ELT 104 Teaching and Assessment of Literature Studies

Ref. No.
: DO-CoEd- ELT104
Status: Rev. 1
COLLEGE OF EDUCATION Date Issued: June 2021
MODULE CONTENT GUIDE
Prepared by: JOBENEIGH G. APDUHAN Noted By: DR. ELIZABETH L. BAGUIO -Dean
Week 1 Term: 1st Semester: 2nd Academic Year: 2020-2021
Subject Code: ELT104 Course Title: Teaching and Assessment of Literature Studies
COURSE DESCRIPTION: Develop skills in examining literary and critical analysis in a variety of texts and genres, including
novel, short stories, drama and poetry, together with contemporary techniques for reading them. This course includes module
material preparation and syllabus design.
I. COURSE INTENDED LEARNING OUTCOMES (CILO)

1. Demonstrate knowledge and comprehension of major texts and traditions of language and literature written in English as
well as their social, cultural, theoretical, and historical contexts;
2. Analyze and interpret texts written in English, evaluating and assessing the results in written or oral arguments using
appropriate support;
3. Demonstrate knowledge of the major texts and traditions of literature written in English in their social, cultural and
historical context;
4. Analyze instances of the variety of literary forms closely in terms of style, figurative language and convention;
5. Discover secondary source material of various kinds and evaluate and use such material in the interpretation of literary
texts (as well as discover and/or explore directions for new scholarship); and
6. Apply concepts from literary theory and criticism in the analysis and interpretation of texts, explaining their interpretations
in class discussion, response papers, reading secondary source material, and written examination answers and/or
papers.
II. COURSE GUIDE (course rules/instructions, Coverage inclusion Dates/schedule, grading criteria)
The entire course covers 8 weekly modules with specific content topics. Students are expected to fully learn the lessons and
achieve the intended learning outcomes. Two big examinations; midterm and finals for term classes and 4 big
examinations for full term classes; Prelim, midterm, semi-final and final examinations. Quizzes, class activities, oral
participations, speeches, and assignments are given to supplement students’ learning. Schedule of examinations are
posted in the bulletin boards.
1st Term Schedule 2nd Term Schedule

Inclusive Dates Week Details Inclusive Dates Week
Week 1 Week 1
Week 2 Week 2
Week 3 Week 3
Week 4 Prelim / Midterm Exams Week 4
Week 5 Week 5
Week 6 Week 6
Week 7 Week 7
Week 8 Midterm / Final Exams / Week 8
Submission and/or compliance of
Requirements
- Term Break
The grading criteria for the assessment of student competence or performance includes the following:
Quizzes/Assignments 25%
Class Activities/Laboratory Output 35%
Periodic Examination 40%
Total 100%
III. MODULE LEARNING OUTCOMES

1. Define and discuss the nature of language and language development.
2. Discuss the stages of Language Development.
3. Distinguish native language from target language.
IV. CONTENT TOPIC DISCUSSION (attach detailed content theories/applications and specific learning objectives)
TOPIC 1: Introduction
 Language and Assessment
 Teaching Literature
V. TEACHING LEARNING ACTIVITES (TLA’s) (with TLA guides, must be doable thru online)
 Face-to-face lecture discussion, autodidactic learning, online research for further ideas relevant to the topic and lastly,
assessment.
 Reading and self-comprehension
VI. ASSESSMENT TASK (AT’s) / EVALUATION/RUBRICS (WITH ASSESSMENT guides)
 Formative Quiz
 Hands-on Quiz
This module is a property of Saint Joseph Institute of Technology (SJIT). The term module refers to an instructional material that focuses on a specific course. Details
and activities vary according to specific content and focus on student-centered learning activities.
No part of this module may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or any means without approval of the CEO/President.
VII. ASSIGNMENT (include here the target module for the preceding MODULE guides )
VIII. REFERENCES
https://mohammedaljohani.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/ling-307-161-modules-1-2-3.pdf
https://www.slideshare.net/MillenAidanEsguerra/language-development-129444717
https://www.slideshare.net/ecaol2/language-and-language-learning
In creating a quality test, the teacher should consider the characteristics of a good test. A good
test should have a positive effect on learning, and teaching should result in improve d learning
habits.
The test should enable the teacher to find out which parts of the language program cause
difficulty for the class. This way the teacher can evaluate the effectiveness of the syllabus as
well as the methods and materials used during the lesson proper
A good test should also motivate by measuring student performance without in any way setting
“traps” for them. A well –developed language test should provide an opportunity for students to
show their ability to perform certain language tasks.
A test should be constructed with the goal of having students learn from their weaknesses. If
this is followed, a good test can be used as a valuable teaching tool.
KEY CONCEPTS
Literature broadly refers to any collection of written or oral work, but it more commonly and
narrowly refers to writings specifically considered to be an art form, especially prose fiction,
drama, and poetry, in contrast to academic writing and newspapers
Assessment is the act of gathering information on a daily basis in order to understand
individual student’s learning and needs.
In the context of language teaching and learning, assessment refers to the act of collecting
information and making judgments about a language learner’s knowledge of a language and the
ability to use it. (Carol Chapelle and Geoff Bingley)
Measurement more broadly includes testing and other types of measurement as well as other
types of information that result in quantitative data such as attendance, records, questionnaires,
teacher’s ratings of students etc.
Evaluation is the culminating act of interpreting the information gathered for the purpose of
making decisions or judgments about student’s learning and needs, often at are porting time.
It forms as part of the assessment.
Question 1: Should we teach children how to read literature?
Think about your own experiences of reading literature. Have educational experiences
increased your enjoyment of specific texts? If so, how? If not, why not?
Read the following statements and see if you agree or not.
Children are naturally capable of taking pleasure in what they read.
Readers are made, not born (Chambers, 1983, p. 30).
Literature is more experienced than taught (Glazer, 1986, p. 51).
Critical analysis of literature somehow destroys pleasure in it.
Many people don’t focus their teaching of literature on the enhancement of pleasure because
they believe that pleasure is private, too dependent on individual tastes and feelings to be
taught (Nodelman & Reimer, 2003, p. 32).
Literature must be discussed. It is only by discussing with others who have experienced a book
that new meaning can be effectively constructed (Bicknell, p. 45).
Children need teachers to demonstrate how to enter into and explore the world of literature, just
as children learning language need adults who show them how the language functions in the
everyday world (Peterson & Eeds, 1990, p. 12).
Question 2: What should teachers do to help children read literature?

Think about your own experiences of reading literature. Did any of your
teachers teach you how to read literature when you were a child? If so,
how?
Read the following statements and see if you agree or not.
Ask children to understand every word written in a text.
Ask children to derive meaning from context as they read,
Ask children to always read closely and analytically.
Allow children to feel free to read against a text.
Encourage children to see their reading of literature as a source of questions to think about
rather than answers to accept.
Ask children to parrot the responses or interpretations of other people, particularly those with
authority over them, to prove that they understood the “right” things about a book they read.
Encourage children to have their own ideas about what they read.
Encourage children to exchange their viewpoints with others and respect the differences.
Provide children with diverse experiences of literature.
Help children to read with an awareness of ideological implications, that is, of the ways in which
texts represent or misrepresent reality and work to manipulate readers.
12 Strategies for Teaching Literature In The 21st Century
1. Use combinations of media–classic and modern together, leveraging one against the other.
2. Have students analyze diverse media forms for their strengths and weaknesses–and involve
both classic and digital forms.
3. Have students turn essays into videos into podcasts into letters into simply-coded games into
poems into apps. (See also #7.)
4. Allow students to choose media while you choose themes and/or academic and/or quality
standards.
5. When designing units, choose the media first, then the standards (yes, this likely goes
against what you were taught–but give it a try).
6. Insist all student work “leaves the classroom” and is published–then design units accordingly.
7. Use RAFT: Role, Audience, Format, and Topic/Tone/Theme. Then have them revise media in
response to new roles, audiences, formats, or topics, tones, or themes. Martin Luther King’s “I
Have A Dream Speech” in a new format (a video?), or to a new audience (modern hip-hop
artists?), or with a new tone (angry?). Students experimenting here are experimenting with
media design, which is exactly what authors do.
8. Use a thematic focus to design units, assessments, project-based learning–whatever
activities students ‘touch.’ One of the hallmark characteristics of classic literature is that it
endures. This is, in part, due to timelessness of the human condition. Love lost, coming of age,
overcoming obstacles, civil rights, identity, and more are all at the core of the greatest of literary
works.
The ability to the texts to nail these conditions gives them their ability to endure, so teach
through that. The author (e.g., Shakespeare) or media form (e.g., a play) may not seem relevant
to a student–and that’s okay. The author chose that form based on prevailing local technology.
Help them focus on what is being said and why–and how.
9. Use tools for digital text annotation on pdfs, note-sharing, and more to help students mark
text, document questions and insights, and revisit thinking or collaborate with others during the
reading of classic texts.
10. Create social media-based reading clubs. Establish a hashtag that anchors year-long
discussion of certain themes, authors, text, or whatever other category/topic that makes sense
for your curriculum.
11. Have students create and produce an ongoing podcast or YouTube channel on, as above,
relevant themes, authors, texts, etc.
12. Connect the old with the new in authentic ways to center the knowledge demands of modern
readers.

