IN THE best literature class I ever took, we didn't read a single book. It was a course taught here at the University on the Broadway musical, based solely on viewings of movies or live theatre performances. In form, it was vastly different from any English class I've taken (and I've taken quite a few). Yet it inspired me in a way that no other academic experience ever has. My own love for the subject matter, and the passion of my professor and classmates, gave class time a special intensity. And it proved to me the value of innovation and creativity in education.
Last Sunday, The Washington Post reported on an educational trend that is causing concern among parents and literary purists. In increasing numbers of D.C. area middle schools, teachers are opting to teach contemporary, young adult novels in English classes in lieu of classics. The objective: To teach children to appreciate reading and critical thinking without intimidating them by assigning the often-difficult canonical works. Teachers who have implemented the approach cite higher interest levels in students, but critics like the Core Knowledge Foundation lament the disappearance of the literary canon and its implications for education ("Schools Shelving the Classics," March 19).
Traditionalists argue -- and rightly so -- that the literary canon is an integral part of any liberal arts education. The most beloved literary characters -- Holden Caulfield, Jane Eyre, Huck Finn -- hold an esteemed place in our culture, and it's not wrong to be concerned that students could leave school unacquainted with their misadventures. But the fact remains that many classics, with their complicated prose, extensive vocabulary and detailed historical backgrounds, can be alienating to a student who has yet to learn how to read with confidence and a discerning eye.
The philosophy behind the movement towards more simplistic fiction is to first equip students with the tools needed to study literature effectively. Particularly in early literature, like Chaucer, it is difficult enough for a middle-school student to grasp the plot on a first reading, let alone form conclusions about the subtler subtextual implications. If they can master the skills involved in close reading and analysis with less difficult reading material, they will not only have the confidence to tackle Dickens and Shakespeare later on, but they will get more out of these important works when they do read them.
More disturbing, though, than a de-emphasis on classics in the classroom is the recent decline of student interest in the classroom -- especially in literature. Many teenagers learn early on to dread English class and its dusty old volumes -- a mentality that they then carry on throughout higher levels of education. More and more children are choosing the lure of television and the Internet over an afternoon with a good book -- canonized or not. If children develop an interest -- if not a love -- for reading in the early stages of education, their reading and writing skills surely will develop at an accelerated rate.
The bottom line is this: At the middle-school level, the first priority should be to actually get kids reading. The second should be to cultivate an enjoyment of it. Students are much more likely to pick up a book in which the protagonist is someone with whom they can identify, more likely to enjoy the book if it doesn't seem overly verbose and intimidating. They ultimately will learn more from a lesson plan that teaches books they have read and enjoyed than books that they skimmed the Cliffs Notes for. If these initial encounters with reading and critical thinking are positive, they are much more likely to challenge themselves later on with the standard literary fare.
It's certainly valid to worry that the classics could disappear from the classroom altogether, and it seems reasonable to require that students begin to tackle the great works by the high school level. It also is worth noting that the right teacher can make even the most challenging work accessible and the most tedious book exciting. To do that, there must be a reciprocal effort on the part of the students, based on their willingness to challenge their own literary skills. That's the kind of attitude that comes with emotional and intellectual maturity -- something that is not at its most developed in the seventh grade.
While a certain amount of concern with this trend is warranted, there should not be an attitude of absolutism when it comes to teaching literature. There is no rule that says all students should suffer through works like "Johnny Tremain" just because that's the way it has always been done. Instead, we should commend teachers who have an accurate perception of student interests and who attempt to integrate them into the classroom. It is only through this kind of careful, open observation and willingness to change that the status of education in this country will improve.
In this electronic age, if all it takes to renew a love for the written word is a little "Literarure Lite," well, it's a sacrifice worth making. Huck would think so, anyway.
(Katie Dodd's column appears Thursdays in The Cavalier Daily.)
Read More
EDITORIAL: Scapegoating students will not stop hazing
By Editorial Board | 2 days agoInstead of retroactively responding to extreme hazing allegations, we, and especially the University, must begin asking more probing questions about the role of fraternal organizations on Grounds.
EDITORIAL: Celebrating and reflecting on The Cavalier Daily’s independence
By Editorial Board | April 18, 2024Our independence grants us the ability to ask the hard questions and to say what University representatives cannot.
ARRAS: U.Va. must revise the Sexual Assault Prevention Training module
By Aoife Arras | April 17, 2024In addition to its failures in interactivity, the module lacks details specific to the University and discusses key concepts in universal terms.
