Another caution:  reading theory/research suggests that readers' background knowledge, reading strategies, and conceptions of reading shape comprehension.  What this means is that whether or not a text is 'readable' for a given reader depends on the relationship between the text and the reader: how much prior knowledge does the reader have of the subject matter? interest? knowledge of the genre? related cultural knowledge? etc. etc.  So any given reader may be able to read texts of widely different 'readability' levels depending on a range of factors.  It is a huge mistake to think that readability is inherent in a text rather than a product of the interaction between the reader and the text.  The same person can read something with a 'high' readibility level if he/she is interested in the text, engaged with the subject matter, etc. and read another text with a 'low' level that she/he has no interest in/background for, etc. 

Elsa Auerbach

> ----------

> From: 	povertyracewomen-bounces at nifl.gov on behalf of Andrew Pleasant

> Reply To: 	The Poverty, Race,Women and Literacy Discussion List

> Sent: 	Friday, January 12, 2007 8:40 AM

> To: 	The Poverty, Race,Women and Literacy Discussion List

> Subject: 	[PovertyRaceWomen 278] Re: GED programswithapopulareducationapproach

> 

> <<File: ATT467518.txt>>

> Hi,

> 

> A caution that should be followed about all these readability formulas (and there are many), along with not labeling by grade or age levels as much as possible, is that these tools give insights but not complete solutions. An inappropriate use of these, in my opinion, is to produce or revise materials by solely relying following these algorithms as a guide to plain language. We can produce sentences and documents that 'test out' as easy to read but are actually quite confusing. A classic example - flying planes can be dangerous - is quantitatively judged by these tools as easy to read, but qualitatively (which the automated tools cannot assess) just what is dangerous - flying a plane or a plane that is flying? 

> 

> Andrew

> 

> 

> 

> On 1/11/07, Ujwala Samant <lalumineuse at yahoo.com> wrote:

> 

> 	Hi Susan,

> 

> 	I think it would be a very useful tool for people who

> 	write manuals, textbooks etc.

> 	Thanks

> 	Ujwala

> 

> 

> 

> 	____________________________________________________________________________________ 

> 	Need a quick answer? Get one in minutes from people who know.

> 	Ask your question on www.Answers.yahoo.com

> 	----------------------------------------------------

> 	National Institute for Literacy 

> 	Poverty, Race, Women and Literacy mailing list

> 	PovertyRaceWomen at nifl.gov

> 	To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/povertyracewomen

> 

> 

> 

>