Remember encyclopedias?


In Chapter 2 of Burke’s (2001) book, “How to Teach Students to Read the World” he continues the discussion on technology with “Reading the Internet.” I think that this chapter can tie pretty directly to the question, “What is the difference between learning to read and reading to learn?”

I was born in 1977. Therefore, much of my initial research in my K-8 education was done using encyclopedias that we had in the house, and taking trips to the library to look for books that may have been relevant using a librarian and the Dewey Decimal System. In high school I used the school library and the neighborhood library to find what I needed. Burke discusses the use of technology for students and the ways in which they can negotiate web-sites to find out what is reputable and how to read critically about the information on these sites. This got me wondering, how did I learn to discern which books were useful in the library? Did I read the entire book? Did I examine the background and/or motivations of the author? Did I look into who had funded the author’s research? Was I thoughtful in analyzing whether both sides of an argument were being offered, rather than a single biased view of information? I don’t remember being taught to do these things, and I don’t think that I would have had the time to do all of this additional research on top of the research for the paper, if it simply meant reading more books. What teenager wants to do all of that?!!?

However, with so much information accessible to students online for research, it not only becomes easier to find source information but it is also easier to do a quick search to find out who the author is, what sources of funding are being pumped into this site, etc. Therefore, it becomes a matter of teaching students how to look for these things. Our students know how to read. They’ve had their phonetic instruction, they’ve gone through the process of identifying site words, and putting together sentences. On all types of different levels they understand that the purpose of writing is to deliver a message, and the purpose of reading is to receive that message. However, in order to teach students to read to learn they have to understand the comprehension aspect. They have to be taught how to sort through information and make sense of the multiple messages being put out there and decipher what is fact from what is someone’s truth as that person has identified it.

Reading to learn means asking pre-reading questions and having those questions guide the reading along the way. Burke identifies these as asking what the information being sought is being used for, what terms to use in the search to narrow the focus, and to have criteria established for selecting particular documents (Burke, 2001, p. 24). Our students are not using hard-copy encyclopedias, but their access to information online is so much broader, more comprehensive, and in some cases erroneous. It’s amazing to think of all of the resources at their fingertips, but it also puts a lot of responsibility on students to sort through and make sense of information that I could never see myself doing with hard copies as a teen. We want critical thinkers, but we need to develop critical readers at the same time; and the way to do this is to consistently be aware of the questions that experienced reader researchers ask themselves almost automatically while reading, and to teach students to set up an automatic process in their brains to use pretty consistently as well.

Comments

  1. When I was a kid my Mom purchased, or perhaps was given, a 1963 edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica. I learned about helicopters, George Washington Carver and mitosis in those pages. Like you my childhood proceeded the a the advent of the world wide web. I am teaching to students who have very different access to information and who have to consider, as you said, the source and motivation of each writer in ways that I certainly did not consider as a high school student. I really like that you raised this point.

    When I think about the kids in my classroom and their phones, the number of times a day that they are distracted by texts, snap chat etc, I used to see a bunch of students who were off task. While the kids are certainly off task, I also see that they are engaged in informal writing. As a 45 year old, I find that I use texts mostly to ask my husband to pick up milk on the way home, or see if my friend is up for an evening walk, and snap chat is undiscovered country. But, are there ways that teachers can capitalize on this type of informal writing that students do all the time? Could they pay a lightening round of texting-style jeopardy questions? What about google classroom? Even if a writing assignment is informal and short, it is a way for kids to think and make connections.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I feel like judging the reputability and accuracy of encyclopedias and library books was something that was not really on our radar, because we were working on the assumption that published materials were inherently accurate. While that may or may not have been true back then (there had to have been published materials written from a particular bias), there was at least a review and acceptance from a publishing entity. Now anyone can go online and create any kind of content that they want, and there are no third party checks. Now the reader has to be able to think critically about the information and the source themselves. Online content creators make that difficult, as they become more and more capable of making their information look legitimate. So it becomes more and more essential that students are taught these critical skills.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment