Assignment 6

Do we want depressed young students or children being children?

Our Centre-Right Alliance government has an idea about how we can make our schools better by authority and grades from early stages. Why do so many students ending school without the knowledge they should have? Is it because of sloppy teachers, a lack of grades in primary school or a let-go mentality in school both by teachers and students? Or is it because of big classes with too many students in need of help and only one stressed teacher? We can only speculate about the causes. After what the government thought was a sloppy attitude against learning during several years, they want more strictness and a whip. Grades in primary school seems to be the only solution for this problem whatever causing it, according to the Center-Right Alliance government.

Grades for primary school pupils could be devastating. You could easily break a little child with grades and no one is better off branded as a FAIL. If we tell young children about their mistakes in a wrong way they will certainly get depressed. Do we not have enough depressed children in our society as it is? It will be comparison and maybe even bullying between children, children will be panic-stroked and parents will maybe rush their children because of the mad scramble for higher grades. This case will certainly not help small children learn what they are supposed to learn, and is that not what we want the children to do - learn?

Secondly, children need to be children - not "study machines". If our children are going to be haunted for better grades that early it could end up with children lacking hobbies and spare time for playing with other children. Children have to play outdoors and feel free. Children are not supposed to be "study machines", chained to a desk all day long and nothing will be better if we force them to study only instead of having fun with each other. Do we not want our children to have a happy childhood? They will be able to feel stressed over grades later on anyway. School is a place of horror for many children as it is, without us increasing the group feeling that way by grading in primary school.

But is it not better to find out difficulties as early as possible? Yes, of course it is - the sooner, the better because it is easier to help children before they are getting too far behind the schedule. But if we point out those difficulties in such early age as primary school and by such a devastating method, we could break the child instead of helping him or her. We do not want to kill their lust, joy and curiosity, are we? We must find a way of helping through provide working methods both to find out their problems and to help them learn, which also must work for all students instead of grading in an early age. Let all children feel success and not failure. If we make the children feel good about what they perform they will be able to continue learning, if they feel as loosers they will become tired of school with devastating consequences for their future. I know this for sure - I have a son who was totally broken by high pressure in third class! He still have problems five years later. Do not create more children as Tobias. It is totally enough as it is.

For the sake of our children we should find other ways of supporting them to learn instead of breaking them by grading in an early age. Children must have a chance of being children, to play and enjoy school instead of being terrified of it. To support children's natural lust for learning and curiosity instead of whipping them to knowledge is not to be sloppy and careless. It is to be human and to dare being a sensitive and caring adult.

Assignment 5

1.) Peter Barry explains in his article "Tackling Textuality - With Theory" (The Use of English Volume 52, Number 1, Autumn 2000) how we usually interpret a text. He gives us ten check points in a list and emphasizes the fact they all being needed during literary studies.

Barry also emphasizes the fact that those ten points is not enough if we are going to get close to a text. We also need four principles for looking not only inside a text, but also outwards it. Even if close reading is a central part we also need to pay attention to cultural context, language, gender and the mental process to be able to cover the whole text. This is why a literary theory is needed and Barry exhibit how this works in reality by using Shakespeare's sonnet 73 with its exciting composition.

Barry strongly point out the relationship between literature and language as the most important aspect because it enables deconstructive reading. Barry explain the decontructive reading and the difference between deconstructive reading and close reading aims by using a cat as an example for a text; if we are close reading we pet the cat as it wishes and it shows how much it love the treatment, but if we pet it against the fur and the cat gets upset we use the deconstructive reading. Deconstructive reading provokes the text while close reading soothes it.

Barry uses Hilda Doolittle's poem "Ored" and Adrienne Rich's poem "Transit" to show how to practice deconstructive reading. He points out strange behaviours of words, the attitudes of figures in the text and how we as readers should not chose the simplest answer while reading a text, because there is no security of how things ought to be. Barry admits that reading is difficult but also fun sometimes when we manage to break up the complexities.

2.) The article contains phrases which ought to be quoted directly because it is so central parts of the article and a bit hard to rephrase in such a striking way as Barry has manage to do. Examples of parts which ought to be quoted directly are Barry's explanation of deconstructive reading, his explanation of how to use the ten points of interpretation and what is missing when we use only them. Finally I think the parts Barry has chosen from the poems should be quoted directly too if I am going to talk about them, because that is what he has analyzed in his article.

3.) Peter Barry's article is really interesting and in a way an "aha-experience" because I usually use some of his principles without having any deeper knowledge - until now.

I must admit I was terrified when I started to read the article, because it is not easy to follow Barry directly from start with all those tricky words and phrases. The text did not make any sence to me when I read it the first time. But as soon as I read it a second time - using the close reading method - it became clear and I understood what Barry meant. And by the third time I could agree with him.

The text is convincing; the argument for using more than ordinary surface reading and frame work, just to mentioning some of the parts, is absolutley something I agree with. Of course a reader must look both outside and inside a text to be able to unravel it.

The text is also well structured and easy to follow during a second reading. The structure with the check points in a row with examples after, is very good and make it easy to get an overview. This might be a useful way of describing the other principles as well to make it less confusing during a first reading.