the Atlantic: The Elite College Students Who Can't Read Books

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand this. Aren't admissions more competitive than ever? Aren't these the superhuman students who aced the hardest classes, scored extremely highly on SATs, had very time-consuming ECs....? We are told nobody has a chance at these schools, and yet, those who are actually there, can't read a book? How is this possible.

Test prep. Read a short passage find the main idea. Move onto the next skill. Meanwhile, they've never read a whole book about anything. I totally understand why this is happening. Since there's no homework these days, I assign it. My kid is always reading a book for homework, and we're always discussing it.

But that just sounds like a run of the mill 4.0 GPA/grade grabber who we are repeatedly told can't get into, e.g. Columbia.

I mean, my 8th grader is not a big reader and she read a non-fiction psychiatry book over just a few days this summer and we discussed it. Pretty sure she would be capable of discussing Pride and prejudice and Crime and punishment within a couple of weeks. I read these books in HS. They are interesting and not that hard to read.

Those books aren't interesting at all. I mean, Crime & Punishment? Are you now going to tell me War & Peace is interesting too?

Perhaps if we let a kid read a non-fiction psychiatry book instead of Pride and Prejudice or whatever, then things would be better.

But, if you want to read Crime & Punishment, then go for it.

Wow, I feel sorry for you. Your inability to understand some of the greatest fiction ever written indicates lacks in other aspects of your understanding of life.

Why...there are a ton of people who hate all fiction writing. Why are you superior because you enjoy fiction and someone else would rather read a 1,000 page book on Oppenheimer or other non-fiction.

One thing is that non-fiction tends to be what-you-read-is-what-there-is. Whereas fiction involves subtle themes, style, symbolism, subtext….things you have to dig to discover. Reading non-fiction is a much more passive process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:CS nerds read Tolkien

I agree with Gen-X, but even in 2024?

Well, my DC was born in 2005, CS and math major, and he read Tolkien in MS for pleasure.

Those are not easy books, that's for sure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand this. Aren't admissions more competitive than ever? Aren't these the superhuman students who aced the hardest classes, scored extremely highly on SATs, had very time-consuming ECs....? We are told nobody has a chance at these schools, and yet, those who are actually there, can't read a book? How is this possible.

Test prep. Read a short passage find the main idea. Move onto the next skill. Meanwhile, they've never read a whole book about anything. I totally understand why this is happening. Since there's no homework these days, I assign it. My kid is always reading a book for homework, and we're always discussing it.

But that just sounds like a run of the mill 4.0 GPA/grade grabber who we are repeatedly told can't get into, e.g. Columbia.

I mean, my 8th grader is not a big reader and she read a non-fiction psychiatry book over just a few days this summer and we discussed it. Pretty sure she would be capable of discussing Pride and prejudice and Crime and punishment within a couple of weeks. I read these books in HS. They are interesting and not that hard to read.

Those books aren't interesting at all. I mean, Crime & Punishment? Are you now going to tell me War & Peace is interesting too?

Perhaps if we let a kid read a non-fiction psychiatry book instead of Pride and Prejudice or whatever, then things would be better.

But, if you want to read Crime & Punishment, then go for it.

Wow, I feel sorry for you. Your inability to understand some of the greatest fiction ever written indicates lacks in other aspects of your understanding of life.

Why...there are a ton of people who hate all fiction writing. Why are you superior because you enjoy fiction and someone else would rather read a 1,000 page book on Oppenheimer or other non-fiction.

One thing is that non-fiction tends to be what-you-read-is-what-there-is. Whereas fiction involves subtle themes, style, symbolism, subtext….things you have to dig to discover. Reading non-fiction is a much more passive process.

Depends entirely on what you are actually reading. In this day and age, at most 50% of adults read one book per year, only 40% of that group reads fiction and 99% of that fiction is Dan Brown; Tom Clancy and 50 Shades of Grey and the like.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I went to FCPS in the 90s and we had lots of assigned books in high school, but I have to say, I don’t think I ever really fully grasped what I was reading. I’ve always thought it’s kind of odd that we expect teenagers with almost no life experience to understand themes in literature written by adults for adults.

Nevertheless, despite my lack of understanding and over dependence on Cliff’s Notes, I got a 5 on my AP English test and never took another English class again. Many years later, as an adult, I discovered a love of reading, revisited many of the novels I read in high school, and finally understood what they were all about! Now I have teenagers who both love to read, but honestly, I’m not too sure they’re really getting it either.

I am sure I didn’t grasp the deeper themes in the many books I read in high school. But that didn’t mean the effort wasn’t worth it. I doubt it is common for anyone who did not get the training required to read challenging books as a child to pick one up as an adult. At some point, kids need to learn how to do hard things, and how to pick up and get through a book that’s challenging. That is the skill set that is being lost.

These books are challenging because they were written for people in a different place at a different time, and it wasn't challenging for them.

Charles Dickens and Shakespeare wrote ”trash" for the common people.
Theie audience weren't delighted by deciphering obsolete language from a past culture. Shakespeare's plays were not even books! They were live performances! You know, like movies.

This PP is exactly right. While it can be educational in a cross-cultural way to be exposed to "the canon", a lot of the canon involves obsolete writing styles and outdated cultural constructs and vocabulary. It's possible to be taught to appreciate these works, or even to appreciate them without assistance, but in general they are losing relevance because they are less interesting than modern entertainments. Reveling in sheer wordiness has gone out of style among highly-educated people. I regret that a bit but it definitely seems to be the case in my environment. And I don't find the new stuff better...it's just more modern and therefore arguably more relevant.

+1 back in Austen day's reading fiction like this was considered low brow, and much like how we see tiktok today.

A society's view of what is considered "quality" or "classics" reading changes over time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand this. Aren't admissions more competitive than ever? Aren't these the superhuman students who aced the hardest classes, scored extremely highly on SATs, had very time-consuming ECs....? We are told nobody has a chance at these schools, and yet, those who are actually there, can't read a book? How is this possible.

Test prep. Read a short passage find the main idea. Move onto the next skill. Meanwhile, they've never read a whole book about anything. I totally understand why this is happening. Since there's no homework these days, I assign it. My kid is always reading a book for homework, and we're always discussing it.

But that just sounds like a run of the mill 4.0 GPA/grade grabber who we are repeatedly told can't get into, e.g. Columbia.

I mean, my 8th grader is not a big reader and she read a non-fiction psychiatry book over just a few days this summer and we discussed it. Pretty sure she would be capable of discussing Pride and prejudice and Crime and punishment within a couple of weeks. I read these books in HS. They are interesting and not that hard to read.

Those books aren't interesting at all. I mean, Crime & Punishment? Are you now going to tell me War & Peace is interesting too?

Perhaps if we let a kid read a non-fiction psychiatry book instead of Pride and Prejudice or whatever, then things would be better.

But, if you want to read Crime & Punishment, then go for it.

Wow, I feel sorry for you. Your inability to understand some of the greatest fiction ever written indicates lacks in other aspects of your understanding of life.

Why...there are a ton of people who hate all fiction writing. Why are you superior because you enjoy fiction and someone else would rather read a 1,000 page book on Oppenheimer or other non-fiction.

One thing is that non-fiction tends to be what-you-read-is-what-there-is. Whereas fiction involves subtle themes, style, symbolism, subtext….things you have to dig to discover. Reading non-fiction is a much more passive process.

Depends entirely on what you are actually reading. In this day and age, at most 50% of adults read one book per year, only 40% of that group reads fiction and 99% of that fiction is Dan Brown; Tom Clancy and 50 Shades of Grey and the like.

So? This is just snobbery.

It's like people who hate Marvel movies and only consider movies by Scorse to be any good.

They are different genres and can be enjoyed equally.

Personally, I don't like romance movies, but I enjoy reading historical romances. I enjoy watching historical dramas, but I don't enjoy reading it; too much like a history book.

I love reading and watching scifi, including Dan Brown and Michael Crighton books.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is absolutely laughable to claim that today’s great minds of CS are not voracious readers of fiction.

Who has made that exact claim?

You would have us believe that a higher percentage of CS majors are voracious readers of fiction than humanities or social sciences majors?

DP. No skin in this game, but no one made that claim either.

Then why bring up the claim that “today’s great minds of CS are voracious readers”? Whether true or not, it’s a complete non sequitur.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand this. Aren't admissions more competitive than ever? Aren't these the superhuman students who aced the hardest classes, scored extremely highly on SATs, had very time-consuming ECs....? We are told nobody has a chance at these schools, and yet, those who are actually there, can't read a book? How is this possible.

Test prep. Read a short passage find the main idea. Move onto the next skill. Meanwhile, they've never read a whole book about anything. I totally understand why this is happening. Since there's no homework these days, I assign it. My kid is always reading a book for homework, and we're always discussing it.

But that just sounds like a run of the mill 4.0 GPA/grade grabber who we are repeatedly told can't get into, e.g. Columbia.

I mean, my 8th grader is not a big reader and she read a non-fiction psychiatry book over just a few days this summer and we discussed it. Pretty sure she would be capable of discussing Pride and prejudice and Crime and punishment within a couple of weeks. I read these books in HS. They are interesting and not that hard to read.

Those books aren't interesting at all. I mean, Crime & Punishment? Are you now going to tell me War & Peace is interesting too?

Perhaps if we let a kid read a non-fiction psychiatry book instead of Pride and Prejudice or whatever, then things would be better.

But, if you want to read Crime & Punishment, then go for it.

Wow, I feel sorry for you. Your inability to understand some of the greatest fiction ever written indicates lacks in other aspects of your understanding of life.

Why...there are a ton of people who hate all fiction writing. Why are you superior because you enjoy fiction and someone else would rather read a 1,000 page book on Oppenheimer or other non-fiction.

One thing is that non-fiction tends to be what-you-read-is-what-there-is. Whereas fiction involves subtle themes, style, symbolism, subtext….things you have to dig to discover. Reading non-fiction is a much more passive process.

Depends entirely on what you are actually reading. In this day and age, at most 50% of adults read one book per year, only 40% of that group reads fiction and 99% of that fiction is Dan Brown; Tom Clancy and 50 Shades of Grey and the like.

So? This is just snobbery.

It's like people who hate Marvel movies and only consider movies by Scorse to be any good.

They are different genres and can be enjoyed equally.

Personally, I don't like romance movies, but I enjoy reading historical romances. I enjoy watching historical dramas, but I don't enjoy reading it; too much like a history book.

I love reading and watching scifi, including Dan Brown and Michael Crighton books.

Hey…I like those books too…but PP was slighting non-fiction as lacking subtext and symbolism as though that’s the reason 99% of anyone reads even a fictional book.

It’s not enough to just be happy people are reading more than a comic book.

Other than the literal symbolism involved in the plot of The Da Vinci Code, of course.

[Anonymous]

This is both sad and pathetic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:CS nerds read Tolkien

I agree with Gen-X, but even in 2024?

Well, my DC was born in 2005, CS and math major, and he read Tolkien in MS for pleasure.

Those are not easy books, that's for sure.

Are we supposed to be impressed?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have younger kids (elementary age) and this conversation is interesting to me because of what I see at our elementary and among families (all upper middle class families with well educated parents -- many working in academic or policy fields where deep reading is a part of the job).

We often feel out of step with others at the school. I often feel like we are the only family that does not allow our kids to do unlimited iReady app use at home for instance. I'm not even comfortable with how much the school uses iReady in class but we definitely aren't going to hand our kids tablets at home for hours of iReady on top of that. When I talk to other parents about it they don't get my concern at all. They like the apps because they can track progress and because it engages kids better than books or paper and pencil. But that's specifically what I don't like about it -- yes it's easier to get a kid to engage with reading comp or math when it's delivered by little characters on a screen with little dopamine rewards for every right answer and each "level achieved." But I worry about what happens when kids are asked to do these things without that interface. So we barely do any iReady at home and instead we encourage reading of all kinds (including on a kindle sometimes but also magazines and lots and lots of physical books) and we supplement math with Singapore math books at home. I think other families think we're weird luddites whose kids will fall behind. Both our kids had to get special training from the school on tablet use in order to take assessments because the school won't offer them by hand and our kids don't get enough tablet time at home to know how to use them by the time they got to K.

I have no idea if this will result in my kids being able to read better than others when they get to college. I'm largely doing this because of my own personal attitudes about screens and knowledge acquisition. But I'd be really sad if my kids got to high school or college and lacked the patience or ability to sit down and read an entire book and then discuss it intelligently. To me that's a fundamental academic skill. It's what most of my career is based on (I'm a lawyer turned subject matter expert). Reading and discussing books is a key component of my marriage and family life.

Anyway -- following with interest.

Reading for pleasure will be easier to keep going with girls than with boys after middle school years. That being said, tablet stupidity is something that is harming our kids. The only reason we got tablets was because our school required it, and it made me so mad. Our district finally completely banned cell phone use this year, so there is hope of some reversal.

This is exactly the kind of attitude that makes them stop assigning books in school. “It’s not fair to the boys!” I have a teen girl and boy and they both read a lot. Stop lowering expectations for the boys. They can manage just fine.

The expectations for men is so low these days, it's a wonder they can get jobs. Anytime there is a suggestion of academic standards, someone has to point out that its discriminatory or "against" boys.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I guess Calkins came full circle

I wonder this as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand this. Aren't admissions more competitive than ever? Aren't these the superhuman students who aced the hardest classes, scored extremely highly on SATs, had very time-consuming ECs....? We are told nobody has a chance at these schools, and yet, those who are actually there, can't read a book? How is this possible.

SAT optional yields these kinds of students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand this. Aren't admissions more competitive than ever? Aren't these the superhuman students who aced the hardest classes, scored extremely highly on SATs, had very time-consuming ECs....? We are told nobody has a chance at these schools, and yet, those who are actually there, can't read a book? How is this possible.

SAT optional yields these kinds of students.

Is there any evidence that this is true, or are you simply assuming based on previously-held beliefs?
SAT, after all, rewards the skill of reading/skimming short passages quickly, not to do the long, deeper, and often slower mental processes involved with reading books.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand this. Aren't admissions more competitive than ever? Aren't these the superhuman students who aced the hardest classes, scored extremely highly on SATs, had very time-consuming ECs....? We are told nobody has a chance at these schools, and yet, those who are actually there, can't read a book? How is this possible.

SAT optional yields these kinds of students.

There are plenty of 1550+ SAT scorers that didn't read all that much in HS.

For all the shortcomings of the AP English classes, they actually provide good preparation for SAT questions...and then along with kids prepping, it produces plenty of high verbal scores.

SAT used to ask analogies and vocabulary, and those types of questions better aligned with a kid that read a ton vs. one that didn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2024/11/the-elite-college-students-who-cant-read-books/679945/

Students at elite universities such as Columbia are showing up to campus unable to read books. They've only read excerpts their entire school career. Many also struggle to write effectively. In response, many Columbia teachers have to water down the curriculum.

This is so disappointing. My DS is in a private school in CA and he's read multiple full novels (Homegoing, Their Eyes Were Watching God, Great Gatsby) in just 9th and 10th grades, full plays (Macbeth, Uncle Vanya) and poems (many modern ones as well as ancient epic poem Gilgamesh). He just started 11th grade a month ago, and he's almost finished reading the full 600-page Crime and Punishment. I'm sad that other schools are only giving abridged or excerpts or reducing assignments to only one novel per year. These difficult books have undoubtedly stretched and challenged my DS, and he'd rather play video games or read excerpts if given the choice, but stretching and challenging him has led to growth.

I wish we'd give our kids more credit.