indeed motivate learners who are negotiating their own tensions and
conflicts as they encounter the new culture.
MacDonald and his colleagues adopted a four-phase learning cycle
adapted from Gajdusek (1988). Each story was covered in four hours, the
first being devoted to pre-reading activities designed to activate relevant
schemata by relating the theme and subject matter of the story to the
students’ own experience and/or knowledge of similar stories. At the end
of the first class, the story was given out. The second phase consisted of
students filling in a worksheet of questions checking on the ‘basic facts’ of
the story – point of view, character, setting, time, place, and so on. This
phase included discussion of these aspects of the story. The third phase in
the cycle involved small-group discussion of key issues in the story – plot
climaxes, themes and style. Each group would focus on specific issues and
feed back to the class. The students then choose from a menu of follow-up
activities, designed to extend and enrich their personal involvement with
the text. They might retell part of the story from a different point of view, or
write a dialogue between characters, or relate the story to their own experi-
ences. Finally the students returned to a discussion which related the
themes of the story to problematical issues in British culture – for example,
class conflict (Pulverness’s
vice anglais
), racial, ethnic or sectarian tensions,
colonisation, or general alienation.
The four-phase cycle described above and the action research which
accompanied it give a valuable model for using literary texts of some length
to explore culture in an ELT setting and monitor the effect of the explora-
tion. The goals of the course were varied: to extend the students’ linguistic
skills, develop their cultural awareness, learn a little about literary theory,
and contribute to personal enrichment. Student feedback suggests that the
learners felt that all four goals were being achieved.
The four-phase model proposed by the University of Stirling team
focuses mainly on the latter part of the ‘encoding-decoding’ cycle. The first
phase – ‘activating the learners’ schemata’ – paves the way for the individ-
uals’ discourse-decoding strategies by activating and moulding their
frames of knowledge. The second part of the cycle, checking facts, is again
concerned with monitoring the decoding process, to the extent that the
content of the stories is understood. Phase three is an opportunity to begin
to compare the individual’s reading of the story with that of his or her
peers – the different interpretations are discussed in small groups. The
follow-up activities allow learners to refashion and extend their interpreta-
tions, with reference to further changes in their frameworks of knowledge,
and further understanding of the language system that underlies the text.
In the final phase these revised interpretations are again tested against a
discussion of the story’s relationship to wider British issues. The process
Using Literary, Media and Cultural Studies
175
C:\Documents and Settings\Stephen Cracknell\My Documents\corbett\corbett.vp
13 August 2003 16:39:15
Color profile: Generic CMYK printer profile
Composite Default screen
described accords with the current tendency in literary studies to focus on
the ‘text decoding’ part of the discourse cycle. There is little discussion of
what the author
really
meant, or the author’s belief system – which would
probably have been the focus of literary studies classes, earlier last century.
The focus instead is on understanding the creative potential of the linguis-
tic system, and on constructing continually revised (and richer) meanings
from the texts in a series of structured discussions.
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: