Engelke 1

Literature Pedagogy: Ensuring Engagement in the Literature ClassroomRunning Head: Literature Pedagogy

As the cost of a college education in the United States reaches record highs, professors search for the best ways to ensure that students are getting the most out of their increasingly expensive education. Countless theories have been put into practice with just as many different outcomes. A college education is now seen as a means to a more prestigious or higher-paying job, when in the past, college was considered a place to get a diverse education and expand one’s worldview, with a high-paying job seen as a secondary perk. These days, professors struggle to keep their students engaged, especially in the technologically advanced society in which we are immersed. This is especially difficult when teaching subjects that can seem irrelevant or outdated to a technology-driven and career-focused student body. The toughest classes in which to spark student interest then become those in the humanities, specifically English and literature, because these classes do not necessarily have a career that is clearly linked to them—for example, like learning how to write code for a engineering or computer science classes wouldclass, or how an antibiotic affects the body for a biology class.

Across all fields of study, however, everyone who has been a student has probably had a boring class or a “bad” teacher. The common lecture hall, full of bored—sometimes texting or even sleeping—students, and a droning professor behind a podium is what we usually picture when we are told these stories. Students who are see themselves as victims of “boring” classes report lower levels of engagement, retention and interest in the material., Aand statistically, they are correct. Research shows that these students are not sufficiently challenged and that they do are not reaching their full potential as college students. In fact, cCurrent research suggests that lecture-style teaching is the least effective way to reach students and

Engelke 2

ensure engagement, because the students are not actively involved in their own learning.

TheA widespread move toward a more student-centered approach, rather than the traditional, teacher-centered approach, is having an immense positive impact on college studentsseeks to remedy this. . Positive results have been reported: Students are indeed more engaged and perform better when classrooms are student-centered. . One of the biggest advancements toward making college moreThe student-centered classroomis ensures greatering engagement by students in enrolled the college classroomcourses. Engaging students is something that every professor should strive for then, but it is not easy, and in fact and requires quite a lot of exploration and reflection into one’s own teaching methods. Current research suggests that lecture-style teaching is the least effective way to reach students and ensure engagement, because the students are not actively involved in their own learning. Instead of lecture-style teaching, collaborative learning environments are encouraged, and explicit relevance to the lives of the students are is considered one of the most effective teaching methods. The positive relationship between student engagement and student learning is emphasized:, because when students have a personal stake in the learning process, retention rates increase. In this context, it is especially important to consider the needs of the technology savvy students of the twenty-first century who enroll in literature courses. I will explore lLiterature pedagogy will be explored within this context as I examine the implementation and impact of traditional and modern teaching methods, and search for ways in which professors can ensure that students are not only engaged in their classes, but also get the most out of their classes and are encouraged to reaching their full potential in their education and in their lives.

Engelke 3

Over the last 20 years there has been a shift in the way literature is being taught at the university level, and it is important in the realm of pedagogy to examine the pedagogy behind these patterns as they develop and change. First of all, it might be appropriate to explore the teaching of literature itself.

Some might ask why literature still matters—especially in a time when funding for humanities education is continually being cut and the world is becoming more focused on science and technology. We, as humans, must study the things that do not fall under the category of “hard science” because only literature can give us things by means particular to it; it Above all, the humanities teach us critical thinking skills: they teach us about humanity and about good citizenship, and they helps us understand our place in the world and how and why we matter as human beings. When advised to cut arts education funding in order to fund the war effort, Winston Churchill asked, “Then what are we fighting for?” What Churchill meant, of course, was that there is no reason to fight for our rights if, on the way to these rights, we forget about humanity. A hHumanities education teaches us how to use what we find in literature to relate to other humans who may be from diverse backgrounds and cultures. In fact, much of the literature I studied identified that the best teachers encourage strategies for students to participate in their communities and cultures. English literature professors have a duty to employ techniques that foster and illuminate the principles and practices of the discipline itself (Chick, 2009). Literature itself contains the opportunity to show students not only how their lives matter, but also ways to make them matter (Van Engen, 2005). Elaine Showalter, in her book Teaching Literature (2003), defines the goal of teaching literature as that of training students to “do” literature in the same way that scientists “do” science. Literature professors aim to equip their students with the tools to think critically so they can then apply those skills to the “world of language, literature and culture around them throughout their lifetimes” (Showalter, 2003, p.26). My research shows that

Engelke 4

using active learning strategies and engagement techniques is the best way to accomplish these goals. Unfortunately, employing these strategies can be difficult when pedagogical inquiry is not a main tenet of teacher training or practice.

