Live data from Hacker News

Book people think they know why 9-year-olds stop reading for fun

slate.com

461–470 of 504 posts

Re: Book people think they know why 9-year-olds stop reading for fun

#461
post #451

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Simpler to lie about moving than deal with the bureaucracy. Every state has mandatory schooling and truancy laws. We planned to move out of Texas anyway. Easier to say we’re moving than try to get permission to homeschool my own child.

> my own child. I've never quite understood this focus. Do you think that because it's your child you should be able to do whatever you want?

No, not "whatever I want." I described taking my daughter out of a public school and legally homeschooling her. I didn't see any reason to explain that or discuss it with the school administration. If I quit a job I don't have to go to an exit interview. Same thing.

As I mentioned we moved to Oregon soon after taking our daughter out of public school. Oregon legalized homeschooling in 1985, before my daughter was born. Texas legalized homeschooling in 1994, the same year we made that decision. We didn't see any need to deal with the public school bureaucracy -- that would kind of defeat the point of homeschooling.

I think parents will generally choose to do whatever they think will best protect their child, or help their child succeed. If you don't understand that "focus" I will guess you don't have children.

Re: Book people think they know why 9-year-olds stop reading for fun

#462
post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Keeping certain books out of school libraries for younger age kids is not a bad idea. Just like preventing children from watching porn is not a bad idea. Parenting is about finding a balance between protection and pushing their boundaries. Schools should be safe places to learn without having to worry about your kid coming home wanting to transition into an asexual raccoon or whatever the hell is trendy that year.

>Keeping certain books out of school libraries for younger age kids is not a bad idea. Except, this isn't what's happening. FFS, it's happening in all libraries, not just the ones meant for the kiddies. You know this, yet paint a different picture, in support of your position. >Just like preventing children from watching porn is not a bad idea. Now we draw the false parallel between non-pornographic books and actual…

I’d love to see your sources showing the data to support that books are being banned in “all libraries”.

This is mostly a conversation about morality and I dont think we’re going to convince one another to change our principles here so my instinct is to say “you win” and move on.

But for context, I personally despise Donald Trump and think he’s a symbol of the downfall of our country. And I mostly think the government should stay out of any choices about how we raise our kids.

The books in school libraries issue is part of a larger discussion about who gets to choose what our kids learn. I don’t have the full answer but I do know, for my kids, it is not “gender studies graduates and communists”.

Re: Book people think they know why 9-year-olds stop reading for fun

#463

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is 30 minutes really the amount of novel reading we find unacceptable these days? I’m not asking quite as snarkily as that sounds. Do you think the problem would be alleviated if the hours of class time were shorter and (maybe) handed over to a study hall period or even to just being sent home? In college I know the theory is supposed to be that one hour of class time equals two hours of homework (though that rarely…

Half an hour is fine, it’s really the cumulative volume. If a kid has 7 classes and each gives half an hour of homework, that’s 3.5 hours of homework. Add on the classes and they’re “working” 11.5 hours a day or 57.5 hours per week, every week. That would be concerning for adults, it’s well into burnout territory. Then we want to act surprised when kids don’t want to read on their own and only want to play video game…

I don't know if I agree with your cynicism.

One thing that standardized education does is guarantee that the majority of people will be somewhere findable within the middle of the bell curve of the social status quo.

You know the same things that your neighbor knows, within a reasonable margin of error. Therefore, you have social compatibility with them.

You feel that if you took the money out of the equation, you could rub shoulders with Biden and Bezos, Musk, Gates and Powell and not be too far out of your own depth.

That's valuable, right?

To get that, you had to go through the same 12 years of history and bored idiot English teachers telling you about symbolism and metaphor and giving you terrible 5 paragraph essays to fill out with the same dumb rote formula.

If you look at the overall social outcome, for the majority, this is a good thing.

If, however, it turns out that you are special and of a rare breed, then for your own children you should hire private tutors or school them overseas or do something somehow to cultivate their greatness.

If you can show us a better path we'll start to move towards it, but until then accept the fact that there are thousands of minor and major pleasantries provided by standardized education that you get to enjoy every day as a matter of course thanks to the social conditioning it provided.

Re: Book people think they know why 9-year-olds stop reading for fun

#464
post #451

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> my own child. I've never quite understood this focus. Do you think that because it's your child you should be able to do whatever you want?

No, not "whatever I want." I described taking my daughter out of a public school and legally homeschooling her. I didn't see any reason to explain that or discuss it with the school administration. If I quit a job I don't have to go to an exit interview. Same thing. As I mentioned we moved to Oregon soon after taking our daughter out of public school. Oregon legalized homeschooling in 1985, before my daughter was bor…

> I think parents will generally choose to do whatever they think will best protect their child, or help their child succeed

And society does the same at large, because "whatever they think best" doesn't always equal "what is actually best" for the children

Re: Book people think they know why 9-year-olds stop reading for fun

#465
post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it so hard to accept the fact that an author might not be completely 100% conscious of all the things influencing them when creating a work of art? That some choices they made because they just felt right in the moment come from somewhere else? And that someone else can see this happening from an external perspective and propose that way of reading the text that the author didn't think about? At the same time, is…

If such things influence works of fiction, they must surely influence works of nonfiction just as much, if not more so — yet I never had a schoolteacher ask me to analyze nonfiction writings anywhere close to the depth I had to analyze novels. It wasn't until the tertiary level that I first analyzed science writings and related philosophy writings to a similar depth (albeit for a different purpose), and discovered to…

Can you share any example of non-fiction literature with beauty and humanity? Thanks!

Re: Book people think they know why 9-year-olds stop reading for fun

#466
post #462

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Keeping certain books out of school libraries for younger age kids is not a bad idea. Except, this isn't what's happening. FFS, it's happening in all libraries, not just the ones meant for the kiddies. You know this, yet paint a different picture, in support of your position. >Just like preventing children from watching porn is not a bad idea. Now we draw the false parallel between non-pornographic books and actual…

I’d love to see your sources showing the data to support that books are being banned in “all libraries”. This is mostly a conversation about morality and I dont think we’re going to convince one another to change our principles here so my instinct is to say “you win” and move on. But for context, I personally despise Donald Trump and think he’s a symbol of the downfall of our country. And I mostly think the governmen…

Sources: The internet and news. If you look, you'll find it easily.

This isn't really about morality alone, imo. This is about attempting to legislate morality with a hammer, which is just as bad. There is no basis for many of the books being banned, other than Republican horse shit. For the record, I'm not seeing Dems line up to ban books. It's activist clowns with an axe to grind.

It's all wrapped up in Jesus and FOR THE CHILDREN, but that's a lie as well.

I seriously doubt many 9 year olds checked out The Diary of Anne Frank, yet it's being banned, because some idiot thinks they know better than everyone else.

Since, you don't seem to google, I'll take care of this one for you: https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/books/2022/06/2...

We do agree on the govt. staying out of child rearing.

The current crop of "people" that get to choose what people can learn are not the people any sane person wants making these calls, yet here we are.

Lastly, your kids, along with everyone else's are exposed to things, daily, that you have zero control over. You have zero input, when the event happens. You're sole option is to teach your kids to think like rational humans, have some compassion for others, and lastly, just leave people alone to live their lives.

Re: Book people think they know why 9-year-olds stop reading for fun

#467

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"widely beloved" by whom? "classic" in what sense?

I'd think Tolkein's "The Hobbit" would fit this description? Or CS Lewis Narnia series, one-offs like "The Secret Garden", Also Edith Nesbit, fantastic children's author, "The Railway children" probably her most famous. century old at least.

This is why I ask beloved by whom and classic by what standard.

Look, Narnia has witchcraft in it and depicts Christ as a lion. It's probably blasphemous (though, yes, I get that it is intended as a regular Christian allegory and is not supposed to be blasphemous). It is not universally loved in the evangelical community and is a possible target for a book ban. It's also got racially insensitive stereotypes depicted and that's a target for complaints from a different direction.

The Hobbit is indeed a popular book, that has repeatedly been the subject of book bans, again for the magic/wizardry/witchcraft thing.

The point is, if your job is to be an elementary school teacher and people try to get you fired for having a book they find objectionable, it's a lot keep on top of. The books people object to vary wildly.

Additionally, when people make these classic book lists, they suffer from what I think of as "classic books that adults believe children ought to like" syndrome. Sometimes these books overlap with what kids actually like, sometimes not.

Re: Book people think they know why 9-year-olds stop reading for fun

#468

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Half an hour is fine, it’s really the cumulative volume. If a kid has 7 classes and each gives half an hour of homework, that’s 3.5 hours of homework. Add on the classes and they’re “working” 11.5 hours a day or 57.5 hours per week, every week. That would be concerning for adults, it’s well into burnout territory. Then we want to act surprised when kids don’t want to read on their own and only want to play video game…

I don't know if I agree with your cynicism. One thing that standardized education does is guarantee that the majority of people will be somewhere findable within the middle of the bell curve of the social status quo. You know the same things that your neighbor knows, within a reasonable margin of error. Therefore, you have social compatibility with them. You feel that if you took the money out of the equation, you co…

> One thing that standardized education does is guarantee that the majority of people will be somewhere findable within the middle of the bell curve of the social status quo.

I’m not saying that we completely get rid of public education, just that we stop appending things to it and pretending they’re important.

Nobody remembers most of this alleged common ground anyways. Go ask around what the 5th amendment says, or what a high pH means, I’d be shocked if a quarter of people remembered.

> You feel that if you took the money out of the equation, you could rub shoulders with Biden and Bezos, Musk, Gates and Powell and not be too far out of your own depth.

Sure, if we’re talking about something covered in high school, but for any topic I’d be realistically interested in hearing them talk about, no. Why would me or Bill Gates want to discuss symbolism in Catcher in the Rye? I’m certainly not going to talk to Musk about chemistry; I’m doubtful he’s a through and through rocket engineer, but his tangential knowledge likely trumps my very limited recollection of valence bands and I have no idea how that relates to the energy density of rocket fuel.

This is just a veneer of equality we tell ourselves. Sure, we’re all equal in the sense that we’ve largely ignored our high school education and probably haven’t really advanced our biology knowledge.

That doesn’t imply that we’re all going to sit around and suddenly want to talk about that instead of rockets or operating systems or investment strategies; I am not on the same part of the bell curve for the topics that make them interesting.

> If you can show us a better path we'll start to move towards it, but until then accept the fact that there are thousands of minor and major pleasantries provided by standardized education that you get to enjoy every day as a matter of course thanks to the social conditioning it provided.

I don’t disagree there are pleasantries, but at what cost? We’re pushing children into working near-slavery workloads, with no recourse to change that, and our means of motivating them is primarily threatening their entire future if they don’t play along.

It’s like the worst job in the world; Amazons warehouses look like a vacation comparatively.

Children can’t switch schools on their own like adults can switch jobs. Children’s records follow them when they do switch, so they can’t escape even if they switch schools. I’ve never had HR records follow me across companies. And any employer that tried to control their employees by threatening to ruin the entire rest of their lives would have the NLRB crawl up their ass and build a branch office.

We’re trading the happiness of children for what? Me and my neighbor having equally shitty recall of the French and Indian war?

I still remember being in high school, and I still remember how miserable it was. I remember kids showing up with huge bags under their eyes because they had to go into “crunch time” and work til midnight because they got a bunch of big assignments at once.

I remember meeting most of my high school classmates and how bright eyed and cheery we were. I also remember senior year, and how many of those smiles had faded into blank, exhausted stares.

I remember the kids who had problems in their family lives whose personalities either disappeared or curdled into sour milk as they tried to cope with 60 hour weeks and just didn’t have the spare time and energy to try to process their parents divorce.

I remember the suicides and addiction the most though. The kids that had bottomed out so hard they would do anything they could to escape the loop of stress, failure, threats about their future, and back to the beginning. The only options we offer them are death or complete desperation, and some kids picked one because they just couldn’t do it anymore.

There were multiple suicides while I was in high school. 3 that I can recall, and one kid that ran away from home and overdosed while sleeping in a public park.

It’s awful for the kids that die, and it’s awful for the kids left behind who now have to figure out how to emotionally process a friend’s suicide while working 60 hour weeks knowing full well that college admissions won’t give 2 shits about why their GPA was low that quarter.

The highschool was ranked in the top 50 public schools in the US when I attended. This wasn’t a backwater dump wrecked by phasing out coal, this was a school held up as an example for other schools.

I don’t find nearly enough value in making a neat bell curve to put kids through that. I wouldn’t put adults through that, and the existence of unions tells me that others feel the same way. Unions would pitch a huge fit over the least egregious of our expectations of children.

Re: Book people think they know why 9-year-olds stop reading for fun

#469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know if I agree with your cynicism. One thing that standardized education does is guarantee that the majority of people will be somewhere findable within the middle of the bell curve of the social status quo. You know the same things that your neighbor knows, within a reasonable margin of error. Therefore, you have social compatibility with them. You feel that if you took the money out of the equation, you co…

> One thing that standardized education does is guarantee that the majority of people will be somewhere findable within the middle of the bell curve of the social status quo. I’m not saying that we completely get rid of public education, just that we stop appending things to it and pretending they’re important. Nobody remembers most of this alleged common ground anyways. Go ask around what the 5th amendment says, or…

I still disagree with you.

There are enormous flaws in public education, some of which you have addressed, but eliminating the study of history and english is going to do bupkis to address any of that.

Thomas Hobbes, in Leviathan, stated that living in a warbound society:

"In such condition, there is no place for Industry; because the fruit thereof is uncertain; and consequently no Culture of the Earth; no Navigation, nor use of the commodities that may be imported by Sea; no commodious Building; no Instruments of moving, and removing such things as require much force; no Knowledge of the face of the Earth; no account of Time; no Arts; no Letters; no Society; and which is worst of all, continual fear, and danger of violent death; And the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short."

Obviously, our governments are always in war. Our schools are always in war. Millions to the football stadiums and rarely even pennies for the arts. Churn out grist for the malady mill and milk the survivors of every drop of value. Every business and enterprise of man is but war in a capitalist society.

Taking away the seeds of the arts because they might not grow into more juice for the war machine is at best a shortsighted thought and at worst the hateful demands of a small and selfish person. They didn't benefit you, but others they do.

Post reply on HN