Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Chat

Join the discussion and chat with other Mumsnetters about everyday life, relationships and parenting.

Original poster

They’re still teaching the same books they did when I was at school

101 replies

Rapidmama · 28/08/2019 20:56

DD massively dismayed to see Macbeth on her reading list. She utterly loathed it in year 7.

An inspector calls....I did that for GCSE 20 years ago

Animal Farm - not so bad but done to death by now surely?

Why can’t they inject some life into the reading syllabus?

OP posts:
Sparklingbrook · 28/08/2019 20:59

I did Macbeth too and hated it. I often wonder what they would do if Shakespeare never existed.

I also did A Tale of Two Cities and I have to say all the picking it apart just ruined it for me and I have never read it again.

AppleKatie · 28/08/2019 20:59

I don’t quite understand.

How can something be ‘done to death’ when each year is a new cohort.

Your daughter will only do her GCSEs once...

Scruffalicious · 28/08/2019 21:00

Has your daughter done all three books before?!

Interested in this thread?

Then you might like threads about these subjects:

General education Secondary education
Autumnchill · 28/08/2019 21:00

Funnily enough we did Macbeth and Animal Farm and that was 30 years ago!

TheOnlyLivingBoyInNewCross · 28/08/2019 21:01

Macbeth and An Inspector Calls are fantastic texts.

What texts would you suggest to "inject some life" into the curriculum?

NewAccount270219 · 28/08/2019 21:02

Are you actually, honestly arguing that they shouldn't study Shakespeare because it's not recent enough?!

Also, unless you have taken it upon yourself to give your DD a rundown of every book you've ever read I don't see how a book will be any more or less fresh to her because you studied it?

Itallt0omuch · 28/08/2019 21:02

Anyone would think Shakespeare was the only playwright to ever exist. Isn't it about time schools branched out a bit?

Sparklingbrook · 28/08/2019 21:02

It is strange to think not much that is new has come through in 30 odd years I think.

DB did Animal Farm IIRC

Original poster
Rapidmama · 28/08/2019 21:03

I mean done to death in that it’s been on the GCSE syllabus forever. There are so many worthy books out there and it’s the same stuff year after year.

She did Macbeth in year 7. Animal farm in year 8. Now they need to do them all over again for GCSE!

OP posts:
TheOnlyLivingBoyInNewCross · 28/08/2019 21:03

Although I accept that if your DD has read Animal Farm hundreds of times before than she has obviously done it to death and might be a bit bored. Which is what I'm assuming you mean as otherwise your "done to death" comment makes no sense since it's a new cohort of kids each time...

Soola · 28/08/2019 21:04

I left school in 1982 and Macbeth was thoroughly enjoyed in my last year. We even had a theatre school trip to see it being performed.

However, I don’t know what today’s youth make of it.

Original poster
Rapidmama · 28/08/2019 21:05

Yes! This fascination with Shakespeare Hmm

I love to read, but I know plenty of adults who would struggle to read a play and dissect it into tiny little parts. Any joy in the actual writing is completely lost in the slog!

OP posts:
NewAccount270219 · 28/08/2019 21:06

She did Macbeth in year 7. Animal farm in year 8. Now they need to do them all over again for GCSE!

Well, yes, that is a bit shit of the school. They have a number of texts to choose from, so it's their own fault and preventable if they're repeating from lower down the school. Possibly they think it improves results, and that's sad if so as they're actively choosing to limit the range of literature the students are exposed to.

Original poster
Rapidmama · 28/08/2019 21:08

You seem to be caught on the “done to death” part.

Yes every cohort is new to Macbeth. But syllabuses must get updated? In 20-30 years? Every adult and child should do the same play?

We all did Macbeth except for the “remedial” kids who got to do Romeo and Juliet. What’s wrong with the Merchant of Venice? Or any other play than bloody Macbeth Sad

OP posts:
Original poster
Rapidmama · 28/08/2019 21:09

It’s absolutely because they think it improves results. Her year 7 English teacher told us as much in parents evening when I said how relieved she was they had finally finished with it!

OP posts:
HarveySchlumpfenburger · 28/08/2019 21:10

I don’t think you can blame the GCSE syllabus for your school’s poor curriculum choice.

eddiemairswife · 28/08/2019 21:11

What is wrong with pupils studying more challenging books in school? I was at school decades ago, and always accepted that the books we read in English wouldn't be something you would automatically get out of the local library.

NewAccount270219 · 28/08/2019 21:11

Shakespeare is so widely taught in part because it's so culturally significant - if kids leave school with no knowledge of Shakespeare then it really puts them at a disadvantage in terms of their cultural capital. I actually believe that it's important that all children have some grounding in the Bible for the same reason - not at all for reasons of religious teaching/indoctrination but because a huge amount of English literature is essentially inaccessible to you with no biblical knowledge.

I see this all the time with the undergraduates I teach - they vary hugely in how comfortable and confident with early modern texts, and sadly it doesn't reflect their intelligence or ability, it reflects the sort of schools they went to. Privately educated students have usually studied much more of the 'canon' and while I don't think those texts are more worthwhile in and of themselves the fact is that they open up a lot of other literature to you.

MsJaneAusten · 28/08/2019 21:12

By ‘they’, do you mean Michael Gove? He put all the books he did at school back into the curriculum when he was educational secretary.

Edexel has just introduced some new texts for GCSE literature but the school funding crisis means that most schools won’t be able to afford to buy sets of the them.

eddiemairswife · 28/08/2019 21:14

What would be acceptable to you OP? Harry Potter? The Hunger Games?

IrishMamaMia · 28/08/2019 21:14

OP I agree. I love George Orwell personally but just didn't have the historical context to fully enjoy it at that age.
Since the changes that Gove brought in some schools have started doing various Victorian texts but they do come with their own challenges for teachers and students.

haveuheard · 28/08/2019 21:15

I did A Child in Time by Ian McEwan for A Level, only 12 years old when I did it so relatively new. Absolutely awful book. And reading the rest of his stuff is worse. All about obsession or incest. Or both. The teacher had great fun telling us every other sentence was a sexual metaphor. We also did work on one Booker Prize nominee from that year - I got stuck with Ahdaf Soeuif The Map of Love which was by far the longest - I was the only one to finish it. And awful.

Anyway, point being modern does not equal good. Very far from it.

OneOfTheGrundys · 28/08/2019 21:16

That’s an oversight of your DD’s school at KS3. Or possibly a very deliberate choice. Which would be depressing but not uncommon.
Schools don’t get to choose curriculum much at KS4 however. We are also skint so rely on what’s in the stock cupboard already.

borntobequiet · 28/08/2019 21:16

Gosh. I did Macbeth in 1969.
Mind, I also did Mill on the Floss and Villette. I bet they’re not on the list now.

DullPortraits · 28/08/2019 21:16

You're right! They should totally do something more modern like ermmm fifty shades of grey 🙄