CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online log in · register
Home › wanderingbadger44 › Posts

Posts by wanderingbadger44

232 posts shown.

What's the point of required reading? in Students & Teens ·
Maria Gray3 said:So what, we should just bring back Home Ec, then throw in carpentry, masonry, drywalling, auto mechanics, and construction? I guess those would be way more "useful" for daily life than physics, biology, English, art, music, or history. 🤔

Generally speaking, could you tell me which specific elementary school subjects actually teach these "useful" skills, and what those skills even are? Or maybe those subjects just don't exist in the current curriculum?

Edit: urbantinker8, I honestly admire anyone who hasn't lost all hope if they truly believe this. It’s kind of depressing to read, frankly. Some discussions on this sub are just as infuriating as reading the comments on the New York Times (and the NYT really gets under my skin 😁). It’s just this mindset that keeps America from ever moving past a backwards mentality. First, parents start panicking about physics, math, and computer science, and now everyone wants their kid to be a tiny robot technician, a little coder, or a junior engineer—as if we’re just trying to fill labor shortages, yay. But then we act like hicks and primitives by ignoring an entire spectrum of other knowledge, labeling it useless, outdated, or stupid. We ignore the fact that kids need to learn how to think. How to turn thoughts into sentences. We forget that you can't just feed a kid formulas and a mountain of math problems and expect them to become a mathematician. We overlook the fact that besides memorizing data—which isn't useless, obviously—other subjects teach kids how to think, connect dots, express themselves, argue, and explain. We forget that a kid might not care about STEM at all and might actually want to be a professor, a musician, a dancer, or a preschool teacher. We're talking about third graders here, hey. And this guy is acting all high and mighty about raising a little irac when his kid probably doesn't even know how to wipe themselves properly and has no clue where their life is even headed.

In my first year of college, we were part of an experimental group that switched entirely to multiple-choice exams because oral exams were supposedly too subjective—even though essay questions are just as subjective. I studied law. Just imagine the mind behind a system where a future lawyer spends a whole year saying absolutely nothing to a professor and just circles bubbles next to A, B, C, or D. I guess that's what it takes so fools won't complain about professors being biased, or how some "special snowflake" wrote one thing when they meant another. 😢

Someone please help me, thank Jesus!🙏

I just put together one of those tests myself. Circle this. Underline that. Color this in. And there's always that one question that asks you to "cross out the incorrect answer," which acts like a total trap because most people end up circling the right one instead of crossing out the wrong one, even though it's clearly stated. Then you've got your standard Yes or No section.

I don't need some entitled brat or even John Doe wasting my time or testing my nerves by questioning whether I'm being objective. Everything is on paper. It's black and white. If anyone has an issue, they can take it up with the Dean's office.
What's the point of required reading? in Students & Teens ·
brightheron64 said:Let me clarify things here, because the real issue is that we’re dealing with an absolute idiot of a philosophy professor who refuses to step outside the narrow confines of his own field... he makes zero effort to grasp fundamental concepts like limits or delta t—concepts that his students have to wrestle with on a daily basis, and which are exactly what's needed right now to demystify these little logical dead ends...

By the way, shall we take another look at that whole saga regarding those absolute idiots...
Is it just me, or does it feel like I’m teaching the exact same lesson to every single new group of students, year after year, from my very first day on the job all the way until I finally hit retirement...

Please, don't trivialize such a profound story with that kind of nonsense...

Since I have a few kids of my own running around, I feel like I’ve earned the right to speak up about the school reading list—not only am I intimately familiar with the classics we all had to suffer through, but I also noticed that remarkably few of the titles have actually changed since I was sitting in those desks myself...

So, you're asking me to explain why they all vanished... if you really want me to dive into that whole mystery, I suppose I could try, though it’s a bit of a rabbit hole to fall down... Loda's courier It seems like you might have hit send a little too early, but I am sitting here ready and waiting to help you transform your content... whenever you are ready to share the text, just let me know... Divine dust...Are they just not classic enough? It feels like they’re bordering on being too banal...

Take a look at this... Divine dust... It really stands as one of the most accomplished pieces of prose in all of American literature... Source: Miroslav Krleža Lexicographical Institute

So, if that’s how it works, why on earth shouldn't I be allowed to give my own child the freedom to choose for themselves...

Honestly, I'm at a loss for words here...

Pythagoras has been dead for ages, yet mathematicians still can't seem to move past $a^2 + b^2 = c^2$.

Linguists are stuck clinging to the same accusative cases used by the ancient Latin speakers, teaching kids how to compare adjectives without ever actually making them think about the mechanics behind it. Even literature professors have been mindlessly repeating since the 13th century that Dante's Divine Comedy consists of 100 cantos, but I wonder if anyone has ever stopped to truly question that.

Chemists haven't found a more accurate periodic table than Mendeleev's, and look where that's left modern chemistry. Physicists are still trumpeting the name of Newton in an era defined by digital technology.

Geographers just parrot the same facts like machines, insisting the Himalayas are the highest mountain range and the Mariana Trench is the deepest point.

It’s honestly tragic...

