[Phys-L] Re: Fog Index

[Brian Whatcott <betwys1@SBCGLOBAL.NET>]

  At 09:59 PM 11/1/2005, Dick Hake, you wrote:

> [Brian W]
> This is an online calculator of the Gunning Fog Index
>   <http://library.loganutah.org:8080/bridgerland/TutorTips/fog>
>
> [Texas John Clement]
>
> "Ahhh, but what is the Gunning Fog Index for Dick Hake?

[Dick Hake]

> To find out, I entered the paragraph below ///
> into the online calculator of the  Gunning Fog Index:
>
> HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
> A survey of pre/post test data using the Halloun-Hestenes Mechanics
> Diagnostic test or more recent Force Concept Inventory is reported
> for 62 introductory physics courses enrolling a total number of
> students N = 6542. A consistent analysis over diverse student
> populations in high schools, colleges, and universities is obtained
> if a rough measure of the average effectiveness of a course in
> promoting conceptual understanding is taken to be the average
> normalized gain <g>. The latter is defined as the ratio of the actual
> average gain (%<post> - %<pre>) to the maximum possible average gain
> (100 - %<pre>). Fourteen "traditional" (T) courses (N = 2084) which
> made little or no use of interactive-engagement (IE) methods achieved
> an average gain <g>T-ave = 0.23 ± 0.04 (std dev).
////
> HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
>
> The online calculator determined that my Gunning Fog Index was 25.2.
////
> No wonder my stuff has had so little impact on American education!
>
> Richard Hake




There is a moral here, of some kind.
  More than one person has remarked on Dick's heavy email style.
But an index of 25?    Surely not!

I looked at the details on the URL mentioned above for
  Hake's extract.     The number of sentences had been
  mis-identified.  Why?

It turns out that Dick has the habit of ending a sentence with an
algebraic notation or some such.   I excised such false endings as
...students N=6542.    to     ...students.
...normalized gain <g>.     to     ...normalized gain.
...average gain(100 - %<pre>).    to       ...average gain.
......average gain <g>T-ave = 0.23 ± 0.04 (std
dev).      to     ....average gain.
......courses. . . .[see Bloom (1984)]. . .    to    ....courses.

With this modest change, he now makes a fog index of 17.

I venture to suggest respectfully, that  adding a little more focus
  on clear, simple, brief sentence structure would help achieve the
results he seeks and clearly deserves.

That's easy to say.  How can it be done?   Here is a sentence.

"The conceptual and problem-solving test
results strongly suggest that the classroom use of IE methods can
increase mechanics-course effectiveness well beyond that obtained in
traditional practice."     Fog Index is 15.3.

How about this change?
"Using the student dialog method in mechanics classes notably
improves results, according to the tests I use."   Fog Index is 11.8.

I used a similar proportion of complex words, but shorter sentences.
That is possibly a usable moral.


Brian Whatcott    Altus OK    Eureka!
_______________________________________________
Phys-L mailing list
Phys-L@electron.physics.buffalo.edu
https://www.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l