@ Elite College Students Who Can’t Read Books

[underwaterrhymes]

Oct 16, 2024 9:34:32 GMT -5 Jalapeñomel said:

The last part of the article: "I can imagine worse preparations for the trials, and thrills, of Lit Hum. Riordan’s series, although full of frothy action and sometimes sophomoric humor, also cleverly engages in a literary exercise as old as the Western canon: spinning new adventures for the petulant gods and compromised heroes of Greek mythology. But of course there is a reason that, despite millennia of reinterpretations, we’ve never forgotten the originals. To understand the human condition, and to appreciate humankind’s greatest achievements, you still need to read The Iliad—all of it."

I have never read The Iliad. I did read The Odyssey and hated it. So awful. Misogynistic, xenophobic crap and it wasn’t taught to me in a way that allowed us to discuss what is problematic about it in todays society, which I would have enjoyed. It was just - this book is a classic and important. That’s a big problem.

FWIW, I think we should teach (some) classics along with other literature, but do in a way that dissects what about how their messaging does or doesn’t work in todays’s society. That’s real critical thinking right there.

I ALSO love what Norway is doing and teaching kids how to dissect misinformation online. Let’s do that too.

[Jalapeñomel]

Oct 16, 2024 10:08:02 GMT -5 underwaterrhymes said:

Oct 16, 2024 9:34:32 GMT -5 Jalapeñomel said:

The last part of the article: "I can imagine worse preparations for the trials, and thrills, of Lit Hum. Riordan’s series, although full of frothy action and sometimes sophomoric humor, also cleverly engages in a literary exercise as old as the Western canon: spinning new adventures for the petulant gods and compromised heroes of Greek mythology. But of course there is a reason that, despite millennia of reinterpretations, we’ve never forgotten the originals. To understand the human condition, and to appreciate humankind’s greatest achievements, you still need to read The Iliad—all of it."

I have never read The Iliad. I did read The Odyssey and hated it. So awful. Misogynistic, xenophobic crap and it wasn’t taught to me in a way that allowed us to discuss what is problematic about it in todays society, which I would have enjoyed. It was just - this book is a classic and important. That’s a big problem.

FWIW, I think we should teach (some) classics along with other literature, but do in a way that dissects what about how their messaging does or doesn’t work in todays’s society. That’s real critical thinking right there.

I ALSO love what Norway is doing and teaching kids how to dissect misinformation online. Let’s do that too.

I think many teachers do teach it this way...just because we were taught one way doesn't mean it's still taught this way! And teachers do teach students how to dissect misinformation online...the unit after my AP exam is all on science bias in the media.  Our Econ teacher does a unit on bogus websites.  And it's not unique to my school...lots of schools teach this way. 

I'm frustrated with this conversation, because it seems that we are missing the point. The point is that kids aren't reading full texts. Regardless if it's the Iliad or Percy Jackson, they aren't reading books. Sure, some of this is the fault of teachers and administration, but it's also the fault of us parents, who are allowing our kids to consume copious amounts of social media, video games, and television. 

[picksthemusic]

Oct 16, 2024 1:12:02 GMT -5 basilosaurus said:

Oct 15, 2024 16:37:53 GMT -5 picksthemusic said:

DD is in 7th and they are reading The Outsiders. They are reading along with an audiobook in class. DH has an issue with it - I do not, as I see audiobooks as books and listening is just as good (if not better than) reading to yourself.

This would drive me bonkers since reading for me is much faster than listening. I'm sure I would read ahead and be done with the book and then have to sit there fuming while listening in class. Or am I interpreting this incorrectly? Maybe they read outsiders and listen to another book. 

No, they are 'reading' it with the book and audiobook in class. I think honestly it's an equity thing - giving every kid the opportunity to read together in class regardless of reading ability, and they also have a copy of the book to take home and read at their own pace.

[pixy0stix]

I'm on my phone and kinda mad, so this might come out as gibberish.

Why do we have the expectation that kids have to relate to a text subject for them to be taught it? This is why I've thought for years that literature is vastly harder than any of the STEM fields, because you actually have to use your brain instead of reciting back what you've learned by rote. No one is expecting kids to relate to algebra to be able to learn it.

[pixy0stix]

Also, I don't care what people read for pleasure. I just want them to fucking READ.

[pixy0stix]

And another thing (lololol), there is a lot of value to what Sent said that much of the literature taught in schools is white male centric. However, that's true for all fields of study.

[kitty]

I definitely recall being allowed to choose some books in the late 80s/early 90s. The teacher would often have 4-6 books to choose from and each student was expected to pick one, read it, and write a book report about it. I typically read all of the books in the amount of time they gave the class to read one but that was because I was a voracious reader whose family socioeconomic status left me basically extracurricular activity-less until HS when I was able to join things on my own and take the late bus. The teachers in the city schools were always fine with letting me return one book and borrow the next one which made me happy because we didn't own a lot of books at home. I only wrote the book report on one book as required because I didn't enjoy writing book reports lol.

This year my 8th grader's ELA class will read The Outsiders, Night, Boys in the Boot, and To Kill a Mockingbird, in addition to additional short stories, non-fiction articles, and poems. They usually will watch the movie after both the book and whatever essay they had to write about the book are completed. When they read novels, they are expected to read and take notes on one chapter each night and they will have an open note quiz the following day to incentivize keeping up and taking decent notes. I think this sounds reasonable and am wondering if kids not reading full texts is "regional?"

I don't think we can say that because the classics are outdated or problematic or full of funny old language we just shouldn't read them at all. They are part of our shared history which is important to know about, both good and bad. Allowing discussion about how these things work or don't work in today's society seems like it would be a prerequisite for engaged students but I'm in a STEM field so I'm not up on how things are done in lit classes these days.

[picksthemusic]

And weren't we all reading VC Andrews and passing them around like contraband in junior high? Like... let the kids read. lol

[abs]

Oct 16, 2024 10:38:50 GMT -5 Jalapeñomel said:

Oct 16, 2024 10:08:02 GMT -5 underwaterrhymes said:

I have never read The Iliad. I did read The Odyssey and hated it. So awful. Misogynistic, xenophobic crap and it wasn’t taught to me in a way that allowed us to discuss what is problematic about it in todays society, which I would have enjoyed. It was just - this book is a classic and important. That’s a big problem.

FWIW, I think we should teach (some) classics along with other literature, but do in a way that dissects what about how their messaging does or doesn’t work in todays’s society. That’s real critical thinking right there.

I ALSO love what Norway is doing and teaching kids how to dissect misinformation online. Let’s do that too.

I think many teachers do teach it this way...just because we were taught one way doesn't mean it's still taught this way! And teachers do teach students how to dissect misinformation online...the unit after my AP exam is all on science bias in the media.  Our Econ teacher does a unit on bogus websites.  And it's not unique to my school...lots of schools teach this way. 

I'm frustrated with this conversation, because it seems that we are missing the point. The point is that kids aren't reading full texts. Regardless if it's the Iliad or Percy Jackson, they aren't reading books. Sure, some of this is the fault of teachers and administration, but it's also the fault of us parents, who are allowing our kids to consume copious amounts of social media, video games, and television. 

Sure. It’s all of it. I truly think the root is that school has become test centric above all else though along with a heaping dose of don’t make parents mad. The vast majority of kids aren’t reading books because they just aren’t exposed to them anymore. Class libraries have to be vetted. Funding shortages means librarians are being let go. It’s so much more than social media bad. In fact in some ways social media has fueled interest in reading. Bookstagram and BookTok are very popular with the teens I know.

It’s all horribly sad and there has to be a better way. This isn’t the fault of teachers. It’s not the administration’s fault either. It’s the state government and the test companies lining their pockets. I recognize that not all states are in the same boat but it’s bad in Texas. Really bad. Teachers don’t even make their own tests anymore. They come from the district. All books that DD has read in junior high are used more for writing assignments than anything else.

I do think we are on the verge of a teacher uprising. I wish Abbott was up for reelection this year. I think he’d lose.

[kitty]

Oct 16, 2024 10:53:24 GMT -5 pixy0stix said:

I'm on my phone and kinda mad, so this might come out as gibberish.

