Not reading books
DiamondAir
> From: SandraDodd@...I have to say, that after spending some time this week visiting my husband's
> Where would this never-read-a-book 60 percent have volunteered their
> information? It sounds like alarmist writing, and no doubt the guy hopes
> lots of readers will believe anything that has numbers.
family, that this statistic doesn't surprise me. None of them have ever
picked up a book and read it. They have no books or newspapers in their
houses. I sincerely doubt that most of them are able to read at a 4th or 5th
grade level (despite having passed those grades). DH himself, though a
brilliant man and successful businessman, is barely literate (not able to
write a coherent and grammatically correct sentence to save his life, cannot
spell even basic words) and never had read a book cover-to-cover before
meeting me. Of course, he managed to get passed from grade to grade and
graduate high school though.
Sadly, I would bet that the statistic of 60% of Americans being like this is
pretty accurate. These people I am talking about are not poverty-ridden in a
ghetto. They have access to fine schools, libraries, etc. They have
disposable income. They are average Americans. They just aren't literate (by
which I mean they can read by sounding out words, but they can't read for
meaning and comprehension, and cannot write at a level to be easily
understood).
Blue Skies!
-Robin-
Mom to Mackenzie (8/28/96) "What if there was no gravity, but we all held on
to something really tight??"
and Asa (10/5/99) who says "Odwalla!" (her favorite treat at the store)
http://www.geocities.com/the_clevengers Flying Clevenger Family
dawn
>while I think that a statistic saying that 60% have *never* read a book is
>
> Sadly, I would bet that the statistic of 60% of Americans being like this is
> pretty accurate. These people I am talking about are not poverty-ridden in a
> ghetto. They have access to fine schools, libraries, etc. They have
> disposable income. They are average Americans. They just aren't literate (by
> which I mean they can read by sounding out words, but they can't read for
> meaning and comprehension, and cannot write at a level to be easily
> understood).
>
probably not quite, true, I bet that *many* of my college students have
never read a book not assigned, after maybe 3rd or 4th grade when reading
books is lots of fun. I live in a lower income apartment complex where
many of the people fall into the working poor or underclass, and I know
for a fact that they never read for pleasure. They read the manuals that
will help them fix cars and motorcycles when they need to; they do
something with newspapers (I guess get them for tv listings) because I see
them on doorsteps, but I know after spending a lot of time socializing
with them that they don't read for pleasure. In fact, the few times we've
takend neighborhood kids to the library with us, it has always been the
first time they've been to the public library. The bookmobile used to
come here every other friday, but stopped because only my family used it,
and we go to the main library at least once (usually 3) times a week and
make at least monthly excursions to two other branches, and the bookmibile
guy knew that;) No one else used it, ever. But in general, at many
income levels, many people do not read for pleasure. My brother doesn't.
My sister doesn't. Both are professionals and I bet neither read more
than a book a year, if that, and always for specific information. My
mother only recently started reading for pleasure. I don't ever remember
her sitting down and reading a book when I was a child. I'm the anomoly
in my family. I read several books a week. And when I started crawling
as a baby, I crawled right to a bookshelf.
dawn h-s
Kerry Kibort
****Sadly, I would bet that the statistic of 60% of
Americans being like this is
pretty accurate. These people I am talking about are
not poverty-ridden in a
ghetto. They have access to fine schools, libraries,
etc. They have
disposable income. They are average Americans. ****
I will have to agree with you. The only one in my
family who even owns more than Sears catalogs is my
sister, who is a school teacher. I always look to see
if people have books when I go in their house. I cant
believe how many people don't! What on earth is going
on?
I know I would not have been exposed to books as a
child if it werent for my sister, who is 21 years
older than I. My brother, who is 18 years older, SEEMS
to be well read, but NOT ONE SINGLE BOOK in his house!
My parents, who grew up during the great depression,
never read more than the newspaper- but atleast I
understand that. How can one think of books when
things like food and clothing seem a luxury?
Anyone know what happened to the Bookmobiles?
Kerry
--- DiamondAir <diamondair@...> wrote:
Americans being like this is
pretty accurate. These people I am talking about are
not poverty-ridden in a
ghetto. They have access to fine schools, libraries,
etc. They have
disposable income. They are average Americans. ****
I will have to agree with you. The only one in my
family who even owns more than Sears catalogs is my
sister, who is a school teacher. I always look to see
if people have books when I go in their house. I cant
believe how many people don't! What on earth is going
on?
I know I would not have been exposed to books as a
child if it werent for my sister, who is 21 years
older than I. My brother, who is 18 years older, SEEMS
to be well read, but NOT ONE SINGLE BOOK in his house!
My parents, who grew up during the great depression,
never read more than the newspaper- but atleast I
understand that. How can one think of books when
things like food and clothing seem a luxury?
Anyone know what happened to the Bookmobiles?
Kerry
--- DiamondAir <diamondair@...> wrote:
> > From: SandraDodd@...
> > Where would this never-read-a-book 60 percent have
> volunteered their
> > information? It sounds like alarmist writing, and
> no doubt the guy hopes
> > lots of readers will believe anything that has
> numbers.
