Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I agree English is the weak point.
I think there’s one easy fix which is to assign more books and better book. Basically everything my kids read was written after 1950 and most of t was written after 2000. They don’t read Shakespeare, dickens, Britney, Steinbeck, Hawthorne, Wharton, Austen etc.
The second one, which is probably impossible to solve, is more feedback on their writing. They just aren’t staffed for that. They would need to give all the English teachers at least one or two more additional planning periods to give them time to really read and edit and provide substantive feedback on writing. Or give them TAs or something. (Although it’s not even clear to me that the new graduates are capable of that.)
Both of my kids have read Shakespeare and Steinbeck.
Not in MCPS. Ours watched a video of Romeo and Juliet but never actually read it (ours techincally did as I bought the book to help them undestand it).
A video?! Are you kidding me?!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I agree English is the weak point.
I think there’s one easy fix which is to assign more books and better book. Basically everything my kids read was written after 1950 and most of t was written after 2000. They don’t read Shakespeare, dickens, Britney, Steinbeck, Hawthorne, Wharton, Austen etc.
The second one, which is probably impossible to solve, is more feedback on their writing. They just aren’t staffed for that. They would need to give all the English teachers at least one or two more additional planning periods to give them time to really read and edit and provide substantive feedback on writing. Or give them TAs or something. (Although it’s not even clear to me that the new graduates are capable of that.)
Both of my kids have read Shakespeare and Steinbeck.
Not in MCPS. Ours watched a video of Romeo and Juliet but never actually read it (ours techincally did as I bought the book to help them undestand it).
A video?! Are you kidding me?!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
I appreciate your insight into this. Genuine question: why do you think teachers in the 90s able to provide more corrections and feedback? I’m pretty sure they taught at least four classes.
That's a good question. Did they? I'm a nerd and have a folder of academic papers from my distant past around somewhere, and I went through it a couple years ago and saw that my English essays had sporadic comments, with the occasional underline for spelling or grammar errors. I'd say that is pretty similar to what I used to do for my students.
I only ever had one teacher (college professor) who went totally nuts marking every aspect of the paper, and it was off-putting because we (students) could barely see what part of our work each comment referred to, as there was so much of it. So, there's that angle.
Generally, what my grad school professors advised (I was a career changer and former copy editor, so I needed this advice to keep things in check or I'd be grading 24/7) was to mark according to the grammar/usage issues we'd been covering in class, as well as key structural elements of the essay that we'd been working on (maybe the thesis, or supporting details in body paragraphs).
Whatever the case, I can't imagine English teachers have ever had it easy in the grading department. We need some older teachers to chime in!
All that said, a lighter grading load (that is, smaller class sizes) is one surefire way to enable better teacher feedback.
As for the curriculum, who knows. I've taught MS magnet and HS IB English. Now I'm homeschooling my kids.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I agree English is the weak point.
I think there’s one easy fix which is to assign more books and better book. Basically everything my kids read was written after 1950 and most of t was written after 2000. They don’t read Shakespeare, dickens, Britney, Steinbeck, Hawthorne, Wharton, Austen etc.
The second one, which is probably impossible to solve, is more feedback on their writing. They just aren’t staffed for that. They would need to give all the English teachers at least one or two more additional planning periods to give them time to really read and edit and provide substantive feedback on writing. Or give them TAs or something. (Although it’s not even clear to me that the new graduates are capable of that.)
Both of my kids have read Shakespeare and Steinbeck.
My kids have read Shakespeare in MS and HS. Didn’t enjoy any of the ones chosen. Read some “classics” and didn’t enjoy most.
Not into Shakespeare either. But I went to a public school that emphasized classics and they were great.
I don’t understand MCPS’s approach to English. At my child’s ES, I rarely see work returned home. How are they supposed to learn if they don’t know where they made grammar and spelling errors? I don’t think some teachers even read the essays.
+1 - rarely get returned work in 5th grade reading/writing. Got more returned work with grammar/spelling/content commentary in 3rd grade.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:MCCPTA either gifted and talented committee or curriculum committee.
Out of curiosity, is this where the global humanities course originated? Or was that teacher initiated?
This is lost to the sands of time but global humanities started as a spin-off from the MS humanities magnet curriculum. When MCPS changed the formula for MS magnet admissions, they simultaneously rolled out HIGH (social studies) and AIM (math) with the promise that kids who didn't make it into the magnets would have the option for an equivalent education alongside academic peers in the home schools.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I agree English is the weak point.
I think there’s one easy fix which is to assign more books and better book. Basically everything my kids read was written after 1950 and most of t was written after 2000. They don’t read Shakespeare, dickens, Britney, Steinbeck, Hawthorne, Wharton, Austen etc.
The second one, which is probably impossible to solve, is more feedback on their writing. They just aren’t staffed for that. They would need to give all the English teachers at least one or two more additional planning periods to give them time to really read and edit and provide substantive feedback on writing. Or give them TAs or something. (Although it’s not even clear to me that the new graduates are capable of that.)
Both of my kids have read Shakespeare and Steinbeck.
Not in MCPS. Ours watched a video of Romeo and Juliet but never actually read it (ours techincally did as I bought the book to help them undestand it).
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I agree English is the weak point.
I think there’s one easy fix which is to assign more books and better book. Basically everything my kids read was written after 1950 and most of t was written after 2000. They don’t read Shakespeare, dickens, Britney, Steinbeck, Hawthorne, Wharton, Austen etc.
The second one, which is probably impossible to solve, is more feedback on their writing. They just aren’t staffed for that. They would need to give all the English teachers at least one or two more additional planning periods to give them time to really read and edit and provide substantive feedback on writing. Or give them TAs or something. (Although it’s not even clear to me that the new graduates are capable of that.)
Both of my kids have read Shakespeare and Steinbeck.
At an MCPS school? Within the last 5 years? Would love to know which one, and whether it was only in the AP or IB curriculum, or whether it was in the 8th-10th grade honors classes. I think things pick up once you get into AP or IB, but the curriculum before then is just so dumbed down.
My kid read Of Mice and Men and Romeo and Juliet in regular honors English 9 or 10 within the last 3 years.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I agree English is the weak point.
I think there’s one easy fix which is to assign more books and better book. Basically everything my kids read was written after 1950 and most of t was written after 2000. They don’t read Shakespeare, dickens, Britney, Steinbeck, Hawthorne, Wharton, Austen etc.
The second one, which is probably impossible to solve, is more feedback on their writing. They just aren’t staffed for that. They would need to give all the English teachers at least one or two more additional planning periods to give them time to really read and edit and provide substantive feedback on writing. Or give them TAs or something. (Although it’s not even clear to me that the new graduates are capable of that.)
Both of my kids have read Shakespeare and Steinbeck.
At an MCPS school? Within the last 5 years? Would love to know which one, and whether it was only in the AP or IB curriculum, or whether it was in the 8th-10th grade honors classes. I think things pick up once you get into AP or IB, but the curriculum before then is just so dumbed down.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I agree English is the weak point.
I think there’s one easy fix which is to assign more books and better book. Basically everything my kids read was written after 1950 and most of t was written after 2000. They don’t read Shakespeare, dickens, Britney, Steinbeck, Hawthorne, Wharton, Austen etc.
The second one, which is probably impossible to solve, is more feedback on their writing. They just aren’t staffed for that. They would need to give all the English teachers at least one or two more additional planning periods to give them time to really read and edit and provide substantive feedback on writing. Or give them TAs or something. (Although it’s not even clear to me that the new graduates are capable of that.)
Both of my kids have read Shakespeare and Steinbeck.
MS students should be reading texts like these, and not excerpts.
I liked reading Steinbeck and Shakespeare in public MS.
Mine touched on Shakespeare in MS. But I'm glad they won't get Steinbeck til later. I know their mental maturity level will be a better match then even though they could handle the reading now.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I agree English is the weak point.
I think there’s one easy fix which is to assign more books and better book. Basically everything my kids read was written after 1950 and most of t was written after 2000. They don’t read Shakespeare, dickens, Britney, Steinbeck, Hawthorne, Wharton, Austen etc.
The second one, which is probably impossible to solve, is more feedback on their writing. They just aren’t staffed for that. They would need to give all the English teachers at least one or two more additional planning periods to give them time to really read and edit and provide substantive feedback on writing. Or give them TAs or something. (Although it’s not even clear to me that the new graduates are capable of that.)
