Public school required reading lists....

[Marisa]

I believe that the best way to get people to read, is to allow them to choose their own books. Everyone has individual interests, there is no single book that will appeal to everyone - force everyone to read the same book, and there will always be people in the class who do not enjoy it.... Allow everyone to choose their own book, everyone picks something they are interested in, now everyone is motivated to read.

That is fantastic for young readers who are learning to read. By middle school, most kids either like to read or they don't. Reading class is not the same as English Lit. This is why for "free reading", students can be allowed to choose their own books.

 

[dust1n]

ok, so let me thicken the plot - here is the assigned book for 8the grade that my daughter is supposed to read over the summer:

I think ultimately there is and will always be a blend between required assignments, variable assignments, and self-directed assignments.

But that said, that book your 8th grade daughter is reading sounds absolutely ridiculous.

 

[SomeRandom]

ok, so let me thicken the plot - here is the assigned book for 8the grade that my daughter is supposed to read over the summer:

Unwind, by Neal Shusterman.

Unwind (Unwind Dystology):Amazon:Books

There are many Christians who love this book for it's pro-life message, and I am actually a pro-lifer myself, but I disagree with making everyone read this who might have different views. I now live in the Bible belt, and feel that the required reading books are motivated by one group of religious people where I live....

Oh, Unwind is also anti-Semitic in that Jewish people tithe (kill) their 10th child as part of their religious beliefs...

I really did not want to turn this into a thread about what books should or should not be required to read, and am just posting this as an example of the types of problems, and political/religious agendas that so easily get mixed into required reading lists.

I agree it is fun to have a book-club discussion over the same book, but there is a fine line between an agenda of indoctrinating political/religious views within kids, and fostering classroom discussion. I think the only way to prevent political/religious indoctrination by the majority where you happen to live is to allow the freedom of choice in books.

Imagine a religious/political view that you disagree with... Now image that the majority of the people where you happen to live hold this view, and that your child is required to read pro-_______ (fill in the blank) books for their RELA class.... what would you do?

There's a pro life message in that book? 0_o
I read it and thought that it kind of demonized both sides of the debate, but I came out of it thinking that Pro Choice is the way to go. But that's just me.

Also, the modern classic 1984 is anti Semitic by that definition. Winston watches a propaganda piece in the cinema early in the story. According to Winston the pic tells the story of a "Jewess" being hunted down and the crowd cheering. And let's not forget Goldberg and the forced animosity sessions Winston and his fellow men engage in every single day. Winston even says that it's hard not to be caught up in the furor and let violent thoughts about Goldberg overtake you. Clearly imitating/parodying the propaganda against Jewish people and various strategies to create hatred against Jewish people that Hitler used.
Just because there's a depiction of something doesn't necessarily mean that the book or author is promoting or even condoning it. That conflation between depiction and promotion is why we have English Lit classes, to teach kids in an environment where they can voice their opinions, but have a guiding force to put things in proper context. You can't do that if there's like 20 books being read at a time.

Free reading is a time for kids to read what they want, assigned reading is just a more streamlined approach to teaching English. I may favor a combination of the two, but there also needs to be limits.

 

[Marisa]

There's a pro life message in that book? 0_o
I read it and thought that it kind of demonized both sides of the debate. But that's just me.

Both sides of that debate should be demonized. It has, in recent US history, been a conversation that's been had with blood. Without having read the book, I'd imagine that's a large part of the author's point.

Also, the modern classic 1984 is anti Semitic by that definition. Winston watches a propaganda piece in the cinema early in the story. According to Winston the pic tells the story of a "Jewess" being hunted down and the crowd cheering. And let's not forget Goldberg and the forced animosity sessions Winston and his fellow men engage in every single day. Winston even says that it's hard not to be caught up in the furor and let violent thoughts about Goldberg overtake you. Clearly imitating/parodying the propaganda against Jewish people and various strategies to create hatred against Jewish people that Hitler used.
Just because there's a depiction of something doesn't necessarily mean that the book or author is promoting or even condoning it. That conflation between depiction and promotion is why we have English Lit classes, to teach kids in an environment where they can voice their opinions, but have a guiding force to put things in proper context. You can't do that if there's like 20 books being read at a time.

Yup.

