Integrating Reflective and Creative Writing with English Literature Survey: Cultivating Voice and Intercultural Awareness in Pre-Service Teachers

Öz

The Survey of English Literature is an obligatory two-semester field course in the English Language Teacher Education curriculum. Preceding another two-semester course that focuses on the use of literature in foreign language teaching, the survey course is grounded in the study of canonical texts, historical literary traditions and stylistic elements, and has considerable importance in providing pre-service teachers with foundational literary knowledge and a basic toolkit for literary analysis. However, it holds another significant yet unexploited potential for transformative learning in teacher education. This article proposes TRACE as a pedagogical model that integrates literary analysis with reflective and creative writing practices, tailored to the needs of pre-service English teachers who have stepped into the realm of literary studies in a foreign language. Drawing on theories of transformative learning, reflective practice, creative pedagogy, intercultural language education and teacher identity, the proposed model aims to foster critical cultural awareness, pedagogical voice, and cultural empathy through reflective tasks, creative reimagining and repurposing of literary texts and interculturality-responsive tasks. Geared for implementation in a restructured English Literature course for pre-service teachers, the model provides engagement with literary texts written by authors such as Chaucer, Shakespeare and Blake in a pedagogically reoriented way to support intercultural insight and teacher identity development. The article outlines the model’s rationale, design and classroom applications, offering a replicable framework for instructors in search of ways to bridge literature and reflective practice in teacher education.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Survey of English Literature
• English Language Teacher Education
• Reflective Writing
• Creative Writing
• Intercultural Awareness

İngiliz Edebiyatı İncelemesi ile Yansıtıcı ve Yaratıcı Yazmanın Bütünleştirilmesi: Öğretmen Adaylarında Ses ve Kültürlerarası Farkındalık Geliştirme

Öz

İngiliz Edebiyatı İncelemesi, İngilizce Öğretmenliği Eğitim müfredatında zorunlu olan iki dönemlik bir alan dersidir. Yabancı dil öğretiminde edebiyatın kullanımına odaklanan başka bir iki dönemlik dersin öncesinde verilen bu ders, kanonik metinler, tarihsel edebi gelenekler ve üslup unsurlarının incelenmesine dayanır ve öğretmen adaylarına temel edebiyat bilgisi ve edebi analiz için temel araçlar sağlamada önemli bir role sahiptir. Bu ders, öğretmen eğitiminde dönüştürücü öğrenme için başka bir önemli ancak henüz kullanılmamış bir potansiyele de sahiptir. Bu makale, yabancı dilde edebiyat çalışmalarına yeni adım atmış öğretmen adaylarının ihtiyaçlarına göre uyarlanmış, edebi analizi yansıtıcı ve yaratıcı yazma uygulamalarıyla bütünleştiren bir pedagojik model olarak TRACE'i önermektedir. Dönüştürücü öğrenme, yansıtıcı uygulama, yaratıcı pedagoji, kültürlerarası dil eğitimi ve öğretmen kimliği teorilerinden yararlanan model, yansıtıcı görevler, edebi metinlerin yaratıcı bir şekilde yeniden hayal edilmesi ve yeniden amaçlandırılması ve kültürlerarasılığa duyarlı etkinlikler yoluyla eleştirel kültürel farkındalık, pedagojik ses ve kültürel empatiyi geliştirmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Öğretmen adayları için yeniden yapılandırılmış bir İngiliz Edebiyatı dersinde uygulanmak üzere tasarlanan model, Chaucer, Shakespeare ve Blake gibi yazarların metinleriyle yapılan çalışmaların, kültürlerarası anlayış ve öğretmen kimliği gelişimini desteklemek için pedagojik olarak nasıl yeniden biçimlendirilebileceğini göstermektedir. Makale, modelin gerekçesini, tasarımını ve sınıf uygulamalarını özetleyerek, öğretmen eğitiminde edebiyat ve yansıtıcı uygulamayı birleştirmenin yollarını arayan eğitmenler için tekrarlanabilir bir çerçeve sunmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• İngiliz Edebiyatı İncelemesi
• İngilizce Öğretmeni Eğitimi
• Yansıtıcı Yazma
• Yaratıcı Yazma
• Kültürlerarası Farkındalık

Kaynakça

1. Akyel, A., & Yalcin, E. (1990). Literature in the EFL class: A study of goal-achievement incongruence. ELT Journal, 44(3), 174-180.
2. Arıkan, A. (2005). An evaluation of literature component of Hacettepe University English Language Teaching Department. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 29, 27-33.
3. Barkhuizen, G. (Ed.). (2017). Reflections on language teacher identity research (pp. 1-11). Routledge.
4. Beijaard, D., Meijer, P. C., & Verloop, N. (2004). Reconsidering research on teachers’ professional identity. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(2), 107-128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2003.07.001
5. Bishop, R. S. (1990). Mirrors, window, and sliding glass doors. Perspectives 6, ix-xi.
6. Block, D. (2016). Journey to the center of language teacher identity. In G. Barkhuizen (Ed.), Reflections on Language Teacher Identity Research (pp. 30-36). Routledge.
7. Byram, M. (1997). Teaching and assessing intercultural communicative competence. Multilingual Matters.
8. Byram, M. (2020). Teaching and assessing intercultural communicative competence: Revisited. Multilingual Matters.