Why do we have the expectation that kids have to relate to a text subject for them to be taught it? This is why I've thought for years that literature is vastly harder than any of the STEM fields, because you actually have to use your brain instead of reciting back what you've learned by rote. No one is expecting kids to relate to algebra to be able to learn it.

I completely agree with the bolded but STEM not using your brain is bananas.

In science, there are a lot of things you have to learn somewhat by rote in the early levels (similar to math) but that is just because you need the building blocks to get to the good stuff. I assure you that my graduate STEM degree and my STEM career have had much more "using my brain" than just reciting things back. You need to learn phonics by rote to make it to literature someday; the runway for STEM is just often longer.

At my liberal arts undergrad they offered "rocks for jocks" type non-major STEM classes to satisfy the core requirements but there was no such thing as non-major lit or history class for the STEM majors so we were expected to work on the same level as the humanities majors in those classes. If STEM is so easy, why didn't the non-majors take orgo and pchem and quantum mechanics with me?

[abs]

Oct 16, 2024 11:12:53 GMT -5 picksthemusic said:

And weren't we all reading VC Andrews and passing them around like contraband in junior high? Like... let the kids read. lol

Yes we were. And Sweet Valley High before that. Which is why when my 13 year old asked to read Fourth Wing I said go for it. She loved loved loved it and it was a great way to bond.

[pixy0stix]

Oct 16, 2024 11:17:04 GMT -5 kitty said:

Oct 16, 2024 10:53:24 GMT -5 pixy0stix said:

I'm on my phone and kinda mad, so this might come out as gibberish.

Why do we have the expectation that kids have to relate to a text subject for them to be taught it? This is why I've thought for years that literature is vastly harder than any of the STEM fields, because you actually have to use your brain instead of reciting back what you've learned by rote. No one is expecting kids to relate to algebra to be able to learn it.

I completely agree with the bolded but STEM not using your brain is bananas.

In science, there are a lot of things you have to learn somewhat by rote in the early levels (similar to math) but that is just because you need the building blocks to get to the good stuff. I assure you that my graduate STEM degree and my STEM career have had much more "using my brain" than just reciting things back. You need to learn phonics by rote to make it to literature someday; the runway for STEM is just often longer.

At my liberal arts undergrad they offered "rocks for jocks" type non-major STEM classes to satisfy the core requirements but there was no such thing as non-major lit or history class for the STEM majors so we were expected to work on the same level as the humanities majors in those classes. If STEM is so easy, why didn't the non-majors take orgo and pchem and quantum mechanics with me?

Easy, because it's not something you have to use every day, but a very specific skill set.

In this thread every single person is using what they learned in an English class. Grammar, punctuation, synthesis of text and application of persuasive writing. Empathy for different views, and critical reasoning.

There is not a single time where quantum mechanics has come up where I would need it.

I can also pull up how those fields of study are stagnating because kids aren't being asked to stretch their brains, and why STEAM (aka traditional incorporation of the humanities) is making a comeback.

[picksthemusic]

Oct 16, 2024 11:19:30 GMT -5 abs said:

Oct 16, 2024 11:12:53 GMT -5 picksthemusic said:

And weren't we all reading VC Andrews and passing them around like contraband in junior high? Like... let the kids read. lol

Yes we were. And Sweet Valley High before that. Which is why when my 13 year old asked to read Fourth Wing I said go for it. She loved loved loved it and it was a great way to bond.

I still need to read that. I have the first two books but haven't cracked them open yet.

[kitty]

Oct 16, 2024 11:23:45 GMT -5 pixy0stix said:

Oct 16, 2024 11:17:04 GMT -5 kitty said:

I completely agree with the bolded but STEM not using your brain is bananas.

In science, there are a lot of things you have to learn somewhat by rote in the early levels (similar to math) but that is just because you need the building blocks to get to the good stuff. I assure you that my graduate STEM degree and my STEM career have had much more "using my brain" than just reciting things back. You need to learn phonics by rote to make it to literature someday; the runway for STEM is just often longer.

At my liberal arts undergrad they offered "rocks for jocks" type non-major STEM classes to satisfy the core requirements but there was no such thing as non-major lit or history class for the STEM majors so we were expected to work on the same level as the humanities majors in those classes. If STEM is so easy, why didn't the non-majors take orgo and pchem and quantum mechanics with me?

