[CASL-L] some thoughts and questions about the Common Core in HS

[IRENE KWIDZINSKI]

Good article.


----- Forwarded Message ----
From: Dorcas Hand <handd51 at tekkmail.com>
To: "aaslforum at ala.org" <aaslforum at ala.org>
Sent: Wed, April 4, 2012 12:02:42 PM
Subject: [aaslforum] RE: Re: some thoughts and questions about the Common Core 
in HS


http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/18/opinion/sunday/the-neuroscience-of-your-brain-on-fiction.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

Check out this article about “Your Brain on Fiction” from the NYT.
Dorcas Hand
AOS
Houston
 
From:Tori Jensen [mailto:sunbear.t at gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2012 10:24 AM
To: aaslforum at ala.org
Subject: [aaslforum] Re: some thoughts and questions about the Common Core in HS
 
What a load of rot! The idea that students should spend only 30% of their 
reading time on fiction is ridiculous.  All of this nonsensical talk is being 
driven by big business and testing.  I read only comic books until I was 20 
years old and very little nonfiction since, yet I have nearly 3 Master degrees 
from good Universities.  I know many, many, MANY teachers that tell similar 
stories.  I don't know how to put the brakes on this, and I doubt they will be 
applied, but I have faith that student, teachers, and librarians will continue 
to read according to their own taste.  I just hope we don't absolutely murder 
the love of reading in some kids.
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 12:48 PM, Sarles Patricia (18K500) 
<PSarles at schools.nyc.gov> wrote:
I've been doing a lot of reading about the common core, but I have a question 
for possible discussion. With the goal of the common core being that students 
read 70% nonfiction by the 12th grade, I'm wondering if English teachers should 
be spending ANY time teaching literature and poetry at all in high school, 
despite the NY Times article which summarizes a study that supports the teaching 
of fiction 
(http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/18/opinion/sunday/the-neuroscience-of-your-brain-on-fiction.html?pagewanted=1&%2339&sq=your%20brain%20on%20fiction&st=cse&%2359;&scp=1<https://outlook.brooklyn.cuny.edu/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/18/opinion/sunday/the-neuroscience-of-your-brain-on-fiction.html?pagewanted=1%26%252339%26sq=your%2520brain%2520on%2520fiction%26st=cse%26%252359;%26scp=1>).


I just read this this morning:

"If you ask students what makes reading hard, they blame the words. And they’re 
right to place so much importance on vocabulary: Authors introduce their ideas 
through words and phrases, and if readers don’t know what these mean, there’s 
little chance that they will make sense of the text. Studies show that 
higher-order thinking in reading depends heavily on knowledge of word meanings 
(Shanahan, et al., 2012)." 
(http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/mar12/vol69/num06/The-Challenge-of-Challenging-Text.aspx<https://outlook.brooklyn.cuny.edu/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/mar12/vol69/num06/The-Challenge-of-Challenging-Text.aspx>).


and it made me think that there was a strong need to spend time teaching 
vocabulary to students as well as remedial reading for I read this as well:

"No matter how successful early instruction in reading is, it cannot fully 
prepare students for the literacy demands that evolve after 3rd grade. 
Supporting adolescent literacy requires simultaneous attention to the needs of 
students who have not mastered basic reading skills and to the common need of 
all students to master ever-more-challenging texts in ever-changing contexts for 
increasingly divergent goals (Biancarosa, 2012) 
(http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/mar12/vol69/num06/Adolescent-Literacy@-More-Than-Remediation.aspx<https://outlook.brooklyn.cuny.edu/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/mar12/vol69/num06/Adolescent-Literacy@-More-Than-Remediation.aspx>).


My question, should English teachers abandon teaching literature and poetry all 
together and spend their time teaching vocabulary, remedial reading, and complex 
texts instead? It seems that under the common core state standards that they 
should. After all now, what is the purpose of teaching literature and poetry if 
we are trying to prepare students for college and careers where, unless students 
are to become English or Comparative Literature majors, they won't be reading 
any fiction or poetry at all?

I'm just curious what others think.



____________________________________________
Patricia Sarles, MA, MLS
Jerome Parker Campus Library
100 Essex Drive
Staten Island, NY 10314
718-370-6900 x1322
psarles at schools.nyc.gov
http://www.scoop.it/t/help-with-the-common-core-state-standards/
http://paper.li/psarles/1332609247

The Internet may be the world's greatest library, but let's face it - all the 
books are scattered on the floor.  - D.C. Denison, Boston Globe

Getting information off the Internet is like taking a drink from a fire hydrant. 
- Mitchell Kapor

To save man from the morass of propaganda, in my opinion, is one of the chief 
aims of education. Education must enable one to sift and weigh evidence, to 
discern the true from the false, the real from the unreal, and the facts from 
the fiction ... The function of education, therefore, is to teach one to think 
intensively and to think critically. - Martin Luther King, Jr., The Purpose of 
Education

.







-- 
Tori Jensen
Media Specialist
LEAP High School
631 Albert Street North
St. Paul, MN  55104

Minnesota Educational Media Organization
Past President
 
"Google can bring you back 100,000 answers, a librarian can bring you back the 
right one."  - Neil Gaiman
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mylist.net/archives/casl-l/attachments/20120404/50aef026/attachment.html>