Really Enjoyed this article on the decline of reading

[Bluegoat]

There is a push for quantity which, for many kids at least, is naturally going to compromise quality.

 

In my recollection, I thoroughly enjoyed reading for fun at elementary age, but I don't remember reading a lot of books.  I remember really interacting with the books I did read.  Now elementary kids are incentivized to read dozens or even hundreds of books a year, on their own time, in addition to school work, music, sports, etc.  How deeply can these kids be reading into the historical settings, author's intent, character development, etc?  I am sure it varies, but how much is realistic for the average child?

 

 

Based on the books that my friend's kids get sent home with, I think a lot of them aren't worth really interacting with.  I don't think they are even fluff in the Babysitter's Club mold - they almost like they were written by computer.

 

FWIW I have no trouble with the idea that some people have no interest in recreational reading.  I don't do recreational math.  But I do think it is better even for those people to try, when they are students, to get their reading skills to a level where they can read adult books without struggling with content.  And university students need to be able to read a fair bit of text, and listen to a lecture for at least an hour. 

[SKL]

Well, I'm not sure all university students need to be able to read and discuss literature.  As another person said, it may go back to why people go to college in the first place.  If you're there just to enhance your job prospects, and your job is electrical engineering, then IMO you are justified if you say you will never ever need to know what Albert Camus was getting at in The Plague.  :P

 

Yes, you need to be able to gain information by reading and listening, but participating in a tech discussion may be a lot easier for some people than a literature discussion.  And vice versa.  What if the powers that be decided every educated person should be able to discuss electrical circuits for two hours a week all year?

[Bluegoat]

Well, I'm not sure all university students need to be able to read and discuss literature.  As another person said, it may go back to why people go to college in the first place.  If you're there just to enhance your job prospects, and your job is electrical engineering, then IMO you are justified if you say you will never ever need to know what Albert Camus was getting at in The Plague.  :p

 

Yes, you need to be able to gain information by reading and listening, but participating in a tech discussion may be a lot easier for some people than a literature discussion.  And vice versa.  What if the powers that be decided every educated person should be able to discuss electrical circuits for two hours a week all year?

 

I was thinking about all kinds of reading, not just lit.  But actually, I do think that even if you are an engineer, if you aren't capable of reading real high school lit, you have a problem.  It doesn't mean you have to like it, necessarily, but you should actually have some level of cultural literacy, which is why even when many people did not complete high school, it was a pre-requisit to university.

[regentrude]

My university prof friends say the same thing.  The students are not well read, and they don't have well-developed reading skills.  They can't read - or won't - the amount of material they used to.

 

I remember in particular one conversation with a woman who is a literature prof.  She is finding students not only are very slow, they don't seem to be competent at being able to read something and then tell what the argument being made is - they can't outline what was said, summarize it, or even identify the main point they are meant to be getting out of it.  Their own writing tends to be fragmented and meandering.

 

I read this article earlier today - it's somewhat meandering too, but I found some of his personal observations to the point - particularly that the students largely don't bother to read the assigned texts.  It reminded me of the thread on the purpose of college. The idea that the classroom process was largely meant for show really resonated with the idea that most expressed that the main purpose was a job qualification of some kind.  I also thought the part on online classes was very interesting.

 

Yes, students don't read assigned readings. I do not require my engineering physics students to read literature - they are assigned a few sections from the physics textbook. The majority do not read, and I suspect a certain percentage is lacking the reading skills to do so and comprehend the contents.

The first question I ask of underperforming students is whether they read the assigned reading. The answer is almost always "no".

Go figure. I can understand that the top student who gets everything from the lecture and does well decides to skip the reading - but if you're struggling to hang on and pass, wouldn't you read the book? Apparently not.

 

Edited January 18, 2016 by regentrude

[regentrude]

Well, I'm not sure all university students need to be able to read and discuss literature.  As another person said, it may go back to why people go to college in the first place.  If you're there just to enhance your job prospects, and your job is electrical engineering, then IMO you are justified if you say you will never ever need to know what Albert Camus was getting at in The Plague.  :p

 

Yes, you need to be able to gain information by reading and listening, but participating in a tech discussion may be a lot easier for some people than a literature discussion.  And vice versa.  What if the powers that be decided every educated person should be able to discuss electrical circuits for two hours a week all year?

 

I won't  go into discussing the merits of literature for any educated person, even an electrical engineer...

Let me just say: they are not just unable to read and comprehend literature, they are unable to read and comprehend technical texts. They can't read their introductory textbooks. That is a problem.

 

ETA: And to get back to "before" and now: one can easily compare standard textbooks from "now" to standard textbooks from "back then". There used to be well written consecutive text, uninterrupted by colorful boxes, side bars, pictures and other distracting bits that foster ADHD. Illustrations were used sparingly, and each illustration would serve a well defined purpose. Compare to the dumbed down books from today, with all the distractions and hardly any consecutive text. (Interestingly, the very best physics texts are still black and white and photo free)  This is catering to students who cannot digest more than a soundbite.

 

Edited January 18, 2016 by regentrude

[athomeontheprairie]

I do not think it is a sensible goal to expect everybody to develop joy in reading.

It is, however, a sensible goal to expect everybody to develop the ability to read and comprehend the texts they come across.

I never said or should be a goal to have joy. Certainly, we should expect the ability.

 

My response was to "people who read looking down on those who don't". Not listing the GOAL of reading 😀

[SKL]

Cultural literacy ... yes, books, but also classic movies, music, travel ....

 

I probably have a somewhat different mindset about college students, since I attended a regional campus designed for "non-traditional students," along with my parents.  I have always had more respect for the school of hard knocks than book learnin.  Not that I didn't have my fair share of book learnin too....