d3a10254
From: your.name@isp.com
In article , Hunter
wrote:
> In article , your.name@isp.com says...
> >
> > "Hunter" wrote in message
> > news:MPG.268e1cfb5cb8271c98a528@news.optonline.net...
> > > In article > > 116.dial.dyn.ihug.co.nz>, your.name@isp.com says...
> > > > In article , MDH
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > "Your Name" wrote in
> > > > > news:hvts7a$soc$1@lust.ihug.co.nz:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Dropping Shakespeare and other such nonsense to have time to
> > actually
> > > > > > teach useful and necessary things makes a school better.
> > > > >
> > > > > YEah, you just lost all credibility.
> > > >
> > > > Yep, because studying Shakespeare's garbage is just so worthwhile,
while
> > > > learning how to spell correctly is pointless. :-\
> > > ---
> > > Shakespeare is garbage? No wonder you don't like the new BSG IIRC.
> > > The new BSG has a heavy Shakespearean bent. "Star Trek" is famous for
> > > using Shakespeare in its plots. "Star Wars" takes a lot of its cues
> > > from "The Bard".
> > >
> > > Granted it is hard to understand because it uses a lot of words we
> > > don't use anymore or they have changed meaning. But teaching modern
> > > English with Shakespeare's classics isn't incompatible. We went on
> > > for years teaching Shakespeare in English classes and graduated the
> > > large majority of students who can used common English intelligently
> > > and learned the rudiments of Shakespeare. I'm taking about from the
> > > 1960's back thought to the 19th century, so teaching Shakespeare
> > > along with standard English rules isn't why students seem to not know
> > > basic English.
> >
> > Schools don't teach the basics because they waste too much time forcing
> > students to read books that are worthlessly boring, including Shakespeare,
> > Catcher in the Rye, and numerous other so-called "classics" ... and yes
they
> > are boring, the vast majority of students will tell you that.
> ----
> And a lot of people would tell you that they are grateful for when
> they were forced to read the classics, ancient (Homer), middle age
> (Shakespeare) and modern (Moby Dick, Catcher in the Rye, Tom Sawyer
> etc).
"A lot" isn't really the description I'd use for one or two in a class (if
you're lucky). :-\
> Student will tell you they hate math too. Some who hate math wonder what is
> the practicality of learning calculus.
Yes, and as I said somehwere along the line, complex algebra, etc. should
also be an option for later school years for those who want it. The
enforeced lessons should simply cover the basics properly: addition,
subtraction, multiplcation, division, percentages, fractions ... things
people actually use.
> The less athletic ones would tell you they hate gym.
Gym is completely pointless in school. Leave that for outside school hours
for those who want to play sports.
> Just because the students hate it doesn't mean it isn't good for
> them. I am sorry if some didn't get the meaning behind those book and
> had a hard time in school with them but that doesn't mean they
> shouldn't be taught in public school.
The point is they teach these worthless subjects at the expense of the
simple, basic things people should know.
> > let alone trying to figure out the stupidity of "what was the author
> > thinking when they wrote that" style questions (they were probably
thinking,
> > it's time for lunch so I'll finish this chapter quickly)
>
> If someone can't do that then it is possible that a person can't
> analyzed what producer and writer are trying to say in a TV show.
Another pointless waste of time. A TV show is entertainment, you're not
supposed to study all the miniscule details out of it and ruin it
(especially since 90% of those details wil be wrong).
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
