Teaching English Literature to a Heterogeneous Class

Cases on Teacher Identity, Diversity, and Cognition in Higher Education Paul Breen Greenwich School of Management, UK A volume in the Advances in Higher Education and Professional Development (AHEPD) Book Series Managing Director: Production Editor: Development Editor: Acquisitions Editor: Typesetter: Cover Design: Lindsay Johnston Jennifer Yoder Erin O’Dea Kayla Wolfe Deann Jo Zombro Jason Mull Published in the United States of America by Information Science Reference (an imprint of IGI Global) 701 E. Chocolate Avenue Hershey PA 17033 Tel: 717-533-8845 Fax: 717-533-8661 E-mail: [email protected] Web site: http://www.igi-global.com Copyright © 2014 by IGI Global. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored or distributed in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, without written permission from the publisher. Product or company names used in this set are for identification purposes only. Inclusion of the names of the products or companies does not indicate a claim of ownership by IGI Global of the trademark or registered trademark. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Cases on teacher identity, diversity, and cognition in higher education / Paul Breen, editor. pages cm Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-1-4666-5990-2 (hardcover) -- ISBN 978-1-4666-5991-9 (ebook) -- ISBN 978-1-46665993-3 (print & perpetual access) 1. Teachers--Training of--Cross-cultural studies. 2. Teachers-In-service training--Cross-cultural studies. 3. Identity (Psychology) 4. Teaching--Social aspects. 5. Multicultural education. I. Breen, Paul, 1971LB1707.C38 2014 370.71’1--dc23 2014001634 This book is published in the IGI Global book series Advances in Higher Education and Professional Development (AHEPD) (ISSN: 2327-6983; eISSN: 2327-6991) British Cataloguing in Publication Data A Cataloguing in Publication record for this book is available from the British Library. All work contributed to this book is new, previously-unpublished material. The views expressed in this book are those of the authors, but not necessarily of the publisher. For electronic access to this publication, please contact: [email protected]. 214 Chapter 9 Teaching English Literature to a Heterogeneous Class: The Challenges and Problems of Differing Identities Sutapa Dutta University of Delhi, India EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Teaching English Literature to an increasingly heterogeneous class is proving to be a major challenge in recent years, especially with the emphasis on inclusive higher education in India. The diferences in educational experiences and socio-cultural background mean that both the learners and the teachers bring to the classroom certain ideas and expectations. A lack of awareness of the socio-cultural relevance of what is being taught, to whom, and how might lead to miscommunication and frustration among the teachers and the learners. The communication gap that exists between producers and receivers of a text can be attributed primarily to linguistic diferences and cultural gaps. This chapter addresses some critical questions related to pedagogical interpretations and actions in the classroom: How to teach diverse learners in a complex culturally diverse setting? What challenges do teachers face in importing a foreign literature and how can they make this more relevant and meaningful in a diferent cultural context? How can classrooms be more interactive and communicative given the fact that students are expressing themselves in a DOI: 10.4018/978-1-4666-5990-2.ch009 Copyright ©2014, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited. Teaching English Literature to a Heterogeneous Class language that for the majority of them is not their irst language? This chapter is based on secondary rather than primary research, but it draws on the author’s extensive experience of teaching English Literature to college and university students. It highlights the necessity to question the traditional paradigms within which we teach and learn English and also suggests some ways to tackle this problem and to further understand the broader socio-cultural context wherein meaning is contextually determined and constructed. INTRODUCTION Globalisation has brought the world closer. The 21st century has seen unprecedented changes brought about by democracy, free markets, and faster communication. Today we live in an interconnected global economy – the Euro symbolises the new European unity and McDonalds and Starbucks have made their presence felt across the globe. But globalisation does not lead to homogeneity. Ethnic identities and social hierarchies remain; people speak different languages and have distinctive views. In fact there are as many ways of interpreting the world and the surroundings as there are people living in it. Each one of us has cultural identifications, and associated with these are shared perceptions, experiences and behavioural patterns. The acceptance of English as an international language of communication has no doubt enabled nations to interact with each other. It is an indispensable medium to share knowledge, experience and culture. It facilitates intercultural communication and allows nations and people to share their diverse thoughts, views and traditions. But the challenge lies in learning and teaching English language and literature in a multi cultural, multilingual, multiethnic classroom. My paper analyses the cultural repercussions of teaching English language and literature in the Indian classroom where for the majority of students and teachers, English is not their first language, nor are most of them familiar with the sociocultural background and context of the literary texts. The cultural paradigm within which English was introduced by the colonizers in 19th century India has changed drastically over the years and so has the composition of the learners in the classroom. Early teaching of English in India was done with the ostentatious purpose of reforming, ‘civilizing’, ‘breeding’ a ‘cultured’ class of people who would fulfil Macaulay’s vision of the subject nation and thus be instrumental in establishing colonial hegemony. The selection of authors and texts for higher English education in colonial India sowed the seeds of what later became the syllabi of most undergraduate English literature courses in Indian colleges and universities. English studies post independence continued to reflect the hegemonistic agendas of the dominant Indian elite. In recent years the government’s conscious attempt to democratise 215 Teaching English Literature to a Heterogeneous Class higher education by including the subalterns into mainstream education has meant a more heterogeneous class of students. This has also reflected in the way the English literature curriculum has changed and evolved. We have definitely distanced ourselves from the colonial heritage of English in India and have replaced it with a more broad based curriculum that encompasses literature from across the globe. The obsession is no longer with canonical texts or the ‘great tradition’ of Eng. Lit. Literature courses include the study of folk and oral literature, women’s writings, film and media studies, and popular indigenous culture sometimes by the most marginalized sections of the society. With each and every group demanding and wanting a slice, English Literature has become a site of a new contest of alternate hegemonies. The English Literature departments in Indian universities have witnessed commendable changes in content and syllabus planning. Yet, the pedagogic methods remain archaic, and hardly any constructive thought has been directed to the problems and challenges of teaching a class that is characterised by wide socio-cultural disparities (Agarwal, 2013; MacIver, 1955; Sen, 