Indicates that the Rix modification of the Lix Readability Formula is easy to calculate, correlates highly with other popular formulas, and is useful for materials for grades 3 through 12. (AEA)

Cites many cases where the necessary check on validity of instruments that measure attitude toward reading has been overlooked. (MKM)

Reviews the revised edition of the Test of Reading Comprehension (TORC). Finds the test to be an interesting and unique approach to the assessment of reading comprehension. Notes that the test is consistent with current philosophies related to the nature of reading comprehension. (RS)

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)

Concludes that inferential reading test questions are as likely to be passage dependent as factual test questions. (MKM)

Describes the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Tests and evaluates their suitability for testing reading, concluding that they appear to be carefully developed survey tests of general reading achievement. (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)

Reports an overall positive response to the tests reviewed, with caveats regarding test reliability and validity. (AEA)

Finds that many commercial reading comprehension test items are not passage dependent. (RB)

Finds the revised Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test an improvement over the original edition. (AEA)

Comments on the strengths and weaknesses of the reading portions of the California Achievement Tests. (JT)

Reviews the Test of Written Language--2 (TOWL--2). Finds the test's blending of contrived and spontaneous assessment of students' writing to be a plus. Discusses drawbacks of the test. (RS)

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

Reviews the Diagnostic Achievement Test for Adolescents (DATA), a test designed to be individually administered to estimate student achievement (for ages 12 to 18) in a variety of academic areas. Concludes that the test is well constructed and easy to use. (SKC)