>
>
> I have to say, that after spending some time this
> week visiting my husband's
> family, that this statistic doesn't surprise me.
> None of them have ever
> picked up a book and read it. They have no books or
> newspapers in their
> houses. I sincerely doubt that most of them are able
> to read at a 4th or 5th
> grade level (despite having passed those grades). DH
> himself, though a
> brilliant man and successful businessman, is barely
> literate (not able to
> write a coherent and grammatically correct sentence
> to save his life, cannot
> spell even basic words) and never had read a book
> cover-to-cover before
> meeting me. Of course, he managed to get passed from
> grade to grade and
> graduate high school though.
>
> Sadly, I would bet that the statistic of 60% of
> Americans being like this is
> pretty accurate. These people I am talking about are
> not poverty-ridden in a
> ghetto. They have access to fine schools, libraries,
> etc. They have
> disposable income. They are average Americans. They
> just aren't literate (by
> which I mean they can read by sounding out words,
> but they can't read for
> meaning and comprehension, and cannot write at a
> level to be easily
> understood).
>
> Blue Skies!
> -Robin-
> Mom to Mackenzie (8/28/96) "What if there was no
> gravity, but we all held on
> to something really tight??"
> and Asa (10/5/99) who says "Odwalla!" (her favorite
> treat at the store)
> http://www.geocities.com/the_clevengers Flying
> Clevenger Family
>
>
>
[email protected]
In a message dated 12/6/00 1:19:28 PM Pacific Standard Time,
kkibort@... writes:
<< My parents, who grew up during the great depression,
never read more than the newspaper- but atleast I
understand that. How can one think of books when
things like food and clothing seem a luxury?
Anyone know what happened to the Bookmobiles? >>
It's interesting to me to hear of families with no books. My mother is the
oldest of 9 children and everyone has books in their homes although they had
to scrape by growing up. My grandparents grew up during the Depression as
well, but they read newpapers, magazines, fiction and non-fiction. They
weren't available to them in the old days, but as the family has prospered
they have acquired them. My grandfather got his GED in his 60's, after his
retirement, because he had to drop out of school around the 6th grade in
order to help support the family. In his 70's he got a B.A. in religion.
They never had great access to libraries or even bookmobiles because they
live in a very rural area. However, knowledge has always been seen as the key
to financial power and books have been seen as the great equalizers, making
the knowledge available to the masses.
candice
kkibort@... writes:
<< My parents, who grew up during the great depression,
never read more than the newspaper- but atleast I
understand that. How can one think of books when
things like food and clothing seem a luxury?
Anyone know what happened to the Bookmobiles? >>
It's interesting to me to hear of families with no books. My mother is the
oldest of 9 children and everyone has books in their homes although they had
to scrape by growing up. My grandparents grew up during the Depression as
well, but they read newpapers, magazines, fiction and non-fiction. They
weren't available to them in the old days, but as the family has prospered
they have acquired them. My grandfather got his GED in his 60's, after his
retirement, because he had to drop out of school around the 6th grade in
order to help support the family. In his 70's he got a B.A. in religion.
They never had great access to libraries or even bookmobiles because they
live in a very rural area. However, knowledge has always been seen as the key
to financial power and books have been seen as the great equalizers, making
the knowledge available to the masses.
candice
Valerie
However, knowledge has always been seen as the key
to financial power and books have been seen as the great equalizers, making
the knowledge available to the masses.
candice
Candice...this was the same for my parents and grandparents. They were
farmers during the Depression. Reading was a luxury to do done after a full
day of chores. But they still did it. My dad says his mother was like a
walking dictionary...if they needed a word spelled they just asked her and
she'd rattle it off. She was just an average farmer's wife with a turn of
the century public education...but how many people in this day of
spell-check could spell nearly any word in their head? Still my dad doesn't
read for pleasure. Not his cup of tea. He's mechanically inclined and would
rather read a car manual.
--Valerie
to financial power and books have been seen as the great equalizers, making
the knowledge available to the masses.
candice
Candice...this was the same for my parents and grandparents. They were
farmers during the Depression. Reading was a luxury to do done after a full
day of chores. But they still did it. My dad says his mother was like a
walking dictionary...if they needed a word spelled they just asked her and
she'd rattle it off. She was just an average farmer's wife with a turn of
the century public education...but how many people in this day of
spell-check could spell nearly any word in their head? Still my dad doesn't
read for pleasure. Not his cup of tea. He's mechanically inclined and would
rather read a car manual.
--Valerie
Lynda
I really don't understand why some folks do and some don't because it has
nothing to do with income! We live in an "economically depressed" area and
my great-grandfather homesteaded. He saved and scrimped and would send to
SF to have books shipped in. My grandfather was a logger and worked a tramp
steamer but always saved to bring books home to his kids. I grew up in the
projects and my mother bought every door to door, pay $1 a week book set and
stories on records deal that came along. We all had library cards as soon
as we could look at picture books.
Even now, up here the library is filled with folks of all walks of life.
There are usually a dozen or so "street" people who are there and they are
reading, not just hanging out so they can be somewhere warm.
