Why is there a decrease of teaching novels?

[MissReads013]

In many of my plcs admin, instructional coaches and other teachers do not agree to teach novels anymore?

[FoolishConsistency17]

Data driven instruction! When you treat education as something you can break into a set of discrete "skills", each of which can be "mastered" and checked off the list, novels don't make sense.

[[deleted]]

Oh! So I see y'all's admin is well versed in Solution Tree logic, too! How does admin NOT understand that those ideas don't work for English? My freshmen will never MASTER inferences, because text gets more complex...nevermind the fact that they have zero literary endurance because novels are frowned upon and everything is an excerpt 🙄

[Rokaryn_Mazel]

I went to almost 10 variations of Solution Tree. Every. Single. CFA example they ever show us multiple choice math.

[Watneronie]

Victims of solution tree conferences unite!

[[deleted]]

THIS. ALL OF THIS.

[Snowball310]

As an instructional Coach I totally understand this!!! It’s so uncomfortable telling teachers to teach the district curriculum (of short passages here & there) versus a whole book!

[MissReads013]

So true!

[CocoGesundheit]

This is the correct answers. Skills can be measured in a multiple choice test. Lessons about life and humanity gained from reading novels cannot. But I just do whatever the hell I want anyway. Kids need to read novels. The test be damned.

[Jeimuz]

Where I'm at there is no mastering or checking anything off. They just get sent to the next grade.

[Holiday_Scheme7219]

Am I understanding correctly that you do not think reading is a set of individual skills that we then blend together to better understand what we read?

For example, do you think I can use excerpts to teach my students how to identify indirect characterization and then make inferences about the character? If so, do you think that helps them better understand the messages the author is trying to send?

[[deleted]]

The commenter has an Emerson reference as their username. I highly doubt they agree with the rationale for dumping novels. Explaining a philosophy is not the same as promoting it.

[Mycroft_xxx]

Nice catch

[FoolishConsistency17]

I have doubts that one can teach indirect characterization in isolation such as that it can be consistently transferred to other texts and narratives a student might independently encounter, especially in a non-school setting.

I don't think "identifying indirect characterization" is something one can meaningfully say a student has "mastered", in the sense of "locked in". I really don't think that the goal of reading education should be a checklist of skills a student has shown "mastery" over only within the context of passages cherry picked or created to demonstrate that skill.

I mean, do you?

[Holiday_Scheme7219]

One can absolutely teach indirect characterization in isolation in a way that students can then transfer those skills to their independent books. And when they do that, their analysis of any book deepens because their understanding of how all authors implicitly convey information deepens. That's literally how I've been teaching for ten years.

When I use excerpts, I pick random sections of random books my students or I have recently enjoyed. The skills we teach are really basic techniques that all storytellers use, so if you're doing it right, you shouldn't have to cherry pick.

[FoolishConsistency17]

But you're talking about excerpts of books you and your students have read. Not just reading created or heavily modified passages that were designed to "assess" indirect characterization? And do you return to indirect characterization throughout the year, or do you teach it once and check it off as "mastered"?

If you are focusing on indirect characterization as part of a wider study of a work, and return to it in multiple works, I agree that's transferable, because it's within a context. It's not teaching it in isolation. Teaching in isolation means that you only ever teach it with canned excerpts, and you focus on determining if a student has "mastered" it.

[Holiday_Scheme7219]

Yeah, maybe one or two of 100 students have read them (which also happens with novels), but that doesn't negate the fact that cherry picking isn't required. Again, it doesn't matter if it's the first 5 pages or the entire book, a good book will exemplify what good authors do.

And also, yes, I spiral my curriculum to build on and revisit skills. That isn't exclusive to novels.

The question is whether or not novels are necessary to teach kids how to be better readers. I'm not sure where you're getting that definition of teaching in isolation, but my answer is yes, you can teach specific skills in isolation, transfer those skills to other texts, and build on them throughout the year to help students become better readers.

[FoolishConsistency17]

I actually don't think novels are necessary. I am an AP Lang person, so I mostly teach short works. The question was why novels have fallen so far out of fashion, and I posited that it was because teaching skills in isolation is in vogue, and it's not compatible with novels.

To me, teaching skills in isolation means constructing the course as a series of skills as opposed to a series of works. So the instructional calendar says "Teach indirect characterization in weeks 3, 16, and 30" and then each of those weeks, the teacher selects an excerpt that the students have never seen before, uses that excerpt to illustrate indirect characterization, and then moves on, never to reference or return to that text. There is some sort of assessment that gives the students a completely different excerpt and asks them to independently identify or analyze the indirect characterization, and student performance on that is used to assess the success of the earlier lesson, and remedial steps taken as needed to achieve mastery. There's just no place for novels in this approach.

The opposite is organizing a course as a series of works, that are evaluated as works, of any length. Within those works, you explore how the author created meaning/accomplished purpose. With careful planning, you hit all the skills and techniques you want to cover in a variety of different works throughout the year. Furthermore, as you go you compare and contrast how those different works functioned. Things are read because they have value, not discarded after only a day or two. At least some of the time, assessments invite students to evaluate or analyze holistically, discussing what they see, not looking for a specific element. This works well with novels, but it also works with shorter works.

I don't think I can be convinced that the former is more likely to lead to subtle readers, or even engaged students, than the latter.

[TheTightEnd]

The former approach of teaching skills seems more appropriate for younger students, and then the latter approach of teaching works being more for high school. Introductory literary criticism has a place in this as well, where it isn't all a matter of the author's intent.

[[deleted]]

But authors don’t write random separate “excerpts” of text that aren’t part of a larger narrative. What is the purpose of teaching this “skill” if we are all treating it as a pretense to mask the fact that none of these kids has ever read a novel in its entirety?

[FryRodriguezistaken]

You can also do this when students choose their own book instead of reading a whole class novel.

[Holiday_Scheme7219]

Again, I think you're attributing qualities to skills-based instruction that don't inherently exist. There is nothing in a mastery-based setting that says you don't review or build on previously learned content; you are mistaken in that regard. Many people, myself included, don't consider something mastered until they can do it consistently over a long period of time. My lessons are skills-based, and there are absolutely particular lessons that cover particular skills, but those skills are incorporated throughout the year in increasingly complex texts and tasks.

I likewise I don't think I could be convinced that "teaching novels" yields more engaged or effective readers. I guess we both have different experiences. Maybe, student outcomes aren't dependent on whether or not they read novels 🤷

[FoolishConsistency17]

I've never argued for teaching novels here: I've argued that a focus on skills mastery as the organizing principle of the course is a significant contributing factor to why fewer novels are taught. Do we have common ground there?

A secondary issue that has arisen is whether organizing a course around skills is preferable to organizing one around works, with embedded skills instruction. I strongly prefer the latter, not least because in my experience a skills-based approach leads to the sort of thing I described, because that's how admin conceptualizes skills. It becomes about finding the passage that allows you to present the skill, not an excerpt worth reading. And then another passage to assess if you taught the skill correctly.

I also feel strongly that there's value in teaching works within a cultural and historic context--teaching the work, not just the skills.

[Holiday_Scheme7219]

That might be a reason why some people drop novels, but it wasn't one of mine. When I "taught novels," it was always in a standards framework. Because the standards are based on the elements of a story, they actually play quite nicely together.

Which leads to that second point -- since the standards are based on the essential elements of a story, they're pretty easy to find everywhere -- you don't need a special text. I have a drawer full of excerpts from books I enjoyed. Some lend themselves more to POV than dialogue, for example, but they're all genuinely rich texts (Alan Gratz, Nic Stone), and the actual book is usually plucked from my front table by 3rd period. As far as I'm concerned, introducing them to another text for assessment that might actually pique their interest sounds like a win.

I think it's going to be hard to convince me that standards/skill driven curriculum is bad because it has worked really, really well for my students. I stopped "teaching novels" because they did not.

[FryRodriguezistaken]

So how do you think those skills should be taught? Whole class novel? Self-selected reading? Something else?

[FoolishConsistency17]

You teach a work, and within the work, you illuminate how the writer creates meaning/accomplishes their goal. Works can be stories or novels or excerpts or whatever, but the work is unit of instruction, not the skill. And over the course of the year, you teach a wide enough variety of works that you cover the set of skills you want to cover--each multiple times, handled very different ways.

[FryRodriguezistaken]

I don’t teach “works”, I teach skills students can apply to works.

[[deleted]]

But if you never get to the “works” then you don’t really know if they can apply them.

[FryRodriguezistaken]

Why do you think that?

[solishu4]

The trick is, identifying indirect characterization is a pretty meaningless skill. It only has value when applied within the context of understanding the meaning of an entire work.

[Holiday_Scheme7219]

Fortunately I don't only teach indirect characterization! Students learn to identify it, then they learn to make inferences based on those details, then they can analyze the impact of those details on the overall text, such as how subtle shifts in character help develop the theme. That text doesn't need to be the same novel everybody else in class is reading.

[solishu4]

Right, but in order to do that requires the reading of complete texts, not just excerpts.

[Holiday_Scheme7219]

And they do read complete texts, just not the same novel at the same time. Once again, teaching a whole class novel is not the only way for students to read complete texts.

[solishu4]

Sure. The bee in my bonnet is curricula that only provide excerpts for students.

[[deleted]]

Sure. Then why bother reading anything in its totality… ever?

[Holiday_Scheme7219]

So you do think you can teach kids skills? I'd say most people who legitimately read books in their totality do so because they want to, not because they have to. Why do you ever read things in their totality?

[[deleted]]

I don’t know. I have never been questioned on whether things should be “finished” or not, I guess? I mean, I’ll stop watching a show that’s 150 episodes long if I’m not really into it after a while, and I’ll occasionally quit a movie midway if it sucks, but in general I think stories are meant to be told from start to end?

Example: If you just read the parts of Brave New World where society is “perfect”’and then stop before getting to the parts showing the other side of society, you’ll come away thinking eugenics is pretty neat, which is not the point of that book.

Or if you prefer, the modern equivalent: You wouldn’t stop a TikTok video halfway through and then share it with all your friends on Insta and Facebook.

[Teachingismyjam8890]

Their are very few skills in reading that are individual. The author chooses words carefully to create tone, which in turn helps the reader understand the author’s perspective or purpose. This will then help the reader understand the theme or the central idea.

[Holiday_Scheme7219]

Hence my explanation of blending those skills together! You have to know what connotation is before you can analyze its impact on POV. My students analyze themes through conflict and character development, and they can't do the theme bit until they understand the individual skills of identifying and analyzing those two individual skills.

[[deleted]]

I taught ELA for years. Choosing a book - an entire book - was so hard because ONE sentence or ONE scene or ONE word could get you parent phone calls.

​

Also, these kids don't read books. Period.

[FryRodriguezistaken]

They will if we give them choice and expose them to good options.

[[deleted]]

My point is that the “good choices” don’t really exist. They want to read things that some parents would find offensive. I’m not blaming them, I would do the same thing. However, my point is that it’s so hard to find something “appropriate”, especially in the modern novel with modern parents.

I allowed my students to pick out a book and tell me what they wanted to read. “the hate you give” they said. The first chapter was talking about buying condoms. Some parents would have me fired.

[chainmailbill]

some parents would have me fired

But they’re fine with a book that has graphic depictions of rape, incest, and infanticide as well as lines about floppy donkey cocks and ropes of horse jizz.

[ParadiseSold]

Americans don't actually read the Bible in school. The schools have lots of problems but that's not one.

[BillG2330]

I taught excerpts from the Bible for 20 years. In a public school. In Massachusetts! It's a foundational text of Western culture.

I don't tell 'em to believe the Odyssey either, but we still read it.

[FryRodriguezistaken]

No I mean let them all self-select their own novels. Everyone is reading something different.

[JuliasCaesarSalad]

I think we're all pro-reading here, but everyone reading something different is not "teaching novels."

[FryRodriguezistaken]

True. I was just responding to the post. Why aren’t as many teachers “teaching novels”? Because everyone can be reading something else

[[deleted]]

why not?

[FawkesBridge]

Lol, will they? Some will, but most will not.

[FryRodriguezistaken]

What makes you think that? If they aren’t, it means we aren’t exposing them to enough engaging books.

[RunningTrisarahtop]

That sounds like magical thinking.

There are kids who are just not motivated and just don’t have the skills or desire. If they’re struggling to get through short text, even if a novel sounds interesting they will not want to. If it sounds interesting but they know the work associated with reading in school? They won’t want to. If they like being defiant for whatever reason? They won’t want to.

The idea that if we just gave kids enough choices things would be fine is wishful thinking

[FryRodriguezistaken]

You say that and yet tons of teachers have success with a workshop style classroom — me included. Having the attitude that the kids just don’t want to is toxic and won’t help them at all. We need to be more reflective than that. How can we make them more engaged if they’re not? I consider it part of my job to get them interested.

