Common Core Standard For English Language Arts (Page 4 of 43) in pdf

Common Core State StandardS for engliSh language artS & literaCy in hiStory/SoCial StudieS, SCienCe, and teChniCal SubjeCtS

during the same time period. Although the decline occurred in all demographic groups, the steepest decline by far

was among 18-to-24- and 25-to-34-year-olds (28 percent and 23 percent, respectively). In other words, the problem

of lack of reading is not only getting worse but doing so at an accelerating rate. Although numerous factors likely

contribute to the decline in reading, it is reasonable to conclude from the evidence presented above that the deterio-

ration in overall reading ability, abetted by a decline in K–12 text complexity and a lack of focus on independent read-

ing of complex texts, is a contributing factor.

Being able to read complex text independently and proficiently is essential for high achievement in college and

the workplace and important in numerous life tasks. Moreover, current trends suggest that if students cannot read

challenging texts with understanding—if they have not developed the skill, concentration, and stamina to read such

texts—they will read less in general. In particular, if students cannot read complex expository text to gain informa-

tion, they will likely turn to text-free or text-light sources, such as video, podcasts, and tweets. These sources, while

not without value, cannot capture the nuance, subtlety, depth, or breadth of ideas developed through complex text.

As Adams (2009) puts it, “There may one day be modes and methods of information delivery that are as efficient

and powerful as text, but for now there is no contest. To grow, our students must read lots, and more specifically they

must read lots of ‘complex’ texts—texts that offer them new language, new knowledge, and new modes of thought”

(p. 182). A turning away from complex texts is likely to lead to a general impoverishment of knowledge, which, be-

cause knowledge is intimately linked with reading comprehension ability, will accelerate the decline in the ability to

comprehend complex texts and the decline in the richness of text itself. This bodes ill for the ability of Americans to

meet the demands placed upon them by citizenship in a democratic republic and the challenges of a highly competi-

tive global marketplace of goods, services, and ideas.

It should be noted also that the problems with reading achievement are not “equal opportunity” in their effects:

students arriving at school from less-educated families are disproportionately represented in many of these statis-

tics (Bettinger & Long, 2009). The consequences of insufficiently high text demands and a lack of accountability for

independent reading of complex texts in K–12 schooling are severe for everyone, but they are disproportionately so for

those who are already most isolated from text before arriving at the schoolhouse door.

the standards’ approach to text complexity

To help redress the situation described above, the Standards define a three-part model for determining how easy or

difficult a particular text is to read as well as grade-by-grade specifications for increasing text complexity in suc-

cessive years of schooling (Reading standard 10). These are to be used together with grade-specific standards that

require increasing sophistication in students’ reading comprehension ability (Reading standards 1–9). The Standards

thus approach the intertwined issues of what and how student read.

A Three-Part Model for Measuring Text Complexity

As signaled by the graphic at right, the Standards’ model of

text complexity consists of three equally important parts.

(1) Qualitative dimensions of text complexity. In the Stan-

dards, qualitative dimensions and qualitative factors refer

to those aspects of text complexity best measured or only

measurable by an attentive human reader, such as levels of

meaning or purpose; structure; language conventionality and

clarity; and knowledge demands.

(2) Quantitative dimensions of text complexity. The terms

quantitative dimensions and quantitative factors refer to

those aspects of text complexity, such as word length or fre-

quency, sentence length, and text cohesion, that are difficult

if not impossible for a human reader to evaluate efficiently,

especially in long texts, and are thus today typically mea-

sured by computer software.

(3) Reader and task considerations. While the prior two

elements of the model focus on the inherent complexity of

text, variables specific to particular readers (such as motiva-

tion, knowledge, and experiences) and to particular tasks

Figure 1: The Standards’ Model of Text Complexity

(such as purpose and the complexity of the task assigned

and the questions posed) must also be considered when determining whether a text is appropriate for a given stu-

dent. Such assessments are best made by teachers employing their professional judgment, experience, and knowl-

edge of their students and the subject.

Common Core Standard For English Language Arts Page 4

Related Articles

Related forms

Related Categories