Katherine Marsh is an award-winning novelist who writes for children in grades fifth-through-eighth. At that age in the 1980s, she remembers falling in love with books. But she knows that children today are not reading for fun as much as they used to. NAEP data say so; parents as well. She knows that the ubiquity of cell phones, the Internet, abd television explain some of that decline in reading.
But she believes there is a problem with the way children are taught reading. No, she’s not talking about phonics and how children learn to read. She refers to the pedagogical approach that is required by the Common Core. children in school are taught to analyze what they read. This technical mindset, she believes, kills the joy of reading.
What I remember most about reading in childhood was falling in love with characters and stories; I adored Judy Blume’s Margaret and Beverly Cleary’s Ralph S. Mouse. In New York, where I was in public elementary school in the early ’80s, we did have state assessments that tested reading level and comprehension, but the focus was on reading as many books as possible and engaging emotionally with them as a way to develop the requisite skills. Now the focus on reading analytically seems to be squashing that organic enjoyment. Critical reading is an important skill, especially for a generation bombarded with information, much of it unreliable or deceptive. But this hyperfocus on analysis comes at a steep price: The love of books and storytelling is being lost.
This disregard for story starts as early as elementary school. Take this requirement from the third-grade English-language-arts Common Core standard, used widely across the U.S.: “Determine the meaning of words and phrases as they are used in a text, distinguishing literal from nonliteral language.” There is a fun, easy way to introduce this concept: reading Peggy Parish’s classic, Amelia Bedelia, in which the eponymous maid follows commands such as “Draw the drapes when the sun comes in” by drawing a picture of the curtains. But here’s how one educatorexperienced in writing Common Core–aligned curricula proposes this be taught: First, teachers introduce the concepts of nonliteral and figurative language. Then, kids read a single paragraph from Amelia Bedelia and answer written questions.
For anyone who knows children, this is the opposite of engaging: The best way to present an abstract idea to kids is by hooking them on a story. “Nonliteral language” becomes a whole lot more interesting and comprehensible, especially to an 8-year-old, when they’ve gotten to laugh at Amelia’s antics first. The process of meeting a character and following them through a series of conflicts is the fun part of reading. Jumping into a paragraph in the middle of a book is about as appealing for most kids as cleaning their room.
But as several educators explained to me, the advent of accountability laws and policies, starting with No Child Left Behind in 2001, and accompanying high-stakes assessments based on standards, be they Common Core or similar state alternatives, has put enormous pressure on instructors to teach to these tests at the expense of best practices. Jennifer LaGarde, who has more than 20 years of experience as a public-school teacher and librarian, described how one such practice—the class read-aloud—invariably resulted in kids asking her for comparable titles. But read-alouds are now imperiled by the need to make sure that kids have mastered all the standards that await them in evaluation, an even more daunting task since the start of the pandemic. “There’s a whole generation of kids who associate reading with assessment now,” LaGarde said.
Under the duress of Commin Core, students are analyzing passages without reading the whole book. They are getting read to do the same on the tests. This is a sure fire way to make reading a chore, not a pleasure.
The architect of the Common Core standards, David Coleman, used to claim all sorts of miraculous things that would happen, if everyone taught the way he wanted. Test scores would rise, achievement gaps would close, etc. in the decade after Commin Core was introduced in 2010, none of those miracles came to pass.
Coleman believed that children needed to interpret what was put in front of them, without context. Understand the four corners of the text in front of them. This may make sense for a test, where the only thing in front of the student is a short passage, but it’s no way to read for pleasure.
Worse, this approach is a sure fire way to turn reading into a dull exegesis of language, not into a source of joy.
In early elementary school, I spent significant time in the library while other students took bible (Ron Desantis is not the first southern bigot to ignore the First Amendment). I can thank my dad, an Episcopal Priest, for making this possible. It was there that I began to devour “All About…” books, particularly on Dinosaurs (Yes, it is ironic that I read about evolution at the time appointed for bible class). I then progressed to “Born Free” and a variety of books on great athletes. I was allowed to follow my interests. I didn’t care about reading until I was eight, and while the adults in my life were panicking over this and had me held back, I was simply interested in drawing, sports, and playing in the woods. My 38 years as an educator confirmed my belief that students, especially American students, are driven by interests. They only take opportunity when it attracts them. Treating reading as a “science” or mechanical process has been detrimental to learning. Reading should be seen as a means to explore the joy of inquiry. Otherwise, it is simply another instructional activity where the end is completion at the means of drudgery.
For what it’s worth, Paul, John Dewey believed that children should not have reading instruction until age 8. Before then, they should explore, make things, learn informally.
My own children learned to read before they were 5 because we read together before bedtime. Sometimes the same book, over and over. They loved the words and sounds.
My son’s school was concerned about his progress when he was in first grade. I think he had his dad’s latent tendencies. The reading specialist said he was the only student she ever had who laughed at the nonsense words. He also had his dad’s sense of irony.
Good morning Diane and everyone,
Since when have schools wanted to support and encourage students in the joy of reading? Since when have schools wanted to support a joy of TEACHING for that matter? We pay a lot of lip service to these things but our actions speak differently. How can we encourage and support in kids what we can’t support and encourage in our own lives? Adults want kids to do a lot of things that they can’t even do themselves. Case in point : the number of teachers who leave the profession. Last week, I got into a conversation with my 9th grade students (a good group) about the qualities that make a good teacher (in their opinion). Here’s what they came up with (I wrote them down.)
1. Be able to adapt and explain things differently if students don’t understand.
2. Have patience.
3. Have a balance between work and fun in class.
4. Hopefully, the teacher will be passionate about his/her subject.
5. Don’t give long-winded explanations at the beginning of class.
6. Give lots of practice and resources – packets, notes, etc. before tests.
7. Be open to questions.
8. Be personable – engage with students.
9. Don’t let students get the class off track.
10. Don’t just give videos to watch with no explanations. (I can’t tell you how many students hate Edpuzzle.)
11. Create an environment that is welcoming and open to all.
12. Teachers should know their subject matter & be prepared.
13. Don’t just use tests to find out what students understand. Use class discussions, games, etc.
14. Don’t make kids hate coming to your class.
15. Challenge students but don’t overwhelm and pressure them.
16. Embrace trial and error in class.
Interesting, isn’t it? Nowhere in there do they even think about loving learning or reading.
“Mamie Krupczak Allegretti”
You left out a vital fact that explains why too many public schools and probably all charter schools work the way they do today, and that fact goes all the way back to President Reagan’s misleading, manipulating, and lying “A Nation at Risk” report and the war he declared against our public schools.
Most if not all children in Finland start school already literate. There is no Common Core Crap. There are no mandatory high stakes standardized tests. Teachers are respected as professionals and allowed to decide what they teach and how they teach.
I taught for thirty years, 1975 – 2005 and focused on encouraging my students to become avid readers and taught them how to write. I refused to obey mandates from district administration, to kowtow to the test, and the rest of the political crap mostly coming out of the extreme right like toxic diarrhea.
Your two questions are misleading. Put the blame where it belongs: ALEC, the federalist society, the Walton Family Foundation. Bill Gates, fascism… et al.
“Since when have schools wanted to support and encourage students in the joy of reading?”
“Since when have schools wanted to support a joy of TEACHING for that matter?”
Schools do not want anything. Schools don’t make the rules. Elected representatives make the rules that guide the schools.
Teachers teach.
Students learn.
Parents support the teachers to teach and the students to learn.
Teachers leaving the profession or not going into teaching are doing it because of the rules. Want to know who is responsible for those rules, FOLLOW THE MONEY back to its source!
Get rid of the dark money that influences elections and maybe this country could follow Finland’s example.
Do NOT blame the schools for what our elected leaders influenced by dark money have created!
Hello Lloyd,
Of course what you say is true. I did leave that out but I don’t have a lot of time now. But we’ve all (teachers, administrators, parents) colluded with it in some way or another at some point. So we can’t totally blame the other. As individual teachers, we try to support and encourage students as best we can in the system in which we have to work. Some will leave if they can’t find a way to do so not to mention the other burdens of teaching. It’s a complex problem. When I taught years ago at a certain district,I had a reading group at 6am for students who wanted to read some of the classics. Try getting high schoolers to do anything at 6am. 🙂 They decided what we would read (with some encouragement).They didn’t have any tests. Wow! What an idea! We read and discussed. It was the highlight of my teaching career. And it wasn’t supported by the district. But that was ok. Those students were rebels because they were doing it for the love of reading and thinking and discussing not because it was on a test. I loved it and so did they. I hope I supported their love of learning, and I hope that’s what they remember. That was the highlight of my career.
Mamie, wonderful story. Can’t imagine high school
Students showing up at 6 am.
Thanks Diane. The reading group actually came about because the students were reading Ayn Rand’s book Atlas Shrugged in their English class. They would come into my French class every day discussing it but felt like they weren’t getting it. I offered to read the book too so that I could discuss it better with them. I did so and we had wonderful conversations.They wanted to continue reading and asked if we could get together as a group. And our reading group was born! We read Hamlet, Fahrenheit 451, The Epic of Gilgamesh, Neil Postman’s books, Ralph Waldo Emerson and Thoreau, The Odyssey and more I can’t remember now. That was my last year at that district because they decided to end their French program and I lost my job.
Teachers and schools do not have the same meaning. Teachers and administrators are not equivalent. Administrators can’t care less about cultivating the love of reading in kids. They care about the statistics – the number of good grades and graduates.
Not all, but many teachers encourage students in the joy of reading and do it by example, sharing their passion for the works of literature. They leave the profession not because they cannot do that, but because of disrespect and often intimidation. Your freshmen seem to have the right idea of a good teacher’s qualities, but their view differs from that of the administrators. Here is an example from my experience. Two principals told me my knowledge of the subject matter was intimidating to students. Interesting, isn’t it? They favored teachers who created a party atmosphere in their classrooms rather than those who focused on education.
As a retired principal, I couldn’t disagree more. I knew many colleagues, myself included, who cared passionately about a love for reading. Our response to the data was often contrived by the district, but that doesn’t mean we didn’t value student passion. All in the school house confront a profound challenge with the high stakes environment. We should be working together not acting on inaccurate perceptions.
“The architect of the Common Core standards, David Coleman, used to claim all sorts of miraculous things that would happen, if everyone taught the way he wanted.”
Yes, a miracle did happen for David Coleman. He became wealthy as CEO of a standardized testing empire, because of the Common Core Crap he forced on a nation (not by himself – he had help),
As an ESL teacher, I introduced reading to my students in the form read aloud picture books from the very beginning. They learned over time to develop an interest in both stories and characters. Considering that mnay of the students had no experience with books or literacy, this was a major step forward. Since I had the same students for three and a few for four years, I got to see their literacy growth and interest in narrative and non-fiction develop over time until they no longer needed my services. When students find pleasure in reading, they are much more likely to become life- long readers.
Many students today are being robbed of the joy of reading. My grandson is one of them. He attends a public middle school in Texas where the district has purchased an array of canned programs. Teachers function like “game show hosts” for the day’s electronic worksheets geared to preparing them for the STAAR Test. The state is more interested in collecting data and training them like rats in a maze than providing them with a more impactful education built on human relationships. They have teachers on staff. Why do they do so little actual teaching? They have no textbooks, and all assignments are collected electronically. I do not know if this is the norm for most public schools in the state, but it is in this Mexican-American majority school district.
“She refers to the pedagogical approach that is required by the Common Core. children in school are taught to analyze what they read. This technical mindset, she believes, kills the joy of reading.”
Makes sense to me. I don’t know if it’s Common Core or not, but this insistence that kids “stop and jot” every other page would definitely crush my desire to read.
I hear this. My youngest son grew to hate reading due to the stupid DIEBELS testing. The testing pushed him to read so fast he couldn’t understand what he was reading. He was above average in reading speed and comprehension, but DIEBELS wanted him to read over 100 words a minute in 3rd grade. He started hating reading and it’s only been in the last 3 years that he’s gotten hooked on reading again (he’s 22 now).
And that was him growing up in a house where reading is adored, where all of us read, and with 2 educator parents who did all they could to get books he would like.
How many others have been ruined by these stupid tests who don’t have the reading support at home and NEVER go back to reading?
Horrible. I have learned to accept that being a slow reader and writer has turned out to be an asset in the long run. I often reread passages, pages, and chapters if I feel like I missed something. Horrible for people who focus only on deadlines, great for every other reason.
Reading fluency has never been a measure for intellectual acuity. Yet, countless elementary aged children label themselves “stupid” because they can’t read as fast as the student sitting next to them. Educational malpractice!