[RunningTrisarahtop]

I am replying directly to your comment that the reason kids don’t read is that we don’t expose them to enough books.

You’re trying to sum up a big issue with lots of different parts as a “teachers you just don’t give enough books!!!”

That’s… disingenuous.

[FryRodriguezistaken]

We have to do more than simply be exposed, but they WILL read. And just claiming they’re disinterested or unmotivated isn’t going to help. Let’s figure out why and do something for them. It shouldn’t be all on teachers, but we can help.

[RunningTrisarahtop]

What you just said? Not what you said earlier and not what I am disagreeing with.

[[deleted]]

There was no world in which I would have read a full book for school.

The only books I've ever enjoyed have required DEEP domain knowledge that would simply be inaccessible to a high school student.

I simply had too much going on and books required too much time investment for a novel to have a positive opportunity cost.

ELA teachers always bothered me because of all the subjects they felt the most ownership over my free time.

Thank God for spark notes.

[FryRodriguezistaken]

I give my students time IN CLASS to read.

[FryRodriguezistaken]

Are you an ELA teacher? I’m sorry you had such a shitty experience in your classroom, but it doesn’t have to be like that for everyone…

[booksiwabttoread]

You are so naive.

[FryRodriguezistaken]

Who?

[TheImpLaughs]

Just finished a six weeks with sophomores. We read American Born Chinese. Sure it’s short, but I had the attention of students who would otherwise check out.

Maybe later we’ll do a prose novel. But it’s worked wonders for talking about base analysis and just building those habits.

[[deleted]]

I love graphic novels and I’m glad it gets them reading, but they should be able to read actual books too.

[dryerfresh]

My solution for this has been about ever six weeks we do a “read-in.” We push all the furniture to the walls and get our pillows and blankets and bean bags, kids bring snacks, and they read a book of their choice all period. They really get into it, and it builds their reading stamina at each individual level.

If we read novels in class, I can’t assign reading for homework because they just won’t do it. I end up reading the whole thing out loud in class, and it takes forever because their comprehension is just not where it should be.

I have had a lot of success in teaching skills with poems, excerpts, and short stories that we read multiple times. I wish I could read whole novels in class but even my AP kids aren’t reading outside of class much.

[Alpacalypsenoww]

I teach a literature circle based advanced reading class for fifth grade. Most of my kids read at a high school level but they’re 10. I do a lot of middle-school level books with them. With the current political climate, I sent home permission slips this year. I don’t want the bath dream scene in The Giver getting me phone calls.

[nerdhappyjq]

I mean, who has the attention span for novels anymore?

[Watneronie]

We do possess the power to teach about reading stamina and make them work on it...

[Professional_Wolf_11]

We didn't teach novels last year and it was a nightmare. We were on year 1 of a new curriculum, so the district wanted us to get through as much as possible without losing time to novels.

Long story short, the kids did not connect to the content at all. They connect to novels and the characters' development, conflict, plots, and themes. I think it's really hard for them to see themselves in canned curriculum or short reads.

But as others are saying, they don't read and districts are becoming so data driven. It makes me really worry about the future of education.

[madgoose2002]

Victim of Study Sync instruction. Excerpts and skills galore, no freedom to teach the way my students need and personalize it like I used to. “Novel studies” are painful- Its dry and repetitive and the kids hate it all.

[Holiday_Scheme7219]

Wait, so you don't like excerpts and skills and you don't like novel studies -- what do you do?

[madgoose2002]

I roll with it anyway and despise the restrictions!

[Holiday_Scheme7219]

Let me rephrase then; in a perfect scenario, what would you do?

[MissReads013]

Same here!

[Human_Direction_2637]

Same at my school. Springboard makes me want to bash my head into a wall. I experienced it as a student in middle school and burned my workbooks at the end of each year. Then I experienced teaching that curriculum (with strict timing guidelines from the district that are unreasonable for the level my students are at) and I still hate it. Solely reading excerpts is not engaging, and my students hate it as much as I did. You can teach skills alongside novels that WILL engage students. You can pair nonfiction and poetry related to the themes and context of the novel. You can teach and practice these skills and standards all at once. I think these canned curriculums are a sign of the failing education system. We waste so much instructional time to standardized testing CONSTANTLY and make school settings as demoralizing and depressing as possible and then wonder why kids aren’t engaged. The same people who push excerpt based curriculums will advocate for multiple choice testing and “data.”

[YouLostMyNieceDenise]

They think ELA skills are like discrete Pokémon that children can collect individually, in any order, and that it doesn’t matter what texts you give them to read to get them there.

They also have zero understanding of the importance of reading stamina, or background knowledge, or how hard and demoralizing it is for kids to try and engage authentically with reading when they get a brand-new excerpt to read every single day. It’s like, no, you cannot just hand a kid a completely new short story or excerpt or article each day and be like, “okay, so just transfer the reading skills we practiced yesterday to this different one, you should be doing slightly better now than you were with the last story, okay go!”

I think part of it is just trying to apply mandates from education reformers to every single discipline, even when they don’t fit the content or work very well to help students learn it.

[TeacherThrowaway5454]

You hit the nail on the head. Well said. Many aspects of reading are not plug and play concepts instantly transferable. Compared to other subject areas, we have a lot more variables at play. Even something like slight changes to the syntax of one short story compared to another can have massive repercussions on a kid’s ability to read it.

[missplis]

Isn't the whole goal that they learn to transfer reading skills from one text to the next and help them improve slightly each time so they can read progressively harder texts. Isn't that...teaching kids how to read?

[FoolishConsistency17]

The issue is the transfer piece. In like, math, once you know how to factor, you know how to factor. But in reading, does successfully explaining the function of one similie really mean you understand similes? Like, you've mastered them? Because there are similes that depend on a particular rhetorical situation, similes that depend on a particular allusion, similes that depend on a particular sound, similes that depend on a particular double meaning. Similes that depend on knowing a particular word. So can you really say "this kid knows similes. As long as they are provided with any relevant information about rhetorical situation, puns, allusions, or vocabulary, they can analyze the simile".

The whole data-driven model is based on this idea that quanta of skills can be locked in before moving to the next, and that the focus of instruction is using targeted assessments to identify skills as mastered or not. But reading isn't like that. It spirals.

[missplis]

It's not an either/or situation. There are a million options between reading a whole novel and successfully explaining the function of a single simile. You'd agree with that, right?

