotic fish to spy on ocean life. https://newsela.com/read/robotic-fish-ocean-spy/id/41688/
Newsela.com. (2021). About:Who we are. https://support.newsela.com/hc/en-us/articles/360008500391-Grade-to-Lexile-Conversion
ReadWorks. (2020). ReadWorks solutions. https://www.readworks.org/our-solutions
Reed, D. K., & Kershaw-Herrera, S. (2016). An examination of text complexity as characterized by readability and cohesion. The Journal of Experimental Education, 84(1), 75-97. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2014.963214
Savvas Learning Company (2016). ReadyGen Literacy Program. Paramus, NJ: Author.
Scarborough, H. S. (2001). Connecting early language and literacy to later reading (dis)abilities: Evidence, theory, and practice. In S. Neuman & D. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook for research in early literacy. New York: Guilford Press.
Smith, D. R., Stenner, A. J., Horabin, I., & Smith, M. (1989). The Lexile scale in theory and practice: Final report for NIH grant ID-19448. New Orleans: International Reading Association conference.
Smith, R., Snow, P., Serry, T., & Hammond, L. (2021). The role of background knowledge in reading comprehension: A critical review. Reading Psychology, 42(3), 214-240. https://doi.org/10.1080/02702711.2021.1888348
Smithsonian TweenTribune. (n.d.). TweenTribune. Smithsonian. https://www.tweentribune.com/
Tilden, V., Nelson, C., & May, B. (1990). Use of qualitative methods to enhance content validity. Nursing Research, 39(3), 172-175.
Tortorelli, L. S. (2020). Beyond first grade: examining word, sentence, and discourse text factors associated with oral reading rate in informational text in second grade. Reading and Writing, 33(1), 143-170. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-019-09956-5
Wilson, F., Pan, W., & Schumsky, D. (2012). Recalculation of the critical values for Lawshe’s content validity ratio. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 45(3), 197-210. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0748175612440286.
Xu, W., Callison-Burch, C., & Napoles, C. (2015). Problems in current text simplification research: New data can help. Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 3, 283-297. https://doi.org/10.1162/tacl_a_00139
Amplify Education, Inc. (2020). Amplify Core Knowledge Language Arts CKLA. Brooklyn, NY: Author.
Arya, D. J., Hiebert, E. H., & Pearson, P. D. (2011). The effects of syntactic and lexical complexity on the comprehension of elementary science texts. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 4(1), 107-125.
Beck, I. L., & McKeown, M. G. (1985). Teaching vocabulary: Making the instruction fit the goal. Educational Perspectives, 23(1), 11-15.
Chall, J. S. (1996). Stages of reading development (2nd ed.). Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace.
Clay, M. M., & Cazden, C. B. (1999). A Vygotskian interpretation of reading recovery. In P. Lloyd & C. Fernyhough (Eds.) Lev Vygotsky: Critical assessments, Volume III: The zone of proximal development (pp. 354-70). New York: Routledge.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Crossley, S. A., & McNamara, D. S. (2016). Text-based recall and extra-textual generations resulting from simplified and authentic texts. Reading in a Foreign Language, 28(1), 1-19. http://hdl.handle.net/10125/66713
Crossley, S. A., Yang, H. S., & McNamara, D. S. (2014). What's so simple about simplified texts? A computational and psycholinguistic investigation of text comprehension and text processing. Reading in a Foreign Language, 26(1), 92-113. http://hdl.handle.net/10125/66686
Duke, N. K. (2000). 3.6 minutes per day: The scarcity of informational texts in first grade. Reading Research Quarterly, 35(2), 202-224. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.35.2.1
Elleman, A. M., & Oslund, E. L. (2019). Reading comprehension research: Implications for practice and policy. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 6(1), 3-11. https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732218816339
Fountas, I. C., & Pinnell, G. S. (2014). The F&P Text Level Gradient revision to recommended grade-levels. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Retrieved from https://www.fountasandpinnell.com/shared/resources/FP_FPL_Whitepaper_The-FP-Text-Level-Gradient_v2014-06.pdf
Gough, P. & Tunmer, W. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7, 6–10.
Hiebert, E. H. (2014). The forgotten reading proficiency: Stamina in silent reading. In E.H. Hiebert (Ed.), Stamina, Silent Reading, & the Common Core State Standards. Santa Cruz, CA: Text Project.
