English Teachers

[Burning ghost]

In most schools there are set texts to be read.

I think it would be much more beneficial for teachers and students to choose which texts to use.

My reasoning is that if a teacher picks a text they are both familar with and passionate about this will greatly benefit the students and inspire them.

I also believe that teaching etymology would be of great use and spill over into helping understand other languages given that English is such a mongrel language.

Since a young age I enjoyed writing stories. I never found any kind of delight in school when it came to studying novels. At college I did find appreciation and interest though.

Do you believe a certain level of maturity is needed to truly appreciate literature? Can we really expect teenagers to care about politics implications and metaphors?

English is generally split into two categories. Language and Literature. Sadly I do think that the "literature" side of things is depreciated and often we are told to critic poems or stories and analyse them. For me literature is about expressing emotions, it is artistic. The most enjoyable part of English is in creation and letting the imagination flow. I am concerned that at roots level this is not being given much consideration.

[Sy Borg]

I also believe that teaching etymology would be of great use and spill over into helping understand other languages given that English is such a mongrel language.

I agree. Much of the etymology I gained was from learning a little Latin at school. Otherwise that learning has been piecemeal, with regular "Oh, that's the derivation!" moments, especially with increased availability of information. Etymology certainly does aid understanding of concepts.

Re: you main question, a good story can be appreciated by any. It is a time-tested way to communicate concepts and promote understanding.

[Supine]

Do you believe a certain level of maturity is needed to truly appreciate literature? Can we really expect teenagers to care about politics implications and metaphors?

I think we need to be cognizant of the fact there are adults in their 30's, 40's, 50's and older and in no small numbers who range from functionally illiterate to fully illiterate. At least that is the case in the United States. I think something like over 20% of the adult population of Milwaukee are functionally illiterate.

A teenager is not simply--by mere means of their age--intellectually inferior to all adults merely because the adult is older in age than they are. Who is more senior in hours and practice put into Brazilian Jujitsu the 14 year-old with a blue belt or the 30 year-old with a white belt?

Alicia Keys the musician was studying classical piano and playing Mozart at age 7 whereas I'm in my 40's and I'm entirely musically illiterate and don't know how to play a single musical instrument. Likewise, you have teenagers that can draw and adults that can't. There are teenagers that can write better than seniors in college.

With exposure to literature and ideas teenagers can become as competent critics of novels and other genres of literature as any adult.

But as a sidebar to this it is my view that "education" is primarily for the purpose of indoctrination (even in college) and not for the purpose of enabling young minds to learn how to think freely. Therefore, it behooves institutions of formal education to teach as little--or zero--philosophy and economics as they can. You want to chain the minds of kids so they respond emotionally to cues like rabid dogs. Feed them the dogmas of your political party and turn them loose to bark at your enemies.

English is generally split into two categories. Language and Literature. Sadly I do think that the "literature" side of things is depreciated and often we are told to critic poems or stories and analyse them. For me literature is about expressing emotions, it is artistic. The most enjoyable part of English is in creation and letting the imagination flow. I am concerned that at roots level this is not being given much consideration.

Literature generally encompasses emotional expressions. Quality literature is supposed to "show" rather than "tell," so, an author is expected to paint a portrait of a scene with words. This is where the analyzation comes in. There should not necessarily be an either or.

But its more common with poetry rather than something like historical novels to just be for the pure purpose of expressing emotions. While I appreciate some poetry I'm not myself into poetry very much. I prefer novels and more especially I prefer non-fiction (e.g., biographies, history, gardening).

[TSBU]

In most schools there are set texts to be read.

I think it would be much more beneficial for teachers and students to choose which texts to use.

My reasoning is that if a teacher picks a text they are both familar with and passionate about this will greatly benefit the students and inspire them.

I also believe that teaching etymology would be of great use and spill over into helping understand other languages given that English is such a mongrel language.

Since a young age I enjoyed writing stories. I never found any kind of delight in school when it came to studying novels. At college I did find appreciation and interest though.

Do you believe a certain level of maturity is needed to truly appreciate literature? Can we really expect teenagers to care about politics implications and metaphors?

English is generally split into two categories. Language and Literature. Sadly I do think that the "literature" side of things is depreciated and often we are told to critic poems or stories and analyse them. For me literature is about expressing emotions, it is artistic. The most enjoyable part of English is in creation and letting the imagination flow. I am concerned that at roots level this is not being given much consideration.

In a perfect world... I don't want to think in that anymore, it hurts. Why do you talk about things you can't change? I'm a teacher (believe it or not, I also teach English XD), and I'vealways felt that schools are making stupid students. The relationship between a teacher and his pupil must be important to both (cof, cof, not like ancient greeks though...), I think in Japan the teacher job is very respected (I heard that they were the only ones who could look at the emperors eyes not so long ago). A child, his mind, is a treasure, and it's very very very (very) delicate, to put a young man so many hours with a book in his hands feeling bored is destroy his soul. Preparing exams instead of preparing himself to the real world, then we end with slave minded people who only want to "fit" with their job. Awful.
The teacher and the student should choose what to read, what to study, together, forcing a teen to read a book is like forcing him to have sex, something that should be beautifull, becomes torture. Of course, childs are generally kind open minded, they know, the feel, that they can't choose alone... but a teacher, a father, etc, should know how to "let him be". Really, maybe I had bad experiences, but I know what I feel when I teach a boy out of school: I have to clean his mind, I have to make him appreciate what they make him hate... and at the same time, if I want to get paid, I have to teach them some stupid things... and asume that I can't teach him what I want.

About literature, nobody start by reading Shakespeare or Cervantes... maturity is a word I usually don't like, haha, "politics implications" are for me... something for teenagers XD. Metaphors are just beautifull and useless comparisons.

I think I agree with Supine in this, at least a bit.

I also believe that teaching etymology would be of great use and spill over into helping understand other languages given that English is such a mongrel language.

I agree. Much of the etymology I gained was from learning a little Latin at school. Otherwise that learning has been piecemeal, with regular "Oh, that's the derivation!" moments, especially with increased availability of information. Etymology certainly does aid understanding of concepts.

Re: you main question, a good story can be appreciated by any. It is a time-tested way to communicate concepts and promote understanding.

All languages gain from each other, and we study English all over the world because it's easy (to get understood), that's good. Languages are there because we want to express something, the same idea can be explained in two languages, it's true that some ideas can be explained better in some of them, and it's true that language changes a lot how you think... but that's... not for teenagers I think, you don't need etimology. Everybody has his own language... I think you shouldn't use so much time explaining language for those who don't want to get into that (as you don't need to teach some math for people who will never use it). Of course, a good teacher should know how to "open the door", a couple of days is enough for that.

[Alias]

I think it's a good idea for students to cover as wide a range of literary forms, periods and styles as possible, in order to understand writing, as well as the many human issues, problems and conditions with which literature concerns itself, and to lay a foundation for their adult reading preferences.
However, not every work of prose and poetry is appropriate for ever stage of a child's intellectual and emotional development.
And, of course, the parents and community have some control over the subject matter they want their children to learn.
Boards of education, therefore, choose what reading material should be offered in what grade. This doesn't have to be carved in stone, though: it can be a large selection of novels, short stories, poems, picture-books and plays, divided into age-groups (Gr1-3; 2-5...) in which every teacher can find a number of works she or he considers right and timely for a particular class, and let the students choose from that short list what they will read next.

[LuckyR]

In most schools there are set texts to be read.

I think it would be much more beneficial for teachers and students to choose which texts to use.

My reasoning is that if a teacher picks a text they are both familar with and passionate about this will greatly benefit the students and inspire them.

I also believe that teaching etymology would be of great use and spill over into helping understand other languages given that English is such a mongrel language.

Since a young age I enjoyed writing stories. I never found any kind of delight in school when it came to studying novels. At college I did find appreciation and interest though.

Do you believe a certain level of maturity is needed to truly appreciate literature? Can we really expect teenagers to care about politics implications and metaphors?

English is generally split into two categories. Language and Literature. Sadly I do think that the "literature" side of things is depreciated and often we are told to critic poems or stories and analyse them. For me literature is about expressing emotions, it is artistic. The most enjoyable part of English is in creation and letting the imagination flow. I am concerned that at roots level this is not being given much consideration.

No doubt that dry archaic tomes lead to uninterested students who get little to nothing out of the class. "Modern", plot driven literature is the best for holding teenage attention and thus is the most efficient vehicle to impart the lessons of the class. OTOH, in college you are dealing with a subset of the population who are paying a lot of money to learn and be taught so that is the time for more esoteric sources, though the class title should reflect that so the Physical Science majors and Engineers can avoid those classes.

[Belindi]

In most schools there are set texts to be read.

I think it would be much more beneficial for teachers and students to choose which texts to use.

My reasoning is that if a teacher picks a text they are both familar with and passionate about this will greatly benefit the students and inspire them.

I also believe that teaching etymology would be of great use and spill over into helping understand other languages given that English is such a mongrel language.

Since a young age I enjoyed writing stories. I never found any kind of delight in school when it came to studying novels. At college I did find appreciation and interest though.

Do you believe a certain level of maturity is needed to truly appreciate literature? Can we really expect teenagers to care about politics implications and metaphors?

English is generally split into two categories. Language and Literature. Sadly I do think that the "literature" side of things is depreciated and often we are told to critic poems or stories and analyse them. For me literature is about expressing emotions, it is artistic. The most enjoyable part of English is in creation and letting the imagination flow. I am concerned that at roots level this is not being given much consideration.

Teachers do want to lead their students as individuals. If someone shows an interest in etymology then the teacher would want to encourage the student's interest. Likewise if the student was interested in reading novels, or had an interest in ethics, or politics. Even if the novels that the student likes are shallow and badly written at least they help the student to scan.

Unfortunately there are not enough teachers for the purpose of the best liberal education which being student and child- centred is expensive. Teachers usually try very hard to provide the best that they can and will encourage individual reading and other interests. Exam-passing is often unpopular with teachers of all levels of attainment and age groupings, but has to be dealt with even although it holds back true educational aims.

The function of a teacher is not to pander to the lazy and weak tendencies of many individual students but to energise them and inspire to hard -working thought. In actual fact, as many on forums like this will know, thinking and learning are hard work and not for the unadventurous. The teacher of English literature stretches and challenges the abilities. The effort involved in stretching and challenging are not fun but are hard work and not for the stupid and the lazy.

[Fooloso4]

Burning ghost:

I think it would be much more beneficial for teachers and students to choose which texts to use.

This is certainly not what is most beneficial from an administrative perspective and, at least in the U.S., administrators call the shots. They do whatever keeps the wheels greased. I have been through several rounds of school accreditation review, from elementary to university levels. Even at the college level, when it comes to course review and approval, it is far easier to have standardized courses that are safe and non-controversial. Across the board, in an attempt to safeguard against the worst the best courses are rejected in favor of the mediocre and lowest common denominator.

It is common knowledge that a large percentage of students are not capable of reading difficult books, but what is not so often acknowledged is that a significant number of teachers are not either. That is why we find so many texts with “teacher editions”. This is connected with the problem of grade inflation. It is very difficult if not impossible to maintain rigorous high standards. When students can’t or won’t do the work both the administration and the students and their families put the blame on the teachers. It is not uncommon for students who do C work to get B’s and complain that this will ruin their 4.0 average.

All of this is connected to the introduction of “rubrics” that are used to justify grades and give the appearance of objectivity. The concept of academic excellence goes out the window then rubrics are introduced. Rather than striving for excellence students start at 100% and then have points taken off for not meeting certain competency goals. The truly exceptional student becomes indistinguishable from the merely competent because both are competent and therefore are graded at or near 100%.

School boards also have an enormous influence on what happens in the classroom. Typically they are more concerned with the appearance of excellence than with doing what it takes to achieve it. They often go hand in hand with local real estate concerns. Houses sell for more in districts with a good reputation. By definition those who are exceptional are not the majority or even a large minority of students, but if only a few students are getting the highest grades it gives the appearance of low rather than high academic standards.

[Burning ghost]

I couldn't care less about grades.