Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of the study is to review readability formulae and offer a critique, based on a comparison of the grading of a variety of texts given by six well-known formulae. Methodology – A total of 64 texts in English were selected either by or for native English speaking children aged between six and 11 years. Each text was assessed using six commonly used readability formulae via the Words Count website (http://www.wordscount. info/) which provides automated readability indices using FOG, Spache, SMOG, Flesh-Kincaid and Dale-Chall. For the ATOS formula, the Renaissance Learning website was used (http://www. renlearn.com/ar/overview/atos/). Statistical tests were then carried out to check the consistency among the six formulae in terms of their predictions of levels of text diffi culty. Findings – The analysis demonstrated significantly different readability indices for the same text using different formulae. It appeared that some of the formulae (but not all) were consistent in their ranking of texts in order of difficulty but were not consistent in their grading of each text. This finding suggests that readability formulae need to be used carefully to support teachers’ judgements about text difficulty rather than as the sole mechanism for text assessment. Significance – Making decisions about matching texts to learners is something regularly required from teachers at all levels. Making such decisions about text suitability is described as measuring the ‘readability’ of texts, and for a long time, this measurement has been treated as unproblematic and achieved using formulae which use such features as vocabulary diffi culty and sentence length. This study suggests that the use of such readability formulae is more problematic than may at first appear. Although the study was carried out with native English speaking children using texts in English, it is argued that the lessons learnt apply equally to Malay speakers reading Malay language texts.
Highlights
It has been argued that the most important pedagogic decision that teachers make is “making the match” (Fry, 1977), that is, ensuring that learners are supplied with reading materials, in whatever subject, that are at an appropriate level of difficulty for them
This study suggests that the use of such readability formulae is more problematic than may at first appear
One of the major outcomes was the production of a large number of “readability formulae”, that is, approaches to analysing texts designed to give a quantitative measure of the “level” a reader would need to be at in order to read and understand a particular text successfully
Summary
It has been argued that the most important pedagogic decision that teachers make is “making the match” (Fry, 1977), that is, ensuring that learners are supplied with reading materials, in whatever subject, that are at an appropriate level of difficulty for them. Learners who are given reading materials that are too easy are not challenged and their learning growth can be stunted (Chall & Conard, 1991). Learners who are given reading materials that are too difficult can fail to make progress (Gambrell, Wilson & Gantt, 1981), are frequently off task and may exhibit behaviour problems (Anderson, Wilkinson & Mason, 1987), or give up (Kletzien, 1991). Making the match is a crucial skill for teachers, for anyone who produces written material they desire to be read and understood by others. Even into the 21st century, new readability formulae have continued to be produced, reflecting the attractiveness of such an approach in matching texts to learners
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
