Wednesday, April 18, 2018

Accessibility for All: Inclusion in the Plain Style



Plain style. Let’s keep it clean and simple, right? The fewer words used, the better off we all are. Writing needs to be understood by everyone. It shouldn’t exclude anyone based on class or education. Nor should it be confusing to readers, no matter what their levels of ability may be. That is the general idea behind the plain style. Everyone deserves to understand what they are reading. Minnesota’s Office of the Secretary of State recently rewrote their document entitled “Absentee Ballot Instructions for Unregistered Voters.” It was originally considered to be too difficult for the average person to understand, so the Office of Secretary of State attempted to create a more readable document for their citizens. The document goes through step by step on how unregistered voters can fill out and send in their absentee ballots as well as their voter registrations. All in all, the plain style has become increasingly popular, and it is easy to see why. People enjoy understanding what they’re reading, but does writing plainly leave something behind? Within “Absentee Ballot Instructions for Unregistered Voters,” there are plenty of strategies and examples to demonstrate that the text is written in plain style and also why writing in the plain style can be so important but also why it can become problematic.
The document was tested for readability by “Visible Thread Readability” in several categories. Overall, the tests demonstrated that “Absentee Ballot Instructions for Unregistered Voters” more or less contains the plain style. This readability calculator first tests for “long sentences” which are defined as being twenty words or longer. This document consisted of 17.14% “long sentences,” which is about 12% higher than the recommended amount. It also tests for passive voice and the goal is to have 4% or less in a text. The document analyzed contains 8.57% passive voice. A readability score also exists, and when tested, the document scored 55 out of 100. Anything over 50 is considered to be a decent level of readability for the general population. Finally, the readability calculator gives the text an average grade level. Since the text is split into many different parts, each section consists of a more specific grade level. The levels for this text ranged anywhere from Grade 1 to 15.3. When averaged, this calculated out as an 8.8-grade level. To reach the general population, readability advocates recommend that writers aim for an average grade level of 8 or lower. However, elements aside from readability also contribute to the plain style.
            To obtain the plain style, writers use different strategies. The readability calculator, “Visible Thread Readability” recommends splitting apart long sentences into smaller ones, eliminating passive voice, turning hidden verbs (is, are, were) into obvious verbs and eliminating unnecessary adverbs. Seems easy enough, right? “The Center for Plain Language” created five steps to achieve plain language when writing. They first advise identifying the audience, in order to understand their needs. Next, create the content in a way that leads readers through the information. Then, write plainly and simply. Keep sentences and ideas short and to-the-point. In addition to this, the document’s design should help and guide the readers. Reading block text creates trouble for readers, so using other ideas or strategies may help them. Finally, “The Center for Plain Language” suggests working with the intended audience to ensure that they understand the text. Many authors or creators of documents intentionally use strategies to make the writing sound plain. The Minnesotan Office of Secretary of State is no exception to this, within the document they used various strategies including:
      Personal language
      Second person (you form)
      Shorter sentences
      Simple phrases and sentences
      Bullet points
      Blocking, spacing, separating out sections of writing
      Pictures 
      Whitespace
      Conduplicatio (repeating the same keyword)
Given all of these different strategies, it is easy to see that plain language helps readers understand documents. Most of the bullet points start with verbs and clearly describe that action necessary to complete the steps of the process. The document uses personal language such as “you will need” and “you must submit the voter registration.” Pictures alongside the directions demonstrate what the voters must do. The document creators also appear to use conduplicatio, for example using “ballot” consistently rather than “record of the vote” or “poll.”  The language appears very simple, readable and user-friendly. However, readers must consider more than solely strategies when analyzing documents.
            The spheres of activities revolved around the document must also be considered. This refers to the types of people and situations that engage with and use the text most often. For this particular document, the audience is large. It is safe to assume that the vast majority of the citizens of Minnesota have access to this document. In its entirety, the population contains roughly 5.577 million people. For that reason, it is rather likely that the writers and creators of this text wrote plainly because of the number of people that have access to this document. Steve Simon currently holds the position of Minnesota Secretary of State. The website available for his office contains several different links to information about voting. In fact, elections and voting is the first tab on the website next to the home tab. Clearly, voting and providing information about voting is a priority for the office of  Minnesota Secretary of State and Steve Simon. Large sections also highlight both registering to vote and voting via absentee ballot They want people voting, and to do that, they need to provide clear, simple and accurate information about how to register for voting.
            However, if citizens cannot read the document with ease, it causes tension between the general population and the politicians in office. If the citizens are not able to get necessary information, such as simple voting directions, they may decide to vote for someone else in an election. Of course, this serves only as a speculation, but it holds valid ideas about the general public. If someone in power does not meet the needs of their citizens, why keep that person in office? Therefore, providing clear information remains in the Minnesota Secretary of State’s best interest. Additionally, the Minnesota Secretary of State’s clarity in their writing could potentially avoid legal issues, such as lawsuits. For that reason, writing plainly and portraying the voting process as straightforward and transparently as possible remains an important consideration and goal for the Minnesota Secretary of State.
            Plain style poses some potential issues, despite its simplicity. As readers, we are forced to question if plain style is leaving out information that we might need. Simplifying everything is not always best, as details and relevant content may be lost when trying to make the information less wordy and complicated. For example, the section entitled “Options for proof of where you live” likely does not contain all possibilities that one could use to prove their home address. Those who created the document presumably included only the most common “options for proof” because a full list would be too extensive. Small details can make a large difference in our understanding of texts and documents. While “Absentee Ballot Instructions for Unregistered Voters” seems clear and to the point, it is possible that readers have questions that are not being answered. For a process as important as voting, don’t citizens deserve as much information as possible? Don’t they have a right to know and understand exactly what happens with their information and their vote? Certainly the “Absentee Ballot Instructions for Unregistered Voters” reads easily, but writing plainly leaves out other vital considerations. Who has access to the information after it is sent in? How can citizens be sure that no one takes advantage of their privacy? Many citizens likely believe they deserve to know this information, but the document mentions nothing related to what happens upon the completion of the absentee ballot. Considering what plain style leaves out by eliminating complicated or additional information is important to acknowledge. The style, while it has its uses, is not appropriate in all scenarios.
            Plain style continues to gain popularity among many government offices and businesses. This document, “Absentee Ballot Instructions for Unregistered Voters” serves as an excellent example for not only what plain style might look like, but also how it can be implemented and used. Strategies appear throughout the text to make it easier to read and user-friendly to anyone in Minnesota who is over the age of 18 and qualifies as a citizen. Many reasons exist for using plain style, but in the case of this particular document, it appears that the creators of the document use plain style to allow more people to access and read the document without confusion or legal disputes. Anyone who may need to read this document was accounted for in its creation. Of course, one document creates an incomplete and insufficient understanding of both the benefits as well as drawbacks of writing plainly. In order to gain a full understanding of the plain style, both the positives and negatives deserve consideration. Is the price of easy reading worth losing additional information? Is it truly fair to omit details simply to make the text more accessible? It’s difficult to say, but clearly, the plain style is powerful while simple, because the more readable it is, the more people can be included in understanding and accessing the text.

Emily Guenther








No comments:

Post a Comment