Posted on March 26, 2018, in Microsoft Office 365 ProPlus English, Word 365 English and tagged Character Count, Characters and Page Numbers in a Word Document, Count, Customize the Status Bar in order to Count Word, Document, Language, Microsoft Office, Microsoft Word, Office Smart, Office System, Page Number, philippospan, Smart Office, Status. Oct 12, 2018 Word counts can reveal information about your code, or make an unknown piece of code more expressive to your eyes. There are online tools to count words in generic text, but most of those I’ve come across are designed around counting words in text and SEO (Search Engine Optimization).
When you are given a writing assignment in college, either a certain number of pages or a particular word count is required. If the assignment is to write a six-page paper on a topic related to the American Revolution, you may wonder how many words are in six pages. The fact is there is no perfect answer to this question.
How many words there are on a page depends on the font type, font size, spacing, margins and paragraph length. Depending on the assignment, the Professor may require students to divide their papers into sections, with headings and subheadings. That can also affect the number of words per page.
General Requirements
For college essays and papers, the typical font types are Times New Roman, Arial, and Verdana. The standard font size requirement is 12pt, and the margin requirements are one-inch on all sides. Also, in college, papers must usually be double-spaced, though single-spacing can also be required by some Professors.
There are general guidelines, on how many pages it takes to reach a word count. For example, a 2000-word essay is approximately four pages when single spaced and eight pages when double spaced. A 60,000 word dissertation written by a Ph.D. candidate is about 120 pages single spaced and 200 pages double spaced.
Calculating Words per Page
Let’s say a student must write a short essay with 1000 words. The assignment calls for Times New Roman 12pt font, one-inch margins, and double spacing. So, how many pages is 1000 words going to take up? The answer is about four pages. If the student uses the Arial typeface instead, the total number of pages will be about 3.7. And when using Verdana, the number of pages will be approximately 4.4.
What about an essay that must be 1500 words? Using our Word Counter, the average number of pages for 1500 words is three pages when single-spaced and six pages when double-spaced. Now, let’s say the spacing must be 1.5 per the assignment instructions. If a student uses the Times New Roman font type, and the font size requirement is 12pt, then the number of pages to reach 1500 words is approximately 4.8, which rounds up to about five pages.
How Many Words are in a Speech?
Another typical college assignment entails giving a speech in front of your peers. For example, your Chemistry professor may require you to give a 5-minute speech on an element from the Periodic Table. In preparing the speech, you will need to know how many words are in a 5-minute speech. Again, there is no definitive answer because pacing (how many words you speak per minute) and pausing (breaking between sentences/paragraphs) will affect the total time it takes. Daphne Gray-Grant over at Visual Thesaurus writes: “The average person speaks at somewhere between 125 and 150 words per minute.”
For a five-minute speech done by a person speaking 150 words per minute, the approximate word count is around 750. However, as a general rule of thumb for giving speaches you should use around 100–200 words per minute. This is because for public speaking it is better to speak slowly so your audience understands what you are saying. Hence, a five-minute speech using this general rule will have somewhere in the range of 500–1000 words.
Word Counts for Publishing
For those people that are out of college and writing professionally (i.e. publishing their work), another factor when considering how many words there are per page is how the final work is to be printed. In addition to the layout, the font type and size used for published works is often quite different from college papers. For published books, mainly paperback novels, fonts such as Garamond and Calibri are often used. However, there is not hard and fast rule, as a different font can be utilized depending on the subject, genre, or any number of other factors. The size of the font often used in paperback novels commonly ranges from 10pt to 14pt.
Other factors that will affect the number of words per page in a published book include:
Word Counter 1 6 2018 Manual
- Whether the book has pictures, charts, graphs, etc.
The formatting for a book containing such elements means the word count will differ from a book that has only words. - The spacing of the text and between paragraphs.
