지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
This study is in an attempt to take a look at the commonalities and differences between ‘Response based on literature education’ and ‘Constructivism based on literature education’.
The literature educational commonalities are as follow.
First, both criticize the ‘New criticism’ and overcoming its limitations at the same time. Second, both agree that the ‘text’ is just ‘paper and ink’. Third, both deny the unity of the response or interpretation about the literary and pursuing its diversity. Fourth, both are strongly opposed to rote teaching on conceptual knowledge in literature. Fifth, both emphasize the importance of debates and discussions among the learners.
The differences are as follow. First, the former pursues variations of ‘reaction’ of readers, while the latter pursues their ‘interpretations’. Second, The former encourages and highlights the individual reader’s response to the each text. The latter claims the ‘communny cart’, the subjective reactions that occur after the individual readers to read the text, which is not recognized as the meaning or interpretation, but only to the interpretation or meaning obtained through the process of communication between members of social and cultural ‘intersubjectivity’. Third, when it comes to in the evolution of the educational paradigm, The former belonging to the ‘Cognitivism’ that respect for the individual readers’ subjective responses, and The latter belongs to constructivism, especially ‘German radical constructivism’.
The commonality in educational contents is that both are strongly opposed to conceptual knowledge teaching from the new criticism perspective. The difference, on the other hand, the former minimizes conceptual knowledge teaching on the literature, and encourages teachers to improve and diversify the reactions of learners. Meanwhile, the latter claims that teachers should teach the empirical knowledge, the ‘Genre schema’ that needed to interpret the literature text.
목차
등록된 정보가 없습니다.
참고문헌 (53)
참고문헌 신청
Edmund J. Farrel / 1991 / Transaction with Literature / Saint Louis：Liberary of Congress Cataloging Publication data
H. Hauptmeier / 1995 / 구성주의 문예학 / 민음사
James Flood / 1991 / Handbook of research on Teaching the English Language Arts / Macmimman Publishing Company
Louise M. Rosenblatt / 1988 / WRITING AND READIN
Rosenblatte, L. M. / 2006 / 탐구로서의 문학 / 한국문화사
H. Hauptmeier / 1995 / 구성주의 문예학 / 민음사
James Flood / 1991 / Handbook of research on Teaching the English Language Arts / Macmimman Publishing Company
Louise M. Rosenblatt / 1988 / WRITING AND READIN
Rosenblatte, L. M. / 2006 / 탐구로서의 문학 / 한국문화사
이 논문의 저자 정보
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0