Of Mice and Men with Year 9 -thoughts?

[PinkIndustry]

Before I start, can I make it clear that I love this novel and recognise Steinbeck's novels as genius. However, having taught it ad infinitum over the years, my love has waned slightly - in short, it bores me to death now, of course.

Like many schools who had 20 years worth of OMAM resources sitting in our cupboards, when Gove banned it from the GCSE syllabus, we simply started teaching it to Year 9 instead.

This year I asked if I could do something else (To Kill a Mockingbird/The Pearl?) on grounds of my own personal boredom. I was overruled and I understand why - admin reasons but good ones.

However, halfway through teaching it to Year 9, I have also come to the conclusion that it is actually inappropriate for this age group. Firstly, some of the 1930s American slang about brothels and sexual encounters etc can make reading it aloud in class almost impenetrable, secondly do I really want to start discussing whorehouses etc with 13 year olds, thirdly the explicit racial language can be difficult with that age group - particularly if they come from backgrounds where racist views are held as this seems to legitimise the language for them.

Of course, I am using the novel and events in the novel to discuss misogyny and racism and prejudice. Of course I'm using the context of the novel to make them aware of these things further etc etc. But, to be honest, they are 13 - there's only so much maturity you can expect at that age.

Personally, I feel that there are so many great texts out there that might be more suitable for raising these kind of issues with this age group (Noughts and Crosses?).

I think I am going to try and stamp my feet next year and plead to teach something else.

Does anyone else have any thoughts on this or suggestions of other texts?

I tend to agree and so am not teaching it to year 9. Luckily we have choices! That said , my DS read it in year 9, loved it, and still quotes from it!

My DD did it in y9. She is quite 'young' emotionally (and not a great reader) but got on fine with it.
I think it was also a good introduction to more grown-up literature in preparation for y10 where she has just started Jekyll & Hyde.

(oh sorry, just realised this isn't in Secondary).

I've done it with Yr 9 before and would love to do so again. I wouldn't do it as their first text in Yr 9 though, but wait until after Christmas.

I'd definitely rather do it than Mocking Bird. The Pearl is great, but not anywhere near as much to get one's teeth into as Of Mice and Men.

Noughts and Crosses is long, (takes a huge amount of class time just getting through it) and nowhere near as good for analysis.

Dd did it in year 7!

Meg - I think that is bloody ridiculous. As a parent, I'd have gone berserk. As a teacher, I'd have refused to teach it.

Ds2 is doing it now (Y9)

I do understand what you say but he absolutely loves it and is gripped by it. I remember tedious book after tedious book when I was at school and I'm so pleased he's enjoying what he's reading.

We do it in Year 9 but at the end of the year.

I think Y9 is about right to tackle these issues. Y7 is far too young, of course.

I did it with my year 8 home tutored girl as that's what her school were doing last summer. (She's unwell so has a lot of time off school and I'm employed by the LEA to tutor her.)

She really enjoyed the book and characters. We discussed the use of racist/sexist language in a historical context and compared to what is acceptable now which led to some interesting discussions. The mentions of brothels, innuendo etc. went a little bit over her head I think but we discussed them in a very general way and it was fine.

My own daughter is now doing OMAM in year 9 and I'm happy with that. I've always been very open with her about some of the issues in the book though- some kids are more sheltered maybe.

I don't suppose anyone has ever considered something written in the 21st century?

There are texts : some quite good ones. But it is often about what is lurking in cupboards.

There are actually quite a few 21st century texts on the GCSE specs.

I'm teaching it to Year 9. It's fine. Like OP, I was fed up teaching it back in the day, but after a long gap, it's nice to come back to it. There's a good film version and I've yet to meet a kid who hasn't enjoyed it in some way.

I taught 'Lord of the Flies' last year because I had a class that would read it at home. OMaM is short enough that you can read every word in class without it going on for weeks.

We have bought class sets of contemporary novels for Y7 and Y8, but not all schools can afford to do that.

i have a child being taught this in an inner city school that really doesn't have a good relationship with contemporary discrimination and prejudicial issues. So I feel there is an inherent contradiction in teaching a text like this which raises complex issues of oppression and discrimination in the context of an academic environment that is grappling with its ability to look at prejudice, lack of kindness and loneliness.

Two years ago the school introduced a stronger emphasis on behavior control, administered through electronic warning points and awards. The overwhelming representation of non white pupils receiving these sanctions is undisputed. The school is not able to talk about this and when I raised it with the head he became deeply uncomfortable and pointed me to their black history month - which they actually celebrate by have only two weeks that can only be attended by selected pupils (due apparently to resource issues) so excludes pupils before it starts and the rest of the year there is nothing more.

My daughter is dual heritage, there is a tiny proportion of non white teachers despite this being an inner city school - language used in this text can be highly politicized among young people who are still grappling with a society that treats people differently along racial and gender divides. If its going to be taught it needs to be within the context of a broader conversation about the message from the authors context to the current one. In my view,

I am teaching it to a yr 9 SEN group and they are loving it. We have such detailed and interesting discussions. One boy, after we had talked about Curley’s Wife and why she looks the way she does, said “I love this Miss, makes you look at things in a different way,” and isn’t that what studying literature is about?

Thank you - good to know so many Year 9 students have enjoyed it. Ok, I will keep going!

I think it's fine for year 9, tbh, and (taught well) incredibly engaging for disaffected boys who are starting to turn off from reading.

