The World from YA Eyes: What books will interest students?

This past week has been filled with news about the GCSE English Literature syllabus and the changes Michael Gove could be making because he 'doesn't like' certain books(Of Mice and Men, for example). At first, the tagline, "Gove kills Mockingbird" could not be ignored; wherever you turned in a desperate attempt to flee what seemed to be an attack on American Literature, there it was. To Kill a Mockingbird and Of Mice and Men, along with others works by American authors are classics. Whilst people argued that they should be read by everyone, my Twitter feed was filled with outcry; how young people need to be taught the lessons these books include. While Gove has denied that he is  'banning' these books, I'm taking a different stance. Rather than discussing whether the author is American or British, or whether the novel is a classic or not, why not think about what will interest students? English Literature should not be a 'free promotion' of sorts for our British authors, nor should it be filled with plays or poems by only Shakespeare. Admittedly, these new changes will affect students studying in England only, but the GCSE should still be encouraging young people to read. Make it interesting, Mr Gove - and, whatever changes you make, involve those who it will have to study the books, after all.

 

A few years ago, I was forced into reading books I rarely found enjoyment from; only did a few series' over the course of my four years of Primary School actually interest me. Instead of dragging myself through, I handed these books to my father to read - which probably resulted in him skimming through - while I continued with my ever-growing Jacqueline Wilson collection. Of course, I was caught out during a discussion, and ironically kept in to read during a break. I was one of the lucky ones, though: taken to the library, read with every night, bought books for Christmas, but for many, the only place they will encounter a book is in school. Unless I had been reading what I chose to, I probably would have never developed a love of books, so choosing what teenagers study in depth for GCSE needs to be based on more than the nationality of the author.

 

At the moment, there are changes taking place to try and achieve more of a variety in the syllabus, but even as a lover of books, so far I'm not impressed. I'm trying to be completely unbiased here and can see why, if this is the course, why reading is deemed as 'uncool' and for 'nerds' or 'geeks'. Literature should include all books - and I would champion modern classics also being included. There are certain things that have to be included now, regardless of whether we're talking about Gove's ideas or a Welsh exam board. What stood out to me was that Jane Eyre was on one of the lists - and I would love to study a novel by Charlotte Bronte. Although, where are the likes of Harry Potter or The Hunger Games, which would interest students, as many may have previously read them. Gove, base what you choose on what you know young people like! Think about it. With J.K. Rowling, themes such as friendship could be explored; with Suzanne Collins the affects of War and how it is handled in a book for young adults.

 

I'd support an English Literature GCSE that included novels that have strong messages; that teach about life; that you can read without having to type into Google and have the plot summarised. It could be so much better. It's the study of books, plays and poetry - and why not make it enjoyable? Hardly any of what I have seen includes a novel from the 21st Century; the books that the young people of today will probably relate the most to. The books where the language is easier to understand, and the concept simpler to grasp. Keep those much loved classics, BOTH the ones from American and British authors, I feel it is necessary to point out. It would be a mistake to throw them away - but possibly include a wider variety. You can't kill a Mockingbird, that's for sure, but how about giving a young person the chance to study 1984 or Fahrenheit 451. After all, the themes of these books are so relevant.

 

I couldn't write a post about this without directing you to Charli's open letter to Michael Gove on Huffington Post! Congrats!

 

So, what books do you think will interest students?

Do you believe those like The Hunger Games or Harry Potter would fit the Literature syllabus?

 

Tell me in the comments!

 

Sophie

x

The World from YA Eyes - The Social Media Scare

"The World from YA Eyes" is posted fortnightly and discusses the latest world-issues threatening to change our world into one we would find in a Dystopia novel.

 

 

The discussion about the age of which young people should be allowed to use social-networking sites is an endless one; and some even argue that no person under the age of eighteen should be allowed on sites such as Facebook or Twitter. Of course, this is an understandable opinion to have, nobody can deny that social media can be a dangerous place, especially when young, vulnerable people are drawn into unsafe situations - tempted by lies that trap them in a web. Social Media is something teenagers across the world are addicted to, all about spending hours online talking to friends they may or may not know in the 'real-world'. While most young people can't get enough of online-worlds, others find it the bane of their existence, nothing more than a place of endless cyber-bullies and constant threats. This is the side that is always talked about; this is the side of social media that makes news-headlines, that is on the front pages of magazines. Adults who avoid these sites, who continue to pretend they understand what their children are talking about when they mention that they had 'ten likes' on a status-update, only hear the stories that make you want to never support social-networking again. . Why is it that the good things that come from social-networking are never talked about? Why is it that nobody ever shares the good? Why is it that Ask.fm seems to be the only form of social-networking that matters to the media?

 

We are all aware that cowards, simply, use their screen to hide-behind, anonymously sending insults and threats, thinking there are not consequences to the actions they make online. Behind a screen, we are safe; we are protected; we are just another user. We don't even have to choose to have an identity. This part of social-media is abused, but I say, nobody ever takes a look at the good. They stereotype all forms of social-media, including the aforementioned, as a place that promotes bullying and suicides, that has no positives whatsoever. Blogger and Wordpress are never spoken-about. As much as it angers me to say this, most people don't even know that these sites exist, and more don't realise that young people - yes, those trouble-making teens that spend all their time smoking and under-age drinking - are behind the blogs. That these 'people who will ruin the country's future' are being productive is almost so hard to believe, it's never mentioned. As we are here. While social-media is hit with dozes of darts, we are still here. Social-networking is a place that can be used for opportunities to share your interests with people across the world,  use the maturity too many adults think we don't have, and discuss interest such as reading, film and fashion. It's a Social Media scare.

 

It's not the fact I don't believe cyber-bullying takes place, I have seen abuse online and it's not a situation I ever want to be a part of myself or see someone else go through. I can't express how shocked I am to hear that young people have felt so-worthless because of cyber-bullies that they have committed suicide. As you all now, I am very much against bullying under any circumstance. I just wish that people who think it's okay to say what they like online don't sink us all on the social-media ship. Put measures in place to make sure abuse does not go unnoticed; set up a system that resembles that of 'Big Brother' but, realise that there are bloggers out there, who continue to use social-media the way it should be used, and put too much effort into running-blogs just for people to not realise that they are also a form of social-networking. Am I the only one who thinks social-media shouldn't be continuously judged based on the few horrible people out there?

 

Blogger allows us to experience something exciting everyday - it's something I, and so many others, spend hours writing on and are proud of. Social-media is not a bad thing that all teenagers mistreat! The next time an adult sees the question, "When do you think young people should be allowed to use social-media?" I want them to consider us, even though they won't. When they say fourteen, how will that ever work, as I've been blogging since I was twelve! Then there's Amber, who has been blogging half her life! So, do all teens misuse social-networking?

 

What do YOU think?

Tell me in the comments!

A huge thank you to Ruby for the gorgeous banner for this feature!

The World From YA Eyes: New year, new diet? No thank you!

The World From YA Eyes is a feature I absolutely love to write as it means I can write a post full of opinion, and about something I feel strongly about. I know that this feature should be posted on a Friday, but I have been so busy lately that I haven't really stuck to my plans...

It's a New Year, and a lot of people say it's a new-start. I don't. You can't change all of last year's events because a day now separates them. You also can't be expected to think none of the things you did last year can no longer be counted as achievements because they didn't happen in the current-year. Personally, the reading goal that I was so proud of because I reached, suddenly means 'nothing' which is something I'm always sad to see go back to '0' books. Of course, I'd like setting  few goals, as it's nice to have something to aim for, 2014 is a year I'm really ready to begin writing-a-novel and so, the New Year can be good to give a push towards that - just like other people decide to give up smoking, drinking or whatever other habits they no longer want. Although, I still really dislike the New Year, and the reason for this is the fact I suddenly need to feel the need to loose weight.

The one thing that is associated most with the New Year, and shouldn't be, is the idea that you should go on a diet and suddenly start eating healthier because January is here! Personally, all the adverts on TV about the latest fitness DVDs or how to join Weightwatchers make me feel bad about my self; and this is something that shouldn't be happening. My first thought when I see these is, 'If you want to loose weight - why don't you start mid-year because by the New Year, you would be already on track to having a better, more preferably lifestyle." Clearly, this is the same for the things I talked about above, and rightly-so. Shouldn't people feel just as inspired to kick-start changing a few things they are un-happy about in, say, March? Also, once again there's the image that these 'New Years Resolutions' are portraying to females. Admit it, you never see anything for men who may have decided to loose weight, so the pressure is really on for women; who now feel they have to loose the weight they have put on over Christmas because everyone else seems to be doing it, while every magazine you see in the supermarket is filled with articles about how to get slimmer in the New Year, and you can't turn on your computer without an advert or tweet about how to loose weight appearing on your screen. You simply can't escape from the sudden need everyone has to go on a diet.

Christmas is the reason most people decide to begin dieting - because you ate a Christmas dinner and enjoyed your food. This year, after reading an article that said how many calories the average person puts on over Christmas, even I avoided eating some desserts or as much as usual because I was worried I'd suddenly get 'fat' as I'd eaten more for just one week of the fifty-two that are in year. I'm only fourteen and have these feelings. The food during Christmas is one of my favourite parts of the festive-period, at times it even beats the gift-giving, but I'm made to feel bad about what I've eaten as soon as January 1st comes around. It's purposefully done, though, I mean when do you think the local Gym has the highest-amount of new members, join? Or when do you think that athlete sells the most fitness DVDs? It's after you have just, to put it quite bluntly, stuffed your face full of food, and are easily made to feel guilty about it.

I'm always thinking about the image it can have on younger-girls, feeling bad about what you've eaten is the basis of some many health-problems regarding weight. Do people no longer think about that? Think about the fact that, despite these diets being aimed at adults, us 'children' still pick it up. We still see the adverts, magazines; still hear the people, when asked what their resolution for the year is say, "To loose weight." So, my question to you is, why does a new year mean you suddenly have to be thin? As it doesn't. I for one, will not be dieting because I've got a new calendar on my wall. For me, the new year means going back to school is inevitably, as when I finish on the last-term I always feel like the holidays will last forever, and that I will probably set targets for myself I won't keep while watching countries compete over who will have the best fireworks; which I always find immensely entertaining! Is that bad?

What do you think? Should everyone start a new diet because it's a new year? Or do you feel it's just a good-time to make everyone feel guilty because Christmas has just gone? Tell me the comments!

'The World from YA Eyes' is a regular-feature that will continue to be posted fortnightly on a Friday(From now on).

Anti Bullying Blog Week(Day 6) - The World from YA Eyes

I want to say a huge sorry to begin with for lack of being around your blogs over the past week; everything has been immensely busy! Although, the reaction to the week has brought so many tears to my eyes and I am so proud to say I am part of a brilliant community - especially one that has supported this project! I've realised though, that I have too many posts just to end Anti-Bullying Blog Week today which is why I have decided this will continue through for a few more days - with my Catching Fire Film Review going up on Monday(be warned, there will pretty much be an influx of reviews that week!)

 

The World from YA Eyes is a feature of mine where I discuss topics that are currently being mentioned; one's that really belong in a futuristic Dystopia. This week, to tie in with #AntiBullyingBW , It's all about bullying!

 

This is a quite a hard post to write - as your first instinct is to go on a rant about what I really think of bullies. Although, this is a discussion post, and I feel it wouldn't be fair unless I was completely honest about it. So, I've decided to go down the route of why I feel people become bullies, if it is ever justified and why I feel it isn't the answer. Before you start shouting at me, just wait until the end!

 

 

I recently was in a position, and if you read the 'Bloggers on Bullying: My Experiences' post you would already know, where I was insulted by the people who I thought were my 'friends.' This is a really hard thing to try to understand, as one minute you were constantly in a conversation and laughing, the next you know you shouldn't say anything as they really wouldn't care. I'm not ever going to say "Bullying is completely justified; I mean, you can't blame people for the way you act" as I will always believe there is a thought-process and most people would know when not to say something offensive. Even so, as these people were my 'friends' I knew what was going on in their personal-lives, and can, in a way, understand why there were so angry, even though I can never recall a time when I have said something to purposefully hurt them. I'm not like that.

 

I feel like the people who decide someone 'is not good enough' - do not have enough self-esteem themselves. It's so easy to imagine them pretending to give off a threatening presence, and to walk the corridors radiating confidence, when really they have horrible home-lives and the only thing that makes them feel good, is to make someone pay for it. To them, I feel it doesn't matter who. They just want to feel that control. Someone has hurt them, they want to hurt them back and they think it will feel good. Whether it is physical, emotional or verbal abusive, bullying is wrong. There is no doubting that.

 

I have so much love for this quote.

 

I can't help but feel that something that needs to happen is that bullies need more support. My guess is you bully someone because you are insecure, and feel, somehow, that they deserve it. There needs to be a two-way street. The people who feel like they are being victimised should feel comfortable to say something, despite threats from the person picking on them. Honestly, do you think these people would scare you into "not saying anything£ if they weren't actually shaking-all-over themselves? 

 

This is why, to stop bullying, I feel we need to offer some-sort of help to those that are the bullies. They do face blame when sometimes they may feel like they have their reasons that nobody else will understand.  I know, after a week of tips for victims, I may sound like I'm contradicting myself. However, if those people who felt frustrated to the point where they want to make those who live a slightly better life feel like rubbish, clearly they need somewhere/someone to go to.

 

I'd like to point out right now, to those that may be out there who are bullying someone, that it is not the answer. Just reading some of the stories that have come out of this week and it can really damage somebody - not just physically. Talk to someone about how you feel. If there's no one at home, try school, if there's no one at school, there are a lot of organisations you can find and I will be posting links on Sunday as part of the Wrap-Up to the week! Let's beat-bullying!

 

Do you agree that some causes of bullying, to a certain extend, can be justified?

Do you feel that people who are bullies should be able to find help, while not feeling the need to give out threats? 

The World From YA Eyes: That Final Page

As someone who loves to read, I always find myself in the library. Despite my initial. 'I'm just going to take these back' and 'I really don't need anymore more books' I always seem to come home with a pile under my arm. I understand how important libraries are, how they are the only place some people can get their hands on books and for others how they always seem to naturally walk in and browse the shelves for a while. They are an important place, and if they suddenly closed, there would be an empty-face that could never be filled.

 

Why, then, are libraries facing being shut-down across the country? Why are these places full of escapism and enjoyment for children and adults alike 'not worth spending the money on.' It really frustrates me to see, through articles online and news broadcasts, that so many libraries are facing closure because of 'Government spending cuts.' By doing this, they are turning that final page and deciding that reading isn't important. How any one group of people can make that decision for book-lovers, I can't begin to understand. How anybody can come to the conclusion that no longer having libraries is 'the best way to save' is...not even in my grasp. Politicians though, haven't experienced the community that we all have as bloggers - I know that if it wasn't for my mum taking me to a library and allowing me to choose books myself, I wouldn't be writing this right now.

 

The reason for this? I didn't always enjoy the books I was given to read at school. If you're not choosing what you read yourself - something is missing from the reading experience. Also, how is someone going to find a book six people(reading groups) are going to want to read? Six indecisive eleven year-olds? When will that even work. I do remember a time where, because I preferred reading my own book and found the school books 'boring' gave it to my Dad to read. The teacher realised and kept me in at lunch-time to read it. I think that's a point proven!

 

The Government are always announcing facts and figures on why children's reading ages are so low, yet, they decide to close down the place they can go to improve that? How ironic. They feel they have the right to take away something so many people care about. The next generation of readers and book-lovers will need libraries to visit; they will need these places where they can choose their own books for free. I think we can all remember a time - or quite a few times - when our parents have taken us to our local library as a child. Without libraries, how are children meant to discover books? The argument will probably be there's a library a short-drive away - but, a library should be right there for whenever we want to read!

 

 I don't understand why places people can go to just get out of the house and communicate with others ahave an underlying message from the Government of 'being useless' - when, of course, they're not.  Although, when I see something like THIS, I feel disgusted. I'd like to point out that, when they are the one's closing down the one place anyone can go to just pick up a book and read, they can't complain about lower grades and exam results across the country. We all know, that they still will though. We all see the news reports at exam times, and now, we just all need to think, "But you were the one's that closed the libraries" - they're not only a place I get books but somewhere I go to do work! If a library closes every group of people will be affected. Are we meant to go, 'Oh, never mind, the politicians need their Gym?' I certainly won't be.

 

What do you think of the latest library closures?

Do you feel there are still enough across the country?

The World From YA Eyes #2 - Hidden Away?

The World from YA Eyes is posted fortnightly and discusses the latest world-issues threatening to change our world into one we would find in a Dystopia novel.

 

I'm one of these people that likes to know what is going on in the world. I like the know what's happening, who it's going to effect and why. I don't like to be hidden-away from that 'reality' and that it is a choice I make personally. I read the articles that appear on the internet, I listen to the hourly news that is live on the radio, I watch the television when I know the news report is on. There are constantly discussions over how much we should be able to see and whether certain things should be kept away from young people to protect them. It took a lot to resist the urge to put inverted comma's around protect, because is that what hiding us away will do? Keep us safe? At one point we have to go out and face the world. At one point school will end, and we will have to leave home and start discovering things for ourselves. If we don't know what can happen in society, It will surely be harder to navigate?

 

My parents did avoid watching the news when I was around when I was younger - it's only been during the last one or two years that I've really decided to take an interest in what's going on. I agree that this was the right choice: let children enjoy the mind-set they are in. Let them enjoy having an imagination, let them enjoy the world they are comfortable in. It's only as you get older you begin to want to know and when that happens, I think it's only the right choice to allow us to see what we want to. Of course, there are always limitations. If it's going to effect someone that clearly doesn't have the maturity to deal with the problems in this world, or that it is brutal and is still for older audiences: it needs to be explained in a way suitable to the person.

 

At fourteen, most people can decide what they want to see and what they don't. I feel like I'm much more mature than others around me so, am able to judge what I can handle. The thing is, when discussing hiding things away from children, you have to realise they can go and search for the information elsewhere. You can turn off the News Reports or tell us to go and do homework while you watch it: you can turn down the radio when you know a certain story is going to be mentioned, but we will only go and search the internet. We will only go and ask a friend. News is out-there for everyone to see. Even if you don't go looking for it, it soon finds you!

 

Of course, young children shouldn't be exposed to most of the events that take place: murders, wars, natural disasters, they are all hard to contemplate. If you are a child and seeing footage, only able to understand snippets, it is frightening. It's not right though, to deny a slightly older and maturing young person information they want. If they want to know what is happening, want to be able to understand and try to grasp the world they must grow to be a part of, information needs to be giving. Stopping young people seeing or reading the News is never going to be able to happen, nor should it. Not letting us have the information we need is like locking us away. Even if children don't ask, sometimes they need to be explained in a way they will understand. At a certain age, you need to begin preparing for the world you will have to walk on your own - imagine relying on what you think happens. Imagine relying on your own image of the world - possibly a perfect one.

 

This is why information needs to be shared. This is why despite they're sometimes being too much shown and shared, it still needs to be there. One day, people may just begin to notice how much of it shouldn't be happening and decide to make a difference. Narnia, The Mortal Institute and Hogwarts should be hidden, though!

 

What do you think? Do you believe there is a certain age when you should start getting answers to your questions? Do you like knowing what's going on in the world you have to live in? Just comment your opinion below!

 

The World from YA Eyes

The World from YA Eyes in a new feature of mine that I've decided to write after I decided I wanted to bring back a type of 'Opinion' post I used to do. Being a book blogger does limit you to what type of posts you can write but, I'm hoping this will be a feature you will enjoy reading!

 

The World from YA Eyes will be posted fortnightly and will discuss the latest world-issues threatening to change our world into one we would find in a Dystopia novel.

 

Miley Cyrus' performance at the Video Music Awards shocked us all. Not only was it the fact that she was aloud to give such an inappropriate performance, or wear such little clothing, it was when it hits you that you're watching the once innocent Hannah Montana star who you grew up admiring and wanting to be like. I'm not going to begin this post by telling you a big fat lie and dismiss ever being a fan of hers because, I remember going to see the movie for my ninth birthday. I remember wanting to be her, wanting to live the double-life she had and memorising the dance routines to the hoe-down throw down. Most of all, I can still recite the words to her songs now.

 

The biggest problem with her performance for me, if not the provocative dance routines, was the reaction. Why was it not Katy Perry's performance, or Lady Gaga's that hit the headlines? And this got me thinking, is this the only way women have of getting any attention? I hope not. But, hope isn't really strong enough in the world that we live in today. If Miley Cyrus knew she would get as much attention if she were, in fact, wearing more than her underwear, it could be true to say she would have done that. But, after thinking for a while about this I realised, women are still seen as some type of display. And women think the only way they can get any attention is to wear as little as possible. And, maybe, that is true. At the point of history we are at, women still feel they must wear low-cut tops and short skirts to get the fame they need. It's the way a women is perceived, and something that needs to be changed.

 

If I move away from the celebrity world and more into today's society and our generation of teenagers, you will see a resemblance to the media. Girls: young girls, see this and think the only way they're going to get noticed by boys is if they wear the shortest skirts and tightest tops. And I'm disgusted by this image the media is setting out. I scroll through my Facebook wall and can see it for myself and am also horrified to see that the girls who are wearing so little, get the most comments. That they get the most 'Likes'. And I'm not one that pays much attention to 'Likes' but, what I do pay attention to is how this fuels the idea that 'I'm going to get more attention with the less I wear'.

 

This is basically a ladder: one that leads right to today's generation of young girls who have to, once again, live up to the media's expectations. People say females and equal to males but why is it that a decently dressed women doesn't get any attention while Miley Cyrus is the topic for weeks? Why is it that people aren't commenting on how harmful this can be to a young girls' perspective and criticising her, rather than hiring her for more performances? I just wish women could be seen, and think more of themselves than low-cut dresses. I mean, just take a look at some of the inspiring women that we know so well as bloggers and young people: Jennifer Lawrence, Emma Watson, Shailene Woodley, J.K Rowling, Taylor Swift, Ellie Goulding and the list goes on. These are really people I hear about a lot!

 

I hope you enjoyed this post, even if it was a little bit different from what I usually schedule. I used to write posts and pieces like this all the time and had a moment where I really wanted to voice my opinion once again. Just to comment though, in no way was any of this meant to be offensive in any way. If you feel this has offended you, or that I've over stepped the line, please contact me and I will remove it.

 

What do you think of this new feature? Any issues you would like to see me tackle next?