To ask what you think your reading level might be?

[2023a]

I think lots of us have had the odd frustrating conversation on here, where the other person just hasn’t seemed to be able to grasp what we’re saying. Apparently, it’s very possible that the posters in question genuinely don’t understand.

A 2011 government survey of adult literacy skills found that 14.9% (or 1 in 7) of adults in England have literacy levels at or below Entry Level 3, which is equivalent to the literacy skills expected of a nine to 11-year-old.

More recently, in 2015, the OECD conducted its Survey of Adult Skills, known as PIAAC (Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies). This survey found that 16.4% (or 1 in 6) of adults in England, and 17.4% (or 1 in 5) adults in Northern Ireland, have literacy levels at or below Level 1, which is considered to be 'very poor literacy skills'.

More info here, if you’re interested: literacytrust.org.uk/parents-and-families/adult-literacy/what-do-adult-literacy-levels-mean/

I never read a book until I was an adult. I was called lazy, stupid and many more names by teachers and parents. I learnt some basics from a very good teacher at high school, she was amazing and really cared but was very limited in what she could do as no one cared about kids with learning difficulties back in the 80s, I only had her until third year (year 9) but I still go through her little sayings and think about what she would say to me every time I struggle. I was in a “special” class with about 4 other kids who couldn’t read or write. I was predicted to fail all GCSEs and I didn’t disappoint. My parents didn’t care, it was all about me earning and contributing to the house. Thankfully I was very lucky and had some amazing mentors throughout my career and although my literacy levels aren’t amazing I can say I’m in a far better position I could have been.

As a side note one side of my family are very intelligent, avid readers, love crosswords but would never ever talk themselves up, all my parents generation left school as children to work, many of my cousins were the same with most not doing o levels or GCSEs yet some of them are far more intelligent than people I know with multiple higher education qualifications. The other side of my family 99% illiterate, those who can do basic reading and writing taught themselves as adults. All were forced to leave school to work. I certainly wouldn’t call them the most intelligent people I know but if you ever know how to wrangle a benefit or payout from a government department they are your go to people.

Absolutely agree balance is key -I was using an exaggeration to balance the poster who seemed to need to understand nuclear power trumped the need to express via the arts.

Personally I’d like an education based on balancing all these areas for me, there’s too much concentration on STEM to the cost of other very important areas

I enjoyed doing that test, thank you for posting the link.

Perhaps your work colleagues and friends are not representative of the population as a whole.

More useful for whom and for what though? Yes sometimes all those things are useful, but they also have their downsides, “getting to the point” often doesn’t reflect a thought process, it limits the opportunity to critically evaluate a point being made.

who decides what is “overly Flowery language”, there’s a push these days to limit the number of words these days. This is abhorrent and can impact on thought processes. Sometimes feelings can’t be described in words and relies on allegory and symbolic use of language. Why equate artistic use of language with lies?

There's more to life than can be explained by Aristotelian logic.

All of these things very much limit what it means to be human -are we to become “machine men with machine minds?”

Defence against the dark arts often requires quite a lot of flowery language I have several books on the subject😀

Nonsensical indeed. The trouble with including such things is that it assumes a prior knowledge of both texts. I haven't read either, so unless the question included relevant excerpts I would be totally stumped.

Focusing on STEM subjects hasn't improved our STEM graduate shortage, and now we have a STEAM shortage, now not only do we have a shortage of science, technically, engineering and maths graduates, we also have a shortage of arts graduates. Madness.

I have a level 5 apparently, but it's pretty eye opening reading about and realising why some people I know really struggle with a lot of things which seem obvious/common sense to me. Also, I have got my education mostly as a mature student, and recognise that there was a time when I did not have some of the skills I have today. I was duped by media narratives, stereotypes and was internally misogynistic. It's taken some unpicking for me, and I am very different than I used to be, but I have friends and family members who have not studied later on who believe in conspiracy theories and have issues with conditionality and seemingly to me, lacked common sense. When actually it isn't common sense, they are actually skills you don't gain until a higher level of literacy which they never have. It makes sense of some of their political views, and why they can't see that what is printed in the daily hate is neither totally true nor totally false, it's that they take isolated incidents and turn them into social narratives. It's not common sense to see that you are being lied to, it's a literacy skill.

Mind blown

Have you ever heard Boris Johnson speak? Or sat in a meeting that should have taken 30 minutes and finished in time for dinner but you're still there at 21:15 and the minute taker is writing things like 'All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy. Redrum redrum redrum redrum' in their notebook?

It's a device to deflect attention away from the question that was asked. Many politicians and middle management use it in exactly the same manner - and it's very effective in making people believe that they are being spoken to by somebody who really understands us but is in fact positively malevolent/incompetent.