Both of my kids have read Shakespeare and Steinbeck.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I agree English is the weak point.
I think there’s one easy fix which is to assign more books and better book. Basically everything my kids read was written after 1950 and most of t was written after 2000. They don’t read Shakespeare, dickens, Britney, Steinbeck, Hawthorne, Wharton, Austen etc.
The second one, which is probably impossible to solve, is more feedback on their writing. They just aren’t staffed for that. They would need to give all the English teachers at least one or two more additional planning periods to give them time to really read and edit and provide substantive feedback on writing. Or give them TAs or something. (Although it’s not even clear to me that the new graduates are capable of that.)
Every book my kids have read in MCPS for the last 20 years makes them want think life is nothing but abuse, murder, betrayal, violence. Sick selection of books. Then they wonder why they need suicide intervention counseling sessions during home room.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I agree English is the weak point.
I think there’s one easy fix which is to assign more books and better book. Basically everything my kids read was written after 1950 and most of t was written after 2000. They don’t read Shakespeare, dickens, Britney, Steinbeck, Hawthorne, Wharton, Austen etc.
The second one, which is probably impossible to solve, is more feedback on their writing. They just aren’t staffed for that. They would need to give all the English teachers at least one or two more additional planning periods to give them time to really read and edit and provide substantive feedback on writing. Or give them TAs or something. (Although it’s not even clear to me that the new graduates are capable of that.)
Every book my kids have read in MCPS for the last 20 years makes them want think life is nothing but abuse, murder, betrayal, violence. Sick selection of books. Then they wonder why they need suicide intervention counseling sessions during home room.
You do realize those have been key themes of many a book for centuries now?
Hamlet
Macbeth
Count of Monte Cristo
Romeo and Juliet
Scarlett Letter
The Illiad
Lord of the Flies
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I agree English is the weak point.
I think there’s one easy fix which is to assign more books and better book. Basically everything my kids read was written after 1950 and most of t was written after 2000. They don’t read Shakespeare, dickens, Britney, Steinbeck, Hawthorne, Wharton, Austen etc.
The second one, which is probably impossible to solve, is more feedback on their writing. They just aren’t staffed for that. They would need to give all the English teachers at least one or two more additional planning periods to give them time to really read and edit and provide substantive feedback on writing. Or give them TAs or something. (Although it’s not even clear to me that the new graduates are capable of that.)
Every book my kids have read in MCPS for the last 20 years makes them want think life is nothing but abuse, murder, betrayal, violence. Sick selection of books. Then they wonder why they need suicide intervention counseling sessions during home room.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I taught MS and HS English in the county for a decade. At the HS level, I had 150(+/-) students at any given time. We were expected to enter at least 2 grades into the gradebook weekly. Even a minute per assignment would take me hours beyond the duty day. For essays, I'd try to keep it to about 4 minutes per student (and no, of course every assignment wasn't an essay). Still, there is a reason why work may be returned without overly detailed notes. A very detailed scoring rubric can be helpful. None of this is best practice, though. Best practice is hard to put into place with the sheer numbers teachers are dealing with.
I appreciate your insight into this. Genuine question: why do you think teachers in the 90s able to provide more corrections and feedback? I’m pretty sure they taught at least four classes.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I agree English is the weak point.
I think there’s one easy fix which is to assign more books and better book. Basically everything my kids read was written after 1950 and most of t was written after 2000. They don’t read Shakespeare, dickens, Britney, Steinbeck, Hawthorne, Wharton, Austen etc.
The second one, which is probably impossible to solve, is more feedback on their writing. They just aren’t staffed for that. They would need to give all the English teachers at least one or two more additional planning periods to give them time to really read and edit and provide substantive feedback on writing. Or give them TAs or something. (Although it’s not even clear to me that the new graduates are capable of that.)
Both of my kids have read Shakespeare and Steinbeck.
MS students should be reading texts like these, and not excerpts.
I liked reading Steinbeck and Shakespeare in public MS.
Mine touched on Shakespeare in MS. But I'm glad they won't get Steinbeck til later. I know their mental maturity level will be a better match then even though they could handle the reading now.