Note: this essay may also be found on Design Observer.

注意：這篇文章也可以在 Design Observer 上找到 。

My first-grade reading tutor gave the best stickers. Puffy, smelly, sparkly — she even had a few that were fuzzy. At that age I was a tornado of excitement. The last thing I wanted to do was settle down and sound out words, but the promise of tiny trophies on my spelling notebook proved to be persuasive. I remember how it felt to run my finger over the fuzzy stickers, but I can’t remember how it felt to struggle with reading. As a father I see clearly now just how steep the climb to literacy can be. The frustrating illogicalities of English are enough to reduce any child into a puddle of doubt.

我的一年級閱讀導師給了最好的貼紙。 浮腫，有臭味，閃閃發光-她甚至還有一些模糊的感覺。 在那個年齡，我是激動的龍卷風。 我想做的最后一件事是安定下來，說出話來，但我的拼寫筆記本上的小獎杯的承諾被說服了。 我記得我的手指在模糊的貼紙上摸上去的感覺，但是我不記得在閱讀上掙扎的感覺。 作為父親，我現在清楚地看到掃盲的難度有多大。 英語令人沮喪的不合邏輯足以使任何孩子陷入疑惑。

Doubt is a prime example of why English can be so bewildering. The word isn’t spelled the way it sounds. Originally doubt was spelled dout. It was spelled this way because the word comes from the Old French word doute, and also because it just makes sense to spell it that way. Then sometime in the sixteenth century, around the birth of the dictionary, the powers that be decided they needed to imbue the common British tongue with the glow of ancient religious scripture. So they set about fabricating connections between English and Latin. The Old French word doute was inspired by the Latin word dubitum. And so a b was inserted into the English word doubt — phonology and emergent readers be damned. The dictionary is riddled with words that were separated from phonologically accurate spellings by the allure of Latin.

懷疑是為什么英語如此令人困惑的一個典型例子。 這個單詞的發音方式不正確。 最初懷疑是被拼寫DOUT。 之所以這樣拼寫，??是因為該單詞來自古法語單詞doute ，并且因為以這種方式拼寫才有意義。 然后在16世紀的某個時候，大約是字典的誕生時，被確定的力量需要它們才能使古老的宗教經文煥發英倫共同的語言。 因此，他們著手建立英語和拉丁語之間的聯系。 古法語單詞doute受到拉丁單詞dubitum的啟發。 因此，在英語單詞“ 疑問”中插入了b-語音學和該死的新興讀者。 字典中充斥著一些單詞，這些單詞由于拉丁語的吸引力而與語音準確的拼寫分開。

Some historians argue that other words were separated from phonologically accurate spellings in response to their letterforms. In medieval times Carolingian minuscule script was common and characterized by letters built from thick vertical strokes — also known as minims — with thin horizontal connectors. Picture a precursor to the blackletter masthead of The New York Times. Words with a critical mass of minims often proved illegible, especially if their delicate horizontal connectors faded. For example, without horizontal connections a word like minimum appears at a glance to be a series of 15 tightly spaced, but otherwise unrelated, vertical strokes. In response to this recurring legibility issue the letter u was replaced with the letter o in words with runs of minims like tun, which became ton. The letter c was also inserted before the letter k as a minim buffer in words like flik, which became flick.

一些歷史學家認為，其他單詞是根據語音形式與語音準確拼寫分開的。 在中世紀，加洛林語的小寫字母很常見，其特征是字母由粗筆直的筆觸(也稱為極小字)和細的水平連接器組成。 想象“紐約時報”發黑的標頭的前身。 具有極小臨界質量的單詞通常被證明難以辨認，尤其是當其精致的水平連接器褪色時。 例如，在沒有水平連接如最小的單詞出現一目了然為一系列15緊密間隔的，但在其他方面不相關的，垂直筆劃。 針對此反復出現的易讀性問題，字母u被替換為字母o ，單詞tun最小，如tun ，變成ton 。 字母c也在字母k之前插入，作為flik等單詞的最小緩沖，從而變得輕彈 。

To be fair, it should be acknowledged that the English we write today resulted from the convergence of a plurality of histories, and the shape of letterforms did not have an equally weighted influence across all of them. Many medieval scribal practices existed contemporaneously. Specifically, it was the Anglo-Norman scribes who made a focused effort to resolve the effect of minim sequences. Still, even though letterform inspired spelling adjustments heralded from a single branch of the English evolutionary tree, they did survive into current use.

