You are on page 1of 4

Research Roundup: Response to Literature

Author(s): Anthony R. Petrosky


Source: The English Journal, Vol. 66, No. 7 (Oct., 1977), pp. 96-98
Published by: National Council of Teachers of English
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/814381 .
Accessed: 07/10/2011 06:07

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

National Council of Teachers of English is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
The English Journal.

http://www.jstor.org
ResearchRoundup AnthonyR. Petrosky

ResponseTo Literature
This research summary continues the series of re- resources in the home, and the general use of lan-
search summaries sponsored by the NCTE Commit- guage as partial explanations for national differences
tee on Research. Since each summary must be highly in cognitive and affective achievement in literature
selective, full reports of studies summarized here can (p. 288).
be located in college or school-district professional A recent thesis on reader response to racial litera-
libraries or, in the case of dissertations, ordered from ture by Collins (1976) acknowledges the uniqueness
University Microfilms (P.O. Box 1346, Ann Arbor, of readers' readings and interpretations but looks
Michigan 48106). deeper, from a psychoanalytic perspective, into the
beliefs, attitudes, and mental-sets that we learn un-
Personality. Just as a reader brings a complicated consciously from the culture. These beliefs and men-
and unpredictable set of past experiences to the tal-sets transmit, according to Collins, deeply in-
reading/response process, so does the reader bring a grained racial attitudes. He concludes that the racial
unique personality to the process. Norman Holland, context for the way we use symbolism, criticism, and
in his recent studies on response to literature (1973, response is "deep beyond the threshold of reason and
1975), talks about the response process as a transac- common sense.
tion between the reader and the text. He sees a read- Collins' study on "the special reading act that takes
er's response as a reflection of that reader's unique place when a white American sits down with a piece
personality style, or identity. Much of Holland's work of literature written by a black American" presents
in response to literature is influenced by the theories a strong theoretical case in favor of the notion that
of two ego psychologists, Robert Waelder and Heinz readers bring complex and subtle sets of racial atti-
Lichtenstein. Lichtenstein (1961) sees the operation tudes to a reading and that these deeply ingrained
of the human psyche as a function of an identity attitudes influence readers' responses to literature
themine-"thecapacity to remain the same in the midst written by black Americans.
of change" (p. 194). According to Holland, people Cognition. Keefe (1975), studying the effects of
try to create a balance in their life styles; as a corol- teacher and student led discussions of short stories
lary to this notion, he sees the ego as a mediating and case accounts on the moral reasoning of adoles-
process that balances the demands of inner and outer cents, takes much the same stance that Piaget does
reality. The end product of this mediating process is on developmentally sequenced stages. Working from
a typical style, a characteristic way of being. Accord- the Kohlberg model of moral development, Keefe
ing to the identity theme theory, each individual de- studied the effects of using short stories to engage
velops a unique personal style that influences every- readers in responses centering on moral issues.
thing the person does from the kinds of clothes the Among other things, he claims that moral develop-
individual wears to the linguistic choices the person ment occurs "as an active change in patterns of
makes in speaking and writing. It has been success- thinking brought about by experiential problem-
fully demonstrated on a number of occasions (Hol- solving situations" (p. 2). Although he concludes
land, 1975; Applebee, 1976; Petrosky, 1976) that a there was no difference in moral development be-
reader's unique personal style or construct influences tween groups reading short stories and groups read-
what that reader says in response to a literary selec- ing summaries of short stories, the experimental
tion. Just as we can say that a person is introverted group that used response as a form of moral prob-
or extroverted, so can we say that a response reflects lem-solving did show development into a more so-
these ways of being (Brozick, 1977). phisticated stage of moral reasoning than the group
Culture. Cultural values are very subtle and work that did not discuss moral issues unless students
in intricate ways to influence attitudes and ideas. chose to.
Alan Purves (1973), in his Literature Education in Growth and Development. Just as personality, cul-
Ten Countries, talks about the powerful role culture ture, and cognition are not static, neither is response
plays in explaining national differences in mother- to literature. What then can we expect from respon-
tongue achievement. He cites the place of literature dents at certain ages? Do readers need specific kinds
in the culture availability of linguistically stimulating of environments for growth to occur? Are there char-
96 English Journal
acteristics that readers share in common within de- 2. Does he identify contrasts (disparities, incongru-
velopmental groups and cultural settings? A few ities, instances of cognitive dissonance) between
studies (Keefe, 1975; Applebee, 1973; Petrosky, the text and himself?
1974) have attempted to explore these questions. It a. Between a character's statement and the read-
seems (and I stress the tenuousness of seems) re- ers understanding of some event, circum-
sponse is indeed developmental and that we can ex- stance, etc.?
pect students to exhibit certain characteristics at b. Between some other facet of the text (e.g., a
certain stages in their development. In a later study, character's actions, motives, values) and the
for instance, Applebee (1976) found nine and thir- reader's own image, i.e., his experience,
teen-year-olds strongly inclined to liking and ex- hopes, values?
pecting happy endings. Happiness-binding, accord-
Space does not permit the presentation of the ques-
ing to Applebee, is temporary and most probably tions for the other five categories, but they can be
the result of a conflict between reasonable expecta-
found in the Odell and Cooper article. Within the
tions derived from children's stories and "the less
context of a classroom situation, their questions can
sanguine conclusions of more adult literature" (p. be useful tools for both teacher and students in build-
230). By the time adolescents are fifteen and seven-
ing a repertoire of response strategies. A response-
teen-years-old, they are involved in ardent quests centered curriculum that encourages the exchange
for meaning and begin to look to the future and the
and sharing of perceptions and responses can make
world of the possible in their responses to literature.
good use of David Bleich's Readings and Feelings:
Developing Questions. There is evidence that stu- An Introduction to Subjective Criticism (NCTE,
dents can and do react to teachers' questioning pat-
terns and that students can be taught a variety of 1975). Other practical ideas relating to response to
literature may be found in the writings of Moffett
ways to develop breadth and depth in their re-
(1968, 1977), Petrosky (1976), and the National
sponses (McGreal, 1976; Lucking, 1976; Sullivan, Assessment of Educational Progress (1975).
1974; Heil, 1974). Odell and Cooper (1976) set up
In Retrospect. Reducing years of serious research
a useful way to approach response to literature.
Their study outlines a technique for analyzing re- to a list does not convey anywhere near the wealth
of information we have, but it does serve as a frame
sponses based on rhetorical and content analysis of reference for thinking about response to literature.
procedures. They ask themselves, when analyzing For reader ease the following list of general notions
responses, a wide range of exploratory and specific about response to literature is presented:
questions based on the tagmemic classification sys-
tem developed by Young, Becker, and Pike (1970). * Response to literature is complex. The why,
The rhetorical procedures give them categories (fo- what, and how of a reader's response is influenced
cus, contrast, classification, change, physical context, by personality, cognitive abilities, expectations, cul-
time sequence, and logical sequence) around which ture, reading ability, and schooling (Purves, 1973;
they devise questions that will show whether respon- Applebee, 1973; Petrosky, 1974).
dents use rhetorical strategies in their responses. * Past experiences, reality perceptions, and fan-
Some of the questions they ask under the specific tasy play a weighty role in what a reader has to say
categories are listed below. in response to a work of literature (Petrosky, 1976).
* Past experiences also play a crucial role in the
Focus
reading process-the processing of information
1. What does he [John, the reader in their study], (Cooper & Petrosky, 1976).
focus on within the text? * Readers of different ages have different pre-
a. One or more of the characters? ferred ways of responding-there are characteristic
b. Some other facet of the text (e.g., a theme or constructs to their response patterns (Applebee,
a setting)? 1976).
2. What does he focus on outside the text? * Students learn a way of responding through
a. Himself? teacher expectations. The response patterns that stu-
b. Some facet of understanding, experience, pre- dents learn in school are partially a function of how
teachers respond and what teachers expect students
conception of the world (e.g., "Most people I
know think that . . ." or "Reading the book to say (Heil, 1974).
was a real experience")? * Since readers have unique and consistent re-

Contrast sponse patterns, standardizing response formats in


the classroom tremendously limits a reader's kind and
1. Does he identify contrast within the text? degree of response (Beach, 1973).
a. Within a single character? * Ilentification plays a strong role in the responses
b. Between two or more aspects of the text (e.g., of young children who prefer to read a story where
between two or more actions, settings, char- they can identify with the principle character in a
acters)? familiar setting (Barrett & Barrett, 1966).
October 1977 97
* Students can be taught various ways of respond- Holland, N. 5 Readers reading. New Haven: Yale
ing. Instruction in ways to respond to works of lit- University Press, 1975.
erature can expand the students' repertoire of possi- Keefe, D. R. A comparison of the effect of teacher
ble responses (Sullivan, 1974). and student led discussions of short stories and
* Readers project their thoughts and feelings into case accounts on the moral reasoning of adoles-
a work of literature; the way they do this reflects cents using the Kohlberg Model (Doctoral disser-
their personal style, or identity (Holland, 1973; tation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Cham-
Bleich, 1975). paign, 1975) Dissertation Abstracts International,
* Soliciting responses to works of literature is a 1975, 36, 2734-A. (University Microfilms No. 75-
delicate process. Teachers exhibit characteristic ques- 24, 335)
tioning techniques that influence what students say Lichtenstein, H. Identity and sexuality. The Journal
about a reading experience (McGreal, 1976; Luck- of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 1961,
ing, 1976). 9, 179-260.
A summary of research on response to literature up Lucking, R. A. A study of the effects of hierarchi-
to 1971 is contained in Literature and the Reader cally-ordered questioning technique on adolescents'
(Purves and Beach, 1972). Beyond them, readers responses to short stories. Research in the Teach-
ing of English, 1976, 10, 269-276.
may wish to review the references contained in Ap-
McGreal, S. S. Teacher questioning behavior during
plebee (1973), Keefe (1975), and Collins (1976). classroom discussions of short stories (Doctoral
dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-
Bibliography Champaign, 1976). Dissertation Abstracts Inter-
Applebee, A. N. The spectator role: Theoretical and national, 1976, 37, 2798-A. (University Microfilms
developmental studies of ideas about and responses No. 76-24, 135)
to literature, with special reference to four age Moffett, J. Teaching the universe of discourse. Bos-
levels (Doctoral dissertation, University of Lon- ton: Houghton Mifflin, 1968.
don, 1973). ERIC Document, #ED 114 840. Moffett, J. A student-centered language arts curricu-
Applebee, A. N. Children's construal of stories and lum, grades k-13. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1977.
related genres as measured with repertory grid National Assessment of Educational Progress. Litera-
techniques. Research in the Teaching of English, ture objectives. (Second Assessment) Denver: Na-
1976, 10, 226-238. tional Assessment of Educational Progress, 1975.
Barrett, P. C. & Barrett, G. V. Enjoyment of stories Odell, L. & Cooper, C. R. Describing responses to
in terms of role identification. Perceptual and Mo- works of fiction. Research in the Teaching of En-
tor Skills, 1966, 23, 1164. glish, 1976, 10, 203-225.
Beach, R. The literary response processes of college Petrosky, A. R. Individual and group responses of
students. English Record, 1973, 23, 98-116. fourteen and fifteen-year-olds to short stories,
Bleich, D. Readings and feelings: An introduction to novels, poems, and thematic apperception tests:
subjective criticism. Urbana, Illinois: NCTE, 1975. Case studies based on Piagetian genetic epistemol-
Brozick, J. An investigation into the composing pro- ogy and Freudian psychoanalytic ego psychology
cess of four twelfth grade students: Case studies (Doctoral dissertation, State University of New
based on Jung's personality types, Freudian psy- York at Buffalo, 1974). Dissertation Abstracts In-
choanalytic ego psychology, and cognitive strat- ternational, 1975, 36, 852A. (University Micro-
egies. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Univer- films No. 75-16, 956).
sity of Pittsburgh, 1977. Petrosky, A. R. The effects of reality perception and
Collins, T. G. A psychoanalytic introduction to read- fantasy on response to literature. Research in the
er response to racial literature (Doctoral disserta- Teaching of English, 1976, 10, 239-258.
tion, University of Minnesota, 1976). Dissertation Purves, A. C. & Beach, R. Literature and the Reader:
Abstracts International, 1976, 36, 3611-A. (Uni- Research in response to literature, reading inter-
versity Microfilms No. 76-27882) ests, and the teaching of literature. Urbana, Illi-
Cooper, C. R. & Petrosky, A. R. A psycholinguistic nois: NCTE, 1972.
view of the fluent reading process. Journal of Read- Purves, A. C. Literature education in ten countries.
ing, 1976, 20, 184-207. New York: John Wiley, 1973.
Heil, C. A description and analysis of the role of the Sullivan, K. The effects of response pattern analysis
teacher's response while teaching a short story on content of high school students' written re-
(Doctoral dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, sponses to short stories (Doctoral dissertation,
1974). Dissertation Abstracts International, 1975, State University of New York at Buffalo, 1974).
35, 6690-A. (University Microfilms No. 75-13, Dissertation Abstracts International, 1974, 35,
190) 3701-A. (University Microfilms No. 74-29, 144)
Holland, N. Poems in persons: An introduction to the Young, R. E., Becker, A. L., & Pike, K. L. Rhetoric:
psychoanalysis of literature. New York: W. W. Discovery and Change. New York: Harcourt,
Norton, 1973. Brace and World, 1970. EJ
98 English Journal

You might also like