|  |
| |
| The The CopyWriters Connection Network is not currently active and cannot accept new posts | Simplify Proposals | Views: 435 | Feb 18, 2006 4:07 pm | | Simplify Proposals | # |  Steven Boaze | | Ever wonder what it means when you run a spelling and grammar check in Microsoft Word and you get the box of "Readability Statistics?" What's a good number and what's a bad one? What are they measuring, anyway?
Readability is based on lots of factors, some of them pretty subtle and very subjective. But the two most important factors are sentence length and word choice. Short sentences and simple words are easier to read than long sentences and big words.
So here's some insight into how you can measure the clarity of your writing. It explains what the measures in Microsoft Word mean, and shows you two ways you can do it yourself.
Measuring Clarity
When you use the Tools: Spelling and Grammar option in Microsoft Word, and you have selected "Show Readability Statistics" under Tools: Options: Spelling and Grammar, you will see a chart that tells you more than you ever wanted to know about your writing.
The chart or box is titled "Readability Statistics." It's divided into three parts: Counts, Averages, and Readability. The section on Counts tells you how many words, characters, paragraphs, and sentences your chunk of writing contains. The section on Averages tells you how many sentences you have per paragraph on average, how many words per sentence, and how many characters per word. The final section, on Readability, is probably the mystery. It tells you the percentage of passive sentences your writing contains, and then gives you the Flesch Reading Ease index and the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level index.
Which prompts the question: What is that all about?
Well, Rudolf Flesch is now a forgotten figure, but as an immigrant from Austria during the Depression, he mastered English and eventually received a Ph.D. from Columbia University in the subject. His dissertation was an analysis of the elements that contribute to clarity in English. What he found was that the greater the number of syllables per word, on average, and the greater the number of words per sentence, on average, the more difficult a piece of writing was to understand. (Flesch measured syllables, but Microsoft Word software counts letters, a rather crude substitution.)
So when you see the Flesch Reading Ease index, the software is applying his formula to your writing to tell you how clear it is. And what does the score mean? The higher the number, the clearer the writing. The index scores writing from 0 to 100. Zero means practically unreadable and 100 means extremely easy. According to Flesch, the minimum score for plain English is 60, or about 20 words per sentence and 1.5 syllables per word.
The grade level index is a measure of the approximate reading proficiency a person must have acquired to read the text comfortably. It's not a measure of the complexity or intellectual content of the writing, since this formula has no way of calculating content at all.
There are several other formulas that publishers and editors use to calculate readability. People who followed in Flesch's footsteps include Edward B. Fry, Irving E. Fang, and Wilson Taylor. One of the most popular formulas was developed by Robert Gunning, and it's simple enough that you can do the calculations in your head.
Gunning's Fog Index
Robert Gunning's Fog Index has nothing to do with the weather. Instead, it measures how "foggy"--or, in other words, how unreadable--a given piece of writing is. The formula computes the school-grade level at which the piece can be read comfortably.
To use the formula, follow these three steps:
1. Count the total number of words in a passage of about 100 words, stopping at the period closest to 100. Then count the number of sentences in the passage. Divide the total number of words in the passage by the number of sentences. This gives you the average sentence length. For example: 99 words / 3 sentences = 33 word Average Sentence Length
2. Going back over the same passage, count the number of words having more than two syllables. Do not include: a. words that are capitalized (proper nouns like Cincinnati) b. words that are combinations of short, easy words (compound c. words like bookkeeper and understand) verb forms that are made three syllables by the addition of -ed, or -es or -ing (like created, trespasses, traveling)
3. Add the numbers representing the average sentence length and the number of words having three syllables or more. Then, to determine the grade level value of the Fog Index, multiply this sum by .4. If you're mathematically inclined, you can see that this formula can be written:
.4 (ASL + Wpoly ) = Fog Index where,
ASL is the Average Sentence Length
Wpoly is the number of words with three or more syllables
The Smog Index
Another easy formula is the Smog Index. Like the Fog Index, the Smog Index measures the murkiness inherent in a piece of writing. I'm sorry to say I don't know who invented it, but its name derives from the fact that it was developed in California.
It uses a slightly different method to arrive at the final answer, which is again a school-grade level that indicates the relative difficulty or ease of reading the given passage.
To use the Smog Index, follow these four steps:
1. Count off thirty consecutive sentences in your text.
2. Count the number of words with three or more syllables in the thirty sentences. (Follow the same guidelines for finding words of three syllables that you followed with the Fog Index.)
3. Find the square root of the number of polysyllabic words.
4. Add three to that number. The result is the grade level of the selection.
For example: if you found 50 words of three or more syllables in the thirty sentences you checked, you would take the square root of 50, which is about 7, and add 3 to that number, giving you a Smog Index of 10.
This formula can be generalized as square root: (30/n sentences x Wpoly) + 3
Using the Readability Formulas
Readability--whatever else it may be--is a fairly complex phenomenon. These formulas can give you a rough numerical value which may or may not be an accurate indicator of a passage's actual clarity. It's possible that a passage might be full of noun clusters, faulty parallel structure, dangling modifiers, vague words, and so on, yet get a good readability score.
However, as a rough guideline, they can be useful, since they measure the two fundamental components of the reading process: syntactical difficulty and vocabulary familiarity.
When using the formulas, recognize that the right level depends on the kind of document, the delivery mode, even the part of the document. For example, e-mail in general should have a lower readability level than printed material. Why? Because for most people it's more difficult to read directly on the screen. They will understand better if you keep the text simple.
In a proposal, the executive summary should be kept to a grade level equivalent of 8 to 10. The body, however, can be written at a grade level of 10 to 12 without posing a problem. Why? Because the executive summary has to be accessible to all potential readers, and must be easy to skim. The body copy is more likely to be read by specialists and will be read more carefully.
Nothing in your proposals, sales letters, e-mails, Web sites, or other customer-oriented messages should be above a grade level equivalent of 12. If it is, you're asking the reader to do more work than they're willing to do and you may send the subliminal message that your ideas are difficult to understand.
The bottom line - simplify.
Steven BoazePrivate Reply to Steven Boaze | Feb 18, 2006 5:44 pm | | re: Simplify Proposals | # |  Onkar Singh Plaha | | Hi Steven,
A brilliant piece of information! Thanks a lot.
Onkar Singh Private Reply to Onkar Singh Plaha | Feb 20, 2006 5:41 am | | re: re: Simplify Proposals | # |  Sheetal Gandhi | | Hi,
Thanks for the brilliant information.
sheetal9Private Reply to Sheetal Gandhi | Feb 20, 2006 6:14 am | | re: re: re: Simplify Proposals | # |  Wot's... Uh The Deal (Vijai) | | Excellent Steven. It's like hitting upon an easter egg! Although, I would use this tool more as an indicator rather than an absolute and conclusive testing method (which I think you've already mentioned). But that is not to hide and admit the fact that this is one of those undocumented beauties.Private Reply to Wot's... Uh The Deal (Vijai) | Feb 20, 2006 1:43 pm | | re: re: Simplify Proposals | # |  Steven Boaze | | Thanks sheetal9, Onkar, and Vijai.
I truly appreciate your value, and kind thoughts.
StevenPrivate Reply to Steven Boaze | Feb 20, 2006 6:11 pm | | re: Simplify Proposals | # |  Cathy Qazalbash | | Wow Steve,
Thank you this is remarkable information. Simplicity is always my key but I did not know there was so much informmation on this.
Cathy Q http://advertise-your-business.comPrivate Reply to Cathy Qazalbash |  |
| |
| |