Literatur verstehen und inszenieren
Foreign Language Literature Through Drama. A Research
Project [1]
Manfred Schewe and Trina Scott, Cork
Based on
the experience that today’s students find it more difficult than students of
previous decades to relate to literature and appreciate its high cultural
value, this paper argues that too little is known about the actual teaching and
learning processes which take place in literature courses and that, in order to
ensure the survival of literary studies in German curricula, future research
needs to elucidate for students, the wider public and, most importantly,
educational policy makers, why the study of literature should continue to have
an important place in modern language curricula. Contending that students’
willingness to engage with literature will, in the future, depend to a great
extent on the use of imaginative methodology on the part of the teacher, we
give a detailed account of an action research project carried out at University
College Cork from October to December 2002 which set out to explore the
potential of a drama in education approach to the teaching and learning of
foreign language literature. We give concrete examples of how this approach
works in practice, situate our approach within the subject debate surrounding
Drama and the Language Arts and evaluate in detail the learning processes which
are typical of performance-based literature learning. Based on converging
evidence from different data sources and overall very positive feedback from
students, we conclude by recommending that modern language departments
introduce courses which offer a hands-on experience of literature that is
different from that encountered in lectures and teacher-directed seminars.
“… without research we do not have a lodestar
to show us which way to face
as we tack our way toward
more effective teaching”
(Betty Jane Wagner,
1998)
1. Challenges for Literature Teaching Today – the Need
for Action
While
in the past it could be indisputably claimed that literature was of high
cultural value, today the situation seems to have changed. It is harder to
convince today’s students, who have grown up in a media-driven society, of the
value of literature. In a “visualised world” literature finds it increasingly
difficult to compete with the power of the image, as presented in cinema,
computer games, internet and on television.
Also, the fact that people today, including students, are often pressed
for time does not particularly help the case of literature as reading,
especially close reading, takes a lot of time.
Students of module Literatur verstehen und inszenieren engaged
in warm-up exercise
Due
to the rapid technological advances in recent decades we find ourselves exposed
on a daily basis to huge quantities of information as well as acoustic and
visual stimuli. We have to assume that, in order for human beings to cope with
this “Reizfülle”, our mode of perception has had to adapt accordingly. Lehmann
(2001: 11) postulates that while in previous decades the predominant mode of
perception could be described as linear-successive, these days it has been
replaced by a mode of perception which could be described as
simultaneous-multiple. Such changes with regard to perceptual modes are most
likely to have consequences for the way in which students learn, including
literature-based learning.
Literature
has traditionally been the territory of the discipline of
“Literaturwissenschaft”. While it has always enjoyed a privileged position
within German programmes at third level and it has always been assumed that
students go through a valuable learning process when studying literature,
representatives of “Literaturwissenschaft” have neglected in their research to
describe and evaluate the actual teaching and learning processes which take
place in literature courses. Hence, to date we have hardly any empirical
evidence for what constitutes good teaching and efficient learning in
literature-based courses, seminars and lectures.
This
contribution is based on the hypothesis that in order to ensure the survival of
literary studies in German curricula, future research needs to make more
transparent for students, the wider public and, most importantly, educational
policy makers, why the study of literature should continue to have an important
place in modern language curricula[2].
We
advocate that the subject debate be shifted from a discussion of text- and
author-related analyses and theories to a development and discussion of
(innovative) teaching and learning practices. Teachers of literature need to
become pro-active and lay open what exactly is happening in their lecture
theatres and seminar rooms, in order to find answers to questions like: What is
the value of literature study? What exactly does the quality of
literature-related learning processes consist of? These are questions that
prompted us to engage in a research project. In what follows we will give a
general introduction to the project, before evaluating it in more detail in
section five.
2. Origins and rationale of research project
We
contend that students’ willingness to engage with literature will, in the
future, depend to a great extent on the use of imaginative methodology on the
part of the teacher. Therefore, in what follows, we will describe a research
project which we undertook at University College Cork from October to December
2002. It was sparked off by our belief that alternatives need to be developed
to the traditional form of literature teaching, i.e. the 50-minute lecture.
Aware of the fact that in today’s world students can get information on a
certain topic, author, literary period etc. instantly, we were guided by the
notion that the lecturer’s role must shift from being predominantly a
transmitter of information to a facilitator of group processes.
In
the Department of German at University College Cork literature courses form a
significant part of degree programmes for students of Arts, Language and
Cultural Studies, Law and German and Commerce with German. Students can choose
from a variety of courses which, for the most part, are delivered using the
lecture or seminar format.
The
impetus to design a literature module using an alternative mode of delivery
came from a new scheme of awards initiated at University College Cork in 2001.
The “President's Awards for Research on Innovative Forms of Teaching and
Learning” were created as part of a university initiative to foster the
scholarship of teaching and learning. The following extract from our initial
award application outlines the rationale behind the design of our new
literature module entitled “Literatur verstehen und inszenieren”:
The aim of
the project is to investigate, document and evaluate the learning process that
is set in motion when learners are confronted with literary texts. It is our
opinion that the conventional approach to the teaching and learning of
literature at University College Cork, that is the lecture format, does not
lend itself to such a study, since its focus is on the result of the process,
usually the production of the traditional literary essay or critical
commentary, rather than on the process itself. We therefore propose to develop
an alternative approach to the study of literary texts which enables the
learner to engage with those texts on several different levels and provides the
teacher/researcher with means of observing, documenting and evaluating the
learning process.
The
methodology we plan to use in the development of this approach is that of drama
pedagogy… In keeping with the proposed methodological approach, we envisage
that the course would consist mainly of workshops, culminating in a performance
consisting of a collage of scenes from German literary texts.