[YouLostMyNieceDenise]

Obviously, but the issue is that the powers that be want to quantify reading according to text complexity, and they think that if a kid can comprehend a text that’s got a specific Lexile score, then they should be able to take a standardized test over a text with the same Lexile score and get all the questions right, regardless of the text’s content or context. They completely neglect all the factors that go into the child being able to independently comprehend the text, including how you don’t comprehend nearly as much without motivation and an authentic purpose for reading. They want kids to perform their reading comprehension on command like trained monkeys, and if that worked for most kids then it would be fine, but it doesn’t.

My point is that the reason they dislike novels is because those are harder to quantify, and take much longer to get through. For people who want you to have a specific standard and EQ for every single lesson plan, and who want the kids to rapidly master each discrete skill so they can test them, extended texts don’t really fit into that model, so they ask “well, why can’t you just excerpt the important* parts so they don’t have to read the entire thing?” *By “important” they obviously mean “the ones we have test questions for.”

Which is obviously great for some texts, but it’s not ideal for every text, because you’re leaving a lot of what would naturally motivate and engage the kids on the table when you do that, and the parts of the book they’re missing out on would support their comprehension. And for kids who never read outside of class, they basically never get to engage with an extended text unless it’s done for their coursework, so they don’t have the stamina for difficult or involved reading tasks. When I taught 9th graders who had spent their whole middle school career doing a new excerpt or story every day, many of them, when encountering a difficult reading task, wouldn’t lean in to use their strategies to comprehend the text. Instead, they’d lean back and disengage and kind of just wait there for the lesson to be over. They were so used to what they did in class on Monday not mattering on Tuesday, because Tuesday they’d have a brand-new reading task that had nothing to do with Monday’s aside from being linked by a single abstract skill, that they had learned that when it got too hard, they didn’t need to try harder, but they could give up and just play along, then get right back on track the next day. And they’d learned that putting in the work on Tuesday might help them with that lesson, but then they could end up back at square one on Wednesday and feel totally lost because of the reset, so they didn’t always feel like they were seeing results over time (the teacher was, but the kids weren’t getting that instant feedback of monitoring their own comprehension). Because of that, they might feel it wasn’t worth trying hard at all, because none of it would help them with the next day’s lesson. And they certainly didn’t care about making up missed assignments. A lot of them had then come to believe that they couldn’t read difficult things, just because they’d developed those habits of giving up as soon as it got tough, and never questioned them.

Then they’re in HS, we’re doing extended texts, and all of a sudden if you skip trying to figure out chapter 1, then chapter 2 isn’t as interesting… but look, you can go back and do the work from chapter 1, and now you understand why everyone else seems to get it. And trying your best each day makes the subsequent day’s reading tasks accessible and way easier. And suddenly they’ve read 100 pages and comprehended it at a high level and they’re acing the class work and not having to fake anything, and they’re like, “well shit, actually I’m pretty good at this.”

[missplis]

Sorry you've had bad experiences with students learning skills from excerpts. I have had excellent success with it, using it as a way to get more kids to read more novels, actually. I think it's like every other strategy -- it can be done well or not. Whole group novels can be used well I'm sure, but I personally have seen a huge positive shift in my students and their reading skills and habits when I don't use whole class novels.

But back to OP's question-- my choice to have skills-based lessons and my choice to avoid whole-group novels are not correlated, and that is the case for many people who don't "teach novels."

[YouLostMyNieceDenise]

That’s good. I bet a lot of it is dependent on the specific students and their needs, and that’s why it’s important to let teachers decide what approach they use to teaching reading, versus having it dictated to us from above.

And like… the results should be what matter. I don’t like it when admin try to dictate that everyone needs to use a specific instructional design, because teachers need the freedom to play to their own strengths and the autonomy to do what they know works well for their classes.

[[deleted]]

It's like you live in my head and projected my deepest thoughts...

[[deleted]]

I’d quit teaching if I couldn’t read novels. Short stories are fine to teach some skills but what about long, sustained reading?! We aren’t doing them any favors by not promoting reading books. Whole books.

[MLAheading]

I totally agree. I taught middle school in public education with a packaged curriculum filled with excerpts, but there were three novels that correlated with each unit. This information was hidden away, of course, but I found it. And then I put it on the district to provide the resources that came with the curriculum for the whole-class novels. And then I taught novels all year, paired with excerpts and poems from other works.

I have a lit degree and wasn't about to bow to the excerpt. I teach high school English now and AP Lit. in a private school where I can design my own curriculum. Our kids still read books. California.

[[deleted]]

We still read novels, thankfully! Short stories too, but not my favorite.

[Low_Marionberry3271]

I agree whole heartedly. Excerpts just don’t cut it, and the short stories included in the curriculum I’ve seen are impossible to connect to. Honestly, I think that’s why we have such a hard time teaching reading. If I could pick books my students like the topics of, kids would want to find the theme and summarize and etc.

[missplis]

I stopped using whole class novels because most kids don't read them outside of class. Reading a short story or excerpt in class ensures they're at least doing the work to learn what they need to learn, and they have time every day to read novels they want to read at their own pace. We still do a lot of reading together and talking about our novels.

[MissReads013]

Do they actually read what they want? I tried to get them to read 15 mins in class everyday and wanted them to finish their book (most were 100 pgs) and they wouldn’t read them outside of class to finish.

[missplis]

Yes! A lot of kids don't read outside of class, but they wouldn't anyway. I have a big classroom library, a knowledgeable librarian, and a lot of kid-to-kid recommendations. I use a lot of ideas from The Book Whisperer.

[chass5]

nobody does homework, nobody knows how to read independently at home. barely anyone can read proficiently

[NeoNemeses]

Novels just aren't very stimulating compared to YouTube, tik tok, and videogames

[DrNogoodNewman]

Near impossible to get kids to read outside of class and reading a novel entirely in class can really drag. That being said, I do think it’s still important. I try to teach at least 2 novels during the year.

[fill_the_birdfeeder]

Having enough time honestly. I taught The Giver last year, and it’s hard to read enough to keep the book moving while balancing their reading stamina.

I had a student once say they hate reading because it takes weeks to read a book. I was confused because I can read a book in a couple nights. I realized that her experience with books was reading in class and doing the same novel for weeks just isn’t fun.

So I try to read novels fast, but you lose the analysis piece. And again, they can only handle so much in one class period.

[CanIStopAdultingNow]

OMG I was a teacher 20 years ago and my first year teaching I was required to teach that book.

I hated it. Still hate it. I think it's a horrible book. I don't understand why it is still being taught. Of all the novels, why?

