In the respondents’ answers language proficiency was a central theme which guided the selection of literary texts. According to Collie and Slater (1987, 8) literary texts should be chosen according to each pupil’s language level (Collie and Slater 1987, 8).
Therefore, the English teachers need to carefully select literary texts to meet their pupil’s language abilities (Floris 2004, 5). Thus, language proficiency is a key element in language learning since overall the purpose of language learning is to gain language proficiency (Pietilä and Mikkola 2015).
In the present research language proficiency refers to the knowledge about language and how to operate with language (Harsh 2017, 250). Generally, language proficiency is divided into the processes of reading, listening, writing, and speaking (Pietilä and Mikkola 2015). Reading and listening are receptive skills and passive processes since they do not encompass the act of producing language (ibid.).
Thus, when pupils read English literature, they do not produce language. In contrast, writing and speaking are productive and active skills since they involve the act of producing language (ibid.). Therefore, when the pupils carry out activities based on English literature, they produce language. However, the division between active and passive processes is not straightforward (ibid.). For instance, reading and listening are results of many complex processes which have been developed actively (McIntosh 1998, 5; Pietilä and Mikkola 2015). One of these processes is the act of speaking which literacy is founded on (McIntosh 1998, 5). Furthermore, language proficiency,
especially constructed in the classroom, involves other important aspects too. These aspects are the pragmatic, social and regional, cultural, and situational phenomena which all take part in constructing language proficiency. (Nissilä et al. 2006, 40-42) When pupils read literary texts, they have a possibility of exploring and gaining insights on these aspects (Khatib, Rezaei and Derakhshan 2011, 201).
When discussing language proficiency, the notion of difficulty is present.
According to Duff and Maley (1990, 8) difficulty is an individual and relative aspect which contributes to learning. Hence, when the pupils read English literature some might experience difficulties in comprehending the content of the texts whereas others do not experience difficulties (ibid.). From this viewpoint, difficulties in
comprehending language in foreign language literary texts have usually related to the
pupils’ linguistic competence (Collie and Slater 1987, 8). Therefore, the pupils’
linguistic competence has normally defined how pupils discover vocabulary and grammatical structures of foreign language (Floris 2004, 5).
In accordance, vocabulary and grammatical aspects relate to the
“kielitaidon kämmenmalli” (=language proficiency palm model) (Nissilä et al. 2006, 41).
In the language proficiency palm model, language proficiency is observed in terms of grammar and vocabulary (ibid.). According to Nissilä et al. (2006, 41), the language proficiency palm model is used to elaborate the areas of language proficiency in teaching and assessing language knowledge. In the language proficiency palm model, the theoretical framework is built around the idea that language proficiency is divided into five elements which the human hand represents. In the model, the palm
represents general language proficiency. Additionally, each five fingers represent an area of language learning which are reading, writing, speaking, grammar and
vocabulary and understanding oral language. Out of all the fingers, the thumb
represents grammar and vocabulary and it has an exclusive role since it affects all the other skills represented by the rest of the fingers. Hence, the knowledge of vocabulary and grammar influence the areas of writing, speaking, and understanding oral
language. (ibid.) This palm model illustrates how the possible linguistic difficulties experienced by the pupils can relate to the grammatical and vocabulary aspect of the model concerning reading English literature. To put in another way, if the pupils have difficulties in understand vocabulary and grammar, it can affect their reading skills.
In the respondents’ answers language proficiency was discussed in terms of difficulty. According to some of the respondents, selecting literary texts within each pupil’s language proficiency was considered challenging since the language abilities among the pupils was acknowledged to differ. Some pupils were believed to
experience language difficulties in understanding the vocabulary within the literary texts which created a problem in the English language classroom since providing the same literary texts for all pupils in this case was considered unbeneficial. That been said, selecting English literature for those pupils whose language abilities were within the same language level was considered to give more opportunities for the selection of literary texts. According to one respondent, with talented pupil groups there was even a possibility to select native level texts:
…Toki se on niinku sen mukaan mikä on se kielitaito siellä, minkä niinkun tasosta tekstiä, minkälaista sanastoo, mitä tota voisin aatella, että ymmärtää. – – (…) monesti on aika vaikee silleen ottaa koko porukalle yhteisesti joku tietty englanniksi, ku sit voi olla aika vaikeeta tekstiä jollekin…(R1)
…Certainly, it [choosing literary texts] is according to what is one`s language proficiency, what the level of language is [in the literary texts], what kind of vocabulary I can think that one can understand. It is often pretty difficult to take something for the whole group in English because the texts can be rather difficult for some [pupils]…(R1)
…No siis oikeestaan vaihtelevasti, että riippuu toki luokasta kanssa, että mikä on sitte niinku silleen sopiva, että on tota kielellisestikin silleen, että tulee tota ymmärretyksi … – – (…) nytten oon niinku tosi taitavan ryhmä kanssa, jonka kanssa on sitten voinut tota ihan kattoo sillee niinku natiivitason juttujakin, että ovat tota, on kyllä onnistuneet että… (R4)
…Well actually variably [what kind of literary texts are used], of course it also depends on the class what is suitable for them and what they can linguistically understand. Now I am with a very talented group with whom I have [read] some native level stuff, [the pupils] have really succeeded…(R4)
From this viewpoint, if the pupils did not comprehend the content of the literary texts, they were seen to experience demotivation towards reading in English. As Collie and Slater (1987, 8) state, when pupils find a literary text difficult, they might not be able to enjoy or agree with it, which is one of the essences of literature. Therefore, it is important to choose literary texts within the pupils’ language proficiency (ibid.) Likewise, Duff and Maley (1990, 8) argue, if a text is considered too difficult for the pupil, it should not be chosen since there are many other texts available.