1970; Shah, 1967). In my teaching experience I have encountered mixed classes of students – some who have good communication and language skills, articulate and well read. They are the empowered youth, technically savvy, globe trotting, confident, urbane and many a times ‘bored’ with the academic curriculum that is pitched at the class average. At the other end of the spectrum are the educationally and economically underprivileged, in many cases first generation college goers who lack communication skills, have poor vocabulary and low confidence level. These have had very limited exposure to foreign cultures, in this case the ‘English’ culture, either through books, films, etc. Such students feel demotivated, and often undergo a complex emotional bewilderment leading to angst and depression. The critical question is – how to teach diverse learners in a complex culturally diverse setting? The challenges that we as teachers face are: (a) importing the literature of a foreign people and making this more relevant and meaningful in a different cultural context, (b) addressing and negotiating the cultural disparity within the classroom, so that students can appreciate the diverse perspectives and ideologies of literary formulations. BACKGROUND: THE HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE Historically, Indian education has been elitist, the privilege of the upper class male Brahmins. Educational inequality that exists in the Indian society today can be seen as a reflection of various forms of social disparity that have been historically prevalent and which continue to persist in the present. Authors such as Acharya (1985), Kumar (1989), and Thapan (1991) have presented a critical analysis of the wide gap, and have linked the problem to wider social and cultural structures within 216 Teaching English Literature to a Heterogeneous Class the society. Educational inequality has been attributed to the inherent established structures of class division, caste hegemony, occupational authority, social power and economic factors. We could add to this list the role of English education in India, which contains an implicit ideology that is in contradiction to the ideals of fostering equality in education. The position and reception of English literature and language studies in India can be perceived by tracing its antecedents within a historical context. The history of the reception and influence of English in India’s higher education can be understood by reviewing its advocacy during British rule in India. Up to the end of the eighteenth century before the British became the undisputed masters of India, education at the primary level was provided in regional languages at the local schools known as pathsalas for Hindus and madrasas for Muslims. Higher education was available in Persian and Sanskrit. Persian was the court language of the Mughals and its knowledge was seen as a sign of good breeding and education. Knowledge of Sanskrit and Arabic were deemed necessary by the higher class Hindus and Muslims. By the end of the eighteenth century the British political and cultural hegemony was more apparently felt over Bengal initially and then slowly over the rest of the country. A few rudimentary English schools, which began at this time, soon gave way to ‘rather more ambitious’ ones ‘reflecting contemporary English educational trends.’ These were primarily meant for British children, but some Indians also joined these solely with the practical purpose of enabling them to qualify for jobs or for business transactions with the British. At first the East India Company government was not in favour of a government funded and supported education system, preferring to adopt a policy of distance and neutrality. It was the English and the Scottish missionaries who played an important role in introducing Western education in India with the primary objective of spreading Christianity in order to ‘civilise’ the natives. What are especially noteworthy are their choice of materials and the method of indoctrination. They introduced ‘progressive’ learning materials and ‘moral education’ like Aesop’s Fables and Goldsmith’s History of England. The selection of texts from Christian scriptures and Western ideas were done with the ostensible objective of highlighting the moral depravity and ethical decadence of those who were being taught. John Clark Marshman developed ‘copy books’ from which the teachers would dictate sentences and the students had to learn by heart. Such rote learning not only ignored the cultural inappropriateness of the textual materials, but also more importantly discouraged the students’ proclivity for enquiry. The learners unquestioningly acknowledged the moral, racial and intellectual superiority of the educationists as a universal truth. One such reader was A Course of Reading by Rev J.M. McCulloch that was prescribed for higher education in Hindu College, Calcutta (later renamed The Presidency College) in 1834. The ‘Reader’ contained excerpts from a wide range of writers and poets including Addison, Miss Edgeworth, 217 Teaching English Literature to a Heterogeneous Class Goldsmith, Wordsworth, Campbell, Cowper, Sir Walter Scott, Spencer, Byron, Gay, etc. The selection of ‘exercises’ that McCulloch provides at the end of each chapter are examples to show how the glory of the country and Christianity were often superimposed with overtly secular ideas of history, science and geography: Example of using the prefixes ‘e’, ‘ex’, and ‘extra’: The most extensive empire in the world is Russia; the largest ocean is the Pacific; the highest mountains are in Asia. The most enormous sea-animal is the whale; the largest land-animal is the elephant; the most extraordinary country in the world is our own island. Example of using the derivatives ‘cess’, ‘ceed’, and ‘cede’: Events that happen one after another are said to fall out in succession. A son succeeds his father. We proceed when we advance with our work. The sea recedes when its water retire from the shore. Our Saviour intercedes for his people in Heaven (Mukherjee, 2009, pp. 202-205). The subtle application of history and literary texts as a substitute for religious teachings had deep implications and a profound impact on the purpose and content of English literary and language studies in India. Gauri Viswanathan has examined in her Masks of Conquest (1989) the moral and the pragmatic dimensions of English education in the colonial agenda of the British rulers in India. In fact, the introduction of English education served a number of often contradictory interests, for both the rulers and the ruled. Zastoupil and Moir (1999) provide a detailed account of what they call the Great Indian Education Debate between the Indian as well as the British proponents. Thomas Babington Macaulay’s momentous Minute of 1835 that has gained a pre-eminent position as an expression of prejudiced imperial mindset tackles the question of a language that can effectively deal with the needs of the time. In his Minutes, he summarily dismisses “the dialects commonly spoken among the natives” as these “contain neither literary or scientific information” (Young, p.348). For Macaulay then, English is the ‘chosen’ language as this has both “works of imagination” and “works in which facts are recorded and general principles investigated.” He famously concludes, “A single shelf of a good European library was worth the whole native literature of India and Arabia” (Young, p. 349). Macaulay was convinced that English literature and language would promote the intellectual, moral and cultural improvement of his subjects, and he condescendingly stressed, “We have to educate a people who cannot at present be educated … we must teach them …” (Young, p. 349). But Macaulay’s intention of ‘educating’ 218 Teaching English Literature to a Heterogeneous Class was only limited to a handful of elite upper class Indians, in order to “form a class who may be Indian in blood and colour, but English in taste, in opinions, in morals, and in intellect” (Young, p. 359). Such an education policy had deep ramifications on the socio-cultural fabric of the Indian society and continues to be felt even today. Macaulay’s policy convinced many Indians who wanted to replace traditional languages and learning by English studies. They were mainly motivated by practical social and political considerations. English education was increasingly seen as a means to enhance one’s social and material standing as it would enable better jobs and proximity to the rulers. Some like Rammohan Roy, an upper class Brahmin Hindu activist, believed that English education would achieve an intellectual transformation: “From personal experience, I am impressed with the conviction that the greater our intercourse with European gentlemen, the greater will be our improvement in literary, social and political affairs” (Raja Rammohan Roy in a Speech on Settlement of Europeans in India, 1906. (as cited in Mukherjee, 2009, p.126). Many others like Radhakant Deb and Ram Kamal Sen were persuaded by Macaulay’s recommendation of developing a small cadre of English educated Indians who would in turn teach the broader society (Laird, 1972). This took care of the urgent need for English educated Indians who could work for the colonisers. The implication of such a move was that it created a hierarchy and incorporated the hegemony of English studies in India which came to be associated with a selective privileged class, and continues to do so even now. THE STATUS OF ENGLISH POST INDEPENDENCE It cannot be denied that English was a colonial imposition, but at the same time it is necessary to understand its continuing importance in post independent India. English literary and language studies, which began as a cultural intellectual framework for the legitimisation and consolidation of colonial power, after 1947 evolved through different phases of contestations and collaborations involving the diverse political, economic and hegemonic interests of different groups. English studies, thanks to Macaulay’s policy, has always been associated with elitism, the prerogative of a handful of upper class, upper caste Indians who were privileged to have received English education. Their ability to wield power came not from the official position they held, but because they were what Macaulay would call “a few gentlemen of talent and learning educated in Europe.” From 1948 onwards a succession of policy makers under the Constitution of independent India, debated over the desirability of English education both at the primary and higher education levels. In 1956, the Official Language Commission recommended the use of English for all official purposes, when only an insignificant minuscule 1.06% of the total population was 219 Teaching English Literature to a Heterogeneous Class literate in English (Mukherjee, 2009, p. 267). After a protracted violent contestation between the supporters of English and Indian languages, a three-language formula was proposed in 1961.This recommended teaching three languages: English, Hindi and the regional language at the school level, keeping in mind the linguistic diversity of the country. Both Hindi and English were recognised as link languages, with all government communications to be conducted in both these languages. At the policy level, English language was seen as an enabling tool, a skill to facilitate communication with the rest of the world. But at the pedagogical level, experts who chaired and decided on the language skill courses to be taught in schools and colleges, continued to be enslaved by the canonical literary texts. The early curriculum for English literature and language were developed and patterned on the texts prescribed in England and Scotland. For the British, the study of an ‘English’ literature, history and culture had proved to be a unifying force for an emerging nation. Benedict Anderson (1983) and Homi Bhabha (1990) have shown how a common literature shared by a group of people can be one of the many factors that consolidate and provide a sense of oneness to a community. “Nations then are, imaginary constructs that depend for their existence on an apparatus of cultural fictions in which imaginative literature plays a decisive role” (Bhabha, 1990, p. 49). The canonical literary texts were responsible in constructing a historical genealogy for Great Britain, for perpetrating the mindset of the people, and in artificially engineering a national character. In replicating the English curriculum in India, the syllabus framers continued to validate what the English had intended for their own country; they sustained the political cultural ideology of glorifying the English race and nation. The Euro- British orientation of the English curriculum in India continued to draw on the aestheticism, romanticism, utilitarianism and individualism of Chaucer, Shakespeare, Spencer, Wordsworth, Bacon, etc., and the students’ critical and literary sensibilities were honed by studying Plato, Aristotle and Longinus. English Literature enjoyed an enviably prominent cult position among liberal arts subjects and was seen as a mark of high culture. In framing a unified literature syllabus for their country, Great Britain had been successful in cutting across the trajectories of class and culture. But English in India has been essentially one of power and domination, and the hegemony has been achieved through a process of complex cultural and social manipulation, of exclusion and filtering that has privileged one section over another. There is an urgent need to ask whether the purpose of teaching English literature and language is functionalist or civilizational, whether it meets the educational need of the present, whether it is consistent with the democratic values, and whether it will transform the lives of the people. It is particularly necessary to engage with these questions because of the contest of hegemonies in India in the present. Communities that have defined themselves as ‘Dalits’ (the oppressed), and who have 220 Teaching English Literature to a Heterogeneous Class been for centuries socially marginalized and economically underprivileged, have begun to question and challenge the power of the dominant elite. While the Dalits’ struggle has been mainly for political power and social rights, there has also been a powerful expression for access to higher education. English education specifically is identified as an important site of contest. Kancha Ilaiah, one of the leading Dalit intellectuals today, considers access to English language and literature important to transform the social position and economic conditions of the Dalits. “In India,” Ilaiah protests, “English is spoken only by the so-called highly educated class. We get a feeling that it is their language. With the passage of time, this view has been further cemented” (Ilaiah, 2004, p.169). Dalit writers emphasise that English can empower them and emancipate them from caste-based occupation. “English-speaking Dalit will not be made a sweeper or a cleaner of toilets. Good knowledge of English will emancipate him and give him the leverage to liberate himself from traditional occupations” (Chandra Bhan Prasad). Subsequently, since the mid 90’s the Government of India has made it mandatory for the “socially and educationally backward classes” to be included in the mainstream education system (Article 340(1) of the Indian Constitution). MANAGING THE LEGACY OF THE PAST IN THE PRESENT: MULTICULTURAL HETEROGENEOUS CLASS In the last few decades there has been a phenomenal growth in Higher Education in India. In 2002 the Indian Parliament amended the Constitution to make education a