FOSSA 101, Session 7

This part of the story is close to my heart. This is because it's about language, and I have spent my whole adult life working with languages. And it's also because it's about learners who don't feel that one perfect language exists.

It's not all optimism and good news, though. I would now like us to talk about the problem with Learning Things that don't get their language right.

The end result will often be a learner who says something like the quote in the heading above. "I can't understand this," or, "This doesn't make sense to me," or maybe "I've just spent five minutes trying to read this one paragraph."

As before, let's look at some reasons behind this, and some common language-related pitfalls for anyone who works on Learning Things. Then we'll move on to a FOSSA Experiment that might help.

Language is a very personal thing. Every person's language is different. The way they learned their languages, the way they use them - there is no way to find two people who have exactly the same language stories.

And still, language is what connects us, and what makes it possible to understand each other. This kind of contrast is a fascinating puzzle - how can something so intimate be the thing that I share with the rest of the world?

We'll come back to this question in a little while, and look for practical ways to use our ideas here. Before that, though, let's talk about the problems. What kinds of things can lead to a communication breakdown?

When people talk about learners and language, a place where they often spend a lot of time is a discussion of learners with learning difficulties or learning disabilities. In all schools and colleges, these learners and their needs often mean that language has to change. When these learners speak with their teachers or their class, a change in language happens. When they use a Learning Thing, it also makes a difference when the language is helping them learn.

But learning difficulties and disabilities are not the only reason why a learner can have a problem with a Learning Thing's language.

The second group can be described as learners who are still learning the language that your Learning Thing uses. If you use English, then here's an interesting fact: there are more English language users out there who weren't born in an English-speaking country than those for whom it's their first, or only, language. The bilingual and multilingual English users outnumber the monolinguals!

Any other places worth looking? Well, how about... all of us, in a few decades' time? It's no secret that as we get older, our memory and learning skills change. Just as our bodies do. It's normal for a twenty-year old lady to have a different gym routine than her sixty-year old grandmother. They'll use different exercises, different weights, different set-ups. Why should we not think about the change in the way they learn, and the way they work with language when they do so?

I hope you begin to see this now: there are many places our learners start from, before they arrive at this FOSSA problem. When they say, "I cannot understand this" - it could be because of their learning disability, or because of the fact they're multilingual, or they're an older learner - or any combination of these things and other reasons.

Besides - we've not even talked about all our learners who are just having a bad day! Going through three pages of lecture notes when you're in your ideal learning zone is very different from going through the same three pages in a cold, crowded library after a bad night's sleep. It's the same learner, and the same Learning Thing - but we've all been there, and the effects are not the same from day to day.

Language matters, then. And for some of our learners, language is a problem. Let's talk about experimenting with it, and using the power of languages to start fixing things for these learners.

Experiment 4: S (also) stands for "Simple"

Our fourth FOSSA problem shows us all kinds of learners getting to the same place, connected with language they can't understand. Our fourth FOSSA Experiment uses language to get them to a place where understanding is possible. We're lucky to have language as our tool here - it's a good one.

This FOSSA Experiment can be described and tested this way:

Simple: You will publish a fully functional version of your Learning Thing which a CEFR B1 language user will be mostly (80%) able to understand.

Right. I owe you an explanation here. It's about the "CEFR B1" thing, isn't it?

CEFR means "Common European Framework of Reference". It's a set of tools and measures to describe languages. It's okay to use it outside Europe, by the way - many countries and companies around the world use it.

CEFR has levels. Each level describes what a language user at this level can do. What can they say? What are they comfortable reading, or listening to? How good is their grammar? What kinds of words do they know? When they use a language - what can they easily get done?

B1 is a good place for an "intermediate" language user to be. When I was a language teacher, most of my learners and classes would be this level. And when we learn languages, we often spend more time around this level than elsewhere. So it makes sense to focus our FOSSA Experiment on these learners.

Now, you may be thinking something like, "But my Learning Thing is about This Complicated Topic! There's no way I can make it simple enough!" There are tree things to say here.

First of all, please remember: doing what you can is the FOSSA way. If you try this Experiment, and end up with a Learning Thing whose language is a bit more simple and a lot more helpful - then that's already good work.

