讀者反應理論應用在高中英文文學教學之研究

全文

(1)國立台灣師範大學英語學系碩士論文 Master Thesis Graduate Institute of English National Taiwan Normal University. 讀者反應理論應用在高中英文文學教學之研究 A Study of Reader Response Approach to Literature Instruction in EFL Senior High School. 指導教授: 陳秋蘭博士 Advisor: Dr. Chiou-lan Chern 研究生: 周紅英 Advisee: Hung-ying Chou 中華民國一百零二年六月 June, 2013.

(2) CHINESE ABSTRACT 中文摘要許多研究已證明英文文學作品能擴展學生的語言能力，培養他們的批判性思維和提升個人成長，是一種能刺激並鼓勵學生學習的豐富資源。另一方面，讀者反應教學法激發學生藉由個人經驗，觀點與情感來與文本互動並作出詮釋。本研究採用讀者反應理論在高中英語課教授英文文學作品。實驗進行九週，每週兩小時，對象為三十九位英文程度中等的女性學生。學生們被分成八組，每組包含不同程度的學生。她們利用各種讀者反應活動學習一本文學作品，例如討論、角色扮演與寫回饋日誌。問卷及訪問結果顯示使用這種方法學習文學作品，許多學生獲得閱讀樂趣。而且，讀者反應理論鼓勵學生做批判性思考以提升個人成長。讀者反應理論的各種活動創造出一個輕鬆的學習氣氛，同時也提升學生之間的相互了解。就語言能力而言，雖然學生對此教學法能否提升整體語言能力意見分歧，但大部份同學仍認為此教學法可以提升她們的英文閱讀及口說能力。本研究結果可應在提醒教師在選擇閱讀教材時應考量學生程度及興趣。關鍵字: 讀者反應理論，讀者反應活動，英文文學，外語學習者. i.

(3) ENGLISH ABSTRACT Numerous research has proved literature to be a motivating and encouraging source in the EFL language classroom as it expands students’ language competence, develops their critical thinking and enhances personal growth. On the other hand, the reader response approach triggers students’ personal experience, opinions and emotions to transact with the text in the interpretation and negotiation of meaning. This study implemented the reader response approach to teach literature in a senior high school EFL class. The experiment was carried out for nine weeks, with two consecutive fifty-minute classes per week. The participants of this study were a group of 39 tenth-grade female students with intermediate English language proficiency level. They were heterogeneously placed into eight groups and were taught a literary work using the response-based activities, such as discussion, role play and response journals. The findings from the questionnaires and interviews showed that many students attained pleasure and enjoyment when using this approach to learn the literary work. Also, the reader response approach encouraged them to make analytical reflection and promoted their personal development. Besides, the response-based activities created a relaxed but motivating learning atmosphere as well as increased students’ understanding of their classmates. As for the language skills, although participants’ opinions about the effects of reader response approach on their language ability were diverse, they were positive about the improvement of their reading and speaking ability after the study. Pedagogical implications of this study will be discussed at the end of the paper. Keywords: reader response approach, response-based activities, literature, EFL learners. ii.

(4) ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS It would not have been possible for me to finish this thesis without the help and support of the kind people around me, to only some of whom I could give particular mention here. First and foremost, to my advisor, Dr. Chiou-lan Chern, whose sincerity and encouragement I will never forget. Her unsurpassed knowledge, constant guidance and unfailing encouragement supported me in all the time of research and writing of this thesis. To Dr. Kun-liang Chuang, whose wise words and knowledgeable lectures inspired me to conduct this research. To Dr. Shiu-chuan Chen, for her thoughtful comments, insightful ideas and constructive advice. To all the instructors of the MA TESOL program at NTNU, for their valuable courses and inspiring advice in the past three years. To my students, for their participation and cooperation in this study. Their involvement and feedback have made this study meaningful and inspirational. To my classmates for their invaluable assistance throughout the years. I am particularly indebted to my good friend, Sophie Chen, for her time, kindness, friendship and support. To my beloved husband, for his selfless support, loving considerations, and great patience. He was always there to cheer me up and stood by me throughout the good times and bad times. To my sweet daughter and lovely son, whose thoughtfulness and understanding sustained me to keep on.. iii.

(5) Last but not least, to the omnipresent and everlasting God, for giving me strength and confidence to plod on despite the physical and spiritual weakness.. iv.

(6) TABLE OF CONTENTS Page CHINESE ABSTRACT .................................................................................................. i ENGLISH ABSTRACT .................................................................................................ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................... iii LIST OF TABLES ..................................................................................................... viii LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................... ix CHAPTER ONE ............................................................................................................ 1 Background of the Study ....................................................................................... 1 Purpose of the Study .............................................................................................. 4 Research Questions ................................................................................................ 4 Significance of the Study ....................................................................................... 5 CHAPTER TWO ........................................................................................................... 6 Graded Readers ...................................................................................................... 6 The Reader Response Theory ................................................................................ 9 Rosenblatt’s Transactional Theory ............................................................... 10 Iser’s Interactional Theory ........................................................................... 13 Application of Reader Response Theory to ESL/EFL ......................................... 15 Scaffolding for the Practice of Reader Response Approach ................................ 18 Strategies and Activities for Reader Response Approach .................................... 19 Literature Circles ......................................................................................... 19 Role Play & Drama ...................................................................................... 23 Student-Led Discussion ............................................................................... 26 Response Journals ........................................................................................ 29 Summary .............................................................................................................. 32 CHAPTER THREE ..................................................................................................... 33 Participants ........................................................................................................... 33 Time Allocation.................................................................................................... 35 Instruments ........................................................................................................... 35 Reading Selection ................................................................................................ 36 A Pre-Instructional Questionnaire on Students’ Perception of Literary Works ... 37 A Sample Lesson Plan of Procedures of Using Reader Response Approach to Teach The Last Leaf and Other Stories................................................................ 38 A Post-Instructional Questionnaire on Students’ Perception of Reader Response Approach .............................................................................................................. 39 Interviews ............................................................................................................. 40 Procedures ............................................................................................................ 41 v.

(7) Data Analysis ....................................................................................................... 43 CHAPTER FOUR ........................................................................................................ 44 Results of the Pre-Instructional Questionnaire .................................................... 45 Results of the Post-Instructional Questionnaire ................................................... 50 Students’ Perception of the Selected Reading Material and ........................ 50 Students’ Responses to Different Response-Based Tasks and Activities..... 54 The Pre-class Worksheet ...................................................................... 57 The Role Play....................................................................................... 57 The Discussion ..................................................................................... 58 The Response Journal .......................................................................... 58 Students’ Participation and Class Atmosphere in the Reader Response Approach ................................................................................................ 59 Students’ Improvement of the Four Language Skills .................................. 60 Students’ Responses and Suggestions to Reader Response Approach ........ 62 The Interview ....................................................................................................... 71 CHAPTER FIVE ......................................................................................................... 78 A Summary of Major Findings ............................................................................ 78 Pedagogical Implications ..................................................................................... 84 Limitations and Suggestions for Future Research ............................................... 88 References .................................................................................................................... 90 APPENDICES ........................................................................................................... 102 Appendix A-1: A Pre-Instructional Questionnaire on Students’ Attitudes towards English Novels (Chinese) ................................................................ 102 Appendix A-2: A Pre-Instructional Questionnaire on Students’ Attitudes towards English Novels ................................................................................. 104 Appendix B: The Lesson Plan of Using Reader Rsopnse Appraoch to Teach Literature .................................................................................................................... 106 Appendix C-1: Appendix C-2: Appendix C-3: Appendix C-4: Appendix C-5: Appendix C-6: Appendix D-1: Appendix D-2: Appendix D-3:. Pre-Class Worksheet (1) ................................................................. 107 Pre-Class Worksheet (2) ................................................................. 109 Pre-class Worksheet (3).................................................................. 111 Pre-Class Worksheet (4) ................................................................. 113 Pre-Class Worksheet (5) ................................................................. 115 Pre-Class Worksheet (6) ................................................................. 117 During-Class Worksheet (1) .......................................................... 119 During-Class Worksheet (2) .......................................................... 120 During-Class Worksheet (3) .......................................................... 121. Appendix D-4: Appendix D-5:. During-Class Worksheet (4) .......................................................... 122 During-Class Worksheet (5) .......................................................... 123 vi.

(8) Appendix D-6: Appendix E-1: Appendix E-2: Appendix E-3: Appendix E-4: Appendix E-5: Appendix E-6: Appendix F-1:. During-Class Worksheet (6) .......................................................... 124 Response Journal (1) ...................................................................... 125 Response Journal (2) ...................................................................... 126 Response Journal (3) ...................................................................... 127 Response Journal (4) ...................................................................... 128 Response Journal (5) ...................................................................... 129 Response Journal (6) ...................................................................... 130 A Post-Instructional Questionnaire on Students’ Perception of Reader Response Approach (Chinese) ............................................. 131. Appendix F-2:. A Post-Instructional Questionnaire on Students’ Perception of Reader Response Approach ............................................................. 134. vii.

(9) LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1: STUDENTS’ RESPONSES TO THE CONTENT OF TEXTBOOKS AND LITERARY WORKS ........... 46 TABLE 2: DIFFICULTIES STUDENTS ENCOUNTER WHEN READING LITERARY WORKS ...................... 48 TABLE 3: WHAT STUDENTS WANT TO ATTAIN MOST FROM READING LITERARY WORKS ................. 49 TABLE 4: STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION OF THE SELECTED MATERIAL AND LITERARY WORKS ............... 51 TABLE 5: A COMPARISON OF STUDENTS’ ATTITUDES TOWARDS LITERARY WORKS BEFORE AND AFTER THE STUDY ........................................................................................................................ 53. TABLE 6: STUDENTS’ OPINIONS OF RESPONSE-BASED TASKS AND ACTIVITIES................................... 55 TABLE 7: STUDENTS’ OPINIONS OF THEIR PARTICIPATION AND THE CLASS ATMOSPHERE IN READER RESPONSE APPROACH .................................................................................................................. 59 TABLE 8: STUDENTS’ OPINIONS OF THEIR IMPROVEMENT OF THE FOUR SKILLS............................... 61 TABLE 9: WHAT STUDENTS LEARN MOST FROM THE READER RESPONSE APPROACH ...................... 62 TABLE 10: STUDENTS’ FAVORITE RESPONSE-BASED ACTIVITY ........................................................... 63. viii.

(10) LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1: THE PROCEDURES OF THE STUDY ....................................................................................... 42. ix.

(11) CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION Background of the Study In Taiwan, English has long been recognized as an essential skill for academic and vocational success. Whatever subject a student would like to major in in college, English is one of the required subjects to be examined. Moreover, many non-English major departments in universities also emphasize the importance of students’ English competence in the admission requirement. In order to help students perform well in the College Entrance Examination, many teachers have taken the mission of training their students to choose the correct answers through the teacher-dominated and grammar-focused instructions and numerous quizzes, tests and exams. This traditional teacher-centered pedagogy in language classroom primarily focuses on the explanation of difficult words and their derivatives to build up students’ vocabulary size, the analysis of complicated grammatical structures for them to do intensive reading, the translation of the text into their first language to help students understand the details of the text, and formulas of writing to compose a good piece of article. It is not uncommon for the teacher to do most of the lecture, while students passively receive the correct answer or the authorial meaning from the teacher. Little time is devoted to the appreciation of texts, the development of personal reaction and opinions to the text. According to the latest 2010 Curriculum Guidelines for Senior High School English, in addition to fostering students’ listening, speaking, reading and writing skills, another major goal of English teaching is to develop students’ logical and critical thinking and their creativity. In the traditional teacher-dominated and 1.

(12) exam-oriented instruction where students play a passive role in learning by selecting the accurate answers and reproducing information or knowledge, there is little room for students to think critically and creatively, to evaluate their teachers’ and peers’ ideas and to explore their own thoughts of the text. To develop students’ critical thinking and creativity, teachers have to create instructional environment in which students are encouraged to read independently, to collaborate with peers to solve problems, and to read beyond the lines to construct meanings. Instead of passively doing intensive reading led by teachers for linguistic knowledge and authorial meaning, numerous language educators and researchers, in recent years, have advocated extensive reading using the interactive and responsive approach to develop students’ critical and analytical ability (Bell, 2002; Day & Bamford, 1998; Iwahori, 2008; Walker, 1997). Bell (2002) states that extensive reading motivates students to read, builds up their confidence, and facilitates them to decode and interpret the message beyond the printed words. As students take a critical stance when reading extensively, they start to raise questions about whose voices are presented, whose opinions are repressed, and how the text is related to personal experience (McLaughlin, & DeVoogd, 2004). To create a context that fosters critical literacy, teachers, students and texts all play important roles. First the teacher should select comprehensible materials that provide challenges and promote reflection. Next, they can scaffold the instruction by using a five-step instructional framework: explain, demonstrate, guide, practice, and reflect (McLaughlin & Allwn, 2002). As for students, they need to be open-minded and active to take in different opinions and develop their own thoughts. Lastly, the text read should provide critical, provocative or controversial perspectives that challenge students’ traditional belief. When students engage in problem posing and solving in groups or individually, they gain a better 2.

