Sunday, 28 September 2014

comparative study between 'The Old Man and The sea' and 'Moby Dick'

Topic :- Comparative study between ‘The Old          Man and The Sea’ and ‘Moby dick’

Name :- Upadhyay Devangana s.

Subject :- The American Literature

Roll no :- 05

Submitted to :- MKB University

 Guide by :- Heenaba Zala

·      Comparative study between ‘The Old Man and The Sea’ and ‘Moby Dick’

·       Introduction
v Herman Melville
                           Herman Melville, the author of ‘Moby Dick’, is recognized today as one of America’s greatest writers, although there was a time when critics as well as readers rejected his writings. He wrote more than ten major novels, based on experiences that he had gone through himself. Some of his adventures in real life were more exciting than the ones he describes in his novels, but none was as strange and thrilling as the story he tells in ‘Moby dock’.
                      Melville was born in 1819 in New York City. His parents like many other Americans, were of mixed nationality, being partly English and partly Dutch. The Melville family was a well known one, but had become poor at the age of fifteen in order to various jobs: farming, teaching at schools, working in offices- in fact any work that he could find. Finally, in 1839, he went to sea as a common sailor. His first voyage took him to the port of Liverpool, in England. He found life at sea so attractive that he decided to remain in this profession.
                       In December 1840, Melville joined the crew of a whaling-ship, the Acushnet, and went on a long voyage to the pacific. After sixteen months on board, he and a shipmate ran away from the ship when it stopped at Nukhera, an island in the group of islands in the pacifies known as the Marquesas. They spent several weeks on this island, where they were in danger of being killed and eaten by cannibal tribes, before returning to America on another ship. Melville described these adventures in tow of his novels which become instant hits-typee and Omoo.
                       Between 1840 and 1843. Melville worked on two other whaling ships the Lucy Ann and the Charles and Henry. His experiences on these ships were used by him in writing ‘Moby Dick’.
                He gave up his sea-doing life in 1844 and devoted himself completely to writing. In 1850, he met the great American writer, Nathaniel Hawthorne, who encouraged him to write ‘Moby dick’ and to whom this novel was dedicated.
                     ‘Moby dick’ is a book with several lyres of meaning and read at different levels. At one level it is an exciting tale of adventure. There are many other well known stories of adventures at sea, but what makes; Moby Dick’ special is the fact that it provide a rare glimpse into a particular kind of life-life on a whaling-ship, or whaler, which Melville knew at first hand.
                      This is the story of Captain Ahab, the captain of a whaling-ship, the Piqued, and his unending battle against a white whale, to which sailors had given the name ‘Moby Dick’. Because of its unusual colour and its great size, Moby Dick had become a valued prize for all whale-hunters. But in the case of Captain Ahab, there was a desire for revenge as well. In an earlier meeting with ‘Moby Dick’, Ahab had lost one of his legs, which were bitter off by the whale. Thereafter, he had only one goal in life-to kill the white whale. After mother at last; the battle is resumed.
                        The story is narrated by a sailor called Ishmael, who becomes a witness to the battle between Ahab and Moby Dick.
v Ernest Hemingway

                 Ernest Miller Hemingway was an American author and journalist. We can find strong influence of 20th century fiction on Hemingway’s works. He won the Novel Prize in literature in1954. He published seven novels, six short story collection, and two non-fiction works. Many of his works are literature. 
                  In 1948, furious at the critical reception of Across the River and into the Trees, he wrote the draft of ‘The Old Man and The Sea’ in eight weeks, saying that it was;
“The best I can write ever for all of my life.”
‘the Old Man and The Sea’ become a book-of-the-month selection made Hemingway an international celebrity and won the Pulitzer prize in may 1952 a month before he left for his second trip to Africa.
                   ‘The Old man and the sea’ is a story about old man how wants to prove himself. He wants to show his ability to young fisherman. He is also success to prove him. On the eighty-fifth day of his unlucky streak, Santiago does as promised sailing his skiff far beyond the island’s shallow coastal waters and venturing into the Gulf Stream. He prepares his lines and drops them. At noon a big fish which he knows is a marlin, takes the bait that Santiago has placed one hundred fathoms deep in the waters. The old man expertly hooks the fish, but he cannot pull it in. instead, the fish begins to pull the boat.
                 But he gets success to prove himself and he was able to kill fish.

