Narratives of Negativity: When they obscure the positive
Fake Apologies, Cowards, and Nothing Burgers

When People Fake Their Credentials to Teach English, Life Gets Messy

 

            I still can’t figure out what the novel has done to deserve banishment from my school district. Maybe it overburdened the other English teachers with its depth and complexity, its characterizations and shifting perspectives. The flashbacks and foreshadows, the genres and vocabulary, the sometimes inverted syntax and literary expressions, certainly the bizarre themes, confusing allusions to other novels and essays, poems and events, the profundity of streams of consciousness, all of these excursions into intellectualism and philosophy tangle into a cavalcade of high expectations, and no one wants high expectations because that means you have to work extremely hard and maybe make a couple of mistakes.

            This isn’t to say that someone that studies psychology or sociology can’t teach English, but it certainly helps if you have a degree in the subject; and if you don’t, then you should be willing to spend the time in a program that can help you fill in the knowledge gaps. Just because you can speak English doesn’t mean you know the subject. While the name English suggests just teaching the language, nothing more could be further from the truth. In fact, English is not about simply teaching the language at all. It is, in fact, an entire subject in its own right. Students that college major in the field of English have a wide range of opportunities: law enforcement, analysts, attorneys, teachers, copy-editors, publishers, writers, and politics. Sadly, the teaching of English has taken a real hit in some states as alternative certification programs allow people with little or no subject area knowledge go ahead and take the super-easy, low-level, examination. This means that English departments can be filled with people who carry no real knowledge of the subject and zero understanding of why certain concepts must be taught in the classroom.

            But even worse, what if someone that has read the novels and experienced the joy of analytical writing and thinking is willing to deny this to students for years on end in order to sanctify some kind of hatred for the subject and the people that teach it? That person, no matter how pretty and articulate, accomplished and convincing, is a quack and should instantly be shown the door. Quackery, in the world of high-stakes standardized testing and accountability, is not something we can tolerate. Quackery in the age of disinformation, the age of  hate in collusion with tyranny, denies our students the weaponry needed for self-protection against racism, sexism, and gender bias. Standing at a podium reading from an African American text is nothing but tokenism, especially if you deny your students an opportunity to communally read and analyze the texts of our best: Maya Angelou, Nella Larson, Zora Neal Hurston, Langston Hughes, Ralph Ellison, and Toni Morrison, to name only a few. The refusal to bend and learn, the forays into low rigor little exercises with no meaning or illumination has resulted in students who, by the tenth-grade, have never read a novel from cover to cover. These students cannot cite from anything profound, unless it’s something they pulled from the middle of a text, or “God forbid” from some “out of context” excerpt. They are not "well-read," and they are not readers.

    So what now? We have a school system filled with students that have no one to show them the point of true literacy, but we keep teaching to the test. When we go to our meetings, we only look at test prep, even if looking at test prep at that time is a gross waste of time. We keep ordering independent reading books and giving them away to students that pull little quotes from them and write in little reading logs, but we can't be critics or experts on five-thousand different versions of the teenage vampire story, or five-thousand different versions of the teen romance. Meanwhile, we overlook the literature that does fit into the classroom, the literature that students must read and should remember and discuss when they go to college. Literature (not necessarily even canonized) provides background knowledge and a window into history and the human condition. The classroom novel is a rite of passage, a way to build a classroom community of writers and thinkers. We are denying this to our students because we have no one at the top to lead us into something better. We have someone at the top that thinks the word "novel" must be printed directly into the curriculum when there is nothing in the standards that can't be taught with a novel. The idea that I need to write this, that I need to fight this fight for my students is ridiculous and absurd. 

          IMG_0828
 

 

 

 

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

LaWanda Eckert


Obviously, any kind of writing is difficult for you, so it makes me wonder why you would try creating a curriculum for a subject you don't even know anything about for an English community that you are not even really a member of.

Pretty and Articulate Quack

I can't believe you're still at it! Surely you realize that you're not changing hearts and minds. But I guess you have to keep the blog going, just in case you need to extort anybody into giving you a job at a school you so clearly hate, like you did a couple of years ago for reasons I'll never truly understand.

Take a deep breath: the novel hasn't been banished. You can support independent reading, honoring their choices and conferring with them to encourage those who are ready to read more challenging, canonical texts. I see that you think you need to have read a book to support a student in reading it. You're wrong, per usual. But OK. Y

ou can still teach a whole-group novel, since you don't want students to choose for themselves. You might not get the money to buy them each a copy (but if you go work at a public school, you totally could, so maybe you should go ahead and apply, since you're so clearly a terrible fit for your current campus), but you could require students to buy or borrow their own copies, or you could pick them something that's in the public domain, and you could alternate between whole-group and small-group reading with note-taking on a targeted meta cognitive strategy. You'd only have to print class sets of the chapters they're doing in small groups, or any chapters you want them to read for homework. (Most of them won't, but you probably don't care whether or not they all actually read and understand the book. You just want to be able to talk about one text for 6 weeks. It's less prep for you.)

Actually, you can do whatever you want in your classroom. You know you can't get fired, no matter how badly you fit with the team, no matter what bankrupt practices you want to lean on. You know that you can write a couple of blog posts in which you bite the hand that feeds you, and you'll get to keep your job because that's the only way the powers that be can shut you up. So it's really silly for you to complain. You get to do whatever you want, with no consequences or accountability. Congratulations! You're a parasite.

I think you fetishize novels because poetry is too abstract for you. And persuasive writing isn't up your alley. We can tell.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)