Track your comments!
[x]


When you register, comments on your articles and replies to your comments appear here. Register Now!

Sign in to your account
[x]

Not a Scientific Blogging member yet?

Register Now for a Free Scientificblogging.com Account

  • Customize your profile with pictures, banner, a blogroll and more.
  • Leave comments on articles, add other members to your friend lists, chat with people on the site.
  • Write blog posts that can be seen by hundreds of thousands of readers.

It's free and it only takes a minute!

Already a Scientific Blogging member?

Sign In Now

Banner
By Becky Jungbauer | August 30th 2009 07:45 AM | 3 comments | Print | E-mail | Track Comments
.

More A Truth Universally Acknowledged articles

All

About Becky Jungbauer

A scientist and journalist by training, I enjoy all things science, especially science-related humor. My column title is a throwback to Jane Austen's famous first line in Pride and Prejudice


... Full Bio

We've all slogged through books in school that we didn't particularly like, wondering how knowing how to interpret the deeper subtexts of the oligarchial collectivist society in Orwell's 1984 will help us as adults.

Education is a perennial topic of concern, and within that debate reading is always a touchpoint. How do you teach literature? How do you instill a love of reading in kids who would rather play video games or watch TV?

A fascinating article in the NY Times describes a new method of doing just that. For those not familiar with the American public school system, the article describes it well:
In the method familiar to generations of students, an entire class reads a novel — often a classic — together to draw out the themes and study literary craft. That tradition, proponents say, builds a shared literary culture among students, exposes all readers to works of quality and complexity and is the best way to prepare students for standardized tests.

I was in agreement up until the last two words. Yes, we do learn lessons that prepare us for standardized tests, but should that really be the goal? What about being able to cogently discuss a novel or play or poem? What about a love of literature?

Instead, a junior high school teacher in Atlanta is "turning over all the decisions about which books to read to the students in her seventh- and eighth-grade English classes."

I had two immediate reactions. One, is that really such a good idea? And at the same time, two, that's a great idea!
But fans of the reading workshop say that assigning books leaves many children bored or unable to understand the texts. Letting students choose their own books, they say, can help to build a lifelong love of reading.

"I feel like almost every kid in my classroom is engaged in a novel that they’re actually interacting with,” Ms. McNeill said, several months into her experiment. “Whereas when I do ‘To Kill a Mockingbird,” I know that I have some kids that just don’t get into it.”

Critics of the approach say that reading as a group generally leads to more meaningful insights, and they question whether teachers can really keep up with a roomful of children reading different books. Even more important, they say, is the loss of a common body of knowledge based on the literary classics — often difficult books that children are unlikely to choose for themselves.

What child is going to pick up ‘Moby-Dick’?” said Diane Ravitch, a professor of education at New York University who was assistant education secretary under President George H.W. Bush. "Kids will pick things that are trendy and popular. But that’s what you should do in your free time."

I see both sides of the argument. Kids should be reading things like Harry Potter in their free time. It's easy and doesn't require a teacher to help you through more difficult passages. But what if kids don't read in their free time? And do we need a common body of knowledge?

I read all the time. I always have, and I love it. So I'm probably not the best example. But one of my cousins was not in to reading when he was younger, so to encourage him my aunt gave him Harry Potter, Captain Underpants, etc - and he is a voracious reader now. Would he pick up Moby Dick? I don't know.

When I was 13, I was assigned the Iliad, Aeneid, and the Odyssey. It was Greek to me. I got the basics, of course, but I had to read those same books again in college for a course on Greek mythology and they sunk in a bit better. I prefer classics to vapid chick lit, so maybe I would have picked them up at some point. With two exceptions, I've loved all the books I read in school - I was in a "great books" program, so we had the history of great literature at our fingertips. (Exceptions being Lord of the Flies and The Moor's Last Sigh. Hated both of them.) But did I need to read the plays of Sophocles (which I enjoyed) to be a better participant in the world? Or should I have been allowed to pick my own books?

The article describes Ms. McNeill's attempts at changing the way she teaches literature and the way her students engage with it, to varying levels of success. I think a compromise might be best: select a list of books that kids "should" read - although I don't know how you'd determine that - and let them choose from among that list, as well as supplement with something of their choice off-list. 

Comments

Gerhard Adam's picture
What child is going to pick up ‘Moby-Dick’?” said Diane Ravitch, a
professor of education at New York University who was assistant
education secretary under President George H.W. Bush. "Kids will pick
things that are trendy and popular. But that’s what you should do in
your free time."

A better question would be, how many adults have read "Moby-Dick" without being forced, and how many are still reading classics?  If the objective is to try and develop a love of reading, then the student must unequivocally be able to choose.   Have them explore the themes in the stories they like, and let them mature into more varied readings.

It is preposterous to suggest that children should be reading books that their parents wouldn't read. 

I know when I was in school, I didn't mind reading some of the required books, but it was absolutely painful listening to the teacher go through all the tired cliches about the themes and  ideas in these stories.  To promote reading literature one must also be prepared to listen to the student's honest opinions and not simply try to shape what they are reading into the "required" results.

Reading is one of the few things one can do that will only be successful when the individual has complete freedom to choose.  I have never seen anyone successfully forced to read anything.

I thought my highschool had a pretty good system that's sort of a compromise between these two positions. They split up our English into "Composition" and "Literature" classes, so you'd have one of each per year. Composition covered the more technical aspects, and covered one, or maybe two, classics (Shakeseapre, Lord of the Flies, etc). The literature portion, however, was more college-like in that we had dozens of topical literature classes. Comedy, Literature of Unexplained Phenomena, Science Fiction, Fantasy, Mythology, American Lit, British Lit, and a bunch more I don't recall were all choices. Of course we still didn't get to choose the exact books we read, but at least this way we could choose a class that would feature books/stories that were more likely to interest us.

Of course, a few years after I graduated they had to change the system because, even though averages in state standardized tests were well above average for our school, it didn't fall within state guidelines.

Gerhard Adam's picture
Given the resultant literacy levels of adults as indicated by the National Center for Education Statistics, I would suggest that all of these approaches are miserable failures.

It would seem that with so few adults operating at sufficiently high literate levels, it clearly suggests that they are unprepared and unlikely to be reading any literary classics.  So while schools can continue to indulge in the fantasy that they are providing a kind of "classical" education, the statistics suggest otherwise.

In my experience, people that read a lot do so because they are primarily influenced by their parents who are also strong readers.   In addition, I suspect that even among people that read a lot, not many read, or will read, the "classics". 


Add a comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <sup> <sub> <a> <em> <strong> <center> <cite> <code> <TH><ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <img> <br> <p> <blockquote> <strike> <object> <param> <embed> <del> <pre> <b> <i> <table> <tbody> <div> <tr> <td> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr> <iframe>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
CAPTCHA
If you register, you will never be bothered to prove you are human again. And you get a real editor toolbar to use instead of this HTML thing that wards off spam bots.