Traditionally, pedagogy has been seen as less important than more “academic” pursuits like research. ; research tends to be publicly funded while teachers are expected to learn how to teach in private and via their own means, with little collaboration with other professors. While research tends to be publicly supported by grants and academic policies, the actual act of learning how to teach has been widely privatized, meaning that it is done alone and without academic support (Tompkins, 1990). MMany sources point to the fact that while pedagogy is looked down upon in some cases, it simply isn’t supported in academia generally. To compound this discrepancy, or perhaps as a result of it, pProfessors do seldom not discuss their teaching techniques, and when observed by their colleagues or heads of departments, they frequently feel threatened. Jane Tompkins, in her article “Pedagogy of the Distressed” (1990), even compared pedagogy to sex—people are not supposed to talk about it, but when the time comes, they are just supposed to know how to do it. Furthermore, people usually avoid talking about their personal experiences with it because there isn’t a vocabulary for articulating those experiences and no institutionalized format for doing so. While research tends to be publicly supported by grants and academic policies, the actual act of learning how to teach has been widely privatized, meaning that it is done alone and without academic support (Tompkins, 1990). Many sources point to the fact that while pedagogy is looked down upon in some cases, it simply isn’t supported in academia generally. It While research tends to be publicly supported by grants and academic policies, the actual act of learning how to teach has been widely privatized, meaning that it is done alone and without academic support (Tompkins, 1990). Many sources point to the fact that while pedagogy is looked down upon in some cases, it simply isn’t supported in

Engelke 5

academia generally. Teacher training, other than for the composition classroom, is usually an afterthought in doctoral programs, and professors are rarely encouraged to investigate their own pedagogical practices (Stenberg, 2002). In fact, most college teachers do not receive formal pedagogical training while earning their doctoral degrees, which impedes their access to newer pedagogical methods and research (Feden, 2012).

Fortunately, from what I’ve found in my research, a shift is occurring. Many professors are pushing to create learning communities wherein professors collaborate in on their teaching methods and observe each other not as judges, but as studentspeers, and provide feedback to each other—this creates an open communication so that professors can improve their teaching techniques. However, changing or expanding the idea of pedagogy is not exactly a simple task, because of pedagogy’s historical position of disdain.

Stenberg and Lee (2002) point out that academia has historically preferred “abstract social visions” over questions regarding what’s actually going on inside the classroom. They suggest a paradigm shift away from this abstract theorizing, toward a more active, hands-on dialogue between teaching and research. Oddly, however, the discussion rarely approaches the fact that most professors-in-training do not “naturally” know how to teach and are not given the necessary opportunities and resources to find out.

One way to counteract this deficiency is to turn toward introspection. Self-reflection into one’s own teaching practices can help professors become better teachers overall. “more skilled, more capable, and in general better teachers.” Research shows that it is good pedagogical practice to regularly question the ideologies that we bring to the classroom, and use that these questions to adjust lessons plans and class structures (Ahn, 2011, p.275). Professors who want to enact pedagogical inquiry should constantly be revising their class plans and discovering new possibilities in their teaching, because this will allow them to understand their students and

Engelke 6

themselves better. Professors then will be able to experiment with new and exciting concepts in their classrooms, which could lead to valuable discoveries (Stenberg 2002).

It is important then to understand that enacting pedagogical inquiry is an ongoing process, and that those who pursue it good pedagogy will not “once and for all” learn how to teach. Rather, their practices will change constantly throughout their career, molding and shifting to fit the needs of their students and the cultural milieu within which they are taking participate.

While pedagogy has tomust be part of an one’s active research agenda then, its practical purpose needs to continue to outweigh its theoretical purposes. The theory of pedagogyical practices should have a working relationship with the actual practice, rather than becoming “the new subject matter to be mastered” (Stenberg, 2002, p.331). This old-fashioned perception of pedagogy, which views pedagogy has an abstract and teaching-unrelated field, has had some negative impacts on academia.

The pPrivatization of actual classroom practice and learning about teaching fostered teaching methods that weare not necessarily conducive to student learning. In this study, tThese are referred to here as traditional teaching methods, and they include some positive and negative aspects. The positive aspects of traditional pedagogical practice are few, but important to understand in order to gain insight into the ways in which professors can ensure their students are given the tools to be successful. Lecture is the key component of the traditional teaching style. While it can seem “boring” to students, it is can be superior to other methods of teaching for a few specific reasonsin certain scenarios and serve a specific purpose within otherwise more interactive classrooms.

Lecture gives the professor the ability to present up-to-date information quickly and efficiently to students. Professors can also use this method to convey the main points from many different sources in a quick and straightforward manner, so that students do not have to read several

Engelke 7

articles or texts in order to glean the main point of the day’s information. In this way, lecture can be a time efficient tool. It also allows the professor to pace the course to meet the needs of the students, which can have a positive influence on their performance. In fact, not all students will say that they find lecture entirely ineffective all of the time. In a study done by Jana Hunzicker and Twila Lukowiak (2012), students appreciated traditional lecturing when they anticipated that it would improve their exam performance. Jennifer Clark (2008) also identified some situations in which lecture is a necessity in college classrooms. When terms and concepts need to be learned quickly in order for the students to apply and use them, lecture and presentations are excellent tools. Presentation technology can be useful for these times because it gives students something to look at other than the professor, while subtly reinforcing the main points the teacher is making. One student in Clark’s study even saidcommented that the reason he liked the use of PowerPoint in his history class was because of the “pretty lights.” (p. 42). And it is true, slides do It adds entertainment value to the traditional lecture for today’s highly-visual students. Furthermore, auditory learners will undoubtedly find lectures stimulating and may get the most more out of this style of teaching than any other. Clark also claimed that PowerPoint allows professors, who are forced to teach in lecture- style due to high enrollment, to engage with their students in ways that traditional lecture does not (Clark, 2008).

In sum, traditional lectures can be useful for a variety of situations: classes with very high enrollment, auditory and or visual learners, maintaining control over the direction and pacing of the class, and condensing many different ideas and sources into one format for the sake of time. Although these are all positive things, there are some drawbacks to using lecture as the primary teaching tool that should not be ignored. Traditional teaching methods are statistically shown to be less ineffective and because do not engage students actively (and therefore do

Engelke 8

not facilitate optimal learning). The lecture, specifically, is what research argues doesn’t “work,”; and it is seen by research as an old-fashioned and outdated practice. Clark points out the widely held belief that lectures are “notoriously boring.” (Clark, 2008, p.39). Without additional audio or visual stimulation, student learning is impeded. In the traditional lecture hall, the professor talks “at” students while they mindlessly take notes on what is being said without actually engaging with the material inintellectually any way (Clark, 2008). The problem with lectures, according to research done by cultural psychologist Lev Vygotsky, is that they are decontextualized and inert (“Scaffolding Learning”, 2002).

Another important factor that reduces engagement in lecture classes is that it is difficult to make the material seem relevant to the students. This can be seen in literature classrooms where the text is typically taught as a “detached, lifeless body” (Van Engen, 2005, p.11). Omitting and even discouraging cultural, social, and historical context in the learning of literature breeds disengagement and even contempt when students simply areare simply unable to make the material relate to their lives. The nature of literature typically makes lecture ineffective for the teaching of it anyway, because literary analysis focuses on aesthetics, themes, content analysis, and other abstract concepts rather than concrete ones.

Paulo Freiiere refersred to the traditional lecture-style of teaching as the “banking method,” where —the professor is expected to gain accumulate as much knowledge as possible and then “deposit” that information into the empty and waiting brains of her students. This is a passive form of learning for students because they aren’t engaged with the lecture material. In fact, according to my research, students only retain about 40% of the material taught to them in lecture-style courses, and most of that only comes from the first 10 minutes (Feden, 2012). This is especially important to consider in light of the culture of today’s college students who have distractions literally at their fingertips when the class turns boring—Candy Crush, Snapchat, TwitterFacebook, and Twitter, and

Engelke 9

many others offer much more exciting alternatives to a boring literature professor.

