To want DD to actually read literature in literature lessons?

[buttonmoon78]

DD1 is in year 9. In English they are just starting Macbeth. Last Thursday she missed a lesson as she had a hospital appointment and this morning informed me that she'd missed some of the dvd they'd been watching. When I said it didn't matter as they'd be surely reading it she said no, they were just watching the dvd. I was a little bit .

I did Macbeth in year 7 - and we read it all. And this was in 1989/90 so not millenia ago.

What makes it worse is that her teacher said that they wouldn't read it because they wouldn't understand it. I mean, what? How to put a student off Shakespeare in one easy step!

AIBU or is this why the Daily Fail goes on about slipping standards in education?

Remembers spending the whole of Year 9 reading A Midsummer Nights Dream out loud. What a fecking waste of time that was. Still don't like Shakespeare.

I think the key word there is studied by children. They were meant as entertainment, pure and simple. Written in the language of the time, understood by those of the time no matter what age.

Will school children in 400 years time be moaning about reading through Eastender scripts in classrooms?

The illiterate uneducated masses didn't have to write essays about the plays. They didn't have to read them. They didnt' have to analyse 'his' language; it was their language too (or most of it was). They laughed at the funny bits, cried at the sad bits and groped orange-sellers during the boring bits. Then they went home.

What we do in a classroom is in a different universe from the original intentions of the dramatist. Personally, I truly love it - but I'm not so blinkered to believe that some children don't find it so bloody hard they can't bear to hear his name mentioned. Any way teachers can find to give them even the tiniest glimpse of the utter beauty of Shakespeare's writing is a step in the right direction.

If it's just a damn good story then what could possibly be wrong with watching the DVD?

I loved Shakespeare. And Chaucer.

DD2 is at a grammar school. She is taking Maths and english a year early, so is already studying for her GCSe's. I would actually expect her to read the set books, but apparently not.

She downloaded Wuthering Heights, and reads it on the school bus.

Well, LeQueen, you may have a point. Perhaps it's something to take up with your MP, as it's the ineffectual and damaging educational policies of various governments that have resulted in this state of affairs, not merely a succession of bone idle teachers as you seem to be implying. Initiatives such as the (thankfully defunct) National Literacy Strategy have led to an over-use of extracts and 'dabbling', coupled with ludicrous target setting which rewards teaching entirely 'to the exam'.

It may also be tricky for you to believe, but there are vast swathes of the population who do not value pastimes such as reading or going to the theatre. There are parents who can hardly read themselves and don't view education as worthwhile. There are children who come from homes without access to books and where academic achievement is ignored or ridiculed and where parents would rather go on-line or watch television than listen to their children read. Perhaps you should visit them and tell them to buck up their ideas, old chum.

LeQueen of course that is the ideal solution and most teachers would jump at the chance but sadly in the modern age of school trips it is not always feesible for this to happen.

Likewise many of the plays are now set in modern settings or musicalised (actual word? It's late and WY on QT is confusing me, what is up with the beard?) like S4K performances.

I have fond memories of going to Stratford in Year 10 and studying with the RSC after their superb performance of Much Ado but that is not available to everyone and every school.

Ouch...

We saw Romeo and Juilet S4K version. My Year 8 bottom set were through most of it and asked if we could see a proper version instead. Sadly not my choice of trip, that was down to the HOD. So what did we do? We read the play and yes we used shortnened versions (still in Elizabethian language), manga version and yes even whispers DVD of RSC performance (an outdoor Shakespeare in the Park version).

'If they find it hard...so what?'

That's the attitude! Why not have a go at teaching yourself? I'm sure you'd be a great success, particularly with students who have difficulty accessing the text.

Winding back up a bit, I did ask DD if she was expected to read WH, apparently not - they will be studying the 'relevant bits'.

Agree 100%, studying isn't supposed to be easy. Or spoonfed.

"And, sticking a DVD on isn't about a teacher trying to give their pupils a glimpse of Shakespeare's beauty. It's about giving them a fairly quiet and easy lesson to oversee, and it ticks a box somewhere."

I strongly disagree with this. It might not be phrased like that, but that's exactly what it's about. To let kids see and hear the acting, to make the words on the page come to life, to hear the words spoken with emotion and meaning - all of that helps. Why is that any less valuable because it's on a DVD not on stage? That's like saying seeing a play is about having a jolly day out and ticking a box somewhere.

Yes, watching a film in a lesson can be an 'easy' lesson, but I don't know any teacher who would do it for that reason.

Quattro-whatever, you've failed to engage with any of my actual points. So I'll stop worrying about your opinion, I think.

I don't think it's about easy teaching. after all, reading from a book someone else has written and then talking about it is much easier than planning a lesson round excerpts.

Shakespeare is difficult to access for a lot of pupils. Loads of pupils have sen, eal, behavioural difficulties etc. in state schools. They come from other cultures so Shakespeare isn't part of their heritage. They don't come from families that read or go to the theatre or that can put these things in context for them. They don't have a family member who will encourage them to download a text onto their smartphone to read on the bus. Or a Mum that will take them on a fun half term trip to the globe or to Stratford.

Perhaps we could look at ways to help others achieve more rather than berating them for not doing as well as others who don't have the same barriers as they do.

VictorianIce -I agree. Probably because I also live and teach in the real world, and don't mix up Mallory Towers with reality, like some.

The last two posts have restored my faith in mumsnet. Thanks ladies.

Oh good, the thread's turned sensible again. Sorry but I've never read so many twattish posts by people pontificating about something they don't have a clue about and couldn't do in the real world to save their lives.

I don't know why I am battling on with this

Can you not see that NOT READING THE TEXT has nothing to do with the teaching of English?

Can you not understand that whilst watching a DVD is good in terms of bringing the text to life (particularly if your class can't afford a trip to the RSC) it is not a substitute?

Why do you teach English? What is it about the subject, or the teaching that makes you want to do it? That's what makes me curious. Is it to engender love of the subject? Or is it to pull a 'D' grade candidate up to a 'C'?

Personally, I do it just to disadvantage students and ruin their life chances. :o

We have children who genuinely cannot read. Who read at a sounding out each word level if at all. And we have quite a lot of them. Now, why they can't read at 11 is a pretty sound question I think, but as a secondary teacher, it's more about dealing with the fact that they can't read yet and trying to put that right. I'm not an English teacher. I teach Science, and that is hard enough with illiterate children. I cannot imagine trying to read a whole Shakespeare play with them. Higher sets are a whole different ball game mind.

I never said I didn't read the text. Upthread I said the opposite. I also said that I have many issues with the current system.

And I really don't want to be rude but do you not understand that (without giving up on anybody) some students are just trying to get into college and are never going to fall in love with Shakespeare? Perhaps they're going to be scientists but struggle with punctuation. Perhaps they want to run their own beauty salon but need a C to start NVQ Level 2. In that case, then unapologetically yes, I am trying to pull a D candidate up to a C because that is what they need me to do.

My love of Literature knows no bounds and many many of my students feel the same. I don't give up on the others. I read whole texts. But I teach according to the needs of my students, not according to the ideals of people who really don't know what they are talking about.

I fail to see how asking pupils who do not have the ability to read standard everyday English to read plays written hundreds of years ago that were meant to be watched or acted is going to fill them with a joy for literature and learning. I love reading but I hate reading Shakespeare. And I've tried. I really have.

This thread has been an education for me, for which I thank the English teachers

And I thank my lucky stars that my DCs aren't taught in excerpts

But part of me feels very sad indeed. How can we hope to eradicate inequality, when a proportion of children are taught to read the text, but a far larger proportion just watch a DVD instead? How can inequality have become so entrenched?

I'm signing off. Somewhat in disgust. You teachers can all congregate together and pat one another on the back for not-teaching, and you can exchange what-does-she-know-anyway comments.

What I do know is that my DCs are fortunately in receipt of an education. They can do with that as they please. Fine if they want to become trapeze-artists. But at least their education will not disqualify them from entering the professional classes. Can you say as much for your students?

I'm not trying to tricky by going against the grain here but I do actually think that the national curriculum is a bit outdated in its teaching of Shakespeare.

I studied A Midsummer Night's Dream in Yr 8 and really didn't understand it very well....until we watched the film and then for GCSEs we did Macbeth, again which was tricky to follow.

I think it's important to look at how Shakespeare wrote but to be honest, there are some truly great books that are far more engaging to children today than any of Shakespeare's stuff.

I'm not saying Mr S should be forgotten but I think capturing children's imagination is going to get them enjoying eng. lit far more than trudging through pages of blurb that is like a foreign language to many children (and I was top set for English so it's not as if I struggled).

The national curriculum is so narrow (IMO) in what and how it teaches - let's get some genuine passion in the classroom when it comes to books and writing.