Subject Code: ELT 104 Course Title: Teaching and Assessment of Literature Studies
III. MODULE LEARNING OUTCOMES (PERFORMANCE INDICATORS)
1. Discuss the elements of Literature
2. Explain the different genres of literature
TOPIC 1: Elements of Literature
2: Genres
assessment.
 Formative Quiz
 Hands-on Quiz
 Purpose of Assessment
 Kinds of Assessment and Evaluation
VIII. REFERENCES
https://www.slideshare.net/josephestroga/language-and-literature-assessment
https://www.slideshare.net/nadarajapillai/teaching-literature-15309098
https://www.slideshare.net/midnightphantom26/language-and-literature-assessment-lecture-1
Elements of Literature
Component parts of a work of literature.
Allegory
The characters are representative of some larger humanistic trait and attempt to convey some
larger lesson or meaning in life.
Allusion
A reference to something in history, culture or literature (especially historical).
Antagonist
The force that works against the protagonist.
Characterization
The creation and development of the people in a story.
Climax
The point in the story where the conflict is at its peak.
Conflict
The struggle a character must overcome.
Connotation
Implied meaning of the word is the associated meaning that comes from its use in various social
contexts; will change over time and vary from location to location.
Crisis
A significant turning point in the story that determines how it must end.
Diction
The author's choice of words to imply some social or connotative meaning.
Exposition
The background information of a story.
Flashback
A strategy of plot sequencing where the author takes the reader back to events that occurred
before the present time in the story.
Foreshadowing
Use of clues to suggest something that is going to happen.
Imagery
The author's attempt to create a mental picture in the mind of the reader.
Irony
A twist of fate in which the results of action are not the expected results.
Metaphor
A comparison of two generally unlike things meant to illuminate truth.
Motif
A recurring image or idea.
Mood
The feeling a reader gets from a story.
Plot
The events that occur in a story.
Point of View
Refers to whether that story is told by a character or an outside observer.
Protagonist
The character the story revolves around.
Resolution
The conclusion of the story.
Setting
Where and when the action takes place.
Structure
The way that the writer arranges the plot of a story.
Subplot
A secondary plot strand that is a supporting side story for the main plot.
Suspense
The tension that the author uses to create a feeling of discomfort about the unknown.
Symbolism
A person, place, event or object that has a deeper meaning that its literal meaning.
Theme
The central idea or lesson about life that an author conveys.
Tone
The author's voice or attitude about what he or she writes
Facts on Elements of Literature
Elements of literature denote the things that are used to make up a work of literature. There are
different types and forms of literature. They are novel, drama, poetry, biography, non-fictional
prose, essay, epic and short story. All these types of literature have some elements. To
complete a piece of literature, a writer, dramatist or a novelist need to use certain elements like
plot, character, theme, etc. However, elements of fiction and elements of drama differ from
elements of poetry. These elements are discussed below:
Elements of Fiction and Drama
Literary types such as fiction; drama and short story have some elements. These include
Plot
Character
Setting
Theme
Structure
Point of view
Conflict
Diction
Foreshadowing
Plot: Plot is the serial arrangement of incidents, ideas or events. In literature, the plot
encompasses all the incidents and provides aesthetic pleasure. The story of the novel
progresses through various plots and conflicts. Plots of dramas are divided into "Acts" and
"Scenes". Drama has five essential parts. These are:
Introduction of the story where the characters and setting are introduced
Rising action
Climax
Falling action
Denouement
Playwrights use dialogue to develop their plots. They reveal information about their characters
such as their background and personality.
Character: Character plays a pivotal role in a drama, novel, short story and all kinds of
narratives. In drama, character reflects the personality of the protagonist and other related
characters. The method of conveying information about characters in art is called
characterization. Characters can be fictional or based on real, historical entities. It can be
human, supernatural, mythical, divine, animal or personifications of an abstraction. There are
round characters, flat characters, stereotypical stock characters, etc. In Marlowe’s drama "The
Tragical History of Dr. Faustus", Faustus is the main character of the play.

