Rating Readability

I use the Fry readability formula - it is very accurate from 2nd to 8th grade. I compare it to the computerized readability I get from Word. I then make decisions based on the language - Florida and America count as one syllable words in my determinations - Hope this helps, Ken Campbell

A long time ago I had a word processing program (it was on the *Amiga*!!) that had a readability formula build in. I could use something like. I don’t usually need it but it would be nice.

—des

Des,
Ken mentioned it and there are computerized readability statistics built into Microsoft Word.
I have found using these statistics motivating for some of my students when they check their written work. Sometimes there is a big discrepancy between their age and the readability level that the computer reports. They don’t like that difference and will try to increase the level to their grade level by improving their written work.

Another poster on this page led me to this resource: there is a site called Renaissance Learning that sells quizzes to go with a large number of books taught in schools. If you check on Buy Quizzes, there is a grade level readability rating, ready calculated, for each book.

Please take *all* such ratings with a large grain of salt. For example, on the Renaissance Learning site, they list the British and American versions of Harry Potter I — which differ *only* in the title — as 7.0 and 6.7, a difference of three months apparently just from rating two different pages of the identical book. Readability ratings are simply not as accurate as they appear to be.

PS — Ken C — I don’t have a resource with the Fry formula handy — can you post the rules here?

>Des,
Ken mentioned it and there are computerized readability statistics built into Microsoft Word.

Well I am happier keeping M$ programs off my Mac! :-)
But thanks.

—des

>Please take *all* such ratings with a large grain of salt. For example, on the Renaissance Learning site, they list the British and American versions of Harry Potter I — which differ *only* in the title — as 7.0 and 6.7, a difference of three months apparently just from rating two different pages of the identical book. Readability ratings are simply not as accurate as they appear to be.

I would guess that any readability formula is merely an approximation. I think they are (mostly) measures which deal with length of word, length of sentence, etc. I don’t think they really even deal with complexity of sentence. And two words that might be two syllable, well one might be easy and another more complex.

I think the British and American versions of HP will have different page nos., so page 260 might actually be page 270 on the American version. They aren’t exactly identical either. However, most of the non-identicalness accounts for things that wouldn’t be understandable to Americans like “jumpers” for “sweaters”, I doubt they’d be too diff. in the readability formulas mostly, but they really might account for little differences of something like 1-3 months.

—des

To get a copy of the Fry Readability - it’s in Mercer and Mercer’s Teaching Children with Learning Problems, all editions. I haven’t Googled it, but that may work.

Readability isn’t exact, nor could it be - you get a ballpark figure - as a strong “I” on the Myers-Briggs - I don’t think there is any difference between a 6.7 and a 7.0 and there’s scant difference between a 6.7 and an 8.

When it comes down to exacting the readabilty of a text for instance, it takes a lot of experence with the age group of the children involved and their language use patterns to fine tune things. That doesn’t come easily nor does it come with any computerized programs I’ve seen. Since computers do such a great job of number crunching, perhaps one day we’ll get better at it.

Ken

http://www.timetabler.com/

for Fry readability information

Many, many schools are now using the Lexile Framework. You can enter titles or get graded lists here:

http://www.lexile.com/DesktopDefault.aspx?view=fa&tabindex=3&tabid=68

Janis

It’s no guess ***ALL*** of these measures are approximations.

“Readability” is a highly variable entity, with all kinds of confounding factors, including what the individual reader brings to the page.

My struggles-at-third-grade level reader can read at a ninth or tenth grade level — *if* the subject is football. “Touchdown” and “interception” are no problem in that context.

Fry uses syllables and sentence length to make its stab — so “important” is three times as hard as “chasm” to the formula — but hardly, for the actual reader.

Some of the newer computerized levelers are a bit more sophisticated — but kindly remember that what is “third grade” vocabulary in one place may just happen to be switched with a word on the fifth grade list down the road. Schools have different curricula.

The “five finger test” is a lot more individual and reliable, in my opinion — though it, too, is hardly hard and fast. (If you think “oh, this shouldn’t mean a book is too hard” then please think again, and consider why in the world some arbitrary number on the book would be more valid :)) http://www.kyvl.org/html/kids/p4_use/FiveFingerTest.html