🤦

People like you really deserve homeschooling—or at the very least, some decent private education.
What's the point of required reading? in Students & Teens ·
hollowcrane47 said:What would actually bother me more is if my kid was just that dim—forced to read some garbage book, and then being so incapable that they can't even make up a single thing they supposedly liked about it. Instead, they just parrot someone else like, "the book sucked," just to get a cookie. 🤦

I’d much rather deal with the kids who scavenge the internet to dodge a boring book just to scrape by with a passing grade—at least those kids showed some initiative 😁 compared to the ones who aren't even lazy enough to finish the reading, yet are too brainless to come up with two decent sentences about what they just read. 🙄

Unless, of course, the little one is actually a total badass and just couldn't care less about any of this. 😎

🙏🙏🙏

Beyond that, having a negative impression counts as an impression too.
You should chime in, build on the points made before you were called out, or take what was already said and put it into your own words.

Honestly, pulling off something like that requires a level of linguistic skill that you actually develop—it's a bit of a paradox, really—through reading. 🙂

Unless the little one is actually a total rebel who just doesn't care at all. 😎

Exactly, which is why she came home from school feeling "sad and a little unhappy," to use the author's words—which is pretty badass in its own way. Usually, that kind of attitude lasts until you hit a C-minus. But hey, look at me rambling—any grade lower than an A in my book would be a problem. 🙂
What's the point of required reading? in Students & Teens ·
Susan James said:It’s actually pretty funny to me how we went from a post where a dad was bragging about getting a C in third grade all the way to a deep debate about high school reading lists and the deeper meaning of *Judith*.
First off, high school isn't mandatory, and you definitely aren't forced to read *Judith*.
Second, if someone hasn't developed a love for reading or picked up the habit by the time they hit high school, they probably shouldn't be heading to high school at all—especially not a prep school.
But here’s my main point, speaking strictly as a parent: it honestly scares me how little kids read in the elementary years. We assign reading just once a month, yet with all the books and translations available today, school has become so simplified that it’s basically training kids to be uninformed. They're being raised to show zero interest in anything beyond the bare minimum required for class, and frankly, the requirements are so low it's terrifying.
Not to mention, the reading lists for every grade are public on the library websites. Usually, there's only one mandatory book, and everything else is left up to the teacher's discretion. I mean, what would happen to a poor kid if they actually tried to read that entire list? There are plenty of fascinating stories out there, sure, but there are also some dull ones—that's just part of life.
It's about practicing grammar, capitalization, and building a solid vocabulary.
If they don't pick those skills up in the lower grades, they never will.

As a parent, I make sure to bring home or buy books for my child. My kid reads because we read at home, too, and we’ve been reading together since they were tiny.
Honestly, I feel bad for the school system and for other parents and their kids.

But look, if teachers actually want kids to learn something, they can't just leave it all up to the parents or shrug their shoulders and say, "Well, the kids don't want to, and the parents aren't helping."

At the end of the day, some people are raising the next generation of leaders, while others are just raising people who will be easily manipulated.
Cheers!🙂

(The only real issue is who’s going to foot the bill for the teachers... especially their pensions...🙂).

Regardless, reading is a great thing, even when the books themselves are a bit lackluster.

For heaven's sake, please explain to me why it would be in a teacher's best interest to force a child to learn something specifically when it goes against what the parent wants. I am genuinely asking you to walk me through that logic.

What exactly is this supposed "teacher's interest" you're talking about?

I could certainly give you plenty of examples regarding a teacher's interest in not pushing back against a parent's wishes.

But I want you to tell me: what is my personal incentive to insist on something that contradicts a parent's will?

Why on earth would I try to force biology on Manchild's kid or John Doe's child—using those specific names Manchild mentioned—or push Faulkner, when at the end of the day, the parent is the customer, and we all know the old adage that the customer is always right?

I clearly see how it benefits society and the community for children to read, to become literate, and to grow more educated. But as for my own personal gain, kill me now, because I simply don't see any.

And if society has such an interest, then society should have the mechanisms in place to make it happen. Instead, society ties my hands behind my back and then expects me to act like it's my personal mission to ensure kids read, even though I have no way to fight for it.
What's the point of required reading? in Students & Teens ·
When it comes to teaching American literature, we’re basically following the same flawed playbook your professor used: we're just letting students pass through without actually learning how to write.
What's the point of required reading? in Students & Teens ·
Larry Walker24 said:🤦🤦🤦🤦🤦 🤦🤦

Try spending one single class period with them where they’re clearly smarter than you. They're jumping over desks, slamming stuff against the walls, and they literally don't give a damn about anything. And thanks to the laws here, you can't even kick them out, and all those warnings or threats of suspension don't mean squat. You really think you could get them interested in some book about Judith

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhaahahah

Tell them, I don't know, tell them Judith was a total slut, and watch how fast everyone starts paying attention.

I'm telling you again, it's not the same teaching American Lit at a prep school where kids actually try, versus a school where people enroll just because they barely scraped by with passing grades.

Look, man... it’s pretty obvious now that you haven't actually sat down and read Judith's work. 😁
What's the point of required reading? in Students & Teens ·
Larry Walker24 said:And let's be real—to some 15-year-old kid scrolling Twitter, obsessed with the Kardashians and nothing else, this stuff feels totally alien. To them, it's just old junk that doesn't fit their 21st-century vibe.

Some random IT guy is gonna be making bank one day, but he sure as hell isn't gonna get rich by reading Judas.

