This week's reading really got at the heart of my concerns as a future teacher of adolescents. More than anything else, we want our kids to be reading. Yet I find myself consistently wondering how the most current set of standards are going to help teachers engage students. Ultimately, getting kids to read falls on the shoulders of the teachers.
The reading on Zach Morales this week made me think a lot about my own development as a reader. I thought a lot about the amount of informational texts that the Common Core is pushing teachers to incorporate into classroom learning. As an adult, I have developed what one might call a taste for informational texts. I read them often and enjoy them. I love essay and newspapers, and informational texts probably make up the majority of the reading that I do on a day to day basis. However, I came to informational text with a love of reading and a passion for current events. I first had to fall in love with reading.
Most of us love stories. We live our lives in story. Sit around any dinner table in the country and hear families and friends recount stories. There is no lack of love for stories in the nature of adolescents, but there is a gap between what teenagers love and what curriculum demands. Ultimately, I learned to read into the depth of a story and the implications behind more complicated text by reading avidly and questioning deeply and having teachers model those behaviors along the way with texts that genuinely intrigued me. If all of those parts hadn't aligned, I doubt I would have pursued becoming an English teacher to this extent. To motivate, we must strike a balance between what students needs to know and what students want to read. Ultimately, we need to find a way to focus our teaching and our schools around developing skills that can be transferred to many types of readings, than committing ourselves and our classrooms to the agenda of an inflexible curriculum.
Beyond the curriculum, the issue of informational text arises. To me, it seems ridiculous that literature should only occupy 8% of the total academic reading students are expected to do weekly. Literature is the love in reading. Literature is where the voracious need for stories is satiated. Certainly, students should be reading informational texts that inspire them to learn more and to go into the world with action and purpose. Informational texts can be highly relevant, and when properly vetted, teachers can inspire curiosity that sparks critical thinking, debate, and motivation. However, standards that blindly push towards tougher and frankly drier reading are unlikely to change the attitudes and behaviors of students reflected in the brief video we watched this week.
I was really struck by the idea mentioned in "Assessing Adolescents' Motivation to Read" that schools are devaluing literacy activities that students are adept at performing. High school students spend a large part of their days reading and deciphering messages that could require the same thinking skills demanded of reading informational texts, if only schools could direct learning in the classroom toward these types of texts. In their future careers, students will need to know how to read many kinds of messages, and it's up to teachers and schools to shift their focus away from very narrow definitions of acceptable texts and start incorporating texts that students are motivated to read. Valuing what students already do is a good way to empower students to think about their lives with the same critical lens we ask them to turn to their studies. Ultimately, if we are charged with educating thoughtful and critical citizens, we have to find a way to empower them with text.
