I so love this piece. Brings together everything Harriett brings to these discussions… knowledge of literature and the larger cultural world, knowledge of reading and how to teach it well, and knowledge of children and just people in general, how they learn, how to support that, and how to to reach for the stars, but with the realization that we do not control every single thing. But if we want to inspire a love of reading in our students, we damn well better make sure they can read, and read well. We have some pretty decent ideas about how to increase the likelihood that will happen. We hy it continues to be controversial beats the heck out of me.
Me too! Great piece, Harriett. I completely agree—first things first: teach kids to read before we worry about teaching them to love it.
And yet...I'm struck by Leah's comments about not avoiding discussion about joy. She wrote, "We can nudge them toward being curious about the things they think they’re not curious about."
Your reflections at the beginning of your post stuck with me—the compliments we most want from students. I teach history, and one of my favorite things to hear from students is: “You made me realize history is interesting.”
I want my students to build knowledge about history. It's critical to literacy and to becoming a better citizen. Still, I didn’t fall in love with history because it felt useful. I found it joyful and inspiring.
I’m thinking about your four criteria for a good book. They work for history, too.
1. Complex characters – Looking at you, Thomas Jefferson.
2. Universal themes – E Pluribus Unum. Liberty and justice for all.
3. Aesthetic language – Thank you, Frederick Douglass and Abraham Lincoln.
4. Compelling plot – war, revolution, political intrigue, assassinations…
So if I design my curriculum and lessons around those things, maybe my students won't fall in love with history like I have, but I can pique their interest and curiosity. And while we can learn things even if they aren't interesting, it sure helps in the motivation department.
"I’m thinking about your four criteria for a good book. They work for history, too.
1. Complex characters – Looking at you, Thomas Jefferson.
2. Universal themes – E Pluribus Unum. Liberty and justice for all.
3. Aesthetic language – Thank you, Frederick Douglass and Abraham Lincoln.
4. Compelling plot – war, revolution, political intrigue, assassinations…"
I absolutely love this! And thank you, as well, for bringing the necessary nuance into the conversation. You make exactly the distinctions we need to be discussing. Really appreciate your comment.
I completely agree that we absolutely must teach students to lift the words off the page to read and write. For children that is hard for, it is not always joyful. As their teacher I need to calmly and steadily take them across the parts that are not joyful and keep moving forward with helping them lift those words off the page. My favorite writing mantra is It's not fun to write. It's fun to have written. (I can use that for lots of things in my life). I also believe that we shouldn't halt all conversation about joy/inspiration in fear that this means we don't believe in lifting the words off the page. That is not something I see you doing but I do think that happens in some circles which is what leads to this constant and tiresome pendulum swing.
"But if we want to inspire a love of reading in our students, we damn well better make sure they can read, and read well."
This is the tag line! I know you've already thrown out the gauntlet and have been waiting patiently for the "opposition" to pick it up. Thanks so much for your kind words. Add me to the list of educators without clout whom you've inspired.
Add me to your list of fans. I love the tag line: "If we want to inspire a love of reading in our students, we damn well better make sure they can read, and read well."
And for your future reference, you can edit a note even after you hit sent. Click on the 3 dots in the upper right corner (on web; not sure if it's somewhere different on a phone) and you can fix those typos.
Okay clearly your words made me think... I have more. I’ve been thinking more about this line from the original piece, which I agree with wholeheartedly:
“We have some roadblocks to overcome because developing desire is a lot more subjective than developing skills, and therefore highly variable.”
And this one too:
“Yes, we immerse our students in authentic literature and attempt to inspire them to become lifelong readers, but this is secondary to the primary goal of something far more objective: giving them the tools to access print at any age. If love blossoms en route, so much the better—and we celebrate it without automatically anticipating it.”
Yes. It is secondary. But I might also say it’s not.. 100-dary. (You get what I mean.)
I agree—I may not have ever sparked a love of reading in a student who wasn’t already wired for it. But I have helped students move from complete avoidance to tentative willingness. I’ve seen students who never saw themselves as readers pick up a book over the summer—maybe even a Captain Underpants—and stick with it, because I let them know it was okay for their definition of “compelling” to differ from mine.
On personality: I can’t say I’ve fully shared the experience described in this quote:
“The effects of parents on their children’s personalities are not only smaller than most people think... What about the effects of teachers on their students’ personalities? Even smaller.”
I agree that I can’t change a student’s personality—but I do think we can help them practice openness. We can nudge them toward being curious about the things they think they’re not curious about. That’s a different kind of teaching—not as neat as lifting the words off the page—but one that still matters deeply to me.
And if that openness results in even one student thinking: Maybe I could be a reader, then I’ll keep holding space for both the skills and the possibility of desire.
Curious to hear others’ experiences—what have you seen?
"I agree—I may not have ever sparked a love of reading in a student who wasn’t already wired for it. But I have helped students move from complete avoidance to tentative willingness. I’ve seen students who never saw themselves as readers pick up a book over the summer—maybe even a Captain Underpants—and stick with it, because I let them know it was okay for their definition of “compelling” to differ from mine."
This is really important, and I debated whether to extend an already lengthy piece to include a version of it. Ultimately, I yielded to the advice from a presentation I attended shortly after getting my credential: A piece of writing is never finished--it's abandoned.
That is such a true statement about writing..at some point you need to not finish it but abandon it. It’s one of the reasons I love Substack. We get to be in conversation through writing and continue the writing long after it’s been officially abandoned. You have sparked a blog post in me so it continues :)
This piece is powerful—and I found myself nodding and pausing.
Yes, our job is to teach children how to read, and that process is often long, slow, and hard. Joy is not always present in the moment—but there’s real joy in the after, when the code is cracked and meaning floods in. I’ve seen that joy. I’ve stood beside it.
But I also believe this: we can hold more than one idea at once.
We can teach kids how to read and intentionally create space for reading to take root in their lives. That doesn’t mean making every child love reading. It does mean getting curious about what might make them want to keep reading after school hours are over.
Some kids love aesthetic language. Some just want a plot that moves. Some want both. And what we adults define as "aesthetic" or "compelling" doesn’t always match what kids experience. I’ve had students light up over Captain Underpants—for them, that is a compelling plot and aesthetic language that speaks to their humor, interests, and sense of play. That doesn’t diminish the book’s value—it reminds us that joy and connection can look different depending on who's holding the book.
Our challenge is to teach the skills explicitly and systematically AND create the conditions—time, space, human connection—for possibility.
It’s not either/or. It’s both/and.
This article from @RobbReview captures the moment we’re in beautifully:
Leah, I can always count on you to bring balance to a conversation, and you never disappoint. You’ve got a beautifully-stated mini-blog here. I especially appreciate the fine reminder that "joy and connection can look different depending on who's holding the book." Thanks so much for always giving me more to think about.
I hope I can keep this up. I have realized that I now have a great vehicle for venting (so much cheaper than therapy)--and I hope I can resist the temptation to go low.
I so love this piece. Brings together everything Harriett brings to these discussions… knowledge of literature and the larger cultural world, knowledge of reading and how to teach it well, and knowledge of children and just people in general, how they learn, how to support that, and how to to reach for the stars, but with the realization that we do not control every single thing. But if we want to inspire a love of reading in our students, we damn well better make sure they can read, and read well. We have some pretty decent ideas about how to increase the likelihood that will happen. We hy it continues to be controversial beats the heck out of me.
Me too! Great piece, Harriett. I completely agree—first things first: teach kids to read before we worry about teaching them to love it.
And yet...I'm struck by Leah's comments about not avoiding discussion about joy. She wrote, "We can nudge them toward being curious about the things they think they’re not curious about."
Your reflections at the beginning of your post stuck with me—the compliments we most want from students. I teach history, and one of my favorite things to hear from students is: “You made me realize history is interesting.”
I want my students to build knowledge about history. It's critical to literacy and to becoming a better citizen. Still, I didn’t fall in love with history because it felt useful. I found it joyful and inspiring.
I’m thinking about your four criteria for a good book. They work for history, too.
1. Complex characters – Looking at you, Thomas Jefferson.
2. Universal themes – E Pluribus Unum. Liberty and justice for all.
3. Aesthetic language – Thank you, Frederick Douglass and Abraham Lincoln.
4. Compelling plot – war, revolution, political intrigue, assassinations…
So if I design my curriculum and lessons around those things, maybe my students won't fall in love with history like I have, but I can pique their interest and curiosity. And while we can learn things even if they aren't interesting, it sure helps in the motivation department.
"I’m thinking about your four criteria for a good book. They work for history, too.
1. Complex characters – Looking at you, Thomas Jefferson.
2. Universal themes – E Pluribus Unum. Liberty and justice for all.
3. Aesthetic language – Thank you, Frederick Douglass and Abraham Lincoln.
4. Compelling plot – war, revolution, political intrigue, assassinations…"
I absolutely love this! And thank you, as well, for bringing the necessary nuance into the conversation. You make exactly the distinctions we need to be discussing. Really appreciate your comment.
Thanks for inspiring it! Will likely inspire a longer post...lots to think about!
I completely agree that we absolutely must teach students to lift the words off the page to read and write. For children that is hard for, it is not always joyful. As their teacher I need to calmly and steadily take them across the parts that are not joyful and keep moving forward with helping them lift those words off the page. My favorite writing mantra is It's not fun to write. It's fun to have written. (I can use that for lots of things in my life). I also believe that we shouldn't halt all conversation about joy/inspiration in fear that this means we don't believe in lifting the words off the page. That is not something I see you doing but I do think that happens in some circles which is what leads to this constant and tiresome pendulum swing.
"But if we want to inspire a love of reading in our students, we damn well better make sure they can read, and read well."
This is the tag line! I know you've already thrown out the gauntlet and have been waiting patiently for the "opposition" to pick it up. Thanks so much for your kind words. Add me to the list of educators without clout whom you've inspired.
Darn I accidentally hit send. “We hy” should have been “why.” I’m sure the other cues clarified that. But just in case
Add me to your list of fans. I love the tag line: "If we want to inspire a love of reading in our students, we damn well better make sure they can read, and read well."
And for your future reference, you can edit a note even after you hit sent. Click on the 3 dots in the upper right corner (on web; not sure if it's somewhere different on a phone) and you can fix those typos.
Thanks Lauren. But the 3 dots only offered this .. copy link, restack, collapse, or report. I'm on the web not my phone. Any other ideas?
I think maybe you clicked on the 3 dots that were on MY comment, which you cannot edit. Make sure you click on the 3 dots next to your comment.
Guess what? I figured it out. Proof of the existence of context.
Okay clearly your words made me think... I have more. I’ve been thinking more about this line from the original piece, which I agree with wholeheartedly:
“We have some roadblocks to overcome because developing desire is a lot more subjective than developing skills, and therefore highly variable.”
And this one too:
“Yes, we immerse our students in authentic literature and attempt to inspire them to become lifelong readers, but this is secondary to the primary goal of something far more objective: giving them the tools to access print at any age. If love blossoms en route, so much the better—and we celebrate it without automatically anticipating it.”
Yes. It is secondary. But I might also say it’s not.. 100-dary. (You get what I mean.)
I agree—I may not have ever sparked a love of reading in a student who wasn’t already wired for it. But I have helped students move from complete avoidance to tentative willingness. I’ve seen students who never saw themselves as readers pick up a book over the summer—maybe even a Captain Underpants—and stick with it, because I let them know it was okay for their definition of “compelling” to differ from mine.
On personality: I can’t say I’ve fully shared the experience described in this quote:
“The effects of parents on their children’s personalities are not only smaller than most people think... What about the effects of teachers on their students’ personalities? Even smaller.”
I agree that I can’t change a student’s personality—but I do think we can help them practice openness. We can nudge them toward being curious about the things they think they’re not curious about. That’s a different kind of teaching—not as neat as lifting the words off the page—but one that still matters deeply to me.
And if that openness results in even one student thinking: Maybe I could be a reader, then I’ll keep holding space for both the skills and the possibility of desire.
Curious to hear others’ experiences—what have you seen?
"I agree—I may not have ever sparked a love of reading in a student who wasn’t already wired for it. But I have helped students move from complete avoidance to tentative willingness. I’ve seen students who never saw themselves as readers pick up a book over the summer—maybe even a Captain Underpants—and stick with it, because I let them know it was okay for their definition of “compelling” to differ from mine."
This is really important, and I debated whether to extend an already lengthy piece to include a version of it. Ultimately, I yielded to the advice from a presentation I attended shortly after getting my credential: A piece of writing is never finished--it's abandoned.
That is such a true statement about writing..at some point you need to not finish it but abandon it. It’s one of the reasons I love Substack. We get to be in conversation through writing and continue the writing long after it’s been officially abandoned. You have sparked a blog post in me so it continues :)
This piece is powerful—and I found myself nodding and pausing.
Yes, our job is to teach children how to read, and that process is often long, slow, and hard. Joy is not always present in the moment—but there’s real joy in the after, when the code is cracked and meaning floods in. I’ve seen that joy. I’ve stood beside it.
But I also believe this: we can hold more than one idea at once.
We can teach kids how to read and intentionally create space for reading to take root in their lives. That doesn’t mean making every child love reading. It does mean getting curious about what might make them want to keep reading after school hours are over.
Some kids love aesthetic language. Some just want a plot that moves. Some want both. And what we adults define as "aesthetic" or "compelling" doesn’t always match what kids experience. I’ve had students light up over Captain Underpants—for them, that is a compelling plot and aesthetic language that speaks to their humor, interests, and sense of play. That doesn’t diminish the book’s value—it reminds us that joy and connection can look different depending on who's holding the book.
Our challenge is to teach the skills explicitly and systematically AND create the conditions—time, space, human connection—for possibility.
It’s not either/or. It’s both/and.
This article from @RobbReview captures the moment we’re in beautifully:
https://therobbreviewblog.com/uncategorized/ferris-wheel/
Instead of swinging wildly, maybe what we need now is to stay steady—to ground ourselves in both science and story, structure and joy.
Let’s keep talking.
Leah, I can always count on you to bring balance to a conversation, and you never disappoint. You’ve got a beautifully-stated mini-blog here. I especially appreciate the fine reminder that "joy and connection can look different depending on who's holding the book." Thanks so much for always giving me more to think about.
Thanks so much for clearly giving me so much to think about....You are clear, passionate specific and direct--exactly what we need in this moment.
"You are clear, passionate specific and direct"
I hope I can keep this up. I have realized that I now have a great vehicle for venting (so much cheaper than therapy)--and I hope I can resist the temptation to go low.