I don't know where they got their numbers, but it sure wasn't around here!
Lynda
nothing to do with income! We live in an "economically depressed" area and
my great-grandfather homesteaded. He saved and scrimped and would send to
SF to have books shipped in. My grandfather was a logger and worked a tramp
steamer but always saved to bring books home to his kids. I grew up in the
projects and my mother bought every door to door, pay $1 a week book set and
stories on records deal that came along. We all had library cards as soon
as we could look at picture books.
Even now, up here the library is filled with folks of all walks of life.
There are usually a dozen or so "street" people who are there and they are
reading, not just hanging out so they can be somewhere warm.
I don't know where they got their numbers, but it sure wasn't around here!
Lynda
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kerry Kibort" <kkibort@...>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2000 1:18 PM
Subject: Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] Not reading books
> ****Sadly, I would bet that the statistic of 60% of
> Americans being like this is
> pretty accurate. These people I am talking about are
> not poverty-ridden in a
> ghetto. They have access to fine schools, libraries,
> etc. They have
> disposable income. They are average Americans. ****
>
> I will have to agree with you. The only one in my
> family who even owns more than Sears catalogs is my
> sister, who is a school teacher. I always look to see
> if people have books when I go in their house. I cant
> believe how many people don't! What on earth is going
> on?
> I know I would not have been exposed to books as a
> child if it werent for my sister, who is 21 years
> older than I. My brother, who is 18 years older, SEEMS
> to be well read, but NOT ONE SINGLE BOOK in his house!
>
> My parents, who grew up during the great depression,
> never read more than the newspaper- but atleast I
> understand that. How can one think of books when
> things like food and clothing seem a luxury?
> Anyone know what happened to the Bookmobiles?
> Kerry
> --- DiamondAir <diamondair@...> wrote:
> > > From: SandraDodd@...
> > > Where would this never-read-a-book 60 percent have
> > volunteered their
> > > information? It sounds like alarmist writing, and
> > no doubt the guy hopes
> > > lots of readers will believe anything that has
> > numbers.
> >
> >
> > I have to say, that after spending some time this
> > week visiting my husband's
> > family, that this statistic doesn't surprise me.
> > None of them have ever
> > picked up a book and read it. They have no books or
> > newspapers in their
> > houses. I sincerely doubt that most of them are able
> > to read at a 4th or 5th
> > grade level (despite having passed those grades). DH
> > himself, though a
> > brilliant man and successful businessman, is barely
> > literate (not able to
> > write a coherent and grammatically correct sentence
> > to save his life, cannot
> > spell even basic words) and never had read a book
> > cover-to-cover before
> > meeting me. Of course, he managed to get passed from
> > grade to grade and
> > graduate high school though.
> >
> > Sadly, I would bet that the statistic of 60% of
> > Americans being like this is
> > pretty accurate. These people I am talking about are
> > not poverty-ridden in a
> > ghetto. They have access to fine schools, libraries,
> > etc. They have
> > disposable income. They are average Americans. They
> > just aren't literate (by
> > which I mean they can read by sounding out words,
> > but they can't read for
> > meaning and comprehension, and cannot write at a
> > level to be easily
> > understood).
> >
> > Blue Skies!
> > -Robin-
> > Mom to Mackenzie (8/28/96) "What if there was no
> > gravity, but we all held on
> > to something really tight??"
> > and Asa (10/5/99) who says "Odwalla!" (her favorite
> > treat at the store)
> > http://www.geocities.com/the_clevengers Flying
> > Clevenger Family
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> Message boards, timely articles, a free newsletter and more!
> Check it all out at: http://www.unschooling.com
>
> Addresses:
> Post message: [email protected]
> Unsubscribe: [email protected]
> List owner: [email protected]
> List settings page: http://www.egroups.com/group/Unschooling-dotcom
>
>
[email protected]
Our Richmond, Ca Library has a bookmobile that has several stops in our small
city :>)
city :>)
Lynda
Hello, small world! This is too kool!!! I'm glad it is still going!!!
That is the bookmobile that we used when I was a mere sprout back in the
dark ages! It use to come to the schools in the poor part of town on every
Thursday! And to the projects on Tuesdays.
Lynda
That is the bookmobile that we used when I was a mere sprout back in the
dark ages! It use to come to the schools in the poor part of town on every
Thursday! And to the projects on Tuesdays.
Lynda
----- Original Message -----
From: <adarl52357@...>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2000 10:11 PM
Subject: Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] Not reading books
> Our Richmond, Ca Library has a bookmobile that has several stops in our
small
> city :>)
>
>
> Message boards, timely articles, a free newsletter and more!
> Check it all out at: http://www.unschooling.com
>
> Addresses:
> Post message: [email protected]
> Unsubscribe: [email protected]
> List owner: [email protected]
> List settings page: http://www.egroups.com/group/Unschooling-dotcom
>
>
[email protected]
In a message dated 00-12-07 00:43:47 EST, you write:
<< I don't know where they got their numbers, but it sure wasn't around here!
true. For one thing, they didn't say "adults," they said "Americans," and at
least in school kids have read books. So I'm guessing that figure meant
"once they get out of school."
