DePodesta 1

Kristin DePodesta
Professor Stephanie Shteirman
ILS 562
17 October 2014
Genetically Altered Food Labels
Background
The majority of grade 10 students take Biology class at my high school (with some students electing to
take it freshman year at an honors or advanced placement level instead). At the request of a Biology
teacher, this Common Core works cited was put together for their unit on Scientific Reasoning and
Communication Skills. For this performance task, students will be required to research and design a
persuasive pamphlet in support or in opposition to the mandatory labeling of genetically altered food.
Common Course Source List
Works Cited
"Are there GMOs in your corn chips?" Consumer Reports 79.11 (2014): 17. iconn.org. Web. 20 Oct. 2014.
<http://eds.a.ebscohost.com/eds/detail/detail?vid=10&sid=af883abb-da37-408d-a2b7124f0a030dfd%40sessionmgr4002&hid=4113&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmU%3d#db=f5h&A
N=98184091>.
Lexile Level: The lexile level of this article is 1230 which falls within the lexile range for this grade
level.
Readability: The Flesch-Kincaid readability grade level is mid-tenth grade according to
editcentral.com which makes this article appropriate reading difficulty for this audience.
Levels of Meaning: I rate this article a score of 8. There are some technical terms used
throughout the article which students would need to have some familiarity with.

DePodesta 2
Structure: I rate this article a score of 10. The article is relatively short and is broken up with
subheadings to give the reader a clear indication as to what each section was about.
Language Conventionality: I score this an 8. There are not too many technical words used
throughout.
Background Knowledge: I gave the article a score of 9. While the article does define the basic
concept behind GMOs, the reader is expected to have some background knowledge on the
subject matter.
Black, Jane. "As nature made them." Prevention 64.4 (2012): 82-89. iconn.org. Web. 20 Oct. 2014.
<http://eds.a.ebscohost.com/eds/detail/detail?vid=3&sid=af883abb-da37-408d-a2b7124f0a030dfd%40sessionmgr4002&hid=4113&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmU%3d#db=mfi&A
N=73278346&anchor=AN0073278346-3>.
Lexile Level: The lexile level of this article is 1330 which falls just outside the lexile range for this
grade level so could prove to be a bit challenging for some readers.
Readability: According to the Flesch-Kincaid reading scale using editcentral.com, the reading
level of the article is mid-eleventh grade. Since this is above the targeted grade level for this
performance task, the teacher will have to determine to use this article for higher-achieving
students or to give students a more challenging read.
Levels of Meaning: I rate this article an 8. There are quite a few technical terms present in the
article, and many are not defined or given context clues.
Structure: I rate this article a 6. It is an article with no subheadings throughout. The paragraphs
used, however, are short and to the point, which makes the reading more manageable for this
grade level.
Language Conventionality: I score this an 8. There are quite a few more complex words
throughout the article which challenges the reader.

DePodesta 3
Background Knowledge: I rate this article a 7. Although the overall message of the subject gives
some background information, the reader is expected to have some background knowledge on
the subject.
Board of Editors. "Fight the GM Food Scare." Scientific American 309.3 (2013): 10.iconn.org. Web.
19 Oct. 2014. <http://web.a.ebscohost.com/scirc/detail/detail?vid=3&sid=c9299ba7-3df9-4509907b9d3da39c9799%40sessionmgr4002&hid=4206&bdata=JnNpdGU9c2NpcmMtbGl2ZQ%3d%3
d#db=sch&AN=89931669>.
Lexile Level: The lexile level of this article is 1340 which falls just outside of the lexile range for
ninth to tenth graders. This should make it a slightly challenging read to the student audience.
Readability: According to editcentral.com, the Flesch-Kincaid reading grade level is mid-tenth
grade. This is the ideal grade level range for the student population this performance task is for.
Levels of Meaning: I gave this article a 9. The editors of this article used a more narrative tone to
present the terms and ideas of how GMOs have been introduced and used in the food industry.
Structure: I rated this article an 8. This article is relatively short. The paragraphs are manageable
for students to read.
Language Conventionality: I rated this an 8 for this article. Although still a scientific article on the
subject, there were not too many scientific words in the article as compared with others, while
still getting the point across.
Background Knowledge: For background knowledge, I would give this article a rate of 9.
Students will need to have some understanding and familiarity with the concept of GMOs prior
to reading the article.
Erdosh, George, and Marcia Lusted. "To GMO or not to GMO?" Odyssey 23.2 (2014): 15-19. iconn.org.
Web. 20 Oct. 2014. <http://eds.b.ebscohost.com/eds/detail/detail?vid=5&sid=ade66820-84e44f33-9c7e-

DePodesta 4
d336910ae1e6%40sessionmgr198&hid=113&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmU%3d#db=f5h&AN
=93990820>.
Lexile Level: The lexile level for this article is 1300 which at the high end of the range for this
grade level.
Readability: However, according the Flesch-Kincaid readability level, this article only measures
at an eighth grade level. The teacher would have to determine if this reads at too low of a level.
Levels of Meaning: I rate this article a 6. There are very little technical terms included in the
article, however, those included are defined for the reader.
Structure: I score this an 8 due to the subheadings used throughout the article. These
subheadings help the reader preread and prepare for what the article is about.
Language Conventionality: I rate this article a 7. Content vocabulary is used, although very few
words are used. Those that are used are defined within the article.
Background Knowledge: I rate this article a 7. The reader is supposed to have some background
knowledge as to what GMOs are.
Harrar, Sari. "How can you tell if they are real or modified?" Good Housekeeping258.8 (2014): 97100. iconn.org. Web. 20 Oct. 2014.
<http://eds.b.ebscohost.com/eds/detail/detail?vid=1&sid=436fa1da-17a8-4a05-8f4b0cdce39d76fa%40sessionmgr198&hid=113&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmU%3d#db=f5h&AN
=96687127>.
Lexile Level: The lexile level for this article is 1250. This is right in the middle of the lexile range
for this grade level which makes this article a good fit.
Readability: According to editcentral.com, the Flesh-Kincaid reading level is a low ninth grader.
A teacher may decide for themselves whether to use this particular article for their students
who may find reading a bit more challenging.

DePodesta 5
Levels of Meaning: I rate this article a 5. There is little technical vocabulary included. The
technical content that is included, however, does have some context around it to give it some
definition.
Structure: I rate this a 10. The article is written in a question and answer style. Each heading is
written in a guided question form with a paragraph following with further detail.
Language Conventionality: I rate this article a 5 for the few technical terms included.
Background Knowledge: I rate this article an 8. The reader does not need to have any
background on the subject.
Mather, Robin. "The Threats from Genetically Modified Foods." Mother Earth News251 (2012): 4251. iconn.org. Web. 19 Oct. 2014.
<http://eds.b.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail/detail?vid=2&sid=6b7954dd-97e6-441c-a8e61af8c766efa8%40sessionmgr115&hid=113&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1zaXRl
#db=8gh&AN=73365285>.
Lexile Level: The lexile level was not given for this article, nor was I able to find a lexile converter
able to calculate this article due to its size being too large. I did, however, feel that this article
was worthy of keeping on the list for the teacher to use since the setup of the article is good for
students (with the various headings) and for the other reasons given below.
Readability: According the Flesch-Kincaid scale using editcentral.com, the reading grade level for
this article is 10.9. Although this is on the higher end of the grade, I feel that the setup and
structure of the article and the background information in the article itself makes this a good
article to use.
Levels of Meaning: I would rate this a 9 for this article. The article gives many technical terms
related to the scientific content of the article and very often defines the terms within the article

DePodesta 6
or gives examples to layer the meaning, however, many times the wording within those
definitions is scientific as well.
Structure: For the structure of this article I would give it a rating of a 10. Although the article is
lengthy, it is broken up with headings throughout, some even posed as questions to push the
reader to think critically and get the thought process started before starting on that section.
Language Conventionality: I would give this a rating of 9. Since the complex words used in this
article are technical in nature, this will be challenging to the students presented to them,
however most terms have some explanation or definition accompanying them.
Background Knowledge: I rated this a 9. Although the terms used are on a higher level, it is not
assumed that the reader has an extensive knowledge of GMOs.
Mientka, Matthew. "Emprace the Purple Tomato." Newsweek 162.5 (2014): 113-117.iconn.org. Web.
19 Oct. 2014. <http://eds.a.ebscohost.com/eds/detail/detail?vid=1&sid=e2eb8dcd-36ae-4ae9b78615837b575474%40sessionmgr4001&hid=4110&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmU%3d#db=mfi&
AN=94187887>.
Lexile Level: The Lexile level of this article is 1380 which falls just outside the lexile ranges 1080
and 1305 aligned to CCR expectations for ninth to tenth graders which could pose as a challenge
to the group of students this is being presented for.
Readability: The Flesch-Kincaid readability score, however, was a 43.5 according to
editcentral.com, and a grade level of 13.1. This puts this text at a much higher grade level than
the group that it is aimed at.
Levels of Meaning: I gave this article a score of 8. While the readability of the article calculated
at a much higher grade level, the more complex terms were often words that a student of their
level should know well such as several, natural and opportunity.

DePodesta 7
Structure: I gave this article a 7 for a score for structure. This article is written in a typical article
fashion with just one headline and then written in paragraph form. However, the paragraphs are
written in a short-style journal article style which breaks up the reading for this level of reader.
Language Conventionality: I gave this a score of 9 since there were many content vocabulary
terms included in the article. Some were included with examples to give context-clues to aid
students in understanding the clues, however, many were not.
Background Knowledge: I gave this a score of 7. Students reading this article would have been
expected to know and have a good understanding of what a GMO was, since no explanation was
given and that is the basis of the entire article.
Paynter, Ben, and Nicholas Cope. "Bred to Perfection." Wired 22.2 (2014): 88. iconn.org. Web.
19 Oct. 2014. <http://web.a.ebscohost.com/scirc/detail/detail?vid=8&sid=b2b324a2-230e421e-bb0d3cf9225aa5db%40sessionmgr4003&hid=4206&bdata=JnNpdGU9c2NpcmMtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db
=sch&AN=94491160>.
Lexile Level: The lexile level of this article is 1130 which is right in the middle of the range of for
ninth and tenth grade students.
Readability: The Flesch-Kincaid reading level, according to editcentral.com, is a high-ninth grade
student. This is a good article to have available for students that are either on a lower reading
level that are in the tenth grade or perhaps for ELL students who sometimes struggle with
reading material given to them.
Levels of Meaning: I rate this article a 7. This gives true examples of what genetically modified
foods are and how they are benefits in an easy to understand, although does not challenge the
reader with the technical terms that could be associated with the topic.

DePodesta 8
Structure: I rate this a 10. The article is broken up by examples. The way that this is written is in
a much more manageable format with students being able to read about an example and then
expand on that.
Language Conventionality: I rate this article a 6 since there are not too many technical terms
used throughout the article. Although the information given in the article can be useful, the
content terms are lacking.
Background Knowledge: I rate this a 6. Students are expected to have background knowledge on
the topic of genetically modified foods prior to reading the article.
Portnoy, Shari. "Organic, Natural & Healthy." American Fitness 31.3 (2013): 24-30.iconn.org. Web.
20 Oct. 2014. <http://eds.b.ebscohost.com/eds/detail/detail?vid=2&sid=e4900aca-17d0-42c1a2b3b4bfcc32642c%40sessionmgr111&hid=113&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmU%3d#db=f5h&AN
=87084230>.
Lexile Level: The lexile level of this article is 1110. This is right in the middle of the lexile range
for the grade level for this performance task so it is an appropriate article.
Readability: The Flesch-Kincaid reading level, according to editcentral.com, is a mid-ninth
grader. This could still be an appropriate article to assign for the performance task for students
who are struggling with the content or find reading more challenging.
Levels of Meaning: I rate this article a 9. This article gives many technical terms while providing
comprehensive explanations about those terms.
Structure: I rate this a 10. This article is meant as an informative piece. It provides the
information in subheadings and breaks the whole article down.
Language Conventionality: This I rate a 9 because of the many technical terms that the tenth
graders are becoming familiar with. Each term is given background and information about.

DePodesta 9
Background Knowledge: I score this a 9. The article does not assume that the reader has any
background knowledge on the subject, rather, it is using this article to educate the reader.
Rauber, Paul. "Eater Beware!" Sierra 85.4 (2000): 30. iconn.org. Web. 19 Oct. 2014.
<http://eds.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail/detail?vid=8&sid=9dd90015-90d5-4552-9897599386dda5b6%40sessionmgr4002&hid=4110&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1z
aXRl#db=8gh&AN=3254853>.
Lexile Level: According to lexile.com, the lexile level of this article was 1360. This is just beyond
the appropriate lexile range for ninth and tenth graders, but will push the higher level students
to challenge their reading skills.
Readability: The Flesch-Kincaid readability score rates it out at a mid-tenth grade reading level.
This makes it a very appropriate article choice for the audience of readers for this performance
task and will challenge those readers who are on the lower end.
Levels of Meaning: I gave this article a 9 for levels of meaning. Since this is for a science class in
which technical terms are a necessity, the fact that technical terms are used in this article is no
surprised. There are some more technical terms that others that have some definition and
background given to the reader however that helped with the higher score.
Structure: I rated the structure of this article an 8. It was written in a typical paragraph style, but
since the topic was so technical, graphics and/or images to accompany the text would have
been beneficial to support the reader.
Language Conventionality: Since there was some definition given to some of the more complex
terms, I would give this article a 10. There are many technical terms related to the topic which I
would expect from a science article.

DePodesta 10
Background Knowledge: I would rate this article a 7. Students would need to come into the
article with some background of what genetically modified foods are, as well as what some
diseases are.