Print vs. online reading
The New York Times has a very pertinent article that all of us who are interested in the teaching of literacy should read. The article debates the merits of online reading as a means to literacy.
As teenagers’ scores on standardized reading tests have declined or stagnated, some argue that the hours spent prowling the Internet are the enemy of reading — diminishing literacy, wrecking attention spans and destroying a precious common culture that exists only through the reading of books.
But others say the Internet has created a new kind of reading, one that schools and society should not discount. The Web inspires a teenager like Nadia, who might otherwise spend most of her leisure time watching television, to read and write.
Take a look at the article then post your thoughts in the comments. Should we be teaching kids how to read effectively online as well as in print?
Image citation: Study uploaded on June 17, 2008 by Spintwig under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike license.
August 4th, 2008 at 7:10 pm
when I clicked the link for the article it didn’t work….
August 4th, 2008 at 7:28 pm
Even though the link didn’t work, I went to the New York Times and found the article myself (much the same way the article talks about us using Google). It opens up quite a debate, but with most things, the problem comes with “absolutes.” Reading online is reading. It may be different, but it’s still reading. What we should hope for is balance. Kids need to read books, too, but if you can only get a kid to read online, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with it. We used to get upset with kids reading magazines and comic books, but now we see them as reading material. My brother read Sports Illustrated as a kid. That was his favorite magazine. Now he’s working on his Ph.D. from the University of Texas. Excellent article!
August 6th, 2008 at 2:55 pm
Thanks for letting me know about the link – it is fixed now!