Is Shakespeare not taught in DCPS?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok, taking a look at varios teams at Deal they are reading:

6th:
Roll of Thunder Hear my Cry
Tuck Everlasting
Inside out and Back Again
Beowulf

7th:
Poetry
Boy by Roald Dahl
Warriors Don’t Cry by Melba Patillo Beals
Call of the Wild by Jack London
Choice of novels
The Ear, The Eye, and the Arm by Nancy Farmer

8th
To Kill a Mocking Bird
Raisin in the Sun
Chains
145th Street


I wouldn't mind some Shakespeare in here, but its still got Beowulf so that's something.

Here's the curriculm a private school which focuses on African history in 6th, early US history in 7th and democracy and immigration in 8th as core themes. Some overlap... but a whole lot more, and not just about the white and AA experience.

6th:
Tuck Everlasting, Babbitt
Roll of Thunder, Hear My Cry, Taylor
The Giver, Lowry
An African Child, Laye
Sundiata: An Epic of Old Mali
Locomotion, Woodson
Home of the Brave, Applegate
Mzungu Boy, Mwangi
A Long Walk to Water, Park
The Ear, The Eye And the Arm, Farmer
The African Mask, Rupert, and other works of African fiction.

7th
The World Made New, Aronson
Braving the New World, Nardo
The Crucible, Miller
The Martian Chronicles, Bradbury
Chains, Anderson
Colonial Comics New England:1770-1775, Rodriguez
To Spoil the Sun, Rockwood, Blood on the River, Carbone
Answering the Cry for Freedom: Stories of African Americans and the American Revolution, Woelfle
The Winter People, Bruchac
Rules of the Game 2, Page et al.
Classical Roots B, Fifer & Flowers

8th
Seedfolks, Paul Fleischman
Lord of the Flies, William Golding
The House on Mango Street, Sandra Cisneros
The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian, Sherman Alexie
When the Emperor Was Divine, Julie Otsuka
A Raisin in the Sun, Lorraine Hansberry
The Tempest, William Shakespeare, selected poems and short stories.

Please post the link to the school

It's 9 hours away from here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How's Shakespeare different from the Bible in your "it's the literary basis of 'Murca" thing?

Ideally both would get taught at some point. But there's no way to get the bible in school - even treated as text and not as part of religion- so I don't pretend to hope for it.

And by 'Murica, you mean "All of English literature."

I’m pretty sure you can teach world religions and religious texts as literature in public schools. schools that don’t are making a choice not to. the first amendment doesn’t prohibit it at all.

Even if that were true, why not teach the Quran then? It has many of the same underlying stories plus a bunch more. It's arguably also more relevant to understanding the world today and recent geopolitics. But why don't you see how well that argument would fly with certain Christians who claim that reading the Bible in public schools is just teaching "literature".

Definitely, students should read selections from the Quran, the Upanishads; know the story of Buddha, and read the epics of Gilgamesh, Sundiata, and Kebra Negast

[Anonymous]

You can download the CK Sequence free to take a look at a very robust K-12 curriculum https://www.coreknowledge.org/our-approach/core-knowledge-sequence/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You can download the CK Sequence free to take a look at a very robust K-12 curriculum https://www.coreknowledge.org/our-approach/core-knowledge-sequence/

Correction: K-8

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How's Shakespeare different from the Bible in your "it's the literary basis of 'Murca" thing?

Ideally both would get taught at some point. But there's no way to get the bible in school - even treated as text and not as part of religion- so I don't pretend to hope for it.

And by 'Murica, you mean "All of English literature."

I’m pretty sure you can teach world religions and religious texts as literature in public schools. schools that don’t are making a choice not to. the first amendment doesn’t prohibit it at all.

Even if that were true, why not teach the Quran then? It has many of the same underlying stories plus a bunch more. It's arguably also more relevant to understanding the world today and recent geopolitics. But why don't you see how well that argument would fly with certain Christians who claim that reading the Bible in public schools is just teaching "literature".

Definitely, students should read selections from the Quran, the Upanishads; know the story of Buddha, and read the epics of Gilgamesh, Sundiata, and Kebra Negast

How cool would a world art/world religions class be?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How's Shakespeare different from the Bible in your "it's the literary basis of 'Murca" thing?

Ideally both would get taught at some point. But there's no way to get the bible in school - even treated as text and not as part of religion- so I don't pretend to hope for it.

And by 'Murica, you mean "All of English literature."

I’m pretty sure you can teach world religions and religious texts as literature in public schools. schools that don’t are making a choice not to. the first amendment doesn’t prohibit it at all.

Even if that were true, why not teach the Quran then? It has many of the same underlying stories plus a bunch more. It's arguably also more relevant to understanding the world today and recent geopolitics. But why don't you see how well that argument would fly with certain Christians who claim that reading the Bible in public schools is just teaching "literature".

Definitely, students should read selections from the Quran, the Upanishads; know the story of Buddha, and read the epics of Gilgamesh, Sundiata, and Kebra Negast

How cool would a world art/world religions class be?

Very cool. Some schools develop integrated units across history, geography, literature, art and music.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How's Shakespeare different from the Bible in your "it's the literary basis of 'Murca" thing?

Ideally both would get taught at some point. But there's no way to get the bible in school - even treated as text and not as part of religion- so I don't pretend to hope for it.

And by 'Murica, you mean "All of English literature."

I’m pretty sure you can teach world religions and religious texts as literature in public schools. schools that don’t are making a choice not to. the first amendment doesn’t prohibit it at all.

Even if that were true, why not teach the Quran then? It has many of the same underlying stories plus a bunch more. It's arguably also more relevant to understanding the world today and recent geopolitics. But why don't you see how well that argument would fly with certain Christians who claim that reading the Bible in public schools is just teaching "literature".

It should be part of world literature studies as well, but the Judeo/Christian works do have more relevance to English lit, that's all. And I totally see why the Bible would never get taught in school; it would be a mess. Doesn't mean that it woudn't be of great value though, it just means it won't happen.

We do it now. World Religions is part of the 6th grade social studies curriculum.

[Anonymous]

It would be cool, but in this thread we are talking about English literature classes. I wouldn't go beyong the bible for religious texts, there is too much to cover.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:At bottom this is a question of what belongs in the American literary canon. What works do we expect high school students to have read to enter the world as "educated" citizens? They can't read everything, so some choices need to be made. I don't think that anyone would argue that the canon should be 100% Shakespeare. But how many Shakespeare works are appropriate, given that choices need to be made?

Personally, I get the the argument that the literary canon has historically been skewed toward the experience of white Americans and Western culture. And it should be diversified. So that mean that some Shakespeare will probably need to be replaced with works from non-white authors. There are plenty of great ones out there. But we need to find a balance. Shakespeare definitely has its place.

Personally, I think that things have swung too far in the direction of reading books only from the perspective of oppressed groups. And some books are chosen because they show diversity but they aren't challenging from a literary perspective the way that Shakespeare, for example, is, and that's not helpful. I'm sure there are people out there who disagree. But these sorts of pendulum swings are typical, I think, and not worth losing too much sleep over.

This is so well put. My only concern is that the pendulum swings you aptly describe seem to be swinging wider and wider these days.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It would be cool, but in this thread we are talking about English literature classes. I wouldn't go beyong the bible for religious texts, there is too much to cover.

Nonsense!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It would be cool, but in this thread we are talking about English literature classes. I wouldn't go beyong the bible for religious texts, there is too much to cover.

Nonsense!

OK, what religious texts would you include in the English literature class besides the bible?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It would be cool, but in this thread we are talking about English literature classes. I wouldn't go beyong the bible for religious texts, there is too much to cover.

Nonsense!

OK, what religious texts would you include in the English literature class besides the bible?

Are you arguing that DCPS students should only study literature from England? That's nuts. Besides, the Bible wasn't written in English. Good grief! Anyway, I've already listed them in a prior post.

[Anonymous]

Also, if you introduce parts of the Bible, you must introduce texts from other world religions. Otherwise, you would be violating the DCPS religious neutrality policy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How's Shakespeare different from the Bible in your "it's the literary basis of 'Murca" thing?

Ideally both would get taught at some point. But there's no way to get the bible in school - even treated as text and not as part of religion- so I don't pretend to hope for it.

And by 'Murica, you mean "All of English literature."

I’m pretty sure you can teach world religions and religious texts as literature in public schools. schools that don’t are making a choice not to. the first amendment doesn’t prohibit it at all.

Even if that were true, why not teach the Quran then? It has many of the same underlying stories plus a bunch more. It's arguably also more relevant to understanding the world today and recent geopolitics. But why don't you see how well that argument would fly with certain Christians who claim that reading the Bible in public schools is just teaching "literature".

Because the Quran obviously does not influence English literature in the same way. But sure, in a world religions class.

Balderdash! There are loads of references to ancient and medieval world religions and texts throughout "English" literature.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It would be cool, but in this thread we are talking about English literature classes. I wouldn't go beyong the bible for religious texts, there is too much to cover.

Nonsense!

OK, what religious texts would you include in the English literature class besides the bible?

People it's not that hard, please no religious texts in public schools! The claim about the Bible being the foundation of literature is such BS.