Kurtz 1

Rachel Kurtz
Response/Reaction Paper
EDUC 206
Sr. MaryAnn Jacobs
Abstract

This essay addresses the issue of the continuous lack of respect of the English
curriculum, not only by students, but also by teacher and administrative colleagues. The
essay attempts to prove why English is a necessary subject in a secondary-school
setting. It explains that although many argue that English is a dispensable subject,
students are missing more than just skills needed for the classroom, like reading and
writing, but the English curriculum encompasses skills that develop students into fully
prepared adults, therefore creating better societies. This essay explains that English
class provides students with the necessary tools to learn how to critically think, see
through different perspectives through the reading curriculum, learn how to analyze
correctly, learn how to create meanings in literature, and much more. The essay also
covers counterarguments when it comes to teaching English in the foreign language
classroom and the argument against the uses of literary elements and themes as
ineffective tools in the classroom.

Research Response Paper

Today, English, as a secondary-school subject, seems to be losing respect. Often
times, English teachers encounters students asking the same overall question why do

Kurtz 2
we need to learn this? It seems this question is not just asked by students anymore, but
also by administrative faculty and colleagues. According to Reeve (1945) in the article
Why Teach English, many states have already reduced English requirements in high
school from four years, to three. Many school administrations even suggest teaching
English three times a week instead of five. While teachers do favor integrated core
curriculums that are supposed to help students, English teachers still do not want to see
the essential values of English neglected. Students and administrations need to realize
that English class is not dispensable; while many students argue that English is not
something they will consider as a career, therefore they do not need it, English class not
only offers a more intelligible way of communication and writing skill, but also develops
students to become mature adults by teaching students to critically think, experience
through different perspectives through reading, analyze situations objectively, and create
meaning in things that one may offhandedly consider trivial.
Gopnik, in his article Why Teach English? (2013) shares this same concern for
the lack of appreciation of the English major today. He states, The English major is
vanishing from our colleges as the Latin prerequisite vanished before it. He expresses
this concern in that, while there are people who continue to study English today, the
numbers are continuously decreasing and there is less and less of a respect for it.
Gopnik states two popular reasons that defend the study of English: one, that English
majors make better people, and two, that English majors (and humanities majors) make
better societies. He justifies this statement by explaining that people need to experience

Kurtz 3
different perspectives, learn about others cultures, and that these are all essential to
people, because humanities as a subject are embedded in what makes humans human.
In turn, this creates better societies because people experience new perspectives and
learns to accept different perspectives through the English class curriculum. In his article
he quotes Christina Paxson, the president of Brown University, that there are real,
tangible benefits to the humanistic disciplines to the study of history, literature, art,
theater, music, and languages. She explains that because society cannot predict the
future benefits of a research, society cannot reject a study and deem it as undeserving,
which is what society is doing to English right now.
Unlike Gopnik, Stephanie Clark, in her article Why Teach Literature? addresses
some issues that critique the way English is taught in high school. While she states that
literature should open the mind, give multiple perspectives, give ideas, and overall make
the mind more free and active, she claims that the English class does the opposite. She
gives a lot of insight on how English teachers could be teaching to criticize literature, not
giving their students the full freedom to make their own opinions about the texts. Her
main point is that English teachers should be more aware as to how they introduce
literary elements, themes, plots, characters, etc. because it does not always allow
students to think outside the box. She explains that while this is the adapted way of how
to criticize literature, she worries that this is erasing other students ways of interpretation
because teachers show that this specific model is the only and the correct way to
interpret literature. While Clark makes very strong points, she fails to realize that not all

Kurtz 4
students have developed this skill in critical thinking, so it is unfair to assume that all the
students can come to sound conclusions and interpretations of the discussed literature.
Literary elements and themes were constructed in the English classroom because it
helps give a direct guide for students to see the writers true intentions. In this same
aspect, literary elements and themes parallel critical thinking skills; taking this away may
hinder a students ability to fully develop this skill. Literary elements and themes are
embedded into the English curriculum; if one is to take away these components, they are
taking away the English class.
While Clark argues against the way English should be taught, she does
recognize that English is essential to the classroom. She lists not only her opinions about
why teaching English/literature is important, but college students opinions as well. She
lists the benefits such as, that English inspires curiosity, disrupts the consumer model of
education, and shows complexity and fine distinctions when understanding the world.
Overall, English class gives students a better vocabulary and is a more relaxed class,
therefore giving students a break from other demands on their lives. She states that
English class provides pleasure for listeners and readers, builds experiences, provides a
language model, and develops thinking skills. English class stretches farther than the
classroom curriculum and even develops students for the real world she states that it
helps young students learn how to deal with their own issues, value others from different
races, ethnic groups, and cultures, helps establish career concepts, and improves
reading and attitudes. Clark quotes the online site, English Education Research, and

