Reading Judy Blume in Flushing?
A colleague of mine recently mentioned that she once worked at a Persian school in Flushing, Queens. While I am not exactly sure of the time frame, I'm pretty sure it was some time in the last 25 years, which would be post-Iranian revolution. Her job was to teach the female students, or at least be their "teacher." She said that the headmasters made it clear that these girls were not to be intellectually stimulated in this school. So, similar to what we encounter in Azar Nafisi's memoir, she closed the door and taught them whatever she felt like (which in this case was something as mundane as a text by Judy Blume).
As English teachers, are we in some ways prevented from teaching what we really want to teach? Do you sometimes wish you could close your door and read texts not necessarily approved by the powers that be? To what extent does arbitrary bureaucracy influence your effectiveness as a teacher of English?
posted by Elissa @ 6:27 PM
7 Comments:
I think that allowing teachers to be creative in their choices of what to materials to use in their classroom will definately prove a more positive and successful learning experience in both part of the teacher and the students. It is often a problem in schools to motivate children to read. I have done some research in this area and students say that they do not like to read books that they do not find interesting (don't we all) and sometimes being forced to read these cannonical texts puts a hindrance on their reading motivation. Many children learn to resent reading and think of it in a negative way. I think that by allowing teacher's to have a say in what is being taught in their own classroom will help this problem because not only do the teachers know their students better than an administrator does, but also a teacher who enjoys what he/she is teaching is a person who will be more engaging to the students. Personally I would much rather learn from a teacher who chose their own material and loved it than from one is forced to teach material they may or may not enjoy.
Azar Nafisi's "private class" in her home with all female students was certainly a radical, yet admirable act. She empowered these young women through literature in which she took them out of their world one day a week and allowed them to enter into another. Although these female students did receive university education, Nafisi allotted them the freedom that was denied in the classroom.
As English teachers, we are often restricted by a set curriculum. However,teachers should use their creative influence and passion for literature to open the door to the world of literature as Nafisi does with her students.
I think being able to read and teach books you like does in fact create a more positive experience. However, I think the success that Dr. Nafasi had with the books was to some extent based on the fact that they are reading those books in a culture that is hostile to Western civilazation, and the danger of reading these "forbidden books is appealling.
I agree with everyone's comments with respect to having the academic "freedom" to chose the texts we wish to teach. I have been fortunate enough to teach where the English teachers were given "guidelines" as to what to teach, but we could add whatever else we wished to the "suggested" curriculum, if we so desired. Additionally, the "suggested" texts were not ALL canon, and so it was quite easy to both comply AND have freedom.
My problem however, lies not so much with the "restrictions" imposed upon us by our department chairpersons, but with a situation in which women are physically and mentally abused and harassed! Why do we constantly tip-toe around this issue? If we, here in the United States and other free countries of the world, do not speak up and make an attempt to irradicate the atrocities committed on women, we certainly can not expect women in Muslim countries to do so. Nevertheless, whether a woman is abused in our country or in another culture, I simply can not understand why she just does not walk out of the situation! Granted a woman with no money, no job, no prospects is certainly risking an awful lot - but does that mean she must suffer pain, torture, abuse and fear? I think not. As Nafsis says, it is "not the actual physical pain and torture of a totalitarian regime but the nightmarish quality of living in an atmosphere of perpetual dread" (23) Let us not permit this situation to continue!
WOW- interesting and insightful posts!!! Judy Blume, eh? Obviously Judy Blume has always caused controversy......from the menstrual dilemma's of the title character in "Are you there God, it's me Margaret" to the vicious catiness of pre-pubescent girls in "Blubber"- Blume's novels have been banned (and still are) in several U.S. counties. Elissa raises the question "To what extent does bureacracy influence your effectiveness?", and I'll agree that most teachers face several curriculum challenges. On the other hand, I felt Nafisi's challenge was her effectiveness with her own students struggle with text material. While American teachers deal with parents and schoolboard members, Nafisi dealt with the challenge of getting her student's to understand the value of Gatsby. Even after Nafisi defied the strict codes of her University, she still had to put up a fight with her class to understand Fitzgerald's "point". Throughout the mock-trial Nafisi was able to prove that the novel was NOT about promoting wealth,adultery, and decadence but about the disillusionment and ultimate "loss of dreams" (133).
I find it quite interesting that most of you have a say in the texts you select. In my model America's Choice school, the teachers actually have little to no say in what books they are reading in their classroom. They must read what is deemed appropriate literature.
Depending on the grade level you are teaching, there are a variety of texts that you must read with the students. As a sixth grade teacher, I read Gary Paulsen, Katherine Paterson, Sandra Cisneros for a vignette unit, and persuasive essay writing. As a teacher in this program, whether I like the works these authors produce or not, I must teach them.
For example, Gary Paulsen is a wilderness man who spends the extent of his novels writing about the animals he hunts, their guts, and how he eats them, and even provides some "tasty" recipes. What's even better, I am a vegetarian! How can I be expected to teach this unit when it completely goes against my own belief system? With that said, I agree that teachers need some say in what they teach. And sometimes, no matter how hard you try, finding value in what you have strong opposition to can be an extremely difficult task. I know that I couldn't do it and I think my students probably picked up on that in my teaching. What then, is the value in this?
Cheryl, when I worked in public school I actually wanted to do America's Choice because I felt the program was great as were the books. However, I do agree with you in the sense that not every teacher is going to connect in a special way with every forced text. I think the answer to this would be to add in some "choice" into the America's Choice framework. If teachers had a list of possible books to choose from, this would provide them with some sense of ownership and pride in what they teach, which would then hopefully result in a more fruitful reading experience for both teacher and student.
Post a Comment
<< Home