English 5599 - Creative Writing For Teachers
Does Oral Storytelling Enhance Writing Ability?
I am not entirely sure what my initial reaction is to all of this. I want to soak in some of the ideas H-- has presented here by asking a series of questions that seem contradictory. I do this for the purpose of learning. I tend to cover more ground when I scrutinize the details of any given argument or data in general.
First, there does not seem to be enough evidence here to state emphatically that oral storytelling does nurture a student's ability to write more analytically and critically. Since this is the main issue at hand, and since my knowledge is limited in the area of storytelling, I am more apprehensive of its validity.
The Davis research advocates reading aloud and downplays the importance of silent reading. Indeed, we encourage our students to read silently, because it is a crucial skill for improvement in speed-reading. We speed-read in order to take in more information in less time. For the avid reader, this is an invaluable tool for increasing knowledge. In fact, teaching children to sound out each word long-term is detrimental to this skill. When they get into the habit of saying each word, they are then instructed to do so silently. However, nothing internal has changed. Their glottal muscles continue to move as their brain sounds each word out. Speed-readers must retrain themselves to avoid this unhealthy practice.
On the other hand, I think reading to children aloud during early development is as crucial to the student's level of interest in reading. Studies prove that reading early to children expose them to communication skills, word/picture associations, and grammar. But this practice, it seems to me, should only go so far. By the time students are in high school, for example, they feel insulted if a teacher reads to them.
I am interested in the quote from Davis that states, "our reading level always outruns our writing level," and how it is used to strengthen H--'s argument that oral tradition encourages growth in writing. I agree that our reading level is greater than our writing level. However, how can Davis make a reasonable leap from this notion to his assertion that as children are learning to read, they ought also to share stories audibly? I want to play the devil's advocate in order to better understand this. So my question is this: How is oral storytelling of any more benefit than simply reading?
I am inclined to follow Sasser and Zorena to an extent. Because oral stories use key points as "anchors" to maintain continuity, Sasser and Zorena contend that this "virtually" prods children to refine their writing. Is this so? Does audible story-sharing enhance a child's tendency to work harder in his writing? Or does the story heard simply "engage the [child's] imagination," (Rosie Turner-Bissett) so that when they write it is a little more fun?
It seems to me that learning to write is an incredibly difficult process. Thus far, no other method of improvement holds as much weight as the simple practice of writing. True, oral storytelling helps a child develop a sense of sequence and timing. But doesn't television? Doesn't reading silently?