Illiteracy: An Incurable Disease or Education Malpractice?

gue_bariumgue_barium Posts: 5,515
edited October 2007 in A Moving Train
Illiteracy in America is still growing at an alarming rate and that fact has not changed much since Rudolf Flesch wrote his best-selling expose of reading instruction in 1955. Illiteracy continues to be a critical problem, demanding enormous resources from local, state, and federal taxes, while arguments about how to teach children to read continue to rage within the education research community, on Capitol Hill, in business, and in the classroom.

http://www.nrrf.org/essay_Illiteracy.html

all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
Post edited by Unknown User on
«13

Comments

  • gue_barium wrote:
    Illiteracy in America is still growing at an alarming rate and that fact has not changed much since Rudolf Flesch wrote his best-selling expose of reading instruction in 1955. Illiteracy continues to be a critical problem, demanding enormous resources from local, state, and federal taxes, while arguments about how to teach children to read continue to rage within the education research community, on Capitol Hill, in business, and in the classroom.

    http://www.nrrf.org/essay_Illiteracy.html


    I can tell you that teachers alone cannot solve it....for it to really change, the child must see reading at home...parents/grandparents must glorify reading for enjoyment....PARENTS: sell those fancy computer games and put away those cell phones....let's get back to basics.
    Dalai Lama—To say that humility is an essential ingredient in our pursuit of spiritual transformation may seem to be at odds with what I have said about the need for confidence. But there is clearly a distinction to be made between valid confidence or self-esteem, and conceit - which we can describe as an inflated sense of importance, grounded in a false image of self.
  • even flow?even flow? Posts: 8,066
    I can tell you that teachers alone cannot solve it....for it to really change, the child must see reading at home...parents/grandparents must glorify reading for enjoyment....PARENTS: sell those fancy computer games and put away those cell phones....let's get back to basics.


    I have heard more times then I care to from more people then I want to admit that it is the school's that need to teach the children. F'd up I know.
    You've changed your place in this world!
  • in_hiding79in_hiding79 Posts: 4,315
    The school's can teach all they want, when it comes down to it, KID'S NEED TO READ A DAMN BOOK! I read so much when I was in school. I liked video games and stuff, but I loved to read and I still do. Parent's need to make sure that once their child comes home he/she needs to do all his/her homework and read. Reading is great, it makes you use your imagination which I think children don't do anymore! :( I know I have no children, but I know how my Parent's raised me and I was to read one or two books a month. During the Summer it was one book a week.
    And so the lion fell in love with the lamb...,"
    "What a stupid lamb."
    "What a sick, masochistic lion."
  • chopitdownchopitdown Posts: 2,222
    I can tell you that teachers alone cannot solve it....for it to really change, the child must see reading at home...parents/grandparents must glorify reading for enjoyment....PARENTS: sell those fancy computer games and put away those cell phones....let's get back to basics.

    wait... you want parents to educate and play a role in their children's lives??? that's just crazy. It's not like the first 5 years of life are formative at all. The teachers of today just must not be very good if kids can't read; there is no other reason. Parental responsibility for teaching and reading??? HA! what's next...do you want parents to teach their kids to respect others and help the students with homework??? That's what teachers are for. I mean, a parent may actually have to tell their child "no" or tell their child they can't play outside b/c the work isn't done.

    ;)
    make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    I can tell you that teachers alone cannot solve it....for it to really change, the child must see reading at home...parents/grandparents must glorify reading for enjoyment....PARENTS: sell those fancy computer games and put away those cell phones....let's get back to basics.

    this is a huge problem. kids today and on the way have too many toys to distract them. I didn't have my first computer until I was 18, cell phone when I was 20. getting back to basics is a difficult challenge for parents today.
  • in_hiding79in_hiding79 Posts: 4,315
    jlew24asu wrote:
    this is a huge problem. kids today and on the way have too many toys to distract them. I didn't have my first computer until I was 18, cell phone when I was 20. getting back to basics is a difficult challenge for parents today.

    Exactly!!
    And so the lion fell in love with the lamb...,"
    "What a stupid lamb."
    "What a sick, masochistic lion."
  • know1know1 Posts: 6,794
    It's a parenting issue....but conveniently they're not mentioned.
    The only people we should try to get even with...
    ...are those who've helped us.

    Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
  • gue_bariumgue_barium Posts: 5,515
    know1 wrote:
    It's a parenting issue....but conveniently they're not mentioned.

    Well, like any social malady, illiteracy tends to move from one generation to the next. I disagree that it cannot be remedied with good early age schooling.

    all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
    except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
  • gue_bariumgue_barium Posts: 5,515
    oops, wrong thread.

    all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
    except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
  • AhnimusAhnimus Posts: 10,560
    As some of you may know, I agree with the ecological systems perspective of human development, and I tend to stray from stage-like concepts like that of Piaget, Vygotsky or Kohlberg, though they are useful in themselves.

    The primary requirement for reading comprehension is the appropriate brain function. A function that develops through neural training. Typically infants begin their training early, with books with large graphics depicting an object and a single word, "Duck" for example. If this development is postponed or neglected, it may hinder the humans ability to learn reading comprehension.

    This part of the development is most directly related to the home environment and the primary caregivers. However, extending this ecological perspective, let's look at the factors that might influence the primary caregivers. Modern families have two working parents, often children are left at daycare services, which will also be a strong influence on child development. Parents are stressed by society, working, paying bills, etc.. as well as the chores common to raising children, dentists, haircuts, school supplies, etc.. These stresses affect the parent-child interaction. Parents are less apt to devote quality time to constructive parenting within our modern society. Sometimes under the impression that it's the duty of daycare services and public school teachers to support the development of their child.

    By extension, the ecological systems perspective implies that we all play a part in the development of 'our' children. There are things all of us can do to help, it starts with a less selfish approach to the issue. Parents can spend more time with their children, assisting in their child's development and offering compassion, love and constructive learning assistance. Teachers can help by rewarding children for their efforts, not rating them against other children and not prescribing hundreds of hours of homework. Children are often overwhelmed by school, especially if they already feel inadequate. The rest of us can help by respecting each other as human beings and supporting social programs like federally funded daycare and legislation like maternity/paternity leave. I hear good things about the Swedish system, perhaps we could learn something from them.

    Peace :)
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • chopitdownchopitdown Posts: 2,222
    Ahnimus wrote:
    As some of you may know, I agree with the ecological systems perspective of human development, and I tend to stray from stage-like concepts like that of Piaget, Vygotsky or Kohlberg, though they are useful in themselves.

    The primary requirement for reading comprehension is the appropriate brain function. A function that develops through neural training. Typically infants begin their training early, with books with large graphics depicting an object and a single word, "Duck" for example. If this development is postponed or neglected, it may hinder the humans ability to learn reading comprehension.

    This part of the development is most directly related to the home environment and the primary caregivers. However, extending this ecological perspective, let's look at the factors that might influence the primary caregivers. Modern families have two working parents, often children are left at daycare services, which will also be a strong influence on child development. Parents are stressed by society, working, paying bills, etc.. as well as the chores common to raising children, dentists, haircuts, school supplies, etc.. These stresses affect the parent-child interaction. Parents are less apt to devote quality time to constructive parenting within our modern society. Sometimes under the impression that it's the duty of daycare services and public school teachers to support the development of their child.

    By extension, the ecological systems perspective implies that we all play a part in the development of 'our' children. There are things all of us can do to help, it starts with a less selfish approach to the issue. Parents can spend more time with their children, assisting in their child's development and offering compassion, love and constructive learning assistance. Teachers can help by rewarding children for their efforts, not rating them against other children and not prescribing hundreds of hours of homework. Children are often overwhelmed by school, especially if they already feel inadequate. The rest of us can help by respecting each other as human beings and supporting social programs like federally funded daycare and legislation like maternity/paternity leave. I hear good things about the Swedish system, perhaps we could learn something from them.

    Peace :)

    couldn't you have said, "read to your children early" and "it takes a village to raise a child?" ;)
    make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
  • gue_barium wrote:
    Well, like any social malady, illiteracy tends to move from one generation to the next. I disagree that it cannot be remedied with good early age schooling.

    It can be remedied with early age schooling, but a part of that still falls back on the child and/or their upbringing. You can't force someone to learn, so if a kid has no desire to learn how to read, and isn't taught by their upbringing about the importance of reading, in some cases a teacher can't do a whole lot.

    That being said, there is no excuse for a student to be able to get passing grades through school all the while not being able to read. That just shows a lack of engagement on the teacher's part in my opinion.
    My whole life
    was like a picture
    of a sunny day
    “We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
    ― Abraham Lincoln
  • AhnimusAhnimus Posts: 10,560
    chopitdown wrote:
    couldn't you have said, "read to your children early" and "it takes a village to raise a child?" ;)

    I don't know man, I don't want to sound dictorial or too opinionated and not learned enough. But this way, I always come across as arrogant. But ultimately that's something that's up to the reader. So, yea, I could have said that, but I said it my way.
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • gue_bariumgue_barium Posts: 5,515
    It can be remedied with early age schooling, but a part of that still falls back on the child and/or their upbringing. You can't force someone to learn, so if a kid has no desire to learn how to read, and isn't taught by their upbringing about the importance of reading, in some cases a teacher can't do a whole lot.

    That being said, there is no excuse for a student to be able to get passing grades through school all the while not being able to read. That just shows a lack of engagement on the teacher's part in my opinion.

    I can't recall ever knowing a grade-schooler who didn't want to learn.

    all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
    except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
  • chopitdownchopitdown Posts: 2,222
    Ahnimus wrote:
    I don't know man, I don't want to sound dictorial or too opinionated and not learned enough. But this way, I always come across as arrogant. But ultimately that's something that's up to the reader. So, yea, I could have said that, but I said it my way.

    no worries, just havin a little fun while i'm working on a presentation. I think you're mantra should be...Why use a big word when a diminutive one will suffice.
    make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
  • AhnimusAhnimus Posts: 10,560
    I think MarylandTeacher nailed it when he/she said:

    "I can tell you that teachers alone cannot solve it....for it to really change, the child must see reading at home...parents/grandparents must glorify reading for enjoyment"

    I didn't appreciate reading until about 9th grade when I got into reading the dictionary. Afterwards I tried The Hobbit and House of Cain but quickly became bored of fiction. I refound my love of reading around 23 when I picked up a textbook. I've mostly found an implicit negative association with reading though, and I find television or video easier to follow. I think it's a sign of our culture, our society, something we are collectively responsible for.

    Ultimately, I can't change the way MarylandTeacher teaches, or the way Mr. Doe raises his children. The only thing I can change is how I interact with MT, Doe, Doe's child and my government. Those are my responsibilities that I need to focus on to help with child development.
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • YoyoyoYoyoyo Posts: 310
    Ahnimus wrote:
    I don't know man, I don't want to sound dictorial or too opinionated and not learned enough. But this way, I always come across as arrogant. But ultimately that's something that's up to the reader. So, yea, I could have said that, but I said it my way.

    Arrogant or pompous?
    No need to be void, or save up on life

    You got to spend it all
  • AhnimusAhnimus Posts: 10,560
    Mestophar wrote:
    Arrogant or pompous?

    Either way. I get my share of both. Interestingly, when someone calls me either arrogant or pompous, they come across to me as being arrogant or pompous.
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • YoyoyoYoyoyo Posts: 310
    Ahnimus wrote:
    Either way. I get my share of both. Interestingly, when someone calls me either arrogant or pompous, they come across to me as being arrogant or pompous.

    You lead a very boring life if that is interesting to you.
    No need to be void, or save up on life

    You got to spend it all
  • AhnimusAhnimus Posts: 10,560
    Mestophar wrote:
    You lead a very boring life if that is interesting to you.

    Depends, boring and interesting are subjective catagories.
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • soulsingingsoulsinging Posts: 13,202
    Ahnimus wrote:
    There are things all of us can do to help, it starts with a less selfish approach to the issue. Parents can spend more time with their children, assisting in their child's development and offering compassion, love and constructive learning assistance.

    i dont think anyone out there doesnt know this is important, but if people already clearly arent doing it, how do you get them to do so? you mention the miriad of stressors that deprive or interfere with this quality time. how do you reduce them?
  • AhnimusAhnimus Posts: 10,560
    i dont think anyone out there doesnt know this is important, but if people already clearly arent doing it, how do you get them to do so? you mention the miriad of stressors that deprive or interfere with this quality time. how do you reduce them?

