An item a few days ago on Radio 4’s Today programme about why increasing numbers of young boys were failing to learn to read properly set me thinking earlier this week.
Well, almost. Actually it set my wife — a former teacher — thinking and that set me thinking about giving her thoughts a little development and a wider airing.
The news was that increasing numbers of boys aged 14 years were failing to read at the level expected of them. The explanation given by tame experts was that boys were reading less than before because there were insufficient books aimed at them and that they preferred to play computer games. Parents were also blamed for failing to set a good example for their children to emulate by not reading themselves.
We’re not so sure. Our theory is that what children do as they grow up directs the development of neuronal networks to suit those activities. So, those who read develop networks that facilitate the recognition of static character strings, while those who play computer games grow networks that help them recognise and shoot moving objects — very different skills, albeit useful in carefully controlled contexts.
Is there any evidence to support us? I don’t know. But I vaguely recall learning that older people who have strokes and then work hard to regain their motor skills can do so by growing new neuronal pathways. So why should the same thing not apply to us when we are young. At least this suggests that there is hope for non-reading 14-year-olds if we can only find a way to make them want to work hard enough at it.
Mike Thompson