The full title of this HLTP and chapter is “Focusing on Cultural Products, Practices, and Perspectives in a Dialogic Context”.
The purpose of this is to help distinguish the practice from more traditional teaching of “culture” and “Culture” as isolated items without regard for context or purpose. The new practice seeks to introduce practices and products as expressions of perspectives.
As noted last time, the IMAGE model is simply one approach to teaching cultural products, practices, and perspectives. It is by no means the only model, and a teach should not feel guilty for using a different model.
The acronym IMAGE expresses four steps. (I think the fact that five letters are used to represent four steps says more about our proclivity toward acronyms that create words than anything essential to the model – but that’s just my opinion.) These four steps are
Images and Making observations
Analyzing additional information
Generating hypotheses about cultural perspectives
Exploring perspective and reflecting further
Before examining the practice and its efficacy, we should at least raise the question of desirability and appropriateness. I ask, not because I think there is something wrong with teaching culture, but because we need to evaluate how everything we do fits into the goals of our instruction.
No one would advocate for cultural ignorance as a desirable outcome. However, are the goals of the IMAGE model consonant with the goals of the language classroom? And is the model itself an appropriate vehicle for accomplishing those goals?
For example, I do not follow a grammar syllabus because research has shown that this approach does not lead to acquisition, and my goal for my classes is that students acquire the target language, not simply learn information about it.
So, where does culture fit into the acquisition process?
The purpose of acquisition is to communicate, that is to express, interpret, and negotiate meaning for a purpose within a context. Often, cultural knowledge (or “Cultural Literacy”, to use a phrase popularized by E.D. Hirsch Jr, Joseph Kett, and James Trefil in their Dictionary of Cultural Literacy) is essential for interpreting a message or text.
Star Trek provided an extreme example of this in its “Darmok” episode on The Next Generation. Picard learns to communicate with the captain of an alien ship only when he realizes that communication is via metaphor based on their history and culture. “Darmok and Jalad on Tanagra” refers to two strangers who united to defeat a common enemy, a situation that the alien captain arranged in order to communicate with the Federation. Even though Picard understood the words, their meaning was hidden because he lacked cultural knowledge and understanding.
Fortunately, most other languages are not quite as opaque, but the principle is still valid: lack of cultural knowledge can lead to failure to communicate.
A key question that Glisan and Donato do not address is: How does the teacher decide what cultural practice or product to introduce to learners?
Does the teacher identify cultural practices or products that arise naturally from a text or in a dialogic context?
Does the teacher identify “high-frequency practices and products”, i.e. those that the learners are more likely to encounter early in their experience?
Does the teacher simply choose at random?
Does the teacher choose a practice or product that he or she finds particularly appealing or noteworthy?
As it stands, the authors simply instruct practitioners to “decide on the cultural content of the lesson to be explored nd the images you will use.” (Glisan and Donato 2017, p. 125) The examples provided in the book arise from a group of teaching assistants at the University of Pittsburgh in the Fall of 2015. (2017, p 119 footnote) Thus, it seems that these were generated fairly randomly, though that may be a misunderstanding due to lack of information.
I often discuss cultural practices and products as they arise in texts that we see, hear, or see and hear. (Remember, a text is any expression of meaning shared with another.) That may not be what Glisan and Donato have in mind, but I find it works well to have cultural practices, products, and perspectives emerge organically for students rather than arising at random or following a rigid syllabus of cultural expression. I also use holidays and other events to highlight cultural differences and their perspectives.
Before describing the practice in action, Glisan and Donato describe the teacher’s preparation.
The teacher needs to
- Consider the level of the class and anticipate the time frame for the lesson.
I find this good advice. If not carefully planned for the target language, “culture” often becomes an exercise conducted in English or the time necessary is far longer than anticipated. - Decide on the cultural content of the lesson to be explored and the images you will use.
The teacher needs to decide on both the cultural product or practice and the cultural perspective it represents. Then the teacher needs to collect two sets of images (imagined by Glisan and Donato as “slides”, but they could also be film clips or other kinds of images) of the product or practice: one set will be used to help students describe what they see; the second set will be used to help students explore and hypothesize about possible cultural meanings and perspectives. (Although the authors maintain that the second set of images “goes beyond static images of the product and/or practice”, it is unclear how this is worked out in practice.) - Anticipate the language that will be needed to participate in the culture discussion.
This language is not just content language for the specific topic but also general “discussion language” that people use in any discussion. Strategies for turn taking, expressing opinion, agreeing and disagreeing, etc. are included in anticipated language.
In addition to the above three descriptions, Glisan and Donato provide a checklist for the teacher. Items on the checklist include:
A. Who are the students? (Age, language ability, course, time frame, etc.)
B. What is the cultural content of the lesson? (Practice or product and the perspective it expresses.)
C. What specific vocabulary do students need? (Content vocabulary and discussion vocabulary; this will be learned in dialogic interaction)
D. What grammar structures do students need? (This is not grammar for the sake of grammar; however, according to Krashen and VanPatten, this instruction still does not lead to acquisition – but, it seems to me that it can facilitate discussion when presented in extremely small chunks that students can easily remember and utilize.)
This chapter is the longest in the book in terms of pages, but it seems to me that some important discussion points were omitted nonetheless. I have raised the question about how the cultural product or practice is chosen; other questions remain unanswered.
Next time we’ll get to the four steps of our five-point acronym and see how IMAGE is implemented in the classroom according to Glisan and Donato.
Until then, enjoy sharing both the target language and the target culture with your students in whatever way you do so. Since my German 3-4-AP courses are finishing up a unit on traveling to Vienna, we’re going to visit the opera and watch “Die Zauberflöte” as a cultural product and practice. My students will listen to one of my favorite arias in all of opera: “Der Hölle Rache kocht” (Queen of the Night aria). Diana Damrau is excellent in this role. For a real treat, go to YouTube and listen to one of her recordings.