In class we talked about different types of books and the one that seemed most interesting to me were referred to as participation books. As talked about by the text and in class, participation books are books in which kids (or adults) interact with what's happening in the text. They: "provide concrete visual and tactile materials for children to explore: textures to touch, flaps to lift, flowers to smell, and pieces to manipulate." (pg. 105 from our text) This talks of the physical interaction children (or adults) may have with books; their appeal to the five senses - a scratch-and-sniff text here, the palpable feel of a fuzzy rabbit, etc. But I would make the claim that
all books are participation books in some way, aren't they? I mean, in simply reading a book you have to physically interact with it, turn the pages, feel the weight in your hands etc. Sometimes books have a new-book smell that entices the reader more even if the books themselves don't have the interactive level of pulling flaps for pop-ups or feeling the "fur" of an animal. And in some ways the most participation you can have with a book is creating images in your mind, especially if no pictures accompany the text as a guide to help you visualize. If you're left with only the words on page your mind has to participate in the action as well, creating visualizations and new worlds, what characters look like, the book's settings, different eras, etc... And even if our visualized ideals of what things were like, or should be like, or could be like are bastardized by our sometimes limited imaginations or rudimentary understandings of what things are or were there is at least, again, a participatory act that takes place every time a child (or adult) reads a book regardless of whether or not the book is considered of a participation breed.
Posts
11 comments:
I agree with your ideas about every book being "participatory". I find that the books I enjoy the most are the ones I can sort of escape with. The books that involve me the most, the ones I can relate to and "participate" in are always the most enjoyable. I find it interesting that the participation books we learned about are aimed at younger kids, who typically have the strongest imaginations. I understand the point behind these participation books, but it just seemed interesting to me that the audience with the strongest imagination has books with interactive components to draw them into the books.
Another part of your post that I found interesting was how you were talking about participating in some way whether its holding the book or turning pages or reading words. An exception to this though is audiobooks, in which the "reader" is only listening to the words. A book in this format though can still have as much participation as a book with words, and it relies very heavily on the imagination. Even a book that only requires the audience to listen can be very participatory.
I definitely agree with all of the points that were made in this post. Building off of the interaction between reader and book, I feel that having that relationship is the most important goal for an author. For a reader to be able to connect to a story and relate to multiple aspects of a story makes a book a good one. If I was an author and my books were able to interact with their readers, I would know I was successful with writing a book like that. Also, I would like to add on to what this blog says about the “textures to touch” kinds of books. I work at a day care and in the infant rooms we have a TON of touch and feel books. They are a BIG hit with all of the babies and toddlers. I think that touch and feel books or “interactive” books are so important in the learning process. I think children gain so much knowledge from books in general and when they are so young it helps to have something they can feel and see along with hearing the words. Children associate textures, colors, and shape with the word much easier if they have all of those elements right in front of them in a touch and feel book. Children can learn vocabulary, the alphabet and counting much faster when introduced to these kinds of books. I agree also with this blog that participatory books can be any kind of book. It’s all about how the reader approaches the story.
When I was younger I just loved the kind of books that you had pull, flip, and turn. So you would have to participate with. Most children love having the feeling of helping. A lot of children are visual learns so this type book would be the best one. If a book can push a child to pick it up then thats going in the right direction. We need to act fast and bring reading back in elementary school. Before children forget to hold back a book. I completely agree with technology, but there needs to be a balance in everything. These types of books shape the children of our world. So we need to do whatever it takes to get a child to read!
I think it is interesting that you said the people with the largest imagination (children) are the ones that participation books are aimed at. This comment made me think about other ways books could bring about a child's imagination. I remember looking at the "Choose Your Own Adventure" books as a child, and loving the fact that I was involved some way in the story. I also think that parents and educators should encourage children to read non-fiction books. I remember certain days during "Library" class in elementary school when the hour/month was specifically dedicated to non-fiction books. It was to encourage students to read about something they were interested in and read a genre they might not necessarily read otherwise because the cover is not bright/colorful. For example, educators could ask students to pick a book about their favorite animal or read about a famous president. I think that students have lost interest in knowing about the world around them; they should be encouraged to pick up a non-fiction book and learn about something just because they are interested in the topic.
I definitely agree with the fact that reading a book, turning the pages, as well as creating pictures in your mind is participating, but there is a difference between participation books and just reading a novel. By reading the book, you are using more of your mind than anything else. The mind imagines the book, doing the most participation, which makes the book either good or bad. By actually participating when reading, I feel as if you need to scratch or feel, or even sniff something. That makes the reader more engaged in what they are learning, especially for children. Would a child pay better attention to reading, or reading as well as interaction. Not all, but most kids would pefer to have some kind of interaction. It makes the story more interesting, as well as keeping the mind focused on the story. Also, when participating while reading, we can learn things. Maybe for a child, what color an animal was, or what color the sky was. Or even how something feels. By just reading, you are only using one sense, but by participating you are using all of your senses, but taste. I absolutley feel that participation books are a great way for children as well as adults to learn in a fun way.
I agree with your statement that all books are participatory, but not in the way that you said. Sure all books engage with the five senses, but using your touch sense to feel the weight of the book or using your sense of smell to smell the scent of a newly printed book are one thing. Being able to feel the fur of a kitten in a story, or to smell the scent of the orange tree is another. These types of participatory senses are some that make you feel that you are a part of the story, and not just reading a new, heavy book that may involve a kitten and an orange tree through the use of words. That is what I think of when I think about participatory books, not how the pages sound when you turn them for the first time. Participatory books get you involved in the story and make you feel as if you are actually there.
I do agree with most of your ideas for participatory books, however I do have a few of my own to go with your response. I do agree that all books can be participatory if the reader is engaged enough to visiualize in their minds of what is going on. I think that the difference with the participatory books lies within the age group of the reader(s). If the reader is young and just beginning to read a book that contains flaps to lift up and scratch and sniffs to smell and other physical attributes than the child will become more engaged with this book. If a child had a book to read at the beginning of their learning experience that did not contain pictures or any of these promts for participation than the child would be less likely to be engaged throughout the book. For older and more advanced readers, I do agree that books can be participatory for them, but I also believe that we cannot classify all books that they read to be this way. If someone has to read through a book in class and not for the pure enjoyment than I do believe that they will be less engaged throughout the book, this is taken solely from my own personal experiences. However, to get back to your main point that books can be participatory for all ages even with out the use of all of the five sense is something that I do agree with, but the idea of these fun books for younger readers is a good way to help them build a positive connection with reading.
I absolutley agree. All books are definatley participatory. Without participation of the imagination through thought process, readers would not be able comprehend what they read. For example, when reading books such as the Harry Potter series, readers consider the text on the page: they imagine what characters look like, what the setting looks like, what they're doing, etc. This interaction works as a tool that scaffolds comprehension. This interaction with the text enables readers to not only comprehend what they read, but also to develop an understanding of the text and make connections. Although most novels may not have the bonus of a scratch-and-sniff page, I agree that all books are definatley participatory.
I have to agree with you when you state that all books are, in some way, participation books. All books take some form of participation even when the individual reader is reading for his or her own individual pleasure. When reading literature, the individual must engage his or herself in certain aspects of the book, which can be done by applying what they are reading to past experiences to gain a better understanding. Readers can also draw on already acquired knowledge to facilitate their comprehension of the text which is personal participation. Adults (teachers, parents, etc.) also interact with children when reading literature. For instance, a parent might read to their child and stop at the end of every page to discuss what happened, or they may ask their child what they think about the book and how it applys to their life. Books do not have to have tactile materials for them to be considered "participation books," any book no matter the font, art, message, etc. engages the reader in some way that nourishes their experience of the book.
I agree in the sense that all books can be considered participatory books, to an extent. There is the idea that you are holding an object and going through the pages, etc. But to say that, that is fully a participation in the book seems wrong. When you compare the act of this turning the page, smelling the "new book smell" to the act of touching what that animal would feel like, or hearing the sound that something would make seems completely different. That is why they call it a participation book because the reader is learning about something through touch/feel/ etc. through the act of feeling like you are involved.
Post a Comment