In most paperback and hardcover novels, the text in the final printed book is single-spaced. Also, a lot of publishers like to put extra spaces between sections of the book to separate point-of-views and settings. - The physical dimensions of the book.
The typical dimensions for a novel are either 5x8 inches or 6x9 inches. It all depends on how the publisher prints the final work and whether it is a hardcover or paperback. - The Reading Level of the book.
For example, children’s books are going to have fewer words per page than a book meant for adult readers.
Common Novel: Word Counts per Page
How many words per page are there in a typical novel? For manuscripts, the answer is about 250–300 words per page if it is double-spaced. A manuscript for a novel is typically 500 words per page if single-spaced. When the final work is printed for sale and published, the number of words per page will differ.
So, how many pages is 500 words? For a manuscript, the answer is two pages if the word count per page is 250 and it is double spaced. If single-spaced, it is one page. It all depends on the font type, font size, spacing, and formatting of the text. If a novel has a total of 80,000 words with 300 words per page, the number of manuscript pages is 267.
It is interesting, as well as necessary at times, to look at the number of words per page. If you are a college student writing a paper, knowing how many words per page there are in your essay helps you track your progress to the required word count for the assignment. If you are an author working on your next bestseller, you should know that a typical manuscript with double-spaced text has about 250 words per page. Overall, there are multiple answers to the question regarding the number of words per page, as it all depends on font type, font size, and formatting.
Pediatricians, who are at the frontlines of caring for children growing up in low-income households, are dedicated to promoting language acquisition. Early literacy is incorporated into pediatric care with a number of successful programs, including the well-known program Reach Out and Read, which provides free books to families at children’s well visits.1 Much of the support and scientific backing for these interventions and concerns about lags in language development are couched in terms of closing the “word gap” between children from low-income families and their more privileged counterparts.2 Recent studies, however, have not replicated these word gap findings and show substantial variations in sociolinguistic environments even within socioeconomic strata. This suggests that there is no singular gap. We question the use of the word gap concept and the reliance on an approach in which the deficits, rather than strengths, of low-income and minority families are highlighted. We argue instead for a universal, nonstigmatizing approach to enhancing childhood literacy and propose using a positive framework of language building to replace the concept of a word gap.
Numerous language acquisition programs are focused on increasing the number of words spoken to children from low-income families in an attempt to address what is termed the word gap. In an often-cited 1995 study, Hart and Risley3 found that young children from low-income homes were exposed to ∼600 words per hour. This was considerably fewer than the 2100 words per hour heard by children from high-income families. Extrapolating, Hart and Risley3 suggested that by the age of 4 years, children of low income have heard 30 million fewer words than their high-income counterparts. This word gap was seen as having long-lasting effects on children’s scholastic abilities. The study, which quickly became iconic as a policy rationale for universal preschool education and early-childhood intervention programs, clearly had design weaknesses, including a small sample of families (a total of 42 families from different socioeconomic strata) and the way in which vocabulary was measured and correlated with scholastic advantage. For instance, 1 point of criticism was that only words spoken directly to the child rather than words spoken around the child, termed the “ambient verbal environment,” were measured.4 Thus, the word gap concept is highly interpretative, is derived from statistically weak research, and lacks nuanced attention to individual and cultural contexts.
Researchers in subsequent, more rigorous studies have also pointed to the importance of early language exposure for vocabulary development, scholastic achievement, and even emotional development. Many scholars of language acquisition, including Hart and Risley,3 note that the quality of language interactions is equally as important as, if not more important than, the quantity.5 Hart and Risley’s3 “word gap” framework also does not address other skills beyond language acquisition that are useful for productive adult lives, such as music, art, math, science, and social skills, the value of which often are not reflected in the word-based curricula of school programs.6
Last fall, researchers found evidence that reliance on the concept of a word gap negatively impacted how educators viewed Latino and Latina students, serving to stigmatize and marginalize young dual-language learners.7 Recently, a large-scale study by Sperry et al4 describing itself as a 'failed replication' of Hart and Risley's3 work, examined the language of children in multiple different socioeconomic strata. They not only failed to find a gap but found that in some low-income environments, the verbal environment was in fact richer than in middle-class environments. The authors noted great variability in word use within each socioeconomic stratum.4 Taken together, the word gap appears to both have been debunked by more rigorous research and been shown to negatively influence views of children of low income, minority children, and children who are linguistically diverse. Unfortunately, this deficit-based approach has a long history that can serve as a cautionary tale to clinicians caring for children who are underprivileged.