(13) understanding of the text, expand their reasoning, seek out multiple perceptivities, as well as take a critical stance in reading (McLaughlin, & DeVoogd, 2004). In this study, the researcher implemented the reader response approach in the instruction of a literary work The Last Leaf and Other Stories written by O Henry to develop students’ critical stance. Reader response theory differs from the traditional teaching in that it does not focus on the linguistic knowledge learning or thorough comprehension of the text; instead it encourages learners to respond to the text and express their opinions and feelings freely. In other words, the concern is not only on comprehension, but also interpretation. According to Rosenblatt (1978) and Iser (1978), the text itself does not have meaning; the reader interacts and transacts with it to create a meaning. When reading a text, the reader relates his or her individual experiences and emotions to interpret the text and make a meaning of it. The making of meaning is a dynamic, interpretative and reflective process, and different interpretation can be made differently at different time and in different context. In the traditional teacher- dominated instruction, the teacher imposes the correct answers and the authorial meaning to students. On the contrary, the reader-centered approach requires students to be active readers, meaning makers, and independent thinkers, which makes the learning experience more enjoyable and stimulating than traditional classroom instruction that focuses on acquisition of the linguistic components of the text (Ali, 1994; Davis, 1989; Elliot, 1990; Liaw, 2001; Long, 1991). When applying the reader response approach to teaching literature, the teacher can use various tasks and activities to facilitate students to relate their experiences and reflections with the text, to interact with peers by listening and responding to different opinions and perceptivities to solve problems and create meanings. These activities promote students’ critical thinking, collaboration as well as appreciation of different 3.

(14) opinions. By means of the response-based activities and tasks, the researcher hopes to examine its effects on literature instruction in senior high school.. Purpose of the Study The main purpose of this study is to investigate the effects of teaching literary works to EFL senior high school students by using different response-based activities and tasks. It is hoped that the findings can provide some insight to the application of literary works and reader response approach in EFL language teaching. Specially, the study was conducted for the following purposes: 1. To investigate EFL senior high school students’ perceptions of the content of school-mandated textbooks and literary works. 2. To probe into EFL senior high school students’ difficulties in reading literary works. 3. To examine how EFL senior high school students respond to the reader response approach. 4. To examine EFL senior high school students’ improvement of the language skills when reading literature via the reader response approach.. Research Questions 1. What is EFL senior high school students’ perception of the content of school-mandated textbooks and literary works? 2. What is the difficulty EFL senior high school students encounter when reading literary works? 4.

(15) 3. How do EFL senior high school students respond to the reader response approach on literature instruction? 4. What improvement do EFL senior high school students make in their language skills when reading literature via the reader response approach?. Significance of the Study The significance of the study can be summarized as the followings. First, the study may provide evidence that teaching intermediate level students literature is feasible in senior high schools. Second, the study provides instructional guidance and response-based tasks and activities for senior high school teachers who hope to bring literature into their language class. Third, it is hoped that the response-based tasks can help to develop students’ critical thinking and creativity. Lastly, by teaching comprehensible materials with thought-provoking tasks and activities, students will find pleasure in reading and will become lifelong readers.. 5.

(16) CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW. Some senior high school teachers in EFL countries are reluctant to include literature in their teaching because they think literary works are beyond the comprehension of their students, whose vocabulary size may be around or less than 1200 words. However, as Krashen (1985; 1989) proposes, the literary text is an efficient vehicle for foreign language acquisition, and using literature in EFL classes can engage students emotionally and personally with the text and the characters. In other words, students can be distanced from the merely mechanical ordeal of language learning. Moreover, what has been lacking for EFL learners is a more active role to read literary texts individually and independently. Nowadays, there are different levels of literary works which are suitable for different levels of students. Choosing materials that are appropriate for students’ levels can avoid problems like comprehension failure due to insufficient vocabulary. In fact, reading materials that are within students’ comprehension can create enjoyment and motivation in them. Hence, supplying comprehensible input is essential to motivate students to read. Graded readers, texts written in simplified language and classified into different levels according to language complexity, seem to be ideal for EFL learners with low or intermediate level (Chen, 2009; Claridge, 2011; Day& Bamford, 2002; Nation, 2007).. Graded Readers Graded readers are simple or particularly simplified texts with controlled structure and lexis to suit different levels of EFL and ESL learners. The vocabulary 6.

(17) used in the graded readers is classified into different difficulty levels mainly through the number of headwords. Hill (2001) defines such books as stories written in language that learners can understand. Hill also mentions that graded readers help learners to (1) develop the skill to read fluently, (2) provide a context to enhance language learning, and (3) offer exposure to language that is within the competence of different levels of learners (p. 301). Because the language and vocabulary in graded readers are controlled, there are several advantages to incorporating them in our teaching. The first advantage is the ease of comprehension (Day & Bamford, 2002; Maneepen, 2002; Walker, 1997). Day and Bamford (2002) mention that comprehensible reading materials help to develop reading fluency and confidence, which is particularly important for EFL learners with low English competence. Another advantage is that they encourage learners to read independently so as to help promote independent reading (Blachowicz & Ogle, 2008; Maneepen, 2002). In addition to reading in the classroom with the guidance of the teacher, learners can learn to do it on their own independently. Lastly, graded readers provide pleasure and entertainment in reading as learners are not tested for their vocabulary gain or reading comprehension (Day & Bamford, 2002; Hill, 2001; Maneepen, 2002; Nation, 2007). Day and Bamford (2002) contend that learners should be encouraged “to read for the same kind of reasons and in the same way as the general population of first-language readers do” (p.138). Reading graded readers thus set learners apart from usual classroom practice for language use and academic purpose but lead them to read for pleasure and personal growth. Since the cardinal purpose of graded readers is to provide learners with an abundant number of comprehensible texts to read extensively, graded readers are particularly written or simplified to make reading fluent, motivating , enjoyable and 7.

(18) most importantly possible for learners with a limitation of vocabulary, sentence structure, and other aspects of the language (Hill, 2001; 2008). Because of this, students can read them without having to refer to the dictionary constantly, which makes pleasure reading possible. Nation (2007) mentions that only a small proportion of the language features should be unknown to the learners. As for the vocabulary, he argues that learners need to be familiar with 95-98% of the running words so that the unfamiliar language items can be learned through context clues and background knowledge. Since graded readers are written at particular difficulty levels to meet the needs of different levels of learners by controlling the structure and lexis, teachers can select those that are suitable for their students. Graded readers can be fictions or non-fictions, simplifications of famous works or simple originals. Simplified famous works begins with a built-in-advantage in that they were written by famous authors and have run through the proof of time for decades or even hundreds of years. These classics are still popular because they create problems that compel our attention, and characters that win our empathy and sympathy (Hill, 2001). Moreover, research has shown that they have been skillfully simplified, and have preserved not only the characteristics of normal English, but also the content (Claridge, 2005). In this study, the material used is a simplified reader which contains five classic literary works. The book which is at Level 2, with the structure and vocabulary being limited and controlled, is within the range of easy comprehension of senior high school students with low or intermediate English competence.. 8.

