Is literature education a real necessity to teach in public schools?

[LitNetIsGreat]

Yes it has a lot to do with Britain being and isolated country in comparison to most other countries in Europe. I don't think most Brits feel European at all, which has a knocking-on effect when it comes to learning other languages.

As for grammar, long ago the government decided that studying grammar is all but a waste of time in the majority of schools, and consequently very little of it is studied at all. As you say this makes it even more difficult to pick up other languages, especially as they are not compulsory study in the majority of cases, as well as impacting on the study of English itself.

[joebob]

It makes little difference. The kids that like to read will, the ones that don't, won't.

The only thing that should be taught in schools are things that they are able to shove down the throats of students with ease; everything else is just a waste of time.

so that means little to none of
art, music, literature, and gym (that's all I can think of right now).

To become skilled in any of those area you need a passion, a love, for the subject. All school does is crush whatever chance a child might have at adoring one of those.

[Drkshadow03]

It makes little difference. The kids that like to read will, the ones that don't, won't.

The only thing that should be taught in schools are things that they are able to shove down the throats of students with ease; everything else is just a waste of time.

so that means little to none of
art, music, literature, and gym (that's all I can think of right now).

To become skilled in any of those area you need a passion, a love, for the subject. All school does is crush whatever chance a child might have at adoring one of those.

Not true. I wasn't much of a reader when I was younger and that changed around the end of high school and beginning of college. Oh, don't get me wrong, I read books when I was little, but I was much more interested in my video games. That's why I always feel like I'm playing catch-up with my literary reading, even though, I have two degrees in the subject.

Even your premise that there should be little to none of these subjects is flawed. Music is rarely Classical Music Appreciation or Music History, neither is art. Music usually takes the form of chorus or orchestra or band. By high school, music and art are no longer mandatory, but many people take these classes for fun as electives (chorus, band, etc.).

I know more kids who hate math than they do literature or art or music. It's not easy to shove down their throats as you put it. Should we get rid of math as well? Ditto science and history. Bye, bye, science and history? Exactly what would be taught in schools then?

Subjects should not be jettisoned because some kids lack a passion for them and find them difficult.

[Mariamosis]

Yeah, but there are a lot of morons around, so such opinions don't surprise me. Just ignore him. I'm sure that there are people around who would want to replace literature with burger flipping or till operating classes; we live in that sort of world.

Kiki, that is interesting, though unsurprising, about the Belgian educational system regarding languages especially. England is so behind when it comes to languages, it's quite embarrassing, damn country.

That is true, he most likely would want to teach burger flipping.

The US is extremely behind in languages as well. Spanish could be considered the second language in the southeast, however the opinions of the American people typically are: "If they come here let them learn our language." (and usually say it with built up hostility) Although it is now getting to the point where it is difficult to maintain certain jobs without knowing the language, yet southerners still refuse.

We teach it in school, yet it is viewed as a joke. Very few people come out of high school with a grasp of any other language but english. (and not a good grasp of that)

[Drkshadow03]

That is true, he most likely would want to teach burger flipping.

The US is extremely behind in languages as well. Spanish could be considered the second language in the southeast, however the opinions of the American people typically are: "If they come here let them learn our language." (and usually say it with built up hostility) Although it is now getting to the point where it is difficult to maintain certain jobs without knowing the language, yet southerners still refuse.

We teach it in school, yet it is viewed as a joke. Very few people come out of high school with a grasp of any other language but english. (and not a good grasp of that)

Because it should start earlier. Languages usually begin in Middle School/Junior High. We should start around 3rd or 4th grade, I think.

[kiki1982]

That is not necessarily true. In the Southern part of Belgium, some school teach Dutch from Kindergarten but they keep a too low level. The result is that pupils stay forever on that low level and never learn to speak the language properly.

Starting late does not really signify, it is how well it is taught.

[isidro]

Of course literature should be compulsory! I understand thoroughly arguments to the contrary but I fear that is where American pedagogy is really quite misguided. One does not learn best by studying each specified subject in its respective cubbyhole but as a culmination of all of them together. How can one understand history if one does not understand the people who made it, and literature certainly tends toward that end. As a certified English teacher, I do not believe that literature can or should be taught alone but alongside history and other humanities and surely anyone who has read Moby Dick must accept that a novel carries with it much information in it of science, humanities, and the like in a much more palatable form. By combining the disciplines one can make physics, chemistry, mythology or anything else far more easily understood by placing it in the setting of a novel. And if you read Ford's The Good Soldier you must agree that literature teaches analytical skills and psychology without taking specified time from precious other subjects to do it. Perhaps it is not that literature is overused, but wrongly used.

Great question and argument, though! Bravo!

[Mariamosis]

Because it should start earlier. Languages usually begin in Middle School/Junior High. We should start around 3rd or 4th grade, I think.

This is true, however, I was taught Spanish beginning in elementary school and still was unable to say anything more than 'hello' and 'sit down' in the language.

I have to agree with kiki1982 in that it depends how well it is taught and how the culture views the teaching of it.

[LitNetIsGreat]

My French is improving bit by bit thanks to Michel Thomas. I would recommend his courses (available to learn French, Spanish and German) as offering something a little different from the standard fair. His method of breaking down the language into small parts and letting the learner think it out seems to suit me better than the usual scenarios, whereby you learn stock phrases set around corny incidents. I would recommend them for sure.

I just got the lot from the library, even though it has taken a while for them all to arrive, it is better than paying around £150 for the whole set. So, I think I am going to be busy with these for a while.

Has anyone else used Michel Thomas with success?

[JBI]

My French is improving bit by bit thanks to Michel Thomas. I would recommend his courses (available to learn French, Spanish and German) as offering something a little different from the standard fair. His method of breaking down the language into small parts and letting the learner think it out seems to suit me better than the usual scenarios, whereby you learn stock phrases set around corny incidents. I would recommend them for sure.

I just got the lot from the library, even though it has taken a while for them all to arrive, it is better than paying around £150 for the whole set. So, I think I am going to be busy with these for a while.

Has anyone else used Michel Thomas with success?

Heh, I find his teaching terrible - his Italian was actually pitiful since, although he gets you basics quickly, he really screws people up, by making the parative "ne" (equiv in French as "en") mean "some" as apposed to "a part of", and then misusing it within that context, to make ne ho comprato I bought some, and j'en ai acheté into "I bought some", which makes sense in context, but completely misses the point.

His most interesting property is his, I guess, teaching of morphology between related languages - but when applied to the long scale, it really butchers the nuance - especially since it is essentially purely oral, which means for a language like French, you miss most of the stuff (the accents, spelling, and grammar, essentially).

Strangely enough, one can find much better resources online (if one knows where to go) - Michel is good for a quick 5-hour intro, but anything beyond that - kind of dreadful, especially at the higher level recordings.



In all honesty, I think education outside of a classroom for languages doesn't work to well - once one gets a foundation, it is different, but really, nothing compares to a living person. In that sense, I don't think elementary and high school language acquisition is very good - university teaching is certainly a lot better (four years of high school is like the equivalent to one year of university) and really functions better - simply because, when a professor calls something a "direct object pronoun", you don't spend a full hour going around having every single person in the class ask what that is - you either know it, or, if you want to do well, make yourself know it - also, I think the fact that the textbooks are being paid for, in a sad sort of way increases their quality - although they are always expensive, the actual quality of the text, being that they change the texts every other year or so, is far better than the textbooks they use (well, at least in French) in high schools.


Still, when it comes down to it, I regret not really taking French in high school - I've already caught up to where I should have been, had I taken it, but there is still that idea that I wasted time and money - but who knows.


As for cultural determinance - Canada is an officially bilingual country, but I would argue, besides a slight portion of anglophone Quebec citizens, and people living in New Brunswick, very few people are fluent in both languages - of course, the bulk of the population is probably bilingual, to an extent - or at least a sizable portion of it, but the vast range of languages - anything from Haitian Creole to Anishinaabemowin - doesn't really create a unity or recognizance a sort of national bilingualism.

Though, when it comes down to it, it doesn't matter - language acquisition is, from my experience, only successful if somebody really wants to learn it - in high school, I doubt that is the case for most people, and in elementary school, other than some songs, I doubt much will come out of people - generally if you had all the language teaching as extracurricular, you would probably do better, as the parents would push the children more, rather than relying on the system - but that is just a guess of mine, it will never be tested.

