Historically there has long been an interest in establishing
whether children's reading levels have declined or
improved in comparison with previous years. This would
seem to be a valid research question and a potentially
useful area of investigation. However, in reality it is a
minefield. There are several reasons for the explosive
nature of this topic.
First, reading holds a central position in children's
education. Producing young people who are literate is the
sine qua non of an adequate education system—the
necessary if not sufficient demonstration that schools are
doing their job. Thus, the measure of reading standards is
seen as a proxy measure for educational standards more
generally.
Second, the rise and fall of reading standards provides
a focus for fierce debates about teaching methods, which
typically crystallise around traditional versus progressive
methods. Currently, the traditionalists champion
methods of teaching reading that involve explicit phonics
tuition. The progressive movement, sometimes referred
to as “the real books approach”, emphasises the importance
of purposeful reading for meaning and enjoyment. In
practice it is established that eclecticism rules.
Third, there are differences of opinion concerning the
most appropriate ways to assess reading levels. In order
to plot reading standards over time, both valid and
reliable methods of assessment are required. Preferably,
too, the same test should be repeated, although parallel
versions of valid tests can also be used. In practice this has
frequently meant that tests involve either decontextualised word
reading or sentence completion. There is
agreement that such forms of assessment do not measure
all the aspects of reading or literacy. There are those who
argue that assessment that fails to take into account a
wider range of higher-order skills, such as skimming,
scanning, interpretation, and comprehension monitoring,
and that uses only a narrow range of decontextualised
text, will tell us little that is valuable about the level of
children's reading. From this position it is difficult to
measure reading standards validly over time. It is also
argued that assessment should measure the areas of
literacy covered by the curriculum and that as this
changes, tests must also change, making comparability
over time problematic.
Despite these debates, children's reading levels have
been measured over time and even across countries. The
question is how valid such exercises are and what
conclusions we can draw from the results.