|
Silentwolf, I must be confused at what you're trying to say.
I agree that classic literature should not be used to teach reading in the initial stages, no matter what the age of the student. However, there are lots of books with pictures that introduce words and phrases without resorting to graphic novels (or the old Classic Illustrated) for the basic books.
Picture stories with words are great for "extra" reading in the school or "outside" reading, but not for the basics.
If you are saying that graphic novels and illustrated classics should be used for the main instruction in literature, I can see all kinds of richness lost. Of course most of the girls didn't like Moby Dick, and I can remember thinking about soccer when we went through Little Women. All classics aren't a hit for everyone, but I learned how words can be strung together to paint better pictures than in the comics we read for extra credit reports.
Reading is work as well as fun, and a mix of tools helps learning, in my estimation, not all learning based on one extreme or the other.
|