Talk:English studies

Biased and Needs Revision
The article feels biased and does not contain original ideas. The text is bland and restates itself numerous times. The article has the potential to be a good article if it is edited to be more neutral, and with the inclusion of original research. The research seems to be very basic, and I'm not sure if the information was gathered from a reliable source because of how basic it is. Mpmill(talk) 9:22, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

revision needed
This article is in serious need of revision. I tried revising it, but there were so many problems I scrapped the initial attempt. Right now the article is not much more than a rambling list of topics relating to English as an academic discipline, with nothing on literary theory, linguisitcs, or any people (including but not exclusive to) influential professors within the field. - IstvanWolf 21:22, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Proposed merge
I have proposed that the article English major be merged into this one, English studies. The two topics are essentially identical, and the title English studies is more inclusive and more readily understandable by those unfamiliar with the terminology of academia.-- Shelf Skewed  Talk  23:06, 30 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree. The English major really means one would be studying English. The classes are obviously different from school to school as well. This would mean there would be no uniform way to do this. DietFoodstamp (talk) 21:36, 30 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Might as well bring English literary studies up here too because nobody had commented on it. I don't think it is worth merging and should be deleted, which I'll nominate soon unless someone has any concerns here. DietFoodstamp (talk) 21:39, 30 April 2012 (UTC)


 * I just redirect it to English studies D O N D E groovily   Talk to me  04:18, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Poor Article
Besides the fact that most of the comments here are original research and also the article itself is biased (there is a clear agenda to portray this college degree as meaningless) We are not here to discuss the viability of this degree or any other. This schould be a clear and concise overview of what the English Major entails. Remember one of the fundementals of education in general are personal engagement. If one is going to sit and create reasons to not be engaged in their education then virtually any degree will become less viable. The english degree familiarizes one with conventions of written English, and more broadly communication. Beyond this the analytical and reading comprehension skills learned are invaluable to any profession. Critical analysis does not only apply to literature. Trolling aside this cannot be contested. Is it really that hard to remain objective? No. But this is the internet. The lack of data on this topic doesn't help either. English majors score a median 155 on the LSAT which is ironically higher than that of pre law and CJ majors. However, articles on these majors are closer to legitimate articles than the farce here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.232.14.2 (talk) 21:26, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

More examples of a future direction
I got lot of information out of the article that was very helpful for a college student, for example, what classes you take as an English major and what to expect. I liked that there were also examples of what kinds of job you can get that having a degree in English would be useful for. What are some more examples of classes to take in college and jobs that an English degree can go towards for after a college student is graduated and ready to get a job relating to what they studied? RelientKatie94 (talk) 20:59, 26 September 2019 (UTC)RelientKatie94

The section on the English major is well developed and seems up-to-date, although it could stand to be edited for tone. At times it includes evaluative language not appropriate for Wikipedia. This is the only major section of the article, however. The article doesn't go into detail about the study of English prior to college level course work, post-grad degrees in the field, or working in the field of English as a professor. This section feels like an add for a university's English department, especially since there is no other information in the article.Maggie.htj (talk) 02:45, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Overly detailed lead?
To me, it seems like the lead/initial paragraphs of this article contain a lot of information that is unnecessary or could be moved to a new section on the page. Does anyone else feel this way? --GarrettTonos (talk) 08:07, 25 March 2020 (UTC)


 * I agree the beginning is cluttered and full or tangents. I think removing some the hyperlinks would also help clear up the intro. CollegeSeth (talk) 19:25, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

The lead section is fine for what is it needed for, but doesn't help transition from another section. There's no buildup or interest, just factual information about English as an academic discipline. What is an Anglicist?? I had to Google that word! Not a good look for a Wikipedia article, or for readers who have never heard of that word before. Even with the definition in the sentence. The lead section doesn't include a brief description of the other sections. There is no proper transition that makes the reader interested to keep reading.Daniellepitter (talk) 23:06, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

Need further modification
I think there are so many unnecessary content in this article. The explanation is too complex and actually one sentence could do it. Besides, I am not sure whether it really needs so many links, and it seems too detail. Haomimimi (talk) 16:21, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Needs More Revisions/Sources
While this article seems to give a broad overview of English studies, it does not have enough inline sources to be a trusted Wiki article. Furthermore, the head seems to have too much information, with much of it unsourced, that could be used in more sections below, that offer more detailed information. Also, considering there is a section header, At High School, we need to add more information about how English is taught in both Britain and the US. Anonymousshrek (talk) 16:39, 5 October 2020 (UTC)


 * High School- I agree that since high school is mentioned in the article, there should be a higher bandwidth of coverage on the topic beyond Ontario, Canada and the UK. There should be more sources on how English is taught in secondary education than simply two locations, and should have better, more trusted sources. Partysnaax15 (talk) 23:14, 7 September 2022 (UTC)


 * High school - I also agree with that statement. There is just a brief mention of what English is in Britain and Ontario, Canada. There is not a broad enough spectrum of how English is taught to other parts of the world. More sources would also suffice with the sections that are currently there. Samhi60 (talk) 01:37, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Tone - The tone is bias. The need to include High school is questionable. This section is poorly written from the view point of secondary school English studies. It would need to be addressed as equal or included sooner in the article than it currently does. Also, this section only includes high schools from the UK and Ontario, Canada. The section itself needs more development if it is to contribute more substantial information to the article.Alaskasunshine0914 (talk) 17:45, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Tone - I agree, the tone is a bit bias. Especially in the Career Opportunities section with the language suggesting that there are "obvious" job paths and "less intuitive" ones. These statements are subjective as not everyone pursues the same path or would consider their path obvious or less intuitive. --Dylan.morin (talk) 13:28, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 August 2019 and 15 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Digitaldivides. Peer reviewers: Coffeelover125.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 20:38, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Content Area Literacy
— Assignment last updated by Ccumm4 (talk) 18:44, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Introduction to Technical and Professional Communication
— Assignment last updated by Savmanbanans (talk) 17:29, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: ENGL A120 Critical Thinking
— Assignment last updated by JustAnotherKeyboardMonkey (talk) 21:49, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Search and the Information Landscape
— Assignment last updated by Daniellepitter (talk) 23:21, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Engl 221 Introduction to Technical and Professional Communication
— Assignment last updated by EMEEdits (talk) 19:29, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Syntax, grammar, and new information
I've added, rearranged, and removed certain punctuation, words, and phrases in order to remove some the bias and redundancy I noticed in this article. I also added a sentence about some of the content covered in the English lit GCSE, as well as a mini paragraph about Anglicists, specifically the history of the term. I've added two new references as well; please let me know if I made any mistakes regarding the references, and/or any of the edits I made! Mariposa41324 (talk) 10:01, 4 March 2024 (UTC)