Picture Books for High Schoolers

[Hunter]

I am increasingly stumbling upon books recommending picture books for middle schoolers and even sometimes high schoolers.

 

They claim that students should be exposed to copious amounts of writing examples at the level they are expected to write at. And that no middle schoolers and few high schoolers are capable of writing at the level of the reading books typically assigned to them.

 

Also they say, for art appreciation, the picture book is an affordable way for students to see a series of work done by one artist.

 

Do you think this is just another way to dumb down the curriculum, or do you think that high schoolers and self-educating adults should be including picture books into their studies?

[flyingiguana]

My high schoolers have always enjoyed picture books -- but they're very much into art and like to look at how someone else portrays things. They're also interested in books of photos.

 

And it's true that a picture can be worth a thousand words.

 

They're useful as part of a mix of resources.

[Mommyfaithe]

I have always used beautiful picture books at all levels of our homeschool. The nice thing is we have always had younger kids around to read them to, so the older doesn't feel ridiculous. I do not have them reading simplified books made for babies, but well written books which happen to have gorgeous illustrations such as Black Ships Before Troy, Betsy Maestro's American History series, D'Aulaires Greek Myths etc.

 

Faithe

[Nan in Mass]

I just gave my mother, who double majored in English and Biology, The Bee Man of Orn for Christmas. LOL. In my family, picture books are just that - books of all levels that happen to have pictures, not something that is just used for children. Our version of Dante's Inferno happened to have pictures every once in a while and they were pretty disturbing. If I had little children, I would keep this book out of reach. Tolkein wrote and illustrated Mr. Bliss. Many great authors have written, beautifully written, books which contain pictures. And some fabulous illustrators have chosen to illustrate classic fairy tales that are written at a pretty high reading level. Other cultures are more accepting of heavily illustrated reading matter for adults. Manga and graphic novels are picture books. Think of Maus. Even in children's books, there is often an economy that isn't exactly easy to pull off, nor is it easy to make the pictures and words work together in a way that tells the story especially well. I grew up on Beatrix Potter (and reread the books as an adult) but I didn't appreciate how well done they were until I was reading the stories to small children whose grasp of English wasn't very good yet. Her illustrations are mirrors of the text. When Jeremy Fisher almost gets eaten by a bass, the picture on the facing page shows half of Jeremy Fisher inside the bass. It required much less energy (much less explaining) for me to read a Beatrix Potter to my children than most other children's literature, so we read a lot of Beatrix Potter. We revisited them when I was trying to teach my children to write a literary analysis essay. It is hard to get lots of essay practice when one has to pause for a few weeks between each try in order to read the book one is analyizng. And when I went to try to figure out what literary analysis was myself, never having done it before and not being sure even what it was, I realized that it was just the running commentary that I automatically included whenever I read a picture book to my children. I also realized that I had done a great deal better a job with the picture half than with the word half of the books. "She used sad colours for this because the story is sad here." "Look how that character is peeking in from off the page." "Why do you think she made the tree blowing all which way in the picture?" "What is the character doing that tells you he doesn't want to go home?" (Dragging his feet.) "Did the artist draw the pictures for this book in lots of detail? Why not?" (Very young main character.) Etc.. I still am not very good at doing this for the text, and I have a hard time doing it for novels, partly because when I am reading a novel, I am in the book, not paying attention to how things are written.

 

So to answer your question - I think it is a good idea to use picture books along with regular books in high school, but I don't like the argument that was given for using them. I think that is erroneous. I think it is just as hard to make a good picture book as it is to write a good novel. I suspect that the teachers are using them for the same reasons that I use them, but that that was a bit complicated to explain so they simplified and the explanation now doesn't really work.

 

-Nan

[swimmermom3]

When I first started home schooling, I would often see certain SL posters recommending picture books for ages that I thought were too old. Actually, my thoughts were "Those lame-o-home schoolers are depriving their children of an age-appropriate education.:tongue_smilie: I finally had the nerve to ask one of the moms about her reasons. She had been home schooling for 14 years and by the time she was done with me, I had a much better understanding of some of the reasons.:D

 

This year I have already used two picture books with my senior: The Epic of Gilgamesh by Geraldine McCaughrean and The Wanderings of Odysseus by Rosemary Sutcliff. We are working to fill literary gaps while she is home this year. She started reading the "real" Epic of Gilgamesh" but the translation I chose was not the right one for her. She read McCaughrean's book, was exposed to the story, and moved on. She read Fagles's translation of the Iliad, but we don't have time for The Odyssey, so she read Sutcliff's book. Is this an ideal classical education? No. Are we building her literary foundation quickly? Yes. The Aeneid may meet the same fate as we are out of time for the antiquities period (?) and must move on. At least dd will know who Aeneas is which is more than I can say for a few of her friends in AP Eng. Lit.

