Programme

ère
nt 1
rencontre annuelle sur l’enseignement de la langue anglaise
2012
Program
CONFERENCE Schedule
9:00 a.m. – 9:30 a.m.
REGISTRATION & BREAKFAST (Pavilion A, Room M050)
9:30 a.m.
PARVIN MOVASSAT, Official Languages and Bilingualism Institute, University of Ottawa
Opening Plenary
L’apprentissage du français langue seconde par le biais d’un contenu disciplinaire: enjeux et
défis pédagogiques des cours d’immersion au niveau universitaire
10:40 a.m.
FRANCOIS DESAULNIERS, École de langues, Université du Québec à Montréal
Presentation 1
Advanced Academic Reading and Writing Skills through Literature
11:20 a.m.
DONNA BAIN BUTLER, American University’s Washington College of Law
Presentation 2
Content-Based Pedagogy in a Second Language (L2) Research Writing Course
12:10 p.m.
MARIE-CLAUDE DANSEREAU, Official Languages and Bilingualism Institute, University of Ottawa
Workshop
Des activités langagières signifiantes
12:50 p.m. – 2:00 p.m.
BREAK FOR LUNCH
BOOK FAIR (A-M050)
2:00 p.m.
MAXIMILIANO EDUARDO ORLANDO, Universidad Pontificia de Comillas, Spain
Presentation 4
Content-Based EFL Materials as Evidence of Language Variability in Specific Genres
2:40 p.m.
TERRY PRICE, École de langues, Université du Québec à Montréal
Presentation 5
Confessions of a Literary Mind
3:20 p.m.
ILYA BROOKWELL, School of Continuing Studies, McGill University
Presentation 6
From Critical Content to Critical Pedagogy in ELT
4:10 p.m.
SUSAN BALLINGER, Department of Integrated Studies in Education, McGill University
CLOSING PLENARY
Tear Down these Walls: Interventions to Connect Teachers, Students, and Languages in
Content-Based Language Teaching
PLEASE JOIN US FOR A WINE AND CHEESE RECEPTION DIRECTLY FOLLOWING
THE CLOSING OF THE CONFERENCE ( Pavilion DS, Room 2901)
2
Plenary Abstracts
Susan Ballinger, Department of Integrated Studies in Education, McGill University
Tear Down these Walls: Interventions to Connect Teachers, Students, and Languages in ContentBased Language Teaching
One long-held tenet of content-based language teaching (CBLT) is the idea that students’ L1 and L2
should be kept separate at all times. This belief stems from the idea that an L2 can be learned in the same way
as an L1, through intensive exposure to and authentic use of that language. According to this logic, students
should learn their L2 through their L2, and any use of or reference to the L1 in the L2 classroom should be
avoided to prevent L1 interference. As a result, CBLT programs tend to build invisible, but solid, walls between
students’ languages. While the intention behind this practice is to aid L2 learning, many current researchers
argue that it is instead cognitively and pedagogically counterproductive. Cummins (2007), for example, has
referred to this practice as the ‘two solitudes’ approach to bilingual education, and he has noted that building
walls between bilingual students’ languages is not in keeping with theories on the development of a common
underlying language proficiency. From a pedagogical point of view, other researchers have pointed out that
these instructional walls prevent teachers from making cross-curricular links to content students have learned
in their other language and from collaborating with teachers who instruct using the other language.
This talk will not only make a case for tearing down the walls between languages in CBLT programs, but
it will also explore methods that might be employed in CBLT to shift towards a more cross-linguistic pedagogy.
Three recent research interventions that have worked to bridge language, content, teachers, and students
within Montreal-area French immersion programs will first be outlined. The overarching goal of these studies
was to promote collaboration among English and French teachers of the same group of students in order to
advance and take advantage of their students’ bilingual knowledge. The three studies progressed from an
exploratory, observational project to a researcher-initiated teaching intervention to action research meant to
develop sustainable collaborative practices. Specifically, the studies were:



Study 1: a 2-year exploratory study to determine the impact of a biliteracy project in English and
French language arts classes on students’ cross-linguistic connections and teacher collaboration.