Following
a successful award application, “Literatur verstehen und inszenieren” was
offered as an optional literature module to final year students of Arts,
Language and Cultural Studies and Law and German in the first term of the
academic year 2002-2003. In addition to the 24 contact hours prescribed for a
module with a credit weighting of 5 credits, students were informed that they
would be expected to attend two one-day workshops to facilitate longer blocks
of rehearsal time closer to the performance. The module was assessed by
continuous assessment. This consisted of two components: a practical
assignment, which included participation in workshops and preparation of the
performance, and a written assignment in the form of a learner diary. The
practical and the written components were allocated 50% each. The interactive
nature of the module meant that the number of participants was limited and 13
students elected to take the course. Over a period of 12 weeks the two-hour
workshops took place in a classroom and in the university’s Granary Theatre and
its studio rehearsal space. The performances took place in the Granary Theatre on 11th and 12th of December,
2002 and,
with a view to strengthening the liaison between university and schools and
creating an interest in German as a subject, were targeted at students of
German at secondary schools in the Cork region.
By
offering such an alternative we do not claim to have a recipe for the learner’s
lasting interest in and engagement with literature. However, we are hopeful
that our model might be of interest to colleagues and become a starting and
reference point for a fruitful discussion of how motivation or even enthusiasm
for the study of literature can be (re)generated and sustained over the next
years and decades to come.
3. Drama Pedagogy and the Language Arts
While
in past centuries and decades modern language teachers might have used elements
of play in their teaching, it is especially since the 1990s that the role of
drama and theatre in the language arts has become part of the subject debate
(for example Schewe 1993; 2002b; Schewe & Shaw 1993; Dufeu 1994; Kao & O’Neill 1998; Tselikas
1999; Schlemminger et al. 2000; Bräuer
2002; Even 2003; Huber 2003) and the discipline of drama in education has
become an important reference discipline for the modern languages, leading to
the development of innovative concepts of language teaching and learning, a
most recent example of which is Susanne Even’s (2003) concept of
“Dramagrammar”, i.e. grammar teaching and learning through drama.
While
such publications have paved the way for acknowledging drama’s important role
in modern languages methodology, this is a relatively new area and hence
fertile ground for researchers with a particular interest in building bridges
between the modern languages and aesthetic education.
While
over the last decade researchers have focused mainly on the teaching and
learning of language through drama,
relatively little attention has been given to the teaching and learning of literature through drama.[3]
While
in the secondary literature you might sporadically come across examples of
drama-based approaches to literary texts in the classroom, there is no coherent
theoretical framework as yet for such approaches. Furthermore, while there are
occasional reports and articles emphasising their benefits, there is as yet
little empirical evidence for learning processes in drama-based projects which
set out to achieve a product, i.e. a public performance. However, in this
context the perspectives of Smith (1984) and Bourke (1993) are of interest and,
more recently, Moody has argued that it would be a waste of learning
opportunities to focus exclusively on process-related work in the classroom,
emphasising that performance-related projects be seen as an integral part of
drama-based teaching and learning:
I would
agree unhesitatingly that improvisation and other process approaches are
frequently very effective, and that they allow learners to interpret the world
through both their bodies and voices, in order to practice the gestures,
movements and utterances of the target language and culture in spontaneous and
imaginative ways. However, literacy is also at the core of how human beings communicate
and situate themselves in relation to one another and over time. We also have
the texts of our lives, which are not only written upon our bodies in
spontaneous oral communication, but additionally in our classroom assignments,
creative writing pieces, and in our great works of literature. Powerful
aesthetic responses can also spring forth from a preconceived text. Serious
reflection is required to interpret play scripts, and within those texts are
the records of a language and culture, and the memories of past sensibilities
and communicative acts. In the social milieu of foreign-language theatre,
teachers and students are able to portray these texts for their audiences, and
to present the richness of the dramatic art form as intercultural speakers and
performers. (Moody 2002: 138-139)
While
Moody from his perspective as an outside investigator in two case studies
offers an interesting insight into different target groups’ (secondary school
students’/college students’) responses to process and product-oriented
approaches and, on the basis of his observations, emphasises the rich potential
of product-oriented approaches, he gives hardly any information regarding the
theoretical framework which guided his research or indeed the different data
sources his research was based on. While Moody’s reflections help to consider
the principal distinctions between process and product-oriented approaches, the
claim that product-oriented approaches become an “inherent option for
drama-based pedagogy” is already implied in the drama-pedagogical concept
advocated by Schewe (1993). He attributes pedagogical value to multiple forms
of drama-based teaching and learning, explicitly including
product/performance-oriented projects, however emphasises that each of these
forms be looked at in terms of the quality of the learning processes they can
achieve. Bearing this in mind we will,
in what follows, outline the steps we took in order to establish how learners
responded to a product/performance-oriented form of literature teaching.
4. Research Methodology
In
her publication Educational Drama and
Language Arts. What Research Shows Betty Jane Wagner (1998) gives the first
systematic overview of research projects which have addressed different aspects
of teaching and learning language arts through drama. While subscribing to her
reservations regarding quantitative research (p. 241) which will not be
recapitulated here, we note that, according to Wagner, qualitative research
studies
look closely
at what teachers and students do both during and after a drama … Like the
anthropologists who try to understand a culture by making sense of its rules,
taboos, unstated values, and tacit knowledge, interpretive researchers approach
the classroom as a specific culture; and they try to illumine how the
participants make sense of their experience there. Qualitative researchers work
to discern the meanings the students make of the drama experience and
categorize these in ways that elucidate the enterprise. (Wagner 1998: 233-234)
Accordingly,
in our research project we set out to discern how final year students of German
at University College Cork responded to an innovative drama-based approach to
literature which was to culminate in a public performance, and to categorise
their responses in ways that elucidated some of the central characteristics of
such an approach.
As
our research is mainly of interest to teachers of foreign language literature,
we allowed ourselves to be guided by Wagner’s (1998: 241) claim that “teachers
need rich descriptions, the kind that typically include long verbatim
quotations of students’ oral and written output”, as studying specific cases
has a more powerful effect on their decisions than the impersonal presentation
of empirical data which is typical of quantitative studies.
Hence,
as is typical of practitioners who conduct the research themselves in order to
improve practice, we decided to apply an action research framework. After all,
according to Cohen & Manion (1998) action research “… is concerned with
innovation and change and the ways in which these may be implemented in ongoing
systems” (188) and seen as a “means of injecting additional or innovatory
approaches to teaching and learning” (189). However, we restrict ourselves here
to the basic stages of action research projects as described by McNiff (1993:
65)[4]:
Stage 1 Discuss
your concern. What are you wanting to improve?