[Drkshadow03]

This is true, however, I was taught Spanish beginning in elementary school and still was unable to say anything more than 'hello' and 'sit down' in the language.

I have to agree with kiki1982 in that it depends how well it is taught and how the culture views the teaching of it.

Of course, I'm not saying all that is necessary is to start early and let's only hire crappy teachers. But I think you'll find more students are tuned into their education when they are younger. Much more interested in their learning, until around the time middle school (6-7 grade) hits. Then they get distracted with the opposite sex, popularity, and learning isn't as socially acceptable anymore.

[LitNetIsGreat]

Heh, I find his teaching terrible - his Italian was actually pitiful since, although he gets you basics quickly, he really screws people up, by making the parative "ne" (equiv in French as "en") mean "some" as apposed to "a part of", and then misusing it within that context, to make ne ho comprato I bought some, and j'en ai acheté into "I bought some", which makes sense in context, but completely misses the point.

His most interesting property is his, I guess, teaching of morphology between related languages - but when applied to the long scale, it really butchers the nuance - especially since it is essentially purely oral, which means for a language like French, you miss most of the stuff (the accents, spelling, and grammar, essentially).

Strangely enough, one can find much better resources online (if one knows where to go) - Michel is good for a quick 5-hour intro, but anything beyond that - kind of dreadful, especially at the higher level recordings.

Yes it is mostly oral, although he does keep throwing in little bits of grammar and spelling, so it is not all that bad. I intend to finish off the first 8 hour course ('bout halfway through now) and then I have his 5 hour advanced course, as well as the review and the language builder, which are a couple of hours each I think.

He does seem to work for me though, I really can't work with the "Gerald is on a business trip to France and doesn't speak the language, let's learn with him" sort of thing. How good Michel's stuff is in reality, I don't know, but I at least feel that I am getting somewhere, even if I have to build on it to a greater degree later - it seems to work as a starter anyway. Michel claims that his courses give a practical and workable knowledge of the language, which I would be happy with at stage one.

Fortunately I do know a few French speakers at work, so I'm sure that they would be willing to help me along the way too. It's true I think that you can't really beat proper interaction.

I also have the first course in Italian and I have listened to the first disk, but I'm putting that aside for now to concentrate on French.

[mortalterror]

Can't say I've found a use for all that Physics and Calculus I took.

[JBI]

Yes it is mostly oral, although he does keep throwing in little bits of grammar and spelling, so it is not all that bad. I intend to finish off the first 8 hour course ('bout halfway through now) and then I have his 5 hour advanced course, as well as the review and the language builder, which are a couple of hours each I think.

He does seem to work for me though, I really can't work with the "Gerald is on a business trip to France and doesn't speak the language, let's learn with him" sort of thing. How good Michel's stuff is in reality, I don't know, but I at least feel that I am getting somewhere, even if I have to build on it to a greater degree later - it seems to work as a starter anyway. Michel claims that his courses give a practical and workable knowledge of the language, which I would be happy with at stage one.

Fortunately I do know a few French speakers at work, so I'm sure that they would be willing to help me along the way too. It's true I think that you can't really beat proper interaction.

I also have the first course in Italian and I have listened to the first disk, but I'm putting that aside for now to concentrate on French.

I dunno - I learn best from text-books with audio CDs - there are some fantastically put together ones with interesting vocabulary and cultural information, though they tend to be on the pricier side of things (new, for like 130$ or so). Generally, for such a grammar savvy language like French, I feel a grammar book is really essential - the whole language is built on grammar, and I think the only thing Thomas will really build is a sort of confidence, which will let people go out and embarrass themselves - the actual ability to speak and understand French though, comes from intensive memorization of vocabulary, and proper introduction to grammar - something which audio cannot really give properly.

[LitNetIsGreat]

Yes I see, I'll get myself a grammar based text book. Do you have any particular recommendations or any useful websites, though I suppose they are pretty much all the same? Of course I am reading a little French alongside Mr Thomas too. I do wonder though if he is really as bad as you make out, as I say he does throw in a little grammar and such as he goes on.