                    Beginning of the both novels ‘The Old man and The Sea’ and ‘Moby Dick’ are different. In ‘The Old Man and The Sea’ is third person narrator and novel began with old man’s descriptions while in ‘Moby Dick’ Ishmael is the narrator and story began with his life. At the beginning of the novel he introduces us to himself. As we know that name is our identity. We generally known by our name. But in ‘Moby Dick’ narrator hide his identity from us.
                         Ishmael is not his real mane at the beginning of the novel he told us that;

“Call me Ishmael”
That is not my real name, but what name could be better?”

                       Ishmael was the name of a man who driven out of his home and forced to wander through the desert for many, many years. He found no peace or rest in life. His story is told on the Bible.
                    Ishmael is name adopted from Bible. Here we can find that he wants to hide his identity from us. In ‘The Old Man and The Sea’ also we don’t know about narrator or in ‘Moby Dick’ also we don’t know about narrator that what is his real name and what is his real identity? Whatever information that he gives us about know. So we can find similarity here that in both novel narrators is unknown.
                   Ahab and old man they are central character in both novels. Ahab is a young man. He is a captain of a whaling-ship. He is a captain of personality to kills any fish. Old man is a aged person and very week also. They both want to kill specific fish. Ahab wants to kill Moby Dick and old man wants to kill shark.
                  At the end of the novels both are die. But one is dying after completed his goal and one cannot. At the end of the novel “The Old Man and the Sea’ old man is able to complete his vision to kill the shark. But he cannot able to complete his vision to kill the Moby Dick.
                          What is reason behind it? Moby Dick and shark are symbols of nature. Old man is very deep love in nature, while Ahab heat nature. If we compared both the novels we can say that we all are part of the nature. We cannot accept our self from the nature, if nature he or she cannot able to live life or nature swallow them. Our existences destroyed somewhere.

“Fish he said ‘I love you and respect you very much.
But I will kill you dead before this day ends.”
-         Old Man
                        This dialogue is representing love of old man’s toward nature. We can find how smoothly and beautifully he is deal with fish and nature. He wants to kill fish not for hatred or any other matter of revenge. But whatever he done it is only to prove himself and get money.
“Please do not refuse Captain Ahab”
The other man begged.”My only son is in that boat. Please help me find him.”

“I am sorry “Ahab replied roughly
“But I have no time. I must sail on.”

“Captain Ahab I shall not leave your ship till you say yes’ to me.
Surely you yourself have a son at home. You know
A father’s heart! How can you refuse? Please help me;
Please help me; or if my terns will not melt your heart, tell me
How much I must pay for your help! I am willing to pay your price.”

“Captain”, he said slowly, “there is not enough money in this world to buy
Ahab. I too, am searching for something and to me it is far
More important than your son or any other man. I cannot help you.
May God excuse me if I am doing wrong! Now please go.”

                      In this dialogue Ahab was taking with another ship’s Captain. He is in trouble his ship was broken. He needs help from Ahab. But Ahab not ready to help him because, he is become a blind into take revenge with Moby Dick. Ahab forget everything in revenge, he does not career for any things. He has responsibility of every sailor from the ship but he forgets his responsibility and any think about his personal revenge.
“I can always come in one the glow from Havana.
There are two more hours before the sun sets and
May be he doesn’t may be he will come up with the sunrise.
I have no cramps and I feel strong. It is that has the hook in his mouth.”

                              In this dialogue we can find hope of the old man. His hope is to much powerful. So many days passes than even he live with hope that when next day will come his lucks also work and he is able to kill fish. And we can find at the end of the novel that he is become success in his vision. Human should live with the hope and it will work.
“Do I look old Starbuck? I feel old I feel faint,
Bowed and humped as if I were Adam carrying the centuries on his shoulders.
Come, stand close to me. I see my wife and child in your eyes.
No you shall stay on board when we chase Moby Dick.”

“Let us go back Captain, “he begged
“Let us go home. Let me change the ship’s course.”
                             In this dialogue we can see well power of Ahab. After long waiting he is loss his confidence and passion. He is telling to his friend Starbuck that “Do I look OLD.” He is thinking that old is a symbol of weakness. Old man cannot do work hard. Here we can find mentality of both the characters that he has an ability to do something extraordinary. And one is very young person than even he think that old man cannot do work hard and still he is not able to catch Moby Dick So he doubted on his own self.
·        Conclusion
              If we compare both novels we can see that one is represented evilness of human being and one is showing wail power of human. If man thinks to do something so any costs he is able to do that if not go against the nature if he I trying to go against nature, nature well kill human being. We can also say that age Is not limitation for doing something sailors are killed and Ahab himself not able to save his life. But the even his goals not fulfill. Old man also die at the end but he is completed his goal.