Jane Tompkins identified the influence behind the banking method. The professor uses lecture as her only form of communication with students because it puts her in a position of power—she’s the only one talking so nobody can contradict her or ask questions to which she doesn’t know the answer.—and Aall of her students respect and are intimidated by her, thereby giving her the aura of the wise and all-knowing professor. This persona is something that most students will be intimidated by, and they become unwilling to challenge the professor, ask questions, or even speak at all, which provides the fear-driven professor with a safety net. Tompkins says when she started teaching, like the majority of new professors, she was so concerned with showing her students that she was capable and worthy of supplying them with knowledge that she would put on a daily “performance” which was not concerned with the student’s learning but with how smartclever and intelligent she appeared. The goal of these performances was to basically make the students like and respect her as a professor. Tompkins terms this method of teaching the “performance model” whose driving force is fear—fear of being shown up, exposed as a fraud, dismissed as a “bad” teacher, or perceived asappearing unknowledgeable (1990, p.654). Strangely enough, the fear that influences the decision to teach in lecture stylefollow the lecture model of teaching is merely cyclical. Professors are afraid of being perceived as bad teachers, so they become bad teachers in the process, blinded by their own fear. Research shows that more modern teaching methods are a better way to reach students, and while they may require professors to step out of their comfort zones, the outcomes make this transition a worthwhile endeavor.

The modern style of teaching places an emphasis on engaging students, as research shows that engagement leads to higher levels of learning. In this new paradigm, professors ask questions, rather than give answers to the students, which then does away with lectures almost

Engelke 10

entirely. Modern teaching methods also focus on stating explicit relevance to students’ lives—when students understand how the material relates to them personally, they take a more personal stake in the learning process and simply care more. In fact, engaged students statistically attend class more often, and when they are theredoare physically present, they are also mentally present in that they truly apply themselves by participating more, taking the homework seriously, studying for exams more diligently, and developing an overall internal desire to learn. The engaged student completes the coursework with enthusiasm and is able to solve course problems creatively and collaboratively. and SheHe also uses the concepts she he has learned in new ways, demonstrating which demonstrates her his learning (Hunzicker, 2012). Engaging activities are fun, interactive, challenging, purposeful, and relevant.

In the student-centered classroom, it is crucial for professors to focus not on what they will say, but what their students will have learned or be able to do by the end of the course (Avery, 2010). Preston D. Feden proposed that engagement can help students develop and maintain their metacognitive processes and other important academic skills that lead to better understanding not only of course material but also of material in other classes, and even in media and other modern forms of communication (2012, p.21).

One of the driving forces behind the shift in pedagogical practices is the presence of millennial students in college classrooms. Millennials are considered those who began arriving on college campuses around the year 2000. Scientists have noticed several concerning trends in their personalities and experiences that may make them more difficult to teach than students in the past have been. For instance, millennial students are not used to reading long passages of text. Instead, they read short e-mails, Tweets, and brief internetFacebook posts,; whichthis trend, as one study suggested, shows demonstrates a decline in their ability to focus on novel-length texts. Scientists have also noted a shocking increase in what they

Engelke 11

have been calling “narcissism” in this group of students. They point to the fact that twice as many high school students in 2010 than in 1976 graduated with an A average, meaning that students were given better grades for doing less work. Some also claim that the old model of a midterm and final exam are not effective for this group of students, because they understand that tests are not necessarily an accurate description of their overall learning. In fact, most young people no longer respond to “appeals to duty; instead, they want to know exactly why they are doing something” (Twenge, 2012, p.68). Furthermore, because Millennials grew up working on teams, they may be less equipped with the the skills to think independently (Wilson, 2006, p.60).

Despite these obstacles,But millennial students have some unique abilities that their older counterparts may have lacked, and there are many innovative ways to reach them without sacrificing content and difficultyrigor. In contrast to adult previous generations, Millennials have been described as team-oriented, achieving, optimistic, confident and socially accepting, and playing on their strengths and weaknesses gives professors a unique ability to truly engage this complicated and complex group of students. For example, focusing on student-faculty contact via one-on-one meetings can increase their motivation, involvement, and intellectual commitment to the course material. Because of their willingness to work on in teams, group discussions and projects are excellent ways to engage them. Moreover F, frequent small quizzes (—rather than two major exams), —smaller assignments, explicit syllabi, and well-structured assignments are all the bestimportant ways to of reaching them (Wilson, 2006, p.62).

