If you could design the English Curriculum..

Bigots are people too.

(raspberry)

Charlie Tunoku is a lover and a fighter.

I think Deboss came across as quite reasonable in this thread. I respect and understand his stance on some other issues a lot more now that he has explained more about where he was coming from.

Still disagree with his views on a fundamental level, but you can't change the fundamental values a person has so MEH.

I'm not sure why his views got such a hostile reaction. They're not uncommon in the wider world.

Ontopic: I would probably include a lot more foreign authors who've been translated, assuming this is around GCSE-level students (~14-16) who would be able to handle some of the problems of translation without head-asplosions. More Dostoevsky, more Kafka. No Proust, ever. Anything marked Magical Realism goes in the shitter. Anything marked "New Weird" goes, hypocritically, front and centre. Actually, yeah, Perdido Street Station and possibly Kraken would be very enjoyable to discuss, especially as they do have flaws as well as good things about them.

Closer to a dozen works of Shakespeare.

And I agree that any math requirements beyond a certain point are bad. I'd put that level at algebra myself.

My stance on "plays should go die" is a personal preference as I find the medium to be sufficiently flawed in it's presentation that it offers no redeeming value for the cost of support. That's not to say I think it should be outlawed, as if it can turn a profit, it deserves to exist.

edited 25th Jan '11 10:57:15 PM by Deboss

Fight smart, not fair.

In the wider world it might be a common opinion, but not so in the literature subforum of a website that is devoted to storytelling and the like.

It's a bit like going to a Twilight fanboard and bashing the series; no matter how valid or reasonable your opinion, it's going to be an unpopular one, given the audience.

edited 25th Jan '11 10:57:33 PM by zerky

Your words strike at Little Shop of Horrors and as a result at the very heart of my soul. Try carrying on and see what I do. Or better yet, don't.

I'm feeling strangely happy now, contented and serene. Oh don't you see, finally I'll be, somewhere that's green...

"I think Deboss came across as quite reasonable in this thread."

I don't think it's reasonable to hypothetically impose a personal predilection on the entire world without being willing to so much as hear the opposing side's viewpoint. It's not that he doesn't seem to grasp that literature is about being exposed to a multiplicity of ideas, it's that as soon as he's presented with such a counterargument, he responds with trollish, cartoonish, exaggerated quips that merely frustrate the dicsussion instead of furthering it with a genuine point of view.

"Anything marked Magical Realism goes in the shitter."

There's more to magical realism than Paolo Coelho masturbating on paper. Try Salman Rushdie, Gabriel Garcia Marquez, and Mikhail Bulgakov.

edited 26th Jan '11 11:25:40 AM by kashchei

And better than thy stroke; why swellest thou then?

In my experience, students (including myself) learn literature best when the story is applied or connected to something else.

In other words, don't hand kids a book and say "read this because it was written because it was written by some dead white guy the literary critics say it's the most amazing thing ever." (Which happens far too often).

Pick a historical novel with an engaging plot and use it to teach about a time period (or the time it was written). Read the epics and discuss how they have influenced modern fantasy stories. Use a novel like Nineteen Eighty Four to start a conversation about real-life dystopias and how much control a government should have. Read a book and watch the film adaptation to compare and contrast tone, characterization, and themes. This is stuff that engages the mind.

And of course, pick something the age group (and the specific group of students) might actually find interesting. There are plenty of books with characterization and symbolism to analyze that aren't mind-numbingly boring.

edited 26th Jan '11 12:34:38 PM by apassingthought

This. Very much this. As annoying as I find post modern literature and the works of the Lost Generation(well Noir stuff gets a pass) I still think they should get a pass. Understanding why these works were written and how the genre changed down the road is a vital part to literature.

And Deboss, I think your stance on "children shouldn't be taught anything unless they seek it out" is too unworkable and useless. Children have trouble deciding what they want in the long run. Better to give them some basis in everything so they can pick up different things if their interests or skills lie elsewhere from where they originally thought. Plus there is the problem of certain classes becoming fads due to any number of things. Some classes get overcrowded and the rest are under supported.

I just can't see that system working well in reality.

"What do you want to learn today Jimmy?"

"Nothin."

Charlie Tunoku is a lover and a fighter.

"What are we going to do today, Jimmy?"

"What we do every day, teacher- absolutely nothing at all!"

I'm feeling strangely happy now, contented and serene. Oh don't you see, finally I'll be, somewhere that's green...

There's a difference between an elective and a mandatory class. When classical literature becomes something that's worth forcing people to reading instead of scraping off the bottom of my shoe, I'd consider adding it back into the mandatory section. As it is, it's never gotten out of the "elective" level of value. Or possibly a separate class for people who aren't interested and those who are, like college does.

Fight smart, not fair.

Even colleges require certain core classes, and at least one literature class is mandatory regardless of your interests or major.

And better than thy stroke; why swellest thou then?

Bullshit. An "english" class is required, there's no literature requirement.

Fight smart, not fair.

