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

I mark GCSE papers. You can tell a mile off who hasn't read the whole book, who has watched the film instead and who has done bugger all revision. It does not necessarily follow that those students are unable to write some wonderful perceptive things in the exam. Sometimes they do. Also, you can do brilliantly on an extract question and on unseen poetry without reading the whole book. Those skills are just as important a part of Literature as boning up on a text. And I'm glad about that. It tests natural ability and flair as well as learned knowledge. Don't tell Gove, he doesn't seem to have realised yet

Yes, it shows brilliant skills in English language and comprehension.

My db got an A in his English literature exam without having read the set texts... and this was before A* existed.

You can't just dumb down an academic qualification until everyone who fancies a stab at it can manage a pass. Put an option on there for the kids who can't read a difficult text or won't read a long one, and everyone will opt for it.

Erm, rabbit, no. Just no. It's about interpretation, perception, analysis, thoughtfulness, sensitivity. Do you not value these things? It's not all about top grades either. Should I fax over the mark scheme?

Yes - those things are called intelligence. I value that. I don't value lessons taught on the basis that hardly anybody has read and thought about a book they are supposed to be reading and thinking about.

I see plenty of scope for frustration from students who are perceptive, analytic, thoughtful and sensitive there.

English Literature is far from being dumbed down. But everyone does have the opportunity to pass on some level. Of course they do.

The Higher paper poems are harder, as are the questions on the texts. You can get an A* on of Mice and Men because it is a brilliant, many-layered book. Not dumbed down.

Unlike the GCSE Food Tech exam I invigilated a few years back. "For 2 marks, looking at the ingredients list for chicken samosas, explain why they are unsuitable for vegetarians". "For 10 marks, draw and colour a design on top of this picture of a cheesecake". Actual questions.

Literature is hard! But it is accessible and so it should be. Of Mice and Men has been a huge part of making it accessible and I will be sad to see it go.

Rabbit if they are all of those things and work hard they tend to get top grades. That's not too frustrating.

ps I assumed comprehension was about interpretation, perception, analysis, thoughtfulness and sensitivity, tbh. You can't have comprehended something beyond more than a very basic level if you don't have these skills.

IHeartKingThistle - it's not all about grades, though, is it?!!! I didn't go to school for 13 years just to pass exams.

I didn't say it was! I certainly don't believe that it's all about grades. I was responding to your original point about deserving to pass exams.

Read this (don't miss the update at the bottom):

www.learningspy.co.uk/english-gcse/can-increase-breadth-challenge/

And my original point about deserving to pass exams was out of sheer irritation at the insistence that lesson plans can never assume that anyone has read anything, even in the top sets. It just made me think, no wonder some parents push to get their children into super selective grammar schools, because I'll bet they don't have to make that assumption. Or do they?...

I just don't think I would have been stimulated and stretched enough at school if my teachers had always assumed the worst of the classes I was in and planned lessons on the basis of no-one having done any preparation. I don't see how you can genuinely differentiate for the most able and most prepared if you are assuming nobody has come prepared, or have given up on asking anyone to prepare for anything.

Of Mice and Men is a pamphlet. It's a shame that this is what is being offered to our top students, no matter how many layers there are in its few, easily readable pages, when there are more challenging, lengthy and equally deep texts that they could be reading for their English Lit qualification but aren't. Teachers are choosing the bottom set text for the top kids.

Interesting to see that blog update. Any incentive to choose the harder texts for the more able kids can only be a good thing.

Of course you can. No-one is assuming the worst of anyone. You are assuming a lot in that post based on the fact that I pointed out the practical problems that occur when many children are asked to read at home. It makes me irritated too.

I could discuss this for ages, and I'm not being snippy, but I really do have 300 GCSE papers to mark. I promise, if they deserve to pass they will .

Sorry x-post.

IHeartKingThistle - I was not assuming a lot based on your post. If you read the whole thread you'll see others have said you can't read a whole long book in class and can't expect all children to read at home and therefore have to teach extracts, knowing that many children have never read the book. Great Expectations in particular was picked on as an example of a book you would have to teach in that way. Since this is clearly a method of teaching employed in some schools, I cannot help feeling a little despairing for my own children as it is not how I would like them to be taught. You may have made it clear you don't like that approach either, but the only possible solutions you seem to have outlined are teaching the same set text for years or teaching incredibly short books. None of those solutions seem to me to be fair on anyone, particularly not those who start out enjoying English literature and wanting to read more of it, risking the end result that nobody will like English literature by the time they are sixteen!...

"What a very inclusive attitude, Rabbit. SEN student who can't (or won't) access Great a Expectations in its entirety and therefore deserves to fail. Lovely."

If a student's special education needs mean that he or she is genuinely incapable of reading an entire book, would it not make more sense to have a second-tier qualification that is pitched at a level more appropriate for such students' needs and abilities? At the end of the day, qualifications are supposed to be about proving you have reached a certain standard... otherwise, what on earth is the point? The qualification ends up becoming a joke.

Rabbit I completely agree and I never said otherwise. I wish it were that simple.

I still cannot believe that a large comprehensive school would be incapable of rustling up a class of children who generally can and do read the books, whether at home, or at school during break times, or in homework clubs. Yes, of course there will sometimes be children who haven't done the work that week in any class, but on the basis of my personal experience, an intelligent child will not be floundering and lost on the rare occasions they've not done the work and will not only be capable of coping if the class just studies isolated sections of text for the whole course. As you've said yourself, such a child can be remarkably perceptive... Also, a child who really likes reading will almost certainly have read the whole book for pleasure already, anyway, and be going back to the bits the class is covering, rather than seeing it all afresh each week. Someone who is enjoying a book will not want to keep putting it away and ignoring it for days at a time. So why do I keep getting the impression from this thread that the real readers' interests are being ignored in favour of catering for the can't dos and won't dos?

(sorry, meant seeing it all for the first time each week!...)

As I said before, I agree with you. I'm just explaining my experience. Telling me how things should be doesn't change the parameters we have to work within and doesn't change the relentless pressure to achieve targets that we're under. Teachers care about reading for pleasure and fostering a love of Literature, believe me.

I'm bowing out of this now. It's distracting me too much!

As I said before, I agree with you. I'm just explaining my experience. Telling me how things should be doesn't change the parameters we have to work within and doesn't change the relentless pressure to achieve targets that we're under. Teachers care about reading for pleasure and fostering a love of Literature, believe me.

I'm bowing out of this now. It's distracting me too much!