“I do know that for the sympathy of one living
being, I would make peace with all. I have love in me the likes of which you
can scarcely imagine and rage the likes of which you would not believe. If I
cannot satisfy the one, I will indulge the other.”
When
I first read this line from the great classic Frankenstein, I
couldn't describe how beautiful the words were.
I was in awe. It was one of those moments when I realized how much I
loved English and appreciated my ability to read. Two years later I was reading the same line out
loud to my own students and…nothing. Nothing at first, then groans, and thus
began one of the most painful moments of my teaching career.
I
have come to realize—and this may offend some English teachers out there—that the
great works that we have been smashing down our students’ throats as a part of
the traditional English curriculum is not doing our students any favors. William H. Schubert discussed the “intellectual
traditional” curriculum and how it can be “found in great works” (p. 170). However, I have to disagree. Trust me, I am an avid supporter of the
classics like Shelley, Shakespeare, etc. (in certain context and classes) but I
have seen a curriculum of great works that have destroyed the love of reading for
our newest generations of readers. We
know there are other reasons why students don’t read (like new technology), but
when I taught the English III curriculum (which is heavily influenced on the
need to teach complex texts to prepare for the ACT), it was devastating to see student after
student say, “I hate reading.”
I
find myself thinking more like a “social behaviorist” when it comes to the curriculum. Specifically, I agree that teachers need to “re-make
curriculum in every generation by asking what successful people do, and more
importantly what they need to know in order to do it” (p. 3-4). For instance, I have been using more mentor
texts by great writers—old, but also new—and having my students look at how those
writers successfully write and what creative methods (grammar, sentence
structure) they use. I have also been
talking more about reading strategies and how students can find choice books students they
will enjoy, with the belief that someday they will find the confidence and
stamina to tackle some of those more difficult, but great works (like Shakespeare).
I
have learned that the “early decades of the 19th century school
curriculum” was “linked to the names of books read” like “Caesar or Virgil”
(p.185-186) is something we still do today. But why? Our students have changed, as has the economy
and culture. Some kids should, and will, want to read these great works, but most students just need to be taught strategies
that will help them with literacy rather than trying to rush through 5-6 full
length "classic" novels that have been part of the curriculum for
decades. Maybe it is time to make a change.
Additional Resource:
I have discovered that this book by Kelly Gallagher called Readicide is a great fit into all this issues about what we teach and why. While it may feel like this book is just for ELA people, it still hits on topics related to using textbooks and what we want our students to read--in all disciplines.
Readicide on Amazon.com
Quotes from the book Readicide
Additional Resource:
I have discovered that this book by Kelly Gallagher called Readicide is a great fit into all this issues about what we teach and why. While it may feel like this book is just for ELA people, it still hits on topics related to using textbooks and what we want our students to read--in all disciplines.
Readicide on Amazon.com
Quotes from the book Readicide
I think your post really grabbed me this week because of your opening. How much you related to one book and wished your students would feel the same. And, no matter how much love you poured into it, it wasn’t there. As was mentioned in the Schubert article, some believe all it takes is a great teacher to make a great work relevant. However, without relevance and a place in a student’s life beyond the classroom, some of these great works will not succeed. To this day, I still have not read To Kill A Mockingbird and enjoyed it. I know how great of a book it is and how it speaks to millions, it just doesn’t speak to me. As a Kindergarten teacher, I do not really delve into great literature beyond Frog and Toad. However, I do wonder how a high school chooses the books it teaches and for what reason those are the ones chosen. How much of the high school curriculum is based on great works for great works sake? Obviously I have been removed from this area for a long time and do not have much personal experience in high school English. I would wonder what books students would relate to these days and how these books may influence students to enjoy reading for what it is. I would hope there are some good books that students can relate to that still provide teachable moments in text.
ReplyDeleteI could not agree with you more about the great classics. I like to read and I read often in my own time, but I wonder if I was forced to read all of these great classics, if I would like to read. I think at times when we push old ideas on our new, modern day students they get turned off from school and from our lessons. There are so many complex texts that the reading skills needed can still be taught and when the right student comes around, then a teacher can introduce them to the great classics if interested. I still find myself connecting back to student interest. However, I do not believe that the student interest needs to be the forefront of the curriculum. I also connected to the social behaviorist background. I believe that standards have a place and at times they need to be revisited to talk about the relevance in our students lives. Standards make sure that all students are taught equally and get an education they deserve no matter the school, the economic status of the city, etc... I find this in my own subject matter math. As much as math and science is pushed, I wonder if students benefit more from the push of having to take Algebra II or if this should be an option for students led in that track. Wouldn't students benefit more from some sort of finance class where they learn how to manage money, create retirements, and all of these real life situations that everyone has to deal with. I am a math teacher, love math, but yet I still have trouble figuring out which retirement plan is best among many other choices in life. Aside from math class, I do not remember a time when I have ever used what I learned in Algebra II.
ReplyDeleteFirst I want to say Thank You for saying what I have been trying to say for years. High School English courses kill students love for reading. The great works just turn students off from reading. Sure there are exceptions but unfortunately there are very few students who enjoy those great works and by forcing students to read them we made students hate reading. I too see such great value in the social behaviorist model. Information is at students fingertips 24/7 so why force the memorization and the things that turn students off to school or certain subjects. What the world needs now is creative problem solvers who can manage information. We won’t get that through traditional teaching methods. I really wish I could send your post to every English teacher I know as this embodies everything that I think needs to be different about curriculum!
ReplyDeleteAmber,
ReplyDeleteI think what you are asking here is a pertinent question for all of us. You are asking us to think deeply about why it is we teach certain things--like "classic" novels--and do not teach other things--like more contemporary YA lit? If you consider the debate about the purposes of schooling that we encountered in Theme 1, and trace that through the history we learned in this theme, it is clear that some elements of our curriculum are outmoded. The notion of teaching "classic" pieces of literature goes way, way back, as you note, but even then, there were debates about why that should be required reading for everyone. Some suggested that knowledge of these "classics" serves as part of a gatekeeping mechanism for those in privilege and that we should storm the gates by teaching it to everyone. Now...I don't know. I think the jig is up with our students...they know that just because one theoretically has "access" to this stuff doesn't mean it is going to DO anything for them in the future. However, I think we enter into dangerous territory when WE are the ones that start deciding which kids can/should learn what material. I wonder if we began, as Dewey suggests, with students own lived experiences and intuitions, that we might expand outward and eventually find ourselves teaching Frankenstein or Shakespeare anyway? What would it take to awaken a love of reading in students?
Big stuff here.
amanda