1. Explain the theories of literature teaching
2. Discuss the development model of teaching literature
TOPIC 1: Theories of Literature Teaching
2: Development Model for Teaching Literature
assessment.
 Formative Quiz
 Hands-on Quiz
 Teaching Learning Process
 Teaching Strategies
 Dimensions of Teaching Literature
VIII. REFERENCES
Literary Theory
“Literary theory” is the body of ideas and methods we use in the practical reading of literature.
By literary theory we refer not to the meaning of a work of literature but to the theories that
reveal what literature can mean. Literary theory is a description of the underlying principles, one
might say the tools, by which we attempt to understand literature.
All literary interpretation draws on a basis in theory but can serve as a justification for very
different kinds of critical activity. It is literary theory that formulates the relationship between
author and work; literary theory develops the significance of race, class, and gender for literary
study, both from the standpoint of the biography of the author and an analysis of their thematic
presence within texts.
Literary theory offers varying approaches for understanding the role of historical context in
interpretation as well as the relevance of linguistic and unconscious elements of the text.
Literary theorists trace the history and evolution of the different genres—narrative, dramatic,
lyric—in addition to the more recent emergence of the novel and the short story, while also
investigating the importance of formal elements of literary structure. Lastly, literary theory in
recent years has sought to explain the degree to which the text is more the product of a culture
than an individual author and in turn how those texts help to create the culture.
1. What Is Literary Theory?
“Literary theory,” sometimes designated “critical theory,” or “theory,” and now undergoing a
transformation into “cultural theory” within the discipline of literary studies, can be understood as
the set of concepts and intellectual assumptions on which rests the work of explaining or
interpreting literary texts. Literary theory refers to any principles derived from internal analysis of
literary texts or from knowledge external to the text that can be applied in multiple interpretive
situations. All critical practice regarding literature depends on an underlying structure of ideas in
at least two ways: theory provides a rationale for what constitutes the subject matter of criticism
—”the literary”—and the specific aims of critical practice—the act of interpretation itself.
For example, to speak of the “unity” of Oedipus the King explicitly invokes Aristotle’s theoretical
statements on poetics. To argue, as does Chinua Achebe, that Joseph Conrad’s The Heart of
Darkness fails to grant full humanity to the Africans it depicts is a perspective informed by a
postcolonial literary theory that presupposes a history of exploitation and racism. Critics that
explain the climactic drowning of Edna Pontellier in The Awakening as a suicide generally call
upon a supporting architecture of feminist and gender theory. The structure of ideas that
enables criticism of a literary work may or may not be acknowledged by the critic, and the status
of literary theory within the academic discipline of literary studies continues to evolve.
Literary theory and the formal practice of literary interpretation runs a parallel but less well
known course with the history of philosophy and is evident in the historical record at least as far
back as Plato. The Cratylus contains a Plato’s meditation on the relationship of words and the
things to which they refer. Plato’s skepticism about signification, i.e., that words bear no
etymological relationship to their meanings but are arbitrarily “imposed,” becomes a central
concern in the twentieth century to both “Structuralism” and “Poststructuralism.”
However, a persistent belief in “reference,” the notion that words and images refer to an
objective reality, has provided epistemological (that is, having to do with theories of knowledge)
support for theories of literary representation throughout most of Western history. Until the
nineteenth century, Art, in Shakespeare’s phrase, held “a mirror up to nature” and faithfully
recorded an objectively real world independent of the observer.
Modern literary theory gradually emerges in Europe during the nineteenth century. In one of the
earliest developments of literary theory, German “higher criticism” subjected biblical texts to a
radical historicizing that broke with traditional scriptural interpretation. “Higher,” or “source
criticism,” analyzed biblical tales in light of comparable narratives from other cultures, an
approach that anticipated some of the method and spirit of twentieth century theory, particularly
“Structuralism” and “New Historicism.” In France, the eminent literary critic Charles
Augustin Saint Beuve maintained that a work of literature could be explained entirely in terms of
biography, while novelist Marcel Proust devoted his life to refuting Saint Beuve in a massive
narrative in which he contended that the details of the life of the artist are utterly transformed in
the work of art. (This dispute was taken up anew by the French theorist Roland Barthes in his
famous declaration of the “Death of the Author.” See “Structuralism” and “Poststructuralism.”)
Perhaps the greatest nineteenth century influence on literary theory came from the deep
epistemological suspicion of Friedrich Nietzsche: that facts are not facts until they have been
interpreted. Nietzsche’s critique of knowledge has had a profound impact on literary studies and
helped usher in an era of intense literary theorizing that has yet to pass.
Attention to the etymology of the term “theory,” from the Greek “theoria,” alerts us to the partial
nature of theoretical approaches to literature. “Theoria” indicates a view or perspective of the
Greek stage. This is precisely what literary theory offers, though specific theories often claim to
present a complete system for understanding literature. The current state of theory is such that
there are many overlapping areas of influence, and older schools of theory, though no longer
enjoying their previous eminence, continue to exert an influence on the whole.
The once widely-held conviction (an implicit theory) that literature is a repository of all that is
meaningful and ennobling in the human experience, a view championed by the Leavis School in
Britain, may no longer be acknowledged by name but remains an essential justification for the
current structure of American universities and liberal arts curricula. The moment of
“Deconstruction” may have passed, but its emphasis on the indeterminacy of signs (that we are
unable to establish exclusively what a word means when used in a given situation) and thus of
texts, remains significant. Many critics may not embrace the label “feminist,” but the premise
that gender is a social construct, one of theoretical feminisms distinguishing insights, is now
axiomatic in a number of theoretical perspectives.
While literary theory has always implied or directly expressed a conception of the world outside
the text, in the twentieth century three movements—”Marxist theory” of the Frankfurt School,
“Feminism,” and “Postmodernism”—have opened the field of literary studies into a broader area
of inquiry. Marxist approaches to literature require an understanding of the primary economic
and social bases of culture since Marxist aesthetic theory sees the work of art as a product,
directly or indirectly, of the base structure of society. Feminist thought and practice analyzes the
production of literature and literary representation within the framework that includes all social
and cultural formations as they pertain to the role of women in history.
Postmodern thought consists of both aesthetic and epistemological strands. Postmodernism in
art has included a move toward non-referential, non-linear, abstract forms; a heightened degree
of self-referentiality; and the collapse of categories and conventions that had traditionally
governed art. Postmodern thought has led to the serious questioning of the so-called
metanarratives of history, science, philosophy, and economic and sexual reproduction. Under
postmodernity, all knowledge comes to be seen as “constructed” within historical self-contained
systems of understanding. Marxist, feminist, and postmodern thought have brought about the
incorporation of all human discourses (that is, interlocking fields of language and knowledge) as
a subject matter for analysis by the literary theorist. Using the various poststructuralist and
postmodern theories that often draw on disciplines other than the literary—linguistic,
anthropological, psychoanalytic, and philosophical—for their primary insights, literary theory has
become an interdisciplinary body of cultural theory. Taking as its premise that human societies
and knowledge consist of texts in one form or another, cultural theory (for better or worse) is
now applied to the varieties of texts, ambitiously undertaking to become the preeminent model
of inquiry into the human condition.
Literary theory is a site of theories: some theories, like “Queer Theory,” are “in;” other literary
theories, like “Deconstruction,” are “out” but continue to exert an influence on the field.
“Traditional literary criticism,” “New Criticism,” and “Structuralism” are alike in that they held to
the view that the study of literature has an objective body of knowledge under its scrutiny. The
other schools of literary theory, to varying degrees, embrace a postmodern view of language
and reality that calls into serious question the objective referent of literary studies. The following
categories are certainly not exhaustive, nor are they mutually exclusive, but they represent the
major trends in literary theory of this century.
2. Traditional Literary Criticism
Academic literary criticism prior to the rise of “New Criticism” in the United States tended to
practice traditional literary history: tracking influence, establishing the canon of major writers in
the literary periods, and clarifying historical context and allusions within the text. Literary
biography was and still is an important interpretive method in and out of the academy; versions
of moral criticism, not unlike the Leavis School in Britain, and aesthetic (e.g. genre studies)
criticism were also generally influential literary practices. Perhaps the key unifying feature of
traditional literary criticism was the consensus within the academy as to the both the literary
canon (that is, the books all educated persons should read) and the aims and purposes of
literature. What literature was, and why we read literature, and what we read, were questions
that subsequent movements in literary theory were to raise.
3. Formalism and New Criticism
“Formalism” is, as the name implies, an interpretive approach that emphasizes literary form and
the study of literary devices within the text. The work of the Formalists had a general impact on
later developments in “Structuralism” and other theories of narrative. “Formalism,” like
“Structuralism,” sought to place the study of literature on a scientific basis through objective
analysis of the motifs, devices, techniques, and other “functions” that comprise the literary work.
The Formalists placed great importance on the literariness of texts, those qualities that
distinguished the literary from other kinds of writing. Neither author nor context was essential for
the Formalists; it was the narrative that spoke, the “hero-function,” for example, that had
meaning. Form was the content. A plot device or narrative strategy was examined for how it
functioned and compared to how it had functioned in other literary works. Of the Russian
Formalist critics, Roman Jakobson and Viktor Shklovsky are probably the most well known.
The Formalist adage that the purpose of literature was “to make the stones stonier” nicely
expresses their notion of literariness. “Formalism” is perhaps best known is Shklovsky’s concept
of “defamiliarization.” The routine of ordinary experience, Shklovsky contended, rendered
invisible the uniqueness and particularity of the objects of existence. Literary language, partly by
calling attention to itself as language, estranged the reader from the familiar and made fresh the
experience of daily life.
The “New Criticism,” so designated as to indicate a break with traditional methods, was a
product of the American university in the 1930s and 40s. “New Criticism” stressed close reading
of the text itself, much like the French pedagogical precept “explication du texte.” As a strategy
of reading, “New Criticism” viewed the work of literature as an aesthetic object independent of
historical context and as a unified whole that reflected the unified sensibility of the artist. T.S.
Eliot, though not explicitly associated with the movement, expressed a similar critical-aesthetic
philosophy in his essays on John Donne and the metaphysical poets, writers who Eliot believed
experienced a complete integration of thought and feeling. New Critics like Cleanth Brooks,
John Crowe Ransom, Robert Penn Warren and W.K. Wimsatt placed a similar focus on the
metaphysical poets and poetry in general, a genre well suited to New Critical practice. “New
Criticism” aimed at bringing a greater intellectual rigor to literary studies, confining itself to
careful scrutiny of the text alone and the formal structures of paradox, ambiguity, irony, and
metaphor, among others. “New Criticism” was fired by the conviction that their readings of
poetry would yield a humanizing influence on readers and thus counter the alienating
tendencies of modern, industrial life. “New Criticism” in this regard bears an affinity to the
Southern Agrarian movement whose manifesto, I’ll Take My Stand, contained essays by two
New Critics, Ransom and Warren. Perhaps the enduring legacy of “New Criticism” can be found
in the college classroom, in which the verbal texture of the poem on the page remains a primary
object of literary study.
4. Marxism and Critical Theory
Marxist literary theories tend to focus on the representation of class conflict as well as the
reinforcement of class distinctions through the medium of literature. Marxist theorists use
traditional techniques of literary analysis but subordinate aesthetic concerns to the final social
and political meanings of literature. Marxist theorist often champion authors sympathetic to the
working classes and authors whose work challenges economic equalities found in capitalist
societies. In keeping with the totalizing spirit of Marxism, literary theories arising from the
Marxist paradigm have not only sought new ways of understanding the relationship between
economic production and literature, but all cultural production as well. Marxist analyses of
society and history have had a profound effect on literary theory and practical criticism, most
notably in the development of “New Historicism” and “Cultural Materialism.”
The Hungarian theorist Georg Lukacs contributed to an understanding of the relationship
between historical materialism and literary form, in particular with realism and the historical
novel. Walter Benjamin broke new ground in his work in his study of aesthetics and the
reproduction of the work of art. The Frankfurt School of philosophers, including most notably
Max Horkheimer, Theodor Adorno, and Herbert Marcuse—after their emigration to the United
States—played a key role in introducing Marxist assessments of culture into the mainstream of
American academic life. These thinkers became associated with what is known as “Critical
theory,” one of the constituent components of which was a critique of the instrumental use of
reason in advanced capitalist culture. “Critical theory” held to a distinction between the high
cultural heritage of Europe and the mass culture produced by capitalist societies as an
instrument of domination. “Critical theory” sees in the structure of mass cultural forms—jazz,
Hollywood film, advertising—a replication of the structure of the factory and the workplace.
Creativity and cultural production in advanced capitalist societies were always already co-opted
by the entertainment needs of an economic system that requires sensory stimulation and
recognizable cliché and suppressed the tendency for sustained deliberation.
The major Marxist influences on literary theory since the Frankfurt School have been Raymond
Williams and Terry Eagleton in Great Britain and Frank Lentricchia and Fredric Jameson in the
United States. Williams is associated with the New Left political movement in Great Britain and
the development of “Cultural Materialism” and the Cultural Studies Movement, originating in the
1960s at Birmingham University’s Center for Contemporary Cultural Studies. Eagleton is known
both as a Marxist theorist and as a popularizer of theory by means of his widely read
overview, Literary Theory. Lentricchia likewise became influential through his account of trends
in theory, After the New Criticism. Jameson is a more diverse theorist, known both for his impact
on Marxist theories of culture and for his position as one of the leading figures in theoretical
postmodernism. Jameson’s work on consumer culture, architecture, film, literature and other
areas, typifies the collapse of disciplinary boundaries taking place in the realm of Marxist and
postmodern cultural theory. Jameson’s work investigates the way the structural features of late
capitalism—particularly the transformation of all culture into commodity form—are now deeply
embedded in all of our ways of communicating.
5. Structuralism and Poststructuralism
Like the “New Criticism,” “Structuralism” sought to bring to literary studies a set of objective
criteria for analysis and a new intellectual rigor. “Structuralism” can be viewed as an extension
of “Formalism” in that that both “Structuralism” and “Formalism” devoted their attention to
matters of literary form (i.e. structure) rather than social or historical content; and that both
bodies of thought were intended to put the study of literature on a scientific, objective basis.
“Structuralism” relied initially on the ideas of the Swiss linguist, Ferdinand de Saussure. Like
Plato, Saussure regarded the signifier (words, marks, symbols) as arbitrary and unrelated to the
concept, the signified, to which it referred. Within the way a particular society uses language
and signs, meaning was constituted by a system of “differences” between units of the language.
Particular meanings were of less interest than the underlying structures of signification that
made meaning itself possible, often expressed as an emphasis on “langue” rather than “parole.”
“Structuralism” was to be a metalanguage, a language about languages, used to decode actual
languages, or systems of signification. The work of the “Formalist” Roman Jakobson contributed
to “Structuralist” thought, and the more prominent Structuralists included Claude Levi-Strauss in
anthropology, Tzvetan Todorov, A.J. Greimas, Gerard Genette, and Barthes.
The philosopher Roland Barthes proved to be a key figure on the divide between “Structuralism”
and “Poststructuralism.” “Poststructuralism” is less unified as a theoretical movement than its
precursor; indeed, the work of its advocates known by the term “Deconstruction” calls into
question the possibility of the coherence of discourse, or the capacity for language to
communicate. “Deconstruction,” Semiotic theory (a study of signs with close connections to
“Structuralism,” “Reader response theory” in America (“Reception theory” in Europe), and
“Gender theory” informed by the psychoanalysts Jacques Lacan and Julia Kristeva are areas of
inquiry that can be located under the banner of “Poststructuralism.” If signifier and signified are
both cultural concepts, as they are in “Poststructuralism,” reference to an empirically certifiable
reality is no longer guaranteed by language. “Deconstruction” argues that this loss of reference
causes an endless deferral of meaning, a system of differences between units of language that
has no resting place or final signifier that would enable the other signifiers to hold their meaning.
The most important theorist of “Deconstruction,” Jacques Derrida, has asserted, “There is no
getting outside text,” indicating a kind of free play of signification in which no fixed, stable
meaning is possible. “Poststructuralism” in America was originally identified with a group of Yale
academics, the Yale School of “Deconstruction:” J. Hillis Miller, Geoffrey Hartmann, and Paul de
Man. Other tendencies in the moment after “Deconstruction” that share some of the intellectual
tendencies of “Poststructuralism” would included the “Reader response” theories of Stanley
Fish, Jane Tompkins, and Wolfgang Iser.
Lacanian psychoanalysis, an updating of the work of Sigmund Freud, extends “Postructuralism”
to the human subject with further consequences for literary theory. According to Lacan, the
fixed, stable self is a Romantic fiction; like the text in “Deconstruction,” the self is a decentered
mass of traces left by our encounter with signs, visual symbols, language, etc. For Lacan, the
self is constituted by language, a language that is never one’s own, always another’s, always
already in use. Barthes applies these currents of thought in his famous declaration of the
“death” of the Author: “writing is the destruction of every voice, of every point of origin” while
also applying a similar “Poststructuralist” view to the Reader: “the reader is without history,
biography, psychology; he is simply that someone who holds together in a single field all the
traces by which the written text is constituted.”
Michel Foucault is another philosopher, like Barthes, whose ideas inform much of
poststructuralist literary theory. Foucault played a critical role in the development of the
postmodern perspective that knowledge is constructed in concrete historical situations in the
form of discourse; knowledge is not communicated by discourse but is discourse itself, can only
be encountered textually. Following Nietzsche, Foucault performs what he calls “genealogies,”
attempts at deconstructing the unacknowledged operation of power and knowledge to reveal the
ideologies that make domination of one group by another seem “natural.” Foucaldian
investigations of discourse and power were to provide much of the intellectual impetus for a new
way of looking at history and doing textual studies that came to be known as the “New
Historicism.”
6. New Historicism and Cultural Materialism
“New Historicism,” a term coined by Stephen Greenblatt, designates a body of theoretical and
interpretive practices that began largely with the study of early modern literature in the United
States. “New Historicism” in America had been somewhat anticipated by the theorists of
“Cultural Materialism” in Britain, which, in the words of their leading advocate, Raymond
Williams describes “the analysis of all forms of signification, including quite centrally writing,
within the actual means and conditions of their production.” Both “New Historicism” and “Cultural
Materialism” seek to understand literary texts historically and reject the formalizing influence of
previous literary studies, including “New Criticism,” “Structuralism” and “Deconstruction,” all of
which in varying ways privilege the literary text and place only secondary emphasis on historical
and social context. According to “New Historicism,” the circulation of literary and non-literary
texts produces relations of social power within a culture. New Historicist thought differs from
traditional historicism in literary studies in several crucial ways. Rejecting traditional historicism’s
premise of neutral inquiry, “New Historicism” accepts the necessity of making historical value
judgments. According to “New Historicism,” we can only know the textual history of the past
because it is “embedded,” a key term, in the textuality of the present and its concerns. Text and
context are less clearly distinct in New Historicist practice. Traditional separations of literary and
non-literary texts, “great” literature and popular literature, are also fundamentally challenged.
For the “New Historicist,” all acts of expression are embedded in the material conditions of a
culture. Texts are examined with an eye for how they reveal the economic and social realities,
especially as they produce ideology and represent power or subversion. Like much of the
emergent European social history of the 1980s, “New Historicism” takes particular interest in
representations of marginal/marginalized groups and non-normative behaviors—witchcraft,
cross-dressing, peasant revolts, and exorcisms—as exemplary of the need for power to
represent subversive alternatives, the Other, to legitimize itself.
Louis Montrose, another major innovator and exponent of “New Historicism,” describes a
fundamental axiom of the movement as an intellectual belief in “the textuality of history and the
historicity of texts.” “New Historicism” draws on the work of Levi-Strauss, in particular his notion
of culture as a “self-regulating system.” The Foucaldian premise that power is ubiquitous and
cannot be equated with state or economic power and Gramsci’s conception of “hegemony,” i.e.,
that domination is often achieved through culturally-orchestrated consent rather than force, are
critical underpinnings to the “New Historicist” perspective. The translation of the work of Mikhail
Bakhtin on carnival coincided with the rise of the “New Historicism” and “Cultural Materialism”
and left a legacy in work of other theorists of influence like Peter Stallybrass and Jonathan
Dollimore. In its period of ascendancy during the 1980s, “New Historicism” drew criticism from
the political left for its depiction of counter-cultural expression as always co-opted by the
dominant discourses. Equally, “New Historicism’s” lack of emphasis on “literariness” and formal
literary concerns brought disdain from traditional literary scholars. However, “New Historicism”
continues to exercise a major influence in the humanities and in the extended conception of
literary studies.
7. Ethnic Studies and Postcolonial Criticism
“Ethnic Studies,” sometimes referred to as “Minority Studies,” has an obvious historical
relationship with “Postcolonial Criticism” in that Euro-American imperialism and colonization in
the last four centuries, whether external (empire) or internal (slavery) has been directed at
recognizable ethnic groups: African and African-American, Chinese, the subaltern peoples of
India, Irish, Latino, Native American, and Philipino, among others. “Ethnic Studies” concerns
itself generally with art and literature produced by identifiable ethnic groups either marginalized
or in a subordinate position to a dominant culture. “Postcolonial Criticism” investigates the
relationships between colonizers and colonized in the period post-colonization. Though the two
fields are increasingly finding points of intersection—the work of bell hooks, for example—and
are both activist intellectual enterprises, “Ethnic Studies and “Postcolonial Criticism” have
significant differences in their history and ideas.
“Ethnic Studies” has had a considerable impact on literary studies in the United States and
Britain. In W.E.B. Dubois, we find an early attempt to theorize the position of African-Americans
within dominant white culture through his concept of “double consciousness,” a dual identity
including both “American” and “Negro.” Dubois and theorists after him seek an understanding of
how that double experience both creates identity and reveals itself in culture. Afro-Caribbean
and African writers—Aime Cesaire, Frantz Fanon, Chinua Achebe—have made significant early
contributions to the theory and practice of ethnic criticism that explores the traditions,
sometimes suppressed or underground, of ethnic literary activity while providing a critique of
representations of ethnic identity as found within the majority culture. Ethnic and minority literary
theory emphasizes the relationship of cultural identity to individual identity in historical
circumstances of overt racial oppression. More recently, scholars and writers such as Henry
Louis Gates, Toni Morrison, and Kwame Anthony Appiah have brought attention to the
problems inherent in applying theoretical models derived from Euro-centric paradigms (that is,
structures of thought) to minority works of literature while at the same time exploring new
interpretive strategies for understanding the vernacular (common speech) traditions of racial
groups that have been historically marginalized by dominant cultures.
Though not the first writer to explore the historical condition of postcolonialism, the Palestinian
literary theorist Edward Said’s book Orientalism is generally regarded as having inaugurated the
field of explicitly “Postcolonial Criticism” in the West. Said argues that the concept of “the Orient”
was produced by the “imaginative geography” of Western scholarship and has been
instrumental in the colonization and domination of non-Western societies. “Postcolonial” theory
reverses the historical center/margin direction of cultural inquiry: critiques of the metropolis and
capital now emanate from the former colonies. Moreover, theorists like Homi K. Bhabha have
questioned the binary thought that produces the dichotomies—center/margin, white/black, and
colonizer/colonized—by which colonial practices are justified. The work of Gayatri C. Spivak has
focused attention on the question of who speaks for the colonial “Other” and the relation of the
ownership of discourse and representation to the development of the postcolonial subjectivity.
Like feminist and ethnic theory, “Postcolonial Criticism” pursues not merely the inclusion of the
marginalized literature of colonial peoples into the dominant canon and discourse. “Postcolonial
Criticism” offers a fundamental critique of the ideology of colonial domination and at the same
time seeks to undo the “imaginative geography” of Orientalist thought that produced conceptual
as well as economic divides between West and East, civilized and uncivilized, First and Third
Worlds. In this respect, “Postcolonial Criticism” is activist and adversarial in its basic aims.
Postcolonial theory has brought fresh perspectives to the role of colonial peoples—their wealth,
labor, and culture—in the development of modern European nation states. While “Postcolonial
Criticism” emerged in the historical moment following the collapse of the modern colonial
empires, the increasing globalization of culture, including the neo-colonialism of multinational
capitalism, suggests a continued relevance for this field of inquiry.
8. Gender Studies and Queer Theory
Gender theory came to the forefront of the theoretical scene first as feminist theory but has
subsequently come to include the investigation of all gender and sexual categories and
identities. Feminist gender theory followed slightly behind the reemergence of political feminism
in the United States and Western Europe during the 1960s. Political feminism of the so-called
“second wave” had as its emphasis practical concerns with the rights of women in contemporary
societies, women’s identity, and the representation of women in media and culture. These
causes converged with early literary feminist practice, characterized by Elaine Showalter as
“gynocriticism,” which emphasized the study and canonical inclusion of works by female authors
as well as the depiction of women in male-authored canonical texts.
Feminist gender theory is postmodern in that it challenges the paradigms and intellectual
premises of western thought, but also takes an activist stance by proposing frequent
interventions and alternative epistemological positions meant to change the social order. In the
context of postmodernism, gender theorists, led by the work of Judith Butler, initially viewed the
category of “gender” as a human construct enacted by a vast repetition of social performance.
The biological distinction between man and woman eventually came under the same scrutiny by
theorists who reached a similar conclusion: the sexual categories are products of culture and as
such help create social reality rather than simply reflect it. Gender theory achieved a wide
readership and acquired much its initial theoretical rigor through the work of a group of French
feminist theorists that included Simone de Beauvoir, Luce Irigaray, Helene Cixous, and Julia
Kristeva, who while Bulgarian rather than French, made her mark writing in French. French
feminist thought is based on the assumption that the Western philosophical tradition represses
the experience of women in the structure of its ideas. As an important consequence of this
systematic intellectual repression and exclusion, women’s lives and bodies in historical societies
are subject to repression as well. In the creative/critical work of Cixous, we find the history of
Western thought depicted as binary oppositions: “speech/writing; Nature/Art, Nature/History,
Nature/Mind, Passion/Action.” For Cixous, and for Irigaray as well, these binaries are less a
function of any objective reality they describe than the male-dominated discourse of the
Western tradition that produced them. Their work beyond the descriptive stage becomes an
intervention in the history of theoretical discourse, an attempt to alter the existing categories and
systems of thought that found Western rationality. French feminism, and perhaps all feminism
after Beauvoir, has been in conversation with the psychoanalytic revision of Freud in the work of
Jacques Lacan. Kristeva’s work draws heavily on Lacan. Two concepts from Kristeva—the
“semiotic” and “abjection”—have had a significant influence on literary theory. Kristeva’s
“semiotic” refers to the gaps, silences, spaces, and bodily presence within the language/symbol
system of a culture in which there might be a space for a women’s language, different in kind as
it would be from male-dominated discourse.
Masculine gender theory as a separate enterprise has focused largely on social, literary, and
historical accounts of the construction of male gender identities. Such work generally lacks
feminisms’ activist stance and tends to serve primarily as an indictment rather than a validation
of male gender practices and masculinity. The so-called “Men’s Movement,” inspired by the
work of Robert Bly among others, was more practical than theoretical and has had only limited
impact on gender discourse. The impetus for the “Men’s Movement” came largely as a response
to the critique of masculinity and male domination that runs throughout feminism and the
upheaval of the 1960s, a period of crisis in American social ideology that has required a
reconsideration of gender roles. Having long served as the de facto “subject” of Western
thought, male identity and masculine gender theory awaits serious investigation as a particular,
and no longer universally representative, field of inquiry.
Much of what theoretical energy of masculine gender theory currently possesses comes from its
ambiguous relationship with the field of “Queer theory.” “Queer theory” is not synonymous with
gender theory, nor even with the overlapping fields of gay and lesbian studies, but does share
many of their concerns with normative definitions of man, woman, and sexuality. “Queer theory”
questions the fixed categories of sexual identity and the cognitive paradigms generated by
normative (that is, what is considered “normal”) sexual ideology. To “queer” becomes an act by
which stable boundaries of sexual identity are transgressed, reversed, mimicked, or otherwise
critiqued. “Queering” can be enacted on behalf of all non-normative sexualities and identities as
well, all that is considered by the dominant paradigms of culture to be alien, strange, unfamiliar,
transgressive, odd—in short, queer. Michel Foucault’s work on sexuality anticipates and informs
the Queer theoretical movement in a role similar to the way his writing on power and discourse
prepared the ground for “New Historicism.” Judith Butler contends that heterosexual identity
long held to be a normative ground of sexuality is actually produced by the suppression of
homoerotic possibility. Eve Sedgwick is another pioneering theorist of “Queer theory,” and like
Butler, Sedgwick maintains that the dominance of heterosexual culture conceals the extensive
presence of homosocial relations. For Sedgwick, the standard histories of western societies are
presented in exclusively in terms of heterosexual identity: “Inheritance, Marriage, Dynasty,
Family, Domesticity, Population,” and thus conceiving of homosexual identity within this
framework is already problematic.
9. Cultural Studies
Much of the intellectual legacy of “New Historicism” and “Cultural Materialism” can now be felt in
the “Cultural Studies” movement in departments of literature, a movement not identifiable in
terms of a single theoretical school, but one that embraces a wide array of perspectives—media
studies, social criticism, anthropology, and literary theory—as they apply to the general study of
culture. “Cultural Studies” arose quite self-consciously in the 80s to provide a means of analysis
of the rapidly expanding global culture industry that includes entertainment, advertising,
publishing, television, film, computers and the Internet. “Cultural Studies” brings scrutiny not
only to these varied categories of culture, and not only to the decreasing margins of difference
between these realms of expression, but just as importantly to the politics and ideology that
make contemporary culture possible. “Cultural Studies” became notorious in the 90s for its
emphasis on pop music icons and music video in place of canonical literature, and extends the
ideas of the Frankfurt School on the transition from a truly popular culture to mass culture in late
capitalist societies, emphasizing the significance of the patterns of consumption of cultural
artifacts. “Cultural Studies” has been interdisciplinary, even antidisciplinary, from its inception;
indeed, “Cultural Studies” can be understood as a set of sometimes conflicting methods and
approaches applied to a questioning of current cultural categories. Stuart Hall, Meaghan Morris,
Tony Bennett and Simon During are some of the important advocates of a “Cultural Studies”
that seeks to displace the traditional model of literary studies.

