|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MLA citation for this article: Watson, Robert. "English Doesn't Have To Be Boring."
3 Sep. 1998. Date of access. < http://www.smarrpublishers.com/whyenglish.html >.
English Doesn't Have To Be Boring
by Robert Watson
(3 September 1998)
I began teaching high school English in the middle of the school year. I was surprised to find that my students had grammar workbooks and actually spent nearly thirty minutes a day doing these exercises because the curriculum said so. I was surprised because I did not think high school students studied grammar. I felt that the thirty minutes during the class period could be better spent discussing the great literature of the past and learning to write.
When I scrapped the grammar, the students offered no protest. I then began an aggressive writing program. One thing that I recall from my high school years was that I had never been taught how to write. Oh, I had to write essays and papers, but getting my rambling thoughts on paper somehow was a great mystery to me. Not until I went to college did I learn to write. Learning to write logically and thoughtfully seemed easy enough and yet I wondered why I had not been taught these simple principles in high school. Indeed, writing became fun and I truly enjoyed writing papers. I believe that I am like most people--something becomes enjoyable when you know what you are doing.
I write this article using the following assumptions. First, learning to write well is a worthwhile pursuit for both students and teachers. Second, challenging students to operate at the highest levels of the cognitive and affective domains is desirable. When I refer to domains, I mean Bloom's cognitive taxonomy that describes a model for intellectual learning. The lowest levels begin with knowledge, comprehension, application, and analysis and ends with the highest levels of synthesis and evaluation. On the other hand, the affective domain applies to the emotions--or the soul--of the student.
The ultimate goal of Christian education centers on the great commandment as expressed by the Lord Jesus Christ: "And thou shall love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength" (Mark 12:30). As the primary law that should guide all human conduct, this commandment reveals two important truths.
First, the distinction between the cognitive and affective domains is essentially artificial. The heart, soul, mind, and strength are to be subsumed into the Godly quality called love and the greatest love that a human being can express is towards God. Thus, the intellect and the emotions must be viewed as a unified whole and the man who neglects the one by preferring the other is not completely human.
Thus, concerning learning, Orlich (1990) is correct when he asserts that the higher levels of Bloom's cognitive taxonomy are "interactive" (p. 118). Even though approaching education from a humanistic viewpoint, Elkins (1976) nevertheless agrees that no distinction really exists between the intellect and the emotions (p. 1). Even Bloom (1964) with Krathwohl and Masia concedes the arbitrary classification of the two domains (Affective domain, p. 89). Yet, the cognitive and affective taxonomies provide useful structural models for educators to discuss learning.
Also, we learn that man cannot love God nor understand His ways with human intellect alone. At best, regarding the soul's salvation, human reason can only conceive of offering human works to appease a righteous God. This is so because sin has corrupted the mind. Indeed, human reason fails completely when attempting to discover the method for mankind's redemption. The plan of salvation has to be revealed through the Scriptures. On the other hand, mere emotion ignores the importance of rational thought. In fact, reason and emotion must work together. Hence, understanding about your relationship to God, to your society, and to yourself starts with the emotion of fear (Pro. 1:7) and this truth is revealed only in the Scriptures. A dynamic love for God requires a complete transformation of the soul and mind that must never become static, but should always strive toward conformity to Christ.
Since loving God is an exercise of mind, soul, heart, and strength, we teachers must reach both the intellect and the emotions of our students. Unfortunately, many teachers overlook the emotional development of students and, at best, center on teaching material directed toward knowledge and comprehension--the lowest levels in Bloom's cognitive taxonomy. We often forget that teenagers are developing not only mentally and physically, but emotionally as well.
According to Bloom (1956), the "major behavior tested in knowledge is whether or not the student can remember and either cite or recognize accurate statements in response to particular questions" (78). In other words, the student is given tests with matching, fill-in the blanks, or multiple-choice questions that tend to challenge the student's ability to recall facts. The student generally memorizes the facts just long enough to put the correct answers on a test paper. Within a short time, students jettison the memorized facts in order to cram new facts into their short-term memory.
In Affective Domain, Bloom (1964) points out that education "is not the rote memorization of meaningless material to be regurgitated on an examination paper" (91). If Bloom's statement is correct, then the activity taking place in the majority of Christian schools and home schools is not education. As teachers, we must take responsibility to ensure that we present meaningful lessons and administer examinations to our students who will be challenged at the highest levels of learning.
