My teaching practice is guided by the goal to empower all students to become critical and independent thinkers. I see the teaching of language and literature at all levels as an effective way to develop the skills necessary for analyzing the complex world around us, and for articulating these analyses cogently. I want my students to be critical readers, not only of literature, but also of reality. The skills I consider necessary for developing this critical literacy, be it in regards to texts, media, or broader social discourses, are 1) close reading and attention to detail, 2) the ability to identify places in the text that call for such attention, namely those that are remarkable or give pause, 3) the ability to explore historical, para- and intertextual context, as well as 4) to identify recurring themes and ideas, and finally, 5) to make connections between observations yielded by these methods to synthesize a complex and nuanced discourse about the text and the larger world.
The first step to achieving that goal for every student is to recognize that their formative journeys through higher education take many different paths, both in terms of where they start, and where they want to go, as well as what students bring to the classroom with them. I therefore center diversity and inclusion at every stage of developing and teaching a course, from designing the syllabus down to each individual session. I see my courses as collaborative learning experiences, which allow us to explore the texts together, and to learn from each other. Fostering a friendly and relaxed environment conducive to the expression of a diversity of viewpoints is key for my teaching practice. I also use feedback and assessment methods throughout the semester to ensure that all students are actively engaged in the material, and that I am conveying my teaching goals effectively, and inclusively.
In terms of syllabus design, I make sure that the skills students will acquire in my course are clearly articulated. I also lay out, in detail, how I will evaluate their performance, what the components of my evaluation are, and what types of assignments they will be given. When I select readings, I choose from different epochs and different kinds of authors, including from historically underrepresented groups, to highlight how discourses have always been composed of several perspectives and approaches, and have also evolved over time. Another important criterion for my selection of readings is that they stand out for stylistic, formal, methodological or thematic reasons, challenging the conventions of their times. In a course on “German Drama,” I wanted to show students how the theatrical stage is and has been a place where humans explore what it means to be human. In particular, I wanted to focus on the “abysmal” aspect of the human, the characteristic ability to commit incomprehensible and horrible acts. As a secondary goal, I also wanted to introduce students to the idea that theater (and literature in general) often reflects upon itself, questioning the formal conventions of its genre, by selecting plays that contain a “play within a play,” or a “stage on a stage,” yielding a mise-en-abîme structure. To that end, many of the authors I chose were radical innovators and notoriously ahead of their times (such as Georg Büchner or Else Lasker-Schüler), and were only recognized as such much later.
For homework and class preparation, I frequently rely on platforms like Canvas, Hypothesis, or Scalar, which allow for discussion and collaborative annotation of a text or video before class. This way, I ensure every student has individual time outside of class to engage with the text, without the pressures of a live classroom. I consider this an inclusive teaching method, because students who are more introverted can find it harder to come up with ideas on the spot during class time. This way, they find it easier to partake in our discussions, because they already developed ideas at home. In addition, it helps all students be well prepared, already have notes about specific aspects they are interested in, and contribute to our discussions more. I also employ short response papers, as well as longer mid-term and final papers. While I always provide writing prompts, I also invite students to come up with their own prompts to give them more room to elaborate on the issues important to them, thus encouraging the expression of diverse viewpoints and approaches by students. I also offer oral presentations as an alternative to mid-term papers, to give students more flexibility regarding types of assignments. This provides them with a way to practice their spoken German in front of a friendly audience, as well as take charge of the discussion, and set their own thematic priorities.