(19) The Reader Response Theory Reader response theory, which is viewed as a challenge to traditional emphasis on the author’s intention, social or historical meaning of the text (Hirvela, 1996; Iser, 1978), is a reaction to New Criticism. New Criticism had enjoyed great popularity and had made tremendous influence on the teaching of literature for almost forty years since the publication of I. A. Richards’ work “Principles of Literacy Criticism” in 1924 and “Practical Criticism” in 1929 (Freund, 2003; Iser, 1978; Rosenblatt, 1978). Richards (1924; 1929) maintains that the text hold the authoritative role and could have only one true meaning when it is read. So the reader’s role is to maximize his or her attention to learn the techniques of unlocking textual meaning and discover the one true meaning by a close study and analysis of essential elements such as theme, rhyme and rhythm (Corcoran, 1987; Robey, Ransom, Wimsatt & Brooks, 1982; Van, 2009). Within this theory, most of the class activities are dedicated to the structure and coherence of the text and its formal elements. This approach disregards the connection between the text and the reader’s experiences during the reading process. However, as Selden (1989) argues, “we can no longer talk about the meaning of a text without considering the reader’s contribution to it” (p. 132). Unlike New Criticism, reader response theory considers authorial intention and historical background irrelevant to the reader’s interpretation of the text (Hirvela, 1996; Iser, 1978; Rosenblatt, 1978). In this approach, the reader participates actively in the creation of meaning while reading a text. His or her past experiences, personal views, assumptions and involvement interact and transact with the perspectives in the text, and meaning is created as a result of this interaction and transaction (Ali, 1993; Iser; 1978; Rosenblatt, 1978). Beach (1993) categorizes reader response theory into 9.

(20) five primary theoretical perspectives. (1) Textual theories of response focus on how readers draw on their knowledge of text or genre conventions to make response to specific text features. (2) Experiential theories of response focus on the nature of readers’ engagement or experiences with text. (3) Psychological theories of response focus on readers’ cognitive or subconscious processes which vary according to unique personality and developmental level. (4) Social theories of response focus on how social contexts can influence the transaction between the reader and the text. (5) Cultural theories of response focus on how readers’ cultural roles, attitudes and values shape responses.. Rosenblatt’s Transactional Theory Rosenblatt’s transactional theory is the most widely cited and discussed reader response theory in recent years. Rosenblatt argues that the text on the paper is merely “marks and ink” and only when the reader transacts with it will the meaning be created (Rosenblatt, 1938, 1978, 2005) . Rosenblatt describes the meaning creation as “evocation,” which is a dynamic construct of a particular reader in a particular situation with a particular text. In her 1978 seminal publication The Reader, the Text, the Poem, Rosenblatt says: The reading of a text is an event occurring at a particular time in a particular environment at a particular moment in the life history of the reader. The transaction will involve not only the past experience but also the present state and present interests or preoccupations of the reader…printed marks on a page may even become different linguistic symbols by virtue of transactions with different readers (p. 20). 10.

(21) Rosenblatt (1978) views the literary reading as a two-way process, in which the text and the reader condition one another to create the poem. In her book, “poem” does not mean any poeticity, but “the whole category of aesthetic transactions between readers and texts” (p.12). The poem is not any concrete object; instead, it is an event when the reader and the text come together. Different readers may have different reactions to these events, and these reactions are dependent on their emotion, interests, and unique past experiences (Van, 2009). Rosenblatt describes that the poem “comes into being in the live circuit set up between the reader and the text at a specific time and place” (1978, p.14). Every reading act is an event, a transaction which involves a particular reader acting upon a particular text in a particular context. During this transaction, the reader brings with him/her the past experiences to create the meaning. In other words, the meaning does not “reside ready-made” in the text or the reader, but “happens” during the transaction between the reader and the text (Rosenblatt, 1978). As the reader reads, he/she may read aesthetically or efferently. Efferent reading means the reader takes a pragmatic approach to attend to the information that he/she can recall for use after reading is over (Carlisle, 2000; Harfitt & Chu, 2012). Efferent reading simply aims to acquire information and to comprehend what the text is saying. Efferent is derived from the Latin, “efferre”, which means “to carry away.” So, when a reader takes an efferent stance, he/she carries away what he/she intends to achieve without exercising his/her own experiences on the text. In aesthetic reading, however, “the reader’s attention is centered directly on what he [she] is living through during his relationship with that particular text” (Rosenblatt 1978, p.25). The aesthetic stance indicates that under the stimulus of words, the reader exercises his/her senses, feeling, imagination and thinking to comprehend what goes on during the reading process. 11.

(22) This aesthetic stance is far more personal and experiential than the efferent one. Rosenblatt points out, “someone else can read a text efferently for us, and report or summarize the results. No one else can read a text aesthetically for us; no one else can experience the aesthetic evocation for us” (Rosenblatt 1986, p.125). Wiseman and Many (1991) describe aesthetic reading as “when the reader’s attention is on the lived through experience of the story and the thoughts, feelings, images and associations are evoked as the story is read” (1991, p. 66). This idea is further elaborated by Cox and Many that aesthetic reading involves the reader’s “transaction with the book and the images, feelings, sensations, moods and ideas [are] called to mind from his [her] reservoir of past experiences with language, literature, and life” (1992, p.29). Rosenblatt (1978) points out that during aesthetic reading, the reader creates a personal literary work of art called “poem.” As has been mentioned before, the poem is a creation that develops as a result of the transaction between the reader and the text. Whether the reading is efferent or aesthetic is not a dichotomy, but a continuum, and all reading stances are positioned along this continuum. At the extreme efferent end, the reader contributes his/her attention as much as possible to the verbal symbols. In contrast, at the extreme aesthetic end, the reader’s primary purpose is satisfied during the reading event, as he/she “fixes his [her] attention to the actual experience he [she] is living through” (Rosenblatt, 1978, p. 27). In the reading process, the reader may shift back and forth along this continuum of efferent and aesthetic modes of reading. In other words, the reader’s stance is flexible and changes during the course of the reading act. This does not mean that there is no inherent meaning in any text and that the reader can fantasize freely. Rosenblatt does not de-emphasize the influence of the text; instead, she says, “the concept of transaction emphasizes the 12.

(23) relationship with, and continuing awareness of the text” (Rosenblatt, 1978, p.29). In fact, to read aesthetically is to link the stimulus of the words with what is lived through to create a particular meaning at a particular moment with a particular text.. Iser’s Interactional Theory Within Iser’s reader response theory, central to the reading of every literary work is the interaction between the text and the reader (Iser, 1989). In The Act of Reading, Iser explains this relationship between text and reader, “…the literary work has two poles, which we might call the artistic and the aesthetic: the artistic pole is the author’s text and the aesthetic is the realization accomplished by the reader” (Iser, 1978, p. 21). Iser further points out that as the reader reads through the different perspectives offered by the text and connects the different views and patterns to one another, he or she sets the work in motion and so sets himself/herself in motion. Thus, the aesthetics, obviously, is neither the objective text (the artistic pole) nor the subjective experience of the reader (the aesthetic pole), but an interaction of the two (Davis, 1989; Freund, 2003). Extending this description further, Freund (2003) contends that Iser’s model of reader response presents three interrelated aspects of the reading process: (1) the text which constitutes a potential for the production of meaning, (2) the reader’s processing to construct and concretize an aesthetic object by means of a synthesizing activity, and (3) the conditions that arise and govern the text-reader interaction. In construction and concretization, reader draws on his or her individual prior knowledge, perception, imagination and experiences to make sense of the text (Beach, 1993). And when a reader perceives and imagines, he/she entertains himself/herself with a range of possible perspectives within the text, and combines all 13.

