Descriptor
| Higher Education | 3 |
| Readability Formulas | 3 |
| Comparative Analysis | 2 |
| Readability | 2 |
| Reading Research | 2 |
| Content Analysis | 1 |
| Economics | 1 |
| Economics Education | 1 |
| Educational Research | 1 |
| Test Reliability | 1 |
| Test Validity | 1 |
| More ▼ | |
Publication Type
| Journal Articles | 2 |
| Reports - Research | 2 |
Education Level
Audience
Location
Laws, Policies, & Programs
Assessments and Surveys
| Dale Chall Readability Formula | 3 |
| Flesch Reading Ease Formula | 1 |
| Fry Readability Formula | 1 |
What Works Clearinghouse Rating
Peer reviewedBurkhead, Marie; Ulferts, Greg – Journal of Reading Behavior, 1977
Using 48 college texts, comparisons were made of Dale-Chall Readability Formula results based on samples taken from various page intervals. (HOD)
Descriptors: Comparative Analysis, Higher Education, Readability, Readability Formulas
Peer reviewedMcConnell, Campbell R. – Journal of Reading, 1982
Determines from empirical information on the application of four readability formulas to a group of widely used college economics textbooks that there is no consistency in the absolute reading levels or the rank orderings of these books. (AEA)
Descriptors: Content Analysis, Economics, Higher Education, Readability
Peer reviewedMcConnell, Campbell – Journal of Economic Education, 1983
The Flesch reading formula is questioned as being appropriate for evaluating college economics textbooks. The Dale-Chall, Modified Dale-Chall, Fry, and Flesch formulas were used to evaluate nine introductory textbooks. There was little or no consistency in either the absolute reading levels or the rank orderings. (Author/AM)
Descriptors: Comparative Analysis, Economics Education, Educational Research, Higher Education
