Measuring Text Complexity

Since the adoption of the CCSS, we have heard the term text complexity many times. The concept has also emerged through questions bubbling up as we embark upon our English curriculum revision.

How do we ensure that we are placing adequately challenging texts within the grade level curriculum guides?

As we seek to diversify our literature options, how do we know that we are adding options that are of high quality?

These questions are undoubtedly important for us to examine during our study because we need to be intentionally including both accessible texts and texts that stretch our students; these questions, however, go beyond the diverse literature element we recently started exploring. As we review the texts currently in our curriculum and as we study potential new texts to add, I challenge us to turn to this question:

What does it mean for a text to be challenging or of high quality?

Often, the first measure to come to mind is a text's Lexile score, which can be a very good place to start. When thinking about Lexile in a post-CCSS-adoption world, however, it can get a bit tricky. The Lexile Band has changed for each grade band due to the fact that over the past 50 years, the gap between most secondary texts and most college texts has widened. In order to move students closer to the College and Career Ready Lexile level, a new "Stretch" Lexile Band has been adopted by The Lexile Framework for Reading. (But this is a whole other topic...Click here to read more from the Lexile Framework group.)

So should Lexile be our go-to for determining a text's complexity? 

Does a Lexile number really inform us if a text will be challenging for our students or if it is of high quality?

While the Ledile measure can be a starting point, the CCSS promotes a three-pronged approach when determining a text's complexity, and many educators with whom I have spoken agree that the following three elements are all important when considering a text: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Reader & Task.

One of the three prongs is, of course, the quantitative measures, which includes Lexile measures. Algorithms are used to analyze the word length, word frequency, sentence length, and cohesiveness of the text. This is helpful, but it is not the only factor to consider.

The qualitative measurements, on the other hand, are evaluated by a human. An actual, living, breathing person has read the text. This pulse-maker considers aspects of the text like levels of meaning, the clarity and conventions of the language used, the knowledge demands, the format and structure, and the complexity of the visual materials. These factors place different requirements on the reader than a Lexile score.

The third prong is the reader and task combination. Within this sphere, reader pieces such as motivation, background knowledge, and previous experience are considered. The other element of this portion is ensuring that the text fits the purpose and the complexity of the task at hand.

Each one of these prongs fails to paint a full picture of the text by itself. Together, however, they create a fairly sturdy stool on which the reader can sit.

As we move forward with our Curriculum Study, it is my hope that we can keep this stool with us. What does it mean for a text to be challenging or of high quality? To start, it means that the stool is just the right size for the reader to grow.