Susan James said:I don't think that's the whole story, though. Usually, all that restless energy comes from not having enough physical activity during the day. 😠
Personally, I see staying in preschool a little longer as a huge plus. I mean, if you look at those daycare centers where kids get to go outside twice a day to run around and climb on things... they can stay active even without a formal sports program built into the curriculum.
Either that, or because there isn't a proper recess. Or PE basically turns into kids chasing a soccer ball while the teachers just sit on the sidelines. Personally, I’m all for bringing in a dedicated gym teacher starting in first grade—someone who actually focuses on coordination and motor skills.
More and more people I know are opting out of the traditional school setup entirely. Honestly, I’d move closer to a school just so my kid could be home alone for a few hours after class. I realize how weird and scary that sounds to some people—leaving your kid home by themselves—but it’s worked wonders for us, and I haven't regretted it for a single second.
Besides, I’d probably push back enrollment anyway just to avoid dealing with this idiot system.😁
So, I just spent some time scrolling through the official event database to see how the experts are reacting (I can’t exactly promote other forums here, so I’ll just be descriptive—we don't have a dedicated thread for this kind of thing and wouldn't be allowed to start one), and honestly? I’m feeling pretty energized about it.
There’s a lot of disagreement happening, people are debating, and they’re planning to post objections and suggestions publicly on sites meant for open discussion. Even the folks who actually wrote the old curricula are chiming in. To me, it feels like a sleeping giant has finally woken up from a long winter nap. Regardless, it looks like there's a real future here; once people start offering ways to improve things, you know there's actual passion and purpose behind the movement.
Personally, I feel like they should grant another year to really refine the documents, put together the handbooks and textbooks, and actually get professionals involved in the public debate. It wouldn't hurt to hammer all of this out before they try any experimental rollouts.
The part I found most interesting was the approach to math and the sciences. I did a little digging into how they handle foreign languages too. Regarding math, I think the approach is solid. For a layperson like me, the easiest example is exponents and percentages. They aren't being saved for the later grades as isolated topics anymore; instead, they're moving them earlier, even up to fifth grade, and then building on them later. That seems incredibly logical to me—introducing kids to powers of 10 and basic percentage concepts early on will definitely help them master physics and chemistry down the road. If I remember correctly, back when I was in school, everything was just thrown at us all at once, even though we were already hitting physics and chemistry where those concepts are fundamental. This way, the basics are already there, making it much easier to absorb new material.
If there are any actual experts in here, please correct me if I'm wrong. I'm just speaking from personal experience, not professional expertise.
On the flip side, what really disappointed me was the total lack of discussion regarding the English language. Everything seems to have been boiled down to just reading assignments.
The fact that some works are missing could definitely be an issue, but there's an easy fix for that: just put together a task force 😁 and coordinate with the other professors to schedule when those pieces should be covered.
Honestly, I think this is mostly about supporting young American authors. I see absolutely nothing wrong with giving them more recognition, printing new editions, and getting them into libraries—really, I don't see a problem at all. Since everyone loves talking about patriotism so much, why not actually show it on a cultural level by backing our rising American writers?
It’s also a perfect chance to digitize books, kind of like what Pixar does. All of this drives national growth and development; it makes contemporary authors way more accessible and opens up fresh areas for interpretation and new themes.
Now, if I have one grievance with the list, it's that the bibliography is incomplete. I really wish they had included the publishers and publication years at the end of each entry. I'm curious to see which publishers are most represented here—that's where you might run into some shady business, I agree.
I honestly think the biggest hurdle when it comes to STEM subjects is just how incredibly difficult it is to recruit high-quality talent into the classroom.
People who actually have enough mastery in these fields to pass it down to the next generation can almost always make significantly more money working in the private sector. Plus, they don't have to deal with all the mindless busywork and administrative headaches that end up burying professionals in this field. I have nothing but respect for the true enthusiasts out there, but they’re rare. Most of what we see are mediocre performers who don't really get it, which leaves us with half-baked instruction where students never see the practical application of science or tech because nobody ever showed them how much these phenomena shape our world.
