AIBU to think they might actually read a book in English? (Secondary)

[runningoutofnewnames]

DS's English class start reading books, then the teacher uses them to demonstrate some kind of grammar exercise or other construction of the English language - then they never actually finish it.

He's in Year 8, and they've only read one book from beginning to end in class since he started at secondary last year.

They're told they're not allowed to read ahead and often they're not even given the book, they're given photocopied sheets each lesson.

So, they read half of Animal Farm. The point of that was to teach them how to write a paragraph with a persuasive argument, apparently. Once they'd done that exercise, the module was finished and they stopped reading the book. DS loves reading and wants to discuss the content of the book in class. This isn't allowed.

This half term, they've done dystopian fiction but they've only read passages from books, not whole books (e.g. photo copied pages from the Hunger Games). The point of that was to demonstrate the elements needed to do a "creative" short story exercise - they were marked on the inclusion of these specific elements, not encouraged to be creative.

He's only read one whole book at school since he started nearly 18 months ago.

Do your DC read whole books in school?

We used to read loads when I was young! We did English Language AND literature when I went to school - it wasn't all about the mechanics of language, it was about appreciating books too and exploring ideas. I loved doing Animal Farm. We certainly read it to the end!

There's a similar focus on the mechanics and lack of creativity in his art lessons too, but that's another story.

Is this is the curriculum (fucking Gove's influence, still?) or his school, I wonder?

I'm a former English teacher and until recently taught in comprehensive secondary schools with very mixed catchments. In every school I worked in, we read an entire novel every year of Key Stage 3 and studied a novel (eg Frankenstein, Lord of the Flies, Jekyll & Hyde, A Christmas Carol) plus a full Shakespeare play. All had a weekly library lesson in Year 7 and sometimes 8 where children selected their own books for quiet reading.

Reading a whole novel is the best way to engage students in English and it's the best behaviour management - even my worst classes of sullen fifteen and sixteen year olds liked being read to and would come into lessons interested to know what would happen next.

I know from some friends still in the profession that there are big academy chains who prescribe a very formulaic curriculum and want English taught in the same way as Maths and Science (and for all other subjects to fall in line, however impossible and counter productive that is). All schools are under insane pressure to produce reams of largely pointless data (this is the main reason I left the profession) and this has a severely detrimental effect on learning and engagement - but it's what Ofsted want to see and what directors at academies who are far removed from teaching understand.

My kids' primary school have a daily reading session of the class novel that is just for enjoyment - they don't study it at all, just sit and listen. I think that's brilliant. They do study other books too, maybe just in extracts for reading comprehension activities.

All schools that I have experience of have had to massively reduce creativity when it comes to writing - kids write to very strict criteria, using specific techniques and it's a bit depressing. I always used to like to sneak in some free writing on a Friday afternoon to be a bit more imaginative and flexible but that's a luxury that's largely disappeared - kids learn to write a short story in exam conditions and that's it.

Sorry my post should have clarified the novels I mentioned were for GCSE

State secondary school here. We have a big focus on reading whole texts. We only have two formal assessment points each year, with the rest being regular formative feedback on key pieces in between

Y7: Two full novels, A Shakespeare play (full original text), poetry, excerpts from one autobiography and short stories.

Y8: One full novel, a Shakespeare play (full original text), one full modern play, poetry, excerpts from Anne Frank's diary and short stories.

Y9; One full modern play, two full C19th novels, an essay collection, poetry and famous Shakespeare speeches

KS4: All set texts are read in their entirety.

We also have tutor time reading where classes read between 4-5 additional full books each year.

I definitely read whole books all the way through from Y7 to A level. I remember all of them. I’m in my 50s. though.

I just buy the texts that they are using so they can read the book, a lot of the classics are very cheap on kindle. Any English teacher trying to stop children reading in their own time needs sacking!

I’m utterly flabbergasted by this thread. How are kids not allowed to read whole books?? I’m in NI with 2 DC in normal state grammar school. Both read whole novels (including a verse novel) plus plays (including a Shakespeare) and poetry in English Lit. They also have separate English language and Drama classes plus the library runs an accelerated reading programme where they’re expected to read a million words over the course of a school year. Im so sad for the children who merely read excerpts of books and never experience the joy of reading an entire novel. Reading is an important life skill.

Mine had to buy the books for GCSE and A level and annotated them

Real shame it has become like this

@XingMing

Back when I was at school, while dinosaurs still roamed the earth's distant corners the 1970s, we read a Shakespeare play every term from Y8 plus a novel and some poetry. My English Literature A level syllabus included three Shakespeare plays, Jane Austen, Arnold Bennett, Chaucer, Eliot, Owen and Robert Frost, Katherine Mansfield and a couple of others IIRC. I cannot believe that the educational establishment considers today's provision adequate. Threadbare is closer...

I did O levels in 1981 and A levels in 1983. I think the dinosaurs had just about disappeared by then. I went to an ordinary comprehensive school. Your description of the English curriculum resonates with my experience. We were also taught aspects of English literature that were not on the official syllabus and had a much broader understanding because of it. We were educated in the subject rather than merely taught to the test, which seems to be the case nowadays. Education seems to have gone back to the days of Mr. Gradgrind, unfortunately, and it is not the fault of the teachers. It is the depressingly narrow curriculum they have to teach that takes all pleasure out of reading. Even many primary schools have the accelerated reading programme, which awards points to the number of words read and asks comprehension questions on a relatively narrow range of books. There seems to be no room for the original thinker who would like to explore a wider range of reading.

@Faffandahalf

We teach all of: Roll of thunder (7) Anita and Me (play in 8) Of mice and men (yr9’s as it’s not gcse any more)

Aaannnd…that’s probably it.

We don’t read an entire shakespeare play at ks3. We often use extracts of novels in order to teach creative writing (that’s pretty standard really). We use extracts from novels for other things too.

There just isn’t the time. We have assessments every 5-6 weeks. You can’t read a full text and teach the skills necessary for the assessment in that space of time. Teachers would love to just read and talk and enjoy teaching a love of literature. The reality of the English classroom is very different. It’s all about progress and data entry points and the assessment flight plan. 😴😴

I’m sorry but if your department gets a ‘deep dive’ during an Ofsted inspection they will absolutely clobber you on curriculum. The NC programme of study specifies two full Shakespeare plays at KS3. Your HOD / KS3 lead has a big job to do.

English literature degrees surely aren't like this, are they??!! Otherwise the next generation of English teachers could theoretically never have read a book!

These examples are really poor practice. We read a full novel every year in KS3.

It is demoralising. I retrained as a teacher at 50, after years of working as a writer, to teach citizenship which was closely related to my degree subject, only to have it whipped off the curriculum the year I qualified.

My age went against me, and because I was so much older, applications I submitted went unanswered. I wasn't interested in teaching all abilities either. There's enough thumping your head against a brick wall in a PGCE year to put you off for life.

That sounds absolutely nuts. When I was at secondary school (in Scotland, left in 2003), I remember doing A Midsummer Night’s Dream, Macbeth, An Inspector Calls, Tom Sawyer, Huckleberry Finn, The Cone Gatherers and loads of other stuff but they’re the ones that stick with me. There was never any question of not doing the whole book/play. Hell, we read whole books in French from 3rd year, albeit short ones. And this was a state school.

It might well be different in Scotland now, with the shitefest that is the Curriculum for Excellence. All the teachers among my family and friends despise it.

That's sad. I was at a very academic secondary school in the 1970s and we read several whole books in our English lessons every year from what would now be called years 7-10. In year 11 we only read the Eng Lit set texts, in a lot more detail than anything we'd read previously.

We were also strongly encouraged to read for pleasure. We had an excellent school library, with a separate junior library appropriately stocked with fiction for older children/young teenagers. I was already a keen reader before I went there but I read so many new and wonderful books in that junior library. We were very lucky.

@ThanksItHasPockets, just one novel...? In a year? Is that considered adequate or good? At 8 years old, I could trough through an Enid Blyton novel in an hour, and I read them all, and a load of other rubbish too. All in addition to school-set novels.

I hope I am not being boring, but how the f*ck is anyone going to learn to be a writer if they don't get the joy and anticipation of turning the page to find out what happened next?

[quote XingMing]@ThanksItHasPockets, just one novel...? In a year? Is that considered adequate or good? At 8 years old, I could trough through an Enid Blyton novel in an hour, and I read them all, and a load of other rubbish too. All in addition to school-set novels.

I hope I am not being boring, but how the f*ck is anyone going to learn to be a writer if they don't get the joy and anticipation of turning the page to find out what happened next?[/quote]
One novel a year explicitly taught in class, yes. That doesn’t mean it’s the only book they read each year. We do masses of work to encourage and incentivise reading for pleasure. Sadly there are students who will read literally nothing else all year but it’s not for our lack of effort.

I think parents have a part to play here too. The number of threads on MN where people are arguing about schools (often state v private, though not always), and the argument that's often trotted out is 'my DC got just as good grades at X school'. I always want to scream - it's not just about the grades!! It's about the education.

Hands up... I helped out in our tiny village library from age 7, I read everything, including all of the Ian Fleming James Bond novels and several Jane Austens before I left primary school. At senior school, I was so opinionated that I was left to choose the whole school's library books, at about 13 years old. It was a very good school library to start and I like to think I enriched it significantly. But I bought what I wanted to read.

It’s reading for pleasure that needs to be encouraged. It’s all well and good reading and studying set texts but for most people that won’t lead to a love of reading.

Ds is in year 7 and his school really focus on reading for pleasure including a lesson a fortnight in the library.

This is not my experience at all. Both dd & ds (at independent schools) have read whole books. They have also used sections from others to strengthen what they were learning. DS did animal farm last year. They read the whole book. School hands out copies, the difference is I guess that if you don't return it, the cost of the book would probably just get added to the terms bill. It's what they do with library books that arent returned

@ThanksItHasPockets, I know that English teachers try to communicate the delight of reading for pleasure. I feel it may be caught rather than taught. My post was not critical, just slightly aghast at the idea that anyone could want to do anything other than read for fun and amusement and information, and on the back of that, education.

Or, just to be told a story. Still my main reason to read, at 66.

Maybe they have divided the pupils up by whether they need to improve their written English or their literature skills. If OP's child is already very good at literature (seems to be the case) then they may be in a class focussing on written English skills.
My DC was the opposite. 2 years of GCSE English Language and Literature spent entirely on Literature because their language writing (level of language, spelling, grammar, structure, fluency etc) was already good, but their literature/poetry analysis was poor.

Ofsted pressure to ensure there is "breadth" in the curriculum. Teachers writing their curriculums have interpreted this to mean lots of extracts rather than one whole book. Progress, data and assessment focus in schools means the joy of reading a whole novel just isn't practical anymore.

btw this DC reads more than any child I know, could read all day every day, reads a book a day when not studying. But for them the analysis ruins it, so they didn't excel at this, hence being a set for those poor at literature/poetry analysis.