Fate play an important role in the life of a person (waiting for Godot)

Topic:- Fate play an important role in the life of a person (waiting for Godot)

Name:- upadhyay Devangana S.

Subject:-T he Modernist literature

Roll no:- 05

Submitted to:- MKB University

Guide by :- dr. dilip Barad

·      Fate play an important role in the life of a person (Waiting For godot)

·      Introduction

‘Waiting for Godot’ is originally written in French in 1948, Beckett personally translated the play into English.
                   Beckett is known to have commented,
“I had little talent for happiness.”
                        This was evidenced by his frequent bouts of depression, even as a young man. He often stayed in bed until late in the afternoon and hated long conversations. As a young poet he apparently rejected the advances the advances of James Joyce’s daughter and then commented that he did not have feelings that were human. This sense of depression would show up in much of his writing, especially in ‘waiting For Godot’ where it is a struggle to get through life.
                   Beckett journeyed through Ireland France, England and Germany and continued to write poems and stories. It is likely that he met up with many of the tramps and vagabonds who later emerged in his writing, such as the two tramps Estragon and Vladimir in ‘Waiting for Godot’. On his travels through Paris Beckett would always visit with Joyce for long periods. Beckett permanently made Paris his home in 1937 shortly after moving there he was stabled him for money. He had to recover from a perforated lung in the hospital. Beckett then went to visit his assailant who remained in prison. When Beckett demanded to know why the man had attacked him, he replied “Je ne sais pas, Monsieur” This attitude about life comes across in several of the author’s later writings.
                  All of Beckett’s major works were written in French. He believed that French forced him to be more disciplined and to use the language more wisely. However, ‘Waiting for Godot’ was eventually translated into the English by Beckett himself.
                Samuel Beckett also become one of the first absurdist play writes to win international fame. His works have been translated into over twenty Nobel Prize for literature, one of the few times this century that almost everyone agreed the recipient deserved it. He continued to write until his death in 1989, but towards the end he remarked that each word seemed to him “an unnecessary stain on silence and nothingness”
                He befriended the famous Irish novelist James Joyce, and his first published work was an essay on Joyce. In 1951 and 1953, Beckett wrote his most famous novels, the trilogy;
·        Molloy
·        Malone Dies
·        The Unnamable
                            The most famous of Beckett’s subsequent plays include Endgame (1958) and Krapp’s Last tape (1959). He also wrote several even more experimental plays, like Breath 91969) a thirty-second play. Beckett was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1969 and died in 1989 in Paris.
                  Throughout the work one can find religious, Philosophical, classical, psychoanalytical and biographical especially wartime-references, there are ritualistic aspects and elements literally lifted. From vaudeville and there is a danger in making more of these than what they are, merely structural conveniences avatars into which the writer places his fictional characters.
                           Beckett makes this point emphatically clear in the opening notes to Film:
“No truth value attaches to the above, regarded
Of merely structural and dramatic convenience.”

Lawrence Harvey saying that:
“His work does not depend on experience [it is]
Not a record of experience. Of course you use it.”

                        ‘Waiting for Godot’ also illustrates an attitude toward man’s experience on earth: the poignancy, oppression, camaraderie, hope, corruption, and bewilderment of human experience that can only be reconciled in mind and art of the absurdist. If Godot is God, then Didi and Gogo’s (mankind’s) faith in God is not only, subject to doubt, but may also have almost entirely disappeared. Yet the illusion of faith-that deeply embedded hopes that Godot might comes still flickers in the minds of Vladimir and Estragon. It is almost as if the faith of these two men has been tested to such extremes that they can perfectly well see the logic of renouncing it-but they cannot completely.    
                     Broadly speaking existentialists hold there are certain questions that everyone must deal with (if they are to take human life seriously) question such as death the meaning of human existence and the place of god in human existence. By and large they believe that life is very difficult and that it doesn’t have an “Objective” or universally known value, but that the individual must create value by affirming it and living it, not by taking about it. The play touches upon all of these issues.
                        We can’t fail to miss the theme of uncertainty in ’waiting for Godot’. Uncertainty is pervasive throughout the play: “the uncertainty of purpose of time, place, emotion, relationships, truth and hope.”Existence is the only certainty the play allows. The Cartesian dictum;

“I think, therefore I am”

