Statistical Readability Formula The Methods of Readability Measurement
a Choose three typical passages of 100 words each
form near the beginning, middle and end of the text.
b Count the number of sentences in each passage to
the nearest 0.1 of a sentence. Add the three totals and divide by 3. The answer is A, the average
number of sentences in 100 words.
c Count the number of syllables in each passage. Add
the three totals and divide by three. The answer is B, the average number of syllables in 100 words.
d Plot the answer, A and B.
55
Furher, DuBay also gives directions in applying this formula. They are:
a Select samples of 100 words.
b Find y vertical, the average number of sentences
per 100-word passage calculating o the nearest tenth.
c Find x horizontal, the average number of syllables
per 100-word sample. d
The zone where the two coordinates meet shows the grade store
56
4 The SMOG Index
This formula is developed by G. Harry McLaughlin in 1969. McLaughlin believes that word length and
sentence length should not be added, but be multiplied.
57
This formula is used by counting the number of words of more than two syllables polysyllable count in 30
sentences. The simple formula of this SMOG Index is:
SMOG Grading = 3 + square root of polysyllable count.
58
The procedure in applying this formula is as follows:
a Choose three passages of ten sentences each from
near the beginning, middle and end of the text.
55
Nuttal, op. cit., p. 27 – 28.
56
DuBay, op. cit., p. 45-46.
57
Ibid., p. 47.
58
Ibid.
b Count all words of three or more syllables in the 30
sentences. The total is DW = difficult words. c
Calculate the square root of DW. d
Add 3 to the square root: the total is the SMOG index.
59
D.
The English Curriculum for Senior High School
In curriculum 2013, English materials that are taught is emphasized in
language competence as the medium of communication. Students are also
made accustomed to reading and understanding texts, and to summarizing
and re-writing them using their own language. Furthermore, students are made accustomed to arranging text systematically, logically and
effectively through exercises of text arrangement. Then, students are given the knowledge of text structure to make them arrange the text correctly. In
addition, students are made accustomed to expressing themselves and their knowledge using trusted language spontaneously.
60
The statement above deals with English curriculum for senior high school. Because the writer is going to analyze the English textbook for the
eleventh grade of senior high school students, the writer will only explain English curriculum for the eleventh grade. The English curriculum for the
eleventh grade of senior high school is as follow:
Table 2.3 The English Curriculum for the Eleventh Grade of Senior
High School
61
Core Competence Basic Competence
1. Comprehending and applying
religious values. 2.
Comprehending and applying
59
Nuttal, op. cit., p. 27.
60
Kementrian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan, Kerangka Dasar dan Struktur Kurikulum 2013, Jakarta: KEMENDIKBUD, 2013, p. 39.
61
Th. M. Sudarwati and Eudia Grace, Pathway to English for Senior High School Grade XI, Jakarta: Penerbit Erlangga, 2014, p. ii
– iii.
the values of honesty, self- discipline, responsibility, care
mutual aid,
cooperation, tolerance,
peace, polite,
responsive and
proactive; demonstrating such attitudes
in solving various problems in interacting affectively with
the social
and natural
environment as well as in being a model in the global
society. 3.
Understanding, applying,
analyzing factual, conceptual and procedural knowledge
based on the interest in science,
technology, arts,
culture and humanities with humanistic, nationalistic and
civilized insights in relation to the causes of phenomena
and events;
applying procedural
knowledge in
desired specific field of studies in solving problems.
3.1. Analyzing the social functions, the structure and language
features of expressing and responding a suggestion and
offer, according to the contexts. 3.2. Analyzing the social functions,
the structure and language features of giving and asking for
opinions, according to the contexts.
3.3. Analyzing the social functions, the structure and language
features of expressing hopes, according to the contexts.
3.4. Analyzing the social functions, the structure and language
features of formal invitation letters,
according to
the contexts.
3.5. Analyzing the social functions, the structure and language
features of personal letters, according to the contexts.
3.6. Analyzing the social functions, the structure and language
features of procedural text in the forms of manual and tips,
according to the contexts. 3.7. Analyzing the social functions,
the structure and language features of stating and inquiring
actions activities events without
stating the
doer, according to the contexts.
3.8. Analyzing the social functions, the structure and language
features of
expressing conditional forms, according to
the contexts. 3.9. Analyzing the social functions,
the structure and language features
of simple
factual academic report about persons,
animals, natural and social phenomena, according to the
contexts. 3.10. Analyzing the social functions,
the structure and language features of analytical exposition
texts, according to the contexts.
4. Processing, analyzing and
presenting developments of the concrete and abstract
domains of
the learned
materials; being able to apply various methods according to
scientific principles. 3.11. Analyzing the social functions,
the structure and language features of simple biographies
of famous people, according to the contexts.
3.12. Analyzing the social functions, the structure and language
features of simple songs. 4.1. Constructing spoken and written
texts to express and respond to a suggestion and offer according
to its social functions, structure and language features.
4.2. Constructing spoken and written texts to express and asking for
opinions, according to its social functions,
structure and
language features. 4.3. Constructing spoken and written
texts to
express hopes,
according to its social functions, structure and language features.
4.4. Understanding the message in formal invitation letters.
4.5. Editing formal invitation letter according to its social functions,
structure and language features. 4.6. Writing formal invitations,
according to its social functions, structure and language features.
4.7. Understanding the message in a
personal letter. 4.8.
Writing personal
letters, according to its social functions,
structure and language features. 4.9. Understanding spoken and
written procedural texts, in the form of manual and tips.
4.10. Editing procedural texts, in the form of manual and tips,
according to its social functions, structure and language features.
4.11. Constructing spoken and written text of stating and
asking about actions activities events without stating the doer,
according to its social functions, structure and language features.
4.12. Constructing spoken and written text of conditional
expressions, according to its social functions, structure and
language features. 4.13. Understanding message in
spoken and written academic factual reports about persons,
animals, things, and natural and social phenomena, according to
its social functions, structure and language features.
4.14. Understanding message in analytical exposition texts.
4.15. Understanding message in short and simple biographies.
4.16. Understanding message in songs.
Based on the English curriculum above, there are 7 types of text that students need to learn. They are: formal invitation letters, personal letters,
procedural texts, factual academic reports, analytical exposition texts, biographies and songs. In learning those texts, students are asked to
analyze the te xts‟ social functions, structure, and language features
according to the contexts. Further, students are also asked to understand, construct, edit and finally write them.
In analyzing the readability level of the texts in Pathway to English, the writer is going to select some texts based on the requirement of English
curriculum as mentioned above. The detail explanation will be presented in chapter III.
E.
The Previous Study
The relevant previous studies that deal with the analysis on the readability level of reading texts on the English textbook was done by Yuli
Darmayanti, Nur Afni Meilia, and Bertola A. D. Perekeme and Catherine
Alex Abgor.
The first previous study is done by Yuli Darmayanti. It is Analyzing the Readability Level of Reading Texts on the English Textbook Entitled
‘Link to the World’. This book was used by students of grade X of MA Pembangunan UIN Syarif Hidayatullah. Yuli conducted the study based
on the problem that she found the teachers at MA Pembangunan found their students encounter the difficulties in understanding the reading texts
on the textbook they used. For that reason, Yuli intended to analyze the
readability level using the Flesch Reading Ease Formula and Cloze Test. From her study, she found that there are 5 of 6 reading texts which are
analyzed of the total 12 texts in the textbook, are readable for the students of grade X of MA Pembangunan UIN Syarif Hidayatullah after she
analyzed it by using Flesch Reading Ease Formula, but there is only one text that is appropriate for the students‟ level. In analyzing the texts using
Cloze Test, she found that there are 4 texts categorized as independent level and 2 texts as instructional level.
62
The second previous study was conducted by Nur Afni Meilia on Analyzing the Readability Level of the Reading Texts on the Textbook
‘English on Sky’ published by Airlangga at grade VIII of MTs. Soebono Mantofani. The writer conducted this study because she found from the
observation that the eighth grade students of MTs Soebono Mantofani had difficulty in understanding the reading texts written on the textbook.
Finally, this study was intended to see how the readability level of the reading texts on the textbook English on Sky is. In this study, the writer
used two methods. They are Flesch Reading Ease Formula and Cloze Test. As the result, she found that by using Flesch Reading Ease Formula, from
the total 14 texts that are analyzed, 6 texts are categorized in the Very Easy Level, 3 texts are in the Easy Level, 1 text is in the Fairly Easy Level, and
4texts are in the Standard Level. Furthermore, in analyzing texts using Cloze Test, she found that there are 9 texts in the Independent Level as the
scores are over 53; this means that the texts can easily be understood by students and can be learned independently by them, 5 texts are in the
Instructional Level as the scores are between 44-53; this means that the texts are suitable for the students, but still with the help of the teacher.
63
62
Yuli Darmayanti, “The Readability Level of the Reading Texts on Link to the World:
an English Textbook for Senior High School”, Skripsi of Undergraduate of State Islamic University Jakarta, Jakarta, 2010, unpublished.
63
Nur Afni Meilia, “An Analysis on the Readability Level of the Reading Texts on the
Textbook English on Sky Published By Airlangga”, Skripsi of Undergraduate of State Islamic
University Jakarta, Jakarta, 2010, unpublished.
Another previous study was done by Bertola A. D. Perekeme and Catherine Alex Abgor on Readability of Language Textbooks Prescribed
for Junior Secondary Schools and Students’ Performance in Reading Comprehension in Bayelsa State, Nigeria. This study is conducted to
investigate the readability level of English Language Textbook prescribed for Junior Secondary School for students‟ performance in reading
comprehension. Thus, this study is conducted based on the problem that students from primary school become poor readers when they come to
secondary level because the reading materials do not match the students‟ reading level. The methods used in this study are Fry Readability Graph
and Cloze Test. The result of this study shows that English Language Textbook that is prescribed for Junior Secondary School is Intensive
English for Junior Secondary Schools written by Oluikpe, B.O., Obah, T. Y., Otagburuagu, E. J. and Onuigbo S. M. The researchers found that the
readability level of prescribed textbook, after they analyzed using Fry Readability Formula, is on level 9. It means that the reading materials are
in frustrational level for the students. Furthermore, the result of Cloze Test shows that there are 120 students who read at independent level, 178
students at Instructional level and 322 read at frustrational level.
64
Those relevant previous studies show a strong relation to this study
because the variables are almost the same and the methods used are so.
64
Bertola A. D. Perekeme and Catherine Alex Abgor, Readability of Language Textbooks Prescribed for Junior Secondary Schools and Students‟ Performance in Reading
Comprehension in Bayelsa State, Nigeria, British Journal of Arts and Social Sciences, Vol. 9, No. 1, 2012, p. 89
– 95.
32