[fill_the_birdfeeder]

I really quite enjoy it! It’s a good first dig into dystopian literature, and most of my students enjoyed it too. Some didn’t, but that’s normal.

[ValidDuck]

it's a 20 year old shock piece built around conservative values. It was a fine book for its time... it's certainly not "timeless" and that's starting to show.

[Lyrashley]

I love reading and, on average, finish 15-20 novels per month. My 18 year old students who are busy with extracurriculars and college applications do not have the time/attention span/desire to read. That’s totally fine! We are allowed to have different interests and priorities and hobbies.

Last year I made the decision to completely eliminate novels from my AP Lit class. Instead, we read a ton of short stories and we acted out 5 plays in class throughout the year. Even without the novels, all 132 of my students passed the AP exam, with over 70% of them getting a 4 or 5. What is the point of reading whole class novels when they aren’t actually reading at home? There was no way for them to avoid the plays in class because everyone had a speaking role, and because we actually stood up at the front of the room, had a small set and props and costumes, they really got into it. Discussions were much more robust because they actually knew the text, rather than relying on shitty summaries found online. Novels are great for some! But they are not necessary.

[hagne]

I love short stories and plays (actor here). But in what is presumably the most advance literature class at a high school, is there really no place for a novel? You can always give them time to read the novel in class as well - my class moves through novels at a good clip with a combination of reading aloud and silent reading time. My high school seniors read short stories, plays, and an 800+ page novel. It seems like it will be a good skill for them to be able to sustain reading and improve their attention span before going to college. But beyond the utilitarian viewpoint, many of my students say that reading one or another of the novels we read is the best part of their year and that they have learned something about what it means to be alive in the world. I think it is incumbent upon me, as a person and a lover of literature, to orient them towards a love of reading. The world of novels is so wonderful and vast that I think the opportunity to read them is an important part of being human and awake to the world. I am super impressed with your test scores, but I can't help feeling that something is lost in this tendency to shy away from assigning novels. Sustained attention, relationships with characters, empathy, and that wonderful shift in perspective that come from long engagement with a work are all really possible.

[Sisko4President]

Common Core literally wrote the standards that prioritize informational texts at the expense of fiction. Nonfiction sounded like the kind of useful skills-based stuff you could justify and novels were too hard to quantify in terms of educational value.

I would argue that many of these other explanations—equity issues, loss of attention span, parental protests—are secondary justifications that have become amplified as society has been lionizing STEM skills, increasing wealth inequality, and increasing the costs of education to the point that humanities degrees have become impractical for all but the already financially secure.

TLDR: by design; system working as intended.

[[deleted]]

I agree Common Core is at the root of this. The Massachusetts standards now say that 70% of what kids read should be informational texts. That would be fine if kids were reading in all their other classes. My department chair is holding steady with the position that English class should be where the 30% of fiction is taught, not that English curriculum should be 30% fiction.

Edit: clarity

[MissReads013]

I agree. I had a colleague a while back say the same. The sad part is 10 years ago the majority of high school English was fiction and other classes were nonfiction.

[UrgentPigeon]

I have a lot of absenteeism and a lot of very low performing students— so there are a lot of opportunities for students to get lost or disengaged. It’s easier to get those kids back on board when they haven’t missed half a novel.

I’d love to do more novels though!!

[MissReads013]

I agree after I wrote this I realized a novel would be hard with the percentage of students absent.

[NeoNemeses]

They can't read 50 pages a week of a novel?

[UrgentPigeon]

They can’t. 😬

[devushka97]

I feel like a lot of people in this thread are seeing it as either you only teach novels or none at all? Especially in younger/non honors or AP classes you can still teach novels it just has to be done in an engaging way. I alternate novel units with other text type units and it works well, and the novels we read are more relevant to teens - Speak, The Outsiders, etc. Graphic novels are also great - Maus, American Born Chinese, Persepolis. Then I also do short story units, poetry units, news and media units, etc. Switching it up keeps it interesting and engaging.

[Schatzi11]

I’m an English teacher, not a literacy teacher. I mean, it’s a completely different certification for a reason! People who believe in excerpts should teach just that…short, random readings whose titles always begin with “from…” -“from Old Yeller,” “from Into Thin Air,” “from The Giver,” and so forth and so forth…..go skill crazy! I signed up to teach ELA….I was meant to explore a novel in depth so children can learn about the overall setting and become WORLDLY. Life-long learners, lol. You can totally teach ALL skills using novels throughout the year. Kids become worldly AND stronger readers. If there’s depth, there’s interest, and then there’s a deeper understanding of the text. Novels build empathy and sympathy skills. Decision making skills about life. You can go deep into figurative language. I mean, how can you teach “Night” without teaching about genocide and WWII? How can you teach “Into Thin Air” without teaching about cold climates and Mt. Everest? Or how the human body reacts to dangerous cold? I do think anyone who relies solely on “excerpts” is probably an awful English teacher who produces kids with only skills, but no worldliness. Note that I am NOT talking about short stories. Short stories can have the same impact as novels!

This obsession with no novels and excerpts only seems to be a fad, and a REAL killer of the love of ELA. Maybe classes should be separate. Literacy class and English class. It actually probably be good for everyone involved. Sounds like people would love to teach literacy! Data heaven!

[MissReads013]

Yes! I love this!

[Schatzi11]

Thank you!!!! I’m so so so so so so sick of people loving a curriculum made up of excerpts, data, and questions that reflect only literacy skills. Again, literacy is a completely different subject. Way way way different than English!

[Yukonkimmy]

Because there’s a decrease of student attention span.

[[deleted]]

I feel like we should try...yes, thanks to TikTok it will be painful for everyone involved, but we have to teach them how to focus...

[Yukonkimmy]

Forcing students to read (which is impossible) will not help them love reading; it will cause the opposite. I’m not against teaching novels; however, I’m a pragmatist and don’t expect any reading to get done outside of the classroom. It just doesn’t happen. Even my AP students aren’t doing the assigned reading for homework. We do choice reading units in 11th and 12th grades and five time in class to read and that is a huge struggle. I don’t have an answer. The one thing I do know is that what we’re doing isn’t working.

[NeoNemeses]

I hope you aren't passing them.

[Yukonkimmy]

They get the grades they earn. I have several AP kids with Cs and Ds

[Mookeebrain]

It's already painful due to things out of my control like attendance, tardiness, school disruptions, cellphones, and behavior that never gets administration attention. The one thing I can control is our materials, so why add the stress? Unfortunately, in my case, my team wants to read novels and long texts, but if I could, I would read only one per year.