公平地講，應該承認，我們今天撰寫的英語是由多種歷史的融合造成的，而字母的形狀并沒有在所有語言中具有同等的加權影響。 許多中世紀的抄寫手法同時存在。 具體來說，正是盎格魯·諾曼(Anglo-Norman)抄寫員致力于解決最小序列的影響。 盡管如此，盡管從英語進化樹的單個分支中預言了字母形式的啟發性拼寫調整，但它們確實可以保留到當前使用中。

Learning to read English is hard because it doesn’t make sense. At the heart of English’s nonsense is a persistent disconnect between its graphemes and phonemes. A grapheme is a letter, or a number of letters, that represents a sound in a word, and that sound is a phoneme. In his book Reading in the Brain cognitive neuroscientist Stanislas Dehaene notes that “Reading difficulty varies across countries and cultures, and English has probably the most difficult of all alphabetic writing systems. Its spelling system is by far the most opaque — each individual letter can be pronounced in umpteen different ways, and exceptions abound. Comparisons carried out internationally prove that such irregularities have a major impact on learning. Italian children, after a few months of schooling, can read practically any word, because Italian spelling is almost perfectly regular. No dictation or spelling exercises for these fortunate children: once they know how to pronounce each grapheme, they can read and write any speech sound.”

學習閱讀英語很困難，因為這沒有意義。 英語廢話的核心是其字素和音素之間的持續斷開。 字素是一個字母或多個字母，代表一個單詞中的聲音，而該聲音是一個音素。 認知神經科學家斯坦尼斯拉斯·德海恩(Stanislas Dehaene)在他的《 大腦中的閱讀》一書中指出：“閱讀困難因國家和文化而異，英語可能是所有字母書寫系統中最困難的。 到目前為止，它的拼寫系統是最不透明的-每個單獨的字母可以以多種不同的方式發音，并且異常情況很多。 在國際上進行的比較證明，這種違規行為對學習有重大影響。 經過幾個月的學習，意大利兒童幾乎可以閱讀任何單詞，因為意大利語的拼寫幾乎是正常的。 這些幸運的孩子無需進行聽寫或拼寫練習：一旦他們知道如何發音每個字素，他們就可以讀寫任何語音。”

In the United States teachers guide students across this landscape of gerrymandered spelling and illogical pronunciation with the help of various leveled reading systems. The most common systems, which are sometimes used in concert, are the Guided Reading Level system, The Lexile Framework, and the Grade Level Equivalent system. Books are assessed and labelled with alphabetic or numeric levels which describe their difficulty. A student’s growth is measured by assessing their reading ability and promoting them up the levels as their reading fluency and comprehension improve. For example, in the Guided Reading Level system students begin with books labeled “level A” in Kindergarten, and by 5th grade they’re reading “level Z.”

在美國，老師們借助各種水平的閱讀系統，引導學生跨過雜亂無章的拼寫和不合邏輯的發音。 有時經常一起使用的最常見的系統是“指導閱讀水平”系統，“ Lexile框架”和“等效年級水平”系統。 評估書籍并用字母或數字級別描述書籍的難度。 通過評估學生的閱讀能力并隨著他們的閱讀流利度和理解力的提高而提高他們的水平來衡量學生的成長。 例如，在“引導閱讀水平”系統中，學生從幼兒園的標有“ A級”的書開始，到5年級時，他們正在閱讀“ Z級”。

A book’s reading level is defined by many criteria. In the Guided Reading Level system criteria include:

一本書的閱讀水平由許多標準定義。 在“指導閱讀水平”系統中，標準包括：

Length: Lower levels feature a small number of words, lines per page, and pages per book. Higher levels feature longer, denser texts.

長度：較低的級別僅包含少量單詞，每頁行數和每本書頁數。 較高的級別具有更長，更密集的文本。

Structure and organization: Lower levels feature simple, repetitive plots. Higher levels feature stories that require more interpretation.

結構和組織：較低級別具有簡單的重復圖。 較高級別的故事需要更多的解釋。

Imagery: Lower levels feature pictures that portray the text literally to help students decode individual words. Higher levels feature less supportive pictures at a lower frequency.

