Destreza de procesamiento mejorada en trabajos de lectura literaria

PROCESSING SKILL IS ENHANCED IN READING LITERARY WORKS QINGSHENG XING* Shenzhen Experimental School, Shenzhen, China ABSTRACT Processing skill is a kind of thinking, reflective, interpretative and inferential skill in the use of the language. Traditional way that English is taught in the Chinese context encouraging teachers’ fragmented approach to teaching is obviously impedimental to developing students’ processing skill. This article intends to discuss how to enhance students’ processing skill by reading literary works. KEY WORDS Processing skill, referentiality, representationality, cognitive strategies, metacognition, imaginativity, creativity, appreciation, pre- / while- / post-read- ing tasks. RESUMEN La destreza procesual es un tipo de destreza de pensamiento, reflexiva, interpretativa e inferencial en el uso de la lengua. El modo tradicional en que se enseña inglés en el contexto chino, propiciando en los profesores un enfoque fragmentado de la enseñanza, es obviamente un impedimento para el desarrollo de la destreza procesual en los estudiantes. Este artículo discute cómo mejorar la destreza procesual de los estudiantes por medio de la lectura de obras literarias. PALABRAS CLAVE Destreza procesual, referencialidad, representacionalidad, estrategias cognitivas, metacognición, imaginatividad, creatividad, apreciación, actividades antes de / durante / después de la lectura. CAUCE, Revista de Filología y su Didáctica, nº 24, 2001 / págs. 457-471 457 * Mr Xing Qingsheng has a number of years of teaching experience. He is a passionate lover of the English language teaching, particularly interested in and devoted to enriching students’ knowledge of the world and raising their language awareness with literature as a medium to develop their processing skill. He graduated, MA in ELT, from the University of Nottingham, England. He is now chairperson of the English Department at the Shenzhen Experimental School, Shenzhen, PRC. QINGSHENG XING 458 RÉSUMÉ L’adresse processuelle est une sorte d’adresse de pensée, réfléchie, interprétative et inférencielle dans l’emploi de la langue. La façon traditionnelle dont on apprend l’anglais dans le contexte chinois, favorisant chez les professeurs une optique fragmentée de l’enseignement, est évidemment un empêchement pour le développement de l’adresse processuelle chez les élèves. Cet article discute comment améliorer l’adresse processuelle des étudiants moyennant la lecture d’oeuvres littéraires. MOTS-CLÉ Adresse processuelle, réferencialité, représentivité, stratégies cognitives, métacognition, imaginanimité, créativité, appréciation, activités avant / pendant / après la lecture. This essay intends to discuss: What is processing skill? Why should we lay emphasis on processing skill in the Chinese context? How to cultivate students’ processing skill by reading literary works? Traditional way that English is taught in the Chinese context is focused only on students’ ability in reading and writing. This, to some extent, hurtles students in achieving communicative competence, because students are exposed to English in artificial situations with minimal exposure to authentic use. They are trained to develop language skills in isolation, without using them for real communication or for making meaning. Accordingly it encourages teachers’ fragmented approach to teaching, and grammar and structures that weigh heavily in teaching are obviously impedimental to developing students’ processing skill. Processing skill is a kind of thinking (McRae, 1996; 1999), reflective, interpretative and inferential (Carter, 1995, p. 13; 1996) skill in the use of the language. Professor McRae (1999) describes processing as the fifth skill in his article Five Skills English. He advocates that “…language learning is moving beyond the traditional four skills…to the development of the indispensable but often ignored or taken-for-grant- ed fifth skill, thinking / [processing]” (1996, p. 23). Processing can be divided into data-based, literal, referential, shallow processing, and conceptually-based, metaphorical, representative, deep processing. If shallow processing is seen as a preliminary stage, then deep processing is an advanced stage. Obviously only deep processing can result in construction leading to critical analysis and judgement, and trigger- PROCESSING SKILL IS ENHANCED IN READING LITERARY WORKS 459 ing rich imaginative responses and potential creativity in students. Therefore processing which permeates through reading to the other skills should be regarded as an indispensable skill apart from the cliché that only listening, speaking, reading and writing are the skills in language learning. Stress on developing processing skill is particularly of far-reaching significance for students who are traditionally (or may be trained to be) dependent, authority-oriented and unconditionally submissive. Chinese students display their distinct patience in unquestioning recipience of the knowledge from their teachers. Apart from traditional cultural factors in that students are used to unconditional subordination, they have rarely been trained to critically process knowledge or relate it to their own received knowledge. Even in mother tongue teaching, students’ thinking, imagination and creativity are condensed within the scope of the former scholars’ perspectives and comments which are written in the teacher’s book and imparted by the teacher in the