Analyzing Literature and the Ongoing Controversial Issue of Uniform Essays in Vietnam

Posted by: WittyRuby on: June 18, 2006

In: Essays
Comment!

Hong-Ngoc Nguyen

Instructor: Jakubowski

English 104, section PG01

10 May 2006

Analyzing literature is the most important part in Vietnamese courses that students have to learn from secondary school until high school. It usually makes up 70% of the total grade in each Vietnamese exam. In America, students also learn to be familiar with examining a piece of writing. However, to some extent, the process of composing analysis papers is different in the two countries. Through my experience and my research, the ways Vietnamese students learn to write the analysis essays are clearly ineffective in encouraging students to show their creative and critical ability in analysis writing but quite effective in burying students’ minds.

At this time last year in Vietnam, a “strange” essay by Nguyen Phi Thanh, an eleventh grade student who entered the contest for outstanding students, was mentioned widely among the online newspapers and public opinions. This essay was called “strange” because instead of meeting the test requirement, Introduce the beauty of “Van Te Nghia Si Can Giuoc”, Nguyen honestly and critically discussed how dry the work was and how inappropriate the ways students were taught to analyze literature. In her essay, she wrote (qtd. in Thanh Nien Online):

“Before a work of literature, there are always opposite views, positive – negative, good – bad; but it seems that we, students, only have the right to like it, to show approval, not to show our own views…. I do not want to write hollow praise for work that I do not like…. I cannot point out its beauty [the piece of literature’s], its appeal because it does not appear beautiful or appealing to me.”

No doubt that this composition digressed from the subject, so she received the grade 3/15; however, it opened a controversial issue to public discussion. Thanh Thao, a reader who respondended, had remarked ironically that an “outstanding eleventh grade” student like Nguyen should be able to understand and realize the beauty of the work. So she scorned the author’s lack of the sense to such a masterpiece. Another argument explained the reason why Nguyen wrote such a paper was because she did not know what else to write. The test chose a piece of literature that she still had not learned, so she was trying to impute her failure in finishing the test to other factors (Kim Hong). More seriously, Vu Thanh Xuan, another reader respondent, suggested that Nguyen “deserved to be disciplined … for her disregard while participating in the contest”. Vu argued that if the student could not finish the test, she could give up instead of making her paper “a list of charges.”

Of course, she was not right when failing to be sensible to the work, which is surely considered a masterpiece of Vietnamese literature. Nevertheless, it does not mean that anyone can have the right to force the others to agree with them without reasonably giving persuasive explanations. Students’ purpose in going to school is to learn, so they should be encouraged to express their thoughts, even if they may have wrong perspectives. By letting students speak their opinions, teachers can know what students are thinking and recognize where they are wrong, then the teachers can direct their students towards a more correct response. The contest obviously gave an unfair topic that required students to analyze only the work’s beauty. It sounded as it was forcing all contestants to praise the work. Thus, if any of them did not like the work, they had no way to show their views without moving away from the subject. Then, students faced two choices, giving up or continuing the test by writing words which contradict their beliefs. Consequently, uniform essays emerged. Probably it was not the first time Nguyen faced this opposing. The test subject, as the last drop makes the cup run over, drove her to write such a strong disagreement essay.

It was clearly unfounded to claim that Nguyen wrote this essay to defend herself from failure of satisfying the test. If she could not meet the test requirement, she surely would get a bad grade. And this fact was applied to her essay as she foresaw. Obviously, she did not need to waste her work and change nothing. It was far more unreasonable that she should be disciplined for her disrespect for the contest, just because she was showing her reasonable opinions. Moreover, the examiners could give her a low score and leave her essay aside as they did to the other digressions. It was they who let her essay become public and an argument issue. Would the examiners be concerned about a worthless and poor paper? Probably not.

It was praiseworthy that she had the courage to stand up and be counted. Her essay had the value of recounting the actual situations that many other students were facing: writing the analysis essays without reflecting their own perspectives, or in another words, they were composing uniform essays.

The Vietnamese courses in Vietnam are standardized throughout the country, so I believe the way I learned is the common way that the other students have to. As students, we read the texts and answer the suggestions for discussion at the end of the text, our homework before class. Coming to school, we listen to the teachers and note down whatever the teachers say or write on the blackboard. I feel that the teachers are like the cooks who prepare and cook food, and the students are like the customers, who come and eat. Students just sit there, in the classes, consume everything from the teachers’ lectures. Then, we should learn the lectures as much as possible, because after studying some pieces, we will be required to analyze one of them in an in-class close book exam. Many pieces, both prose and verse, require memorization so that we can use them as foundations for our analysis essays.

Certainly, most of the teachers do not want to teach their students in such a passive way. Nevertheless, students have to learn numerous pieces of literature while the time allowed is extremely limited. The teachers teach one piece of literature in only about one to three periods, which are totally 45 to 120 minutes, according to the length of the text. The course schedule demands that we finish two or more pieces a week. In such a limited time, the teachers go through the biography of the authors and analyze the work in depth. I still remember my seventh grade teacher often ran out of time because of his enthusiasm for imparting his passion to students. As a result, there was no time left for discussion.

Moreover, not only the teachers but also the students face with the pressure of time. Ms. Nguyen Thi Mao, Cao Ba Quat High School teacher, pointed out that students had to learned so many things at once (eleven different subjects with a lot of homework for each) that they “did not have the pleasant of reading the text carefully to be sensitive to the interesting and beauty of the work of literature” (qtd. in Thanh Lan). Students may have the ability to write wonderful essays, but these essays may lack the expression of their real emotions toward the literature. For example, the ten-point essay (10/10) once became a contentious issue since it was hard and rare that a student could get the maximum grade for the Vietnamese subject in a university entrance exam. The essay, of course, had met the standard requirements with coherent writing, but it was still lack of the “vibration” of being moved by the work, because both students and teachers were not given enough time to be insightful to the texts (Thanh Lan).

In addition, the pressure of getting good grades also prevents students from expressing their real opinions in writing. In class, the reason for our silence is because we consider discussion as a waste of time. We do not believe that our views will be taken into consideration. Most students while attending school want good grades so they will find the best way that complies with their desire. As I found out, to gain a high score, I had to have good writing skills with extensive knowledge about the author, the work itself and the lectures. A critical mind, for me, has no more role than helping me memorize all these more easily. More important, I should stand by the lectures’ view when making value judgments about characters in the literature.

Often, students who cannot do well in a particular subject will hate that subject. For example, a student who usually gets less than average score in math, probably hates math. Surprisingly, for Vietnamese subjects, there are a considerable number of students, such as Le Dung and Vega, a current student and an alumnus of Pho Thong Nang Khieu, who frequently get high scores, more than seven over ten, expressing that they extremely dislike Vietnamese. Le Dung admitted that although he used to get 9.3 GPA out of 10, he “never loves Vietnamese even one minute.” He feels sad that those high scores are not really his scores since they fail to reflect his real sense towards literature, so he horribly dislikes Vietnamese.” Vega stated those high scores “are the results of the unwillingness to imitate the model essays” (qtd. in Pho Thong Nang Khieu Forum). One of the reasons is that most pieces of literature, especially pieces in high school, relate to politics. Vega argued, “once analyzing literature, pieces of writing which connects to political beliefs, the freedom of stating points of view is restrained instantly.” Politics should be taught in political science class instead of being “crammed into literature” (Vega, qtd. in Pho Thong Nang Khieu Forum).

On the other hand, while writing analysis essays, American students focus on improving their skills in introducing and developing their own theses. I gained interesting background details through passing out to Americans a survey that I conducted, in which I asked them about ways of learning to analyze a work of literature before attending college and I got nine respondents. Based on the article “Analyzing Literature” from Georgia Colege, they showed me that the process of composing their essays was almost similar to the article, except the stating and solving problem part. Most of the occasions, they were given enough time to read and think about the text carefully. They controlled their attitudes towards the pieces. If they enjoyed the text, they would take more time and be more willing to analyze the text as they felt. Otherwise, they could listen to whatever their teachers said. Many of them agreed with my question, that their teachers interpreted both the strength and the limitations of the text, “but emphasized on strenghs,” as one added. To show me how he did his essays, one respondent describes: “I listened to the teacher talk and picked up on key points and buzzwords. Then, I applied as much of my own thought as necessary in order to give the appearance of original ideas while following the teacher’s rubric as closely as possible in order to get a good grade.”

Interestingly, I made a nice discovery; when I asked them if they have ever been given sample essays and “encouraged” to learn them by heart to prepare for the exams, 100% respondents affirmed “Nope”. Fortunately that they did not have my experience of being vehemently encourage to study the material (Honestly, I was like to study that way since I was lazy to think on my own, to imagine and fabricate all the things that I never really had on my mind). Of course, not all Vietnamese were in my situation, but most of them relied wholly on sample essay books that were sold everywhere while composing their papers.

Also, I had the luck of contacting a high school teacher, Miss Erbe, who provided detailed sources of how she instructed and graded her students in this kind of writing (see appendix 1, appendix 2, appendix 3). When we take a look at the scale, we can see that it mainly measures how reasonably her students give their theses and how well they show their skills in writing a paper. In contrast, looking at the grade scale in Vietnamese university entrance exam (2005), there is a certain grade for each point of view toward the text. At the end, there is a statement added: “Accept those ideas out of the scale, but they must have logical and reasonable basement. Encourage unique ideas that are really meaningful and directly connect to the topic”. Although it sounds brilliant, actually it is not that wonderful. Giving such a scale, of course, students will choose the certain way to get good grades. They never want to risk their chance of entering college, which is their far more important goal. They expect to be able to get rid of their internal confilcts once they get out of high schools.

In fact, the regulation of teacher lectures and rubrics help students have detailed and concrete material in studying an abstract subject as literature. When I first read the lecture or the sample analysis essay for a work of literature, I could tell that without these materials, I would have no idea about how to write my own paper. However, unlike math in which every student can undoubtedly accept the right answer, literature affects students in different ways with unique ideas. For those students who have good sense of literature, I think teachers should allow them freedom in expressing their own views. Mr. Ha Binh Tri, a specialist in charge of literature, the Ministry of Education and Training, admitted: “So far, ‘standardizing’ teachers’ lectures and students’ writings [in Vietnam] is still widely happening” (qtd. in Thanh Nien Online). This is not a good sign for encouraging students to show their creative and critical ability in analysis writing. Hopefully, the Ministry of Education and Training will modify the Vietnamese course by allowing teachers and students to be more independent in their process of teaching and learning, so that the students’ uniform essays and their obsession about writing trite and hollow papers can no longer exist in the near future.

Works Cited

Analyzing Literature. Online posting. Georgia Perimeter Colege. 19 April 2006. http://www.gpc.edu/~lawowl/handouts/analyzing-literature.pdf

This is a handout that helps students organize and plan their analysis paper. I use this handout as a part of my survey to pass out to students (to answer the question whether they use this format).

Bai Van “ La” Gay Xon Xao Lang Giao. Online posting. 12 May 2005. Thanh Nien Online. 19 April 2006. http://www.thanhnien.com.vn/Thegioitre/2005/5/12/109608.tno

Dap An – Thang Diem De Thi Tuyen Sinh Dai Hoc, Cao Dang Nam 2005, Mon Van Khoi D. Tuoi Tre Online. 10 April 2006. http://www.tuoitre.com.vn/media/dapanDH05/dapanVanD05.pdf

Dung Ghet Mon Van. Online posting. Pho Thong Nang Khieu. 19 April 2006. http://ptnangkhieu.com/v1/forums/viewtopic.php?mode=viewtopic&topic=211 &forum=25&start=0

Kim Hong (2005).“Nhung Tac Pham Kho Moi Thu Thach Hoc Sinh Tim Hieu.” VN Express. 19 April 2006. http://www.vnexpress.net/Vietnam/Ban-doc-viet/2005/05/3B9DE30A/

Thanh Lan (2005). “Hoc Sinh Co Duoc Phep … Tu Duy? Tu ‘Bai Van La’ Den ‘Bai Van Diem 10’.” Sach va Doi song. Online posting. 26 October 2005. Chungta. 19 April 2006. http://www.chungta.com/Desktop.aspx/GiaoDuc/Thuc-Trang-GD-Pho-Thong/Tu_Bai_van_la_den_Bai_van_diem_10/

Thanh Thao. “’Bai Van La’ Gay Chan Dong Tu Phia Nao?” Thanh Nien Online 16 May 2005. 19 April 2006. http://www3.thanhnien.com.vn/Chaobuoisang/2005/5/16/109900.tno>.

Vu, Thanh Xuan (2005). “Bai Van La Se Tro Thanh Tien Le Xau.” VN Express. 14 May 2005. 19 April 2006. http://www.vnexpress.net/Vietnam/Ban-doc-viet/2005/05/3B9DE37F/

Appendixes

Appendix 1

Appendix 2

Appendix 3