What I'm most curious about is how we stop this cycle of negative selection in hiring. And does anyone think we should loosen up collective bargaining agreements so that someone in education could actually be let go without years of endless legal battles? I'm also wondering about raising awareness regarding reporting colleagues who aren't actually doing their jobs—though, honestly, I don't see that happening anytime soon.
It’s an open question, really. On one hand, we could better define learning outcomes; on the other, we need to figure out what teacher training actually entails, how much federal funding it would require, and whether we'll be draining resources from USA funds to make it happen...
Something clicked for me when the idea was mentioned about restructuring how classes are organized—moving toward block scheduling. It’s similar to what successful private prep schools do, and from what I know, it works. We could potentially merge the natural sciences into interdisciplinary blocks held over a month at a time. It would require teachers to collaborate heavily, involve way more project-based learning, and demand different types of planning, but I truly believe it makes sense.
Though... right now, the focus is entirely on salary hikes driven by GDP growth. The profession doesn't seem to realize how much that spending will eventually be used as an excuse to kill off any real reform, because cuts will have to be made somewhere. It won't be until the industry realizes the money isn't infinite—and that by making positive changes and weeding out the dead weight, we can actually create the conditions for better pay and better environments—that things might change. Once we realize that reforming vocational training through on-the-job learning and strengthening core instruction creates new jobs and attracts young people who think outside the box, then maybe we'll finally see some real progress instead of just talking in circles.
For now, I still find LeBron James fascinating and I don't see any reason not to trust his perspective. I actually love his rhetoric; he constantly keeps those playing the lead roles—the politicians—in check by repeatedly calling out specific names and faces, regardless of whether they're on the left or the right.
swiftranger16 said:Yeah, I read the entire book. I don't half-ass things like that. Do I seriously have to quote the book for you to get why this is a problem? You need to see the difference between how Kovacic describes Ferkonja and Laura versus what this guy is writing while we're telling kids to face taboos. Get real. I honestly cannot believe there are parents or teachers out there who would actually hand this book to their kids to read. I just can't fucking believe it.
If our actual goal is to teach literature, then we should know that the classics were often born from taboos and were even banned back in the day. Looking at it through a modern lens, it’s essentially the same thing; it's just that people used to have less information and education, so those old taboos seem like nothing to us today. Or maybe enough time has passed that we just don't recognize them anymore.
Parents of children who are supposed to be reading Black Mother aren't shaping their reading tastes, nor can they stop them from reading whatever they want.
Having someone who is seventeen tell me what I am or am't allowed to read... I don't even have the mental capacity to process how abstract that even is.
Susan James said:Today at 2:00 PM, we had a guest over on Reformer.
It was a pretty good conversation—though, honestly, if the host were a bit more engaging, I think it would have been even better.
I just finished watching, and I’m actually quite pleased with how it went. Still, though... I can't help but feel like none of this really changes anything. It feels like we aren't going to see any real progress in this country as long as people like Prosper or Novak are running the show.
swiftranger16 said:Nah, that's Black Sea territory. It’s meant for high schoolers. Summer, you really think grade level matters here? I honestly haven't been able to get it out of my head since I read it. Believe it or not, that text actually haunts me. And there's more. This is easily the most extreme example I've stumbled upon while digging through books on my reading list that I hadn't touched before. Seriously. Just wow.
Did you actually finish the whole book? I don't see the issue with the descriptions; they serve as a solid starting point for talking to kids about boundaries—how to spot those kinds of intentions and how to fight back against them. I mean, the Iliad and the Odyssey are absolutely crawling with incest, assault, and murder. Even Judith slaying Holofernes involves her being sexually manipulated right before the act. What's the "lesson" in those classics then? That everything goes in war? These kids might actually get more out of Black Sea land in terms of maturing and learning to resist sexual abuse. It opens up a conversation that might touch on things many of them are personally dealing with. Maybe you'll even help one of them find the courage to report an abuser.
If someone had encouraged me to open up back then, my life might look a lot different today. If teachers understood how breaking a taboo can actually be healing—how they could use it to truly support their students—maybe my homeroom teacher would have actually responded to my essays once upon a time, instead of just fearfully noting that I had "too much imagination" or that she didn't understand what I was writing and that I should "tone down my expression."
We read The Glembays, The Registry, Crime and Punishment... they're all full of killers and twisted personalities and vivid, intense descriptions. We even have Louisa May Alcott in lower elementary grades... So what's the problem? Is it just facing the proximity of the taboo?
Hey everyone, please try to stay on topic here. I've moved all the posts about math and specific question-and-answer threads over to their own dedicated section.
swiftranger16 said:Lyanna, where on earth did you see me bringing up Marulic? And when did I say people wouldn't be reading? If that's how you interpret texts at your university, you should probably be glad about the current credit system.
Look, I am an expert. But only for the sake of this discussion. In real life, I'm not really in that world anymore. After sixteen years of schooling and fifteen years of trying to actually make a difference in different ways, I just quit the American education system. So yeah, I'm unemployed now. Honestly, it beats sitting around listening to and watching a bunch of half-informed hacks draft reforms based on whatever the daily political news cycle dictates.
The only place a real reform can actually happen is in the classroom. The only person who can pull it off is a teacher. Not Jokic. If we kill off every bit of intellectual effort, if we just lock ourselves in schools until June because we're checking boxes or running some "project week," and if we keep blindly copying someone else's curriculum without understanding it... man... anyway, I've got stuff to do.☕
I’m still curious about what specific problems you're seeing. If you feel like sharing, walk me through some concrete examples. Also, if you quit teaching altogether, then things clearly weren't great before, which means change is definitely needed.
And from what I understand, LeBron James didn't write this reform; it was a massive group of people straight from the classrooms—people who are mostly just listed as "directors" in the newspapers.
swiftranger16 said:Stouffer is just the tip of the iceberg! I’m honestly proposing we just strip everything out of schools that requires actual effort from students or teachers. If it doesn't align perfectly with what our kids find fun or easy, get rid of it. We could solve the whole school year length issue too—two weeks should be plenty to cover whatever's left. We don't even need to worry about the weather or anything else.
But seriously, ladies, have you actually thought about what the curriculum experts are saying? Like, they’re claiming the learning outcome is basically just mastering prepositions or something? Or is the goal for fifth graders just to learn how to mash words together? I’d love to hear from any of you who actually step into a classroom or are involved as parents. Otherwise, you're just talking for the sake of it. Has anyone actually sat down and read the curriculum? I highly doubt it. It’s way easier to just throw out criticisms based on vibes. The American English curriculum is a total mystery—it's vague and poorly defined, as usual. But instead of looking at that, the whole country is obsessed with specific book lists, and now everyone is picking sides over Stouffer. They threw out the bait, the little fish bit, and here we are. Though I guess I shouldn't even mention Preradovica... wouldn't want to start a whole new wave of drama.
Feel free to share your observations on the reform. I'm interested in what the experts are saying, because I don't live under the delusion that anything real can happen here without some shady dealings behind the scenes.
I mostly just skimmed through it, and my takeaway is just a general sense of ambiguity. If you can explain your specific issues more clearly and provide some actual counterexamples, please do so. Right now, your post is just offering undefined views without any real analysis.
There are parents here who aren't subject matter experts, so we need to be pedagogical in how we present our views. Maybe then we can actually reach a solid conclusion together and figure out if this reform is just window dressing and corruption, or if it actually makes sense.
I haven't seen any posts from you yet, frupy. If you have something on your mind, feel free to share. I'm here to listen and chat. kaže: Sure thing. Wait, aren't you? 😕 It all starts with those folks from the Midwest who still talk in the third person plural... I mean, honestly... radio? It’s kind of wild how much we still rely on it. I was just sitting there thinking about it. You listen to the local stations, maybe catch some news or a specific DJ you actually like, and it just hits different than an algorithm telling you what to play. There's something about that live, broadcast feel—it feels more human, you know? Not like those sterile, perfectly curated playlists that feel like they were made by a robot in a basement. Just me rambling, I guess. But yeah, radio still has that soul., I see you., I don't know about you all, but I’ve been sitting here thinking... just really chewing on things lately. It's one of those moods where everything feels heavy, you know? Just a lot of thoughts swirling around without much direction....you know, those folks from up north who never really got a solid grasp on sibilance? They end up making all sorts of mess of their speech. It's right there in your hand. I'm still trying to wrap my head around this one... I honestly don't know if it's "this" or "that." It’s such a toss-up. on footI haven't quite figured out what you mean by that. It looks like a fragment, or maybe just a typo? If you were trying to make a point or ask something specific, could you try again? I’m happy to chat, but I need a little more to go on!😉 Hey, who’s checking in? I don't really know what to make of all this. It feels like everyone is just... everywhere at once. Just a lot to take in. I mean, that’s for the people who aren't quite sure yet, right? Man, look at this car. ili This car.. There's actually a perfect example of this when you look at exports. It doesn’t even matter if someone claims they only use that style "when they're just at home." The truth is, those sloppy mistakes are bleeding into their professional life too—especially when they actually need to sit down and draft an official memo or a formal email for work.
You're spot on there. There are honestly so many more examples out there—some of them are purely morphological, stemming directly from regional dialects or just the way people actually speak in everyday conversation.
I’ve been sitting here for a while just thinking about everything that’s been going on lately... it’s a lot to process. I wanted to jump in here because I feel like we need to have a real conversation about this. It isn't just about one single thing; it's how all these pieces fit together in the grand scheme of things here in the States. I was reading some of the points made earlier—and I mean really digging into them—and I can't help but feel a bit conflicted. On one hand, you see the way things are moving, and on the other, there's this sense that we're missing the mark entirely. It feels heavy, you know? Like we're all just circling the same drain without actually addressing the core issues. I'm not trying to be contrarian just for the sake of it. Honestly, I'm just being earnest. I care about where we're headed. I look at the way our institutions are functioning right now—and let's be real, it's hit or miss at best—and I wonder if we're even looking at the right data. Are we? Or are we just reacting to the loudest voices in the room? It's a lot to chew on. I'll probably spend the rest of the night mulling this over. I just wanted to get my thoughts out there, even if they're a bit scattered. We need to be more deliberate. We need to be better. kaže: As someone who's pretty much a total novice here, I feel like I have enough freedom to point out that for everything you just laid out, the absolute most important thing is reading. Just... reading and reading and reading. I honestly can't wrap my head around it... how does someone actually go through two or three books a month and still have absolutely no grasp of basic syntax or common idioms? It just doesn't compute for me. I mean, I honestly don't even see how you could "learn" something like that during an American English lit class. 🤷
I could honestly write entire volumes about the editors I’ve had to work under while proofreading books—people who were supposed to be "experts" but clearly didn't have the slightest clue how basic syntax actually works. Seriously, total amateurs.
The way we teach language in our schools needs a total overhaul. Just being able to read isn't enough. I get that in literature, you can do whatever you want—it's all part of artistic expression—but in a classroom setting, we should be focusing on teaching standard American English. It’s the common ground that connects every citizen in this country. We aren't exactly at a point where we can start teaching based on deep, inherent grammatical structures alone, especially since we have so many different regional dialects to account for here in the States, right?
Daisy, grammar isn't just about phonology and morphology. Honestly, I think the real struggle people face today is actually with syntax—maybe I didn't explain that clearly enough earlier.
Where am I running into this? In my work, specifically with the freelance gigs I'm picking up right now. 🤣
When I take on proofreading jobs, I rarely see papers that are truly bad in terms of spelling. It’s much less common than the absolute syntactic disasters I encounter. And I'm not talking about someone being "creative" with word order; I mean a total lack of understanding regarding case structures (which, honestly, is taught so poorly in our schools—the methods are just abysmal) and the tendency to force sentence structures from other languages into English. They just don't feel natural to the language, and they end up having the opposite effect of what was intended. Academic papers are particularly egregious; some of them are completely unreadable until I step in.
Spelling rules are also taught through grammar, though if I were in charge, I'd enforce much more order and cut out some of the nonsense.
Plus, hardly anyone seems to grasp our idiomatic expressions anymore. I run into all sorts of awkward constructions.
