This article argues that reading for pleasure is systematically being destroyed by inane, mind-numbing practices found in schools. The cure is deep reading modelled in the classroom and encouraged outside. Classes that focus on the form of writing at the expense of meaning are at risk of failing to develop the clear and critical writing skills of students necessary in the modern world. Many students attain education for pragmatic reasons (money, status) so when competing with other study and social media, reading ceases, especially true for STEM students. Therefore, it is necessary to capitalise on the mandatory English Year 11-12 course for all students (regardless of career interests) and provide them rich opportunities for deep reading, not form composition, which can offer them pleasure, recreation, escape and their critical understanding of the world and the emotional experience of their relationships.

Grover’s chapter effectively illustrates the significant impact that engaging with short stories can have on secondary students in the classroom. The strength is within the format; rich texts ready for exploration and meaning extraction without the time commitment of a novel. Within this chapter are numerous strategies for integrating short story engagement in the classroom. This includes dissecting the features of a short story, which are underpinned by classroom activities that engross students in rich learning experiences where they will explore complex ideas, literary techniques, and human experiences where they can create texts of their own to be read by authentic audiences.

The article by Lovejoy et al., (2020) argues that the way writing is currently taught and assessed is too narrow. Assessors place emphasis on technical skills, assessment criteria and outcomes, and standardised testing, which forces the hand of passionate teachers to change their English teaching pedagogies. This leads to writing feeling like a formulaic and mundane activity which disengages students from seeing the intrinsic value of it. Prior to their research, Lovejoy et al., (2020) found that standardised tests stifled student creativity and the enjoyment of writing, leading to declining NAPLAN scores. To overcome this, the study became inspired by research out of several low-SES schools which featured teachers trialling ‘low-stakes’, writing based on their recognition of the students rich cultural, linguistic, and cognitive resources. Lovejoy et al., (2020), inspired by this, trialled a similar exercise in their study, providing students 15 minutes of low-stakes writing once a week. The impact of this practice was significant, with participant teachers viewing the program as a positive influence on their students attitude and writing resilience.

This chapter argues that schools need to rethink how writing is taught in the classroom. Graham (2018) argues that strong writing skill is not developed naturally through sporadic writing opportunities and assessments, but rather through a structured progression of instruction. Current research indicates that exemplary writing programs are only created when teachers offer significant amounts of time to them, but universally, most writing programs are sub-standard and reveal concerning statistics about students, including that approximately two-thirds of students in the United States are writing below or at the basic level (Graham, 2019). Consequently, schools and teachers should develop writing programs that apply methods with a proven track record of success (Graham, Bruch, et al., 2016, as cited in Graham, 2019). Firstly, students should be explicitly taught necessary writing skills, including planning, drafting, and revising. Once a foundation of knowledge is achieved, they should take control of their own writing process through frequent and purposeful extended writing opportunities. Inspired by Graham’s research, I have ensured that Gradual Release of Responsibility is a key strategy of this English unit.