CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Problem

Nowadays English plays an important role in todays global era. The
importance of English cannot be denied since English is the most common
language spoken everywhere. There are four skills that need to be learnt in
learning English. They are listening, speaking, reading and writing. Those skills
are used to create a discourse in daily life. According to Concord (1973) in
Nunan (2005:17) as cited in Wahyuningsih and Aswandi (2012:1) the
relationship between those skills is very close in which the strength of each
skill influence each other1.
Reading is one of the skills in English that has to be mastered by the
students when they are learning English. Because of that, students have to learn
reading as well as the other skills if they want to master English. According to
Nunan (2003:68) as cited in Wahyuningsih and Aswandi (2012:2) reading is a
fluent process where in building the meaning, readers should combine information
from the text with their own background of knowledge. Dikutip dari hal brapa,
While, Alyousef (2005:144) states that Reading can be seen as an interactive
process between a reader and a text which lead to automaticity or (reading
fluency). It is assumed that reading is not a passive skill because it needs so
many times to practice and exercise. The improvement of the readers
comprehension is based on how they work on it. It means that if the reader read
more, they get better reading or comprehension2.
In teaching and learning process, teacher should considered the learning
materials which are used in the class. Textbook is one of the learning materials

1Wahyuningsih,

N., and Aswandi (2012) An Analysis Of Reading Materials In Textbook

English In Focus For Grade Vii Junior High School Published By Department Of National
Education, Journal Universitas Negri Surabaya, Vol 01, Thn 2012. Page 1
2Alyousef, Hesham Suleiman. 2005. Teaching Reading Comprehension to ESL/ EFL
Learners.The Reading Matrix, Vol. 5 No. 2; 144.

which are commonly used. It is kind of printed materials which have an important
part in teaching and learning process. Textbook is a main learning material which
is usually used by teacher and students. Textbook also has many advantages in
teaching and learning process. According to Tomlinson (1999:2) as cited in
Wahyuningsih and Aswandi (2012:2), the advantages of textbook are (1)
providing structure and a syllabus for a program; (2) helping standardized
instruction; (3) maintaining quality; (4) providing a variety of learning
resources; (5) being efficient; (6) providing effective language models and
input; (7) training teachers; and (8) being visually appealing3.
Reading serves a wide range of purposes in the lives of different categories
of people who are literate. In school, it is the basis for learning different subjects.
Whatever, the aspect of life one is considering, one discovers that the ability to
read efficiently enhances individual ability to function in an effective manner. A
reader does not approach text merely for the purpose of reading the language itself
but for a purpose other than reading the words on the page. Given the importance
of reading, one understands why many researchers consider as very unfortunate
the failure of developing countries to give reading its rightful place in schools
programs, unlike what obtains in many developed countries.
The object of this study was the English textbook for the eighth graders of
junior high school entitled Scaffolding English for Junior High School Students
for VIII Grade published by Pusat perbukuan departemen pendidikan nasional in
2008. The textbook written by Joko Priyana, Arnys R Irjayanti and Virga
Renitasari. There were two reasons of why the researcher wanted to analyze this
textbook. Firstly, the textbook was recommended by Department of National
Education and it was used in some public and private schools. Secondly, there
was no previous study that analyzed the aspect of readability of the book.
To make students able to achieve the English skill, they need some
English textbooks that have good quality. By learning those quality textbooks,
they are able to improve their English skill productivity. Dealing with the quality
3Wahyuningsih,

N., and Aswandi (2012) An Analysis Of Reading Materials In Textbook

English In Focus For Grade Vii Junior High School Published By Department Of National
Education, Journal Universitas Negri Surabaya, Vol 01, Thn 2012. Page 2

of a textbook, in 2008 Department of National Education publishes some BSE

(Buku Sekolah Elektronik) English textbooks. One of them is an English textbook
for eighth Graders of Junior High School entitled Scaffolding English for Junior
High School Students for VIII Grade which is not only used by public schools
but also private schools. However, the researcher think there is no guarantee that
textbook published by Department of National Education is meeting the
expectation of quality English textbook. Therefore, this study is intended to
describe whether the reading materials in Scaffolding English for Junior High
School Students for VIII Grade textbook published by Department of National
Education for eighth graders of junior high school meet the requirement of
readability suggested by Pusat Perbukuan, Ministry of National Education.