Furthermore, it was considered important to support those students who had difficulties in reading and comprehending literary texts. According to one
respondent, pupils should be supported and encouraged to read by listening to their reading in a way which is suitable for their language level, without paying attention to the correctness of language. This is also beneficial since it can motivate the pupils to read:
…siinäkin on eroja et jotkut sietää paljon sitä et joka sanaa ei ymmärrä, jotkut lannistuu, et on aika niinkun vaikee nää aihealueet ja sisällöt. – – Niin et onko sit semmosta joka sopii kaikille et kaikki innostuis ja sit tosiaan se kielitaito, ettei sit niinku lytätä, lytätä oppilasta sillä ettei mitään ymmärrä jostain aletaankin lukee, menee ihan, niinkun tavallaan,
luovuttaa siinä vaan sit pitää niinku tukee ja kuunnella eri tapaa sitä sitä lukemista sitten. – – Ne on vähän käsikädessä et mikä on sen kielitaidon taso, kuinka paljon niinku osataan ja mikä minkä siihen vois sitten istuttaa kirjallisuudesta… (R1)
…There too are differences that some [pupils] can tolerate without understanding each word, some become discouraged due to the topics and content because they are experienced as rather difficult. So [I ponder] is there something [content wise] that suites and excites everyone, also within [the pupils’] language proficiency. So that the pupils would not feel discouraged because they do not understand everything [within the text] when they begin reading and then [they] quit [because they do not understand the text]. Instead you [the teacher]
need to support and listen to the [pupils’] reading in another way [which supports their language level]. Overall, the level of the pupils’ language proficiency goes hand in hand with what they can infuse from
literature…(R1)
Language difficulties were also discussed in terms of grammatical structures. For one respondent, the grammatical structures of language were understood to cause
difficulties for the pupils in comprehending literary texts. Moreover, those pupils who lacked knowledge of some grammatical structures, such as past tense verbs, were viewed as having more difficulties in understanding literary texts. Therefore, it was considered important to construct a good language base in order to understand the content of the literary texts:
…pitää perusasioita mennä paljon yksistään ja sit verbioppia, että se on varmast hallussa et sit kun se on hallussa ni pystyy myös vähän sitä
kirjallisuutta enemmän jos pakosti tulee kaikkii imperfektejä sun muita, et jos siel on vielä aukkoja niin ei ymmärrä sitä tarinan kulkua sitte…(R1)
…we need to study the [English] basics alone and learn verbs, it needs to be made sure that these [basics] are mastered [by the pupils]. After, we can [include] more literature [into the lessons]. There are all kinds of past tenses and other [grammatical] matters [in the literary texts] so if [the pupils] still have gaps [in their knowledge of grammar], they might not understand the storyline…(R1)
As stated before, the respondents considered vocabulary and grammatical structures difficult especially for those pupils who had lower language abilities. Therefore, choosing literary texts according to the pupils’ language proficiency was considered difficult. In addition, one respondent considered finding suitable material for pupils
with reading difficulties challenging. Since some pupils might already have problems in reading in Finnish it can also affect their reading in English. Furthermore, some pupils were acknowledged to read on the word-level which made using literary texts
complicated. In these possibilities, the use of English literature as reading material was questioned:
…Eritasoset oppilaat, ja sitte oppilaat, joilla on todettu lukivaikeus, tai lukivaikeuksia, niin heillehän se on tosi haastavaa sitte, jos on
hankaluuksia lukea suomeksi, niin sitte on kyllä hankaluuksia lukea englanninkin kielellä. Eli et miten heille sitte löytää sellasia tekstejä, jotka ei oo liian haastavia tai oikeastaan sit on sellaset jos on tosi paljon
vaikeuksia niin sit mennään jo vaan sanastotasolla, että ei ehkä pystykkään niin tekstejä käyttää…(R2)
…[Choosing literary texts for] pupils who are on different [language]
levels [is difficult], and [for] pupils with reading difficulty or reading difficulties, so for them it is really challenging. If you already have difficulties in reading in Finnish, then you will also have difficulties in reading in English. So how to find suitable texts for [those pupils with reading difficulties] that [the texts] would not be too challenging. Then there are those [pupils] who already have a lot of difficulties, then [the pupils read] only on the word-level, so maybe you cannot use [literary]
texts at all…(R2)
To conclude this section, based on the respondents’ answers, language proficiency was a key element in choosing English literature. When literary texts were chosen
according to the pupils’ language level, at their best literary texts were seen to
motivate the pupils to learn English and to read English literature. However, due to the various language levels of the pupils in the heterogeneous classroom, choosing literary texts was not considered a simple task. Moreover, offering suitable literary texts for lower level language pupils and pupils with reading difficulties was seen as complex. If the literary texts were not chosen within the language proficiency of the pupils, the pupils experienced demotivation since their opportunities for engaging with the literary text was lower, and therefore they could not benefit from reading.