Return-Path: <nifl-family@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.9.0.Beta5/8.9.0.Beta5/980425bjb) with SMTP id EAA24496; Sun, 25 Oct 1998 04:40:54 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 04:40:54 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <19981025094453.15412.rocketmail@send103.yahoomail.com> Errors-To: azaheer@famlit.org Reply-To: nifl-family@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-family@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-family@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: "D. Gates" <depickett@yahoo.com> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-family@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-FAMILY:1738] Re: sports X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii I must agree with Chris regarding the sports section issue. If we are to wisely educate America's children; we must surely gently gear them towards an understanding of many arenas of life to get a balanced view of their world. However, I can applaud the teacher for addressing that which the student "likes" first---after that, the educator must subtly introduce other subjects that will and must relate as all subject matter does in one aspect or another to the "likes" the student tends to lean toward in his reading. My son, for example, enjoys science and reading. So I got science materials from all forms of media that he could enjoy. Afterwards, I introduced history in the form of scientists who made valuable contributions to the world of Science. Eventually, I had my son integrated into looking at many subjects by this gentle persuasion that all of life relates in one way or another. Delayne depickett@yahoo.com ---Chris <copple@toad.net> wrote: > > I can't agree. I don't particularly understand the "premise" of working on > the strengths of another person. I would think that one would work with the > weaknesses of others. You simply can't teach someone something he already > knows. Being able to read for pleasure is a reward of being able to read. > There are things that we should read, that we have to read. And I certainly > don't expect 6th graders to read a newspaper coveer to cover, but to read > and summarize (even orally) a few news stories not related to baseball or > sportsdoesn't seem inappropriate. > > Education isn't about letting the student learn only those things he wants > to know about. It is about teaching them the things they need to thrive in > society. I know so many educated, native English speaking men who are aware > of the non-sprts sectins of the newspaper only in as much as it comes > betweeh them and the sports section. Learning needn't all be drudgery, but > neither is is always some sort of game. Concentrating on the sports section > gives the impression that it is that that is the most important thing in > tha paper - even to the exclusion of all else. If you are teaching any kind > of minority population, this is inexcusable. > > What you are doing, albeit tacitly, is saying to the kids, "The sports > section is what you need to know about; all that other stuff is for middle > class, educated people and you don't have to worry about it." I think it is > good for boys to have an interest in, and play sports, but only in > moderation. Do we need another cohort of jock-heads who only want to learn > enough to play football? Or do we want to show kids the opportunities that > reading can open up to them? We don't let "regular" kids get away with > reading only those things that they find "interesting"; why should this be > acceptable with respect to ESL students? > > > The attitude that it is OK o only read the sports sectin is similar to the > age-old attitudes that hold that girls only have to learn enough to keep > house and raise children, that blacks don't have to learn more than they > need to play basketball, and that Jews should only to to college to be > accountants and lawyers. By allowing these ESL students to concentrate > solely on sports at age 12, you are channelling them into a place where > they will be experts on the Yankees, but will still be virtually ignorant > of the rest of New York - not to mention the rest of the world. If this is > what education has become, I can see a furure where Johnny can read at > grade level, but will remain as ignorant as if he were illiterate. Is it so > far-fetched that one of these ESL students would take an interest in > politics, givernment, community development, or any of the other things > other than sports that are in the paper? > > > At 10:33 AM 10/24/98 -0400, you wrote: > >Hello, > > > >Just read with interest that the sports pages should be read as a reward > >after reading the rest of the paper. I could not agree less. I think > >learning to read, reading for meaning, and loving to read only come when we > >are allowed to read what we are interested in. Using reading as a reward, > >especially in a family literacy program is very inappropriate--where the > >premise that we work on the strengths that others bring. > > > >As a "reader" I like having my interests respected and we should deliver no > >less for our students. I applaud the teacher who recognized the strength > >in having the students read what they were interested in and going with > >that flow to further their basic understanding of reading. > > > >Zulmara Cline > >Even Start Director > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jan 11 2000 - 13:20:59 EST