Читать книгу Ugandan Children's Literature and Its Implications for Cultural and Global Learning in TEFL - Stephanie Schaidt - Страница 9

For a very long time in FLT history in Germany, cultural learning approaches focused on the study of national cultures. In the late 19^th century and early 20^th century, teaching approaches put their emphasis on the investigation of concrete content and real objects (Realienkunde). From the 1920s, this fact-oriented, positivistic concept evolved into a more nationalist approach which focalised the understanding of the national culture of the countries of the target language (Kulturkunde): “Culture was set apart from the social realia and mystified as a people’s soul and character as expressed in their philosophy, arts and literature” (Buttjes, 1991a, p. 55). The underlying intention was to strengthen the German national identity (see Sommer, 2003, p. 19). With its tendency to generalise, the concept of Kulturkunde was prone to creating stereotypes and presenting a simplistic image of the target culture (Steinbrügge, 2005). Thus, it was only a small step that Kulturkunde was ideologically instrumentalised during the so called ‘Third Reich’. The Nazis used the study of national mentality (Wesenskunde) and the degradation of ‘the other’ to justify their own claim of cultural superiority (Lüsebrink, 2007, p. 61).

After 1945, a break with this Wesenskunde was desired and a depoliticisation of the foreign language classroom was strived for. However, the legacy of Kulturkunde continued to prevail. This concept influenced the foreign language classroom until the 1960s (Buttjes, 1995, p. 144). Now literary works were taken as the most important expressions of national culture: “After the experience of the failure of Kulturkunde and in the emerging intellectual climates of the Cold War and of New Criticism, literature rather than culture was taught in most foreign language classes” (Buttjes, 1991a, p. 57).

In the late 1960s and 1970s, against the backdrop of educational reforms, the student movement and an increasing politicisation of society, teaching about cultures in the foreign language classroom experienced fundamental changes. The term Landeskunde [area studies/regional studies/background studies] was introduced to refer to culture teaching in the foreign language classroom in Germany and various approaches with different foci developed. With the introduction of TEFL as an obligatory subject at the secondary technical school level (Realschule and Hauptschule)1 in 1964/65 (Klippel, 2007), a more practice-oriented approach to teaching about cultures was pursued. The focus shifted to the “actual language learning process” (Buttjes, 1991a, p. 58) and contents were chosen accordingly. Thus, students were prepared for basic interaction in the contexts of travelling and consuming in the foreign language classroom. The communicative turn in the 1970s, which gave rise to communicative competence as the major aim of FLT, contributed to the development of this rather pragmatic, communicative-oriented approach to Landeskunde. Increasingly, however, scholars warned against a Landeskunde approach which reduces cultural contents to the fields of tourism and consumerism and pleaded for a stronger political orientation in FLT. Socio-critical and political perspectives and critical reflections of clichés and stereotypes increasingly found their way into the foreign language classroom during that time (Buttjes, 1981; Fischer-Wollpert, 1968; Keiner & Köhring, 1982; Köhring, 1981; Markmann, 1986; Raasch, 1983; Schüle, 1983).

In addition, the Landeskunde approach developed an intercultural perspective. In this context, the Stuttgarter Thesen zur Rolle der Landeskunde im Französischunterricht (1982) were very influential. This document, which was published by the Robert Bosch Stiftung in cooperation with the German-French Institute, proclaimed “transnationale Kommunikationsfähigkeit [transnational communicative competence]” as the major aim of FLT in an interconnected world. It pointed to the importance of students’ own experiences and cultural background in the context of teaching and learning about cultures:

Der Fremdsprachenunterricht erreicht deshalb erst dann sein Ziel, wenn er die eigenen Erfahrungen der Lernenden und die historisch geprägten Wirklichkeitserfahrungen der Menschen des anderen Landes ausdrücklich in Beziehung setzt. [For this reason, FLT only achieves its aim when it expressly relates learner experiences to the historically influenced experiences of the people in the other country.] (Robert Bosch Stiftung & Deutsch-Französisches Institut, 1982, p. 11; my translation)

Thus, the document encouraged a shift away from the mere focus on the foreign language and culture to a more learner-centred and comparative approach. This led the way to an intercultural orientation in FLT. In the following years, the call for an intercultural Landeskunde approach became louder. Melde (1987) emphasised the importance of relativising one’s own individual and national perspective and establishing a coordination of perspectives. Thus, she anticipated important findings in the field of Fremdverstehen (see Volkmann, 2007, p. 49).

From the 1970s, scholars in foreign language didactics were also increasingly influenced by cultural studies (Hallet, 2002; Kramer, 1976; Nünning & Nünning, 2000; Schumann, 2000). Advocates of cultural studies (Hall, 1980; Hoggart, 1957; Thompson, 1963; Williams, 1958) set themselves apart from an objective and monolithic concept of culture and instead consider culture as a heterogeneous product of human action (see Sommer, 2003, p. 8). Landeskunde approaches which draw on cultural studies also look at culture in a wider sense, integrating all cultural practices, being part of high or popular culture. Political and ideological critique is particularly important for these approaches. They are often associated with “concepts of emancipation, egalitarianism, and critical thinking” (Grimm, Meyer, & Volkmann, 2015, p. 157).

Despite various developments in the field, the concept of Landeskunde enjoys little prestige in academic discourse today. It is criticised that Landeskunde approaches often remain rather vague concerning the political agenda and present idealised social images of the target culture(s). Landeskunde no longer conforms to the contemporary notion of culture: It focuses on monocultures with a fixed national identity and so reduces complexity. Critics further remark that the concept focalises culture with a capital C and neglects culture with a small c (Grimm et al., 2015, p. 156; Volkmann, 2010, p. 45). Another point of criticism is that the focus of Landeskunde is usually on the cognitive domain (knowledge), whereas skills and attitudes are neglected (Raddatz, 1996, p. 245).

Notwithstanding the legitimacy of this criticism, it should be acknowledged that Landeskunde contributed significantly to developments in the field of teaching and learning about cultures and thus provides a crucial impetus for current discussions:

Auffallend ist bei gegenwärtigen interkulturellen und kulturwissenschaftlichen Positionen die demonstrative Abgrenzung gegenüber der als überholt abgewerteten Landeskunde. Dabei wird nicht erkannt, dass Landeskundekonzepte durchgehend von Gegenkonzepten und der genannten Suche nach einem Mehrwert der Landeskunde begleitet waren. Viele der heute diskutierten Fortschritte bei der Betrachtung anderer Kulturen wurden bereits – ohne dass dies entsprechend gewürdigt wird – in den 1970er und 1980er Jahren angebahnt. [When looking at current intercultural and cultural studies positions, the pointed demarcation from the concept of Landeskunde, which has been devaluated as outdated, is striking. It is not recognised that concepts in Landeskunde were continuously accompanied by counter-concepts and the search for an enriched Landeskunde. Without being adequately acknowledged, the ground for much of the progress in the field of learning about cultures discussed today had already been prepared in the 1970s and 1980s.] (Volkmann, 2010, p. 49; my translation)

Aspects of a rather politically oriented Landeskunde (see Köhring, 1981; Markmann, 1986; Schüle, 1983), for example, constitute the foundation of the global education approach in TEFL in Germany (see Chapter 2.8).