AR leveling: HIT

[rschulte <rschulte@WTN.K12.SD.US>]

Wow, sounds like most of you are throwing out the levels.  Guess the
important thing is that the kids are reading.  Too bad the company isn't
listening to our concerns, as we are their target audience, and they
don't seem to care that we aren't pleased with it.  Maybe we should go
one step further and just quit buying their tests.  I just can't get that
many tests written for my students in one year.  It took me 2 years to
get the 75 tests that I have written into the computer!
Here are the responses that I got:

I think you should remember that reading level and age/maturity level are
not the same thing.  Just because something uses a 4.7 grade vocabulary
does not meen that it is appropriate tor a 4th grader, only that an older
student reading at a lower level will be able to read and perhaps enjoy
it.
At least the subject matter isn't too juvenile for them and the book just
has a managable vocabulary.

You don't suppose that perhaps the 7.4 to 4.7 change could have just been
a
typo of sorts?  I wouldn't know which way would be right.  I'm with you ,
I
sure would like to hear what the company has to say.  It might be helpful
if they could let us know how they determine the reading level so we could
double check for our selves if we wanted too.

Hi - I'm new to the list, too.  Last year (my first as librarian) a parent
volunteer and I "stickered" all our books with grade levels.  Now, bless
her
heart, she volunteered to help change the ones that had new levels.  Both
of
us thought this wouldn't be such a big deal.  Now we both know she could
spend another year REMARKING the books with ridiculous changes.  It's
enough
to make me want to quit AR.  WHAT were they thinking???  I wonder if the
LMnet community has discussed what the company says about what chaos they
created?  Good luck to you.  I'll watch eagerly to see what others say.

The level is the READING level, not the maturity level, of the book.
There are many middle and high school students reading below grade level
who need books on their maturity and interest levels as well as a lower
reading level. One ordinarily wouldn't be selecting books from the AR
list based on the reading level anyway. Recognized selection procedures
should apply to AR books as well as other materials (if you have them)
in the collection.


Interest and maturity levels are not the same as reading level.


Raynette, I have been yelling and screaming about this all year.  The
book "The Color Purple" has dropped from level 9, I think it was, to
LEVEL 4!  And there are numerous other examples I could cite.  I chose to
keep the old levels on the tests I already had and am glad I did.  I have
emailed AR about these problems several times and always get the company
"pat answer", how the new levels are much more accurate and so on.  The
last time I emailed the AR employee back and asked her to please JUST
LOOK at the book and see if the level made sense.  Haven't heard from her
again, so I'm sure that never happened.  There's one book that I won't
even bother to order the test for - "An Acquaintance with Darkness" by
Ann Rinaldi.  They have it at 3.6 and any idiot can tell by looking at
the book and reading a few pages that there's no way a child reading on
that level could read this book.  I'll have to make a test myself when I
have time.
Maybe you can tell that I'm a trifle upset by this.  Sorry if I dumped on
you, but I have fought this battle all year.


Raynette,
Just so you know, you're not the only one who wasn't impressed with the
new and improved ATOS. I can go along with some of the theory that they
say it takes into account the length of the book whereas the older
system did not, but when I found out about it I called to tell them I
didn't like it and that I felt it rated some books fine but was out of
line on others. The old one wasn't foolproof either, but I don't think
ATOS is the godsend they want to make it out to be. I basically got a
"pat on the head" and assurances that their "experts" had spent years
developing this new system and they all thought it was just wonderful. I
haven't changed all the books to reflect their new levels and in fact
there is a program you can download that will convert new testing disks
back to the old way, which I used. Check their website if you're
interested.



The only thing that I can figure out about the new levels is that you have
to adhere passionately to the Book level / Reading level grid that I found
in the teacher handbook that I bought for our teachers from Ren. Learning.
 Boy has that been a real hassle having to teach all 625 kids plus
teachers  and parents that The Book Level isn't anywhere near the Reading
Level so you have to go to the grid to figure out what level you want to
choose.  Next year we are going to print a version of this grid in their
student handbook as well as a space for the Reading Level the child should
be aiming for so they can have an easier time of it.  Once you get the
drift of it, it does make sense but I too think it is way more complicated
than it has to be.  As a middle level librarian I always have the conflict
between the subject matter being interesting but the language or a
situation being too mature for my students.  Gary Paulsen's The Beet
Fields being a case in point that just recently happened.  Great book but
too mature in some situations to be Middle Level.


Oh, if that's what the conundrum is, it's because everyone is switching
to a new reading formula: Lexile. Reading Counts started the trend.
Lexile is more accurate, according to today's assessments.  "Helpful"
isn't the criteria. It's reading level. Different formulas come up with
(sometimes very) different levels.



We have discussed this before, but with no useful answer.  The AR people
seem oblivious. I thought we had the choice of not upgrading to the new
levels but it happened anyway when we installed 5.0 on our network.  I'm
not happy either and have had great difficulty convincing teachers to
re-adjust their reading level and point requirements.



You can't rely solely on the reading levels for appropriateness of any
book.
You never could, but with the more accurate reading levels you must be
more
vigilant.

I've said this before and I will continue to say it.  The new levels are a
godsend for high schools.  I finally have some books that are of interest
to
my lower readers at their reading levels.  They did not like reading
little
kid books.  I am very happy that they changed the levels.

I do believe the new levels to be more accurate.  Instead of taking
content
into account, they are analyzing only the actual text and it's difficulty.
You can read more about the method of determining at their website.



I, too, am frustrated. I called them and tried to reasonably speak to
them.
They were so passive and wanted to smooth it over. Maybe if we start
something here, they will do soemthing. As far as I am concerned, there is
no rhyme or reason for the  system they used. The changes are unreal.
Please post a hit if you get a lot of responses.



Raynette- what you are griping about is the reason another teacher and I
have been pleading with our principal and teachers to be VERY careful in
the use of this program.  As an evaluation tool and perhaps a motivator
for
some of the kids who need an extra challenge, but we have to ignore the
reading levels because they sometimes look like a chimp assigned them at
random.  Frankly, I don't see AR or any other computer 'reading incentive'
program as educationally valuable.  This one certainly doesn't have  very
many educators on it's staff.


I agree! These new AR reading levels are ridiculous, and I am really
considering switching to Reading Counts.  We've been using AR for 3 years
with the STAR test, but Iguess we are supposed to buy the new STAR test,
which I assume uses the sane readability formula, and try to explain to
parents why their childrens' reading levels have DROPPED. I hope you post
a
hit if you get any info from the company.
Thanks for letting me vent!


I have been very frustrated with this as well, especially after the book
Scorpions came in at a 3.7, the same level as many Dr. Seuss books.  I
called AR who said leveling was done strictly by vocabulary, not by the
subject of the book.  Many upper elementary teachers don't want their
students reading below their grade level and I have finally told them not
to
pay attention to the levels since some are questionable.



Raynette Schulte, Librarian
Lincoln Elementary School, Watertown, SD
rschulte@wtn.k12.sd.us

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=
All postings to LM_NET are protected under copyright law.
To quit LM_NET (or set-reset NOMAIL or DIGEST), send email to:
listserv@listserv.syr.edu   In the message write EITHER:
1) SIGNOFF LM_NET 2) SET LM_NET NOMAIL or 3) SET LM_NET DIGEST
4) SET LM_NET MAIL  * Please allow for confirmation from Listserv.
For LM_NET Help see: http://ericir.syr.edu/lm_net/
Archives: http://askeric.org/Virtual/Listserv_Archives/LM_NET.html
 See also EL-Announce for announcements from library media vendors:
    http://www.mindspring.com/~el-announce/
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=