Blog Readability Test
Uh, I guess regular readers should be proud... but maybe I should make an effort to broaden my audience.
Level of education required to understand this blog: Genius
Find out what your blog's readability level is here.
I'd be interested in finding out what level of education readers have!
Hat tip: Larry and Bora
Posts
BS biology
ReplyDeleteMS Marine biology
The code generated looks like it has a link to a loan shark, but I guess that can be left out?
ReplyDeleteFord, yes, just delete the last line or so of the code to remove the link.
ReplyDeleteB.A. Philosophy.
ReplyDeleteLove your blog, don't understand a lot, but I have fun anyway.
I assume the algorithm used to "rate" your blog is based on things like word length, word "difficulty," sentence structure, paragraphing, etc. I doubt that content or ideas are involved. As an old hand working with these kinds of "parsing machines," I can also tell you that spelling errors and run-on sentences can increase your "geniosity." Not that I'm imputing those flaws to you, but you should be aware of the likely criteria. Anyway, don't rush out to buy yourself a genius hat just yet.
ReplyDeleteBy the way, nice blog. I'll be visiting regularly.
I'd also like to respond here -- because it's germane -- to something you wrote in a previous post. You asked: does science writing in the Economist need to be dumbed-down? I don't think the concepts should be dumbed-down. I also don't think simple words should be substituted for necessary scientific terms. But I do think that much science writing is bloated with obfuscatory verbiage aimed at making the writer's ideas sound more profound and arcane than they really are. So, the answer to your question is a qualified "no," with the proviso that the writer try to get across his or her ideas in a clear, concise way within the confines of the special lingo required. If you look at The New York Times Science pages, I think you'll see good examples of non-dumbed-down writing that's immediately understandable to the non-scientist. Another excellent example is The Selfish Gene (and almost all other science writing by Dawkins), which is extremely lucid despite its subject matter.
as far as I am aware "bloated with obfuscatory verbiage" isn't so much a problem in science as it is in other disciplines *Cough cough* humanities *cough*
ReplyDeletePlease cover your mouth when you cough. My humanities professor says you can spread germs if you don't.
ReplyDeleteB.Sc. (Hons) Palaeobiology & Evolution - 2004
ReplyDeleteCurrently in the "thesis induced insomnia" phase of my Ph.D. (otherwise known as "writing up").
BS in Molecular and Cellular Biology
ReplyDeleteCurrently a Research Tech. and deciding on which grad programs to apply to.
I have been a regular reader from the start, very good blog.
PhD Immunology 1979. Career in cytokines, now retired teaching part time at local community college. Having fun.
ReplyDeleteSG
B.A. Biology, 1965. Carry on!
ReplyDeleteBS Molecular, Cell, And Developmental Biology
ReplyDeleteMasters in Education
Keep up the good work.
Apparently you have to be a genius to understand mine as well and I talk utter rubbish !!!
ReplyDeleteI don't have impressive letters after my name, but I *do* enjoy reading blogs like this one because I figure I might educate myself further just by reading what's here and what others have said. (I have only a high school diploma to my credit) *looks embarrassed*
ReplyDelete