Advertisement

The Playground of the Mind: Teaching Literature at University

  • Deborah PikeEmail author
Chapter
Part of the International Perspectives on Early Childhood Education and Development book series (CHILD, volume 18)

Abstract

This chapter begins with the claim that conventional serious, strictly syllabus- and goal-oriented teaching does not inspire students with confidence in their own capacity to engage critically and creatively with and contribute to interpretations of literature. It poses the solution of employing a playful pedagogy, via games and props. The chapter initially explores the theoretical background of the concepts of play and playful pedagogy, drawing on early learning and, where available, adult learning contexts, as well as literary and philosophical perspectives on creativity and play. It then argues that by appreciating the playful aspects of both reading and writing, literary study becomes more pleasurable. Johan Huizinga’s notion of poeisis, which ‘proceeds within the play-ground of the mind, in a world of its own which the mind creates for it’ (Huizinga, Homo Ludens: a study of the play-element in culture. Beacon Press, Boston, 1955, p. 119) is central to the argument, as is Donald Winnicott’s notion of the ‘transitional object’ (Winnicott, Int J Psychoanal 34:89–97, 1953). Extrapolating from these theories and from the author’s own teaching experience, the chapter offers a suite of playful activities to enhance playfulness in literary studies in the adult learning context. The possibility of this kind of enhancement can inspire educators to return to this ‘playground of the mind’ to reanimate student engagement with texts, stimulate imaginative thinking and nuanced analyses, as well to provoke a deeper experience of literature.

