flickr photo by basheem http://flickr.com/photos/bastian/2270463815 shared under a Creative Commons (BY-NC-ND) license
Professor Timothy Shanahan writes an excellent blog on literacy. His latest post, “How Much Text Complexity Can Teachers Scaffold?” is a great and thoughtful read.
“How much of a “gap” can be compensated through differentiation? If my readers are at a 400 Lexile level, is there an effective way to use a 820 level chapter book?
This is a great question. (Have you ever noticed that usually means the responder thinks he has an answer).
For years, teachers were told that students had to be taught with books that matched their ability, or learning would be reduced. As a teacher I bought into those notions. I tested every one of my students with informal reading inventories, one-on-one, and then tried to orchestrate multiple groups with multiple book levels. This was prior to the availability of lots of short paperback books that had been computer scored for F & P levels or Lexiles, so I worked with various basal readers to make this work.
However, a careful look at the research shows me that almost no studies have found any benefits from such matching. In fact, if one sets aside those studies that focused on children who were reading no higher than a Grade 1 level, then the only results supporting specific student-text matches are those arguing for placing students at what we would have traditionally called their frustration level.”
Read the entire piece here.