# Teaching > General Teaching >  selecting books

## motherhubbard

I am posting a question for a class I am taking. I would appreciate any ideas or advice.

Many of the books with an appropriately challenging reading level for high school students contain controversial subject matter. Im concerned that some students and parents may object to the more mature content found in many well known classics. In fact, many classics are banned by high schools. How does one decide what to assign?

----------


## motherhubbard

bump!!!

----------


## Virgil

> I am posting a question for a class I am taking. I would appreciate any ideas or advice.
> 
> Many of the books with an appropriately challenging reading level for high school students contain controversial subject matter. I’m concerned that some students and parents may object to the more mature content found in many well known classics. In fact, many classics are banned by high schools. How does one decide what to assign?


That's a tough one Mom-H. I respect community values and different communities have subtle differences. I think it should involve as many members of society as possible, and it should not be restricted to teachers only. Perhaps teachers can make a broad list and let a diverse parents group from the community come to a consensus.

----------


## SleepyWitch

> In fact, many classics are banned by high schools.


 :Eek:  seriously?
O say, does that star-spangled, Banner yet wave, O'er the land of the free,
And the home of the brave, lalalalaaalaaalaa...
sorry, .. I'd better research the situation over here before I b*tch about other places..

----------


## Niamh

many classics are banned?!!! thats mad!
this referes to censorship in ireland (what happened after books where unbanned)



> There are instances of books which were at one time banned in Ireland subsequently not only having the ban overturned but the books in question becoming required reading on the Leaving Certificate syllabus.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censors...lic_of_Ireland

----------


## Virgil

Oh I think "banned" was a poor word choice. I think Mom-H means the books not selected for curriculum. No one is going to arrest a student if he brings a particular book into school.

----------


## motherhubbard

“The challenges range from demands that the book be removed from the curriculum, either as mandatory or elective reading, to demands that it be pulled from the school library. Because of the local nature of book challenges, it is difficult to list the books in any definitive order. The list is based on information from People for the American Way and the American Library Association”

http://www.rethinkingschools.org/arc.../cenfreq.shtml

I do mean banned from public schools. I'm sure a student could bring his own books, but he won't find them in the library. Some of these books were required reading when I was in school. I can't imagine graduating from high school without having read some of these books.

----------


## SleepyWitch

so every school or local authority sets their own curriculum and if some parents or teachers find a book immoral or offensive it gets banned?
i think you must have more detailed curricula over there than in Germany. ours only say "German, year ten: read excerpts from classic and romantic German literature" or "English year eleven/twelve read one play by Shakespeare, one novel from either the 19th, 20th or 21st century(=contemporary  :Smile:  ), short stories, poems"
everything else is left to the teacher, except: there's got to be one play by Shaky.. and of course those books are to be picked from a canon of what is considered "literature".. you can't just have your pupils read any old pulp novel.. but apart from that there are no restrictions...
[/ramble]
could you name some of the books that were required when you were in school and are now banned?

----------


## motherhubbard

The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain 
Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck 
*Bridge to Terabithia by Katherine Paterson 
*A Wrinkle in Time by Madeleine L'Engle 
To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee
*The Outsiders by S.E. Hinton 
The Adventures of Tom Sawyer by Mark Twain
*Summer of My German Soldier by Bette Greene

*these books have been required for at least one of my children. 

these are from a list of commonly challenged books found here 

http://www.ala.org/ala/oif/bannedboo...frequently.htm

----------


## SleepyWitch

A Wrinkle in Time? that's a children's book.. what's offensive about it? actually, it's got both science and Christianity, so it should cater to all tastes?
how can they ban Mark Twain, John Steinbeck and Harper Lee? I mean, these books are integral parts of American culture.. if schools go on banning these books, soon foreign kids will know about American history and culture than American ones!
sorry I'm getting heated up about this... my rants probably don't help to answer your original question at all...

----------


## motherhubbard

I think some foreign kids probably already do know more about American history than Americans.