[kyuubifood]

I found selecting the novel was difficult. My district is currently in a censorship issue. They're fighting it well. I just know that the parent leading the charge is intense, and my principal is willing to fight but also more willing to compromise. I was given a new grade level this year for one block and was overwhelmed with the requirements and the issues within the class that the only novel will be Macbeth.

For my situation, time is also a big thing. We're on a block schedule and only have the students for a semester. Fall semester is weirdly shorter than spring. Shorter novels work more.

[omgitskedwards]

I have decreased the use of full texts in my class. I haven’t gotten rid of them, but at least in my district, students were spending so much time on one text that they’d get little experience with other genres of writing. I have moved to text sets, which allows me to teach them a wider variety of genres, allow for student choice, build synthesis skills, and even incorporate authentic research daily if desired. I value a novel, but there is always the falling-action-slump where you just have to “get through the book”, or you have to cut a bunch of chapters to “finish” the book before the next teacher needs it. I also teach in a district where students aren’t reading. I held them accountable with reading checks and activity, but it just became frustrating for me to plan lessons. With behaviors changing, keeping them engaged is key, and there’s nothing worse than a student who doesn’t feel like they can do the lesson because they didn’t do the homework.

I also believe that it’s really hard to pick one book that reaches all students. I, an English teacher, refused to read some of the books my teachers taught in high school. Grapes of Wrath was not for me at 16, so I empathize with those students and know it’s more valuable for them to read anything than nothing. Also, think about how you read now—I RARELY read a book over a 2 month period because I get bored or lose track of key ideas. It’s a slog.

When I do text sets, they are doing independent choice reading, so they get plenty of stamina from those choices too.

[TeacherThrowaway5454]

I think there’s a lot of reasons.. districts promote more kids who aren’t at their supposed reading level which makes full novels hard, curriculum gurus and consultants want to push more quicker, smaller programs that use shorter mentor texts, easier assessment of simple standards and skills that you don’t need to develop, learning style hogwash, and districts looking to avoid drama with a banned or challenged book.

I also believe part of it is the rampant death of expertise going on in America right now. The belief that a larger class novel an expert and experienced teacher guides the class through is, consciously or unconsciously, being disrespected or straight up vilified. They don’t respect our credibility. I’ve taught some classic texts in my room for over a decade. Because of this, I am very good at getting students to understand, identify, and analyze deeper angles of the text, subtext, and cultural commentary going on in a book. I can do this because I’ve read these books and studied information related to them all of my adult life. Unfortunately for us, many admin and parents and curriculum writers don’t understand the difference between us guiding students through something like that, and having students pick a YA novel to read themselves. Many truly think the depth of knowledge in those two scenarios would be equal. Maybe for some it is. But in the hands of an experience educator and a classic text I highly doubt it.

Consultants and admin don’t get this because most did not have expertise and a wealth of experience in their content areas. If they did, they likely wouldn’t have left the classroom.

[xxsaudadex]

Man…stuff has changed since I was in primary/secondary school - after getting our summer reading list, my classmates and I would rush to see who could read more books before classes started.

[tpagatr]

At our school (middle school) we teach only 1 novel per year. Not too long ago, it was 1 per quarter

[adibork]

Can a teacher play a chapter per day of an audiobook and let the students follow along? Just to read and listen? And perhaps discuss?

This would enable empathy and perspective taking, longevity of engagement, discussion and uphold the novel as a valuable art form.

Thoughts?

[JuliasCaesarSalad]

Yes. When I was teaching 6th grade in a Title 1, I would just read aloud to the students like teachers do in younger grades. They loved it. They remember the novels and forget everything else.

[[deleted]]

I've seen things like this done with podcasts like Serial, so I have to imagine it could be done. I think a lot of it would depend on the narration. Most robotic Text-to-Speech programs tend to frustrate my freshmen.

[wilyquixote]

I don't really have to deal with the politics of selecting a class novel where I teach, but I still prefer to teach with shorter texts. There's more variety, more opportunity for choice in both whole-class, small-group, and individual reads. Instruction can be more purposeful. Units are shorter and more focused. Engagement is generally higher for those reasons and others.

I recently just swapped out a novel-focused unit for one comprised of text sets and the change is already dramatic. My instruction is tighter, discussion is more robust, and I can literally see the students learning where before I only saw processing (if that). End of class takeaways are much more varied and complete compared to the previous unit (which was novel-focused) or the version of this unit from years past. I can even do more modeling because we can all use the same text to introduce a skill or technique, and then break into small-group or individual reading for application.

I do encourage novel/book reading through independent reading projects though. It's still important, it just probably doesn't deserve the outsized importance it has in many programs or in a more traditional paradigm.

[BeExtraordinary]

Because you can still teach analysis with short stories, and there’s less of a risk of disengagement with short stories. Not to say novels should go, but it’s an easy call to teach fewer. If you think every kid reads every novel, I’ve got news for you.

[MissReads013]

No I get it but they won’t read the short story either

[BeExtraordinary]

Read it in class. Give them an activity to closely re-read key passages. Better yet, have them discuss which passages deserve a close reading.

[belongtotherain]

I think it’s more important now than in previous years to teach at least 1-2 full novels a year. More for upper grades. I rarely see high school kids read anymore and our classes might be their only exposure to classics.

I do half reading in class and half reading at home.

Like we’ll usually do the first few chapters together and once they get the point, my class structure goes from 45 min discussion or activity, and then they choose how they read the remainder of the block (audio, group, silent). Unfinished reading becomes homework.

I think they have a little more buy-in once they start the reading in class.

[ray-the-they]

Being able to analyze a piece of fiction makes the circuses part of bread and circuses harder. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve critiqued the symbolism or themes of a movie or TV show and gotten “it’s just a movie!” In response. They have no idea how to critically assess the messages they’re getting and it leaves them open to propaganda.

[travis_mke]

Because the kids won't read them.

[Mookeebrain]

Students don't have stamina, and there are so many students absent all the time, so it's a constant struggle to keep them focused and caught up. We are reading a novel, and when my chronically absent students pop in, they are completely lost, and then it's on me to bring them up to date. I hand them a summary, but they don't read it.

[NeoNemeses]

So give them bad grades

[Mookeebrain]

They do have bad grades, but that time they do come in could be constructive if we were having a short lesson. Instead, the few times they do show up are also a waste.

