Fiction versus non-fiction

If David Coleman, President of the College Board has his way, he would convert an entire generation of potential "workers"--i.e. 4th through 10th graders in the nation's public schools--into precisely that: "workers".

Coleman's is the leading brain in designing the new English curriculum, or the Common Core Standard, for future K-12 in PS's across the nation. Thus, starting in 2014, when the new Common Core will be in effect, Language Arts teachers will find themselves teaching more non-fiction than fiction.

Coleman's rationale for ushering out fiction and ushering in non-fiction into the curriculum is as follows: 

English classes today focus too much on self-expression [...] It is rare in a working environment, [...] that someone says, Johnson, I need a market analysis by Friday but before that I need a compelling account of your childhood.

If the above doesn't represent reductive thinking, then I don't know what does; what's scarier is that this kind of thinking springs from the head of the president of the College Board.

Let's look at the non-fiction that Coleman has in mind to produce future workers who can churn out market-analysis with robotic efficiency: historical documents, scientific tracts, maps and other “informational texts” — like recipes and train schedules.

I've always known fiction to encompass all the above and much more. When was the last time one heard of fiction being lumped together as a genre of "self-expression?"

For lack of a better explanation, one has to assume that Coleman has narrow conceptions of both fiction and non-fiction, and probably has little respect for the in-between genre of creative non-fiction.

I support Sara Mosle's corrective. Mosle suggests teaching good non-fiction, not just "informational texts." 

What is Diversity, Really?

German intelligence: The story of Miriam and Christian Rengier, German expats in New York City, is heart-warming.

The Rengiers are affluent and highly educated and wanted to provide their kids with the best possible education money can buy. After shopping around for schools in Manhattan, they chose a Public over private schools on the following grounds: Private schools did not have diversity, whereas public schools abounded in it. Being white and “Germanic”, the Rengiers didn’t want their sons to experience more of the same.

They scoffed at the token diversity on display in private schools—in the choice of cafeteria food:

The kids were able to choose between seven different lunches: sushi and macrobiotics and whatever, […] And I said, What if I don’t want my son to choose from seven different lunches? And she looked at me like I was an idiot.

The Rengiers said they wanted “real” diversity in the lives of their children, not simply a gastronomic one.

This isn’t just about how smart the Germans are in differentiating between “real” and “cosmetic”, but about how illuminating this whole ability to make fine distinctions is.