    Well, maternity leave is one way, the U.S. has poor maternity leave compared to other nations.

    Perhaps though, we should reevaluate our standards of living. 50 years ago a single income couple could raise 9 kids, now it takes two incomes to raise one child. What's going on here?
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • Oh come on! You can't be serious as to blame this too on "stressors" and "problems". I am so sick of hearing how Johnny can't do this and Latisha can't do that because their parents have a crappy life. BS! If these people cannot find 10 minutes each day to read with their children, then quite frankly, they don't deserve to have them. It is called prioritizing. Perhaps if mom and dad stopped playing video games and hanging out in the corner pub, they would actually have time to interact with their kids. Excuses is all this boils down to. Not reasons. Sure there are those small few who work horrible hours to make ends meet. But then, again the question comes up, what kind of environment are these kids living in. Why are they parents if they cannot properly take care of them? Which of course boils down to ethics. Just because you CAN have kids doesn't mean you SHOULD.
    "When you're climbing to the top, you'd better know the way back down" MSB
  • AhnimusAhnimus Posts: 10,560
    Oh come on! You can't be serious as to blame this too on "stressors" and "problems". I am so sick of hearing how Johnny can't do this and Latisha can't do that because their parents have a crappy life. BS! If these people cannot find 10 minutes each day to read with their children, then quite frankly, they don't deserve to have them. It is called prioritizing. Perhaps if mom and dad stopped playing video games and hanging out in the corner pub, they would actually have time to interact with their kids. Excuses is all this boils down to. Not reasons. Sure there are those small few who work horrible hours to make ends meet. But then, again the question comes up, what kind of environment are these kids living in. Why are they parents if they cannot properly take care of them? Which of course boils down to ethics. Just because you CAN have kids doesn't mean you SHOULD.

    Do you have children? And are these opinions based on fact?
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • Ahnimus wrote:
    Do you have children? And are these opinions based on fact?
    Yes I have children. Which facts would you like Ahnimus?
    "When you're climbing to the top, you'd better know the way back down" MSB
  • AhnimusAhnimus Posts: 10,560
    Yes I have children. Which facts would you like Ahnimus?

    How about the ones that support your opinions.

    For example:

    54% of children in female-headed homes, and 10% of children in two-parent homes are living in poverty (Eggebeen & Lichter, 1991) Most African-American children live at some point in poverty (Brooks-Gunn, Klebanov, & Duncan, 1996) 65% of whom spent time in single-parent homes. (Teegartin, 1994).
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • AhnimusAhnimus Posts: 10,560
    Snippet:

    Recent studies on the impact of economic hardship on children have demonstrated that some of the negative effects are mediated through changes in the parent-child relationship. Elder, Van Nguyen, and Caspi (1985) found that economic hardship increased children's socioemotional distress by increasing punitive and arbitrary parenting behaviors, especially of the father. Harold-Goldsmith, Radin, and Eccles (1988) found that, although unemployed fathers had more time for child care, they displayed fewer nurturing behaviors than did other fathers. Lempers et al. (1989) observed that under economic hardship, parental nurturance decreased and inconsistent discipline increased. Conger et al. (1992, 1993) showed that economic pressure had an effect on adolescent adjustment by increasing parents' depression, which was associated with less involved parenting. Findings by Galambmos and Silbereisen (1987), Flanagan, 1988), and Larson (1984) all have indicated that parents facing economic hardship felt more depressed about the future of their children, felt less competent in helping their children choose future careers, tended to lower their expectations for their children's education, and were less likely to encourage them to finish college. These lowered parental expectations were associated with decreased academic aspirations in the children, who expected to undergo vocational training instead of attending a four-year college (Isralowitz & Singer, 1986; McLoyd, 1990). Flanagan (1990) showed that adolescents in families experiencing job loss reported more conflict with their parents.

