No Improvement in Americans Literacy, Officials Report

L

loml

New Member
Joined
May 17, 2005
Messages
1,645
Reaction score
0
Reading and understanding newspapers, bus schedules and drug prescription labels are not easy tasks for 30 million Americans.

This group below the basic level of literacy can do no more than simple activities such as signing a form and adding the amounts in a bank deposit slip, according to a report released Thursday by the National Center for Education Statistics in the Department of Education.
Click to expand...


http://www.axcessnews.com/modules/wfsection/article.php?articleid=7172
 
Hopefully something will be done about it. I have to write on paper and pen and there are some people who seriously do not know how to read and write then I go to homemade gestures they finally understand with a happy and geninue smile which is a real smile.
 
i have a hard time reading. thats why i hate when ADers write such long posts cuz i can never read them. i get intimidated and just forget about reading it, or i try to read it and get discracted in the middle of it. and, i cant spell worth crap.
 
AJ, (or anyone) Do you mind telling me - what books did they make you read in school? For example, did you read any Chapter books, Young Adult books, "Classics" such as Great Expectations or Catcher in the Rye? Also, did you go to a Deaf or Mainstream school? I have been searching for this information for a long time.

Thanks,
Jessica
 
Just goes to show that the mainstream educational system is not attending to the literacy needs of its hearing students. How in the world can we expect it to attend to the needs of a deaf population using the same methodlogy that is failing hearing students?
 
jillio said:
Just goes to show that the mainstream educational system is not attending to the literacy needs of its hearing students. How in the world can we expect it to attend to the needs of a deaf population using the same methodlogy that is failing hearing students?
Click to expand...

Yep! *agreeing*
 
Yes indeedy.................public schools are too "one size fits all!"
 
Yeah, I wonder if part of the reasons are that we are not attending to the change in generations of children. Some teachers began to use graphic novel (manga) instead of classic books to get children to read. Of course they will pick manga that has a lots of words in it, so in a sense it's no difference from reading a novel. Get past the biased thoughts is the tough part. Students understand something that happens during their era better than something that happened more than 100 or 200 years ago.

Those teachers are smart, that's one way to get students to read. Wish my teacher done that when I was in school. I was very bored with books they picked. Especially that hateful book "The Great Gatsby." Grrr.

I wonder if depending on phonetic so much can actually hurt some children? I was told that's the first method of teaching children how to read and speak. That never made sense to me, because in the end, some people can't even tell the difference between "than" and "then" or "lose" and "loose."

As someone said, "one size fits all" does not work very well.
So for some students, that may work, but I believe that it can't be working for all students.
 
Silentwolf, I must be confused at what you're trying to say.

I agree that classic literature should not be used to teach reading in the initial stages, no matter what the age of the student. However, there are lots of books with pictures that introduce words and phrases without resorting to graphic novels (or the old Classic Illustrated) for the basic books.

Picture stories with words are great for "extra" reading in the school or "outside" reading, but not for the basics.

If you are saying that graphic novels and illustrated classics should be used for the main instruction in literature, I can see all kinds of richness lost. Of course most of the girls didn't like Moby Dick, and I can remember thinking about soccer when we went through Little Women. All classics aren't a hit for everyone, but I learned how words can be strung together to paint better pictures than in the comics we read for extra credit reports.

Reading is work as well as fun, and a mix of tools helps learning, in my estimation, not all learning based on one extreme or the other.
 
Chase said:
Silentwolf, I must be confused at what you're trying to say.

I agree that classic literature should not be used to teach reading in the initial stages, no matter what the age of the student. However, there are lots of books with pictures that introduce words and phrases without resorting to graphic novels (or the old Classic Illustrated) for the basic books.

Picture stories with words are great for "extra" reading in the school or "outside" reading, but not for the basics.

If you are saying that graphic novels and illustrated classics should be used for the main instruction in literature, I can see all kinds of richness lost. Of course most of the girls didn't like Moby Dick, and I can remember thinking about soccer when we went through Little Women. All classics aren't a hit for everyone, but I learned how words can be strung together to paint better pictures than in the comics we read for extra credit reports.

Reading is work as well as fun, and a mix of tools helps learning, in my estimation, not all learning based on one extreme or the other.
Click to expand...

Well said!
 
Hmm, I wish I have saved the article that discussed about introducing manga to school and positive benefits it can bring.

To me, I would rather have student at least read something than nothing at all. It's not about pictures, but how it was putted together.

Here's one link, maybe it will bring you a new perspective on how something like this can be beneficial. Reading Online - New Literacies:

Remember, everyone's different. Some people might have benefited from this more than reading a regular book. Only if teachers are opened mind about this.
 
Silentwolfdog said:
To me, I would rather have student at least read something than nothing at all. It's not about pictures, but how it was putted together. . . . Remember, everyone's different. Some people might have benefited from this more than reading a regular book. Only if teachers are opened mind about this.
Click to expand...

I'd never denying graphic literature has value. Back in the day (you know, when we walked five miles to school uphill both ways through hip-deep snow) our little backwoods school had at least fifty Classics Illustrated titles (about a third of those available at the time). You checked them out like all outside reading, and even though the comic versions of 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea and Last of the Mohigans didn't get as many extra-reading credits as the same story in book form, the comics books got read till they fell apart and had to be replaced.

I do agree that some reading and exposure to literature is better than none, and graphic works (as well as DVDs) must be available to students for free reading, one-to-one peer-reading, and individual teacher-assisted reading.

But I don't agree graphic material should be the main classroom material for all, leaving books for free reading. It reduces learning to the lowest common denominator, and cheats most who learn better when challenged.

Kind of what I mean: When I taught MacBeth in high school, I wasn't crazy enough to think kids would love 400-year-old iambic pentamiter prose. Besides, Shakespeare was meant to be seen, not read, so when no local play was available, we first saw the old black-and-white movie. When reading the text in class, several copies of Classics Illustrated #158 was available on the resource table.

Is that close to what you're saying?
 
Back
Top