Is challenged but essentially hold true. Didi and Gogo are themselves vivid dramatic representations of the Descartes’ body/mind split. Didi is all minds, Gogo all body. Thinking and inexhaustible talking may not be the same thing, but in the absence of the one the other will do. Throughout the play thinking is associated with doubt, with uncertainty, weariness, or absurdity. Clearly, the image of our ability to think is challenged in this play.
                    The language of the play is stripped bare, scaled down to its naked essence. You won’t find a writer more capable than Beckett in this regard. The beauty of Beckett’s language is in its absolute economy. It’s a tight little fist that punches hard. The language of this play forces us to reflect on how we use language, really. Is it as neat and tidy as we think? Are we really that concerned about being logical or rational? Do we really describe “reality” and how rational or logical is reality? How much of what we say is emotional, illogical and ambiguous?
                      In all of its aspects, including its language. ‘Waiting for Godot’ confronts the absurdity of existence and challenges us to figure out who we are and what we’re doing here. In this random universe, where everything who lives and who dies, who’s up and who’s down, is a matter of pure chance, and the odds aren’t necessarily in our favor, what do we do? What’s our purpose? The existentialist would say that our purpose is to be confronting our existence, our being to be aware of and a part of every passing moment to make choices, to act-to live authentically, in good faith aware of our essential freedom and responsibility. This is what Didi can’t or won’t do, and he persuades Gogo to keep him company while he continues to wait for Godot, while he pins his hopes on a future that may never arrive. His futile waiting is either absurd or heroic, depending on your own interpretation.
                       Reading a work of literature often makes a reader experience certain feelings. These feeling differ with the content of the work and are usually needed to perceive the author’s ideas in the work. For example; Samuel Beckett augments a reader’s understanding of ‘Waiting for Godot’ by conveying a mood, (one which the characters in the play experience) to the reader. Similarly a dominant mood is thrust upon a reader in Beowulf. There moods which are conveyed aid the author in conveying ideas to a reader.
                  In ‘waiting for Godot’, Beckett uses many pauses silences and ellipses to express a feeling of waiting and unsureness. There is a twofold purpose behind this technique. For one, it shows that Vladimir and estragon the two main characters that are waiting for Godot, are unsure of why they are waiting for him. This also foreshadows that they will be waiting a very long time. In some cases in literature, as idea can only be conveyed properly if those on the receiving end of the idea are able to experience the feelings that a character is experiencing in the work. For example in order for a reader to feel how and understand why Vladimir and Estragon feel as though they do while they, wait, it is essential for that reader to either feelings that Vladimir and Estragon are experiencing. Vladimir and Estragon are waiting, waiting for Godot, to be exact and Beckett wants the reader to feel as if he or she were waiting also. Along with the feeling of waiting that a reader may experience, he or she might also understand how Vladimir and Estragon feel at times.
                         Unsure not very anxious to move on and constantly having to wait. A feeling of timelessness is even evoked, allowing almost anyone from nearly any time to understand Vladimir and Estragon’s predicament. Many times people may feel overwhelmed by a higher force unalterable such as their fate. In the Anglo-Saxon culture a popular belief was that of fate. The writers of Beowulf may have known that not all people believe in the power of fate. Therefore to properly convey such an idea as the inevitability of fate in the epic the writers included events which when read are also ‘experienced’ by the reader. For example, the narrator of Beowulf states how fate is not on Beowulf’s side. After many years of winning countless battles, Beowulf was killed by a dragon in a fierce fight. While he was fighting and because the narrator had stated that fate was not on his side, the reader could identify with Beowulf and feel how he may have at the time: overwhelmed, overpowered and as if a force greater than he was controlling him (his fate).
                         Moods that are created such as that of longing or waiting and fear or inevitability, in ‘Waiting for Godot’ and Beowulf respectively hold a distinct purpose. The moods presented usually serve the purpose of helping the author express more fully and the idea or ideas that he or she wishes to convey. Also by conveying a universal mood, or one that nearly everyone is able to comprehend and interpret, the work of literature’s longevity is augmented. This will further help the reader to interpret the work and understand more fully the moods presented.
                  Inspired by Beckett’s literary style, particularly in ‘Waiting for Godot’ Stoppard wrote ‘Rosencrantz and Guildenstern and Dead’ As a result of this many comparisons can be drown between these two plays. Stopper’s waiting was also influenced by Shakespeare’s ‘Hamlet’. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern as minor characters exist within Shakespeare’s world providing Stoppard with his protagonists. However, the play is not an attempt to rewrite ‘Waiting for Godot’ in a framework of Shakespeare’s drama.
                      In studying these texts the reader is provoked into analyzing, comparing and contrasting them. In particular the characters in ‘Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead’ provide intriguing material to consider the human condition. The characters their personality traits and responses to stimuli, as well as what directs and motivates them is worthy of discussion.
                    Stoppard gives Rosencrantz and Guildenstern an existence outside ‘Hamlet’ although it is one of little significance and they idle away their time only having a purpose to their lives when the play rejoins the ‘Hamlet’ plot after they have been called by the king’s messenger:
“There was a messenger……. That’s right.
We were sent for.”
Their lives end tragically due to this connection with ‘Hamlet’ predetermined by the title, but the role provided them with a purpose to their otherwise futile lives making them bearable. Their deaths evoke sadness and sympathy leaving reader grieving for them.
                In contrast to Stopper’s play ‘Waiting for Godot’ is much bleaker in the respect that Vladimir and Estragon seem to have no purpose or direction in their lives. Their only hope rests on the mysterious Godot who ever comes however they do remain alive at the end. This leads the reader to question which pair of characters are the most unfortunate. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern may not have been saved from death but they have been saved from the futility of life which Vladimir and Estragon exclaim:
“We can’t go on like this”

