A wonderful essay in this morning’s New York Times’ Schoolbook blog asks “Is Literature Necessary,” and it opens with this pop quiz:
“Now, what I want is facts. Teach these boys and girls nothing but facts. Facts alone are wanted in life. Plant nothing else, and root everything else out.”
Who said the above?
- a. Bill Gates, Microsoft founder and educational gadfly
- b. Michelle Rhee, staunch proponent of standardized testing
- c. David Coleman, author of the Common Core standarda
- d) Thomas Gradgrind, a fictional character created by Charles Dickens in the 1854 novel “Hard Times.”
Funny, as I try to understand the times we live in, I find myself thinking of literature even more than history. I think about 1984 and Brave New World and other strange eras when the times were “out of joint.” And the other day, trying to imagine how to resist a certain kind of intellectual conformity, I remembered Nabokov’s Invitation to a Beheading.
Yes, we need literature. And history. And science. And civics. And lots more.
And you need to read this article.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
I teach literature. I teach grammar. I teach Social Studies and Science. I teach the art of public speaking. I teach speaking out and organizing. I teach.
LikeLike
Very well stated, Lynda.
Everyone, please read, The Neuroscience of Your Brain on Fiction, and pass it on to every educational decision maker you know.
http://www.nytimes.com/…/the-neuroscience-of-your-brain-on-fiction.html...
Marginalizing and reducing the amount of fictional text that students read will profoundly narrow their knowledge of the world. Contained in the pages of great fiction is our civilization and culture. Are we now banning certain types of books?
I am supposed to give my students fiction to read only 30% – 40% of the time this year. Hmmm … Wonder what I am going to do?
LikeLike
The article, The Neuroscience of Your Brain on Fiction, has been archived by the NY Times. You can do an archive search after clicking on the link or google the title.
LikeLike
Nothing is necessary for all. Learning should never be forced not only because it is ineffective, but also because many of us value freedom.
When we ask about what is necessary or not we assume the answer is the same for all and that learning can only happen at a set time in our lives. This is not true.
Learning should be customized to the choice of the individual, not standardized to the system.
If we do that the answer is this:
For some people it is necessary. For others it is not.
LikeLike
We have got to get the current crop of idiots off the top of the education pyramid — it appears that ignorance is one of the few things that actually does trickle down.
LikeLike
LOLOLOL Ok that was funny!! Accurate but FUNNY!
LikeLike
Jon’s been on a roll lately!
LikeLike
Thanks for mentioning my essay. I agree that the reform movement is getting more Orwellian by the day. We are told test scores are way up when they are stagnant. We are told that poverty doesn’t matter. We are told that “enthusiasm” trumps experience.
People who have spent little or no time in the classroom, like Gates, Rhee, and Coleman, are now the architects of public education going forward. Who needs algebra, literature, music, or any of the arts? In the face of an obesity epidemic among our children, the mayor mandates smaller soda cups while eliminating or reducing physical education. It all feels surreal, but it is happening all the time and unless the trend changes, I fear we may lose public education altogether.
LikeLike
The greatest tragedy is that subjects like literature and algebra, as well as the arts, are not being challenged in the schools that then”reformers” send their children- only those they want to control. That to me is criminal.
LikeLike
A wonderful piece indeed–wise, witty, eloquent, and important.
I have a new satirical piece on a related topic: “The Need to Eliminate Personal Narrative”:
http://open.salon.com/blog/dianasenechal/2012/08/15/the_need_to_eliminate_personal_narrative
The two topics–literature instruction and personal narrative writing–are not the same, of course. I am usually a much stronger proponent of the former than of the latter. But when I see narrative writing disparaged as useless, I worry about where we’re heading.
LikeLike
To teach literature, philosophy and poetry to students is to help them pursue a life based on reason, logic, critical thinking, compassion, empathy, humility, integrity, dignity, political and social justice, responsibility, mutual respect, and life-long learning.
http://teacherpoetmusicianglenbrown.blogspot.com/2011/03/in-my-classroom-students-learn-that-i.html
LikeLike
One reason — though hardly the only one — to teach literature is that it helps students who have weak social skills learn about how other people think and feel, that is, what makes other people “tick.”
