6714 Coldstream Drive

AWAD KESHTA

Pasadena, Texas77505

April 16, 2003

Senior Editor

Dear Sir:

I am a Professor in the Department of English at the Islamic University of Gaza. While on academic leave in the United States, I have completed the analyses of a study I recently conducted among university students in Gaza Strip. I propose to submit to your journal an article summarizing this research, which examines the teaching of E

nglish as a second language to university level students via the mediums of drama and short story in a cultural setting. For purposes of the research, participating students studied Shakekspeare’s “ Othello” and Faulkner’s “A Rose for Emily.”

The specific purpose of the study was to find more efficient and meaningful ways to teach English in Gaza Strip universities, through improving the level of understanding of the culture behind the language. The more general purpose was to make a meaningful addition to the body of research regarding the teaching of the English language to ESL students throughout the world.

I look forward to hearing your response.

Sincerely,

Awad Keshta, Ed.D.

TEACHING ENGLISH-LANGUAGE LITERATURE

TO ESL STUDENTS IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES

Awad Keshta, Ed.D.

During the years of colonialism, European nations spread their cultures across the globe in a rush to claim more lands than their neighbor countries. The British established public schools in their colonies and, using English as the language of instruction, taught English grammar and literature. As a result of being schooled by English colonists, British colonial subjects, to a large extent, absorbed Western traditions and values. The Westernization efforts were often seen as good for the new colonies, because they were able to participate effectively in the affairs of the state, take an active role in the administration of the colony, and even get involved in the law-making procedures.

Kachru (1992) noted that English came to serve as a “link language between linguistically separated native populations,” as well as the language of a new emerging international intelligentsia. As the English language permeated national borders throughout the world, there developed an English literature by indigenous writers. Concurrently, in many countries, English became the language of administration and law.

Different factors promoted the teaching and learning of foreign languages in developing sountries including the Arab world. The strategic geographical position of the Arab countries converted this area into a center for trade routes and a crossroads for paths of invading armies. British and French colonization of the Arab countries around 1918 (after World War I), which was motivated by Western economic and political interests in the region, made necessary the creation of intensive programs for foreign language instruction. From the perspective of the Arab countries, the need to acquire English, French, and other languages was stimulated by the need to keep up with Western scientific and technological development.

As English became the world’s universal language in technology, commerce, and communication, nearly all government schools in the Middle East required the teaching of English. English even became the language of instruction in many private schools and public national universities. Parents insisted that their children study a foreign language in order to attain prestige (Yazigy, 1994). Zughoul (1987) pointed out that, in addition to being the world’s business language, English has become the international language of scholarship. Thus, as time passed, the study of English literature has become a means to obtain advantages, rather than an expression of a desire to learn the English lifestyle or traditions (Zughoul, 1987).

Language and Culture

Teaching English to speakers of other languages with very different values such as in developing countries requires a cross-cultural comparison and a keen understanding of how languages and cultures interact. Braj B. Kachru, over a 25-year period, conducted a number of studies on the Englishes of the world. He first described the relationship of English to languages from India in Indian Universities (1975) and described what he called “Models of English for the Third World” from the perspective of pragmatics (1976). When Kachru began to confront problems in the use of English by people from India, he realized that the English language was a most dynamic system within the various cultures in which it became a second or third language (1977). He dedicated himself to discussions of the theory and method used to teach and learn English as a foreign language, with unique responses in terms of lexicography (1980, 1981a, 1981b, 1981c, 1981d).

The concerns of scholars about the best ways of teaching English to different groups of speakers of other languages was also addressed by Kachru (1984), who later addressed the differences between the various institutionalized ways of teaching the English language (Kachru, 1985a, 1985b). The teaching of the English language through English literature, had, according to Kachru, unique challenges. The standards, the linguistic varieties, the non-native literatures in English that became important resources for teaching, and most of all, the significant sociolinguistic codes that needed to be explained through sound pedagogy were discussed by Kachru (1986a, 1986b, 1986c).

Methods used in Teaching English Language and Literature

Language, Literature, and Culture

Language is culture and therefore one cannot be separated and learned without the other (Badrawi, 1994). And since literature is language in use (Qudah, 1993), it becomes extremely difficult to deal with literature as a single element void of culture. This brings us nearer to the question of the role of culture in teaching literature in general and English literature in particular.

One of the main goals of teaching culture, and hence literature in developing countries, is to develop cultural knowledge to overcome false beliefs, ideas, and prejudices against the people who speak the target language. The learning of correct cultural content will help foster positive attitudes in EFL learners towards the people of the community so that they can appreciate their way of life. This is indeed a very noble goal if it is not taken in terms of subjecting other peoples’ culture to the culture of the literature being taught.

The type of literature selected by instructors in ESL classrooms in developing countries should address the students’ needs and everyday life experiences, or at least it should not be very demanding because the student cannot cope with the linguistic burden in addition to the cultural one. This is important because the background of the literary work needs to be explained to a foreign language learner, who is unaware of its social and historical context (Gulmez & Topark, 1993).

Another noteworthy element is that the culture embedded in the literary selection must not be in sharp contrast with the culture of the foreign learner in the developing country because it may prevent him from even beginning to explore the work of art. Consequently, he will resist it on both the conscious and the unconscious level.

According to Shanahan (1997), university teachers of foreign language face a pedagogical environment in which two thoughts have developed, one basing its emphasis on communicative competence, the other on the importance of exposure to culture and, especially, literature. The reliance of the former on data from empirical studies often conflicts with the feelings of the latter that non-quantitative, intuitional aspects of language learning are essential to language acquisition. However, much research into the role of culture and literature in language learning remains to be done in order that it may be used more extensively in the development of materials, syllabi, and curricula.

Moreover, according to Marshall (1997),

one takes comfort in the observation that trans-cultural teaching of literature to non-native speakers is the historical academic norm rather than an unfortunate deviation. In ages past, one didn’t have to study one’s own literature; one simply read it. Indeed, the traditional study of classical language and literature is a useful analogue. Courses in modern and contemporary literature have only recently been felt necessary as barriers have been erected which make the so-called literature inaccessible to many of its readers. We are further reminded that at no time in literary history have the values of authors and all potential readers coincided. Within a given historical period, people saw with different eyes. The monks rejected secular poetry. The Puritans detested Shakespeare’s theater, Dryden was misunderstood, Blake was unknown. . . . In short, even the accurate establishment of historical context may be too simple, as values still interfere. The professional task extends to values as well, as we build sympathy with literary sensibilities alien in time or attitude, to allow enjoyment and broaden understanding. (p. 334)

Culture must be woven into the ESL curriculum at both the secondary and university level, and literature is one feature in the cultural domain that provides what one might call “added value” beyond the level of language acquisition. Through literature, ESL students in developing countries can develop a full range of linguistic and cognitive skills, cultural knowledge, and sensitivity.

Shanahan (1997) stated that “a working model of the relationship between language and culture that can be applied to the language learning experience is absolutely essential to any systematic articulation of the ways in which literature may contribute to that experience” (p. 170).

According to Simpson (1997), “learners who perceive social cultural distance between themselves and the target language culture will have greater difficulty in achieving pragmatic competence and developing cultural and pragmatic awareness than those who do not perceive this distance” (p. 1). Moreover, Simpson suggested that the general failure to adopt artificial languages, such as Esperanto, may be explained in terms of their separation from culture. It was Valdes’s (as cited in Simpson, 1997) belief that although the English language has become a lingua franca, particularly throughout the international business world, it does have an underlying sociocultural basis.

Language as an instrument of communication, then, cannot be separated from its heuristic role as a device for organizing and categorizing contexts and situations as experienced by the speaker. In addition, there is a strong correlation between the content of a language and the beliefs, values, and needs that exist in the culture of its speakers. The strong bond between language and culture discussed here suggests that greater appreciation of culture should help promote more successful language learning, which can then lead to greater cultural understanding, thus promoting a cyclical or spiral development and maximizing second language acquisition.

Students do not learn a foreign language simply by being told how its grammar and syntax work; they must be exposed to the language in use and invited to interact with it.

Brumfit and Carter (1991) suggested the following criteria for text selection:

1. Linguistic Level - This can of course be measured in lexical or syntactic terms. But it is essential to recognize that no descriptive linguistic model can measure significance in literary terms.

2. Cultural Level - Different works of literature will be close to the cultural and social expectations of different groups of learners.

3. Length - Length is still a crucial pedagogical factor.

4. Pedagogical Role - (in relation to the literature - literature or literature-life connections). At appropriate levels works which are satisfactory on other grounds may be linked to others.

5. Genre Representation - If the course is truly concerned with developing reading capacities, it cannot be restricted.

6. Classic Status (or face validity) - Some texts may be demanded and therefore motivating for students, even though they are not essential on other grounds. The desire to read Dickens or Shakespeare may enable students to overcome difficulties which would be significant in terms of the other criteria. (pp. 189 -190)

However, Brumfit and Carter (1991), caution us that it is dangerous to be too simplistic about what is accessible and to whom. Shakespeare has been far more successful in the developing country of Africa, where there is a strong tradition of oral rhetoric still alive, than in many urban centers in Britain. Students in developing countries may actually find nineteenth-century literature closer to their own experience of how they live their lives than more contemporary work. The goal should be to provide students with a reading experience that enriches their perceptions of what it is to be human. It will be a long time, Brumfit and Carter suggested, before a more versatile piece of educational technology than the paperback book is invented, and there is no more easily available source for personal growth than serious literature.

Modern language teaching at the secondary and university level, including ESL, has developed over the past decade from more or less traditional approaches involving the explicit teaching of grammar and translation, to versions of communicative methodology. Grenfell and Harris (1999), noted that in England, the communicative accent had been reflected in the Graded Objectives Movement, the General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE) and the reform of Advanced Level syllabi. However, despite this trend, there was a growing concern that language learning had not progressed as much as might have been expected.

There are numerous language methods documented. To name only a few: The New Method, The Newer Method, The Reform Method, The Natural Method, The Rational Method, The Correct Method, The Sensible Method, The Direct Method, The Phonetically Method, The Phonetically Transcription Method, The Imitative Method, The Analytical Method, The Concrete Method, The Conversational Method, The Anti-Classical Method, The Anti-Grammatical Method, The Anti-Translational Method, The Reading Method, The Drip-Feed Method, The Active Method, The Eclectic Method, and The Dual Language Method. All of these methods have had relative degrees of success and failure. It has been proven that no oneESL method works all the time, in all cases, because too many variables — e.g., age, culture, context, personal preferences, external support, individual learning differences — influence outcome. What works in one time and place does not necessarily work in another situation. The change from audiolingualism and situational language teaching to communicative language teaching at the secondary and university level in EFL came about more directly as a result of new discoveries in the nature and process of language than in modern languages (Grenfell & Harris, 1999).

Communicative language teaching is the methodology which has perhaps most dominated classrooms in recent decades. The communicative movement has swept along almost everything and everyone in its path. There are excellent opportunities for English literature teachers to create lively, attractive, interactive modern-language lessons that maximize target-language use and make the culture of the language three dimensional. (Grenfell & Harris, 1999).

Carter and Long’s Three Approaches

Carter and Long (1991) identified three main approaches to teaching literature in EFL classes: (a) an information-based approach, (b) a personal-response-based approach, and (c) a language-based approach.

The information-based approach. The information-based approach tended to be teacher centered, relying almost exclusively on lecturing and the printed materials, thus overvaluing information and undervaluing creative thinking. The lecturers spent most of the time speaking, arguing, citing eminent critics’ points of view, balancing them, and timing the scale in favor of a certain view. Students were passive and did nothing except strive to write down some fragmentary notes to memorize for examination purposes.

Personal-response-based approach. This approach, which is practically non-existent in many developing countries such as in Arab university classrooms, focused on motivating the students to read by relating the themes and topics in the literary works to their personal experience (Kotob, 1993). This approach was basically anti-analytic. It was closely related to a language model for reading literature in order to make the text one’s own (Carter and Long, 1991).

Language-based approach. This was a rather recent approach in teaching literature at Arab universities, which derived its impetus from the developments in the fields of stylistics and text linguistics. Students were encouraged to read between the lines, rather than just for vocabulary in the lines of a text. It concentrated on “processes of reading” and was less concerned with literary text. In other words, it trained students to manipulate the possibilities of language, which was the guide to literary interpretation (Carter and Long, 1991). Students were also more likely to appreciate and understand texts if they experienced them directly as part of a process of meaning-creation. According to Carter and McRae (1996), “The language-based approach is student-centered, activity-based and process oriented” (p. 3).

Process-based Teaching

Process-based teaching aimed to involve students with the text and develop their perceptions of it. Rewriting, prediction activities, and role-playing were used in the literature lesson. The channel of communication between teacher and student was no longer exclusively one way. The instructor’s aim was to encourage greater independent learning by using an interactive, communicative approach to enhance the content-area material. Examples of generally effective teaching methods that could be employed by the English literature teacher were the creation of a learner-centered classroom, promotion of classroom interaction, cooperative learning, peer tutoring, an integrated skills approach, and a process approach to writing (Ervin, 1991).coming from.