19th century novels for GCSE English....

Oh, I love Wemmick, and the castle!

And Jaggers, always washing his hands so sinister! And the friendship between Pip and Herbert Pocket, not to mention Joe looking after Pip, and Pip caring for Magwitch there's been loads of really exciting new criticism recently on Dickens and homosexuality/homosociality a great book called 'Queer Dickens' bet that would get their interest!

Yeah, it's when he grows up and it all starts being about bloody indentures and stuff that the interest might start to drift.... . Wemmick: what on earth is the point of him?

As I'm a specialist in C19th literature I'm always glad to think that these great novels are being read more widely.

I do think Great Expectations is hard, but in the hands of a skilled teacher there is a lot there for 'level 4c boys' -- fear and loneliness, domestic abuse, sexual humiliation, friendship, love... those are themes that speak to adolescents regardless of the fact that the book was written in 1860.

I can kind of understand why they feel they should leave school having read a 19th century novel but I can't see why it has to be for GCSE. I also hated Jane Eyre. I'm annoyed by Austen. I'm not a fan of Dickens. I have nothing against H G Wells.

I have studied English Lit at university in the last 15 years. But, I may be being pessimistic and/or biased.

"It's not that they're nineteenth century - it's that they're a mix of long and complex (Jane Eyre) or, well, frankly, quite hard to do decent lit crit on (Jekyll and Hyde). It'd be nicer to do books that had a better chance of getting them at least reasonably interested."

I would say in the last decade Jekyll and Hyde has been the subject of a boom in literary criticism -- there are tons of new approaches to it as a novel which could make it very good to teach even to 'lower sets' (hate that term). If teachers have studied English literature at university in the last 15 years or so they stand a very high chance of already having studied the gothic and done either or both of Frankenstein (a difficult read but fascinating) and Jekyll and Hyde.

The War of the Worlds is a fantastic story - and there are some amazing resources to support it. The Jeff Wayne album (1978!!!) is really powerful - and I am pretty sure that most secondary kids would have seen at least one of the film versions. The language may be relatively complex but the issues are involved are cracking topics for teenagers to discuss. I would have loved having this as a set text!

I find it difficult to say anything terribly exciting about Jane Eyre and Great Expectations. But that is because I find them dull.

Honestly, they must be tough for a lot of children.

I'm not sure why the allocated time for English can't be used more flexibly as long as the language syllabus is covered. English teachers have creative skills in abundance so between them a department could fix on a few books suitable for low attainers without needing a GCSE exam at the end of it.

Because English lit is set and taught along side English language, it doesn't get a separate timetable slot.

You might have a few pupils who love books and reading, despite their basic written English being poor in a class, but you still have to choose set books the whole class can cope with.

Elephant here lies the problem with GCSEs, you immediately think a book needs to be learned rather than understanding and analysing.
Also a 'dull' book can surprise you because the pleasures are there even if they are not easily accessible initially.
Hakluyt Winchester does n't do GCSE English Lit just Language but a lot of literature is included, why could n't 'low attainers' do the same?

We read Great Expectations in class when I was 11. I don't see that any of the books mentioned are especially "difficult." Jane Eyre is a great read.

I didn't think that was the implication.

There are plenty of people who are better at English Lit than other things, and would still find it touch and go to get a C.

Now maybe these books are great for them, but I do think they sound an odd choice.

I don't think doing GCSEs means you can't learn life skills, either. They could be compatible, even mutually reinforcing.

Well if it's their stronger subject perhaps with good teaching and given time they'll cope with the books. The implication is that they are low achievers who are not good at Eng Lit.
My DH who employes a couple of kids each yr considered to be low achievers will tell you it's life skills they need more than anything else.

Sheep rate ??? Separate !

Lower Attainers, may not do English lit as a seep rate subject, but there are set books in language too.

I think DD1 used of mice and men for both, which a lot of why it's pointless.

Taking one very dull book, learning it inside out and parroting the answers out if the revision text book on to your exam script does not teach you to love or value literature or encourage you to want to read more.

They did Romeo and Juliet in Y9 and for their exams too. She was delighted, she loves it.

However, given she's a strange child who actually likes Shakespeare, surely they should do two or three different ones.

happy - what if Eng Lit is one of their stronger subjects?

I don't find that a wildly inspiring choice, TBH.

It's not that they're nineteenth century - it's that they're a mix of long and complex (Jane Eyre) or, well, frankly, quite hard to do decent lit crit on (Jekyll and Hyde). It'd be nicer to do books that had a better chance of getting them at least reasonably interested.

But what do I know? Maybe someone is passionate about these texts and will make them come alive with sparkly magic for GCSE students who are finding English tough. I just wouldn't want to be asked to do it!

I agree that it is important to think of those students who are struggling, as well as those who are able. It's cruel not to. It needn't involve lowering standards.

sandi - you don't happen to remember what edition the Chaucer was, do you? I'm just curious how much it was modernized (I know that's a language isue, not to do with the other complexities of the text).

Halk you haven't answered my question why do low achievers need Eng Lit GCSE?