CONTENT QUESTION #1:
Sullivan refers to Kelly Gallagher’s concept “readicide” (para 15 ). What does the term mean?
In “An Open Letter to High School Students about Reading,” author Patrick Sullivan admits that “teachers have probably created some of the aversion to reading that many students feel.” Educator Kelly Gallagher refers to this process as “‘readicide,'” which she defines as “‘the systematic killing of the love of reading.'” Gallagher describes that this is ‘”often exacerbated by the inane, mind-numbing practices found in schools.'” In essence, readicide favors the educational practices that focus on developing test-taking skills such as the SAT and ACT, rather than ones that encourage “deep reading” skills such as reflection, analysis, creativity, and curiosity.
CONTENT QUESTION #2:
Sullivan grounds his claims in research on reading. Take note of these studies: what fields do these researchers work in? What points do they help him make?
In “An Open Letter to High School about Reading,” author Patrick Sullivan references educators: “Educator Kelly Gallagher,” and “education scholar Sheridan Blau,” historic novelists: “French novelist Marcel Proust,” researchers: “researcher Maryanne Wolf,” and multiple sociologists, including “sociologist Judith C. Roberts and Keith A. Roberts,” and “French sociologists Pierre Bourdieu and Jean-Claude Passeron.” In order to be able to reference all of these scholars, Sullivan had to read their work and analyze them to incorporate their knowledge into his own. Educators enable him to gain perspectives from within the classroom, historic figures allow him to gain perspective of educators and scholars view on education from the past, research grounds his point with examined facts, and sociologists attest to the true way that students learn and functioning in a school environment. Each of these references support Sullivan’s argument in versatile ways, while also showing that Sullivan has read and understood their work.
INTERPRETIVE QUESTION #1:
Sullivan recalls telling high school students that they “needed to love reading…to read for pleasure, and…to do a lot of reading overall” (para 2) in order to be ready for college. Yet many students wonder whether they “really need to love reading” or need “to read a lot for enjoyment.” How would you distinguish “loving to read” from reading for “pleasure” and reading “a lot,” or even from making reading “an important part of your life” (para. 17)? Do these distinctions make any difference in the way you respond to Sullivan’s claim?
Loving to read in the broadest sense is loving to learn. It shows a strong sense of curiosity and excitement for knowledge. Reading for “pleasure” (para. 17) means reading for the pleasure of learning, it hints at a willingness to learn about the subject one is reading about. Reading “a lot” just means reading often, but does not show the same willingness. However, reading a lot is learning a lot. Loving to read means reading for pleasure, and doing it often, because if you love to read, you want to learn, and you want to learn a lot. Making reading “an important part of your life” (para. 17) means making it a conscious priority. So, if you love to read, you make a conscience effort to do it often because you are curious to learn – and thus, you are always reading for pleasure. This shows that Sullivan’s claim about deep reading is correct, and that a love for reading is the result of a diligent, conscience effort to learn and grow one’s intellectual versatility as much and as often as possible.
INTERPRETIVE QUESTION #2:
One point that was made in our discussion was that Sullivan doesn’t take into account all the other things high school students want or are expected to do. If reading for pleasure is so important, how could schools encourage kids to do it? What practices would have to change, or what obstacles to reading might schools have to remove?
High school students are expected to take certain classes to meet core requirements such as math, reading and writing – the exact skills that are tested on exams like the SAT and ACT. On top of that, they are also usually overwhelmed with the amount of homework from all their classes, which makes no time for reading on their own time. Schools should encourage students to read for pleasure by offering options for personal reading books that are relevant to their class and incorporating this into the time that’s set aside for homework. This would eliminate the obstacle of overwhelming homework and would be good for classes such as social science, science and math. In students’ English classes, the teacher should offer an option for personal reading, have students vote, and whichever students choose the same book should have classes set aside for socratic seminars – allowing the students to argue and think deeply about the themes and components of their book.