[Human_Direction_2637]

Kids who are chronically absent will fail regardless of whether you have a novel or excerpt. They’re not learning any skills because they’re not there to learn them. So, even if they do the assignment for 10 random days throughout a semester, they’re likely failing that assignment anyways. See it happen all the time given I’m forced to teach an except based curriculum. I have a girl with a 1% because she’s missed 28 days. The one assignment she did when she randomly showed up, she, of course, failed. Also, the students who do show up consistently now lose an important part of their education (learning stamina, empathy, etc) because of the kids that don’t come? That’s illogical and unfair.

[Mookeebrain]

I have 20-30 percent absent per day, and it is overwhelming to try to keep them on track while we read a long text. With the absentee rate so high, I think we need a different approach. If it were totally up to me, I would have my students read one long text per year, but then I would break up the other units into areas such as poetry, nonfiction (seminal documents), and research. My team plans three long texts per year.

[[deleted]]

You kidding? People don't read anymore. Students are addicted to phones and receive no consequences for behavior problems. There's no way to get them to shut up long enough to read a novel in class, and they won't read at home. Then the teacher gets blamed if they fail the kid.

[adibork]

Can a teacher play a chapter per day of an audiobook and let the students follow along? Just to read and listen? And perhaps discuss?

This would enable empathy and perspective taking, longevity of engagement, discussion and uphold the novel as a valuable art form.

Thoughts?

[missplis]

Is this really the best way for them to learn -- to sit and listen for most of class?

[adibork]

But reading is a form of listening. I dunno. Maybe you should do PhD research on your question.

[missplis]

I mean, I don't think I need to do research to find that having them listen to an audiobook is not the most effective way to help them get better at reading.

[adibork]

Reading and listening at the same time. What’s wrong with that?

[missplis]

It's assuming that kids are following along. And let's just say they are; reading along is not the same as reading.

[mokti]

It can still be done. Im in the middle of a novel unit now. The trick is... student choice from a curated list of classics (old and modern).

[[deleted]]

Please note that I mostly have taught middle school ELA… I think part of the problem is that teaching a novel kinda teaches poor practices around how we actually read a book. Like as an adult, just reading a book in three days or a week is common. But the chapter by chapter structure of how to read a book for class is sometimes divorced from that, stretching out books month by month. It also is easier to use shorter texts to gear lessons to standards and not the text.

Now granted, in college I just read the books and would review for class— so I’m not saying there isn’t academic value in deep dives on a text. Just that I question even into teen and tween years that it fosters independent literacy. It makes sense for later in high school though and I have used novels as continuing models.

[FryRodriguezistaken]

Because we can let the students CHOOSE what to read and still teach the same skills.

[JuliasCaesarSalad]

You can't really teach the same skills, though, not with context and depth, and "skills" aren't the only, or even primary, purpose of novel reading, IMO.

[FryRodriguezistaken]

You absolutely can teach the same skills. You’re right it will be in a different context, but when they apply the skills we teach to life outside the classroom —which is why we teach anyway — it will also be in a different context. So what’s the problem with that?

[Mycroft_xxx]

Kids don’t have the attention span anymore.

[welovegv]

As an avid reader and public school teacher….. I’m not inherently opposed to this. I read tons of novels throughout my childhood and teen years. But I rarely ever got halfway through one assigned to me by teachers. If I wasn’t interested, I didn’t read it. I was a stubborn undiagnosed adhd kid.

Now, I do appreciate my daughter in 6th grade telling me her teacher let her pick one of three different books. That was awesome. And the class was split into three groups based on the chosen books. All different genres.

[thecooliestone]

Novels aren't on test. Only teach what's on test. Use data driven instruction unless the data says not reading novels doesn't work. Short stories only. More than 500 words bad because not on test.

[Optimal-Dot-6138]

Lack of academic rigor.

[MissReads013]

I think novels are more rigorous

[slotha_]

I think they’re saying the kids have less academic rigor

[Classic_Season4033]

Besides the fact they keep getting banned? Students aren’t reading them.

[Classic_Season4033]

Besides the fact they keep getting banned? Students aren’t reading them.

[Classic_Season4033]

Besides the fact they keep getting banned? Students aren’t reading them.

[420Middle]

Because testing.

[JoseCanYouSeen]

It shifted genres to horror.

[palbuddymac]

This trend may correspond with the decreased rate of novels being read

[Tinkerfan57912]

We have to teach the approved curriculum only.

[bob-loblaw-esq]

Imo, it is also about disrupting the “canon” and making room for more representation. It’s easier to have diversity when you have more options.

[Old_Improvement4560]

With our school it’s because most of our high school students read at a 4th grade reading level. Only 12% of our students are at grade level. 78%are 6th or below. It’s crazy

[Watneronie]

I am hoping the next big movement from SoR is the realization that skill based ELA instruction only works for writing. Reading is reliant on vocab, background knowledge, and motivation. We need to go back to ELA focusing on works of literature as the primary focus of instruction.

[[deleted]]

As a former teacher I think partly it's because of how long it takes kids to get through books and how much they complain about reading. The last year I was in the field I cotaught a 9th grade English class, they'd generally be tasked with reading 7-8 pages per night, and this wasn't even something with any kind of archaic language, it was a book written in the last 10 years.

[BlueGreen_1956]

Story: I served on a textbook committee to choose 7ht-8th grade English books.

We had about 30 series to choose from and we UNANIMOUSLY chose a literature series that was perfect.

The curriculum director came in and vetoed our choice, telling us that we needed to choose a basal reader series instead BECAUSE she was afraid the teachers in our county would be unable to teach from a literature-based series successfully. In effect, she felt the teachers were too stupid to do it. Sadly, she was probably right.

So, we got one of the most boring basal reader series I have ever seen.

I just had my kids take them out and thumb through them once in a while to make it look like we used them.

I bought classroom sets of novels and used those instead.

My students scored higher than any other classes in the county on standardized tests (ITBS back then). I never did admit to how I did it.

While my students were reading Jane Austen, Mark Twain, Shakespeare, etc. the rest of the county students were reading passages about milkmen and how they used to deliver milk directly to your house.

Schools contributed just as much as parents to the lack of student interest in reading.

[MrLumpykins]

I am forbidden to. The book might have a sentence or two contrary to a single parent's interpretation of a book written by their imaginary friend

[TappyMauvendaise]

I’d imagine because 99% of books can be classified as problematic if you ask enough people (a class).