Yet ironically they are left to do so.
               In ‘Waiting for Godot’ we know little concerning the protagonists, indeed from their comments they appear to know little about themselves and seem bewildered and confused as to the extent of their existence.
                      Their situation is obscure and Vladimir and Estragon spend the day (representative of their lives) waiting for the mysterious Godot interacting with each other with quick and short speech. Although Beckett’s characters seem to expect so little from life, Viviam Mercier observes that they are never the less frustrated.
“They expect so little from life and yet
Their minimal expectations are frustrated.”
We laugh at the characters because the scenes are humorous, yet it is human unhappiness that we are laughing at.
                       Beckett creates this human in such a way that there is no discernible purpose behind it. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are two Elizabethans not easily told apart who play games to idle away the time, relying on others for amusement and impetus. They resemble Vladimir and Estragon in their interdependent relationship with one another however characteristically they are very different. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are incompetent and unfortunate. They continually appear to be bemused and lost unaware of what they are doing and why they are doing it, yet still feel omnipotent able to escape. Martin Esslin comments on their situation ”Beckett’s characters are no antique heroes and they are mostly unaware of the depth of their predicament.” 
                           At one point Guildenstern says;

“We are entitling to some direction……….
I would have thought.”

Guildenstern begins to accept this feeling that his life is out of his control and says;
“We move idly towards eternity, without
Possibility of reprieve or hope of explanation.”

“We’ll know better next time.”
                  Rosencrantz and Guildenstern’s deaths shows how effectively Stoppard created these characters by the audience’s emotional reaction to their Vulnerability and predicament.
               Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are unable to get their own names correct and similarly other characters in the play confuse them highlighting their insignificance:
“My mane is Guildenstern and this is Rosencrantz.
I’m sorry-his name’s Guildenstern  and I’m Rosencrantz.”
They obviously cannot register their own identities or value. This strange lack of identity and individuality is odd as they actually different. Human nature is such that we believe we are the centre of our world and yet we are merely insignificant in someone else’s. Stoppard exemplifies this in ’Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead’ by the unique connection the play has with Shakespeare’s ‘Hamlet’ on which it is based.
                    Stoppard integrates the two plays by drawing out two minor characters from ‘Hamlet’ turning them into the protagonists bringing them to the fore-front of the stage in his play. He creates an identity for them separate to that in ‘Hamlet’. Likewise the protagonists in ‘Hamlet’ are reduced to minor characters in Stopper’s production. Stoppard is known for grafting much of his best works onto plays that are already well established, such as his play ‘On the Razzle (1981) which is an adaptation of a Austrian play ‘Einen Jux will er sich machen’ by Johann Nestroy.
                 The first references to ‘Hamlet’ show Rosencrantz and Guildenstern’s role in Shakespeare’s play. They are sent for by Claudius although they don’t know for what purpose. Claudius greets them;

“The need we have to use you did provoke
Our hasty sending.”
Rosencrantz: “We were sent for”
Guildenstern: “yes”
Rosencrantz: “That’s why we were here” He looks around, seems doubtful

                             Despite their confusion and hesitation they seem to regain identity and purpose when they re-enter the ‘Hamlet’ plot. Hamlet greets them;
“My excellent good friends; How does thou Guildenstern?”

                        The other story they become a part of is that of the player and the Tragedians. From their speeches is becomes clear how important it is for them to have an audience. The player illustrates their dependence on others because good performers are nothing without an audience and in this quest for an audience they;

“Look on every exit being an entrance somewhere else.”

