The Read-Aloud Handbook by Jim Trelease
3rd and 6th editions
General Review:
Trelease's general premise: Read to your children 15 - 20 minutes a day from birth. He spends a whole chapter explaining why reading is important, why reading aloud to a child is important, and why reading now is so important. A sampling of his support includes:
- Since humans are pleasure centered and reading takes practice to be done well, reading must be pleasurable for us to want to put in the practice. Being read to from a good book is pleasurable right from birth. Babies enjoy the sound of your voice, toddlers are curious about everything, and the older we get the more we love the conflict, emotion, hope, and escape offered by fiction. Reading is pleasurable, unlike the 1,000 worksheets your child is likely to encounter annually in elementary school.
- Reading to your children (as well as traveling with them) builds background knowledge. A huge part of background knowledge is knowing our collective culture. We encounter such references as the Trojan Horse, Noah's Ark, Paul Revere, and countless others daily. Without this knowledge, we don't get the point, or often, the joke.
- Adults, parents in particular, are role models. If a child sees and hears adults reading daily, he will expect that reading is part of adult life. Reading aloud is the perfect advertising for the product of reading.
- The cost is very low: Some time, a library card, some second hand books, and a basket or shelf for the child to keep the books. A bed side reading lamp is a plus if you can swing it.
- Reading aloud to a child starting at young age prepares your child for school by exposing him to rich, formal language not used in every day conversation and by increasing his attention span.
- Experts believe that the amount of exercise the speech centers of the brain receive between 12 to 18 months directly affects the lifetime potential of that person in that area. Parents are therefore most important in providing that stimulation.
I particularly enjoyed the chapter on the stages of read-aloud, which discussed topics like bonding with your children over stories, why its good for toddlers to hear the same book a million times, how to move to chapter books, and more. (Though, the reader more intent on getting to the heart of the matter quickly, might want to skip right to the Do's and Don't chapter). The libraries and Sustained Silent Reading (SSR) chapters also contained a lot of interesting points.
Trelease discussed home, school, and public libraries. Of course, he mentioned that its been discovered that the number of books in the home is said to directly correlate with student success. But, I'm still left wondering why that is. I personally think it is not because of the books themselves, though wide access to print is important; I believe that it is the values and attidutes connected with reading in homes with many books that makes the difference. And what about those who are poor who use the library so well but own few books? Are they a rare minority and thus don't affect the numbers? Even still, with $1 books available at The Dollar Store and Target, and even cheaper or free books available through other charitable sourses, there isn't much reason for a child not to receive at least book or two a year. Even with the youngest children, Trelease states that ownership is important. Not only does the child get to mangle the book with love, but under the age of two it is important to build a relationship with the same few books versus the constant flood of different books one might get from a library.
For classroom libraries, there is also a connection between numbers of books and achievement. Most notably, classrooms with libraries report 50% more books read. Yet, sadly, the older students get, the less likely it is for them to have access to classroom library. But, as my personal experience can support, its not enough to just have the books. Teachers must advertise them. Book talks, reading aloud, and cover forward shelving are some of the methods presented. All these books aren't cheap though. In a time where school funds are cut in all areas, Trelease takes a strong stance I'm completely behind. He says to cut sports funding. A community will not allow its sports to be underfunded. But, if the library funding is cut, no one rallies enough to make a change. (As he states about the funding of public libraries later in the chapter, we don't miss what we don't use, and less than ten percent of Americans are regular library patrons. Thus, its not a huge leap that these same adults would allow a school library to be underfunded). I'd add that the school library benefits all students. Not only is the best opportunity for independent reading then present for all students, but all students use the school library in connection with their classes. Meanwhile, sports are not designed for all students, just based on the number of students. Furthermore, I was shocked by the statement that the higher a communities sports scores, the lower their reading scores.