----------


## SleepyWitch

back on topic.. why not read the Declaration of Independence &U.S. Constitution? I read them about 3 or 4 times when I was in school, because I had nothing better to do. They're a really interesting read and I'm sure no one can ban them  :Biggrin: , plus, it's cheap..  :Smile: 

on the whole, I think Virgil's solution makes most sense



> Perhaps teachers can make a broad list and let a diverse parents group from the community come to a consensus.


why don't you draw up a list and ask parents to vote at a Parent-Teacher-Association meeting or one of them thingies

----------


## Virgil

I still think the word ban is too strong to apply here, even if that article is applying it. Most of these are not in the curriculm because of supposed racial insensitivies, profanity, or violence. Not because they are banning ideas. It's a question as to what exposure parents feel comfortable for their children. I don't think that Huck Finn is racially insensitive, but unfortunately many people do. Given that some people like to use the word "nigger" (and frankly they are repulsive, but unfortunately they do) I can understand why many want to restrict Huck Finn, where the word is used quite often. So this is the type of community debate i'm talking about. I don't think Huck Finn is racially insensitive, in fact just the opposite so I think that offsets the language issue and I would support it being in the curriculm. 

I don't know for a fact because i've never read it, but if the Angelou book does describe rape and insults white people, then yeah, i have a problem with that being taught.

----------


## motherhubbard

That is one idea, but do you think that math or history teachers should have parents vote on their lesson plans?

Virgil, I think that sex, rape, racial struggles and many other difficult topics are very much a part of the high school experience. I know you agree with me that these can not just be ignored. I think high school should be about preparing students for the next stage of their lives. Many will go to work and many will go to college. Do you think that a student who has been exposed to as many of these books as possible stand a better chance of success in college as well as the work force?

----------


## Virgil

> Virgil, I think that sex, rape, racial struggles and many other difficult topics are very much a part of the high school experience. I know you agree with me that these can not just be ignored. I think high school should be about preparing students for the next stage of their lives. Many will go to work and many will go to college. Do you think that a student who has been exposed to as many of these books as possible stand a better chance of success in college as well as the work force?


True, true. That's what the parental community should discuss. But I think that Niamh and Sleepy were shocked because they saw the issue as just the banning of books, and it's not that. It's a question of what's appropriate for young people.

----------


## SleepyWitch

> True, true. That's what the parental community should discuss. But I think that Niamh and Sleepy were shocked because they saw the issue as just the banning of books, and it's not that. It's a question of what's appropriate for young people.


well.. nope, the reason I was shocked is this: how can pupils be expected to develop critical thinking if they are overprotected like this? 
how are they supposed to learn to distinguish between, let's say *a)* a book that promotes racist ideas, *b)* one that contains racist elements (like the N-word in Huckleberry Finn, which was the norm at that time) but promotes anti-racist ideas (Huck helping the slave to escape) and *c)* one that depicts the evils of racism in a realistic way in order to denounce racism? How can they learn to distinguish between these if they've never seen any of them, not even the ones in the "b)" and "c)" category?
How can they learn to distinguish between fact and fiction and to discuss issues that go beyond "I downloaded a new tune for my ipod and it sucks sh*t" ?

sorry if I come across as patronizing  :Frown:  of course our school system is riddled with flaws, too, but I've never heard of schools banning books (except for a private Catholic school that tried to ban sex ed books but didn't succeed)

----------


## Virgil

> well.. nope, the reason I was shocked is this: how can pupils be expected to develop critical thinking if they are overprotected like this? 
> how are they supposed to learn to distinguish between, let's say *a)* a book that promotes racist ideas, *b)* one that contains racist elements (like the N-word in Huckleberry Finn, which was the norm at that time) but promotes anti-racist ideas (Huck helping the slave to escape) and *c)* one that depicts the evils of racism in a realistic way in order to denounce racism? How can they learn to distinguish between these if they've never seen any of them, not even the ones in the "b)" and "c)" category?
> How can they learn to distinguish between fact and fiction and to discuss issues that go beyond "I downloaded a new tune for my ipod and it sucks sh*t" ?
> 
> sorry if I come across as patronizing  of course our school system is riddled with flaws, too, but I've never heard of schools banning books (except for a private Catholic school that tried to ban sex ed books but didn't succeed)


Are you saying that teachers are completely free to teach whatever they want in Germany? Obviously decisions have to be made as to which are in the curriculm. All i can say is you don't have our racial history and so certain things are sensitive. That doesn't mean we don't have books about racism. The books on racisim are selected for whatever other reasons, perhaps less charged or less profanity or somewhat toned down than Huck Finn. For instance, for whatever reason which I'm not aware of, we did not read Huck Finn in elementary school (don't know if there was a reason such as we are discussing), but we did read a book called _Sounder_  (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sounder) that had many racial themes as well. We learned about racism, but it didn't have the N-word on every page. Those are the kinds of choices that are made.

Actually thinking about Germany, I can't imagine that students younger than college level would learn about anti-semitism by reading Mein Kampf. But I would hope they read something about anti-semitism at some point. At what grade do they read Mien Kampf in Germany?

