Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-rwnhh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-18T13:14:48.878Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Meaningful literacy: Writing poetry in the language classroom

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 May 2011

David I. Hanauer
David I. Hanauer*
Affiliation:
Indiana University of Pennsylvania, [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper develops the concept of meaningful literacy and offers a classroom methodology – poetry writing – that manifests this approach to ESL/EFL literacy instruction. The paper is divided into three sections. The first deals with the concept of meaningful literacy learning in second and foreign language pedagogy; the second summarizes empirical evidence that characterizes second language (L2) poetry writing; and the third describes the practical aspects of teaching poetry writing. This approach is presented as a way of humanizing the second and foreign language classroom by refocusing on the individual language learner as the center of the learning process.

Type
Plenary Speeches
Information
Language Teaching , Volume 45 , Issue 1 , January 2012 , pp. 105 - 115
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Hanauer, D. (2003). Multicultural moments in poetry: The importance of the unique. The Canadian Modern Language Review 60.1, 69–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanauer, D. I. (2010). Poetry as research: Exploring second language poetry writing. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kramsch, C. (2006). Preview article: The multilingual subject. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 16.1, 97–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kramsch, C. (2009). The multilingual subject. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Laufer, B. & Nation, P. (1999). A vocabulary-size test of controlled productive ability. Language Testing 16.1, 33–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maxwell, J. A. (1996). Qualitative research design. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
Newman, M. & Hanauer, D. (2005). The NCATE/TESOL teacher education standards: A critical review.TESOL Quarterly 39.4, 753–763CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pennebaker, J. W., Chung, C. K., Ireland, M., Gonzales, A. & Booth, R. (2007). The development and psychometric properties of LIWC2007. Austin: LIWC Inc.Google Scholar
Widdowson, H. G. (1993). The ownership of English. TESOL Quarterly 28.2, 377–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Widdowson, H. G. (1998). Context, community and authentic language. TESOL Quarterly 32.4, 705–716.CrossRefGoogle Scholar