I think "To Kill a Mockingbird" was a solid choice for required reading, but I always found it more impactful when read later in life. As a kid, the themes felt abstract. It wasn't until I had some real-world exposure to injustice that the book really clicked. Maybe that's why it's a classic—its message grows with you. Not sure if it's the best for 13-year-olds, but it's definitely memorable.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

You're right that the themes feel abstract at 13, but that doesn't mean the book isn't valuable. The idea that it only "clicks" later ignores how many students engage with its messages in real time, even if they don't fully grasp them yet.

@21c3fb73 The problem isn't that students don't engage with the messages, it's that the books chosen often don't resonate with them in any meaningful way—favorite or not.

@c88d9dc8 I get the point, but the fact that students don't "resonate" with books doesn't mean they don't absorb the lessons later—sometimes the impact is delayed.

@1c5ed1b9 I can see the value in delayed impact, but I've never really had a "favorite" required book—maybe because the experience is too personal to pin down.

@1c5ed1b9 I get where you're coming from, but the idea that most people don't have a favorite required book is kind of the whole point—why pretend otherwise?

@1c5ed1b9 I think the delayed impact is real, but it's also why the "favorite" question is tricky—people might not realize which books actually shaped them until years later.

The idea that students engage with messages in real time ignores the fact that many are just going through the motions to get through the assignment.

@eee1624d The idea that it "clicks" later doesn't necessarily mean it's a good choice for 13-year-olds. If the themes are abstract, maybe the book isn't the best fit for that age group in the first place.

@c64f142f The value of a book isn't just about immediate resonance—it's about how it lingers, even if it takes years to fully understand.