• Searching TikTok for trending sounds to reference
• Following teen influencers to stay “current”
• Learning about whatever game is popular this week
• Trying to “speak their language” authentically
• Racing to keep up with youth culture

But here’s what I’ve noticed after 17 years in the classroom: The most engaged discussions often happen when I share connections I’m genuinely excited about – even if they’re not necessarily “relevant” to teens.

Two Approaches to Student Engagement

Picture this: I’m teaching Macbeth. I have two options:

Student Engagement Option 1: Force “Relevant” Connections

• Compare Lady Macbeth to current teen drama
• Find social media parallels for every scene
• Make strained connections to high school politics
• Try to find trending references for every moment

Student Engagement Option 2: Share Real Analysis

• Break down how the play mirrors reality TV power dynamics
• Analyze character arcs like season-long story development
• Examine how ambition plays out in competition shows
• Draw on patterns I actually study in my own viewing

Guess which creates better student engagement and deeper discussion?

It’s not because reality TV is more “relevant” to students than their own experiences. It’s because:

1. I bring genuine analytical insight from my deep understanding
2. Students see authentic intellectual curiosity in action
3. The connections emerge from real pattern recognition
4. The analysis has actual depth and substance
5. The thinking creates authentic discovery

Beyond Forced Relevance

Here’s what I’ve learned about real student engagement:

• Authentic interest is contagious – students respond to genuine enthusiasm
• Deep analysis builds natural connections across contexts
• Real patterns create genuine insights and discoveries
• Systematic thinking reveals meaning students actually care about
• True engagement comes from authentic intellectual work

Engineering Better Analysis

Instead of asking “How do I make this relevant?” try:

• What patterns do I genuinely see in this text?
• Where does my expertise offer unique insight?
• How does this connect to what I understand deeply?
• What makes this analysis actually matter?
• How can I model real analytical thinking?

From Surface to Substance

Real student engagement doesn’t come from:

• Forcing youth culture connections
• Pretending to share their interests
• Creating artificially “relevant” links
• Finding trendy references
• Racing to stay “current”

It comes from:

• Bringing authentic analytical thinking
• Sharing genuine pattern recognition
• Building real analytical tools
• Creating conditions for discovery
• Modeling intellectual curiosity

What Real Student Engagement Looks Like

Let me give you a specific example from my classroom. Recently, I was teaching The Great Gatsby. Instead of forcing connections to teen social media drama, I shared my fascination with how reality TV shows build and break alliances. Not that I don’t see the social media comparisons – I definitely do. It’s why I bring up the reality show The Circle and the parallels I see in that dynamic.

The discussion that followed was electric – not because students particularly cared about reality TV, but because:

• They saw genuine analytical thinking in action
• The patterns revealed something real about power and relationships
• The analysis had actual depth and complexity
• The connection emerged naturally from authentic interest
• They got to see (and appreciate?) my enthusiasm for the analysis 

I also think we can learn a lot by studying the media that our students consume, but I don’t think it needs to be so…on the nose. The key wasn’t the specific connection – it was the quality of thinking it inspired. Students started noticing their own patterns, drawing on their own areas of expertise, building genuine analytical skills.

If the students make that connection to teen social media drama…great! That is their connection and we don’t need to make it for them.

Where Do We Go From Here?

We’re not ignoring student interests. When authentic connections to their experiences emerge, absolutely explore them.

But if you find yourself desperately searching for ways to “make it relevant,” try sharing what genuinely interests you instead. Your authentic analytical thinking will create better student engagement than forced connections ever could.

Want to build more engaging analysis in your classroom? Start with my free Discussion Engineering Mini-Course. You’ll learn:

• How to build real expertise (vs surface preparation) 
• Why genuine knowledge gaps create engagement
• Ways to make everyone’s contribution matter
• How to design discussions that actually work

Because ultimately, student engagement isn’t about relevance – it’s about creating conditions for real thinking to flourish.

[Click here to access your free Discussion Engineering Mini-Course]

Teaching gets better when we bring our whole selves to it, including our genuine intellectual curiosity.

The post The Most Popular Student Engagement Hack Is Missing Something appeared first on English Classroom Architect.

For years, I tried everything to get deeper discussions going in literary analysis discussions – discussion roles, accountability forms, those speaking trackers that look like spider webs (anyone else try those?). But something was still missing.

Here’s what finally changed everything in my classroom: I stopped hoping for magic and started building genuine interdependence through systematic skill building. Trust me – if my 6th period can do it, any class can. (Just kidding 6th period! You’re my favorite!)

Why Most Group Analysis Falls Flat

I had to face two hard truths about why my literary analysis discussions weren’t working:

1. Students need concrete analytical tools to contribute meaningfully (vague “share your thoughts” instructions weren’t cutting it)
2. They need a real reason to engage with each other’s ideas (beyond getting participation points)

It’s not enough to just put students in groups and hope for the best. We need to build both skills and structures for real analytical thinking.

Building the Foundation: A Systematic Approach for Literary Analysis Discussions

(Or: How I Finally Got My Students to Do More Than Quote-Dump)

Level 1: Basic Close Reading

First things first – students need to really understand what they’re reading before they can analyze it. Sounds obvious, right? But I kept pushing for deep analysis before taking enough time building this foundation, then wondering why discussions stayed surface-level.

Tools like Say/Mean/Matter help students:

• Break down what the text literally says
• Figure out what it means
• Consider why it matters

Nothing fancy, but it works. Students start building confident close reading skills almost without realizing it. These assignments have become my absolute favorites for teaching these foundational analysis moves.

Level 2: Getting Specific

Next up: teaching students to analyze specific literary elements. Quote Crushing (yes, I really call it that) helps them examine:

• Diction choices 
• Interesting phrases
• Figurative language
• Syntax patterns
• Connections to bigger ideas

This is where students start creating actual evidence for analysis, not just hunting for any quote that mentions the theme. (Quick tip: If you’re looking to create your own close reading passages, Amanda Cardenas has an amazing process for this. Her step-by-step approach completely changed how I prepare texts for analysis.)

Level 3: Making Connections

Now students learn to see relationships between ideas. Connection Bounce helps them:

• Link different pieces of evidence
• Build on previous analysis
• See how ideas develop
• Create chains of meaning

This develops more complex thinking.

Level 4: Pattern Finding

Finally, students are ready to tackle larger analytical tasks. By giving different students different sections to analyze, they:

• Become experts in their pieces
• Need others’ insights to see full patterns
• Have genuine reasons to listen and connect
• Build meaning collectively

Why This System Works

True collaborative literary discussions happen because:

1. Students have specific analytical tools
2. Each level builds confidence
3. The final task requires collaboration
4. Everyone has something valuable to contribute

Real Results: Macbeth in Action

Recently, my students analyzed Macbeth using this system. The discussions were incredible – not because I have uniquely brilliant students, but because:

• Everyone had concrete evidence to share
• They needed each other’s sections to see full patterns
• The analytical tools gave them confidence
• The task structure required real collaboration

Students traced patterns like blood imagery, explored the Great Chain of Being, and built sophisticated interpretations – together.

Making Literary Analysis Discussions Work in Your Classroom

This system for literary analysis discussions works with any complex text. The key principles:

1. Build analytical skills systematically
2. Give students specific tools
3. Create genuine interdependence
4. Make everyone’s contribution necessary

Next Steps

Consider:

• What analytical tools do your students need?
• How can you build skills progressively?
• What tasks require real collaboration?
• How can you structure literary analysis discussions for genuine interdependence?

Because ultimately, we want students doing more than just sharing isolated thoughts – we want them building meaning together.

Want to try this system with your students? I’ve developed a complete framework for teaching Macbeth using this approach. [Link to bundle]

Want to learn more about how I structure discussions? Check out this free discussion toolkit for more ideas!

…and here are some other Macbeth ideas!

