Characteristics of Onegin in modern school

Literature is taught in schools as before. Programs in other subjects have changed, new textbooks have been written even for mathematics, and only such a subject as literature is studied as before. In the notebooks of the students, Onegin's description is still being written, the arguments about Famusov and Chatsky. Do we need a cardinal reform of the literature course in the school or not?

On this account, there are two opinions. On the one hand, this program has already been worked out. It starts with simple and easily read literary works, poetry is affected to a minimum, prose is thoroughly developed. The works of Russian authors dominate foreign literature. What is the bad characteristic of Onegin in the student's notebook?

It is on his example that you can see how a person lives who is practically devoid of national roots! Fostered by the Frenchman, superficially educated (everyone would have such a superficial education), an egoist, in general, a cosmopolitan, a man of peace - that's a brief description of Onegin. And if the child understands this, nothing will prevent him from reading and continue, switch to foreign classics.

On the other hand, modern literature is really represented in the program poorly. Works written in the 20th century, published only in children's textbooks on reading, but more serious books are almost not offered for reading in middle and high school. Interest in literature among adolescents is not so great, and here is an obligatory characteristic of Onegin instead of the works of Selenger.

Indeed, if you look at this point of view, programs on literature should be reformed urgently, and everything: from the fifth grade to the eleventh. Otherwise, interest in the subject will dry up completely. Let the children read at least something, then do not read anything at all.

The pupils of the school, in general, are divided into three unequal groups:

• Children reading. Their minority, but such are and always will be. They are not intimidated by the characteristic of Onegin, the arguments about Tolstoy and Chekhov, they have already read all this and discussed it with adults.
• Children who read little, not very willingly, but with the stimulation of this process are ready to start reading books that are adequate to their age.
• And finally, those who do not read and will never read. For those want to organize courses on teaching reading of literary works. Unfortunately, such children are literally three quarters of a class.

Thus, it is clear that changes in the program will attract a very limited contingent to the literature. But if you change the subject of literature lost a special national flavor, the direction of the program. How will the transfer of moral principles take place, if not through literary works? How does the child learn what is possible, what is unacceptable, what is good and what is bad, how not through literary works. After all, not all families regularly raise these important topics. And the characteristic of Onegin in this issue, by the way, comes first. Just like thinking about Natasha Rostova and understanding the works of Turgenev. In the meantime, the debate in the pedagogical community does not stop, in the student notebooks again and again appears the line: "Characteristic: Eugene Onegin."