Reading Levels and Vocabulary

When I used to think about reading levels, I thought about the grade level number that was printed along with the book, calculated by some magic people I couldn't see and I didn't know how they figured it. After researching more about language instruction, I found out a lot more about reading levels that I did not realize before. Reading levels for each of our students can be different and are based on 3 different things. As Ivannia Soto-Hinman and June Hetzel state, "One should keep in mind that there are three student-text matches when it comes to readability: the independent reading level, the instructional reading level, and the frustrational reading level" (2009, p. 22).

In order to clear up what is meant by these different student-to-text matches, a table is provided on page 24 that shows different ways to approach texts that are located on these 3 different levels. This is also tied to vocabulary instruction in that a lot of what causes texts to be frustrating or on instructional level is the student's ability to decode the vocabulary and text found in the passage. To outline the table provided, I have included below a list of the 3 types of levels and the different purposes for reading that should be located on which level of individual students.

• Independent Reading Level: Recreational reading; fluency development; reinforcement; child reads alone

* These should be texts that students are able to read relatively quickly and with recognizable vocabulary terms. When assigning tasks at this level, I ask myself: Can this student bring home this assignment to complete on his/her own and do it without wanting to give up?

• Instructional Reading Level: Teaching level; instructor provides support for appropriately challenging text

* When choosing texts on this level, I ask myself: Can this student learn from this text with my support? Will this text be challenging enough? Too challenging?

• Frustrational Reading Level: Instructional Read Aloud (IRA); provides opportunity for student to hear teacher read text above his current ability; teacher helps build and model new understanding of concepts and vocabulary.

* Texts that require more teacher modeling are those which could be packed full with words that are unknown or difficult to decode. Especially, when comprehension is more important than ability to read fluently, IRAs can be used to help provide an example of the decoding while students can focus their energy on the meaning rather than the reading. When deciding to approach texts in this manner, I ask myself: Does my student need so much support that reading it aloud would provide a better understanding? Would my modeling of this text/word be more beneficial to my student than laboring through the decoding process?

Overall, this is a lot to think about; however, there are even more factors to consider. When looking at appropriate texts, frustrational levels may be different depending on the background knowledge students have in the topic/ideas being addressed in the text. This is why it is so important to choose text and material that is culturally relevant to our students, with explanations and vocabulary around topics that are able to be applicable to our students' lives. This is not an easy thing to tackle.

This idea also points out the importance of our knowledge of student levels. If we are unable to assess our students' abilities, we may be assigning them tasks that are beyond their frustrational level, leaving them feeling inadequate and stupid. We do not want this to happen. Our students should be able to feel successful when approaching language and literacy within our content areas. So, even as science or social studies or math teachers, we need to do our own assessments of literacy levels within our content specific vocabulary. It is also beneficial to have an open relationships with our students' English teachers, so we can be mutually helpful when approaching our students in helping them make progress in each of these 3 levels.

Works Cited:

Soto-Hinman, I., & Hetzel, J. (2009). Decoding. In The Literacy Gaps: Bridge-Building Strategies for English Language Learners and Standard English Learners (p. 21-54). California: Corwin.