- Bridging English (pages 143-153) by Joseph O’Beirne Milner
and Lucy Floyd Morcock Milner
- Reading Better, Reading Smarter
(pages 21-74) by Deborah
Appleman and Michael F. Graves
- When Kids Can't Read: What
Teachers Can Do (pages
73-175 & 176-203) by Kylene Beers
- Preventing Readicide: How
Schools are Killing Reading and What You Can Do About It (pages 90-109) by Kelly Gallagher
- What Matters: Meeting Content
Goals through Teaching Cognitive Reading Strategies with Canonical Texts (pages 53-61) by Mary E. Styslinger, Julianne Oliver
Ware, Charles W. Bell, and Jesse L. Barrett
One of the biggest challeneges that I face is how much
emphasis I will place on teaching the classics in my classroom. This week’s
reading certainly deals a lot with how we determine a great balance between
teaching classic literature as well as dealing with modern literature—in addition
to numerous methods to teaching the classics.
By now, many people can tell that I am much more of a
progressive thinker when it comes to my teaching philosophy. I think that we should
focus moreso on reading texts that allow our students to connect with the real
world, and I will be the first to depend that I don’t always think you can get
that real world connection with reading texts exclusively from the “dead white
guys” (but I will teach them nonetheless).
One of the reasons why I support the notion that we move
away from the canon is for a number of reasons. When we read canonized text,
the time period in which it was written is clear that those text were not
written with today’s audience in mind. The readability of the text can
sometimes deter students from wanting to engage in them which alters the
connection that we would like them to have. One thing that Gallagher says in
her article is that when we are using difficult text (canonized) text is the
fact that sometimes teachers will just throw this literature at students and
expect that they will be able to handle it, even with strategies---ummm WRONG!
I believe that we need to work away from this thought and start with texts that
students can engage with first which will provide meaning to their lives. Once
students are engaged with the meaning of the text, we then move them to more
difficult texts. “Ok, we have just read a book that you can identify with in
today’s society, but how do you think Shakespeare addressed these common issues
in Romeo & Juliet? We are going to use this mentor text to find similarities
and differences in this play compared to the one we just read.” Students need
to have consistent scaffolding before you should introduce the canon in the
classroom.
The Styslinger article was a great insight along with Bears
as it brought in so many strategies that are relevant and important for
teaching—modern and canonized text. Understanding that we are trying to move
towards developing a community of readers and not staying within the realm of
reader response, these strategies are particularly important and provide great
assists for teachers who may not have that perfect balance between to two
mentor texts. Once we have built our community then we can move more to formal
analysis—and I believe that you will have a much stronger analysis stage when
your students have built a community around the text and each other. Using life
experiences to navigate together is the key that many teachers fail to hark on.
For me, when Gallagher stated that she “is a teacher, not an
assigner,” really sits quite well with me! I believe that when we approach
texts like the canon, we often teach it the way we were taught it because that
is the only way we can get through the text. How do you navigate a text that
you wouldn’t read in your spare time and expect students to like it too? The
problem like she says is how we teach these works, not the works themselves.
Maybe I’m having a realization as I’m typing this that this could be the reason
I dislike canonized text? I wasn’t taught it in a way that made me feel any
emotion to them…perhaps, but let’s not forget what we give up when we don’t
have that balance. Cultural responsibility is important in to the classroom
too, and it should be addressed, and if you’re going to do so, teachers need to
learn the ways to do it well—if your students don’t connect with ANYTHING you
teach, look at how you’re doing it.
Do: For the do, I am doing something different. (Sty, I
know, I know). It is a video I found on youtube and one that I intend to use as
I am thinking about how to get away from the stigmatized “bad canonized text”
teaching. What do you think??
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sLSTyhZzPmc
I agree about the questionable value of the classics. I posed the option of simply using newer texts that teach the same values and moral lessons as the old dead white guys. I even went so far as to suggest we give the classics to the history department and be done with them. Then I think about Brave New World; this is almost 100 years old and written by an old dead white guy, yet we find it of immense value, even though it is somewhat difficult for we “expert” readers to navigate. Where do we draw the line? I like the ideas about introducing students to the classics, using the classics to teach reading strategies, and then making them available for those students who are interested enough to read them on their own time.
ReplyDeleteI also like the idea of using current texts in conjunction with the classics, and then seeing what the classics have in common with modern life. This order seems more logical.
Good that you reminded us not to stay in reader response. I have been fed it for so long that I have a hard time not staying with it. I rely very heavily on life experience to get my students to write; it’s what they know the best, they were there, and I don't have to teach background knowledge or content.
The first grad class I took at USC was completely composed of working teachers. Many could not get past the idea of teaching like they were taught, stuck in the “it worked with me so it should work with you and if it doesn't it’s your fault” mentality. My students have almost zero in common with teenagers of my time, and neither does our society, nation, or world. I never read a classic that I liked, and I agree, I probably will not read one on my own time. When I think back to the ones I read in school, like Great Expectations, I can still remember feeling gloomy and depressed for the whole time we were reading it. I like your last line, how the teacher is responsible for class content, and if we are losing the students we need to do something different. It reminds me of a line in one EDRD text about the students we describe as “hard to teach”. It says something like what we are really saying is not that the students are hard to teach, but that the students are hard for ME to teach.
Do you have a link to the YouTube video? I would like to watch it.
Oh no! I can't access the video--like John, I really want and need to see it--can you please either re-load the link or just tell us how to search it by title on YouTube? As for the SAY, I enjoyed reading through your process and final epiphany--I agree that much of the reason we dislike reading the canon is because of how it is taught--but I also have to point out that these texts were not written for an adolescent audience--they were written for an adult audience, so it is no wonder that our students more easily connect and relate to texts written with them in mind--
DeleteFinding that "sweet spot" and balance between pre-during-post reading strategies, formal analysis, critical synthesis, and not forgetting personal response is not easy--and what about the readings pertaining to vocabulary? How do we fit in that as well? How do we not overteach and still allow for the aesthetic experience of reading?
Gosh, It really upsets me that you linked a Fox News video. While I actually agreed with all of the interviewee's words, the entire slant of this video was to aggressively yell and shove the #AllLivesMatter argument down the viewers throat. Of course Shakespeare is a dead white guy, and rather than first acknowledging that the school system may present a huge cultural imbalance in regards to racial exposure around texts, the network belittled the teacher who was trying something new and ultimately (again) backed the white voice and the white text. In addition they used the same logic around race to defend teaching Shakespeare (it's just a skin pigment; we're all one people, etc.) that they mock whenever POC use it as a cry for peace.
ReplyDelete