I like the library!

This chapter was particularly interesting to me because I could really relate to a lot of the information. I have a three and half year old daughter and a two year old son. There were so many moments in the beginning of the reading that I recognized as accurate depictions of my daughter’s behaviors. From the scribbles to the irregular verbs, it was as if Williams was describing Bella exclusively.

I guess the big debate that Williams wants to bring to the forefront is phonics vs. whole language. Personally, I was taught the phonics approach and it worked. I liked being able to “sound out” words. It was an effective tool for me. I am not one to say that previous theories cannot be improved upon. With teaching, I think improvements can always be made. Williams brought out a lot of valid pros and cons of both. I wasn’t really familiar with the whole language approach before reading the text and found it rather interesting. I do believe that Williams says it best when he states, “most children need multiple tools to become proficient readers” (165).

Another area that I thought was really fascinating was the link between reading well and writing well. I guess I always assumed that these two areas went hand in hand. Williams points out that this is not the case. Just because a person is well-read does not make that same person is a great writer and vice-versa. This is kind of a generalization because I know it isn’t the same for everyone, but I think that most people who like to read also enjoy writing. Avid readers may have more motivation to write because they enjoy reading other people’s writings. Also, exposure to different types of writing may open writers up to more techniques and styles of writing that otherwise may have been unfamiliar to them. I guess this kind of brings us back to the point that reading literature and writing papers on it isn’t necessarily going to make student writers better writers.

On page 169 Williams talks about writing with computers. He states that many teachers make students hand in papers in cursive. When I read this, I actually looked to see when the book was published because I really couldn’t believe it. I know that students are still supposed to learn cursive but I never heard of handing in papers that weren’t typed. I really thought that in our age of technology, most teachers (even at a very low grade level) would require or at least allow papers to be typed. I am kind of skeptical of this example and am very curious to get input from the rest of the class. If this is true, I absolutely agree with Williams. We live in a world where the majority of people have access to word processors and email. Why would teachers not allow students to use the technology if that is the student’s preference?

On the other end of the coin, Williams finished out that section with some words about the library. He points out that with the internet and online databases, libraries may become unnecessary. I guess I can see how this is true, but it still really bothers me. I am one of the few students left that prefers to use the library when doing a lot of research. He says that recognizing credible information on the internet is no different than recognizing credible information at the library. I have to disagree. Web pages can be posted by absolutely anyone. Look at the number of students that rely on Wikipedia for papers without knowing that this is not reliable information. I guess in this respect I am still kind of old fashioned.