True Education Teaches Context

It isn't only reading where the US education system spends too much time on the basics before moving on. Kids are curious creatures. (That last sentence was deliberately ambiguous.) They love learning about stuff. Their reading practice should allow them to learn about stuff. Similarly, their math lessons should teach them something about the world at the same time they are learning mathematics.

I do have a gripe about the way he phrased his main point. For example, his summary was:

1. Once students learn decoding, they can decode anything.

2. But they can't understand anything they read. Comprehension requires prior knowledge.

3. Attempts to boost comprehension through reading strategies alone will fail.

#3 is his main point, and I agree entirely. But, I think that #2 is overstated. If a child learns to read (that is, learns to decode the written language), AND is encouraged to satisfy his or her own curiosity about the world by reading things (I'd have said books, but there are other sources of written information available to kids these days), then he or she will develop an understanding of the world. Perhaps slowly at first, but with ever greater speed as their knowledge of the world becomes less fragmented. My point is that (for example) it doesn't require PRIOR knowledge of cricket to read enough about it to understand the sample paragraph about cricket. Reading the right material is enough. The quotes at the start of the clip ARE true. Reading IS power.

I agree that he didn't mean to say it. I'm quarreling only with the overstatement he made (more than once).

It isn't only reading where the US education system spends too much time on the basics before moving on. Kids are curious creatures. (That last sentence was deliberately ambiguous.) They love learning about stuff. Their reading practice should allow them to learn about stuff. Similarly, their math lessons should teach them something about the world at the same time they are learning mathematics.

I do have a gripe about the way he phrased his main point. For example, his summary was:

1. Once students learn decoding, they can decode anything.

2. But they can't understand anything they read. Comprehension requires prior knowledge.

3. Attempts to boost comprehension through reading strategies alone will fail.

#3 is his main point, and I agree entirely. But, I think that #2 is overstated. If a child learns to read (that is, learns to decode the written language), AND is encouraged to satisfy his or her own curiosity about the world by reading things (I'd have said books, but there are other sources of written information available to kids these days), then he or she will develop an understanding of the world. Perhaps slowly at first, but with ever greater speed as their knowledge of the world becomes less fragmented. My point is that (for example) it doesn't require PRIOR knowledge of cricket to read enough about it to understand the sample paragraph about cricket. Reading the right material is enough. The quotes at the start of the clip ARE true. Reading IS power.

I agree that he didn't mean to say it. I'm quarreling only with the overstatement he made (more than once).