I usually begin my sessions by asking the students for their general impressions about the assigned readings, and what most intrigued them about it. I let other students respond to those initial impressions, as well as give my own responses. This allows everybody to recall the material, activate their knowledge about the subject, and bring their own perspectives to the table. Making notes of what they brought up, I will come back to those issues as we go through the points I prepared for us to work through. The structure of my sessions is centered around a “think-pair-share” model, which I consciously employ to give students space and time to come up with ideas, peruse the text, and discuss their thoughts with their peers. The “think” portion either consist of a short presentation by myself, or by gathering pre-existing ideas students have about a specific topic, and having them write those on the board. For their pair-work, I provide both open-ended prompts to look for places in the text relevant for our topic, and specific prompts about particular places in the text. Based on feedback I received, students find this “pair” technique particularly helpful, as it allows them to pre-formulate ideas, and receive a response from their partner, including suggestions on better ways of phrasing their ideas. This way, they feel more empowered to discuss complex questions, which might not be possible for every student when asked “a question cold,” and “in a silent room,” as one student wrote. In an advanced course on German modern drama, we read The Soldiers by Jakob Lenz. My teaching goal was to convey the skill of interpreting and analyzing representations of historically marginalized groups, and in particular to open student's ears to important literary aspects, such as “framing,” “context,” and “tone.” In one scene, an offensively stereotypical caricature of a Jewish person, an unlisted character named Aaron, becomes the victim of a violent prank with homophobic undertones at the hands of the eponymous soldiers. As I anticipated, students were appalled, but also already had accepted that this was due to it being a German play from the 18th century, thinking Lenz was simply an antisemite. While they identified one harmful stereotype, their overall analysis was itself a bit schematic, relying on another essentializing stereotype. I acknowledged the presence of an overtly antisemitic trope, and that this was an important observation. After this “think” portion of the lesson, I provided students with excerpts from a relevant journal article, which argued that the burden of the scene is to characterize the soldiers as a vile and anti-social group, decoding their racist, sexist, and homophobic stereotypes, such as the “greedy” and “horny” Jew. I asked them to read and discuss these ideas in pairs, giving them opportunity to develop their ideas on this challenging material. Now, they had access to multiple perspectives, both their discussion partner's and the author's, empowering them to develop their individual viewpoints in a more dynamic and powerful way. In the “share” portion, they remarked how they had not considered that harmful stereotypes could also be referenced to deconstruct and denounce them. Still feeling uneasy about the portrayal of Aaron, as did I, they suggested that Lenz could have written him as a more well-rounded, realistic character. In response, I offered them a creative way to articulate their critique: to write a monologue for Aaron. We finished by talking about “indirect” modes of conveying ideas (through omission, emphasis, or irony), and the question of “how” something is said. I also talked about the historical context of the enlightenment, the so-called “Jewish question” and the “Jewish enlightenment” (the haskalah), and the discourses surrounding the emancipation of Jews at the time. This way, students learned about historical context, methods of literary interpretation, and refined their critical tools to deal with artistic representations of social issues, while feeling respected and validated in their justified response to a difficult subject matter.
In my language teaching, I also employ the “think-pair-share” method, using a communicative approach to language teaching, as well as a “flipped classroom.” This means that students learn about the grammar and subject matter through their homework, while class time is devoted to practicing their new skills and knowledge. I center the classroom activities around situations they frequently encounter in their daily lives, such as going to college, going on vacation with friends and family, and extracurricular activities, inviting them to tell the class about their individual perspectives and experiences. I also incorporate authentic material for students to explore, such as newspaper and magazine articles, television clips and movie trailers, or websites. For a lesson in a beginner-level course on “German reunification,” I drew on my passion for environmental topics by designing an activity where students explored a website belonging to the project Das grüne Band (The Green Belt). Along the former inner German border, where the deadly border fortifications used to be, one can now experience a unique natural preserve, as well as numerous art installations. It is the first gesamtdeutsche cooperation in ecological matters, and students were amazed by how the area had been transformed, as well as by the project's poetic significance. In addition, I like to expose students to my favorite authors or movie-makers, such as Franz Kafka, Rainer Werner Fassbinder, or Werner Herzog. Oftentimes, students tell me they have never before seen or read something like what I just showed them. When it comes to one particular aspect of language teaching, namely error correction, I consciously employ an active listening technique on which I have received very positive feedback. Whenever a student's verbal contribution warrants correction, I will listen to what they are saying politely and intently, as if we were simply engaged in a regular conversation. I will then repeat back to them what I understood, but use a grammatically correct, and perhaps more idiomatic way of phrasing their thoughts, asking for confirmation if I understood them correctly. This way, a student can learn the correct way of expressing a complex thought, while saving face and not feeling like they made a mistake. In addition, I am making sure they feel like they are being heard and taken seriously.
In terms of feedback, apart from my regular check-in at the beginning of every sessions, I ask students for their final impressions and thoughts whenever we conclude a text. I also incorporate feedback I receive through Brown's course evaluation system. When I taught my advanced course on the Goethezeit, one student remarked that while they very much enjoyed the focus on close reading and pair work, they would have appreciated a more historical introduction of the texts by me, which I have started doing since then. When I taught a bridge course on “Culture and/or Technology” during the last Fall semester, another student suggested it would be helpful if I provided more of my own opinions and insights on the material after they have had their discussions, which I now offer more regularly. In the future, I plan to use more feedback and assessment tools, such as “entrance” and “exit” tickets. I also plan to discuss at the beginning of the semester what types of discussion formats have worked well for students in the past.