Chapters 2 & 3

Chapters 2 & 3

Chapter 2, Going with the Flow, gives us a window into the motivations and desires of guys in their natural habitat.  The “flow” state referred to is that state in which self-consciousness is abandoned, and mental concentration becomes single-pointed.  This chapter helps us look at the circumstances in which boys experience this state, and why this state does not always occur within a reading context.  

Among other things, boys have a sensitivity to reading that seems to be highly emotionally bound: they want to feel an element of control, but still feel some challenge.  If the reading is too simple, they will become bored.  If it’s too difficult, those in this study indicated feelings of disengagement.  Likewise, how they reach the flow state within their own hobbies is by having the freedom to choose their actions.  Even in reading activities, if they are choosing it of their own free will, they are more likely to enjoy the reading act.  However, when the reading is assigned, the sense of control is removed, and the reading becomes work.

Additionally, when observing the subject’s preferred hobbies, we can see how feedback directly influences the flow experience, and how clear immediate feedback rarely occurs within school assignments (novels), but does occur more so in informational readings.  This once again reaffirms some of the stereotypes of male readers.  What is further highlighted is the engagement around efferent reading.  

For teachers this can be tricky, as the researchers point out that the flow state achieved in a particular context cannot necessarily be mined by teachers for use in another context.  Metaphors might help students understand the connection, but it’s unlikely that they will feel the connection, and therefore not be given to it.  So how does a teacher factor in all of these various factors?  Do they base assignments around Ss likes and dislikes?  Analyze student genre preference for curriculum creation?  While it is not so clear cut, and no common text could ever be effective for a classroom of different students, understanding the conditions in which students enter into a freer state of mind can help shape the approaches taken by teachers when creating and administering assignments.

Chapter 3

Chapter 3 provided a lot of food for thought.  Titled, Do the Right Thing; The Instrumental Value of School and Reading, the researchers brought to light student tension in response to the view of reading versus the application of it.  What struck me is that most of the interviewees had internalized a view of reading as positive and “something you should do,” but they just didn’t want to do it.  Their “profound belief in the importance of school” seems at odds with the preface for this study, even.

Judging from what we’ve studied in class, it would seem possible to harness this type of attitude similar to how the teacher who made Death of a Salesman relate to sports (in a sport-oriented high school).  Still, is there a magic bullet in all cases to make an assignment personally viable?  Obviously not, and I feel like this exemplified teacher may be an exception to the rule (but who am I to say, having no experience with high school classes?).  

Anyway, contrasting with students’ proclaimed respect for other case studies who were well read was an opposing view that just reading wasn’t enough: that creating social bonds and having real world experience was equally or more important.  Is there any way to cross these views in a classroom and integrate them into a reading assignment?  Where do street smarts meet academia?  

I guess I’m still left with just as many questions as when I started this book, although I am intrigued by the candor of the researchers and test subjects.  When we get into the pedagogical side of things, I’ll be curious how the approach will differ from current teaching trends, or if it will reinforce modern practice (as the book is from 2002).