There are many alternatives to the traditional lecture that are much more effective, and there also are several specific activities that are considered engaging to today’s students. Enacting these strategies can have highly positive outcomes for both students and professors, and these techniques are easily translated to the literature classroom. Collaboration, relevance, community involvement, personal expression, context, physical

Engelke 12

or verbal activities, and variation all can be implemented in literature classrooms in order to meet the goal of student retention and success.

Collaboration is identified as one of the key methods to engaging students. When students partake in collaborative learning tasks, students see their task as more important (Ahn, 2011). It has also been shown that students who prefer to work alone still benefit from group work, and that most group work is well-received by college students. A collaborative work environment, research shows, leads to a deeper understanding of course material and more significant metacognitive thought in students. An example of a collaborative group exercise was put forth in Ruth Ahn and Mary Class’ article, “Student-Centered Pedagogy: Co-Construction of Knowledge through Student-Generated Midterm Exams” (2011). In their study, Ahn and Class made students agents of their own learning, and shifted the power away from the instructor and toward the students. The authors attempted to engage their students with the class material by having them create their own midterm exam questions. The requirement for the project was that the exam questions could not be true/false or one-word-answer questions. Ahn and Class’ students were forced to dive deeply into the content of their textbook in order to write questions that actually tested their knowledge and applications of concepts, rather than memorization of facts. This activity improved their higher-order thinking skills and allowed them to activate their learning and apply it in new ways. The professors also found that working in small groups as a team to create questions for their assigned chapter improved the students’ participation in full-class discussions (p. 277).

Tompkins described an experiment in which she also handed complete control over to her students, and they were and required them to collaborate intensely throughout the semester. She made the students responsible for presenting the material to the rest of the class, rather than she herself having that task. She maintained that it is’s important for professors to understand that they don’t need to polish their own

Engelke 13

presentation skills and knowledge set, but rather that the students need to develop theirs and find their voice, which is something this activity allowed them to do (p. 657). In order to successfully implement this class structure, Tompkins recommended some rules of thumb. She placed an importance on entrusting students with control of the class, because one of the main components is that they feel a sense of their own power in their learning—the activity is not designed for the professor to prove herself. She also recommended keeping a light workload, which helped the students focus on the material more critically.

Nancy Chick, Holly Hassel, and A. Haynie also conducted an experiment with collaboration in the classroom. They found that when students are presented with a difficult text, they tend to “shut down” because they do not have full command of the skills required to analyze it (Chick, 2009, p.400). Their goal was to make reading for complexity in literature seem valuable and interesting to students, rather than intimidating. In order to do this, they first had their students analyze a brief poem on their own and write out their interpretations of it before class. During the next class period, the students then wrote down any themes and patterns they saw in the poem, and any elements they thought did not seem to “fit” in the poem. The students then formed small groups to discuss their different interpretations and findings, and tooktaking careful notes throughout. After this, the students informally presented their work to the full class, and explained their interpretations of the poem with textual support. A writing assignment followed in which the students discussed the complexity of this short piece of work. The assignment asked the students to discuss how the patterns related to each other, how it’s possible for all of these different patterns to exist in a single piece of work, and what elements that they perceived to be out of place. This activity was a way for students to see the myriad of possible interpretations of a single poem might yield, and it allowed them to become more comfortable and less intimidated by something they had originally considered quite difficult to

Engelke 14

grasp. The professors’ data suggested that group work had a tremendously positive effect impact on students’ understanding of and engagement with the material. They said, “our students’ initial interpretations of the poem were challenged, reinforced, and enlarged by small-group discussions” (p. 418). Another method that works quite well for collaboration is to issue guided reading questions for a longer piece of work, and to have students discuss their answers in small groups. This technique fosters communication and teamwork.