----------


## SleepyWitch

> For instance, for whatever reason which I'm not aware of, we did not read Huck Finn in elementary school (don't know if there was a reason such as we are discussing), but we did read a book called _Sounder_  (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sounder) that had many racial themes as well. We learned about racism, but it didn't have the N-word on every page. Those are the kinds of choices that are made.


that sounds reasonable  :Smile:  it sounds much better than banning books.




> Actually thinking about Germany, I can't imagine that students younger than college level would learn about anti-semitism by reading Mein Kampf. But I would hope they read something about anti-semitism at some point. At what grade do they read Mien Kampf in Germany?


we don't read it at all. it's banned, but in a different way than those books motherH listed. it's illegal to sell or buy it anywhere in Germany, so it's banned from the whole country not only at particular schools. 
you've made a very good point there. If it was legal to buy Mein Kampf in Germany, I'd probably be against pupils under the age of 18 reading it, anyway. but it just so happens nobody is allowed to buy it, so that's different.
yep, pupils in Germany read/ learn about anti-Semitism all the time.. 
I think we read young adult novels about kids' live during the third reich from year 5 on (10-11 y/o).
as for history lessons, the third reich and holocaust are only treated in year 9 (15 y/o), but Anti-Semitism in the Middle Ages gets taught earlier...
basically, I learned about it every single year of my school carreer (in German, History, RE lessons) even when it wasn't part of the curriculum.



> Are you saying that teachers are completely free to teach whatever they want in Germany?


nope, of course not. every federal state has a curriculum that is binding for all the schools in that state.
of course, you're supposed to read "literature" and there seems to be a list of recommendations, but no book that is regarded as a classic in the culture as a whole has been banned from schools in the past uhm.. 20 years.
I'll admit that German pupils in year 12 (final year) are a year or even two years older than American ones, but still.. if you look at the German lit curriculum for years 10 and 11 (age 16/17): there's Goethe, Schiller, the Romantics, Enlightenment, _Sturm und Drang_, contemporary literature...
...
I suppose you could ban lots of these according to the criteria on that page motherh quoted.

I'll give you an example. I'm sure you've heard of the Nazi propaganda film _Jud Süß_?. Well, it's "based" on a novel by Jewish writer Lion Feuchtwanger (actually, it's a terrible distortion of the book, but never mind). The book is about a Jew in the 17th? centure who wants to climb the social ladder and gives up his identity and religion in order to fit in. Now, Lion Feuchtwanger himself can hardly be said to have been Anti-Semitic, but some of the things the character in the book does are not exactly positive (he harms himself most of all, so it's not a case of the evil Jew harming others, but he's not exactly a hero either)
Now seeing as the film of the same title is a Nazi propaganda film, what do you do about the book? maybe it would be banned in America because of "anti-Semtitism" or racial slurs (I don't remember exactly, but I think it had some words equivalent to the N-word) in it. well, here it's allowed and my teacher asked me to give a presentation about it in year 11 (17-18 y/o) and we discussed how the author portrayed Jews and how the Nazis managed to turn that book into a propaganda film.

heehee, sorry I rambled so much  :Smile:

----------


## motherhubbard

You are both making excellent points. I think that there is an enormous difference is assigning a book by Howard Stern, who is on the list, and Harper Lee, who is also on the list. Huck Finn doesn’t advocate racism; it just simply represents the way things were. I doubt that there is an English teacher in the world who would assign the Stern book and suggesting that one should be able to, but there is a long list of novels traditionally considered to be appropriate. They address real issues and often give insight into another perspective. I believe this makes children more empathetic and that is something we desperately need.

----------


## Virgil

> that sounds reasonable  it sounds much better than banning books.


That's why I'm saying banning is the wrong word. It's the selecton process for the curriculumn. 




> we don't read it at all. it's banned, but in a different way than those books motherH listed. it's illegal to sell or buy it anywhere in Germany


You're criticizing the US and you actually have a banned book in your country.  :Tongue:  No, seriously I understand. It should be banned in Germany.




> nope, of course not. every federal state has a curriculum that is binding for all the schools in that state.


So I don't understand what's the difference. That news article called it banning, probably to be sensational.




> I'll admit that German pupils in year 12 (final year) are a year or even two years older than American ones, but still.. if you look at the German lit curriculum for years 10 and 11 (age 16/17): there's Goethe, Schiller, the Romantics, Enlightenment, _Sturm und Drang_, contemporary literature...


