Gove kills the mockingbird with ban on US classic novels ...what do you think?

[mrz]

www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/article1414764.ece?CMP=OTH-gnws-standard-2014_05_24

Evil

Wondering- have you ever taught A level English?

Because if you have you must know that it's not possible to get through the syllabus without some reading outside of lessons.

On the basis of your arguments, children from homes where reading is not happening ( as homework) would therefore be prohibited from studying an A level - inc English.

And extrapolating your opinion you seem to be saying that homework of any kind is impossible for some children because of their home circumstances.

Given that most GCSE pupils have to do 3 hrs a night, I don't know where this leaves your argument

Out of interest what do you think happens at university seminars where you might be expected to read 5 books in a week?

You aren't- you'd be given a termly/ yearly reading list and be expected to get ahead of the game.

'If they need a longer exam to show they are capable of that, then why are the exams so short?'

There are to be 2 exams for Eng Lit. One is 1 hr 45 mins and the other is 2 hrs 14 mins and 2 exams for Eng Lang each 1 hr 45.

Everything has to be packed into these exams at the end of year 11 along with the other 15 odd papers the poor kids will sit given that Gove has got rid of the modular system and controlled assessments.

Yes, I've taught A Level English. A Level students get study periods built into their timetables which helps.

You clearly do not live in the real world. In a great many homes GCSE students do not do 3 hours homework each night. It is a massive issue for schools, and has led to lots of creative ways to deal with it - homework clubs, compulsory before/after school "prep" sessions etc etc.

My point is Lazy that nobody in the world of English teaching and learning would expect to spend English lessons simply reading the book and talking about vocab. You would cover virtually nothing and certainly no skills if this is what you did.

I'm not sure I've ever come across the suggestion that this would be a good thing outside this thread.

Lazy - I did an English degree. I was not given a yearly reading list. We were sometimes told a week in advance what would be looked at in the following seminar.

'You aren't- you'd be given a termly/ yearly reading list and be expected to get ahead of the game.'

Not when I did my degree and my MA.

Hence reading every other page of Middlemarch in order to blag my way through a tutorial memorably!!

Some of you clearly have no idea what Eng Lit is all about - it's quite entertaining really.

THanks for info about accelerated reading Evil and mrz. Will look into that although I suppose you could do your own in house version at no cost at all???

Regardless of the fact that in the lesson you have to focus on something, I would not expect an exam board to be so specific about what it is going to test you on that you can limit your reading and revision to tiny sections of a book. I would also expect a teacher to stretch the pupils who have read the book by encouraging them to make connections with other passages in the book, or with other books they have read. I would also hope homework would give scope for children to show their wider reading and understanding and for teachers to mark that effectively. This was all possible when I went to school, so what's gone wrong?

Depends really - you could easily do the half hour daily reading thing, but the grading/banding of books and the quizzes is what AR sells itself on. Means that brighter kids aren't really able to read books which are too easy and those who struggle get appropriate material as well. The kids at my school like doing the quizzes. In fact, when we did the staff training, we all go v competitive about that

rabbit, teachers don't set the exam. Gove made the edict and the exam boards responded (with some awareness of the real world given that kids who would have got grade G under the old system have to sit the same exam as kids who would have got A*). Gove gets what he wants and can pretend that everyone's sitting around reading the whole of Dickens if that's what makes him happy; English teachers do what they do which is to get the best out of their kids and make their lessons as interesting and valuable as possible.

As for the stuff about encouraging reading and stretching, of course, we'll do all that. Nothing to disagree with there.

Evil Please stop telling me which world I've lived in! I have lived in the real world for almost 60 years which I suspect is longer than you have- and taught in some very deprived schools along the way.

I don't need any lectures about how some children find it hard to find a place to do homework.

But you seem to want to construct a syllabus/exam on the basis of children who comes from homes where education is not supported.

'This was all possible when I went to school, so what's gone wrong?'

But it probably wasn't happening then either or at least not for everyone.

I don't know why everyone gets all golden age about education. There was never a golden age. You just have to look at the poor levels of adult literacy to know that. It is not the case that everybody's grandparents have read the whole of Dickens and Austen and loved it!

'But you seem to want to construct a syllabus/exam on the basis of children who comes from homes where education is not supported.'

Once again. Teachers DO NOT write the curriculum or exams.

Evil, when do they do the half hour reading then? And do they?

I actually don't see the problem with constructing an exam syllabus which is accessible to even those who don't have supportive homes, and if you really have taught in some deprived schools, I struggle to see why you would want children excluded from being able to achieve because of things totally outside of their control.

Perhaps you could explain? Because what you seem to be advocating is education which is accessible to those whose parents are able to provide them with comfortable homes in which they can study independently in a quiet space. The rest can go to hell.

Bluestraw - we have a timetable but it's generally done in core lessons, so sometimes (say twice weekly) in English, sometimes in Maths, sometimes Science. They avoid lessons which students only have once per week. It was all arranged in discussion with the HODs. And yes, they do it! The kids who like reading love it. Those who struggle sometimes go out with a TA or a 6th former for 10 mins and read aloud. Our Head of English is excellent and the whole thing is very well organised. They have to do the quizzes at break or lunchtime, but given that there are prizes involved, lots do that. Only problem is if they forget their book, but there are boxes of spares (usually short story anthologies) in classrooms for that.

It's pretty odd as well. English is one of the easiest subjects to differentiate by outcome. THe same question can be tackled by a 5 year old and a phD student with very different results. It it's possible to get kids achieving A* (having read the whole text and being able to select and evaluate etc) and G (having not read or understood the text and being able to write in only a narrative way) on the same paper what exactly is the problem?

Thanks Evil - that's interesting.

bluestraw why are you stating the obvious? We know teachers don't construct the curriculum- but there are plenty of posters here who are writing as if they'd like to!!!! That is SURELY the point of this thread LOL!

Evil that is not a true reflection of what I am saying.
BUT if you start from the premise of 'we must have an exam which is accessible to all children no matter what their home circumstances' then that is not what education should be about.

You have to start with what is worth learning and how it can be examined- not what is possible for some children due to their coming from unsupportive homes.

And I still don't see why it's be impossible to get through the syllabus in 2 years by reading in class. Many of us did in the 70s and 80s.

It seems many still do Lazysummerdays.

Because it takes 16 hours to read Great Expectations!!! And reading in class doesn't help you learn or practice anywhere near the full quota of skills which you will be assessed on in the exams (and which are life skills). You would have less than half a term for each set text if you are going to get through the whole curriculum (50% of which is English Language which has to be given priority because it's what employers and universities look for first).

Nobody outside this thread thinks that English lessons should be spent reading.

Universities would you laugh at you!!!

No, I don't think English lessons should be spent just reading. I think they should be spent talking about what you've read... If you haven't read anything, you've got nothing to talk about.

Still, I guess it is good practice at aping what the teacher says and talking out of your arse. Good training for journalism, maybe?