Abstract

This study, conducted as correlational research, aims to objectively examine the validity of cloze tests in Turkish, which are commonly used to assess reading comprehension levels, general language proficiency, and the readability of written materials, and to evaluate the procedures for using these tests to measure reading comprehension. The study investigates the consistency between multiple-choice reading comprehension tests, frequently used in national exams for their functionality and objectivity, and cloze tests designed and scored using various methods. During the study, a total of eight measurement tools were administered to a sample group of 90 seventh-grade students. These tools consisted of four multiple-choice reading comprehension tests based on four distinct texts and four cloze tests, each systematically deleting a word at a different position within the text. Two scoring methods were applied to the cloze tests, one considering only the exact words as correct and the other accepting alternative words that preserved the meaning of the sentence. Within this scope, approximately 23,000 test items were presented to the students in the study group, and around 43,000 evaluations were conducted on these items. Data collected during the 2023-2024 academic year were analyzed using Pearson correlation analysis, revealing a significant positive relationship between cloze tests and multiple-choice tests. Tests scored by considering only the exact words demonstrated greater consistency, while the correlation decreased when context-preserving alternatives were accepted as correct. The highest correlation occurred when every sixth word was systematically deleted. Based on the findings, it is recommended that in cloze tests, exact words should be accepted as correct instead of context-preserving words, every 6th word should be systematically deleted, and the tests should be systematically integrated into measurement and evaluation practices.

Keywords: Cloze test, Multiple-choice test, Reading comprehension, Correlation, Turkish