And school has turned more kids OFF books than any one thing ever has, I'm
sure, with their forced-march reading and their book reports and grades.
But in any case, I hang around with all KINDS of people who read books,and
although I have been in some houses without books, I've been in more with.
And my main objection is the emotional intent of any statistic which is
intended to shame people but which has no possible basis for validity.
Would it be based on book sales? Reports of social workers? (They only deal
with a certain element of the population.) Are carpet layers being called on
to surreptitiously count books and heads and report who's reading?
My mother-in-law has one single floor to ceiling bookshelf in her house. She
has mostly her nursing school books from the 40's, encyclopedias, some old
reader's digest novel things, and lots of church stuff. But she has ALWAYS
read the latest mysteries and Michener stuff because she checks books out
from the library, one at a time, has one on request, takes one back, checks
one out... How would that show on anyone's stats? If libraries are the
source of the statistics, then I don't read enough to count. I checked out
the autobiography of the Dalai Lama two years ago and kept it too long.
Had the statement been qualified or had a citation (according to x-source,
perhaps as many as 60% of Americans have never read a book) I wouldn't have
squawked, but ANY statement such as "60% of Americans have never read a book"
needs more information. Are they counting pre-readers and infants? The
severely retarded? Where did the numbers come from and why? One bad piece
of information taints a whole article as much as stupid questions taint a
test.
Beware of quoting or living by statistics.
Sandra
<< I don't know where they got their numbers, but it sure wasn't around here!
>>That was some of my point too. In my experience, such a figure could NOT be
true. For one thing, they didn't say "adults," they said "Americans," and at
least in school kids have read books. So I'm guessing that figure meant
"once they get out of school."
And school has turned more kids OFF books than any one thing ever has, I'm
sure, with their forced-march reading and their book reports and grades.
But in any case, I hang around with all KINDS of people who read books,and
although I have been in some houses without books, I've been in more with.
And my main objection is the emotional intent of any statistic which is
intended to shame people but which has no possible basis for validity.
Would it be based on book sales? Reports of social workers? (They only deal
with a certain element of the population.) Are carpet layers being called on
to surreptitiously count books and heads and report who's reading?
My mother-in-law has one single floor to ceiling bookshelf in her house. She
has mostly her nursing school books from the 40's, encyclopedias, some old
reader's digest novel things, and lots of church stuff. But she has ALWAYS
read the latest mysteries and Michener stuff because she checks books out
from the library, one at a time, has one on request, takes one back, checks
one out... How would that show on anyone's stats? If libraries are the
source of the statistics, then I don't read enough to count. I checked out
the autobiography of the Dalai Lama two years ago and kept it too long.
Had the statement been qualified or had a citation (according to x-source,
perhaps as many as 60% of Americans have never read a book) I wouldn't have
squawked, but ANY statement such as "60% of Americans have never read a book"
needs more information. Are they counting pre-readers and infants? The
severely retarded? Where did the numbers come from and why? One bad piece
of information taints a whole article as much as stupid questions taint a
test.
Beware of quoting or living by statistics.
Sandra
Laura Simeon
> Beware of quoting or living by statistics.Wise words! And with that in mind, I offer up another article filled with
>
> Sandra
statistics, but ones which point a more hopeful picture. So you all can take
your pick.
Laura
This article from The Chronicle of Higher Education
(http://chronicle.com) was forwarded to you from:
_________________________________________________________________
From the issue dated October 27, 2000
Librarians Ignore the Value of Stories
By WAYNE A. WIEGAND
At the beginning of a course I teach to all first-semester
students at the University of Wisconsin at Madison's School of
Library and Information Studies, I run through a litany of
statistics: There are more public libraries in the United
States than McDonald's restaurants. Americans make 3.5 billion
visits to school, public, and college or university libraries
every year -- three times more than visits to the movies.
Children and young adults go to school libraries 1.7 billion
times during the school year -- two times more visits than to
state and national parks.
When Americans go to the library, I tell my students, they are
usually looking for stories to read. They want material that
inspires them or affirms their identities, written in the
narrative form that years of reading have made familiar --
from the latest Danielle Steel novel or Harry Potter and the
Goblet of Fire, to nonfiction like Mitch Albom's Tuesdays With
Morrie, Frank McCourt's Angela's Ashes, or Tom Brokaw's The
Greatest Generation. A 1998 survey by the American Library
Association showed that two-thirds of Americans use a public
library at least once per year, and of that number 80 percent
(about 145 million people) go there to check out a book.
Fortunately, scholars in the humanities have been studying the
subject of reading stories for the past 25 years, from a
variety of perspectives -- including literacy studies,
reader-response theory, ethnographies of reading, the social
history of print, and cultural studies, which examines how
people "read" nonprint material like the videos and compact
disks that libraries also circulate by the millions. Those
scholars analyze who reads what stories, and why, by focusing
on the complex ways that readers from various cultures use
what they read in their daily lives.
