Teacher Ariel Sacks notes two clashing trends in teaching literature: teach whole books or excerpts.
The recent trend toward short texts seems to have come from the Common Core State Standards and accompanying standardized tests. As Peter Greene explains in a Forbes Magazine article, Common Core Testing and the Fracturing of Literature, “Both the standards and the tests are focused on ‘skills,’ with the idea that the business of reading a play or a story or any piece of text is not for the value of that text, but for the reading skills that one acquires and practices in the reading.” This limited focus on skills overlooks so much of what literature offers young people. But my issue with excerpts goes beyond the skills versus content debate, which has been going on many decades.
I question the choice to alter a novel’s form by excerpting it. This is partly on principle—the author didn’t intend for it to be read in bits. But more importantly, I believe reading excerpts puts students at a disadvantage in developing a love of reading and their skills in literary analysis.
The Whole Story Advantage
Literature is art. When we read a novel, we are reading an author’s artistic production, which was created intentionally in a specific form. The novel as a literary form asks readers to spend time living in a world and experiencing the story subjectively as it unfolds, detail by detail. Sure, the length can be prohibitive at times on a practical level; but fundamentally, the work of art begins at the beginning and ends at the end. Without the whole story, our experience is incomplete, and we really can’t know what the author is trying to convey with major gaps in our knowledge of the text.
I like to compare this to looking at a work of visual art—a painting, for example. Yes, we can study a corner of a painting, but we would almost never do so without first viewing the painting as a whole. Without seeing the whole, we miss out on the experience of the art as it was intended. And we are at a gross disadvantage in analyzing even the details we see in one corner, because we don’t know what purpose they serve in relation to the whole.
I agree with Sacks. A writer goes to great lengths to create a novel. Teaching only an excerpt does violence to the work and destroys love of literature. Excerpting is butchery.

“Close Painting ”
Though artist does his work “up close”
He must step back to see the most
For context is the reference frame
Which consecrates the work for fame
LikeLike
Great analogy. It’s like we’re looking only at Mona Lisa’s lips and not the rest of her face or the background to figure out if she’s smiling. Dumb.
LikeLike
Isn’t the fact that we’re talking about something so stupid itself an indicator of the deformation being wrought by “education reform”?
LikeLike
indeed!!!
LikeLike
If I am not mistaken, it was David Coleman who famously said
“when we [the Deciders] act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do’.
So, we are left to “study” and deal with what people like David Coleman created.
Who are we to argue with the Lord Most High?
LikeLike
Actually, it was one of the devil’s minions, Karl Rove who said that. But Coleman basically said the same when he uttered his “The don’t give a shit about. . . “
LikeLike
In the visual arts there is the further complication of education that on,y involves looking at a reproduction of a work, or a photo of architecture or sculpture. Even high fidelity digital images are remote from the experience of seeing the original and in the case of architecture, moving through the spaces, experiencing multiple views, and grasping the functions of spaces.
A wonderful cartoon depicts the Metropolitsn Museum of Art mounted on wheels, pulled by several trucks and touring the country so everyone can see the treasures. Teachers of art who are savvy about the cropped, small, digital versions and variations in print quality of reproductions will do much to overcome the idea these images are the art. They are proxies, and some are better than others.
LikeLike
Your comment made me think immediately of the murals in George Washington high school that the San Francisco School Board plans to destroy. Part of the magic of murals is the way they work with the architecture and space they are in.
And of course, the idea that you can “preserve” any painting — to say nothing of giant murals — as a digital image is something that only Bill Gates would appreciate.
LikeLike
I once helped design and create — and painted some murals for — a kids’ “play space” with the theme “bringing the outdoors in” which had a lot of the things you find outside in a park, a treehouse, a climbing wall, a teetor totter, monkey bars , trees and even a “pond” and “grass” (in carpet).
The murals were of trees and wildlife and would have lost much of their magic if they had simply been situated outside the playspace.
LikeLike
If, when I teach literature, I want breadth, I teach short stories. For depth, novels. Excerpts? Why? There are whole works of quality abounding. In all sizes. Find something that fits the need–but don’t deface it to make it fit.
LikeLiked by 1 person
amen
LikeLike
When we put together the Heath Anthology of American Literature, we faced this problem and decided NOT to use excerpts (with only a very few exceptions–e.g., Cooper). In fact, almost all fiction writers, and certainly non-fiction writers, have produced short stories or essays, which can be used whole, as their authors intended. The only author about whom we had a problem was Toni Morrison, and we now use a piece of short fiction.
In fact, there is no real reason to excerpt novels. Many shorter fictional works are wonderful and also work better in class. That’s true of Hawthorne, Melville, Jack London, Richard Wright, Tillie Olsen, Louise Erdrich–just to name a few I had success in teaching. And there are many authors like Poe and Alice Cary, who hardly wrote any longer fiction. Students can, I found, better get their heads around short stories, as they can, too, around short poetry, if given half a chance.
LikeLiked by 1 person
But you’re STILL leaving out whole novels or plays as part of the curriculum. It’s not just excerpts that are the problem. It’s that kids dont’ get the opportunity to go through a sustained piece of literature anymore. Short stories are fine, but they need to be balanced with some full-length novels.
I’m sorry, but reading a short story or non-fiction take on the Holocaust, for example, is NOT the same as reading “Night,” or any of the other excellent Holocaust memoirs out there. And that’s the case with a lot of other essential pieces of English literature.
LikeLike
I didn’t say we don’t use whole novels. We do, both within the anthology and outside of it. We just do not use excerpts. But there’s no reason not to use The Scarlet Letter or The Bluest Eye. PL
LikeLike
We need a return to real reading, writing and thinking. We need to get off the behaviorism train led by those that want to format students’ education to accommodate computer testing. Students must read whole works to understand and appreciate what the author has written. Students need context in order for art to connect to the real world.
Before NCLB teachers taught literature in its entirety. Teachers used their budgets to purchase classroom sets of books. In fact, grade level teachers pooled their money and rotated sets among classrooms. It is a much better investment than buying a variety of canned materials. The CCSS tests have undermined real learning in schools. In many schools instruction is mostly test prep. The poorer a school is the more likely the instruction will be a narrowed curriculum and a loss of real reading and writing. We need to get the politicians and billionaires out of our public schools for the benefit of the students. We need to eliminate test and punish. We need an authentic, meaningful curricula that prepares students to be critical thinkers as being able to reason is a necessary component of a functioning democracy.
LikeLiked by 1 person
retired teacher I think we need to abandon the idea that those who we are talking about don’t want a “functioning democracy,” or at the very least, they are so short-sighted as to have no idea what one looks like, why it’s important, or how to maintain it. CBK
LikeLike
“We need a return to real reading, writing and thinking.”
I agree with you and other comments in this discussion so much. Reading novels and longer non-fiction books requires patience, effort and time. These qualities are so much more important to teach and learn in this time of—oh, how I hate this word—multitasking and social media immediate gratification (or frustration).
LikeLike
Multitasking is a bunch of hooey. All it means is switching your attention rapidly between multiple tasks meaning that none of them are really done well.
LikeLike
It’s more accurately described in the Paul Simon song Call Me Al, short little span of attention.
LikeLike
scary times when we are now desperate for legislators to allow a RETURN to real reading, writing and thinking
LikeLike
Even scarier that we have to ask legislators to enact a law permitting 15 minutes of recess a day.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Indeed, Ciedie! It’s astonishing, isn’t it? I never thought, when I started my career as a teacher, many decades ago, that we would be in such a place! But I never imagine, either, that a lowlife like Donald Trump could be elected president of the United States.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Diane In music, we talk of “movements.” Story also has a movement, . . a cohesive stream of thought in which we immerse ourselves, relating our own lives for good and for bad, and from front to back.
I happen to love reading quotations from different authors. Anthologies, day books, and “editors’ treasuries” are full of brief excerpts from all sorts of writers and writings–all good for all of us. However, one only has to read one great book full through to know the difference and how each kind of reading, and rereading, finds its way into the architecture and substance of our interior life.
When are the powerful “we” going to realize the depth and purpose of their own lives, and so the importance of others’? My own “take” on the situation is to think that those who continue to try to reduce everything human and alive down to the non-human and dead didn’t get either an intellectual, moral, social, political or spiritual education themselves. CBK
LikeLike
Oh my Lord! I am SO SO SO SO happy to see this discussion!!!! The Coring of English language arts instruction has just about destroyed it–except where brave English teachers ignore the skill drill approach fostered by Lord Coleman and the industry that has grown up around his puerile ideas and continue to create situations in which students can have full, rich, authentic interactions with whole texts.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Affluent schools can ignore a lot of the test prep, and they will still make a good showing on the tests. Poor schools with poor students are fighting to keep their doors open. Teachers are on a treadmill to train students like pet squirrels for the big standardized tests. The students in these poor schools are being denied access to a rich and varied curricula in the name of “testing.” It’s the “Hunger Games” applied to education.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Exactly.
LikeLike
I am not a teacher of English and language arts…I am, however, a reader. In order to make any sort of sense of a snippet or snapshot from literature, one needs to know what was writer prior to the snippet – the “setting the stage”, the character development and so forth. One also needs to keep reading to discover what follows in order to see how the snippet fits into the overall picture. Trying to analyze that snippet just doesn’t make any kind of sense to me.
LikeLike
The whole-vs.-excerpt debate is THE worst aspect of CCSS and testing. How are kids supposed to surmise the author’s purpose with a snippet?
Techies, I think, were looking for shortcuts —similar to what they do with their own products. Of course, w/o an appreciation of literature, teaching and learning, excerpts became efficient reform. Criminal.
LikeLike
One of the problems is that people put in charge of policy don’t have the expertise to make appropriate decisions on curriculum. Since they have no background on the philosophy of education and, in the case of ELA, the components of good literature, their choices seem random and counterintuitive. This seems pervasive throughout society where money buys positions instead of even basic competence. It’s a wonder that anyone is able to be successful.
I remember looking at the list of reading materials supporting Common Core when they were first presented, feeling appalled. Many of the items were out of print, recommended for the wrong grade level, as well as lacking diversity. As soon as it was put forward it was out of date. When I was still involved, prior to my retirement, many of the teachers pretty much ignored these “suggestions”, but new hires, I’m sure, were happy to have guidelines (no matter how misguided).
LikeLike
We read literary works in order to enter into imaginative worlds and have experiences there that are significant to us. Then, because these are significant, we feel compelled to share them, discuss them, argue with others about them based on material in the text and in its context, and so on, and this mutual engagement over the work creates community. This sharing of the wealth of transmitted culture, fueled by our passion about those experiences, leads to in-depth engagement with the work. The Coleman approach to literature distorts–mangles beyond any recognition–these natural responses to literature. Turn Coleman on himself. Listen to one of his talks. Then, instead of engaging with what he has to say, write and answer a multiple-choice question about how his use of figurative language affects the tone or mood of his presentation. This is, of course, entirely unnatural. As a result of the hidden curriculum growing like weeds out of Coleman and Gates’s puerile bullet list, an entire generation of students has learned that literary study means these trivial, inane exercises in application of a standard [sic] from the list to a snippet of text in order to arrive at the predetermined correct answer. It’s sickening. It’s like reducing the study of the Civil War to comparison of the relative sizes of Union and Rebel cannonballs. It’s not an exaggeration to say that Coleman and Gates are responsible for wholesale vandalism of English language arts curricula and pedagogy and for robbing an entire generation of authentic, normal, natural engagement with literature.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well stated!
LikeLike
Using snippets is a violation of students’ rights. Everyone should have the right to be taught great literature, not just tiny, unrelated pieces of it. A generation has fallen victim to technology, the Great Dumbing of humankind.