1. Explain the process of teaching-learning.
2. Discuss the dimensions of teaching literature.
3. Explain the teaching strategies and its concept.
TOPIC 1: Teaching Learning Process
2: Teaching Strategies
3: Dimensions of Teaching Literature
assessment.
 Formative Quiz
 Hands-on Quiz
 Examination/Review for the Midterm Exam and Iterative Statement for the Final Coverage
VIII. REFERENCES
TEACHING LEARNING PROCESS
12 Strategies for Teaching Literature In The 21st Century

1. Use combinations of media–classic and modern together, leveraging one against the other.
2. Have students analyze diverse media forms for their strengths and weaknesses–and involve
both classic and digital forms.
3. Have students turn essays into videos into podcasts into letters into simply-coded games into
poems into apps. (See also #7.)
4. Allow students to choose media while you choose themes and/or academic and/or quality
standards.
5. When designing units, choose the media first, then the standards (yes, this likely goes
against what you were taught–but give it a try).
6. Insist all student work “leaves the classroom” and is published–then design units accordingly.
7. Use RAFT: Role, Audience, Format, and Topic/Tone/Theme. Then have them revise media in
response to new roles, audiences, formats, or topics, tones, or themes. Martin Luther King’s “I
Have A Dream Speech” in a new format (a video?), or to a new audience (modern hip-hop
artists?), or with a new tone (angry?). Students experimenting here are experimenting with
media design, which is exactly what authors do.
8. Use a thematic focus to design units, assessments, project-based learning–whatever
activities students ‘touch.’ One of the hallmark characteristics of classic literature is that it
endures. This is, in part, due to timelessness of the human condition. Love lost, coming of age,
overcoming obstacles, civil rights, identity, and more are all at the core of the greatest of literary
works.
The ability to the texts to nail these conditions gives them their ability to endure, so teach
through that. The author (e.g., Shakespeare) or media form (e.g., a play) may not seem relevant
to a student–and that’s okay. The author chose that form based on prevailing local technology.
Help them focus on what is being said and why–and how.
9. Use tools for digital text annotation on pdfs, note-sharing, and more to help students mark
text, document questions and insights, and revisit thinking or collaborate with others during the
reading of classic texts.
10. Create social media-based reading clubs. Establish a hashtag that anchors year-long
discussion of certain themes, authors, text, or whatever other category/topic that makes sense
for your curriculum.
11. Have students create and produce an ongoing podcast or YouTube channel on, as above,
relevant themes, authors, texts, etc.
12. Connect the old with the new in authentic ways to center the knowledge demands of modern
readers.
Dimensions of Teaching Literature
Dimension 1: Students are actively engaged in learning
Dimension 2: Students' prior knowledge and experience is built upon
Dimension 3: Teaching caters for student diversity
Dimension 4: Students are aware of key learning outcomes
Dimension 5: Students are encouraged to develop/expand their conceptual understanding
Dimension 6: Actively uses links between research and teaching
Dimension 7: Uses educational resources and techniques appropriately
Dimension 8: Presents material logically
Dimension 9: Seeks feedback on students' understanding and acts on this accordingly
 Foregrounding
 Content
 Message
 Genre
 Aesthetic technique
 Language use
 Characterization
 Cultural features