That's great. I think our schools don't push students in literature enough. But still I read The Great Gatsby and Shakespeare at that age.




> I'll give you an example. I'm sure you've heard of the Nazi propaganda film _Jud Süß_?. Well, it's "based" on a novel by Jewish writer Lion Feuchtwanger (actually, it's a terrible distortion of the book, but never mind). The book is about a Jew in the 17th? centure who wants to climb the social ladder and gives up his identity and religion in order to fit in. Now, Lion Feuchtwanger himself can hardly be said to have been Anti-Semitic, but some of the things the character in the book does are not exactly positive (he harms himself most of all, so it's not a case of the evil Jew harming others, but he's not exactly a hero either)
> Now seeing as the film of the same title is a Nazi propaganda film, what do you do about the book? maybe it would be banned in America because of "anti-Semtitism" or racial slurs (I don't remember exactly, but I think it had some words equivalent to the N-word) in it. well, here it's allowed and my teacher asked me to give a presentation about it in year 11 (17-18 y/o) and we discussed how the author portrayed Jews and how the Nazis managed to turn that book into a propaganda film.


 :Blush:  I must admit I have never heard of Jud Sub. Must be my poor school system. It's shameful on my part but I have not read much German literature, just some Kafka and Mann. Sounds like a complicated novel. 




> heehee, sorry I rambled so much


No this has been a great discussion.




> You are both making excellent points. I think that there is an enormous difference is assigning a book by Howard Stern, who is on the list, and Harper Lee, who is also on the list. Huck Finn doesnt advocate racism; it just simply represents the way things were. I doubt that there is an English teacher in the world who would assign the Stern book and suggesting that one should be able to, but there is a long list of novels traditionally considered to be appropriate. They address real issues and often give insight into another perspective. I believe this makes children more empathetic and that is something we desperately need.


Unfortunately many African-Americans disagree on Huck Finn. Just do a search on lit net and you'll see how many discussion of racism in Huck Finn has come up. I had a African-American college English professor, a very smart man and someone whose opinion I highly valued and usually agreed with on most literature issues, but he said he was insulted by Huck Finn. And he was a college professor. He wasn't so offended by the N-word but by what he considered the simple characterization of Jim, having him scared over ghosts and believing in supersttions. He felt that Jim was portrayed as a simpleton, being led around by a little white boy. So you see different groups will see things completely different sometimes. That's why I advocate community participation.

----------


## SleepyWitch

sorry, should have used the international spelling. it's Jud Suess (not Sub).. the weird letter that looks like a "b" is the equivalent of a double "s"




> nope, of course not. every federal state has a curriculum that is binding for all the schools in that state.





> So I don't understand what's the difference. That news article called it banning, probably to be sensational.


aaah, now I know why we're talking at crosspurposes! when you say curriculum, you mean a plan that states exactly which books pupils should read (and which they are not to read)??
our curriculum is different, it states which topics should be treated (e.g. which periods in Literature) but it doesn't say which books have to be read, e.g. it will say "English, year 12: one novel of the 19/20/21th century, one contemporary play, short stories (it doesn't even say how many), poems.". the only exception in specificity is "one play by Shakespeare"
which novel, play, short stories and poems a particular class will read is for the teacher to decide/ the pupils to vote on.
of course, by "novel" the curriculum doesn't mean Stephen King.





> That's great. I think our schools don't push students in literature enough. But still I read The Great Gatsby and Shakespeare at that age.


ah, well,... before year ten, we mostly read "educational" young-adults books about the horrors of drugs, racism, religious cults.. most of them were well-written and even won prizes, but I wouldn't call them literature..

heehee, that was an interesting discussion. when i have to study the U.S. school system for my graduation exams, I'll talk to litnetters, it's much more informative than our text books

*edit*: I should add for clarification that we have 3 different types of secondary school in Bavaria (it's a selective system, whereas highschools are like comprehensives in the UK: everyone goes on to the same type of school after primary school,right?). the curriculum I referred to is the one for the most "academic" of these three types. I don't know what the other two types do in terms of teaching lit.. i guess they do the same, only less of it.
heehee, if you want to criticise German schools for ahange, aim for the selective system and you'll be right on target. it's more ridiculous and unfair than any book-banning in the U.S. could ever be.

----------


## Virgil

Great discussion Sleepy. Yes, that's what I meant by curriculum. (Not sure if I'm spelling that right.  :Wink:  ) Too bad none of the teachers got in on this conversation. I bet they could explain better than me.