You guys act like you've been living under a rock for the last 20 years or something.🤦

Honestly, what is your problem?

Look, if you don't like reading, haven't read it, and think Judith is garbage—and I mean the whole thing, all thirty pages of poetry including the footnotes that take up half the page—then fine. But you can't claim to value the mindless scrolling of a teenager and then foam at the mouth like you're on some heavy medication. Tell me, does this logic only apply to literature, or does it extend to, say, biology too? Try swapping out Judith's name for "gymnosperms" or "insects" in that sentence of yours and see how it sounds. 🤷

High school isn't mandatory. ☕
What's the point of required reading? in Students & Teens ·
nimblelynx7 said:Around here, it’s always been about whether you "like" something. If you don't, you just get a one-star rating, and any actual argument explaining why you didn't like it gets shut down immediately.

It looks like you're struggling with basic reading comprehension. Honestly, I'm worried we might have to enroll you in a remedial education program together.

Don't turn this around on my ability to understand what's being said—I just don't buy the story that people were getting failing marks simply because they disliked a piece of art. I wasn't trying to call you a liar, per se.
What's the point of required reading? in Students & Teens ·
nimblelynx7 said:And what happens if he isn't even allowed to say it's garbage? If he can't even admit he hates it? Instead, he's forced to claim every single work is somehow better than the last one.

I actually started typing out a really biting response to that, but I ended up deleting it. Dealing with you requires a completely customized approach.

The issue isn't someone calling a piece of work mediocre. The real problem arises when that person thinks simply labeling it "bad" is enough, acting as if there’s nothing left to analyze, write about, or debate once they've dropped that judgment.

If it makes you feel any better, saying you "just like" something is just as shallow and unhelpful.

I once had a mother threaten to report me because her son wrote that he chose a specific passage because he liked it—the assignment was to pick a snippet and explain the choice—and his entire justification was basically, "I like this." Meanwhile, I had written something explaining why it *didn't* appeal to me.

So, neither "this is trash" nor "I like this" is a sufficient answer. You need to articulate exactly what, how, and why it fails to resonate or why it succeeds.
What's the point of required reading? in Students & Teens ·
In the official curriculum, required reading isn't listed as its own isolated category, which makes sense because its goals are woven directly into the broader English Language Arts standards. We're really talking about helping students engage with and actually experience literature—teaching them how to receive a story, sharpening their sensitivity to language, nurturing a genuine love for reading, and building those lifelong habits that allow them to dive into a book all on their own.

Even though analyzing these books is treated as a distinct activity in our teaching guides, it’s actually a way to hit all the major subject areas at once: grammar, speech, writing, literary analysis, and media literacy. It’s one of those perfect opportunities for cross-curricular learning.

During classroom discussions, students get a chance to test out their observations and opinions on what they've read. They trade perspectives with their peers, which helps them sharpen their critical thinking skills and discover their own unique tastes. Plus, they pick up new vocabulary and work on their ability to express themselves clearly and confidently out loud.

On paper, that's exactly how the whole system is supposed to function. 😁

But let's be real—when you call on a student to share an insightful take on a novel and they just shrug and say, "It sucked," all those lofty educational goals go right out the window. It's impossible to meet those standards when a kid doesn't even have the desire or the vocabulary to explain *why* they didn't like it. If they feel like it was "trash" and their parents back them up, they basically get a free pass to check out of the assignment entirely.
What's the point of required reading? in Students & Teens ·
Man, thinking back to my high school graduation and that one question about how many people were actually in the boat. 😁

Graduation is honestly such a beautiful, wonderful thing, even if it just serves as a spotlight for all the hypocrisy from the public, the students, and especially the parents.

The whole system basically takes the straight-A kids, grinds them down to dust, and buries them alive, which is exactly why everyone makes such a massive fuss over it.

If you look at Homer's quote, it clearly says the crew consists of himself, Nicholas, Pascoe, and Pascoe's son—which adds up to four people.

But if you listen to everything else history and literature have taught us, Fisher's is really about the author and two fishermen, making it three. And every single student has been drilled with that version, just like they were with anything else on the reading list.
Because that’s what the textbook says! All those quotes and verses attached to the question are totally useless, and the instruction to read the passage before answering is a joke. THE QUESTION SHOULD BE VOIDED!!!11!!
What's the point of required reading? in Students & Teens ·
That’s exactly what I was thinking of adding. Canonical works don't necessarily have to be the ones assigned in school reading lists. Honestly, maybe they shouldn't even be. But regardless, that doesn't change the reality that Shakespeare's Judith is a canonical, quintessential, and supreme masterpiece of American language and literature.
What's the point of required reading? in Students & Teens ·
silentraven6 said:It’s honestly not a good idea to get lazy in the long run if we want our standardized testing and high school graduation exams to actually mean something. I don't want us reaching a point where they base everything on trivial nonsense—like asking which song was playing in the background during that scene in *Olga* and *Lina* when they find the piano, or what color flower Julia had tucked in her hair when Romeo first saw her, or even what shade of blue the sky was in *Romeo and Juliet*. We need substance, not trivia.

The worst part about all this is that people start asking these kinds of questions before they’ve even sat kids down to explain what the symbols mean. They don't bother pointing out those specific moments that actually deserve extra attention—whether it's within the pacing, the overall work, or just the flow of the action itself.

The fundamental question really comes down to this: what is the actual purpose of required reading, and who exactly gets to decide which books earn the title of "classic," "canonical," or a "masterpiece"?

Like I’ve said before, what actually makes up "the canon" isn't some fixed, holy truth. It’s really just whatever the zeitgeist decides it is at any given moment. You’ve got groups of hyper-focused literary historians—including those self-proclaimed "experts" who act like they discovered everything yesterday—as well as the academic establishment (usually those folks over at the Academy of Sciences who, let's be honest, often lacked any real teaching intuition even back when they were lecturing at universities). Then you have the social order shaped by ideology, and even small circles of dedicated humanists who are genuinely trying to make a difference. The canon is always being re-evaluated. It isn't some untouchable, sacred category that stays frozen for centuries; it never has been in history. Throughout time, the selection of canonical authors and works has been swayed by all sorts of phenomena—most often that pedagogical and didactic element used to serve specific ideologies, certain ways of teaching, or particular methods of study.

I honestly can't get behind this whole idea that kids today are lazier than previous generations just because of how they handle required reading. Let's be real here—kids have always been lazy. Every single one of us knows that. I'm 34 years old now, and even back then, only a tiny fraction of us actually sat down to read entire books from cover to cover, let alone any extra stuff. If anything, I think it was even worse in the past. Remember those ridiculous reading logs? Those massive 25-page booklets where you had to list everything you "read"? Half the time, it was just moms sitting there filling them out for their kids. It was a total sham. Nowadays, with the way written tests are structured, it’s much harder to cheat like that. It feels like the focus has shifted toward actual discussion and dialogue about the books, which is a much better way to see if someone actually engaged with the story.

That’s a whole different conversation: what even qualifies as "required reading," and what is its actual purpose? Does it really need to be confined strictly to American literature classes?

It feels like we’re constantly trying to justify ourselves by clinging to the canon. We act like because we forced these books down everyone's throats, and they turn out to be terrible or just too much work to actually read, then it’s somehow not our fault. It's like we're shifting the blame. A massive group of people decided that ten specific works were "masterpieces" just because of some high-brow artistic label, but most people don't want them. To them, it's all just a chore—too heavy, too tedious, just plain exhausting. It’s honestly a bit pathetic.

We basically washed our hands of their whole reading culture. I mean, the entire idea behind required school reading was to cultivate a genuine love for books, to sharpen aesthetic judgment, and to build up critical thinking skills—not just to serve as a dry history lesson on literature.

My favorite type of people are those who constantly lecture everyone else about "the classics," even though they only ever cracked them open because it was required for a high school English credit and haven't touched them since. Seriously, how is that even considered reading? How is that supposed to be a love for literature? About 90% of these critics—the ones calling everyone else lazy for skipping the old stuff—have never actually picked up one of those books again, let alone explored another work by the same author. They remind me of those religious types who swear by the Bible but haven't read a single actual letter from it unless they're hearing it read aloud during a sermon at church.

The whole idea that Americans don't read? Honestly, I think that’s complete nonsense. It's just not true. You can't look at a claim like that and call it a valid data point when you aren't even accounting for all the variables. People are reading; they're just doing it differently than how some folks might expect.

When you look at the data, most people focus on book acquisitions or, more recently, how libraries are adding physical media to their collections. But honestly, even that doesn't give you the full picture. It’s impossible to get an accurate sense of the actual state of things because not every library is integrated into the central database—like the Library of Congress system. You also end up missing out on private exchanges between institutions, small local home libraries, and we’ve only just started accounting for alternative sources like e-readers. There are just too many gaps in the data to say we have the whole story.
Also, what can we actually say about library access across the US? Does anyone here actually know what the situation looks like on the ground? I’m curious how well-equipped school libraries in smaller towns really are—specifically regarding collections that aren't just strictly required reading lists. What are they doing to actually encourage kids to read for pleasure? Are librarians in those smaller communities taking the initiative to build up their own little collections to spark some interest in the smallest readers?

I could be really mean here and say that if my kid wanted to find something beyond the required reading list, he’d first have to hunt down a librarian somewhere in the school hallways and try to actually strike up a conversation that isn't just, "Hey, I need this for class." But honestly, I know that's not how it works, and I truly respect the work librarians do all over the US. They run such incredible programs and workshops. How many of them are doing that kind of heavy lifting? I don't know, but it feels like there aren't nearly enough. On one hand, you have my life in a place like Chicago—I'm basically a professional bibliophile who spends way more time tucked away in libraries than the average person. I feel at home in them. Instead of grabbing coffee on a busy street corner, I’d much rather be sitting in a library, reading, working, or just chatting with the staff. But then there's the rest of the country. There's the issue of accessibility, the actual availability of books, and the reality that for a lot of people, purchasing power is just too low to make reading an easy choice.

And why on earth should reading assignments be confined strictly to English class? If we’re actually serious about encouraging people to read—if we really care about preserving literary history, the canon, and all that other stuff—then we can do it during math, history, or physics too. Think about the massive potential hidden in the papers of legendary physicists. Honestly, let's stop this constant brainwashing in English class that strips the subject of its actual purpose. Let them read in the original languages they're learning in school; let them dive into scientific papers, essays, or even feuilletons. It’s absurd to act like English class is the only way to spark an interest in reading, or like reading is nothing more than just picking up a piece of fiction.

That’s spot on.

So where does the friction actually come from?

It's all in the grading, 🙂, just like one user mentioned.

There has never been a time when every single kid was a reader, nor has everyone ever enjoyed assigned books. Not once. Before the internet age, kids would just skim the forewords and afterwords, swap summaries with friends, and find any way possible to scrape by while pretending they had done the work.

But nowadays, everyone is expected to pull an A. We have formal reading assessments now, and that's where the tension lies. Not everyone can hit that top mark, and when they don't, people look for someone to blame—usually pointing the finger at the reading list itself.

Give me a break...

Even if you made the list nothing but short stories, you'd still have students who wouldn't want to read them, students who read them but couldn't grasp the meaning, or students who would just complain about the titles chosen.

It's the grading. 🙄
What's the point of required reading? in Students & Teens ·
You are building your entire argument on two fundamentally flawed premises. First:

silentraven6 said:It’s honestly not a good idea to get lazy in the long run if we want our standardized testing and high school graduation exams to actually mean something. I don't want us reaching a point where they base everything on trivial nonsense—like asking which song was playing in the background during that scene in *Olga* and *Lina* when they find the piano, or what color flower Julia had tucked in her hair when Romeo first saw her, or even what shade of blue the sky was in *Romeo and Juliet*. We need substance, not trivia.

The worst part about all this is that people start asking these kinds of questions before they’ve even sat kids down to explain what the symbols mean. They don't bother pointing out those specific moments that actually deserve extra attention—whether it's within the pacing, the overall work, or just the flow of the action itself.

The fundamental question really comes down to this: what is the actual purpose of required reading, and who exactly gets to decide which books earn the title of "classic," "canonical," or a "masterpiece"?

Like I’ve said before, what actually makes up "the canon" isn't some fixed, holy truth. It’s really just whatever the zeitgeist decides it is at any given moment. You’ve got groups of hyper-focused literary historians—including those self-proclaimed "experts" who act like they discovered everything yesterday—as well as the academic establishment (usually those folks over at the Academy of Sciences who, let's be honest, often lacked any real teaching intuition even back when they were lecturing at universities). Then you have the social order shaped by ideology, and even small circles of dedicated humanists who are genuinely trying to make a difference. The canon is always being re-evaluated. It isn't some untouchable, sacred category that stays frozen for centuries; it never has been in history. Throughout time, the selection of canonical authors and works has been swayed by all sorts of phenomena—most often that pedagogical and didactic element used to serve specific ideologies, certain ways of teaching, or particular methods of study.

I honestly can't get behind this whole idea that kids today are lazier than previous generations just because of how they handle required reading. Let's be real here—kids have always been lazy. Every single one of us knows that. I'm 34 years old now, and even back then, only a tiny fraction of us actually sat down to read entire books from cover to cover, let alone any extra stuff. If anything, I think it was even worse in the past. Remember those ridiculous reading logs? Those massive 25-page booklets where you had to list everything you "read"? Half the time, it was just moms sitting there filling them out for their kids. It was a total sham. Nowadays, with the way written tests are structured, it’s much harder to cheat like that. It feels like the focus has shifted toward actual discussion and dialogue about the books, which is a much better way to see if someone actually engaged with the story.

That’s a whole different conversation: what even qualifies as "required reading," and what is its actual purpose? Does it really need to be confined strictly to American literature classes?

It feels like we’re constantly trying to justify ourselves by clinging to the canon. We act like because we forced these books down everyone's throats, and they turn out to be terrible or just too much work to actually read, then it’s somehow not our fault. It's like we're shifting the blame. A massive group of people decided that ten specific works were "masterpieces" just because of some high-brow artistic label, but most people don't want them. To them, it's all just a chore—too heavy, too tedious, just plain exhausting. It’s honestly a bit pathetic.

We basically washed our hands of their whole reading culture. I mean, the entire idea behind required school reading was to cultivate a genuine love for books, to sharpen aesthetic judgment, and to build up critical thinking skills—not just to serve as a dry history lesson on literature.

My favorite type of people are those who constantly lecture everyone else about "the classics," even though they only ever cracked them open because it was required for a high school English credit and haven't touched them since. Seriously, how is that even considered reading? How is that supposed to be a love for literature? About 90% of these critics—the ones calling everyone else lazy for skipping the old stuff—have never actually picked up one of those books again, let alone explored another work by the same author. They remind me of those religious types who swear by the Bible but haven't read a single actual letter from it unless they're hearing it read aloud during a sermon at church.

The whole idea that Americans don't read? Honestly, I think that’s complete nonsense. It's just not true. You can't look at a claim like that and call it a valid data point when you aren't even accounting for all the variables. People are reading; they're just doing it differently than how some folks might expect.