While I have fond memories of teachers reading aloud to me, I don't have any postive memories of SSR. I don't believe I disliked it, but the power of aloud reading left more of a lasting impression. However, I agree with Trelease that SSR goes hand in hand with aloud reading, and I was very impressed with the results I saw implementing daily it in my high school level classes my last year of teaching. (Though I did disagree that reading in class should come before writing in class, because students are more likely to read at home than write at home and writing is a more social process needing the classroom environment to flourish. Ideally, it would all fit, but a secondary teacher can't lengthen the period). I would have loved for SSR to have been daily and school wide, but once students move to a schedule where they have many teachers, SSR starts to become more about policing the students, and only English language arts teachers are left on board. But, how can we expect students to spend time on something academic that we won't spend time on in school? The studies cited state that 90% of students spend only 1% of their free time on reading. Additionally, 90% of students read for less than four minutes a day. (And this is not even mentioning the summer loses children make. I was surprised to hear that it is the summers that widen the gaps in the highest and lowerst studnets).
When SSR is instated in a home or school, there is then a battle about what is acceptable reading. I love Trelease's stance that pretty much anything is allowed. Not only newspapers and magazines of all sorts allowed, but he strongly believes in the value of comic books, series, and even Where's Waldo. In discussing series like Babysitter's Club and The Hardy Boys, which are so often sneered at by many adults and teachers, he states that there is a time when "non-threatening, immediately accessibly reading" is needed. I couldn't agree more. There is a point in most reader's lives where what they need is to read a lot of text to gain fluency and improve on all sorts of basic reading skills. A lite youth series is perfect for this purpose because children and teens are engaged by the plot lines and plow through the texts with huge motivation. My only problem with series like Cirque de Freak and Clique are when a high school freshmen or sophomore still resists trying a book outside their comfort zone. Otherwise, I know their importance. For me it was The Babysitter's Club, closely followed by all of Judy Blume. Another important item in my reading at this important time was Calvin and Hobbes collections. Trelease fully supports comics and comic books, and even explains that their structure and vocabulary can be more complex than other texts. The type of text that Trelease is hard on is the classics. He points out that these books traditionally read in school are not only dated, but often weren't intended for child or teen audiences. He continues on to explain how the cirriculum of only reading the cannon of dead white guys has left generations increasingly more disengaged adult readers. Over the years, I've come to agree with Trelease that the classics aren't the best way to engage all students. But, I have an obligation as an English teacher to expose my students to these texts and teach them how to do my content of literary analysis. My compromise my last year of teaching was to let free choice reading reign most of the year, and then two or three times we read a classic together to practice close reading, thesis writing, and the other English class skills that used to bog down every text.
The information about television in both editions spurred the most conversation between my husband and I. While we both read for recreation, it is not in the same amounts. Recently, I only watch TV if its on for my daughter or if my husband and I are watching a specific show together in the evening; I almost never turn it on for myself anymore. In the past, I used to turn the TV on upon arriving home from school, and I would read and often grade with it on as background noise. My husband is involved in more weekly shows than I, as well as watching the news and sporting events. This means he in general watches more than I do now. But, do either of us feel that Trelease's discussion apply to our home? Are we addicted to television? Are we making a serious mistake by allowing our daughter, who is still under two, to watch about between 2 to 4 hours of TV a day?
At present, we don't feel we are the parents that Trelease reprimands. We do set viewing limits for our daughter. With the exception of a few Disney movies and old cartoons like the Smurfs, Natalie watches only shows directed at preschoolers, all of which have some educational value, even though we know that television only offers passive learning. (I did find the direct quotation implying TV addiction from the president of Nickelodeon shocking, no matter how much I love their subsequently created commercial-free, preschooler channel). Not only are shows monitored, but the times she can watched are set by us, and generally are an hour or so in the the morning and no more than three hours in the evening. However, we wouldn't feel comfortable with these time limits if our daughter just sat and stared the TV the whole time. She stares some, but usually only 10 or 15 minutes at a time before she interacts with us or starts playing with a toy. Additionally, she is still home all day. Even with four hours of a day devoted to TV, she has all the rest of her awake hours to play, socialize, and learn. I'd feel differently is she were away from us at day care for eight hours, or when she starts school. However, I don't claim to be an expert on children and television. The controls we have set in our family have thus far worked. Could she spend more time running and climbing? Yes, but at the time of writing this, we were exiting the winter with me half way through a pregnancy. We all do what we can. And what we've done thus far has given us a well rounded toddler who loves singing, letters, colors, and animals as well as splashing water, climbing stairs, running down ramps and is everywhere commented on about her outgoing personality and verbal abilities. At this point in time, I'm not going to let Trelease's experts scare me into changing our way of life. But ... Trelease expects this reaction from parents; he doesn't believe most parents would attempt or succeed in a TV turn-off project. So, he totes that setting limits, on content and quantity, and teaching critical viewing skills in school is very important, both points I agree with fully.