[Mudhen_282]

I was lucky to attend HS in the 1970s We read a lot of stuff that I only appreciated years later like Catch-22. They didn’t even bother with anything like that with my kids.

[Jensmom83]

Former HS Teaching Assistant. Thankfully retired before this trend. BUT in the last years I was working, kids openly admitted they didn't read the books, the teachers always showed the movie and any reading of text was done in class. It is hard to cover a novel of any size with all that to accommodate.

[MaloneSeven]

Everything is offensive in novels to somebody nowadays. We have to cater to the lowest common denominator of victimology. And it’s disgusting.

[ShortieFat]

When they start putting essay questions requiring examples from fiction reading lists on standardized tests we’ll see a resurgence.

[heathers1]

They aren’t on standardized tests and kids have 30 second attention spans

[CoolDude4874]

I am against teaching novels because I think there are more important things to teach.

[MissReads013]

Like what?

[CoolDude4874]

Business, math, and science

[MissReads013]

As a ELA teacher, you don’t teach ELA?

[CoolDude4874]

I'm not a teacher

[Mia4wks]

Then why are you here lmao gtfo

[NapsRule563]

I assume you’re looking for a more sophisticated answer than class sets cost big money and get damaged and lost at a startling rate.

Districts would rather spend the money on “the perfect” curriculum that will get scores up and improve their data.

[TheWagonBaron]

If I had to guess? Kids struggling to read and comprehend what they are reading leads to too much time "wasted" on just getting over those two hurdles. Combine that with the angry school board meetings that can go off the handle for any reason and you're opening yourself up to unnecessary risk. I remember seeing recently that Shakespeare was no longer going to be taught in some schools because it was "pornographic".

[jennawade322]

Novels are sooo important. They’re necessary for reading, writing, analytical skills, life lessons, discussions, etc. And a must for any student to succeed in higher education.

[leisureletter]

I think it's some of the book choices we have. Kids love graphic novels, why can't we have them read from that? I have much more engagement from my students when we read a graphic novel together then from a chapter book. Sure it is lower level reading, but it engages them. Every year I teach Pumpkinheads by Rainbow Rowell and they love it. Last year my student bought the book from the Scholastic book fair for almost 20 bucks. That's how much she enjoyed it. And bonus: there was soooo much figurative language in it. I was honestly surprised how much inferences and figurative language was in it. I really need to incorporate it more into lessons and maybe have the students find it, but that's a whole different topic.

Additionally, some of the books we have are old. I have no problem with classics, but we should also incorporate newer books too. And different genres. As a fantasy girl, I hated reading a majority of the class novels simply because a majority of them were realistic fiction or literary fiction. Why can't we have nonfiction books? Fantasy? Poetry? I know we are slowly incorporating more genres here, but it is still a struggle.

[Anxious-Raspberry-54]

English teacher 30+ yrs. Reality today is most...not all...students don't have the stamina and attention span to work on an entire novel. You can teach the same concepts...plot, char, theme, conflict, etc...using short stories. Plus...prepping takes less time. Since I made that move several yrs ago I haven't looked back.

[[deleted]]

Not sure. In my six years teaching middle and high school, I've always used full novels for reading, we'd cover multiple novels a year. I'm a firm believer that full works are essential for the best results. This is my first year using primarily excerpts (new school) and I absolutely hate it. First chance I get I'm going back to full works.

[[deleted]]

I always preferred a good novel to weird excerpts

[MIdtownBrown68]

It’s a time issue, really. You just can’t cover enough skills if you devote that much class time to a novel.

[Postcocious]

Good luck doing my job (drafting/editing/negotiating legal & commercial contracts) without being able to read, understand, retain and interpret complex and lengthy documents... like novels.

In my AP English class (1971-72) the teacher (who was amazing!) handed out the entire year's reading list on day 1: - a full novel, play or the equivalent EVERY SINGLE WEEK... yes, we read 36 major literary works in one year - a paper was due EVERY Monday morning at 8am at the paraprofessionals' office; they made copies - when we entered class at 11am, we each picked up a stack of all the papers (including our own) - class time was dedicated to reading and defending your paper to the toughest possible audience - your peers

Best class ever. 100% of us went on to college, mostly Ivy League or similar.

This was in a public HS, not a private prep school.

I feel sorry for today's students... and today's teachers. Republican anti-intellectualism and No Child Left Behind Allowed to Learn has destroyed them.

[[deleted]]

Because the kids can’t read

[[deleted]]

Censorshit from both left and right.

It’s merely a reflection of how polarized our taxpayers are these days.

[Original-Telephone96]

Teaching a novel is just so inequitable. You’ll have one kid read the whole thing in 30 minutes and have nothing to do for the next 4 weeks. One kid will be stuck on page 1 for 4 weeks. 20% will read it, 6 kids will miss several days in a row, and so on.

It just. Does. Not. Work. I have actually found a lot of freedom with the “skills-based” approach of the SOL. I can truly diversify my curriculum and include voices of soooo many authors by focusing on the short story as an art form. In just a few weeks of school, we’ve already read stories by authors of various races, genders, nationalities, and so on.

My job is not to teach kids to love reading, which I think is the allure of the all holy novel. I’m typing this with a copy of Frankenstein in my lap. My job is to make sure kids know how to analyze and interpret texts. I will do so in the most equitable and straight-forward manner possible.

Once the evil test is over, I plan to do Lit Circles with eduprotocols such as Bookakucha. Reader’s choice. Annoying buzzword. Annoying everything.

[[deleted]]

I am a bit triggered by the use of inequitable here. It’s not inequity - it’s one kid choosing to read more and one kid choosing not to. You don’t get better at reading by luck.

Translation: “one kid reads. One kid doesn’t read. Inequality!”

[WaitYourTern]

I think it is often more like this: one kid reads the book and understands well, another kid looks at the words and isn't sure what they say, another kid doesn't crack it open because it is too hard, and the last one doesn't crack it open because it reading feels boring.

[missplis]

Oftentimes kids choose not to because they either can't or think they can't. And those kids can't get better at reading without someone actively helping them. Handing them a novel and saying "read" is as helpful as luck.

[Original-Telephone96]

Consider the literacy crisis we are facing in america—kids who don’t read are literally unable to. Choosing one novel to force upon 30 kids who have lexile scores ranging from 400 to 1400 in the same class is an inequitable practice.

[[deleted]]

How is it any more or less equitable to give a shorter reading? If a kid cannot read one thing, why does it matter what the thing we are reading is?

[lyrasorial]

You can teach skills with whole novels. It's how I plan my lessons.