Return-Path: <nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id f5H3kUf19921; Sat, 16 Jun 2001 23:46:30 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2001 23:46:30 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <000801c0f6e0$cac9bda0$ce2b1ad8@teleport.com> Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: "Dominique Brillanceau" <dombril@teleport.com> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-4EFF:1701] Re: [ Re: an observation re a recent posting X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; Status: O Content-Length: 1065 Lines: 40 In sixteen years of teaching ESL to adults, I have never heard of the Flesch Readibility scale. ( I wonder why....) The following link explains what it is, unless you already know. http://www.swt.edu/~df12/pr/tests.htm Dominique Brillanceau Portland CC, Oregon ----- Original Message ----- From: Tom Stuart <tstuart@wlsmail.org> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov> Sent: Friday, June 15, 2001 7:59 AM Subject: [NIFL-4EFF:1699] Re: an observation re a recent posting > I just ran a readability evaluation on the nuts and bolts > content of a recent post to NIFL-EFF. I don't believe > it much matters which post. I don't think the results > are that atypical for a substantial portion of the body of > contributions here. > > Results were: > > "Words per sentence 39.3 > Passive sentences 37% > Flesh Reading Ease 19.1" > > Oh, the State of Indiana legislates a minimum Flesch > Reading Ease Score of 40 for insurance policies. > > Somehow, this seems salient and a tad ironic to me. > > Tom Stuart < tstuart@wlsmail.org > > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Apr 09 2002 - 13:30:06 EDT