fundamental right. In 2010, the government took a historic step by implementing the Right to Education which aims to emancipate millions of children by providing free and compulsory education. In terms of numbers, India is the largest educational system in the world, and has the second largest enrolment rate in the world. But its enrolment ratio of 11% falls way below that of the developed countries (FICCI, 2012). Economist Martin Trow classified higher education systems worldwide according to their enrolment ratio. He defined the state of ‘elite’, ‘mass’, and ‘universal’ education as less than 15 percent, between 15-50 percent, and more than 50 percent respectively (Agarwal, 2013, p. 27). As per Trow’s categorization, India’s higher education is still an ‘elite’ system. Building upon Trow’s work, J. Brennan defined the characteristics of the elite, mass and universal systems of higher education. According to him an elite system shapes the mind and character of a few for certain privileged posts in the society. Mass higher education undertakes to prepare students for technical and economical roles. Universal education is concerned with enabling the entire population to keep pace with rapid technological changes in society. The 221 Teaching English Literature to a Heterogeneous Class higher the economic position of a country the more universal would be its education system. Such countries would be more focused on providing people with technical skills and competence (Agarwal, 2013, p. 27). In the last few years, higher education in India has seen a rapid transformation in the composition of the classroom. Access to higher education is no more restricted to the elite, as there has been a conscious and deliberate attempt on the part of the government to democratise education. Such a policy was based on two principles: firstly a recognition of the glaring social and economic inequalities that exist in the Indian society and affect access to educational opportunities, and secondly, it was an attempt to rectify the historical injustice meted out to a section of the society. The Central Educational Institutions (Reservations in Admission) Act, 2006 provided for a reservation of seats for students from marginalized castes and poorer economic backgrounds, officially designated as Scheduled Classes (SC), Scheduled Tribes (ST), and Other Backward Classes (OBC). Now 27% of seats in government educational institutions are reserved for OBC students and another 22.5% seats are reserved for SC and ST students. The government mandate of inclusive education has promoted aspiration in the marginalized to become a part of the mainstream. In order to meet the rising demands of a demographically large population, and in its efforts to make education inclusive, there has been a dramatic rise in the number of educational institutions. But such growth has been unplanned and unsound. Inadequate infrastructure, paucity of qualified faculty, outdated teaching methods, and unmotivated students have resulted in academic standards being jeopardised (Andre Beteille, as cited in Agarwal, 2013, p. 29). Though much has changed in the composition of the students, no substantive changes have been noticeable in the manner or the component of teaching English at the college level. Most higher education institutions in India admit students to their undergraduate Departments of English on the basis of the school leaving 12th standard marks, or an admission test. The performance of the student indicates his/ her general proficiency and skills in the comprehension and use of the language. While there might be normative differences in the language skills of the class, there still remains an unseen, intangible component which we as educators completely overlook – the divergence in the learners’ cultural background. The challenges of teaching/studying an alien culture in a foreign tongue are seldom taken into consideration. A lack of consideration of the variation in the upbringing of the learner, the educational background, and the cultural traditions of the community into which the person has been brought up can therefore thwart the expectations of the learner. Earlier, when classes used to be more homogeneous, students would more or less have attended the same ‘type’ of school. Those who opted for English literature had unitarily attended English medium elite schools, known as ‘convents’, mostly 222 Teaching English Literature to a Heterogeneous Class run by foreign missionaries. They would have seen the same movies, read the same books, and would have belonged to an elite metropolitan cultural background. The class is now an extremely diverse group with wide socio-economic, geographical and cultural disparities. An inclusive education policy means we no longer have a ‘type’ of students in our classroom; there are inevitable divides that exist in the social class, educational background, and language skills. As a result of the differences in educational experiences and socio-cultural background, both the learners and the teachers bring to the classroom certain ideas and expectations. Teachers could have preconceived notions of the target learners, or they simply might be completely unaware or even ignorant of their students’ expectations. Similarly the learners could come to class with certain expectations from the course and the methodology. The content of the syllabi may be culturally inappropriate for certain groups of learners, or the chosen methodology of teaching may not ‘fit’ with the students’ cultural framework. A lack of awareness of the socio-cultural relevance of what is being taught and how it is being taught might lead to miscommunication and frustration among the teachers and the learners. Teaching English Literature becomes intricate and complex because of – 1) its pressing necessity to ‘know’ a culture that is so drastically different from one’s own in its basic values, assumptions and conventions; 2) adopting a teaching methodology and pedagogy whose educational and social interaction and mediation are on a completely different cultural variable, thus often leading to misinterpretations or sometimes leading to attributing much more meaning. CLASH OF PEDAGOGIC METHODS Another implication of learning English is the inter-cultural position we occupy as teachers and learners. We are in an intermediary position between ‘theirs’ and ‘ours’. We bring in a linguistically and culturally foreign text and try to apply it to a discourse, pedagogy and perspective that our culture has conditioned us to. The Indian pedagogical practice is very different from the methodology followed by the West (Kapoor, 2005). The Indian tradition confers centrality to the text. The text, oral or written, is fundamental to the understanding. The oral tradition of transmitting knowledge was the pedagogic convention of the Indian education system. Texts were recited and passed on from one generation of learners to another. The sruti (what was heard) was compressed into the mantra or sutra, which held the maximum meaning within the minimum number of words. Great value was given to the potency of the sabda (sound), rhythm, and vibration – ‘Sabda is Brahma’ (The Word is God). The guru in the Indian tradition is the source of the ultimate authority in the given 223 Teaching English Literature to a Heterogeneous Class domain of knowledge. The function of the teacher is to lead the immature and the ignorant, to mould a shapeless lump of clay, to illuminate, to lead the student to the light of knowledge. He is the spiritual father and guide responsible for the overall moral development of the students. A close intimate association between the teacher and student was vital to education. The received tradition of the Indian system of teaching and learning which regards the text as god given entity, and the teacher as the