Everything has positives and negatives encircling it, and the English curriculum is no exception.
CHS has an English curriculum unlike most districts. It offers 22 different courses and a conferenced writing program that provides students with 10 individual writing conferences every year. Still, some students question whether the strong emphasis on literary analysis will meet their future needs.
Most teachers support the English curriculum as it is.
“For centuries, human knowledge has been recorded in books,” CHS English Department Chair John Ryan said. “We live in an age where the means of recording is being tested by superior, faster, more efficient means of storing human knowledge. Until the time comes when books are irrelevant, we will continue to read them and explore their ideas through reflection, discussion, and composition.”
English teacher Sue Teson said that fiction is often an easier way for younger students to access ideas.
“I think that regardless of how bright or insightful students are, they’re still young in terms of experience with the world,” Teson said. “Fiction gives young minds chances to explore behavior, consequence, and loss of innocence in a way that is objective. Being able to dissect a fictional character gives them insight in facing real world experiences. Fiction is a great tool for students to talk about life.”
Also, some teachers argue that English is more skill-focused and less centered on a specific body of knowledge.
“It’s different from science, math, and history,” English teacher Emily Grady said. “Instead of memorizing material, we read and make inferences. We want you to learn to think. Learning to look at the creations around you helps you to become a good thinker. Reading fiction helps you think in different ways.”
Ryan said he believes English is one of the humanities, and the English teacher’s job is to explore the human being in relation to change.
“Books offer powerful insights into who we are, whether they are explicit discussions of real calamitous events or fictional portrayals of the harms a state can inflict on an individual,” Ryan said.
English teacher Adam Dunsker offers a similar perspective.
“I hope my students will feel confident understanding a novel on several levels in 20 years,” Dunsker said.
Ryan defended the strengths of the English curriculum.
“Over the course of four years, students get an extraordinary and nationally-recognized program in writing instruction,” Ryan said. “They read a variety of literature from drama (Shakespeare, Lorraine Hansberry, and Arthur Miller) to fiction (such as ‘Lord of the Flies’) to nonfiction (like ‘Black Boy’) to poetry (‘The Odyssey’ and works of Dickinson and Whitman).”
Although most of the core curriculum is fiction, students also study nonfiction. The English department uses essay writing and reading nonfiction works to complement the fiction-based curriculum.
“I know a lot of teachers support nonfiction with independent reading assignments, or IRAs, just to give students a different spectrum of literature,” English teacher Brenda Bollinger said. “In my AP Language class, in lieu of reading IRAs, we have reading circles. We do these about three times a semester. Students form groups of three, and then those three read the same nonfiction book and share analyses of the purpose and summary, writing strategies, and language analysis.”
The curriculum is not static but is rather a dynamic document that grows and changes.
“Each year, teachers try out new texts, plan new lessons, and examine assessments,” Ryan said. “We begin with asking, ‘What do we want students to learn?’ We have formal curriculum reviews for grades K-12 every several years. During those years, we present our curriculum to the Board of Education for approval.”
The English department also buys new texts. They select “core” and “protected” works. “Core” works are taught to all students at a certain grade level, such as “Romeo and Juliet,” and “protected” works are books that can be but are not necessarily taught at a certain grade level. These “protected” books cannot be used as “core” texts in other parts of the curriculum.
Another strength is the conferencing program; teachers work one-on-one with students 10 times a year about their writing.
“I love the conferencing program,” Grady said. “To get to work one-on-one with a students is a dream. I’m not sure that students appreciate how special it is.”
Conferencing addresses the student’s individual needs. Many students struggle with grammar.
“Concepts handled in conferences – whether grammar and usage, organization, or development – are more likely to be explored meaningfully and lastingly in such an arrangement,” Ryan said.
English teacher Dave Jenkins said the conferencing program works well for students who use it properly, but it is up to the student to understand information presented.
“Some students are short on grammar skills,” Jenkins said. “In conferencing, when I emphasize grammar, some students take it to heart, but some kids do not. It really depends on how seriously they take the assignment.”
Even though teachers must cover the core texts with their class, they do have freedom within the classroom.
“I don’t think our curriculum is so restrictive that teachers can’t bring in more grammar and nonfiction reading,” Dunsker said. “Individual teachers choose to make it a part of their own courses. For example, I probably spend more time on vocabulary than others who spend more time on reading.”
To Teson, grammar is an area in which some students lack skill.
“Grammar is a legitimate issue,” Teson said. “So much research proves that studying grammar is both good and bad. It comes down to if students read, write, and talk correctly. They should have a very acute and advanced sense of grammar if they do those things.”
Bollinger is one of the teachers who teach grammar in class, and she points out another strength in the current English curriculum.
“Our curriculum as it is exposes students to such good literature and writing that they have a sense of what is right and wrong, even though they don’t know why,” Bollinger said. “They read so much that modeling what they read is a method of learning.”
Last year, the English department started the “No Excuses” policy, an attempt to start following grammar rules known since grade school.
“The ‘No Excuses’ policy is still in effect,” Jenkins said. “Mainly, it emphasizes careful proofreading instead of grammar instruction.”
Grady said lack of students’ response to direct grammar instruction is one of the reasons teachers back away from it.
“If a lot of people would show interest in grammar, we would teach it more,” Grady said.
However, some CHS teachers believe that the middle and grade schools are also responsible for the students’ education.
“Grammar and sentence structure needs to be taught in elementary and middle school,” English teacher Sheri Steininger said.
Although some students make the point that they will not be analyzing fiction in college, the English department has a reason for teaching fictional analysis.
“The average student will encounter more nonfiction in their professional life,” Jenkins said. “However, the literary analysis is more easily taught because the author makes points through themes.”
Dunsker said that although students might prefer analyzing nonfiction, the English curriculum prepares them well through analyzing fiction.
“Also, our curriculum isn’t designed to prepare students for the work world,” Dunsker said. “Whether analyzing fiction helps you get a paycheck isn’t my primary concern. Clayton’s college preparatory curriculum isn’t the same as vocational or technical education. We work to equip students with thinking skills that will contribute to their success in college and in a variety of life experiences. We don’t design our courses specifically to increase students’ income.”
Steininger said that the differences between fiction and nonfiction are a matter of perspective.
“It’s important to see how people understand the world,” Steininger said. “It seems like there is not such a big difference between nonfiction and fiction if the nonfiction is narrative.”
Among policies tackling climate change, the Kyoto Protocol is the most recent, internationally encompassing treaty. According to the United Nations website, The Kyoto Protocol was organized 12 years ago by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC), consisting of 192 parties, and signed by 37 countries and member nations of the European Union. The protocol legally bound the signatories to lower greenhouse gas emission targets to assigned amounts within 2008-2012. One of the most controversial aspects of the Protocol was the U. S.’s refusal to ratify the treaty.
he advancement of cleaner energy sources.
Loading ...
