The End of the Rainbow
There's no pot of gold at the end of this rainbow. I heard on NPR that the PBS program Reading Rainbow ends its 26-year run this week. on Friday. The show started in 1983 and has been hosted by actor LeVar Burton. It has won more than two-dozen Emmys, and is the third longest-running children's show in PBS history (beat out only by Sesame Street and Mister Rogers).
The shows always featured a children's book that launched some adventure with Burton. One of LeVar's signature lines was to say "But you don't have to take my word for it." That was the lead-in to a segment where kids gave their own "book reviews" of books they enjoy.
The official story for the show's demise is that they just can't get funding. But John Grant, who is in charge of content at WNED Buffalo, Reading Rainbow's home station, says that another reason is a shift in the philosophy of educational television programming. He points back to a change in the Department of Education under the Bush administration towards a focus on phonics and spelling.
When the show was developed in the early 1980s, the question to ask was "How do we get kids to read books?" The current reading research prefers to ask "How do we teach kids to read?" It makes the assumption that kids don't have basic reading skills, Getting them to have a love of books can come later - and from some other source.
If I had to take sides on these two approaches, it would be a tough choice. My gut feeling is to go for the love of reading. If a kid loves to read, she will push forward through the skills and keep reading, and nothing makes a reader more than reading. Of course, if a kid can't read or reads poorly, why would they love the activity?
An easier stand for me to take is on the side of Reading Rainbow. It was a good program. It was gentle and real and it served a purpose. I can't see that there is no place for it anymore. In fact, if there truly is no place for encouraging the love of reading, it bodes badly for the teaching of reading.
The shows always featured a children's book that launched some adventure with Burton. One of LeVar's signature lines was to say "But you don't have to take my word for it." That was the lead-in to a segment where kids gave their own "book reviews" of books they enjoy. The official story for the show's demise is that they just can't get funding. But John Grant, who is in charge of content at WNED Buffalo, Reading Rainbow's home station, says that another reason is a shift in the philosophy of educational television programming. He points back to a change in the Department of Education under the Bush administration towards a focus on phonics and spelling.
When the show was developed in the early 1980s, the question to ask was "How do we get kids to read books?" The current reading research prefers to ask "How do we teach kids to read?" It makes the assumption that kids don't have basic reading skills, Getting them to have a love of books can come later - and from some other source.
If I had to take sides on these two approaches, it would be a tough choice. My gut feeling is to go for the love of reading. If a kid loves to read, she will push forward through the skills and keep reading, and nothing makes a reader more than reading. Of course, if a kid can't read or reads poorly, why would they love the activity?
An easier stand for me to take is on the side of Reading Rainbow. It was a good program. It was gentle and real and it served a purpose. I can't see that there is no place for it anymore. In fact, if there truly is no place for encouraging the love of reading, it bodes badly for the teaching of reading.
Some show history http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reading_Rainbow
Comments
No comments