9. Carter, R., & Long, M. (1991). Teaching literature. Longman.
10. Coşkun, A., & Daloğlu, A. (2010). Evaluating an English language teacher education program through Peacock's model. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 35(6), 24-42.
11. Çelik, Ş. N., & Kasap, S. (2019). Türkiye’de uygulanan ingilizce öğretmen yetiştirme programları üzerine karşılaştırmalı bir değerlendirme. Van Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 16(1), 1010-1031.
12. Çelik, S. N., & Memduhoğlu, H. B. (2022). The evaluation of the English language teacher Education program in Turkey. International Journal of Educational Methodology, 8(4), 833-851.
13. Çıraklı, M. Z., & Kılıçkaya, F. (2011). Literature courses in EFL curriculum: Pre-service language teachers’ perceptions. Pegem Eğitim ve Öğretim Dergisi, 1(3), 11-15.
14. Çubukçu, F. (2001). Use of poetry for EFL purposes. Buca Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 14, 85-92.
15. Dodou, K. (2020). What are literary studies for? A review of English teacher education in Sweden. Educare, (3), 110-158.
16. Dumlao, R. P., & Pinatacan, E. A. (2019). Reflective teaching: An approach in developing critical thinking skills of pre-service teachers. International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, 9(1), 628–635.
17. Ghosn, I. K. (2002). Four good reasons to use literature in the primary school ELT. ELT Journal, 56(2), 172–179.
18. Gray, J. & Morton, T. (2018). Social interaction and English language teacher identity. Edinburgh University Press.
19. Greene, M. (1980). Aesthetics and the experience of the arts: Towards transformations. High School Journal, 63(8), 316–322.
20. Greene, M. (1995). Releasing the imagination. Essays on education, the arts, and social change. Jossey-Bass.
21. Greene, M. (2001). Variations on a blue guitar: The Lincoln Center Institute lectures on aesthetic education. Teachers College Press.
22. Guilherme, M. (2002). Critical citizens for an intercultural world: Foreign language education as cultural politics (Vol. 3). Multilingual Matters.
23. Hall, G. (2005). Literature in language education. Springer.
24. Hişmanoğlu, M. (2005). Teaching English through literature. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 1(1), 53-66.
25. Iida, A. (2016). Exploring the value of poetry writing in developing students’ identities, beliefs, and writing fluency in a second language. Asian EFL Journal, 18(3), 108–128.
26. Kaşlıoğlu, Ö., & Ersin, P. (2018). Pre-service teachers’ beliefs about literature integration in English language teaching classrooms. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 14(3), 213-232.
27. Kitchenham, A. (2008). The evolution of John Mezirow's transformative learning theory. Journal of Transformative Education, 6(2), 104-123.
28. Kohli, W. (2016). The dialectical imagination of Maxine Greene: Social imagination as critical pedagogy. Education and Culture, 32(1), 15-24.
29. Kramsch, C. (1993). Context and culture in language teaching. Oxford University Press.
30. Kramsch, C. (1998). Language and culture. Oxford University Press.
31. Kramsch, C. (2006). From communicative competence to symbolic competence. The Modern Language Journal, 90(2), 249-252.
32. Kramsch, C. (2022). Afterword: The multilingual turn in language teacher education. Language and Education, 36(5), 467-471.
33. Krasniqi, S., & Muhaxheri, N. (2022). Literary works in foreign language acquisition: Monography.
34. Küçükoğlu, H., & Arıkan, A. (2011). Prospective English language teachers’ views on literature in their teacher education curriculum and its potential value. Procedia-Social and Behavioural Sciences, 15, 1718-1722.
35. Lazar, G. (1993). Literature and language teaching: A guide for teachers and trainers. Cambridge University Press.
36. Lee, I. (2007). Preparing pre-service English teachers for reflective practice. ELT Journal, 61(4), 321–329.
37. Lešić-Thomas, A. (2008). Memory, narratology and the problem of authenticity. In K.Kulavkova, (Ed.) Interpretations, European Research Project for Poetics and Hermeneutics (Vol. 2, pp. 101-118). Macedonian Academy of Sciences and Arts.
38. McKay, S. L. (2001). Literature as content for ESL/EFL. In M. Celce-Murcia (Ed.) Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language (pp. 319-332). Heinle & Heinle.
39. Mezirow, J. (2018). Transformative learning theory. In K. Illeris, (Ed.) Contemporary Theories of Learning (pp. 90-105). Routledge.
40. Morgan, B. (2004). Teacher identity as pedagogy: Towards a field-internal conceptualisation in bilingual and second language education. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 7(2-3), 172-188.
41. Nunan, D. (2016). Language teacher identity in teacher education. In G. Barkhuizen (Ed.), Reflections on Language Teacher Identity Research (pp. 164-169). Routledge.
42. Okumuş, A., & Daloğlu, A. (2024). A programme evaluation study: The case of english language teaching programme. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 24(1), 187-216.
43. Paran, A. (2008). The role of literature in instructed foreign language learning and teaching: An evidence-based survey. Language Teaching, 41(4), 465-496.
44. Reid, L. A. (1969). Meaning in the arts. Humanities Press.
45. Seferoğlu, G. (2006). Teacher candidates’ reflections on some components of a pre‐service English teacher education programme in Turkey. Journal of Education for Teaching, 32(4), 369–378. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607470600981953
46. Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and Teaching: Foundations of the New Reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.57.1.j463w79r56455411
47. Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books.
48. Varghese, M., Morgan, B., Johnston, B., & Johnson, K. A. (2005). Theorizing language teacher identity: Three perspectives and beyond. Journal of Language, Identity, and Education, 4(1), 21-44.
49. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge University Press.
50. Widdowson, H. G. (1983). Talking shop: On literature and ELT. ELT Journal, 37(1), 30-36.
51. Yavuz, A., & Topkaya, E. Z. (2013). Teacher educators’ evaluation of the English language program: A Turkish case. Novitas Royal (Research on Youth and Language), 7(1), 64-83. https://www.ajindex.com/dosyalar/makale/acarindex-1423909793.pdf