An excerpt I wrote about Common Core and reading:
The very first third-grade ELA section amply demonstrates the absurdity of the entire scheme. Students are asked to read a relatively innocuous piece titled “Sugaring Time.” It is a straightforward description of the process through which maple syrup is produced. The intentions are laughably transparent throughout this dull exercise. I can just imagine a freshly minted MBA and a Teach for America alumna sitting in a Pearson cubicle saying, “Good education is student-centered, right? Kids like maple syrup, don’t they? Great idea!” The first sentence of “Sugaring Time” – “You probably like to eat maple syrup on your pancakes and waffles, right?”
Yummy! This test will really be fun!
The essay is presented in short chunks, probably because the Teach for America graduate had a brain-biology seminar during her several weeks of training. Each chunk is numbered, so as to allow easy reference when the kids look back and try to figure out which one of the several plausible multiple-choice answers they should select. A junior-sized SAT.
A less developed third grader on the Upper West Side scratches his head in confusion, squirms in his chair and gives up. The words on the page, which had initially been mildly interesting, become an incomprehensible blur.
A more developed third grader in Westchester County wastes 10 minutes pondering the reasons that three of the proposed answers might be right. The pondering leads to anxiety, which leads in turn to the student gazing longingly out the window at a real maple tree, wishing she could be climbing it.
Thousands of third graders in the South Bronx don’t know or care about maple syrup, since it costs $20 a pint. It’s like having an SAT question about a 1982 Chateau Haut-Brion.
I’m essentially a Vermonter, despite living and working in New York. I love maple syrup so much that I could pour it on broccoli. I never believed that anything could make me averse to maple syrup. But I was wrong. It may take months before I can look at a can of “Grade A Light Amber (Fancy).” New Englanders should object to the Common Core just on the basis of its potential to disrupt the local economy.
Using maple syrup to draw little moths to the flame of testing and accountability is philosophically offensive. The whole mess is philosophically offensive. Anyone who understands child development – nay, anyone who was actually a child and remembers it – knows that curiosity is as natural as sap from a maple tree. Kids want to learn, unless we make it dull and frustrating.
Here’s a radical idea! Why not take the class to a sugar bush in upstate New York, let them tap a tree, taste the sap, visit the sugarhouse and watch the process of making
Brilliant and completely accurate. Should b read by everybody moaning about test scores and why Johnny can’t read! Where is the school superintendent, or the secretary of education with the guts to reject common core?
SOR folks sure have been pretty quiet on the Common Core.
We had to use a program called Study Sync. The kids called it, “Study Stink.” It was a canned computer program that used excerpts from stories. It drove me nuts. A lot of highly-intellectual processing for kids who were “emerging readers.” I had to “study my brains out” to figure out what the “end game” was and then how to explain/teach it to my students. Once “I” got it (not lying took a lot of study time on my part) I could teach it. It was still boring. We had “Lord of the Flies” but only an excerpt. None of the kids got it. I found several YouTube videos that reviewed and explained the story. Once I did that, one of my students said, “I went home and read the whole book three times! It was one of my favorites.” When I taught reading, I would read out loud so kids would HEAR the characters voices (yes I did the voices as well). For struggling readers they typically move through a sentence like they are walking on glass. But, we worked together. One book that we started was “The Pig Man.” It started out slow (geez I was slow) but started liking the book to the point kids were saying, “Can we read The Pig Man and find out what happened?” They felt the words. They connected to the characters. We could ask questions like, “If you were Tommy what would you do in this case? What should the Pig Man do about the broken statue?” Then because I was making a connection to the book and trying to follow the curriculum I was deemed “moving too slow” and the department head said, “Just collect all the books and move on.” What did I know? And then the kids had to take Accelerated Reader tests. This told them what type of book they qualified to read by their AR or Lexile number. When they went to the library the librarian would tell them, “Oh, the rocket ship book is not in your Lexile number range, you cannot read about rocket ships.” I grumbled something like, “This is f-ing messed up under my breath.” Then, I noticed their test scores all went down. I asked them, “I am curious. You were all doing so well and then I noticed that your AR scores dropped (it’s okay) but I am just curious.” They told me the test added a clock-timer that their eyes kept looking at. “We got anxious because we could tell we only had so much time to answer the question.” Some Kids decided to “f” it and punched any answer just to be done. Wow, that was fun. And when we went to distant learning, one little girl asked, “Mr. Charvet can I read this book because it is not my Lexile number.” I told