Offers step-by-step instructions for rewriting reading material which is too difficult for secondary students who are reading at a second or third grade level. (JM)

Concludes that the readability levels of textbooks can be done rapidly and accurately by computer. (RB)

Attempts to determine whether the Raygor graph produces readability estimates compatible with estimates derived from the Fry graph, whether the Raygor graph is less time-consuming, and whether it lends itself to greater computational accuracy. (DD)

Compares the Fry, Dale-Chall, and SMOG readability formulas and cautions users about their limitations. (RB)

Discusses why proper nouns should be counted and how to count syllables and words, recent work on the validity of readability formulas, and the readability graph extrapolated to college level. (JM)

Provides a checklist that considers "learnability" factors as well as "understandability" factors to use as an alternative to readability formulas. (MKM)

Suggests caution in using readability formulas in determining how to use a textbook for instruction and suggests other factors to consider. (MKM)

Analyzes instructional materials according to five criteria: readability, concept load, background information, organization, and format and style. (MB)

Humorously describes the "dumbing down/smartening up" phenomenon which, on the one hand, attempts to convey complex ideas in simple language, but on the other hand may water down the material so much that readers will never have to tackle even a moderately challenging reading task on their own. (RS)

Raises doubts about the validity of readability formulas. (RB)

Assesses the qualities and drawbacks of high-interest easy reading books and lists the best of these books that are currently available. (SRT)

By understanding factors that can make reading difficult for students who are normally able readers, content teachers can facilitate comprehension in their classes. (AEA)

Reports on a study that examined differences in the comprehension scores achieved by seventh and eighth grade students on Form 1 and Form 3 of the Gates-MacGinitie, Level E. (HOD)

Argues that the Degrees of Reading Power test is not a valid tool for its main purpose, matching students to appropriate texts, because the test's units of text difficulty are not uniformly comparable to the test's units used to reflect a reader's ability. (HOD)

Explains significant but accounted for factors that affected the validity of the Degrees of Reading Power Test. (HOD)