The first thing the author talks about is to not simply teach definitions. When I was in high school, we had something called vocab workshop in which we learned 20 new words a week. However, all we did was learn the definitions and then basically match the definition to the word. I agree with the author that this is utterly useless. First of all, the knowledge does not stay long when you are simply memorizing and simply knowing the definition of a word does not mean you are able to use it. I think vocabulary should be taught through the reading of stories and texts in which a word is used in a sentence and not by teaching definitions. The author goes on to talk about how words can be classified into labels and concepts, the need to find different words to describe things such as said, and how to teach words with multiple meanings. I really think that no matter how much we stand up on a whiteboard and talk about words the only way kids are going to use words is if they are exposed to it in a natural environment such as a book or conversation. The section in mathematics was particularly interesting to me. It talks about teaching the vocabulary in context which I think is the only way to do it. In my first student teaching, I taught a class on scatter plots. I first gave them the definition of a scatter plot and then asked the class "so who knows what a scatter plot is now?" They all looked at me with a blank stare. Definitions are useless in mathematics without a visual or mathematical understanding of what the term means. For example, I could tell you the definition of a hyperbola but it does you no good unless you know how to apply it. An example of a hyperbola and how to arrive at a hyperbola should be shown first and then say to the class "okay now this is called a hyperbola" not the other way around.
In readicide they talk about the decline of reading amongst teens. I'm sorry but there is nothing we can do about this. Technology unfortunately has nearly killed reading for pleasure when there is TV, video games, etc. at kids disposal. 40 years ago when none of that existed, of course kids read more. This is just a fact of our times and there is little we can do about it. We just need to focus on keeping the reading levels where they are or increase them but I do not think we can achieve the reading for pleasure numbers of 30 years ago. Again Gallagher touches on what we make the students read as a problem and it was certainly a problem for me. I hated Shakespeare because I couldn't understand it. I used to say "We don't talk like that anymore, what is the point!" Like anything else if it doesn't have some enjoyment value, kids aren't going to do it. I think Gallagher makes an excellent point about bringing the library to the students. I think that students have been forced to read so many unenjoyable books that they assume whatever is assigned will not be enjoyable. I'll be honest, I still feel that way today. I was not excited at all about reading The Giver because due to my past experiences I figured it would be boring and awful. I was surprised. I think by getting the kids excited about the book by telling them a little about what it is about encourages the students to have an open mind. Thats all I've got.