her, “You read any book you want. Just do what I told you: if you don’t understand a word, look it up or put it on your sticky note so you can keep reading. I will help you later. But if you keep stopping, you will lose the flow and that’s no fun.” The reading was painful to the point, I wanted to skip it. But, I did find some great FREE programs online that the kids loved as long as they didn’t tell anybody — making reading fun, our little secret. I printed out all the papers because most kids like to have something they can “feel” when they read. The computer reading hurt my eyes; it created headaches for many of my kids. When I taught art I had a magazine cabinet for collages. I looked up one day and there were a group of middle school boys giggling and having a good time. “Hey you kids! What are you doing back there?” I reminded them there was no reading, just collecting pictures. Then I said, “Nah, what did you find?” “Mr. Charvet, check out this giant spider egg that was buried in the ground. And look at this old boat they found. And look at this…and this… and this. They had so much fun. I said, “You know I come back here to look for pictures, too. Then an hour goes by after I read all these great articles and learned so much. You know, this is the stuff (by knowing) you can win thousands of dollars on a game show!” For crying out loud, they gave away $250K for knowing that Frodo (LOTR) was not a Pokemon. We all laughed, but that kind of reading didn’t count because they could only read books. You know REAL books. I loved reading everything from matchbook covers and especially on the back of cereal boxes — to the comics that would take me on adventures. Nowadays, “Yes we know Spiderman saved the day. But what was the tone of his thinking? What do you think he meant by using this word? In sentence three, he used plethora. How can that be applied in other ways?” Man, we were just happy Spiderman got rid of the bad guys. Peace out.
Excerpts are the enemy of critical thinking and deep understanding. When I attended high school in the 1960s, I am so thankful that I had to read so many books, plays and poems, most of which were classics. We learned about the literature in the context of the history and politics of the times. We analyzed, interpreted, researched and wrote all the time. We discussed, debated and defended positions. All of these thoughtful activities could be applied to other subjects as well. Learning to think is a life skill.
Our young people deserve so much more than endless test prep. They must be prepared to become informed citizens and voters, and so many states have politicized education to the point of destruction. It is tragic that right wing extremists continue to demolish the commons with impunity.
@retired teacher — Call me crazy, but that’s what I thought. I never understood public education. I was supposed to be a “hot shot” advertising person, but one day someone told me, “You would make a good teacher.” And the rest is history. I totally agree that reading helps students understand and delve deeper into any subject matter. I used a ton of reading in my art classes that symbiotically connected it all together. I just don’t get it anymore. Blessings to you and yours.
Coleman was and is clueless. One provides background as necessary. One does analysis incidentally to illuminate particular aspects of the text. But the thing never to lose sight of is THE REASON WHY PEOPLE READ THIS TEXT TO BEGIN WITH.
And, Coleman’s “New Criticism Lite” is only one of many, many, many possible approaches to texts.
The upshot of this awful way of approaching texts is kids who don’t read because reading has been made, for them, a miserable, joyless experience.
It is LONG past time to can the puerile Gates/Coleman bullet list, all the state “standards” built on that list, and the idiotic Common Cored curricula and pedagogy that Gates and Coleman spawned, which has metastasized throughout U.S. K-12 education.
Coleman claimed that his Common Core would close achievement gaps and raise achievement to new heights.
None of that happened.
Exactly. None of it. But what did happen is that curricula and pedagogy throughout the united states were deformed.
You nailed it, Diane. A failed experiment. Some of us knew that it would be from the start. Isn’t it funny how these folks who tout themselves as “driven by data” will not accept the fact that BY THEIR OWN MEASURES, their experiment has been a complete failure? No accountability for the accountability mavens. What a surprise.
The damage that has been done to our public schools, students and teachers is tragic. It continues still through all the mindless technology and endless “personalized” testing software that is imposed on many public schools despite the fact there continues to be zero evidence it has value. The goal is to commodify education from the outside (charters-vouchers) or from the inside out (tech. products).
At 46, I changed careers and became a special education teacher through a teaching residency program designed for career-changers and non-traditional teachers. I clearly remember the training materials making a point that “you are here to teach children to read, not to make them love books or read for pleasure.” I was appalled then and still. I ignored the advice and know that at least of my students thoroughly enjoyed Charlotte’s Web, Flat Stanley, and other chapter books for kids. I don’t know if they became book lovers as older people, but I sure tried.