Saturday, February 16, 2008

A Review of Readers


Why use readers at all?

They are rather old-fashioned, but they're immensely well suited to laying the foundation to a classical education. In fact, they were designed to do so.

They are practical: passages increase in complexity from book to book as a child's reading improves. They're wonderful for copywork as paragraphs are usually numbered and the passages are short, making them excellent for children to read aloud and practice their elocution. But other than their usefulness, what makes them valuable?

There is a wonderful brief history of the success of the McGuffey Readers by Henry H. Vail over at Project Gutenberg. In his first paragraph, Vail, who held the copyright to the Readers in 1920, extols its virtues and goals:

the reader should cover the whole field of morals and manners and in language that will impress their teaching indelibly upon the mind of every pupil. While the chief aim of the school readers must be to teach the child to apprehend thought from the printed page and convey this thought to the attentive listener with precision, these efforts should be exerted upon thoughts that have permanent value. No other texts used in the school room bear directly and positively upon the formation of character in the pupils. The school readers are the proper and indispensable texts for teaching true patriotism, integrity, honesty, industry, temperance, courage, politeness, and all other moral and intellectual virtues. In these books every lesson should have a distinct purpose in view, and the final aim should be to establish in the pupils high moral principles which are at the foundation of character.
In 1900, a thoughtful woman decried the Readers then in publication in a letter to the New York Times. She wrote that the "new" readers were failing to provide moral instruction. The Pacific Coast Series created a furor when they removed the moralistic tone and introduced Pacific Coast writers. But modern educators persisted in modernizing the Readers, culminating in the publication of the Elson-Grey Readers in 1930. Now, these old readers are not used as Readers per se, but are analysed in higher level Univeristy classes for their "stereotypical descriptions" and analysis and exegesis of the time-bound values they illustrate and exhort as this brief example shows.

But, there was another objection to the Readers of the time voiced by Charles Eliot, then President of Harvard. They are not, as it were, actual literature, he pointed out. "They are but scraps of literature."

This criticsm influenced the content of the Readers, for the better. One of the best, the Heart of Oak series, developed by another president of Harvard University, Charles E. Norton, was expressly designed to include not only literature, but the best of Nursery Rhymes, fables and folk tales. Look at Book 2, for example.

It's not difficult to see why, in an essay for the New York Times on the gradual degradation of the selections in Readers, Ravitch mentions them in glowing terms. You can see the Heart of Oak Series on-line here. It's hard to believe they were in publication for only five years.

But the shift from phonetic readers with moral tales to "look-say" readers with even scrappier bits of tales about children in their everyday lives, seems in retrospect, inevitable. There were many things afoot, not the least of which was the idea that not all children would grow up to be managers and the like--and neither should they be educated to be. William Elson, the author of The Elson Readers was one of the early proponents of this view.

Elson believed in providing a "general" education to all children until about grade four and then separating them into two tracks: one to prepare for high school, the other for work. He strongly believed that 95% of all children were destined to be "industrial and commercial" workers and should be educated accordingly. (Ravitch, Left Back, p. 91)

And so, most of us never learned

"Who has seen the wind?
Neither I, nor you:
But when the leaves hang trembling,
The leaves are passing thro'

Who has seen the wind?
Neither you nor I:
But when the trees bow down their heads
The wind is passing by." *

No, the pundits that be declared we'd be better served by reading,

"Look, Spot, Look."

************************
More reading on readers:

An interesting article which places Readers in the context of the history of spelling--and the story of Ayres and his list.

From spellers to readers. An interesting ovrview of various readershere.

An interesting site on all things McGuffey including an article on the differences between the editions and contains interesting history on Mr. McGuffey, himself.

On The Dick and Jane Readers: here.

*Who Has Seen the Wind, by Christina G. Rosetti, a common selection in the Readers.

2 comments:

scb said...

Although I started with Dick and Jane and the rest of their cronies (Shouldn't the Look-say method be called the Look Look Look Say Say Say method?) my mother ensured that I was exposed early and often to poetry. She used to recite poetry to me a lot. So I heard "Who has seen the wind? Neither you nor I" long before I could read it.

We started using readers that were anthologies in Grade Three, and I remember them with fondness. I don't know who compiled them -- they had titles such as "All Sails Set", "Wide Open Windows" (I think that second one is correct).

scb said...

That approach Elson talks about, of separating the two streams of learning (the vocational and the academic) is something I didn't have to deal with. In SmallTown (near the farm where I grew up before moving to SmallCity) there was only one school, so everyone learned the same things - or at least, was exposed to the same things - and fortunately, that included a wide range of poetry and stories, from our readers.