(24) his/her memory, imagination and experiences to establish an interpretation, in which he/she obtains enjoyment and becomes productive (Iser, 1978). In establishing an interpretation, the reader adopts a “wandering viewpoint” within the text (Iser, 1989), and has to fill in the “gaps” or “blanks” or indeterminacies” in the text (Davis, 1989; Freund, 2003). In order to fill in the gaps and blanks, the reader employs such strategies as predicting, engaging, conceiving, connecting, explaining, interpreting and judging (Beach, 1993; Iser, 1978). While the reader tries to “bridge the gaps, communication begins” (Iser, 1978). The gaps serve as the center around which the text-reader relationship revolves. The gap filling stimulates a constitutive activity on the part of the reader, which results in the process of interaction. Although the reader is free to fill in his/her imagination, at the same time, he/she is constrained by the patterns supply in the text. That is, the text proposes and instructs, while the reader disposes and constructs (Freund, 2003). This interaction between the text and the reader is a dyadic and dynamic “journey” (Iser, 1989), which is constantly being modified as the reader encounters new elements and new perspectives of the text (Davis, 1989). Since these elements and perspectives cannot be identical to anything already existing in the world, the reader seeks indefinable reality and contexts that are familiar to his/her own experiences for the interpretation (Iser, 1978). This shows that the message is transmitted in the text and the reader receives it by continually filling in the gaps with his/her personal experiences. In other words, the meaning of a literary text is not restricted to only the authorial truth, but is the result of a dynamic interaction between “the textual signals and the reader’s act of comprehension” based on personal experiences (Iser, 1978, p. 9). In this dyadic interaction, the reader asks questions in order to ascertain how far his/her imagination and interpretation have bridged the gaps. 14.

(25) He/she is thus drawn into the status to supply what is meant from what is not mentioned. The gaps will disappear when the schemata of the reader and perspectives in the text have been linked together (Iser, 1989). To sum up, the dyadic and dynamic interaction to fill in the gaps is not simply to “internalize” the perceptions and meanings given in the text, but also to induce and guide the reader to act upon it to create constitutive activity, and from these activities the meaning of the text comes alive in the reader’s imagination and interpretation (Iser, 1989).. Application of Reader Response Theory to ESL/EFL Language Classroom In reader response theory, the act or reading is a constructive, active and dynamic process in which the reader takes charge of the development and creation of meaning. Traditionally, literary work is taught for (1) culture and background knowledge, (2) the author’s intentional meaning, and (3) linguistic knowledge and comprehension of the content (Amer, 2003; Beach, 1993). When teaching is targeted for these purposes, the teacher dominates the teaching and imposes the cultural background, authorial meaning and linguistic knowledge on the students, while students passively receive what they are given. This kind of teaching approach limits students to merely taking the efferent stance to learn about literature, but not the aesthetic stance to personally experience literature. But “literature is always more than language” (Brumfit &Carter, 1986, p.41), literature learning should be connected to students’ experiential lives so that students can respond to the text and express their feelings, emotions and ideas (Iser, 1978; Rosenblatt, 1978). In spite of the fact that many researchers have applied the reader response 15.

(26) approach to their classroom practice in L1, not until recently have this approach gained some recognition in ESL/EFL instruction. Some researchers have recognized the potential benefits of reader response theory in ESL/EFL language learning (Davis, 1992; Hirvela, 1996; Oster, 1989; Strong, 2012). Others have incorporated reader response approach to their language classroom (Ali, 1993; Carlisle, 2000; Elliot, 1990; Harfitt & Chu, 2012; Khatib, 2011; Yasmin, 2011). Ali (1993), in his study with a group of fifteen advanced engineer students in a university of Malaysia, concluded that using reader response approach to teach literature gave students no threat nor compulsion for correct answer or to compete for the best interpretation and thus helped to develop students’ critical thinking and independence. Believing that learning need not just act as a vehicle for language learning but can also be a form of aesthetic enlightenment that will enhance further the experience of reading in a second language, Harfitt & Chu (2011) and Elliot (1990) applied the reader response approach to teach ESL college students and found that students provided more creative and imaginative responses. They concluded that enacting scenes from a novel enabled students to experience events happening in the book more directly as well as encouraged students to write more interesting and imaginative scripts. Elliot (1990) used role play to teach a group of L2 university students in Brunei two novels and found drama activities to be particularly enjoyable and helped to build up students’ confidence. Harfitt & Chu (2011) incorporated the reader response approach into a teacher training course in Hong Kong and reported that students could provide their own responses and sensitivities toward the texts, and their anxiety about linguistic content was reduced. In recent years, more and more researchers and instructors have attempted to apply reader response approach to their teaching of literature in the EFL context 16.

(27) (Carlisle, 2000; Khatib, 2011; Yasmin, 2011). In her introduction of the reader response approach to teaching English literature to Iranian EFL students, Khatib (2011) found that students could give aesthetic responses to literature without impairing their comprehension of the literary text. Yasmin (2011) investigated the effectiveness of using reader response theory on Omani secondary school students’ comprehension of short stories and their attitudes towards the method used in teaching short stories. The results showed that students who were taught with this approach did better on the comprehension test than those taught using the traditional method. Moreover, the students favored the reader response approach more. To encourage students to interact with the text, Carlisle (2000) used the reader response mode to stimulate a group of fifty students in a junior college in Taiwan to go beyond the first barrier of semantic understanding and to move towards critical appreciation. The results showed that students enjoyed the relaxed atmosphere and enjoyed being given the space to express their own feelings. Liaw (2001) used reader response approach to teach English reading in a class of non-English majoring freshmen in Taiwan. Analysis of the response journals revealed that students went beyond mere understanding of the text, but they also actively transacted with the text to construct individual meanings and interpretation. Although reader response approach has been advocated and incorporated into the field of ESL/EFL language learning by some researchers and educators, it has not yet been widely acknowledged and practiced. More studies are needed to be conducted to examine how ESL/EFL students transact and interact with text to make responses to the literary text.. 17.

(28) Scaffolding for the Practice of Reader Response Approach Although students need to have opportunities to respond personally to the literature they read, they would not want to read if the text could mean anything they want to mean. Without guidances, students may lack the medium or tool to interact and develop an aesthetic relationship with the text they are reading (Dias, 2002). These guidances play the role of scaffolding that provides students with the pleasure of reading. Graves and Graves (2003) define scaffolding as “helping students complete tasks they could not otherwise complete, and aiding students by helping them to better complete a task with less stress or in less time, or to learn more fully than they would have otherwise” (p. 30). Scaffolding does not complete the task for students or tell them what to do; it only provides supports that assist students to gain more from the reading, to complete a task, and to achieve success with a task. The scaffolding, thus, functions to condition students’ experiences but not overly constrain them (Sumara, 2002). When preparing the scaffolding activity, Liang (2011) recommends teachers to take into consideration three elements: the characteristics of the text, the purposes for reading the text, and the strengths and needs of students in relation to the text and the purposes (p. 3). After considering these elements, teachers can devise pre-class, during-class, and after-class activities for the implementation phase that will help students better understand the text and achieve the purposes set for reading it. With scaffolding provided by teachers, students will increase the likelihood to successfully complete the task and gain more from the reading than they would have without (Clark & Graves, 2005). Research has shown that scaffolding focusing on higher-level thinking helps students respond more critically and analytically without impairing their achievement in other traditional linguistic 18.