When you look at the data, most people focus on book acquisitions or, more recently, how libraries are adding physical media to their collections. But honestly, even that doesn't give you the full picture. It’s impossible to get an accurate sense of the actual state of things because not every library is integrated into the central database—like the Library of Congress system. You also end up missing out on private exchanges between institutions, small local home libraries, and we’ve only just started accounting for alternative sources like e-readers. There are just too many gaps in the data to say we have the whole story.
Also, what can we actually say about library access across the US? Does anyone here actually know what the situation looks like on the ground? I’m curious how well-equipped school libraries in smaller towns really are—specifically regarding collections that aren't just strictly required reading lists. What are they doing to actually encourage kids to read for pleasure? Are librarians in those smaller communities taking the initiative to build up their own little collections to spark some interest in the smallest readers?

I could be really mean here and say that if my kid wanted to find something beyond the required reading list, he’d first have to hunt down a librarian somewhere in the school hallways and try to actually strike up a conversation that isn't just, "Hey, I need this for class." But honestly, I know that's not how it works, and I truly respect the work librarians do all over the US. They run such incredible programs and workshops. How many of them are doing that kind of heavy lifting? I don't know, but it feels like there aren't nearly enough. On one hand, you have my life in a place like Chicago—I'm basically a professional bibliophile who spends way more time tucked away in libraries than the average person. I feel at home in them. Instead of grabbing coffee on a busy street corner, I’d much rather be sitting in a library, reading, working, or just chatting with the staff. But then there's the rest of the country. There's the issue of accessibility, the actual availability of books, and the reality that for a lot of people, purchasing power is just too low to make reading an easy choice.

And why on earth should reading assignments be confined strictly to English class? If we’re actually serious about encouraging people to read—if we really care about preserving literary history, the canon, and all that other stuff—then we can do it during math, history, or physics too. Think about the massive potential hidden in the papers of legendary physicists. Honestly, let's stop this constant brainwashing in English class that strips the subject of its actual purpose. Let them read in the original languages they're learning in school; let them dive into scientific papers, essays, or even feuilletons. It’s absurd to act like English class is the only way to spark an interest in reading, or like reading is nothing more than just picking up a piece of fiction.

The SAT isn't based on what you're claiming. It's simple enough to verify because everything is completely transparent, and you can find last year's national exam papers all over the internet.

Only someone incapable of reading the provided text would stir up an outcry over a question like "what color was Judith's ring?" from a few years back, especially when anyone could clearly see from the lines provided that Judith had a "ruby red on her fingers." Or take that recent nonsense regarding Hemingway, where people were foolishly circling a quote describing an infection and a high fever to claim the heroine died in a fire.

The point is, they weren't testing trivia; they were testing reading comprehension based strictly on the PROVIDED EXCERPT.

Second:

The canon is subject to re-evaluation in every era; it isn't some untouchable category that stays frozen for centuries.

That is entirely incorrect. You really ought to check the dictionary under the primary definition of the word canon.

Homer, Dante, Shakespeare, and Baudelaire will always be part of the canon. And so will Shakespeare, Milton, and Hemingway.

The canon can certainly expand to include contemporary works, which makes perfect sense. But it doesn't change, and you can't have some fool claiming "ugh, Judith" as if she's suddenly irrelevant. I mean, sure, they can try. Obviously. 🙄

It's the same kind of logic people use when they question whether the Earth is round or if vaccines cause autism. ☕
What's the point of required reading? in Students & Teens ·
brightheron64 said:No, she isn't whining about the grade—she was just feeling a bit embarrassed, really. She got exactly what she deserved, so let's just call it a day and move on...

But honestly, I completely respect her right to come to her own conclusions and experience things on her own terms... whether she finds the whole thing trivial or absolutely world-class...

You’re basically labeling me a flat-earther, all while conveniently ignoring how much the establishment has burned through its own credibility just because they refused to bow down to the fundamental truth... that very same canon you seem so incredibly desperate to defend...

I suppose I really should have guessed you were the one doing the complaining here; kids are usually sharper than that and they generally understand when they’ve actually earned their outcome.

But I completely agree with her right to come to her own conclusions and experience things by her own standards, whether she finds them trivial or absolutely brilliant.

It's the same for me and my colleagues, which is why we ask those questions you dismissed as stupid: what did you enjoy, what was your impression, how did the work resonate with you?

When all we get back is a dismissive "it was whatever," it doesn't exactly feel like critical thinking is happening. We must be terrible people for wanting actual arguments, reasoning, quotes, or a bit of healthy debate...
You're labeling me a flat-earther while ignoring how much dirt everyone gets on themselves when they push back against the fundamental truth... that canon you're defending so fiercely.

Oh sure, because apparently every kid you know is the next Copernicus or Jordan Bruno 🤣 Poor kids, having to live up to expectations like yours. 😢
What's the point of required reading? in Students & Teens ·
brightheron64 said:Quincy...

Blah, blah, blah...

I’ll just mention one thing:

I had Nazorov as required reading back in elementary school myself. Only difference is, I was reading Percy Jackson instead of White Deer... 😉

The child I’m talking about has been a member of the public library since they were five years old. If there is any sense of continuity in my family, it is this culture of reading. When I was setting up a new room for the kids, the very first step wasn't the bed—it was installing the reading lamps...

So, please, don't... It’s honestly heartbreaking to see you trying to pass down this forced, artificial conditioning to the next generation...

Of course. Just like how anyone who doesn't recognize Jackson Pollock as a transcendent genius is clearly just some simpleton with zero appreciation for beauty...

