Apparently, I have decided to use this blog as a philosophical outlet discussing why we teach the things we teach and do the lessons we do. My posts are not, nor never will be, in response to a specific teacher or instance, but rather about trends I am noticing at conferences and from conversations with teachers from here and at other schools. One nice thing about coaching speech and debate and traveling every weekend to tournaments is I have the opportunity to talk to teachers from all over the area about what they are doing. Plus, since I am a trained speech, theatre, and mass communications teacher and English is my secondary certification, I can, perhaps, give an outsiders perspective of the field. Anyways, I hope you enjoy my posts. I look forward to discussions and responses.
I have always been confused about the empahsis on the rationale of teaching the plot of stories. The first day of school, I tell my students I am not an ordinary English teacher. I don't care if you know, according to posters I see around many high schools, the plot of the top 100 books all people should know. I don't really care if they can regurgitate facts and details about Romeo and Juliet, The Scarlet Letter, or any other story I am required to have them read.
I really don't care.
My fellow comrades, when is The Most Dangerous Game REALLY going to play a role in the future lives of our students?
It won't.
What I do care about is teaching them how to fully comprehend and analyze ANY piece of literature anyone places down in front of them. I care students can determine the point of conflict in the story, what challenges and obsticles the characters face in achieving their goals (the rising action), where the characters have to make a decision they cannot escape the consequences (the climax), and I care they can analyze the consequences of that decision (the falling action). We all know these stories were not just written to entertain people for a few minutes each night, although the stories can be entertaining. The authors are making some sort of argument. I care that my students can understand when the sun shines or meteors fly in the sky or clothing starts glimmering like metal in the Scarlet Letter, Hawthorne is making a statement about right and wrong and not just saying light was shining in a certain direction. While I don't care if my students can tell me about the names of the families or state the events in Romeo and Juliet, I care my students can comprehend the old English language and be able to comprehend Romeo's mother committed suicide because Romeo is was exciled.... without me having to tell them Romeo's mother committed suicide.
Other than to check if the students are actually reading the assignments, I don't understand why emphasis in classrooms and assessments on literature is on what happened in the story, opposed to analyzing why the characters are doing the things they are doing, evaluating the actions and effects to the characters, and tunring these themes to connections to their own lives.
I know, I really am a strange English teacher.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I understand what you're saying David, but I don't think you can discount the value of factual plot studies.
ReplyDeleteIt's on a low-order level of thinking, the plot is, but it's necessary. The plot would be in Bloom's first taxonomy circle on the "knowledge" level. I think students need to get it fast and then move on to the deeper material that you are writing about.
I usually try to focus quickly at the beginning of a lesson on what happened in the previous chapters so students prior knowledge is activated. Then, they are more ready to take in new information and analysis. I don't like "did you actually read" quizzes either, because I was always a kid who read and I got Cs on them, but As on essays because I could analyze.
So, while it isn't the main course, covering plot items first is at least like an appetizer that whets the appetite. Then, I suppose a reflective activity over plot and deeper analysis would be dessert :-)