 

[SomeRandom]

Both sides of that debate should be demonized. It has, in recent US history, been a conversation that's been had with blood. Without having read the book, I'd imagine that's a large part of the author's point.

Ahh I see. Well I'm not well versed on the politics involved in the US Abortion Debate, mainly because I do not understand politics to begin with. (And yet ironically one of my favorite authors is renowned Politics ideas man George Orwell. Go figure lol!) But I can see why pointing out the flaws in both sides is a good strategy for examining the debate in the context of a story. Gives one a sense that this author is not only objective, but also critical without the hypocrisy of an agenda.

 

[Marisa]

Ahh I see. Well I'm not well versed on the politics involved in the US Abortion Debate, mainly because I do not understand politics to begin with. (And yet ironically one of my favorite authors is renowned Politics ideas man George Orwell. Go figure lol!) But I can see why pointing out the flaws in both sides is a good strategy for examining the debate in the context of a story. Gives one a sense that this author is not only objective, but also critical without the hypocrisy of an agenda.

I think the reason that so many books get demonized is that often times authors do take on social struggles of the day. It's always been the case. Dickens did it, Orwell did it, the book I referenced The Handmaid's Tale is by a somewhat prolific "feminist" author.

On a more personal note, I mentioned that I prefer to read almost exclusively non-fiction. With very few exceptions of reality oriented scifi (which sounds like an oxymorn) a la Henlein, Asimov and Clarke. English Lit was a bit of a struggle for me, I enjoyed Shakespeare but Orwell bored me to tears. It was particularly difficult for me to get past the fact that I was reading a book about talking pigs to dig in for the deeper meaning.

 

[SomeRandom]

On a more personal note, I mentioned that I prefer to read almost exclusively non-fiction. With very few exceptions of reality oriented scifi (which sounds like an oxymorn) a la Henlein, Asimov and Clarke. English Lit was a bit of a struggle for me, I enjoyed Shakespeare but Orwell bored me to tears. It was particularly difficult for me to get past the fact that I was reading a book about talking pigs to dig in for the deeper meaning.

Ahh but reading animal farm whilst eating a bacon sandwich is quite satisfying.

I was actually good at English Lit, despite not being able to articulate anything verbally. Still can't. I suppose that has to do with my tendency for daydreaming and all around aloofness.
After all, English Lit class may act all hoity toity, but at it's heart it's all artsy, abstractness and silliness.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Free reading is a time for kids to read what they want, assigned reading is just a more streamlined approach to teaching English. I may favor a combination of the two, but there also needs to be limits.

That's what my school had. It was called the AR program, which I think stood for Advanced Reading.

Ahh but reading animal farm whilst eating a bacon sandwich is quite satisfying.

You are a truly savage monster!
You ate Snowball you big meany head!

 

[SomeRandom]

That's what my school had. It was called the AR program, which I think stood for Advanced Reading.

I think my teachers were just a tad on the lazy side lol! I remember once during the last few weeks of the last semester one year we watched and read Bleach. Well my friend's class did, I just hid in the back to avoid my English teacher.

You are a truly savage monster!
You ate Snowball you big meany head!

Perhaps. But remember. Some animals are more equal than others. I just feel that extra equality gives me reign to eat the others

 

[Wirey]

I'm sure my grandmother didn't want my dad to read "Lord of the Flies" because it was just newfangled mumbo-jumbo, and they should just stick to Booth Tarkington and the Magnificent Andersons. Times change, and books come out that are great. Since I left high school, these have come out:

Remains of the Day
Life of Pi
Room
The English Patient
How Late It Was, How Late
Billy Bathgate
The Shipping News
The Poisonwood Bible

Does anyone think asking a kid to read these would be a mistake? Each carries an incredibly important message and is a fantastically good book (my favourite is Room, and not just because Emma Donoghue is a good Canadian girl). Each of these books will be better able to capture a present day kid's attention than Heart of Darkness, or The Great Gatsby. Should we teach classics? Of course. Should we automatically exclude new literature? Hell, no.

 

[Marisa]

Ahh but reading animal farm whilst eating a bacon sandwich is quite satisfying.

I had bacon for breakfast, whilst talking with bestie. Could only have been better had I been reading a good book. {sorry, bestie!} The good news is, my bestie would agree.

I was actually good at English Lit, despite not being able to articulate anything verbally. Still can't. I suppose that has to do with my tendency for daydreaming and all around aloofness.
After all, English Lit class may act all hoity toity, but at it's heart it's all artsy, abstractness and silliness.

I'm a very simple person, and I like simple things. Perhaps that's why I prefer non-fiction, where the point is presented to you on a golden tray. I don't like to have to dig for it.

 

[Marisa]

I'm sure my grandmother didn't want my dad to read "Lord of the Flies" because it was just newfangled mumbo-jumbo, and they should just stick to Booth Tarkington and the Magnificent Andersons. Times change, and books come out that are great. Since I left high school, these have come out:

Remains of the Day
Life of Pi
Room
The English Patient
How Late It Was, How Late
Billy Bathgate
The Shipping News
The Poisonwood Bible

Does anyone think asking a kid to read these would be a mistake? Each carries an incredibly important message and is a fantastically good book (my favourite is Room, and not just because Emma Donoghue is a good Canadian girl). Each of these books will be better able to capture a present day kid's attention than Heart of Darkness, or The Great Gatsby. Should we teach classics? Of course. Should we automatically exclude new literature? Hell, no.

I haven't read any of those. But I have read:
The Year of Living Biblicaly
The Sixth Extinction
Lysistrata
Lying
Letters from Earth
The Kite Runner
Ishmael
Guns
Letter to a Christian Nation
and I'm currently reading MisQuoting Jesus and The Gnostic Gospels.

 

[Wirey]

I haven't read any of those. But I have read:
The Year of Living Biblicaly
The Sixth Extinction
Lysistrata
Lying
Letters from Earth
The Kite Runner
Ishmael
Guns
Letter to a Christian Nation
and I'm currently reading MisQuoting Jesus and The Gnostic Gospels.

The Kite Runner? I thought you were just supposed to buy a copy of that and leave it on your coffee table so everyone knew how deep you were. The Kite Runner. Every copy of it should come with a bonus copy of The Color Purple and The Cay. Indeed.

 

[Wirey]

I'm a very simple person, and I like simple things.

How you doin'?

 

[Revoltingest]

I liked....

 

[Marisa]

The Kite Runner? I thought you were just supposed to buy a copy of that and leave it on your coffee table so everyone knew how deep you were. The Kite Runner. Every copy of it should come with a bonus copy of The Color Purple and The Cay. Indeed.

I actually really liked it. So maybe I'm not as simple as I thought?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

The Kite Runner? I thought you were just supposed to buy a copy of that and leave it on your coffee table so everyone knew how deep you were. The Kite Runner. Every copy of it should come with a bonus copy of The Color Purple and The Cay. Indeed.

Nah. For that you need at least one of the shelves of a book shelf full of nothing but German philosophers.
And then at least half of the shelf bellow filled with French philosophers, and the other half British philosophers.

 

[Musty]

So I was looking over next year's required reading list for my kids, and am rather disappointed... Nothing educational, it's basically soap-opera trash (not award winning literature, no classics, etc. etc.)

Rather than get into a long debate on what kids should or should not be forced to read, I have a different proposal, and was curious as to everyone's opinion on it.

If I created a survey with the following, would you sign it? Please edit/suggest away!

Thanks.

When I was at school the required reading for English Literature was a bit of a mixed bag for me. While I enjoyed some of the books (Lord of the Flies & Macbeth) some of it just didn't interest me at all (Romeo & Juliet) and I'd much rather have studied something that I read independently as a child (Lord of the Rings or Terry Pratchett). There is a risk that the kids would end up up reading some crap like the Twilight Series but I think that generally you'd see a greater diversity within the required reading list as opposed to a degeneration into pig swill.

I read a great deal of sci-fi and fantasy but this is rarely is ever included in required reading lists as far as I'm aware despite the wealth and brilliant literature out there.

 

[Wirey]

Nah. For that you need at least one of the shelves of a book shelf full of nothing but German philosophers.
And then at least half of the shelf bellow filled with French philosophers, and the other half British philosophers.

British philosophers? Benny Hill wrote a book?

 

[Wirey]

I actually really liked it. So maybe I'm not as simple as I thought?

Don't go gettin' uppity now.

Actually it was good, but forgettable good. Not exactly Vonnegut on a roll, you know?