There we go, now we’re just uneducated Americans without any literary culture...

You can only build a foundation by inspiring someone, not by forcing them into it. Isn't our own history proof enough of that?

I suppose they’re just as articulate as your daughter, who spends all her time buried in books but can't tell you a single thing about what she's read besides saying, "It was boring."

And then comes the crying when it's time for report cards.
What's the point of required reading? in Students & Teens ·
We’re talking about elementary school here.

By the time kids reach high school, they've mostly just been casual readers, occasional visitors to the local library, or maybe they only saw a book during a field trip.

As for electives, I actually invite them in this September during those first few sessions to help build our reading list, giving them a chance to voice what they're actually interested in.

In the end, I usually just give them what they want. 😬 Mostly because they don't offer much of substance themselves, or they'll joke around with titles like, "Little Red Riding Hood! Picture books! Pinocchio! No, no, Pinocchio takes too long! I'm the weakest kid in class! Jack and Mary!" Eventually, they just hand the whole list over to me.

The seventh graders, though, always seem to gravitate toward things like the Prince's diaries and similar stuff. 🙄

I honestly don't get where this stubborn public delusion comes from—this idea that kids would read if it weren't for some grumpy old professors insisting on Homer. That's why they won't touch it.

Kids just don't read. Period. And honestly, I get it. Visual media has seriously stunted their ability to visualize things on their own. They are constantly fed ready-made images. Reading requires a huge time investment, and life moves way too fast for that now. It's just the reality of it.

Nobody is to blame for this situation, so please stop pointing the finger at damn good authors or the curriculum itself.

Unless you're going to sit here and argue that Daniel Defoe isn't a great writer or that his Robinson Crusoe isn't a masterpiece? I stopped assigning him a long time ago, and I think that's actually better. There's no point in making them read it when they either skip it entirely, force themselves through it, or just recount the damn movie to me despite all my efforts to explain that the two mediums are completely different.

edit: The White Stag is a magnificent work, featuring top-tier style and an incredible story. Anyone who says otherwise is just a total philistine!
What's the point of required reading? in Students & Teens ·
It feels like we’re all just drifting through these quiet, uncertain moments together, much like waiting for a slow train in a sleepy Midwestern station, hoping the tracks finally lead somewhere meaningful. There’s a certain heavy stillness in the air today, isn't there? It’s like when you’re watching a movie where everything feels just slightly off, as if the colors aren't quite right or the dialogue sounds rehearsed instead of real. Someone said:
That is exactly why it matters, and that is precisely the point.

I saw someone earlier comparing literature to the hard sciences like math, physics, or chemistry—those fundamental building blocks you absolutely have to master if you want to actually build something meaningful with your life.

What is the actual point of assigned reading anyway? Is it about developing a genuine reverence for the written word, sharpening our ability to express ourselves, or perhaps sparking some deep reflection and creativity? It feels a bit hollow to sit there analyzing a book and answering questions like, "what part of this story resonated with you most," when the story itself feels completely irrelevant to your life.

Just to be clear, my kids only tackle those required school reading lists because they have to; outside of those mandatory assignments, they actually devour at least three times as many books as anything assigned by their teachers. I make a point of encouraging them to read constantly, though I never try to force a specific title or subject on them, much like how you wouldn't force a child to pick a specific hobby just to keep them busy. Sometimes... Courier Today feels like one of those moments where everything just aligns, much like when you finally find that perfect rhythm while driving down a quiet stretch of highway in the Midwest. White StagOh, come on...

Who exactly is the one sitting in judgment over our reading lists? It feels like there’s this whole committee of experts, academics, and self-appointed intellectuals deciding what qualifies as essential knowledge based solely on their own narrow perspectives and subjective standards. It makes you wonder—if I choose to skip a book handpicked by Slobodan Prosperov Novak, am I suddenly written off as some uneducated kid who doesn't know any better?

There’s just something about this whole situation that keeps pulling me back to a specific scene in a movie. Dead Poet Society It’s just like that moment at the end of Dead Poet Society where Robin Williams shifts from being a mentor to playing some stiff, formal character who tries to teach his students how you actually "measure" poetry. It feels exactly like those rigid school assignments where they hand you a prompt like "A Stormy Autumn Day" and expect you to follow a strict formula for an essay.

Has it ever crossed anyone's mind to actually run a survey among high schoolers to see which books truly resonated with them back in elementary school? Imagine if we used those insights to build a curated reading list—one that balances what kids actually find engaging with the essential literary classics. If we did that, you wouldn't walk into a school library and have a student ask, "Uh, do you even carry *The Great Gatsby*?" Instead of being shocked by how disconnected or inarticulate kids seem to be today, we might actually give them a reason to love reading.

That’s just gross.

This is exactly how you end up with conspiracy theorists, anti-vaxxers, and those self-proclaimed "independent thinkers" who pride themselves on resisting any kind of established authority—as if questioning every scientific consensus or expert opinion is somehow a mark of unique character rather than just a refusal to accept reality.

It’s just one massive, heartbreaking mess.

It seems like everyone walks around carrying this unspoken assumption that they possess enough expertise to sit in judgment and pass a verdict on the world around them.

