There's a difference between reading and writing, and reading and writing well. I would expect the tests to expect higher proficiency than what is expected in your usual text messages.

▲

Der_Einzige 5 days ago | parent [-]

The quality of most text msgs is higher than what passes for “quality literature” in many lit classrooms.

Texting is unironically a better use of time than reading infinite jest, or gravities rainbow, etc.

	▲	fiforpg 5 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		While you can certainly argue that some texts have more substance to them than these literary works, you cannot deny that most texts have worse prose than the books.
	▲	BeetleB 5 days ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		> The quality of most text msgs is higher than what passes for “quality literature” in many lit classrooms. First: Your HS kids hang out with a different crowd than my HS kids :-) Second: This is about reading ability (comprehension, etc), not literature. Whether the quality of a text message is superior/inferior to whatever they use in literature classes is irrelevant.
	▲	realo 5 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Hum... "R U OK" is sooo much better than ... “How do you feel, Jake?” “Fine, it doesn’t hurt much.” “Are you all right?” ... (Hemmingway)