A place for professors of Spanish Literature to complain about or defend the field.
Friday, March 6, 2009
Hispanic Studies Becoming Obsolete?
Since we seem to have a general theme going, I thought I'd ask if any of you saw this in the Chronicle? You have to be a subscriber to read it, but I've linked a listserv that has the full article.
Wow. I found that compelling, for a variety of reasons. First, we are in the middle of revamping our program, and some of my newer colleagues seem to feel that we should be feeding more students into literature. I, as well, have resisted the idea that literature exists to reinforce language. I like that he does not advocate, necessarily, the idea that literature should reinforce language, but that he advocates for an acknowledgement that most of our students are in it for the language, not the literature.
I'm intrigued by the notion of combining language with literature. I know there are plenty of readers out there that do it, but usually with very short, very easy stories. I wouldn't want every lit class to be an excuse to teach grammar, but perhaps integrating vocabulary tests and occasional grammar instruction would not detract too much.
Very stimulating. I agree with the observations regarding language and literature, and I would only add that language is put to different uses and with different effects in literature. Also, I think we should be careful to not let the tail wag the dog. We need to be sensitive to what's going on in the real world, but we also need to create a sound curriculum based on some of the good old basics of liberal education: critical reasoning, analysis, argumentation, close reading, etc. Like the author's students, many of mine are double majors who want to learn to speak Spanish as a first priority. I always tell my students that a language major gets a double benefit--learning language as well as literature, history, etc., of the culture and period. Language and literature objectives need not conflict. Besides, students are getting grammar and vocabulary lessons through their readings. We could probably do a better job with Business majors on the international track who probably think literature courses are a waste of time. I need to convince them that it isn't and help them make some practical connections.
Back to social change. Don't ya'll think education has been one of the greatest social movements of the twentieth century? In terms of helping improve people's lives? It hasn't always been accessible for all classes, races, and genders, but it sure has come a long way.
Thanks for posting this important article. Dave makes a good point about striking a balance between practical language knowledge/skills and cultivating good reading/argumentation/reasoning skills.
Having read this article has me thinking more seriously about making changes I have been pondering for some time. Since I have been teaching, I have grappled with the question: "How can I make Cervantes, Tirso, or Calderon (etc., insert name) relevant to my students' lives and therefore more interesting to them as an object of study?" Perhaps this is the wrong question to be asking. Perhaps the reason my lit classes (and as far as I can tell those of my colleagues) often end on a flat note, leaving students frustrated and discouraged is because the students are simply not interested in the material (we can of course debate my role in them hating the literature...). Given that the language of the texts, say, in Golden Age, is often impenetrable anyway, the students are forced to read texts mostly incomprehensible to them, on which I give lectures that may or may not be comprehensible or interesting, and on which they will now have to produce some sort of written expression of their ideas (exams, papers, etc.). In the end I would say that the students (namely non-native) get relatively little use or enjoyment out of my lit classes. In the end, a less-is-more approach might be the answer, with more student-led discussion/analysis of fewer texts. Beyond this, as the article suggests, perhaps a change in curriculum is a worthwhile consideration.
All of this depends on a lot of factors that will differ from university to university. The first factor that comes to mind is class size. If we were at Amherst we would have 8-10 students in our lit classes and we could take our time to pore over the material, answer all questions, clarify all doubts. When one has 15-20 students in a lit class, then the personal approach is almost an impossibility, owing to time restrictions. This would necessitate cutting the number of texts. And that might be the appropriate solution in many cases.
One last thing. The article mentions three possible approaches to having students engage the material: Spanish only, Some Spanish some English, and all English (this of course reintroduces Dave's concerns in an earlier post about writing in English). I am just finishing up a culture and civ class. The heritage learners are doing well and enjoying the class. The non-heritage folks are mostly lost. They have had virtually no time to develop their language skills and the processing of such a large amount of information in Spanish has been very problematic for them. The lectures were in Spanish and all course work was in Spanish (just try to imagine UCLA's M42 and M44 taught in Spanish in a single quarter!). That article certainly has me favoring my recently revamped approach to this class. The next time I teach it, it will be something of a "greatest hits" of Hispanic culture and civ, with much more time devoted to the students discussing/processing a far less dense material. I will also devote one of the four hourly lecture hours solely to answering questions and having students work in discussion groups.I will even allow them to discuss in English, if that helps. Even with these changes, I think the majority of Spanish majors would get a heck of a lot more out of this type of class if it were taught completely in English (as done at UCLA).
I just wrote a long post and blogger lost it...in short, I think the article is thought-provoking, and like Eric said, it really depends on each department and university.
I had a similar experience with students in my Hispanic civ. course the first time I taught it. I'm due to teach it again this Fall. I'm thinking about offering some readings in English. I would like to open it up to GE but that would force me to do it in English. If so, I would like to have an additional hour of discussion in Spanish for the majors and minors.
I tried to do a number of things on the UCLA model when I first got hired, which left me open to criticism from those without scruples. I suddenly became 'the guy who wants to bring more English into the Spanish program' or 'the guy who can't speak Spanish well enough to actually teach in it.' Power has shifted in our program, but I still feel the need to tread carefully when it comes to teaching certain things in English, much as I would like to for the reasons discussed above.
What do you all think about multiplying the number of Spanish courses "professionals" (business, health care, law enforcement, etc.)? That seems to be another suggestion of this article?
I think it's a good idea. I would love to offer a "Spanish for the Professions" course, or even specific courses like Medical Spanish, etc. I'm convinced there would be a market for it, but as always the issue would be a)finding the money and b)finding someone who wants to design/teach the course.
Yes, it is really a question of funding, because the demand for the courses and even the desire to offer them is there. Given this economic climate, this university will not be expanding Spanish offerings anytime soon.
10 comments:
Wow. I found that compelling, for a variety of reasons. First, we are in the middle of revamping our program, and some of my newer colleagues seem to feel that we should be feeding more students into literature. I, as well, have resisted the idea that literature exists to reinforce language. I like that he does not advocate, necessarily, the idea that literature should reinforce language, but that he advocates for an acknowledgement that most of our students are in it for the language, not the literature.
Much food for thought.
I'm intrigued by the notion of combining language with literature. I know there are plenty of readers out there that do it, but usually with very short, very easy stories. I wouldn't want every lit class to be an excuse to teach grammar, but perhaps integrating vocabulary tests and occasional grammar instruction would not detract too much.
Very stimulating. I agree with the observations regarding language and literature, and I would only add that language is put to different uses and with different effects in literature. Also, I think we should be careful to not let the tail wag the dog. We need to be sensitive to what's going on in the real world, but we also need to create a sound curriculum based on some of the good old basics of liberal education: critical reasoning, analysis, argumentation, close reading, etc. Like the author's students, many of mine are double majors who want to learn to speak Spanish as a first priority. I always tell my students that a language major gets a double benefit--learning language as well as literature, history, etc., of the culture and period. Language and literature objectives need not conflict. Besides, students are getting grammar and vocabulary lessons through their readings. We could probably do a better job with Business majors on the international track who probably think literature courses are a waste of time. I need to convince them that it isn't and help them make some practical connections.
Back to social change. Don't ya'll think education has been one of the greatest social movements of the twentieth century? In terms of helping improve people's lives? It hasn't always been accessible for all classes, races, and genders, but it sure has come a long way.
Thanks for posting this important article. Dave makes a good point about striking a balance between practical language knowledge/skills and cultivating good reading/argumentation/reasoning skills.
Having read this article has me thinking more seriously about making changes I have been pondering for some time. Since I have been teaching, I have grappled with the question: "How can I make Cervantes, Tirso, or Calderon (etc., insert name) relevant to my students' lives and therefore more interesting to them as an object of study?" Perhaps this is the wrong question to be asking. Perhaps the reason my lit classes (and as far as I can tell those of my colleagues) often end on a flat note, leaving students frustrated and discouraged is because the students are simply not interested in the material (we can of course debate my role in them hating the literature...). Given that the language of the texts, say, in Golden Age, is often impenetrable anyway, the students are forced to read texts mostly incomprehensible to them, on which I give lectures that may or may not be comprehensible or interesting, and on which they will now have to produce some sort of written expression of their ideas (exams, papers, etc.). In the end I would say that the students (namely non-native) get relatively little use or enjoyment out of my lit classes. In the end, a less-is-more approach might be the answer, with more student-led discussion/analysis of fewer texts. Beyond this, as the article suggests, perhaps a change in curriculum is a worthwhile consideration.
All of this depends on a lot of factors that will differ from university to university. The first factor that comes to mind is class size. If we were at Amherst we would have 8-10 students in our lit classes and we could take our time to pore over the material, answer all questions, clarify all doubts. When one has 15-20 students in a lit class, then the personal approach is almost an impossibility, owing to time restrictions. This would necessitate cutting the number of texts. And that might be the appropriate solution in many cases.
One last thing. The article mentions three possible approaches to having students engage the material: Spanish only, Some Spanish some English, and all English (this of course reintroduces Dave's concerns in an earlier post about writing in English). I am just finishing up a culture and civ class. The heritage learners are doing well and enjoying the class. The non-heritage folks are mostly lost. They have had virtually no time to develop their language skills and the processing of such a large amount of information in Spanish has been very problematic for them. The lectures were in Spanish and all course work was in Spanish (just try to imagine UCLA's M42 and M44 taught in Spanish in a single quarter!). That article certainly has me favoring my recently revamped approach to this class. The next time I teach it, it will be something of a "greatest hits" of Hispanic culture and civ, with much more time devoted to the students discussing/processing a far less dense material. I will also devote one of the four hourly lecture hours solely to answering questions and having students work in discussion groups.I will even allow them to discuss in English, if that helps. Even with these changes, I think the majority of Spanish majors would get a heck of a lot more out of this type of class if it were taught completely in English (as done at UCLA).
I just wrote a long post and blogger lost it...in short, I think the article is thought-provoking, and like Eric said, it really depends on each department and university.
I had a similar experience with students in my Hispanic civ. course the first time I taught it. I'm due to teach it again this Fall. I'm thinking about offering some readings in English. I would like to open it up to GE but that would force me to do it in English. If so, I would like to have an additional hour of discussion in Spanish for the majors and minors.
I tried to do a number of things on the UCLA model when I first got hired, which left me open to criticism from those without scruples. I suddenly became 'the guy who wants to bring more English into the Spanish program' or 'the guy who can't speak Spanish well enough to actually teach in it.' Power has shifted in our program, but I still feel the need to tread carefully when it comes to teaching certain things in English, much as I would like to for the reasons discussed above.
What do you all think about multiplying the number of Spanish courses "professionals" (business, health care, law enforcement, etc.)? That seems to be another suggestion of this article?
I think it's a good idea. I would love to offer a "Spanish for the Professions" course, or even specific courses like Medical Spanish, etc. I'm convinced there would be a market for it, but as always the issue would be a)finding the money and b)finding someone who wants to design/teach the course.
Yes, it is really a question of funding, because the demand for the courses and even the desire to offer them is there. Given this economic climate, this university will not be expanding Spanish offerings anytime soon.
Post a Comment