The overarching mistake that adults make is assuming that social media has made teens’ lives dramatically different than in previous generations. The specific anxieties or concerns ebb and flow, twist and turn. For a while, concerns about sexual predators were front and center. Then addiction, bullying, sexting, privacy. Right now, for better or worse, the media-driven anxiety is as fragmented across topics, and teens’ engagement is fragmented across services and apps.
The situation could get more complicated, though, if a district mandated its teachers to read my book and adopt the approach I share. I’d be happy about this on the one hand, but cautiously so, because I’d wonder this: would it be clear to teachers that they should feel free to pick and choose what they want to implement and to make adaptations to suit their students’ needs and their own teaching styles? I know I make that point generally throughout the book, but can I be sure that it would come through if the book were forced on people? In other words, is my book “big brother-proof”?
The typical American read five books in 2013, according to the Pew Research Center’s new report on reading and e-readers. That’s the median, rather than the average, meaning half of Americans read more than five books and half read fewer; if you look just at people who read at least one book last year, the figure rises to seven.
“Reading” encompassed printed books and e-books as well as audiobooks. Overall, print remains the dominant way Americans read books: More than two-thirds (69%) of people said they had read at least one printed book in the past year, versus 28% who said they’d read an e-book and 14% who said they had listened to an audiobook. 87% of e-book readers and 84% of audiobook listeners also read a print book in the past 12 months.
In her new book Teaching in High Gear: My Shift Toward a Student-Driven, Inquiry-Based Science Classroom, Marsha Ratzel recounts a transformational journey marked by a gradual shift from teacher-centered to student-driven education and bolstered by a powerful virtual network of colleagues from around the world. Here’s an excerpt!
Yes, I’m a junkie for PBS News Hour, watch this video and you’ll understand why! Last night they talked about Sheryl Sandberg's (COO of Facebook) new book Lean In on female leadership. I found their panel’s insights into the book enlightening, so I’ve copied a bit of the video transcript down here.
The main responsibility for changing this situation cannot rest on individual women. There are plenty of women who have leaned in very hard and are just invisible to people who do not want to employ women. They may think they do, but each individual woman, somehow, she’s not the right woman.
That’s why I would place much more emphasis than Sheryl Sandberg does on things like affirmative action, anti-discrimination suits, quotas. Do you know that the only countries where women are gaining in representation in legislatures are countries that have quotas of how many women should be there and parties that have quotas of how many women candidates they put up?
The problem is she wrote a book that was for all women, as opposed to narrowing the focus there. And so I feel like that’s where a lot of this criticism and confusion is coming from, because a lot of things she says make sense if she is talking about her own peers. It doesn’t necessarily make sense if she’s talking about all women in general, because the plight of working-class, poor and middle-class women is demonstrably different.
It really boils down to family leave. I mean, women are trying to create this work-life balance. And until business accommodates that, it is always going to be an issue.
I think if we listen to her, however, we will not solve the problem that she herself so eloquently states, which is how do we get to a world where half of our leaders are women? And I believe if that’s our goal, which I think it should be, the problem is women aren’t leaning in not because they don’t know how to, but because they don’t like the wold they’re being asked to lean into.
JUDY WOODRUFF asks: So, you’re saying employers have responsibility here, too?
I think employers and our culture. I think it’s about what kind of leaders we want.
Do we want leaders only who go through this particular path? Or do we want to create other routes to leadership that allow for a diversity of people, broadly speaking, not just women, but men and women, to get to leadership positions with a different set of choices than Sheryl and her peers are making?
The video is definitely worth a watch, and it may even inspire you to pick up a copy of the book.
The team looked at how digital and analog books currently are being read, shared and collected, as well as at trends, business models and consumer behavior within related fields. We identified three distinct opportunities—new narratives, social reading with richer context, and providing tools for critical thinking—and developed a design concept around each one.
I realize that most Social Studies and History Departments have simply given up on having students read a history book, even in those few cases where they may have tried in the past. They are almost universally content, it seems, to leave the assignment of books (and too much of the writing as well) entirely in the hands of their English Department colleagues.
You thought the rising cost of college tuition was bad? Then check out the rising cost of college textbooks. The American Enterprise Institute’s Mark Perry has put together this chart showing the egregious, 812 percent rise in the cost of course materials since 1978, as captured in the Bureau of Labor Statistics’s consumer price index data. The price of all those Intro to Sociology and Calculus books have shot up faster than health-care, home prices, and, of course, inflation.
In what may come as a pleasant surprise to people who fear the Facebook generation has given up on reading — or, at least, reading anything longer than 140 characters — a new report from the Pew Research Center’s Internet and American Life Project reveals the prominent role of books, libraries and technology in the lives of young readers, ages 16 to 29.
“We found that about 8 in 10 Americans under the age of 30 have read a book in the past year. And that’s compared to about 7 in 10 adults in general, American adults.”
“We heard from e-book readers in general [that] they don’t want e-books to replace print books.”
“We found that [younger people are] very interested in the idea of preloaded e-readers — being able to check out an e-reader at a library that already has some popular titles on it.”
The Next Time Someone Says the Internet Killed Reading Books, Show Them This Chart
“Remember the good old days when everyone read really good books, like, maybe in the post-war years when everyone appreciated a good use of the semi-colon? Everyone’s favorite book was by Faulkner or Woolf or Roth. We were a civilized civilization. This was before the Internet and cable television, and so people had these, like, wholly different desires and attention spans. They just craved, craved, craved the erudition and cultivation of our literary kings and queens.
Well, that time never existed. Check out these stats from Gallup surveys. In 1957, not even a quarter of Americans were reading a book or novel. By 2005, that number had shot up to 47 percent. I couldn’t find a more recent number, but I think it’s fair to say that reading probably hasn’t declined to the horrific levels of the 1950s.”
One of the things I found most interesting and surprising about the movie The Hunger Games (HG) is how mathematical it is. Let’s focus on two mathematical aspects of the movie: the lottery probabilities, and the game theory of sleeping.