A cross-case study to compare significant relationships between official and actual curriculum and teaching approaches for the study of literature in British schools forms 1-6.

摘要

This study described and compared the literature models employed in four selected cases--three in Great Britain and one in the United States--in 22 English teachers' classrooms.;Categorization of questionnaire responses, interview comments, and classroom observations was dictated by the data and analyzed for answers to the two guiding questions: (1) What is the goal of the study of literature? and (2) What approaches to literature shape its teaching?;Based on the data, the findings follow: (1) While British reading lists seemed to be significantly influenced by the student ethnic enrollment, such was not the case at the American school. (2) The definitive structure that the G.C.S.E. gave to the British literature studies was equally accomplished by the American teachers who worked together to guarantee horizontal and vertical articulation. (3) The study of poetry was not emphasized as much in the American case as it was in the three British cases, but study of the essay, which had not featured in any of the classes observed in the British schools during the researcher's study, was an important element in the literature curriculum of the American high school.;Less able students invested more class time in just reading literary works while more able students were reading literature independent of the teacher. (4) Across British cases, the inquiry method was most favored; in the American case, the shared inquiry method was most favored. (5) Gender played a significant role in the teacher's approach to teaching literature and in curriculum and instruction. (6) Teaching approaches do not represent those defined in the texts. (7) The independent and private schools provided numerous opportunities for cultural study and enrichment. (8) Pastoral care was a part of the school structure and curriculum in all four cases. (9) Objective-type exams testing factual or recall information were not employed.