JUSTIFICATIONS FOR TEACHING LITERATURE

IF 1 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH L1 Educational Studies in Language and Literature Pub Date : 2022-12-17 DOI:10.21248/l1esll.2022.22.1.494
P. Myren-Svelstad, Ruth Gruters
{"title":"JUSTIFICATIONS FOR TEACHING LITERATURE","authors":"P. Myren-Svelstad, Ruth Gruters","doi":"10.21248/l1esll.2022.22.1.494","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The role and importance of imaginative literature in L1 education is a topic of continuous debate. In Norway, working with imaginative literature in several genres, and from various linguistic origins, is only one of several components in the L1 subject. In this article, we present the results of a survey aiming to investigate what literature can and should do in school, according to teachers. Using a qualitative hermeneutic content analysis, we analyze and categorize the survey results. We are guided by an affirmative approach to teachers’ competences, discussing the extent to which respondents demonstrate subject matter content knowledge. \nOur analysis enables us to isolate eight categories of justification, many of which show significant overlap with central tenets in literary theory, the curriculum, and L1 scholarship. However, we also find indications that critical literacy is undervalued. Furthermore, the Norwegian curriculum arguably motivates an instrumental use of literature as a way of developing general literacy or adding perspectives to topics addressed in other subjects. \nWe propose visualizing the justifications teachers express in a model taking into account two dimensions: 1) whether they imply a primary focus on the text, the reader, or the context including the author; and 2) whether their goal is benefitting the student (e.g., in terms of skills) or promoting societal change. This model is intended to provide a flexible typology which literary educators at any level can use in order to critically assess their practice.","PeriodicalId":43406,"journal":{"name":"L1 Educational Studies in Language and Literature","volume":"83 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"L1 Educational Studies in Language and Literature","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21248/l1esll.2022.22.1.494","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The role and importance of imaginative literature in L1 education is a topic of continuous debate. In Norway, working with imaginative literature in several genres, and from various linguistic origins, is only one of several components in the L1 subject. In this article, we present the results of a survey aiming to investigate what literature can and should do in school, according to teachers. Using a qualitative hermeneutic content analysis, we analyze and categorize the survey results. We are guided by an affirmative approach to teachers’ competences, discussing the extent to which respondents demonstrate subject matter content knowledge. Our analysis enables us to isolate eight categories of justification, many of which show significant overlap with central tenets in literary theory, the curriculum, and L1 scholarship. However, we also find indications that critical literacy is undervalued. Furthermore, the Norwegian curriculum arguably motivates an instrumental use of literature as a way of developing general literacy or adding perspectives to topics addressed in other subjects. We propose visualizing the justifications teachers express in a model taking into account two dimensions: 1) whether they imply a primary focus on the text, the reader, or the context including the author; and 2) whether their goal is benefitting the student (e.g., in terms of skills) or promoting societal change. This model is intended to provide a flexible typology which literary educators at any level can use in order to critically assess their practice.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
教文学的理由
想象文学在母语教育中的作用和重要性一直是一个争论不休的话题。在挪威,研究来自不同语言来源的多种体裁的想象文学只是L1学科的几个组成部分之一。在这篇文章中,我们提出了一项调查的结果,旨在调查教师认为文学在学校可以和应该做什么。使用定性解释学内容分析,我们对调查结果进行分析和分类。我们以教师能力的肯定方法为指导,讨论受访者展示主题内容知识的程度。我们的分析使我们能够分离出八类理由,其中许多与文学理论、课程和L1奖学金的中心原则有很大的重叠。然而,我们也发现了批判性素养被低估的迹象。此外,挪威的课程可以说激发了文学的工具性使用,作为发展一般素养或为其他科目的主题增加观点的一种方式。我们建议将教师在模型中表达的理由可视化,考虑两个维度:1)他们是否暗示主要关注文本、读者或包括作者在内的上下文;2)他们的目标是使学生受益(例如,在技能方面)还是促进社会变革。这个模型旨在提供一个灵活的类型学,任何层次的文学教育者都可以使用它来批判性地评估他们的实践。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
L1 Educational Studies in Language and Literature
L1 Educational Studies in Language and Literature EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Writing to Learn History: An Instructional Design Study High school students’ attentional stance, modes of reading engagement, and self-insight during literary reading Developing the “Language Profile Test” for Greek Students aged 11-15 Years. Strategies for Expository and Literary Texts Separating the relevant from the irrelevant: Factors influencing L1 student teachers’ ability to discern (ir)relevant arguments in time-pressured grammatical discussions
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1