Jeannette's Reflection 4

Literature in School

I am currently in Nan Chiau Secondary School and they offer English Communicative Arts their lower secondary students. This started last year, and according to my CT, is done in hope that it will promote Literature and encourage them to take Literature in upper secondary. I like ECA very much because even though the teacher is required to teach both English and Literature, it gives a lot more time for the teacher to explore the text with the students, as some English skills are learnt based on passages from the text. Currently, the Sec 2s are doing Macbeth while the Sec 1s are doing Emily of Emerald Hill. I am unsure how many upper secondary classes they have at the moment, but I remember my CT sharing with me that they are doing The Crucible, and do not do Shakespeare at upper secondary level. (Hence Macbeth at Sec 2.)

The teachers in my school are supportive of Literature, and because they were receptive, have allowed the ECA programme to be possible for the lower secondary school levels. I have spoken to some students about Literature and some of them like it while some of them do not. Some find it very interesting to be able to study different characters. Those who do not like it cannot understand why they have to “quote, quote, quote”.

Typical approaches to teaching would be giving out worksheets and going through the text at the same time. However, they do include videos and activities like “hot seating” to make lessons more exciting. Assessment would come in the form of written homework, and test papers. I think this is so because it is ECA, and maybe because English requires assessing their writing skills, their assessment mode tends towards written papers.

Literature, a declining subject?

I cannot deny that the number of classes taking Literature is declining every year, but I am encouraged that Nan Chiau is making an effort to promote Literature with their ECA curriculum. Nonetheless, there is always the concern that even with ECA, students may still dislike Literature because they now have to do Literature in class every day and they get bored of it. (“Teacher, why every day do the same book? We already know the story!”) In this case, because it is tied to English, students would study the book very seriously, but I think that this loses the value of learning Literature. They end up wanting to copy everything there is about every character, memorise themes and quotes and whatever they can get their hands on to get an A. With so much to copy, Literature then becomes a chore. I think there must be a balance where students are also given the opportunity to voice their opinions and realise that there is no model answer, but is very much dependent on how well they can bring across their points.

I also believe that if schools stop seeing Literature as a subject where only students who are good in English can take, there might be more students who are willing to give Literature a shot. I have met students who are interested in taking Literature, but because their schools do not offer it, they do not have a choice but to take something else up. This effectively cuts off many students from Literature, which automatically leads to the declining numbers. Perhaps, ECA may be a good way to give a greater exposure to Literature to students in the Lower Secondary Level (because more periods are allocated to Literature and English combined), and to really experience what Literature is like.