3. Better reading level formulae will not help resistant readers.

Providing access to books is necessary but of course it is not sufficient. A few students will resist reading even when books are available. But not many. Von Sprecken and Krashen (1998) demonstrated that during SSR time, about 90% of children observed in the middle of the school year were engaged in reading and surveys indicate that most children and adolescents enjoy reading (Krashen and Von Sprecken, 2002).

It has not been established that the few who resist reading are simply having a problem finding a book at their level. In fact, what little data there is on this issue suggests that matching for reading level is not the problem. Kim and Krashen (2001) reported that only 16 of 103 sixth graders they interviewed did not like to read. When asked why, ten said that books were "boring" and only one said that books were too hard. The problem appears to be one of finding books of interest, not one of matching reader to reading level. It should also be noted that these children were from low income families and attended school in a district with very poor school libraries. These print-deprived children need more access to books, not more precise readability formulae.

Limiting Choices

The use of systems such as the Lexile Framework can limit choices. Studies show that children often select books both above and below their current reading level, and this is a good thing. Children can often understand large sections of books that are "too hard" because of their interest in and knowledge of the topic,² and "easy" books often provide valuable background in a new genre that encourages subsequent reading and makes it more comprehensible (Carter, 2000). Left on their own, children engage in a "back and forth movement" between easy and hard books, reading both below and above their current reading levels (Fresch, 1995). In addition, children gradually read books that are more challenging, without the use of reading levels (Krashen, 2001a). The back and forth movement is actually a sine wave that gradually moves upward.

Stenner appears to agree. in one Metametrics brochure ("The 3 Rs': Using the Lexile Framework"), it states that "one strategy that works well is to have students read an easier text on the same subject in order to provide some background knowledge and vocabulary" (p. 3). And Stenner, Burdick, Sanford and Burdick (2001) advise that "the Lexile Framework should never be the only factor considered when selecting a book" (p. 49).

Stenner feels, however, that the lexile measure of a book, "should be the first step in the book selection process" (Stenner et. al. 2001, p. 48). This suggests that the reader can only make a choice within a certain lexile level or range. Elsewhere, Stenner takes a position that appears to be opposed to readers reading above and below their level: "As the reader improves, new titles with higher text measures can be chosen to match the growing person measure, thus keeping the comprehension rate at the chosen level. In essence, we need to locate a reader's 'edge' and then systematically expose the reader to text that plays on that edge..." (Stenner, 1996, p. 20).

3