References

  1. Abanami, A. A. (1982). Readability analysis of the 11th and 12th grade earth science textbooks used in the public schools in Saudi Arabia (Doctoral dissertation). Houston University, Houston.
  2. Abraham, R. G., & Chapelle, C. A. (1992). The meaning of cloze test scores: An item difficulty perspective. Modern Language Journal, 76(4), 468-479.
  3. Akyol, H. (2020). Türkçe ilk okuma yazma öğretimi. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
  4. Alderson, J. C. (2000). Assessing reading. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  5. Arastaman, G., & Kısa, N. (2020). Geçerlik ve güvenirlik. In N. Cemaloğlu (Ed.), Bilimsel araştırma teknikleri ve etik (pp. 193-205). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
  6. Arıcı, A. F. (2018). Okuma eğitimi. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
  7. Aşılıoğlu, B. (1993). Ortaokullarda Türkçe öğretimi (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Ankara University, Ankara.
  8. Ateşman, E. (1997). Türkçede okunabilirliğin ölçülmesi. Dil Dergisi, 58, 71-74.
  9. Bachman, L. (1982). The trait structure of cloze test scores. TESOL Quarterly, 16(1), 61-70.
  10. Balcı, A. (2016). Okuma ve anlama eğitimi. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
  11. Başaran, M. (2013). Okuduğunu anlamanın ölçülmesinde paragraftan anlam kurmaya dayalı çoktan seçmeli sorular. Eğitim Bilimleri Araştırmaları Dergisi, 3(2), 107-121.
  12. Booth, D. (1998). Guiding the reading process. Portland Maine: Stenhouse Publishers.
  13. Bormuth, J. (1963). Cloze as a measure of readability. Proceedings of the International Reading Association, 1, 131-134.
  14. Bormuth, J. R. (1964). Mean word depth as a predictor of comprehension difficulty. California Journal of Educational Research, 15, 226-231.
  15. Bormuth, J. R. (1966). Readability: A new approach. Reading Research Quarterly, 1, 79-132.
  16. Bormuth, J. R. (1967). Cloze readability procedure. California: University of California.
  17. Brown, J. D. (1982). Testing EFL reading comprehension in engineering English (Doctoral dissertation). University of California, California.
  18. Brown, J., & Grüter, T. (2020). The same cloze for all occasions?: Using the Brown (1980) cloze test for measuring proficiency in SLA research. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 60, 1-26.
  19. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2006). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
  20. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F. (2023). Eğitimde bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
  21. Cain, K., & Oakhill, J. (2006). Assessment matters: Issues in the measurement of reading comprehension. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 697-708.
  22. Carlisle, J., & Rice, M. (2004). Assessment of reading comprehension. In A. Stone, E. Silliman, B. Ehren & K. Apel (Ed.), Handbook of language and literacy (pp. 521-555). New York, NY: Guilford.
  23. Carvalho, M., & Souza, A. (2023). Reading assessment in Brazil between the years 2014-2020: Instruments and skills. Educação e Pesquisa, 49, 1-19.
  24. Coleman, E. B. (1965). On understanding prose: Some determiners of its complexity. (NSF Final Report GB-2604). Washington D.C.: National Science Foundation.
  25. Craker, H. V. (1971). Clozentropy procedure as an instrument for measuring oral English competencies of first grade children (Doctoral dissertation). New Mexico University, New Mexico.
  26. Creswell, J. W. (2020). Eğitim araştırmaları (H. Ekşi, Ed. & Trans., 5nd ed.). İstanbul: EDAM. (Original work published 2012)
  27. Cutting, L. E., & Scarborough, H. S. (2006). Prediction of reading comprehension: Relative contribitons of word recognition, language proficiency, and other cognitive skills can depend on how comprehension is measured. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10(3), 277-299.
  28. Çelenk, S. (2006). Etkinlik temelli ilkokuma ve yazma öğretimi. İstanbul: Morpa Kültür Yayınları.
  29. Çepni, S., Gökdere, M., & Küçük, M. (2002). Adaption of the readability formulas into the Turkish science textbooks. Energy Education Science and Technology, 10(1), 49-58.
  30. Çetinkaya, G. (2010). Türkçe metinlerin okunabilirlik düzeylerinin tanımlanması ve sınıflandırılması (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Ankara University, Ankara.
  31. Dağ, N. (2010). Okuma güçlüğünün giderilmesinde 3P metodu ile boşluk tamamlama (cloze) tekniğinin kullanımı üzerine bir çalışma. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Özel Eğitim Dergisi, 11(1), 63-74.
  32. Darnell, D. K. (1970). Clozentropy: A procedure for testing English language proficiency of foreign students. Speech Monographs, 37, 36-46.
  33. Dubay, W. H. (2007). Smart language: Readers, readability, and the grading of text. Impact Information.
  34. Febriyanti, P. (2017). The correlation between reading comprehension and students’ ability in answering cloze test of the seventh grade students at SMPN I Kalipuro Banyuwangi in the 2014/2015 Academic Year. Language and Art Journal, 1(2), 36-47.
  35. Flesch, R. F. (1948). A new readability yardstick. Journal of Applied Psychology, 32(3), 221-233.
  36. Froese, V. (1971). Cloze readability versus the Dale-Chall formula. International Reading Association, 1, 19-23.
  37. George, D., & Mallery, M. (2010). SPSS for windows step by step: A simple guide and reference, 17.0 update. Boston: Pearson.
  38. Geske, A., & Ozola, A. (2008). Factors influencing reading literacy at the primary school level. Problem of Education in 21th Century, 6, 71-77.