classroom. Their thinking is far from critical, creative or imaginative but a sheer duplicate of the teacher’s or the former scholars’. This kind of thinking or processing is uni-directional, convergent rather than multi-directional, divergent, which will certainly bridle students’ thinking ability, potential imagination and creativity. I understand that the importance attached to developing students’ processing skill goes far beyond the limitation of language learning and teaching itself. It helps students become active, reflective, meditative, imaginative, creative, independent and responsible so as to promote social progress. It can make students into a new generation with their own mind and with the capability of reading the world as a text, observing objectively, analyzing and thinking critically, seeing through the appearance to get at essence. And this new generation will surely facilitate the steps in China’s current reforms. Reading in real sense entails students getting actively involved in giving out or producing what is needed to contribute to deeper processing, imaginative interpretation, multi-dimensional appreciation, and creative thinking of a text. I believe this kind of reading will bring students from surface to deep, from passive to active, from serialist to holist, from static to dynamic, from plane to stereo, which is the core of language learning, the orientation of language teaching. It is important not to be satisfied with a surface approach to a text, because reading is not only for passive reception but also for active production; it is not only for the understanding of explicit, referential QINGSHENG XING 460 but also for implicit, representational meaning of a text; it is not only for seeing into the working of a text but also for seeing through and around a text (Carter and Nash, 1990; McRae, 1991; Carter, 1996, 1997; McRae, 1996). In Bernardt’s words reading is not only a meaningextracting but also a meaning-constructing process (1991, p. 5). McRae mentions the key concept of referential and representational materials in reading. He further explains that referentiality “remains close to what they mean in a dictionary sense. [It is] purely informational, or at the level of basic interpersonal communication. [And it] requires very little in the way of thinking. It requires a memory for vocabulary and an ability to manipulate grammatical forms” (McRae, 1991, p. 5). Representationality does not differ from referentiality in that respect, but “[it] opens up, calls upon, stimulates and uses areas of the mind, from imagination to emotion, from pleasure to pain, which referential language does not reach” (McRae, 1991, p. 13). Talking about discourse analysis, Carter (1997, p. 75) states “…it means the analysis and interpretation of language use not just as reference but also as representation”.Representationality appeals to students’ interaction, negotiation, thinking, and creativity in processing the text according to language, content, effect and impact. It also contains elements of intentionality and elements of uncertainty that gives the reins to the students’ imagination and creativity (Carter 1996). Brumfit and Carter (1986), Carter and Long (1991), Duff and Maley (1991), McRae (1991) and Widdowson (1992) respectively put forward some theoretical underpinnings in advocating the application of literature in language teaching. Language and literature cannot be separated from each other. They are interdependent rather than mutually exclusive. “The study of literature involves an approach to texts as aesthetically patterned artifacts; and it also involves critical concepts, knowledge of conventions and the like. Using literature as a linguistic resource involves starting from the fact that literature is language in use and can therefore be exploited for language learning purposes.” (Carter and McRae, 1996, p. xx). Carter and McRae (1996, p. xxi) state “Texts are not completely fixed or stable entities”. Mao (1996, p. 180) says “[Texts] multiply in meanings”. They actually imply that even the same text may be interpreted differently by different people in different contexts at different times. A text itself is static, waiting to be explored. It is the reader, the interaction between the reader and the text through tasks that make it dynamic, bring it to life. Tasks are normally designed according to the PROCESSING SKILL IS ENHANCED IN READING LITERARY WORKS 461 order of before, during and after reading. Barnett (1989) and Bernhardt (1991) describe various tasks in reading, among which pre-reading tasks, while-reading tasks and post-reading tasks are often utilized in classroom language teaching. Pre-reading tasks aim to relate a text to students’ prior experiences and relevant knowledge, activate and expand their content and formal schemata, build vocabulary and help identify cultural influences that may affect reading comprehension or interpretation (Byrd, 1995) through brainstorming questions, group discussion, skimming, scanning or writing, etc. Some pre-reading questions which are within students’ capacity are “designed to stimulate response, and a willingness to response” (Brumfit and Carter, 1986, p. 47). The purpose of designing pre-reading tasks is obviously to arouse students’ interest and help them approach the text more meaningfully and purposefully. But we need to balance the degree of operating pre-reading tasks. The “warm-up activity that goes on [either] too long [or too far] can be distracting, taxing, and