Establishing rRelevance is one ofanother the major keysvaluable step toward ensuring engagement in the literature classroom. Relevance is the gateway to allowing students to become for comfortable with unfamiliar, complex, and historically-distant texts (Showalter, 2003). Many authors made the claim that without forging a connection between the material and the lives of the students, teaching them is an “empty labor” (Tompkins, 1990). A component of providing relevance is to present students with context for the works they will come into contact with throughout the semester. Julie M. Barst recommended conveying historical and social background via lecture, student research essays, or presentations (2013). Stories, in this manner, are also an excellent tool with which to engage students. Providing a brief story about the author’s experiences that influenced his/her writing of the text will immediately make the text more interesting and easy to remember for the students (Feden, 2012). Several sources also recommended giving students a say in determining the syllabus as a way to make the course more relevant to them. Many literature professors implement this technique by presenting students with a pool of texts from which to choose. The students either choose one on their own or vote on the ones they will read that semester. One author points out that this doesn’t mean reducing the material to what is only relevant or appealing to the students. Instead, tThis technique enables the professor to discover commonalities between the students and the material and use that as a starting point to evoke their interest (Youssef, 2010). In

Engelke 15

this way, students maintain a personal stake in the direction and flow of the class, thereby increasing their engagement, while the professor may use their common interest as a starting point. When sStudents have more interestare invested in the material,, and higher levels of interest lead, naturally, to higher levels of engagement and learning occur.

An example from my research is a professor who struggled to make the poetry of Langston Hughes relevant to her majority-black students. One would think it would be easy for the students to find his poetry engaging, but the Civil Rights movement themes were, in fact, not engaging to them because, as the professor found out, it was something that no longer seemed relevant to their twenty-first century lives (Youssef, 2010). We found several solutions to her problem using the suggestions I mentioned. The professor could have provided social context about the civil rights movement and analyzed, what prompted Hughes to write his poetry. She could also have talked about something as contemporary as the Trayvon Martin case if the students showed disinterest or claimed a disconnection between their concerns and those of Hughes. Trayvon was 17 years old—around their own age. The professor could then have had them generate a list of other gender-ethnicity stereotypes (including clothes, hairstyles, tattoos, etc.) and discussed with the students related crimes and cases of discrimination. They then could discuss have integrated their own lives and to find out if anything like that had ever happened to them, and even get into a discussion on their own privilege— – being in college is something that would have been a major struggle in during Hughes’ time.

A few secondary considerations for engagement include techniques such as presenting opportunities for community outreach, allowing or even encouraging personal opinions, and incorporating technology. One of the foremost objectives of studying humanities is to become more familiar with the ways in which humans interact, to acknowledge their struggles, triumphs, and personal concerns. Offering students opportunities for applying their knowledge outside of the classroom in impactful ways

Engelke 16

accomplishes these goals. Furthermore, permitting personal opinions to enter conversations allows students to feel that their voice matters; it makes them feel more comfortable participating in class discussions of a text (Showalter, 2003). Likewise, professors may use social media such as blogging, class websites, or online discussion boards to help with this component. Students may feel more comfortable posting their findings on a class webpage because many of them do something very similar on a daily basis with their ubiquitous social media outlets. This technique also integrates technology into the classroom, which is something many modern students expect (Wilson, 2006). In this context, Reader-Response Theory may also find its place. The Reader-Response framework offers a unique medium for students to express themselves because it gives them the theoretical tools to discuss their interpretations of texts (Showalter, 2003). All of these techniques can help students feel important and empowered in the literature classroom, which is just the validation many modern learners crave.

An additional component of relevance is that it may encourage students to participate in their communities via outreach programs and activism. After all, one of the foremost objectives of studying humanities is to become more familiar with the ways in which humans interact, to acknowledge their struggles, triumphs, and personal concerns. Offering opportunities or outlets for applying their knowledge outside of the classroom in meaningful ways accomplishes these goals (Showalter, 2003).

Allowing personal opinions to enter discussions is a good way to allow students to feel that their voice matters; it, and therefore makes them feel more comfortable participating in class discussions of a text. Professors can use social media like blogging, class websites, or online discussion boards to help with this component, while also allowing integrating technology to enterinto their teaching classroom. Reader-Response Theory finds its place in this context. The Reader-Response framework offers a unique medium for

Engelke 17

students to express themselves because it gives them the theoretical tools to discuss their interpretations of texts (Showalter, 2003). Another impactful pedagogical tool is to present students with context for the works they will come into contact with throughout the semester. Julie M. Barst recommended conveying historical and social background via lecture, student research essays, or presentations (2013). Stories, in this manner, are also an excellent tool with which to engage students. Providing a personal story that relates to the material or a brief story about the author’s experiences that influenced his/her writing of the text will immediately make the text more interesting and easy to remember for the students (Feden, 2012).