                  Central to both plays is the theme of futile waiting and nothing happening which the audience can relate to the feeling frustration and ineffectiveness. In ‘Waiting for Godot’; Vladimir and Estragon live their lives in paralyzed anticipation in case Godot comes but they may not even recognize him if he does. This shows the resilience of humans to retain hope, often until the end. Their whole lives are resting on ‘Godot’ which is never defined. Whether it is supposed to be God or death or something else is unclear. Every evening they wait for this ‘Godot’ who they have probably never met “He’s a kind of acquaintance,’ We hardly know him’ “. They seek to pass the time representative of human fear that the end will come but also afraid that it will not. Stoppard suggests the outcome to this will be as a result fate or chance and tries to show how chance can be a key part of human life.
              The possibility of chance is discussed in the first few pages where the two protagonists are tossing coins and the outcome is left to fate and probability. All the possible meanings of the word ‘chance’ are shown in the following quotes illustrating its importance.

Player: “It was chance then?”
Guildenstern: “you found us.”
Player: “Oh yes.”
Guildenstern: “ Chance then”.
Player: “or fate.”
Guildenstern: ”Yours or ours?”
Player: “It could hardly be one without the other”
Guildenstern: “Fate then”
Player: “We have no control.”
                 The Player readily accepts dusting and the unknown future, like Rosencrantz and Guildenstern who like to feel that they do have control in their lives.
                       In ‘Waiting for Godot’ the subject of chance and probability is also considered;

Estragon: “I don’t know there’s an even chance, or nearly.”
Vladimir: “Well, What’ll we do?”
Estragon: “Well, don’t let’s do anything, its safer.”

·       Conclusion

                   What is this play really about? What does it all mean? What does it all have to do with us? Some audiences see immediately how they, like Gogo and Didi, are waiting, too. Maybe not for “Godot”, but for something. A little help, a little push, a little sunshine, a little windfall. The play tales pains not to be specific, to provide the space to read into it any way we want to. It does not preach a “message.” But when you think about it even a little bit, you realize that, just like Gogo and Didi we’re waiting all the time, too. Think about it: aren’t we waiting for war in Iraq to end. If you are a bank broker you might be waiting for and to bankruptcy court or class action suits or social security or taxes. Or an end to racism…. An end to poverty, domestic violence… May of us are waiting for environmental disaster, the next world war, the next flu epidemic, the next school shooting, the next terror attack… We’re waiting for security, good times that great vacation, that better job, that better wardrobe, that better car, that smaller computer , cell phone; We’re waiting for the perfect soul mate, the perfect body, the perfect moment… We’re waiting for our hopes to be heard our prayers to be answered, our wishes to be granted… We’re waiting, and meanwhile we’re…here. 


Second Language Teacher Education as shifting construct

Topic:- Second Language Teacher Education (SLTE)

Name :- Upadhyay Devngana S.

Subject :- Second Language Teaching (ELT)

Topic:- Second Language Teacher Education (SLTE)

Roll no :- 05

Submitted to :- MKB University

Guide by :- Parth Batt

Second Language Teacher Education

·        Introduction :-
                                    Second Language (L2) teacher education describes the field of professional activity through which individual learns to teach L2S. In terms commonly used in the field, these formal activities are generally referred to as teacher training, while those that are undertaken by experienced teachers, primarily on a voluntary individual basis, are referred to as teacher development. I return to this issue of nomenclature later on at this point, however the reader should understand that the tern to be language teachers. Those learning to teach – whether they new to the profession or experienced, whether in pre – or in – service contexts – are referred to as teacher learners.
                          The shifting ground of terminology has plagued L2 teacher education for at least the past 30 years. The four – word concept has tended to be an awkward integration of subject – matter and professional process. In this hybrid the person of the teacher and the processes of learning to teach have often been overshadowed. As the relative emphasis has shifted the focus among these four words has migrated from the consent, the ‘Second language’, to the person of the ‘teacher’, to the process of learning or ‘education’, thus capturing the evolution in the concept of L2 teacher education in the field. Until the latter half of the 1980, the emphasis was on the contributions of various academic disciplines e.g. :-
Linguistics, psychology and literature
To what made an individual an ‘L2 teacher’.
“The field of teacher education is a relatively
Underexplored one in both second and foreign
Language teaching. The literature on teacher
Education in language teaching is slight compared with
The literature on issues such as methods and
Techniques for classroom teaching”

