British Schools: Just as dumb!

The Millenium Library Trust, a British institution that gives classic books to schools, has had dozens of its donations returned...because students found the books "too difficult." God Forbid!

Story Here

Not really shocking. According to a UK friend of mine, most schools won't even teach proper grammar, for fear of "stifling student creativity." I could see that shit happening in the US, but I was surprised it was a problem in the UK.

Cries..40 schools with no library that's just great.

How were the books being taught? If someone just gave me a copy of Shakespeare and expected me to understand it, I'd have a very hard time (as would most people). Shakespeare's plays were never meant to be read (and certainly not by a modern audience that speak a language that differs vastly from Shakespeare's version of English) - they were meant to be seen performed as plays.

When I did Shakespeare in a British school, we'd be given certain characters to play and have to read a few pages out loud, and stop after a few paragraphs to talk about the meaning/significance of them.

If schools were just handing out copies of these books with no kind of tuition or guidance on how to understand the texts, I can completely understand why students would be uninterested in them. And I don't think it's dumb at all.

Errr...the point isn't that the students find it hard. There is nothing wrong with that. The problem is that the schools are refusing free books because they are too hard. That's why it's dumb. That's also why I called out the schools and not the students.

Schools should be promoting things that are difficult, not discouraging them.

To be honest, I can see why schools would rather teach more accessible modern literature to students over a small selection of 'classics'. Shakespeare and Dickens are not the be all and end all of literary merit, and if British students would rather study Margaret Atwood and William Blake, then there's nothing wrong with that.

Sometimes teaching literature isn't about pushing the student to read the most difficult thing, but about stirring their passion with whatever texts they find most engaging.

Please read the article.

This isn't about what they're teaching, this is about what they stock in their libraries. I don't know where in the world you're coming up with William Blake...he'd probably be considered too difficult as well.


For some reason, the link in the OP isn't working: www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23389728-details/Schools+refuse+gifts+of+'boring'+classics/article.do

No, he's taught in alot of schools in Britain. And I gave Blake as an example of an acessible writer that is easy to understand (compared with Shakespeare).

Anyway, I still don't see the problem with schools refusing to store books that there is no demand for. If a person really wants a book, they can always just go to their local library and ask the library to order them a copy (for free).

Shakespeare's really not that hard. It's only hard if you don't care.

And yes, Shakespeare is, pretty much, the be-all and end-all of literary merit.

I wouldn't go that far, but in the English speaking world, your education is pretty deficient if you don't cover Shakespeare pretty extensively. If for nothing more than the references to him from so many writers that have come after him, he's indespensable. It's like jumping straight to algebra without making sure you've got that adding thing down yet.

The link to the article still doesn't work, i can't find the story.

I'd like to read what schools that these books were being donated to. When we donate to our schools they ask for childrens books and literature, because, they're kids. Some are turned away because they already have multiple copies, and they are trying to save space, seeing as that the school levies don't pass very often, they don't have a lot of space for a library, it's actually just a converted class room.

I love Dickens, Poe and Shakespeare. I also read Stephen King, I read a lot about the civil war, WW II and vietnam. I also read Graphic Novels and i read engineering guides. All books i enjoy. But if i were to hand anyone of them to my 7 year old daughter and say "read this" i could almost guarantee what the outcome would be.

I usually read with my daughter, one or two grade levels about what she is in. I don't hand her a book that is based on a tenth grade level and expect her to fully understand the book. I can't read the article so i am not sure if these were being offered to a high school library or a grade school library.

Shakespeare is taught in British schools, and compulsory at A Level - I've already suffered through Hamlet, Othello and Taming of the Shrew. However, some schools simply do not have a need for copies of certain books.

I couldn't see anything in the article about which type of schools refused the books. Were they vocational colleges (e.g. ones that specialise in travel and tourism or motor mechanics, etc), were they primary schools, etc. What proportion of students were actually studying English Literature at A Level?

so you did say the students are finding the books to hard? surely, or am i reading this wrong??? Difficult means hard right? i mean i wasn't in top set for English but i read the classics.

witch one is it?

plus when i was at school form the ages for 9-16 i coved one shakesspear book at lest each school year

there where enough copy's for everyone in class to have a copy to take home and keep for the duration of that books studying. so your looking at 300+ copy's of each book, same to be said for all over books that i studied, be its Bronte or Dickings or whatever, my school stocked more then the required amount of every book that was on the English *silly bus* across the 3 learning levels,

seems to me these schools proberly turned down book they had loads of already

i never once got a book out of my school library as i had so many to read and study anyway why whoudl i want more, and i'm sure this is the same for most British students

Oh, for the love of shit. I'm saying (for the hard of reading) that, yes, the students found it "too hard" and "too difficult" but that shouldn't matter to the schools!!

Do you really think that schools should stop teaching things that the kids think are too hard? Really? No more difficult math: "our students were having a hard time with maths, so we're teaching TV now!"

The issue isn't that complicated, people.

"Suffered through" Hamlet? Yeah, I mean, it's only maybe the greatest thing ever written.

I dunno, man. Those Budweiser ads are pretty funny.

sorry you should make it more clearer next time

no i don't think that schools should stop teaching something because it is hard, and they properly aren't stopping teaching it, like i said in my last post when i was studying a book everyone in class had access to a copy. every lesson as they where given one. this was the same in my sisters schools

also over the course of the year depending on your level depended on what books you coved, prime example being taming of the shew and of mice and men, both covering smiler subjects but ones easier then the other,

it has to matter to the schools in some respect as they have to tech the kids, based on there abilities, like i said i was in a lower group for English, though some kids thrived in this group and progressed to a higher set. to learn more, this is the norm for all key subjects across schools in the UK. its how its done,

the school turned down books probarly because it had enough copy's and possibly because the standard of learning at that school was lower then say at Eaton,

though having jsut read the artical, i can underderstand the kids as well i sued to get board of my tits at school with some of thses books, but as for having no libary, not everyschool dose, perhaps tehy keep all there books in a classroom or two, jsut as they have no libeary, dosn't mean the kids don't have access to books,

plus as has been said before, most towns in the UK have a free library or two, kids can get books there as well.

man, this post really seems to prove the thread title

taken from the artical

exactly, only some kids will love the complete dickens version of oliver or whatever, others could perhaps do with an easier more modern version thats easier to read meaning that when they finished that they may think,

'wow thats a grate book i wonder what the proper version is like''

I'm reading hard times, and its hard going. loads of words that aren't used today if they updated and perhaps gave copy's of them books made with mordern language rahter then the original script, then kids wouldn't find them so hard. but still learn the grates

whys that?

i was referring to all of your spelling and grammatical mistakes. just making humor jokes is all.

fair enough.
but like i said i was in the lower sets

awesomesauce

From the article:

I observe that "not all the responses were negative". That would be 50 schools that refused them, out of 4150.
"Not all the responses were negative". Riiight. No political agenda there at all.