# data[].attributes.body
My "ah-ha" moment came immediately from just reading the title "A level is a teacher's tool, not a child's label." Making sure that we use their level to drive our instruction but not our feelings about their capabilities is very important. The article mentioned that children should have as many opportunities and choices when simply choosing a book, just as their peers. They need to be encouraged to read because the more we can get them to be interested in their books, the more they will want to read and grow. As the article stated: leveled readers should be a resource, not a restriction.

# data[].attributes.body
The main idea of both articles that I read was about using complex reading materials no matter the reading level of the child. The articles explain that a child must master decoding, and other things to master grade level reading. When using complex text more support might be needed but everyone should be using the same text as the others with just different support. Differentiation and scaffolding is needed more for some students to be successful with these complex text. I read Teaching with complex text and also Considering Reading Instructions with the end in Mind. Of these two, I agree with the second one the most because it explains more of how to meet a child where they are but get them to where they are going. I agree that we as teachers must find out what the problem is and why they are not on grade level. We should create an intervention and support strategy and always remember to meet all students where they are going and not where they are. I had an A-Ha moment on the second article because I have never been ask to look at where the student was going. I have always been told to meet the student where they are and bring them up to where they need to be. I agree with giving lower student more complex text and have them read the same material everyone else reads. I agree that they will learn more from these text with some extra support and a lot of scaffolding.

# data[].attributes.body
After reading “Considering Reading Instruction with the End in Mind,” I am left wondering how do we get this started? We can read articles all day long and WANT to make the changes necessary to help students read these complex texts, but with all the other demands placed on classroom teachers to provide Reading and Math interventions, to give enrichment, to differentiate, to keep up with behavior goals, to attend IEP meetings, those wishful desires get lost in the chaos of everyday. I agree with the article that teachers need professional development and a list of proven interventions that help scaffold complex texts for lower readers. This shift will have to begin with administration and/or a leadership team that truly seeks change for their students.

# data[].attributes.body
Sherron Horton
The big ideas of the two articles I read consisted of students needing to be introduced to text at the instructional level. Students need a variety of text and complex text with the teachers support. In order for teachers to implement complex effectively, they need to be provided with support to bridge the gap. One of the articles stressed the point that students need to be meet where they are going and not just where they are. This was the biggest A-Ha moment for me. I have mixed feelings because I have been in education for over 20 years, but I see the need of the shift. If teachers are using complex text and they are trained properly, this could reduce the chances of failing.

# data[].attributes.body
A Level is a Teacher's Tool NOT a Child's Label & Considering Reading Instruction With the End in Mind

The two articles I read paired very nicely together, they emphasized the same point from different perspectives. In the first, A Level is a Teacher's Tool NOT a Child's Label, I reflected on how reading is handled in my classroom. My students have the opportunity to select their own independent books from my personal library or through online resource. In both of these platforms, students are not restricted based on Lexile on AR  level. I want them to read because they want to read. I also thought back to my time in elementary school. I LOVED to read and was pretty good at it too- however I vividly remember a substitute librarian fussing at me for picking up a Nancy Drew novel and making me replace it with a "first grade book". I ended up not checking anything out that day and waited until the end of the week when our librarian came back so I could get the book I wanted. I say this as a reminder that kids remember things. They have their interests and likes and dislikes. So what if they choose a book they can't fully grasp. If they are trying to read they are learning to read, and eventually they will find a combination of subject and level that work for them.
In the second article I read, Child's Label & Considering Reading Instruction With the End in Mind, I focused on teacher guided instruction. The author emphasized the importance of building students up, when they are already behind. By assessing their needs and what they know, a teacher can find ways to show students grade-level work with appropriate scaffolding.

# data[].attributes.body
My A-ha moment came when I was reading "A Level is a Teacher Tool- Not a Child's Label". This might sound crazy, but I didn't know that a child's reading "letter level" was not for the student or parent to know. I think a lot of educators don't realize this. My own personal children's teachers have shared their reading levels with me. I've even heard children at my church discuss what "letter" their own. I can definitely see how this can be discouraging to students who are not on a high level. The article clearly states that reading levels are a resource for teachers- a guide. It should never be used as a punishment or a limitation.

# data[].attributes.body
Considering reading instruction with the end in mind- Knowing where the student needs to be in the end is very important.  Then, you can help bridge the gap and help them where they are.
Do leveled readers hurt or help my ELS? i think it helps and hurt them. ON one hand, you have to meet them where they are if they are still learning the basics of reading. On the other hand, they need to see and read more complex material.

# data[].attributes.headline
A Level is a Teacher's Tool, not a child's label.  (Jennifer Guidry)

# data[].attributes.subject
A Level is a Teacher's Tool, not a child's label.  (Jennifer Guidry)

# data[].attributes.body
I enjoyed reading this article. I know it has to be hard for students to realize that they aren't on the same "level" as other students in their class. As a second grade teacher, I do have a classroom library where students can get books to read independently. I do not restrict students to a certain "level." I let them choose the book they want to read independently and if they feel its too hard then we either read it together during AR reading time or they choose another book. I want students to focus on the content, not the level.