·       The Gap Between Teacher Education And Teacher Learning :-

                    It is ironic that L2 teacher education has concerned itself very little with how people actually learn to teach. Rather, the focus has conventionally been on the subject matter – what teachers should know and to a lesser degree on pedagogy – how they should teach it. The notion that there is a learning process that undergirded, f not directs, teacher education is a very recent one. There are many reasons for this gap between teacher education and teacher learning. Some have to do with the research paradigms and methods that have been valued and used in producing our current knowledge. In the case of teacher education, there paradigms raise questions about how teaching is defined and studied in education and how teacher education inks to the study of teaching. Other reasons have to do with history. In the case of L2 teacher education these reasons have raised the issue of how the so – called ‘parent’ disciplines of applied linguistics – cognitive and experimental psychology – and first language (L1)acquisition have defined what language teachers need to know and be able to do. Still other reasons have had to do with professionalization and attempts to legitimize teaching through the incorporation of research – driven, as contrasted with practice – derived, knowledge to improve teaching performance.
·       Teacher Education From Knowledge Transmission To Knowledge Construction :-
                                      In general terms however it is fair to say that teacher education has been predicated on the idea that knowledge about teaching and learning can be transmitted through processes of organized professional education to form individuals as teachers. This knowledge has been broadly defined as consisting of subject matter and pedagogy. From this standpoint, pre – service teacher education programmers provide teacher – learners with certain knowledge – usually in the form of general theories about language learning prescriptive grammatical information about language, and pedagogical method – that will be applicable to any teaching context. Leaching, to teach has meant learning about teaching, usually in the context of the teacher education programme, and then actually doing it in another context. The bridge to practice has come in observing teachers and in practicing classroom teaching behaviors overtime in other classroom contexts during their first years of teaching.
                          There are many problems with this knowledge – transmission view. Principally, it depends on the transfer of knowledge and skills from the teacher education programme to the classroom in order to improve teaching. Thus, this view overlooks, or discounts the fact that the teacher learning takes place in on – the – job initiation into the practices of teaching. Further it does not account for what practicing teachers know about teaching and how they learn more through professional teacher education than they receive in – service, during their teaching careers.
                              Since the 1980s teacher education has moved from this view of knowledge transmission to one of knowledge construction in which teacher – learn build their own understanding of language teaching through their experience by integrating theory, research and opinion with empirical and reflective study of their own classroom practices. To understand this change from knowledge transmission to knowledge construction.
·       Background and Research
                               For many reasons there tended to be very little substantial research in teacher education, both in education generally and in the field of language teaching. From the 1960s to 1980s the process – product parading which dominated educational research focused researchers on how specific classroom or curricular processes generated particular learning outcomes or products. In language teaching throughout the 1970s, process – product research combined behaviorism to emphasis a view of teaching that focused on activity and technique. Effective classrooms were those in which teachers successfully applied learned behaviors to condition their student’s mastery of language forms. Teacher education if it was thought of at all, was viewed as a techniques undertaking of transmitting knowledge to modify teacher’s classroom behaviors and thus improve student learning. Indeed most teacher preparation in language teaching concentrated on literature; little attention was paid to classroom pedagogy. Thus, L2 teacher education was in many senses an invisible undertaking, unframed by its theory and undocumented by its own research.
·       The questions at stake are substantial :

1.     What is the nature of teaching and of teacher’s knowledge?
2.     How it is most adequately documented and understood?
3.     How is it created influenced or changed through the interventions of teacher education?
                   Although there were hundreds of studies reported which sought to assess the impact of training teachers to do particular things, very few researchers actually looked at the process of teacher education as it happened over time and at how teachers and student teachers interpreted and gave meaning to the pre – service and professional development program they experienced.

·        The Role of Input: Teacher Education strategies

                       As mentioned in the first section confusing nomenclature has been the Achilles heel of L2 teacher education. The clearest instance the co-mingling of the terms teacher training, teacher development and teacher education. Like, any form of the notion that some type of input is introduced or created which then has an impact on the learner. Further, input can be examined for what it is, its content and for how it is introduced or created the process used, and for the impacts or outcomes it generates. This tripartite organization of what is taught, how and to what effect can serve as a basic organizing frame to examine educational input. However it is important to note that some research on classroom teaching has raised complications with casting content and process – or subject-matter and teaching method- as independent of one another, by pointing out that from the student’s perspective the content or the lesson and how it is presented are often largely inseparable. Nevertheless, this tripartite structure of content process and outcome continues to be a useful way of thinking about input in teacher education.
                         In the case of L2 teacher education content and process combine to create two broad strategies for input: Teacher training and teacher development.
“In teacher training the content
Is generally defined externally
And transmitted to the teacher learner
Through various processes.”

