High School

[AlfredtheGreat]

After reading some posts about classics that were required reading for people in school (Dickens, Melville, Salinger). I feel a little left out maybe it's the fault of a poorly organized California education system but this is a list of the books I have been required to read in High School.

Romeo and Juliet
A Separate Peace
Tuesdays With Morrie
Fast Food Nation
Into the Wild

So what do you think, is that just right or is that hardly the right selection of books to warrant the Title 'English' class.

[togre]

1. Yeah that's a pretty anemic list. Both in total length and overall quality. And...

2. I can glimpse some of the agenda they seem to be pushing too, which isn't really the job of an English class. However...

3. I don't think any high school English class offered to the general student population can have a book list meaty enough and long enough. I don't mean to belittling high schoolers, but my own experience was that I grew a lot in my tastes, comprehension and overall appreciation since high school. (I was known to belittle Shakespeare, Twain and Hemingway as the 3 greatest blights on the world--a view I have all but completely retracted.) The age of the students, their lack of life experience, the fact that some of them will never want to understand literature and the basic time constraints make covering all the books that need to be read impossible. Therefore...

4. A truly great English class will not try to read everything that need reading. Instead it will seek to instill the skills necessary to read good literature on one's own, cultivate the desire to read at a high level and expose students to the various major directions that literature has taken.

[blackbird_9]

The California education system makes me want to roll around on rusty nails and stick my face in a hot pan of coals... On another note ummmm... I can't honestly remember everything we read. In advanced english in 10th grade, we got through a good 60-70% of the Norton Anth of Am Lit. 11th grade AP..... uhhh, I know we read Scarlet Letter. We read some other book I think, but I would say 75% of the class was spent on writing. 12th grade, my teacher was a space cadet so I never went to class. That was all 7 years ago though. I'm sure there was more. It's just hard to remember because I was an active reader then too so I can't separate what was school and what was my own reading.

[andy13]

Yes, that's a rather short and not entirely great list of books for English class. It seems like they're trying to install many non-fiction books into the curriculum. Hopefully this list is only for one year, but I'm not sure. I once had a teacher who would make us read the required 7-10 books, but the teacher would also make us read at least 500 pages of books that we chose to read per quarter so that we would benefit from reading something that we would actually enjoy reading. I don't go to school in California, so I didn't know how much the system there is screwed up, but where I go to school they're also prescribing overused books (Romeo and Juliet) and then many more modern books, completely bypassing the free for Kindle stage yet not written in Old English. I think that the oldest book (excluding Shakespeare) that I've ever read for school was Master Harold and the Boys (I've never had to read Steinbeck for school).

If it's any consolation to you, however, at least know that (from what I can see), your school's type of book list is becoming a trend.

[AlfredtheGreat]

Yeah, thats for 4 years of high school.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

I, too, didn't get to read a lot of staples that many read in HS. We did read Lord of the Flies, Romeo and Juliet, Julius Ceasar, and To Kill a Mockingbird, and probably more that I can't remember. We never read The Scarlet Letter, The Great Gatsby, or any Dickens. I guess we were down the middle of the road, which is good. I don't think it's a good idea to stick solely to classics in a high school curriculum.

I'm curious, though, was that all you read, or just some of the "classics," or more popular works you read? If that's all you read, that's a true shame. Plus, you did read short stories and poetry, right?



3. I don't think any high school English class offered to the general student population can have a book list meaty enough and long enough. I don't mean to belittling high schoolers, but my own experience was that I grew a lot in my tastes, comprehension and overall appreciation since high school. (I was known to belittle Shakespeare, Twain and Hemingway as the 3 greatest blights on the world--a view I have all but completely retracted.) The age of the students, their lack of life experience, the fact that some of them will never want to understand literature and the basic time constraints make covering all the books that need to be read impossible. Therefore...

I'm going to have to disagree. I think many underestimate high schoolers, and really think they need to be challenged more. I do agree that there isn't enough time to read all the material that should (or need) be read, though, especially since everyone's definition of essential literature is different. That doesn't mean a reading list can't be long or meaty enough.

When I taught literature, it was mostly short stories, and almost completely discussion based. Yes, they had to answer questions after the reading, but this was mostly just a guide to get them thinking about the material. All the tests I gave were full written--no multiple choice. Some of the other English teachers were not only surprised by the depth of the questions they answered, but the skill at which they answered them. I pretty much ended up teaching a honors-level English class to regular-track students, and you know what? They did excellent, because I knew they could do it.

Not enough of this happens.



4. A truly great English class will not try to read everything that need reading. Instead it will seek to instill the skills necessary to read good literature on one's own, cultivate the desire to read at a high level and expose students to the various major directions that literature has taken.

Paradoxically enough, I agree with this, also. I agree with it completely, actually. Plus, I'm speaking as someone who just finished student teaching Freshmen and Sophomore English. While a teacher can cram in all the books possible, this really is a counterproductive way to teach literature. Literature needs to be read and thought about, and then discussed (something, unfortunately, too many English teachers refuse to do, or do a pseudo-discussion that is barely more productive than handing out packets).

[AlfredtheGreat]

Thinking thats all I can remember reading for assignments. But we read one Faulkner short story.

[faithosaurus]

Hmm, a rather short list. Through out my high school career (I'm a senior now) we've read the following:

To Kill A Mockingbird
Romeo and Juliet
The Great Gatsby
The Scarlet Letter
Lord of the Flies
Grapes of Wrath
Julius Caesar
The Tempest
The Stranger
1984 (next in line for me)

[AlfredtheGreat]

That's a great list by comparison.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Hmm, a rather short list. Through out my high school career (I'm a senior now) we've read the following:

To Kill A Mockingbird
Romeo and Juliet
The Great Gatsby
The Scarlet Letter
Lord of the Flies
Grapes of Wrath
Julius Caesar
The Tempest
The Stranger
1984 (next in line for me)

Have you read anything contemporary? Or, at least something published post 1980? And, have you read any short stories/poetry?

[faithosaurus]

Have you read anything contemporary? Or, at least something published post 1980? And, have you read any short stories/poetry?

Yes, I just didn't put it in the list because I can't remember all the names. We've read a multitude of short stories, poems, and recent articles.

[Hyacinthine]

In my first semester of high school (I was homeschooled after that), we read:

The Autobiography of Miss Jane Pittman
The Three Musketeers
Cold Sassy Tree
Romeo and Juliet

I don't remember which poems, short stories, or essays we read.

[Wilde woman]

Just curious. Are you guys in regular, honors, or AP level English? I did AP in high school, and remember reading a great deal more than the samples you guys listed here. Of course, I didn't go to school in California, but I've taught there and, yes, it is pretty pathetic.

[Hyacinthine]

In my first/only semester of high school for which I listed the reading above, it was an honors class.

[AlfredtheGreat]

Regular. "College-Prep"

[Big Dante]

In High school being in Australia we read many Australian novels and in both Grade 9 and 10 we did a unit on Shakespeare which included Romeo and Juliet along with Macbeth. Other than this we did not read any well known classics.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Just curious. Are you guys in regular, honors, or AP level English? I did AP in high school, and remember reading a great deal more than the samples you guys listed here. Of course, I didn't go to school in California, but I've taught there and, yes, it is pretty pathetic.

In my humble opinion, this is something wrong with AP classes. The idea that reading more equals learning more is fallacious. AP classes should read the same amount as regular track classes, but look at the texts deeper. Reading as much as possible as fast as possible isn't "advanced," it's just faster, which usually isn't better.

[Wilde woman]

In my humble opinion, this is something wrong with AP classes. The idea that reading more equals learning more is fallacious. AP classes should read the same amount as regular track classes, but look at the texts deeper. Reading as much as possible as fast as possible isn't "advanced," it's just faster, which usually isn't better.

In defense of AP classes, they do more writing, which tends to force students to read more critically. I remember having to do many more timed writings and research papers on certain books or poems than the regulars or honors students, and it certainly made me a better reader.

On the other hand, I agree with you. In my senior AP class, we blew through a number of the Western classics (Beowulf, the Aeneid, the Inferno, Paradise Lost) with very little discussion of them, and I left high school hating a good number of them (esp. Milton). But having been exposed to them led me to revisit them later in life, and my opinions have been almost totally reversed.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Oh, I definitely think more is learned in AP classes. I just think a lot more could be learned if there was a different approach. Especially with classics. You can't blow through works like the ones you listed. You can with some contemporary works, but not centuries old epic poetry. If you're going to do Milton, do it right and devote enough time to it so students understand it. If this takes too much time, don't do it at all. That's the way I see it, at least. And, of course, the curriculum doesn't always give you a choice.

It's funny, because students take college prep classes when those classes are nothing like what an actual college class is.

[Hyacinthine]

It's funny, because students take college prep classes when those classes are nothing like what an actual college class is.

We've blown through books a lot in several of the college classes I've taken. I can't really compare them to high school classes though since I was barely in high school.