  39. Güler, N. (2019). Eğitimde ölçme ve değerlendirme. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
  40. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2013). Multivariate data analysis. Harlow: Pearson.
  41. Harmer, J. (2002). The practice of English language teaching (3nd ed.). England: Longman.
  42. Hızarcı, S. H. (2009). İlköğretim 6. sınıf yeni sosyal bilgiler ders kitaplarının okunabilirlik düzeylerinin incelenmesi (Unpublished master’s thesis). Gazi University, Ankara.
  43. Hinofotis, F. B. (1980). Cloze as an alternative method of ESL placement and proficiency testing. In J. W. Oller Jr. & K. Perkins (Eds.), Research in language testing (pp. 121-128). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
  44. Huensch, A. (2013). The perception and production of palatal codas by Korean L2 learners of English (Doctoral dissertation). Illinois University, Illinois.
  45. Irvine, P., Atai P., & Oller J. W. (1974). Cloze, dictation, and the test of English as a foreign language. Language Learning, 24(2), 245-252.
  46. James, W. (2004). Special education and social development. New Delhi: Anmol Publications PVT. LTD.
  47. Kalyoncu, R., & Memiş, M. (2024). Türkçe için oluşturulmuş okunabilirlik formüllerinin karşılaştırılması ve tutarlılık sorgusu. Ana Dili Eğitimi Dergisi, 12(2), 417-436.
  48. Kaplan, K., & Çiftçi, M. (2021). Okuma seviyesinin belirlenmesinde ikame kelime uygulaması. Türk Dili Araştırmaları Yıllığı-BELLETEN, 72, 209-236.
  49. Karakaya, İ. (2014). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. In A. Tanrıöğen (Ed.), Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri (pp. 57-82). Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
  50. Karatay, H. (2018). Okuma eğitimi kuram ve uygulama. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
  51. Karatay, H., Bolat, K. K., & Güngör, H. (2013). Türkçe ders kitaplarındaki metinlerin okunabilirlik ve anlaşılabilirliği. The Journal Academic Social Science Studies, 6(6), 603-623.
  52. Katz, S., & Lautenschlager, G. J. (1994). Answering reading comprehension items without passages on the SAT-I, the ACT, and the GRE. Educational Assessment, 2(4), 295-308.
  53. Keenan, J. M., Betjemann, R. S., & Olson, R. K. (2008). Reading comprehension tests vary in the skills they assess: Differential dependence on decoding and oral comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 12(3), 281-300.
  54. Keskin, H. K., & Akıllı, M. (2013). Fen ve teknoloji ders kitaplarının okunabilirliğinin farklılaştırılmış boşluk doldurma testleri ile ölçülmesi. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 27, 47-66.
  55. Klare, G. R. (1974). Assessing readability. Reading Research Quarterly, 10, 62-102.
  56. Klare, G. R., Simaiko, H. W., & Stolurow, L. M. (1972). The cloze procedure: A convenient readability test for training materials and translations. International Review of Applied Psychology, 21(2), 77-106.
  57. Kleijn, S., Pander Maat, H., & Sanders, T. (2019). Cloze testing for comprehension assessment: The HyTeC-cloze. Language Testing, 36(4), 553-572.
  58. Koda, K. (2005). Insights into second language reading: A cross-linguistic approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  59. Köklü, N., Büyüköztürk, Ş., & Çokluk, Ö. (2007). Sosyal bilimler için istatistik. Ankara: Pegem Akademi
  60. Köse, E. Ö. (2009). Biyoloji 9 ders kitabında hücre ile ilgili metinlerin okunabilirlik düzeyleri. Journal of Arts and Sciences, 12, 141-150.
  61. Kurudayıoğlu, M., & Karadağ, Ö. (2005). Kelime hazinesi çalışmaları açısından kelime kavramı üzerine bir değerlendirme. Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 25(2), 293-307.
  62. Loewe, E. E. (1983). The effect of using cloze data for revising instructional materials (Doctoral dissertation). Florida University, Florida.
  63. Lu, G. (2006). Cloze test and reading strategies in English language teaching in China (Master’s thesis). Western Cape University, Cape Town.
  64. Manis, M., & Dawes R. M. (1961). Cloze scores as a function of attitude. Psychological Reports, 9, 79-84.
  65. Mariotti, A. S., & Homan, S. P. (2001). Linking reading assesment to ıntruction: An application worktext for elementary classroom teachers. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  66. Mariotti, A. S., & Homan, S. P. (2009). Linking reading assessment to instruction: An application worktext for elementary classroom teachers. New York: Routledge.
  67. Mertens, D. M. (2015). Research and evaluation in education and psychology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  68. Nation, I. S. P. (2009). Teaching ESL/EFL reading and writing. New York: Routledge.
  69. Oller, J. W. (2006). Close Tests of the second language proficiency and what they measure. Language Learning, 23(1), 105-118.
  70. Oller, J. W., Bowen, D. J., Dien, T. T., & Mason, V. W. (1972). Cloze tests in English, Thai, and Vietnamise: Native and non-native performance. Language Learning, 22(1), 1-13.
  71. Ömeroğlu, E. (2018). Açık uçlu sınavlarla çoktan seçmeli test sınavlarının karşılaştırılması test sınavlarının yazma becerisine etkisi. International Journal of Language Academy, 6(26), 548-570.
  72. Özbay, M. (1997). Test türü imtihanların Türkçe öğretimindeki yeri. Bilge, 11, 13-16.
  73. Özdemir, M., & Doğruöz, E. (2020). Bilimsel araştırma desenleri. In N. Cemaloğlu (Ed.), Bilimsel araştırma teknikleri ve etik (pp. 65-98). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
  74. Özyılmaz, G. (2010). İlköğretim 7. sınıf öğrencilerine okuduğunu anlama stratejilerinin öğretiminin okuduğunu anlama başarısı üzerine etkisi (Unpublished master’s thesis). Yıldız Teknik University, İstanbul.