Outcomes are assessed on external, often behavioral, evidence that the learner has mastered the content. In a typical postgraduate teacher education program, for example, the faculty defines the curriculum which teacher-learners must master. Often this language on learning on teaching and so on. The content may be presented through conventional processes- such as lectures, reading and the like- or through more participant-oriented processes – such as project work, case studies and so on. The assessment of impact is usually measured through some form of demonstration – such as exams academic articles or portfolios. In short term teacher training courses, the same broad typology holds.
                   In contrast in teacher development the content generally stems from the teacher learners who generate it from experience. Thus, the processes engage teacher learners in some form of sense making or construction of understandings out of what they already know and can do. Because it depends on teacher-learner generated understanding the impacts of teacher development are usually self-assessed through reflective practices. Typical teacher development activities can include teacher study group’s practitioner research or self-development activities. In a teacher study group for example, the triggered by a reading or other external input. The emphasis however is on how teacher-learners cannot the input to their own knowledge experience and ongoing practice. Assessment focuses on the value to teacher-learner of the development activity. Given the emphasis on teacher learner’s experiences, teacher development is generally viewed as an in-service strategy which can take advantage of the background and teachers. Ti is often used in the context of peer-led staff development, peer mentoring or coaching, and other self-organized actives.
                        There are several misconceptions that tend to surround these two strategies. First they are often presented as dichotomous and mutually exclusive, which they are not. Both training and development depend on information which is external to teacher-learners, when they then incorporate through internal process into their own thinking and practice. The distinction is training; the information usually originates from sources external to the teacher-learners. In development, the information is often externalized from the teacher-learner’s experiences through collaborative work, reflective processes and so on A second misconception is that training and development are often couched in sequential terms. Although it is true the training tends to be a pre-service strategy, while development is more widely used in in-service contexts, most effective L2 teacher education programmers blend the two. Finally the nomenclature is not strictly applied so people may speak of being.” teacher trainers’’ when in fact as teacher educators they use both strategies.   

·        The Role of Institutional Context : Teacher Education In Place

              Acknowledging the existence of prior knowledge in teacher education has led directly to serious reconsideration of the role of institutional contexts in learning to teach. Clearly teacher learner’s ideas about teaching stem from their experiences as students in the context of schools; similarly their new practices as teachers are also shaped by their institutional environments. The question is what is the role of schools in learning to teach? In general, little attention has been paid to how the sociocultural forces and values in there institutional environments can shape impede encourage or discourage new teachers pre-service teacher education has treated schools as places where teacher learners go to practice teaching in practice or internships, and eventually to work Classrooms students and schools have been seen as settings in which teacher-learners can implement what they are learning or have learned in formal teacher education. From a pre-service standpoint there assumptions and misconceptions have been rarely tested since teacher-learners leave their pro-grammas and go on to teach with- relatively little formal feedback on the validity of the connection. The dramatic attrition rate among, focused that teachers had ‘fitting into’ schools as institutions.

·        The Role of Time : Teacher education Over time

If schools as institutions provide teacher education with a context in space, teacher-learner’s personal and professional lives offer a similar context in and though time. Prior to the work of Lorie and other, the notion of teacher’s professional life spans was not a major concern. Major research and conceptualizations by Berliner, Huber man and others served to establish the concept of career. Further this work pointed to definite stages in the development of knowledge and practice which could inform teacher education practices. It is clear that at different professional interests and concerns. If for example as this research shows, novice teachers tend to be concerned with carrying out their images of teaching by managing the classroom and controlling students, it would perhaps make sense to focus professional support and in service education although not exclusively on these concern themselves with the purposes and objectives of their teaching and how they may be accomplishing them. Thus, in-service education which draws on development strategies of reflection, self-assessment, inquiry and practitioner research maybe more suited for these learners of teaching.

·        Conclusion

                 There has been an assumption in teacher education that the delivery of programmers and activities is the key to success. In this view, learning to teach is seen as a byproduct of capable teacher learners and teacher educators, and well – structured designs and materials. Thus, in a broad sense, teacher education has depended largely on training strategies to teach people how to do the work of teaching. Underlying there aspects of delivery, however, lies a rich and complex process of learning to teach. Focusing at this level on the learning process, as distinct from the delivery mechanisms, is changing our understanding of teacher education in important ways. This shift is moving l2 teacher education from its concern over what content and pedagogy teacher should master and how to deliver there in preparation and in-service programmer to the more fundamental and as yet uncharted questions of how language teaching is learned and therefore how it can best be taught. We know that teacher education matters; the question is how, and how to improve it.