Thesis (MPhil)--Stellenbosch University, 2013. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: The purpose of this study was to gain more insight with regards to the comprehensibility of
the revised Afrikaans undergraduate application form (see Form B in Excerpt 2) of the
Stellenbosch University (SU), especially in comparison to the previous version of 2011 (see
Form A in Excerpt 1), to be able to guide document designers with designing a better form.
Answers to the following question were searched for: Do prospective students regard the
revised Form B as more understandable than the previous Form A? The revised form was
changed by a team of experts, as requested by the SU, in order to make the form more
understandable. There were 140 male and female, white and coloured grade 11 respondents
of both Vredendal High and Vredendal Secondary.
This study was launched in light of the South African Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008
that took effect on 1 April 2011. In terms of section 22 of this Act, documents must be
written in plain and simple language, because consumers have got the right to information
that they understand (2008:32).
Plain language is practical attitudes about the meaning of good written work, the goal of that
and what benefits the reader the most. It is also our intellectual understanding of the way in
which people read, the questions readers ask about a document, and readers’ reaction towards
various forms of document design (De Stadler, 2012:3).
Three parts of the two versions of the SU’s Afrikaans undergraduate form was used,
specifically the cover, the program and personal information, and the responsibility of the
prospective student. The forms were judged according to its comprehensibility, design and
logic order by using a between-group design after respondents had to fill in the parts of the
form by using fictional information on an information page. With that, respondents also had
to underline words in the form they didn’t understand and fill in a questionnaire.
Most of the information was statistically processed. To be able to make comparisons between
the forms, a twee-way-variance-analysis was done with alternative form/gender and
form/race as independent variables. By using the data collected, it became clear that respondents didn’t like a specific version of
the form more than the other version. It also became clear that respondents had huge
problems filling in both forms. Even though respondents perceived the form’s
comprehensibility, design and logical build-up in the same way, more respondents left out
questions in Form B. This, against what we would have anticipated, means that respondents
made better sense of Form A. It can even mean that, in contrast to their experience,
respondents made more sense of the design and logical build-up of the questions in Form A,
compared to the questions in Form B. This result is not a good outcome for the team of
experts who made the changes to the revised form. It may be, however, that the SU didn’t
allow the team to make enough changes, and because of that the forms are not really
perceived as different from one another. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Die doel van hierdie ondersoek was om meer insig te kry oor die verstaanbaarheid van die
hersiene Afrikaanse voorgraadse aansoekvorm (Vorm B in Bylae 2) van die Universiteit
Stellenbosch (US), hoofsaaklik in vergelyking met die vorige 2011-weergawe (Vorm A in
Bylae 1), sodat ’n verbeterde vorm daargestel kan word. Op die volgende vraag is daar
antwoorde gesoek: Beskou voornemende studente Vorm B as meer verstaanbaar as Vorm A?
Die hersiene vorm is deur ’n taakspan, wat opdrag van die US gekry het, verander met die
doel om meer verstaanbaar te wees. Die proefpersone was 140 manlike en vroulike, wit en
kleurling graad 11-leerders van beide Hoërskool Vredendal en Vredendal Sekondêr.
Die ondersoek is geloods in die lig van Suid-Afrika se gepromulgeerde
Verbruikersbeskermingswet 68 van 2008 wat vanaf 1 April 2011 in werking getree het.
Volgens hierdie wet moet besighede tekste skep in verstaanbare taal, want verbruikers het die
reg tot inligting in gewone en verstaanbare taal (2008:32).
Verstaanbare taal is “[p]raktiese houdings oor wat goeie skryfwerk is, wat die doel daarvan is
en wat in die beste belang van die leser is. [Dit is ook die v]erstandige aannames oor hoe
mense lees, die vrae wat lesers te stel het oor enige dokument, [en] lesers se reaksies tot
verskillende vorme van dokumentontwerp” (De Stadler, 2012:3)
Drie gedeeltes van die twee weergawes van die US se Afrikaanse voorgraadse aansoekvorm
is in die ondersoek gebruik, spesifiek die voorblad, program- en persoonlike besonderhede,
en verantwoordelikhede van die voornemende student. Die vorms is ten opsigte van
verstaanbaarheid, ontwerp en logiese orde beoordeel deur ’n tussengroepontwerp te gebruik
nadat proefpersone die genoemde gedeeltes van een vorm aan die hand van fiktiewe inligting
in ’n inligtingsbladsy moes gebruik. Tesame hiermee moes hulle ook moelike woorde in die
vorm onderstreep en ’n vraelys invul.
Die meeste van die inligting is statisties verwerk. Om vergelykings te kon tref tussen die
vorms, is twee-rigting-variansie-analises gedoen met alternatief vorm/geslag en vorm/ras as
onafhanklike veranderlikes. Uit die data wat versamel is, blyk duidelik dat deelnemers nie ’n voorkeur vir een spesifieke
weergawe gehad het nie. Dit is ook duidelik dat deelnemers ernstige probleme gehad het met
die invul van beide vorms. Alhoewel deelnemers se ervaring ten opsigte van die vorm se
verstaanbaarheid, uiterlike ontwerp en logiese ordening dieselfde was, het deelnemers meer
antwoordvelde in Vorm B as Vorm A oopgelos. Dit kan, teen die verwagting in, beteken dat
deelnemers Vorm A makliker of meer verstaanbaar as Vorm B gevind het. Dit kan selfs, in
teenstelling met hulle ervaring, beteken dat deelnemers meer sin van die uiterlike ontwerp en
logiese ordening van die vrae in Vorm A as die vrae in Vorm B kon maak. Hierdie resultaat
is dus nie ’n goeie uitkoms vir die span wat die vorm moes hersien nie. Dit mag egter wees
dat die US die ontwerpers nie toegelaat het om genoeg veranderinge aan die hersiene vorm
aan te bring nie, en daarom verskil die vorms nie genoeg van mekaar nie.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:netd.ac.za/oai:union.ndltd.org:sun/oai:scholar.sun.ac.za:10019.1/85821 |
| Date | 12 1900 |
| Creators | Esterhuyse, Elana |
| Contributors | De Stadler, L. G., Stellenbosch University. Faculty of Arts & Social Sciences. Dept. of Afrikaans and Dutch. |
| Publisher | Stellenbosch : Stellenbosch University |
| Source Sets | South African National ETD Portal |
| Language | Afrikaans |
| Detected Language | Unknown |
| Type | Thesis |
| Format | 128 p. : ill. |
| Rights | Stellenbosch University |
Page generated in 0.0027 seconds