Hiebert, E. H. (2018, November 28-December 1). Vocabulary and topic familiarity: Variable or static across text levels? Literacy Research Association Annual Conference, Indian Wells, CA. https://www.literacyresearchassociation.org/assets/LRA-2018%20Conf%20PROGRAM.pdf
Hiebert, E. H., & Mesmer, H. A. E. (2013). Upping the ante of text complexity in the Common Core State Standards: Examining its potential impact on young readers. Educational Researcher, 42(1), 44-51. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X12459802
Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. (2020). Into Reading. Boston, MA; Author.
Lawshe, C. (1975). A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel Psychology, 28(4), 563-575. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1975.tb01393.x.
Li, D., Beecher, C., & Cho, B. Y. (2018). Examining the reading of informational text in 4th grade class and its relation with students' reading performance. Reading Psychology, 39(1), 1-28. https://doi.org/10.1080/02702711.2017.1361493
Lupo, S. M., Tortorelli, L., Invernizzi, M., Ryoo, J. H., & Strong, J. Z. (2019). An exploration of text difficulty and knowledge support on adolescents' comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 54(4), 457-479. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.247
McNamara, D. S., Ozuru, Y., & Floyd, R. G. (2011). Comprehension challenges in the fourth grade: The roles of text cohesion, text genre, and readers' prior knowledge. International electronic journal of elementary education, 4(1), 229-257.
Mesmer, H. A., Cunningham, J. W., & Hiebert, E. H. (2012). Toward a theoretical model of text complexity for the early grades: Learning from the past, anticipating the future. Reading Research Quarterly, 47(3), 235-258. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.019
Metametrix. (2021). The Lexile Framework for Reading: Matching readers with texts. https://lexile.com/
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common Core State Standards for English language arts and literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. Washington, DC: Authors.
National Reading Panel (U.S.) & National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (U.S.). (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching children to read: an evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.
Netburn, D. (2018). Scientists build a robotic fish to spy on ocean life. https://newsela.com/read/robotic-fish-ocean-spy/id/41688/
Newsela.com. (2021). About:Who we are. https://support.newsela.com/hc/en-us/articles/360008500391-Grade-to-Lexile-Conversion
ReadWorks. (2020). ReadWorks solutions. https://www.readworks.org/our-solutions
Reed, D. K., & Kershaw-Herrera, S. (2016). An examination of text complexity as characterized by readability and cohesion. The Journal of Experimental Education, 84(1), 75-97. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2014.963214
Savvas Learning Company (2016). ReadyGen Literacy Program. Paramus, NJ: Author.
Scarborough, H. S. (2001). Connecting early language and literacy to later reading (dis)abilities: Evidence, theory, and practice. In S. Neuman & D. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook for research in early literacy. New York: Guilford Press.
Smith, D. R., Stenner, A. J., Horabin, I., & Smith, M. (1989). The Lexile scale in theory and practice: Final report for NIH grant ID-19448. New Orleans: International Reading Association conference.
Smith, R., Snow, P., Serry, T., & Hammond, L. (2021). The role of background knowledge in reading comprehension: A critical review. Reading Psychology, 42(3), 214-240. https://doi.org/10.1080/02702711.2021.1888348
Smithsonian TweenTribune. (n.d.). TweenTribune. Smithsonian. https://www.tweentribune.com/
Tilden, V., Nelson, C., & May, B. (1990). Use of qualitative methods to enhance content validity. Nursing Research, 39(3), 172-175.
Tortorelli, L. S. (2020). Beyond first grade: examining word, sentence, and discourse text factors associated with oral reading rate in informational text in second grade. Reading and Writing, 33(1), 143-170. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-019-09956-5
Wilson, F., Pan, W., & Schumsky, D. (2012). Recalculation of the critical values for Lawshe’s content validity ratio. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 45(3), 197-210. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0748175612440286.
Xu, W., Callison-Burch, C., & Napoles, C. (2015). Problems in current text simplification research: New data can help. Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 3, 283-297. https://doi.org/10.1162/tacl_a_00139
Downloads
Published
2022-11-20
How to Cite
Rand, C., & Rand, M. (2022). The Effect of Altered Lexile Levels of Informational Text on Reading Comprehension. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 15(1), 1–9. Retrieved from https://www.iejee.com/index.php/IEJEE/article/view/1890
Issue
Section
Articles