In order to engage his students on many different levels, oOne professor used turned to debate in his literature classroom during their study of when they were reading Dante’s Inferno. He posed a mock trial of Satan in which the students played the roles of defense, prosecution, Satan, and Judge (Showalter, 2003, p.110). The same can be done for texts like Frankenstein and King Lear. This technique seems especially effective since a good percentage of English majors are also pre-law students. Along this same line, some professors highly recommend getting students physically and verbally active in the classroom. When students are encouraged to physically participate in learning activities, their brains are working in different ways that actually facilitate brain growth and strengthen their interpretive abilities (Avery, 2010). For example, a class that covers drama may allow students to act out particularly important lines. In fact, verbal interactions with texts literally train students’ brains to engage with their metacognitive thinking processes (Feden, 2012). A playful atmosphere strengthens students’ memories and helps fortify their interpretive abilities. Eric Jensen agrees, saying, “Humans at play are motivated to repeat newly acquired skills… thereby increasing the strength of neurological structures underlying these skills and opening opportunities for further learning” (Avery, 2010, p. 7). Vygotsky also concurs, positing the idea that verbal

Engelke 18

interactions literally train students’ brains to engage with their metacognitive thinking processes (Vygotsky, 1962, p. 45).

Vygotsky’s Scaffolding Scale (see fig. 1) is a visual representation of what is termed the Zone of Proximal Development. This area represents the optimal level of difficulty in which the highest levels of successful learning and comprehension occur. In this zone, the material is neither too hard so as to cause anxiety, nor too easy so as to cause bore the student boredom. When the student is able to complete a task on her own, she is able to apply the new concepts to new situations, thereby entering her Zone of Actual Development. When a student is completely unable to perform the task without the help of a teacher, she is in the Teacher-Regulated Zone, which only produces learning in the one who doesn’t need it: the professor. However, on the flip side of this, when a student can successfully complete a task without any help at all, they likely could already do it prior to the teaching, and they thus have learned nothing new (“Scaffolding Learning”, 2002).

An added important consideration regarding engagement activities is variation. Some sources suggested changing the focus of the material every ten minutes. Others recommended introducing at least six new terms, ideas or conclusions every 15 minutes (Twenge, 2012). The big picture idea here is to focus on not using the same techniques in class every day across the semester. Instead of having guided reading questions for every text and having the students discuss their answers in small groups nearly every day, for example, a professor might hold a debate, show a related video, or briefly lecture on the author the students are about to read and show some art work from the given time period.

While it’s important for professors to engage their students as much as possible, it is also useful to discuss the different teaching styles professors may have. In my Teaching Literature class, together with help from the instructor, we identified three major styles that exist together on a

Engelke 19

continuum. On the far end of the continuum we identified what we called Teaching Style A. This style is teacher-focused, using lecture heavily. The professor maintains the expert persona, and the students are minimally engaged. We identified this as the easiest teaching style to maintain because the professor has complete control of the class. In stark contrast to this teaching style is Teaching Style C. This method is student-focused, wherein the professor facilitates discussions, uses lecture only as a reactionary tool, and learning typically occurs in roundtable-style discussions. We identified this style as the most difficult to employ for;, in order for it to succeed, students must feel completely safe sharing their opinions and interpretations of texts, and this can be very difficult to achieve. It’s also worth noting that allowing a free-flowing atmosphere of feelings and interpretations may allow students’ feelings to get in the way of accurate analysis of literature. Students study literature because it elicits emotions in them, and there are ways to use those emotions in the classroom, but in order for the study of literature to remain academic, students must be aware that their emotions may increase the likelihood of inaccurate interpretations.

In the middle of this continuum stands Teaching Style B. This, we identified, is the ideal teaching style. Professors who employ this teaching style frame group discussions with lecture, with an effective balance of lecture and other, more active engagement techniques. There does not exist a singular, “best” method for teaching a particular subject, nor is there a singular, “best” method for students to learn that subject, so balancing a variety of employing different teaching styles is the best way to convey different material to different students (Loughran, 2013).

