urbantinker8 said:Mine is also in second grade, and Pinocchio isn't on our list. So, if you ask me, the only "idiot" in this scenario seems to be the teacher.😛
But isn't the one who put it on the list really the one at fault? 🤔
Well, I actually have my degree recognized—it was officially approved for me. You, for instance, probably wouldn't be able to work in your field without going back to finish a local university program; at most, you might land an assistant role in a school. A friend of mine, who teaches English, is doing incredibly well here in CA—she’s got a great life and a solid paycheck working at a real estate agency. I won't say she hasn't managed to make it, but she isn't actually practicing her original profession. A lawyer, for example, would basically have to start from scratch over here. Same goes for medical professionals—though for nurses, absolutely nothing is recognized, so they truly have to start from zero. It’s still somewhat manageable in Europe, but for those kinds of careers, our degrees are almost entirely worthless here. Like I said, it really depends on the job. I know plenty of people who have made it and are doing fantastic, but usually, they're in fields that don't require a higher education—plus, they arrived with work experience, which is something employers here often value more than a diploma anyway. Besides, we aren't really the point here. I'm talking about future generations, employability, and how competitive our kids will be in the global job market down the road. But anyway, I guess we're already way too far off-topic 🙄
Nobody is lying here—it’s just how things work. People either end up working outside their field entirely or they have to go through extra training once they move abroad. It really depends on which US state you land in. In my experience, most US Universities only recognize the bare minimum of a bachelor's degree. IT is probably the one exception, but for everything else, it's a much tougher road to climb.
Look, Nosorog, I’m not the one drafting the curriculum here 🤣—I stepped away from that whole situation because I was unhappy with it; I just didn't see my kids being represented in there. I’ve mostly been speaking from my own personal experience with it, and I’ve even tried to be careful not to bring up how things look on my end (except when answering a direct question). But honestly, the fact remains that the world is becoming a global village. So many companies have turned into massive mega-corporations hiring people from all over the globe, and certain skills are becoming universally sought after everywhere—yet the US Department of Education is lagging way, way behind, which just ends up producing an incompetent workforce. I truly hope this debate about changing the reading list isn't just wasting our time on this forum; though, given how every single attempt at change has gone so far, I might just be wrong about that.
Look, in a lot of school systems, this isn't some wild experiment—it’s actually the standard. 🤷 Not every kid is being taught the exact same math; some vocational tracks don't even touch certain advanced topics in their final years because the focus is shifting toward hands-on, practical learning.
The goal is teaching kids how to find information rather than just memorizing a mountain of facts.
In American schools, there isn't much flexibility right now—English and Math are mandatory for everyone, and the curriculum, reading lists, and equations are basically identical for every student, right? Except, I guess, a trade school student might have fewer hours than a prep school student who—naturally—goes much deeper into the subject matter. That trade student would probably get way more value out of an extra hour of Chemistry, maybe doing a hands-on experiment to see how leather and rubber react to a specific substance, than they would sitting through a block of Smail aga Čengić's analysis class.
That's a great point, Elvis Presley. I wonder if we should just start a dedicated math thread so we don't clutter this one about reading lists? Random photo, my soda can holder 😬
Richard Perez3 said:Yeah, we gotta stick to my guns on this one because I just can't wrap my head around the idea of removing something just because some kid finds it boring. Who cares? Honestly, anything can be boring if you're the type of person who just sits there taking everything passively.
Edit. Like, would it actually kill her to find out?
Just to circle back to this one more time; it isn't about whether "some" kid finds it boring. The real issue is that 99.9% of people don't find required reading "boring"—they find it unbearable. If you ran a poll among 30 or 40-year-olds, I bet the results regarding what they read and their opinions on it would be pretty negative—not to mention among the younger generation. The thing is, you have to analyze the content, build arguments, and characterize the figures—you have to understand them, their motives, and why they act the way they do; but a lot of these works feel completely foreign to kids today. Raskolnikov isn't even the biggest hurdle here, but something like Moby Dick... In my view, what I wrote above is basically the whole point of assigned reading—it's a work we can argue about if we're dissecting it or writing essays on its characters. But that kind of approach requires actually grasping what was read. How much can a teenager truly grasp about Dunda Maroje?
Man, I’ve been thinking about this too—I'm genuinely curious what they're actually up to in high school. My daughter is only in second grade, and they don't really assign specific required reading lists yet. But instead, they have this whole "Home Reading" program, and she practically comes home with a different book every single day. Sometimes it's fiction, sometimes it's non-fiction—like yesterday, she had this book all about how milk turns into ice cream. They spend time in the school library every day and pick out books to read right there in class (since they don't really use traditional textbooks). She reads incredibly well without us having to lift a finger at home; she just loves reading and absolutely loves school. I honestly don't think it'll hurt her in the long run that she isn't sitting there dissecting every single plot point, setting, timeline, or character arc for every little book... 😬
Richard Perez3 said:Look, you can easily grab two out of her—it’s all about being entitled, acting like a jerk, just skimming through some book and calling it a day. Why is that such a big deal? Because if everyone found everything interesting enough to pull an A+, the whole system would be trash. But that’s not how things work anywhere, period. We’re all turning into mindless sheep because life lacks any actual challenge, not because we’re reading Fyodor Dostoevsky.