圖像：較低級別的圖像以文字形式描繪文字，以幫助學生解碼單個單詞。 較高的級別以較低的頻率提供較少支持的圖像。

Words: Lower levels feature high-frequency words. Higher levels feature multisyllabic words and a broader vocabulary.

單詞：較低級別具有高頻單詞。 較高的級別具有多音節單詞和更廣泛的詞匯。

Phrases and sentences: Lower levels feature simple sentences. Higher levels feature longer, more complex sentences with embedded clauses.

短語和句子：較低級別具有簡單的句子。 較高的級別具有包含子句的更長，更復雜的句子。

Literary features: Lower levels feature straightforward storytelling. Higher levels feature more complex devices such as flashbacks and metaphors.

文學功能：低級功能具有簡單的講故事功能。 較高的級別具有更復雜的設備，例如閃回和隱喻。

Content and theme: Lower levels feature topics and themes that are familiar to younger children. Higher levels feature sophisticated themes that require background knowledge for comprehension.

內容和主題：較低級別的功能包含年幼兒童熟悉的主題和主題。 較高的級別具有復雜的主題，需要了解背景知識。

Typography: Lower levels feature large point sizes with wide word and line spacing. Higher levels feature smaller point sizes with tighter word and line spacing.

印刷術：較低的水平具有較大的字號，字和行間距較寬。 較高的級別具有較小的點大小，字和行間距更緊密。

The Guided Reading Level system acknowledges that typographic properties — referred to in education circles as perceptual features — play an important role in a student’s reading fluency and comprehension, but guidelines for typesetting leveled text rarely go much deeper than the preceding paragraph. Professional levelers often describe making typographic judgment calls based on sensibilities honed from countless hours of experience with leveled texts. In this way the typographic principles of leveled reading are a textual feedback loop that can limit input from professional designers.

引導閱讀水平系統承認，印刷屬性(在教育界稱為感知功能)在學生的閱讀流利度和理解力方面起著重要作用，但是排版水平文本的準則很少比上一段更深入。 專業的水準測量人員通常會根據根據無數小時的水平水準文字磨練而產生的敏感性來描述進行印刷判斷。 這樣，水平閱讀的印刷原理就是文本反饋循環，可能會限制專業設計師的輸入。

Robust typesetting guidelines for leveled texts do exist, but primarily as internal support documents for design teams at educational publishers. These documents aren’t typically referenced by professional levelers, and it’s the levelers who define a book’s official reading level.

確實存在針對分級文本的健壯的排版指南，但主要是作為教育出版商的設計團隊的內部支持文件。 這些文件通常不被專業的調平器所引用，而是由調平器來定義一本書的官方閱讀水平。

In the past I’ve been charged with leading the design of proprietary typographic leveling guidelines. I can report from firsthand experience that developing such guidelines is far less straightforward than you might imagine. Each of the leveling criteria listed above interact with each other, and with the properties of each typeface and book, in complex ways.

過去，我一直負責領導專有的印刷水準儀設計指南。 我可以從第一手經驗中報告，制定這樣的指南遠沒有您想象的那么簡單。 上面列出的每個校平標準都以復雜的方式相互影響，并且與每種字體和書本的屬性相互作用。

For example, it’s difficult to prescribe a specific point size for a specific reading level in the abstract without also prescribing a specific typeface and book size. Typographic properties like x-height (the height of the lowercase letters) and book properties like trim size (the size and aspect ratio of the book) have a dramatic impact on how large text feels irrespective of its point size.

例如，在不指定特定字體和書本大小的情況下，很難為摘要中的特定閱讀水平規定特定的磅數。 諸如x高度(小寫字母的高度)之類的印刷屬性以及諸如修剪尺寸(書籍的大小和縱橫比)之類的書籍屬性對大文本的感覺產生巨大影響，而不論其點號如何。

But mandating a specific typeface across a range of books intended for reading instruction runs counter to the belief within education circles that having a diverse range of authentic texts for students is critical to their growth as readers. “Authentic texts” refer to books that weren’t written specifically as tools for use in reading instruction, like the “See Spot run” basal readers that were popular throughout the mid-to-late 20th century. So even if an educational publisher develops a library of leveled picture books specifically for use as tools in reading instruction the books can’t feel that way. Every book must feel unique.

但是，在用于閱讀指導的各種書籍中強制使用一種特定的字體，這與教育界的信念背道而馳，教育界認為，為學生提供多種多樣的真實文本對于他們作為讀者的成長至關重要。 “真實的文本”是指不是專門用作閱讀教學工具的書籍，例如在整個20世紀中葉左右流行的“ See Spot run”基礎讀者。 因此，即使教育出版商開發了專門用于閱讀指導的水平圖畫書庫，這些書也不會有這種感覺。 每本書必須感覺獨特。

My solution was to develop a typesetting target — a paragraph of sample text that designers were asked to use to optically correct the size and spacing of their body text. But even after developing a full alphabet of leveled reading typesetting targets that were vetted and approved by our editorial and leveling teams, we still ran into exceptions. For example, the gestalt of a tiny book, with a particular illustration style, reframed the typesetting target for that book’s level as too large in one particular case.

我的解決方案是開發一個排版目標-一段示例文本，要求設計師使用這些文本來光學校正其正文的大小和間距。 但是，即使在制定了由我們的編輯和水準團隊審查和批準的完整的水準閱讀排版目標字母表之后，我們仍然遇到了例外。 例如，一本具有特定插圖風格的小書的格式像在某種情況下將該書的排版目標重新定為太大。

Building, and implementing, detailed typesetting guidelines for leveled texts is challenging, but the following research suggests that rising to this challenge produces measurable gains for young readers. Dr. Bonnie Shaver-Troup, an educational scholar, and Thomas Jockin, an educator and type designer, teamed up to develop a set of seven font families, collectively named Lexend, which were designed with the goal of improving reading fluency. Lexend’s variable width design rests on the foundational belief that “a font, much like the prescription in a pair of eyeglasses, should change based on the reader’s unique needs.”

構建和實施針對水平文本的詳細排版指南具有挑戰性，但是以下研究表明，應對這一挑戰可為年輕讀者帶來可觀的收益。 教育學者Bonnie Shaver-Troup博士與教育家兼字體設計師Thomas Jockin共同開發了七個字體家族，統稱為Lexend，旨在提高閱讀流暢度。 Lexend的可變寬度設計基于以下基本信念：“一種字體，就像一副眼鏡中的處方一樣，應根據讀者的獨特需求進行更改。”

In one study conducted by Dr. Shaver-Troup twenty-third graders were asked to read for one minute in five fonts — New Times Roman (the control), and then four of the Lexend Series: Regular, Deca, Mega, and Giga. The text was typeset at 16 points and was a couple of levels above the participants’ current grade level to “ensure the typography was being measured, rather than reading competency.” The students were asked to read aloud, and the number of correct words per minute was noted as an indication of fluency. Seventeen out of nineteen students had better fluency scores with Lexend than with New Times Roman. The use of Lexend resulted in a 19.8% instant fluency gain.

在Shaver-Troup博士進行的一項研究中，要求二十三年級的學生閱讀五種字體一分鐘-New Times Roman(對照)，然后閱讀Lexend系列中的四種：Regular，Deca，Mega和Giga。 文本的排版為16分，比參與者當前的年級水平高出幾個級別，以“確保對字體進行了衡量，而不是閱讀能力。” 要求學生大聲朗讀，并記錄每分鐘正確單詞的數量，以指示其是否流利。 Lexend的19名學生中有17名的流利度得分高于New Times Roman。 Lexend的使用使即時流利性提高了19.8％。

The majority of reading performance studies that have explored the effects of manipulating a text’s font, point size, line length, letter-, word-, and line-spacing have examined the impact of these perceptual features on reading rate and accuracy. Less frequently examined is the impact on reading comprehension.

大多數閱讀性能研究都探討了操縱文本的字體，磅值，行長，字母，單詞和行距的影響，這些研究都研究了這些感知特征對閱讀率和準確性的影響。 較少檢查的是對閱讀理解的影響。

In a study conducted by Dr. Tami Katzir, Dr. Shirley Hershko, and Dr. Vered Halamish, forty-five fifth graders were asked to read four age-appropriate texts. The control text was typeset using the same typographic properties that are commonly used in fifth grade textbooks. The other three texts were intentionally designed to be more difficult to read, using combinations of smaller point sizes and tighter spacing. Their hypothesis was that making the text less comfortable to read would slow students down, and their slower reading speed would lead to higher comprehension scores.

