Thursday, May 31, 2012
I'm working on a post about this NPR story (take a look here and here and let me know if you have any reactions*). It started out as a post on kids and reading, then it became a post on kids and reading and the way we frame research questions, then it became a post on kids and reading and the way we frame research questions and the Hawthorne effect, then it became a post on kids and reading and the way we frame research questions and the Hawthorne effect and...
I assume I'm not alone in struggling with Hydra posts. They've always been a problem but since my schedule's gotten busier with contract work they've really been coming fast and furious thanks to the double whammy of having less time and suffering from a strange ailment that reacts to tight schedules by coming up with more things to do.
The sad part is that the most substantive posts are the ones most likely to keep sprouting heads. It's the trivial ones that are easy to finish. I wonder if, in general, the unimportant writing in the blogosphere tends to drive out the important, sort of a Gresham's Law of blogging.
* One of the points I'm curious about. I always assumed that the rationale behind reading to young children was to model the behavior, create positive associations and cultivate an appetite for stories and the written word. Did anyone else have a similar take on this?
Posted by Mark at 10:17 PM