The most frequently complained-about component of high-level English classes, such as AP Language and Composition, AP Literature, and IB Literature, is without a doubt the annotations. The overly-structured process that students are forced to follow limits them from being able to fully engross themselves in and enjoy a piece of literature.
For example, in IB literature courses, it is mandatory that students find three levels of annotations on each page: an example of craft, why that example is significant to the novel, and how it relates to a greater significance or theme of the novel. These requirements sometimes triple the amount of time that annotating would typically take, depending on the speed and quality of the annotations, and they cause students to be unable to immerse themselves in a story. It requires students to constantly stop and scour the page for an example of figurative language to highlight and connect. How are students supposed to relate to the characters’ emotions and the author’s thought process when they need to stop and highlight for central oppositions on every page? Often, these annotations end up being procrastinated as a result of their arduousness and subsequently rushed in order to get a good grade rather than to fully understand a text. An IB junior commented, “I think that having to write annotations in such a structured way limits a student’s creative thinking process and makes students annotate for quantity instead of quality. We only worry about the annotations rather than truly understanding the book.” The process of annotating makes students dislike the books they are required to read, purely off on the basis of the meticulous annotations that must be done with it. Is being completely disinterested in a book an appropriate price to pay when the actual intent of annotating is to introduce students to the love of the written word on a deeper level?
However, there are some instances when students can enjoy annotations. In AP Language and Composition, students complete metacognitive logs for every passage they read and have to find multiple quotes supporting possible inferences they have about the text. This form of annotation is more personal to the writer and is, therefore, more well-liked by more students. Additionally, in AP Literature, students are given a list of motif and themes to center their annotations around but are primarily able to personalize them to their interpretation. A senior in the class commented, “It’s a pretty good way to annotate because it gives us some guidance but also a lot of freedom to analyze the books from our own perspective.”
In theory, yes, annotating is very helpful to understanding the deeper meanings of a text. However, when actually forced upon unwilling students, annotating does more harm than good. It causes students to resent the process of analyzing a piece of literature that they may love if done on their own terms. Instead of being required to annotate for specific components, students should be able to annotate for what they find to be significant. If completed in this way, students would be able to focus on actually understanding a text rather than just writing something down on each page. Overly-structured annotations are taxing and burdensome to students, and should not be a part of class curriculums.
It is safe to say that if a student in their junior or senior year of high school is asked about their English class, whether that be IB, AP, or Honors, they will most likely mention annotations at least once. Over the years, annotations have become a bigger and bigger portion of Myers Park’s English curriculum. Although more than a few students would argue against this shift, it takes up large amounts of time and seems tedious, but these annotations actually help students understand what they are reading past the level of knowing the plot. It allows them to gain insight into the author’s intentions and technique while also gaining a new appreciation for the intricacy and mastery of literary works.
Take IB English, for example. IB English classes have adopted a method they call “three-level annotating”. A student must first identify a literary device: imagery, tone, diction, etc., then explain how that literary device contributes to the progression of the work, and finally discuss what theme or “universal human truth” that technique is presenting to the reader. This process, although it can seem long, is actually a very efficient and helpful method of finding a deeper meaning within a text. By finding this deeper meaning, a student can begin to understand the work beyond just the actions happening within. This can allow a student to start to understand the intricate concepts and pieces that go into creating a literary work with substance and meaning. It is also teaching students how to search for these devices and buried meanings on their own with any text they are reading. The hope for many of these English teachers is that their students will continue to use these reading techniques outside of the classroom and give them a new appreciation for reading.
AP Literature and Language also have similar methods. In AP Literature, students must find evidence and quotes within the text to prove an inference they have made about the work while in AP Language the students are given a list of motifs and symbols to annotate for. While these techniques are much less structured than the techniques used in IB, the basis is still there: students are still being forced to look deeper into a text and gain insight that would have been looked over otherwise.
One of the stronger arguments against this process of annotating is that it tarnishes the work for students, not allowing them to enjoy the work they are reading and therefore pushing them farther away from an appreciation of literature. In some cases, this may be true, but in other cases annotating can actually bring a student closer to a work. If a student is struggling with understanding the appeal of a novel or a poem, that appeal can come from the analysis of the work. If the student is able to see the deeper levels that make up the work or to comment on the strategic use of literary devices, they may be able to connect with the text they had felt unattached to. For students who are not as interested in English and literature, the search for patterns within a work may be more appealing than trying to sit down and read with no guidance. People who tend to lean more towards math are able to impart the use of patterns and formulas to understand a work, making the process more enjoyable and the text easier to understand.
While these points in no way apply to every student and their experience with annotations, that does not mean the importance and value of annotating should be discredited. Annotating can give students access to a deeper meaning within a text, a new appreciation for literature, and reading skills that will continue to benefit them throughout college and into their adult life. Should we sacrifice all of that just because the process is tedious?