0
POPSAugust 2nd, 2006 post -- A story for everyone It's not a "valid argument" to say a student would be prejudiced against a book simply because it was assigned in class. It's actually fallacious (specifically Dicto simpliciter fallacy, which is known as the sweeping generalizations fallacy). An argument is considered valid when it is backed up with proof, and the blog author's "valid argument" contains no proof at all. Stating that 30% of kids finished a classic book but 90% finished the book when offered a well-written young adult novel is also fallacious. Readers are not given any more details about this "study" (it's implied that it was an informal study conducted by the blog author), we do not know how many teachers were polled, how many students responded truthfully, or even anything else at all except the numbers that could very easily have been fabricated (since your study lacked proof of their veracity).
1
POPSAugust 2nd, 2006 post -- A story for everyone
I don't know what "many teens" the author is referring to because even though I was a very active young adult (many dance classes, gymnastics for a bit, being a member of a swimming team for a while, and then I started doing community theater), I still managed to find time to read a whole lot of books. I would agree that those "many teens" might not be inclined to read a book outside of class, but that does not mean they do not have the time for it. I also thought her reference to a "recent study" in which "reluctant readers" cited their English teachers as their number one source of book recommendations. To which I ask: What were those English teachers recommending? Perhaps they were recommending all sorts of genre books (the "fun" books, as this author puts it). Since no specifics were given about the recommendations made by teachers in this "recent study," it is unfair to use that study as proof that teens are not being offered different types of books to read in class.
0
POPSAugust 2nd, 2006 post -- A story for everyone That paragraph started off positive, even though I thought it was curious that she so quickly changed her mind about teachers directing their students towards the classics ("exposing kids to that area of literature is a worthy endeavor"). I actually completely agree with that statement, but then she followed it up with yet more negativity. Once again, more hasty generalizations about what is being "taught" (another oblique reference to teachers) in most of our schools ("only one type of literature" -- the classics). She also reiterated her assumption that teaching classics in school is "stifling and creates some unwanted effects," those "unwanted effects" being students that have stopped reading books after graduation because their teachers didn't do a well-enough job of engaging their interest in books. Which is an unfair criticism when most english teachers want nothing more than to encourage their students to be readers.
0
POPSSept. 11th, 2006 post -- The slippery upward slope Once again, the blog author is implying that the problem with teens not wanting to read books lies with the teachers. (Even though she did not use the term "teacher," she still made an oblique reference to english teachers about her perceived flaws in "assigned reading in high school." The people assigning the reading are teachers.) It's also unfair to say that students are not given access to "more variety in storytelling styles and genres." While curriculum dictates that an english teacher must teach a certain set of books, every english teacher I've ever had has also supplemented the in-class reading assignments with genre books. The reason being, as the blog author pointed out, is to engage students with books that are well-written but also interesting, and maybe even fun. (Although she negatively focused on what teachers DON'T do, and I'm attempting to focus on the positive things that teachers are doing, so there's a slight difference in our opinions on this matter.)
0
POPSSept. 11th, 2006 post -- The slippery upward slope Once again, the blog author makes a hasty generalization that there is "only one kind of book assigned in high school (the 'classics')" and it results in "MANY students" believing that "there is only one kind of book out there, period." Which is an absurd, fallacious statement. Schools have crazy things called libraries, which means that every student knows that there are more books available to them than simply the ones assigned in class. I also take offense to her statement that the classics are the only books assigned in high school. This is an unfair generalization, and is patently untrue (many high schools include more than just the "classics" in their literature curriculums).
0
POPSJan. 15th, 2007 post -- Seuss for the teenage mind Again, the blog author is insinuating that classic books fail to hold the interest of high school students. She also made a hasty generalization by saying that she doesn't "know any teens who read them for class and just couldn't put them down. Frankly, I don't know one in thirty teens who when assigned them actually finish them." Recalling my own high school experience, I had many classmates who both finished their assigned reading and actually enjoyed "Death of a Salesman." To imply that only one in thirty teens enjoys that play is just wrong.
0
POPSJan. 15th, 2007 -- Seuss for the teenage mind The implication from the above clip is that classics are "boring." Which is a surprising statement coming from a published author. If her books were to become classics some day, would she still label them as boring?
0
POPSJan. 21st, 2007 post - Ugh Once again, I feel that Shannon (the blog author) has posted disparaging remarks about teachers. "I have met so many adults who gave up reading altogether after high school because their reading experience in their English classes was so negative." Meaning that the english class, which is taught by an english teacher, was to blame for turning "so many adults" away from books. Again, I do not think this is a fair, or even factual, remark to make in regards to what students are taught in high school. Without providing some type of proof (even anecdotal) for her statement, it merely reads as yet another negative remark against teachers.
0
POPSFeb. 18th, 2007 post -- No guilt for pleasure reading! I'm a disheartened by the fact that an author would say that people are learning in high school that "the only books good for you are the classics and anything of a genre or anything written in the last 20 years must be rubbish. Hm. And we wonder why adult literacy is in trouble." As the daughter of two teachers, I strongly feel that such a statement is a sneaky, back-handed criticism of teachers. The only way a group of people would "learn" in high school that classics are the only good books to read, and genre books are "rubbish" is from teachers. Which is why I feel this is a disparaging remark against teachers.
Clips
Latest Pops
Latest Comments
Most Pops
Tags
Print
Save
Turn on live update