(29) knowledge (Graves, & Liang, 2002; Liang, 2011). Scaffolding can be in many forms, from data collecting, data identifying, illustrating, to open-ended questioning, writing in response or dialogue journals, dramatizing, and imaging (Many & Cox, 1992; Marshall, 2000; Martinez & Roser, 2003; Rosenblatt, 1982). Different forms of scaffolding act as different supports for the comprehension and interpretation of texts.. Strategies and Activities for Reader Response Approach Based on the students, the text, and the purpose of different stages of reading, the teacher can select activities and strategies that will help students better understand the text and transact with it, and consequently develop aesthetic reading of the text. A number of different activities have been introduced to the reader response approach, and among them are literature circles, drama & role play, discussion and response journals.. Literature Circles Literature circles are defined as small, peer-led temporary discussion groups who read and respond to the same piece of literature, and then come together on a regular program to share their interpretation and responses to what they have read. (Daniels, 2002; Strong, 2012). Literature circles are instrument that encourages students to respond to literature and to interact with it both efferently and aesthetically. When they draw their attention to extract information from the text, efferent reading occurs; on the other hand, aesthetic reading emerges when students’ feeling, associations, and attitudes are aroused by a particular text. 19.

(30) In literature circles, each student is assigned different roles with the Role Sheets before they read. These Role Sheets serve as tools for the post-reading discussions (Daniels, 2002). There are basically five roles for EFL literature circle groups. The first role is the Group Discussion Leader who acts as a facilitator in the group to keep the discussion flowing. The Discussion Leader starts the discussion with a few open-ended questions related to the story, and then proceeds to call on other group members to share their opinions with the group. It is recommended that the Discussion Leader be an outgoing person who is good at managing the group. The second role is the Summarizer whose job is to present a brief summary of the story in the beginning of the discussion for one or two minutes so that every group member can remember the plot of the story. The Summarizer is advised to retell only the most important events in the story in his/her own words. Other students are encouraged to ask the Summarizer to repeat the summary a second time if that helps them get a better understanding of the plot. The next role, the Connector tries to find connections between the text and the real world in which he/she lives. The Connector may associate the thoughts, feelings or actions in the story with those of friends, classmates or family members. The Connector’s role is rather challenging so it is recommended to be assigned to an outgoing student as well. The fourth role is the Word Master. The job of the Word Master is to choose some words or short phrases that he/she believes to be the most important ones in the story. He/she is not confined to giving the definition of words, but to present those words he/she considers important in the story. The last role is the Passage Person and his job is to read the text intensively to look for well-written or key passages in the story. He/she can also choose passages that are confusing or difficult and present them for discussion in the group. 20.

(31) When students are fulfilling these roles, in addition to getting a fuller understanding of the text, they are developing their communicative competence and collaborative learning (Strong, 2012). The roles that students play may vary and can be rotated for each new reading cycle. This helps students exercise a different focus when reading a different text, and this in turn raise their awareness of reading for different reasons (Furr, 2004; Strong, 2012). In addition to the aforementioned roles, Furr (2004) introduces ten features that successful EFL literature circles should contain. (1) Instructors should select reading materials appropriate for their student population. Teachers should choose graded reading materials that can enhance reading fluency in literature circles so that students can engage in “real-life” meaningful discussion about the text. That is, students should be provided with materials that they can read without frequent reference to a dictionary. (2) Small temporary groups are formed based on students’ choice or the teacher’s discretion. To manage the group dynamics, the teacher is recommended to include at least one outgoing student among the five or six members in each group. (3) Different groups are reading the same text. While L1 students are encouraged to select their own reading materials for literature circles, EFL students may often lack the historical and cultural backgrounds and linguistic knowledge to do so. Moreover, when students read the same story, the teacher can raise different cultural and historical questions related to the stories for further discussion after the literature circle activity. (4) After having finished reading the book, readers may prepare a group project and/or the teacher may provide additional information to “fill in some of the gaps” for students to have better understanding. For example, each group may make a poster concerning the major themes in the story and then explain the poster to other groups. After their demonstration, students will discover that different groups 21.

(32) may have a very different climax for the same story. When students feel they have made meaningful discussions and are hooked by the story, they are often motivated to produce the group project. (5) Groups meet on a regular, predictable schedule to discuss their reading. EFL literature circles require a lot of student training time, so the teacher must be willing to devote several cycles (stories) with literature circles before positive results can be obtained. (6) Students use role sheets to guide both their reading and their discussion. The role sheets prompt each member of a group to read a story from a different perspective and to make preparation for the small group discussion based on the reading. In other words, the role sheets break reading down into several smaller, manageable parts so that each group member focuses on one aspect. Then they are brought together, and through discussion, these different parts become whole. (7) Discussion topics come from the students. The role sheets provide a framework for students to generate topics for meaningful discussion which in turn will help them discover the themes and important points in the story. (8) Group meeting aims to generate open, natural conversations about books, so personal connections, digressions and open-ended questions are welcome. Since students are encouraged to share their opinions of the texts for literature circles, it is natural that not all of the discussion is “serious.” (9) The teacher serves as a facilitator, not a group member or instructor. The teacher needs to step back and allow students to take the responsibility of guiding the literature circle discussion. (10) A spirit of playfulness and fun pervades the classroom. To create a playful and fun atmosphere, the key is to promote informal talks about great stories. It is agreed that literatures circles create a student-centered, communicative, interactive, reflective and cooperative learning environment (Brown, 2002; Burns, 1998; Sanders-Brunner, 2004). To sum up, the roles and role sheets in literature 22.

(33) circles enable students to collaborate to get deeper into the text. They also motivate students to read outside of class, to write copiously to be prepared for the group discussion, and to question each other to figure out the real meaning of the text.. Role Play & Drama The Dictionary of Education defines role play as “an instructional technique involving a spontaneous portrayal (acting out) of a situation, condition, or circumstances.” Dortothy Heathcote (1984) defines drama as “human beings confronted by situations which change them because of what they must face in dealing with those challenges” (p. 48). In role play and drama, students need to act out or even read aloud certain content. When doing so, they enter into the story world, relate themselves to characters, make judgments, and personally connect their prior experience to the story (Wagner, 2002; Wilhelm, 1998). Elliot (1990) states that enacting scenes from a text enables students to experience events more directly as they have themselves “live-through” a situation similar to those in the text (p. 193-194). Moreover, if students are assigned a role from a text that is not described explicitly or a scene that has not been mentioned, their imaginations will be more liberated. This provides students with excellent opportunities for the discussion of characters as well as opportunities for imaginative and inspirational creation. Instead of having very formal drama, Elliot and many other researchers advocate the informal improvisational drama (Baxter, 1999; Elliot, 1990; Wagner, 2002; Wilhelm, 1998; Wolf, Edmiston, & Enciso, 1997). With improvisational drama on text, students are given several minutes to think about the situation and plan in pairs or groups before they physically and emotionally dramatize it. If the play is an extension of the text, 23.

(34) students have to explore the text to create meanings and scenes for the drama and visualize their imagination and creation. Because students have to work together to create a drama, they are engaged in collaborative learning as well. McMaster (1998) lists out the effects of implementing drama in literature. (1) It develops emergent literacy. When students participate in dramatization, they pay closer attention to the reading for they know they will be acting out the story. Moreover, they will also listen attentively as they pantomime or wait for their opportunity to act. (2) It develops the ability to decode knowledge. Dramatization leads to developing the skill of decoding symbolic representation as students must internalize what they have read before they portray who they are and where they are in space and time. This internalization creates a visual, aural, and kinesthetic memory of what they have read. (3) It develops fluency. In order to extract meaning from the story, they must move beyond word-by-word decoding to achieve fluency in reading. In addition, they need to reread the same material with the purpose of selecting collaborative scenes for performance, roles for enactment, words for emphasis, as well as different interpretation of the text. (4) It develops vocabulary knowledge. When new words are dramatized in a drama activity or extended improvisation, students have more concrete examples in multiple modalities to assist them in the understanding of the words. (5) It develops discourse knowledge. When students discuss the ideas that should be presented in the “play version” of the story and what should be left out, they are exploring the differences between these two discourse types, and what elements are required to make up a good drama. (6) It develops metacognitive knowledge. The act of portraying a character leads students to analyze one’s part by asking questions like “Am I convincing?” or “If not, why, and how can I change?” To solve their questions, students reread, confer with peers, or look in other sources to evaluate their lines to make them convincing. 24.

(35) This creates a situation for the development of higher level thinking skills and the overall comprehension of text. Baxter (1999) points out that it is essential the “drama method” does not focus mainly on episodes or scenes from the story, but the generation of meaning from the text by students. In addition to formal drama, he also describes some drama activities that can be implemented in the language classroom. (1) Hot-Seating. This exercise highlights character motivation and encourages insights into the relationship between attitudes and events. In this activity, one student takes the role of any character whose motives are ambiguous or questionable and sits in the “hot-seat”. Other members of the group or the whole class bombard him/her with questions about issues of motivation or feelings. (2) Variations on “Tableau” or “Frozen Image”. These activities highlight issues of characterization, character relationships, and plot development. In these activities, students will use photos or pictures of characters and different moments in the story to discuss the significance of different important and less important characters, the awkward, intrusive and significant moments. (3) Role-breaking. This activity draws attention to the minor characters, who are usually marginalized within the text. The teacher or the students choose a scene where a minor character is involved but probably in the background to the main action. The students reenact the scene with the minor character “role-breaking” by intervening in the action in such a way that the plot is forced to take a different direction. (4) Conscience Alley. This exercise not only highlights character motivation and relationships, but also foregrounds issues of social and racial marginalization of minor characters in classic texts. One student takes the role of a leading character whose motivation is suspect or unclear. He or she then walks slowly between an alley formed by other characters who have prepared some words about social or racial issues to ask 25.

(36) him/her. (5) Thought-tracking. This activity reveals publicly the private thoughts or reactions of participants in role at specific moments in the action. For example, characters in a tableau (mentioned above) might be asked to speak their inner thoughts at a particular moment. This may require students to draw upon real experience in order to make such thoughts or reactions.. Student-Led Discussion Gambrell (1996) describes discussion as “essentially dialogic: it is not completely controlled by a single participant; rather it occurs as a natural conversation in which individuals engage in a free and open exchange of ideas” (p.26). Discussion provides students with opportunities to participate in the comprehension of text, construction of meaning, and expansion of ideas (Ruddell & Ruddell, 1994). This is identical to Rosenblatt’s transactional view of reader response in that it reinforces the need for collaboration in which students draw on the prior knowledge, social, and cultural experiences to make connections to the new knowledge to create meaning. In the 1980s, attention has shifted from teacher-led discussion to peer-led discussion groups, in which students collaborate to construct meaning or work out different interpretations in order to obtain new understandings of text (Gambrell, 2004). In peer-led discussion, the text and the readers’ response are the central focus while the teacher serves as a facilitator who initiates opportunities in the classroom for discussion, provides students with support and encouragement to engage in problem-solving talk which leads to a more in-depth interpretation of the text (Almasi, 1995; Maloch, 2002). Peer-led discussion requires that the teacher relinquish some power within the classroom so that students are able to communicate collaboratively 26.

(37) and successfully by raising opinions, challenging and probing ideas, making connections, sharing knowledge, and constructing meanings (Almasi, O'Flahavan & Arya; 2001; Kong & Fitch, 2002). To put it in another way, peer discussions provide a student-centered context in which students collaborate to negotiate, to understand, to judge and to create meanings. Bridge (1979) mentions that discussions require participants to see themselves as “a potential source of knowledge as well as a beneficiary of the insights of others.” This means that during discussion, students shape, reshape and alter their interpretations and opinions and those of others in the creation of meanings (Langer, 1992, 1995). Moreover, when students involve themselves in group discussion, they explore the text deeper and emotionally and intellectually enter into a dynamic interaction with it, which may contribute to further motivation and aesthetic appreciation of literary works (Kim, 2004). In fact, this type of interaction engages students to work within the Zone of Proximal Development as they exercise their background knowledge to work mutually to understand and solve the difficulties they encounter to achieve comprehension (Kim, 2004; Kong & Fitch, 2002; Vygotsky, 1978) When implementing discussion in the classroom, Gambell (2004) suggests several important points for teachers to observe. (1) Learning is in the talk. When students have opportunities to share their ideas and give response to the ideas of others, they look deeper into the text to make his/her ideas meaningful. (2) Provide opportunities for students to interact with one another and to challenge the ideas of others to support their higher level thinking. When students make comments or challenge those of others, they engage themselves in higher level thinking skills. (3) Provide students with opportunities to discuss different text types. When students are given opportunities to read a variety of texts, they increase their comprehension 27.