In discussing a fictional character’s personality, motivations and life circumstances, the student who isn’t skilled at seeing things through another person’s eyes is introduced to what it means to take another person’s perspective.
Now I think this is an all-around important life skill and one that is essential to being the most decent human being one is able to be, but people like David Coleman ought to be for this because you aren’t going to be successful in the work place (which as I understand it, is what Mr. Coleman thinks is the only purpose of schooling) if you don’t have what’s been called emotional intelligence.
In fact, many people who lose their jobs can do the work; they are let go because they don’t know how to fit in and follow the unspoken rules of the workplace. The foundation for these soft skills is perspective-taking. It can be taught and literature is one of the ways it is taught.
LikeLike
WOW. Good summary. I will just add that I have a friend who is a teacher. She brought up a good point about her daughter (now in her mid 20’s) learning vocabulary by reading literature. IT expanded her vocabulary.
I like the idea of a strong ethical message kids can learn too.
LikeLike
That is why I read short stories and novels as a young girl. Life was confusing. Novels helped me understand the people I encountered.
LikeLike
I applaud the spirit of this piece and absolutely celebrate the attack on how the Common Core and standardized tests devalue creativity, individuality, and imagination in writing assignments. [Replacing graphic novel writing with an 8-page research paper in 6th grade. Horrifying!] But I can’t endorse some of the details. Grammar and vocabulary really can be effectively taught in context, and there is considerable research showing that out-of-context grammar instruction does not improve students’ actual writing. Also, the Common Core, while emphasizing non-fiction reading across the curriculum, does not call for an emphasis on “informational” reading in Language Arts and English classes. (This is at least the claim of the NCTE’s overview of the Common Core.)
LikeLike
Regarding grammar instruction, I agree with the author of the article. At my first school, we were told never to teach grammar in isolation. But how can you teach grammatical topics in any logical sequence that way? How can you give students a wide selection of examples?
It makes the most sense to teach grammar both in isolation and in context. Teach specific grammatical topics; give students lots of practice with them. Then bring them up in context as well. This will often help students with reading comprehension; when they recognize how a sentence is put together, they can understand what it says.
I am glad that my teachers taught me grammatical topics in isolation. Then, once I had the chops (or even as I was developing them), I could recognize how those rules and principles played out in the literature I read. I learned a lot from diagramming sentences, reading Strunk and White, studying the grammar of other languages (including Latin and Greek), etc., and then figuring out the syntax of, say, the first full sentence of Paradise Lost:
Of man’s first disobedience, and the fruit
Of that forbidden tree, whose mortal taste
Brought death into the world, and all our woe,
With loss of Eden, till one greater man
Restore us, and regain the blissful seat,
Sing heavenly muse, that on the secret top
Of Oreb, or of Sinai, didst inspire
That shepherd, who first taught the chosen seed,
In the beginning how the heavens and earth
Rose out of chaos: Or if Sion hill
Delight thee more, and Siloa’s brook that flowed
Fast by the oracle of God; I thence
Invoke thy aid to my adventurous song,
That with no middle flight intends to soar
Above the Aonian mount, while it pursues
Things unattempted yet in prose or rhyme.
LikeLike
This is why foreign language instruction is so important. I think it can be easier to learn grammar in a language other than one’s own, and to compare the target language to the native one.
LikeLike
I think we largely agree. When I write that grammar can be taught in context, I don’t mean that the vocabulary of grammar and the rhetorical uses of grammar shouldn’t be explicitly taught. I just want teachers to avoid long units of exercises and worksheets instead of having students put the directly-taught concepts into practice in their own writing and, as you suggest, in their close reading. / Although he shows little (and perhaps too little) concern for the shared vocabulary of grammar, Stanley Fish does a great job, I think, of explaining such in-context study of language in his book “How to Write a Sentence.”
