Reading is Believing (And That’s a Problem)

by Robert Pondiscio
August 30th, 2012

When planning class read-alouds as a teacher, I was an unabashed fan of historical fiction.  Christopher Paul Curtis’ Depression-era novel, Bud, Not Buddy; Lois Lowry’s Number the Stars, set in Nazi-occupied Denmark; and the 19th century frontier novel Sarah, Plain and Tall were among the books that allowed me to weave history and geography—sorely needed by my inner city 5th graders– into the literacy block.

With Common Core State Standards calling for more non-fiction in literacy instruction, mixing more academic content into ELA instruction is becoming standard practice.  But not everyone is eager to see fiction and literature loosen its grip on language arts.  Dan Willingham’s science and education blog asks, can’t kids learn about the world through fiction?

They can and do.

“The advantage of fiction is that the narrative can engage students, transport them into the story. The fear is that readers will assume that information in fiction is true, whereas fiction may well contain inaccuracies. We don’t expect fiction to be vetted for accuracy the way a non-fiction source would be. (Certainly Hollywood movies are notorious for playing fast-and-loose with the truth.)”

Research shows inaccuracies in fiction can indeed later be remembered by students as true.  Willingham describes an experiment designed to test whether exposure to accurate or inaccurate information in a fictional story influenced how students responded to a later test about that information.  Exposure to correct information “makes it more likely you’ll get the answer correct on the test,” Willingham writes. “Reading the misleading information makes it less likely you’ll get it correct and more likely you’ll get it wrong.”

Sounds obvious, but there’s more.  “Prior knowledge is not protective. In other words, the misleading information has an impact even for stuff that most of the students knew before the experiment started,” (emphasis added) Willingham observes.   Encountering inaccuracies in fiction, in other words, can override what students knew before they read it.  But all is not lost: alerting students to the specific inaccuracies or misinformation in a story, Dan notes, “is very effective in preventing subjects from absorbing the inaccuracy.”

The takeaway for teachers?  Use fiction to engage and bring history, science and other subjects to life.  But you’ve got know your stuff so you can flag instances of literary license to your kids.

The Daily Beast on Kids and Reading

by Robert Pondiscio
March 29th, 2010

It might be familiar stuff to the readers of this blog, but it’s nice to see The Daily Beast weigh in with a smart Dana Goldstein piece on the need for children to read nonfiction.  “This is especially important for poor children, who may not be exposed to as much ‘background’ information at home,” writes Goldstein.  She quotes Dan Willingham who points out once more how people misunderstand the nature of reading.

“They feel that reading is a skill, that it’s transferable, so once you’re a good reader, you can read anything that’s put in front of you. But that’s only true for decoding—what you learn until grade three or four. After that, when you see good readers versus poor readers, what you’re looking at is mostly differences in the knowledge that kids bring to the reading. It’s easy to read something when you already know something about the topic. And if you don’t know about the topic, it’s utterly opaque to you.”

E.D. Hirsch is also quoted in the piece:  ”One of my big gripes is the imperialism of literature, of trivial fictions and poetry,” he says. “Fiction doesn’t have a monopoly on narrative…Take, for example, biographies. They have the form of fiction. It isn’t whether kids can read it or not, it’s whether it is taught or not.”