A quick instructional pace, coupled with class variety, and a delicate balance of active, student-centered tasks and teacher-led tasks is the most effective way to ensure that students are engaged in their learning (Hunzicker, 2012). The importance of engagement, specifically in the literature classroom, cannot be understated because e. Engagement

Engelke 20

improves higher-order, complex, critical thinking skills in students., These skills are developed by and the most useful ways to engage students include providing opportunities for collaboration,. Teachers should, aiminging for explicit relevance, encouragingeing community involvement, allowinging personal expression, and discoveringing creative ways for students to participate physically and verbally with the material, and all the while focusing on variation of presentation style. Engaged students retain more information, feel more connected with the material, and overall learn more from their classes. Thus, engaged students become more successful and, with earn better grades. Universities will record, higher graduation rates, as a result and be able to show more community involvement, by their alumni and more fulfilling careers. The boring lecture hall is a thing of the past. Modern teaching methods should be implemented not only in literature classrooms, but across all classes and majors. The current state of higher education necessitates a move from the conventional, time-honored methods to more modern, different, and perhaps even unusual techniques so that students are able to succeed in their education and in their lives outside of the university.

Engelke 21

References

Ahn, Ruth, and Mary Class. (2011). Student-Centered Pedagogy: Co-Construction of

Knowledge through Student-Generated Midterm Exams. International Journal

in Teaching and Learning in Higher Education 23(2), 269-81. ERIC. Web. 1 Feb. 2014.

Avery, Bruce. (2010). You don't know Jack. Pedagogy 11(1), 135-51. EBSCO MegaFILE. Web. 1 Feb. 2014.

Barst, Julie M. (2013). Pedagogical Approaches to Diversity in the English Classroom: A Case Study of Global Feminist Literature. Pedagogy:

Engelke 22

Critical Approaches to Teaching Literature, Language, Composition, and Culture 13(1), 149-57. EBSCO MegaFILE. Web. 27 Feb. 2014.

Chick, N. L., H. Hassel, and A. Haynie. (2009) Pressing an Ear against the Hive: Reading Literature for Complexity. Pedagogy: Critical Approaches to Teaching Literature, Language, Composition, and Culture 9(3), 399-422. EBSCO MegaFILE. Web. 4 Feb. 2014.Clark, Jennifer. (2008). PowerPoint and pedagogy: Maintaining student interest in university lectures. College Teaching 56(1), 39-45. Academic Search Premier. Web. 8 Feb. 2014.

Feden, Preston D. (2012). Teaching without telling: Contemporary pedagogical theory put into practice. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching 23(2), 5-23. EBSCOMegaFILE. Web. 5 Feb. 2014.

Hunzicker, J., & Lukowiak, T. (2012). Effective teaching and student engagement in the college classroom: Using the Instructional Practices Inventory (IPI) as a tool for peer observation and self-reflection. College Teaching 23(1), 99-132. Academic Search Premier. Web. 1 Feb. 2014.Loughran, John. (2013). Pedagogy: Making Sense of the Complex Relationship Between Teaching and Learning. Curriculum Inquiry 43(1), 118-41. Academic Search Premier. Web. 1 Feb. 2014.

"Scaffolding Learning." (2002). MyRead. Commonwealth of Australia. Web. 18 Mar. 2014.

Showalter, Elaine. (2003). Teaching Literature. Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub. Print.

Engelke 23

Stenberg, Shari, and Amy Lee. (2002). Developing Pedagogies: Learning the Teaching ofEnglish. College English 64(3), 326-47. JSTOR. Web. 8 Feb. 2014.

Tompkins, Jane. (1990). Pedagogy of the Distressed. College English 52(6), 653-60. JSTOR. Web. 14 May 2012.

Twenge, J. M. (2012). Teaching Generation Me. Teaching of Psychology 40(1), 66-69. SAGE. Sage Publications, 20 Dec. 2012. Web. 1 Feb. 2014.

Van Engen, Abram. (2005). Reclaiming Claims: What English Students Want from English Profs. Pedagogy 5(1), 5-18. EBSCO MegaFILE. Web. 1 Feb. 2014.

Wilson, Maureen E. (2006). Teaching, learning, and millennial students. Pedagogy 6(3), 435-452. EBSCO MegaFILE. Web. 1 Feb. 2014.

Youssef, Lamiaa. (2010). A matter of relevance: Teaching classics in the 21st century. College Teaching 58, 28-31. ERIC. Web. 8 Feb. 2014.