ultimate authority thereby clashes with the western concept of ‘deconstructing’ the text and challenging the interpretations of the teacher. The normative approach of students in the classroom is noticeably one of unquestioning deference towards the teacher and of awe and admiration for the given text. Hence there is a general sense of gratitude and acceptance of what is being said/taught. It is seen that students hesitate to make eye contact with the teacher, or interrupt, or ask questions. Students manifest distinct signs of unease and discomfort when as teachers we encourage them to see the multiple layers of possible meanings in a text, or, to criticize the author for certain shortcomings in a novel or poem. Even at the post graduate level students have to be coaxed to come up with their own interpretation of the text. There is a distinct hesitation to question the text/author/teacher. Again, the general expectation is that the teacher should dominate the classroom. A teacher who does very little ‘lecturing’ in the class risks being seen as incompetent. Students are more comfortable doing group work rather than individual presentations. Memorizing passages or entire texts is easier for them than critiquing and debating. These are some of the academic impediments and implications of a methodology of teaching that is culturally alien to our received tradition of learning. ENCOUNTERING A FOREIGN LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE The English Departments at the college level are faced with two difficult mandates – a) teaching a foreign culture and its literature, and b) teaching it in a foreign language. The ‘encounter’ between the producers and receivers of a literature belonging to different cultures happens when the language, the subject material, the context, the learning methodology are the products of one culture and the receivers are members of another. The language that a group or society uses is a crucial indicator of its culture. Linguists like Sapir and Whorf claim that language – its lexicon, semantics, and syntax have a huge impact on the thinking and manners of its users. The way and manner in which people talk, the words they use can go a long way to define the ‘type’ of people they are. It can also indicate their mental makeup, thought process, behavioural conditioning, and their attitude and personality. Language is a reflector 224 Teaching English Literature to a Heterogeneous Class of the group’s ideology, values, experiences, etc. To understand the nuances of language, especially a foreign language, it is imperative to make students appreciate the implications of words, stress, tone, modulation, etc. Again, Literature is a discipline of knowing, a narrative mode of understanding varying perspectives and alternative human possibilities. Literature learning therefore essentially involves interpreting, creating, and elaborating meaning. The relative cultural difference between the producer and the recipient of the text can play a crucial and dominating role in the understanding of the text. It would depend to a large extent on the values, attitude, and norms of the two varying cultures. There are two reasonable questions that students and teachers of English Departments in Higher Education need to ask themselves: 1) What is the course? and 2) Why study/teach it? Expectations about the outcome are varied, often based on indifference or ignorance. Students are often under the misconception that an English literature course would ‘improve’ their language skills, make them more proficient in speaking English and enhance their vocabulary. Again, in India the colonial hang-up of ‘doing Eng Lit’ raises the student’s worth in the career market. It is either an attitude of ‘I don’t care what I do as long as I get a degree’, or ‘It is cool to do Eng Lit’, or ‘This would enable me to get a good job’. English Literature at the UG and PG levels remains a mere academic exercise oriented towards learning the ‘correct’ textual answers and performing ‘well’ in exams. Seldom is there any attempt on the part of the students to understand how individuals perceive and react to cultural rules. Neither is there a conscious attempt on the part of the teachers to facilitate students to develop concepts and perceptions that value their histories and culture and at the same time appreciate diversities. According to Paula Gunn Allen, “The significance of a literature can be best understood in terms of the culture from which it springs, and the purpose of literature is clear only when the reader understands and accepts the assumptions on which the literature is based.” A person who was raised in a given culture has no problem seeing the relevance, the level of complexity, or the symbolic significance of the culture’s literature. We are all from early childhood familiar with the assumptions that underlie our own culture and its literature and art (Allen, 1986, p. 54). Study of literature does increase cultural awareness of a place, but at the same time both teachers and readers should be aware that there is no single central dominating culture, and also be sensitive of the ideological-cultural perspective that it comes from. English departments have to consciously combat the Eurocentrism that pervades the textbooks, the ideas, the methodology and means of communication. It means for the teacher an understanding of dispositions, competencies, belief systems, and experiences of the students in their interactions with family, community, and peer social network. 225 Teaching English Literature to a Heterogeneous Class INACCESSIBLE CULTURAL DIALOGUE Indian teachers and students are handicapped because they do not have a direct access to the English culture. They have to study the social history and read up the literary and mythological references before they can understand the allusions, customs and manners. In a multilingual country like India, there are speakers of different languages in the class. Each one’s mother tongue equips him/her with a different mindset. The differences in the mental makeup of speakers of different languages result in different concepts/ideas in their mind. The teacher who teaches an English text is the first interpreter of a culture and thought process that is linguistically and culturally alien. When this is communicated to the students, they become the second level of interpreters. While the linguistic application and meaning of a particular cultural situation in the text may or may not have been accessible to the first interpreter, it might get totally lost or absolutely misinterpreted by the second level of interpreters. Each learner’s linguistic-cultural cognition guides him/her to make an interpretation that is likely to be much altered from the original. However, English literature as taught and learnt in institutions of higher learning in India has not supported any constructivist ways of knowing and thinking. The problem that the English teacher faces is one of determining the learning problems faced by the target learners, and how well to impart the understanding of one culture to another. A random thoughtless selection of texts can invalidate the very purpose of a cultural dialogue, because particular literary texts may not have the scope to evoke the socio-cultural sensibilities of the learners. Such texts might have been written from a specific contextual viewpoint which might appear to be ‘untrue’ and ‘foreign’ to the target student group. Students who are taught such texts might feel baffled and disoriented by such apparent conflicts between the contrasting views of two disparate cultures. It is necessary to question the traditional paradigms within which we teach and learn English. It is necessary to understand the language within the broader sociocultural context wherein meaning is contextually determined and constructed. The communication gap that exists between the producers and receivers of a text can be attributed primarily to linguistic differences and cultural gaps. This can be bridged, at least in theory, by furthering knowledge of the other culture. A mindless importing of texts written in English will not help. Careful selection of contextual areas along with a liberal knowledge of geography, history and ethnography can enable students to better understand the cultural context in which the text was written. Pictures, slides, and films may help significantly to provide cultural content for observation. These enable learners to get a peek into the mindset of the linguistic culture in which it was produced. 226 Teaching English Literature to a Heterogeneous Class A greater challenge lies in tackling the difference in the education, training, and experiences of the interactants in the classroom. For greater understanding and communication, both teachers and learners have to be aware of the barriers that need to be overcome. These could be purely linguistic barriers, like lack of sufficient language skills, or it could be cultural ignorance, or it could be misunderstandings based on ethnocentricism and stereotyping. We have to keep in mind the two recurrent aspects of culture – one which is a cognitive one – the manners, values, behaviour of people in a group; and the other form is that which people have in their mind that enables them to perceive, interpret and respond to these external stimuli. There has to be a greater understanding and sensitivity to the essential behaviour and values of the ‘Other’ culture. In our interrogation and imagining of the Other, we have to be careful not to either demonise it, or define and posit it as deficient and ignorant. Intercultural communication can be successful and meaningful only when we question the ‘established’ truth and recognise the fallacy of an ‘essential’ culture of a people. The very idea of ‘culture’ in this sense is an abstraction because it constantly shifts and changes and gets restructured by external influences and individual idiosyncrasies. By and large the English Literature syllabi at most of the colleges and universities in India began by following the old English canon of courtly, aristocratic texts by Marlowe, Spencer, Ben Jonson, Shakespeare, Milton, Pope, Dryden, Wordsworth, Tennyson. Such a study is focused on the history of England, understanding the text and its historical background, and implies learning by rote lines and even passages from the texts. The decades of the 1960s, 70s and 80s saw the gradual introduction of other literatures in the English curricula, notably, American, Canadian and Australian. Makarand Paranjape feels “That these new areas of studies were not introduced innocently, in response to our own needs, but were rather actively promoted by other political and pecuniary considerations...” (Paranjape). Such selections were mainly influenced by the political authority and importance of nations, or, on the ability of such nations to finance third world students for higher studies in their own country. As Paranjape rightly points out, the hegemony of one colonial power has been replaced by newer ones. The concern among the academic circles has been to find a way to reconstitute English literary studies. The suggestions have ranged from the necessity to “give it a distinctly Indian grounding” (Trivedi, 1993, p. 242), to “a filtration system” to select those who are fit for an English literary education (Nagarajan, 1978, p.165). In their insistence to rid the course of the ‘Anglocentric’ tag, there were ostensible attempts to make English literature more broad based. Today, a typical undergraduate/postgraduate English literature course includes Indian writing in English, Comparative studies, Indian Aesthetics, Modern Western Classics, Postcolonial writings, Women’s writings, Dalit literature, Literature in Translation, Western Critical Theories, etc. This new configuration of the curriculum 227 Teaching English Literature to a Heterogeneous Class was seen by many educationists as necessary to “free us from an altogether abject dependence on English literature.” The proposal was for “a greater rootedness as well as for spreading the branches far and wide” which would ensure “a healthy future for English studies in India” (Ghose, 1978, p. 154). This medley of literary works has no doubt provided a wider framework of literal and cultural references for the students. But it has also left the students confused and stressed as more and more groups clamour to be included in the academic curriculum. A broader framework does not necessarily enable a culturally heterogeneous group to understand or empathise with literature in the same way. The serious linguistic and cultural gaps that exist in the classroom do not allow the same involvement or response to literature. More than broadening the framework of texts, what is required is a precise academic training for the students to enable a more fruitful critical engagement with the texts. Our efforts ought to be more concentrated on, to quote Meenakshi Mukherjee who argued for relating the teaching of English literature to the Indian cultural context: … to sharpen the student’s response to life, … to provide greater aesthetic enjoyment to his response to art, to train his critical faculties, to enable him to grasp the totality of life, the meaning of tradition, the relevance of the past, to find the universal core of human experience… (Mukherjee, 1978, pp.130-131). SOLUTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: A MORE MEANINGFUL ENGAGEMENT Given the logistics of large numbers of diverse learners in the classroom, the constraints of time, a humungous and often redundant syllabus, and the lack of technological support, it is practically difficult for teachers to improvise. What is required is the awareness that: 1) intercultural communication is difficult and can cause misinterpretation because of the vast and ostensible differences of culture, and 2) the requirement of a strong interpretive methodology for critical cultural awareness. Implementing the following solutions, which I have listed below, can to some degree solve the problem: • 228 Making close investigations of the characteristic diferences and education of the interactants. It is important to be aware of the fact that a multicultural class of learners bring their own world experience, notions and conventions. It is necessary for education policy makers to realize that a ‘one shoe its all’ curriculum framework can be insensitive and unaccommodating towards the diversity in aspirations, attitudes and competence levels. Teaching English Literature to a Heterogeneous Class • • • • • • The reception of a ‘foreign’ literature should keep in mind the undercurrents of ideological politics that is present in popular narratives of culture. It is necessary to understand the essentialist reductivism of stereotyping and how culture, ideology, and prejudice work and operate in narratives and texts. It has to be emphasised that respect and importance should be given to diferent historical and cultural perspectives. The cultural content of English literature teaching has to be integrated with methodology training that can foster greater awareness among the target learners. Students should be taught to recognize the complex interactions of language and literature with the history, politics and culture from which it emerges. They have to be encouraged to develop the critical skills necessary to understand how culture shapes and are shaped by the production and consumption of literary texts, so that they understand the intrinsic relationship between society and literature. Academic curriculum needs to break out of its rigid canonical parameters, move out to encompass other