Study 2: a 7-week teaching intervention that included a bi-literacy project bridging students’
English and French classes as well as instruction of collaborative language learning strategies for
reciprocal learning.
Study 3: an ongoing initiative involving school board administrators and teacher participants aimed
at facilitating sustainable cross-linguistic planning practices among English and French teachers of
the same group of students and on building students’ cross-linguistic morphological awareness.
The presentation will include a discussion of common findings among these studies, while calling on
researchers and practitioners to work towards building the foundations of cross-linguistic pedagogy across
CBLT contexts.
3
Plenary Abstracts
(continued)
Parvin Movassat, Official Languages and Bilingualism Institute, University of Ottawa
L’apprentissage du français langue seconde par le biais d’un contenu disciplinaire: enjeux et défis
pédagogiques des cours d’immersion au niveau universitaire.
L’apprentissage d’une langue seconde basé sur le contenu a fait l’objet de nombreuses études au
Canada et dans d’autres pays du monde. La recherche sur l’acquisition d’une langue seconde basée sur le
contenu a démontré que ce mode d’apprentissage comporte plusieurs avantages – entre autres, une
motivation plus élevée chez les étudiants- reliés à la contextualisation de l’apprentissage (Brinton, Snow &
Wesche, 2003; Wesche, M., 2010). Le concept du locuteur/acteur prend ici tout son sens: l’étudiant n’est plus
considéré uniquement comme un apprenant, mais comme un acteur social qui doit mobiliser ses
connaissances et les faire valoir dans le cadre d’interactions interpersonnelles et sociales (Kern, R. & Liddicoat,
A., 2008). Il s’agit de cheminer vers un « bilinguisme fonctionnel » en construisant progressivement un «
répertoire bilingue » dans le domaine de son expertise (Geiger-Jaillet, A., Schlemminger, G., Le Pape Racine, C.,
2011). Acquérir des connaissances en langue seconde qui lui permettraient de mettre à l’oeuvre ses savoirs
disciplinaires sur le marché du travail et d’avoir « voix au
chapitre » (Kramsch, C., 2008) dans un milieu sociolinguistique différent du sien devient alors l’un des enjeux
principaux pour l’étudiant d’immersion.
Le système d’immersion, implanté au Canada à partir des années 60 (Rebuffot, J., 1993), a été un
laboratoire pour évaluer les forces et les faiblesses de ce type d’enseignement/apprentissage et a permis de
jeter les bases d’un modèle éducatif, plus ou moins similaire, au niveau universitaire. Parmi les universités
canadiennes, l’Université d’Ottawa fait figure de chef de file dans la mise en place d’un programme
d’immersion. En effet, dès les années 1980, elle avait mis sur pied des cours d’immersion, appelés « cours
encadrés/sheltered courses » où les étudiants avaient la possibilité d’assister à certains cours de leur cursus
universitaire dans leur langue seconde. Forte de cette première expérience, qui n’a duré que quelques années,
faute de financement, (Burger, S., Weinberg, A., Hall, Movassat, P. & Hope, A., 2011), l’Université d’Ottawa a
lancé, en 2006, un nouveau programme, appelé le « Régime d’immersion », beaucoup plus ambitieux que le
premier : l’université propose aux étudiants, dans une cinquantaine de disciplines différentes, d’assister à un
certain nombre de leurs cours dans leur langue seconde en leur offrant un cours d’encadrement linguistique
d’une durée d’une heure trente. Il existe plusieurs niveaux de cours d’encadrement linguistique divisés en deux
catégories : les cours centrés sur les habiletés réceptives (la compréhension de l’oral et de l’écrit) qui ont pour
objet de s’assurer que les étudiants suivent bien les exposés magistraux et arrivent à faire leurs lectures de
façon efficace et soutenue. Les cours axés sur les habiletés productives (production de l’oral et de l’écrit), eux,
ont pour but d’amener les étudiants à utiliser leurs connaissances dans le champ d’expertise de leur discipline,
en s’exprimant dans leur langue seconde.
