Google Lit Trips: Reading About Reading
45.7K views | +3 today
Follow
Google Lit Trips: Reading About Reading
An Educator's Reading List of Contemporary Literature, Literacy, and Reading Issues. Visit us at https://www.GoogleLitTrips.org
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Scooped by GoogleLitTrips Reading List
Scoop.it!

Portraits Of Librarians Celebrate America's Bookish Unsung Heroes

Portraits Of Librarians Celebrate America's Bookish Unsung Heroes | Google Lit Trips: Reading About Reading | Scoop.it
“Libraries are more important to our world than people realize."
GoogleLitTrips Reading List's insight:
25 May 2017

"“Librarians are warrior princes and princesses wielding book love like words! We are ever vigilant, curious, intelligent, and kind. Libraries are the banners that we carry proudly into the fray! Forward, ever Forward!”
~ Susan K .McClelland, Adult and Teen Services Librarian at Oak Park Public Library

Hoping this book becomes a best seller!

brought to you by GLT Global ED | Google Lit Trips an educational nonprofit
more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by GoogleLitTrips Reading List
Scoop.it!

Awful Titles Famous Authors Almost Gave Their Novels

Awful Titles Famous Authors Almost Gave Their Novels | Google Lit Trips: Reading About Reading | Scoop.it
Even the greatest writers fall prey to "I don't know what to call this" syndrome.
GoogleLitTrips Reading List's insight:
27 October 2016

Just a quick scoop of an interesting look at author's early thoughts about titles for books eventually were published under different names.

Might be of interest when discussing titles for essays or the power of rough drafts in general.

brought to you by GLT Global ED | Google Lit Trips, an educational nonprofit
more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by GoogleLitTrips Reading List
Scoop.it!

Historical Fiction Gets No Respect -- Here's Why It Should

Historical Fiction Gets No Respect -- Here's Why It Should | Google Lit Trips: Reading About Reading | Scoop.it
Katy Simpson Smith, author of the new novel 'Free Men,' on the joys and frustrations of exploring the past.
GoogleLitTrips Reading List's insight:
1 April 2016

Yesterday I scooped an article entitled "Fiction v nonfiction – English literature's made-up divide." In my comments, while recognizing some of the benefits, I expressed concerns about the downside of genre classifications in the classroom.

When I came across this article, it seemed perfect follow-up evidence that genre classifications can have deleterious  impact upon readers by passing on the de facto bias of literary scholarship to students who may not be on track to become Literature majors. 

A question arose in my mind...
If we who teach literature teachers were evaluated upon the following two criteria, would we consider our efforts successful?
1. What percentage of our students grow up to be Literature teachers, scholars, or some kind of literati-type?
2. What percentage of our students become completely turned off as life-long readers specifically because of the esoteric nature of our efforts to have them read literature like scholars do?

Of, course the fallacy of my reducing the assessment of our efforts to these two categories, overlooks what we hope is still a significantly large portion of our students; that group that does not grow up to be literature scholars, but does gain a depth of appreciation for what they do read that does motivate them to become lifelong readers. 

That concession being made, ironically, I am reminded of Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States, a powerful attack on established tendency of curricula in universities that tends to pass on the biases of historical events taught in schools, from generation to generation, rather than to encourage a reconsideration of those often un-reconsidered biases to see if perhaps Custer was not so much of a hero as we had previously taught our students that he had been.

Transitioning the thought to the literary arts, we have made progress in reconsidering the long held biases that previously held reign in literary curricula. Consider the reduction in assumption that the "Dead White Poets" were worth more than women writers, writers of color, and cross-cultural global writers. 

But, to see educators still passing on biases implying or outright accusing genres such as science fiction, historical fiction, YA lit, as being "entirely" second rate at best by some sort of "default fault" is doing not only harm to our students who we hope to become life-long readers regardless of their eventual career decisions, but ironically even to those we hope will choose to become bearers of the literary torch who I personally, would hope would not enter future classroom, noses aloft, telling students that what they like to read is essentially trash or unworthy just because "those types" of books have always been under appreciated by too many university curricula planners.