However, I find myself more educated than the average parent, especially in terms of reading. Some of that comes from teaching high school English for five years and having a Master's degree in Literacy Education, but, surprisingly, my undergrad degree contained absolutely no information on how children learn to read and my master's program, which certifies me K-12, only required one course. Even that one reading development course spent almost no time on babies. So, where did I gain my knowledge of how to develop my daughter's literacy? Two places: 1) my own childhood experiences and 2) doing my own research. Because of these factors, I didn't need Trelease telling me to read aloud to my child from birth or to not let her watch adult television for hours on end. I was excited to read to her the moment she was born and brought her to story time for the first time at 3 weeks old. But, this is not the case for every parent. And after reading this text, I'd say its not even the case for the average parent.
One of my most common wonders while reading this book was are parents uninformed, or do they just not care? More than once Trelease mentions that parents say there isn't time for reading aloud. He sites a study that shows stay-at-home mothers only spend a minute more on one-on-one conversation and educational interactions that working moms. This clearly shows that it isn't a matter of time. Later, Trelease asks parents to think about the amount of time they spend letting their child watch TV or running errands at the mall? The time is there, parents just seem to not know any better. Trelease addresses that a lot of it boils down to how we tend to parent the way we were parented. In my home, reading, books, and education as a whole were highly regarded; father read aloud to us frequently until I was an early teen, all kinds of reading materials were everywhere, and library trips were frequent. Thus, it was natural for my home and my parenting to reflect these values. But, this is not the experience of every child and family, especially those with roots in poverty. The differences in family attitudes on education and reading was the biggest culture shock for me when I began teaching. Thus, this book strives to be a force to educate parents, as well as teachers, librarians, and anyone else who works with parents and children, about the extreme benefits and low time and monetary costs.
Other than TV, father's reading is one of Trelease's big causes. I'm very glad that over the ten years we've been together, Mike has started to read for recreation. (I give Harry Potter full credit; more on the boy wizard below). When Natalie was a newborn, he didn't read to her much. But, within a few months we got into a bed routine that had him as the primary reader. As she got older and grew a strong bond with her Daddy, she now asks him to read to her as often as she asks me. Knowing we have a son on the way, I'm very glad for this positive male role model. Of course, there are many ways for a father to be a strong male influence, but Trelease's book outlines how rarely reading is within the father's arena. So many males aren't recreational readers (because their father's weren't and so on?), so they feel that either the mother's influence is enough, or that it is fine for their sons to not love reading either. The line of thinking "If it was good enough for me, then its good enough for my child," is often valid, but what if you could make things better for your child, and all it took was a library card and 15 minutes of your attention a day? If for so little time and no money you could: improve attention span, enrich language, build world knowledge, share values and morals, teach cultural background, and set the paving stones for independent reading, which is the most important school skill all the way through the grades, why wouldn't you? Again, it leads me to wonder if parents, both fathers and mothers, are ignorant or stubborn.
One of my favorite subjects that came up over and over in this book was Trelease's comments on how literature and reading are about more than the building blocks of academic education. Frequently in his discussions, he comment about how literature helps build our soul as well. For example, he discusses how fairy tales prepare children for the harsh realities of the world. Other times, he mentions how reading teaches us about our culture, both modern and ancient, and is a strong way to teach morality and humanity. Trelease explains how a Havard Business professor teaching ethics had a syllabus full of nothing but literature. Many a time I found myself commenting that these were the real reasons we read. These are the reasons one decides to teach high school English, not to improve test scores or prefect the nation's grammar.
What about all the other teachers? Trelease makes a very strong agreement for why ALL teachers, even the secondary math and science and art teachers, should read aloud in their classrooms. A love for reading affects a child's view of the whole curriculum, and all subject teachers should seize the opportunity to spread that enthusiasm by sharing good titles about their content. Reading aloud to the students gets them interested, and then they strive to read more to learn more, which then improves their vocabulary, spelling, and writing skills. (Yes, its true, reading is the best way to improve spelling and vocabulary, NOT looking words up in the dictionary!). Furthermore, people tend to love fiction; teaching content through story is a great way to hook students.