I won't get sidetracked discussing literature right now because that's a huge detour. There are ways to connect the material to vocational training in trade schools, depending on the field. This specific thread shouldn't be about dissecting every little example, can we agree on that? If you're interested, feel free to DM me and I'll share some of my methodological ideas involving Walt Whitman, assuming you don't mind waiting until I deal with these current bugs and obligations. 😁
From what I've gathered—though I haven't done a deep dive into the curriculum reforms for my subject yet—there's going to be major pushback from professionals. If these reforms are as great as they claim, the focus will shift toward practical application rather than just rote memorization. That’s something the subject hasn't really dealt with before, since it used to be rooted mostly in historical overviews and dry facts. Now, I'm curious to see how the national standardized tests will adapt to this change; that could be really interesting to watch.
urbantinker8 said:So, well... maybe that’s something worth considering. If the stuff being pushed by the SHK is totally uninteresting, out of touch, and just doesn't click with kids, then maybe—and I'm just speculating here—trash literature might actually be what grabs their attention.🤷
I’m not joking around; I honestly mean that.
And as for those public debates... whenever someone dares to suggest that we probably shouldn't just force certain books on everyone simply because they happen to be trendy, cool, or easy to digest, they get branded as some sort of narrow-minded, outdated dinosaur who's stuck in the past, supposedly only pushing certain authors because they fit a specific political agenda.🙄 Discussions like that always seem to turn into these endless tug-of-wars that never truly reach a conclusion. The whole reform process will probably stay "in progress" for years to come.
I don't understand why everything has to be pinned on the individual.
I’d answer your questions using Shakespeare himself:
While reading history here, it occurs to me that I should interpret it in our own tongue, so that even those who aren't well-versed in Latin or scholarly texts can understand.
If all these people whining and complaining because their dad—get this—is being kicked out of the required reading list actually asked Shakespeare what he thought about it, I bet you'd end up quoting his preface to Juliet.
Back then, the man was a reformer; he stayed close to the people, and the language he wrote in was accessible to them, much like the old spice merchants. That says enough to suggest he's probably rolling in his grave right now.
As for the reform itself, anything is possible in this little country of ours. And I didn't say I agree with everything one hundred percent; it's just that people make such a massive fuss over things that are ultimately trivial, while the real issues can't even be touched because the people tasked with implementing the changes are the biggest stumbling block in this whole mess.
urbantinker8 said:Fine, but then just say it out loud: let's add this to the required reading list as an example of trash lit and let the kids debate it until they're blue in the face.👍 Instead of just haphazardly tossing in various "authors" without any real criteria or cohesive plan... just as examples of... nothing, really. It seems like as long as it's modern and easy to digest, the actual value doesn't matter much.
🙏
...and let's not forget those summer makeup classes that would probably be held until August 1st in 105-degree weather. We'll all just pass out from heatstroke, I suppose.🙄
I mean, personally, it doesn't matter too much to me since our board meetings always run until July 15th, so we're already sitting in a greenhouse at 95 degrees anyway, but imagine adding thirty students to a single room for five or six or seven hours a day in that heat...🙂
The list has been put up for public comment; the document itself makes it pretty clear that it's open for discussion.
I have to admit, I haven't really encountered the term "trash literature" before.
I don't really know what to make of this one yet. It feels like there's more to the story, but I'm just sitting here trying to process it all. Honestly, it’s a lot to take in. kaže: The way things have been handled up until now—and honestly, I suspect they’ll stay that way—is that high school English classes basically function as a chronological tour through literary history. The focus tends to land on those massive, foundational works that actually shifted the needle or introduced a major new movement. The general philosophy seems to be that for the average student, it’s enough to walk away from the class having grasped the core essentials of each work: you know, the basic themes, the main motifs, and just enough literary theory to make sense of the structure.
I really think the core idea here should be that, as a society, we need to master the basics: being able to actually write in our own language and truly understand what we’re reading. Beyond just the mechanics, though, there's this vital awareness that every single piece of literature is its own unique universe. An author's work isn't some static thing; interpretation and how we experience a story are entirely subjective. To me, that’s where the magic happens—diving into those different perspectives and debating the world within a book. It’s honestly such a blast because those discussions open up endless possibilities, all stemming from our own messy, diverse characters and life experiences.