• Shakespeare and the Gunpowder Plot (blog)
• Teaching Macbeth as an RPG (blog)
• Then and Now: Reimagining Shakespeare (podcast)

The post Moving Beyond “Good Point”: Building Real and Powerful Literary Analysis Discussions appeared first on English Classroom Architect.

The Old Way of Teaching Shakespeare

When I first started teaching Shakespeare, I was determined to have my students understand every word, every nuance. I armed myself with countless books breaking down each line, believing that if students could grasp each individual word, they’d understand the whole. But this traditional method of teaching Shakespeare often led to:

• Student disengagement
• Lack of overall comprehension
• Missed opportunities for deeper analysis

The New Approach: Holistic Shakespeare Teaching

Now, my strategy for teaching Shakespeare focuses on the bigger picture. Here’s how I’ve restructured my approach:

1. Thematic Understanding in Shakespeare’s Plays

When teaching Shakespeare, we identify key concepts early on and trace them throughout the play. For Macbeth we might focus on:

• Ambition and its consequences
• The nature of guilt
• Gender roles and power dynamics

2. Character Analysis in Shakespeare

Instead of getting bogged down in language, we delve deep into character motivations. When teaching Shakespeare’s Macbeth, we might:

• Create character maps showing relationships and motivations
• Analyze key soliloquies for insight into characters’ thoughts
• Debate characters’ decisions and their consequences

3. Historical Context in Shakespeare Teaching

Understanding the historical backdrop adds depth to our Shakespeare lessons. For Macbeth, we explore:

• The political climate of Shakespeare’s time
• The influence of the Gunpowder Plot on the play
• Elizabethan/Jacobean attitudes towards witchcraft and kingship

4. Visual Aids for Teaching Shakespeare

Graphic novels have become a powerful tool in my Shakespeare teaching. They provide visual context that helps students grasp the story more easily, even with Shakespeare’s original language.

5. Multimedia Approach to Shakespeare

When teaching Shakespeare, we don’t just read the play; we watch various film adaptations, comparing interpretations and discussing how different directors bring the text to life. This version of the play (which you can stream for free!) performed at the Folger Shakespeare Library and directed by Aaron Posner is my favorite.

6. Creative Projects in Shakespeare Lessons

Instead of traditional essays, I now assign projects that allow students to engage with Shakespeare’s text in more innovative ways, such as:

• Social media campaigns for Shakespeare’s characters
• RPG-style games based on Shakespeare’s plots
• Modern retellings of key Shakespeare scenes

7. Language Exploration in Shakespeare’s Works

While we no longer focus on understanding every single word, we do pay attention to Shakespeare’s use of language in key moments. For example, when teaching Macbeth, we explore the concept of equivocation.

8. Contemporary Connections in Shakespeare Teaching

To make Shakespeare truly relevant, we draw connections between his plays and our students’ lives. This might involve:

• Comparing political ambition in Macbeth to modern politics
• Discussing how social media might change the plot if the play were set today
• Exploring how gender roles in Shakespeare’s plays compare to contemporary society

The Results of This Holistic Approach to Teaching Shakespeare

By taking this holistic approach to teaching Shakespeare, I’ve found that:

• Students engage more deeply with the text
• Classroom discussions are richer and more engaging
• Students develop critical thinking skills that extend beyond Shakespeare

Challenges in Teaching Shakespeare Holistically

Of course, this approach to teaching Shakespeare isn’t without its challenges:

• Balancing depth and breadth of Shakespeare study
• Time management in Shakespeare units
• Addressing concerns of Shakespeare purists

Conclusion: Revolutionizing Shakespeare in the Classroom

Teaching Shakespeare doesn’t have to be a battle against boredom. By thinking outside the script and approaching these timeless works with creativity and relevance, we can help our students see why Shakespeare’s plays have endured for over 400 years.

Where have you found success with Shakespeare? Add to the comments!

The post Teaching Shakespeare: A Holistic Approach to Teaching Shakespeare appeared first on English Classroom Architect.