Friday, November 13, 2015

Eras of English Teaching

If we go back to the time of the one-roomed schoolhouse, most children, especially in more rural areas, did not attend traditional school--and if they did, it certainly wasn't for the standard 12 years we have nowadays. English class was focused on rote memorization. Penmanship was important, in part because it was easy to test. Teachers were less concerned with analysis than they were with grammar--in a society where many didn't know how to read or write, having those skills was a big deal. Around 1776, when revolution and independence were the focus, schools began to emphasize religion less and the nation more. The amount of literature in the curriculum increased drastically, in the hopes that this would make for a more educated and moral society.

After the development of the public school system as we know it today, analysts and teachers have been working for years to develop better curriculums. As it became more common for students to further their education by attending college, teachers worked hard to standardize educational programs so that their students would be prepared to attend the college of their choice. Unfortunately, this has led to a situation in which standardized tests are the focus of the curriculum. (See an essay discussing this here.)

As I’m waiting to hear back from some of my previous English teachers, I decided to contact Kemry Johnakin, who is nearing the end of the English major at BYU-I. She and I discussed how teaching style has changed not only over physical history but as the student progresses to different levels. In middle school (or junior high, depending on where you grew up), English class was fairly distant. Grammar was emphasized (yayyyy diagramming sentences) and literature studies typically went along the lines of “here’s a book, read it and then we’ll do an in-class worksheet to show you understood the basic concepts”. In high school, your experience with English class likely varied based on the class you took: AP, IB, or standard. In the higher level classes, many teachers introduce the Socratic Method of discussion. Teachers of this level try and make English matter to their students, to help them foster a love of learning and a love of language. In my friends words, “in college, the professor assumes you care because you’re taking the class. We apply theory now and actually figure out if it all matters”.

In essence, English class has become more structured and standardized over time, and teachers have less control over their individual classroom topics of instruction. In some ways, this is beneficial—students will get the same level of education regardless of the public school they attend. However, this has also led to an era of students who can diagram a sentence but don’t ever develop a true love of literature.

4 comments:

  1. Interesting how there is kairos in professions, English teaching seems like a timeless art, but obviously there have been a lot of changes in how and what is being taught.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I completely agree. I developed a love for literature in my honors English classes in high school. This was in part due to the teachers love for English as well as the positive learning environment that develops in a higher level class.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think it's interesting on how the same teacher could treat groups differently based on their willingness to engage. It looks like it could lead to a vicious cycle.

    ReplyDelete
  4. It still seems to me that the education is based on what is easy to grade. Penmanship in the old days, standardized testing now. I found myself feeling similarly in my research on the history of Academia (you already commented on my post). It would be nice for education to really be about learning and internalizing the material as opposed to passing tests.

    ReplyDelete