By all means learn different ways of expressing oneself and in addressing matters of the Human Condition - but first and foremost, everybody needs to be able to understand and communicate clearly, concisely and effectively.

You can see the issue when a parent will go off on a five minute explanation of how the poor doggie will be really sad if they think Jessica doesn't really love them because in this house we do cuddles and kisses and of course Jessica can feel cross about being asked if she could possibly think about sitting nicely like Daddy knows she can do because she's done it before at Nursery and doesn't she want to show Grandma how big and clever she is because Grandma really loves her and doesn't Grandma have a lovely smile - what Jessica really needs is 'Do. Not. Poke. The. Dog.' and the stick removed from her hand. Because Jessica can't decode all the fluff and nonsense and probably drifted off five minutes ago into wondering whether a bigger stick would squish the dog and stop the noise that's coming out of Daddy's mouth - she needs the imperative. She needs her father to get to the fucking point.

Communicating clearly and concisely is the fundamental. The rest, whilst it has merit once the fundamentals are truly grasped, is not as valuable as being able to understand that poking Grandma's Yorkie with a stick is not allowed before Grandma's Yorkie expresses that sentiment in dog language - which can be painfully clear in intent and meaning.

I have come around to the thinking that a broader education is better rather than so narrow focused in the UK, especially keeping up foreign language learning. High school here is very broad though you narrow down for the matriculation exam but that's only after you've spent 2-4 years learning everything. When I did my erasmus year here I could choose from all kinds of courses, not just ones related to my degree, whereas in the UK my options were very limited and everything followed the same pattern of lectures and seminars and final exam.

But we’re not talking fundamentals here really. I have assumed when we are comparing the merits of a limited “to the point” type of text with more poetic text, there is an equal understanding of simple language.

Surely language acquisition would progress something along these lines (it’s been a long time since I did my English language A level😂)

-Simple single words
words -yes/no mama/dada

putting two or more words together to get to a point -Want book”

aware of distinction between you and others - I am, you are. Etc

more complex, multi step instructions/expressions involving emotions

language involving metaphors/similes as language is not able to provide words to describe the situation at hand

Poetry etc to arouse emotions beyond rational thought.

Yes
sometimes one type of communication might be more important. But to the point can be indicative of a person who is unwilling to listen, to debate, to explore. Stating things as facts, black snd white thinking. A lack of accountability.

I would suggest in your example there is a lot more information available than “Don’t poke the Dog”. It enables you to read between the lines, it would suggest that the mother is very stressed, does not feel able to exert authority in her own name etc.

Yes simple language is good when you’re talking to people unable to understand nuance, whose language skills are still basic level. However, to the point language just can’t communicate the level of complexity needed to discuss humanity.

Both types of communication are important but the ability to understand and communicate with poetic language is much more useful in non- black and white situations which is the majority of human existence

In other words - if you can't blind them with science, baffle them with bullshit. Concisely.

I have a neighbour who can spend five minutes explaining to her dog why it needs to do a wee-wee in the garden.

@NeverDropYourMooncup I wish I had read that years ago. I'm very guilty of this long winded explanation.

I don’t think it should be either/or. At this age, Jessica needs to be told clearly not to poke the dog. As she gets older, a science education will allow her to understand that animals feel pain. A literary education will allow her an emotional appreciation of why we should not be cruel to animals and why her parent is too stressed to communicate clearly.

It’s well known that standardised testing needs to be moderated for cultural and other biases. A simple example - giving outback kids in Australia comprehension tests or creative writing assessments about a trip to the beach. Even ignoring socio-economic factors, coastal kids will be at a massive advantage.

So your point would be

1. People need to develop fundamental language skills first.

1. Once they have the fundamentals, then they are able to learn expressive devices?

Yes, I have never said anything different than that, learn the basics first. But being able to have full expression as an older child and adult which, iMO poetry is pretty much the zenith of linguistic expression - black and white “to the point” language is more useful for simple instructions than any mode of expression. This post is about ready levels, to read (and write) and understand poetry requires a much higher level of skill.

Where has the idea that literature requires less knowledge to understand come from?

English teachers across the land are teaching about all sorts of things: history, politics, mythology, religion, philosophy, farming practices, navigation practices, all sorts. Just so that they can help students to interpret texts.

Even fans talking about fantasy books or manga online are often busy discussing cultural, historical or other contextual issues. If I wanted to find an expert on Celtic mythology, I actually think finding a fantasy booktoker might be more fruitful than trawling university departments these days. 🤣

I learned everything I know from Iron Maiden lyrics😂