Bill is exactly right. There is NO evidence that the individual was indeed illiterate. What we know is that he SAYS he was illiterate. It’s the newest trick that works so well in our media-obssesed, victimological culture: I know one because I am one. Come on, folks. What he did was write a book in which he presented NO objective evidence that he was illiterate. He then publicized the book. What does he gain? Money. Not a dumb man.

Being unable to read doesn’t mean that he couldn’t teach. Some of the best lectures I’ve attended in my life were performed by professors without notes, and without visual aids. The Socratic method doesn’t stop for students to write down their responses. It seems he’s an intelligent person who couldn’t read, not someone who was unable to learn to read. After 17 years of teaching, he did seek out tutors, and did learn to read.

As for the questions raised about his story, illiterate adults find ways to cope. It’s probably harder to pick out illiterate adults in professions such as teaching because you’re not looking for it. He probably didn’t have sterling grades, but he had a college degree during a teacher shortage. Employment forms can be filled out at home. I remember a time when many forms had to be typewritten, so of course an applicant could pick up forms at the office, and bring them back filled out.

As for the book, I think the nonfiction, celebrity life story, and personal self-help genres are to a great degree written by ghostwriters.

An illiterate adult that is intelligent enough to work as a teacher and real estate developer by definition has a reading disability. While they can be remediated, it certainly isn’t easy for most of them.

The object of anger and outrage is not the idea, per se, of an illiterate adult. It is the fact that he essentially committed a fraud in holding a post and taking money for something he was arguably not capable of doing: classroom teaching.

Moreover, if his story is true, then those who really belong in the pillory are the “educators” who hired him, allowed him to continue in the system with no review whatsoever, gave him tenure, and further, allowed him to continue in the face of what must have been annual parents’ complaints. (And there must have been complaints. Alternatively, we must believe that no one ever caught on, and no one ever asked serious questions about this man or his performance during the 17 years or so that he took money under false pretenses.)

There are serious questions to be asked of his story, of course; you can read some of them in this thread. I find the entire story dubious. If it’s true, then there is indeed cause for outrage.

I don’t believe it’s BS. I think it’s something we’d like to think is BS. Remember, “Carlsbad City Library literacy coordinator Carrie Scott said people of all walks of life go through the reading program, including teachers.”

How many teachers, especially in the early grades, are functionally illiterate? How can they teach reading, when they can’t read themselves? And, a further thought, is the influx of technology in the classroom making it easier for teachers to hide illiteracy?

You are probably right in everything you say.

But, if I were you, I’d seriously consider a change in employment (either a different school, district, or career).

Your views as expressed seem to represent someone who is seriously burnt out. I think you are doing yourself and your environment (students, colleagues, etc.) a disservice with your current attitude.

Find another way to excel, impact, soar.

You (apparently) think you have superior skills that are not being utilized — and you are probably right (in my experience, that is most often the case). Now you owe it to yourself to find an outlet for your talents; you obviously have a lot to offer and could positively impact many students/colleagues. Expend your energy to build up yourself and those around you.

If that’s true, you’re right, but it had nothing to do with the then-and-now-execrable California school system.

Bill