areas, be more interdisciplinary in its approach, and embrace a wide-ranging set of interests spread over geographic, linguistic, cultural, and aesthetic territory. The comparative approach to literature and interdisciplinary training will also prepare students for a number of career possibilities which involve intercultural communication like education, law, business, advertising, publishing, journalism, communication and mass media. Collaborative teaching between disciplines would facilitate the learning process. Stress must be given on the plurality of traditions and the diversity and vibrancy of other literatures. The focus has to be on developing a critical perspective that would allow students to evaluate literary works, irrespective of the language in which they are written. In the Indian context it would mean introducing more texts translated from Indian languages. A participative environment has to be encouraged by collaborative tasks that would involve presentations, discussions, group projects, role-play, etc. leading to better student involvement with the text. Working in a group while at the same time performing individual roles would develop skills of communication, debating, and mediating. This would also enable them to belong to a social learning network. The methodology of teaching has to be more learner-centred rather than teacher oriented. Classroom teaching has to emphasise that it is the student who understands and interprets the text. The teacher is merely a facilitator in the process of knowledge construction, not someone who simply transfers information from his/her reservoir of knowledge to that of the students. 229 Teaching English Literature to a Heterogeneous Class • • We have to move with the times. Literature teaching/learning can no longer be a private intimate afair with a novel or a poem. Classrooms have to be technologically enabled. Electronic technology-mediated activities are not only far more enjoyable and exciting than traditional methods of teaching, but these have become indispensable today for information sharing and knowledge. A virtual learning atmosphere would promote actual awareness of places, people and culture. Social networking sites can help instant exchange of ideas. Students all over the world can exchange socio-cultural information, share their opinions and views of the texts that they read, and even publish their work. Teachers can design global synchronous projects for learners of varying linguistic skills and culture. This can efectively take care of teaching and evaluating a heterogeneous group of learners in the class. It may be more meaningful to implement a variety and range of academic courses that would address the diferent objectives and needs of the students. Teaching of English literature which is European or American centric can be separated as a specialized ield of study for those who are interested in it or need it for speciic individual reasons. There has to be more distinct structural separations within the English department based on the need and competence level of the users – for business/economic purposes, for communication, etc. This would simultaneously demand equivalent qualiications and competencies from those who teach these courses. The above suggestions will enable a more holistic and a truly global approach towards the study of people, the commonalities and the differences of the diverse languages and literature that exist in this world. Such an approach to learning will reinforce the skill and capacity of students to negotiate multiple, polyvalent and contradictory concepts of culture in whatever career they choose and in whatever part of the world they might find themselves in. CONCLUDING REMARKS: FUTURE DIRECTIONS AND EMERGING TRENDS In contemporary postcolonial India, English literary study occupies a curious position which demonstrates a tussle to keep alive the signs of cultural identity among a growing globalised Anglophone community. The influx of multinationals and cyberspace has hastened the importance of English, made it the lingua franca for the global community and given it a position of undoubted superiority. But it has also confiscated cultural identity and individuality. On the one hand is the contestation with the imperial centralised control of an Eng. Lit. canon and an attempt to be free 230 Teaching English Literature to a Heterogeneous Class from colonial cultural domination, and on the other hand the desire to be a part of a global system. Rapid globalisation and multiculturalism is increasingly leading to fuzzy national boundaries and fluid cultural identities. It is hard to argue who owns the English language, or who should teach whom. Postcolonial literature ever more addresses issues of migration, hybridity, loss of identity and multiculturalism. The major Indian writers today who use English as their medium of expression show an ease and comfort in their writings which come from having transcended rigid linguistic and cultural barriers. New forms of writing, cultural practices and alignments continuously emerge which challenge and try to decentre the hegemony of ‘English’ Literature. Writers like Salman Rushdie, Vikram Seth, V.S. Naipaul, Amitabh Ghosh, Jhumpa Lahiri, Kiran Desai, occupy an interstitial space between the national and the international. Not only do their lives straddle two continents, but their writings also reflect the fine, fragile balance required to satisfy both the local and global readers. If colonialism was about territorializing, demarcating the ‘us’ and ‘them’, then postcolonial modernism is about de-territorializing – seeking a liminal space, of moving beyond rigid limitations. But in the euphoria of a post national globalised cosmopolitanism, let’s not resort to a furious aggressive tearing down of all differences. This would merely result in an indiscriminate, unrecognisable, homogenised lump. Let us, as literary scholars and teachers, provoke curiosity about cultural differences thus leading to an awareness of cultural diversity. We need to set up our own narratives that do not relegate certain styles and modes, and is not embarrassed about its saleability in the global market. Reservation of seats for the underprivileged in educational institutions cannot by itself resolve the issue of including the marginalized into the mainstream. What is simultaneously required is an understanding of the local inequities and differences that exist, which can be achieved by including a varied range of experiences and voices. Incorporating a few subaltern texts would not perhaps alter their social status quo, but it would help to lever a better understanding of cultural differences both among teachers and learners. More significantly, it would resist the homogenising effects of global consumerism and reformulate our very own ‘English Literature’. REFERENCES Acharya, P. (1985). Education, politics and social structure. Economic and Political Weekly, (42): 1785–1789. Agarwal, P. (2013). Indian higher education: Envisioning the future. New Delhi: Sage. Allen, P. G. (1986). The sacred hoop. Boston: Beacon Press. 231 Teaching English Literature to a Heterogeneous Class Anderson, B. (1983). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. London: Verso. Bhabha, H. K. (Ed.). (1990). Nation and narration. London: Routledge. FICCI Higher Education Summit. (2012). Higher education in India: Twelfth five year plan (2012-2017) and beyond. Author. Ghose, S. (1978). The future of English studies in India: A note. In English and India: Essays presented to professor Samuel Mathai on his seventieth birthday. Madras: Macmillan. Ilaiah, K. (2004). Buffalo nationalism: A critique of spiritual fascism. Kolkata: Samya. Kapoor, K., & Singh, A. K. (Eds.). (2005). Indian knowledge systems (Vol. 1 and 2). New Delhi: D. K. Print World. Kumar, K. (1989). Social character of learning. New Delhi: Sage. Laird, M. A. (1972). Missionaries and education in Bengal 1793-1837. Oxford, UK: Calrendon Press. McCulloch, J. M. (1834). A course of reading. London: Oliver & Boyd. Mukherjee, A. K. (2009). This gift of English. New Delhi: Orient Blackswan Pvt. Ltd. Mukherjee, M. (1978). Teaching literature to a sub-culture. In English and India: Essays presented to professor Samuel Mathai on his seventieth birthday. Madras: Macmillan. Nagarajan, S. (1978). The decline of English in India: Some historical notes. In English and India: Essays presented to professor Samuel Mathai on his seventieth birthday. Madras: Macmillan. Paranjape, M. R. (n.d.). Website. Retrieved from www.makarand.com/acad/teachingliteraturetoday.htm Prasad, C. B. (n.d.). Ënglish the goddess. Retrieved from http://www.aiccindia.org/ newsite/0804061910/news/English-30-10-06.htm Thapan, M. (1991). Life at school: An ethnographic study. New Delhi: Oxford University Press. Trivedi, H. (1993). Colonial transactions: English literature and India. Calcutta, India: Papyrus. Vishwanathan, G. (1989). Masks of conquest: Literary study and British rule in India. New York: Columbia University Press. 232 Teaching English Literature to a Heterogeneous Class Young, G. M. (1952). Speeches by Lord Macaulay with his minute on Indian education. London: Oxford University Press. Zastoupil, L., & Moir, M. (Eds.). (1999). The great Indian education debate: Documents relating to the orientalist- Anglicist controversy, 1781-1843. Richmond, UK: Curzon Press. ADDITIONAL READING Annual Report 2011-12. Department of School Education & Literacy, Department of Higher Education. MHRD, Government of India. Apple, M. W. (1979). Ideology and Curriculum. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. doi:10.4324/9780203241219 Bernstein, B. (1971). Class, Codes and Control. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. doi:10.4324/9780203014035 Chitnis, S. (1974). ‘Sociology of Education: A Trend Report’ in A Survey of Research in Sociology and Social Anthropology (Vol. 2). New Delhi: Indian Council for Social Science Research. Confederation of Indian Industry and Pricewaterhouse Coopers Ltd. (2012). Taking Stock: A sector wide scan of Higher Education in India. FICCI. 2012. Handbook of Private Universities in India 2012. FICCI Higher Education Summit 2011. Private sector participation in Indian Higher Education. Ghosh, S. C. (2010). The History of Education in Modern India 1757-2007. Delhi: Orient Blackswan. Global Monitoring Report, E. F. A. (2009). Overcoming Inequality: Why governance matters. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Gudykunst, W. B. (1998). Bridging Differences: Effective Integration Communication. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage. Hofstede, G. (1997). Cultures and Organisations: Software of the Mind. London: McGraw-Hill. Holliday, A. (2011). Intercultural Communication and Ideology. New Delhi: Sage. 233 Teaching English Literature to a Heterogeneous Class Holliday, A., Hyde, M., & Kullman, J. (Eds.). (2004). Intercultural Communication: An Advanced Resource Book. London, new York: Routledge. Joshi, S. (Ed.). (1991). Rethinking English: Essays in literature, Language, History. New Delhi: Trianka. Kramsch, C. (1998). Language and Culture. Oxford: oxford University Press. Kumar, K. (1991). Political Agenda of Education: A Study of Colonialist and Nationalist Ideas. New Delhi: Sage. MacDonald, M. (1977). The Curriculum and Cultural Reproduction. England: The Open University Press. MacIver, R. M. (1955). Academic Freedom in Our Time. New York: Columbia University Press. Margolis, E. (Ed.). (2001). The Hidden Curriculum in Higher Education. New York, London: Routledge. Maringe, F., & Foskett, N. (Eds.). (2012). Globalization and Internationalization in Higher Education: Theoretical, Strategic and Management Perspectives. London, New York: Continuum International Publishing Group. Mill, J. (1968). The History of British India: Vol. 1 and 2. Introduction by John Kenneth Galbraith. New York: Chelsea House. Monkman, L. (2007). Nation, Literature and Institutional Change. In C. Vijayshree, Meenakshi Mukherjee, Harish Trivedi & T. Vijay Kumar (Eds). Nation in Imagination: Essays on Nationalism, Sub-Nationalisms and Narration. (pp.100-110). India: Orient Longman Pvt. Ltd. Naik, M. K. (1982). A History of Indian English Literature. New Delhi: Sahitya Akademi. Palmer, D. J. (1965). The Rise of English Studies: An Account of the Study of English Language and Literature from its origins to the Making of the Oxford English School. London: Oxford University Press. Pannikkar, K. N. (1987). ‘Culture and Ideology. Contradictions in Intellectual Transformation of Colonial Society in India’. Economic and Political Weekly, XXII(49), 2115–2120. Prince, T. J. (2012). Culture Wars in British Literature: Multiculturalism and National Identity. North Carolina: McFarland & Company. 234 Teaching English Literature to a Heterogeneous Class Rai, V., & Kumar, N. (2010). Right to Education: The Way Forward. New Delhi: Perfect Publications. Rajan, S. Rajeswari. (Ed.). (1992). The Lie of the Land: English Literary Studies in India. New Delhi: Oxford University Press. Scrase, T. J. (1993). Image, Ideology and Inequality: Cultural Domination, Hegemony and Schooling in India. New Delhi: Sage. Sen, Amartya. (1970). ‘The Crisis in Indian Education’. Lal Bahadur Shastri Memorial Lectures, 10-11 March 1970. Shah, A. B. (Ed.). (1967). Higher Education in India. Bombay: Lalvani Publishing House. Soler, E. A., & Maria, P. S. J. (2007). Intercultural Language Use and Language Learning. Netherlands: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-5639-0 Stern, B. S., & Kysika, M. L. (Eds.). (2008). Contemporary Readings in Curriculum. California: Sage. Tharu, S. (Ed.). (1998). Subject to Change: Teaching Literature in the Nineties. New Delhi: Orient Longman. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society. Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS Backward Class: It is a collective term used by the Government of India for certain castes that have been historically disadvantaged, educationally and socially. Dalit Literature: Etymologically the word ‘Dalit’ means “suppresssed,” or “trampled.” The Dalits have been a class of people in India traditionally discriminated as socially inferior in the Hindu caste system. Dalit Literature is a distinct part of Indian literature which deals with issues of social subjugation and economic poverty of the oppressed class of people. Heterogeneous Classroom: It is a class which has different kinds of learners, as opposed to a class where the learners are similar in their skills and ability, family background, social class, and so on. Inclusive Education: Inclusive education in India focuses on integrating those children who were previously excluded from mainstream educational institutions by dimensions such as caste, poverty, social discrimination, disability, etc. Educational access for all children fulfils the Fundamental Right to Education enshrined in the Constitution of India in 2002. 235 Teaching English Literature to a Heterogeneous Class Intercultural Communication: It is communication between individuals or groups of different linguistic and cultural origin. The acquisition of communication skills and knowledge of other cultures can enhance intercultural communication. Marginalized Groups: These are the disadvantaged people in the socio-economic, political and cultural spheres that are deprived of full access and participation in social life. Multiculturalism: An amalgamation of diverse cultures, languages, religions and ethnicity. A coexistence of various ways of life, cuisine, literary style, festivities, and values in the demographic make up of a nation, organisation, or educational institution. 236