Statistics clearly demonstrate that many people rely on
libraries for their stories, and generally, librarians know
what gets checked out. Unfortunately, librarians have little
knowledge of why people read what they do. As a result, they
lack a deeper understanding of how libraries already serve
readers, and they miss evidence that they could use to
convince state legislatures and other sources of financial
support that spending money on stories is important. They also
are often unable to help patrons find just the right story to
read, nor do they develop enough programs -- book clubs, for
example -- to connect readers to one another.
Part of the blame for that tremendous professional oversight
belongs to library and information-science programs, which
have generally ignored the literature on reading and -- except
for children's literature -- traditionally undervalued the
reading of stories.
As a historian, I think I understand how that oversight
evolved. Michel Foucault argued that centuries ago, the new
order that we now call modernity separated people's experience
of daily life into work and leisure. Over time, we came to
think of information that answers questions related to work,
or helps people become informed citizens or intelligent
consumers, as especially important; we labeled it "useful
knowledge." In a library, people usually get that kind of
information at the reference desk, with the help of a
librarian. We consider reading stories, however, an activity
of leisure, and we underestimate the value of the information
that stories contain.
Evidence of that bifurcated thinking abounds in U.S. library
history. For example, the Public Library Inquiry of 1949,
supported by the Carnegie Corporation, concluded that public
libraries ought to minimize their practice of supplying the
popular reading that nearly three-quarters of their users
desired, and concentrate instead on a smaller but more
influential combination of "serious" readers, community
leaders, and students of adult education who used public
libraries to obtain useful knowledge.
That same kind of thinking is evident in library schools.
Today, most educators in library and information-science
programs are convinced that their profession's chief
responsibility is to give patrons access to useful knowledge.
Further, because the curricula are increasingly driven by the
technologies that do such a good job of manipulating that kind
of information, many professors seem to feel that if a
computer isn't involved somehow, the material in question
can't be information.
In library schools, basic texts that students must read for
core courses include little or no coverage of the recent
literature on reading. Doctoral students typically investigate
topics connected to new technologies. Advertisements for new
professors almost always emphasize teaching skills and
research expertise in information technologies; they almost
never mention the need to develop an understanding of the
information that millions of Americans find in the stories
they get from their libraries. Some library schools have
eliminated story-centered teaching positions and courses --
like children's librarianship.
Even critics of current thinking can't seem to venture outside
the box. For example, The Chronicle published nine letters to
the editor in its May 12 issue that sought to debunk or
clarify an April 7 article titled "In Revamped Library
Schools, Information Trumps Books." None of the letters cited
the library's primary role as a reading institution. Instead,
what united the correspondents was their belief that libraries
are more than just books.
The narrow vision of library professionals was made
particularly obvious in 1996, when the Benton Foundation
issued preliminary findings of a study on what the public
thought of leading librarians' visions of the future for
libraries. The investigators reported what they had found to
representatives of the 18 institutions that had commissioned
the study, which included four library schools.
Among the findings was that a focus group of suburban
public-library users had collectively identified as their top
two public-library services "providing reading hours and other
programs for children" and buying enough popular titles so
that patrons could, as one member of the focus group put it,
"get the book that everybody is reading right now." The
investigators concluded that the public did not "understand
what goes on in the library other than taking out books."
As far as I can tell, neither the investigators nor the people
they reported to connected the study's findings to the
literature on reading. Referring to the work of scholars like
Janice A. Radway on romance novels, George N. Dove on
detective stories, Henry Jenkins on science fiction, or
Matthew Pustz on comic books might have made it clear that
members of the public understand that taking out books is the
most important activity that happens in the library. Instead,
the library leaders planned to change the public's perception
of libraries.
I hope that no one reading this essay concludes that I am
against technology. Not at all. Professional librarians -- and
the programs that educate them -- certainly have to tap the
potential of information technologies in serving their
patrons. But the contrast between the statistics on what
Americans do in libraries and the near-total absence of
attention to reading in library schools across the country
shows that we aren't teaching future librarians nearly enough
about the activity that is most central to librarianship.
Rather than restricting the definition of information to what
technology can provide, we should greatly expand the focus of
library schools.
In the next year, nearly 5,000 new graduates of programs
accredited by the American Library Association will get jobs
at public, school, and academic libraries whose patrons use
them chiefly to get reading material. The vast majority of the
new librarians will eventually learn who reads what stories,
but they won't understand why, in spite of the abundant
literature that addresses that question. Worse yet, they will
have been schooled to think that understanding why millions of
their patrons read stories is none of their professional
business. What a shame.
Wayne A. Wiegand is a professor at the School of Library and
Information Studies at the University of Wisconsin at Madison
and coeditor, with James P. Danky, of Print Culture in a
Diverse America (University of Illinois Press, 1998).
_________________________________________________________________
Chronicle subscribers can read this article on the Web at this address:
http://chronicle.com/weekly/v47/i09/09b02001.htm
If you would like to have complete access to The Chronicle's Web
site, a special subscription offer can be found at:
http://chronicle.com/4free
Use the code D00CM when ordering.
_________________________________________________________________
You may visit The Chronicle as follows:
* via the World-Wide Web, at http://chronicle.com
* via telnet at chronicle.com
_________________________________________________________________
Copyright 2000 by The Chronicle of Higher Education
[email protected]
Lynda, you grew up in Richmond?
