Readability of Individuals With Disabilities Education Act Part B Procedural Safeguards: An Update

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this study was to analyze the readability of Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Part B procedural safeguard documents, as distributed by each of the 50 U.S. states. Results were compared to the 5th- to 6th-grade readability guideline for documents recommended by experts in health literacy and health communication. Method A commercially available readability software, Readability Studio ( Oleander Software, 2009 ), was used to assess document readability. Text-based files of each IDEA Part B procedural safeguard document were analyzed using four readability formulas: Flesch-Kincaid ( Flesch, 1965 ), Gunning fog index ( Gunning, 1952 ), Flesch Reading Ease ( Flesch, 1948 ), and Simple Measure of Gobbledygook ( McLaughlin, 1969 ). Results No procedural safeguard document scored below an 11th-grade reading level. Seventy-four percent of these documents were found to be written at a graduate reading level—meaning these documents are written for a reader who is currently enrolled in a master's degree or higher education program. Conclusion In an effort to decrease barriers to parent participation in the Individualized Education Planning process, those who administer IDEA Part B procedural safeguards should be sensitive to the potential mismatch between the literacy skills of the parent/guardian and the literacy skills needed to comprehend these documents. Developers of IDEA Part B procedural safeguards should account for estimated literacy skills of the general public as ongoing revisions to these safeguards are made.

Cancer survivors treated with platinum-based chemotherapy affected by ototoxicity and the impact on quality of life: a narrative synthesis systematic review

“…Furthermore, the language used in the assessment tools can also lead to patients providing unreliable and confusing information, which does not always reflect their true experience. The readability of the questionnaires, therefore, is also an important confounding factor that should be considered when analysing this type of information Gray, Zraick, and Atcherson 2019;Douglas and Kelly-Campbell 2018). The term "ototoxicity" must be defined when publishing trials and research studies.…”

When Checking a Box is not Enough: The (Un)Readability of PREA Messaging

“…Hanish et al (2022) similarly note approximately 21% of U.S. adults read at, or below a 5 th -grade level, while an additional 30% read at a level between 6 th and 8 th grade. Readability, in the context of written materials, refers to the ease with which individuals can read and comprehend content (Gray et al, 2019). Predictors of readability encompass both the complexity of the document itself and the educational background of the reader.…”

Communication strategies for nursing research with older adults diagnosed with schizophrenia using life course theory

“…In forming simple meaningful phrases , words at recommended 6th to 8th grade reading levels facilitate OADWS’s understanding of both verbal and written communication (Foe & Larson, 2016; Gray et al, 2019). Older adults have reported that informed consent documents are too complicated to understand, so they may “pretend” to read the informed consent because they feel “ashamed” to ask for explanations (Bloswick & Skowron, 2019).…”