# data[].attributes.headline
Considering Reading Instruction with the End in Mind (Jennifer Guidry) 

# data[].attributes.subject
Considering Reading Instruction with the End in Mind (Jennifer Guidry) 

# data[].attributes.body
The big idea that stood out to me the most in this article is that we need to meet students where they are going, not where they are currently. I think we need to give students grade-level text and help them read it with support rather than give them text on "their level." Students will never grow and be able to progress if we continue to give them work that is below their grade level. I am a firm believer of given them grade level work because it forces them to work hard and progress. With the right scaffolding, students will excel!

# data[].attributes.headline
A Level is a teacher's tool, not a child's label

# data[].attributes.subject
A Level is a teacher's tool, not a child's label

# data[].attributes.body
The points made in this article were astronomical and eye opening to say the least. As an educator with many years of teaching experience, I have always been taught that if a student struggles on his/her reading level, then it would be pointless to assign them higher reading material. But this article stated just the opposite contrary to what past and current research says. The implication that students who love to read will start to lose this love and passion if they feel like they are reading for competition. As the text states, they should not compare themselves with others because this would be detrimental to their self-esteem.
Leveled readers can also be detrimental to an EL students as well. In the article, DO Leveled Readers hurt or help my EL's, the author makes it plain that in order for EL students to get the rich reading experience they need to be exposed to complex texts. These kinds of texts are authentic and are written with the form and structure needed to become more proficient in English.

# data[].attributes.body
A Level is a Teacher's Tool, NOT a Child's Label is my new favorite article. I have long thought that making students only select books within "their" band was a bad idea. I grew up before all of that nonsense and my sister and I both have always loved to read and have had books in our hands. It never mattered if it was a picture/ story book or a novel. Too much pressure is put on students these days to compare themselves to others and I feel that pressure causes those that struggle to potentially shut down. If we never tell them that they are a struggling reader, then they might just never know it.

# data[].attributes.body
I really liked the points that were made with the End in Mind article. We always are encouraging students to get to a higher level. Parents are also pressuring them. By doing this, we are taking away their joy in reading. The ultimate goal is for students to want to love to read and not just be forced to read. I know that at my school, we put pressure on students to get higher and higher reading goals. I think that this is something that we need to stop putting so much emphasis on.

# data[].attributes.body
“Considering Reading Instruction with the End in Mind” discussed how we need to meet students where they are. All of my students have poor decoding, no phrasing, and lack of automaticity. They have weak foundational skills, limited vocabulary, poor comprehension, and poor fluency. We provide “intervention” for 20 minutes, 3-4 days per week, but that does not seem like enough nor is the “intervention” necessarily geared towards individualized skills needed by each student. My students and their parents get reports regarding their level of reading. According to the article “A Level is a Teacher Tool – Not a Child’s Label”, we should not share student levels with students or parents, but instead use the information to know where our students are and build from there. With the pressure of state testing and the emphasis on levels, that concept sounds great but is not a reality (at least not in the school where I work). It would be interesting to see the results of “intervention” and student growth if we allowed students to choose books that interest and engage them to read during “intervention” time. Would the merged concepts presented in both articles result in student success?

# data[].attributes.body
“Considering Reading Instruction with the End in Mind” discussed how we need to meet students where they are. All of my students have poor decoding, no phrasing, and lack of automaticity. They have weak foundational skills, limited vocabulary, poor comprehension, and poor fluency. We provide “intervention” for 20 minutes, 3-4 days per week, but that does not seem like enough nor is the “intervention” necessarily geared towards individualized skills needed by each student. My students and their parents get reports regarding their level of reading. According to the article “A Level is a Teacher Tool – Not a Child’s Label”, we should not share student levels with students or parents, but instead use the information to know where our students are and build from there. With the pressure of state testing and the emphasis on levels, that concept sounds great but is not a reality (at least not in the school where I work). It would be interesting to see the results of “intervention” and student growth if we allowed students to choose books that interest and engage them to read during “intervention” time. Would the merged concepts presented in both articles result in student success?

# data[].attributes.body
Dr. Timothy discusses how the phrase research based has been thrown around as a way to justify not exposing everyone to same complex text and instead only giving it to them at their "instructional level". Finding out that evidence does not support this theory is very interesting. As it suggested in the article my thoughts went immediately to my most proficient reader vs my student that struggles with basic decoding. I have mixed feelings because I have seen some students immediately give up when faced with complex text even with scaffolding.

# data[].attributes.body
Fountas and Pinnell suggest that reading levels are only for educators. Students and parents should not be made aware of the child’s reading level. They say it can cause worry or panic in either parents or children if the child is reading at a lower level than his/her peers. However, I think informing parents of their child’s reading level can be helpful. It’s another data point just like grades or scores to show successes or lack of growth, and reading levels are much more accurate than grades.

# data[].attributes.body
We often talk about filling in the gaps for students. As we do that, when do these students ever “catch up” to their peers. The strong readers continue to grow by reading and analyzing complex texts. Meanwhile, the weak reader is constantly playing “catch up.”  However, “putting the same complex text in front of students who are at different reading levels does not support their instructional needs.”