Literature isn't some tool designed to win over parents or satisfy kids; if people actually enjoy reading it, that’s just a nice little bonus. Honestly, everyone's tastes are so wildly different that trying to make everything universally appealing would be a fool's errand from the start.

Literature is meant to offer you the heavy hitters—those canonical, anthology-worthy masterpieces from both American and world classics, much like how the White Stag by Nazorov stands as a pillar of great writing. Honestly, who cares if your personal taste leans more toward catchy pop hits or light reading? The world is wide, and the libraries and bookstores out there are endless; feel free to read whatever your heart desires.

It honestly gets under my skin when I hear people complaining about required reading lists today. They act like they’ve developed this deep-seated hatred for books, but they forget that back then, we weren't even allowed to explore anything outside of what was strictly assigned for school. It was like being trapped in a vacuum; if a book wasn't on the official curriculum, it basically didn't exist for us. I remember walking into the local library and having the librarian tell me point-blank that I couldn't check out anything unless it was part of the required reading list. Even at the neighborhood bookstore, the clerks would practically lecture parents who tried to pick up something just for fun that wasn't on the approved syllabus. We were essentially stripped of the chance to discover literature on our own terms because everything else was treated like it was forbidden. If you ask me, that's exactly why so many people struggle to find an interest in reading today—we were never given the freedom to actually fall in love with it.

You can't really have it both ways—complaining that your kid was handed a failing grade for an incomplete assignment while simultaneously bragging about how much they love to read. It just doesn't add up. If they truly had a genuine passion for reading, they wouldn't have struggled to tackle a simple short story or missed the mark on a few basic comprehension questions.

He acts like a tough guy out there, but then he comes home whining about a C grade. And here you are on the forum questioning the literary classics just because you think you know better.

While everyone is busy making a huge fuss over certain required reading, nobody seems to care that the music program isn't playing anything like Taylor Swift or whatever is topping the charts. It’s no wonder our concert halls are sitting empty; it’s probably because the music curriculum has basically taught kids to turn their noses up at Mozart, Shostakovich, or Mahler—shame on them.

We need to do something about the music department! Run a survey! Let’s actually hear what the kids and their parents want to listen to and let that shape the programming!

Good grief, I’m getting worked up. Parents whose children can't actually grasp or comprehend a book appropriate for their age level constantly make excuses by claiming the material is just "boring."

And what is a teacher supposed to do? Should they read some trashy garbage like a teen romance sequel just because it’s popular? Or should they teach every single title that a mom or dad thinks is "appropriate"—because let's be honest, it's the parents who decide what the kid likes—just so they can cover twenty-five different books during a literature seminar? Even if they did all that, someone would still find a way to complain about the selection.

What about the music teacher? Are they expected to play nothing but Top 40 hits and pop radio tracks just because students and parents have zero interest in classical or jazz?

So, you don't want to read the assigned book? Fine. If Mom and Dad say it's fine and agree that it's "lame," go ahead. Take your passing grade and act cool. Then head straight to the library and read whatever your heart desires. But if you claim the assignment is pointless, then prove it. Argue, cite evidence, and explain your reasoning. That is literally the point of the assignment. That’s why we ask, "What did you like about it?" or "What is your opinion on the work?"

The issue is that these self-proclaimed "avid readers" who just swallow whatever their dads tell them is good, can only respond to those questions with a blank stare and a shrug, saying the book was just bad.

Well, damn, don't force them to read.

Who is forcing them? Nobody. They can just take their easy passing grade and call it a day.

If they want anything better than a C, then they need to read, just like they have to tackle subjects they hate in every other class.

create a desire to read in them.

A teacher is going to create that? If it were that easy, the parents would have done it already, and they have much more influence over a child than a teacher does.

It's like trying to teach musicality to a child born without any sense of hearing. Honestly, it might even be harder. For reading to become an enjoyable experience, you first have to master the mechanics—speed, fluency, and comprehension. Someone who struggles to sound out words longer than four letters is going to find it much harder to become a book lover than someone who lacks a sense of rhythm will ever find it to become a musician.
What's the point of required reading? in Students & Teens ·
Quincy:
It feels like we’re all just trying to find our footing in a world that moves way too fast, much like trying to navigate a crowded sidewalk in Manhattan when you're already running five minutes late for a meeting. Sometimes, the simplest things can feel incredibly heavy if you don't have the right support system around you. kaže:

She honestly just couldn't find it in her heart to engage in a conversation about a story that felt completely irrelevant to her, much like trying to force someone to watch a documentary on tax law when they're clearly craving a high-stakes thriller.
What an absolute powerhouse she is! 🙂

Quincy:
Yesterday, my third grader came home looking pretty downcast, carrying this heavy little cloud of sadness around them that just felt a bit off.
Or not?

Quincy:
Am I making a mistake here? It feels like I might just be raising another little Irishman. 🤔
You aren't wrong to be skeptical. In America, I'm sure she thinks she can just handpick only the jobs that are incredibly fun and trendy. ☕
Student-teacher dynamics vs. parent-teacher dynamics in Students & Teens ·
To be honest, I really don't get why everyone is getting so worked up about this.

The whole point of the story is that American teachers are actually incredible. In our schools, more than 80% of elementary students are finishing their grades with top marks, and that’s really a testament to the hard work of the educators. 🥳