LikeLike
Teach whole people? Or just excerpts?
LikeLike
Lord Coleman and the oligarchs whom he serves as vassal is not interested in whole people (nobody cares what you think) but in “human resources” who will sit down, shut up, and do any inane task that the overlords put to them. This is conditioning for prole children. You won’t find this apply-the-skill-to-the-snippet crap being done in the schools that the children of the oligarchical masters attend. This is conditioning for Prole children.
LikeLike
Of Experts and Excerpts
“Experts” like Coleman
Say “Excerpts are golden”
But teachers say “Not!”
And “Coleman is rot!”
LikeLike
Another gem, SomeDAM!
LikeLike
LMAO, Poet! Yet another great one!
LikeLike
You can actually get an APP that distills the text for the reader. Good GAWD!
LikeLike
I think the real problem is the students and we really need to eliminate them from the equation entirely
“Pearsonalized Learning”
When robots take the test
Our problems will be gone
Cuz robots are the best
And never ever wrong
LikeLike
“The Colemanbot”
Designed in a lab at MIT
The Colemanbot for SAT
Unequaled for the standard test
Can beat Commander Data’s best
LikeLike
But until we can eliminate the students from the equation, we can at least eliminate the human teachers
“Siri-ous School Relationships”
Relationships with Siri
Are Siri-ous and very
Good for learning stuff
In schools, she is enough
The teacher isn’t needed
She really has been beated
By Siri and her kin
The best there’s ever been
“Pearsonalized Learning Aids”
When teachers are all gone
The bots will teach the children
Shock them when they’re wrong
Like Dr. Stanley Milgram
LikeLike
Oh my Lord, SomeDAM. These are wonderful. Thanks for making, of all this ugliness, such delights.
LikeLike
I would like to see, SomeDAM, a nationwide protest among high-school students in which their only response on the high-stakes standardized ELA tests is to write on them:
“My mind is not standardized enough to formulate the requested responses. Please ask one of Mr. Gates’s computers to complete this.”
LikeLike
“The Mood Meter”
(It’s real and brought to you by geniuses at Yale)
An app is what we need
To tell us how kids feel
Control their fervor speed
And keep on even keel
To keep them from the harm
That comes from ups and downs
With very loud alarm
And vids of dancing clowns
That shocks them when they stray
From straight and narrow path
(And sends them on their way
To certain psychopath)
LikeLike
You are on a roll today. Thanks for contributions here.
LikeLike
I read a snippet of an excerpt of your poem and concluded that the central theme or idea was that nobody gives a s**t what you think unless you’re a dancing clown.
LikeLike
Yes, LCT
That is exactly what it means (I think, but I could be wrong. Have been before, a couple times)
LikeLike
I just mistakenly posted a comment about the lack of the teaching of Civics on the next post RE: ELL. (It has more to do w/this post; that is, the short-changing of necessary curriculum in public schools, even the best of them).
Anyway, my relevant comment, here, is, why not just give everyone Cliff’s Notes & teach an entire book that way?! I am expecting, momentarily, to read an Onion article entitled, “Students Praised for Using Cliff’s Notes Rather Than Reading *A Tale of Two Cities…’Dickens Would Approve,’ Adminimal Says.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sorry for the misuse of italics & other errors, above; wish my laptop would auto-correct as I’ve discovered my smartphone does!
LikeLike
A resounding YES! to your idea, Bob, at 6:14 PM above!!! Brilliant!
LikeLike
We need deep dives into whole texts. Who are we to excerpt segments of a literary work of art? Maybe those are not the parts that will resonate most with a reader, and excerpting leaves a false impression that a reader has read a work. It reminds me of the way some works of literature were included in anthologies for students. Sometimes they would leave out sections of the work without ever warning a reader. Sometimes language itself was changed with no warning.