LikeLike
Del,
Thanks for your clarification. As a Spanish teacher I have always rejected the “total immersion” or Total Physical Response were the teacher is basically an actor trying to keep the students interested. But I have especially rejected “don’t teach the grammar” that those two approached suggest. The students will “naturally” learn grammar just like their first language (a la Rosetta Stone). Hogwash!! Our brains don’t work the same as an infant to toddler learning our first language compared to a high school student or adult learning a second language.
I use grammar as a bridge to connect the structures and words of both English and Spanish. How would you know to use a subject pronoun when needed? (the immersionistas would say that it will just happen, yeah after going and living in a country for X number of years). My upper level students many times have pointed out the fact that they learned more about English grammar in Spanish class than they learned in English classes, how sad!! Although that is starting to change as their seems to be a push toward using grammar, and the terms as Del has pointed out.
LikeLike
I realized to my horror that I provided a modernized version of the opening of Paradise Lost (same words but modern spelling and capitalization).
Here’s the real thing:
Of Mans First Disobedience, and the Fruit
Of that Forbidden Tree, whose mortal tast
Brought Death into the World, and all our woe,
With loss of Eden, till one greater Man
Restore us, and regain the blissful Seat,
Sing Heav’nly Muse, that on the secret top
Of Oreb, or of Sinai, didst inspire
That Shepherd, who first taught the chosen Seed,
In the Beginning how the Heav’ns and Earth
Rose out of Chaos: Or if Sion Hill
Delight thee more, and Siloa’s Brook that flow’d
Fast by the Oracle of God; I thence
Invoke thy aid to my adventrous Song,
That with no middle flight intends to soar
Above th’ Aonian Mount, while it pursues
Things unattempted yet in Prose or Rhime.
LikeLike
I’ve been teaching since 1994 and am an ace English teacher. The Common Core Standards are trying to gut literature. Me? I’m going to keep teaching Shakespeare, Orwell, Miller, Eliot, Twain, Homer, Dahl (great short story writer), Chaucer, Emerson, Frost, Fitzgerald, Faulkner, O’Connor, Tennyson, Swift, Bunyan, Ginsberg, Mishima, Kafka, Conrad, Morrison, Wolff, Yeats, Eliot, Dickens…
WHEN I get caught, I’ll plead insanity. I’ve read of references to Fahrenheit 451 on this blog. Yep- “They” don’t seem to want a thinking public.
I figure it will take the powers that be in my district a year or so to catch me. I’ve already put CCS gobblygoop into my lesson plans. I’ve always given them the high test scores and then some so they don’t usually poke their heads into my classroom. I’m not sure what I’ll do WHEN the district comes in with a Pearson per-packaged curriculum.
On a side note: Two local high schools are in restructuring. The district has hired all sorts of quasi-administrators (on teacher pay scale- all jobs have “This is a two year contract and is funded by Race to the Top money) to “oversee” teaching and make sure everyone pulls the oars nice and hard. I think “commissar” would be a decent title for such a job.
LikeLike
In our state, we actually have a person with the title Special Master, which is not too far off from commissar.
LikeLike
I truly believe that these ‘reformers’ want to turn out cogs, not humans.
LikeLike
I have to jump in here and ask if the writer of the NY Times article has read or studied the Common Core Standards? I teach high school, and we are already incorporating the CCS. Literature is one of the MAIN categories and is listed first from K – 12. Shakespeare and American drama are mentioned SPECIFICALLY (RL.1112.7 Analyze multiple interpretations of a story, drama, or poem (e.g., recorded or live
production of a play or recorded novel or poetry), evaluating how each version
interprets the source text. (Include at least one play by Shakespeare and one
play by an American dramatist.)). This is high end work — to not only read Shakespeare or and American drama, but to study other works that interpret that particular drama. This is not for the faint at heart and it certainly encourages the reading of literature in a deep way.
Grammar instruction is focused in the lower grades with the aim that by H.S. they should know it — but, of course, we are continuing to teach it in context, mostly through poetry and other texts that we are studying in other ways.
Yes, we do “informational” but we are keeping a clear balance between that and literature.