1. Define assessment.
2. Discuss the purpose of assessment.
3. Explain the kinds of assessment and evaluation.
TOPIC 1: Purpose of Assessment
2: Kinds of Assessment and Evaluation
assessment.
 Formative Quiz
 Hands-on Quiz
 Functions of Language Tests
VIII. REFERENCES
ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION PRINCIPLES

Assessment and evaluation are essential components of the teaching-learning process. They
should be planned, continuous activities which are derived from curriculum objectives and
consistent with the instructional and learning strategies.
A variety of assessment and evaluation techniques should be used. Techniques should be
selected for their appropriateness to student’s learning styles and to the intended purposes.
Students should be given opportunities to demonstrate the extent of their knowledge, abilities,
and attitudes in a variety of ways.
Teachers should communicate assessment and evaluation strategies and plan in advance,
informing the students of the objectives of the assessment procedures relative to the objectives.
Students should have opportunities for input into the evaluation process.
Assessment and evaluation should be fair and equitable. They should be sensitive to family,
classroom, school and community situations and cultural requirements; they should be free of
bias.
Assessment and evaluation data and results should be communicated to the students and
parents/guardians, regularly in meaningful ways.
Assessment and evaluation should help students. They should provide positive feedback and
encourage students to participate actively in their own assessment in order to foster lifelong
learning and enable them to transfer knowledge and abilities to their life experiences.
Assessment and evaluation should use a variety of techniques and tools. The teacher collects
assessment information about student’s language development and their growth in speaking,
listening, writing and reading knowledge and abilities. The data gathered during the assessment
becomes the basis for an evaluation. Comparing assessment information to curriculum
objectives allows the teacher to make a decision or judgment regarding the progress of the
student’s learning.
PURPOSES OF ASSESSMENT
1. ASSESSMENT FOR LEARNING
Assessment for learning focuses on the gap between where the learner is in his/her learning,
and where he/she needs to be – the desired goals. This can be achieved through processes
such as sharing criteria with learners, effective questioning and feedback. Black and William
define assessment for learning as all those activities undertaken by teachers and/or by the
students, which provide information to be used as feedback to modify the teaching and learning
activities in which they are engaged.
Learners learn best when…
• They understand clearly what they are trying to learn, and what is expected of them.
• They are given feedback about the quality of their work and what they can do to make it better.
• They are given advice about how to go about making improvements.
• They are fully involved in deciding what needs to be done next, and who can give them help if
they need it.
2. ASSESSMENT AS LEARNING
• Assessment as learning is about reflecting the evidence of learning. This is a part of the cycle
of assessment where pupils and staff set learning goals, share learning intentions and success
criteria and evaluate their learning through dialogue and self and peer assessment.
• Through this, learners become more aware of:- what they learn- how they learn- what helps
them learn
3. ASSESSMENT OF LEARNING
• Assessment of learning involves working with the range of available evidence that enables
staff and the wider assessment community to check on student’s progress and using this
information in a number of ways.
• Assessment of learning provides an arena for the management and planning of assessment,
and the teachers to work collaboratively with the evidence. It connects assessment to the
curriculum.
Assessments of the students should be• Valid (based on sound criteria)
• They are reliable (The accuracy of assessment)
• They are comparable (they stand up when they compared in other departments or schools)
Types of Assessment and Evaluation
Assessment and evaluation studies may take place at the subject, department, or Institutional
level, and range in size and scope from a pilot study to a complex project that addresses a
number of different topics, involves hundreds of students, and includes a variety of
methodologies. Typically, assessment efforts are divided into two types, formative or
summative. Below, each is described briefly along with a third less frequently seen type called
process assessment. Included, as well, is a grid that classifies different assessment
methodologies.
Formative Assessment
Formative assessment implies that the results will be used in the formation and revision process
of an educational effort. Formative assessments are used in the improvement of educational
programs. This type of assessment is the most common form of assessment in higher
education, and it constitutes a large proportion of TLL’s assessment work. Since educators are
continuously looking for ways to strengthen their educational efforts, this type of constructive
feedback is valuable.
Summative Assessment
Summative assessment is used for the purpose of documenting outcomes and judging value. It
is used for providing feedback to instructors about the quality of a subject or program, reporting
to stakeholders and granting agencies, producing reports for accreditation, and marketing the
attributes of a subject or program. Most studies of this type are rarely exclusively summative in
practice, and they usually contain some aspects of formative assessment.
Process Assessment
Process assessment begins with the identification of project milestones to be reached, activities
to be undertaken, products to be delivered, and/or projected costs likely to be incurred in the
course of attaining a project’s final goals. The process assessment determines whether the
project has been on schedule, deliverables produced, and cost estimates met. The degree of
difference from the expected process is used to evaluate success.

1. Define language test.
2. Explain the functions of language tests.
TOPIC 1: Functions of Language Tests
V. TEACHING LEARNING ACTIVITES (TLA’s ) (with TLA guides, must be doable thru online)
assessment.
 Formative Quiz
 Hands-on Quiz
 Outline and lesson plan making geared on the 21st century skills.
VIII. REFERENCES
Definition 1
"Language Testing is the practice and study of evaluating the proficiency of an individual in
using a particular language effectively."
Priscilla Allen, University of Washington.
(Winning entry from the 2009/10 "definition" competition run on this website)
Definition 2
"The activity of developing and using language tests. As a psychometric activity, language
testing traditionally was more concerned with the production, development and analysis of tests.
Recent critical and ethical approaches to language testing have placed more emphasis on the
uses of language tests. The purpose of a language test is to determine a person’s knowledge
and/or ability in the language and to discriminate that person’s ability from that of others. Such
ability may be of different kinds, achievement, proficiency or aptitude. Tests, unlike scales,
consist of specified tasks through which language abilities are elicited. The term language
assessment is used in free variation with language testing although it is also used somewhat
more widely to include for example classroom testing for learning and institutional
examinations."
Alan Davies, University of Edinburgh.
FUNCTIONS OF LANGUAGE TESTS
In Learning
Tests are used to measure students’ language ability, to discover how much they have been
learning, to diagnose students’ strengths and weaknesses and to motivate students in learning.
In Teaching
• Tests are used in teaching as a means to ensure effective teaching, to improve teaching
quality and to obtain feedback on student learning
• Tests can have a backwash effect, which means that they may result in changes of
instructional programs or teaching practices to reflect the test contents because language
teachers want their students to do well on high stakes tests for many different reasons.
In Research
• Language tests have a potentially important role in virtually all research, both basic and
applied, that is related to the nature of language proficiency, language processing, language
acquisition, language attrition, and language teaching.

1. Create course outline and lesson plan that are geared towards developing the literacies and the 21st century skills.
TOPIC 1: Outline and lesson plan making geared on the 21st century skills.
assessment.
 Formative Quiz
 Hands-on Quiz
 Demonstration Teaching
VIII. REFERENCES
Constructing a Course Outline or Syllabus

