For years, students have had mixed feelings about assigned reading. This opinion has shifted to a discourse towards literacy and student participation as a whole. Liberty High School is no exception to this discussion, seeming to benefit more from reading in a group setting rather than individual assignments and expectations. In shifting the educational curriculum towards a more inclusive and conversational approach, students and teachers could better understand one another and expand their educational opportunities.
As classroom structure changes, so do the demands and expectations of the students. The ease of Sparknotes and ChatGPT summaries has begun to fill the place of reading within the educational curriculum. But would students be more engaged if they had more of a say in what they spend their class time reading? “I think it really just depends on each student, there are some that really get into picking their books, and they realize they like to read, but then there are some that…are just not going to read,” English and AP Literature teacher Michelle Ryan remarked. Former English teacher, Cristine Stephens, agreed, noting that, “my readers were readers and my non-readers were non-readers.”
Despite these observations, both teachers felt that novels regarding social commentary or issues tended to be better received and often produced projects that they were excited to give to their students. “As educators, we are tasked with shaping minds and futures. Reading is not merely a skill; it is a gateway to learning,” wrote the Graduate Program for Educators Blog in “Benefits of Reading for All Students.” With this in mind, finding a more updated way of engaging and educating students on literature is as important as ever. Ryan expressed concern for the growing gap between students and certain classic works, “We’re in a society now that doesn’t necessarily value reading.”
This lack of emphasis on the role reading plays in society extends much further than the classroom. There is a constant use of literary references within all types of media, spanning from adaptations to slapstick jokes; the ability to understand such remarks is a rapidly dying art. So what can be done? Both educators agreed that having a balance between individually picked and self-paced reading, paired with in-class reading, seemed to weed out literary misconceptions for their engaged students. This raises the idea of potential influence on reluctant readers, in allowing more literary freedom, given the proper guidance or context, could spark a newfound interest in literary works.
The Wordy Habitat wrote, “the class shouldn’t only be about language itself,” a sentiment that many may find refreshing amidst piles of rhetorical essays and sentence structure analysis. In bringing more classroom engagement and more student opinion into the classroom, it maximizes the impact the class could have on the student body. Stephens commented that today, reading a novel front-to-back is not necessarily the skill to be prioritized, but students coming to terms with consuming content they may not immediately enjoy.
In pushing for a more modernized curriculum, not necessarily focusing on student enjoyment, but on student engagement, a new standard could be set for reading comprehension. Both teachers found that small group projects surrounding novels seemed to be well-received by students, showcasing that potentially discussion-based rather than the standard essay or test-based assessment may be more clarifying and less intimidating.
While opinions differ for students and teachers on the topic of required reading, it is clear that the curriculum and the way in which literature is discussed have been rapidly changing. Without efforts by students and staff alike, literary study could continue to spiral into obsolescence. It is crucial in these rapidly evolving moments to make an effort to understand each group and move forward as a collective to better support a new, educated, and engaged generation.
