Why do boys hate reading?

[abecedarian]

Well, I do know a handful of teen boys(besides my own) and they are anything but geeks(whatever a geek is anyway). One comes from a cowboy/rancher/wheat farming family(you should see his dad!) and they are among the most literate batch of folks I know. Another comes from a farm family as well, and he picks up books from his dad's stash all the time. Another is a reading jock/actor/all around nice kid who likes to talk to me(!) about whatever we're reading at the time. Oh, and another boy is kinda geeky I guess, but he passes books onto my 14 year old formerly reluctant reader, so I'm not complaining..
My daughters had a close friend they shared books with, but she recently moved. That was the only girl I can think of they knew who was interested in books. So, maybe it's not so much a boy /girl problem as an anti-book society we live in.. Hard to say.

 

[Motokid]

Read this and then post some more....

"Around the globe, boys and books just don’t seem to get along, and Canada is no different. Canadian literacy statistics show boys trailing girls when it comes to reading and writing. In 1998, 13-year-old Canadian girls scored higher than boys on literacy tests conducted by the Canadian Council of Ministers of Education (www.cmec.ca/saip/rw98le/pages/ResultsE.stm).

Girls also outperformed boys on writing tests, but Laura Sokal, an education researcher and professor at the University of Winnipeg, believes these numbers don’t tell the whole story. “Not all boys are failing in reading,” she insists, “but there is a problem.” Sokal and other Canadian education researchers are trying to see beyond the numbers, and, in some cases, into boys’ backpacks, to understand why boys consistently trail girls in reading and writing. These findings show that Canadian boys have a lot to teach us about literacy."

 

[Motokid]

And I went by this:

"Date of Birth:
January 1, 1980

Age:
25

Gender:
Male

Biography:
I'm 25 years old from Glasgow, Scotland.

Location:
Glasgow

Interests:
Reading, football, golf, drinking and socialising

Currently Reading:
Windswept House by Malachi Martin

Reading Next:
Jonathon Stange & Mr Norrell by Susanna Clarke

Top Three Books:
Fiction wise in no particular order
Lord of the Rings Trilogy by JRRT
The Godfather by Mario Puzo
The Vampire Lestat by Anne Rice

Top Three Authors:
Again in no particular order
JRRT
Iain Banks
Charles Dickens"

 

[Motokid]

and read this too

and here too

How many links do you want? There's reason, and room for discussion. It's not a silly thing, and the responses by the members here are not silly either.

 

[RobertFKennedy]

Or alternatively MotoKid, how about answering any of the questions I have asked you?

 

[abecedarian]

I noticed this Australian article gave some advice for overcoming this problem. It is exactly what all those "how to raise a reader" books and articles have been saying for at least the last 22 years I've been in the parenting business. Not one suggestion is anything but good common sense. So why are so few readers being raised?

 

[Motokid]

Or alternatively MotoKid, how about answering any of the questions I have asked you?

Answer your questions? What questions?

I've provided numerous articles from numerous sources that back up everything most people here have been saying. You, on the other hand, come in and say it's all nonsense, but have yet to provide any information to back your side of the debate up other than your limited view of the world.

"Searching for “why”
Why does this disparity exist? Theories abound. According to Michael W. Smith and Jeffrey D. Wilhelm in Reading Don’t Fix No Chevys: Literacy in the Lives of Young Men (Heinemann, 2002), research on gender and literacy provides some interesting insights:

Boys take longer to learn to read than girls do.

Boys read less than girls read.

Girls tend to comprehend narrative texts and most expository texts significantly better than boys do.

Boys value reading as an activity less than girls do.

According to a national survey conducted by the Young Adult Library Services Association in 2001, boys of an average age of 14 listed their top obstacles to reading:


boring/no fun 39.3%

no time/too busy 29.8%

like other activities better 11.1%

can’t get into the stories 7.7%

I’m not good at it 4.3%

Jon Scieszka, author of children’s books such as The Stinky Cheese Man and the Time Warp Trio series, believes that boys are slower to develop than girls biologically and therefore often have early struggles with reading and writing skills. On his website (www.guysread.com), he also says that the male way of learning, which tends to be action oriented and competitive, works against boys in many classrooms."

 

[RobertFKennedy]

Answer your questions? What questions?
[/I][/COLOR]

You can't be serious Motokid. come on. look back and look for the question marks. If you will do me the courtesy of answering these questions I will look at your information.

 

[Motokid]

You can't be serious Motokid. come on. look back and look for the question marks. If you will do me the courtesy of answering these questions I will look at your information.

"According to a national survey conducted by the Young Adult Library Services Association in 2001, boys of an average age of 14 listed their top obstacles to reading:


boring/no fun 39.3%

no time/too busy 29.8%

like other activities better 11.1%

can’t get into the stories 7.7%

I’m not good at it 4.3%"

This says it all, I don't need to answer your questions....you have lost this debate until you can provide some articles or statistics which back up your attempts to paint the members who've posted here as rediculous.

 

[RobertFKennedy]

And I went by this:

Strange. From that you assumed that reading was my number 1 interest. I simply do not believe that the thought that reading might have been at the start because this is a book forum failed to cross your mind. What made you believe that the list was in order of preference or indeed any order?

 

[Motokid]

Strange. From that you assumed that reading was my number 1 interest. I simply do not believe that the thought that reading might have been at the start because this is a book forum failed to cross your mind. What made you believe that the list was in order of preference or indeed any order?

and with that, I'll bow out...you, RFK obviously have nothing but a dying arguement founded in quicksand....just continue to ignore everything I've posted in the last few posts and have a happy day....buried in the sand....

 

[RobertFKennedy]

"According to a national survey conducted by the Young Adult Library Services Association in 2001, boys of an average age of 14 listed their top obstacles to reading:


boring/no fun 39.3%

no time/too busy 29.8%

like other activities better 11.1%

can’t get into the stories 7.7%

I’m not good at it 4.3%"

This says it all, I don't need to answer your questions....you have lost this debate until you can provide some articles or statistics which back up your attempts to paint the members who've posted here as rediculous.

"This says it all, I don't need to answer your questions"
Yes, that does say a lot. A minute ago it was "questions? what questions?"

"you have lost this debate until you can provide some articles or statistics"
In internet messageboard debates it normally reflects badly on people when the claim that they are "winning" or that someone else is "losing."

"your attempts to paint the members who've posted here as rediculous."

There are no such attempts. Did you make this up?

 

[RobertFKennedy]

and with that, I'll bow out...you, RFK obviously have nothing but a dying arguement founded in quicksand....just continue to ignore everything I've posted in the last few posts and have a happy day....buried in the sand....

What a sad way to go about posting. Hit and run with smilies. dear oh dear.

 

[abecedarian]

You misunderstand me SFG75, there is nothing wrong with the topic. Its some of the commentary on this thread which is preposterous.

I did wonder which commentaries you found preposterous.

 

[Kookamoor]

Okay, stop the bickering, both Moto and RFK. RFK - if you want some specific questions answered I'd suggest putting them in the one post. It was a little hard to follow your train of thought given it was spread over 15 or so posts. Oh, and by the way:

And women "just sit around"???? I think you're making some sweeping generalisations here, Moto.

Why have you picked up on Moto's sweeping generalisations. There are plenty more on this thread before Moto's but you havent mentioned them.

When I got to this post of yours I lost a little bit of faith in your argument. You seem to be just picking on people, particularly given that I am supporting some of (what I think) are your thoughts. You find fault with my post because it wasn't "sweeping" enough in it's scope? Gimmee a break.

Totally over the top way to deal with kids fighting. sort it out properly within the school. but don't have kids ending up with criminal records because of a fight at school. This is just passing the buck to the cops and maybe ruining a kid's live by giving them a criminal record. As we all know, the person who didnt cause the fight could end up being punished along with the aggressor.

Assault is assault, whether it happens in the home, the school or the workplace. This child was beaten and scratched by another child - I hardly see the injured child being punished in this case. Schools should involve the police where an assault has occurred because punching a kid in the school grounds should not be protection from the law. The victim will have the right to press charges or not, and this can be worked out later (ie: just because a fight breaks out and police arrive doesn't mean criminal charges will result). Having a police presence when there is an altercation should show the kids just how serious such behaviour is... and frankly that can only be a good thing. If you want to continue this debate, feel free to start a different thread about it - I don't think the discussion belongs here.

 

[Motokid]

What a sad way to go about posting. Hit and run with smilies. dear oh dear.

There's not a member here who will not tell you that Motokid is the last person to back down from a debate. But you are not supporting any of your claims, and I am. Until you start providing any kind of "proof" to support your arguement we have no debate.

And debates have winners and losers....and for now....you've lost....

 

[Motokid]

This thread is without doubt the most ridiculous I've ever seen on this forum.

I'm actually going to take the trouble to go through it shortly and point out all the nonsensical comments.

Some absolutely incredible remarks on this thread. I was sitting here shaking my head in disbelief as I read through it.

I did not make this up. You did.
You flamed plenty of people with this did you not?

If not, maybe you should apologize for your poor choice of wording?

 

[RobertFKennedy]

Okay, stop the bickering, both Moto and RFK. RFK - if you want some specific questions answered I'd suggest putting them in the one post. It was a little hard to follow your train of thought given it was spread over 15 or so posts. Oh, and by the way:


When I got to this post of yours I lost a little bit of faith in your argument. You seem to be just picking on people, particularly given that I am supporting some of (what I think) are your thoughts. You find fault with my post because it wasn't "sweeping" enough in it's scope? Gimmee a break.


Assault is assault, whether it happens in the home, the school or the workplace. This child was beaten and scratched by another child - I hardly see the injured child being punished in this case. Schools should involve the police where an assault has occurred because punching a kid in the school grounds should not be protection from the law. The victim will have the right to press charges or not, and this can be worked out later (ie: just because a fight breaks out and police arrive doesn't mean criminal charges will result). Having a police presence when there is an altercation should show the kids just how serious such behaviour is... and frankly that can only be a good thing. If you want to continue this debate, feel free to start a different thread about it - I don't think the discussion belongs here.

Ok, fair point. apologies if it seemed like I was picking on anyone. I didn't mean to. I just noticed that some other sweeping generalisations hadn't been mentioned but Moto's had and I wondered what flagged that one in particular up.

I agree assault is assualt. The original point was 2 kids fighting in school and the police becoming involved. I think thats totally over the top, it's passing the buck and it sees kids ending up with criminal records when there are others ways this can be dealt with. Bullying is a separate case entirely but away from bullying, kids fight.

 

[RobertFKennedy]

There's not a member here who will not tell you that Motokid is the last person to back down from a debate. But you are not supporting any of your claims, and I am. Until you start providing any kind of "proof" to support your arguement we have no debate.

And debates have winners and losers....and for now....you've lost....

that's really pathetic. I'll come to your links. I just wish you would answer my questions.

 

[RobertFKennedy]

I did not make this up. You did.
You flamed plenty of people with this did you not?

If not, maybe you should apologize for your poor choice of wording?

you did make up that I was attempting to paint posters as ridiculous. And it's not the only thing on this thread you've made up.

But if my language was a bit strong for the sensitive souls on here I'll happily apologise.

I'm sure you will do the decent thing too and apologise for misrepresenting my posts and dodging questions.

Cheers.