University in Rijeka Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences Department of English Academic year 2011/2012

ESSAY: Pros and cons of teaching literature in ESL classroms

Student: Dajana Raki, 1st year of MA studies Course instructor: dr. Sintija uljat Course title: The Culture of Reading

In Rijeka, April 12th 2012

Throughout this seminar paper I will be dealing with the examination of pros and cons of using literature in an ESL classroom. Should literature be part of an ESL curriculum is the main question here, which has been embedded in many types of research about creating an appropriate teaching environment in ESL classrooms, and which has been pouring oil to an already ignited debate ever since it was raised. However, if literary texts are to be used successfully, they must be selected with caution and care and approached in a manner that will only promote an aesthetic interaction between the reader and the text itself; I will explain the term aesthetic in more detail in the sections to come. Also, it might be tempting to view any attention to literature (and literary texts serving almost as textbooks) within the ESL curriculum as unnecessary, but the last thing we ought to do is to jump to conclusions. This is precisely what I will try to argue in this paper. Let us consider the arguments against using literature first. Since one of the main goals of ESL teachers' is to teach the grammar of a particular language, literature, due to its structural complexity and its unique use of language, does not do much to contribute to their goal. Or so it may seem at first. Their argument is that the study of literature contributes nothing to help their students meet their academic and/or occupational goals. They contend that the main objective of language teaching in general is to promote the students' awareness of the structure of that language. Here I would like to mention dichotomy introduced by Widdowson (1978, 3), who claims that we ought to discriminate between language usage and language use. The former involves a knowledge of linguistic rules, and the latter entails knowing how to use these rules for effective communication. Following this disctinction, the original question is now transformed can a literary text contribute to a knowledge of either one? Literature can provide a basis for extending language usage. Particular grammar points are present in the text, just as the vocabulary expansion is dealt with by paying attention to specific word forms and expressions. However, literature has rarely been used to develop language use, although it has been thought ideal for developing an awareness of language use because it contains particular register or dialect of a language, which is embedded in and therefore dependant upon a social context of the text and so on. Another argument against is that literature will do nothing toward promoting the students' academic or occupational goals. It seems that one might deduce from this claim that literature is to be studied in the exclusion of other types of texts. I regard this to be far from truth; what we ought to do when incorporating literature in the curricula is to attempt at the complementation, and not exclusion. I think that this question of not promoting one's goals whatsoever is of little importance, since I myself have witnessed that, in so far as literature can

foster an overall increase in reading proficiency, it will continue contribute to the goals addressed, whatever they might be. An another argument against using and incorporating literary texts in an ESL curriculum is the fact that literary texts often reflect a particular cultural perspective, which could pose if not a threat, then at least some sort of difficulties for the ESL learners. But the question of examining if any benefits arise from the cultural aspect of a literary piece will not be addressed here in greater detail. On the other hand, literature might work to promote a greater tolerance for cultural differences for both the student(s) and a teacher. Also, it may promote the students' creativity; whereas students may indeed be unfamiliar with some of the cultural assumptions in a specific literary text, the advantages of confronting these assumptions may be well worth the struggle. Moving onto the benefits finally, which will be formulated in the opposite claims from the against arguments. First of all, literature is, in my own opinion, quite useful in developing linguistic knowledge, both on usage and use level mentioned above. Secondly, only on the basis of the reader's enjoyment in reading literature may it increase her motivation to interact with the text, resulting in increased reading proficiency. Thirdly, exploring the foreign culture through literature may awaken both her understanding of that very culture, and the respect for her own. Selecting the (appropriate) literature is yet an another question that needs to be considered, once we have concluded to include the literature in an ESL curriculum. I consider this to be the key to success in using literature in ESL classroom. But, an extremely difficult text, either on the basis of its linguistic or cultural level, will have fewer benefits than might be expected. However, oversimplifying the text may lead to an another problem: the reduction of motivation and challenge, and little or no contribution to the development of reading skills (sticking to the Krashen's (1981) i+1 principle might prove to be quite helpful). When picking out the literary texts that are stylistically uncomplicated, it is important to select themes with which the students can identify. From a personal perspective, I found the text more intimate, more readable and even persuasive in some respects if it consisted of a plot and characters very much similar to myself and my peers. With all due respect to highschool education and the teachers back then, I have learnt a great deal more from fictional characters with not-so-fictional thoughts, doubts, emotions and the like. Indeed, as McKay (1982, 532) mentions that while a text may not be involving for an individual at a certain time, later the same person, by bringing additional experience to the text, may find it involving. This is exactly what I had witnessed throughout highschool years, mostly concerning the foreign, usually English, pieces of literature. Personally, I found Proust's In Search of Lost Time psychologically exhausting, when

