http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2012/12/04/schools-are-teaching-less-fiction-because-fiction-isnt-helpful-for-shitty-business-jobs Comments On: Schools Are Teaching Less Fiction Because Fiction Isn't Helpful for Shitty Business Jobs by Paul Constant en-us Copyright 2013 The Stranger. All rights reserved. This RSS file is offered to individuals, The Stranger readers, and non-commercial organizations only. Any commercial websites wishing to use this RSS file, please contact The Stranger. webmaster@thestranger.com (The Stranger Webmaster) Tue, 18 Jun 2013 00:00:01 -0700 Tue, 18 Jun 2013 19:15:00 -0700 Foundation http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literac…

By grades 6-12 those charts and whatnot go away to be replaced with a focus almost entirely on literary nonfiction.
http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literac…

The Publishers' Criteria for people who are creating textbooks and the like says that more of the literary nonfiction they read should emphasize arguments and be built on "informational text structures" rather than structured as stories, but again, if you look at their example genres you'll see that they're still supposed to be "narrative" as most people think of it--just not all biographies.

Posted by leek]]> Fri, 07 Dec 2012 09:41:02 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Captain Wiggette]]> Thu, 06 Dec 2012 22:53:13 -0800 The Stranger Posted by shane33]]> Thu, 06 Dec 2012 14:25:49 -0800 The Stranger Posted by McJulie]]> Thu, 06 Dec 2012 08:09:48 -0800 The Stranger
I'm not sure anymore who I learned more about Physics from, Einstien or Douglas Adams.

Does it matter?
Posted by Machiavelli was framed]]> Wed, 05 Dec 2012 22:35:21 -0800 The Stranger Posted by axolotl9]]> Wed, 05 Dec 2012 21:53:13 -0800 The Stranger This shit is only important to mammy-wiped-my-butt upper middle class suburban kids, who grow into a world in which they are able to convince themselves that other people give a shit about what they think and feel.

But that reality is, the world does not give a shit. We don't need more writers and songstresses and poetry jams. The internet has made that shit so easy that the worst among us are participating. You wonder why people don't real anymore? It's because average dumbasses are writing books.

The truly creative in our world will find a way to express themselves and enrich our lives. The averagely creative should stick with whatever whatshisface recommends.
Posted by fetish]]> Wed, 05 Dec 2012 14:09:43 -0800 The Stranger @67 : trying to make an argument about the relationship between development and democracy isn't the same thing as writing about how Jim Casey was a metaphorical Christ figure in the Grapes of Wrath

Not exactly the same, but I still think they're pretty close if you define the process as 1. analyze the material, 2. pick a relevant topic, 3. write a coherent essay using evidence from the material. Sure, the process is tweaked as you move from one discipline to another. But if students aren't learning how to write a decent social science essay, the solution is to teach them how to write a decent social science essay. Coleman's solution sounds more like teaching them to write the same bad English lit essays, only about nonfiction instead of fiction.

Anyway, modern politics ought to prove that "cherrypicking quotes and passages and presenting them as if that is evidence" is not a problem in any way limited to English lit. Teapartiers do it with the Constitution, the religious right does it with the Bible, people selling diets do it with scientific findings, etc.
Posted by McJulie]]> Wed, 05 Dec 2012 12:41:38 -0800 The Stranger
Almost ALL my first and second year students were unable to write a decent essay appropriate for a social science context. They overwhelmingly resulted to this absurd format they had beaten into them by their high school English teachers... and sorry, but trying to make an argument about the relationship between development and democracy isn't the same thing as writing about how Jim Casey was a metaphorical Christ figure in the Grapes of Wrath.

One (when done well) requires a careful weighing of evidence and the ability to look at the logical implications of proposed causal mechanisms. The other, as taught in high school, requires cherrypicking quotes and passages and presenting them as if that is evidence. Hell, one kind of writing should almost never include quotations!

Sure, kids sure learn fiction. Kids should also learn to write a fucking essay in a manner beyond what is taught to them by their (alas, almost universally incompetent) English teachers.
Posted by Madasshatter]]> Wed, 05 Dec 2012 10:27:15 -0800 The Stranger Posted by rca]]> Wed, 05 Dec 2012 09:25:10 -0800 The Stranger
So, if you want kids to get the arts, stop teaching to the fuck-ups and teach to the winners.

"kind of reading and writing that is required to do college level work and be employable in most middle class jobs. Please realize that claiming education should be ONLY about feeling and exploring and having fun is a huge disservice to students in poverty who are actually relying on their education to escape that poverty. "

Bingo. Because little Johnny Gangbanger shows up at school unable to so much as read his name, your kids gets to study train tables. Is it any wonder smart people don't want their kids to study with little Johnny Gangbanger?
Posted by Teach Excellence]]> Wed, 05 Dec 2012 07:18:52 -0800 The Stranger Posted by CbytheSea]]> Tue, 04 Dec 2012 21:56:39 -0800 The Stranger "What [people] instead care about is, can you make an argument with evidence, is there something verifiable behind what you’re saying or what you think or feel that you can demonstrate to me?"

If only we could apply such logic to science classrooms in public schools.

Also, michaelp, did the words "twiddler", "dreamer", or "silly-heart" come up during this parent-teacher conference?
Posted by Knat]]> Tue, 04 Dec 2012 17:48:51 -0800 The Stranger "What they instead care about is, can you make an argument with evidence, is there something verifiable behind what you’re saying or what you think or feel that you can demonstrate to me?"

Which, interestingly enough, is exactly what I had to do in pretty much every English lit paper I ever wrote.

"Compelling account of your childhood" is what the people in the "narrative nonfiction" class were writing.
Posted by McJulie]]> Tue, 04 Dec 2012 17:41:47 -0800 The Stranger Posted by kim in portland]]> Tue, 04 Dec 2012 17:36:12 -0800 The Stranger Posted by bozbozeman]]> Tue, 04 Dec 2012 17:18:36 -0800 The Stranger
Not only do I think this statement misunderstand the comprehensive value of a proper education, but I think it is wrong on it's face. I work exclusively with geeks in a highly technical field, and not a week goes by where most of my peers have not asked me for a compelling personal narrative of some aspect of my life... That rapport building actually has a huge impact on our performance in an otherwise completely non-fuzzy environment.
Posted by Also, I Write Shit Here, Or Something]]> Tue, 04 Dec 2012 17:03:17 -0800 The Stranger Posted by OK, then]]> Tue, 04 Dec 2012 16:51:33 -0800 The Stranger
Literature teachers teach kids to HATE literature.

and they are actually very good at it....
Posted by Paul. don't be afraid of the Real World. you ignorant pussy.]]> Tue, 04 Dec 2012 16:47:06 -0800 The Stranger Posted by DRF]]> Tue, 04 Dec 2012 16:42:40 -0800 The Stranger Posted by cedarthvader]]> Tue, 04 Dec 2012 16:37:01 -0800 The Stranger http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/201…) by Sara Mosle.

Common Core is also leaning towards more non-fiction (not necessarily a bad thing).

"For example, the Common Core dictates that by fourth grade, public school students devote half of their reading time in class to historical documents, scientific tracts, maps and other “informational texts” — like recipes and train schedules. Per the guidelines, 70 percent of the 12th grade curriculum will consist of nonfiction titles.

Alarmed English teachers worry we’re about to toss Shakespeare so students can study, in the words of one former educator, “memos, technical manuals and menus.”

What schools really need isn’t more nonfiction but better nonfiction, especially that which provides good models for student writing. Most students could use greater familiarity with what newspaper, magazine and book editors call “narrative nonfiction”: writing that tells a factual story, sometimes even a personal one, but also makes an argument and conveys information in vivid, effective ways.

In addition to a biology textbook, for example, why can’t more high school students read “The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks”?"

What should students read in order to learn to write?
Posted by westello]]> Tue, 04 Dec 2012 16:20:29 -0800 The Stranger Posted by DRF]]> Tue, 04 Dec 2012 16:14:39 -0800 The Stranger
Art, including fiction writing, is being downplayed because the students aren't learning the basics of reading, writing (composition), math, and science that they need to be adults in the modern world. The purpose of the public school system is to produce adults who can use their votes responsibly. For that, they need to be able to read newspapers, understand science, and I'd add history to my core list.

As to why the students aren't learning the way they used to, that's a whole other argument. But the bottom line is this: Any shortfall made by the schools with respect to enrichment subjects like art, fiction and some science can and should be made up by the parents. Take the kid to the children's museum. Read Harry Potter when they're young and read Pride and Prejudice together when they're older. Do family art projects. Of course, that requires that the parents 1. not have to work more than two jobs so that they actually have time to spend with their kids and 2. be WILLING to spend said time with their kids.
Posted by DRF]]> Tue, 04 Dec 2012 16:12:24 -0800 The Stranger Posted by sarah70]]> Tue, 04 Dec 2012 16:06:28 -0800 The Stranger