Nowadays, schools are still too much focused on teaching students knowledge. But in the western world, where almost everyone has access to more or less all the knowledge of the world within seconds, the teaching of knowledge seems unnecessary. The ultimate question is: What do students need to learn if it’s not primarily knowledge?

The answer is skills, character and meta-learning (after The Center for Curriculum Redesign). The people of tomorrow need hard skills like reading, writing and calculating, but more importantly, soft skills, such as social skills. Because knowledge is always accessible, students need to know where and how to find the information they need and how to decide if the source and information is trustworthy. Furthermore, they need to develop their character, their values, train resilience, mindfulness, leadership, and decision-making. As a part of meta-learning, students learn metacognition, how to develop a growth mindset, and learn how to learn, how to (self-)reflect, and how to adapt to new circumstances. Of course, teaching these skills and competencies is not possible without also teaching knowledge. The difference is that the primary goal – the output – is not students who know as many facts as possible and who can obtain those in the fastest way possible. The goal is rather students who know how to use their skills in a way that enables them to orientate and navigate themselves in this world.

What the future society needs are critical-thinking individuals who do not shy away from making mistakes and then learning from them. Individuals who are mentally strong and resilient and are able to communicate and collaborate with other human beings respectfully. Individuals who are willing and capable of trying new ideas and are mentally flexible to adapt to changes.

The burning question is: How can students learn these skills and traits in the best way? First of all, we need good teachers. And by that, I mean teachers who embody (in the best case) everything the students are about to learn and who also know how to teach those skills and character traits. Hence, teacher training has to change in order to prepare the teachers adequately for their important job. Secondly, the school and the staff need to care for all their students. The basis of learning – a feeling of security and acceptance – can only be established in a protective and caring environment. It then enables the students to trust, to be themselves, and to unfold their potential and widen their horizons. Particularly disadvantaged children need caring teachers at school because their families often do not have the resources to support their children properly.

In short: School is a place to learn. Rather than knowledge, it needs to teach skills, character, and meta-learning, which require trained and caring teachers. As we need to change the world, we need to change education.

Center for Curriculum Redesign

Ich habe für mich eine Antwort auf diese Fragen gefunden: Lyrik drückt durch Sprache aus, was durch Sprache nicht ausgedrückt werden kann. Dabei wird dieses Paradoxon überwunden, indem Sprache in Form und Wortwahl sehr bewusst verwendet wird und dadurch oft eine irritierende Wirkung hat.

Die erste Frage, die sich stellt, ist, was durch Lyrik ausgedrückt werden soll. Im Gegensatz zur Prosa will Lyrik nicht informieren. Es geht nicht um Zahlen, Daten oder Fakten. Durch Lyrik soll vielmehr ein Gefühl, eine Emotion ausgedrückt und vermittelt werden. Aus Emotionen heraus konstruiert jeder für sich seine Sicht auf die Welt, woraus sich wiederum Erfahrungen ergeben. Deshalb entsteht der Drang zum Schreiben, meiner Meinung nach, immer aus einem Gefühl heraus. Dieses und somit auch die Erfahrung werden durch das Schreiben verarbeitet. Beim dem Rezipierenden werden wiederum Emotionen ausgelöst. Dabei kann es sich um Emotionen handeln, die er schon aus eigener Erfahrung erlebt hat oder aber, es sind Emotionen und Erfahrungen, die ihm bis jetzt unbekannt waren, die sich nun aber durch einen lyrischen Text erschließen. Kurz gesagt: Lyrik will Emotionen und Erfahrungen ausdrücken und auslösen.

Nun drängt sich eine zweite Frage auf: Warum können Emotionen und im weiteren Sinne auch Erfahrungen nicht durch Sprache ausgedrückt werden? Ein Ausflug in die Neurologie würde an dieser Stelle zu weit führen – es sei daher nur so viel gesagt: Emotionen bzw. Gefühle und Sprachproduktion bzw. -verständnis werden in komplett verschiedenen Hirnarealen erzeugt und verarbeitet. Dabei laufen Prozesse der Emotionserzeugung und -verarbeitung zum Großteil unterbewusst ab, während sprachliche Prozesse eher bewusst ablaufen. Die dichtende Person versucht somit, sich das Unterbewusste bewusst zu machen und auszudrücken. Die rezipierende Person geht diesen Weg quasi rückwärts und versucht das Bewusste – das, was auf Papier geschrieben steht – ins Unterbewusste zu überführen.

