Reviews for The Faber storybook

The average rating for The Faber storybook based on 2 reviews is 3.5 stars.

Review # 1 was written on 2018-10-01 00:00:00 Alex Ayers The Faber Storybook is a large chunky book containing 74 traditional children's stories. There are eight sections. "Kings and Queens" and "Magic Spells" include folk tales such as "Jack the Giant Killer" and "The Princess and the Pea". There is one by Walter de La Mere called "Mollie Whuppie" about a courageous and resourceful woodcutter's daughter, as well as some other fairy tales by the brothers Grimm, and tales from Ireland which are not quite so well known. Myths, more serious and classical tales are collected under the general heading of "Ancient Tales of Gods and Heroes" and "Old Stories of Animals and Holy Men". There are also fifteen of Aesop's fables, as well as "Stories from Here and There", and some "Nonsense" tales. Other authors represented include Hans Christian Andersen and Joel Chandler Harris, although for many of the traditional folk stories, just the country of origin is credited. The book is illustrated with woodcuts and black line drawings, as well as eight colour plates. Each illustration is well matched to the mood of the tale. Although this collection dates from 1961, it has been reprinted with a new cover design several times. In 1986, a shortened collection was made from it. I remember first reading many folk stories, fables by Aesop, and Greek and Scandinavian myths for the first time, from this compendium.

Review # 2 was written on 2011-11-27 00:00:00 william j bryant This overview of the philosophy of education is a good survey of thinking on education through the ages. Noddings comes to the subject with a strong commitment to dialogue between competing view points, and thus presents a wide variety of perspectives on concepts as diverse as logic, epistemology, ethics, equity, and accountability. However, her own strong conviction for an ethic of care overshadows the presentation of competing perspectives. Noddings argues that unbiased reporting is impossible, and thus is open about her own agenda. I appreciate her openness, but I was left feeling like some points from people that would disagree with her are watered down and simplified. It helps that I generally agree with everything that she has to say. Specifically, I appreciate how she highlights the importance of relationships in any learning interaction. However, I disagree with her thinking about learning standards, and am curious about a more expansive exploration of the contrasting points of view which get short shrift here.