lbbc, read this, or watch the video. These people are homeless, yet through reading, one has kicked his addicitons. In literature, especially classic literature, people CAN learn about themselves. Denying kids this exposure is a huge disservice, IMO. They should be exposed at the minimum. The aren't forced to pursue it, but it's just plain wrong not to give them the opportunity. And they should be encouraged. It kills me the prevalence of the perception that classic literature, or even reading anything other than what is absolutely necessary, is wasteful. Who are we? Puritans?

 

I go back to a very honest question that may deserve it's own thread. Who decides what is a classic and what is not? Tom Clancy is a classic to me. I could go my whole life and be happy and never read a Jane Austin novel.

I'm sorry, LBBC, but I'd have to say that unless you gave an honest effort to read the literature I can't hold your opinion valid that it's not valuable. Literature, the study of literature, and all the writing involved, is about more than just words.

 

I thought about this and you have made my point.

 

Somehow, because a person has not a valid opinion because they have no desire to read Shakespaere or something of that type of reading.

 

You have a whole building of HS students who won't read it and we are just to discount them and their learning because they won't read it?

 

I am NOT saying don't study literature. I feel reading and writing and the basics of math is the MOST IMPORTANT THINGS they can study in school. They MUST study AND READ, READ and READ!!!!

 

I am just saying we could chose a whole lot better things that they would actually READ!!!!

 

And you could have a class with the "classics" whatever that means but also have classes with reading choices that some kids would actually want to read.

Dang straight I should know those things. No one is saying an academic is smarter than a laborer. But what you're advocating is not even exposing a segment of the school population to academia, because they're not going to use it. There is value in ALL learning. One can be an academic who appreciates the falue of vocational training, as well as a laborer who appreciates classical literature.

 

You are perpetuating a persecution complex.

 

Not sure what you mean by the bolded.

 

I hate seeing kids fail because they refuse to read and then do the work for some story that they have zero interest in when there could have been better stories chosen that might have peaked their interest and for some, at a reading level, that they could actually read.

Let me clarify something about what I have posted on AP. I absolutely agree 100% that AP and top level students should be challenged to the very limits of their ability.

 

In doing that, I realize that most of the challenging is with knowledge that they will never need or use.

 

The process of them being challenged and pushed is what is rewarding. Most of the actual information is useless.

 

That is what I meant.

 

That said, all levels of students need to be challenged. Problem is we are jamming everyone in those same cookie cutters and thinking we can challenge the non to low readers with the same things that we challenge the upper level students with.

 

And the results, the non/low reader doesn't participate at all. When we could have challenged them with something that they would/could actually read.

I thought about this and you have made my point.

 

Somehow, because a person has not a valid opinion because they have no desire to read Shakespaere or something of that type of reading.

 

You have a whole building of HS students who won't read it and we are just to discount them and their learning because they won't read it?

 

I am NOT saying don't study literature. I feel reading and writing and the basics of math is the MOST IMPORTANT THINGS they can study in school. They MUST study AND READ, READ and READ!!!!

 

I am just saying we could chose a whole lot better things that they would actually READ!!!!

 

And you could have a class with the "classics" whatever that means but also have classes with reading choices that some kids would actually want to read.

 

I can't wait till these students get out into the real world never having had to learn the discipline to focus on a task they may find unappealing, or tough through something they don't understand. God forbid we set requirements and make the kids learn that THAT is what required. Instead, we should simply let them determine their own course. IMO, that's a large part of what's wrong with education these days. No consequences. Too many outs, too any excuses why they SHOULDN'T HAVE to do what's required.

Not sure what you mean by the bolded.

 

I hate seeing kids fail because they refuse to read and then do the work for some story that they have zero interest in when there could have been better stories chosen that might have peaked their interest and for some, at a reading level, that they could actually read.

 

How in the world, if you don't even attempt it, can yo usay that Shakespear or Austen wouldn't pique a kids interest? Too many people are telling them what useless literature it is. Why should they even think about learning about it on their own?

Let me clarify something about what I have posted on AP. I absolutely agree 100% that AP and top level students should be challenged to the very limits of their ability.

 

In doing that, I realize that most of the challenging is with knowledge that they will never need or use.

 

The process of them being challenged and pushed is what is rewarding. Most of the actual information is useless.

 

That is what I meant.

 

That said, all levels of students need to be challenged. Problem is we are jamming everyone in those same cookie cutters and thinking we can challenge the non to low readers with the same things that we challenge the upper level students with.

 

And the results, the non/low reader doesn't participate at all. When we could have challenged them with something that they would/could actually read.

 

 

I don't know much about how public education is structured, relative to requirments, but my experience with education is that nothing is rammed down the throats of kids that is beyond their abilities. Classes are structured to teach to the abilities of the kids.

And about that KEES money thing. :lol::lol::lol: