English+Education

This week's readings, sans the //13 Steps to Teacher Empowerment// -as it is in route to my shipping address-, focus on defining and qualifying what English Education is. This definition rests at the very heart of any instruction in English Language Arts, certainly; however, some would argue, as John Mayher does, that it is the very heart and soul of all education, all disciplines, all of life. Thusly, it is a difficult task, that of defining English education. One so difficult, in fact, that it has spanned, in the collected readings for this week's class alone, over a century of close study. The review of English Education proffered by Allan Abbott in 1901 describes and decries some of the very same troubles that I am witnessing in my third-year English classroom in 2012. English education is continually changing and growing. The educators who have answered the highest call to teach students the ins and outs of the spoken and written word have to grow and change along with their field. The questions posed early last century tug at us still. English Education is life; and in many cases, it is a life lived "under duress" (Abbott).

In 1896, only about seventeen percent of students who sat for the college entrance exam for Harvard College received a mark above a C (Abbott). Abbot bemoans, in great detail, the misspellings, the egregious paragraphing and sentence structure, and the punctuation errors of the "sub-freshmen" hoping, against hope, that their skills will earn them admittance to the nation's finest institutions. My yearly tortured tango with the written essay on the ACT gives me a view into his agony and earns this teacher leader from yesteryear a place in my highly-strung heart. Could it be that the only difference between my time and Abbot's is a great many years and socio-economic status? In truth, there are many more differences, but then, how can we explain our similar conundrums. The students in 1901 and in 2012 are similarly unprepared for college. They are taught the correct and necessary information, made privy to the same tomes of civilized brilliance, and encouraged, to the point of bribery, to read far and deeply outside of the classroom. How is it then we arrive at the same unsatisfying result? Is Mayher correct in his rant that English education and teacher preparation has changed and morphed so much as to have perpetuated the current crisis? Are we really unable to prepare educators properly, due to the strangle-hold curriculum developers hold over us all?

I was glad to read Abbott's "English in the Secondary School; A Review" for the emancipating idea that we have yet to uncover the turnkey that will enflame our students' hearts with a unquenchable thirst for English education. Buehler's call to take up, and bravely hold forth, a questioning stance as we grow into teacher researchers speaks directly to my experience and developing practice. Mayher's frustration mirrors that of my own English Department chairperson's. These educational thinkers, from then and now, join ranks with me in the quintessential battle of our times where the victors MUST be our students.

Works Cited Abbott, Allan. "English in the Secondary Schools; A Review." //The School Review// 9.6 (June 1901): 388 - 402 Buehler, Jennifer. "The Power of Questions and the Possibilities of Inquiry in English Education." //English Education// 37.4 (July 2005); 280 - 287 Mayher, John; "English Teacher Education as Literacy Teacher Education." //English Education// 44.2 (January 2012). 180 - 187