The teaching of English to children (TEYL) in Indonesia dates back
only a few years ago, for which reason the practice has been more a
trial-and-error than it is a professional undertaking. This is
proven—among others—by the fact that TEYL has never been part of
elementary school teacher education program and that existing textbooks
for that purpose have not been written following sound theories
regarding how children learn. Colleges preparing teachers are also
blamed for not responding quickly to this widespread practice by opening
a D3 program to train teachers to teach English at elementary level,
for example.
In the midst of this, the provision of such subjects as TEYL—that I
learned in the previous semester—and teaching literature to children
this term is really a blessing. It opens up my mind as to know more
about what children’s learning is like and how teaching English fits
into the scheme. Especially for teaching literature to children, it
reveals vast information regarding firstly the nature of reading, next
literature, and lastly the teaching of literature to children itself.
Concerning reading, I interestingly learned that reading is not
anymore believed to be a process of reader’s finding simply facts in
whatever he is reading. Reading is now taken to mean reader’s
constructing meaning out of what he reads making use of his background
knowledge on the subject and interpretation of that all. This is
especially so with what is known as aesthetic reading, that is, reading
that employs the reader’s feelings, emotions, and experience all
exported to the text. This kind of reading is closely associated with
literary works. As a result, two persons reading a similar piece of
literary work may have different interpretation of the text depending on
the background knowledge and experience each has. This is how the
difference in interpretation is justifiable and considered to be
knowledge-constructing. The efferent reading, on the other hand, i.e.,
reading to find facts or information that already exist in the text
without the reader having to interpret them anymore still stands, of
course. This is attached to academic or scientific texts.
As for literature, I learned that literature is not necessarily only
literary pieces of work anymore. Any written work targeted at reader’s
finding out something either efferently or aesthetically in the text
constitutes literature. By definition, a menu makes up a literature the
same way a novel does in that both have the reader find something out
regardless of the different nature of reading both entail. The former
constitutes what is called non-fiction literature, the latter fiction
literature. This shift in the way I should now perceive literature
affects the way I should teach that to children. I can use both fiction
and non-fiction literature in the classroom.
In teaching literature to children, I learned that I can alternate
between these three strategies: 1). Exploiting a fiction literature to
teach children to experience aesthetic reading; 2). Exploiting a
non-fiction literature to teach children content knowledge and academic
language; and 3). Adopting free voluntary reading with me not
intervening too much in the process, instead letting the children go
about reading themselves starting with selecting the text and reading it
till finished. In so doing, I should be sensitive towards the
children’s level of literacy, interest in reading topics, etc. I have to
take all this into consideration if I am to make the learning effective
and successful.
The immediate effect of learning about literature and teaching
literature to children that way above on me is my choosing a children
VCD program called “Magic English” to investigate for my thesis with
regards to its adoption or non-adoption of TEYL principles. I come to
think that the program is a perfect example of literature in its modern
sense. It is an audiovisual that entices a lot of children to learn from
it. But I have changed my mind. I have found a more workable and
manageable topic for my thesis having something to do with argumentative
essay writing that is believed to be able to promote critical thinking.
I have therefore offered the above topic to one of my friends and she
is most interested in it.
Apart from learning about the subject of teaching literature to
children, I learned something else from this class in which I had a
guest-lecturer coming from America, the country that has always inspired
and fascinated me as far as its English speech is concerned through its
cowboys movies, soap operas, movies, English 900, Bill Clinton’s
inaugural speech, etc. He taught in a way different from that most of my
lecturers adopt. The way I see it, he taught us the American way, that
is, where the students have a lot of say in whatever they are learning.
With him, it was a very student-centered class. With my friends, I got
to discuss things in groups, compared the results with other groups’,
reported the findings to the whole class, etc. This was quite a
different experience for me especially since that happened almost in
every session I had with him. What he did was that he simply he
facilitated the activities, not intervening too much in the process of
group or class discussion. We were really made to “construct knowledge”
by ourselves. He did not spoon-feed us with answers; we were to find the
answers through our discussion and deliberation. I think I liked it
very much though sometimes I felt that still I wanted him to lecture us
once in awhile for a change.
Jumat, 25 Juli 2014
Langganan:
Posting Komentar (Atom)
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar