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?

I'm honestly surprised that the over emphasis on extract-based teaching and over reliance on 'multi-modal texts' (read: DVDs) isn't common knowledge. The subject leader where I work, and at my previous school, actively advocates the approach, to the dismay of a minority of the team. It's a hideous way to 'teach' literature, engendering no love of literature or intellectual challenge.

The good thing for me at the moment is that KS3 English is so neglected now that APP is archived, that no-one notices me going my own way. I'm currently up to Act Three of Romeo and Juliet with my set 8 year 9, and we're having a great time with it. I will have spent an entire term on the play by the time we've finished, and that's a luxury (our current schemes of work are 2-4 weeks in length!)

YANBU, OP. Schools (and actually, plenty of English departments) don't care about the teaching of literature. All that matters is the A*-C in English. Many students are being pulled out of GCSE English Literature altogether, in pursuit of 'value added'. What a joke.

Fortunately my DCs are not at schools where 'extract-based teaching' (for which, read non-teaching) is practised. I am too old for this form of non-teaching to have been practised on me, so I was blissfully unaware that a significant proportion of English teachers had given up on their subject. To the extent that apparently some now think that Shakespeare is Middle English.

I've got beyond frothing. I'm just grimly determined to keep my DCs away from schools of this nature,

Year 9s are quite unlikely to do "literature lessons". They probably have 'English', where they'll do some language and some study of literary texts. To compare a snapshot of a year 9 unit of work with A Levels from the 80s is frankly ridiculous. It's the same as the poisonous Gove's rose-tinted lenses view of Education in the Good Old Days, and shows no understanding of current issues facing schools.
She could be doing a unit on 'witches in literature' or looking at women characters, or doing something on Shakespeare's language. She could be comparing a theme in two Shakespeare plays. Yes, she could be 'just watching the film', but who cares? This is a tiny, tiny freeze-frame of an entire year of education, based on a single comment from a 14 year old.
How people can make such rude, judgemental comments about teachers, state schools and English teaching in general on the basis of NO information, is beyond me.

I have a 14 year old. She's just finished reading (yes, reading!) The Tempest. She has seen it in production. She's watched a DVD. DD will almost certainly do an English degree. She engages with Shakespeare, and loves literature in fact.

I knew nothing of this excerpt based learning, and the fact that teachers aren't teaching, and children aren't or can't read until you lot came and told me about it.

So yes, I am shocked. Shocked to the core. I am not being rude. I will take jolly good care that this form of 'education' is not being provided to my DCs. If you are offended by my shock, why don't you go and relax and watch a DVD of Shakespeare or something. You can call it preparation for lessons. Why not?

I care quite a lot if 14 year olds are just watching films in any lesson.

She could be doing a unit on 'witches in literature' or looking at women characters, or doing something on Shakespeare's language. She could be comparing a theme in two Shakespeare plays.

As an English teacher, I loathe this piecemeal approach. I don't see the point in investigating characterisation at a remove from the text. I believe that to really understand Shakespeare's presentation of Lady Macbeth, you need to be engaged with the play as a whole, not to be comparing her with, say, Kate or Ophelia (to give an example of apparently random character choices suggested by our curriculum).

To me, knowledge of whole, discrete texts comes first. Comparisons between them years later, otherwise, where's the depth?

I think you might also be surprised at the amount of free time at KS4 generated by students opting out of languages and not being entered for a broad range of subjects. I know of kids on 4 'study' periods a week, increasing as they complete coursework and exams in subjects such as IT and maths.

Tarty, I sincerely hope that you are teaching my children

Thank god there are some English teachers out there

"If you are offended by my shock, why don't you go and relax and watch a DVD of Shakespeare or something. You can call it preparation for lessons. Why not?"

You are being rude. That's very rude.

I'm not offended. I'm a bit irritated that a teacher daring to use a DVD in lessons is being used as a stick to beat the entirety of state education. But not offended.

You are missing the point. I sincerely hope that you are deliberately missing the point, but I am nervous.

And the point is ....

WATCHING A DVD IS NOT A SUBSTITUTE FOR READING THE TEXT

Have you got it now?

Victorian DD2 is in Y9 and doing 'proper' Literature lessons as she has started her GCSe courses.

State education isn't perfect, it never will be to some exacting standards but it is jolly good and yes some mistakes are made but after all teachers are human too. Don't like the system? Complain to those who create it (little hint: not the teachers)

I hold the teachers responsible

I bloody do hold the teachers responsible

And the heads of department, and the slothful governors

How dare you substitute watching a DVD for reading the text

Answer me that!

Is that addressed to me personally? Sorry to say I have never gone down that route but to slate an entire system based on one small example is never a good idea.

LeQueen totally agree with you on that front and hadn't seen your post about it when I posted before.

All those being snooty about the use of DVD have clearly never had to plough through an entire Shakespeare text with a group of poor readers. Far better whip up enthusiasm with a film, then study extracts, themes, characterisation and so on than to spend hour after loathsome hour stumbling along forcing kids who can barely read to tackle language which is difficult if you don't read much. It ruins the confidence of the readers and wrecks the enjoyment and understanding of the subject for everyone else.

Anyone want to teach me?

Le Queen, I do understand that. I can't say I think it's an acceptable state of affairs. However, I still think there is a basic logical fallacy in this thread: to extrapolate that all of English teaching is beyond redemption simply because one class has apparently seen a DVD, and may not be reading the whole text, does seem to be rather overstating the case. Doesn't it?
I'm aware that I'm being somewhat of an apologist for English teachers here, but they work incredibly hard to get teenagers to engage with some complex texts which were written for adults, and never intended to be studied by children. And they succeed - time and time again, in the most difficult circumstances.

Quattrocentro, you're still being rude.