One of the fastest ways to get students to exercise their powers of higher thinking is by having the students practice critical writing. While many students dislike writing, Bereiter and Scardamalia (1982) insist that students respond well to writing once they are given a form: "Considering the low value placed on composition skills in our society, considering the frequently negative attitudes of children toward writing, we have been continually astonished at the great urge toward mastery that children exhibit as soon as they come into contact with a procedure that promises to give them a foothold in the arduous ascent [of learning to write]" (p. 58). My experience suggests that this statement is true. Students who are taught how to write seem to enjoy writing.
However, in addition to a form, a literature program is essential for a successful writing program. Older writers often draw from their personal experiences; however, the young writer has fewer experiences in life than an adult has. Yet, through literature, the student can vicariously experience life and a host of emotions through the lives of the characters. The primary value for studying good literature is precisely for its ability to affect our emotions. Also, for the young person, reading literature is the quickest and surest way to learn about human nature and life. Therefore, to remedy the "memorize-regurgitate-jettison" syndrome, the English curriculum for high school students ought to center on a comprehensive literature and composition program.
The Ideal English Curriculum
With this article, I hope to reaffirm my belief that writing can be an enjoyable exercise. Also, I believe that practicing a task in a systematic and continuous way will improve any task, and that challenging the highest levels of cognitive and affective domains of high school students ought to be the norm and not the exception. Teaching objectives for high school English should include the student's acquiring a love for literature, forming a positive attitude toward writing, and developing an excellent quality of writing. Major features of the high school English curriculum should include:
Eliminating the formal study of grammar at the high school level. Comprehensive instruction in grammar should exist only in the elementary and seventh and eighth grades. Evidence from educational research shows that the study of grammar does not necessarily make good writers (Manning, p. 240).
Emphasizing critical writing. Yates (1987) states that teaching about writing is not enough (p. 8). Learning to write well is like all other worthwhile pursuits: one must practice the task of writing. Students are generally poor writers because exercises in grammar workbooks can never take the place of pre-writing, writing, and rewriting. Writing is a "building" process; that is, the writing process builds upward with each preceding step as a foundation. First, the teacher instructs students how to form a thesis statement that is then followed by the forms for the in-class essay, the argumentative paper, and finally, the research paper.
An attempt to teach literature to affect the emotions, rather than merely the intellect. While didactic instruction is important, the only valid reason for teaching literature is for the student to develop emotionally and to enjoy great poetry and prose. The body of knowledge called literature is first, and foremost, a form of art. As art, literature penetrates not only the mind but the soul as well. Thus, as an academic course, the learning desired by the teaching of literature ought to be uniquely emotional. By teaching literature only at the lower levels of cognition, teachers lose the exciting opportunity to reach the emotions of their students. Such a teaching opportunity rarely exists in the science, history, or math classroom. However, in the English classroom, the stirring of students' emotions should be the norm.
Rodrigues (1978) points out, "Stressing factual information only causes students to view literature as an obstacle, something to be 'learned' rather that experienced" (p. 4). That literature should affect the emotions of students is not surprising. After all, the standard for all great literature--the Bible--moves the soul emotionally (Horton, p. 97). Thus, while a major objective of the high school English curriculum ought to be the improving of writing skills, the study of literature must play a leading role in the lives of our students.
Indeed, the student's enjoyment of literature is an independent objective. This enjoyment comes by the student's being able to understand the author's workmanship and imagination. Since many outstanding examples of good writing exist, the better literature provides students with fine patterns by which they can emulate, and therefore, helps the writing process (Rodrigues, p. 177). Also, as a student reads from the classics, the student's vocabulary will become better. A better vocabulary will help improve the scores on the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT), since the English portion is essentially a vocabulary test.
Once a writing program is started, teachers must be patient with their students. To successfully improve their overall writing skills, students will require at least three years of practice. Thus, the sooner a high school student can begin the art of critical writing, the better prepared the student will be upon graduation.
Therefore, the following skills are necessary for a college-preparatory English course. These skills should become the basis for any evaluation of assigned papers and essays:
Reading selected literature for enjoyment and analysis
Developing a thesis statement
Writing clear topic sentences that support the thesis statement
Marshaling detailed internal support for topic sentences
Using a clear, logical format for in-class essays
Using the classical format for argumentative papers with introduction and conclusion
Conducting research for the research paper (twelfth grade only)
Writing the research paper using MLA format (twelfth grade only)
Avoiding plagiarism
Developing an individual, yet pleasing, writing style
Ensuring accuracy of mechanics and spelling
After using a similar writing curriculum, English teachers at the University High School on the campus of the University of Illinois reported that achieving the school's objectives "took three years of instruction for the students to become proficient in writing essays…" (Tibbetts, p. 204). According to the article, the teachers taught the students the classical, argumentative form.
The University of Illinois study offers some insight for Christian and home schools. First, the composition course must be unified; that is, all teachers of composition must teach composition in the same way. For the average Christian school, usually one or two English teachers instruct all of the English courses and, thus, singleness of purpose should be no problem.
Second, the key to good writing is repetition and practice. Third, the University High School had small classes of twenty to twenty-five students, similar to Christian schools. Fourth, students do not progress at the same rate nor does any student write an outstanding paper every time. This suggests the importance of evaluating every paper for every assignment on its own merits. (Tibbetts, pp. 203-207).
Okay, But So What?
Well, the benefits for the students include being ready to enter college, being prepared to enter the job market, being able to think independently, and being able to stretch their emotional and cognitive abilities to the fullest potential.
The teacher will definitely benefit from this curriculum. Generally, the English teacher is burdened with an extremely heavy workload. This curriculum promises to relieve that burden in several ways. First, the preparation of objective tests is eliminated. A well-developed test takes several hours to construct. Nevertheless, the objective test is considered easier to grade, particularly if the students use machine-graded answer sheets. On the other hand, objective questions test only the lowest levels of learning.
But, even assuming that objective tests are generally undesirable, one may argue that the time saved will be used to grade papers and that reviewing papers will a greater burden than creating tests. However, when grading subjective papers and tests, the teacher does not need to correct every jot and tittle. I would look for certain predetermined errors on different assignments. I would not correct every error. Also, I developed my own form for grading subjective work. Every four weeks I had collected 125 papers. This form simplified grading and all papers were returned to the students within three days.
Writing assignments and in-class essays will test the highest levels of cognition and of affection. The students will be limited by the form that they must use but will have liberty to use their own ideas and to draw from their own experiences. According to the cognitive taxonomy, students who write papers are thinking at the synthesis level (Bloom, Cognitive Domain, p. 169). By writing an in-class essay or an argumentative paper, students must judge a work of literature based upon internal criteria using their evaluative level of cognition (p.193). Seeing students writing and thinking well has great intrinsic value to any teacher.
Also, the teacher will be freed from the instruction of grammar that challenges only the intellect. Most English teachers enjoy the teaching of literature, because generally, students prefer reading literature. The teacher can now concentrate on becoming an expert about the best literature. In fact, graduate classes in English seldom offer courses about teaching grammar. Indeed, graduate English programs center on literature and writing. In place of grammar, the teacher will be free to teach novels, drama, poetry, or even teach creative writing, such as short stories and poetry.
For the Christian school, academic excellence should increase. Good writing is fundamental to all classes. A comprehensive writing curriculum could be one of the major selling points that will persuade parents to enroll their children in the school. Also, student writers can contribute to the public relations of the school by intelligently writing editorials, newspaper columns, and essays.
For both the home school and the traditional school, teachers and students will be communicating about ideas that shaped our society and world. Discussing ideas is more rewarding than talking about facts and events. Students will become acquainted with some of the greatest thinkers in the world through literature and by writing about these ideas. No longer will the student just exist to accomplish the next homework assignment. Students will truly participate in the process called life.
A writing program centered on literature represents a break from the grammar-intensive instruction found in many curricula. As they practice the craft of writing, students are challenged to use the highest cognitive and affective levels. I am convinced that the teenage student has very deep emotions that need to be developed toward loving God and possesses unchallenged cognitive and affective abilities that for the most part are wasted with "busywork."
WORKS CITED
Bloom, B. S. (Ed.). (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: Handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York: David McKay Co.
Deuink, J. W. (Ed). (1988). A fresh look at Christian education. Greenville, SC: Bob Jones University.
Elkins, D. (1976). Teaching literature: Designs for cognitive development. Columbus, OH: Merrill Publishing Co.
Horton, R. A. (Ed.) Christian education: Its mandate and mission. Greenville, SC: Bob Jones University.
Krathwohl, D. R., Bloom, B. S., Masia, B. B. (1964). Taxonomy of educational objectives: Handbook II: Affective domain. New York: David McKay Co.
Manning, D. (1971). Toward a humanistic curriculum. New York: Harper & Row.
Orlich, D. C., Harder, R. J., Callahan, R. C., Kauchak, D. P., Pendergrass, R. A., Keogh, A. J., & Gibson, H. (1990). Teaching strategies: A guide to better instruction (3rd ed.). Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath and Co.
Rodrigues, R. J., Badaczewski, D. (1978). A guidebook for teaching literature. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Tibbetts, C. The composition skills: Reality vs. perception. Urbana, IL: Univ. of Illinois. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. CS 210 102).
Yates, Joanne M. (1987). Research implications for writing in the content area (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: National Education Association.
END OF ARTICLE
|
|
|
|
|
|
