During the first week of school I sat down with Libby to check her letter identification. "Are you going to time me?" she asked. I love that Libby has a gift for saying what's on her mind. I wanted to say, "Seriously? You're only 6. What message have we taught you in your very short educational career? There are no stopwatches in the vicinity." No I didn't say any of that, but it was tempting.
I was reminded of this little moment with Libby when I recently read an issue from The Big Fresh Newsletter from Choice Literacy by Brenda Power. (Click the highlighted words to read the newsletter and possibly subscribe. It's a treat to read every week.) In the newsletter she included this quote:
"We need to put away the stopwatches and say in every way possible -- 'This is not a race. Take your time. Pay attention. Touch the words and tell me how they touch you.'"
Thomas Newkirk, in The Art of Slow Reading
Thomas Newkirk, in The Art of Slow Reading
In the name of fluency, thanks to high-stakes testing, have schools done a disservice to young readers? Fluency is not evil, but without balance, what message does it and its ever present stopwatch send? How about, "I don't see a stopwatch in your hand. Is this really important?"
Libby's not going to see a stopwatch in my hand while I listen to her read. (There are a few times throughout the year when I'll use one, but I'll keep it hidden as best I can.) Regardless, how can I do a better job of teaching the art of slow reading?
Regie Routman says, "We need to be the gatekeepers for sane and sensible practices."
She also challenges me with this statement. "Is this a practice that occurs in the real world? If it's just a school thing, we need to question the practice."
Libby's not going to see a stopwatch in my hand while I listen to her read. (There are a few times throughout the year when I'll use one, but I'll keep it hidden as best I can.) Regardless, how can I do a better job of teaching the art of slow reading?