Honestly, I think a meaningful, well-argued debate—you know, like being tasked to write an essay breaking down specific parts of the text—about the positive or negative traits of Bella’s character in Twilight would be way more valuable than just memorizing a bunch of random bullet points about Fishing and fishing regulations. It feels pointless when a student can just Google the answers and find exactly what they need in seconds. Fishing and Fisherman’s Complaints I was just revisiting this classic piece about Fishing, and honestly, it hits much differently when you really sit with it. It’s one of those stories that feels like it could have been written yesterday because human nature doesn't change all that much, does it? We love to complain, even when things are actually going pretty well. The whole premise centers on this guy who is out on the water, and instead of just enjoying the peace or being grateful for whatever he catches, he spends his entire time grumbling about how unfair everything is. It’s that universal human tendency to focus on the one thing that went wrong rather than the thousand things that went right. You know the type—the person who wins the lottery but complains the ticket was slightly wrinkled. It makes me think about how often we do this in our own lives here in the States. We get a promotion at work, but we immediately start stressing about the longer commute. We land a great house in a nice suburb, but then we spend all weekend complaining about the HOA rules. We’re experts at finding the friction in an otherwise smooth ride. There’s something deeply humbling about the way the story handles the fisherman's attitude. It forces you to look in the mirror and ask: "Am I being the person who appreciates the catch, or am I the one complaining about the weight of the net?" It’s a heavy read, but in a quiet, necessary kind of way. It’s less about the act of Fishing itself and more about the internal struggle to find contentment in a world that constantly gives us reasons to be dissatisfied. Definitely worth a reread if you're feeling a bit cynical lately. Then you’ve got to learn how to actually recite it. I mean, it’s an epic poem that functions like a travelogue, weaving in quotes and verses from all sorts of other works. On top of that, the whole thing is written in these double-rhymed dodecasyllables. It's pretty intense stuff once you get into the rhythm of it. I honestly don't know if this is how the experts say it should be done, but then again, how are you even supposed to identify which students are actually capable of pulling out the "essential data"? Some kids might just breeze right past those key moments thinking they aren't important. To me, though, it feels like we're just stripping the soul out of literature—turning everything into this completely sterile, lifeless exercise.
Look, I might be completely off base here—and honestly, I could be totally wrong—but I just don't see how forcing students to memorize this kind of granular data about a text actually helps their literacy. How does knowing these specific details contribute to them actually becoming better readers? Back in high school, I was definitely one of those students who lived for the literature discussions—you know, getting lost in deep dives about character arcs, symbolism, and overarching themes. But when it came to this kind of raw data? Forget it. I’d probably cram all that info the night before an exam and then completely flush it from my brain the second I handed in my paper. Look, I mean, let's be real here—it’s just plain easier to grade a test when you're actually hunting for "correct answers" within it. I don't know... maybe that's exactly where the problem lies? 🤷
This kind of insight is absolutely vital for anyone who actually makes a living through literature. Students rarely truly internalize the material; instead, they just end up memorizing raw data that feels like total abstraction to most of them. I mean, I could at least wrap my head around it if we were being asked to count syllables or figure out rhyme schemes ourselves, but that’s not how it usually works. It’s just handed to you on a silver platter by the teacher. At least in my experience, it was always just some set of terms the professor would scribble on the chalkboard while we sat there mindlessly copying everything into our notebooks.
That’s exactly why we’re seeing this shift where students don't actually read anymore—they just memorize summaries and bullet points. Honestly, if anything, it's just clear proof that this entire style of teaching is fundamentally broken. Books are starting to feel like empty shells. Honestly, there’s just no substance left in that kind of approach anymore. It’s actually pretty common to see students pull off an A in English class without ever having cracked open a single book.
Why do people even bother writing books in the first place? Is it so that someone else can pick them up, see their own lives reflected on the page, and maybe walk away with some heavy questions or a few much-needed answers? Or is the ultimate goal just to land on a high school reading list, forcing students to memorize a bunch of bullet points about a character's traits just so they can scrape by on an exam?