counter-productive” (McRae, 1996, p. 25). Based upon pre-reading tasks, while-reading tasks are designed to help students to become efficient in dealing with complex or unfamiliar structures and words so as to work through the text. Reading strategy practice, linguistic development and activation of thinking or processing form the core of while-reading tasks. Different kinds of questions designed for discussion can range from lower-order, referential, closed questions to higher-order, inferential, open questions (Carter and Long, 1991, p. 38; McRae, 1991, 1996) so as to encourage students at different levels to read, analyze and appreciate the text not only literally but also between the lines. They also challenge students to reflect analytically, critically and creatively, trigger their questioning, and stir up their imagination. In post-reading tasks, students are provided with opportunities for summarizing, deducting and evaluating the text. Students’ language, text and cultural awareness is raised through discussion, and they are helped to go beyond the text they have read and understood to recast or transform the text feature into a new setting or form. Professor Carter said that “Reading is probably not the passive process we take it to be. It involves us in relating the experiences of the [narrator] to the experiences we ourselves have undergone or can imagine ourselves undergoing” (1991, p. 16). I strongly believe that students will be better motivated to read a literary text if they can relate it to their own experience. QINGSHENG XING 462 However, it should be pointed out that tasks may not be necessarily confined to be designed according to the phases as was mentioned above. There is no clear-cut demarcation between them. The tasks designed in each phase may be overlapped or interwoven. They should be, based on what the text is, flexibly operated in the processing of the text with developing students’ processing or thinking skill as a core. Both the teacher and students bring different affective and cognitive conditions to the construction of a text presentation so that different interpretations for a text will be expected (Ruddell and Unrau, 1994, p. 123). “The reading we are directing is an appeal to the individual mind” (McRae, 1991, p. 123). I strongly advocate that students are encouraged or challenged to relate the text they are learning to the reality they are facing. “Reality itself is a plural text with as many interpretations as there are individuals experiencing it. The text, therefore, is to be considered as an expression of experience” (McRae, 1991, p. 124). We should not only improve students’ linguistic, pragmatic competence but also develop their cognitive and metacognitive strategies through processing literary works. According to O’Malley, Chamot (1989) and Oxford (1990), cognitive strategies refer to processes and behavior which learners use to help them improve their ability to learn or remember something, particularly those which learners use with specific classroom tasks and activities in reading comprehension. Any mental process which learners make use of in language learning such as inferencing, generalization, deductive learning, monitoring, memorizing, problem-solving, etc. belongs to a cognitive process which deals with learning systems of knowledge, particularly those processes involved in thought, perception, comprehension, reflection, etc. Metacognitive strategies “refer to the extent to which the reader is thinking about or reflecting on what is being read. This feature demonstrates that the reader is monitoring his / her own comprehension process. Metacognition is characterized in written recalls by question marks, parenthetical comments, vague vocabulary, or blanks that illustrate the reader’s uncertainty about particular aspects of the text or demonstrate additional [interpretation] that the text has not made explicit” (Berhardt, 1991, p. 122). Metacognition is an important component of the comprehension process for students, because it demands that they reevaluate and reflect on their interpretations of the text. Based on all the above-mentioned, it is axiomatic that literature should be introduced to students in the classroom as a means or PROCESSING SKILL IS ENHANCED IN READING LITERARY WORKS 463 resource for the enhancement of their language proficiency and more important, their processing skill. And language should, in turn, be applied as a “point of entry” for the improvement of their understanding and appreciation of literature. Language teachers should teach language for literature purposes and vice versa. I would like to introduce short stories such as “Windows” and “A Job on the Side”to senior grade students in my school, and guide them to process the texts properly with the questions following the texts. These short stories are literally simple but metaphorically deep in meaning. They are “rich enough for study at a variety of levels and within a variety of contexts” (Dunning 1968, p. 8). They are good enough to train students’ processing skill. Short story Windows Freeman J. Wong Yes, she was a helpful neighbor. She kept our mutual lane spotless all year round. She raked the maple leaves for me in fall, cleared my ice in winter, and mowed my lawn in summer. And she asked for nothing in return, but God knows what she was up to! Then on Canada Day last year, while my wife and I were entertaining friends in our backyard, I heard a loud crack. My basement window had