To think Michael Gove has actually got something right for once?

[privitandpetunias]

Article in the guardian saying that Mr Gove wants to remove the American literature from the GCSE curriculum and replace it with English literature (sorry can't do links). This is something I have often thought that there are so many great novels out there that are part of our cultural heritage that it would be great for our children to study.

The vast majority of children study English Literature at GCSE and then drop it. Primarily the point of the subject is to teach them how to analyse texts and write about them.

If I was still teaching English to large numbers of economically impoverished and usually ethnically diverse 16 year olds in inner London, many of whom will struggle to get a C, I would be weeping at this. Educating most school children about British cultural history comes much further down the list for me than helping them to learn how to write and how to read. Many of the children I have taught are not enthusiastic readers and getting them to engage with a text at any meaningful level is a challenge. Deliberately jettisoning from the syllabus texts which have proven to be highly popular with children, and meaningful to them, on the basis that they are not part of our cultural heritage is irresponsible, arrogant and elitist.

No one is disputing that these texts are brilliant books and I agree with many of Geoff Bartons points , but not to the exclusion of everything else , don't English teachers get bored teaching the same texts year after year ?what makes them so good that there should be no other authors considered .I got my life long love of Austen from O'level and for Henry James from A level . I also read Hardy which I swore I would hate , but found it was actually brilliant , I would never have chosen it on my own.

One of my favourite English teachers ( Miss Tromans if you are out there , thank you ) once told me she relished choosing the texts from the set list to engage her pupils each year .She described it as opening the wardrobe and finding the right dress for the right occasion .

filestore.aqa.org.uk/subjects/AQA-9710-W-SP.PDF

It seems to me that this decision relates to one part of five units which make up the GCSE. "Exploring culture". Isn't there rather more to "culture" than two US novels - one based in 1930's America and the other in 1960s America. It can't just be me who thinks there's a bit more to other cultures than what went on the USA and it can't just be me who thinks this matter has been spun by the press and by a number of activists on here and elsewhere.

If one looks at the requirements of the other units this one seems quite discrete from them. My children's schools have introduced books to them far and beyond the curriculum.

On reflection, I read a book for O'Level called "A Pattern of Islands". It was lovely but I've never heard of anyone else having read it at that time or indeed have I heard about it since. But it was a book that looked into an Island culture whilst containing reflection about the culture of empire as I recall.

Why is the emphasis so heavily focussed on two American books and should it be that way? There are others surely.

"League tables focus on Eng Lang/English & Maths."

All the schools I know talk about how many students have attained five A* to C or more at GCSE. Unless that's changed - and all that matters now is whether students have passed English lan or maths - then getting your students to a C grade in English literature will have an impact on that figure.

mummymeister: "I never ever want to read another Jane Austen novel as long as I live. I read them all as read around the subject was important. I just found the themes so damn trivial"

That says a lot more about you than it does about Jane Austen.

I only did O'Level but I remember studying these: Romeo and Juliet, Macbeth, Richard II, as a precursor to Henry IV, Part I, Pride and Prejudice, Great Expectations and A Pattern of Islands. We also did a selection of poetry and I still distinctly remember the Journey of Magi.

We focussed on Henry IV and Great Expectations for our O'Level.

I also remember a book about a black pearl which was a bit about human frailty and hope from when I was about 11/12. Apart from that I have little recollection.

Am 34 and went through the Scottish system. At Standard Grade, Macbeth/Twelfth Night, Shane, Roll of Thunder Hear My Cry,The Crucible, Animal Farm (there were more, those are the ones I remember). At Higher, Lord of the Flies and Catcher in the Rye (again,there were others). At CSYS, we did three Hardy books (Mayor of Casterbridge/Tess/Far from the Madding Crowd) and three Austen (Mansfield Park/P&P/Emma). I did a study on Dostoyevsky as my final piece.

Looking back, it was maybe a bit of a dated set but I really enjoyed it - I had a couple of fantastic teachers as well which helped a lot. The Crucible, Animal Farm, Lord of the Flies and the Dostoyevsky stuff (Crime and Punishment/The Devils) really stuck with me as an angsty teenager. I had already read Austen by the time we got round to her, but I find the idea that "you can't expect boys to like Austen" really infuriating. There's still this attitude that wimmen write mimsywimsy books about dating and urgh, wimmen stuff, which a manly red-blooded boy will spurn contemptuously and rightly so. Austen was a powerful and satirical writer, she wasn't doing Mills and Boon, and by the time you get to CSYS/Advanced Higher you ought to be able to read books by the opposite sex, for fuck's sake.

I know that's not directly relevant to the English system but I do see a lot of complaints about making BOYS read AUSTEN - there are some here - and it's actually fairly misogynistic at times. One of our English teachers even apologised to the boys in his class for making them read her books! Not only is that fairly stupid and counterproductive (he actually said "You boys might be bored with this, I am sorry but it's a course requirement" which isn't going to produce a thirst for reading more) it's rather insulting to the boys. Does it make them less masculine if they can appreciate well-written fiction written by a woman - does it make their cocks fall off or something?

I had a similar experience to you badteacher, also going through the Scottish system. Although I did have to read Sunset Song which I hated.

Thanks for the link to the Geoff Barton blog - a brilliant piece.

Gove makes me want to weep. If nothing else is wrong with this decision, the fact that he made it based on the fact that he personally doesn't like Of Mice and Men should be a huge warning that it is wrong.

SetPhasers, the other Higher set did Sunset Song! Were we in the same school and opposite sets? :D

I just remembered someone mentioned Malorie Blackman and wanted to endorse her as a fantastic writer. The Noughts and Crosses series are amazing books. However, they would be appropriate a bit earlier on - not for 17/18 year olds who might be on the verge of doing an Eng Lit degree. They are, however, the sort of books which might open the eyes of a reluctant teenage reader...

I love reading and Jane Austin is my favourite all time author (some of you out there are completely missing the point of her novels by the way...)

But I am amazed that there are people out there that think OMAM and TKAMB are some how light weight and easy!! Their themes are hard hitting and just exactly pitched for teenagers to make it relevant.

Geoff Barton wrote 'We read these books because they matter, not just because they are examined at GCSE'

Well, there's no problem then is there? He can still teach these books that matter even though they are not examined at GCSE.

Although I rather suspect that he won't.

'I love reading and Jane Austin is my favourite all time author (some of you out there are completely missing the point of her novels by the way...)'

However, we know how to spell her name, and that such details matter.

what a brilliant point noble.

My DS did the Great Gatsby and Purple Hibiscus for English (I honestly can't remember which board). He did To Kill a Mocking Bird Lower down the schol; as indeed did dd and it's a book that happens to be on our bookshelves along with 100s of others in any event. I seem to remember that DS got 99% and 98% respectively for his two English papers (must have been IGCE on reflection because there were no controlled assessments).

DD is doing GCSE AQA this year. She hasn't studied either of these texts but the girls in bottom set have done Of Mice and Men she has just told me.

Not quite sure why these two books are being considered so indispensible to be perfectly honest but I get the impression that if Tristram Hunt had said the same thing, you would all be agreeing with him.

I mentioned Malorie Blackman, shockingly, I was thinking with regard to GCSE rather than A level. Mine loved the Noughts and Crosses series, Pig Heart boy, etc. Yes, I too think she would engage the more reluctant reader, I also think she appeals to both sexes. The boy here, that loved her is now doing Lit at uni, the girl is doing AS levels and planning to do Lit!
I also think Phillip Pullman should be there.

Ooh Goblin, you are a card!

Still read each book many times, and a biography. Does that make me worthy enough to comment or does a slip of the pad or an auto correct without checking rule me out of serious debate?

Their themes are hard hitting and just exactly pitched for teenagers to make it relevant.
Which is why a government worried about any sort of revolution, be it velvet gloved or iron fisted would rather it wasn't taught. These books have a tendency to stay with you.

To Kill a Mockingbird is not only important for it's subject matter, but I think it's possibly the most beautifully written child-accessible book in existence. I can't think of any other that matches it.

I posted too soon. I noticed my son gleaned a bit of its elegance in his writing around the time he read TKAM.

Dawndonnaagain, exactly! I think her books would be perfect for the run up to Standard/GCSE and for the more engaged student, they might be a good launching point for something else (students with a serious interest in dystopias or alternate realities might also consider 1984, We, Handmaid's Tale, or even Ishiguro's Never Let Me Go, problematic though it is).

I think those who are continuing to focus the debate on OMAM and TKAM are (deliberately?) missing the point of what the effect of this Gove-ism is: the DfE has said the following:

"We published the new subject content for English literature in December.
It doesn't ban any authors, books or genres. It does ensure pupils will learn about a wide range of literature, including at least one Shakespeare play, a 19th-century novel written anywhere and post-1914 fiction or drama written in the British Isles."

It's that last bit which is ringing alarm bells for English teachers - post-1914 fiction/drama written in the British Isles seems to rule out a lot of fascinating, challenging and important texts written elsewhere. It's a very narrow-minded view of literature in today's world.

And as for this point:

Geoff Barton wrote 'We read these books because they matter, not just because they are examined at GCSE'

Well, there's no problem then is there? He can still teach these books that matter even though they are not examined at GCSE.

Although I rather suspect that he won't.

Have you any idea how much time pressure English teachers are under to complete the prescribed teaching in the teaching time allowed for the two courses we have to deliver at KS4? We barely have time to teach the set texts, never mind anything else.

Reading about Gove wanting to replace with classics with the work of Dickens and Austen is worrying. I studied English Literature at university and out of all the texts I studied, I found Austen's and (most of) Dickens' work the dullest - they just didn't connect with me as a young person in the modern world. I found Austen's work particularly too much 'of it's time'. Strong themes about marriage being essential for women who live in a totally different society. Many of my friends felt the same.

However, the themes raised in To Kill a Mockingbird (racial prejudice, doing the right thing) and Of Mice and Men (loneliness/isolation, ambition for something more) are still relevant today and I loved them. These books interested me and motivated me to do well in my exams. It's sad that these books are being removed, as I doubt most teenagers would discover them otherwise.