In the Chicago Tribune today there was an article, "Balancing Act with Books," describing how teachers are having to change their reading lists, picking books that "both challenge and give a cultural reference."

quote:

"What we have found is not every student can and will read 400 pages of Huckleberry Finn," said Debby Fralick, English department chair at the Streamwood school. "We can't just teach a novel because we love it. Our role as English teachers is really changing."

Along with this article, the Tribune included survey results from the National Endowment of arts, U.S. Dept. of Labor, U.S. Dept. of Education, and the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation.

Question:
How many weekday minutes are spent reading for pleasure in the 15-24 age group (U.S. sample)?

Choices:
7
29
58
60
350

 

I am so glad that high school English departments are beginning to think in terms of regularly re-examining their reading lists. My 3 kids are only 5 yrs apart. As recently as 5 yrs ago, I was surprised to find my poor eldest (not a fiction-reader in any case!) wading in frustration through The Good Earth, The Grapes of Wrath, and The Catcher in the Rye, as though time had stood still since my late h.s. years in the mid-'60's. I am happy to report that my youngest's required reading list has a nice mix of classics that a h.s. teen can relate to (like Lord of the Flies and 1984) as well as recent fine historical literature like The Things They Carried, with a few always-classics like Romeo & Juliet and The Great Gatsby.

The teachers who made my kids readers were the few in elementary school who gave their students plenty of time every day in early grades to pick & read from the multiple baskets of readers available in the classroom.

Parents don't get off scot-free. If you cannot be seen whiling away the evening hours with a book, why would your kid even think to do it? My kids get a booster shot every August because the computer service is still pretty poor in Cape Cod, and there's blessed little to do while sunning oneself besides reading. We make it happen by ordering a huge box of age-appropriate books for them to choose from every summer.

quote:

Parents don't get off scot-free. If you cannot be seen whiling away the evening hours with a book, why would your kid even think to do it?

Sometimes that doesn't work. My parents were great readers (at a time BTV -- Before TV) yet I am the only one who read extensively. My brother and sister seldom read anything beyond the phone book, while I -- after several years of DEMANDS from my wife -- recently gave away 24 cartons of my old books to a library sale. And the wife's still not satisfied with the resulting open space.

I've posted this before, but that's because it made such an impression on me. When our kids were young (perhaps 5, 7 and 10?), we were planning to travel to a place in Wisconsin that had an outside theatre with Shakespeare productions. Before we left, we decided the kids should have some idea of what "Hamlet" was about, though we felt they were too young to read it. Therefore, we went to Borders and bought Cliff's notes, thinking we were being good parents to have them do some reading first. Well, the clerk in the store literally yelled at us for not having them read the real thing. I just felt she was way too judgmental.

In the end, the kids understood the story and loved "Hamlet."

quote:

Well, the clerk in the store literally yelled at us for not having them read the real thing. I just felt she was way too judgmental.

Hey, at least you found a Borders clerk who was passionate about literature.

quote:

My parents were great readers (at a time BTV -- Before TV) yet I am the only one who read extensively. My brother and sister seldom read anything beyond the phone book

My parents were both great readers, and my sister and I followed in their footsteps. My brother, however, hardly reads a thing. I attribute it to the acquisition of a TV. My parents deliberately refused to get one until my sister and I were 16+ for fear that it would affect our school work. My brother, however, would have been only 11 when the one-eyed monster appeared in the corner of the room.

I refused to have a TV in the house until I was in my forties. In those days I would read at least one book every day.

quote:

My parents were both great readers, and my sister and I followed in their footsteps. My brother, however, hardly reads a thing. I attribute it to the acquisition of a TV.

Oh, I don't know, arnie. I also think that people are so very different. We surely didn't raise our kids that differently, and yet they're so different in many ways. It may have played a role, but I doubt a big one.

There are 5 paltry guess? Come on folks! I want to post the answers (there were other age groups given, too), but let's have a bit more poll activity.

The poll looks a little odd to me, Kalleh. Why differentiate between 58 and 60 mins a week?

It has been awhile now, Stella, so I don't remember why I chose 58 and 60; clearly it was a mistake.

Here are the results from the article:

1) 15-24 year olds - 7 minutes per day during week; 10 minutes during weekend

2) 25-34 year olds - 9 minutes per day during the week; 11 minutes during the weekend

3) 35-44 year olds - 12 minutes per day during the week; 16 minutes during the weekend

4) 45-54 year olds - 17 minutes per day during the week; 24 minutes during the weekend

5) 55-64 year olds - 30 minutes per day during the week; 39 minutes during the weekend

6) 65 and older - 50 minutes per day during the week; 67 minutes during the weekend

Arnie, just today this article on television watching was in the Tribune It reports 2 studies (one from the 60s and one from the 90s) where they found no correlation with television watching and a child's test scores. The effect of television seems to be better for poorer children and those with English as a second language. Interestingly, they say that television is likely responsible for a rise in verbal IQ scores, but may be to blame for declines in the verbal SAT scores. The IQ, they said, uses everyday vocabulary, while the "SAT's look for 'Latin-based, literary vocabulary'."

I suppose the poll did not take into account the reading today's kids do on the computer? Some do little reading/writing there other than gabbing. Or there is my oddball youngest who is constantly doing something that involves using and interpreting symbols.. looks a lot like reading but it's actually inventing MP3 music by editing samples (>good grief<. But there is my eldest, who rarely reads books, and then only non-fiction: he reads a tremendous amount online in the course of researching and communicating about his favorite technical subjects.

If I can judge by my kids and their peers [born late '80's - early '90's), the tide has turned. Nobody that age sits in front of a TV for long. Their preferred "screen time" is interactive & often teamwork at computers & video systems.

You are right, bethree. I bet they didn't consider the computer, and there's a wealth of information to be read there (including my Blog...hint, hint. ) Good point.

This is a very interesting study - an equally interesting discussion among the group. I think about reading habits a lot, of course, and I've been disappointed, of late, to realize that I spend less and less time reading books. The computer screen, on the other hand, is almost always in front of me (unless I'm knitting).

I like bethree5's point, though, about computer reading. That is mostly what I'm doing. I watch and read about 100 blogs, I participate in this discussion board and Facebook and a few other social networks, and I have LOTS of email to sift through each day. I would say I probably spend 4-5 hours a day reading . . . and about 10 minutes reading books. If I get a really great book, I'll abandon other things (even my knitting!) to read it. By the same token, if I have a great knitting project, or a fun new computer game, I'll abandon all else and do those.

I've been part of conversations/trainings in the educational world where they've talked about how teaching methods have had to change over the last 40 years because (they speculate) of television. Children have shorter attention spans (note how Sesame Street is all done in "commercial length" segments of learning?), tend to be more commonly kinesthetic learners (rather than the verbal/aural learners most of us were/are), etc.

I found a great site that explains the different learning styles, and allows you to test yourself, too! Very interesting!

Oh yes, the other thing I wanted to say is this: my son's school seems to have abandoned almost all of the great books in exchange for schlock. The 6 books he had to choose from this summer for his assignment were, every single one of them, trash, IMHO. I wonder if they even thought about talking to a Librarian about their choices! One of the books was book 3 in a cheap, poorly-written series. Why would you pick book 3?

I'm assuming they're picking "light" reading for summer . . . but do they have to pick garbage? NTS: talk to his teachers about this to maybe change it for next summer.