American reading habits have turned south. Only 30 percent of 13-year-olds read almost every day, according a recent NEA study. The number of 17-year-olds who never read for pleasure increased from 9 percent in 1984 to 19 percent in 2004. Almost half of Americans between ages 18 and 24 never read books for pleasure, which may explain why one out of three does not make it to high school graduation.

As teachers cite the lack of parents’ involvement as a primary cause of faltering of education, parents blame that lack of discipline as the major cause. Both camps, however, can agree on one thing: lack of funding is the second biggest problem.

Indeed, even if nobility is still associated with the profession, the economy is far from showing its appreciation. Many young people who would have gone into teaching have told me they were deterred by financial insecurity. “I would consider teaching seriously but if I ever want to own a house in the Bay Area, I might as well forget that profession,” a graduate from Berkeley recently told me. In Silicon Valley, in order to keep talented teachers, there are now housing units being built for many who couldn’t afford a home, as the average salary for a beginning high school teacher is $44,000 in a county where the median income is around $85,000.

Something about our fast-paced, super consumerist society seems to have robbed the teaching vocation the respect it deserves, disposing that once concrete and tender human relationship to a matter of mere transaction. "You’re a paying customer!” said the yoga student. If in my mother’s world of North Vietnam, the word “teacher” is still interchangeable with the word “father,” in the world I live in now, I fear teaching as a profession is in danger of being reduced to "humble scutwork."

I interview a lot of people and I always ask interview candidates what was the last book they've read. I've never recommended to hire anyone who didn't have a good answer to that question. Thats not because that question is a deal breaker, its just that people who don't have a good answer to that question pretty much also fail to our technical questions.

I can only speak from my own experience, but every child in my homeschool group reads for pleasure. To top it off, our group meets weekly at Barnes and Noble for 'social time' that is often spent having a snack and discussing books, or the older kids reading to the younger kids back in the child's section. Usually half the kids or so leave with a new book they've picked out, and the rest might have an ISBN to go find online for less. It is definitely a culture that cultivates the intellectual love of reading and awareness of books.

Perhaps that is because they are allowed to read what they want - including current popular fiction. No 'reading books full of boring ol stories no one wants to read' are used with long droning busy work of explaining the symbols or WHATEVER it is that I used to have to do that made reading my least favorite class.

As far as teachers' losing their respect, I'd have to wonder if that is because the market on information is saturated. :) Lower level teachers now have competition from knowlegeable parents and siblings, Leap Frog, tv programs and documentaries, Internet articles, Cosmeo, books, accessible libraries, and even You Tube.

I think the rare jewel teacher with the really incredible knowlege and gift for inspriation and wonder will always be well respected, sought out, and well compensated.

Perhaps I am just being the devil's advocate here, but I don't think more funding is going to help anyone learn to read, unless it actually buys a child a book they WANT to read.

skullaria wrote:
I can only speak from my own experience, but every child in my homeschool group reads for pleasure. ... It is definitely a culture that cultivates the intellectual love of reading and awareness of books.

I'm becoming more and more interested in the potential of homeschooling.

Perhaps that is because they are allowed to read what they want - including current popular fiction. No 'reading books full of boring ol stories no one wants to read' are used with long droning busy work of explaining the symbols or WHATEVER it is that I used to have to do that made reading my least favorite class.

True, especially at first. My father applies a related theory in his guitar school... from day one he took the approach of asking students for songs they wanted to play. He'd figure the songs out and teach them *that* song, unless it really was just insanely hard (sorry kids, you probly can't play Eruption right off the bat). He's convinced that the retention rate is higher. Serious students will eventually learn the scales on their own. I expect the analogue to reading, particularly reading fiction, is extremely close.

As far as teachers' losing their respect, I'd have to wonder if that is because the market on information is saturated. :) Lower level teachers now have competition from knowlegeable parents and siblings, Leap Frog, tv programs and documentaries, Internet articles, Cosmeo, books, accessible libraries, and even You Tube.

I think this attitude is popular, and that may cause the result you indicate, but I don't think that should be tolerated particularly. There's a vast gulf between information and knowledge. A good teacher helps you convert the former into the latter. In particular, the best teachers are able to find different ways to do that for different types of student. Simply presenting material is a low yield method for "education" in my book.

I think the rare jewel teacher with the really incredible knowlege and gift for inspriation and wonder will always be well respected, sought out, and well compensated.

Assuming they bother to take up teaching in the first place. I imagine the majority of individuals in the best position to be that kind of educator opt for more lucrative career paths. Thus, you get the small portion of smart, inspirational, motivated folks that *also* just can't imagine doing anything but teach, in addition to a lot of folks with passion, but limited skill, or skill in some subject area, but no particular passion for teaching.

I absolutely think that increasing teacher salaries would attract more of the right kind of people to the field, and result in a better education for the students.

Perhaps I am just being the devil's advocate here, but I don't think more funding is going to help anyone learn to read, unless it actually buys a child a book they WANT to read.

This statement does expose another point which is that the best teachers in the world won't make a difference if they're hamstrung by shitty or backwards curricula, hounded by conservative/liberal parents and community leaders, etc.

It's for this last reason among others that I'm most pessimistic about the American educational system. I, perhaps obviously, have a progressive and liberal viewpoint on what education should be. If I have kids someday, it will bother me for their education to be stifled by the lowest-common-denominator forced upon them by the political realities of public education. Of course, maybe dealing with that stuff is part of their education too. It's not simple, certainly.

What I'd like to see is the money go with the child - not for homeschooling, but for public and private schools. (I don't want ANY public money supporting homeschooling personally.)

But then parents could CHOOSE where they wanted their kids to be, and the kind of education that they felt was best suited for their children - and market forces could predominate. This is the system that is used in some of the best systems in Europe.

I've always been an autodidact myself. I'm pretty much 'unteachable' otherwise. I don't particularly value teachers. I value thinkers that can communicate and inspire.

Acidus wrote:
I interview a lot of people and I always ask interview candidates what was the last book they've read. I've never recommended to hire anyone who didn't have a good answer to that question. Thats not because that question is a deal breaker, its just that people who don't have a good answer to that question pretty much also fail to our technical questions.

Just out of curiosity, what're your criteria for a good answer?

k wrote:

Acidus wrote:
I interview a lot of people and I always ask interview candidates what was the last book they've read. I've never recommended to hire anyone who didn't have a good answer to that question. Thats not because that question is a deal breaker, its just that people who don't have a good answer to that question pretty much also fail to our technical questions.

Just out of curiosity, what're your criteria for a good answer?

"The last book I read was [book title] about [some amount of time less than 6 months] ago."

The "best" answer I ever got was "MacBeth" and I asked "oh, you like plays" and they said "not really, I had to read it for English class." Yes, this late 20s guy hadn't read a book since he was in high school. He also didn't know the difference between IP and TCP. I cut the interview off after 15 minutes.

Acidus wrote:

k wrote:

Acidus wrote:
I interview a lot of people and I always ask interview candidates what was the last book they've read. I've never recommended to hire anyone who didn't have a good answer to that question. Thats not because that question is a deal breaker, its just that people who don't have a good answer to that question pretty much also fail to our technical questions.

Just out of curiosity, what're your criteria for a good answer?

"The last book I read was [book title] about [some amount of time less than 6 months] ago."

The "best" answer I ever got was "MacBeth" and I asked "oh, you like plays" and they said "not really, I had to read it for English class." Yes, this late 20s guy hadn't read a book since he was in high school. He also didn't know the difference between IP and TCP. I cut the interview off after 15 minutes.

Ugh. That's weak. I certainly don't expect everyone to have the time or inclination to read like I do, but I *really* don't get absolute non-readers.