Motivating Students to Read

The reading curriculum in the U.S. has been criticized for emphasizing a standard list of classics, and for catering too heavily to female readers.

[Tony G Rocco]

I am a little confused by this article because I am not clear if it's about reading per se, or about the literature young people should have to read, which is a different issue. Is the goal to nurture a love of reading or a love of reading the "right" kinds of literature, the so-called "classics?"
If it's just a love of reading we want young people to learn, then it seems wise to let students pick the kind of stuff that interests them because they'll be naturally motivated to read it. For example, I used to love reading magazines about hot rods and motorcycles when I was in high school (although I also read all the literary stuff my teachers gave me).
If we want young people to have a well-rounded literary education, then I think what kids read has to be determined by prevailing opinion on what literature young people should be exposed to. That's a different issue entirely and whole different dialogue.

[Sherry]

Some kids have it and some kids don't. But we've got to start all this at home, that's for sure.

[conorian]

There's a great program in NYC called READ - it lines up teen volunteers to read one on one with younger children and has been very successful.

[Janet]

Tony G Rocco wrote:

I am a little confused by this article because I am not clear if it's about reading per se, or about the literature young people should have to read, which is a different issue. Is the goal to nurture a love of reading or a love of reading the "right" kinds of literature, the so-called "classics?"
If it's just a love of reading we want young people to learn, then it seems wise to let students pick the kind of stuff that interests them because they'll be naturally motivated to read it. For example, I used to love reading magazines about hot rods and motorcycles when I was in high school (although I also read all the literary stuff my teachers gave me).
If we want young people to have a well-rounded literary education, then I think what kids read has to be determined by prevailing opinion on what literature young people should be exposed to. That's a different issue entirely and whole different dialogue.

Good point, Tony. I think the article was trying to point out that instilling a love of reading is very important; how you do that is the question. Parent involvement is key. And while it would be nice if kids would naturally gravitate to what is considered respected literature, it's more reasonable to accept that they'll probably be more inclined to read what interests them--Harry Potter? Hot Rod magazines? Fine by me. I still haven't made it through "Moby Dick" (hated it) and wouldn't expect my child to read it, either.

[Maurice]

conorian wrote:

There's a great program in NYC called READ - it lines up teen volunteers to read one on one with younger children and has been very successful.

This sounds really cool. I'm going to look into it! thanks for the tip.

[Anita]

Janet wrote:

<quoted text> Good point, Tony. I think the article was trying to point out that instilling a love of reading is very important; how you do that is the question. Parent involvement is key. And while it would be nice if kids would naturally gravitate to what is considered respected literature, it's more reasonable to accept that they'll probably be more inclined to read what interests them--Harry Potter? Hot Rod magazines? Fine by me. I still haven't made it through "Moby Dick" (hated it) and wouldn't expect my child to read it, either.

I agree with Janet's point, some standard books all of us had to read during school were definitely an ordeal (I, too, deeply disliked Moby Dick!). However, reading those books gives kids an invaluable "archive" of knowledge they will be able to refer to in the future, whether or not they enjoyed a particular reading experience. Furthermore, it is highly possible that many kids will never read those books if they weren't made to. I suppose some parts of learning aren't supposed to be fun for everyone (calculus, anyone?).

[Johnsonian]

Tony G Rocco wrote:

I am a little confused by this article because I am not clear if it's about reading per se, or about the literature young people should have to read, which is a different issue. Is the goal to nurture a love of reading or a love of reading the "right" kinds of literature, the so-called "classics?"
If it's just a love of reading we want young people to learn, then it seems wise to let students pick the kind of stuff that interests them because they'll be naturally motivated to read it. For example, I used to love reading magazines about hot rods and motorcycles when I was in high school (although I also read all the literary stuff my teachers gave me).
If we want young people to have a well-rounded literary education, then I think what kids read has to be determined by prevailing opinion on what literature young people should be exposed to. That's a different issue entirely and whole different dialogue.

I'm a little confused by you.

[Yedos Cristos]

I never got excited about reading growing up. I always viewed it as a chore, and regrettably, only skimmed most of the reading assigned to me during school.

If I'd been exposed to more interesting literature I'm sure it would have been different.

[Regina]

I think Motoko Rich did a great service to other teachers by asking people to comment on what made them passionate about literature. I hope that teachers won't eliminate classics altogether but giving kids freedom to choose their own books some of the time isn't a bad idea.

[Tina]

Tony G Rocco wrote:

I am a little confused by this article because I am not clear if it's about reading per se, or about the literature young people should have to read, which is a different issue. Is the goal to nurture a love of reading or a love of reading the "right" kinds of literature, the so-called "classics?"
If it's just a love of reading we want young people to learn, then it seems wise to let students pick the kind of stuff that interests them because they'll be naturally motivated to read it. For example, I used to love reading magazines about hot rods and motorcycles when I was in high school (although I also read all the literary stuff my teachers gave me).
If we want young people to have a well-rounded literary education, then I think what kids read has to be determined by prevailing opinion on what literature young people should be exposed to. That's a different issue entirely and whole different dialogue.

There are many solutions I am sure. I have found a great way to motivate
my students to be more sensitive to nature and plants.
Just grow a TickleMe Plant. The leaves fold and the branches move when you Tickle It. It's so much more exciting then growing a lima bean.
I am sure similar methods can be tested to get kids more exited about reading. I had my students research TickleMe Plants on line.
That seemed to work. I found it at http:www.ticklemeplant.com