Noughts and Crosses is a great novel but it is really long and only feasible as a class reader if you have enough copies to send them home for reading homework and a class conscientious enough to actually do it. As a pp has said the language is much less rich and I don't think it's much lighter in terms of content: segregation, racism, kidnap, terrorism, Lynette's trauma and suicide, the executions of Ryan and Callum, underage sex, teen pregnancy etc.

I think it's fine for Yr9. My school teaches it at the start of Yr8 which I think is way too young. (I'm not an English teacher so don't teach it or have a say in it myself)

@middleeasternpromise

i have a child being taught this in an inner city school that really doesn't have a good relationship with contemporary discrimination and prejudicial issues. So I feel there is an inherent contradiction in teaching a text like this which raises complex issues of oppression and discrimination in the context of an academic environment that is grappling with its ability to look at prejudice, lack of kindness and loneliness.

Two years ago the school introduced a stronger emphasis on behavior control, administered through electronic warning points and awards. The overwhelming representation of non white pupils receiving these sanctions is undisputed. The school is not able to talk about this and when I raised it with the head he became deeply uncomfortable and pointed me to their black history month - which they actually celebrate by have only two weeks that can only be attended by selected pupils (due apparently to resource issues) so excludes pupils before it starts and the rest of the year there is nothing more.

My daughter is dual heritage, there is a tiny proportion of non white teachers despite this being an inner city school - language used in this text can be highly politicized among young people who are still grappling with a society that treats people differently along racial and gender divides. If its going to be taught it needs to be within the context of a broader conversation about the message from the authors context to the current one. In my view,

Zombie thread alert but I found this thread when googling about what age Mice and Men is appropriate for. Just wanted to say that this is a fantastic post. And so relevant and astute even before the last couple of years have brought more awareness about decolonising the curriculum.

This thread reminded me of the last time I taught OMAM in my last UK school. The school, and my GCSE group had a substantial number of of black students and the text presented no difficulties.

What did exercise a number of them was the Gary Sinise film of OMAMI used as support which, inexplicably, has Lennie using the word "nigger". I remember one lad saying to me, quite sadly: "Lennie would never say that word." It was a tribute to the power of both novel and film, that his character was so plain to them.

Anyway, that was about 2005 and times have changed, and it would be interesting to see how it would be approached now.

A thing that always emerged powerfully was when asked to describe the relationship between Lennie and George, the pupils always said "love". While I agree, I was surprised and encouraged that in a teen culture of open homophobia, they could say this without batting an eyelid.

The Hate You Give is getting more popular in schools. It's long (400 pages) but very current and popular with year 9s.

I don't think it's as good a piece of literature as Of Mice and Men though.

Completely agree. I've always thought that all but the most able Y9s struggle to genuinely process the issues raised. They just lack the maturity to understand what he is trying to achieve. You end up reading a lot of responses calling Curley's wife a whore and nobody ever understands the use of racist language or the structural genius of chapter 4! I find I feel I am doing more damage than good sometimes ...

To Kill A Mockingbird deals with similar issues but is more explicit and thus I think better for younger kids - although it's ironically much more difficult to read with less able students 🤷

Do you read Animal Farm with KS3 at all? I love teaching that! X

As a senior teacher (of 26 years) Of Mice and Men, in my opinion, should not be taught, and neither should Noughts and Crosses. Why?
As the only non-white teacher of literature in our school, it is to me that black pupils complain and explain their uncomfortable reactions to the 12 instances of the N word in Steinbeck’s well intentioned book. Their disempowerment is palpable, and yet, white teachers who believe themselves to be non racist insist on teaching it, lower and lower down in the curriculum.
“Malcom said he loved the film.” Said one colleague.
I asked Malcom. He told me he’d said what his teacher wanted to hear.
Another pupil admitted that white kids had secretly filmed their teacher - also white - reading the N word, and had used it to make jokes at the expense of black kids and the teacher.
That Candy, a favoured character, with whom we identify and champion, uses the word, does show the more literate what ignorance was around, both then and now. But the overwhelming disinterest in Reading, among many many teens generally results in a shocked, emotional and dismayed reaction from black and white pupils alike. On one hand, “protect your characteristics” is promulgated; on the other, white teachers are laughed at and consigned to Karen status, as pupils go deeper into disenfranchisement over the book’s inclusion on the curriculum.

It took very little for our neighbourly racists to call for the murders and abuse of the 3 black penalty takers, after the Euro football championships; none of the black kids in my school wanted to come to school the next day.

To place us into the position of perpetrators of racism in Noughts and Crisses, is even worse. It assumes that given the power of whites, we’d enact the same violence upon them as racism must be a ‘natural’ part of human nature!

I’m currently the only teachers who’s taken a stand: I have refused to ever teach OMAM to teens, ever again. Like the excuses about SEND kids loving it, I am reminded of Lennie’s own uses of the N word, for Crooks. What do these teachers think they’re teaching and what do they think their kids remember?

The time is coming when advocates of the book will be ashamed at how their own emotional reasons for teaching it will be remembered by those they don’t really give a voice to. Like the white teacher who tells me how much her dad’s black friend loved having his afro patted by colleagues, your embarrassment will be as much of an elephant in the room, as the racism you romantically defend.

Are you white? You say you black kids had no problem with it. Do you mean that they just wouldn’t share their truth with you?