The Gunning Fog Index the Gunning Fog Index Discussion Solution

The Gunning Fog Index the Gunning Fog Index Discussion

Table of Contents

Order ID# 45178248544XXTG457	Plagiarism Level: 0-0.5%	Writer Classification: PhD competent
Style: APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago	Delivery: Minimum 3 Hours	Revision: Permitted
Sources: 4-6	Course Level: Masters/University College	Guarantee Status: 96-99%

Instructions

The Gunning Fog Index the Gunning Fog Index Discussion

Discussion participation due dates (Please do not post before the first day of the week)

By Thursday, make your initial discussion board posting

By Saturday, make one response to a classmate’s posting. NOTE: make a response to a posting that does not yet have a response. DO NOT make a second response to a posting that already has one response.

By Sunday, answer professor’s questions re: your posting

The Gunning Fog Index the Gunning Fog Index Discussion

By Monday, return to your discussion and reply to classmates who responded to your posting

The Gunning Fog Index was developed in 1952 by Robert Gunning, a textbook publisher. Gunning observed that high school graduates were not able to read much of what was written in newspapers and business documents. He determined that the reason for their inability to read such material was the writing. He felt that many of the texts in newspapers and business documents was unnecessarily complex.

The Gunning Fog Index calculates the complexity of passages of text using an algorithm. For more information on how the index calculates the text, see the following websites:

The Gunning Fog Index: A Useful Tool for Targeting an Article to an Audience

The Gunning Fog Index (or FOG) Readability Formula

The Gunning Fog Index the Gunning Fog Index Discussion

For an example, please copy the following paragraph and paste it into the text box at this link: Gunning Fog Index:

In analyzing technical communication, the reader has to navigate various features of a document, such as white space, proximity, alignment repletion, contrast, hierarchy, and language, all of which can impact the document’s readability. It is assumed that the user experience, coupled with user background, informs document design when technical

communicators draft instruction manuals, procedures, feasibility reports, and white papers. However, companies have a tendency to ask engineers, rather than technical communicators, to write technical documentation, a practice that renders the documentation less readable to the lay person. For this reason, technical professionals and

communication specialists should work side-by-side in producing documentation for users.

Gunning concluded that a piece of text should have a fog index of less than 12 in order to be readable to a wide audience.

The Gunning Fog Index the Gunning Fog Index Discussion

What was the fog index of the paragraph above? Please give at least two reasons for its score, based on your understanding of how the Gunning Fog Index calculates the level of complexity.

Insert your own piece of writing into the text box. You don’t have to share your fog index here in this discussion topic. However, please write a few sentences on your impression of the Gunning Fog Index. Do you think it is a valid method of determining the complexity of a piece of text?

RUBRIC
Excellent Quality 95-100%	Introduction 45-41 points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.		Literature Support 91-84  points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.			Methodology 58-53 points Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met.
Average Score 50-85%	40-38 points More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided.		83-76  points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration.			52-49  points Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met.
Poor Quality 0-45%	37-1 points The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided.		75-1 points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration.			48-1 points There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met
You Can Also Place the Order at www.perfectacademic.com/orders/ordernow or www.crucialessay.com/orders/ordernow The Gunning Fog Index the Gunning Fog Index Discussion

The Gunning Fog Index the Gunning Fog Index Discussion

PLACE THE ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET A PERFECT SCORE!!!