

The rise of a software system that helps teachers track student reading - mapleoin
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/30/books/review/Straight-t.html?ref=review&pagewanted=print

======
quant18
Some more info about their readability formula: it uses "the number of words
per sentence, the number of characters per word, and the average grade level
of the words in the book".
<http://doc.renlearn.com/KMNet/R003520002GE7114.pdf>

Personally I don't think this is a very good marketing strategy, and I'm not
surprised it's hidden in a 10MB PDF document four levels deep on their
website. Either they should:

1\. Go deeper and do things like comparing complexity of parse trees of
sentences. This might bring ratings more into line with NYT columnists'
expectations, but more importantly, it sends a signal to buyers that "we think
about this more deeply than you can understand". (And as an added bonus it
would generate jobs for people like me.)

2\. Give out points randomly --- unpredictable rewards are better motivation
than fixed rewards, and shield you from criticism by people who don't like the
fact that their chosen books don't earn enough points, so you can spend more
time selling and less time trying to justify your ratings mechanism.