4
Plenary Abstracts
(continued)
Dans ce contexte, le rôle du professeur de langue seconde et les défis auxquels il est confronté d’un
point de vue pédagogique sont d’une importance cruciale dans la réussite de l’expérience étudiante (Knoerr,
H., 2010). Ainsi, le professeur de langue doit s’adapter aux spécificités inhérentes à la nature des cours
d’immersion : le format particulier des cours d’encadrement linguistique, l’interaction avec le professeur qui
enseigne le contenu disciplinaire, les défis reliés au mode d’évaluation des habiletés langagières (Movassat, P.,
Hall, C. & Hope, A. 2009), entre autres, sont autant de facteurs qui influent sur les pratiques d’enseignement
dans ce genre de cours. De plus, le professeur de langue doit tenir compte des difficultés de la compréhension
du contenu disciplinaire pour les étudiants qui doivent suivre les cours dans leur langue seconde sans avoir
droit à des accommodements particuliers. Il est donc indispensable pour le professeur de langue de développer
des matériels didactiques adaptés pour aider les étudiants à comprendre le contenu de leurs cours et à se
l’approprier dans la langue seconde. Plusieurs études ont été faites sur les activités et les pratiques langagières
les plus utiles et/ou les plus appréciées des étudiants d'immersion (Burger, S. and Chrétien, M., 2001; Burger,
S., Wesche, M., and Migneron, M. 1997; Migneron, M. et Burger, S., 1996; Ready & Wesche, 1992; Weinberg &
Burger, 2010 ; Weinberg, A., Burger, S. and Hope, A. 2008). Certaines de ces études démontrent la complexité
du contexte dans lequel se déroule l’enseignement de la langue seconde dans les cours d’immersion au niveau
universitaire et les particularités pédagogiques, inhérentes à la nature de ces cours.
Dans cette communication, nous présenterons des exemples de matériels didactiques développés sous
forme d’activités basées sur la compréhension du contenu disciplinaire (lecture et
écoute). Ces exemples proviennent des matériels utilisés dans les cours disciplinaires (criminologie, sociologie,
études des femmes, etc.) et permettent d’illustrer les caractéristiques des cours d’immersion au niveau
universitaire ainsi que les défis auxquels les professeurs doivent faire face pour le développement de
ressources didactiques dans le cadre de ces cours.
Bibliographie
Brinton, D.M, M.A., Snow and M., Wesche. (2003). Content Based Second Language Instruction. Michigan: Michigan
Classics Edition.
Burger, S. and Chrétien, M. (2001) The Development of Oral Production in Content-based Second Language Courses at the
University of Ottawa, The Canadian Modern Language Review / La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes [French
Immersion and Content-based Language Teaching in Canada/Immersion et apprentissage axé sur le contenu au Canada],
58 (1) (Sept. 2001), 84-102.
Burger, S., Wesche, M., and Migneron, M. (1997) Late, late immersion: Discipline-based second language teaching at the
University of Ottawa In Johnson, Robert Keith, and Swain, Merril (eds.) Immersion education: international perspectives,
Cambridge, England, Cambridge University Press, 65-84
Burger, S., , Weinberg, A., Hall, C., Movassat, P. and Hope, A. (2011) French Immersion Studies at the University of Ottawa:
Programme Evaluation and Pedagogical Challenges (123-142) In Tedick, D.J, Christian, D. and Williams Fortune, T. (eds),
Immersion Education. Practices, Policies, Possibilities, Multilingual Matters, Bristol, UK.
