I can no longer open the reading at risk file because my computer has a mind of its own, otherwise I would quote the part that I didn't agree with but instead I'll have to paraphrase from memory. It said something along the lines of technology demands less attention than reading and because of this attention spans are getting shorter and people are becoming more stupid. Also it equated reading with intelligence saying something about reading being a progressive skill dependent on years of practice.
Call me crazy, but I don't think you have to be particularly intelligent or have "years of practice" to be able to read. I have a lot of stupid guy friends that "read" Playboy on a regular basis (because it has such great articles) and although the light reading is accompanied by naked women my friends are reading none the less. These guys are not particularly intelligent, they bought the magazine for the sole purpose of looking at naked women, but they still READ. They did not practice reading for years, in fact they all dropped out of high school, and they are reading something of little to no importance, but the fact of the matter is they are still reading.
I brought this up briefly on the discussion board and I'm going to bring it up here again. If I was interviewed for this survey I would have been one of the adults that don't read because the survey specified reading as a leisurely activity not related to school or work. I can't remember the last time I read a book leisurely. The survey dismissed the millions of college students that read much more than the average person, but because they are reading for a purpose it doesn't count. I don't get it. It seems like the survey was conducted with all these exceptions as to what constitutes reading because the NEA wanted to see a certain result. I feel like someone woke up one day and said I'm going to go out and prove that reading is on the decline, and in order to do this I am going to skew the information and exclude the people that spend the majority of their time reading.... and six years later I'm going to completely change my viewpoint and show that reading is now on the rise. I bet it was my stupid playboy reading friends that conducted this survey.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
To a certain extent, I agree with the NEA. College students are reading books for class not because they want to, but because they are obligated to. If I didn't have ENG5080, I would not have read, let alone purchased, 'Old Books and New Histories.' Sure, I love learning new things. Afterall, knowledge is power. Moreover, as the NEA is trying to prove, most books that are read by students would not be read in there spare/leisure time. They would probably be consumed by twitter, facebook, or something uneducating as the sort.
ReplyDeleteAs far as your hormonal friends, I highly doubt that they're reading those articles. If they are, they're really skimming for the female's bra size or something that has absolutely nothing to do with the essence of reading. Their focus are the pictures, not the articles. Many years ago I learned that reading is fundamental. Unfortunately, a lot individuals in our generation lack that idea.