The Article “Text Complexity: State of the Art and the Conundrums It Raises” by
Susan Goldman and Carol Lee. This article talks about the complexity of texts
in today’s educational system. The authors talk about four important features
to take in account regarding learning disciplinary content by taking in
consideration the four features of text; topic complexity, genre and function,
word-level indicators and task complexity. The authors mention that it is
important to challenge readers to engage more deeply in interpreting,
understanding and explaining complex text when children are engaging in
reading.
Topic
Complexity; topics can be understood
at different levels of complexity and the influence on reader’s comprehension.
Genre
and function; it is important to
comprehend the sources of the text because it would show kind of text you
reading. For example; Literature- stories, poetry, and play. Serves as a useful
tool to make predictions of what the student are reading.
Word-Level
Indicators; it is important to
understand words in order to make qualitative judgments in the text regarding
complex themes.
Task
Complexity; It will take practice for
the student to challenge their comprehension of the text depending in the
demands of the task of reading that they are doing.
This study was conducted by the
project READI Literature Team that wanted to study more comprehensive ideas
about studying literature. One important point is to develop appropriate forms
of literacy practices by all specialist in various disciplines. Also, the CCSS
Common Core State Standards, advocate for more complex text standards in order
to teach student new ways of comprehension, critique, and production of
arguments based on information of the text.
The authors mention that it is best
to provide readers “with texts appropriate to their knowledge and skill levels”
it is important to know that texts should be provided/used in order to
encourage the reader to improve their own knowledge and reading skills little
by little. It is important that student learn beyond their current knowledge
but not too difficult because this can play a negative effect in the student’s
comprehension and cognitive learning. All these is wonderful information for
teachers and students to develop professionally as text readers, but How students
are going to compete for job in the 21th century if the schools are losing
money from all kinds of programs that help student develop essential skills?
I do agree that those four features are important with reading a text because they help the reader's understanding and comprehension beyond the surface level. It can be difficult for students to have the same level of understanding from one discipline to the next and teaching students these tools can be crucial for them to advance their comprehension levels. As the article states, "That is, texts should challenge readers sufficiently that they are pushed to improve their existing knowledge and skills for reading, comprehending, and learning from texts 'just beyond' their current levels— but not too far beyond." (Goldman & Lee, 2014). I agree with you that students should learn beyond their current level of knowledge, but not too much at once because it can have a negative affect. I have seen students forced to try to read too far beyond their reading level and it discouraged them because they were not able to fully understand the text as they would have if the text was closer to their level. In order to help students progress, we as teachers must first help them develop these necessary skills in order to progress at a rate suitable for them.
ReplyDeleteLaura, I think you hit the nail on the head on the topic of text complexity-- selecting texts that go a step beyond students' knowledge and skill level is undoubtedly important in order for the information to be accessible, but Goldman and Lee emphasize that even more important is having the skills and persistence needed to engage with the challenging texts and tasks associated with them for comprehension (298). They also argue that complexity is not just about what the text contains, but also what readers bring to the text in terms of prior knowledge and the abilities to break-down the information being provided (Goldman & Lee, 298).
ReplyDeleteWhile I am united with you in the concern surrounding the loss of funding for special programs designated to assisting students with tutoring or mentoring, I think that simply rethinking the way we make use of classroom time can be a step in the direction of progress while using what we have already been provided with. Like Professor Coppola mentioned in class in the past, exercises in the development of reading comprehension skills doesn't necessarily have to take vital time away from instruction, but rather can be an in-class workshop where one or two days can be spent on sharing strategies with students and evaluating their current methods or simply integrating or blending skill development into segments of our instruction.
Laura - thank you for your post. The question of funding is an important one, and I think Goldman & Lee do a great job of drawing attention to teachers' need for better tools for assessing complexity. As someone hoping to practice in the discipline of literature, I find myself particularly discouraged. The article highlights a set of unique challenges language arts teachers face when assessing their text's difficulty and complexity, such as having to assess the difficulty of "thematic" content and "literary devices" impact students encountering the text.
ReplyDeleteThe bigger problem than funding, it seems, is time. Since no automated assessment tool exists for determining text complexity/difficulty, teachers need to sit down and sift through different texts, reading them and coding them individually, in order to determine the best set of texts. I struggled with having to do this just once for my strategy presentation; I can't imagine having to do it for a year-long curriculum.
Goldman & Lee do present a useful strategy, though, by saying we should take sociocultural context into account. Perhaps instead of trying to select the best text from what we have, we can help get students from a wide array of skill sets more engaged by selecting texts that are germane to their own interests. It stands to reason that students might readily "elevate" themselves to a challenge if that challenge is posed by a text or a topic they already care about.