    In the current study, depression and loneliness were selected as indicators of adolescent distress because of the previously documented effects of economic hardship on the parents and the parent-child relationship. Parents who, because of financial pressure, become more depressed, more irritable, and/or more self-preoccupied might be less nurturant and supportive in their daily interactions with their children, and perhaps more distant, uninvolved, and rejecting on a daily basis (Maccoby & Martin, 1983; Patterson, 1982). These stress-induced parental moods and behaviors, and the resulting negative parent-child interactions, may be related to their children feeling depressed, less wanted, and more lonely. Further, as Jones (1988) reported, children from economically deprived families tended to feel isolated, to have had conflictual relationships with peers, and to be suspicious of children from social classes different from their own. Hook (1990) found that adolescents lacked identification with peers as a result of their inability to discuss with 'anyone in their communities their families' financial status, for which they felt partly responsible.

    Research also documents the negative effects of economic hardship on marital quality and stability (Voydanoff & Majka, 1988). Studies have noted the effects of the quality of the marital relationship on child outcomes (Emery, 1988; Reid & Crisafulli, 1990). Most studies have tended to support the generalization that a decrease in the quality of the marital relationship is correlated with an increase in child disturbances (Dadds, 1987). Several studies have indicated that the marital relationship mediates the effect of economic hardship on child outcomes (Conger et al., 1992, 1993; Ge et al., 1992). According to McLoyd (1989, 1990), financially pressed parents might be less likely to be affectionate with and respectful of each other and even be more hostile.

    http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2248/is_n126_v32/ai_19619414
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • YoyoyoYoyoyo Posts: 310
    "What your government pays for it gets. When we understand that, then we look at government financed institutions of education and see the kind of students and kind of education that is being turned out by these government financed schools. Logic will tell you, that if what is being turned out in those schools was not in accord with what the state and federal government wanted then it would change it. The bottom line is that the government is getting what they have ordered. They do not want your children to be educated. They do not want you to think too much. That is why our country and our world has become so proliferated with entertainments, mass media, television shows, amusement parks, drugs, alcohol and every kind of entertainment to keep the human mind entertained. So that you don't get in the way of important people by doing too much thinking. You had better wake up and understand that there are people that are guiding your life and you don't even know it."

    Some guy
    No need to be void, or save up on life

    You got to spend it all
  • AhnimusAhnimus Posts: 10,560
    Mestophar wrote:
    "What your government pays for it gets. When we understand that, then we look at government financed institutions of education and see the kind of students and kind of education that is being turned out by these government financed schools. Logic will tell you, that if what is being turned out in those schools was not in accord with what the state and federal government wanted then it would change it. The bottom line is that the government is getting what they have ordered. They do not want your children to be educated. They do not want you to think too much. That is why our country and our world has become so proliferated with entertainments, mass media, television shows, amusement parks, drugs, alcohol and every kind of entertainment to keep the human mind entertained. So that you don't get in the way of important people by doing too much thinking. You had better wake up and understand that there are people that are guiding your life and you don't even know it."

    Some guy

    Sounds like Alex Jones.
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • gue_bariumgue_barium Posts: 5,515
    Oh come on! You can't be serious as to blame this too on "stressors" and "problems". I am so sick of hearing how Johnny can't do this and Latisha can't do that because their parents have a crappy life. BS! If these people cannot find 10 minutes each day to read with their children, then quite frankly, they don't deserve to have them. It is called prioritizing. Perhaps if mom and dad stopped playing video games and hanging out in the corner pub, they would actually have time to interact with their kids. Excuses is all this boils down to. Not reasons. Sure there are those small few who work horrible hours to make ends meet. But then, again the question comes up, what kind of environment are these kids living in. Why are they parents if they cannot properly take care of them? Which of course boils down to ethics. Just because you CAN have kids doesn't mean you SHOULD.
    You're not anyone to be giving advice on illiteracy. I think you may be among the illiterate. I posted a link to an article to begin this topic. It has lots of useful information and a lots of links to further the understanding of illiteracy in America.
    This topic isn't about how you hate ghetto folk parenting.

    all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
    except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
Sign In or Register to comment.