Stage 2 Decide on a strategy for change
and improvement.
Stage 3 Put the strategy into effect –
act!
Stage 4 Evaluate the outcomes of your
action.
Stage 5 Modify your statement of
concern in the light of the evaluation.
In
what follows we will adhere to these stages, but mainly focus on stages 3 and
4, in order to give readers a sense of how students reacted to this form of
teaching. In order to work towards “data triangulation”, we will refer to
examples taken from three different sources which emphasise the learners’
perspective:
· Learner diaries
· Student responses to an anonymous
electronic survey
· A video transcript of a discussion
with students on the last day of the course.
As
part of the formal requirement of this course the students were asked to keep a
learner diary and given guidelines accordingly (for details see Appendix 1).
Aware of the fact that the assessment factor might possibly prevent an
individual student from being as open as possible about his/her learning
experience, we ensured that students were also given an opportunity to respond
anonymously to their experiences in this module by filling in a questionnaire
which was centrally evaluated by the Quality Promotion Unit, University College
Cork.[5] Furthermore, we recorded several of
our seminar sessions on video, including the final discussion with the
students, which was subsequently transcribed and, together with the learner
diaries and the questionnaire, will be referred to in what follows. While these
became our three main data sources, we also collected photographic evidence.
However, for reasons of space we have to restrict ourselves here to only a few
examples which highlight the learners’ perception of performance-based
literature learning. Note that the learners’ names have been changed.
5. Evaluation of
Performance-based Literature Learning
5.1 Concerns
As
already stated in sections 1 and 2, the starting point for our research project
was our concern about today’s students increasing lack of motivation for the
study of German literature and our own dissatisfaction with the predominant
forms of literature teaching, i.e. the teacher-directed traditional lecture or
seminar. Therefore we set out to develop an alternative form of literature
teaching and thus to improve teaching practice. Based on the premise that a
more active learning methodology was required and on our experiences in the
separate fields of literature teaching and drama and theatre studies, we
decided on a drama-in-education approach for this course.
5.2 Strategy for Change and Improvement
Obviously
there are differences between analysing a literary text in an essay or critical
commentary and preparing it for performance. Both require a certain
understanding of the text, which in both instances finds different means of
expression. Performing a text necessitates the use of vocal and facial
expression, gesture and movement on the part of the performer. Other
considerations are set, lighting, sound, costume, props, make-up, all of which
are devices that can be employed to communicate an understanding or
interpretation of the text. A change in the tone of the voice, a pause, a
gesture, an adjustment in lighting, the addition of music, to give just a few
examples, can convey so much on stage, and decisions about such things often
require just as much consideration as a written analysis. Hence, as a strategy
for change and improvement, why shouldn’t the interpretive tools of the theatre
be used by students of literature?
5.3 Theatre Making as a Model – Action and Evaluation of
Action
Within
the theatre-making teaching model, the student of literature becomes the
actor/performer who enters the rehearsal process in the knowledge that when it
is over he/she will perform before a live audience. This prospect immediately
lends the learning process a dimension of urgency and anticipation. In their
learner diaries some students describe the effect that simply working in a
theatre space had on them:
Today we
were in the Granary Theatre, which I absolutely love because it is so
atmospheric. I think that working here helps us to perform to a higher
potential. (Rachel, November 22nd, 2002)
An atmosphere of anticipation prevailed. We
were all delighted our group was allocated the Granary. It is an inspiring
space to work in. Even though the chairs were empty, I immediately became more
focused on the needs of an audience. (Ciara, November 11th, 2002)
The
prospect of a performance means that the motivation to participate and learn is
immediately very high as the student/actor has even more of a vested interest
in performing well. Whatever they feel about privately receiving a low mark in
a written piece of work, no one wishes to suffer the humiliation of failure in
public. Working together towards a performance created a work ethic in the
class group and instilled in the students a sense of ownership, responsibility,
commitment and teamwork. There are several references to that effect in the
students’ learner diaries. For example:
Unfortunately,
I had to unexpectedly go to Limerick today and so I missed the class. I was
really disappointed, as I had successfully managed not to miss any up until
now. The worst thing was that not only was I letting people down, but I would miss
out on a lot of work too ... It was not until this stage that I comprehended
how much ground we covered in one class. (Rachel, 4th December 2002)
Never before
have I put so much into anything outside sport, especially where college is
concerned. (Jean, 12th December 2002)
The last
thing I wanted to do was mess things up, as I would feel like I’d left everyone
down. (Denise, 9th December 2002)
I am
convinced that the performance around Christmas provides a real focal point for
the class and influences us to settle down to work faster in each class and to
work hard on producing something by the end of each session. (Joe, 25th
October 2002)
We exceeded
the number of sessions prescribed for this course almost two-fold, we were
required to attend a total of 24 sessions, but instead we partook in 42
sessions. The 18 extra hour-long sessions were completed by us of our own free
will and surely indicate the enthusiasm of those who took part in the course .
. . Those who partook in the course did so with an enthusiasm that I have not
witnessed in any other course during my four years at university. (Gary,
Introduction to Learner Diary)
I didn’t see
“LiteraTOUR” as an assessment while I was on stage. I was there for myself, and
the group, and it meant a lot to me that it went well. (Lisa, 13th December
2002)
Taking
the theatre-making process as our model necessitated using the methods of
theatre work. Therefore, workshop sessions always began with warm-up exercises
normally used in the drama classroom to generate energy, free the body and the
voice and focus the mind on the work at hand. Having divided the group to work
on different texts, each teacher would then engage in text-specific exercises
with his/her group, mostly in different rooms. In the limited time available
each group then worked on preparing a text, or sometimes two texts, for
performance before the other half of the class. The performances were followed
by a feedback session in which students commented on the performance of the
other group and on their own experience of the session. A concrete example of a
workshop facilitated by Trina Scott on 18th October 2002 is outlined
below and will serve to highlight certain aspects of our research project. While
this session gives an impression of the way in which we worked, other sessions
were conducted very differently.
Sample Workshop Session
This
session was the third of the course and focused on a poem by Peter Otto
Chotjewitz entitled “Reisen”.[6] The text is printed below.
Reisen
ich
bin mit dem Zug nach Ulm gefahren
ich bin
mit dem Zug nach Ulm gefahren
ich bin mit
dem Zug nach Ulm gefahren
ich bin mit dem
Zug nach Ulm gefahren
ich bin mit dem Zug
nach Ulm gefahren
ich bin mit dem Zug nach Ulm
gefahren
ich bin mit dem Zug nach Ulm
gefahren
nun bin ich in Ulm:
was soll ich hier?
The
text has two parts. The first part, lines 1-13, consists of the repetition of
one sentence. Each time the sentence occurs, it is spread over two lines. As
text goes on, for the most part, one more word of the sentence is placed in the
first line of each pair until, in line 13, the complete sentence is in one
line. A line break then proceeds the final two lines of the text. The students
were not presented with the text at the beginning of the workshop session.
However, the following exercises were chosen specifically to prepare the
students for subsequent work on the text.
Vocal warm-up
Before
working with words, the group did some physical stretching exercises for the
neck, shoulders, face, mouth and jaw. The voice was warmed up with a humming
exercise and the repetition of the vowel sounds “ah-ay-ee-oh-oo”. Some work on
articulation brought the students’ attention to the organs of speech which
would need to be exercised to ensure good diction while on stage. As the
students were going to have to learn to use their voices effectively in order
to perform well, they needed to be sensitised to the vocal possibilities of
words spoken aloud. Because “Reisen” is linguistically simplistic, yet
experiments with language, it seemed to be an ideal text with which to explore
the potential of the voice.
First
students were asked to have a dialogue with a partner using only the words
“you” and “me”. Over time they were also permitted to use the words “yes”, “no”
and “maybe”. With the limited vocabulary at their disposal, the students
attempted to communicate with their partners and naturally began to experiment
with the way in which they spoke the words. The restriction placed on the words
they could use was to prepare them for the similarly limited vocabulary of
“Reisen”. Next, standing in a circle, students were asked to experiment vocally
with their own names by stressing the vowels first and then the consonants.
This exercise was repeated using some words from the text of “Reisen”. With
eyes closed they listened to their own voices and those of their classmates.
At
this point students were given a copy of “Reisen” and had to “pass” the text
around the circle by speaking one word each. This required concentration and
cooperation as they tried to pass the text seamlessly from one to the other,
speaking as a single voice. They were then asked to speak the text and
experiment with volume, pitch, pace, tone and facial expression. One student comments
on this part of the session as follows:
Again we had
a time limitation today, but nevertheless we started with a few exercises to
help with our vocal abilities, such as saying our names in various ways. We
also played a game where we repeated the words “you”, “me” and eventually added
in other words such as “maybe”, “yes” and “no” in groups of two. I really
enjoyed this game as it proved that one could do a lot with just a few words
and also the fact that the same words can be interpreted in so many different
ways, depending on the intonation used. (Leonard, 18th October 2002)
Dramatisation of the text
Betty
Jane Wagner (1998: 183), referring to Benton , describes the reader as follows:
Benton
(1979) has characterized a reader not just as an interpreter but as a performer
who builds a mental stage and fills it with people, scenes and events from the
text. Students who respond to literature by creating a drama transform the
classroom into this mental stage.
This
is exactly the process our students engaged in when, after the above exercises,
they were asked to consider how the text could be dramatised using visual
images. The image of a train was suggested by one student and this then sparked
further ideas. A student describes the process in his learner diary:
When I read
“Reisen” it seemed to be quite a monotonous poem. I could not have imagined
that it could be performed entertainingly ... However, using the new-found
possibilities for our voices, we quickly developed a scenario for the poem,
whereby six of the group were passengers on a train with Leonard as its driver.
Using the full range of our voices and imaginations we were able to conjure up
different moods for each person involved in the performance, I was flamboyant,
Siobhán was exhausted and so on. By realising the possibilities of our voices
we were able to give life to what seemed to be quite a monotonous poem. We were
also able to experiment with different concepts of how we would stage the
piece. Trina did not dictate what we were supposed to do, but instead acted as
a guide, keeping the momentum in the session, contributing her own ideas but
also remaining open to the ones which we contributed. (Gary, 18th
October 2002)
While
working on the dramatisation of “Reisen”, the students made discoveries about
the text in a natural and spontaneous way. They decided to allow the up-down
motion of the train that they physically formed to dictate the rhythm in which
the poem was spoken and they coordinated speech and movement accordingly. They
adhered to the structure of the poem by dividing up the lines of the text among
different speakers. Through the creation of characters who spoke their lines in
different tones of voice, with varying facial expressions, gestures and
movements, the students tried to convey the moods of the different people who
might be travelling on a train to Ulm. Based on the break in the text, they
decided to add a train driver who would speak the poem’s final two lines – he,
they thought, was the only one with no real reason for going to Ulm – other than
having to drive everyone else there! Gary continues his description of the
session as follows:
The
resulting performance of “Reisen” was thus like a tapestry that had been woven
from the imagination of everyone involved in the piece. It belonged to all of
us, it was something that we had not just done because we were told to do it,
we were not merely following instructions. This I believe led to the pride that
developed within the group as a whole; because the final performance was to be
a reflection of ourselves, we wanted to make each piece as perfect as possible.
It was this perfectionism and pride that was also the motivating force in the
extra sessions and work that we completed. (Gary, 18th October 2002)
This
extract highlights an important aspect of the course which is considered in the
next section.
Roles of the learner and the teacher
Gary’s
description of the learning process which he experienced in the particular
session outlined above is frequently echoed in the data sources. In her diary
entry following the course’s final meeting, which took place after the
performances, Lisa reflects as follows:
This course
is very different to any course I’ve ever taken at college before, and the
learning experiences that come of it are worth more than other courses I’ve
taken ... It was a broad learning experience, where I developed talents and had
to challenge myself in ways that I had not done before. It was a great
improvisational class, it was a real open scenario. Every class we had was an
experiment and a process of exploration, and all of us had a hand in being part
of that experiment, whose results came out positive. We were like a team with
two leaders, our two lecturers, but instead of the lecturers playing
traditional roles, they played much more active roles in the classroom,
communicating directly with us, the students. The role of the learner was
really important in this course, the emphasis at all time was on us, the
students. The course required us, the learners, to be adaptable, creative,
inventive and independent. (Lisa, 13th December 2002)
In
the anonymous electronic survey (see Appendix 2) the students were asked the
following question: “How does your role as a learner in this module differ from
your role in other literature modules?” Recurring words and phrases with
reference to the learner’s role in this module include: “more active”,
“necessity for participation”, “more involvement”, “more interaction”, “input”.
All of this is seen by the students as having the following results: “more
confidence”, “fun”, “enthusiasm”, “motivated”, “part of a team”. To quote one
anonymous response in more detail:
Rather than
sitting back spending an hour trying to absorb what a lecturer has to say on a
particular piece of literature, in this module I am free to express my opinions
and play an active role in making literature “come to life”. I also felt that
instead of just learning for myself, what I learned was also of benefit to my
classmates because we were all working towards the same goal.
If
the role of the student undergoes such a dramatic change, then the role of the
teacher must do likewise. In the data sources the teacher is often referred to
as a “guide”, rather than being regarded as an all-knowing authority. An
example from the video transcript and one from a learner diary:
Gary: It was
more like having someone with you. Just sitting there, just listening, the
group really participating with the lecturers, you were more like guides than
dictators. You go into a class, and they say things and you take them down, and
you might question things, but at the end of the day your lecturer knows what’s
right, but here it was more like everyone making something together. It was
cool.
Since this
module began, I haven’t looked on either Trina or Manfred as “lecturers” in the
traditional sense. I feel the role they play in this class is more that of
guidance than instruction, in the sense that instead of telling how a text
should be performed, they assist us in working through our own ideas and
interpretations ... in their capacity as guides rather than lecturers, they
allow for a large creative input from the students; a factor that is generally
overlooked in traditional literature courses. (Denise, 1st November
and 13th December 2002)
Thus,
taking the theatre-making process as a teaching model succeeds in shifting the
focus of teaching and learning away from the teacher and on to the student, a
move that is certainly perceived by the students as something positive.
Student reactions to drama-based literature learning
As is
evident from the workshop session described above, this model also provides
both teacher and learner with different mechanisms with which to approach a
literary text. On the video of the module’s final discussion session, two
students describe the drama-based approach used as follows:
Ciara: For
me, I always liked literature, but I often have found it hard to visualise a
text. I might read it and often wonder about vocabulary and all that, and this
course helped me to actually imaginatively understand a text better.
Gary: I read
“Reisen” and I thought, what a load of crap, and it seemed like the most boring
text that I had ever seen – “Ich bin mit dem Zug nach Ulm gefahren” – come on,
and then the most important things we did for all the texts was to make them
very visual and very un-texty.
This
reaction is echoed strongly in the anonymous electronic survey (see Appendix 2).
In Question 1, using a scale from 1 to 10 (1 = strongly disagree; 10 = agree
completely), students were asked to indicate the extent to which they agreed or
disagreed with the statement: “In this module I have experienced new ways into
literary texts”. 69.2% of students indicated their complete agreement, while
the remaining respondents circled either 8 or 9. In response to the question
“Has this course introduced you to new dimensions of learning?”, all of the participants
answered “yes” and two went on to comment as follows:
This course
has definitely introduced me to new dimensions of learning. Before, I found
myself thinking of literature as merely words on a page. Now I approach texts
with eagerness, as I now like to envisage the scenes as if they were playing
out in front of me. I find this to be a helpful learning technique as I feel I
can connect to the text in some way.
Performance
of texts allows a deeper understanding of the contents. It heightens one’s
sensitivity to the language of the text and imprints the contents on one’s
memory.
One
of our aims in developing this module was to offer an alternative approach to
the teaching and learning of literature that engages the learner on several
different levels. We introduced our students to Howard Gardner’s (1993) theory
of multiple intelligences so that they could reflect on their own learning from
this perspective. In the anonymous electronic survey (see Appendix 2) they were
asked to rate on a scale of 1-10 how frequently they thought they used their
various intelligences during the module workshops. The responses indicate
frequent use of linguistic intelligence, as one might expect from a literature
course, but also of spatial, bodily-kinesthetic, intrapersonal and
interpersonal intelligences.
Other learning
It is
evident in the data sources that, in the course of the module, the students
were aware of engaging in learning that was not solely of a literary nature. As
they prepared the texts for performance, their appreciation and knowledge of
theatre as an aesthetic medium increased. Watching the other half of the group
perform in each workshop session made them more aware of the needs of an
audience. As the workshops gradually became proper rehearsals, including
technical and dress rehearsals, the students increasingly referred in their
diaries to the effects of lighting and sound, as well as the importance of
cues, timing, pace, pause, fluidity of entrances and exits, movement, and use
of space. Because the performance consisted of a collage of texts, it was
necessary that it have an opening and an ending, as well as links between the
various texts. The students therefore had the additional challenge of staging
the performance in such a way as to make it a coherent whole. In addition to
performing, each student was a member of a working group responsible for
preparing a particular aspect of the performance e.g. costume and props,
programme, posters, tickets and post-show discussion. This process prompted one
student to comment in her diary: “There is a lot more to theatre than one
thinks”. Another reflects on her experience as follows:
I have learnt
a lot from this course but what I think is the most important lesson in
relation to performing is that the more you hold back, the worse it looks on
stage. The stage, I feel, is like a massive magnifying glass where all movement
and expression is scrutinised and interpreted instantly by the audience. (Jean,
15th November 2002)
Students
also mention that participating in “Literatur verstehen und inszenieren” helped
their self-confidence, improved their organisational, communication and time
management skills and convinced them of the value of dedication, motivation and
teamwork. One student summarises the experience by saying: “This has given me
something other than a mark towards my degree, which is important and sometimes
people forget this” (Ann, 13th December 2002). Two other diary
entries elaborate this thought further:
To conclude,
if this module has taught me nothing else, it is to think more positively about
daunting projects. But I have learned far more than that. I understand now that
it is impossible to know your limits when you haven’t even exerted yourself to
your potential and so it is always a worthwhile exercise to push yourself to
see those limits and to see what your capabilities are ... I have come to
realise the importance of quality preparation work through our warm-up
exercises, which also taught me invaluable skills that include, but also
stretch beyond the realms of drama and theatre work. Skills such as voice
projection, building confidence, energising one’s self, trust and many more besides.