----------


## SleepyWitch

> Great discussion Sleepy. Yes, that's what I meant by curriculum. (Not sure if I'm spelling that right.  ) Too bad none of the teachers got in on this conversation. I bet they could explain better than me.


heehee, give them some more time  :Smile:  probably they're busy either studying the curriculum for the next school year or finding ways around it  :Smile:

----------


## aabbcc

What. An. Idiocy.

I apologise for harsh words, but that is the only way I can put into words my feeling towards such "smart" ideas. 
Since when does literature, _art_, has to indulge the "standards" of the masses (and let us not forget that those same masses do not read a laudable lot of things, nor have a particularly laudable variety of their choices, and in most cases they do not even read the works of the Western canon and thus are inexperienced in the field), for what do those know about _literature_? Hobby reading of popular novels is one thing, literature class is another thing. If you are not literature expert, why telling somebody who _is_ what they should teach your children? They certainly know it better than you.

This is a list of the typical school readings in average Croatian gymnasium (general education high school for students aged 14(15)-18(19)), taken off the site of the Zagreb's libraries. Even disregarding works of national literature whose titles do not mean much to you, look at that list. Homer. Sophocles. Dante. Goldoni. Goethe. And the list goes on. Included the "controverse" American novel of _The Catcher in the Rye_. Please do not tell me that an absurd can happen, that Croatian teenagers are normally assigned this novel, and nobody complains about it, finds it weird, offensive, and whatnot. Not only those children (and I was one of those before I moved to another country  :Wink: ) read Salinger, they also read the canon of literature. Notice how the curriculum is made - with a couple of exceptions - to, in 4 years, familiarise student not only with specific works of literature, but also with development of European literature, and history thereof. Also, please notice the amount of compulsory works per school year. Yeah. That is what I call a _literature class_ that actually educates students about literature. Combined with a textbook on history and theory of literature, with a plethora of excerpts from works and literary criticism, and even larger lists of elective reading. That is how you create readers.
You do _not_ make a class with a couple of "politically and linguistically correct" books a year, then spend entire year analysing to the depths - depths which are sometimes insane and laughable, seeing symbol in everything - those poor couple of pieces of literary works. 

Alas, something must change in people's minds to accept it and to allow professors of literature to do their job. I really feel for those of you forced by circumstances to indulge the taste of masses and teach what is "correct". The whole scene would be laughable, had the situation not be so... tragic, actually. You are depriving your children of decent education because of such nonsense. So they will all end up reading fairy tales (oh no, wait, Vasilisa Prekrasnaya is racist because she "worked in sun but her skin remained beautiful and light"; Peter Pan is a typical drug story - he gives them a magical substance which "makes them fly"), or fables (but wait, some of them might have hidden political meaning), or... what?!
Way to go America. Way to go "the developed West". Congratulations.
The utter stupidity of those ideas of banning literature is not what shocks me. The social acceptance of those nonsense is what does.

----------


## SleepyWitch

well said, nastija (hehe, I hope calling Anastasijas Nastija is not a purely Russian thing and you will hate me forever for mixing up different Slavic cultures)
wow, that's lots of books. I've noticed that in many eastern Europeans students have to read a lot (including summer reading, which does not exist at all here). I like this kind of curriculum a lot. 
over here, we don't have literature classes in school really,.. we've got _German_, which means a hotchpotsch mix of excerpts from different books, reading silly educational books for young adults (about how drugs are sooooooo bad, as if we didn't know), essay writing (a good thing in itself, but I think German language and literature should be separated and taught as two different subjects, so you can concentrate on them properly and don't have to switch back from one thing to another every 45 minutes) , grammar (as if we didn't know the grammar of our mother tongue)...

hehe, it's funny you call your secondary school gymnasium, too.  :Smile:

----------


## Il Penseroso

Let me intercede with my humble American opinion to say that I believe that posted by Anastasija to be absolute elitism. The reason we allow the "masses" to have a say in what we teach is because the students that proceed through our educational system become the "masses". You write with contempt towards the very product of the educational system of which you seem so proud. Obviously something is not done correctly if those "readers" are not valued to have a say themselves in what is appropriate to teach.

That being said, I also would like to say that I do believe the American system to do too much coddling of our children. Most students are eighteen upon graduation, the same age we allow them training to go to war. How can someone who has not been taught to deal with the word nigger be expected to face the absurdity of war?

----------


## motherhubbard

Thank you for posting Il Penseroso. I appreciat your insight.

----------


## firefangled

This is an excellent post, MH. We ran into this situation with my daughter's high school last year.