5
Plenary Abstracts
(continued)
Geiger-Jaillet, A., Schlemminger, G., Le Pape Racine, C., (2011) Enseigner une discipline dans une autre langue :
méthodologie et pratiques professionnelles, Édité par le Centre européen pour les langues vivantes (CELV), Peter Lang,
Frankfurt
Kern, R. & Liddicoat, A., (2008). De l’apprenant au locuteur/acteur. In G. Zarate, D. Lévy and C. Kramsh . Précis du
plurilinguisme et du pluriculturalisme, Éditions des archives contemporaines, Paris, pp. 27-33
Knoerr, H. (2010) L’immersion au niveau universitaire : nouveaux modèles, nouveaux défis, pratiques et stratégies, Les
Cahiers de l’ILOB/OLBI 1 (1), 89-110.
Kramsh, C. (2008) Voix et contrevoix: L’expression de soi à travers la langue de l’autre.In G. Zarate,D. Lévy, and C. Kramsh .
Précis du plurilinguisme et du pluriculturalisme, Éditions des archives contemporaines, Paris, pp. 35-38
Migneron, M. et Burger, S. (1996) Les cours encadrés: description et démarches pédagogiques (215-230), In R. Courchêne,
Burger, S., Cornaire, C., LeBlanc, R., Paribakht, S., Séguin, H. (eds.), Twenty-Five Years of Second Language Teaching at the
University of Ottawa\ Vingt-cinq ans d'enseignement des langues secondes à l'Université d’Ottawa, Second Language
Institute/Institut des Langues Secondes, Ottawa, ON.
Movassat, P., Hall, C. & Hope, A. (2009) Évaluer les habiletés réceptives dans les cours d’immersion au niveau
universitaire, Journal de l’immersion, 31 (3), 44-46 [Numéro spécial : L’apprentissage d’une langue en situation formelle ou
informelle d’immersion : nouvelles perspectives pour la recherche et les politiques gouvernementales, Actes du colloque
du CCERBAL et de l’ILOB, à l’Université d’Ottawa, le 30 avril et 1er mai 2009].
Rebuffot, J. (1993) L ‘immersion au Canada. CEC, collection « le point sur » dirigée par Claude Germain
Ready & Wesche, (1992) An evaluation of the University of Ottawa sheltered program : Language teaching strategies that
work. In R. Courchêne, J. Glidden, J. St-John, andC. Thérien (Eds.) Comprehension-based second language
teaching/l’enseignement des langues secondes axé sur la comprehension. Ottawa. Ottawa University Press. 389-405
Weinberg, A. and Burger, S. (2010) University level immersion: Students’ perception of language activities, Les Cahiers de
l’ILOB /OLBI Working Papers, 1 (1), 111-142
Weinberg, A, Burger, S. and Hope, A. (2008) Evaluating the Effectiveness of Content-based Language Teaching, Contact
(TESL Ontario), 34 (2) [Research Symposium Issue], 68-80.
Wesche, M. (2010) Content-based second language instruction. In R. Kaplan (ed.) Oxford handbook of applied linguistics.
Oxford: Oxford University Press. 275-293.
6
Presenters & Conference Abstracts
Donna Bain Butler, American University’s Washington College of Law
Content-Based Pedagogy in a Second Language (L2) Research Writing Course
This session addresses content-based language learning where the teacher uses techniques from
academic content areas as the vehicle for developing language, content, cognitive, and study skills (Crandall,
1994). The purpose is (a) to explore the exact role of content material in terms of authentic text acquisition and
production, and (b) to better understand the issues and implications of content-based pedagogy in a second
language (L2) legal research writing course.
Theoretical underpinnings for content based instruction (CBI) have contributed to the development of
research-based classroom practice in that scholarly (academic) writing from legal sources crosses cultural,
linguistic, and disciplinary borders. "Because student goals at higher proficiency levels often focus on specific
content" (for example, diplomacy, aeronautics, negotiation, business, and law), "programs are more often than
not content-based….While the content schemata may be high among students, most often the linguistic skill is
not at the level needed" (Leaver & Shekhtman, 2002, p. 30). Research within CBI context supporting scholarly
L2 legal writing ranges from second language acquisition (SLA) studies, to classroom training studies, to various
strands of research in education and cognitive psychology (Grabe & Kaplan, 1996; Grabe & Stoller, 1997). In
particular, Segev-Miller’s (2004) classroom training (writing intervention) study reveals how writing from
sources, or "discourse synthesis," may be very demanding for most native speaking college students without
strategies. Her review of the literature shows discourse synthesis to be a "hybrid" reading (comprehension)–
writing (production) task that requires students to select, organize and connect content from source tests as
they compose their own texts. Citing Flower (1989), Segev-Miller (2004, p. 6) points out that writing from
sources is an "act of literacy in line with recent educational emphasis on the development of academic
discourse” which places special value on integrating own ideas and knowledge into the written conversation
with one's sources (…) Such integration [is expected] as a move toward critical literacy and toward realizing
writing's epistemic potential to transform knowledge rather than to report knowledge (Flower, 1989: 26).
The following general principles for adapting instruction for English language learners (ELLs) will be
discussed: (1) increasing sources of information (e.g., different kinds of knowledge); (2) decreasing complexity
of concept, text, or task (e.g., process approach to writing that promotes writer self-reflection); and (3)
increasing interaction (e.g., peer and teacher feedback and formative assessment).
References
Crandall, J. (1994). Content-centered language learning. Retrieved October 13, 2012, from the Center for Applied
Linguistics website, http://www.cal.org/resources/digest/crandal01.html.
Flower, L. (1989). Negotiating academic discourse (Reading t-to-Write Report No. 29). The Center for the Study of Writing,
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania/Berkley, California.
Grabe, W. & Kaplan, R. (1996). Theory & practice of writing. Essex, UK: Addison Wesley Longman Limited.
7
Presenters & Conference Abstracts
(continued)
Grabe, W. & Stoller, F. L. (1997). Content-based instruction: research foundations. Retrieved September 22, 2008, from the
University
of
Minnesota,
Reprinted
on
the
CoBaLTT
Web
site
with
permission:
http://www.carla.umn.edu/cobaltt/modules/principles/grabe_stoller1997/READING1/foundation.htm
Leaver, B. L., & Shekhtman, B. (2002). Principles and practices in teaching superior- level language skills: Not just more of
the same. In B.L. Leaver & B. Shekhtman (Eds.), Developing professional-level language proficiency (3-33). Cambridge, UK:
Cambridge University Press.
Segev-Miller, R. (2004). Writing from sources: the effect of explicit instruction on college students' processes and
products. L1–Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 4(1), 5-33.
Ilya Brookwell, School of Continuing Studies, McGill University
From Critical Content to Critical Pedagogy in ELT
Though thrilling and rewarding for some, the experience of learning in an English language class room
may differ drastically between students. Just as the settings and procedures that are required to execute a
scientific experiment might be accessible and encouraging for a few star pupils while others feel restricted or
alienated, language forms, skills and objectives are also far from all-inclusive. Indeed, Mary Louise Pratt
reminds us that classrooms are often best characterized as “contact zones” where cultures meet and negotiate
asymmetrical relations of power (Pratt, 1991). Pratt’s scholarship can help explain why English language
teaching in particular can be so difficult to navigate, but as instructional designers, teachers, and educational
theorists, we must press further by asking difficult questions. We can start from the basics: What is the
content? What are my aims? What does the curriculum require? We must follow with more: Who are the
students? Where are they from? How will they interact as a group, with their instructor and with the content?
Good pedagogy should always remain situated to the various contexts, histories and people who are involved.
This presentation proposes that critical content-based language classes are an excellent first step to creating an
educational environment; nonetheless, content alone is not enough. We must move from critical content to
critical pedagogy in ELT if we wish to overcome the challenges of the contact zone, achieve better learning
outcomes and shape the English language for future generations.
The talk draws on a diverse group of scholars from the disciplines of Second Language Education,
Philosophy of Education, Semiotics and Sociology.
References
Baudrillard, Jean. (1983). “The Ecstasy of Communication”. In H. Foster (ed.) The antiaesthetic: Essays on postmodern
culture. Port Townsend WA: Bay Press, pp. 126-134
Cummins, J. (2009). “Pedagogies of choice: Challenging coercive relations of power in classrooms and communities.”
International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism.12, pp. 261-272.
Lightbown, P. & Nina Spada (2006). How Languages are Learned. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Pratt, Mary Louise (1991). "Arts of the Contact Zone". Profession, pp. 33-40 Modern Language Association
8
Presenters & Conference Abstracts
(continued)
Marie-Claude Dansereau, Official Languages and Bilingualism Institute, University of Ottawa
Des activités langagières signifiantes
Inspirée des travaux de Krashen, Brinton et Wesche, l'Université d'Ottawa offre depuis plus de cinq ans
un programme d’immersion postsecondaire aux étudiants non francophones. Dans ce programme, qui
s’échelonne sur 4 années, l’étudiant est immergé dans des cours de discipline (contenu) destinés à un auditoire
francophone. À ces cours de discipline sont jumelés des cours de langue (FLS) dont les activités langagières ont
pour contexte le contenu du cours de discipline.
Pour l’étudiant universitaire, c’est une expérience d’apprentissage hors du commun et un contexte
d’apprentissage stimulant. Pour le professeur, cela représente tout un défi. En effet, comme il existe peu de
matériel pédagogique pouvant être utilisé dans ces cours de langue, le professeur de langue devra, à partir du
contenu disciplinaire, élaborer un grand éventail d’activités langagières. Mais une question se pose : comment
développer des activités signifiantes pour l’étudiant dans ce contexte bien particulier où la discipline et la
langue sont indissociables?
Dans cet atelier, je démontrerai l'importance de considérer certains critères lors de l'élaboration des
activités du cours de langue dans el contexte de l’immersion postsecondaire et présenterai des exemples
concrets d’activités langagières pour l’enseignement de l’écrit et l’oral en immersion.
François Desaulniers, École de langues, Université du Québec à Montréal.
Developing Advanced Reading and Writing Skills through Literature
The introduction of literature in an ESL classroom presents teachers and students with new challenges
and opportunities. Beginning with text selection and reexamining the roles of teacher and student, this
presentation then focuses on the reading and writing skills that advanced ESL students can develop while
reading literature. Without using literary theory, it is possible for students to develop advanced critical and
analytical reading skills. In addition, academic writing skills can be honed with essays based on reason and
logic, and students can also demonstrate their ability to engage with a literary text through more creative
assignments. Francois Desaulniers shares examples of literary texts and successful activities that he has used
over the years to develop his students' reading and writing skills.
References
Gadjusek, Linda. "Toward Wider Use of Literature in ESL: Why and How". TESOL Quarterly. Vol. 22, no. 2. June 1988.
Lazar, Gillian. Literature and Language Teaching. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge: 1993.
Hismanoglu, Murat. "Teaching English Through Litereature". Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies. Vol. 1 no. 1, April
2005.
DeMan, Paul. Allegories of Reading. Yale University Press. New Haven: 1979.
9
Presenters & Conference Abstracts
(continued)
Maximiliano Eduardo Orlando, Universidad Pontificia de Comillas, Spain
Content-Based EFL Materials as Evidence of Language Variability in Specific Genres
Several studies have compared Textbook English with authentic General English (Lyung, 1990; TogniniBonelli, 2001) and concluded that it is important for EFL teachers to supplement EFL textbooks with contentbased materials (Sheehan, 2005; Meyer, 2006). One reason for this has been the need for EFL learners to be
aware of language variability in specific genres (Lewis, 2001). In this study, request letters have been chosen
since research has shown that requests are conveyed differently cross-linguistically (Blum Kulka et al, 1989),
which makes it difficult for EFL learners to formulate them as native speakers do. The objective of this paper is
to compare modal verb frequencies and request strategies in request letters from two samples: one written by
native EFL teachers and another one in B2 EFL textbooks. Both teachers and textbooks are key priming agents
in many learning contexts (Hoey, 2005). However, what makes the analysis of the letters from the first sample
interesting is that they have been written by teachers who are also fluent speakers of English. Indeed,
supplementing textbook materials with content-based materials written by native speakers when learning to
write genre-specific texts may help EFL learners establish possible links between lexico-syntactic choices and
language context (Paquot, 2008) as well as to challenge existing rules.
References
Blum-Kulka, Shoshana and Juliane House. 1989. «Cross-Cultural and Situational Variation in Requesting Behavior». In
Cross-Cultural Pragmatics: Requests and Apologies. New Jersey: Ablex Publishing.
Hoey, Michael. 2005. Lexical Priming: A New Theory of Words and Language. New York: Routledge.
Lewis, Michael. 2001. « Materials and Resources for Teaching Collocation ». In Teaching Collocation. Further Developments
in the Lexical Approach. England: Language Teaching Publications.
Lyung, Magnus. 1990. A Study of TEFL Vocabulary: Acta Universitatis Stockholmiensis 78 (Stockholm, 1990). Stockholm:
Almqvist & Wiksell; cited in Elena Tognini-Bonelli, Corpus Linguistics at Work, Amsterdam, 2001.
Meyer, Charles. 2006. « Corpus Linguistics, the World Wide Web, and English Language Teaching ». Ibérica: Revista de la
Asociación Europea de Lenguas para Fines Específicos (AELFE), Issue 12, 2006, pp. 9-21.
Paquot, Magali. 2008. « Exemplification in Learner writing. A Cross Linguistic Perspective ». In Phraseology in Foreign
Language Learning and Teaching. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Sheehan, Raymond. 2005. « Language as Topic: Learner-Teacher Investigation of Concordances ». In Teachers Exploring
Tasks in English Language Teaching. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Tognini-Bonelli, Elena. 2001. Corpus Linguistics at Work. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
10
Presenters & Conference Abstracts
(continued)
Terry Price, École de langues, Université du Québec à Montréal
Confessions of a Literary Mind
This presentation will discuss possible ways to use literature in the English classroom and will attempt to
answer questions related to the incorporation of literature into our everyday teaching practices, in order to
shed light on the positive impact that doing so can have on students and teachers alike. Terry Price will share
conclusions he has come to based on his past experiences as a teacher, specifically within the contexts of the
courses Introduction to English Literature and Culture and Teaching Literature to ESL Students, which he has
taught numerous times at l’Université du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue. In doing so he will expose the
intellectual processes both teachers and students go through when working with literature as a pedagogical,
academic tool. Reference will also be made to the opinions of such seminal experts in the field as Gillian Lazar
(Literature and Language Teaching: a Guide for Teachers and Trainers, 2008), a selection of authors, as well as
direct survey responses provided by English teachers from various levels and backgrounds.
11
Special Thanks
We would like to express our appreciation to the following contributors for their
collaboration and financial support:
-Fonds d’initiatives pédagogiques (FIP), UQAM
-L’École de langues, UQAM
-Division de la promotion institutionnelle, Service des communications, UQAM
-Faculté de communications, UQAM
-Matthieu Verrette, Cégep de Granby
Sincerely,
The 2012 MELT Organizational Committee
Martyna Kozlowska, École de langues, Université du Québec à Montréal
Heather Newell, École de langues, Université du Québec à Montréal
Suzanne Springer, École de langues, Université du Québec à Montréal
Please check our website in the coming month for information regarding the publication of the MELT 2012 proceedings.
www.melt.uqam.ca
12