Since the early 1960s, researchers have found that children of low income and children of color are at a significant disadvantage in terms of school readiness and language acquisition. Although poverty and its sequelae, including nutritional and housing insecurities, have been recognized as significant risk factors for poor academic performance, many studies have been focused on how “competent” mothers can mitigate these risks for their children.8 As American policy makers turned their attention to addressing poverty in the 1960s, perceptions of how parents of low income differ from those of higher income became increasingly well accepted, brought to the forefront by anthropologist Oscar Lewis9 in his 1959 culture of poverty theory. Lewis9 argued that poor families had a unique cluster of destructive behaviors that rendered them poor, passive, and unable to advance in mainstream society. Most if not all of this research was focused on African American children and their mothers, part of a long tradition of pathologizing minority families.10 Over the past 6 decades, researchers have highlighted poor parenting, rather than poverty, as the primary cause of scholastic disadvantage. Accordingly, when children in low-income families struggle, this is often attributed to poor parenting rather than structural inequalities. Such commonly used concepts as “grit” and “strivers” also can be used to implicitly blame children growing up in poverty themselves if they do not progress in school.11
The belief that poor families are fundamentally different from and deficient in comparison with middle-class families was used to inform many of the interventions designed for children from the 1960s onward. This deficit-based theory, often couched in terms such as “cultural deprivation,” was used to pathologize poor families rather than focus on cultural diversity, strengths, and resilience. This mind-set has had a long-lasting influence on America’s early education programs and has informed our poverty intervention policies more generally. Rather than providing poor families with what they needed, such as jobs, housing, health care, and nutritional security, many programs were focused on what we perceive poor families lack: motivation, appreciation for education, and a love of reading books.10 This is deeply stigmatizing.
This deficit-based view also has clear policy implications. If certain interventions are viewed as useful only for low-income families with poor parenting, then they will not be offered to all children. Yet when an intervention is proven to be beneficial, for instance, early childhood education (preschool) or the provision of free books, it stands to reason that it should be available universally. This stigmatizing of early education as a compensatory intervention is 1 of the reasons the United States does not provide universal early childhood education but only compensatory interventions, such as Head Start, used to target vulnerable populations.10
We believe that the word gap approach also holds the risk of pathologizing poor families in the individual clinical encounter because it leads clinicians to focus on what families lack rather than on their strengths. When pediatricians learn uncritically about a word gap between children of low income and those of higher income, they may internalize a deficit-based view of these children.7 This view is neither a productive stance to begin conversations with families nor a constructive educational message to impart to trainees. Although other authors have called for pediatricians to specifically mention the word gap to patient families as a way to motivate health behaviors,2 we argue for universal, nonstigmatizing approaches for literary promotion. We encourage pediatricians to partner with programs that give out books, including Reach Out and Read, and help promote a love of reading. Reading should be viewed as a universal good rather than a compensatory intervention to address a word gap that likely does not exist. If reading is beneficial and books are valuable, this holds true for all children, and we encourage pediatricians to speak in positive terms of language building and literacy promotion. Rather than discussing with parents how to remedy a perceived gap, we recommend pediatricians highlight the long-term benefits of reading to children. Programs such as Reach Out and Read are beneficial in encouraging early literacy and promoting the value of reading. This rationale is sufficient; invoking the word gap has an unfavorable risk/benefit profile. Physicians have endorsed universal approaches, such as hand hygiene and personal protection, as being both medically sound and destigmatizing. No sanitation gap is required to explain the need for hand hygiene. Early literacy interventions should be no different.
Clinicians know that words matter. We choose our words carefully as we discuss care plans with patients and families and as we mentor trainees. Words also reflect intellectual trends and changing concepts. “Intellectual disability” and “differential abilities” have replaced “mental retardation”; “adherence,” an active word, is favored over “compliance.” Using the term word gap, a concept based on flawed research that highlights perceived deficits in low-income families’ homes, is a choice we should move away from. Instead of identifying deficiencies in how parents of low income talk to their children, pediatricians should look for, point out, and compliment specific positive language interactions, including in their offices. Pediatricians can lead the way in speaking positively of language building rather than of a word gap that needs to be bridged. Let us encourage early literacy programs for their intrinsic value rather than in the name of a gap or a deficit. Let us model, encourage, and reward helpful parent-child discourse. Although as physicians we are accustomed to discussing interventions in terms of addressing pathologies, in this case, we should embrace early literacy interventions but reject the pathologizing of low-income families and their cultural and linguistic backgrounds. This is in keeping with current trends in pediatric education because programs have adopted approaches, such as the asset-based community development model, to highlight skills, abilities, and partnerships rather than deficits.12 We are not denying that problems in language development exist; however, these are not rooted simply in a deficient home environment. All children can and should benefit from language-building enrichment interactions and activities, and this should be the message imparted in clinical encounters.
Dr Raz conceptualized the essay and drafted the initial manuscript; Dr Beatty commented on and revised the initial manuscript and provided input on content and subsequent revisions; and all authors approved the final manuscript as submitted and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.
References
1P
, BP
, AL
. Reach Out and Read: literacy promotion in pediatric primary care.
. 2009
;:11
– [PubMed]
2Word Counter 1 6 2018 Download Windows 10
JS
, J
, M
. The 30 million–word gap: relevance for pediatrics.
. 2016
;(9
):–826
3B
, T
. Meaningful Differences in Everyday Parenting and Intellectual Development in Young American Children
. : Brooke
; 4DE
, LL
, PJ
. Reexamining the verbal environments of children from different socioeconomic backgrounds [published online ahead of print April 30, 2018].
. doi:5A
, A
. Twenty years after “meaningful differences,” it’s time to reframe the “deficit” debate about the importance of children’s early language experience.
. 2015
![Word Counter 1 6 2018 Word Counter 1 6 2018](https://i.pinimg.com/originals/ee/c1/f8/eec1f882001b1f1a674b26cb9eef2994.jpg)
1
):–4
6N
, E
, S
, et al. J Ling Anthropol
. ;25
():66
–7JK
, KS
, ME
. How the word gap argument negatively impacts young children of Latinx immigrants’ conceptualizations of learning.
. 2017
;(3
):–334
8B
. The debate over the young “disadvantaged child”: preschool intervention, developmental psychology, and compensatory education in the 1960s and early 1970s.
. 2012
;(6
):–36
9O
. Five Families: Mexican Case Studies in the Culture of Poverty
. : Random House
![Word Word](https://slideplayer.com/slide/17169088/99/images/18/4%2F6%2F2018+Static+Confusion…+C+has+a+different+use+for+the+word+static+%3A+to+create+a+persistent+local+variable..jpg)
M
. What’s Wrong With the Poor? Race, Psychiatry and the War on Poverty
. : UNC Press
Word Counter 1 6 2018 Free
; 11A
. . New York, NY
: ; 2016
12ST
, EM
, E
, RJ
, A
, AF
. Community health and advocacy training in pediatrics: using asset-based community development for sustainability.
. 2012
Word Counter 1 6 2018
;(2
):–184.e1
Copyright © 2018 by the American Academy of Pediatrics