Question

formula of alternative method ​

Answer 1

Your question is not clear .....

Answer 2

Answer:

Alternatives to readability formulas fit into two categories—text-based(like the formulas) and reader/text-based. Both alternatives allow the user to focus attention on factors involved in comprehension. 

Text-Based Alternative 

A newer text-based method of analysis has the advantage of involving meaning in the estimation of readability. Phrase analysis (PHAN) described by Clark (1980) is a straightforward method which employs the linguist's tool of suggestive analysis to determine the coherence of text passages. The system enables the user to examine the clarity of relationships between ideas within the text. The present writer's experience using PHAN in college classrooms indicates that teachers become efficient in the use of Clark's system after one or two trial applications. 

Reader/Text-Based Alternatives 

The least complex and most specific method to find if a text is appropriate for a reader or group of readers, involves trial reading. Select the book for a reader and ask him to read aloud the text. If a group of readers will be using the book, then ask several average readers to read samples of the text. You can evaluate the appropriateness of the text according to the following criteria:

Independent level — 99% word accuracy (90% comprehension)

Instructional level — 95% word accuracy (75% comprehension)

Frustration level — 90% word accuracy (50% comprehension)

Some experts disagree about the exact limits of these levels. Harris and Sipay (1981), for example, allow two or three unknown words at the independent level. Generally, however, the above levels are acceptable. 

A second reader/text basedalternative to use readability formulas is teacher judgment. This approach is direct and highly reliable; Dale and Chall (1948) and others (Klare, 1963) have reported that the judgments of panels of teachers correlated on the order of .90 with formula scores. This method is probably best for experienced teachers who are familiar with reading materials at several grade levels. Judge the difficulty of text as follows:

Does the text include difficult vocabulary?

Are difficult ideas or concepts included?

Are sentences unusually complex or simple?

Are relationships between concepts or events clearly stated? (A weakness of passages written in short sentences is that such passages frequently omit key relationship words i.e., because, thus, therefore.)

Does the text require the reader to interpret graphics, such as pictures, charts, tables, and diagrams?

These factors should help maintain high reliability in teacher estimates of readability.