By Diya Kokkirala
Talon Staff
As Barrington High School continues its effort to “de-level” core courses, this is the first year in which freshmen have been allowed to pursue Honors Distinction in Language & Literature rather than taking a full year, honors-level course.
In freshman English, honors distinction involved reading and analyzing three related short stories written by various authors and then participating in a 20-30 minute seminar with a small group of our peers. We could choose between two sets of four texts, one of which was required from each set and we could choose the other two.
I chose the first text set for which Liam O’Flaherty’s “The Sniper” was the required story. That left me to choose between “The Monkey’s Paw” by W.W. Jacobs, “The Open Window” by Saki, and “The Necklace” by Guy de Maupassant.
I chose the text set involving perspective (“How does perspective shape our understanding of events, others, and ourselves?”) and was pleasantly surprised by the short stories. My preparation for the seminar included taking notes on how text text related to the prompt, quotations I felt were important, as well as an overall summary of the text.
As for the seminar itself, mine was on Zoom due to the COVID quarantine at the time. The seminar involved myself and five other students with Mrs. Jennifer Bergevine, a Lang. & Lit. teacher, as the host and assessor of the discussion. I personally enjoyed how it was a smaller group and the fact that it was voluntary. This allowed for there to be an equal amount of insightful participation from each individual. It felt more like a relaxed discussion as compared to a stressful seminar that would normally take place in an English language arts classroom.
However, the idea of being able to choose which two out of the three texts to read (not including the main text) proved to be a significant flaw. If five out of six students engaged in the seminar read the same texts,”The Monkey’s Paw” and “The Open Window”, and the other student picked “The Monkey’s Paw” and “The Necklace” there was a disconnect in the discussion that not only upset the entire rhythm of our seminar but also hurt the group as whole because at least one participant was automatically left out. This ultimately damages their chances of gaining the distinction when they had no means of knowing they would be choosing the odd text out.
For this reason, I think it should be required for everyone to read all the same texts or for those who chose different texts to be placed in different seminar groups.
I also noticed that many people had different interpretations of the questions given to discuss during the seminar which created more confusion than thought-provoking discussion. And while this does not reflect everyone’s experience of the English Honors Distinction seminar it does accurately reflect mine—both the positive and negative aspects of it.
Overall, I found this to be a beneficial experience and I will do it again when given the opportunity to do so next semester.