George's Mingin Medicine as theclassreader - why, exactly??

[SirChenjin]

Apart from the SNP'S obsession with all things Scoa'ish obviously . We don't speak like that, none of our friends or family do, I don't understand the majority of the words and have no idea how to pronounce them - so when I listen to him reading I haver no idea of what he's saying is correct and then have to sign his readi g record. They would have been better giving him a book written in Mandarin - far more relevant and about as understandable to 99% of his class.

Do take it up with the teacher that the reader, effectively in a foreign (to him) language has not engaged him.

But on the wider topic, isn't the great thing about literature that we like different books - I loved Sunset Song (eventually ) and went off and read the other two books of the trilogy off my own bat but there again, I was a real bookworm.

Kudos to you SirChenjin for going off and studying your own book. I had to do that for my O Grade as we came back from NZ after the October Week and they'd nearly finished Macbeth but as I'd started Hamlet in NZ, I just continued doing that on my own. It helped that my mum was an English teacher . Also meant that I had a head start in the Higher. (Also got a good A for my English Higher and stopped the Dux from getting a clean sweep in subject prizes as he came second to me in the prelim, beating him by a country mile Still proud of that nearly 40 years later )

Ds has studied at least 2 Shakespeare plays S1 to S4 (Midsummer's Night Dream in S1 and Macbeth at end of S2 and I think another one last year - Merchant of Venice?) and will be doing yet another one this year for his Higher (not sure which one - forgot to ask his teacher at the Parents Evening ds sure as hell won't tell me ). He also studied some Shakespeare sonnets last year.

So the lack of Shakespeare at some schools is down to teachers' choices - not the curriculum per se.

Fwiw, dh always laughs at me trying to pronounce Scots words in my posh Bearsden accent - even when I'm trying to recite Burns . But I thole him doing it

Looking back none of the Shakespeare I studied at school was of any use to me when studying English at degree level. But I'd never use that as rational for not teaching it .

We studied Shakespeare at school but ended up doing Macbeth several times, plus the Merchant of Venice. I do know one class did Sunset Song, but mine didn't. We studied George Mackay Brown (Magnus and Fishermen with Ploughs) in sixth year which was amazing.

Interesting reference to Clockwork Orange up thread - I was given that by my English teacher at 12 years old (as the mother of a thirteen year old I'm not sure how I feel about that now) and the language was a struggle, but I got through it. I do think I blanked a lot of the violence though, so maybe I didn't understand as much as I thought I did.

We teach a Shakespeare to each year group.S1 Midsummer Night's Dream. S2 Twelfth Night. S3 Romeo and Juliet. S4 Macbeth and Higher / Advanced Higher Hamlet, King Lear, Othello or Richard III.

But, we do that because we think it matters and we can ignore some of the nonsense because I gave a supportive Head.

have...gave sounds painful. Or rude...

My fave typo for a long time. Such dedication

gave a supported head 😅😅😅
Thank you I needed to laugh!

And fwiw I'm late to the thread and it's clearly moved on, but I agree 100% with the original op. The money spent in developing the learning and teaching materials alone would have been better spent on something useful imho.

Gave a supported head

There's always one who lowers the tone isn't there

"The money spent in developing the learning and teaching materials alone would have been better spent on something useful imho."

The publishers have things like downloadable teaching notes and audio files and offer a discount for bulk orders...so actually they've probably gone for them because it's saved a whole load of teacher's hours spent preparing materials, it's way easier to start with something prepared from the publisher than from nothing.

It's actually on the Scottish Book Trust website ( under learning resources)

www.scottishbooktrust.com/learning/learning-resources/resource/introducing-your-pupils-to-scots-through-dahl

There is a useful explanation of the educational benefits/rationale which might go some way to answering the OP's original "why, exactly??" question.

Interesting documents....although what they haven't answered is 'why has this been given as the class reader - ie the one which is to be read at home - in homes which don't speak Scots'. If the teacher wants to introduce Scots then I'm happy for her to knock herself out - but feel she's passed the buck (although perhaps she feels the same as I and many other Scottish people do about 'Scots' as a 'language and is hoping to avoid this awful text as much as possible...). Remember also that the SBT gets direct SG funding which in turn is used to further their political views in the field of literacy.

I've already explained that I don't have a problem with Scots and other dialects/languages being taught in schools, but what I do have a problem with is the appropriateness of this as a reader in a class such as DSs.

Oh - and one of the suggested activities states "We have left this Activity as a short one because speaking in Scots is often the most difficult of all – particularly for those who are learning their first Scots words".

So what has happened here is precisely the opposite of what is advised. A non-Scots speaking child has been given a book to read aloud at home in a family where Scots is not spoken - a task which the SBT acknowledges is difficult. Will it turn him onto Scots? I doubt it. Will it encourage his reading? Ditto.

You know, I do actually agree that the whole book is probably a bit of a labour of love ( as is all Dahl as far as I am concerned, whether in English or Scots) .

I wonder if a different approach could have worked better - clearly the teacher has wanted to do something for Scottish Book Week - but maybe doing it in English as the reader ongoing, with a week in Scots during Book Week, rather than turning it into a whole term - would have been more fun and engaging for the bairns. And parents. ( not that Scots is only for Scottish Book Week, but I'm sure you understand what I mean)

TBH though, kids are going to be engaged by some things and not others all through their learning at school. Some of them hate Shakespeare, don't get it, can't access it - some love it. It happens.

My DSs always hated Dahl regardless of what language it was in. Both were avid readers.

I remember DS1 coming home depressed as they were doing Charlie and the Chocolate Factory in class. :o

The last chat I heard in educational circles was that Dahl was rather out of favour. Ed psych, inclusion support specialists etc felt that there was (not my words, not my field of expertise) "excessive emotional peril" . Now I grew up with Dahl but do see many orphans, parental loss, physical chastisement ...

But I also loved Enid Blyton and hopefully I'm not a racist, body shaming misogynist

The last chat I heard in educational circles was that Dahl was rather out of favour. Ed psych, inclusion support specialists etc felt that there was (not my words, not my field of expertise) "excessive emotional peril

Really? I had always thought that was the whole point of stories - I presume fairy stories are also out of favour?

I get the impression there is specific arts funding for Dahl related projects this year? I took DD3 to the Childrens' Classic Concert of The Three Little Pigs. She was singularly unimpressed with Red Riding Hood's treatment of the wolf and the pigs.

Cannot wait to reread Amelia Jane with her, even if I do sometimes wonder if she was not always a model of best behaviour for DD2.

Not a primary teacher but in my experience of 4 DDs - never saw fairy tales being taught. Endured Biff, Chip and Kipper and muddled through Ginn 360 and would have welcomed a much loved fairy tale at times- but no.

I'd welcome exposure to "emotional peril " in the safe confines of fiction for younger learners. Would save so many parental complaints about everything in English being bleak at secondary.

I did say not my words or area of expertise.

Excessive emotional peril is what my 9 year old loves reading about . We're tackling GMM tonight - he's stalling for time at the moment, as am I. If I don't reappear on MN you know it's all got a bit much for me...

I completely agree that kids will be engaged by different things at school , absolutely. I do think though that appropriateness and proportion is key - you wouldn't present 9 year old pupils with the written works of Shakespeare or a French text and a dictionary for example, but instead you introduce his works or the language gradually, in a fun and engaging way. The same should have been done here imo. Very few Scottish people use Scots to the extent that the book does - some speak it to a greater extent than others obviously, but the mish mash of words from different dialects sounds artificial (again imo).