The paper describes how to use readability information as a basis for adapting materials. The rationale for making specific decisions is discussed. A practical outline of the process of adapting materials is offered.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AntonakR. J., & RobergeJ. J. (1978). Characteristics of conditional reasoning of educable retardates. American Educational Research Journal, 15, 519–528.
2.
CohenA., & KornfieldG. (1970). Oral vocabulary and beginning reading in disadvantaged black children. The Reading Teacher, 24, 33–38.
3.
ColemanL. J. (1977). An examination of seven techniques for evaluating the comprehensibility of instructional materials. Education and Training of the Mentally Retarded, 12, 339–344.
4.
Concept Inquiry: Educational Research Council Social Science Program. (1971). Ancient civilization and Greek and Roman civilization. New York: Allyn & Bacon.
5.
HarrisA. J., & SipayE. R. (1975). How to increase reading ability (6th ed.). New York: David McKay.
6.
OgdenC. K. (1970). The general basic English dictionary. London: Evans Brothers.
7.
RobertsonJ. E. (1968). Pupil understanding of connectives in reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 3, 387–417.
8.
SafierD. (1959). Notes on readability. Elementary School Journal, 59, 429–430.
9.
StoodtB. D. (1972). The relationship between understanding grammatical conjunctions and reading comprehension. Elementary English, 49, 502–504.
10.
TaylorW. L. (1953). Cloze procedure: A new tool for measuring readability. Journalism Quarterly, 30, 415–433.
11.
ThibodeauG. P. (1974). Manipulation of numerical presentation in verbal problems and its effect on verbal problem solving among EMH children. Education and Training of the Mentally Retarded, 9, 9–14.
12.
WilliamsR. (1972). A table for rapid determination of revised Dale-Chall readability scores. The Reading Teacher, 26, 158–165.
