In the educational debate presented here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/fiction-vs-nonfiction-smackdown/2012/10/17/cbb333d0-16f0-11e2-a55c-39408fbe6a4b_story.html
experts argue on whether English classes should have more fiction or nonfiction reading in them. One person suggests that by 12th grade, students be reading 70% nonfiction! Now, I don't know about you all, but I think that is ridiculous.
Non-Fiction reading is for learning facts. You don't really learn enough about creativity, culture, or style unless you're reading fiction books. Most of the literature we've gotten this year has been fiction, and it has been way more interesting than reading your history textbook. I think that cutting out fiction is like cutting out labs from science. You just can't learn all there is to know without it.
Also, fiction reading keeps kids more interested in what they're learning. Granted, not all of our English short stories or books are going to be everybody's favorite, but I guarantee they're better than reading nonfiction.
"Pondiscio says he admires Bauerlein and Stotsky and doesn’t see why English classes have to carry the nonfiction weight. Social studies and science courses can do that."
I agree a lot more with this guy ^^ than the guy who was on the side of non-fiction. Kids will enjoy fiction more, learn more creative writing skills from fiction, and the non-fiction skills can be covered by other classes. I feel like I learned most of the non-fiction reading skills I needed from reading the entire AP World and AP US textbooks. Personally, that was enough for me.
No comments:
Post a Comment