I personally like to read books with lots of illustrations/pictures in them. I also like to read books without those items. But if I am learning something new, I find illustrations very helpful. I do think we should grow in our reading level as we grow up into adults. But, for me I think I have reached the level where I am comfortable in stopping. I can read some college level stuff. I have only junior college level classes so far in my transcript. I guess I am referring to for example some magazine articles which are marketed to anyone, but the wording sounds like it is addressed to experts. So while I may be able to get the gist of the article, I am muddled down with all these words. It seems that children should be encouraged to grow their reading abilities and vocabulary, but maybe not force it so much. Let them read things they can learn from AND enjoy, then sprinkle in some of the harder reading. I also think too much emphasis is placed on being able to understand Shakespeare or things of that nature. I can understand some and with some help- more, but does that speak of the person I am or just what I know. I actually enjoy stretching my brain on occasion, but I think too much importance is placed on "higher" thinking. Plus, when I meet a friend I never ask them if they can do algebra (which I loved) or if they can read Shakespeare. These type of things are really only important if they are used in balance or if they suit the career you choose. I guess I am just at a stage of why is this considered important? why not that? How come many can do algebra, but not balance a checkbook or count out change? I am rambling and better stop my one sided sermon.
I'm the same type of reader, and I think a lot of people are. I "can" read anything, but I "prefer" to read easy stuff that has illustrations. I like children's books up until they turn into chapter books. After that, they're not much fun for me anymore. I'm happy watching the Harry Potter movies. I know, I know... people say I'm missing so much by not reading the books, but eh... I'm not much of a reader. My son also reads things that are well below his level. He enjoys them. I don't care. If I force him to read only things on his level all the time, he'll get burned out and learn to hate reading. So what if he likes to go in the baby's room and read board books? Is it going to kill him to have a little fun? No.
We do both. We work together on a more difficult book during literature class. (which I try to make more fun by having fun projects and etc. to go with it.) Then in the evening I let them pick whatever they want to read, no matter how young a book it might be. They can choose to read to me or to themselves.
Reading is so important. I had a hard time during school because it was BORING! So the comprehension of it would fail so I failed tests. Now that i have the equivalence of an Associates Degree I have found to pick out the important things and have found I can test much better. In fact I have done better in college than in HS. Who knew? Ha ha. My dd reads at a level above a hs graduate but below college so I have been blessed. SHE TESTS great too. My son on the other hand is too distracted with everything else to concentrate. I don't have any advice but experience.
For the most part, the "required reading" I expect my children to do is a higher level. But the books they get at the library to read on their own can be on whatever level they chose. The exception is for Phillip. He doesn't enjoy reading, so I will often give him a "required" book that goes with our history that perhaps isn't as "hard" as I would like.
Ugh. I hate Shakespeare. I hate outdated language too. I think reading has two purposes - fun and learning. When you can combine the two that is the best of both worlds. I love reading and I have spent much of the last 10 years reading biochemistry textbooks and if they didn't have pictures I would not know what to do. Sometimes, a picture really IS worth a thousand words (especially when it is a diagram!) Needless to say - we did not read Shakespeare when DD was in high school (though she did WATCH Midsummer Night Dream) and unless DS asks for it - he won't either. I go out of my way to find books he will enjoy - there is no reason for torture. We do read classics - but only if they can hold his interest. We read Call of the Wild and Tom Sawyer last year and he loved them both. He is a great reader - he doesn't need practice in reading. I just want him to read so that he knows it can be enjoyable. So far this year DS has read - The last Percy Jackson book, The Outsiders, The Alchemist (Nicholas Flamel), and Quantum Prophecy. As you can see - only one of them is considered "literature". He loved it though and we will definitely be reading more SE Hinton. Every book has something to offer, something to learn about. It doesn't have to be Wuthering Heights to have a take away message. We still have Lord of the Flies and I am the Cheese for our list this year. I would say both of those are classics even though IATC was written in the 70's. I have come to the conclusion that homeschooling is about making MY kid's education what WE want it to be. And if that doesn't include some of the "traditional" things so be it. I care less and less every year about other people's academic expectations of my child.
I think it's more the point of being ABLE to read it. If my kids head off to college - the first years they are required to take English classes which WILL require books they don't enjoy reading - but they HAVE to read them. My job as parent/teacher is to make sure they are prepared for that day. After they do that.... it's totally up to them what they read. Personally I read everything and anything.... I love fluff books and I love serious books. Most people who know me laugh because I will have an audiobook, a kindle book and then a traditional paperback book all going at once because it will depend where I am. In the car - I listen.... sitting at home I will sometimes just read on my iPhone or grab the paperback and head into the bathtub for some "don't bug me" time!
Silly Dana, that's what CliffNotes are for... :lol: Kidding... I am embarassed to say that yes, I read the CliffNotes version of Othello in college. 45 minutes before the test. I picked an essay question based on my limited reading and got a B+. Bad Julie. Bad bad Julie.
Wow, that is a lot of great comments. I personally like to read books with or without pictures, but I prefer ones with pictures (even longer books). Surprisingly I am enjoying a lot on non-fiction lately. I have been reading some of the books from YWAM about missionaries. I am currently reading a book about the Lusitania, it is a large book, but with lots of pictures mixed in. My son seems to enjoy the Eyewitness books ( I like them too). :love: Another thing to think about is the word "classic". I think some of the "classics" are great, but of course I haven't read many of them. But, I think sometimes the world is overly concerned with reading material that fits in this category. But, what about other authors and their writings that could cover important topics. I remember enjoying "The Scarlett Letter" and to this day I don't remember a lot of details but I do remember thinking that judging people was wrong and learning it is better to be compassionate. I think that is what makes literature great, something can be learned to better ourselves. There is reading like that out there not listed under the classics. I really want my son to read some of the missionary stories. They speak to self sacrifice, following God, and many other important moral lessons. But the reading level of these books starts at age 10 I think (as far as the publisher lists them). But, they are easy to read, they make me think, and I learn. In fact, there is other things to learn in these books, they mention different historically important events that are going on during the time. The vocabulary may be easy, but the lessons are eye-opening. Why do some people think this type of literature is not as worthy as literature with more difficult vocabulary:?: By the way-has anyone read the short story "The Lottery" by Shirley Jackson? I read this in college and it sticks with me even today. It is actually a morbid type of story, so not great for little kids, but it can make you think. The funny thing is, I thought the story was written to make people think about their actions, but I believe the author said she didn't write it with any moral lesson planned, just to write a story.
Loved "The Lottery". We read it in 9th grade English class. As far as Shakespeare goes, other than Rachael having to read Julius Ceasar for History this year, we've not read any of them. BUT all three of my children has seen several Shakespeare plays. Phillip I think saw his first Shakespear when he was 7. Columbus has FREE outdoor Shakespeare in the summer. They have seen "Midsummer Night's Dream", "A Comedy of Errors", "The Tempest". Those are the ones I can think of right off. I wanted them to see "Taming of the Shrew", but the troupe was doing something strange with it, so I decided against it. Usually, we read a story version first ("Tales from Shakespeare" by Charles and Mary Lamb), so the kids have a good understanding of the story when they go. This way, they are able to follow the story line, even though they may miss some of the language. Ballet Met is doing "Midsummer Night's Dream" this year, and I will take them to the School Performance of that.
I love to read kids books. If I am reading a book 95% of the time it is a childrens book. For school my girl reads on her level but then for fun (which I usually count for school anyway) she can read anything.
Jackie, We had to write a paper and I wrote how I thought the story illustrated that people don't often speak up against evil until it affects them. That story really made me think, I think that is why I found it amazing the author wasn't trying to teach any kind of moral lesson. Well, even if she didn't, she did-at least to me.
*Went through high school and college courses using ONLY cliff's notes* LOL... don't shoot me. I made A's and B's on everything, and I also made A's and B's on the $20 papers I did for my friend. Add me to the bad list, Julie.
Harry Potter has been criticized by some because they say JK Rowling is not that a really great author....but tell that to the millions of kids who maybe got turned on to reading other books because of her. I've read and re-read a lot of classics and also remember having to read "The Last of the Mohicans" in high school - It was over 20 years ago and I still remember that it was torture! I took a class in Shakespeare and can't say that I enjoyed it - I don't ever desire to read Shakespeare -am I a better person for having experienced it? I don't think so. Some people think Danielle Steele writes great books -who am I to say she doesn't? Who says a book is a "classic"? It's just like movies, music, etc. ....one man's trash is another man's treasure. Having said all that I think kids should be exposed to the classics and I want my son to at least try to read something other than science fiction (his current fave) but I'm just thrilled that he likes to read and read often. Jane
Oh, Jane, like I said! It's OK not to have read Shakespeare, but you can still appreciate the plays!!! I was suppose to have read Hamlet both in highschool and college. Wasn't able to get through it either time, but years later I went to see it. (I actually remember telling my friend it couldn't be as bad as I remembered it being, lol!) And I actually DID enjoy it! And the comedies are SO funny! I've also tried three times to read Last of the Mohicans, after watching the movie. Never got further than the first chapter! (But I've read a kids' version to my son when we studied the French and Indian War, and had Rachael watch the movie!)