I realize I am coming in quite late on this thread, but last year in my daughter's school there was a question whether to teach To Kill A Mockingbird, which we had encouraged her to read the summer before. I was amazed at the thought of forbidding such an amazing book to be taught when she told us.

I think the controvesial subject matter in many books chosen for highschool readiing list just have content that mirrors real life, as you say. It's up to the teacher, I think to handle what reactions might be triggered by some of the language in Huck Finn or situations in Catcher in the Rye. Some parental reactions could be assuaged by a well written note to them at the beginning of the school year explaining how the content would be handled.

You are correct in your later post, I think, that by the last two years of high school our sons and daughters are no longer children, especially in these times. They need to be prepared on how to think about contoversial topics and how to live in a world where they are not just a story.

My sister was a teacher and was very idealistic, something I do not believe to be a fault in anyone, she was driven out by the way she had to teach. I think teaching is the most important profession - second to none! 

I believe the teaching of so-called controversial subjects must be handled through a closer relationship between the school, teachers and parents. I also think there are books that are not appropriate for high school simply because they have no redeemable value within the objective of secondary education or they exceed a 17-18 year old's processing skills.

----------


## motherhubbard

Thank you Firefangled. That was such a wonderful and well thought out response.

----------


## Redzeppelin

> I am posting a question for a class I am taking. I would appreciate any ideas or advice.
> 
> Many of the books with an appropriately challenging reading level for high school students contain controversial subject matter. Im concerned that some students and parents may object to the more mature content found in many well known classics. In fact, many classics are banned by high schools. How does one decide what to assign?


"Controversial" does not necessarily mean "inappropriate." The term means that the book contains issues that create "controversies" in that they invite multiple interpretations/perspectives, some of which that may offend some of the other views involved in assessing the work. The presence of sex or violence definitely makes a book "controversial," but the appropriateness of the book has to rest upon the ultimate message the book sends. More than once in these forums I have suggested that literature (and to a degree, all art) should speak the Truth. The truth of _Huckleberry Finn_ outweighs the social discomfort of having to read the repetition of the "n-word" (among other offenses commited by Twain); the truth of _Macbeth_ outweighs the violence of killing women and children, or witchcraft and oceans of blood. That said, I do think there comes a point where truth can be trumped by the nature of your audience. In other words, what is the "cost" of exposing the mind to such truths? For example, there is truth to be seen in movies shot of the atrocities in WWII concentration camps - but do we show that to 7th graders? We should definitely show such things to college students and HS upper classmen; the same is true of books - how much of the reader's innocence to you take in exchange for the truth the book has to offer?

I don't shy away from teaching "controversial" books - but I do think that it is irresponsible to disregard the "cost" of teaching a certain book to a certain audience.

----------


## aabbcc

> Let me intercede with my humble American opinion to say that I believe that posted by Anastasija to be absolute elitism.


Please read carefully my post again and perhaps you manage to see it in a different light. I fail to see any track of open elitism in my post, rather, all I wrote I find to be rather objective claims.




> The reason we allow the "masses" to have a say in what we teach is because the students that proceed through our educational system become the "masses".


That is correct, however, I disagree with that "logic" of doing things.
My friend, I was not speaking with any contempt you accuse me of of masses; what I stated was that people who are not experts in the field (i.e. the usual "mass" of people, by "mass" I meant your average citizen of your country who is not an educational expert nor expert for all the fields taught at school) should not have an equal say on what goes to standard curriculum of schools. That should be up to experts.

I do not know about you, but as a _student_ (I am 17 years old), I would certainly prefer my Biology curriculum to be created by _scientists_, not by religious or "politically correct" organisations, or parents of my school colleagues _who know less about Biology than I do_. I do not see why History of Art, or Literature, should be any different in that matter. I want my Literature curriculum to be created by comparatists of literature and by people with _high formal education in the field_ rather than by my friends' parents - who might have "cooler" or more contemporary choices, but will their choices present literature as academic field to me, if they are not experts? Somehow I doubt it...
If I were a parent I would probably have even higher demands upon people who create curriculum for my child, and their formal education in that which they plan to be taught to my child.




> You write with contempt towards the very product of the educational system of which you seem so proud.


No, I do not. I simply stated that "masses" do not have education and qualifications needed to do a thing as creating academic curriculum, what is fundamentally wrong about that claim? And where is the contempt involved?
As I said, read my post instead of juding from general impression. I may be young, but trust me that I think very thoroughly about every claim I make (especially in foreign language).

I was stating the _facts_. The _facts_ are that your average reader is _not_ qualified to make a literature curriculum, that your average reader does not have a theoretical and historical knowledge of world literature to create it, and that schools should strive to teach things _in perspective_ rather than teaching a couple of isolated facts (e.g. approaching history, literature, art and music chronologically, and making connections between them, rather than selecting few works of literature and study them without having fundamental basis to build on, i.e. the "classics" - if you want me to use that word - and the basics of literary theory, history and criticism).

I will use Biology again as example of my most "beloved" subject. Though I would adore if I could kick out of curriculum all those, for me, genuinely boring things - ecology, zoology, botanics, physiology of human and plants, for example - and focus on those very few things I find interesting in the whole curriculum - as genetics, basics of molecular biology, or citology - and broaden them, I would never dare of suggesting it because I am not expert in Biology. People who made my Biology curriculum _are_, and probably have damn good reasons for putting _all_ of that in that curriculum, precisely in those years when it is put (it is certainly not accidental that citology is studied in 5th grade, human physiology in 8th, and molecular biology in 12th, for example... for it would be somehow ridiculous if it was the contrary), in ratio it is combined, etc...
Certainly, I _can_ have my say, but I cannot expect it to have the same "weight" as the say of one biologist from insitute. Starting with the fact that he actually knows what is Biology as a field and what it consists of, whilst I have typical school-ish 8 years of it, on one very middle/high school level.
Our opinions cannot even be compared.

Why would it be any different when it comes to Literature as a field?




> Obviously something is not done correctly if those "readers" are not valued to have a say themselves in what is appropriate to teach.


We are valued, and we can have our say; but, as I nicely explained above, our say can never be the say of comparatist of literature (actually, mine _will_ be as I intend to study Literature in university, but that is one another discussion  :FRlol:  ), because we do not have academic competence in the field, and something formal as school curriculum must be made by somebody who _has got_. Otherwise the entire schooling would be one bad joke, would it not?

What is appropriate to teach? 
Before everything else, academic fundaments of the discipline you are teaching. Just as those exist in Biology or Mathematics (you are probably not going to do things such as trigonometry, or group theory, prior to high school, right? Because in order to access it, some basics must be got down), those exist in Art and Literature as well. Are you going to show your students Dali's works and ask them to analyse them before you teach them the historical development of art to a point of Dali, the movements in the history of art, and before you make sure they got down the basic theoretical points in art, and art criticism? Probably not. Just as you are not going to speak of Beethoven and his innovations in music before you have got down the classical period, and enough musical theory for your students - especially those who do not deal with music and who just take it as general education subject - to recognise and _hear_ those innovations. See my point? 
All has continuity and its place in curriculum. Experts are the one to create it to be such.

Then why, _why_, does everybody make Literature exception? And desires to teach children contemporary works and movements without having done basic history and theory of literature first?
How can students who have not read Dostoevsky understand half of the European literature after him? And how are you going to give Dostoevsky in the first place to students who know nothing of realism? And how are you going to give works of realism to those who have not prior to it studied romanticism? _That_ is my point. In order to have academic fundaments in literature, it takes a bit more than choosing a couple of "politically and linguistically correct" books a year to teach. Literature is a scholarly discipline, and should be approached as such when it is a subject in schools, rather than as some poor joke in which children end up reading things they essentially do not view in _context_ - because they lack context in history, history of literature and of art, etc.

And that - if we are to transcend our discussion to something which is essentially wrong about many "western"-type educational systems - is the main reason of why are kids today lean towards that which back in Croatia we used to call "fah idioti", or specialists for a specific area ignorant of context.
So you are going to have children who will know by heart those few pieces of literature you are going to force them to study to details each year, and they will know everything about those few pieces, but will not be able to contextualise them on the level of _ideas_ in literature, history or philosophy, because they will be deprived of context - other than bits of context taken out of context for that purpose - because they did not have enough experience in those fields. You are going to have WWII specialists ignorant of classical antiquity (which is - needless to preach anyone on that - basics of Western civilisation...), and thus ignorant of one entire philosophical dimension of history, and...

You know, I really do not feel like going on. I might end up in another one of those "Why I hate the concept of modern western education" discussions which I have been having over the years with too many people (educational experts included). The bottomline is, I believe that your Literature curriculums, bad as I view them to be, perfectly match the bad general education system I believe you have got as a nation. So it basically fits in it. You cannot change it without changing the system. F**k it, eh. We will just have to agree to disagree. Message me if you want to chat about it one on one, as I really do not feel like polluting the thread with this off-topic.

(Oh, and a side whisper - read a few paragraphs above carefully, and notice the origin of "Americans are stupid" stereotype - which is an utter idiocy as any stereotype, but here you can see what it is based on, and why it is present in countries with drastically different philosophies behind their educational systems. Not on quantity of knowledge or expertise, but on context. Fah-idiot culture, that is, would be what is perceived as "stupid" here no matter how great expert you are... But that is off-topic of off-topic...  :Biggrin: )




> That being said, I also would like to say that I do believe the American system to do too much coddling of our children. Most students are eighteen upon graduation, the same age we allow them training to go to war. How can someone who has not been taught to deal with the word nigger be expected to face the absurdity of war?


How has somebody who has not studied philosophy, world history and art do so?

What you are - not you as individual, but you as society - doing is arguing over nuances, whilst closing your eyes on the essence of the problem.
Creationism vs. evolution, or profanity in novels, are _nuances_.
The essence of the problem is that you haven't got a _system_ out of your educational "system" at all, but rather chaotic mess which does not equipen the student with context and perspective needed, but with bits of knowledge from various fields. That is dangerous way of doing things.

----------


## aswelch

Anastasija,

I have been doing some research to play devils advocate here. I am not saying that I completly disagree with your view on American school systems. I am going to be spending my life working with these issues that you have brought up. I think some things that haven't been discussed here are the Standards that guide our National Curriculum. If you go to http://www.doe.state.in.us/standards/welcome2.html You will see the standards of all grades for Indiana. There are national standards as well but they are very generalized and focus more on teacher practices than on specific things that should be taught. I think this will give you a better perspective on how we are teaching our children. 

There is also a list of books on this website http://www.doe.state.in.us/standards/readinglist.html that are recommended to be read in Indiana. They are also suppose to stand as exemplars for the quality of literature that is to be taught at these grade levels. 

You may find the regulation of our education to be strange, but the United States is in an era of Education overhaul. Things are changing and fast. We are regualting education in this extreme to see if the changes we are making are actually helping. 

I do agree with some of your arguments. However, I do think that alot of your arguments are biased with the "stupid American" thought process. For this reason you lose credibility in my eyes. All I hear in my culture classes is that Americans are seen as uppity, stupid, uncultured, and think of themselves are superior to other cultures. The more time I spend on this website the more I see that other cultures think of themselves as much more superior to us. I think this comes from the longer histories of these countries. They seem more cultured than us because they have had a longer time to develop a culture than we have. Some of them date back to antiquity. We can never hope to attain this kind of ancient history and culture. You are stereotyping us. Americans everywhere look up to the cultures of Europe and beyond. I think if some people could get past our politics and the face of George Bush they could find an America that still idealizes Europe. I have spent more time on Brit Lit, World Lit, a whole class on Shakespeare, and many world culture classes, than I will ever spend on American studies (one american history class, 2 american lit classes.) I hope you take a little time to look at the things we are doing with our educational system. I don't think this thread has done it justice yet.

----------


## jon1jt

> I am posting a question for a class I am taking. I would appreciate any ideas or advice.
> 
> Many of the books with an appropriately challenging reading level for high school students contain controversial subject matter. Im concerned that some students and parents may object to the more mature content found in many well known classics. In fact, many classics are banned by high schools. How does one decide what to assign?


i'm surprised there's not a censor board at your school (i.e. principal/chair) who decide. 

in public schools the deciding is done for teachers according to the almighty state curriculum standards. public school teachers are cogs in a wheel.

----------


## Beverly S

What about Jane Eyre by Charlotte Bronte? That's a great classic (happens to be my favorite!)

----------


## blazeofglory

How about reading D. H. Lawrence? His works are masterpieces, and they are all time-classics. Every time I find his books great sources of ideas and inspirations. Not only his novels, in which he had indeed attained perfection, but also in poetries. He is so immersed in his writing, of course, life got reflected by them . 

I find his books really appealing and touching, but never tiring. 

Dostoevsky is another favorite. His works were really magnum opus. They were indeed some sources of ideas. 

It is really hard to choose ones from others. Kafka is really another writer who is really engaging. The book that remain never get tired of reading is the Metamorphosis. Every time I find it really different. 

Bu if one seeks for style or form it is indeed James Joyce, and of course his Ulysses. This book is matchless, tour de force and I found no book to compare it with notwithstanding the fact that it is really hard to understand it.

----------

