Re: AR vs Lexile?
Posted by Mike on 9/28/08
I was just reviewing some research from Renaissance Learning,
developer of the AR system, which talks about different book
rating systems. One very important point is that the rating
for a book is generally based on a passage from the book that
is analyzed. The rating can vary significantly with the
exerpt, whatever the rating system. I assume that the various
rating systems take measures to minimize this, but it can
cause large differences.
The other point I take with a grain of salt, since everyone
wants their rating system to be best. But Renaissance points
out that there are several measures that can be used to
estimate the "level" of a text passage, such as average word
length, sentence length, frequency of words, etc. Renaissance
apparently teamed up with another group to study what the
"best" measures are, determined by extensive data on reading
levels of books. They chose the three most significant
measures, also compensated for word grade levels, and the
length of the book to develop a new rating system that they
claim is much more accurate than others, including Lexile.
The explanation is all very convincing to me, but I'll leave
that assessment to others more qualified. Renaissance also
points out that a reading level assigned to a book is only a
recommendation for parents and/or teachers, who are the best
judges of appropriate books for their kids.
Hope that helps some. Good question.
Mike
On 8/31/08, Francie wrote:
> I am choosing a novel to read in my 7th grade class and was
> concerned about the appropriate reading level. I understood
> the AR levels to be similar in function to the lexile
> scores? However, in comparing 2 books, I found one (that my
> school has used in the past: Catherine Called Birdy) to
> have a very high lexile relative to the AR rating compared
> to another book I was looking at (Ben Hur) that had a lower
> lexile, but a higher AR.
>
> I am new AR, but more familiar with lexiles.
>
> Is this just a fluke, mistake or do they measure things so
> differently that this could be correct?