Intelligence Test
The web site theyworkforyou.com provides MPs - or more accurately their researchers - with hours of fun, as it logs the number of votes MPs attend, the number of times they speak and the number of questions they put down. Now my researcher has discovered they test the “readibility” of your speeches, using the Flesch-Kincaid Readability Test. According to this test, my speeches are suitable for 17-18 years and upwards. This is the same as Oliver Letwin (good), better than David Cameron, who manages 15-16 (the same as Dennis Skinner), but worse than Michael Gove, who gets up to 18-19. Annoyingly, the highest score my researcher has found is for Nick Clegg, who manages a staggering 19-20. But then he does speak four languages.
Antony said on October 19th, 2006 at 3:56 pm:
Intresting
Meriel said on October 19th, 2006 at 4:57 pm:
As far as I remember about writing for general consumption, you should aim for a reading age of 11-12 is you want to be understood! I think a rating of 19-20 would be appropriate for an audience with PhD level knowledge of the subject. You shouldn’t patronise the audience but if you make us work too hard our minds will start to wander to “what’s for tea?”!
steve said on October 20th, 2006 at 8:29 am:
ED
surely the lower the age score the better. The higher the age to understand just makes people switch off. The clue was in the fact that Clegg has a high score - dull as anything, too complicated etc.
no coincidence that DC and TB both have low scores - good charismatic speakers
NigelC said on October 20th, 2006 at 10:29 am:
Ed,
You do seem to have missed the point that lower scores are better if you want a mass audience. Obviously within the Westminister village different rules may apply.
Steve Borodin said on October 23rd, 2006 at 11:43 am:
The Flesch index is a good one but you realise that it has been subject to inflation over the period of this government. Two examples:
I recently sat in with a Masters course in a scientific discipline watching a frustrated lecturer trying to explain to two 23-year-olds that the figure 10 could be cancelled from the top and bottom of an arithmetical expression. Despite a “good first degree in a science subject” they had a sub-11+ grasp of arithmetic (I am 59) and thought this was trickery. I spoke to the lecturer afterwards and he said “it’s getting worse every year”.
I did a course with assorted social science masters and PhD students. They lacked rudimentary verbal reasoning skills. Any argument involving the logical combination of more than one fact made them confused, especially if it challenged preconcieved notions. They usually retired and accused one of being too “rationalistic”.
Thus, Flesch 18-19 now should be equivalent to pre-Blair approximately 11-12. Education, Education, Education!