So we went from "you don't have to" to "you absolutely have to, damn it" for the sake of a grade, I guess.😉 Here’s a challenge for you, then: try getting a seventeen-year-old interested in Fyodor Dostoevsky without resorting to that dry, "you must do this" attitude.😉
Let's just agree to disagree, okay? I'm not really looking to go back and forth on this—we're clearly never going to see eye to eye😬 and since my kids aren't even being educated in the US, I'm not sure why I'm even weighing in on this topic at all.😬
Well, as far as I know, American schools include language arts in the curriculum for grades 3 through 4, and required reading is mandatory in all of them—I guess the only real difference is how much you have to read, though the book lists stay pretty much the same whether you're in middle school or high school—so saying you "don't have to" is probably a bit of a stretch on your part 🤷 Elementary school is mandatory. And so is the required reading. So, calling it "optional" is honestly a pretty weak argument.
But honestly, the way Intelligent presents this is actually a massive issue—not just with required reading, but with the entire American education system. Everything is framed as a "must," boiled down to dry rote memorization of piles of useless data. Looking at that list Peter Doyle2 posted, I had to read 99% of it, and yet for most of those books, I don't even remember the plots or the characters anymore. There aren't any schools actually trying to engage students or make the material interesting; excuse me, what? That’s basically a recipe for turning a nation into a flock of sheep. No one is saying school needs to be an amusement park or that teachers should be clowns, but a little break from this rigidity really wouldn't hurt! People immediately jump to extremes, starting from the premise that some blogger like Nika and stories about vampires will somehow replace all the classics ever written, as if there isn't a whole arsenal of quality works that kids could actually relate to 🙄
It would be interesting to see how this works abroad and what kind of required reading they have over there. We can try to comfort ourselves with "general culture" and whatnot, but at the end of the day, does any of this actually matter in real life (unless you're signing up for a trivia night)? The painful fact remains that American schools and the University of California (mostly) aren't held in high regard outside the US. And every potential change is met with total resistance—even this situation with required reading, though a few of us have already dealt with a system like this before.
But you just breeze through those works during class—especially the ones that are a total slog because of all the archaic language and old-fashioned regional dialects. If you aren't actually reading for comprehension, then what’s even the point? Honestly, they teach that stuff in elementary school, but it doesn't really help you grasp something like an Equinox. I remember the titles, and I remember how every other word felt totally foreign. I kept reaching for a translation guide, but even then, I honestly can't tell you what I actually read. That's exactly my point! Content like that is pure torture. It just makes kids want to stay away from books entirely.
Richard Perez3 said:Look, the point is that you read it. It doesn't have to be fun.
If you want electricity, you gotta pay the bill. If you want to pay the bill, you need money. If you need money, you have to go earn it somehow. Whether you enjoyed doing it or not—that's beside the point. If your job sucks, bad luck, but you're still gonna do it because you need the paycheck, and you need the lights on. If you can make the job tolerable, or maybe, if you get lucky, actually interesting—hooray! If not, it'll suck, but you're still gonna grind through it because you need that freaking electricity. And nobody's gonna give a damn about how much you hate your job.
Or—you won't have electricity. Metaphorically speaking, you'll get an F on the reading assignment—a bad grade in English class—a failing grade—and you'll fail the grade. But you'll read the book if you want to pass the grade/earn your paycheck.
Honestly, I don't get why this is so hard to wrap your head around.
So, getting back to the title, are you saying literature is just meant to instill a sense of duty in kids rather than actually encouraging them to read with interest and comprehension?
Jamie Davis9 said:Let’s be honest, nobody in high school actually sits down and finishes reading Shakespeare from cover to cover, and you certainly won't find anyone powering through the entirety of The Iliad or The Odyssey. We just skim through a few chapters before the teacher wraps everything up in a rushed lecture. I've been running up against these exact same myths for years now, and I really feel the need to point out that this isn't something simply hardcoded into the software. 🙂
Sorry, but I actually did. I read all of Shakespeare. Do you really want me to list my school, my graduating class, and my professor's name just so you can verify it? For instance, at that technical high school in Chicago, our American language teacher—we used to call him Zeus, fittingly enough—actually insisted we read the entirety of The Iliad and The Odyssey. So, they aren't myths, unfortunately. That’s probably why so many of us are traumatized.😬
wanderingbadger44 said:Is anyone actually following what Richard Perez3 is posting here?
Look, if you can't be bothered to slog through the required reading, then don't—it’s your life. Just pick through every second or third book, scrape together enough points to pass the assignment, and call it a day. You still have five other grading components in your American literature class to make up for, so as long as you nail those, you'll be fine. Honestly, skipping a few books isn't going to stop you from winning a Nobel Prize if you're truly destined for greatness.
Besides, who really cares if the material feels dull? It's just like how some people find math or history incredibly tedious. You either put in the work to master those subjects and get the grades, or you don't and you fail. It’s the exact same deal with these classics. They aren't included in the curriculum just to keep you entertained, for heaven's sake.
That never worked for me. If I didn't read the book, I got a 1 that I had to make up; you can't just leave the assignment unread, and my teacher asked questions specifically designed to figure out if you actually read the book or just skimmed it.🥳 Well, since you've already laid it all out like that, why don't you tell us—what exactly is the point of MANDATORY reading if the advice is just "don't bother reading it"?🤷
Jamie Davis9 said:That’s nothing; I personally had seventeen different subjects during high school. Some absolute madhouse of an American high school, truly. Good grief.
I mostly just messed around, focusing on the things I actually cared about while doing the bare minimum to get by elsewhere, eventually getting into the college I wanted, graduating on time, and now I'm just working my job. That’s it.
So, what exactly is the issue here?
Well, it's the reading list 😬 which was—well, it was overwhelming, dense, and honestly pretty boring. I get that for you American English teachers, someone like Shakespeare is priceless, but maybe try to understand that for a sixteen-year-old, it’s an absolute nightmare to get through. Why does everyone immediately get defensive the moment anyone mentions required reading alongside that whole "these are invaluable literary works and literature is art" argument? I mean, nobody is disputing that—but is it strictly necessary to read every single one of those books as mandatory assignments? Probably not. A lot of it could be covered in class just like any other work. Maybe give them excerpts instead of the entire The Iliad or The Odyssey. I don't think anyone on this thread is arguing that we should scrap everything currently on the list; but if the list could be updated and shortened to include content that actually resonates with kids, then yeah, absolutely. I used to love quotes and spent half my life hanging out in the library. Up until high school, anyway. High school basically killed my love for reading because those required books were pure torture. It took me years to actually want to pick up a book again. And I'm definitely not the only one. Someone who actually wants to become an American English teacher and study literary history will probably be inspired to read the whole thing after just seeing an excerpt from, say, Judith. But 90% of other kids aren't going to major in literature; they should at least leave school with some positive knowledge about the work, rather than just remembering it as something that was incredibly painful to finish.
Look, I’m sorry, but how—and when—are you supposed to read anything besides the damn required reading list? When the pace is one book every week or two at most, and the books themselves are so packed with archaic language that you can barely follow the plot without constantly flipping back to a glossary... it's exhausting. I apologize if things have changed drastically since my high school days, but it's been 🕺 since then, and that was just our speed. One week to finish a 300–400 page book that doesn't even interest you, all while juggling about ten other subjects you have to study—you just read whenever you find a spare second. And honestly, back in my day, there were actually parents who would pay for speed-reading courses for their kids! Is that really the point of assigned reading? If so, fine.
But there are honestly so many ways to handle this; like, maybe a "pitch me" session where students have to present their chosen content so effectively that even the professor actually wants to dive in. Then, for example, during the next class, everyone shares those most compelling pieces and opens it up for discussion. I think it would lead to way more engagement and genuine enjoyment than, I don't know, Combray (which still gives me nightmares, honestly). And again—we’re talking about one single block period here, not an entire year of elective freedom—so they should be able to manage it; besides, for the exact reason you mentioned—they barely read anything as it is! If you want to encourage them to actually read more and interact, you have to offer them something that actually resonates with them.
I can give you a great example from back in the late '90s and early 2000s; back in 8th grade, our teacher actually gave us two different books to choose from! We still had to write about them, of course. I even remember which ones I picked—Empress and Ujevic. Throughout high school, we spent all four years discussing literature during seminar blocks. Sometimes we’d get an essay for homework, and one of the prompts would almost always be tied to a book we read. So, it’s definitely doable—certainly nothing groundbreaking. And honestly, what's the harm in analyzing something written by someone like Nick? In my senior year, we were allowed to pick any song by a domestic artist we liked and analyze it for an assignment. I still remember analyzing Gibbon's "Secret Skill." Teaching kids critical thinking and how to build an argument based on things they actually relate to—how is that such a bad thing? It doesn't mean the entire curriculum will be garbage or that everything else gets tossed out.
I don't think it was Sarah Hall53—we definitely went up to 100 in first grade, since by second grade we were already doing multiplication and division within 100. In second grade, I mean, for the class of '91/'92, they introduced the quarterly grading system and updated the emblem on the textbook. I actually have two copies—one from first grade and another one from second grade that lasted me through the end of elementary school.