Return-Path: <nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id i2NJfGI07672; Tue, 23 Mar 2004 14:41:16 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 14:41:16 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <5A2E19FB.4B9A6F00.0AB94E44@aol.com> Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: AndresMuro@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-AALPD:1191] Re: Readability Formulas X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Mailer: Atlas Mailer 2.0 Status: O Content-Length: 3266 Lines: 55 The message below clearly demonstrates that literacy is not a neutral technology transferred from context to context and measurable with a standardized test. It depends on use, context, and situation. I often use the following hypothetical example to illustrate this: Imagine a housewife with a 4th grade education who came from another country, who does not speak English well. She goes to the grocery store, picks all the ingredients necessary to prepare a several course healthy meal for her family. She goes home, and cooks it in a short period of time. She knows which cans, fresh fruits and vegetables, meats and spices to pick. She can pay. She can get home and knows the amounts that she needs to mix up the ingredients and have everything ready for her family. Is she literate? She is clearly identifying the products that she needs in the correct sections, she is paying for them and she is mixing the right amounts. She must be reading something in the environment that allows her to do this. Imagine that she is married to a nuclear physisist, molecular biologist, chemist, who teaches at the university, but has never been to the grocery store or cooked a meal. Now, imagine that his wife says: "darling, I have to go to my country to visit my family for a week, so, during the week, you'll be responsible for preparing meals for the children". So, she writes directions for him to go to the grocery store, select ingredients, and cook for himself and the kids. Can he do it? Is he literate? Obviously, this example shows two types of literacies, that are not transferable. The wife, will not automatically become a nuclear physisist. the husband, will not automatically become a home caretaker. these two literacies are different and need to be acquired in context and with practice. Now, which do we value more? and why? Can you all imagine a family without nuclear phyisists? How about a society w/o them? Can you imagine a family or a society without people that can prepare healthy home cooked meals? Andres In a message dated 3/22/2004 10:27:04 PM Eastern Standard Time, djrosen@comcast.net writes: > > Please note: this message is posted for Sarah Beaman-Jones whose email > was not cooperative today. > > Colleagues, > > Readability formulas work only to give you an indication of how easily > something can be read. For example, the word “run” has many different > meanings. To a toddler, it means moving fast; to a second grader it > could > mean going from base to base in a game; to a fifth grader it could mean > seeking political office; then there is a run of luck, a run of > business, > etc. Formulas do not account for that. Further, there is the graphic > element; the denseness of text compared to the amount of white space. > The > use of fonts: serif vs. san serif; capitalization and organization. As > the > late Jane Root use to explain, focus groups are really the only way to > be > sure you are communicating effectively. This is a > complicated subject. > Do > not rely solely on readability formulas. > > Sarah Beaman-Jones, MAT > Literacy Program Developer > LIFT-Missouri > 500 Northwest Plaza, suite 601 > St. Ann, MO 63074 > > > > go here: www.geocities.com/andresmuro/art.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Dec 23 2004 - 09:45:43 EST