I am not a gloom and doom person. I usually see the good in people and in events, and I have a tendency to believe that things will work out. However, I am going to be a little negative for a moment. I read an article recently titled "The Decline and Fall of the English Major" and it bothered me.
The article laments the fact that on many of our country's top universities, the number of student majoring in English literature and composition has declined significantly over the last few years. The author sees one of the main reasons for the decline in the number of students choosing to study writing and literature as the recent demand that students at lower levels read much more straight-forward, fact-laden pieces of nonfiction, leaving less time for them to explore literary texts. While I cannot argue the validity of this statement, I can tell you that such a shift is occurring, that that shift is disheartening, and that literature does not have to be a victim in this shift, left on the side of the road to rot.
I have had the pleasure the last few years to work with our district team to explore and implement the Common Core Standards, aka the College-Career Readiness Standards. One of the points we discussed early in the process was that the new standards stress nonfiction reading and actually state that a high school student should read 70% argumentative and expository nonfiction material and 30% literary texts. One of my colleagues asked me if that was the proportions of the reading in my classroom. I said, "No, nor should it be." I went further to ask, "Is 30% of what students read in science or social studies literary?" Of course not, nor should it be. I do agree that we, as teachers in the English classroom, must infuse all kinds of nonfiction reading into our curriculum, and we are doing that, although I admit I need to do a better job. However, the assumption that the 70%-30% proportion falls entirely on the shoulders of English teachers is flawed, unless one contends that the only place a student today should read is in English. First, all reading, falls under those percentages, not just extended reading, such as novels. Research reading, biographical articles, historical documents all fit. Secondly, students should be reading, and reading more, in all areas.
As I thought about the article and the shifting emphasis in what students may be asked to read, I started thinking about how we use reading. One of the most frustrating questions for me in my class (right behind "How long does it have to be?") is "Why are we reading this? Is this history class?" It might be articles we read in preparation for Of Mice and Men about those young men in the 1930s who jumped trains and traveled the nation in search of work. It might be editorials about invasions of privacy or the 4th Amendment, texts I have used prior to cracking 1984. I had a student complain that we were reading science articles about the ebola virus during our unit on Edgar Allen Poe and "The Masque of the Red Death", until we had actually gotten into the short story and he suddenly blurted, "Oh wow, that's pretty cool."
Other teachers, in other content areas, have to deal with the same questions, in reverse, and I am happy about that. Not that they have to deal with those questions, but that they are having their kids read. Students in biology can be seen carrying around copies of The Hot Zone, a nonfiction novel. Some of our history teachers do regular current events reading. I know our art students read biographical articles about their favorite artists as well as particular artistic styles.
So our kids are reading. Should they read more? Yes, in all of our classes. Should they continue to read literary material? Absolutely. Literary texts, short stories, novels, and poetry all for students to think, and they often trigger understanding in students that might not otherwise click. One day this year, I had one of those moments of excitement when one of my students raised his hand in class to talk about what happened in history class. I paraphrase the student, but he said something along the lines of "Do you remember that poet Sandburg we read? Mr. Hotmar gave us one of his poems in class. It was pretty cool. It really made sense." The poem was "Killers", and the class was studying World War I. For this kid, the poem took the events out of the textbook, off of the page, and it made them real. My freshmen studied a poem this spring by Shane Koyczan. In the feedback from the students, one student wrote, "Every year we get lectured about bullying and have assemblies. Doing this poem is better for bullying than any of that could ever be." Sometimes, for some kids, that is how it works.
I started thinking back, way back, to my high school days. One of those teachers that I hope to one day live up to, one that had a great influence on my education, was Mr. Jerry Marsh. Mr. Marsh taught history, government, and economics. Each and every student had to go through his doors in order to graduate. Mr. Marsh challenged us. Mr. Marsh made us read. I would lay odds that any student who had his class will remember 10 point quizzes, where we had to write down 10 points from articles taken from The Wall Street Journal, not a publication most high school students read. Were the quizzes primarily about comprehension? Yes, they were, but they also served as the basis for the discussion, lecture, or activity for the day. I also remember that in World History, Mr. Marsh required us to read some extended text, historical fiction or nonfiction. I chose to read a translation of Mein Kampf and a light little piece titled Johnny Got his Gun. I do not know that I would have read either of those pieces if it were not for that assignment. Actually, I would have read Johnny Got his Gun, mainly because Metallica recorded the song "One" which was based off of the events of the anti-war novel.
I guess what I am getting at is this: kids need to read. They need to read a variety of texts, and they need to read in variety of settings. Reading of all kinds and colors is importnat, and it all can make you think or feel. And in most cases, in the immortal words of John Belushi's Bluto in Animal House, "It don't cost nothin'."
No comments:
Post a Comment