Textbook publishers are under attack for producing books that are superficial in content and oversimplified or confusing in language. They respond that their products are the inevitable result of applying the many textbook selection formulas to book production. Efforts by educators to improve textbooks are currently being organized. (PGD)

Criticizes a study of the reliability and validity of curriculum-based reading inventories by L. S. Fuchs, D. Fuchs, and S. L. Deno and raises questions regarding the study's internal and external validity. (AEA)

Discusses appropriate reading material selection in light of content area reading instruction. Presents some ideas for determining the difficulty level of textbooks and other materials. Concludes that teaching reading in the content areas is one way to focus on the process of reading as an instrument to develop cognitive skills and thought…

Presents the Reading Estimate Program, which follows the same procedure as the Raygor Estimate for determining readability. (CRH)

Argues that health educators must learn to predict readability levels of textbooks to be sure that they are challenging and understandable to the student. Concludes that this can be accomplished through the use of readability formulas. (FL)

Discussion of the notion of readability focuses on predicting readability with computerized readability formulas. Semantic and syntactic factors are discussed, the development of readability formulas is described, and five commercially available computer readability formulas are reviewed, including the Readability Estimator, Readability Formulas,…

Noting that readability formulas are strictly text-based and therefore do not reflect the interactive nature of the reading process, this paper argues that many of the instructional material evaluations for which such formulas are used are inappropriate and offers more reader-based alternatives to the use of formulas. The first half of the paper…

Lists the dangers of readability formulas and concludes that while they may be a necessary evil, they should not be used as the underlying structure of a reading program. (FL)

Argues that, while computers make the computation of readability formulas easy, teachers should not forget the need to apply judgment and common sense to the results. Discusses RIXRATE, a computerized version of the Rix index and compares its performance to that of the Rauding Scale. (FL)

Discusses methods of textual documentation that can be used for software documentation. Highlights include measurement of text comprehensibility; methods for the measurement of documentation quality, including readability and the Cloze Procedure; tools for the measurement of text readability; and the development of the Reading Measurability…

Points out that readability indexes can serve a useful role in the teaching of writing when used as they were intended to be used. Focuses on Gunning's Fog Index. (EL)

Suggests that common sense be applied when calculating text readability using a microcomputer. (CRH)

Surveys recent trends in the area of clear writing. Discusses the problem of incomprehensible language in functional writing (forms and documents). Considers solutions, particularly those developed by the Document Design Center. (PD)

Discusses the importance of determining the reading difficulty of vocational materials. Explains how to determine the readability of materials, using the FORECAST Readability Formula, presenting guidelines on how to select sample passages, apply the Formula, and analyze the data. An example showing the Formula's use is provided. (LRA)

Argues that readability formulas accurately predict how easily a passage will be understood by considering sentence length and word difficulty. Claims that the misuse of readability formulas as writing guides is responsible for much of the criticism. Challenges the critics to come up with something better. (RS)