been smashed to pieces. We rushed to the scene, and there was that busy woman again! But why did she break our basement window? Was she clearing the way for her husband or someone else to break into our home? “What have you done to my fucking window?” I reproached her sternly. “Nothing. I was just sweeping the leaves when it suddenly broke. I didn’t even touch it.” “Shut up! No more fucking stories! Do you want to fix it for me, or should I call the police?” “Kindness is never paid in kindness,” she mumbled to herself. “Serves me right.” “Fuck you! Speak out. What are you going to do?” “I’ll get a contractor to replace the window for you.” “When?” “Right now,” she said firmly as she walked away. A man came and took the measurements. Thirty minutes later, he returned with a new aluminum window wrapped in plastic and foam. In less than an hour, my forty-year-old wooden window was replaced by a modern one. To tell you the truth, I had wanted to change it for a long QINGSHENG XING 464 time, but just didn’t have a chance. Thank God, I got it free of charge at last. Why not? She was a helpful woman who enjoyed doing good deeds for others anyway. Just between you and me, the true story is that while she was sweeping the tree leaves for me, my boy –who was playing in the basemen– kicked his ball right through the old window. It was the perfect moment for me to threaten to press charge against her. What a helpful child! That evening I rewarded him with two pounds of white chocolate. After saving three hundred dollars on the new window, I began to seek opportunities to have the other window replaced. To improve my chances, I placed a five-foot long stick through an old hole to trip her up. I intuitively listened for the stick whenever I heard footsteps around my house –I woke up even in the small hours of the night, lest she would hit and run. But she never came again. The synopsis of this short story: The narrator took a chance to corner and threaten his helpful neighbor to replace his old window with a new one. The neighbor couldn’t find a witness to prove that she was innocent, so she got a contractor to replace the window. What was even worse is that he took it for granted and tried to seek another chance to trap her, but failed at last, because she never came back to his help. To activate students’ schemata, I give them some pre-reading questions to discuss about so as to provide a connection with this short story. •Do you know your neighbors or their names? If not, why not? •What comes to your mind the moment the word “neighbor” is mentioned? Cognitive psychology identifies three phases in language development: perceiving, in which students attend to certain aspects of experience by means of listening and reading; ideating, through students reflect on the experience; and presenting, in which students express their ideas by means of speaking and writing (Goodman, 1986). •Why didn’t the narrator use his neighbor’s name, instead, he used “she” all through the text? •Do you believe that a woman was ready to help her neighbor all year round only for the purpose of seeking an opportunity to break into her neighbor’s house with an out-of-date wooden window that had been used for 40 years? PROCESSING SKILL IS ENHANCED IN READING LITERARY WORKS 465 •What do you think of the narrator and his neighbor based upon the dialogue between them? Do you think the narrator rude, domineering, unjustifiable, or overbearing? Do you agree that the neighbor was passive, helpless, self-controlled, forbearing, or submitting to humiliation? If yes, why? If no, why not? •Do you think the woman is strong or weak in character? Why and why not? •Use your imagination and tell why she decided to replace his old wooden window with a new, modern one since it was not her fault at all? The students had a heated discussion on this question: maybe the window was too old to fix; maybe she just didn’t want to get involved in this unpleasant, meaningless disagreement or conflict; maybe she wanted to prove that she was God’s daughter, loving not only her friends but also her enemies; maybe she wanted to continue to help her neighbor, leaving him an unforgettable impression; or maybe she wanted to give him a good lesson by forming a sharp contrast of the two windows, which would definitely make him feel guilty, or humiliated, while making her feel good whenever she saw it.; maybe… •What does the word “you” in the first sentence of the second paragraph from the bottom refer to? Why? Obviously most students will say “you” refers to the readers, because readers have nothing to do with her or this dispute. It may refer to God, because he kept the secret to himself and nobody knows it except omnipresent God. And it may also refer to nobody but the other half of the narrator himself. If “me” is physically the narrator, then “you” psychologically the narrator. Maybe he didn’t want to tell, but deep in his heart the other half of the narrator just couldn’t help telling the truth. •What does “the perfect moment” mean? •What does the word “reward” mean? What influence would what the narrator did have on his child? Do you think his child will follow suit when he grows up? Do you think what the narrator lost was far more than what he got, or vice versa? In what way? •Why didn’t the woman come to his help after that? •Do you believe that the narrator got a free-of-charge new window actually at a cost of his moral quality? How? •What do you think the title is (if the title is held back)? Why?