3 ms·
I get where you are coming from (and take no offense). If I understand your intent correctly, you are right that I should be more generous to teachers. In the c
by pge 3y ago
I get where you are coming from (and take no offense). If I understand your intent correctly, you are right that I should be more generous to teachers. In the context of larger educational challenges (and a recovery from the pandemic), I did not mean to suggest that teachers’ intimate familiarity with Shakespeare should be a high priority in our schools, merely that in a perfect world (without other challenges), students would learn Shakespeare better (which I think would be a benefit) from teachers that know the material.
Sadly, our educational system has much deeper challenges than that, and I didn’t mean to suggest otherwise. The conversation was about Shakespeare specifically and how his works are taught, not the broader state of education.
- tgv 3y agoOTOH, English teachers once did know their Shakespeare. And Goethe, and Moliere. I had a colleague who could recite some Shakespeare, I even can remember some Heine (even though I hated it), and my former boss could recite the opening of the Odyssey, in Greek. All taught in secondary school. And in these same formative years, my daughter is taught dick jokes. It doesn't require much imagination to see what that does to education. It certainly downgrades the teachers. Too much emphasis has been placed on knowledge being useful, without actually knowing what comprises useful knowledge, and fun in the classroom, in the unproven expectation to improve performance, while at the same time "broadening" the curriculum and lowering the standards, so more children can participate.