Keywords

Literary Study Aesthetic Experience Literary Text Student Feedback Creative Writing 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Anning, A., Cullen, J., & Fleer, M. (2008). Early childhood education: Society and culture (2nd ed.). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  2. Auden, W. H. (1976). Squares and oblongs. In J. S. Bruner, A. Jolly, & K. Sylva (Eds.), Play: Its role in development and evolution (pp. 638–640). Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin.Google Scholar
  3. Bakhtin, M. (1930s). диaлoгичecкaя вooбpaжeниe. English Edition: Bakhtin, M. (1981). The dialogic imagination: Four essays. M. Holquist (Ed.) (trans: Emerson, E. & Holquist, M.). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
  4. Bérubé, M. (1998). The employment of English: Theory, jobs, and the future of literary studies. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Blake, W. (2000). William Blake: The complete illuminated books. London: Thames & Hudson.Google Scholar
  6. Brown, B. (2001). Thing theory. Critical Inquiry, 28(1), 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Coleridge, S. T. (1907). In I. Shawcross (Ed.), Biographia Literaria. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  8. Connell, J. M. (2000). Aesthetic experiences in the school curriculum: Assessing the value of Rosenblatt’s transactional theory. Journal of Aesthetics Education, 34(1), 27–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Connor, S. (1985). Great expectations. In S. Connor (Ed.), Charles Dickens (pp. 109–144). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  10. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper Collins.Google Scholar
  11. Dangarembga, T. (2001). Nervous conditions. London: Women’s Press.Google Scholar
  12. Dickens, C. ([1861] 1979). Great expectations. London: Pan.Google Scholar
  13. Dufrenne, M. (1973). The phenomenology of aesthetic experience. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Eagleton, T. (2008). Literary theory: An introduction. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  15. Edmiston, B. (2008). Forming ethical identities in early childhood play. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
  16. Eliot, T. S. (1921). The sacred wood. London: Faber.Google Scholar
  17. Ellison, R. (1952). Invisible man. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  18. Erikson, E. (1963). Childhood and society. New York: W.W. Norton & Co.Google Scholar
  19. Freud, S. ([1907] 1995). Creative writers and day-dreaming. In: P. Gay (Ed.) The freud reader (pp. 436–443). London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  20. Froebel, F. (1826). Die Menschernerziehung. English edition: Froebel, F. (1887). The education of man. New York: D. Appleton and Company.Google Scholar
  21. Froebel, F. (1840). Allgemeinen deutschen kindergartens. English edition: Froebel, F. (1899). Pedagogics of the Kindergarten. (trans: Jarvis, J.). London: D. Appleton.Google Scholar
  22. Fromberg, D. P. (1987). Play. In P. Monighan-Nourot, B. Scales, J. VanHoorn, & M. Almy (Eds.), Looking at children’s play. New York: Teacher’s College Press.Google Scholar
  23. Fromberg, D. P. (1992). A review of research on play. In C. Seefeldt (Ed.), The early childhood curriculum: A view of current research (pp. 42–84). New York: Teachers’ College Press.Google Scholar
  24. Gekoski, R. (2006). What do we read when we read English? English in Aotearoa, 60, 3–10.Google Scholar
  25. Greene, M. (1995). Teaching for openings. In M. Greene (Ed.), Releasing the imagination: Essays on education, the arts and social change (pp. 109–121). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.Google Scholar
  26. Greene, M. (2001). Variations on a blue guitar: The Lincoln center institute lectures on aesthetic education. New York: Teachers’ College Press.Google Scholar
  27. Greenfield, P. M. (1994). A theory of the teacher in the learning activities of everyday life. In B. Rogoff & J. Lave (Eds.), Everyday cognition: Its development in social context (pp. 117–138). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Greenfield, S. (2008). Perspectives: Who are we becoming? New Scientist, 198 (2656), 48–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Griffiths, T. (2007). The humanities and an environmentally sustainable Australia. Australian Humanities Review 43 (December): http://www.australianhumanitiesreview.org/archive/Issue-December-2007/EcoHumanities/EcoGriffiths.html. Accessed 20 Nov 2015.
  30. Harris, P. (2007). Developing an integrated play-based pedagogy in preservice teacher education: A self-study. Studying Teacher Education, 3(2), 135–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Heidegger, M. (1971). The Thing (trans: Hofstader, A.) In Poetry, language, thought (pp. 169–180). New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  32. Huizinga, J. (1955). Homo Ludens: A study of the play-element in culture. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  33. Jones, G. (1997). Eleanor reads Emma. In G. Jones (Ed.), Fetish lives (pp. 44–57). Fremantle, Australia: Fremantle Arts Centre Press.Google Scholar
  34. Josipovici, G. (Ed.). (1976). The modern English novel: The reader, the writer and the works. London: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Kant, I. ([1790] 2007). Critique of judgement. New York: Cossimo.Google Scholar
  36. Moyles, J. (1989). Just playing? The role and structure of play in early childhood development. Milton Keynes, UK: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Moyles, J. (Ed.). (2010). The excellence of play. Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Moyles, J., & Adams, S. (2001). Statements of entitlement to play: A framework for playful teaching. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Nadeau, M. (1966). Histoire du surréalisme. English Edition: Nadeau, M. (1968). The history of surrealism. (trans: Howard, R.). New York: MacMillan and Co.Google Scholar
  40. Pellegrini, A. D. (1991). Applied child study: A developmental approach. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Elbaum.Google Scholar
  41. Piaget, J. (1945). La formation du symbole chez lenfant: imitation, jeu et rêve, image et representation. English edition: Paget, J. (1962). Play, dreams and imitation in childhood (trans: Gattego, C. & Hodgson, F. M.). New York: W. W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar
  42. Piaget, J. (1962). Léquilibration des structures cognitives: problème central du développement. English edition: Piaget, J. (1985). The equilibration of cognitive structures: The central problem of intellectual development. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Proust, M. (1905). Sur La Lecture. English edition: Proust, M. (1994). On reading. (Trans: Sturrock, J). London: Penguin Syrens.Google Scholar
  44. Schiller, F. ([1875] 1954). On the aesthetic education of man in a series of letters. (trans: Snell, R.). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd.Google Scholar
  45. Shakespeare, W. (1602) 2004. Twelfth night, or what you will. In: E.S. Donno (Ed.). New Cambridge Shakespeare. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Shelley, P. B. ([1821] 1840). Essays, letters from abroad, translations and fragments, volume II. M. Shelley (Ed.). London: Moxon.Google Scholar
  47. Spencer, H. (1873). The principles of psychology. New York: D. Appleton.Google Scholar
  48. Sutton-Smith, B. (1994). Does play prepare the future? In J. H. Goldstein (Ed.), Toys, play and child development (pp. 130–146). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Sutton-Smith, B. (1997). The ambiguity of play. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  50. Swift, J. ([1735] 1971). Gulliver’s travels. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  51. Thomas, C. (2005). Moments of productive bafflement, or defamiliarizing graduate studies in English. Pedagogy: Critical Approaches to Teaching Literature, Language Composition and Culture, 5(1), 19–35.Google Scholar
  52. Tolstoy, L. (1869). Boйнa и миpъ. English edition: Tolstoy, L. (1978). War and peace. (trans: Edmonds, R.). Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin.Google Scholar
  53. Turner, V. W. (1982). From ritual to theatre: The human seriousness of play. New York: Performing Arts Journal Publications.Google Scholar
  54. Turner, V. W. (1992). Blazing the trail: Way marks in the exploration of symbols. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona Press.Google Scholar
  55. Van Engen, A. (2005). Reclaiming claims: What English students want from English profs. Pedagogy: Critical Approaches to Teaching Literature Language Composition and Culture, 5(1), 5–18.Google Scholar
  56. Vygotsky, L. (1930). Paзум в oбщecтвe. English edition: Vygotsky, Lev. (1978). The role of play in development (trans: Cole, M.) In V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner & E. Souberman (Eds.), Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes (pp. 92–104). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  57. Vygotsky, L. (1934). мыcль и язык. English edition: Vygotsky, L. (1986). Thought and language. (tans: Kozulin, A.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  58. Winnicott, D. (1953). Transitional objects and transitional phenomena. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 34, 89–97.Google Scholar
  59. Winnicott, D. (1965). The maturational processes and the facilitating environment: Studies in the theory of emotional development. London: Hogarth.Google Scholar
  60. Winnicott, D. (1971). Playing and reality. London: Tavistock Publications.Google Scholar
  61. Woolf, V. ([1919] 1984). “Modern Fiction” In: A. McNeille (Ed.), The essays of Virginia Woolf. Volume 4: 1925 to 1928. London: The Hogarth Press, 1984.Google Scholar
  62. Woolf, V. ([1927] 2006). To the lighthouse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The University of Notre Dame AustraliaSydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations