Many people think that one of the important things English courses and English teachers do is make sure everybody's read "the great texts," or at least that they've been in the room while a discussion of them was carried on. So people assume that an introductory English course will be one in which someone will tell them what the "great texts" are (and that they'll be Shakespeare, some nineteenth century novels, and some modern, Romantic and sixteenth century poetry).

I don't think this is, or at least should be, a central goal of an English course: I think what it's primarily about is to help students become the sort of people who actually care about that sort of literature, and might read it later in life, go to plays, and generally engage themselves with writing -- as an art form, as a tool for being in the world, as a recreation. I'm not sure the best way to do that is to take a list of "great works" and do "the English course thing" with them.

I think a much better way is to create a situation in which people have lots of chances to get better at attending to texts, at talking and writing about them, and at handling written (and oral) language. Also, and perhaps most important, I hope they have a chance to deepen their awareness of how it all works. If at the end of that they're better readers and writers (and listeners and speakers) I think that's far more important than whether they know some plots from Shakespeare, some good lines from poetry, and some opening lines from great novels.

Not only that, the English department agrees with me (or at least they've said publicly they agree with me). If you check out our statement of goals for English 1006 (and you should) you'll see there's not a word there about the history of literature, Shakespeare, or great novels.