Secondly: please note the 80% number above, in the way the Experiment is described. All learners expect to learn new things all the time, and getting out of our comfort zone is okay here. You can use the 20% of your Learning Thing's language to fit the difficult words, the jargon, the technical language. If your 80% is written well, it will help your learners get the point of the 20% better.

And finally: In my 20 years as an editor, producer and translator, I learned that complicated topics don't always need to use difficult language. Many people believe they need to use big words to make their topic look important. And many learners believe that the more fancy words they learn, the smarter they'll appear. Language is important, and it's wonderful - also because it can be fancy or simple, and be just as powerful and helpful.

---

A quick note on coming up with your own tests

This Experiment is a good place to answer a question you may be asking. It's about the way in which we measure and test the FOSSA Experiments.

Simply speaking - is it OK to come up with a test of your own, when doing FOSSA work? If the measuring tool or test doesn't work for you, is it OK to change it?

My gut feeling on this changes from one Experiment to another, but the answer will always be: "Yes, if the effect for the learner is just as positive, and fixes the same problem."

CEFR levels are a tool I talk about here, because I know and trust them. I worked with them, and I met people who built the tool. The CEFR is a strong and powerful way of measuring what people can do with words and languages. And it works for many other languages out there, not just English.

But maybe there is a better way to do it for your Learning Thing, and your language. Maybe you don't know CEFR, and don't want to spend more time having to learn about it. If, in the end, the result is the same as it would be with CEFR - go ahead and change the test.

This applies to other Experiments, too. I'm working with file sizes for the "Small" Experiment. Maybe you want to work with page load times? If the result is an improvement for your learners, then go for it.

In the next section, we talk about accessibility. For this Experiment, the way we measure things online is actually the same all across the world, and anyone who works with web accessibility knows WCAG guidelines. So for the "Accessible" FOSSA Experiment, I would suggest you keep the test, even though you might not like it. WCAG is important and understood.

But things may change in the future. Feel free to update these tests and ideas. Just as long as they lead to the same positive effect for the same learner problem.

---

Making "Simple" work - ten FOSSA ideas

1. This Experiment will take time. There will be more drafts than you think. This is normal, but please plan for this. If you're on a tight deadline, plan another time for this Experiment.
2. Let experts do the work. You hire a video editor for your videos. You let your artists do your art. But because humans use language all the time, we sometimes fall into this trap: "I'll just proofread and edit it myself." Good editors are out there. Work with them on this one.
3. Use machines and humans to test things. A good computer checker will help you get the words and the grammar right. A good editor, or an interview with a language user, will show you what a learner can try to do with your language. Use both for the right results - but see the last point below about "AI"!
4. Make sure the authors are on your side. Talk to them, and explain what you are doing and why. Make sure they know what this means for the shape their Learning Thing will be in. Not every author will be happy with this.
5. This is a team effort. Someone will write the text for your Learning Thing. Someone else will edit the drafts. Others will proofread this. Maybe you'll need an expert to review it. And it's good if your marketing people are talking the same language, too. Keep building a team that will understand what this Experiment is about.
6. It's not just about words and grammar. There are many parts to this Experiment. How long are your sentences? How big are your paragraphs? Are your headings useful? Are you helping the learner make sense of the text?
7. Prepare a style guide and a tone of voice. If you haven't got these documents yet, then this Experiment is a good chance to start working on them. Get your editors and marketing / communications teams to work on these. And please, pretty please: make these two documents simple and useful, too. Busy people will be using them on a daily basis.
8. This Experiment is about consistency. You can use the 20% of your Learning Thing to be creative, unpredictable, fresh... That's good, and all Learning Things need this to be interesting. But eight times out of ten, your learners will be happy to see similar things done in a similar way.
9. Do your research, but feel free to mix things up. English already has some ways of making itself simple: there is Plain English, Simple English, and other similar ideas. Many of these solutions are useful - but it's not always great if you only use one of them. Language changes, and your Learning Things are unique. Feel free to mix things up.
10. "AI" is a seriously bad idea here. Large language models cannot give you consistency. They will give you language that is different from day to day. And they will change in the future. This one is about control and accuracy. "AI" is bad at both. Sorry.

---