LikeLike
All the 9th-grade literature texts contain Romeo and Juliet. Typically, these texts excise, without comment, almost a third of the play. But that’s not the worst of what’s happening. The worst is that instead of authentic engagement with complete texts, we get, in current textbooks and educational software, the treatment of texts as mere occasions for applying one or more of the stupid skills from the puerile Gates/Coleman bullet list. It’s a deranged approach. I call it the “Monty Python and Now for Something Completely Different” approach to literature instruction.
Thanks, Master of the Universe Gates. Thanks, Lord Coleman.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Instead of teaching an appreciation of good literature, our students get teasers which make little sense out of context. I would rather they read a graphic novel of the original work so they can at least get the gist of what is happening. (My hope is always that the reader will be so entralled that they will be motivated to read up the unabridged novel to read
LikeLiked by 1 person
(Will be motivated to read the unabridged version)
LikeLike
Retired teacher said: “We need to get off the behaviorism train led by those that want to format students’ education to accommodate computer testing. Students must read whole works to understand and appreciate what the author has written. ”
YES, That train left the station four decades ago. How many know/remember when teachers had to rewrite all their course discriptions for state accreditation reviews with “behavioral objectives” and eliminate all hints of aiming to have students love/appreciate/enjoy a work of literature? (Of course, most of us ignored the edict when the classroom door was shut and we had their attention with Chaucer, or Shakespeare or Twain or Fitzgerald. But how many of the younger teachers == say, anyone 55 and under — know to do this?)
LikeLike
Yes, I well remember this idiocy. Who would have thought that once we moved past the era of the Behavioral Objective (which persisted in American education long after psychology as a discipline had undergone the cognitive revolution) that we would end up with the same crap in a different guise–with depersonalized education software that is just another version of programmed learning? https://bobshepherdonline.wordpress.com/2019/03/17/a-warning-to-parents-about-online-learning-programs/
LikeLike
Please forgive me if someone has already stated this: Literature is a body of knowledge (what is now called “content”) like any other: mathematics, biology, history.Currently, public schools are failing to teach literature as a coherent body of knowledge. The Common Core mandates teaching “texts” without providing backround information or context. Of course, we always must be updating the “canon” of “classic literature,” and making sure that we teach from a diverse roster. If literature is merely “text” that we use to teach rhetorical strategies, however, then it doesn’t matter what we teach; hence, the CC’s emphasis on “informational text.” The robust argument about what literature should be taught seems to have devolved into a discussion of what students need to be able to “DO” with the little snippets of “text” that they read. Not only are we denying students a full education and the chance to acquire cultural literacy and fluency, we are failing to introduce students to the culture heritage(s) of the U.S, and other regions. The Common Core sees literature not as art or even “stories,” but as texts whose status is not so different from that of instructional manuals. It’s all just “information”. My first year, first generation college students often can’t even explain the difference between fiction and non-fiction. pr denotation and connotation.
LikeLike
Great comment. Thank you for your insight.
LikeLike
So, so very well said, Ms. Richards!
LikeLike
The “excerpt” is just so efficient compared to all that reading. Its such a good idea that I think art museums should do the same for paintings. Cover them all in black canvas and cut a random one inch square out. Much more efficient viewing! And hell why do radio stations have to play entire songs? Why not a random 10 second snippet? So much more efficient for listening. Just imagine how may symphonies you could listen to on a 30 minute lunch break.
LikeLiked by 1 person
LMAO!
LikeLike
I always thought that reading the Readers Digest version was a waste of time. If the book was worthy of my attention, I wanted the entire experience. Excerpts are even worse – unless they are used as a teaser (kind of like a movie trailer). Of course, according to your “philosophy” those movie trailers save time and have as much merit as an entire movie.
Imagine:
Oliver – a homeless boy greedily requests seconds for dinner
Moby Dick – whales are possessed by the devil and need to be destroyed
Romeo and Juliet – Young Love is deadly
The Crucible – witches make lousy witnesses in court
Outlander – watch out for protruding rocks
MacBeth – blood spots never wash out
LikeLike
Oh my Lord, this is delicious.
LikeLiked by 1 person