(38) ability and critical thinking ability. (4) Interesting and relevant text enhances discussion. When students are allowed to explore issues and ideas that they want to talk about during a discussion, their motivation and participation increase. Texts that are interesting and relevant enable students to take ownership of the discussion, which results in increased engagement. (5) Provide opportunities for students to ponder confusing aspects of the text or to challenge it. The teacher should create a classroom climate that values good reasoning rather than correct responses. When students identify and reveal conflicts between personal and textual ideas, they not only gain a deeper understanding and appreciation of text ideas, but also understand deeper of themselves. As aforementioned, peer-led discussions facilitate students in the exploration and creation of meaning; however, the grouping methods and the role of the teacher can influence the outcome. Numerous researchers have suggested that heterogeneous discussion groups appear to generate more desirable outcomes than homogeneous ability groups (Almasi et al., 2001; Alvermann et al., 1996; Chen, 2011; Maloch, 2002). In heterogeneous discussion groups, while the more capable students can facilitate the less capable ones in comprehension, the less capable ones may also inspire their peers by generating questions for deeper and more thoughtful reflection (Chen, 2011). On the contrary, in homogeneous discussion groups, the less able groups resisted to engage in informal discussion despite the urging of the teacher (Wollman-Bonilla, 1989). As for the role of the teacher, he/she should provide enough effective scaffolding and guidances to encourage students (not rely on the teacher) to solve interaction problems (Almasi et al., 2001). On the other hand, he/she should remain on the periphery while observing students’ negotiation and construction of meanings. Only momentarily may he/she step in to model a particular social or 28.

(39) interpretive strategy, pull pieces of the conversation together to construct a meaningful interpretation of the text.. Response Journals According to Rosenblatt’s (1978) transactional theory and Iser’s (1978) interaction theory of reading, the meaning of the text resides not in the words on the page, but in the reader; in other words, the reader transacts and interacts with the text to create a meaning, and each individual reader may create his/her own unique interpretation of the text based on his/her personal experiences, emotions, feelings, etc. When students write down what they think about what they’ve read, they are clarifying their thinking and reading critically and reflectively from an aesthetic stance (McIntosh, 2006; Swartz, 2002). Response journals provide students with a method to actively engage in critical and reflective thinking by questioning, adopting, personalizing and reflecting what they have read. Parsons (1994) states that “a response journal is a notebook or folder in which students record, in a variety of formats, their personal reactions to, questions about, and reflections on what they read, write, observe, listen to, discuss, do and think” (p. 12). He further demonstrates the importance of a response journal in the following statement: In any classroom, regardless of subject area, and at any given time, students are trying to make sense out of what’s going on to determine what relevance, if any, it all has with their own personal lives. Since each student is centered in a different subjective context, each one finds the experience colored in a different way. Response journals allow students to “make sense” of what they have read while 29.

(40) personalizing and applying them to their individual experience and context to be reflective readers (Good & Whang, 2002; Hancock, 1992; Lee, 2008; Swartz, 2002). In fact, response journals are powerful tools to help students develop reading ability and value judgments, make connections and practice critical thinking because they are tailored to each student’s interests, concerns, and needs (Dreyfuss & Barilla, 2005; Good & Whang, 2002). If response journals are implemented effectively, students will be able to trace the evolvement of their thoughts and perspectives and see the gradual change in their thinking disposition (Good & Whang, 2002). Lacking confidence in their own ideas, many EFL students rarely learn to compose or to formulate their own ideas or knowledge; instead, they simply “defer to external authorities or the teacher as the primary source of knowledge” (Anson & Beach, 1995). When students write down their reactions to what they have read, they are sharing their personal experiences related to events and issues in the book they are reading, which develops their reflectivity and independence. Lee (2008) examines reflectivity in terms of the depth of the reflective thinking process and categorizes it into four levels. The first one is the “non-reflection/pure description” level, where only recall/description is involved. The second one is the “descriptive reflection/recall” level, where description/recall as well as an attempt at simple explanation is involved. This is described as the lowest level of reflection. The third one, a higher level of reflection, is the “dialogic reflection/rationalization” level, where exploration of alternative explanations from different perspectives is involved. The last level is the highest level of reflection, the “critical reflection/reflectivity” level. This level involves a critical analysis that employs reasoning from a broader historical, social, cultural or political context, with the hope of making changes or improvement in the future. In other words, the higher level of reflection is distinguished from the lower one in that it 30.

(41) requires deeper thinking process to actively interpret an issue/situation (Lee, 2008). In addition to deepening students’ understanding of the text they are reading, reflective thinking also stimulates their interest, enhances their motivation, and builds up their confidence (Cole et at., 1998). To be critical and reflective in the response, Berger (1996) indicates that “ readers need a guide when writing about what they notice, question, feel and relate to in reader response journals…[With the reader response, ] they deepen their involvement with and understanding of the literature" (p. 380). She also suggests four general but fruitful questions to be good guides. (1) What do you notice? (2) What do you question? (3) What do you feel? (4) What do you relate to? Guides for response journals provide students with the challenge to “create, explore, invent, reach beyond, and discover individual response on the personal journey” (Hancock, 1993). In addition to guides, teachers can also provide questions or prompts to direct students to relate text with their individual experiences. These prompts should be broad and open-ended (Kelly, 1990), and that they should encourage students to develop their own meaning rather than the interpretation that the teacher desires (Wollman- Bonilla, 1989). Lastly, the teacher is encouraged to respond to students’ journals, as this will motivate them to invest more interest and energy in the journal writing (WollmanBonilla, 1989). Instead of being evaluative, teachers’ comments should be supportive, nonjudgmental, encouraging and thought provoking (Benton, 1984; Hancock, 1993). That is, the focus should be on encouraging students to develop individual responses and ideas rather than correcting their errors or stressing the mechanics of writing (Berger, 1993; Simpson, 1986). Comments that focus on linguistic knowledge may negate the freedom of the response journals (Hancock, 1993). Carlisle (2000) 31.

(42) mentions that students particularly enjoy seeing comments like, “I felt exactly the same when I read this bit.” So, what students expect from teachers is not comments on linguistic usage, but opinions, supports, and encouragement for the exploration of aesthetic meaning.. Summary In this chapter, some important rationales and activities of reader response approach are explored and discussed. In addition, the reasons for using literary works, especially graded readers in the EFL classroom are justified. The present study utilized different response-based activities to teach literary work in a senior high school in the English class. Both qualitative and quantitative data were collected to examine the effect of teaching literature in EFL senior high school using the reader response approach. In the following chapter, the study design is presented.. 32.

(43) CHAPTER THREE METHODOLOGY. This research explored the implementation of reader response approach to literature teaching on EFL senior high school students. With the response-based tasks and activities, the researcher intends to examine students’ perception of the application of reader response theory in senior high school EFL literature instruction.. Participants The participants for the present study are 39 female tenth –graders in a girls’ high school located in New Taipei County. In this school, those students who perform quite well in the first two years in the junior high school section are earnestly encouraged, but not forced, to continue to study in the senior high school section of this school without having to take the Basic Competence Test as most other senior high school students do. In this scholastic year, there are totally 67 of them, which are placed into two classes. Those students with excellent performance were assigned to Class A¹, which consists of 28 students. The rest of them formed Class B. The students in this study are those students in Class B. In addition to those students in these two classes who are from direct entry from the junior high school section, there are also six classes in which students are from ________________________________________________________________ 1.. According to their performance in the first two years in junior high school, students in Class A are supposed to have the capability to be admitted to a national university, and this class is also unofficially called the “National-University-Guaranteed Class”.. 33.