Easy, because it's not something you have to use every day, but a very specific skill set.

In this thread every single person is using what they learned in an English class. Grammar, punctuation, synthesis of text and application of persuasive writing. Empathy for different views, and critical reasoning.

There is not a single time where quantum mechanics has come up where I would need it.

I can also pull up how those fields of study are stagnating because kids aren't being asked to stretch their brains, and why STEAM (aka traditional incorporation of the humanities) is making a comeback.

I think we would be better off as a society if more people retained what they learned in science and math classes and did use those skills regularly.

Maybe we wouldn't have as much misinformation about climate change to combat or as many people falling prey to predatory lending or so much disregard for the entire public health field if some of these things were thought of as something everyone should use every day.

I knew I was going to major in STEM and purposely chose a liberal arts school because I wanted to have a well-rounded education for my undergrad degree so I'm not advocating for STEM at the exclusion of everything else. I think it is all important to end up with a society of critical thinkers.

[pixy0stix]

Oct 16, 2024 11:34:34 GMT -5 kitty said:

Oct 16, 2024 11:23:45 GMT -5 pixy0stix said:

Easy, because it's not something you have to use every day, but a very specific skill set.

In this thread every single person is using what they learned in an English class. Grammar, punctuation, synthesis of text and application of persuasive writing. Empathy for different views, and critical reasoning.

There is not a single time where quantum mechanics has come up where I would need it.

I can also pull up how those fields of study are stagnating because kids aren't being asked to stretch their brains, and why STEAM (aka traditional incorporation of the humanities) is making a comeback.

I think we would be better off as a society if more people retained what they learned in science and math classes and did use those skills regularly.

Maybe we wouldn't have as much misinformation about climate change to combat or as many people falling prey to predatory lending or so much disregard for the entire public health field if some of these things were thought of as something everyone should use every day.

I knew I was going to major in STEM and purposely chose a liberal arts school because I wanted to have a well-rounded education for my undergrad degree so I'm not advocating for STEM at the exclusion of everything else. I think it is all important to end up with a society of critical thinkers.

I hate to burst your bubble, but none of that is STEM related. It's all based in the humanities fields. I don't have to understand the nuances to be able to trust the science if I can reason it out.

I don't have to understand the process from studying bread mold to the advent of penicillin to see how the advent of that medicine changed the course of human history. I get that information from scientists (and historians) synthesizing the information into relatable chunks that the layperson can understand, which is a humanities based skill. Critical thinking is a humanities skill.

A concrete example of this is when Michael Crichton published The State of Fear and used a paper published by the soil lab I was working for to erroneously back up his information. The director of the lab had me buy, read, and synthesize his argument and then draft a response. She didn't ask he colleagues, she didn't ask her grad students, she asked me - a newly minted English grad with an education minor - to do this. Because she knew that her and her colleagues response would be too technical and she felt it was important to reach all audiences.

[msmerymac]

Oct 15, 2024 13:25:06 GMT -5 pixy0stix said:

Hell, we can't even get people here to read a short article before people comment with a fully formed (and sometimes way off topic) opinion. (No one in this thread... yet.)

There's just so many themes packed into the article - teaching to the test; lack of critical thinking when you're just asked to synthesize the material; overscheduling activities; not allowing people to be "bored; the erosion of the education system/grade inflation; technology and the shortening of attention spans; pursuing degrees for the paycheck; STEM becoming God and how we're losing the humanities (and how that ultimately erodes STEM itself); etc.

One thing that wasn't brought up was how we're losing the ability to empathize with others if we're not allowed to read about our shared human experience.

To answer the question in the OP - audiobooks are books. As humans we have a vast cultural touchpoint of oral history and traditions, audiobooks fit into that.

I’ve also long lamented the fact that the last few generations have treated college as “job training” rather than education for the sake of education, which goes along with the loss of humanities a bit. Can’t major in history, what will you do with that degree?! Spanish major? What, are you going to teach high school?

I understand that multiple things are true - college is expensive, the GI Bill opened higher education up to millions of people who may not otherwise have been able to go (my grandfather included), and most schools, especially elite ones, have long been tasked with educating straight, white, Christian men as a way to consolidate power in society.

