Reading educates in many different ways, and children enjoying these books are certainly learning some of the things that reading can teach. Furthermore, there's nothing wrong with the fantasy/sci-fi genre that isn't also wrong with mainstream literature --yeah, most of it is shit but then so are most books. But what's really tiresome is the notion that reading is merely a means of educating oneself. It's an enjoyable and interesting pursuit in its own right, just like listening to music or looking at paintings. Rest assured that many great writers have had little interest in educating their readers, if they were even considering readers at all.
I agree. The one-dimensional notion of reading as an educational tool is just not sexy. Content is of course always up for discussion, but unless it's The Terrorist's Cookbook or The Sun, I cannot be mad.
And here's a little story about the positive effects of reading on any level:
When my mother came here in the early seventies, she quickly realised that she had to learn the language as fast as possible if she wanted to accomplish her goals. Besides being an outgoing person who wasn't afraid to learn it by making an effort in everyday interactions, she also had another way of expanding her vocabulary and grammar knowledge. For years she was a member of one those book clubs where you get 4 hit novels a month. A lot of crime/drama stuff like Alistair McLean, Desmond Bagley and Len Deighton, as well as Judith Krantz-like rubbish and of course the local bestselling authors. Could have been yer old pal Dan Brown today. In a few years, ploughing her way through those blockbuster novels helped her to rapidly speak the language on a level that people who have been here longer than her still can't get on.
Sure, this Harry Potter craze might seem silly, but it still looks like a win-win situation to these eyes.
Harry and The Potters were singing rock songs about the books for about 5,000 people of all races, all ages, in various costumes.
At one point, he yelled, 'It's just a few hours now...Are you ready to read!!!' and the crowd went bananas. The crowd knew the words, dances, etc.
Shit is crazy.
Lines down the blocks at all the bookstores.
I'll be honest; I read the first 3 books, and moved along. But, hell yeah- anything that can generate this much positive energy and enthusiasm for reading is fine by me. Enjoy, kids...Hope your boy makes it through.
Yea - but those people all choose to live in Boston. Doesn't it make sense that they'd be in Harvard Square singing songs by a Harry Potter tribute band?
Dude, most were kids. And, the band was teenagers...It was the most positive, non-hattable event i've ever seen. Step the fuck back with the hatt here.
Hahaha...I'm sorry I'm sorry. I spent the 4 years of college in Boston and grew a large animosity towards the city. Fucks with Cambridge though....sorta just like to raise a stink. I just saw a lot of shit there that irked the fuck out of me - that though, my friends, is another thread.
Don't feel bad. You're animosity toward Boston is dwarfed by the animosity the citizens of Boston feel toward the college kids and tourists that invade our city.
I can definitely understand that - I hated the majority of the college kids that were in your "city" (big town that just stumbled upon electricity is a little more appropriate) when I was there as well.
But seriously folks, a bit of opinion page on "the Potter." I have had to grade aptitude tests in English writing last winter, and NONE of the high school students who chose Harry Potter books got a "talented tenth" score. Why? Because there is no depth in the books, and the purported depth (the most recent movie and its take on fascism) is so mind numbingly simplistic as to be relatively useless as a parable.
It's nice kids are reading, but it'd be great if they could point to all 50 states or Iraq correctly on a map, take a graph and interpret data stated on it for themselves, or realize a "research paper" shouldn't rely solely on the internet.
Let me see if I understand you. You grade high school English aptitude tests? Is that your profession?
So these kids who chose Harry Potter didn't get a good grade. And the aptitude tests tested their aptitude in Potterology? Were there other aptitude tests where kids could choose books such as Catcher In The Rye? Sorry the whole post is confusing to me.
Were the kids allowed to pick which books they would be aptitude tested on. Kind of a trap since you were already going to give a failing grade to anyone who picked Harry Potter, not because of problems with the kids test answers, but because "there is no depth in the books". (I like how you prove your point by referencing a movie.)
Perhaps instead of grading aptitude tests you should spend your time teaching geography and statistics since clearly that is your passion.
And here's a little story about the positive effects of reading on any level:
When my mother came here in the early seventies, she quickly realised that she had to learn the language as fast as possible if she wanted to accomplish her goals. Besides being an outgoing person who wasn't afraid to learn it by making an effort in everyday interactions, she also had another way of expanding her vocabulary and grammar knowledge. For years she was a member of one those book clubs where you get 4 hit novels a month. A lot of crime/drama stuff like Alistair McLean, Desmond Bagley and Len Deighton, as well as Judith Krantz-like rubbish and of course the local bestselling authors. Could have been yer old pal Dan Brown today. In a few years, ploughing her way through those blockbuster novels helped her to rapidly speak the language on a level that people who have been here longer than her still can't get on.
Sure, this Harry Potter craze might seem silly, but it still looks like a win-win situation to these eyes.
it also helps to prevent Alzheimers and other related mental degradations in senior citizens.
I see a bald-headed dude in his 40s reading the newest Harry Potter at the public library right now. I can't help but stare. He seems really really into it.
But seriously folks, a bit of opinion page on "the Potter." I have had to grade aptitude tests in English writing last winter, and NONE of the high school students who chose Harry Potter books got a "talented tenth" score. Why? Because there is no depth in the books, and the purported depth (the most recent movie and its take on fascism) is so mind numbingly simplistic as to be relatively useless as a parable.
It's nice kids are reading, but it'd be great if they could point to all 50 states or Iraq correctly on a map, take a graph and interpret data stated on it for themselves, or realize a "research paper" shouldn't rely solely on the internet.
Let me see if I understand you. You grade high school English aptitude tests? Is that your profession?
So these kids who chose Harry Potter didn't get a good grade. And the aptitude tests tested their aptitude in Potterology? Were there other aptitude tests where kids could choose books such as Catcher In The Rye? Sorry the whole post is confusing to me.
Were the kids allowed to pick which books they would be aptitude tested on. Kind of a trap since you were already going to give a failing grade to anyone who picked Harry Potter, not because of problems with the kids test answers, but because "there is no depth in the books". (I like how you prove your point by referencing a movie.)
Perhaps instead of grading aptitude tests you should spend your time teaching geography and statistics since clearly that is your passion.
I grade aptitude tests in all subjects, including science, reading, writing, and math. What I am saying is when they choose Harry Potter to write about (they can choose any book under the sun), the depth of Harry Potter's themes, plot, characters, rising action, denouement, etc. make it so that for whatever reason they frequently get a mediocre score. In reflecting on what I said, I think I was just being a dick about the book, but the students "boxing themselves in" by writing about Harry Potter holds true. It is what it is. I don't know why. Kids need to be taught the fundamentals and to think for themselves. If reading Harry Potter does that, great. From what I've seen, it is literary spoon feeding and provides no room for interpretation. What you see on the page is what is there. I don't know what else to say.
But seriously folks, a bit of opinion page on "the Potter." I have had to grade aptitude tests in English writing last winter, and NONE of the high school students who chose Harry Potter books got a "talented tenth" score. Why? Because there is no depth in the books, and the purported depth (the most recent movie and its take on fascism) is so mind numbingly simplistic as to be relatively useless as a parable.
It's nice kids are reading, but it'd be great if they could point to all 50 states or Iraq correctly on a map, take a graph and interpret data stated on it for themselves, or realize a "research paper" shouldn't rely solely on the internet.
Let me see if I understand you. You grade high school English aptitude tests? Is that your profession?
So these kids who chose Harry Potter didn't get a good grade. And the aptitude tests tested their aptitude in Potterology? Were there other aptitude tests where kids could choose books such as Catcher In The Rye? Sorry the whole post is confusing to me.
Were the kids allowed to pick which books they would be aptitude tested on. Kind of a trap since you were already going to give a failing grade to anyone who picked Harry Potter, not because of problems with the kids test answers, but because "there is no depth in the books". (I like how you prove your point by referencing a movie.)
Perhaps instead of grading aptitude tests you should spend your time teaching geography and statistics since clearly that is your passion.
I grade aptitude tests in all subjects, including science, reading, writing, and math. What I am saying is when they choose Harry Potter to write about (they can choose any book under the sun), the depth of Harry Potter's themes, plot, characters, rising action, denouement, etc. make it so that for whatever reason they frequently get a mediocre score. In reflecting on what I said, I think I was just being a dick about the book, but the students "boxing themselves in" by writing about Harry Potter holds true. It is what it is. I don't know why. Kids need to be taught the fundamentals and to think for themselves. If reading Harry Potter does that, great. From what I've seen, it is literary spoon feeding and provides no room for interpretation. What you see on the page is what is there. I don't know what else to say.
What a pathetic correlation you've drawn. Obviously, there are many reasons for the score other than writing about Harry Potter books. Ever think that if these same kids picked a classic, their score could be even worse?
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, the seventh and final tome in the spell-casting series, smashed records over the weekend, to become the fastest selling book in history[/b], publisher Scholastic Inc. said Monday.
Within 24 hours of its release Friday at midnight, Deathly Hallows had moved 8.3 million copies in the United States alone, averaging more than 300,000 copies an hour???that's 5,000 a minute.[/b]
My wife read the whole thing in 2 days. Too bad I can't get into all that, but I'm for any book that gets kids (and adults) excited about reading.
But seriously folks, a bit of opinion page on "the Potter." I have had to grade aptitude tests in English writing last winter, and NONE of the high school students who chose Harry Potter books got a "talented tenth" score. Why? Because there is no depth in the books, and the purported depth (the most recent movie and its take on fascism) is so mind numbingly simplistic as to be relatively useless as a parable.
It's nice kids are reading, but it'd be great if they could point to all 50 states or Iraq correctly on a map, take a graph and interpret data stated on it for themselves, or realize a "research paper" shouldn't rely solely on the internet.
Let me see if I understand you. You grade high school English aptitude tests? Is that your profession?
So these kids who chose Harry Potter didn't get a good grade. And the aptitude tests tested their aptitude in Potterology? Were there other aptitude tests where kids could choose books such as Catcher In The Rye? Sorry the whole post is confusing to me.
Were the kids allowed to pick which books they would be aptitude tested on. Kind of a trap since you were already going to give a failing grade to anyone who picked Harry Potter, not because of problems with the kids test answers, but because "there is no depth in the books". (I like how you prove your point by referencing a movie.)
Perhaps instead of grading aptitude tests you should spend your time teaching geography and statistics since clearly that is your passion.
I grade aptitude tests in all subjects, including science, reading, writing, and math. What I am saying is when they choose Harry Potter to write about (they can choose any book under the sun), the depth of Harry Potter's themes, plot, characters, rising action, denouement, etc. make it so that for whatever reason they frequently get a mediocre score. In reflecting on what I said, I think I was just being a dick about the book, but the students "boxing themselves in" by writing about Harry Potter holds true. It is what it is. I don't know why. Kids need to be taught the fundamentals and to think for themselves. If reading Harry Potter does that, great. From what I've seen, it is literary spoon feeding and provides no room for interpretation. What you see on the page is what is there. I don't know what else to say.
What a pathetic correlation you've drawn. Obviously, there are many reasons for the score other than writing about Harry Potter books. Ever think that if these same kids picked a classic, their score could be even worse?
But seriously folks, a bit of opinion page on "the Potter." I have had to grade aptitude tests in English writing last winter, and NONE of the high school students who chose Harry Potter books got a "talented tenth" score. Why? Because there is no depth in the books, and the purported depth (the most recent movie and its take on fascism) is so mind numbingly simplistic as to be relatively useless as a parable.
It's nice kids are reading, but it'd be great if they could point to all 50 states or Iraq correctly on a map, take a graph and interpret data stated on it for themselves, or realize a "research paper" shouldn't rely solely on the internet.
Let me see if I understand you. You grade high school English aptitude tests? Is that your profession?
So these kids who chose Harry Potter didn't get a good grade. And the aptitude tests tested their aptitude in Potterology? Were there other aptitude tests where kids could choose books such as Catcher In The Rye? Sorry the whole post is confusing to me.
Were the kids allowed to pick which books they would be aptitude tested on. Kind of a trap since you were already going to give a failing grade to anyone who picked Harry Potter, not because of problems with the kids test answers, but because "there is no depth in the books". (I like how you prove your point by referencing a movie.)
Perhaps instead of grading aptitude tests you should spend your time teaching geography and statistics since clearly that is your passion.
I grade aptitude tests in all subjects, including science, reading, writing, and math. What I am saying is when they choose Harry Potter to write about (they can choose any book under the sun), the depth of Harry Potter's themes, plot, characters, rising action, denouement, etc. make it so that for whatever reason they frequently get a mediocre score. In reflecting on what I said, I think I was just being a dick about the book, but the students "boxing themselves in" by writing about Harry Potter holds true. It is what it is. I don't know why. Kids need to be taught the fundamentals and to think for themselves. If reading Harry Potter does that, great. From what I've seen, it is literary spoon feeding and provides no room for interpretation. What you see on the page is what is there. I don't know what else to say.
What a pathetic correlation you've drawn. Obviously, there are many reasons for the score other than writing about Harry Potter books. Ever think that if these same kids picked a classic, their score could be even worse?
1) I'm not the only person scoring these. 2) When kids chose classics to write about, it even depended on the classic they chose if they were able to do well or not. Of Mice and Men: mediocre papers. Catcher In The Rye: usually pretty decent. 3) When the kids chose Pieces To Weight by 50 Cent, they also were quite frequently bad papers. Would you say that correlation is meaningless as well? Maybe smart kids pick more interesting books to write about or have a wider variety of books in their repertoire to choose from? The best paper I read was on Siddhartha.
I'm not fighting about this at all. Kids reading is always a good thing. Hopefully, this book is a springboard to other books.
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, the seventh and final tome in the spell-casting series, smashed records over the weekend, to become the fastest selling book in history[/b], publisher Scholastic Inc. said Monday.
Within 24 hours of its release Friday at midnight, Deathly Hallows had moved 8.3 million copies in the United States alone, averaging more than 300,000 copies an hour???that's 5,000 a minute.[/b]
My wife read the whole thing in 2 days. Too bad I can't get into all that, but I'm for any book that gets kids (and adults) excited about reading.
fiddy and kanye will have trouble matching those numbers
Comments
I agree. The one-dimensional notion of reading as an educational tool is just not sexy. Content is of course always up for discussion, but unless it's The Terrorist's Cookbook or The Sun, I cannot be mad.
And here's a little story about the positive effects of reading on any level:
When my mother came here in the early seventies, she quickly realised that she had to learn the language as fast as possible if she wanted to accomplish her goals. Besides being an outgoing person who wasn't afraid to learn it by making an effort in everyday interactions, she also had another way of expanding her vocabulary and grammar knowledge. For years she was a member of one those book clubs where you get 4 hit novels a month. A lot of crime/drama stuff like Alistair McLean, Desmond Bagley and Len Deighton, as well as Judith Krantz-like rubbish and of course the local bestselling authors. Could have been yer old pal Dan Brown today. In a few years, ploughing her way through those blockbuster novels helped her to rapidly speak the language on a level that people who have been here longer than her still can't get on.
Sure, this Harry Potter craze might seem silly, but it still looks like a win-win situation to these eyes.
I would only like to add that, despite my love for Quo and Gee, there is not a salary in the world that could persuade me to move to Connecticut.
sayoing.
I can definitely understand that - I hated the majority of the college kids that were in your "city" (big town that just stumbled upon electricity is a little more appropriate) when I was there as well.
Let me see if I understand you. You grade high school English aptitude tests? Is that your profession?
So these kids who chose Harry Potter didn't get a good grade. And the aptitude tests tested their aptitude in Potterology? Were there other aptitude tests where kids could choose books such as Catcher In The Rye? Sorry the whole post is confusing to me.
Were the kids allowed to pick which books they would be aptitude tested on. Kind of a trap since you were already going to give a failing grade to anyone who picked Harry Potter, not because of problems with the kids test answers, but because "there is no depth in the books". (I like how you prove your point by referencing a movie.)
Perhaps instead of grading aptitude tests you should spend your time teaching geography and statistics since clearly that is your passion.
You won't hear no argument from me, I left many a time only to be pulled back in like Pacino.
IMG SRC=http://art.blogging.la/archives/pullmebackin.jpg>
it also helps to prevent Alzheimers and other related mental degradations in senior citizens.
It was great.
How's this for irony?....SOME OF YOU FOOLS NEED TO GROW THE FUCK UP[/b].
Herm
lw: POTTEROLOGY! this shit had me laughing out loud here at the hospital. folks are looking at me like "what the fuck?!!" hilarious.
herm - what you think of the book? i read it off a pdf and am going to go get the book after all the hype dies down.
http://www.humormonster.com/videos/Harry%20Potter%20Ruined%20For%20All%20The%20Nerdlings_218.html
imagine if fools were lined up like this to read the newspaper.
Dude should have been punched in the face.
From the looks on this guy's face, yes, it is 10 fold more interesting than reality.
I grade aptitude tests in all subjects, including science, reading, writing, and math. What I am saying is when they choose Harry Potter to write about (they can choose any book under the sun), the depth of Harry Potter's themes, plot, characters, rising action, denouement, etc. make it so that for whatever reason they frequently get a mediocre score. In reflecting on what I said, I think I was just being a dick about the book, but the students "boxing themselves in" by writing about Harry Potter holds true. It is what it is. I don't know why. Kids need to be taught the fundamentals and to think for themselves. If reading Harry Potter does that, great. From what I've seen, it is literary spoon feeding and provides no room for interpretation. What you see on the page is what is there. I don't know what else to say.
People complaining about kids getting excited to read. Seriously. What the fuck?
BUT THEY SHOULD BE OUTSIDE PLAYING AND SOCIALIZING!!!
What a pathetic correlation you've drawn. Obviously, there are many reasons for the score other than writing about Harry Potter books. Ever think that if these same kids picked a classic, their score could be even worse?
Within 24 hours of its release Friday at midnight, Deathly Hallows had moved 8.3 million copies in the United States alone, averaging more than 300,000 copies an hour???that's 5,000 a minute.[/b]
My wife read the whole thing in 2 days. Too bad I can't get into all that, but I'm for any book that gets kids (and adults) excited about reading.
SHIT YEAH!!! teacher fight...
CAUGHT!!!!
YOU NEED TO GET OUTSIDE AND SOCIALIZE
DO YOU EVEN PARTY??
how embarrassing!!!
1) I'm not the only person scoring these.
2) When kids chose classics to write about, it even depended on the classic they chose if they were able to do well or not. Of Mice and Men: mediocre papers. Catcher In The Rye: usually pretty decent.
3) When the kids chose Pieces To Weight by 50 Cent, they also were quite frequently bad papers. Would you say that correlation is meaningless as well?
Maybe smart kids pick more interesting books to write about or have a wider variety of books in their repertoire to choose from? The best paper I read was on Siddhartha.
I'm not fighting about this at all. Kids reading is always a good thing. Hopefully, this book is a springboard to other books.
fiddy and kanye will have trouble matching those numbers