I read this article twice because I was sure I missed something. I really
agreed with what the authors lay out at the beginning of the chapter.
They make a clear and compelling case that schools are taking low
achieving readers and drilling them on skills they don’t have. They also
explain that literacy is about more than knowing how to read.
Then I get lost. I understand that multimedia and visuals in particular
have a role in helping students learn. I wouldn’t have chosen the
educational paths I have if I didn’t believe strongly in this. Where I
have trouble is the almost 1980’s notion that students who watch t.v. will
be able to learn.
I get that the authors are not saying let’s put students into a classroom
so they can watch Reading Rainbow together. However, are we as educators
supposed to advocate that kids, especially at risk students, know t.v. so
that is what we need to give them?
Instead of making videos that relate the students “real world” why don’t
we start making online books, comics, or other reading materials that
relate???
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
From Jennifer Knott: Rachel, I'm glad you bring up the question of videos that we believe might be reaching students because it reflects what we believe their life to be. It brings to my mind in another class, Videography, the readings about students making their own videos. In this way students are empowered to learn while they tell their own story, instead of listening to the media make a bunch of assumptions about their story.
ReplyDeleteRachel,
ReplyDeleteYou raised a very valid question, and I thought the same way, specially when I am raising my two children. Instead of visual devices for various games, why there is not a portable e- copies of good books? Probably, me too a little bit more cautious about what kids watch, read, and interpret? As that help them build their character.
After I read the MOST article, I felt good that technology can be utilized this way to give a good start for young kids for building better individuals.
Dipali
Hi Rachel,
ReplyDeleteYour post really made me question this model. I'm guessing the makers of this model thought the best and only way to connect with students who have difficulties with reading is to use some common medium like TV. I agree with you that other "real world" media should also be considered.
Mary Ellen
I think that with this model - and with others - that it's not necessarily an all-or-nothing kind of thing. This is just one perspective, one theoretical opinion on one way to reach kids.
ReplyDeleteI don't think we should turn it all over to TV, but I also don't think what happens right now to kids (dumping huge amounts of text on them, study study, test the mess out of them) is the best plan either. And, for better or for worse, TV does provide a perspective into our culture/world. A point of view worth sharing??
I think we could use a little more "real world media" in addition to what you've described, however. Good points. :)
I think the authors were just trying to address misconceptions relating to television and learning. A person can learn a lot from a television program provided that the content is educational and the student actively processes the information. Since the challenge is to ensure active processing, the authors recommend a variety of strategies such as enabling replay, summarizing, product creation, etc.
ReplyDelete