On College, literacy, helicopter parenting, and YA books

June was the month of rain.  It rained, and rained and rained.  And it was so cold it felt more like March than June.  The good part about rainy days?  I tend to want to curl up with something to read.  Whether it is a book, an article, the paper, my homework, or the computer, I just feel like soaking in words.

It all started when I was at class.  Our instructor told us about an article in the New Yorker titled, “Live and Learn:  Why We Have College” and encouraged us to read it.  Well, thanks to Willow, I subscribe to the New Yorker!  I went home and read it.  It was fascinating.  Louis Menand discusses in-depth the two (or three) theories of why we need college:

Theory 1:  To sort people into the correct categories, and to assign degrees accordingly.  College people are people who jump through the hoops and graduate.  They get the good jobs.  They are the “select” population. 

Theory 2:  To teach people.  To create an educated society.  College people will learn the same types of things and will learn the appropriate behaviors that are necessary in a civilized democratic society.

These are vastly different views, but Menand argues that it could be a blend of both.  His argument is that college is worthwhile, and should be available to anyone.  (He is more of a Theory 2 person.)  However, there should be standards to which the students should be held accountable.  He discusses this while citing Professor X’s articles in the Atlantic:  In the Basement of the Ivory Tower and An Anti-College Backlash?  This Professor X goes on to discuss why he believes (quite strongly) that not everyone is suited to earn a college degree.

Since my students are the same type students that Professor X teaches, I found what he had to say quite interesting.  He is definitely a Theory 1 person.  He is emphatic that there are many, many people who are not “cut out” for college.  I will admit that this would be an easy Kool Aid for me to drink.  However, what it did instead was to force me to ask myself why I teach.  Why did I teach Kindergarten?  There were never arguments that Kindergarten wasn’t for everyone.  And now, why do I teach these college students who fail their placement exams?  A paycheck is not why.  I discovered what I already knew.  I am a Theory 2 person.  I am teaching so that everyone has the opportunity to have a better life.  So we have a more literate world.  Words are Power.  Without the ability to read (which means TO UNDERSTAND WRITTEN SYMBOLS) there is no ability to evaluate any aspect of life.  What doctor you should see,  who you should vote for, if your insurance covers everything it needs to, how to fill out a job application, write a resume, if the advertisements are telling the truth, if you should sign consent forms, how to apply for a loan….I could go on.  Being literate, whether you have a degree or not, is required in my brain.  Required.  If you are not literate, you have given up controlling your destiny.  You just exist.

Now, I know you can listen to amazing things and learn things from listening.  TED talks have very inspirational lectures.  There is a show called “Midmorning” that I love that is on every morning.  And I have linked to a show “Being” that talks about Democracy.  So, yes, you can learn without reading and writing.  There is also learning by doing.  Hands on things like building and fixing and creating.  But, in order to be in control of your life, my opinion is that being literate is required.

This brings me to one of the questions that I brought up a while back:

How do I make sure that I am teaching the content of the course at the level the course was designed, and teach within the zone of proximal development, meeting each student where they are and providing the scaffolding to the next incremental step in order to provide the best possible instruction?

Also?  How do I make sure all of my students have improved their reading ability whether they pass my class or not?

So, that is one area that my brain is stuck.  Then, I was listening to Midmorning another day and Kari Miller (who I love) was interviewing Lori Gottlieb about the article she wrote for The Atlantic:  How to Land Your Kid in Therapy.  It was such a great discussion about how there is a balance between doing everything for your children and letting them figure out some stuff themselves.  Including how to fail.  Which is hard to let your kids do.  Especially for me.  (This is why I try to ignore them as much as possible, then I am not micro-managing.)  It is much easier to learn to fail when it isn’t a big deal, than it is when a job opportunity is on the line.  But there is that tugging at the back of your brain…my kids are interested in (insert wonderful educational opportunity here) and there is a three-week camp on that very subject….of course we will sign up for it!  And for this other wonderful opportunity too…and this one!  Pretty soon they have no days to figure out how to entertain themselves, what to do when they feel bored….how to make up a game, or pretend something of their own imagination.  I will tell you it is a struggle for me sometimes to say, we are doing enough.  No piano lessons.  (And DENY them the opportunity!  Bad, bad parent!)  So, as I was making MAJOR connections to my own life and my own kids, I was also thinking about Professor X.  He said that there are work places that require people to get credits in order to advance in their jobs.  He doesn’t cite (that I can remember) what jobs, they very well could be positions that require people to be able to put good sentences together and to read well enough to not mess stuff up, but he made it sound like these jobs wouldn’t require such basic things.  Is this another form of hovering?  If people are perfectly capable of fixing an air conditioner without being able to write an essay, why are we requiring them to write an essay in order to advance in an air conditioner-repair job?  Is our society moving in this direction?  I still think that everyone should be able to communicate with writing and be able to read, but how far should the requirement go?  So, yes  I still believe that being literate is required in order to live your best life and have control over your own destiny.  But, how literate?  Where does one draw the line?  How do you decide where it is literate “enough?”

And then, of course there was the Wall Street Journal article, “Darkness too Visible” by Meghan Cox Gurdon.  I didn’t see this until Sam posted Sherman Alexie’s rebuttal on Facebook:  “Why the Best Kid’s Books are Written in Blood.”  There were two segments on midmorning regarding this topic of censorship, what is appropriate for teens, and how to deal with the maturing audience that is YA.  One is short and one is a whole hour.  When I thought about the body books that I hid under my bed because I thought they were a bit too graphic for Sarah…they discussed eating disorders in great detail, and cutting…neither of which she has any idea about.  I thought, “Oh, geez.  Am I for censorship?”  Is this another way we hover?  But then, The Diamond in the Window, being awesome as she always is, let me know how I really felt.  And the longer mid morning also spoke of how thirteen year olds have a different tolerance than an eighteen year old.  I have read books about many a dark thing, it doesn’t mean I am going to commit the crimes or become an addict.  But I am a parent, so it is my job to protect my children and make sure that they read what they can handle.  Cutting?  At nine?  Unless she had a friend that did it, or saw a news program or something and had questions about it….then no.  And, is this limiting of books creating less literate people? I am still not really sure I would limit books.  If Sarah asked me if she could read a book?  I would probably warn her, but let her.  Even though I won’t let her read Harry Potter.  I know she would LOVE it.  But she would also want to read all seven books.  And, she gets too scared for the darkness that begins in book four.  Plus, I want to read it to her…selfish, that is what I am.

Now you know what has been pin-balling around in my head for the last month.  I have this feeling that all of these articles are connected, and that they mean something significant.

I tried to articulate my connections, but what I really want to know is what do you think?