I have the exact same complaints when it comes to language arts classes. Honestly, they could strip the entire curriculum down to nothing but grammar and spelling, and it would still be an improvement. At least then we’d actually graduate people who know how to correctly spell basic things like "don't know," "flower," "house," or "doubt." 😁
Daisy, let’s start with the language aspect. You’re honestly off base there. It’s not like anyone struggles to just Google spelling rules nowadays, but true literacy isn't built on some arbitrary consensus of rules—it's built on actual grammar.
The thing is, most people don't even grasp this, let alone have the capacity to teach it properly... and look, I'm not trying to write a whole dissertation here 😁 but that's why I keep harping on the fact that the core of any reform lies with the people actually teaching it. And frankly, that sector is a mess right now.
As for the works by Hemingway, you really picked a perfect example. His stuff is an incredible model for how to approach methodical analysis and serves as a stellar roadmap for comparative study. 😁
I think you might be oversimplifying things because of some bad personal experiences. When it comes to meeting students halfway, giving them freedom, and opening up new perspectives, we aren't going to go so far as to reduce reading down to nothing more than raw emotion, character tropes, or ideological takes. To truly understand a text, you have to understand how it was constructed.
That’s not a field for amateurs. Being a true expert is a given. What a high schooler needs to know is how the paradigm shifts—how meter changes, how the influence of Latin fades, how literature opens up to the vernacular and develops new rhythms. And, of course, the "taste" of the era. You take that info, you count the syllables, and you work with what resonates with them today—like analyzing the rhythm in modern spoken-word poetry, for instance.
You shouldn't be radical about this. You need a deep command of the subject matter before you start throwing things out the window.
Oh, and of course they count syllables and learn rhyme. That's taught in a completely different way than just dictating rules and scribbling them on a chalkboard... though, seeing your take, it sounds like you didn't exactly have great teachers growing up.
Karen Richardson3 said:Look, I'm totally on the same page—I just didn't see your post because I was busy typing up my own 😁
Honestly, I’d probably scrap most of the heavy literary theory too. In my experience, that stuff just creates confusion and pushback for most students, making it feel completely, utterly unnecessary.
Most people struggle immensely with actually comprehending what they read, and that's exactly where literature classes should be putting all their energy. We need to focus on reading comprehension, deep reflection, and teaching kids how to critically analyze what's right in front of them.
Anyway, I was browsing some news sites yesterday and one teacher's comment really caught my eye. Her biggest headache is that she hasn't had a formal methodological breakdown for every single book on the syllabus. She mentioned she’s read some of them for her own enjoyment, but admitted that doesn't quite cut it for teaching.
I mean, shouldn't people be able to express themselves to their teachers without having to break down in tears just because there isn't a pre-packaged lesson plan ready to go for every single classic?
See, I called it. 😁 It feels like if I don't act like some kind of know-it-all polymath, I'm somehow failing at this. 😁😁
I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "literary theory," so I might not give you the perfect answer. But think of literary theory as applied to literature like math is to science—it's about the logically organized internal world of a text and its structure. Breaking things down into structural components is really just the starting point for a journey through the text toward true understanding. Semiotics is like street signs; there are certain patterns and rules you have to recognize.
To some, this seems irrelevant because it’s often taught poorly, without any mention of why we perform these analyses or how they contribute to general literacy when done correctly. Unfortunately, the way American language arts are taught tends to focus more on building national myths and nurturing patriotic symbols. Because of that, even when analyzing texts through theoretical lenses, people often fall into the trap of turning everything into ideology, mostly out of sheer ignorance.
Our broader issues with education, especially in the humanities, stem from the university level. The real culprit behind these flawed teaching methods is the University of Arts. Any real reform has to include them. They need to realize it's time to start training actual teachers, not just theorists, linguists, or pedants—there are plenty of specialized scientific tracks for those people.
And man, that story about the teacher is just depressing. I wasn't a great student myself, so whenever I read a book now, I jot things down and build a basic methodological framework. You just throw out five main points, look up the available literature, and dive deeper. Not to mention how much it helps parents when kids read assigned books; they can actually talk to their children about it, note their reactions, and learn from them. It's about raising a new generation of capable young people who aren't intimidated by books.
Edit: Just to add one more thing, I really care about this topic. 😁 My goal for American language and literature instruction would be to equip all young people with the ability to tackle diverse texts, encouraging lifelong reading habits and genuine comprehension. I want to foster generations of people who value reading so much that they won't shy away from texts outside their niche—like scientific papers. People who can gather all the clues in a text and form an informed opinion; people who won't read selectively, but openly; and people who know their own language so well that they can spot satire and tell when someone is trying to manipulate them verbally for their own benefit.
urbantinker8 said:Well, I'm certainly not denying the poetic value of various authors, so perhaps we could just use a more general term, like "libretto." It's just that, if we follow this logic in an American English curriculum, I'm a little unsure where that leaves us, especially since our primary criterion for students seems to be almost entirely based on their capacity for reception and cognitive engagement.🤷
I wonder, what comes next? Is it Hulic?🤷
It hits the marks for poetic excellence, genre consistency, and literary value within the context of the New Wave.
Honestly, I don't see any issue with using nothing but the student's ability to comprehend and relate to the text as the sole criterion when choosing required reading for English class. To me, these books aren't meant to be a history lesson on literature; they're meant to spark a love for reading and build actual literacy skills.
And this endless whining about *what* kids should be reading really gets under my skin. Tastes are formed by all sorts of things, including bad, inappropriate, or non-literary content. Even if they had put someone like Oprah Winfrey on there, you could always offer a different type of female autobiographical writing from an American perspective and challenge the kids to write a comparative critique of two different texts.
Plus, there's a lack of journalistic pieces in the reading list, even in this selection. I feel like it needs more genre-bending variety. For instance, Mima Simić isn't on this list, yet she stands out. Instead of Bunića-Vučić, I’d probably go with Pilgrim, since it’s more like Academy Fantasy.😁
Anyway, I was browsing some news sites yesterday and one teacher's comment really caught my eye. Her biggest struggle, she claims, is that there isn't a pre-packaged lesson plan for every single work on the list. She admitted she read certain books simply because she liked them personally, but said that wasn't enough.
Is it really too much to ask for people to explain themselves to teachers and instructors without then bursting into tears because there isn't a ready-made template for analyzing literary works?! A person in a teaching position should have enough imagination and professional expertise to develop their own methodical approach to a novel by Slavenka Drakulić, especially when there are already heaps of academic studies available on her.
urbantinker8 said:I never actually said it was instead of Dante. There really isn't any need to jump down my throat or start lecturing me with these historical-sociological deep dives.🥱 The fact that he represents the New Wave matters to me, I suppose, from a musical standpoint, rather than a literary one.
I'm with him on that.👍[/i]
How can you look at the New Wave just through a musical lens and not a poetic one? What does that even mean?
Both Springsteen and Dedic meet the requirements. I'm not exactly a huge Springsteen fan, but I won't deny his poetic value.
There are some hints that many Academy works were inspired by Italian melodrama—researchers are still looking for proof of whether they softened things up. They certainly use a libretto-style framework.
When we pick literary works intended for full reading, we look at a few specific things: how well they match the student's cognitive reach, a healthy mix of genres (poetry, prose, drama), poetic excellence, overall literary merit, and a balanced blend of American and international classics, including both anthological staples and contemporary hits.
The whole goal here is to focus on the student's own choice of what to read. We want to spark a genuine hunger for books—reading for pure pleasure, reading to escape, and ultimately building lasting reading habits and a true sense of literacy.
This list of suggested readings was put together using several core principles. First, we focused on texts that align with the culturally dominant idea of what constitutes "great literature." Second, we made sure to only include texts that are actually suitable for a student to tackle independently from start to finish. Because of that, you won't find many massive pillars of world or American literature on this specific list, like the Bible, Homeric epics, Don Quixote, Judith, or those classic tales about fishing or being a slave. That doesn't mean students won't encounter them at all; rather, they'll get to know them through their most significant passages or excerpts, which is pretty standard in American classroom practice. So, please don't mistake this list for a formal syllabus or a complete overview of "required curriculum."
I really want to emphasize again: this list of suggested texts for full reading isn't some closed, mandatory, canonical set of rules. It’s intentionally open because we believe that focusing on the student and respecting the professional autonomy of the teacher are the absolute foundations of a high-quality education.