  75. Potter, T. C. (1968). A taxonomy of cloze research, part I: Readability and reading comprehension (Report No. TR1). California: Southwest Regional Laboratory for Educational Research and Development.
  76. Retorta, M. S. (2001). Multiple-choice and cloze procedures in reading tests: What do they really measure?. ESPecialist, 22(2), 127-154.
  77. Ruddell, M. R. (2005). Teaching content reading and writing. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
  78. Shahnazari-Dorcheh, M., Roshan, S., & Hesabi, A. (2012). What is the optimum lenght of a cloze test?. International Journal of English Linguistics, 2(5), 142-153.
  79. Shiba, S. A. (1957). A study of the measurement of readability- application of the cloze procedure to the Japanese language. Japanese Journal of Psychology, 28, 67-73.
  80. Stubbs, J. B., & Tucker, G. R. (1974). The cloze test as a measure of ESL proficiency for Arab students. Modern Language Journal, 58(5), 239-241.
  81. Suehiro, A. C. B., & Santos, A. A. A. (2015). Reading comprehension and phonological awareness: Evidence of validity of their measures. Estudos de Psicologia, 32(2), 201-211.
  82. Sukarni, S. (2021). The use of cloze test to test reading comprehension of non-English department students. Jo-ELT (Journal of English Language Teaching) Fakultas Pendidikan Bahasa & Seni Prodi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris IKIP, 8(1), 74-82.
  83. Şahindokuyucu, A. (2006). A study of cloze and multiple-choice tests for measuring reading comprehension of preparatory students (Unpublished master’s thesis). Bolu Abant İzzet Baysal University, Bolu.
  84. Taşpınar, M. (2017). Sosyal bilimlerde SPSS uygulamalı nicel veri analizi. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
  85. Taylor, R. (1990). Interpretation of the correlation coefficient: A basic review. Journal of Diagnostic Medical Sonography, 6(1), 35-39.
  86. Taylor, W. L. (1953). Cloze procedure: A new tool for measuring readability. Journalism Quarterly, 30(1), 415-433.
  87. Taylor, W. L. (1956). Recent developments in the use of cloze procedure. Journalism Quarterly, 33(1), 42-48.
  88. Taylor, W. L., & Lee, K. W. (1954). KM readers lend hand to science: Cloze method works in written Korean and may serve as a tool for Korean language reform. Korean Messenger, 3, 4-5.
  89. Tekin, H. (1982). Eğitimde ölçme ve değerlendirme. Ankara: Daily News Ofset Tesisleri.
  90. Temizkan, M. (2007). İlköğretim ikinci kademe Türkçe derslerinde okuma stratejilerinin okuduğunu anlama üzerindeki etkisi (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Gazi University, Ankara.
  91. Temizkan, M., & Sallabaş, M. E. (2011). Okuduğunu anlama becerisinin değerlendirilmesinde çoktan seçmeli testlerle açık uçlu yazılı yoklamaların karşılaştırılması. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 30, 207-220.
  92. Tremblay, A., & Garrison, M. D. (2010). Cloze tests: A tool for proficiency assessment in research on L2 French. In M. T. Prior, Y. Watanabe, & S. K. Lee (Eds.), Selected proceedings of the second language resarch forum 2008 (pp. 73-88). MA: Cascadilla Press.
  93. Tuncer, M. (2020). Nicel araştırma desenleri. In B. Oral & A. Çoban (Eds.), Kuramdan uygulamaya eğitimde bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri (pp. 205-227). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
  94. Tunçer, B., & Erden, G. (2015). Boşluk doldurma testlerinin ilkokul 4. sınıf öğrencilerinin okuduğunu anlama düzeylerini belirlemede kullanılabilirliği [Special issue]. Bartın Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 318-324.
  95. Turgut, F., & Baykul, Y. (2019). Eğitimde ölçme ve değerlendirme. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
  96. Ulusoy, M. (2009). Boşluk tamamlama testinin okuma düzeyini ve okunabilirliği ölçmede kullanılması. Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 7(1), 105-126.
  97. Uyanık, G. (2011). İlköğretim 5. sınıf öğrencilerinin boşluk tamamlama tekniğiyle belirlenen okuma seviyeleri ile okuduğunu anlama düzeylerinin karşılaştırılması (Unpublished master’s thesis). Gazi University, Ankara.
  98. Uyanık, G. (2012). İlköğretim 5. sınıf öğrencilerinin okuma seviyelerinin farklı boşluk tamamlama testleri ile belirlenmesi. Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 32(3), 657-672.
  99. Üstüner, A., & Şengül, M. (2004). Çoktan seçmeli test tekniğinin Türkçe öğretimine olumsuz etkileri. Fırat Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 14(2), 197-208.
  100. Vacca, R. T., & Vacca, J. A. L. (2005). Content area reading: Literacy and learning across the curriculum. London: Pearson Education.
  101. Vari-Cartier, P. (1980). The readability and comprehensibility of Spanish prose as determined by the frase graph and the cloze procedure (Doctoral dissertation). Rutgers University, New Jersey.
  102. Wahdaniah, Marbun, R., & Husin, S. (2013). The use of cloze test in increasing the students’ reading comprehension. Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran Khatulistiwa, 2(1), 1-12.
  103. Williams, R. S., Ari, O., & Santamaria, C. N. (2011). Measuring college students’ reading comprehension ability using cloze tests. Journal of Research in Reading, 34(2), 215-231.
  104. Yılmaz, H. (1998). Eğitimde ölçme ve değerlendirme. Konya: Mikro Basım-Yayın-Dağıtım.

Copyright and license

Copyright © 2025 The Author(s). This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.

How to cite

Kalyoncu, M., & Memiş, M. (2025). Cloze Tests in Measuring Reading Comprehension Levels. Education and Science, 50, 69-92. https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2025.14079