But I cringe a bit at what appears to be a complete lack of intellectual curiosity from students at what is ostensibly one of the top universities in the world.

[mcppalmbeach]

Oct 16, 2024 12:05:51 GMT -5 msmerymac said:

Oct 15, 2024 13:25:06 GMT -5 pixy0stix said:

Hell, we can't even get people here to read a short article before people comment with a fully formed (and sometimes way off topic) opinion. (No one in this thread... yet.)

There's just so many themes packed into the article - teaching to the test; lack of critical thinking when you're just asked to synthesize the material; overscheduling activities; not allowing people to be "bored; the erosion of the education system/grade inflation; technology and the shortening of attention spans; pursuing degrees for the paycheck; STEM becoming God and how we're losing the humanities (and how that ultimately erodes STEM itself); etc.

One thing that wasn't brought up was how we're losing the ability to empathize with others if we're not allowed to read about our shared human experience.

To answer the question in the OP - audiobooks are books. As humans we have a vast cultural touchpoint of oral history and traditions, audiobooks fit into that.

I’ve also long lamented the fact that the last few generations have treated college as “job training” rather than education for the sake of education, which goes along with the loss of humanities a bit. Can’t major in history, what will you do with that degree?! Spanish major? What, are you going to teach high school?

I understand that multiple things are true - college is expensive, the GI Bill opened higher education up to millions of people who may not otherwise have been able to go (my grandfather included), and most schools, especially elite ones, have long been tasked with educating straight, white, Christian men as a way to consolidate power in society.

But I cringe a bit at what appears to be a complete lack of intellectual curiosity from students at what is ostensibly one of the top universities in the world.

All this. But I’m the biggest education for education’s sake person you will ever meet. Unfortunately that mindset doesn’t fuel a capitalistic society. Maybe not my favorite classes, but two of the best experiences I had in college were geology and art history. I was never ever going into that at as a field, but feel so enriched by havingtaken them. Folding little people into boxes and not broadening their worldviews is how we ended up with Trump.

[smock]

Oct 16, 2024 6:51:06 GMT -5 underwaterrhymes said:

“For years, Dames has asked his first-years about their favorite book. In the past, they cited books such as Wuthering Heights and Jane Eyre. Now, he says, almost half of them cite young-adult books. Rick Riordan’s Percy Jackson series seems to be a particular favorite.”

I honestly think it’s wrong to criticize this. My favorite books growing up were Charlotte’s Web, Where the Red Fern Grows, Bridge to Terabithia, It and The Stand. Those are all great! To this day I see people in Gen X saying things like “To Kill a Mockingbird is my favorite book.” While it is a great novel, I think it’s wonderful if people are saying Percy Jackson is their favorite because to me this says they’re reading for pleasure and they are comfortable admitting what they like to read rather than what they “should” like to read.

That's such a good point – there's way less shaming today for liking "popular" books/music/movies. What 20 year old TRUTHFULLY says Wuthering Heights is their FAVORITE book!?! Maybe these professors just got used to college students giving the "right" answer.

I wonder if the Gen Zers in college are just being more honest all around? Maybe they're confessing when they don't do the reading, rather than lying and faking their way through class discussions. 

[smock]

Oct 16, 2024 10:53:24 GMT -5 pixy0stix said:

I'm on my phone and kinda mad, so this might come out as gibberish.

Why do we have the expectation that kids have to relate to a text subject for them to be taught it? This is why I've thought for years that literature is vastly harder than any of the STEM fields, because you actually have to use your brain instead of reciting back what you've learned by rote. No one is expecting kids to relate to algebra to be able to learn it.

This is sort of a tangent, but I've noticed a huge change in how elementary kids learn math. The focus is on understanding the why behind simple stuff like addition/subtraction/etc. rather than memorizing. And giving kids lots of different tools to solve math problems so they can find approaches that make sense to them. And about half of their math work is word problems.

These are all such positive changes that help kids "relate" to math, and I'm curious if this new pedagogical approach will mean fewer students (often girls) "opting out" of math as they reach middle school. This is an area where applying a humanities-informed approach could really pay off. 