Let us not throw a "one-size-fits-all" blanket of condemnation over historical fiction, science, fiction, YA and any other "genres" who have been so condemned. 

brought to you by GLT Global ED dba Google Lit Trips an educational nonprofit. 


more...
Flurries Unlimited's curator insight, April 1, 2016 4:37 PM
1 April 2016

Yesterday I scooped an article entitled "Fiction v nonfiction – English literature's made-up divide." In my comments, while recognizing some of the benefits, I expressed concerns about the downside of genre classifications in the classroom.

When I came across this article, it seemed perfect follow-up evidence that genre classifications can have deleterious  impact upon readers by passing on the de facto bias of literary scholarship to students who may not be on track to become Literature majors. 
 
A question arose in my mind...
If we who teach literature teachers were evaluated upon the following two criteria, would we consider our efforts successful?
1. What percentage of our students grow up to be Literature teachers, scholars, or some kind of literati-type?
2. What percentage of our students become completely turned off as life-long readers specifically because of the esoteric nature of our efforts to have them read literature like scholars do?
 
Of, course the fallacy of my reducing the assessment of our efforts to these two categories, overlooks what we hope is still a significantly large portion of our students; that group that does not grow up to be literature scholars, but does gain a depth of appreciation for what they do read that does motivate them to become lifelong readers. 
 
That concession being made, ironically, I am reminded of Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States, a powerful attack on established tendency of curricula in universities that tends to pass on the biases of historical events taught in schools, from generation to generation, rather than to encourage a reconsideration of those often un-reconsidered biases to see if perhaps Custer was not so much of a hero as we had previously taught our students that he had been.
 
Transitioning the thought to the literary arts, we have made progress in reconsidering the long held biases that previously held reign in literary curricula. Consider the reduction in assumption that the "Dead White Poets" were worth more than women writers, writers of color, and cross-cultural global writers. 
 
But, to see educators still passing on biases implying or outright accusing genres such as science fiction, historical fiction, YA lit, as being "entirely" second rate at best by some sort of "default fault" is doing not only harm to our students who we hope to become life-long readers regardless of their eventual career decisions, but ironically even to those we hope will choose to become bearers of the literary torch who I personally, would hope would not enter future classroom, noses aloft, telling students that what they like to read is essentially trash or unworthy just because "those types" of books have always been under appreciated by too many university curricula planners.
 
Let us not throw a "one-size-fits-all" blanket of condemnation over historical fiction, science, fiction, YA and any other "genres" who have been so condemned. 
 
brought to you by GLT Global ED dba Google Lit Trips an educational nonprofit. 
 
 
Lynnette Van Dyke's curator insight, April 1, 2016 8:32 PM
1 April 2016

Yesterday I scooped an article entitled "Fiction v nonfiction – English literature's made-up divide." In my comments, while recognizing some of the benefits, I expressed concerns about the downside of genre classifications in the classroom.

When I came across this article, it seemed perfect follow-up evidence that genre classifications can have deleterious  impact upon readers by passing on the de facto bias of literary scholarship to students who may not be on track to become Literature majors. 

A question arose in my mind...
If we who teach literature teachers were evaluated upon the following two criteria, would we consider our efforts successful?
1. What percentage of our students grow up to be Literature teachers, scholars, or some kind of literati-type?
2. What percentage of our students become completely turned off as life-long readers specifically because of the esoteric nature of our efforts to have them read literature like scholars do?

Of, course the fallacy of my reducing the assessment of our efforts to these two categories, overlooks what we hope is still a significantly large portion of our students; that group that does not grow up to be literature scholars, but does gain a depth of appreciation for what they do read that does motivate them to become lifelong readers. 

That concession being made, ironically, I am reminded of Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States, a powerful attack on established tendency of curricula in universities that tends to pass on the biases of historical events taught in schools, from generation to generation, rather than to encourage a reconsideration of those often un-reconsidered biases to see if perhaps Custer was not so much of a hero as we had previously taught our students that he had been.

Transitioning the thought to the literary arts, we have made progress in reconsidering the long held biases that previously held reign in literary curricula. Consider the reduction in assumption that the "Dead White Poets" were worth more than women writers, writers of color, and cross-cultural global writers. 

But, to see educators still passing on biases implying or outright accusing genres such as science fiction, historical fiction, YA lit, as being "entirely" second rate at best by some sort of "default fault" is doing not only harm to our students who we hope to become life-long readers regardless of their eventual career decisions, but ironically even to those we hope will choose to become bearers of the literary torch who I personally, would hope would not enter future classroom, noses aloft, telling students that what they like to read is essentially trash or unworthy just because "those types" of books have always been under appreciated by too many university curricula planners.