Differences between 3rd and 6th Editions:
First, I want to note that I read the bulk of the text out of the 3rd edition because it my library had this edition. But, after reading the chapter on television, I searched for a newer edition and got it through inter-library loan. There were big differences between the two editions, but the general message was still the same. The 6th edition had been completely reformatted. Not only was a new font employed and some photographs added to spice it up, but the headings were all turned into questions. I didn't like the heading change, or maybe it was that it seemed the text was generally parred back (about 60 pages shorter despite the room new photos and charts take up in the newer edition). I believe these changes were made to make the text more parent friendly, but as a teacher as well as a parent, I didn't need those changes. Having question headings like a What to Expect parenting book wasn't a plus for me. A change that I did enjoy was to the treasury of read aloud texts at the end. The slight formatting changes made it much easier to read the titles and ages at a glance.
As far as content changes, there were a few fields: technology, titles, and studies. Since I did not reread all of the 6th edition, I didn't see many of the newer references to studies, but I specifically sought out the new titles and technology info. The third edition was published in 1995, and the 6th in 2006. This is a huge difference in terms of new children's titles and technology changes. The treasury of read aloud texts was completely revamped to include many titles from the 10 years between the editions. But, the technology section's revisions were the most needed. In the 3rd edition, there is no mention of the internet and video games are only mentioned in passing. The technology chapter is about television almost exclusively, which makes sense for 1995. But, in 2011, television is not the lone detractor for reading time. Now, the games, social sites, and streaming video the internet offers pose a stronger threat, in my mind, than television alone. If Trelease is ever to publish a 7th edition, he needs to spend even more time on this topic. But, as it is now, the 6th edition does a much better job addressing the technology that interferes with reading. The 6th edition brings many new statistics about television viewing to the plate. (However, I'm not sure that I believe that there is a connection between young TV viewing and ADHD without some rational). Trelease also offers ideas on controlling TV that are more modern, but nothing as modern as the parental controls built into digital TV boxes.
The sixth edition had a chapter dedicated to three new phenomenon: Oprah's book club, Harry Potter, and the internet. I found the ideas about Oprah and Harry most interesting. He looked at both of these cultural reading rockets and explained why they were so successful, versus the interventions that are often forced in the classroom. The four lessons we've learned from Oprah's book club are:
- To instill the love of reading, you must be an avid reader yourself. However, most teachers don't read any more than the rest of the population.
- The idea of a book club works better than a class.
- There should be more discussion of books, and less writing about them. Talks about books should be open (again, more like a club than a class).
- Put these all together and you get the final lesson: A love of reading is more caught from others, than taught.
- Not all series are created equal. Harry had children highly motivated to read books nine times as long as lite youth series like Goosebumps.
- "Children want page turners, just like grown-ups do."
- When meeting censorship in the name of religion, remember "Christ came to take away our sings, not our minds."
- There is no reason to fear series books as trash. Even the ones with less quality than Harry Potter have their place.
- Much research has shown that successful and avid readers enjoyed series books as children, too.
- Use movies to promote sequels or other books by the same author. (It was the marketing for the first Harry Potter movie that got both my husband and I to start the series. After getting the last three books on publication day and reading most of the series aloud to our infant daughter, we are currently planning on celebrating our fifth wedding anniversary by seeing the last movie installment).
- Giving someone a computer doesn't make them more responsible. Kids will instant message in class and go to all manner of inappropriate cites. Who are we kidding? Adults do to on their jobs! I know for a fact that many of the teachers, myself included, I know would use their computers for non-work related purposes during meetings and master's courses. A computer doesn't make someone instantly engaged in the subject and thus immune to the fun allure of the internet.
- The internet and a good library should work together. When you need an in-depth, reliable answer, you need more than Wikipedia.
- Reading from a computer screen (at least in 2006) was slower than paper due to the quality of the image. Also, the embellishments possible on a computer can hide lack of content or creditability.
- Email does not help writing skills.
- Time on the computer isn't any better than time in front of the TV when that time is detracting from reading, socializing, or exercising.
