NAEP Scores: National Shout-Out

As prep for a longer post I am writing on the topic of Infographics, I took a look at the NAEP State profiles for the 2011 testing year, focusing on my state, Maine, and at grade 8 in particular.

Imagine my delight when I received, the same day, a FOR IMMED. RELEASE online press release from the D.O.E. Director of Communications, David Connerty-Marin.  The headline is:

Maine up in 8th grade math; flat elsewhere

Oh?

The release goes on to explain that:

•  Maine’s scores and the percentage of students “proficient” – that is, meeting or exceeding expectations [in math and reading] – has remained largely flat.
• “Maine has continued to show no progress in reading for far too many years.” Bowen [Commissioner of Education] said. “There is compelling scientific research about how kids learn to read, but we are not applying those methods universally.”
• in reading in grades 4 and 8, Maine showed no statistically significant change.

http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/states/

As I read the data (chart and graphs shown above) and did some research,

• I notice that the X axis units are not the same - what happens to the Reading or Mathematics score lines if the tics are identical?  These graphs can not be compared.
• Writing is no longer tested.  So why are the NECAP writing test results from 1998-2010 not part of this article?  I want to know if those scores are improving.  Writing is, after all, the 2nd most compelling and important element of literacy, and a significant part of the state's reading test.
• Reading in Grade 8 is not flat - it is decidedly up and down.  And in the last 2 years, it is decidedly UP.  Does this indicate that we are beginning to see some up-trending as a result of 3-5 grade efforts in literacy over the last three years? Or is it simply an indication of variable test groups and cohorts?
• For several years, while the nation decreased in Reading, Maine improved.  What was going on?  What happened between 2007 and 2009?  (HINT: End of Local Assessments + Readicide + Economic Depression in Maine = curricular confusion at the 6-8 level.  I know - I lived through it.) 
• a 2 point change is not significant, but a 4 point change is.  OK - so why don't the graphs mine us down to the 1 point level?  
• It looks to me like Maine is recovering.  

Perhaps something good is already happening with Literacy in Maine.  What's so bad about that?  Mine must be a very unpopular point of view.  I wonder if anyone talks about what GOOD is happening? and Where?  and How?


But then again, data can be mined for a purpose, which may not be the purpose of the actual data.  This purpose seems to be tied to making a sound argument for funds for preK-3 Literacy development in Maine.  

Those funds and that attention to literacy are needed, but I don't understand the purpose of selling a state's progress short in order to gain funds.   Or maybe it is important to agree with the national take on the NAEP results.

It seems as of this morning that this headline is national news. The New York Times, the Washington Post, and Education Week carry it as a story.   It seems that superintendents and commissioners around the country are jumping on this story. 

The Times article is the only one to suggest some reasons for the "stagnant" reading scores.

I have heard all of these reasons before - for at least five years.  If Literacy funding can combat poor parenting, poverty, an educational system and schedule that discourages rather than encourages "deep reading," and an emphasis that is less on understanding each child's reading need than on average and aggregate scores - go for it.  But I think perhaps more programming is not the best answer.

There is far from one "scientific understanding" of how and why a child learns to read. There is no scientifically based understanding of why many children stop learning to read before middle school.  There are as many research based pedagogies and programs as there are universities, reading recovery programs, best-selling educators and teacher's colleges.  I have reviewed, worked with, or read much of this - and every single program works.  As long as it is matched to the specific needs of a specific child reader.  If you don't give children your time, they won't learn as quickly or as well. 

There is no one band-aid for reading.  Never has been.  I fear that these catch phrases - Flat Scores and "the knowledge economy of the 21st century" (Arne Duncan) - will lead to another search for the better band-aid, at the expense of some excellent child-centered practice.  I'm not sure that we are a "knowledge economy" - or that we aspire to be.  We do seem to be heading in the direction of a "knowledge-based economy."  That's knowledge, not reading ability.  They are different.

What is needed, in Maine and elsewhere, is a good long look at the districts, schools, and teachers who ARE making progress happen consistently, coupled with a data-driven look at the students with whom they work.  And states should study those math programs that are working for DC and elsewhere.  How do they work?  Why do they work?

Celebrate this and model what works.  My sense is that a little celebration will go a long way toward energizing education.

I know that SHOUTING OUT FAILURE is not going to motivate teachers - or their students.  

Why Lexiles are Handy

My daughter Willa is a new mother. Along with a beautiful baby girl named Beatrice, she has gained two sizes - or one size if we group sizes into Small - Medium - Large. She went shopping today for new clothes, a gift from her mom and a needed motivator. The clothes are lovely and so is she - a size larger than she was a year ago is a good thing.

Retailers do the work for clothes shoppers. Any serious shopper knows that sizes vary by retail chain, country of manufacture, and fabric. This knowledge can be counted upon if you, like me, do not like to "try on" before purchase. In fact, the more knowledgeable about size and brand you are as a shopper, the better the fit will be.

And that is why Lexiles are handy. They size self-critical middle school readers in a reliable way. All middle school teachers know that students like most of all to know "where they stand."

The NWEA reading tests, which we give twice a year, provide teachers and families with a lexile range as of the testing date. I understand that this can be inaccurate; a student can have a very bad, a very angry, a very indifferent, or even a very good day. But over a 3-year reporting period, the lexile becomes a fairly accurate guage of - well - of what a lexile measures.

What lexiles are, exactly, remains somewhat of a mystery to me, but over the course of this year I have come to trust the measure itself. A good place to find out a little more about lexiles is the Lexile Framework for Reading explanation. Briefly put, a lexile measure is an indication of the reading difficulty of a text or piece of text. A lexile range is the range of lexile measures at which the student can be expected to comprehend 75% - a "good fit." The lexile of most novels our students read can be found by a title search at lexile.com. Book lists are also available for a given lexile range. Some automated library catalogs provide lexile measures, as do some online database article searches. One's lexile range can be a very handy fact to know.

That is enough explanation for most students.

I use lexiles in three ways right now:

1. Able readers who resist reading outside of class or in class: I pull up the all-grade NWEA reading report, highlight the student's Lexile, and say, "This tells me that you are reading in the top 9% of the 8th graders who took this test - probably you are reading at least in the top 9% of the kids in the country." Then we talk about reading choices, opportunities, likes and dislikes. It is no longer possible for the student say, "I can't read."
   
2. Very able readers who are reading consistently below their ability: At the end of a reading conference, I pull up the all-grade NWEA reading report, highlight the student's Lexile, and say, "Your reading is at a lexile measure of _______. [explain what that means]. Let's look up the Lexile of this book [invariably 100-200 points lower]. It might be a good idea to find some good books that will be more challenging. What are you thinking about reading next? [or] Let's look for some books that you might like to read."
   
3. Readers who overhear the above conversations and ask, "How about me?": These are my best talks. They often happen after parent conferences. They often happen with boys. We often use lexile.com to look up the ratings of the last three books read. This leads to great conversations about books - far beyond lexiles. And these conversations are the best of all motivations to read.
   

Conclusion: Even if you do not have access to NWEA lexile measures, check out the lexile measures of the books your students are reading on their own. I note these in my Comments to our online reporting system (PowerSchool). Your school library may have a lexile indexing of fiction titles in an online catalog. Find out.

Lexiles are a gain-gain proposition in the middle school LA classroom.