I can present some degree of optimism, though I wonder if optimism is the right word depending on what one might think of the quality of my books. My young adult novel gets taught in hundreds of high schools across the USA and in schools worldwide. I've Zoom-visited over 100 classrooms during the pandemic because of English teachers who very much favor the book itself—or should I say that they "center" my book. And I've noticed that, along with my contemporary books, these teachers also present many of the classics—Beloved, To Kill a Mockingbird, and The Great Gatsby being among the most common. I've also visited classrooms where Austen and Dickens are on the syllabus. And these schools I've visited have ranged from elite private to at-risk public. I believe there are English teachers (how many?) who don't necessarily follow their parent organizations' condescending philosophies.
I appreciate what you have written, and share your concerns. Reading this reminded me of my 7th grade English teacher in a public school in rural South Louisiana. I am afraid I cannot remember her name. But after an initial writing assignment she met with me and asked if I had ever heard of a Thesaurus. Of course, I had not, and she presented me with one. I enthusiastically received her help and my next paper was filled with the extravagance of language that brought about another meeting. This time, she thought I might tone it down a bit. But she cared, made an effort to help me write better, and at that young age I am certain paved the way through the later years of education. That same year I also had a math teacher who tried her best, but I am a hopeless case there. So, I feel very blessed to have had teachers that cared in a public school system that didn't have the greatest of resources. They wanted me to write. And I did.
A wonderful essay, Charles, and well thought out as opposed to simply being combative. I hope for our sake there are still literary giants in our future, who shape young minds and give young adults a reason to be widely read and to write with purpose and influence.
Thank you for this, from a writer and a parent who is deeply concerned about what schools are suggesting to our children. Classics are stripped out- even good writing is stripped out because- one assumes though this is not stated- there is something concerning in content. Instead of encouraging interrogation of that content and discussion, the
Books simply disappear into the giveaways at the front of the school. Writing, in the honors students I've been asked to mentor, is abysmal. This is a critical issue for both thinkers, doers and those who can understand, appreciate and produce good argument, beautiful thought and much more.
No doubt why charter schools have become popular. The best still teach the basics of English and writing, as opposed to sliding ever deeper into the pit of educational mediocrity.
All of the things listed in that "listicle" paragraph can now be done either with AI or with AI-assisted tools. So in the NCTE's desire to, in effect, get down and dirty with the kids in a way that won't unduly challenge them, they are not only depriving them of the ability to express themselves well in writing and enjoy first class reading, but also potentially depriving them of the means to earn a living later in life. It's good that many schools use Sherman Alexie's books because it suggests that not all English teachers have decided to give up and dumb down. I'm sure the NCTE mean well, unless they are very cynically intent on closing the doors to the academy so to speak, but this approach seems to me to be rather misguided.
It might seem natural to claim that there is only one version of contemporary English to discuss, but that's not the case. Much of urban America is tasked with teaching a school population which is significantly unable to learn and use English within the constraints of a Grade 1 to 12 school system. New students enter classrooms ever day and they speak almost no English. In my system over 65% of the students do not have English as a primary language and virtually no one they live with speaks English. Yet, we are tasked with pushing them through the system. They enter into ELL classes and test constantly until they meet a test performance level which mainstreams them into regular English classes. I have grade 12 students who have openly told me that they will not speak English in class and rarely submit assignments. Some of these students are 21 yrs. old or older because they can be in school until age 22. My goal in this situation is to get them to understand as much English as possible and try to have their writing be communicable with English speakers. It's a stretch and not accomplished with a good percentage.
It's not a matter of teaching them to write, read, or speak better English. Rather it's a situation of getting as much into them as possible before they age out of the system. Assignments are routinely presented with translation tools which allow students to auto-translate electronically or via immersive reading programs. They are able to compose in another language and to then auto-translate into English. Literature is nuanced and does not auto-translate well. Academic language is less idiomatically influenced and works better. There is only so much time allowed to teach and the students age faster than they are able to learn. A student entering 10th grade at age 18 with NO english knowledge is NOT going to learn proper English of any kind by the time the graduate high school. Whether or not they should graduate is possibly a more appropriate question.
“in school settings, writing is often perceived and enacted as a gatekeeping device, which contributes to achievement gaps and other inequities. This happens when writing instruction and assessments focus on the writing—the products that are ultimately assessed and evaluated—rather than on the writers themselves.”
I appreciate your efforts to illuminate what appears to be a concerning direction education is poised to take. I fear that in the quote above that you cited, their intent is actually worse than your interpretation. It’s not so much that they would cast off those who cannot write, but instead seems to be capitulation to woke anti-meritocratic logic. Rather, my take is that they are implying each student is as valued and celebrated as the next: regardless of whether they are capable of arranging words in a certain order that amounts to something more than word salad. This seems obviously bad, if teachers themselves fail to endorse good writing, students will similarly fail to learn the skills needed to enter and succeed in higher education and the job marketplace.
It seems there is a theme a foot, that is to dumb down the populace. Rather than developing critical thinking skills via evolved literal devices, show the masses pretty pictures. Does anyone believe for a second that any BRIC nation is doing the same, hmmm?
As I've said before, I enjoy how you create a sort of subtle manifesto. . . maybe that's just called a proclamation. I enjoyed reading a bit of the position statements you linked to as well. Not having been in school for decades and having no children, I'm pretty far removed from present day education so I enjoyed some of the comments as much as your piece. Glad you turned them on for this post! And comforted to hear that Sherman's books are being assigned along with the older classics. And speaking of classics, sometimes it's not what is or is not assigned, but it's more about how those books are taught and if the students are ready. We read many of the classics in jr high and high school, but the true beauty and form of them were lost on me. . . is that because we were reading them at too young an age or because they weren't taught as well as they could be?
I can present some degree of optimism, though I wonder if optimism is the right word depending on what one might think of the quality of my books. My young adult novel gets taught in hundreds of high schools across the USA and in schools worldwide. I've Zoom-visited over 100 classrooms during the pandemic because of English teachers who very much favor the book itself—or should I say that they "center" my book. And I've noticed that, along with my contemporary books, these teachers also present many of the classics—Beloved, To Kill a Mockingbird, and The Great Gatsby being among the most common. I've also visited classrooms where Austen and Dickens are on the syllabus. And these schools I've visited have ranged from elite private to at-risk public. I believe there are English teachers (how many?) who don't necessarily follow their parent organizations' condescending philosophies.
I appreciate what you have written, and share your concerns. Reading this reminded me of my 7th grade English teacher in a public school in rural South Louisiana. I am afraid I cannot remember her name. But after an initial writing assignment she met with me and asked if I had ever heard of a Thesaurus. Of course, I had not, and she presented me with one. I enthusiastically received her help and my next paper was filled with the extravagance of language that brought about another meeting. This time, she thought I might tone it down a bit. But she cared, made an effort to help me write better, and at that young age I am certain paved the way through the later years of education. That same year I also had a math teacher who tried her best, but I am a hopeless case there. So, I feel very blessed to have had teachers that cared in a public school system that didn't have the greatest of resources. They wanted me to write. And I did.
A wonderful essay, Charles, and well thought out as opposed to simply being combative. I hope for our sake there are still literary giants in our future, who shape young minds and give young adults a reason to be widely read and to write with purpose and influence.
Thank you for this, from a writer and a parent who is deeply concerned about what schools are suggesting to our children. Classics are stripped out- even good writing is stripped out because- one assumes though this is not stated- there is something concerning in content. Instead of encouraging interrogation of that content and discussion, the
Books simply disappear into the giveaways at the front of the school. Writing, in the honors students I've been asked to mentor, is abysmal. This is a critical issue for both thinkers, doers and those who can understand, appreciate and produce good argument, beautiful thought and much more.
No doubt why charter schools have become popular. The best still teach the basics of English and writing, as opposed to sliding ever deeper into the pit of educational mediocrity.
All of the things listed in that "listicle" paragraph can now be done either with AI or with AI-assisted tools. So in the NCTE's desire to, in effect, get down and dirty with the kids in a way that won't unduly challenge them, they are not only depriving them of the ability to express themselves well in writing and enjoy first class reading, but also potentially depriving them of the means to earn a living later in life. It's good that many schools use Sherman Alexie's books because it suggests that not all English teachers have decided to give up and dumb down. I'm sure the NCTE mean well, unless they are very cynically intent on closing the doors to the academy so to speak, but this approach seems to me to be rather misguided.
Mark R Delong, who writes https://technocomplex.substack.com/, told me about this post after he'd read my own somewhat 'exercised' article about the role of teachers: https://terryfreedman.substack.com/p/facilitators-or-guides-on-the-side
It might seem natural to claim that there is only one version of contemporary English to discuss, but that's not the case. Much of urban America is tasked with teaching a school population which is significantly unable to learn and use English within the constraints of a Grade 1 to 12 school system. New students enter classrooms ever day and they speak almost no English. In my system over 65% of the students do not have English as a primary language and virtually no one they live with speaks English. Yet, we are tasked with pushing them through the system. They enter into ELL classes and test constantly until they meet a test performance level which mainstreams them into regular English classes. I have grade 12 students who have openly told me that they will not speak English in class and rarely submit assignments. Some of these students are 21 yrs. old or older because they can be in school until age 22. My goal in this situation is to get them to understand as much English as possible and try to have their writing be communicable with English speakers. It's a stretch and not accomplished with a good percentage.
It's not a matter of teaching them to write, read, or speak better English. Rather it's a situation of getting as much into them as possible before they age out of the system. Assignments are routinely presented with translation tools which allow students to auto-translate electronically or via immersive reading programs. They are able to compose in another language and to then auto-translate into English. Literature is nuanced and does not auto-translate well. Academic language is less idiomatically influenced and works better. There is only so much time allowed to teach and the students age faster than they are able to learn. A student entering 10th grade at age 18 with NO english knowledge is NOT going to learn proper English of any kind by the time the graduate high school. Whether or not they should graduate is possibly a more appropriate question.
Pretty depressing
“in school settings, writing is often perceived and enacted as a gatekeeping device, which contributes to achievement gaps and other inequities. This happens when writing instruction and assessments focus on the writing—the products that are ultimately assessed and evaluated—rather than on the writers themselves.”
I appreciate your efforts to illuminate what appears to be a concerning direction education is poised to take. I fear that in the quote above that you cited, their intent is actually worse than your interpretation. It’s not so much that they would cast off those who cannot write, but instead seems to be capitulation to woke anti-meritocratic logic. Rather, my take is that they are implying each student is as valued and celebrated as the next: regardless of whether they are capable of arranging words in a certain order that amounts to something more than word salad. This seems obviously bad, if teachers themselves fail to endorse good writing, students will similarly fail to learn the skills needed to enter and succeed in higher education and the job marketplace.
It seems there is a theme a foot, that is to dumb down the populace. Rather than developing critical thinking skills via evolved literal devices, show the masses pretty pictures. Does anyone believe for a second that any BRIC nation is doing the same, hmmm?
As I've said before, I enjoy how you create a sort of subtle manifesto. . . maybe that's just called a proclamation. I enjoyed reading a bit of the position statements you linked to as well. Not having been in school for decades and having no children, I'm pretty far removed from present day education so I enjoyed some of the comments as much as your piece. Glad you turned them on for this post! And comforted to hear that Sherman's books are being assigned along with the older classics. And speaking of classics, sometimes it's not what is or is not assigned, but it's more about how those books are taught and if the students are ready. We read many of the classics in jr high and high school, but the true beauty and form of them were lost on me. . . is that because we were reading them at too young an age or because they weren't taught as well as they could be?