Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How bad are childhood literacy rates?

vox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 79 posts

Re: How bad are childhood literacy rates?

#31

Post by ryao »

nmarinov wrote: post #27
ryao wrote: post #13

When I was young, I was amazed at how they would try to teach us English grammar and spelling, then have us read books like Huckleberry Finn that undid 6 months to a year worth of English language education. When you are young and you do not really a firm grasp of the right way to do things, being forced to spend substantial time “reading” books that show the wrong way is counterproductive. It was like having a const…

Hmm, I get where you're coming from and I'd agree if it was math or physics or chemistry but I'm not so sure about languages. I learned English as a second language and while I did have formal lessons, the most bang for buck learning came from stuff like Huckleberry Finn and forums and random songs (especially hip hop) and cartoons. Not because they are "good english" but precisely because they are "bad english" but…

> it's English as used by native speakers

I do not speak that way and I do not know anyone else who speaks that way.

That said, being relatively average at English as a student because I was constantly confused by the literature I was forced to read did negatively affect my test scores.

Re: How bad are childhood literacy rates?

#32

Post by ryao »

_alternator_ wrote: post #18
ryao wrote: post #13

When I was young, I was amazed at how they would try to teach us English grammar and spelling, then have us read books like Huckleberry Finn that undid 6 months to a year worth of English language education. When you are young and you do not really a firm grasp of the right way to do things, being forced to spend substantial time “reading” books that show the wrong way is counterproductive. It was like having a const…

I think you’re pointing out a real problem, but the solution is backwards. English, like any language, is not a formal rigid system like a programming language. “Undoing” the supposed ‘rules’ of language with good literature shows that the true rules of language are more complex and nuanced than the heuristics we use to teach children, and that these exceptions create richness, variety, and culture. Ultimately it rea…

People get plenty of this outside of school. If they get it in school too, they will always be confused, like I was.

Re: How bad are childhood literacy rates?

#33

Post by smogcutter »

7thaccount wrote: post #14
nobodyandproud wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“They shifted attention to really focus on teaching phonics, which is good and important…we did too much of that focus”. Without knowing the before and after, it’s not safe to say it’s still very early. Few additional weeks? Few additional months? Few additional years? At some point and grade a class should be moving past the time-consuming out-loud reading and pronunciation corrections to timed (and silent, focused)…

Agreed. Phonics is great and how you learn to read, but there is a limit in my opinion. The below is a little long winded, but covers my recent experience with my daughter. I taught my daughter to read when she was 4 and she was reading ~30 page books in kindergarten. Nothing outrageous, but she was pretty far ahead of her class that were still going over ABCs. This was outside of a few other kids who had parents tha…

Done properly, phonics shouldn’t be about memorizing rules per se so much as practicing them deliberately, until they are internalized.

For some kids, phonics mostly comes naturally. That sounds like your daughter, and myself for example as well. Spelling and pronunciation came easily. I was always the kid who had to flip back to find the page the class was on when it was time turn to read.

But our experiences aside, the fact is that if your daughter’s class was doing 3-cueing instead of phonics, many of her classmates simply wouldn’t learn how to read.

Re: How bad are childhood literacy rates?

#34

Post by SchemaLoad »

logsr wrote: post #22
dec0dedab0de wrote: post #8

Maybe reading books is less important than ever, and the kids are adapting to the new world. I am reminded of this xkcd, which I just realized Im about a decade behind on. https://xkcd.com/1414/

literacy is only important if you don't want to live a subsistence poverty lifestyle. other than that, completely useless.

There's not just one kind of literacy though. I have no problem reading books or blog posts on HN, but someone handed me a research article and I realised I struggled to understand it at all and had to re read and concentrate hard. Almost like there was some kind of performative obtuseness to the writing to appeal to an in group of other researchers.

Re: How bad are childhood literacy rates?

#35

Post by OgsyedIE »

One argument I've seen forwarded elsewhere is that school methods have tracked university methods.

According to the argument, watering down standards to increase retention (and revenue) gained legitimacy in the sixties as the higher education act empowered administrators to increase the size of their ranks and policy views at colleges across the country. These colleges trained education majors according to their new philosophy, who became a new rank of principals and superintendents in the eighties and onwards, promulgating the transactional and nihilistic view of the purpose of teaching.

On the one hand, it sounds farfetched. On the other hand, all five of the teachers and professors over 50 whom I've raised the topic to over the years agreed wholeheartedly.

Re: How bad are childhood literacy rates?

#36

Post by logsr »

SchemaLoad wrote: post #34
logsr wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

literacy is only important if you don't want to live a subsistence poverty lifestyle. other than that, completely useless.

There's not just one kind of literacy though. I have no problem reading books or blog posts on HN, but someone handed me a research article and I realised I struggled to understand it at all and had to re read and concentrate hard. Almost like there was some kind of performative obtuseness to the writing to appeal to an in group of other researchers.

language is one of the basic mechanisms for social differentiation and status. in academia specialized language is how different disciplines are differentiated and abstruse literary references are how people demonstrate their knowledge and status in the field.

knowing how to read ("knowing your letters") is not literacy. from an academic perspective the majority of the population is illiterate.

Re: How bad are childhood literacy rates?

#37

Post by mrangle »

ryao wrote: post #13

When I was young, I was amazed at how they would try to teach us English grammar and spelling, then have us read books like Huckleberry Finn that undid 6 months to a year worth of English language education. When you are young and you do not really a firm grasp of the right way to do things, being forced to spend substantial time “reading” books that show the wrong way is counterproductive. It was like having a const…

I disagree. Reading style ("flaws") is a major part of literacy. Even for people with learning disabilities.

If you aren't on the reading level for a specific book, that's another issue.

Re: How bad are childhood literacy rates?

#38

Post by 4b11b4 »

smogcutter wrote: post #25

For my sins, I teach middle school. There’s plenty of different angles on this, but I’d like to highlight a recent one that may not immediately occur to people here without young children: COVID retirements hit the elementary schools particularly hard. Teaching high school on zoom is one thing, now imagine teaching 3rd. So the veteran elementary teachers retired or quit, and there’s no adequate pipeline to replace th…

For my sins... I appreciate your deep intentions in that

Re: How bad are childhood literacy rates?

#39

Post by mrangle »

ryao wrote: post #29
chimpansteve wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is English your first language? If it isn't, I completely agree with you. However if it is, then I would make the argument that it's exactly the right way to teach it, particularly to young people. As you point out, it's a very fluid language with a lot of rules that are completely arbitrary. As a native speaker, it's more important getting to grips with the, I dunno what we'd call it on here, pseudocode rather than…

English is my first language. However, I had an undiagnosed learning disability until college. That said, to name one example, I do not think an understanding of adverbs versus adjectives can develop effectively if one is constantly exposed to people using adjectives as adverbs. It causes a loss of nuance that comes back to bite people, especially when it causes friction with those who know better. I remember in the…

To be generous, what this meant is either that you were below the reading level for the book or you misunderstand the core skill of reading and using style in the English language. Reading and understanding when rules are broken leads to knowing when they can be. We don't skip Shakespeare because the language is funny and archaic. Reading these authors is both a part of style and content literacy for the English language. Disclaimer: I'm not comparing them.

Re: How bad are childhood literacy rates?

#40

Post by mrangle »

logsr wrote: post #36
SchemaLoad wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's not just one kind of literacy though. I have no problem reading books or blog posts on HN, but someone handed me a research article and I realised I struggled to understand it at all and had to re read and concentrate hard. Almost like there was some kind of performative obtuseness to the writing to appeal to an in group of other researchers.

language is one of the basic mechanisms for social differentiation and status. in academia specialized language is how different disciplines are differentiated and abstruse literary references are how people demonstrate their knowledge and status in the field. knowing how to read ("knowing your letters") is not literacy. from an academic perspective the majority of the population is illiterate.

Knowing how to read is partial literacy and the first step toward literacy, regardless of anyone's lust for pretense. From an academic perspective most academics are illiterate.
Post reply on HN