Narrative writing is also clearly delineated in the standards (W.1112.3 Write narratives to develop real or imagined experiences or events using effective technique, well-chosen details, and well-structured event sequences), along with argument and expository (to be overlapped with research in some cases.)
The school that eliminated the highly creative and synthesizing activity of the graphic novel didn’t have a CLUE what they were doing. It sounds like the perfect Common Core related project — it would teach many of the standards. I agree with Diane when she says the standards haven’t been tested, so we have yet to know how this will all work out. But as a professional, all I can do is embrace them (because, Lord knows, they are a million times more succinct than the fuzzy standards we’ve been following for years) and make the best of it. I encourage everyone to study up on the standards before buying that they are all bad. Most teachers who read through them can immediately see that they do have some benefits, as well as challenges. The implementation is what is going to be the toughest for some districts and disciplines, because of misunderstandings like the one mentioned in the article.
LikeLike
“[A]s a professional, all I can do is embrace them…” No disrespect Ms. Sadler, but as professionals educators should be resisting these attempts by the Gates Foundation to narrow curriculum, permanently entrench high-stakes testing, and further impose the banking system of education on a generation of hapless students.
Rather than familiarizing themselves with Coleman’s monster, educators should be lining up behind Susan Ohanian and Professor Stephen Krashen’s efforts to resist CCSS at every turn.
LikeLike
I’m certainly not a fan of Gates or much of what has happened, esp. what I know about Hillborough county in FL which sold its soul to Gates Foundation. I am a vocal opponent to the amount of testing that is going on in our schools. In my high school, it is totally out of control. The point I was trying to make is that literature is not thrown out with the CCS, nor should be projects such as the graphic novel. It seems that sometimes people are talking about CCS without actually knowing what is in the CCS.
Are there problems with this? Most likely. But as Alfie Kohn said in his book “The Schools Our Children Deserve” — and I am paraphrasing because right now I cannot seem to put my finger on the quote — we have to work within the system AND outside the system to effect change. If I teach the CCS which has been handed to me and is part of my job, then I am better able to discuss where the problems are. I will have specifics. Meanwhile, I continue to advocate for the best education possible for my students by being an authentic educator and finding the things that work well. To the outside world, I educate others on the issues with standardized testing, Race to the Top, and all the other nonsense that pass for “good ideas” or reform. We are in the midst of a great possibility for change. I work tirelessly in each arena — in and out of the classroom — to do what I can to move us in a positive direction.
LikeLike
Well be warned, since politics play a big role in this, expect this to become a political battle. We already have legislators who will try again to get rid of Common Core in our state. It failed before, but they will not stop until the feds get out of the classroom. I suspect it’s just a matter of time before they are gone.
Schools will waste money aligning to Common Core and like NCLB it will become something no one wants.
LikeLike
I am one of those who does NOT perceive the standards as totally bad. In fact, I see a great deal of potential good in them. (Full disclosure: I played a minor role in the creation of the standards: I suggested some text exemplars and commented on drafts.)
I do see several problems:
1. They need piloting and revision.
a. For instance, the term “informational text” is limiting. A great deal of nonfiction is much more than informational–and a great deal of literature contains rich information (think of Moby-Dick and the passages on cetology).
b. Similarly, in the writing standards there’s a divide between argumentative/persuasive writing and informative/explanatory writing. What happened to analytical/interpretive writing? An interpretation of a literary text is somewhere in between “argumentative” and “explanatory”–but the standards don’t acknowledge this.
c. The specified ratios of literary to informational text serve no constructive purpose that I can see. Yes, students should read nonfiction as well as fiction. They should read historical material in history class, literature in literature class, etc. Also, not every class needs to have extensive reading. One wonderful thing about math and music is that you get to think in nonverbal ways (well, of course they involve words, but they also have their own symbols). If the curriculum is substantial and well designed, students will read plenty of literature and nonfiction (and will learn to think in other modes as well).
d. The “Speaking and Listening” standards have very few references to listening. Granted, listening is implicit, but it deserves more attention. Shouldn’t students develop the practice of listening to a poem, a presentation, or (gulp) the teacher? Shouldn’t quiet students who listen attentively and write thoughtfully get their due?
There are other aspects that might need touching up or changing, but enough of that for now. As for other problems:
2. Many schools have received the message that everyone, including English teachers, should include more informational texts among their readings. The situation that Tim Clifford describes is not isolated. CCSS leaders should state clearly that a rich curriculum comes first–that it should not be subordinated to some narrow aspect of the standards.
3. Along similar lines, although the standards do mention Shakespeare and American literature/foundational documents, they are still heavily focused on skills. Assessments are being created to match the standards; they, too, will focus on skills. This means that students will be tested primarily on skills, as they have been in the past. This in turn may force an emphasis on skills in the classroom.
4. Yes, many literacy programs have gone too far in the direction of personal narratives, generic reading strategies, and low-level texts. Unfortunately, CCSS spokespeople have countered this with extremes of their own. David Coleman (whom I have met and whom I like) has stated that people in the business world don’t care how you think and feel; what matters to them is that you be able to make an argument and support it. Two points: first, this isn’t so. Even in the business world, logos, ethos, and pathos all come into play. Second, the business world is not all of life. We also educate for intellectual, civic, and cultural life, and for the beauty of the subjects themselves. (In all fairness, I wouldn’t be surprised if Coleman had reconsidered his statements by now.)
5. As with many other education reforms, they have been rushed in (thanks in large part to Race to the Top). People are anxious because they don’t know what’s coming (in terms of assessments, for instance) and don’t know how this will play out. States that adopted them for funding may not actually like them or may not find them superior to their own state standards. It would have been wiser to make their adoption entirely voluntary, pilot them, work out the problems, and take it from there.
All that said, they do contain some good, in my view. I applaud the emphasis on attentive reading, high-quality literature and nonfiction (specifically, Shakespeare and American foundational documents), and argumentative writing (with all the caveats I have mentioned earlier). This nudges in the direction of a real curriculum without telling schools exactly what to teach.
Enough. I have gone on too long.
LikeLike
Diana, my biggest problem with Common Core is not the standards at all, it’s the 10th Amendment of the Constitution. This should NEVER leave the state and become a national agenda.
Even in many states, this would violate the STATE Constitution.
LikeLike
Eek–I made a grammatical error in the first sentence. It should read: “I am one of those who do NOT” instead of “does NOT.”
MOMwithAbrain, do the provisions of Race to the Top count as a federal mandate? If the federal government says, “To be eligible for funds, you must do X,” the states technically have the option of not doing X. Now, I find Race to the Top objectionable anyway (and see it as federal overreach), but is it unconstitutional?
LikeLike
LIterature keeps reading entertaining and gives people a reason to enjoy reading. It came about when large numbers of learned to read and wanted something enjoyable to read. Stories expand on thoughts and facts to provide insight and deeper thought. Facts can’t tell they whole story because one can’t pretend to read the minds of those engaged in fact making. It also denies others, usually the people who are not the elite, a voice in books. It would be the elite who would record facts and fewer people would be spurred to read them.
LikeLike
MOMwithAbrain, I am still having trouble understanding why this is NOT a clear violation of the 10th amendment. It feels absolutely surreal….
LikeLike
One thing we need to reform is our semantic complicity with this gang of self-described reformers — it does not pay to dignify them with the name of reformers when they are really pushing an agenda of Regressive Education.
LikeLike
Yes, “edudeformers” or just plain “deformers” is what I use.
LikeLike
The Crocodile in the Common Core Standards
http://www.dailycensored.com/2011/10/18/the-crocodile-in-the-common-core-standards/
LikeLike
I find it hard to imagine going to school and having everything read to me or by me be non-fiction. There is a place for both. Sometimes the age, circumstances and interest bring about what is the read of the day. Remember those assignments? You are required to read at least one auto-biography or biography. Others, science fiction, historical fiction, fantasy, various types of poetry, a book from ??? Dewey Decimal shelf. To be honest, I moaned and groaned at some of those assignments at the time. Should they have been overlooked or discarded. Nope. If we do not give children a wide choice, I believe we are going to stifle imagination, curiosity and creativity. Reading is an avenue to a healthy quality and appreciation of life in adulthood. I am such a believer in educating the whole child that to be limited to what should be reading material, really, really bothers me. Yes, literature is very important. I think it would be a pretty blah world without it.
