Flesch–Kincaid readability test

[Kelise]

So Kate, Fodwocket and I have been going through this together - has anyone else seen the Readability Stats offered in word? It's usually part of statistics or under the preferences/options of Spellcheck - google your version of Word along with this, and it should tell you where it is in your version

Basically, it tells you what the reading age of your writing is. It tells you how 'easy' your writing is to read, and then the age comprehension level. It's really quite nifty. When I'm getting something ready to send off, I usually use this and wordcloud (a website that shows how many times you've used the same world, I use 'almost' a lot, apparently (also 'apparently') and with those... well, half your editing is done for you.

 

[Ravana]

I've been familiar with it for years–Nisus Writer generated it automatically whenever you ran a spellcheck, long before Word included it (in fact, until just now, I didn't know it had included it)–and always considered it a lot of fun. Especially whenever I decided to try to beat my old high score. Based on, and gives lots of stats about, such things as average word length (try getting that over four letters! at least in English; in German, getting it that low would be the trick), average sentence length, longest sentence, number of words not in its lexicon (which is a bit too easy to run up scores on when using fantasy names, or even large numbers of mundane proper names), and suchlike. Though the "reading level" returned may be a bit too optimistic these days, given what I'm used to seeing in college freshmen.…

 

[Derin]

Is this feature available in OpenOffice?

 

[Kelise]

Is this feature available in OpenOffice?

I googled it. It seems you have to install a extension - probably best to look on the OpenOffice website?

 

[Derin]

I googled it. It seems you have to install a extension - probably best to look on the OpenOffice website?

Thanks. (Damn downloads... this is my fault for having separate internet and writing computers...)

 

[Ophiucha]

What does it judge it off of, out of curiosity? Does it analyze each word on its merits, or merely its length? For instance, is apparently judged at the same level as ostentatious (which, depending on your accent, is four syllables as well as apparently) or psithurism? Or would a word like 'louche' (one syllable) be as many... 'points' or whatever... as psithurism in spite of being a shorter word, though just as obscure/difficult?

 

[balthore]

It is a great feature to let you gauge your writing. Then you can decide if you want it to be what is selling best now, or aim it at older/younger crowds.

Seems many of the best selling series (Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, Twilight) fall in the 5.5-7.0 range for grade level. Seems strange until you consider that most high school students average books about 6.6 range (on the places I found anyway). Even magazines designed for adults (Time, People, etc) only range into the 8.0 range occasionally.

Is that a sign of our comfort level for reading...or a sign we need to push ourselves more as readers and writers to increase these numbers?

 

[Derin]

Is that a sign of our comfort level for reading...or a sign we need to push ourselves more as readers and writers to increase these numbers?

Why would we need to push ourselves more? It probably represents the point where ease of storytelling turns into unneccessarily complicated wordspinning for no reason.

 

[Kate]

I only found about this yesterday. Apparently the formula was developed as part of the Plain English movement. As far as I know (and I admit I only did a quick bit of research here) it has more to to with syllables and sentence length than any actual quality of writing.
I really like sparse writing, but I don't necessarily think simple writing equals good writing, especially when we're talking creative writing. I recall reading too that the test was developed mainly for academic texts. So yeah, while the word thing is helpful in pointing out passive sentences (something a normal grammar check does anyway), and indicating a base level of general readability, that's not really a true level of quality. If only it were that easy!

 

[Kelise]

Patrick Rothfuss, a favourite author of many, tested in at: 87.9 ease of reading, 2.5 grade level and 1% passive sentences.

 

[Kate]

Just used the Wordcloud on the story I finished yesterday. Nifty! There are a few writing programs that offer a similar feature, but not so pretty.

My story, Cascade Street (one might call it horror, one might not) has 0 passive sentences, 85.3 Readability and 4.1 Grade level. I choose to believe that means someone will publish it.

 

[Kate]

I'm going to experiment here... I've another short story I'm about to start editing. Let's see how the numbers might change and infer what that might mean. Currently, 1% passive sentences; 85.4 Reading Ease, and 4.4 Grade Level. (fairly close to the polished story from yesterday).
On the Wordcloud, I use "like" a lot - I do tend to use too many similes.
Stay tuned....

 

[Fodwocket]

It's a really interesting idea. I do think (after some though and worry) that ease of reading is a good thing - because there is a difference between quality, thematic maturity and all those other things that can make a novel intelligent and/or great. If it's hard to read, it could well mean those things are also harder to convey effectively. Writing needs to flow and the reader shouldn't need to stop to reread sentences or have to slow down, so ease of reading seems like a really good thing (if indeed this is what it means). And that Patrick Rothfuss got a score similar to us makes me feel like it being a good thing could indeed be true.

Also I tested a few of my uni essays on complex physics and philosophy topics - they got a high difficulty of reading, which makes sense. I do well in the context of uni, but when converting the essays into something like an online article, I do tone it down to explain things more simply. And then they go back to getting a high easy reading score.

 

[Fnord]

Why would we need to push ourselves more? It probably represents the point where ease of storytelling turns into unneccessarily complicated wordspinning for no reason.

Yeah, I'm with you on this. I had to spend enough of my life reading stuff like ". . . we consider economies and diseconomies of scope for large U.S. banks by employing ordinary and hybrid translog cost functions. . . ." that I don't particularly want to revisit that kind of writing complexity in my pleasure reading. I think there is a great deal of talent in being able to spin wonderful tales without bogging it down with sesquipedalianism (hilarity intended!) for its own sake.

 

[Derin]

Yeah, I'm with you on this. I had to spend enough of my life reading stuff like ". . . we consider economies and diseconomies of scope for large U.S. banks by employing ordinary and hybrid translog cost functions. . . ." that I don't particularly want to revisit that kind of writing complexity in my pleasure reading. I think there is a great deal of talent in being able to spin wonderful tales without bogging it down with sesquipedalianism (hilarity intended!) for its own sake.

We should always make it as easy as possible for readers to read, because they're not obligated to and if it becomes more work than fun they will just put the book down. Things requiring more concentration to follow is an unavoidable consequence of a complex plot and good, vivid description, not something to strive for for its own sake. People who confuse storytelling with an excuse to show off their vocabulary to the detriment of the story frustrate me. If people can't appreciate a story, it's not because it's "too deep for them", or they "don't grasp our genius"; it means that we, as storytellers, failed.

 

[balthore]

Why would we need to push ourselves more? It probably represents the point where ease of storytelling turns into unneccessarily complicated wordspinning for no reason.

Very good point. I should be tired of trying to write "up" in level. Spent enough time doing scientific papers full of overlong words and scientific jibberish I should be happy to write something easier read and understood.

So I think I shall. *nod*

 

[Chilari]

Right. I have just done it for the only novel I ever completed and the results are in:

Flame Undying (completed 2009)
Person: 1st
Words: 78,814
Passive sentences: 3%
Reading Ease: 86.5
Grade level: 3.6

A scene I wrote recently for General's Secret (May 2011)
Person: 1st
Words: 3413
Passive sentences: 2%
Reading Ease: 88.2
Grade level: 3.2

The new version of General's Secret (May 2011)
Person: 3rd
Words: 1056
Passive sentences: 4%
Reading ease: 73.7
Grade level: 5.7

I wanted to compare a recent university assignment too, but it won't show the stats, as it claims that sections marked "do not check for grammar" were not checked and this somehow invalidates the stats or something. And that was after I removed all references, the bibliography, and the chapter titles. Grr. Oh well.

 

[Ophiucha]

I threw in my short story about the giant squid that attacked the Nautilus and got 67.3 readability and 8.3 grade level, which is about what I expected. I don't write with children or teenaged audiences in mind.

 

[Fnord]

Well, I went back and tested some of my academic papers against some of the fiction I have written. The papers seem to hover between the 11.5 and 12.0 grade level and the fiction around 9.5. Hrrrmmm, I assumed the fiction would be lower.

 

[Ravana]

I can't get Word to give me my results, for some reason… says a dialog box showing the stats should pop up, but it doesn't. Disappointing. May have to mess with it a bit and see what happens.

(I dread what a wordcloud might return. I already know some of my weaknesses. Though I may try it anyway.…)