The Lexile Framework: The Controversy Continues

In fact, statements such as "As a reader grows, he or she can be matched with more demanding texts" (Stenner et. al., 2001, p. 52), give the impression that the reader is a passive participant in the matching process. I hope this impression is incorrect.

Notes

1.	Children do most of their book selection on their own, however, getting only a small percentage of book recommendations from friends, teachers, librarians, parents and siblings (Lamme, 1974):
2.	The lexile formula is based on word frequency and sentence length only, and is not sensitive to interest or background knowledge: "Under lexile theory, no special consideration is given to prior or special subject matter knowledge" (Stenner, 1996, p. 21). Prior knowledge of a topic strongly influences comprehensibility (e.g. Bransford and Johnson, 1972).

References

Bransford, J. and M. Johnson (1972). Contextual prerequisites for understanding: some investigations of comprehension and recall. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 717-726.

Carter, B. (2000). Formula for failure. School Library Journal, July 1, 2000: 34-37.

Duke, N. (2000). For the rich it's richer: Print experiences and environments offered to children in very low- and very high-socioeconomic status first-grade classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 37(2), 441-478.

Fresch, M. (1995). Self-selection of early literacy learners. The Reading Teacher, 49 (3), 220-227.

Heyns, B. (1978). Summer Reading and the Effects of Schooling. Academic Press.

Kim, J. and S. Krashen, (2000). Another home run. California English, 6(2):25.

Krashen, S. (1993). The Power of Reading. Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited

Krashen, S. (2001a). The Lexile Framework: unnecessary and potentially harmful. California School Library Association Journal, 24(2), 25-26.

Krashen, S. (2001b). Current research: The positive impact of libraries. California School Library Association Journal, 25(1), 21-24.

Krashen, S. and Von Sprecken, D. (2002) Is there a decline in the reading romance? Knowledge Quest 30(3): 11-17.

Lamme, L. (1974). Are reading habits and abilities related? The Reading Teacher, 30, 21-27.

McQuillan, J. (1998). The Literacy Crisis: False Claims and Real Solutions. Portsmouth: Heinemann.

Neuman, S. and D. Celano (2001). Access to print in low-income and middle-income communities. Reading Research Quarterly, 36(1), 8-26.

Ramos, F. and S. Krashen, S. (1998). The impact of one trip to the public library: Making books available may be the best incentive for reading. The Reading Teacher, 51(7), 614-615.

Stenner, A. J. (1996). Measuring reading comprehension with the Lexile Framework. Durham, NC: MetaMetrics, Inc.

Stenner, A.J. (2001). The Lexile Framework: A common metric for matching readers and texts. California School Library Journal, 25(1): 41-42.

Stenner, A.J., D. Burdick, E. Sanford and H. Burdick.(2001). A response to "Assessing the Lexile Framework: Results of a panel discussion" In S. White and J. Clement (Eds.) Assessing the Lexile Framework: results of a panel meeting. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Educational Statistics Working Paper No. 2001-08. pp. 46-55.

Von Sprecken, D. and S. Krashen (1998.) Do students read during sustained silent reading? California Reader, 32(1): 11-13.