[Jalapeñomel]

Oct 16, 2024 10:53:24 GMT -5 pixy0stix said:

I'm on my phone and kinda mad, so this might come out as gibberish.

Why do we have the expectation that kids have to relate to a text subject for them to be taught it? This is why I've thought for years that literature is vastly harder than any of the STEM fields, because you actually have to use your brain instead of reciting back what you've learned by rote. No one is expecting kids to relate to algebra to be able to learn it.

This is where I sit, but couldn't articulate.  

[Jalapeñomel]

Oct 16, 2024 11:15:39 GMT -5 abs said:

Oct 16, 2024 10:38:50 GMT -5 Jalapeñomel said:

I think many teachers do teach it this way...just because we were taught one way doesn't mean it's still taught this way! And teachers do teach students how to dissect misinformation online...the unit after my AP exam is all on science bias in the media.  Our Econ teacher does a unit on bogus websites.  And it's not unique to my school...lots of schools teach this way. 

I'm frustrated with this conversation, because it seems that we are missing the point. The point is that kids aren't reading full texts. Regardless if it's the Iliad or Percy Jackson, they aren't reading books. Sure, some of this is the fault of teachers and administration, but it's also the fault of us parents, who are allowing our kids to consume copious amounts of social media, video games, and television. 

Sure. It’s all of it. I truly think the root is that school has become test centric above all else though along with a heaping dose of don’t make parents mad. The vast majority of kids aren’t reading books because they just aren’t exposed to them anymore. Class libraries have to be vetted. Funding shortages means librarians are being let go. It’s so much more than social media bad. In fact in some ways social media has fueled interest in reading. Bookstagram and BookTok are very popular with the teens I know.

It’s all horribly sad and there has to be a better way. This isn’t the fault of teachers. It’s not the administration’s fault either. It’s the state government and the test companies lining their pockets. I recognize that not all states are in the same boat but it’s bad in Texas. Really bad. Teachers don’t even make their own tests anymore. They come from the district. All books that DD has read in junior high are used more for writing assignments than anything else.

I do think we are on the verge of a teacher uprising. I wish Abbott was up for reelection this year. I think he’d lose.

It's also the pressure of parents...parents want their kids to get a great SAT/ACT score, they want them to get 5s on the AP exams, they want them to have 4.0+ GPAs...state testing feeds into this pressure from parents, from society. We can point the finger at everyone else, but until we recognize that we are also part of the problem, we will be in a loop of testing. 

[abs]

Oct 16, 2024 12:40:01 GMT -5 Jalapeñomel said:

Oct 16, 2024 11:15:39 GMT -5 abs said:

Sure. It’s all of it. I truly think the root is that school has become test centric above all else though along with a heaping dose of don’t make parents mad. The vast majority of kids aren’t reading books because they just aren’t exposed to them anymore. Class libraries have to be vetted. Funding shortages means librarians are being let go. It’s so much more than social media bad. In fact in some ways social media has fueled interest in reading. Bookstagram and BookTok are very popular with the teens I know.

It’s all horribly sad and there has to be a better way. This isn’t the fault of teachers. It’s not the administration’s fault either. It’s the state government and the test companies lining their pockets. I recognize that not all states are in the same boat but it’s bad in Texas. Really bad. Teachers don’t even make their own tests anymore. They come from the district. All books that DD has read in junior high are used more for writing assignments than anything else.

I do think we are on the verge of a teacher uprising. I wish Abbott was up for reelection this year. I think he’d lose.

It's also the pressure of parents...parents want their kids to get a great SAT/ACT score, they want them to get 5s on the AP exams, they want them to have 4.0+ GPAs...state testing feeds into this pressure from parents, from society. We can point the finger at everyone else, but until we recognize that we are also part of the problem, we will be in a loop of testing. 

I don’t disagree at all. It’s sort of chicken and egg and what came first but parents over all have lost their freaking minds. That’s probably another reason we can’t have books….teachers have to answer the 900 complaint emails instead. Y’all aren’t paid nearly enough.