1.2 Problem Statement

Matching students reading level to appropriate reading material is a
difficult problem for many teachers. This is because the principle that students
read most successfully if the reading material they are given matches their reading
level is easy to accept but hard to use. The importance of reading materials,
especially prescribed textbooks in the school system need not to be
overemphasized. This is because textbooks are a vital instrument for teaching and
learning. Students ability to read effectively is related to a number of problems.
The first problem is English speaking. This is the main factor on the inability of
students to communicate their ideas effectively through Standard English among
themselves and between them and their teachers. Secondly in more specific terms,
understanding the written words presents a very serious problem to most students.
This is because students are deficient in reading skills. Through empirical
findings, it is discovered that the ability to understand a passage depends on its
readability. The easier the language used in writing a reading text, the better the
comprehension rate.
By learning those quality textbooks, they are able to improve their English
skill productivity. Dealing with the quality of a textbook, in 2008 Department of
National Education publishes some BSE (Buku Sekolah Elektronik) English

textbooks. One of them is an English textbook for eighth Graders of Junior High
School entitled Scaffolding English for Junior High School Students for VIII
Grade which is not only used by public schools but also private schools.
However, the researcher think there is no guarantee that textbook published by
Department of National Education is meeting the expectation of quality English
textbook.Therefore, the main problem of this study is investigating readability
level of the Scaffolding English for Junior High School Students for VIII
GradeTextbook. This will be achieved, using the Fry Readability Graph and
Cloze Procedure.

1.3 Research Question

In order to make the design for investigation more specific, the following
questions were formulated:
1. What is the readability level of the English textbook for eighth Graders of
Junior High School entitled Scaffolding English for Junior High School
Students for VIII Grade using the Flesch Readability Formula?
2. What is the level of students performance in reading Comprehension
using the Cloze Procedure?

1.4 Purpose of the Study

The specific purposes of this study are to;
1. Ascertain the readability level of the English textbook for eighth Graders
of Junior High School entitled Scaffolding English for Junior High
School Students for VIII Grade using the Flesch Readability Formula.
2. Determine the levels of students performance in Reading Comprehension,
using the Cloze Procedure

1.5 Significance of the Study

The researchers have mentioned the importance of matching reading
materials to the reading level of students. In the light of the above, this study is
significant in that teachers would be able to identify some of the strategies used in

teaching the English textbook for eighth Graders of Junior High School entitled
Scaffolding English for Junior High School Students for VIII Grade. It will also
enable teachers to have knowledge of reading interest and tastes of students.
Teachers would in addition, be able to determine the readability level of Junior
High School English Language Textbooks and identify the reading problems and
skills of their students.
The study will help supervisors of schools to sensitize the strategies used
by teachers in teaching reading to students. It will also help parents to have an
insight into their childrens reading habits and finally assist government in
assessing the type of English Language textbooks available before recommending
them for use, bearing in mind, the ability and interest of the target audience.

CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE RIVIEW

2.1

Textbook

2.1.1 Definition of Textbook

Ur (2006:183) as cited in al-sowat, (2012:340) said textbook is the
courses book which the teacher and, usually, each student has a copy, and
which is in principle to be followed systematically as the basis for a language
course.Textbook is a guide for a teacher, a memory aid for the pupils and a
permanent record or a measurement for what student has been learnt from the
book4.

2.1.2 The Important Role of Textbook

A textbook can be referred to as a published book specially designed to
help language learners to improve their linguistic and communicative abilities. In
addition to being a learning instrument, textbooks are also used as a supporting
teaching instrument. The students book usually comes with other materials such
as a workbook, a teachers book or even additional multimodal texts for reference
as a textbook package (Masuhara & Tomlinson 2008:17). They are designed to
give cohesion to the language teaching and learning process by providing
direction, 5 support and specific language-based activities aimed at offering
classroom practice for students and foster effective and quick learning of the
language (Mares, 2003:130).
The wide spread use of textbooks in different English language teaching
contexts requires little further explanation. It continues to play an essential role in
English language teaching classrooms all over the world. The importance of
textbooks in the English language teaching classroom is so extensive that it is
Al-sowat, H, (2012),An Evaluation of English Language Textbook "Say It In English" For
First Year Intermediate Grade in Saudi Arabia Journal of Studies in Curriculum and
Supervision, Vol. 3 - No. 2/ Rajab 1433 - May 2012 page 340
4

almost a universal element in English language teaching and it is crucial to any

English language teaching program. Research has suggested that it is extremely
common to see English language teaching professionals incorporating the use of
textbooks for daily teaching purposes and very few of them would not use
published English language teaching materials at some stage of their career
(Makundan and Kalajahi, 2013:39)5.
Even though the importance of use of textbooks in English language
teaching has been justified by many different researchers, opinions on whether
textbooks can actually help or hinder the teaching and learning process seem to
polarize. In view of this, I would like to provide also a literature review on both
pros and cons of using textbooks in teaching.

2.1.3 Advantages and Disadvantages of Use of Textbooks

First and foremost, textbooks provide a readily available source of English
language teaching materials for teachers to focus on doing the real work of
teaching, and not having their energy dispersed by preparation of teaching
materials. The way textbook chapters are designed and structured can provide a
blueprint of how lessons shall be conducted. Textbooks can also serve as a tool to
motivate and stimulate language learning. In a learning environment in which
learners are motivated and positive about their learning environment, the speed of
language acquisition can be greatly enhanced, making language learning more
effective (Tomlinson 2008:5 cited in Lawrence, 2011:6)6. Secondly, textbooks
can serve as a reference point for teachers managing their 6 teaching progress, and
also help to provide a focus for teaching. One of the major motivations in using
textbooks in the English language-teaching environment is that textbooks can
serve as a good monitor for measuring progress of teaching and learning.
Textbooks can have a similar function of a map, showing the teaching progress
5Makundan,

J., and Kalajahi, S. A. R., (2013) Evaluation of Malaysian English Language

Teaching Textbooks. International Journal of Education & Literacy Studies, Vol. 1 No. 1; July
2013. Page 38-46
6 Lawrence, W. P. W., (2011), Textbook Evaluation: A Framework For Evaluating The Fitness
Of The Hong Kong New Secondary School (Nss) Curriculum. Disertation Unversity of
Hongkong. Page 6.

and can provide for direction and ideas in how lessons can be delivered. They are
effective tools in terms of allowing for carefully planned and systematic
presentation of the syllabus of an English language teaching program and can
facilitate curriculum change. Thirdly, textbooks are particularly useful in
providing support and security for new inexperienced teachers or teachers, who
have relatively low confidence to deliver English language teaching lessons in a
communicative way. A good textbook can be an extremely valuable English
language teaching device, especially in situations where interesting and
motivating authentic materials are difficult to compile in an organized manner.
Students can also benefit from using textbooks in many different ways.
Similar to the case of teachers, textbooks can act as a reference point for their
learning process and keep track of their development. Students can use the
textbook as a tool for revision of previously taught items, and at the same time,
familiarize themselves with the new items that will be taught soon. Textbooks are
also one of the more economic and convenient forms of access to carefully
structure packaged learning materials. Textbooks provide additional benefits to
students, as they are an efficient collection of materials for self-accessed learning
and for knowledge consolidation. Textbooks can also potentially save learners
from teachers incompetency and deficiencies (Lawrence, 2011:7)7.
With the many advantages that textbooks may have as an essential tool for
English language teaching, a number of researchers have highlighted the
disadvantages regarding the use of textbooks. At one extreme, the wide use of
textbooks can be seen as an educational failure. Harwood (2005:154) as cited in
Lawrence (2011:8) attempted to neutralize the situation, based on his 7 review of
previous literature, by arguing that there are Strong and Weak versions of
anti-textbook attacks (Lawrence, 2011:8)8. Nonetheless, we shall explore the

Lawrence, W. P. W., (2011), Textbook Evaluation: A Framework For Evaluating The Fitness
Of The Hong Kong New Secondary School (Nss) Curriculum. Disertation Unversity of
Hongkong. Page 7.
8 Harwood, N., (2005), What Do We Want AEP Teaching Material Pro? Journal of English for
Academic Purpose Vol. 4 page 149-161
7

rationale behind the anti-textbook voices to better understand the potential

downside of using textbooks.
Textbooks can provide a basic framework on how a lesson can be
delivered. In reality, many teachers would, therefore, develop reliance on the
textbook and become uncreative in teaching and uncritical of content and values
portrayed by the textbook. Although textbooks can function as a framework for
the learning and teaching process for both students and teachers, no one textbook
can effectively address individual learning styles, differences of learners, and the
requirements of every classroom setting. At its worst, the teachers may become
totally reliant on the textbook, and not spend time preparing their lessons. This
would ultimately lead to an adverse situation which the teacher teaches the book
rather than teaching the language itself. Also, in English language teaching
contexts which constitute a strong exam-oriented culture, such as Hong Kong,
textbooks are often regarded as exam practice sessions rather not a facilitation tool
for successful language acquisition. Textbooks, in some situations, may affect
learner involvement in the language acquisition process. He suggested that prepackaged textbooks are inadequate to sufficiently cater for the complex dynamics
of the process of language acquisition. The structure of the textbook may inhibit
creativity and imagination during the learning and teaching process. Teachers may
even be led to believing that the activities and tasks of the textbooks are always
superior to their own ideas. Also, learners may dislike the topics covered by the
textbook and this may lead to association with boredom in English lessons. After
all, language learning should be interactive and shall not be limited to the
structure imposed by the textbook. No matter how pedagogically sound the
textbook is, learners will quickly lose interest if they find the materials dull and
not interesting. A big potential disadvantage of using textbooks is that only an 8
minority of textbook writers have actually applied language acquisition principles

when writing the materials. Many of them instead rely on their intuition as to what
they perceive is best for language learning (Lawrence, 2011:9)9.

2.1.4 The Need for Textbook Evaluation

The ever-increasing number of textbooks on the market makes formulating
the right choice in textbooks difficult. Textbook selection can have a massive
impact on the teaching and learning process as teachers would make references to
the textbooks or even design the entire EFL syllabus around it (Garinger, 2002
cited in Lawrence, 2011:9). In that sense, the quality of a textbook might be so
important that it can determine the success or failure of an English language
teaching course. However, textbooks are often purchased without careful
analyses. Frequently, a textbook selection is not based on its intrinsic pedagogical
value, but of the perceived prestige of the author and or the publisher, or skillful
marketing by the publishers. Preference is given to books printed in attractive
covers or that teachers would blindly use the best-selling textbooks which are
used in many other places (McGrath 2002 cited in Lawrence, 2011:9)10.
A number of studies have suggested that most current global, local English
language teaching textbooks are developed for commercial purposes but are not
based on principles of language acquisitions and development recommended by
scholars and educators (Tomlinson, 2003, 2008 & 2010). Financial success has
become the primary goal of textbook publishing. Textbooks, like any other book
that publishers print, are pieces of merchandise; the ultimate objective of their
production is for commercial success. Instead of contributing positively to
students development in the acquisition of the English language, many textbooks
are in fact leading to learners failure in acquiring the language and in the worst
case, contain serious 9 pedagogical flaws and practical shortcomings (Litz, 2005
in Lawrence, 2011:9-10).

Lawrence, W. P. W., (2011), Textbook Evaluation: A Framework For Evaluating The Fitness
Of The Hong Kong New Secondary School (Nss) Curriculum. Disertation Unversity of
Hongkong. Page 8.
9

The first cause of failure is that possibly motivated by the need of

commercial success, publishers would have to produce according to the public
demand. Textbook writing as a result is molded according to the liking of
teachers, parents and administrators with a heavy focus on teaching of linguistic
items instead of creating opportunities for students to acquire the language. Also,
teachers tend to choose textbooks that are designed to allow for minimal
preparation for their classes. The second cause of failure is that instead of
focusing on how learners could actually benefit from using the textbook, textbook
writers relied on their intuition and produce materials what they think would work
best for their intended users. They are biased towards perceived rather than actual
needs of learners. Though the textbook written by professional writers are usually
of good quality in terms of organization, packaging and design, they tend to be
lacking in qualities of being creative and imaginative (Tomlinson, 2008:7)11. Litz
(2005) as cited in Lawrence (2011:10) also suggested that some more recent
scholars in the area of English language teaching materials development
expressed concerns for the cultural content of textbooks that are inherently social
and culturally/ biased and help to perpetuate a form of gendered English.
In view of the above, it is therefore very important for us to conduct
English class textbook evaluation so as to ensure English language teaching
textbooks can effectively facilitate the attainment of our teaching objectives, and
at the same time, be economically viable to teachers and students. Wrong choice
of textbooks would be likely to negatively affect both teaching and learning.
Financial resources would also be wasted (Mukundan 2007:80 cited in Lawrence,
2011:10)12.

2.2

Readability

2.2.1 The Development of Readability Formulas in Short

Tomlinson, B. (Ed.) (2008). English Language Learning Materials: A Critical Review.

London: Continuum. Page 8.
12Mukundan, J. (2007). Evaluation of English Language Textbooks: Some Important Issues
for Consideration. Journal of NELTA, Vol 12 No1&2: page 80-84
11

The classic readability studies started as early as in the late 19th century
and the first formula to measure readability was published in 1923. Since then,
more than 200 different readability formulas and more than 1000 studies in the
field have been published. However, of these formulas, only 12, at the most, are
widely used. At the time of the first readability formula, readability studies were
generally focused onvocabulary aspects such as difficulty, diversity and range.
Starting in the late 1920s, focus shifted towards examinations of numerous
different aspects which were believed to be possible variables of text difficulty.
Over the years these variables have been reduced into semantic and syntactic
factors, leaving stylistic factors aside. Still today, the majority of the established
readability formulas test the comprehension of a text by using only a combination
of the two components syntactic and semantic difficulty; the former often
measured by average sentence length and the latter often measured by word length
(counting letters or syllables) or frequency of unfamiliar words. These variables
were already from the very beginning of readability suggested by Sherman to be
predicators of text difficulty. Out of numerous statistically measurable factors,
they are also the two that in studies have correlated the best with readers
understanding of texts (Gunning, 2003: 175). In the last decade focus within
school has been on leveling systems, which are based on more aspects of the text
than the language. However, readability formulas are still alive and offer a more
objective alternative as they can be calculated by computers (Langeborg,
2010:2)13.

2.2.2 Readability Formula

Many studies have shown the importance of matching students with
suitable texts at their individual levels to facilitate and enhance their learning and
even to motivate the students. Such a match is supposed to enable students
optimal learning gains. Appropriately challenging texts ease both understanding

13Langeborg,

L, (2010), Readability - an Analysis of English Textbooks for Swedish School

Years 7-9, Essay of English Linguitics, Akademin fr utbildning och ekonomi. Page 2

and learning. Burns (2006) accounts for three different levels for students
understanding of texts:
Table: 2.1: Readability Level
Level

Words recognized

Text comprehension

Independent level

96-100%

90-100%

Instructional level

90-95%

70-89%

Frustration level

0-89%

0-70%

(Burns, 2006:34 in Langeborg, 2010:3 )14

Students need material at both the independent and instructional levels to use in
different situations (Burns, 2006:34). Gunning (2003: 182) also believes that such
anindependent level is preferable to the frustration level. To use readability
formulas in order to match a text with its reader is also inalignment with
Vygotskys Zone of Proximal Development (DuBay, 2004: 54), especially if
students receive material slightly over their current level of development, which
is what experts in reading recommend for instructional reading. However, the
students motivation is imperative for understanding and can make a student
understand a text well above his normal capacity. This is why researcher stresses
that it is mainly materials that the students are required to read that need
matching. Such a matching has, since the beginning of readability studies, been
the main purpose of the field. Gunning (2003:175) points out that the matching
can be done in several different ways, but every method has its benefits and its
shortcomings ways. Studies have shown that readability formulas correlate well
with comprehension difficulty as measured by reading tests (DuBay, 2004:15).
There are no simple, convenient alternatives [to readability formulas] that would
assign more accurate levels. DuBay (2004:3) even asserts that they are the only

14Burns,

B. 2006. I Dont Have to Count Syllables on My Fingers Anymore: Easier Ways to

Find Readability and Level Books. Illinois Reading Council Journal 34 (1), page 34-40.

objective method for determining the difficulty of written texts (Langeborg,

2010:4)15.

The use of readability formulas is therefore the most common method

(Gunning, 2003:175). In fact, readability formulas are used by 89% of the
textbook publishers in the USA in order to estimate the reading grade level of
their texts. Such books are generallywritten at least on grade level (Gunning,
2003). That readability is important for written educational material is also
indicated by the results from a study by Klare in1973, which showed a correlation
between the Flesch Reading Ease scores of the material andthe probability of
students completing the course. Readability formulas are sometimes used when
writing texts, in order to adapt them to a broad reading audience (Fry, 2002;
Gunning, 2003). The importance of considering readability is evident in that
many best-selling adult novels are written at the eighth-grade level (Fry, 2002).
However, readability formulas do not consider all factors involved in the
production of readable writing. Therefore they are not recommended to use as
guidelines for writing, but more appropriate to use at the end of the writing
process (Hall, 2006:69).
The formulas are also used within other fields where reading
comprehension is essential. That there is such a need is suggested by indications
that American adults in general read at the 7th grade level. For instance
readability researchers have assisted in decreasing the readability of front-page
stories in newspapers. In addition, several states in the USA have laws that
control the language in important public documents to ensure comprehensibility
of vital written information (DuBay, 2006:55 in Langeborg, 2010)16.