Samantha Stopple
I love to read for pleasure and for information. But
does being able to read or reading a sign of
intelligence? I don't think so. I think the Kalahari
bushmen would disagree.
Peace,
Samantha
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products.
http://shopping.yahoo.com/
does being able to read or reading a sign of
intelligence? I don't think so. I think the Kalahari
bushmen would disagree.
Peace,
Samantha
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products.
http://shopping.yahoo.com/
[email protected]
In a message dated 12/6/00 10:43:48 PM Pacific Standard Time,
lurine@... writes:
<< Hello, small world! This is too kool!!! I'm glad it is still going!!!
That is the bookmobile that we used when I was a mere sprout back in the
dark ages! It use to come to the schools in the poor part of town on every
Thursday! And to the projects on Tuesdays.
Apparently he still owes the Richmond library some money for Charlie Brown
books that never made it back !
candice
lurine@... writes:
<< Hello, small world! This is too kool!!! I'm glad it is still going!!!
That is the bookmobile that we used when I was a mere sprout back in the
dark ages! It use to come to the schools in the poor part of town on every
Thursday! And to the projects on Tuesdays.
>>Hey, my husband grew up in Richmond, CA. (I grew up outside of Richmond, VA).
Apparently he still owes the Richmond library some money for Charlie Brown
books that never made it back !
candice
[email protected]
In a message dated 00-12-07 15:38:20 EST, you write:
<< I love to read for pleasure and for information. But
does being able to read or reading a sign of
intelligence? I don't think so. I think the Kalahari
bushmen would disagree. >>
I agree that this is an important question to ask.
I have a friend who reads no magazines ever, of any sort. But he watches the
news like a soap opera. If I read Newsweek and Time, he will still know more
of what's going on than I do, and his information will be more current.
Is the medium more important than the message?
Someone who asks intelligent questions and really listens to the answers can
learn more than someone who skims eyes across lines of print for years
without actually applying that information or assimilating the ideas.
I think the over-rating of reading in and of itself, the glorification of
reading, is a school-connected thing in this day and age. Certainly 400
years ago it was *THE* way to learn, and even now in English universities
students are said to be "reading in history" (not studying or majoring). I
won't argue the history of the glory, but the current emphasis on reading
over and above other methods of receiving information is hanging on the thin
and stretching line.
If you're reading this right now, has it occurred to you that most people in
your life would consider it and you more valuable if you were reading the
same words in a bound, paper book than in pixels-on-light on a computer?
There's a problem with the whole deal.
Sandra
<< I love to read for pleasure and for information. But
does being able to read or reading a sign of
intelligence? I don't think so. I think the Kalahari
bushmen would disagree. >>
I agree that this is an important question to ask.
I have a friend who reads no magazines ever, of any sort. But he watches the
news like a soap opera. If I read Newsweek and Time, he will still know more
of what's going on than I do, and his information will be more current.
Is the medium more important than the message?
Someone who asks intelligent questions and really listens to the answers can
learn more than someone who skims eyes across lines of print for years
without actually applying that information or assimilating the ideas.
I think the over-rating of reading in and of itself, the glorification of
reading, is a school-connected thing in this day and age. Certainly 400
years ago it was *THE* way to learn, and even now in English universities
students are said to be "reading in history" (not studying or majoring). I
won't argue the history of the glory, but the current emphasis on reading
over and above other methods of receiving information is hanging on the thin
and stretching line.
If you're reading this right now, has it occurred to you that most people in
your life would consider it and you more valuable if you were reading the
same words in a bound, paper book than in pixels-on-light on a computer?
There's a problem with the whole deal.
Sandra
Deirdre Malfatto
> Librarians Ignore the Value of StoriesThis is an interesting article, but he doesn't really get much into
>
> By WAYNE A. WIEGAND
what the value of stories actually is. I'm curious. My dh and I have
hashed this out a few times. He is constantly reading but reads
only non-fiction that he carefully selects as worth his precious little
time. He sets goals for himself on what he's going to learn. I
respect this, but I am a more eclectic reader. I read plenty of non-
fiction, but I do love a good story. Dh has a hard time disguising his
disappointment that I would choose to waste my time this way (to
his credit, he does try).
A few of the arguments I've given him are that fiction inspires me,
that it opens up my eyes to new worlds, new perspectives, new
ideas, that it relaxes me and gives me a little vacation from my
every day world. His answer is that he gets some of the same
results from non-fiction while learning much more and can get the
rest of the results in far less time by watching the occasional movie.
This argument a big deal because we each do what we want to do,
but I am bringing this up because I do see his point to some extent.
I am wondering what some of your answers would be to the
question "what are the value of stories?"
Deirdre in NYC
Julie
> >Good point Samantha! There was a case last year of a 15 year old who had
> I love to read for pleasure and for information. But
> does being able to read or reading a sign of
> intelligence? I don't think so. I think the Kalahari
> bushmen would disagree.