My creative abilities were also utilised and although they are far from
extensive, at least I now know they are there and that they can be used for
everything from writing an essay, to acting out a poem, to understanding
literature. (Rose, 12th December 2002)
What did we
learn from it all? The first thing that I learned was that literature isn’t
just words on paper. Literature is more like baking soda. In its dry powder
form it isn’t very exciting, but if we add water it starts to fizz and bubble.
You could look at a thousand books, you could even read them, but without
imagination they are just fossils of life that once lived. Literature needs to
be lifted from its pages and brought to life. This is something that I learned
to do as part of this course.
Did we learn
anything else? When I was a boy my mother would tell me “Stick to the books
because you’re no good with your hands”. I only discovered lately that my
mother was wrong. I think that a lot of us discovered hidden talents, that we
weren’t just “good at the books”, that we could be creative. I never knew that
I could play the role of the clown or the street performer. I never knew that
Ciara could sing so beautifully or that Denise could play the flute. I never
knew Jean could sound like a washerwoman or that Joe could sit alone in front
of an audience under a spotlight and read aloud. I never knew any of these
things before and maybe they didn’t know them either. I didn’t know that there
was another way to teach. I didn’t know that there was another way to learn. I
never knew learning could be fun, that reading poems and plays didn’t have to
be a chore. I never knew that I could do so much work and not complain about it
once! During the course we learned a lot about literature, about each other and
ourselves. (Gary, 12th December 2002)
Many
of the students use the words “pride”, “satisfaction” and “sense of
achievement” with reference to the performance, which they regarded as the very
concrete result of their coursework and an essential element of the module, as
is evident from the following exchange in the final session:
Manfred: ...
Staying with the performance, and staying with the more overall context of the
course and imagining this kind of module would happen again next year. Do you
think the performance element is a good element to keep or could the course
happen without the performance?
Leonard: No,
I think it’s good, because then they have to reach a level of perfection, which
they possibly wouldn’t bother if ...
Denise: It’s
much more satisfying to see something actually come out of your work. Something
you can be proud of and something that you can see after three months of work.
It’s nice.
Presenting
their work in this public way appealed greatly to the students, as did the
opportunity it afforded to receive feedback on it from people other than their
teachers. To quote one example:
There was a
fantastic atmosphere among the cast afterwards. We were all excited, the
adrenalin was buzzing and we felt good about ourselves because of what we had
achieved ... the appreciation of the audience when it’s finished. This kind of
direct and immediate response to what you have completed is an overwhelming
experience. In life in general, there aren’t many times where you experience
this. (Ann, 11th December 2002)
6. Conclusions and New Concerns
In
light of the converging evidence from different data sources, only a fraction
of which could be dealt with here and the overall very positive feedback from students,[7] we can claim with some conviction that moving
the site of teaching and learning from the classroom to the theatre opens up
many exciting possibilities for teacher and learner. The new roles that both
must play in this creative arena are challenging but rewarding. Interactive and
collaborative learning is fostered in a way that allows a valuable encounter
with literary texts, fellow learners, teachers and, perhaps most importantly,
oneself.
While
this method of working might not appeal to every teacher of literature, we
nevertheless are of the opinion that modern language departments which in the
past have put special emphasis on literature and intend to do so in the future,
should take the learner’s perspective seriously. Admittedly, some of the
learners’ critical feedback might appear to be a bit too black and white and
therefore undifferentiated, but it nevertheless conveys a sense of how learners
feel about different approaches to literary study.[8]
This
project is our first attempt to look at the learner’s perspective on literature
study in a more systematic fashion. However, given the narrow time scale and
the pressures we as practitioners who conducted their own research were under,
we had to abandon our original plans to
also look in more detail at the teacher’s perspective, the issue of assessment,
language learning, etc. Based on teacher diaries and other data sources, it
would be necessary to establish further how students perceive team teaching,
how a teacher selects text material that is suitable for a performance, plans a
workshop, develops specific skills and so on.
For
us this action research project has given rise to a number of questions and has
led us to consider modifications to last year’s module. For example, as a
result of discussions with the students, we have changed the weighting for the
two course components. Instead of a 50:50 distribution, now the weighting for
the practical assignment[9] has increased (60%) and,
accordingly, the weighting for the learner diary been decreased (40%),
reflecting a more realistic assessment of the time and effort the students have
to invest into each of these components.
Questions
which have arisen for us and which need further attention include, for example:
· How could a course such as this,
which emphasises aesthetic practice, be fruitfully complemented by a literature
course which focuses on theory and looks at issues of theatre history and
different conventions within the dramatic genre?
· What kind of research tasks can be
assigned to students to ensure that they read and engage with a wide range of
literary texts?
· What drama pedagogical teaching
techniques are available to the teacher and how can these be applied in order
to achieve specific learning objectives with regard to literary study?
Based
on the data we collected and evaluated, we recommend that modern language
departments introduce courses which offer a hands-on experience of literature
that is different from that encountered in lectures and teacher-directed
seminars. Like the farmer who varies the crops he/she sows to keep the land at
its most fertile, we propose that departments advocate a variety of teaching
methods in the teaching of literature. We wish to conclude by repeating our
conviction that while the survival of literary studies in modern language
curricula will also depend on a number of other factors, it will, to a
considerable extent, depend on how teachers use imaginative methodologies,
including drama in education, in order to create a genuine interest in
literature:
… we did a
good bit of literature last year, and I didn’t read a single book to be honest.
I got by, without reading the books. I researched the essays, found a few books
in the library, there you go, there’s your exam. Didn’t need to read the books.
There you go, but there was a genuine interest through this medium. (Denise,
video-recorded final discussion)
Bibliography
Benton, Michael (1979) Children's Responses to Stories. Literature in Education 10 (2), 68-85
Bourke, Eoin (1993) Work at the Coalface. An Empirical Approach to
Foreign Language Theatre for Students. In: Manfred Schewe & Peter Shaw
(eds.) Towards Drama as a Method in the
Foreign Language Classroom. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 227-247.
Bräuer, Gerd (ed.) (2002) Body and
Language. Intercultural Learning Through Drama. Westport/USA: Greenwood.
Cohen, Louis; Manion, Lawrence (1998) Research Methods in Education. London/New York: Routledge.
Dufeu, Bernard (1994) Teaching
Myself. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Even, Susanne (2003) Drama
Grammatik. Dramapädagogische Ansätze für den Grammatikunterricht Deutsch als
Fremdsprache. München: iudicium.
Gardner, Howard (1993) Multiple
Intelligences. The Theory in Practice. A Reader. New York: Basic Books.
Huber, Ruth (2003) Im Haus der
Sprache wohnen. Wahrnehmung und Theater im Unterricht. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Kao, Shin-Mei; O’Neill, Cecily (1998) Words Into Worlds. Learning a Second Language Through Process Drama.
Stanford, Connecticut: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Lehmann, Hans-Thies (2001) Postdramatisches
Theater. Frankfurt: Verlag der Autoren.
McNiff, Jean (1993) Teaching As
Learning. An Action Research Approach. London/New York: Routledge.
McNiff, Jean; Lomax, Pamela; Whitehead, Jack (1996) You and Your Action Research Project. London/New York: Routledge.
Moody, Douglas J. (2002) Undergoing a Process and Achieving a Product: A
Contradiction in Educational Drama? In: Bräuer, Gerd (ed.) 135-160.
Schewe, Manfred (1993) Fremdsprache
inszenieren. Zur Fundierung einer dramapädagogischen Lehr- und Lernpraxis.
Oldenburg: Universität Oldenburg/ Zentrum für pädagogische Berufspraxis.
Schewe, Manfred (2002a) Teaching Foreign Language Literature: Tapping
the Students’ Bodily-Kinesthetic Intelligence. In: Bräuer, Gerd (ed.) 73-93.
Schewe, Manfred. (2002b) Literaturvermittlung auf dem Wege von gestern
nach morgen. German as a Foreign Language
3, 25-47.
Schewe, Manfred; Shaw, Peter (eds.) (1993) Towards Drama as a Method in the Foreign Language Classroom. Frankfurt:
Peter Lang.
Schlemminger,
Gerald; Brysch, Thomas; Schewe, Manfred (2000) Pädagogische Konzepte für einen ganzheitlichen DaF-Unterricht. Berlin: Cornelsen
Smith, Stephen M. (1984) The
Theatre Arts and the Teaching of Second Languages. Reading, Massachusetts:
Addison Wesley.
Tselikas, Elektra I. (1999) Dramapädagogik
im Sprachunterricht. Zürich: Orell Füssli.
Wagner, Betty Jane (1998) Educational
Drama and Language Arts. What research shows. Portsmouth/NH: Heinemann.
Appendices
1. Course Record Assignment / Learner Diary
Module: GE 3118
Literatur verstehen und inszenieren
Course Record Assignment (Learner
Diary) = 50% of total mark
After
each seminar during teaching period 1 (Fridays, 11 a.m. – 1 p.m.) you are
expected to reflect upon your own learning, i.e. to reflect on aspects dealt
with in a particular seminar session. These reflections should be written down
and entered into your “learning diary”. This “learning diary” should, for
example, focus on:
· a short reconstruction of each
seminar/workshop session;
· your initial understanding of
“literature” and how this understanding undergoes changes;
· how the methods used in this course
relate to methods used in other literature courses you have attended in
previous years in school and university;
· how the work in this course
challenges you: how does it affect you personally? Which of your intelligences
were especially tapped in a particular seminar/workshop session?
· an appreciation of different drama
strategies used in the study of literary texts;
· new experiences/understandings with
regard to German literature;
· new experiences/understandings with
regard to the art form of theatre;
· the progress and problems of your
own learning (if something has not become clear during the seminar session
write down what it is that caused problems for you, which questions remain open
etc.);
· the expression of feelings and mood
states about your own learning (including a reflection on what might have caused
these feelings/mood states);
· questions which are raised/remain
for you after a seminar/workshop session.
In
order to be able to keep a “learning diary”, you are advised to attend classes
on a regular basis. It is expected that you write about two A 4 pages per week.
As your “learning diary” is a part of the formal assessment in this course, you
are asked to have it edited, typed and completed by December 20th,
2002.
Should
you encounter problems with the keeping of your “learning diary”, contact (one
of) your lecturers as soon as you become aware of these problems.
2. Anonymous Electronic Survey
GE
3118: Literatur verstehen und inszenieren
1. Please
indicate to what extent you agree or disagree with the following statements.
Please use
a scale from 1 to 10.
1 =
strongly disagree
10 = agree
completely
1) In this
module I have experienced new ways into literary texts.
2) The work
in this module has heightened my sensitivity to literary/poetic language.
3) This
module has increased my confidence in dealing with literary texts.
4) This
module allows me to learn autonomously.
5) I will
be able to apply what I have learnt in this module to my study of other
literary texts.
6)
Participating in this module has made me more aware of the potential of
collaborative learning.
7) In this
module I engage with literary texts at a deeper level than in other literature
modules.
2. Try to
find comparisons that describe your study of literature in more traditional
modules and this module.
Use this
format:
Studying
literature in this module is like ..., studying literature in more traditional
modules is like ...
(Examples:
like playing cards, like riding a bicycle, like doing a jig-saw puzzle, like
playing chess)
3. Based on
Howard Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences, indicate to what extent you
used each of the intelligences in this module.
Use a scale
from 1 to 10
1 = not
used at all
10 = used
very frequently
1)
Linguistic intelligence
2)
Logical-mathematical intelligence
3) Musical
intelligence
4) Spatial
intelligence
5)
Bodily-kinesthetic intelligence
6)
Intrapersonal intelligence
7)
Interpersonal intelligence
8)
Naturalist intelligence
9) Existential
intelligence
4. Outline the differences between approaching
literary texts on your own and in a group. What are the advantages and
disadvantages of both approaches? Please comment in as much detail as possible.
5. How does your role as a learner in this module
differ from your role in other literature modules?
Please comment in as much detail as possible.
6. Has this course introduced you to new dimensions of
learning? If so, briefly outline them and
their effects on you as a learner. Please comment in
as much detail as possible.
7. Have you learnt anything new about German
literature or literature in general?
Please comment in as much detail as possible.
8. Please indicate to what extent you valued German
literature in the past and how your value ratings have changed since you have
started this module.
Please use
a scale from 1 to 10.
1 = no
value
10 = very
high value
9. Please indicate your level of satisfaction with
this module.
Use a scale
from 1 to 10.
1 = very
unsatisfactory
10 = very
satisfactory
10. Do you have any suggestions for improvements?
11. Final comments!
Should you wish to add any further general comments or
more specific comments with regard any of the questions above please feel free
to do so in the box below.
You may also make suggestions for questions which are
not covered in this questionnaire but could be important for the evaluation of
this new module.
2.1 Students’ answers to question 2 of questionnaire
Question 2:
Try to find
comparisons that describe your study of literature in more traditional modules
and this module. Use this format:
Studying
literature in this module is like ..., studying literature in more traditional
modules is like ...
(Examples:
like playing cards, like riding a bicycle, like doing a jig-saw puzzle, like
playing chess)
|
Going to mass and listening to a boring
sermon |
Playing the piano - practice makes perfect |
|
-- no entry -- |
Doing a jig-saw puzzle |
|
Scientific process of dissection |
Getting inside the work and bringing it to
life |
|
Can feel more like a chore such as washing
the dishes or doing laundry |
Doing things I enjoy: going swimming or doing
one of my favorite hobbies |
|
Looking from the outside in at another world |
Being involved in the world of the extract
and not just being a spectator |
|
Listening to a story |
Putting words into reality |
|
-- no entry -- |
Putting a jig-saw together |
|
Analysing a text/poem in more detail |
Studying a completely different aspect of the
text/poem Interpreting a text in a personal way |
|
Being a runner Climbing over a wall Being lost in a forest |
Being part of a basketball team Going through a gate Discovering a new world |
|
Playing chess Watching TV |
Playing the piano Doing a jig-saw puzzle Singing in a choir |
|
… didn’t hold interest |
Held interest |
3. Assessment Criteria for Practical Assignment
· Contribution to workshops dealing with
literary texts (discussion, interpretation skills, independent research)
· Contribution to performance piece
(awareness of dramatic form, dramatic skills)
· Improvement of German language
competence
· Contribution to special working
group
· Overall commitment (punctuality,
attendance)
4 Texts / text extracts used as basis for performance
LITERA-TOUR - Eine
kleine Reise in die deutsche Literatur
Author Title
Genre Period
|
Peter Handke *1942 |
Publikumsbeschimpfung |
Play |
20th c. |
|
Robert Walser 1878 - 1956 |
Das Alphabet |
Short Prose |
19th c. |
|
Gebrüder Grimm Jacob: 1785 - 1863 Wilhelm: 1786 - 1859 |
Der Fuchs und die Gänse |
Fairytale |
19th c |
|
Peter Otto
Chotjewitz *1934 |
Reisen |
Poem |
20th c. |
|
Kurt Tucholsky 1890 - 1935 |
Augen in der Großstadt |
Poem |
20th c. |
|
Wolfgang von Goethe 1749 - 1832 |
Erlkönig |
Poem |
18th c. |
|
Peter Jankowsky *1940 |
Cold War and Warmth |
Extract from
Autobiography |
2001 |
|
Matthias Claudius 1740 - 1815 |
Der Mond ist aufgegangen |
Poem/Song |
18th c. |
|
Hans Manz *1931 |
Ein Stuhl |
Poem |
20th c. |
|
Peter Bichsel *1935 |
Nichts Besonderes |
Short Prose |
20th c. |
|
Ernst Jandl *1925 |
Ottos Mops |
Poem |
20th c. |
|
Franz Hohler *1943 |
Der Traumprinz |
Fairytale |
20th c. |
|
Yüksel Pazarkaya *1940 |
die deutsche sprache |
Poem |
20th c. |
Biodata
Dr.
Manfred Schewe (www.ucc.ie/german/schewe.html) was a (German Academic Exchange)
lecturer at the German Department, National University of Ireland, University
College Cork, from 1982-1987. He was a lecturer/teacher trainer at Carl von
Ossietzky Universität Oldenburg in the areas of Drama/Theatre in Education,
German and English Studies from 1987-1994. Since 1994 he has been a permanent
full-time lecturer at the German Department, University College Cork. His
primary interest in research and teaching has been to develop holistic
approaches to the teaching and learning of language, literature and culture by
building bridges between different but complementary disciplines: Drama and
Theatre Studies, Education, German as a Foreign Language, Applied Linguistics,
Language Pedagogy, Literature Studies and Intercultural Studies.
Dr. Trina Scott holds a PhD in German Literature
(UCC) and a Licentiate Diploma of Teacher of Speech and Drama (Trinity College
London). Now an Assistant Lecturer in Speech and Drama in the Drama Section,
Cork School of Music (a constituent school of Cork Institute of Technology),
she was formerly a language teacher in the Department of German, University
College Cork. Her interests include Austrian and German literature, drama in education,
actor training and directing.