Es ergibt sich nun folgendes Problem: Alles, was durch Sprache ausgedrückt wird, hat eine Bedeutung (oder sogar mehrere). Jedes Wort, jede Phrase, jeder Satz bedeutet etwas. Im Gegensatz zur Musik, wo ein einzelner Ton oder Akkord erstmal neutral ist und in sich keine Bedeutung trägt, so ist das bei Sprache nicht der Fall. Das heißt, wenn jemand ein Gedicht liest, dann werden auf einer ersten Instanz die Worte und deren Zusammenhänge wortwörtlich verstanden. Das lyrische Gedicht wird als Prosa-Text gelesen und verstanden. Ultimativ werden somit aber nur die oberflächlichen Informationen aus einem Gedicht entnommen. Um Emotionen und Erfahrungen nahezubringen steht der Dichter somit vor der Aufgabe, die reine Informationsverarbeitung von Worten zu umgehen – sowohl bei sich selbst als auch bei den Rezipierenden. Hier ein einfaches Beispiel zur Veranschaulichung:

Dieser Satz ist in Prosa geschrieben und jedem ist sofort klar, worum es geht. Die gegebene Information über den Berg wurde verstanden. Anders verhält es sich mit folgender Form:

Die Information ist immer noch dieselbe, aber sie ist zweitrangig, denn die Wirkung ist nun eine ganz andere. Es geht jetzt vielmehr um die Stimmung, die Energie, um das Bild, das im Kopf entsteht. Es geht um Emotion, um Erfahrung. Und diese andere Perspektive auf die gleichen Worte wurde nur damit erreicht, dass das Verb weggelassen, einzelne Satzzeichen hinzugefügt und die Worte auf drei Verse aufgeteilt wurden. Durch die sehr bewusste Auswahl und Anordnung von Worten ist kein Lesefluss wie in der sonst gebräuchlichen Prosaform möglich. Die rezipierende Person wurde aus dem Lesefluss gebracht und das irritiert zunächst einmal. Die Lösung für unser Problem der normalerweise sofortigen Bedeutungszuschreibung beim Lesen von Worten, lautet Irritation. Denn durch diese Irritation drängen sich dem Rezipierenden nun ganz andere Fragen als sonst auf: Warum wurden gerade diese Wörter ausgewählt? Warum wurden sie genau so angeordnet? Sind die Wörter wörtlich zu verstehen oder steckt da vielmehr noch eine ganze andere Bedeutung hinter? Was wollte der Dichter vielleicht damit ausdrücken? Was für ein Gefühl löst das Gedicht in mir aus?

Was nun deutlich wird, ist, dass es beim Verstehen von Lyrik nicht damit getan ist, sie einfach nur zu lesen. Sondern man muss sich als Rezipient damit beschäftigen, darüber nachdenken, in das Gedicht eintauchen und es in der Tiefe ergründen, wenn man die Essenz eines Gedichts und damit die darunter liegende Emotion und Erfahrung wirklich verstehen, also auch fühlen will. Der Energieaufwand sowohl des Dichters als auch des Rezipierenden ist bei einem Gedicht deutlich höher als bei einem vergleichbaren Prosa-Text. Aus eigener Erfahrung kann ich sagen, dass es unglaublich schwer ist, für bestimmte Gefühle, die richtigen und wirklich passsenden Worte zu finden. Und genauso schwer ist es, ein Gedicht wirklich zu verstehen, jeden einzelnen Vers aufzudröseln und zu überlegen, was den Worten eigentlich zu Grunde liegt. Es bleibt daher nur noch zu sagen: Es ist höchste Kunst, zu beschreiben, was unbeschreiblich ist. Und es ist auch höchste Kunst, das beschriebene Unbeschreibliche zu verstehen.

Photo by Jr Korpa on Unsplash

In “Politics, Power Relationships and ELT,” Alastair Pennycook outlines English’s (often hidden) legacy of colonialization, exploitation, discrimination, and globalization and, therefore, its consequences for English Language Teaching (ELT). Pennycook states that English and, especially ELT, always need to be seen in relation to power and politics. English not only creates opportunities but also fosters inequality because its spread in the world has always been “pushed by many forces”. In the context of ELT, every interaction – from textbooks to the English-only policy – “needs to be seen as social and cultural practices that have broader implications than just elements of classroom interaction”. He aims to reconstitute English in “more inclusive, ethical, and democratic terms” and to form a many-sided view of the relations of power and politics of ELT. Among other things, the role of English in local economies and student motivations for learning English need to be taken into account.

While I was reading Pennycook’s article, it reminded me of Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie’s speech called “The Danger of a Single Story”. I, personally, never questioned the status and influence of English in today’s society and never wondered why this language had become a lingua franca. But in many regards, Pennycook’s critical take on the spread of English was eye-opening for me and I realized that, until now, I had only heard a single story about English as a world language. He shows impressively that the spread of English was never coincidental but always bound to culture and the use of the language. Coming to see English in a new light also changes my perspective on ELT because as a teacher I stand in the tradition of propagating English.

For me, questions arise about how we can implement this other story of English in the ELT classroom. Unfortunately, Pennycook fails to develop and present precise suggestions for English teachers in order to change their teaching style according to his perception of English. Instead, he remains highly theoretical, abstract, and specific in stating his arguments. Because of the complexity of this topic, it remains a theoretical construct and nothing that seems actually realizable. I can only guess how Pennycook would like his view of English to be implemented in practice.

The reality is that in today’s globalized society, a lingua franca is necessary in order to communicate properly. With its legacy, English is predetermined to play this role – this is irreversible. Pennycook’s critical view of this trend is not only justified but also highly relevant in order to change the image of English permanently. Seen as the language of Great Britain or the United States of America, it needs to become a global language – a global English for everyone. This new perception of English should bear in mind its role in the history of colonialism and power relations. From this point onwards, a perception of English should be developed which acknowledges all Englishes spoken equally. In the classroom, English could then be taught as a language with connections to almost every part of the world which go back many centuries.

Adichie, Chimamanda Ngozi. “The Danger of a Single Story.” TED Talk, www.ted.com/talks/chimamanda_ngozi_adichie_the_danger_of_a_single_story/transcript. Accessed on 27 June 2022.

Pennycook, Alastair. “Politics, power relationships and ELT.” The Routledge Handbook of English Language Teaching, edited by Graham Hall, Routledge, 2016, pp. 26-37,
www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9781315676203.ch2. Accessed on 27 June 2022.

Photo by Kyle Glenn on Unsplash

So, first, let’s do a quick recap of what motivation actually is: in general, motivation can be described as “the force […] to initiate behavior” (Petri et al.). Especially in school or university, most of the actions related to learning are goal-oriented, need effort and persistence, and distractions must be avoided. Motivation is the focus that keeps you on track. It’s the answer to the question “Why are you doing what you are doing?” – but motivation has different manifestations.

Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation – also called push and pull motives (Petri et al.) – are the two opposite poles. When you’re intrinsically motivated you carry out the action for its own sake (Rheinberg, Vollmeyer 176f.), but when you’re extrinsically motivated “the motive of the conduct lies outside the act itself” (Rheinberg, Vollmeyer 117), e.g. a good grade or social recognition.
Okay, now we know what motivation is – but how do we get our students and ourselves motivated?

What you need is CARP – no, not the fish, but these four components:

Competence               Autonomy                  Relatedness                Purpose

The CAR – competence, autonomy, and relatedness – is based on the Self-Determination Theory (SDT) by Edward L. Deci and Richard M. Ryan. Today, it is “the leading theory in human motivation” (“Self-Determination Theory.”). The broad framework contains six mini-theories that explain certain phenomena of motivation more explicitly. According to it, the three conditions an individual needs in order to experience “the most volitional and high-quality forms of motivation” are autonomy, competence, and relatedness (“Theory. Overview.”).

The following model explains the three components in more detail:

If you have been reading this blog carefully, you might have noticed that the last component of CARP is still missing – purpose.

Purpose is not part of the Self-Determination Theory but rather something I came across by myself:

A few weeks ago, I had to write a term paper for my seminar, and I was already running late with it – but as I was sitting in the library to write, I was unmotivated.

So, I checked all the parameters of the Self-Determination Theory:

I felt pretty competent because I had participated in the seminar, I already had done a lot of research on my topic and it was not my first time writing a term paper. I knew what I was doing. Competence check!

I also was autonomous because I could write whenever and wherever I wanted to, and I could choose the topic. Autonomy check!

And I felt related, too, because I had people with whom I could talk about my topic, and watching other students study in the library gave me a sense of togetherness. Relatedness check!

But still, I was unmotivated and could barely get myself to work on the paper.

What was the problem?

After a few days of basically doing nothing but constantly having the paper on my mind, I realized that something was missing:

I didn’t see my goal, the central theme in this term paper. I didn’t know where I was going with my writing. Of course, I knew why I was writing it in the first place. I needed to pass the course and I had a deadline to meet – but these external factors didn’t motivate me at all, they just kept me reminding that there was still a lot of work to do.

What I needed and eventually got was a motive that came from within the term paper. Something that made the paper itself meaningful and relevant – a purpose.

I am very sure that purpose is not only something I need to be motivated by but which applies to many other people as well. It is something very personal and sometimes it takes time to figure out what you want.

So, the take-away message for you is:

Use CARP – for yourself but also for your students to get motivated.

Whenever you are preparing a lesson just check these four components and try to find them in your lesson plan. In the beginning, it won’t be easy to implement all of them, especially purpose, which is a tricky one, but I am sure it will be worth it. CARPe Diem!

Works Cited:

“Our Approach. Self-Determination Theory.” University of Rochester Medical Care, 2022, https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/community-health/patient-care/self-determination-theory.aspx. Accessed 5 May 2022.

Petri, Herbert L. et al.. “Motivation.” Encyclopedia Britannica, 31. March 2022, https://www.britannica.com/topic/motivation. Accessed 5 May 2022.

Rheinberg, Falko, Vollmeyer, Regina. Motivation. Stuttgart, Kohlhammer, 2019
(9th ed.).

“Self-Determination Theory.” Center for Self-Determination Theory, 2022, https://selfdeterminationtheory.org/. Accessed 9 May 2022.

“Theory. Overview.” Center for Self-Determination Theory, 2022, https://selfdeterminationtheory.org/theory/. Accessed 5 May 2022.