Read on Twitter
A Defense of the Canon in K12 Schools
Some books are better than others.
This shouldn't be a controversial opinion but alas it is and so I write. There have been many terrible takes on this recently and here are my 2 cents. Mega thread
Some books are better than others.
This shouldn't be a controversial opinion but alas it is and so I write. There have been many terrible takes on this recently and here are my 2 cents. Mega thread
Outline
Thoughts on foundational ideas
Practical implication 1: literacy
Practical implication 2: race
Practical implication 3: love of lit
Conclusion
Thoughts on foundational ideas
Practical implication 1: literacy
Practical implication 2: race
Practical implication 3: love of lit
Conclusion
There's this idea out there that not only should we diversify the canon (a good thing) but go a step further to dismantled it all together (a bad thing). John Searle acknowledged a movement to deconstruct the very idea of a "hegemonic canon."
Before getting to the implications, let's address the self-defeating nature of this idea.
First of all, surely the poetry of Langston Hughes out-sings my grade-school limericks and the paintings of Dali out-beauties my first scribbles in crayon.
First of all, surely the poetry of Langston Hughes out-sings my grade-school limericks and the paintings of Dali out-beauties my first scribbles in crayon.
Even those who disagree with the idea--that some books are better than others--cannot escape it. You'll read in their threads "don't read canon book X because non-canon book Y is better!"
They still judge books based on quality.
They still judge books based on quality.
I'll debate anybody on the merits of one book over another. Perhaps we should replace some books on the traditional canon.
Remove the idea of aesthetic quality though and you removed the purpose of education. It becomes little more than economic training.
Remove the idea of aesthetic quality though and you removed the purpose of education. It becomes little more than economic training.
PRACTICAL IMPLICATION 1: it's better for literacy.
Even if we accept a utilitarian (job training) idea of education, complex, historically significant texts are better for literacy--reading difficult books with rich history, language, themes, and vocabulary.
Even if we accept a utilitarian (job training) idea of education, complex, historically significant texts are better for literacy--reading difficult books with rich history, language, themes, and vocabulary.
After a student learns basic phonics, literacy depends on a broad knowledge base. Example: an American academic could not hope to read a paragraph about cricket not because they lack "reading skills" but because they just don't know the gosh darn words. Knowledge matters.
With this theory in mind, our nation's most successful charter schools center historically significant complex texts and their scores show it.
They cannot justify perhaps one pre-eminent list of books but if they replace Shakespeare, they do so with a book of equal quality.
They cannot justify perhaps one pre-eminent list of books but if they replace Shakespeare, they do so with a book of equal quality.
The alternative is free reading. I'll just cite professor Timothy Shanahan here:
A free-reading model to literacy instruction is "unlikely to lead to literacy success for all of America’s public school children," especially those in impoverished schools.
A free-reading model to literacy instruction is "unlikely to lead to literacy success for all of America’s public school children," especially those in impoverished schools.
PRACTICAL IMPLICATION 2: it'd improve race relations.
I imagine the impact it would have if we maintained our commitment to aesthetic quality paired with a diversified canon.
I imagine the impact it would have if we maintained our commitment to aesthetic quality paired with a diversified canon.
How would our students' perceptions of different races change if they read Tolstoy alongside Chinua Achebe, Langston Hughes alongside Emily Dickinson, or Gabriel Garcia Marquez and Edgar Allan Poe. Reading the beauty and truth that all races can achieve.
Also, just sayin', literacy is the key to success in this country. Good luck at any job if your education didn't bring you past a 3rd-grade reading level. Closing the literacy gap would do wonders to improve other racial injustices in America
PRACTICAL IMPLICATION 3: A love of literature
Free reading does not instill a love of literature, a great teacher opening up before their students' eyes all that a great book has to offer does, helping those students connect to the humanity within a book 100s of years old
Free reading does not instill a love of literature, a great teacher opening up before their students' eyes all that a great book has to offer does, helping those students connect to the humanity within a book 100s of years old
Personal example, I HATED Moby Dick but a teacher helped me understand the beauty that I couldn't see. Jazz music rarely appeals to me until I've listened a few times.
Sometimes, I do think we have to ask if the fault lies in our perception or the book itself
Sometimes, I do think we have to ask if the fault lies in our perception or the book itself
We can train our taste buds to enjoy healthy food that we might not immediately enjoy. So too we should train our minds to appreciate the books that may not immediately appeal to us
CONCLUSION:
We only have our students for an hour a day. Time is a scarcity. Let us use that time to offer our students the best that has been thoughts and said.
Footnote: even if we disagree, I still think you're a wonderful human being worthy of love and respect
We only have our students for an hour a day. Time is a scarcity. Let us use that time to offer our students the best that has been thoughts and said.
Footnote: even if we disagree, I still think you're a wonderful human being worthy of love and respect