Let us not throw a "one-size-fits-all" blanket of condemnation over historical fiction, science, fiction, YA and any other "genres" who have been so condemned. 

brought to you by GLT Global ED dba Google Lit Trips an educational nonprofit. 


Luke Padilla's curator insight, April 4, 2016 1:38 PM
1 April 2016

Yesterday I scooped an article entitled "Fiction v nonfiction – English literature's made-up divide." In my comments, while recognizing some of the benefits, I expressed concerns about the downside of genre classifications in the classroom.

When I came across this article, it seemed perfect follow-up evidence that genre classifications can have deleterious  impact upon readers by passing on the de facto bias of literary scholarship to students who may not be on track to become Literature majors. 

A question arose in my mind...
If we who teach literature teachers were evaluated upon the following two criteria, would we consider our efforts successful?
1. What percentage of our students grow up to be Literature teachers, scholars, or some kind of literati-type?
2. What percentage of our students become completely turned off as life-long readers specifically because of the esoteric nature of our efforts to have them read literature like scholars do?

Of, course the fallacy of my reducing the assessment of our efforts to these two categories, overlooks what we hope is still a significantly large portion of our students; that group that does not grow up to be literature scholars, but does gain a depth of appreciation for what they do read that does motivate them to become lifelong readers. 

That concession being made, ironically, I am reminded of Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States, a powerful attack on established tendency of curricula in universities that tends to pass on the biases of historical events taught in schools, from generation to generation, rather than to encourage a reconsideration of those often un-reconsidered biases to see if perhaps Custer was not so much of a hero as we had previously taught our students that he had been.

Transitioning the thought to the literary arts, we have made progress in reconsidering the long held biases that previously held reign in literary curricula. Consider the reduction in assumption that the "Dead White Poets" were worth more than women writers, writers of color, and cross-cultural global writers. 

But, to see educators still passing on biases implying or outright accusing genres such as science fiction, historical fiction, YA lit, as being "entirely" second rate at best by some sort of "default fault" is doing not only harm to our students who we hope to become life-long readers regardless of their eventual career decisions, but ironically even to those we hope will choose to become bearers of the literary torch who I personally, would hope would not enter future classroom, noses aloft, telling students that what they like to read is essentially trash or unworthy just because "those types" of books have always been under appreciated by too many university curricula planners.

Let us not throw a "one-size-fits-all" blanket of condemnation over historical fiction, science, fiction, YA and any other "genres" who have been so condemned. 

brought to you by GLT Global ED dba Google Lit Trips an educational nonprofit. 


Scooped by GoogleLitTrips Reading List
Scoop.it!

Nonfiction Book App To Eliminate Books, Reading From Reading Experience

Nonfiction Book App To Eliminate Books, Reading From Reading Experience | Google Lit Trips: Reading About Reading | Scoop.it

"What’s the worst part of reading nonfiction? Is it having to sit through an entire, exhausting book? Is it having to look at words with your eyes? Maybe both of those obstacles leave you daunted. Blinkist is here to help."

GoogleLitTrips Reading List's insight:

13 December 2014

_____

Please consider favoriting our efforts at:http://ebay.to/11vhysK

And, if so motivated, while you're at it, you are also quite welcome to support our efforts with a tax-deductible donation of as little as $5.00.

_____

 

Had to scoop this one. No long commentary, just  two questions that popped into my mind. Maybe you can help me decide...

 

Does this technology enable us to take in more informational reading more efficiently?

OR

Does this technology enable us in ways similar to enabling an alcoholic?

 

I suppose it depends upon the way the user perceives its value.

 

But, I tend to want to not blame technology as much for how it is used as I blame the intentions of the user of the technology.

 

What am I talking about? It's a sort of Alfred Nobel conundrum.

 

 

 ~ www.GoogleLitTrips.org ~

brought to you by GLT Global ED, an educational nonprofit

 

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by GoogleLitTrips Reading List
Scoop.it!