在塔米·卡齊爾(Tami Katzir)博士，雪莉·赫什科(Shirley Hershko)博士和韋拉德·哈拉米什(Vered Halamish)博士進行的一項研究中，要求四十五名五年級學生閱讀適合年齡的四篇課文。 使用與五年級教科書中常用的印刷屬性相同的排版屬性對控制文本進行排版。 其他三本書經有意設計為更難閱讀，結合使用了較小的磅值和更緊密的間距。 他們的假設是，使課文閱讀不舒適會降低學生的學習速度，而閱讀速度較慢則會導致學生的理解力得分更高。

They found that using a smaller point size to achieve intentional disfluency produced an instant 10% gain in comprehension. Line length and spacing had less of an effect. They found this counterintuitive correlation between reading difficulty and improved comprehension was unique to older students and in fact found the inverse to be true with younger students.

他們發現，使用較小的磅數來實現有意的流落感可以使理解力立即提高10％。 線長和間距影響較小。 他們發現，閱讀困難與理解能力之間的這種反直覺的關聯是年長的學生所獨有的，實際上，相反的關系在年輕的學生中是正確的。

The researchers summarized their observations succinctly: “The interaction between the reader and the text is not only content-based, nor does it solely relate to factors such as background knowledge, proficiency in decoding, spelling etc. In fact, text presentation changes the way information is encoded and processed. This notion has been previously suggested for the reading rate and accuracy of young children. In the current research we suggest that a similar effect exists for higher-level processing, i.e., reading comprehension.”

研究人員簡潔地總結了他們的觀察結果：“讀者與文本之間的交互不僅基于內容，也不僅僅與諸如背景知識，解碼能力，拼寫等因素有關。事實上，文本表示會改變方式信息被編碼和處理。 先前已經提出了關于幼兒的閱讀率和準確性的概念。 在當前的研究中，我們建議在更高層次的處理中也存在類似的效果，即閱讀理解。”

This concept of intentionally designing disfluent long-form reading experiences runs counter to many of the design and leveling community’s core principles. Designers and levelers are taught to prioritize readability above all. Dr. Katzir, Dr. Hershko, and Dr. Halamish’s research into “desirable difficulty” highlights the potential benefits of reviewing long-held typographic, and leveling, best practices through the lens of recent reading research.

故意設計不同的長篇閱讀體驗的這一概念與許多設計和水準社區的核心原則背道而馳。 教給設計師和矯平器首先要優先考慮可讀性。 卡齊爾(Katzir)博士，赫什科(Hershko)博士和哈拉米什(Halamish)博士對“理想的困難”的研究突出了通過近期閱讀研究的角度來回顧長期以來一直保持的印刷和水準最佳實踐的潛在好處。

Reading is a verb that speaks to what happens in a person’s mind. In school we practice reading until the action becomes automatic enough for the letterforms to tumble down into our subconscious. Perhaps this is why typography is sometimes framed as an afterthought — a decorative element that sits at a distance from the real business of ideas. But reading and the ideas that reading inspires aren’t a byproduct of a text’s meaning alone. The ideas we come to as a result of reading are inextricably bound with the physical identity of a text.

閱讀是一個動詞，可以說出一個人的想法。 在學校里，我們練習閱讀，直到動作變得足夠自動以使字形下降到我們的潛意識中為止。 也許這就是為什么有時將版式設計為事后思考的原因-一種裝飾元素，與真正的創意業務相距遙遠。 但是，閱讀和閱讀啟發的思想本身并不是文本含義的副產品。 閱讀所產生的思想與文本的物理特性密不可分。

The leveling and design communities should further research the precise correlation between typography, fluency, and comprehension, with the goal of establishing more precise typographic recommendations for reading instruction. Doing so will produce instant fluency and comprehension gains for children who face the steep slope of English’s illogicality. Typography is a foothold that can help hoist children up over their doubts and onto the summit of their literate selves.

水平和設計社區應進一步研究排版，流利度和理解力之間的精確相關性，以期建立更精確的排版建議以閱讀指導。 這樣做將為面對英語不合邏輯的陡峭兒童提供即時的流利度和理解力。 字體印刷是一個立足點，可以幫助孩子克服疑惑，升入識字自我的頂峰。

Bridges, Lois Bridges 26 April 2018. “All Children Deserve Access to Authentic Text.” EDU, edublog.scholastic.com/post/all-children-deserve-access-authentic-text#.