A course outline is a document that benefits students and instructors. It is an essential piece
when designing any course. The course outline has a few purposes.
A syllabus is a planning tool. Writing it guides the instructor’s development of the course.
Through the development of a syllabus, instructors can set course goals, develop student
learning objectives, create and align assessment plans, as well as establish a schedule for the
course.
A course outline or syllabus also works as a guide for students. By setting course goals and
student learning outcomes, you are informing students about the materials they will engage.
The schedule also tells students what expectations are had of them and provides a timeline of
these expectations.
Finally, a course outline also works as a reference for colleagues, administrators, and
accreditation agencies. It allows others to see what you are doing in your course, and what is
expected of your students. In some cases, others may refer to your course outline to determine
what skills students should have after completing your course. Related courses that utilize your
course as a prerequisite or co-requisite will likely build on the outcomes mapped out in your
current course outline.
When creating your course outline there are some essential pieces that you need to include:
Course Description from the Academic Calendar
The University Calendar has a description of your course that gets published every year. It is a
good idea to take a look at this description because this may be the description your students
are using to determine if they wish to take your course or not.
Course Goals
What are the big ideas that you are going to cover in your course? What are the essential
understandings that students will take away with them after the course has finished? It is
important to define these course goals, as they will help you determine what you expect from
your students, and what your students can expect from the course.
Student Learning Objectives/Outcomes
Designing outcomes is essential to designing your course and is a valuable element to have in
your syllabus. The outcomes are usually statements that are verb oriented and directed at the
students. For example: “Students will be able to identify key geomorphological formations on a
Southern Alberta map.” This example uses the verb identify, which is a lower level thinking skill.
A higher order thinking skill is incorporated in the next example: “Students will be able to read
and analyze population maps interpreting any trends the data may show.”
Assessment Overview
The assessment overview is a grading guide that allows students to see what weightings can
apply to the different assessment elements of a course. An example of an assessment overview
is below.
Quizzes: 50%
Participation: 5%
Journal Assignments: 20%
Team Assignment: 10%
Final Exam: 15%
As well as including the overview of grading, a grading scale should be identified for the
students, so they understand at what level they are performing. Grade scales can range
between faculties and departments. It is best that you check with your department and faculty
and use the scale they wish you to use.
Assessment Plan
Assessment plans are built in line with student learning objectives. Student learning objectives
state what students will learn while your assessment plan states how you, as an instructor, will
gather evidence for achievement of the objectives. The assessment plan will detail the type of
assessments that will occur within the course structure, how they will be marked, and how they
provide evidence of student learning. Your assessment plan will more than likely consist of
multiple assessments ranging from online examinations to essays and group projects. Different
assessments can and should be used to find evidence for multiple outcomes.
Schedule of Activities
This portion of the outline should be built once the plan has been made. Once you understand
how you want to assess your students, you can create activities that help facilitate the learning
that needs to be done to help students achieve the objectives. Course activities should work in
parallel with the assessment plan. If students need to provide evidence of learning by
completing a multiple choice exam, then the activities in the schedule should prepare them for
this assessment. Lectures, readings, small group and whole group discussions can all be
activities that help the student meet their learning objectives.
Plagiarism Announcement
Due to student privacy issues, if you wish to submit your student’s work through a plagiarism
detection service such as Turnitin, you must inform your students that you are going to do so.
Furthermore, if students request an alternative method of plagiarism detection because of
privacy concerns, you must provide them with an alternate option.
Reading List
It is a good idea to put the readings for the course within the syllabus. What you include may
simply be a reference to a textbook, or it may be many references to online readings. Listed
readings will allow students, administrators, and other educators see what content will is to be
covered within the course. Listed readings also allow students to prepare for your course and
acquire the texts needed. If the location of your readings is within a Learning Management
System such as Moodle, it is still a good idea to list these readings within the syllabus.
Week 8 Term: 2nd Semester: 1st Academic Year: 2020-2021

Subject Code: EL 11 Course Title: Children and Adolescent Literature
1. Integrate language with the study of literature on the lesson plan.
2. Execute a lesson properly, smoothly, and professionaly.
TOPIC 1: Demonstration Teaching
assessment.
 Formative Quiz
 Hands-on Quiz
 Examination/Review for the Final Exam
VIII. REFERENCES
https://www.slideshare.net/pvenglishteach/science-fiction-47067955
Teaching Presentation Rubric:
Criteria Greatly Exceeds Meets Below Does Not

Exceeds Expectations Expectations Expectations Meet
Expectations Expectations
(Good) (Satisfactory) (Fair)
(Excellent) (Poor)
4 points 3 points 2 points
5 points 1 point
Knowle Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates

dge of masterful above adequate/ below a very poor
Subject knowledge of average average average knowledge of
Matter the subject knowledge of knowledge of knowledge of the subject
matter. the subject the subject the subject matter.
matter. matter. matter.
Commu Demonstrates a Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates

nication superior ability an above an a below a very poor
Skills/Cl to communicate average adequate/avera average ability to
arity with the ability to ge ability to ability to communicate
class/audience, communicate communicate communicate with the
and the with the with the with the class/audienc
presenter/teach class/audienc class/audience, class/audienc e, and the
er is clearly and e, and the and the e, and the presenter/tea
easily presenter/tea presenter/teach presenter/tea cher is not
understood. cher is clearly er is cher is not easily
and easily understood. easily understood.
understood. understood.
Poise/ Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates

Confide an extremely an above an average a below a very poor
nce poised and average display of poise average display of
confidence display of and confidence display of poise and
demeanor while poise and demeanor while poise and confidence
presenting the confidence presenting the confidence demeanor
lesson. demeanor lesson. demeanor while
while while presenting the
presenting the presenting the lesson.
lesson. lesson.
Method Demonstrates a Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates

of superior ability an above an a below a very poor
Present to use creative average adequate/avera average ability to use
ation and effective ability to use ge ability to use ability to use creative and
teaching creative and creative and creative and effective
methods during effective effective effective teaching
the lesson. teaching teaching teaching methods
methods methods during methods during the
during the the lesson. during the lesson.
lesson. lesson.
Voice Speaks using a Speaks using Speaks using an Speaks using Speaks using
superior volume an above adequate/avera an below a poor volume
level and clarity. average ge volume level average level and is
Also speaks volume level and with volume level very difficult
without the and with adequate clarity. and is difficult to
repetition of clarity. Also Also speaks to understand.
words or speaks without using understand. Speaks using
phrases. without using many repetitious Speaks using many
repetition of words or many repetitious
words or phrases. repetitious of words or
phrases. words or phrases.
phrases.
Visual Demonstrates a Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates

Contact superior ability an above an a below a very poor
to maintain eye average adequate/avera above ability to
contact with the ability to ge ability to average maintain eye
class/ audience maintain eye maintain eye ability to contact with
throughout the contact with contact with the maintain eye the class/
lesson. the class/ class/ audience contact with audience
audience throughout the the class/ throughout
throughout lesson. audience the lesson.
the lesson. throughout
the lesson.
Evidenc Demonstrates a Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates

e of superior ability an above an adequate/ a below a very poor
Preparat to organize and average average ability average ability to
ion execute the ability to to organize and ability to organize and
lesson. organize and execute the organize and execute the
execute the lesson. execute the lesson.
lesson. lesson.
Orderly The logical The logical The logical The logical The logical
Sequen progression of progression of progression of progression of progression of
ce the lesson the lesson the lesson the lesson the lesson is
topics is topics is topics is topics is demonstrated
demonstrated demonstrated demonstrated demonstrated with poor
with superior with above with with below competency.
mastery. The average average/adequa average The lesson
lesson easily mastery. The te competency. competency. does not
flows well from lesson easily The lesson The lesson adequately
topic to topic. flows well adequately does not flow from
from topic to flows from topic adequately topic to topic.
topic. to topic. flow from
topic to topic.

ELT 104 Teaching and Assessment of Literature Studies

Uploaded by

Document Informationclick to expand document information

Copyright:

Available Formats

ELT 104 Teaching and Assessment of Literature Studies

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

ELT 104 Teaching and Assessment of Literature Studies

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ref. No.

MODULE CONTENT GUIDE

I. COURSE INTENDED LEARNING OUTCOMES (CILO)

1st Term Schedule 2nd Term Schedule

III. MODULE LEARNING OUTCOMES

Question 2: What should teachers do to help children read literature?

Week 2 Term: 1st Semester: 2nd Academic Year: 2020-2021

Week 3 Term: 1st Semester: 2nd Academic Year: 2020-2021

Week 4 Term: 1st Semester: 2nd Academic Year: 2020-2021

TEACHING LEARNING PROCESS

12 Strategies for Teaching Literature In The 21st Century

Week 5 Term: 1st Semester: 2nd Academic Year: 2020-2021

ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION PRINCIPLES

Week 6 Term: 1st Semester: 2nd Academic Year: 2020-2021

Week 7 Term: 1st Semester: 2nd Academic Year: 2020-2021

Constructing a Course Outline or Syllabus

Week 8 Term: 2nd Semester: 1st Academic Year: 2020-2021

Teaching Presentation Rubric:

Criteria Greatly Exceeds Meets Below Does Not

Knowle Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates

Commu Demonstrates a Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates

Poise/ Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates

Method Demonstrates a Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates

Visual Demonstrates a Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates

Evidenc Demonstrates a Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates

You might also like