Kurtz 5
states, because literature interacts, simplifies, and focuses our experiences, it helps us
realize what is more important, most basic, in that experience. She concludes and
states that literature is critical and that in no way should it be stopped being taught.
Without it, society would lack critical thinking and prepared adults.
As mentioned earlier, Reeve expresses concern for the lack of appreciation of
English classes today in his article Why Teach English? (1945). While many are trying
to reduce the implementation of the English curriculum in classrooms, he explains that
this would be detrimental to students because of the various benefits that come from the
English class that no other class can fulfill. Reeve strongly points out that without the
basic skills of English (listening, reading, speaking, and writing), without adequate
vocabularies, without clear thinking and critical judgment, without the social and
psychological aspects of life learned vicariously through literature, the individual is
handicapped in earning a living, in enjoying a full life, in being the best sort of citizen.
Reeve shares the same reasoning Gopnik did, in that, English creates better citizens,
therefore, creating better societies. He justifies this statement by sourcing J. Donald
Adams entry in the New York Times in his article because he claims that literature has
some sort of power that widens and deepens sympathies for people. He states that if we
were to take away some of the opportunity to understand and read through others
personal experiences, it would make tolerance and consideration of the rights of
othersimmensely more difficult. In other words, people will continue to see in a closeminded, sheltered, perspective if they are not given opportunity to read and experience

Kurtz 6
others lives. This is part of why it is essential to have English taught in schools, because
literature gives a voice to those who do not have a voice. We will make choices in our
own lives that care and give opportunity to those whose rights would otherwise be
neglected. In turn, English makes better citizens. Reeve concludes that teachers should
not only realize these values just for themselves, but for their students and the
generations to come. He explains that when teachers educate their students these
values, they are teaching communities to help them realize just why we teach English.
In the article, Why Teach Literature in the Foreign Language Classroom? by
Sell (2005), he specifically addresses whether literature should be taught in the foreign
language classroom. He states that time and time again, the value of teaching literature
in a foreign language classroom is continuously questioned. He first recognizes the
counterargument: that many times teachers who are teaching English to non-English
speakers, there is almost always a cultural gap. He mentions that the history of literature
is much to do with linguistic imperialism, leaving teachers to be afflicted by guilty
feelings. He states that when they introduce their students to Shakespeare, Dickens, or
Ted Hughes, these men are all condemned for cultural imperialism, leaving non-English
speakers and non-white students to feel a disconnect. Overall, Sell is stating that it is
okay to learn a different culture/language when one is already an English speaker
because English (and Europeans in general) has continuously been in history, a higher
place of racial and cultural privilege than someone who is of African, Black,
Hispanic/Latino, Asian, Pacific Islander, Middle Eastern decent. If it is the other way

Kurtz 7
around, it could come off as a form of imperialistic history being pressed on a person of
color whose entire culture and racial history have already been affected by white
imperialism. Instead of eradicating the English classroom, educators must alter the
curriculum to appeal to non-white and non-English speakers. If the curriculum is only
being appreciated and understood by one specific demographic, than English is not
being used to its fullest benefits.
Although Sell mentions very real and concerning aspects to teaching English in
the foreign language classroom, English and literature still offer multiple benefits that one
cannot acquire if the entire English classroom is eliminated. He states these benefits are,
1) that literature can enhance language learning at primary level 2) literature that is in the
target language gives readers a better insight into other non-target language cultures, in
turn, preparing students to act appropriately when dealing with people from those
specific cultures 3) literature may be even more relevant to modern day life to learners
than textbook material. Sell also lists multiple reasons that support literature. He states
that it gives cultural enrichment because it promotes cultural understanding and
awareness, it is a good linguistic model, it extends linguistic competence, its convenient,
and literature is always open to interpretation. He mentions that not only does literature
give understanding to culture, but also has mental benefits such as mental training and
memorability.
Many argue that English is a dispensable subject because they are not going into
an English field, or that they already know English, therefore they do not need to take a

Kurtz 8
class about it. What they do not realize is that they are missing more than just reading
and writing; they are missing critical aspects that help develop people into fully prepared
adults. Not only does English class provide an intelligible way of communication and
writing, it teaches students to critically think, experience through different perspectives
through reading, develop analyzing skills, and create meanings, not just in literature, but
in their everyday lives. Gopnik states that people need to experience different
perspectives, learn about others cultures, etc., because the humanities are essential, as
it is embedded into what makes someone human. Gopnik concludes by stating that we
need humanities, not for trivial things that society places importance on like money or
companies, but because it is what helps society understand, enjoy, and make sense of
the world. He concludes by stating, The reason why we need the humanities is because
were human. Thats enough.

Kurtz 9

Works Cited

Applebee, A., Langer, J., Nystrand, M., & Gamoran, A. (2003). Discussion-Based
Approaches to Developing Understanding: Classroom Instruction and Student
Performance in Middle and High School English. American Educational
Research Journal, 40(3), 685-730. Retrieved from
http://aer.sagepub.com/content/40/3/685.full.pdf html
Gopnik, A. (2013, October 31). Why Teach English? The New Yorker, p. 3. Retrieved
from
http://immagic.com/eLibrary/ARCHIVES/GENERAL/NEWYKRUS/N130827G.pdf

Reeve, A. W. (1945). Why Teach English?. English Journal, 376-378.

Sell, J. (2005). Why Teach Literature in the Foreign Language Classroom? Encuentro,
93-93. Retrieved from
http://dspace.uah.es/dspace/bitstream/handle/10017/573/11_Sell.pdf?
sequence=1&isAllowed=y

Why Teach Literature? (2013, November 23). Retrieved October 1, 2015.