I come from a family of teachers--my mother is a teacher, and 3 of her 4 sisters are as well. A few of them also married teachers, and now a good part of their children are also becoming teachers. I once figured out that one could conceivably go from kindergarten to an associate's degree being taught by at least one member of my family at all times. It's a bit ridiculous, and growing up I had no intention of following the family tradition.
When first came to college, I was an English major with a linguistics emphasis, and I loved it. I soon found myself falling into a familiar thought pattern, though--I kept learning all these cool things and I couldn't keep them to myself. I found myself figuring out how to explain things to other people, and it wasn't much of a jump to explaining them to a hypothetical class. I gave in and switched my emphasis from linguistics to teaching and I love that too.
It's really important to me to remember that every student in a classroom is different: they have varied interests, goals, and skills, and it's not my job to convert them to liking English as much as I do. It's my job to cater to them and their needs and give them the tools they need to succeed.
I was having a discussion with a few people the other day about a dichotomy we see in teaching English, specifically literature. We read three articles that touch on this: "Reader-Response Theory and the English Curriculum," by Robert E. Probst, "Literature and Literacy: Rethinking English as a School Subject," by Robert P. Yagelski and "Toward Thoughtful Curriculum: Fostering Discipline-Base Conversation," by Arthur N. Applebee. These articles talked a lot about using literature as a means to learning something else, like critical thinking, reading comprehension, and exposure to other cultures and points of view. This set my group thinking about why we chose to study literature in college. The truth is, I don't love literature because it teaches me critical thinking skills, although that is a perk. I love it because I love the stories and the characters.
This leads me to wonder, what is the purpose of teaching literature? Should we teach Shakespeare because Shakespeare is awesome, as Probst suggests in asking, "How do we teach so that the experience with literature is its own justification?" Or, should we teach Shakespeare because through it, students can learn about history, can be exposed to interesting thoughts and ideas, and can learn how to interpret unfamiliar words and phrases? Should we be doing some mixture of both?
The quandary comes because how we present literature to our students can greatly affect whether they approach it from an efferent or aesthetic stance. How possible is it to teach students that they can choose to read from either stance, and would it be a good idea to do so? How does this fit in with what our job is as English teachers?
I can see that you have a love of literature and that you can see the many ways in which we as readers benefit from reading. I think that in the end we all end up trying to find a stance on the matter that is somewhere in the middle of the two stances mentioned in your post. I also think that the fact that you place a greater value upon the story than on its perks will be evident in the way you approach teaching literature. I draw a parallel here to my own thoughts as I too find that I enjoy reading more for the experiences and characters in books. I wonder how this will fit into the way you plan to teach. How will you be able to focus on the perks if that is what is called for by your employer?
ReplyDeleteI often struggle with a similar problem with English classrooms. Math, science, and history all seems so simple. In math, you are there to learn math because you will probably need it at some point. Science is available to teach students about the body and about how the world works on a physical basis. HIstory is there to teach us about what our nation and the world has been through so that we may have a greater understanding of our world's discourse (and so we know what to avoid in the future). But where does English fit? Is it about teaching grammar? Literature? Writing? What kind of writing? What is the point? My math major friends always joke about how literature is pointless. Well it's not! I just can't ever think of a good argument at the time because I get so worked up. But really what is the point?
ReplyDeleteTo answer your question about Shakespeare, I think we need to teach a mixture of both. Yes. English is a language study in which we need to inform students how to effectively express themselves, but can't we do that through literature? Can't we teach students to empathize by showing them to relate to a character? Doesn't literature enrich our lives by showing us life?
Also, I have zero members in my family who have chosen teaching as a profession. I've often wondered if you have anxiety over whether you'll be "as good" as your mom or as another one of your relatives. Are they helpful or is there a bit of competition there?
Dory,
ReplyDeleteThere were two things that really struck me as fascinating in your entry. The first one was that you loved linguistics, but felt the need to share and "teach" it to other people. This related to what I wrote in my blog, because I talked about distinguishing your hobbies from your career. Which is just for fun, and which could you see yourself doing in 20 years? Based on how you came into the teaching profession, I would say that you are in it for the long haul because it sort of came to you. You didn't pick it randomly. I liked that. You can also incorporate linguistics into your lesson plans how you see fit, so you get the best of both worlds.
The second thing that stood out to me, was when you said it is not your job to convert your students into English enthusiasts ( I re-worded, but kept the concept.) I completely agree with this. Not everyone that walks into our classrooms is going to enjoy English. We as teachers need to figure out a way to get the material to our students in a way that is applicable to them, so they retain it. I am horrible at math, and have only liked one math class that I have taken in my entire educational career. The only reason that I liked that class, was because I had an awesome teacher. We need to be that teacher for our students, whether they like our subject or not.
Great job on your blog entry - I really enjoyed it!
Laura