Gallagher defines "readicide" as "the systematic killing of the love of reading, often exacerbated by the inane, mind-numbing practices found in schools" (2). Take note that Gallagher attributes this killing to the practices currently being used in school classrooms. He does not mean to offend here, but explains this statement by saying, "In an earnest attempt to instill reading, teachers and administrators push practices that kill many students' last chance to develop into lifelong readers" (2). Recent assessments have shown student literacy scores dropping over the past few years and significant gaps in reading ability. Reading is dying in our schools!
However, Gallagher does not attribute this readicide solely to the "usual" factors (poverty, language barriers, etc.). He keeps another suspect in mind:
High-interest reading is being squeezed out in favor of more test preparation practice. Interesting books are disappearing as funding is diverted to purchase "magic pill" reading programs. Sustained silent reading time is being abandoned because it is often seen as "soft" or "nonacademic." For many students, academic reading, though incredibly important, has become their only reading. (4)
This statement illustrates the recent changes made in English education, largely demanded by standardized testing. Teachers, under pressure to have their students perform well, are focusing on testing to the extreme. The classroom spends less time on novels and more time preparing for test materials. Along with this "phony" teaching, teachers have developed a tendency to either over-teach or under-teach a text. Texts are under-taught when teachers try to rush through them in order to tackle the necessary amount of content. However, I am more afraid of over-teaching a text. This method involves analyzing a text page by page, examining every little detail to the point of exhaustion. While these details are certainly important, such extreme analysis disrupts any sort of reading flow. Students cannot get immersed in the story or ideas being presented.
All these factors have attributed to the development of readicide. As an English and literature lover, this fact is hard for me to come to terms with. I want my students to love, or at least appreciate, reading. Fortunately, Gallagher offers some suggestions to help combat readicide in the classroom. These strategies include framing, re-reading, closer readings of small chunks, and teaching students what good readers do. However, I the trick I'd most like to incorporate in my classroom is giving students time for Sustained Silent Reading (SSR). Gallagher promotes this idea in his book as well, and cites several studies illustrating the value of SSR time for students. For example, one study claims "Reading as a leisure activity is the best predictor of comprehension, vocabulary, and reading speed. Kids who do the most recreational reading become the best readers" (42). Gallagher also argues that "SSR is necessary to allow students an opporunity to build their prior knowledge and background" (43). SSR also helps students develop reading as a "recreational habit." Without this time, many students would never experience the power of books to suck the reader in and take them on an adventure. Additionally, this time gives students a chance to read something they like and are interested in reading rather than being forced to read some text they do not care about. The value of SSR cannot be denied. I am worried about fitting such an important activity into 50 minute class periods, but I can guarantee there will be individual reading time in my classroom.
Readicide is a scary concept. I am glad I had the chance to explore this idea and pick up some strategies to help prevent readicide in my classroom. This will be one of my toughest jobs as an educator, but I am determined to succeed.
I also looked in to the epidemic of 'readicide'. I think it's interesting that we, as a society, tend to look down on students for just reading young adult literature, and not the canonical literature. I believe that we should applaud the students who do read for finding time for leisure reading. The problem lies with trying to bridge the canon and young adult literature; however, it is an effective method for teaching these. For example, 1984 and The Hunger Games would look at a classic and modern example of a society going down hill eventually leading to a dystopia. By comparing/contrasting students would soon realize the similarities between two texts generations apart. I also completely agree with SSR. I remember doing SSR in elementary school and middle school, but soon faded out entering high school. I wonder why that is? You made a good point with problem teachers are facing with trying to adhere to common core standards, while also preparing for standardized testing. It's going to be a difficult time with these two stressors to contend with.
ReplyDeleteI had not considered the way society views students reading young adult literature, but I find the idea very interesting now that you mention it. You would think adults would be happy to see students reading and learning rather than watching TV or playing video games. Maybe they are concerned with the content students may encounter in literature; however, this seems ridiculous considering the content young adults see on TV today. I think bridging canonical literature with modern texts is a great idea. I'm really excited about my pairing of 1984 and The Hunger Games for my methods unit plan! I want to explore this idea more and will do so in my post on using young adult literature.
DeleteI do not know why SSR seemed to fade out in high school. Maybe due to stricter time restraints? Regardless of other practices, I will find a way to utilize SSR in my classroom.