2.2.3 Advantages and Limitation of Readability Formulas

The main strength of readability formulas is that they are relatively easy to
use; an applicability, which has increased with the development of, computerized
Langeborg, L, (2010), Readability - an Analysis of English Textbooks for Swedish School
Years 7-9, Essay of English Linguitics, Akademin fr utbildning och ekonomi. Page 2
16DuBay, W. E. (ed.). 2006. The Classic Readability Studies. Costa Mesa: Impact Information.
Page 55.
15

programs (Burns, 2006). Another strength is that the formulas are highly validated
through many studies. They are also objective (DuBay, 2004; Fry, 2002). Worth
noticing is however that different methods used by different computer programs
to count sentences, words, and syllables can also cause discrepancies even
though they use the same formula (Langeborg, 2010:5 )17.
Although the most common readability formulas correlate well with each
other, occasionally they disagree as much as three grade levels. This inconsistency
between formulas is partly explained by their different starting points. However,
even though formulas may not provide exact difficulty levels for individual texts,
they are better at indicating the progression of difficulty level between texts.
Therefore some researchers argue that readability formulas are precarious for
matching a specific text with any individual and that they should be used more
generally.
It is imperative to stress that readability formulas cannot measure all the
ingredients essential to comprehension. In order for them to do so they would be
too complicated and neither objective nor easy to use. Some critics, such as
Gilliland (1972:84 cited in Langeborg 2010:5), state that the accuracy of a
measure decreases with its ease of application. However, others claim that there is
scientific evidencethat the addition of attributes does not increase the reliability
of the formulas. Klare states that a formula with more than two variablesusually
increases effort more than predictiveness and that formulas with two variables
thereby are sufficient for rough screening. That readability formulas have
always been limited is a fact known to all readability researchers (Fry, 2002,).
Even Sherman, who is considered to have started the classic readability studies in
the late 19th century, stated that the readability of a text depends on the reader.
Readability formulas cannot, nor are they designed to, assign exact values
of comprehensibility; instead they offer numerical approximations of text
difficulty (DuBay, 2004:56). Therefore the formulas need to be used carefully and
also generally be complemented with other methods in the process of choosing
17Langeborg,

L, (2010), Readability - an Analysis of English Textbooks for Swedish School

Years 7-9, Essay of English Linguitics, Akademin fr utbildning och ekonomi. Page 5

appropriate texts (Gunning, 2003:182). The readability formulas also become

poorer predictors of difficulty at high grade levels (especially college) where
content weighs more heavily. Furthermore readability formulas imply that the
readers skill in dealing with increasingly difficult words rises in the same
proportion as his skill in dealing with increasingly difficult sentences , which
need not be the case.
It is also essential to point out that longer words do not necessarily equal
harder words (Gunning, 2003). Similarly, although there is in fact a correlation in
English between long sentences and complex sentences , a short sentence may be
more complex than a longer one and thereby harder to understand (Fry, 1988:8 in
Langeborg, 2010:7)18.

2.2.4 A Focus on Two Readability Formulas

Two common readability formulas are Flesch Reading Ease and FleschKincaid; both included in Microsoft Words Spelling & Grammar (Microsoft
Office Online, 2010).

2.2.4.1 Flesch Reading Ease

For his first formula from 1943 Rudolf Flesch used three variables
(Flesch, 2006: 99). In order to make the formula easier to apply, he modified it
and published his new, Reading Ease, formula in 1948 (republished as Flesch,
2006). According to that study, the new formula was only slightly less correlated
with the criterion used for both formulas, namely a 75% comprehension of the
McCall-Crabbs Standard test lessons in reading. In other words comprehension
was interpreted as getting 75% right on these tests on written texts. The formulas
were to match a students typical grade level with such a comprehension of texts
with given individual readability scores (Flesch, 2006: 100).19

18Langeborg,

L, (2010), Readability - an Analysis of English Textbooks for Swedish School

Years 7-9, Essay of English Linguitics, Akademin fr utbildning och ekonomi. Page 7
19Flesch, R. 2006. A New Readability Yardstick. In DuBay, W. E (ed.). The Classic Readability
Studies. Costa Mesa: Impact Information, page 99-112.

Fleschs new formula, the Reading Ease formula uses only two variables.
The first one, average sentence length in words, remains from the original formula
and had, according to earlier studies, been shown to measure sentence complexity
indirectly. In a similar way, other studies had shown that the second variable,
average wordlength in syllables, indirectly measures word complexity (Flesch,
2006). Flesch (2006) also concluded that this new second variable correlated well
(0.87) with the second variable used in his original formula (number of affixes)
and was easier to apply.
Eventually, the Flesch Reading Ease grew to be the most common
formula, at least for other than pure educational purposes. Studies have also
established it to be one of the most tested and reliable. However, one study
indicates that readability formulas which are based on syllable counts underrate
nonfiction texts and that this may depend on the particular terminology used
(Gunning, 2003:178). The Flesch Reading Ease has been shown to correlate very
well (0.98) with the Dale-Chall Readability Formula, which in turn has been
carefully validated and was the most common in schools for a long time. Fleschs
formula has also been validated against other formulas and against expert
judgment (with correlations of 0.61-0.84) (langborg, 2010:6-8).

2.2.4.2 Flesch-Kincaid Readability Formula

In 1976, the Flesch formula was once again revised; this time in order for
it to immediately generate a grade level. The study was ordered by the U.S. Navy
and did not include Flesch himself. The new formula is now called the FleschKincaid readability formula and is one of the Navy Readability Indexes. It is also
called the Flesch Grade-Scale formula and the Kincaid formula (DuBay,
2006:97). A study by Klare shows a high level of agreement between The Flesch
Reading Ease and the Flesch-Kincaid; they do not vary more than two grades and
usually agree within a grade. Flesch-Kincaid uses the same variables as the Flesch

Reading Ease but the relationship between them has been altered (Langeborg,
2010: 9-10)20.
Jasa pembuatan skripsi tesis dan disertasi serta olah data statistic dapat
mengunjungi blog berikut:
http://spss-data-analyst-experts.blogspot.com
http://thesis-data-analysis.blogspot.com/
http://pembuat-skripsi.blogspot.com/
http://thesis-dissertation-writer.blogspot.com/
http://proposal-tesis-disertasi.blogspot.com/
Jasa pembuatan proposal tesis ekonomi manajemen, pembangunan,
pendidikan, ilmu sosial, teknologi informasi, bahasa inggris dan lain-lain.
Jasa pembuatan proposal disertasi ekonomi manajemen, pembangunan,
pendidikan, ilmu sosial, teknologi informasi, bahasa inggris dan lain-lain
Jasa pembuatan proposal tesis ekonomi manajemen, pembangunan,
pendidikan, ilmu sosial, teknologi informasi, bahasa inggris dan lain-lain
Jasa pembuatan tesis s2 pendidikan, ilmu sosial, teknologi informasi, bahasa
inggris dan lain-lain
Jasa pembuatan proposal tesis ekonomi manajemen, pembangunan,
pendidikan, ilmu sosial, teknologi informasi, bahasa inggris dan lain-lain
Jasa pembuatan proposal disertasi ekonomi manajemen, pembangunan,
pendidikan, ilmu sosial, teknologi informasi, bahasa inggris dan lain-lain
Jasa Pembuatan Skripsi dan tesis
Jasa pembuatan skripsi tesis yang murah dan berkualitas
Jasa pengolahan data statistik SPSS and SEM
Jasa Pembuatan Disertasi ekonomi, pendidikan, teknologi informasi dan ilmu
sosial
Jasa pembuatan proposal tesis ekonomi manajemen, pembangunan,
pendidikan, ilmu sosial, teknologi informasi, bahasa inggris dan lain-lain
Spss data analyst expert
Low cost spss data analysis service for thesis and dissertation
Jasa Pembuatan instrument penelitian tesis dan disertasi
Jasa pengolahan data statistik SPSS and SEM

Langeborg, L, (2010), Readability - an Analysis of English Textbooks for Swedish School

Years 7-9, Essay of English Linguitics, Akademin fr utbildning och ekonomi. Page 9-10
20