路易斯·布里奇，布里奇，橋梁，2018年4月26日。“所有兒童都應獲得真實的文本。” EDU edublog.scholastic.com/post/all-children-deserve-access-authentic-text#。

“Base Font Effect on Reading Performance.” Readability Matters, 1 Feb. 2020, readabilitymatters.org/articles/font-effect.

“基本字體對閱讀性能的影響。” 可讀性問題》 ，2020年2月1日， readabilitymatters.org / articles / font- effect。

“Change the Way the World Reads.” Lexend, www.lexend.com/.

“改變世界的讀書方式。” Lexend ， www.lexend.com /。

French, M. M. J., et al. “Changing Fonts in Education: How the Benefits Vary with Ability and Dyslexia.” The Journal of Educational Research, vol. 106, no. 4, 2013, pp. 301–304., doi:10.1080/00220671.2012.736430.

法語，MMJ等。 “改變教育中的字體：收益如何隨能力和閱讀障礙而變化。” 教育研究雜志 ，卷。 106號 2013年4月，第301-304頁，doi：10.1080 / 00220671.2012.736430。

Katzir, Tami, et al. “The Effect of Font Size on Reading Comprehension on Second and Fifth Grade Children: Bigger Is Not Always Better.” PloS One, Public Library of Science, 19 Sept. 2013, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3777945/.

Katzir，Tami等。 “字體大小對二，五年級兒童閱讀理解的影響：更大并不總是更好。” 公共科學圖書館PloS One ，2013年9月19日， www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov / pmc / articles / PMC3777945 / 。

“The Old English Roots of Modern English Spelling.” The History of English Spelling, 2012, pp. 33–64., doi:10.1002/9781444342994.ch3.

“現代英語拼寫的古老英語根源。” 《英語拼寫史》 ，2012年，第33–64頁，doi：10.1002 / 9781444342994.ch3。

“The Old English Roots of Modern English Spelling.” The History of English Spelling, 2012, pp. 33–64., doi:10.1002/9781444342994.ch3.

“現代英語拼寫的古老英語根源。” 《英語拼寫史》 ，2012年，第33–64頁，doi：10.1002 / 9781444342994.ch3。

Pondiscio, Robert, and Kevin Mahnken. “Leveled Reading: The Making of a Literacy Myth.” The Thomas B. Fordham Institute, fordhaminstitute.org/national/commentary/leveled-reading-making-literacy-myth.

龐迪西奧，羅伯特和凱文·馬肯。 “水平閱讀：識字神話的形成。” 托馬斯·B·福特漢姆研究所 (fordhaminstitute.org)/ national / commentary / leveled-reading-making-literacy-myth。

Reber, Rolf, et al. “Effects of Perceptual Fluency on Affective Judgments.” Psychological Science, vol. 9, no. 1, 1998, pp. 45–48., doi:10.1111/1467–9280.00008.

Reber，Rolf等。 “感知流利度對情感判斷的影響。” 心理科學卷。 9號 1998年1月1日，第45-48頁，doi：10.1111 / 1467-9280.00008。

Refsnes, Hege. “Rejecting Instructional Level Theory.” Rejecting Instructional Level Theory | Shanahan on Literacy, shanahanonliteracy.com/blog/rejecting-instructional-level-theory.

Refsnes，Hege。 “拒絕教學水平理論。” 拒絕教學水平理論| Shanahan談掃盲 ，shanahanonliteracy.com / blog / rejecting-instructional-level-theory。

Trask, Robert Lawrence, and Robert McColl Millar. Why Do Languages Change? Cambridge University Press, 2011.

Trask，Robert Lawrence和Robert McColl Millar。 語言為什么會改變？ 劍橋大學出版社，2011年。

Venezky, Richard L. The American Way of Spelling: the Structure and Origins of American English Orthography. Guilford Press, 1999.

Venezky，Richard L. 《美國拼寫方式：美國英語拼寫法的結構和起源》 。 吉爾福德出版社，1999年。

“What Is Leveled Reading?” Scholastic, www.scholastic.com/teachers/articles/teaching-content/what-leveled-reading/.

“什么是水平閱讀？” Scholastic ， www.scholastic.com / teachers / articles / teaching-content / what-leveled-reading /。