LikeLike
I love literature and it is absolutely necessary. It gives children a voice, and it helps them to grow. I hope to share with my students the love of literature and there will always be something about there for them to read. I don’t know if anyone else has seen this video series but I absolutely love it.
http://learner.org/resources/series183.html They have other grades as well. This just proves how important literature is in the classroom.
LikeLike
My cardiology professor in medical school advised all of us to read at least one non-medical book every week. We all said, “Yeah. Right. When?”
It wasn’t until I was out in practice, very busy, and having lot’s of difficulty keeping up with numerous medical journals that I recalled what Dr. Frishman had said and picked up some science fiction just for fun.
Low and behold, I started to enjoy reading again and my skills, speed and comprehension of the technical stuff seemed to improve.
Lessons to be learned.
1. The more you read, the better you will read.
2. Reading for fun will make reading for content less onerous.
Not all reading is fun. If we are to succeed in helping students achieve in a computer and STEM filled world we have to get them to read some very technical publications. Any way we can get them to regard reading as something other than a chore, (or worse, the enemy), is worth trying. Hopefully we can all share any such ideas and strategies.
LikeLike
My daughter just completed third grade in a Manhattan District 2 public school. On her last day she brought home a “summer reading contract” which instructed her to read 45 minutes per day and list the on the attached sheet all books she completed. At the bottom of the printed contract document which had probably been used for years, someone had hand-written “*please don’t forget to read some nonfiction!” in letters that I swear were trying to look self-effacing and apologetic.
My daughter loves science and so has a shelf of nonfiction books she has read/is reading/is planning to read real soon, but almost universally these books are not designed to be “completed” – they are designed to be browsed. They are divided into semi-autonomous subtopics, each of which has a luscious two page spread with 15 or so separate captioned illustrations and six or seven sidebars. It’s as though each subtopic is given its own Ripley’s Believe It or Not comic, or NatGeo photo spread. (Once you have checked out the “platinum” spread in the periodic table book, it doesn’t automatically follow that you will turn the page and read the “gold” spread. You would be more likely to do other things related to platinum outside of the book experience.)
So we went looking for nonfiction books that an interested reader would want to consume cover to cover with the same avidity that she could feel for any reasonable fiction work. We found almost nothing except biographies (which are pretty straightforward narratives.) The History of US is fantastic, but it’s still presented in this magazine-y style.
The nonfiction works I myself read cover-to-cover, can’t-put-it-down style tend to have groundbreaking, disruptive hypotheses at their core (like “Guns, Germs and Steel” say.) If educators want children to read entire nonfiction books for pleasure they are going to have to augment the way kids nonfiction is written and published.
LikeLike
My two cents on why art is necessary. Even if you don’t read my blot,read Northrup Frye’s The Educated Imagination. http://amethysthintonsainz.blogspot.com/2012/08/artists-are-necessary.html
LikeLike
Born on the cusp of the New Math, where I first got catechized in the Old Math and then had to learn the New Math in order to help my succeeding siblings through their homework, I am the survivor of more national curriculum reforms than either fashion of Math taught me to count.
But the one thing that distinguished all those Old Style reforms was the question of who was in charge of reforming the curriculum. No matter how much textbook publishers may have had their hands in the till and their thumbs on the scales, it was the professional educators who mainly ran the show.
That is the main thing that no longer holds true today, and that is making all the difference.
Professional educators need to quit fussing over the red herrings in this current kettle of fish. Curing the Common Core will not happen unless the professionals who still have a clue what education is start asking who has now captured control of the ever-continuing process and start taking control back from those who know nothing but how to cash in on other people’s bees-wax.
LikeLike