[cville]

Oct 16, 2024 11:12:53 GMT -5 picksthemusic said:

And weren't we all reading VC Andrews and passing them around like contraband in junior high? Like... let the kids read. lol

Yes. But if a college professor had asked me what my favorite book was, I would have had more recently-read, complex examples than "Logan Likes Mary-Anne" and something involving Jessica and Elizabeth and their matching lavaliers and shared Spyder convertible.

When I hear that a 20 year old's favorite book is Percy Jackson it says to me that around middle school-ish is about the last time they were asked to or had the luxury of devoting time to reading something rather than cramming disparate facts into their heads to get a high ACT score.

Don't get me wrong, The Witch of Blackbird Pond was a middle grade favorite I reread as recently as law school. But my favorite book when I started college was Beloved. It changed the entirety of how I thought about literature.

[cville]

Wuthering Heights and Tess of the D'Ubervilles are trash. I hate them both. I wish everyone fell off a moor and into the sea.

[Deleted]

Oct 16, 2024 13:23:00 GMT -5 cville said:

Oct 16, 2024 11:12:53 GMT -5 picksthemusic said:

And weren't we all reading VC Andrews and passing them around like contraband in junior high? Like... let the kids read. lol

Yes. But if a college professor had asked me what my favorite book was, I would have had more recently-read, complex examples than "Logan Likes Mary-Anne" and something involving Jessica and Elizabeth and their matching lavaliers and shared Spyder convertible.

When I hear that a 20 year old's favorite book is Percy Jackson it says to me that around middle school-ish is about the last time they were asked to or had the luxury of devoting time to reading something rather than cramming disparate facts into their heads to get a high ACT score.

Don't get me wrong, The Witch of Blackbird Pond was a middle grade favorite I reread as recently as law school. But my favorite book when I started college was Beloved. It changed the entirety of how I thought about literature.

Or maybe it means that of all the things they’ve read since, they most fondly remember the books that first captured their imagination and fascinated them. I’ve read a LOT of books for pleasure in adulthood, and it’s still books I read as a middle-schooler that make me feel very fondly about reading. I’m guessing if I read them again now they may not hold the same power over me as they did then. Maybe there’s something that happens to our brains in middle school that allows us to experience wonder in ways we can’t do anymore as adults.

[lust2hart]

Oct 16, 2024 14:11:52 GMT -5 @villainv said:

Oct 16, 2024 13:23:00 GMT -5 cville said:

Yes. But if a college professor had asked me what my favorite book was, I would have had more recently-read, complex examples than "Logan Likes Mary-Anne" and something involving Jessica and Elizabeth and their matching lavaliers and shared Spyder convertible.

When I hear that a 20 year old's favorite book is Percy Jackson it says to me that around middle school-ish is about the last time they were asked to or had the luxury of devoting time to reading something rather than cramming disparate facts into their heads to get a high ACT score.

Don't get me wrong, The Witch of Blackbird Pond was a middle grade favorite I reread as recently as law school. But my favorite book when I started college was Beloved. It changed the entirety of how I thought about literature.

Or maybe it means that of all the things they’ve read since, they most fondly remember the books that first captured their imagination and fascinated them. I’ve read a LOT of books for pleasure in adulthood, and it’s still books I read as a middle-schooler that make me feel very fondly about reading. I’m guessing if I read them again now they may not hold the same power over me as they did then. Maybe there’s something that happens to our brains in middle school that allows us to experience wonder in ways we can’t do anymore as adults.

Anne of Green Gables is still one of my favorite books. 

[abs]

Oct 16, 2024 14:11:52 GMT -5 @villainv said:

Oct 16, 2024 13:23:00 GMT -5 cville said:

Yes. But if a college professor had asked me what my favorite book was, I would have had more recently-read, complex examples than "Logan Likes Mary-Anne" and something involving Jessica and Elizabeth and their matching lavaliers and shared Spyder convertible.

When I hear that a 20 year old's favorite book is Percy Jackson it says to me that around middle school-ish is about the last time they were asked to or had the luxury of devoting time to reading something rather than cramming disparate facts into their heads to get a high ACT score.

Don't get me wrong, The Witch of Blackbird Pond was a middle grade favorite I reread as recently as law school. But my favorite book when I started college was Beloved. It changed the entirety of how I thought about literature.

