Last week, I had a pleasant argument with a Daily Post reader who was concerned about my references, in Part Two of this editorial series, to claims made by various people, suggesting that President Trump not only disliked reading books, reports, and memos, but that he in fact might be only marginally literate — that he might read at, say, an 8th grade level.
She argued that I was citing articles written by people who “hate Trump” and will do anything they can to discredit him. She felt confident that Donald Trump is a perfectly competent reader, but that — like any good manager — he doesn’t dig deeply into the details of a situation, but takes the 30,000-foot view and lets his underlings deal with the specifics. That’s why he asks for bullet points, and one-page memos.
This is a reasonable assumption. It’s very possible Donald Trump is an excellent reader, and a master of the English language, but chooses to limit his verbal vocabulary to two-syllable words in order to communicate effectively with the widest possible range of citizens. But I wondered if she could provide some research, some evidence for her beliefs?
“I don’t need evidence,” was her response. “You’re the one writing the editorial. Do your own research.”
The funny part of this argument? I was not trying to be critical of President Trump, when I cited evidence that he doesn’t — or possibly, can’t — read complex, complicated reports or scholarly, sophisticated books. Rather, I was suggesting that maybe… just maybe… the ability to read is losing its importance.
I wrote:
All of which begs the question: Has reading become unnecessary? If a person unwilling to read two-page memos can direct the federal government for four years, and nearly be re-elected to another four-year term… is that evidence that America has outgrown the written word?
If indeed the research I’m seeing is accurate, something like 50% of American adults cannot fully understand a text written at the 8th grade level. (Whatever that might mean.) If our current President reads at the 9th grade level, that might still put him ahead of most Americans.
And if indeed the research I’m seeing is accurate, public schools — tasked two decades ago with leaving no child behind — are failing to teach successfully reading to the same percentage of children they were failing to teach two decades ago.
I have taught in the public schools, and I’m familiar with some of the challenges faced by educators on a day-to-day basis. Teaching a child to read is a piece of cake, if the child truly wants to learn to read… and if the child has access to books that suit the child’s interests and personality… and if the child is not pushed beyond his or her capabilities.
That first qualification — that the child truly wants to learn to read — strikes me as perhaps the most important qualification (based on what little I know about the subject). I can think of three key reasons why a child would want to learn to read.
- The child is surrounded by people — adults and peers —who enjoy reading and who share that joy with the child.
- The child finds that certain types of information, and certain types of entertainment, are found in books and other materials.
- The child wants to impress teachers, parents, peers with his or her language skills.
I can think of three equally strong reasons why a child might find ‘reading’ to be useless or unpleasant.
- The child is surrounded by people who do not read, but get their information and entertainment from electronic devices, friends, and other non-literary sources.
- The child is forced to read materials that are too difficult, or uninteresting, or insipid.
- The child has been shamed and embarrassed by teachers, peers, or parents for being “an incompetent reader.”
A recent survey of Americans performed by the Pew Research Center concluded that close to one-third of US adults had not read a book — in whole or in part — in the past year.
A survey by the US Bureau of Labor Statistics suggests that only about 20% of Americans read on a daily basis. Compare this with the 80% who watch TV each day.
It’s not too farfetched to suggest that, if our schools and educational institutions wanted to reflect ‘real life in America’, our school kids would spend 80% of their time watching videos and 20% of their time reading books. But our schools and educational institutions are not currently equipped to reflect real life. They reflect an idealized version of America — and, I would argue, an outdated version — where everyone reads books.
Here again is one of my assumptions about why a child might be eager to read.
- The child is surrounded by people — adults and peers —who enjoy reading and who share that joy with the child.
And here is one of my assumptions about why a child might find school-based “reading instruction” to be relatively irrelevant.
- The child is surrounded by people who do not read, but get their information and entertainment from electronic devices, friends, and other non-literary sources.
Children are not stupid. They notice how the world operates, and — whether they consciously realize it or not — they want to fit in, and become active participants in the society around them.
Until relatively recently — relative, that is, to the 50,000-year of human history — only the wealthy and powerful had access to painstakingly-produced written materials. We then moved into a period of time when paper was relatively cheap and mass-produced printed materials were available to ordinary families, and to the schools their children attended. Another phase of human history began when large, well-funded corporations began broadcasting information and entertainment on radio and TV, and, as a result, reading became less and less popular among ordinary families.
We have now reached a point when practically anyone with a smart phone can produce a 30-minute video and post it online, to be shared globally. The information and entertainment streams of the future — after centuries of dependence upon the written and printed word — are becoming disengaged from the art of reading.
Time to rethink our education system?