Teachers fight to save Shakespeare

Just responding to Edwyn Rudge (#1 Posting). What "Socialist agenda" are you talking about? So in accordance with your argument if I'm a top-notch English Literature graduate who knows Shakespeare like the back of my hand--I must be a (Gordon Geeko-styled) "greed is good" capitalist. Extending your implied rationale, texting technophiles are nothing more than simple-minded luddite voyeurs with an aversion to English Literature. Your "Socialist agenda" argument doesn't make sense.

I think the wider issues is relevancy. How relevant is Shakespeare in regards to today's education needs? Before you flame me let me clarify a few things. I have a degree in accounting. Both of my parents are qualified teachers and my father was a school headmaster for many years. Moving on, I remember writing essays on Janet Frame and Robert Frost in high school yet nothing about business letters, memos, proposals and schematic reports--useful stuff that are valuable whether you're going to uni or straight into the workplace. Our education system is not just elitist ie it is perceived as catering for budding lawyers, philosphers, doctors etc (ditto for the "less ambitious" builders, carpenters and plumbers etc) but it inflexible and increasingly being considered irrelevant. Ever noticed the growing trend of industry and workplace-based training? Why don't we have a tiered system that caters for the vocational minded as well as the elitist. I'm of the view that irregardless of what a high school student's future plans are, when they leave school they should be able to: 1. Speak and write well (English needs to cover the practical business communication as well as the higher level literature stuff) 2. Be competent in the use of mathematics to solve practical quantifiable problems (Math needs to remain compulsory but it should add a more practical stance for vocational training) 3. Make an argument and defend it (Philosophy should be compulsory in school) 4. Calculate a loan and do basic cash flow forecasting (Financial Management should be compulsory). 5. Master basic management concepts and tools (organisation management should be compulsory).

I don't think this would be "dumbing down" the education, far from it. I would consider it innovative and brilliant. Here's why. Irregardless of what you become (or what you do) after high school you'll need to use all of the listed capabilities at one time or another in your lifetime.

There is a lot of very subjective, reactionary comment being aired, some of which seems to be a rehash of the whole 'NCEA or not' debate. There is a whole range of world and NZ literature that can be studied which will be just as demanding and educationally valid as a study of Othello or Hamlet. Novelists, poets and short story writers have always been the choice of individual departments and I cannot see why making Shakespeare part of that range of choices should arouse all this angst.

Shakespeare is so much more than a reproduction of the pure rhythm of our human hearts; the content addressed in his plays explores the quintessential workings of the human mind and it's reaction to it's surroundings. No one can deny that learning about our own and other's behaviours have no real world application.

We want to create a nation of people who are well rounded in their education. A democracy needs this general education in History and Literature so that society can better handle their power of the 'The Vote'.

If these changes happen, I hope that more schools will turn to giving their students alternatives like the Cambridge of IBs.

just because some teenages are not smart enough to learn shakespere does not mean it should be stopped im not very good at english im in year 13 now i only just pass most things in english and i find shakespere easiest out of the topics we have done this year so maybe they should leave it and the people who study and try will pass and the people who dont will fail which is what exams are about ??

I don't get this socialist agenda. I thought even the previous national governments were semi-socialist. Each government since '35 has continued the welfare state. And in response to Dave - internal assessment for the crawlers who can't pass exams? I hate exams. Testing your knowledge about a subject in a three hour test is ridiculous. Good for some but not for others - perhaps I'm one of these crawlers? Can someone please explain to me what "socialist education" actually is? I'm familiar with Gramsci's ideas and some of Marx's but I can't see how they relate to NCEA. Thanks

Will the Ministry of Education actually listen to the subject associations (the practitioners)or just make minimal changes to this new philosophical stance? Surely all it does is save them money.

Will they back down in the face of public pressure?

Dare I ask, but will the majority of union members refuse to do any extra marking for internals or allow the added increase to the amount internals are worth without getting any compensation such as extra time and/or money? It might be time to get active.

As a secondary History teacher who has been involved highly in my subject association meetings, I find it interesting that this has now come into the open just as the National party comes to power. I hope this can be nipped in the bud sooner rather than later as Labour seemed unwilling to discuss this with us, repeated claiming to know nothing about what was happening - including Mary Chamberlain.

It is true, there are to be no more topics in history. Teachers can teach whatever they like, which for some of the lazier ones means they can study one topic all year and students will still "faithfully reproduce content" in exams... I am not against changing topics or ever getting rid of them, it offers a lot of opportunities for teachers who wish to take them...however, the ministry is ramming this through so fast, teachers will not be able to do a good job of this process.

Without some understanding of the major historical events of the past few centuries, the future generations may be doomed to repeat the mistakes of the past... Please slow this process down Mr. Key so we can do this properly.

DP: You say that as a student, you can imagine why some people want Shakespeare's plays gone. Gone from the syllabus they may be, but they won't be gone from the canon of English literature. I can imagine why some students / educators might want other things to disappear too. It would make teaching and learning a lot easier, but ultimately our society will suffer from a large underclass of uneducated drones that this kind of dumbing down will create.

If there is no standard what is the point of employers asking for CVs? How can the new workforce be measured? It's commonly said about computer systems, "put rubbish in get rubbish out". Now applicable to the education system as well.

"Schools have the professional responsibility for designing learning programmes which contain appropriate knowledge that are relevant for their particular students." Interesting. So the education system hands over an unmeasurable methodology for educating the pupils, which they will be measured on when ERO comes round.