>
> Peace,
> Samantha
been accepted into one of the Oxbridge colleges because he was so
intelligent. He was also functionally illiterate because of severe
dyslexia. I know of many children up to the age of 12 who do not read but
because their parents read to them or they listen to tapes they would be
considered to be "well-read" . Literacy is a convenience for those who hand
out written instructions to classes but it is not a sign of intelligence.
It also brings up the point of what constitutes an education? If an
education is meant to prepare one for life in the society in which one
lives, reading can be pretty far down on the list of objectives.
Peace
Julie
Julie
Dierdre wrote
<snip>
He is constantly reading but reads
I find that I get so little time for reading these days that I keep going
back and reading the same stories over and over. I don't want to waste my
time on something I may not like. :-)
I have recenlty started a reading group for older home-ed kids (10s and up)
around here. There are only two who come (and one of them is my daughter)
but even in the few weeks we have been discussing books I have been amazed.
Because it is a small group, because there is no agenda, ie questions to
think about, the discussions are really cool. We begin to discuss a theme
or situation in the book and they are making connections with tv shows, or
things that have happened to them or other books. For example when we read A
Wizard of Earthsea they compared Ged and the shadow to an episode of Deep
space Nine where different aspects of a character were embodied in the other
characters. They compared Ogion the old wizard to Obi Wan in Star WArs.
They compared one character who was a bit of a bully with a child that we
all know and tried to figure out why he acts the way he acts. So when you
say
But there are also different ways of reading stories. Entertainment is a
biggy and there is no problem with that. But we can also read and then use
other parts of our brain to figure things out. We have to make connections
and sense ourselves when we read fiction. sometimes when we read
non-fiction, it is all spelled out for us and there is no creative thinking
needed. But then there is non-fiction that again encourages us to figure
things out and make connections so that our understandin goes deeper.
Perhaps it is not the difference between the type of reading material that
is so imprtant but out different intentions in what we get from the
material. It sounds like you and your husband generally have similar goals.
His answer is that he gets some of the same
identifyable value?" If we decide on a value, does that mean people who read
for different reasons are wrong? Of course not.
Julie
<snip>
He is constantly reading but reads
> only non-fiction that he carefully selects as worth his precious littleI immediatly related to this statement but for a completly different reason.
> time.
I find that I get so little time for reading these days that I keep going
back and reading the same stories over and over. I don't want to waste my
time on something I may not like. :-)
I have recenlty started a reading group for older home-ed kids (10s and up)
around here. There are only two who come (and one of them is my daughter)
but even in the few weeks we have been discussing books I have been amazed.
Because it is a small group, because there is no agenda, ie questions to
think about, the discussions are really cool. We begin to discuss a theme
or situation in the book and they are making connections with tv shows, or
things that have happened to them or other books. For example when we read A
Wizard of Earthsea they compared Ged and the shadow to an episode of Deep
space Nine where different aspects of a character were embodied in the other
characters. They compared Ogion the old wizard to Obi Wan in Star WArs.
They compared one character who was a bit of a bully with a child that we
all know and tried to figure out why he acts the way he acts. So when you
say
>I would say you are spot on.
> A few of the arguments I've given him are that fiction inspires me,
> that it opens up my eyes to new worlds, new perspectives, new
> ideas, that it relaxes me and gives me a little vacation from my
> every day world.
But there are also different ways of reading stories. Entertainment is a
biggy and there is no problem with that. But we can also read and then use
other parts of our brain to figure things out. We have to make connections
and sense ourselves when we read fiction. sometimes when we read
non-fiction, it is all spelled out for us and there is no creative thinking
needed. But then there is non-fiction that again encourages us to figure
things out and make connections so that our understandin goes deeper.
Perhaps it is not the difference between the type of reading material that
is so imprtant but out different intentions in what we get from the
material. It sounds like you and your husband generally have similar goals.
His answer is that he gets some of the same
> results from non-fiction while learning much more and can get theOf course another question would be "Why do stories have to have an
> rest of the results in far less time by watching the occasional movie.
>
> This argument a big deal because we each do what we want to do,
> but I am bringing this up because I do see his point to some extent.
> I am wondering what some of your answers would be to the
> question "what are the value of stories?"
identifyable value?" If we decide on a value, does that mean people who read
for different reasons are wrong? Of course not.
>Peace
> Deirdre in NYC
>
Julie
Valerie
question "what are the value of stories?"
Deirdre in NYC
Deirdre,
I believe it was Albert Einstein who said, when asked by a mother how she
could bring out genius in her child, "Read him fairy tales." I don't know if
he explained that, but he was insistent. Perhaps some minds need fantasy to
flourish, while others (like your husband) do not. Not better or worse, just
different.
--Valerie in Tacoma
Deirdre in NYC
Deirdre,
I believe it was Albert Einstein who said, when asked by a mother how she
could bring out genius in her child, "Read him fairy tales." I don't know if
he explained that, but he was insistent. Perhaps some minds need fantasy to
flourish, while others (like your husband) do not. Not better or worse, just
different.