 

I don't agree with exposing older students to picture books because that is the level of writing they will be expected to perform at. :tongue_smilie:I will have to think that one through more carefully but my initial response is probably not appropriate for a public forum and would dissolve into a rant about low expectations.

[Teachin'Mine]

Picture books are great for all ages. Don't we all flip through books to see the pictures first?

 

But to say that high schoolers aren't capable of writing at the level of their reading and to bring their reading down to a lower level ... like Swimmermom I'll refrain from what I'd like to say and just agree with you that it's another dumbing down situation. :tongue_smilie:

[swimmermom3]

 

So to answer your question - I think it is a good idea to use picture books along with regular books in high school, but I don't like the argument that was given for using them. I think that is erroneous. I think it is just as hard to make a good picture book as it is to write a good novel. I suspect that the teachers are using them for the same reasons that I use them, but that that was a bit complicated to explain so they simplified and the explanation now doesn't really work.

 

-Nan

 

Thanks, Nan. That's much better than I can articulate without coffee.

 

Hunter, I forgot to mention Ready Readers: 10 Lessons in Reading Comprehension. I used this as a review for my oldest and an introduction for my youngest.

[Stacy in NJ]

My middle school aged boys (6th and 8th grades) have been reading picture books for logic stage. They've read many of the books already mentioned (Gilgamesh, Black Ships Before Troy, The Wanderings of Odysseus, D'Aulaire's Myths - both Norse and Greek). Additionally, as we're covering the Middle Ages this year, we really like the picture books written by Michael Morpurgo (Beowulf, Arthur High King of Britain, Sir Gawain and the Green Knight). The Ancients and Middle Ages offers the best periods for picture books; there are fewer really great ones available for the later periods.

 

My 8th grader as also read some longer -not picture book versions- of the same stories like the Padraic Colum and Roger Lancelyn Green books.

 

The language in these picture books is really quite complex, at least if you compare them to many modern novels. The pictures really are art and add much to the story. I think they offer a way to familiarize the reader with a complex story in an inviting and not overwhelming format.

 

I would recommend them to an adult or high school student who isn't already familiar with the stories or who isn't used to books written in complex language. This issue really speaks to cultural literacy. I never read many of these stories until I began homeschooling, and I really feel that I missed out on important references widely understood in our culture.

 

Now, if you have read these books in grammar or logic stage then you are probably ready to jump into the real thing.

[Nan in Mass]

I forgot to add that I am extra aware of reading levels because I use picture books for practice with foreign languages. Many of them use pretty high-level language, much higher than, say, an Agatha Christie mystery, so using them as a short way of exposing students to more complex grammatical structures is probably a good idea. I like the idea of using picture books with a complete story rather than using short excerpts of longer works. If you pick the ones meant for a young child to read to themselves, they are good for foreign language practice, too. So are graphic novels like Tintin - lots of conversational language and picture clues so you don't have to look up every word.

-Nan

[Nicole M]

I forgot to add that I am extra aware of reading levels because I use picture books for practice with foreign languages. Many of them use pretty high-level language, much higher than, say, an Agatha Christie mystery, so using them as a short way of exposing students to more complex grammatical structures is probably a good idea. I like the idea of using picture books with a complete story rather than using short excerpts of longer works. If you pick the ones meant for a young child to read to themselves, they are good for foreign language practice, too. So are graphic novels like Tintin - lots of conversational language and picture clues so you don't have to look up every word.

-Nan

 

This is what I was thinking, about the grammatical structure, and sometimes even vocabulary. With some picture books, ones meant to be read aloud to slightly older children, the plot and language can be rather sophisticated. I would argue that it's harder to write a picture book than a longer novel because you have to convey so much (humor, plot and character development, etc.) in only a thousand words or so.

 

I wish I could think of some examples, but I was awake half the night and haven't had coffee. I'm sure they will come to me.

 

Anyhoo, I agree that picture books are useful for all of us.

[regentrude]

They claim that students should be exposed to copious amounts of writing examples at the level they are expected to write at. And that no middle schoolers and few high schoolers are capable of writing at the level of the reading books typically assigned to them.

 

Picture books are nice, certainly great for art and history. I still love books with beautiful illustrations as an adult.

This said, the explanation seems nonsense to me. I strongly believe that the best way to write well is to be exposed to quality literature by people who are experts at crafting language. This will go a long way towards a student's feeling for language, use of literary devices, structure etc.

NOBODY nowadays is supposed to write like Charles Dickens, Jane Austen, even Hemingway. The purpose of literature is not to learn to emulate a writer's style.

 

My children are becoming good writers because they are reading quality literature. They would cringe if they had to read the writings of middle school students - it would not be fun, and I do not think it would be an efficient teaching tool either.

Reading samples of age appropriate writing in small amounts can have a place in a writing curriculum - but is not a substitute for good books.

[Hannah C.]

They claim that students should be exposed to copious amounts of writing examples at the level they are expected to write at. And that no middle schoolers and few high schoolers are capable of writing at the level of the reading books typically assigned to them.

 

The reason I write as well as I do is because I have read ridiculous amounts of literature written a level FAR beyond what I could have been expected to achieve in my own writing at whatever age I happened to be. Reading at a higher level is not going to damage someone's writing. It may, in fact, make it better! So this particular reason for assigning picture books is bunk, imho. :glare:

[Nan in Mass]

My sons say the same thing.

[Hunter]

....

My children are becoming good writers because they are reading quality literature. They would cringe if they had to read the writings of middle school students - it would not be fun, and I do not think it would be an efficient teaching tool either.

Reading samples of age appropriate writing in small amounts can have a place in a writing curriculum - but is not a substitute for good books.

 

I think the idea I read about was, that quality picture books were used as writing examples, instead of that of their peers.

 

I'm too new to this idea to have any real opinions, yet. I'm interested in what everyone has to say. I learned years ago to hit the kid's non fiction, but had no idea that the picturebook and fiction area had anything to offer me.

[Nicole M]

I think the idea I read about was, that quality picture books were used as writing examples, instead of that of their peers.

 

I'm too new to this idea to have any real opinions, yet. I'm interested in what everyone has to say. I learned years ago to hit the kid's non fiction, but had no idea that the picturebook and fiction area had anything to offer me.

 

You might be interested in my friend's blog. She is an expert on children's literature, has a column in the local paper reviewing children's books, and is just generally awesome:

 

http://rebeccayoungbooks.blogspot.com/

[Tamarind]

Picture books marketed specifically to educated adults are also known as coffee table books!

 

However, few coffee table books have the literary merit of the best in children's picture books.

[regentrude]

I think the idea I read about was, that quality picture books were used as writing examples, instead of that of their peers.

 

 

Even if it is a picture book with deceptively simple language, a quality picture book is the product of a thoughtful and capable writer with a lot more knowledge than a middle school student. So I do not think this would even constitute a useful writing sample on which a student can measure his own writing as a "peer".

It is extremely difficult to write a good children's book - even if the language used is simple in structure and the vocabulary limited.

 

Edited to pose a question: does one even NEED any writing samples of "peers" at all in order to teach writing? Or would it not better to have a model that is high quality writing which the students may not (yet) be able to achieve or even get close, but which can serve as a target? I am seriously asking, writing instruction is not my area of expertise.

Edited January 12, 2011 by regentrude

[Hunter]

Thank you everyone for the links. I'm still checking them out.

 

I've always thought that teachers fall back to using peer examples for lack of anything else to use as an example of their lesson plans, rather than being commited to the idea itself.

 

I think that is why I came across some teachers advocating the use of carefully chosen picture books to illustrate certain types of writing for their middle school and high school students. They felt it was a step up, not a step down for their students, despite the incredulous reactions they were getting from other teachers and parents.

 

I said I wasn't commited to opionions about the use of picture books, but actually I am for art. I definately see the use of a series of art in the form of a picture book.

 

And most of the time, adult poetry is of little IMMEDIATE use to me as an example of poetry writing, but silly little kid's poems really help me to understand an assignment, well enough to attempt a similar poem.