Thank you to those of you who have responded or indicated an interest in doing so to the ltRRtl “quote” readability “unquote” survey posted yesterday. For those so inclined: Give me five minutes. Anonymity guaranteed. I’m interested in any and all comments.
Full disclosure: My pedagogical philosophy is anchored in “teach fishing, not fish.” Like Whitman the swimmer whose stroke exceeds mine as their teacher proves my own worth. Teaching in this space is fraught with risks and dilemmas. Texts vary in their level of challenge; teachers generally look for a sweet spot regarding challenge, and traditionally they assign or make available texts that fall in that spot. Depending on teacher judgment, the risks rest in underestimating the learner’s problem-solving competence. Much of my perspective is grounded in my early school experiences in a rural setting. I taught my teachers not to underestimate me despite coming from the other side of the ravine. This theme is core to the classroom teaching of Text Actors (cf: Cervetti and Pearson, 2023).
Principle #1: Developing readers need guided experience in assessing the level and types of challenges they face. Situating a reading task in a realistic context provides a learner with a degree of control. Foreknowledge of challenges evokes preparation and reflection.
*****
Three survey responses so far. Biggest takeaway—suspicion. I don’t know what you are asking me to do. Is this a test? Cool. Fun looking at texts and comparing. Reminds me of Rosenblatt.
Clarification: Passages as problems. Which problem is least challenging to solve? Next? Hardest? Rationale—what about reading the passages made one easier or harder to solve? Important pedagogical issue. That’s why I ask. Nothing really to do with Rosenblatt—yet. In the end, yes.
*****
Oscillations in sentence length ahead. 🚸
Most readability formulas assume that syntax as measured by average sentence length is a reliable predictor of readability. This assumption is undermined by linguistic research. By six years old most children can construct simple, compound, and sometimes complex sentences, using conjunctions to connect ideas. They grasp subject-verb relations, understand objects and complements, tense consistency, and the functions of pronouns. Applying appropriate syntax they can invert syntactic slots in English question formation and form negative sentences, a difficult nut to crack that continues to befuddle AI. They love to play with the music and magic of words, rhythm and rhyme, creating, expressing.
As a way of thinking about readability, a quick and dirty tool, I think about syntax and vocabulary, eyeballing it. From several years teaching remedial reading in a community college, I learned to match readers with materials, sometimes relying on the colors built into SRA Power Builders or RFU cards, sometimes talking with them about books they were reading in classes. Truth be told, SRA clinic kits weren’t constructed from readability formulas. Passages from Time magazine with good questions considering they were multiple choice were selected because they were well-written, informative, and rich in detail.
I’ve enjoyed playing around with readability formulas during acts of writing myself. There is a discipline involved that in some weird way reminds me of practicing guitar leads in the Phrygian mode, dark, primitive, edgy. Give yourself four words. Because the short sentence can punctuate a rolling rhythm, it can arrest the reader. Stay within 12-24 words. Readability activities actually worked pretty well as a classroom collaborative assignment in reading methods courses, a practical experience for elementary credential candidates who need the skill, an eye-opener for secondary folks who see through text to meaning. I’m planning to use the bot to help me sort out the similarities between Phrygian styles of music and Ionian styles of writing.
*****
Compare and contrast the following two sentences in terms of readability. By readability, I mean the text as a problem to solve. Which sentence is “easier” to grasp as an expression of mood, i.e., less of a problem. How does syntax contribute apart from word choice? In other words, is syntax a problem for cueing the mood?
I.
"Sunlight, piercing through the chaotic morning clouds—unexpected, laughter bubbles up, as if from nowhere, and the day, suddenly, isn't so daunting anymore."
II.
"In the hushed hallways of the once jubilant house, where memories, layered like dust on old photographs, hint at secrets too heavy for the heart to hold, shadows grow longer with each passing hour."
I have been called moody. the moody beauties. I dont think of mood in the traditional way, I think. I think of it as expression where feelies erupt with defiance or compliance, plus and plenty.