--Valerie in Tacoma
Cory and Amy Nelson
Deirdre-
I feel exactly the same way about stories and reading fiction. I have to
admit that it takes me much longer to read non-fiction works and to really
dig my teeth into them. I see your husband's point, but for me there's just
something about getting lost in the language of a book.
Amy
Mama to Accalia (6/14/99)
"The hardest to learn was the least complicated" -Indigo Girls
I feel exactly the same way about stories and reading fiction. I have to
admit that it takes me much longer to read non-fiction works and to really
dig my teeth into them. I see your husband's point, but for me there's just
something about getting lost in the language of a book.
Amy
Mama to Accalia (6/14/99)
"The hardest to learn was the least complicated" -Indigo Girls
> A few of the arguments I've given him are that fiction inspires me,
> that it opens up my eyes to new worlds, new perspectives, new
> ideas, that it relaxes me and gives me a little vacation from my
> every day world. His answer is that he gets some of the same
> results from non-fiction while learning much more and can get the
> rest of the results in far less time by watching the occasional movie.
Laura Simeon
> I believe it was Albert Einstein who said, when asked by a mother how sheI agree! Deirdre, you could also point out to your husband that many great
> could bring out genius in her child, "Read him fairy tales." I
> don't know if
> he explained that, but he was insistent. Perhaps some minds need
> fantasy to
> flourish, while others (like your husband) do not. Not better or
> worse, just
> different.
>
> --Valerie in Tacoma
scholarly and religious traditions have been passed down through the ages
via stories, not to mention genealogies, epic poems of many cultures, and
oral history. Someone posted the other day about the value of reading and
the Bushmen of the Kalahari. I accidentally lost that post before I could
respond, but she was absolutely right! The history of the written and
printed word is relatively brief - and the history of large numbers of
people having access to written matter (either physical access to it, or
even possessing the ability to read) is even shorter and more geographically
confined. The days of the Renaissance man are rapidly passing us by. The
much-hyped "information age" is here, and none of us can hope to know it
all. I think the real risk these days is in suffering from an information
overload without having enough time for contemplation of what we know. I'd
tell your husband that it's not the number of facts you know that matters,
it's how you understand them. And if stories are the way to greater
understanding for you, then that is fine.
What I meant to reply to the Bushmen post was that I started reading "In
Their Own Way" by Thomas Armstrong and he had some very interesting things
to say about multiple intelligences. There is clearly an intersection
between innate learning preferences and abilities, culture, and the child's
individual environment. Parents all over the world prepare their children to
be successful (as in well-adapted) members of their own cultures. I think
you can help a child develop the coping skills they'll need in a particular
environment without destroying their individuality. Literacy may not say
anything about a person's intelligence, but there is no question that it is
an important skill to have if you are living in a modern, industrialized
society.
Laura
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Laura Simeon
mailto:thisbe@...
http://www.kjsl.com/~thisbe/
Lynda
Born in SF, spent the next 4 years in Humboldt County and then spent 8 years
in Richmond, El Sobrante, El Cerrito and San Pablo going to grammar school
and first year of junior high.
Lynda
in Richmond, El Sobrante, El Cerrito and San Pablo going to grammar school
and first year of junior high.
Lynda
----- Original Message -----
From: <adarl52357@...>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2000 10:42 AM
Subject: Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] Not reading books
> Lynda, you grew up in Richmond?
>
>
> Message boards, timely articles, a free newsletter and more!
> Check it all out at: http://www.unschooling.com
>
> Addresses:
> Post message: [email protected]
> Unsubscribe: [email protected]
> List owner: [email protected]
> List settings page: http://www.egroups.com/group/Unschooling-dotcom
>
>
mary krzyzanowski
My 8yod is just beginning to read. However, her comprehension skills are
wonderful. We listened to an audiotape of "Where the Red Fern Grows"
recently. Yesterday, she saw someone take out the videotape at the library
and began to tell her about the story. I had to stop her before she gave
the whole story away.
Mary-NY
Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com
wonderful. We listened to an audiotape of "Where the Red Fern Grows"
recently. Yesterday, she saw someone take out the videotape at the library
and began to tell her about the story. I had to stop her before she gave
the whole story away.
Mary-NY
>From: "Julie" <julier@...>_____________________________________________________________________________________
>Reply-To: [email protected]
>To: <[email protected]>
>Subject: Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] Not reading books
>Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2000 09:04:13 -0000
>
> > >
> > I love to read for pleasure and for information. But
> > does being able to read or reading a sign of
> > intelligence? I don't think so. I think the Kalahari
> > bushmen would disagree.
> >
> > Peace,
> > Samantha
>
>Good point Samantha! There was a case last year of a 15 year old who had
>been accepted into one of the Oxbridge colleges because he was so
>intelligent. He was also functionally illiterate because of severe
>dyslexia. I know of many children up to the age of 12 who do not read but
>because their parents read to them or they listen to tapes they would be
>considered to be "well-read" . Literacy is a convenience for those who
>hand
>out written instructions to classes but it is not a sign of intelligence.
>It also brings up the point of what constitutes an education? If an
>education is meant to prepare one for life in the society in which one
>lives, reading can be pretty far down on the list of objectives.
>Peace
>Julie
>
Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com