A Critique on “Literature in the ESL Classroom”
By Prof.
Jonathan Acuña Solano
Tuesday,
May 5, 2015
Twitter:
@jonacuso
Post 164
As
Long (1986) has put it, “the teaching of literature has lacked a consistent
methodology for presentation to non-native speakers.” And many teachers have
opposed to the teaching of literature since it does little to help students
internalize grammar, develop their “academic and/or occupational goals,” and
comprehend “cultural perspectives” (McKay, 1986). This is a short-sighted
attitude towards literature, and this mindset must be changed to profit from
the use of literary texts in the classroom.
McKay
(1986) states the fact that literature has two levels that can be exploited in
class: level of use and level of usage. For her, literature has
mainly been used to develop student “language usage” (grammar) instead of
utilizing it for “language use” (pragmatics). “Literature is ideal for
developing an awareness of language use” (McKay, 1986). Academically and
occupationally speaking, literature can be used to boost “reading proficiency.”
And literature can promote “a greater tolerance for cultural differences”
(McKay, 1986). As Long (1986) suggests, the teaching of literature should be a
multi-directional mode of presentation, where students practice “verbal” and
“creative” responses while they interact with the text aesthetically and not in
an efferent manner (McKay, 1986).
McKay
(1986) makes a good point in mentioning what needs to be done to achieve
success in the use of literature in the classroom. On the one hand, she points
out the fact that literary works need to be carefully chosen, and not at
random. Additionally, the author identifies an important distinction that needs
to be done to use a literary piece in class; it needs to be used aesthetically
(student-text interaction) and not in an efferent manner (just to gain
information, or as stated by Long (1986), as cases of “text(s)-as-object”). The
one main problem with McKay’s approach is that she envisions this in an ESL
classroom, and no mention to EFL learning settings are mentioned or even
tested.
It
cannot be claimed that literature has no room in ELT; it can be practically
incorporated within the school curricula. If student motivation can be
triggered, reading in English can be an end in itself. Literature can be used
to illustrate how language is used and how cultural assumptions can be made.
Its success profoundly depends on a careful selection of literary pieces, on
using an aesthetic approach instead of an efferent one. With all these in mind,
and as Long (1986) suggests, there must be a shift on the focus: “The whole
emphasis” of teaching literature must be “on the learning rather than the
teaching.” For all these reason, “literature does indeed have a place in the
ESL[/EFL] curriculum” (McKay, 1986).
Long,
M. (1986). A Feeling for Language: The
multiple values of teaching literature. Literature and Language Teaching.
Edited by Brumfit & Carter. Oxford: OUP.
McKay,
S. (1986). Literature in the ESL
Classroom. Literature and Language Teaching. Edited by Brumfit &
Carter. Oxford: OUP.
Tuesday, May 05, 2015
Post a Comment