Classic Books Yanked From Virginia County Schools After Parent Complaint

Classic Books Yanked From Virginia County Schools After Parent Complaint | Google Lit Trips: Reading About Reading | Scoop.it
In a divided time, can we afford to read books like "Huck Finn" -- or can we afford not to?
GoogleLitTrips Reading List's insight:
2 December 2018

Yes, Mark Twain's The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn and Harper Lee's To Kill A Mockingbird  are among the most banned books in schools and have been for decades. 

Well, here's an A+ book report any student capable of critical thinking could write about each of these stories.

"BLACK LIVES MATTER TOO!!!"

Both authors bravely confronted and attempted to expose the facts that LIKE IN OUR OWN TIMES, Blacks have suffered too much sh-- , racism, and inequality from too many in the dominant culture. 

Both authors created stories that put the sins of racism front and center and truthfully in our faces. And, each chose children as the witnesses and recorders of those horrific sins. 

Some somehow believe that our children should hate the book when the point of each story is to expose hatred.

Both Huck Finn and Scout Finch and all of our children must sooner, rather than later, come to understand the harsh realities of racism's indefensible victimization of innocents. 

Both books are generally taught in high school. By that age, aren't students old enough to begin learning such lessons? If not, when will they be?

If we believe that high school students are not old enough to begin facing the harsh reality of life and believe banning these books somehow protects them from facing those harsh realities of racism, when will they be ready to accept their adult responsibility of  confronting our unfinished business of pursuing Liberty and Justice FOR ALL?

Each novel has only one primary black character; Jim in The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn and Tom Robinson in To Kill A Mockingbird are victims and powerless to do anything about their victimization because they lived in times when there was still work to be done to ensure that all citizens have the right to expect life, liberty, and JUSTICE FOR ALL.

Final Exam Question:
After reading The Adventures in Huckleberry Finn and To Kill A Mockingbird, explain your level of empathy for Jim, Huck, and how that empathy might be expressed best given today's news.

 ~ www,GoogleLitTrips.org ~
brought to you by GLT Global ED | Google Lit Trips, an educational nonprofit

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by GoogleLitTrips Reading List
Scoop.it!

Here’s How Long It Took To Write Your Favorite Book

Here’s How Long It Took To Write Your Favorite Book | Google Lit Trips: Reading About Reading | Scoop.it
Who's the speediest novelist of them all?
GoogleLitTrips Reading List's insight:
2 October 2016

The title says it all. Interesting graphic. Several titles are popular in classroom curricula. Any surprises?

By the way, titles are listed by not only "time to write" but also number of pages.

Try this, find the book with the longest writing time AND the least number of pages and calculate the time per page rate.

And of course the reverse math with the title with the shortest writing time AND the most number of pages.

brought to you by GLT Global ED | Google Lit Trips an educational nonprofit
more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by GoogleLitTrips Reading List
Scoop.it!

The NRA Finally Makes Fairy Tales Child-Friendly By Adding Guns

The NRA Finally Makes Fairy Tales Child-Friendly By Adding Guns | Google Lit Trips: Reading About Reading | Scoop.it
Valuable life lesson: Guns prevent stranger danger, being eaten by witches, and bloodshed. Er ... what?
GoogleLitTrips Reading List's insight:
1 April 2016

I can only hope this is an April Fools (unfunny) "joke." However, given the current (lack of) "quality" in public discourse regarding gun rights and other controversial topics where difference of opinion are often expressed more in volume than in substance, it is hard to tell whether or not this is actually a joke or not.

Whether or not this is an actual true article, for those fighting the tug of war between the importance of literary reading vs informational reading, remember we need not look far to see that there is much important work to be done in improving our understanding of the value and importance of each.

brought to you by GLT Global ED dba Google Lit Trips an educational nonprofit
more...
Flurries Unlimited's curator insight, April 1, 2016 4:37 PM
1 April 2016
 
I can only hope this is an April Fools (unfunny) "joke." However, given the current (lack of) "quality" in public discourse regarding gun rights and other controversial topics where difference of opinion are often expressed more in volume than in substance, it is hard to tell whether or not this is actually a joke or not.
 
Whether or not this is an actual true article, for those fighting the tug of war between the importance of literary reading vs informational reading, remember we need not look far to see that there is much important work to be done in improving our understanding of the value and importance of each.
 
brought to you by GLT Global ED dba Google Lit Trips an educational nonprofit