TEACHING SHAKESPEARE AT TERTIARY LEVEL: PRIMARY AND SECONDARY BENEFITS

Authors

  • Silvana Neshkovska Faculty of Education – Bitola “St. Kliment Ohridski” University – Bitola- Macedonia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.34301/alsc.v2i1.17

Keywords:

Shakespeare, tertiary level, EFL, benefits

Abstract

Teaching Shakespeare at all levels of education (primary, secondary and tertiary) has a long history not only in English but in non-English speaking countries as well. The inclusion of mandatory courses on Shakespeare in the curriculum of university studies of English as a second/foreign language has proven to be particularly beneficial and worthwhile, although some concerns are voiced about the outdatedness of Shakespeare‘s works. What we propose in this paper is that Shakespeare should be preserved in the curriculum of English majors, especially in the curriculum of English majors of EFL as the benefits for the students are, in fact, multifarious. In fact, on the basis of careful class observation, introspection and self- evaluation, as well as students’ feedback, what
we suggest here is that there are two types of benefits of teaching Shakespeare at university level – primary and secondary benefits. The former affect students’ knowledge of the English language, i.e. improve the development of students’ language skills (writing, reading, speaking and listening). The latter are more general and influence the development of students’ personality by improving their thinking processes, emotional intelligence and cultural awareness. All of these, we believe, are pivotal in generating well-rounded future English professionals who at the same time will be well-balanced individuals capable of handling all sorts of life challenges.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Addison, M. N. (2013). Teaching Ideas in Shakespeare. The Journal of Literature in Language Teaching. Retrieved from http://liltsig.org/journal/2_2/

LiLT2_2_FA_Addison.pdf

Anderson, N. (2015). Skipping Shakespeare? Yes, English majors can often bypass the Bard. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2015/04/23/skipping-shakespeare-yes-english-majors-canoften-bypass-the-bard/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.33ab9658a21b.

Brumfit, C. (2001). Individual Freedom in Language Teaching. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

Gibson, R. (1998). Teaching Shakespeare. Cambridge, U.K.; New York: Cambridge University Press.

Madsen, V. (2001). Strategies for Teaching the Shakespearean Drama. A project submitted to the Faculty of Education of the University of Lethbridge in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Education, Lethbridge, Alberta.

Khatib, M., Rezaei, S., & Derakhshan, A. (2011). Literature in EFL/ESL Classroom. English Language Teaching, 4, 201-208.

Salomone, E. R., & Davis, E. J. (1997). Teaching Shakespeare into the twenty-first century. Athens: Ohio University Press.

Strauss, V. (2015). Teacher: Why I don’t want to assign Shakespeare anymore (even though he’s in the Common Core. Retrieved from https://

www.washingtonpost.com/news/answersheet/wp/2015/06/13/teacher-why-i-dont-want-to-assign-shakespeare-anymore-even-though-hesinthe-common-core/?utm_term=.0faf0dc13bab

Downloads

Published

2019-06-30

How to Cite

Neshkovska, S. . (2019). TEACHING SHAKESPEARE AT TERTIARY LEVEL: PRIMARY AND SECONDARY BENEFITS. The International Journal of Applied Language Studies and Culture, 2(1), 35–41. https://doi.org/10.34301/alsc.v2i1.17