My college has a literature requierement. It does not have to be in the English department, however, and it cannot be fulfilled by a composition class. But I suppose it could be "bullshit" for whatever institution you're attending.

edited 26th Jan '11 8:33:18 PM by kashchei

And better than thy stroke; why swellest thou then?

If I was designing an English curriculum for a single year... There would be month-long units focusing on different types of writing. Each unit would involve three weeks of reading a short piece before class each day and discussing it, trying to make the pieces as varied as possible, and a week/two weeks during which students would be able to choose a longer piece of the type being covered and read/write about it, or alternatively try writing a short piece of the style discussed. Units would include various types of fiction, historical writing, speechwriting and rhetoric, science writing (mainly focusing on how to communicate difficult ideas to other people, using writings by science writers like Carl Sagan), visual/experimental formats (focusing on bits from graphic novels, manga, online media, books like House of Leaves), and whatever else would fit into one year. There would be no required readings longer than a few pages; anything longer than that would be the choice of students during projects, though the books would have to be approved first.

See that's a good plan. I'm going to borgify it now.

Fight smart, not fair.

The one problem I see with that plan is that there's no effective way to discuss longer narratives, since all but the absolute shortest of stories will only be read if the student selects them. Sure, you could cover issues pertaining to longer works, but there will be no shared frame of reference. One way I could see around this would be to make the allowed list very short (perhaps still taking student suggestions into account) so that the students can get a grasp of what's going on in the, say, 3 books they didn't read through group presentations and such, thereby ensuring that the point of the material isn't lost because there were 20 different books read by 40 students. In any case, the idea seems like it would function well so long as your goal was to focus on the micro level, and it were the only English class the students had to take. The curriculum seems like it would work better if all of the English classes had that structure so as to prevent overlap between years.

Side note: Putting the upper cap at just a few pages seems to be over-compensating for students disliking assigned reading. While it's a noble goal to try and stop students from having to read something they dislike for more than fifteen minutes  ^*

, extending the limit to something like 10 or 15 pages (split over two days) would allow you to cover more than just the micro-shorts in full and give a greater understanding of the macro level even if you don't do what I mentioned above.

edited 27th Jan '11 3:46:08 AM by Ironeye

I'm bad, and that's good. I will never be good, and that's not bad. There's no one I'd rather be than me.

8th grade is the 8th year of education, right? That's what, 12-13? By the time I was 11, we'd read Norse mythology and the tales of Brer Rabbit. They were presented simply as stories, to be read without any particular agenda behind them. I think they missed out Greek and Egyptian because of all the incest, rape, bestiality and murdering that went on.

He may have meant that, but what he actually wrote was that he thinks people who teach Shakespeare should be sent to Congress. Or possibly barred from entering Congress.

In that case, the problem lies with you, not with the works.

edited 27th Jan '11 6:23:33 AM by AndrewGPaul

When I was at secondary school, over the five years we covered, among other things, ...

Shakespeare - Romeo And Juliet, A Merchant Of Venice, A Midsummer Night's Dream. We also saw theatrical performances of Romeo And Juliet, Macbeth and Hamlet.

Wuthering Heights

Cal by Bernard Mac Laverty,

the poetry of Philip Larkin,

Of Mice And Men,

The Untouchables (yes, the film).

Then there was the RPR (Review of Personal Reading) essay that we had to do in fifth year. That was pretty much a free choice; I did Paddy Clark Ha Ha Ha by Roddy Doyle, a friend of mine did Feersum Endjinn by Iain M. Banks and I'm pretty sure another friend did The Unbearable Lightness Of Being by Milan Kundera.

While I don't think I'd have chosen to read any of those, the only one I really would never consider reading again is Cal. Even the cack-handed attempts of illiterate 12-year-olds to read Shakespeare's prose hasn't put me off. I think sometimes only myself and the teacher got some of the dirtier jokes.

edited 27th Jan '11 6:23:08 AM by AndrewGPaul

"Even the cack-handed attempts of illiterate 12-year-olds to read Shakespeare's prose hasn't put me off. I think sometimes only myself and the teacher got some of the dirtier jokes."

Ah, but maybe the rest of the class got that Shakespeare mostly wrote in verse.

Are you Jamaican?

edited 27th Jan '11 7:34:37 AM by kashchei

And better than thy stroke; why swellest thou then?

Unless I'm in the majority, in which case, the problem is with the novel and the class.

Fight smart, not fair.

As this thread perhaps suggests, you're in a very vocal minority, and your tendency to project may cloud your views.

And better than thy stroke; why swellest thou then?

Pthbbbbbt.

No. Should I be?

No, what I quoted sounds like you didn't fully read the material, then deliberately forgot what little you had read, then deciding that it was worthless. I can't see how that's anyone's fault but yours.

edited 27th Jan '11 8:18:10 AM by AndrewGPaul

In the thread. I'm talking about everyone that takes the subject.

Fight smart, not fair.

It's "everyone who takes the subject," not "everyone that," and since you don't have close familiarity with "everyone," we can dismiss that statement right away.

"No. Should I be?"

Sounds like you have a similar school system.

And better than thy stroke; why swellest thou then?