we were assigned to read it; the next time I read it, couple of years later, I happened to lose track of time, simply flowing through the pages. I myself was not the same, and therefore the very act of reading the same book was never the same again. It might be the case here that I argue for the so-called aesthetic reading, the type of reading which gives primacy to the experience of reading. It is the fact that the majority of literary experiences outside of the classsroom proceed in this manner. I believe this very enjoyment attained by interacting with the text should be advocated within the ESL classroom's four walls. Interaction between the reader and the writer (author) through the act of reading is vital, because reading actually necessitates the ability to interact with a given text (decoding the language in the text, comprehending the concepts involved etc.). The notion of interaction through the process of reading implies a reader's willingness to interact with the given text. However, it is crucial to select a text by examining its linguistic and conceptual difficulty and to consider its use on the basis of the students' abilities to cope with it. Sometimes, literature may provide the affective, attitudinal and experiential factors which will motivate them to read. Thus, literary texts can aid in the development of reading proficiency and can contribute to the students' academic and occupational objectives. In aesthetic reading, a reader often relates his world of experience to the text. Asking if anything similar happened to the students might increase their (un)conscious connection to the text. As Gareis, Allard and Saindon (2009, 144) have pointed out, authentic literature also offers excellent opportunities for individualized vocabulary development. With words connected to memorable plots and characters, students often find vocabulary development through reading novels more effortless than through working with textbooks or other texts. Eventually, (ibid, 145) "novels allow students to get caught up in the characters lives and in the time and place of the setting. Thus they foster student-centered learning, where students construct their own meaning and relate it to their individual worlds and contexts. An another characteristic of aesthetic reading is that readers often make judgments about the characters, or they even fantasize as to what they would do in a similar situation. Asking questions like the one mentioned a few lines above might raise a hot debate over e.g. Karenina's morale in choosing the love of her life over her lawful husband and children, and thus the consequences of her choice putting an end to her life. And last, but not least to consider, culturally relevant teaching is, according to LadsonBillings (2000, 142), the kind of teaching that is designed not merely to fit the school culture to the students' culture, but also to use student culture as the basis for helping students understand themselves and others, structure social interaction and conceptualize knowledge. Realizing that

academic language proficiency in L2 takes a lot of time to develop should encourage us, the current and future teachers of English, to facilitate the process of reading in such a classroom environment that we ourselves would want to be part of. To conclude, I believe literature does indeed have a place in the ESL classroom, often reflecting a particular cultural perspective and heritage of the writer of a particular literary piece, but most of all, it serves as an excellent vehicle to support the integration of students' skills. Provided that they are carefully chosen and used, literature can enrich every classroom, not just the ESL one. Although it may seem too radical a leap from traditional teaching ways to novel-as-a-textbook program, we should consider the realm of possibilities that opens up for our students. After all, after they gain intensive and extensive skills, as well as the enjoyment that comes from reading literary pieces, we might even come to a conclusion that this might be a whole new dimension, an alternative to texbooks in ESL learning and teaching. Why not give them, and ourselves, a try?

REFERENCES:

1. Widdowson, H.G. (1978) Teaching language as communication. England, Oxford University Press, pp.3. 2. Krashen, S. (1981) Second language acquisition and second language learning. Oxford, England, Pergamon. 3. McKay, S. (1982) Literature in ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, Vol. 16, no. 4 (Dec. 1982), pp. 529-536. 4. Gareis, E., Allard, M., and Saindon J. (2009) The Novel as Textbook. TESL Canada Journal, vol. 26, no. 2 (spring 2009). Pp. 144-145. 5. Ladson-Billings, G. (2000). Reading between the lines and beyond the pages: A culturally relevant approach to literacy teaching. In M. Gallego and Hollingsworth (eds.) What counts as literacy? Challenging the school standard. New York: Teachers College Press. pp. 139-151. 6. Rosenblatt, L. (1978) The reader, the text, the poem. Carbondale, Illinois. Southern Illinois University Press. pp. 24. 7. Parry, K. (1996) Culture, literacy, and L2 reading. TESOL Quarterly, vol. 30, no. 4 (winter 1996), pp. 665-692. 8. Drucker, M.J. (2003) What reading teachers should know about ESL learners. Reading Teacher, Vol. 57, no. 1 (Sept. 2003). Pp. 22-29. 9. Eskey, D.E. (2002) Reading and teaching of L2 reading. TESOL Journal, II(I), p. 5-9.