Or maybe it means that of all the things they’ve read since, they most fondly remember the books that first captured their imagination and fascinated them. I’ve read a LOT of books for pleasure in adulthood, and it’s still books I read as a middle-schooler that make me feel very fondly about reading. I’m guessing if I read them again now they may not hold the same power over me as they did then. Maybe there’s something that happens to our brains in middle school that allows us to experience wonder in ways we can’t do anymore as adults.

Fully agree. It was all the Judy Blume and Babysitter’s Club and Christoper Pike books that made me love reading. Being able to disect Shakespeare and The Great Gatsby is another (and important) skill altogether. Do the childhood books help with that? Yes probably but the early books of my choosing are the ones that transported me to another world. The books I choose as an adult are the same. I am glad I’ve read some of the classics but I certainly don’t choose them now.

[sillygoosegirl]

I really question the assumption that most of the students actually can read well enough. You guys have all listened to "Sold A Story" by now, right? Lots of kids just aren't being taught to read and aren't learning to read. I'm sure not getting practice at reading whole books in high school doesn't help, but I don't see how they can be so sure lack of reading ability isn't also driving the decision to assign less reading and fewer whole books in high school.

I'm a parent of a struggling reader, and the number of people who blow off my concerns (whether they are other parents, school administrators, the neuropsych) is mindboggling. It seems like most people just don't think that reading well is very important anymore. It's not just that teachers are teaching to tests that don't go deeper than "identify the main idea in a short passage", it seems like as a larger society, we seem to think that you haven't really changed the meaning if you read "the dog is on the crate" instead of "the dog is in the crate", at least judging by how many people tell me that changing the small words doesn't change the meaning or the child's ability to comprehend. Certainly when we are measuring "comprehension" on a multiple guess test, that's a mistake that is unlikely to change which answer you select... but that shouldn't be confused with not changing the meaning of the phrase.

I love audiobooks. I'm pretty sure I'm dyslexic and they are the most efficient way for me to consume books. But they aren't as efficient as skilled silent reading. They aren't always available. They leave you woefully unprepared to spell the names of the characters or cite page numbers in your essay. For content with embedded figures, photos, or diagrams, you often end up without the whole picture. I don't see them as that great of a replacement for reading, especially for people who have the capacity to actually become good readers in the traditional sense of the word. I'm well aware of how insurmountable the task of reading the traditional large quantities of text is for struggling readers, because I have plenty of lived experience with that, and it matches exactly what they are quoting these students as saying. I even thought I was a competent reader back then, since back then I thought all that time I spent trying to figure out words working backwards from context->meaning->pronunciation was normal (I know now it's not, it's just what I was doing to compensate for a terrible reading vocabulary). If the core problem of the students is not being able to pay attention--which frankly I doubt, but supposing it was--audiobooks aren't going to help because they are slower than skilled readers can read and they really really tempt you to multi-task (which virtually all humans are bad at, even the humans who think they are good at it). I love multitasking with an audiobook because my adult life is filled with mind-numbingly boring mundane tasks, and because I'm not a great reader, if I was back in a college literature class, audio would probably be a good way for me to go to get the most out of the books, but listening while I cook dinner is probably NOT the best way to get myself prepared for class.

[mcppalmbeach]

I feel about book selection like food. I mean…fed is best so if all you like to eat are French fries and hamburgers well that will get the job done. But really every once in a while someone should come along and make you eat a salad for your overall wellbeing. But now school isn’t serving salads anymore and I don’t know many kids who wouldn’t pick Percy Jackson over Moby Dick. And as much as I love to read, it’s hard for me to force my kid to read something more substantive on top of a heavy school workload so if he read at home (which he sadly does not) it’s going to be junk.

[Poppy]

I read a LOT as a kid, though admittedly skipped most books that were assigned in school. By the time I was a couple years out of college (around the time I got a smart phone), I was barely reading books anymore. I kind of have to on reading after DNFing book after book. I have really only just started getting back into reading but I still struggle with anything dry.

For me, it is definitely an attention span thing. I read a lot of news, forums, blogs, etc but longer-form stuff is a struggle. It makes me sad. I do think that all the reading I did when I was young made a big difference for me in terms of empathy and open mindedness.