Lexile reading growth as a function of starting level in at-risk middle school students

Archer, Laura E. (2011). Lexile reading growth as a function of starting level in at-risk middle school students. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 54(4), 281-290.


This article is about how to define reading growth in struggling (the deficit term “at-risk” is used here) middle school readers looked at ways to interpret how much “growth” such readers make within a single school year, as defined by their Lexile scores, which are measured five times per year. I do not quarrel with the basic premise, which is that we have to interpret a child’s growth based upon where he or she began at the beginning of the year. Absolute scores have no meaning, and I am fine with the notion that what really matters is how far a student has come from Point A to Point B. Would that our schools could define Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) by using growth scores rather than absolute grade level benchmarks. For my money, growth is what is important. When the playing field is not level, it is unfair and unjust to compare schools and districts using set benchmarks. It also makes sense that readers who start at the lowest levels would typically have larger growth scores than those who start higher. There is more room for growth at the bottom, and growth will typically level out as the student’s level increases.

What I have a problem with is the idea that if we can just get an “accurate” Lexile score on a child, that will solve our problems. Let’s give the struggling reader a number and define him or her by a “level”, and we are on the road to helping him or her become a better reader. I see all assessments as tools to help us help children, but not as ends in themselves. Just because I have a number for a child, it doesn't mean I can automatically match him or her with the right reading materials, and that number will not necessarily tell me what kind of instruction would be best for that child. So many other factors come into play. While Lexile scores (or any other kind of test scores) could serve as one piece of the picture for any given child, I do not think they should be the only piece or even the main piece.

Here, there was just too much focus on getting the right number for a child and not enough focus on how to provide high-quality reading instruction for that child. Also, there seems to be an almost unquestioning acceptance of Lexile scores as accurate measurements of a child’s reading. I am not certain that is true. In any case, reliance on any one assessment for making instructional decisions is unsound educational practice. We need to look at some qualitative, classroom measures as well as the more quantitative, test-oriented ones.