I didn't do well in English classes either. English teachers in general have been very hit or miss for me. I had teachers that loved everything I ever did and others that disliked me, what I did, or expected me to do repetitive exercises or be parroted back to. In between getting awards for things I wrote and being expelled, I think I've seen a good chunk of the possibilities.
The most interesting thing was probably the time the teacher started off hating me and almost failing me, then apologizes to me and giving me an A+ in the course senior year. I actually had quite a few apologies from teachers/principals that year... that's weird to think about. Thinking on it I'm suddenly curious if there was some behind the scenes logic to that...
English is annoying because it can be entirely subjective what is good and what is not. I've had teachers tell me I've been too descriptive and indepth at times. One teacher said my sentences were unnecessarily complex (ie. I was using complex words, sorry I like to use more concise wording when writing papers). It often comes down to finding out what your teacher is looking for which means that you need to review your work with them. It's a pain in the ass but sometimes that's just the way it is.
Using a drone to strike U.S. citizens on U.S. Soil would be political suicide. I doubt any rational leader would try it even if it were completely legal, which it isn't (to the best of my knowledge). Your Facebook buddies need to either smoke a fatty and chill out, or ease up off the weed because they're getting paranoid.
Everyone in Facebook is shitting themselves at the possibility they might be attacked by a drone.
I haven't been on facebook in a couple of weeks, so I need to ask. How many people would you say are worried about a hell fire missile strike in their suburbs?
The English teachers I know of have pretty consistent standards. I've only ever taken college-level English classes, though.
I failed to mention most of my issues have been with writing papers for non English classes. Social sciences and history classes mostly. Either way every English class I've had I usually have the teacher read through my paper a couple days before it's due.
Sadly, given how subjective most English classes are, it's almost a requirement. For better or worse, I tend to be very skeptical of English classes, especially since many of the teachers seem to want you to subscribe to their view (or their teachers' editions' views) of the symbolism/hidden meanings/etc. contained within the texts and will mark you down if you don't. If the teacher grades you based on how well you make your argument during your analysis, whether it agrees with theirs or not, that's certainly more reasonable. However, I'm not sure how common those teachers are.
FWIW, English was my worst and least favorite subject in high school because of all this subjectivity. Math, science, and history, were my stronger subjects due to being far more objective.
There's something odd about that to me. "Here, grade my paper before you grade my paper so I can correct it to your specifications."
If the specifications for grading are present then it's usually not necessary, but if the rubric isn't known then I'm going to make sure that I'm not going to fail. I don't give a shit what the teacher thinks except that they agree that I should pass. Yeah it's dumb but it's the same as a game, by any means (except cheating) you should try to win.
Poor spelling is shit writing. Mixed tense is shit writing. Second person in an academic paper is shit writing. Failing to make use of the Oxford comma is shit writing.
Many aspects of style are a matter of personal preference, but many will agree with the following MUCH more subjective style advice, which itself is open to vigorous debate.
"However, if we kill all the puppies, there won't be any more puppies," is a weak sauce sentence.
"If we kill all the puppies, however, there won't be any more puppies," is similarly weak.
"If, however, we kill all the puppies, there won't be any more puppies," is a nicer one in many (but not all) contexts.
The first of these is stronger in spoken word if one is attempting to follow a straw point with an immediate rebuttal.
"Sure, we could eliminate the problem by eliminating puppies altogether. HOWEVER... If we kill all the puppies, there won't be any more puppies."
But in written word, it's not nearly so strong.
If I were writing that sentence, I would use a little more "glue."
"If, however, we were to kill all of the puppies, then there wouldn't be any more puppies at all."
I would do so to make a better meter and reflect the "all" in the first half with another at the end. It also highlights the hypothetical nature of the statement and overall makes a nice little package.
I consider myself to have "won" many a game by not playing.
Well you don't need to play school game either, life just might be shittier one chooses to do so.
Rym, teachers aren't always objective. Realistically you can only get so far with objective writing when it comes to school grading. If you're doing a research paper on imagery in Heart of Darkness the criteria, if not presented, can be entirely subjective.
I famously wrote a paper on Great Expectations despite having never read it. I based my essay solely on discussions from the class, and fudged my way through if I had to expound on anything during said class.
Once I realized that none of my English teachers actually gave a shit, I pretty much did the same thing. English was basically a joke class for us; if you turned in anything at all you'd get full marks, you just have to memorize the assigned reading. Memorizing books? That's more or less my forte.
I spent most of my english classes sitting in the back reading unrelated novels.
I based my essay solely on discussions from the class, and fudged my way through if I had to expound on anything during said class.
This is the real secret. Basing your writing around the lecture and discussions is literally the safest bet in any English class. Often I find that when people have trouble with English classes it's because they either don't think to regurgitate what was said in class or are too proud to.
Personally, I realized all these mechanics and played with them at first myself, but at the end of the day I would rather behave honestly and not risk any sacrifice of integrity to get by. I'm all the more proud for that.
That shit wouldn't fly in high-level lit theory classes. If you can't present high-quality, original thought to a teacher in an English degree program you'll get shitty grades.
Yeah, high-level liberal arts for a liberal arts student is a bit more difficult. But entry-level college classes and high school? Doesn't matter. Even AP English, I got through without reading some of the books, just made semi-original thought out of nowhere like a boss.
Related to English, I didn't realize until today that Americans spell cancelled "canceled". I guess this isn't really a fail, but I thought I'd just put that out there.
Comments
"You failed, but it not a total fail, just a regular fail. Either way, you failed."
The most interesting thing was probably the time the teacher started off hating me and almost failing me, then apologizes to me and giving me an A+ in the course senior year. I actually had quite a few apologies from teachers/principals that year... that's weird to think about. Thinking on it I'm suddenly curious if there was some behind the scenes logic to that...
FWIW, English was my worst and least favorite subject in high school because of all this subjectivity. Math, science, and history, were my stronger subjects due to being far more objective.
For example, poor parallelism is shit writing. If you disagree, then you are a shit writer.
http://www.writersrelief.com/blog/2009/08/finding-parallel-perfection-parallelism-in-writing-sentences/
Poor spelling is shit writing. Mixed tense is shit writing. Second person in an academic paper is shit writing. Failing to make use of the Oxford comma is shit writing.
Many aspects of style are a matter of personal preference, but many will agree with the following MUCH more subjective style advice, which itself is open to vigorous debate.
"However, if we kill all the puppies, there won't be any more puppies," is a weak sauce sentence.
"If we kill all the puppies, however, there won't be any more puppies," is similarly weak.
"If, however, we kill all the puppies, there won't be any more puppies," is a nicer one in many (but not all) contexts.
The first of these is stronger in spoken word if one is attempting to follow a straw point with an immediate rebuttal.
"Sure, we could eliminate the problem by eliminating puppies altogether. HOWEVER... If we kill all the puppies, there won't be any more puppies."
But in written word, it's not nearly so strong.
If I were writing that sentence, I would use a little more "glue."
"If, however, we were to kill all of the puppies, then there wouldn't be any more puppies at all."
I would do so to make a better meter and reflect the "all" in the first half with another at the end. It also highlights the hypothetical nature of the statement and overall makes a nice little package.
TL;DR: Read this book, do what it says:
http://www.amazon.com/The-Lively-Writing-Mentor-Series/dp/0451627121/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1360187218&sr=8-1&keywords=lively+art+of+writing
Rym, teachers aren't always objective. Realistically you can only get so far with objective writing when it comes to school grading. If you're doing a research paper on imagery in Heart of Darkness the criteria, if not presented, can be entirely subjective.
It was a disheartening lesson, to be sure, but one I took to heart nonetheless.
I bullshitted many an essay and presentation in high school with beautiful prose and showmanship.
I spent most of my english classes sitting in the back reading unrelated novels.