Introduction

Modernity has been structured under the perspective of progress, the idea that humans are always moving towards a more developed world. Alongside this romantic conception of constant advancement, reality shows a world full of inequalities. This dichotomy is explored by Antônio Candido (2011) when discussing The Right to Literature. After all, do people convey literature as everyone’s right? Candido explains that most people commonly acknowledge that everyone should have access to food, treated water, health assistance, and other basic needs. However, the author questions if people see literature and culture as necessary for every person as much as they see other resources required for life. This discussion demonstrates that literature has long been accessed and produced by a privileged part of society, which has always fought to maintain such an elitist status quo. Consequently, education has also been affected by this conception of high-and-mighty literature, thus perpetuating it among teachers and students. Given such context, this study needs to ask: where does literature stand in language teaching?

Many authors have studied the use of literature in language teaching by acknowledging its potential and pointing out how to use it. Firstly, the authors claim that literature is an excellent source of authentic material, providing learners with realistic examples of language use (Cruz, 2019; Setyowati, 2018). Secondly, the authors affirm that using literature allows learners to be in contact with a wide range of linguistic elements, such as figures of speech and lexical resources (Choudhary, 2016; Hismanoglu, 2005). Furthermore, scholars have suggested different ways of using literature in language teaching, thus assuring its potential to promote critical thinking and intercultural connections (Bobkina; Stefanova, 2016; Lucas, 2022). However, although a lot has been discussed about this subject, teachers’ experiences in language teaching demonstrate that there are still many challenges ahead.

In a study investigating teachers’ professional development, Tantawy (2020, p. 182) claims that discussing teachers’ perceptions is “pivotal to gaining a comprehensive understanding of the existent and potential obstacles teachers might face.” This study examines challenges and possibilities for using literature in language teaching by considering three teachers’ perceptions and experiences. These teachers work at the language center of the Federal University of Goiás (UFG), Brazil, and they have all used literature in their language classes. The study was done through semi- structured free online interviews to investigate their perceptions. These interviews were composed of three questions grounded in understanding why these teachers use literature to teach language, their acquaintance with theoretical perspectives on this subject, and their perceptions of the use of literature at the language center where they work.

The use of literature in language teaching: paving a meaningful path

Given the educational scenario targeted in this study and, most importantly, how language teaching has been practiced for the past decades, it is crucial to address how the communicative approach has been shaped as time passes due to its yet strong influence. The communicative approach emerged in the 1970s as a reaction to grammar-based traditions in language teaching (Richards, 2006). Regarding this period, Valério and Mattos (2018) state that the world was starting to thread pathways toward globalization, which opened room for intercultural communication. Accordingly, language teaching evolved with this new globalized scenario, as it “could no longer be restricted to linguistic competence, which was prioritized by the approaches in vogue at that time” (Valério; Mattos, 2018, p. 317).

Globalization is a hegemonic process, as it evolved grounded in power relations. In this context, as every culture has its features and, consequently, its trajectory, it is essential to look at the communicative approach alongside locality. Valério and Mattos (2018) say that the communicative approach “has not yet made its way through the Brazilian educational landscape” (Valério; Mattos, 2018, p. 315). The authors add that it could be explained by teachers’ difficulties in using the target language, the distance between the students’ realities and communicative situations, and the lack of investment in implementing a communicative curriculum. This shows that changes influenced by the communicative approach have happened in a particular way in Brazil, as there have always been obstacles to decentralizing language structuralism.

This paradigm change potentialized by CLT, which is focused on meaning rather than structure, involves specific principles, the way learners learn a language, the activities promoted by teachers, and the roles of teachers and students in language classes (Richards, 2006). Richards (2006) explains that the communicative approach emerged when people worldwide increasingly needed English. Accordingly, the author states that “the worldwide demand for English has created an enormous demand for quality language teaching and language teaching materials and resources” (Richards, 2006, p. 1). Furthermore, it demonstrates that changing teaching approaches involves rethinking what materials to use and how to use them in class. Thus, considering these changes language teaching has undergone in recent years, where does literature stand as teaching material?

The communicative perspective in language teaching sets the ground for conveying and using language classes to extend social life (Richards, 2006). It resulted in bringing real-life situations into the language classrooms so that interaction became the focus of the learning process. Materials and resources had to be reconsidered to achieve it since they were mostly grammar-oriented. In this sense, using authentic materials has increased among language teachers as they provide students with more realistic language input. Regarding authentic materials, Akbari and Razavi (2015, p. 106) state that they “help students to bridge the gap between classroom knowledge and their capacity to participate in real-world events,” related to the idea of approaching real life to language learning. Could literature be considered authentic material in language teaching?

Setyowati (2018) explains that using literature in language teaching is still challenging. The author says that many language teachers still see literary texts as meant to be used only in literature classes. The author claims that this differentiation between literature and language learning happens due to teachers’ experiences in their undergraduate courses, where this scissure between language and literature classes remains. Another challenge pointed out by the author is the teachers’ lack of expertise in choosing appropriate literary texts for their classes, as it can result in “unreachable goals.” Setyowati (2018, p. 42) adds that when these challenges are overcome, literature can be used as a “beneficial and useful” source of authentic material.

Literature is indeed authentic, as it is not designed for language teaching purposes (Setyowati, 2018). Additionally, Cruz (2010, p. 2) argues that literature can be considered authentic teaching material for two main reasons: firstly, because it is a genuine example of “language in use” and, secondly, because it is an “aesthetic representation of spoken language.” In this sense, Violetta-Irene (2015) claims that literature “encompasses every human dilemma and conflict.” Using literature in language teaching provides students with meaningful learning, as they are in direct contact with situations, features, and problems of real life through literary texts.

Setyowati (2018) suggests why literature can be claimed as authentic material. Firstly, literary texts are written based on original vocabulary because of their originality. The author argues that “the choice of words, styles and syntactical structure” corresponds to the context proposed in the literary texts, making it original and a rich source of authentic language. Secondly, Setyowati (2018) argues that literature is rich in genres, namely – in a broad perspective – poems, prose, and plays, with their respective sub-genres. This offers learners different opportunities to have contact with organized, paced, and authentic language representations.

While discussing the reasons for using literature in language teaching, Violetta-Irene (2015) suggests the cultural model. As far as culture is concerned with the use of literature, the author states that:

Through literature students get to know the background not only of the particular novel but also they learn about history, society, and politics of the country described in the novel or story. By experiencing this, they open themselves to understanding and appreciating ideologies, mentalities, traditions, feeling, and artistic form within the heritage the literature of such cultures endows. (Violetta-Irene, 2015, p. 75)

This opportunity to have contact with the history, society, and politics of the context targeted in the literary text is one of the most valuable aspects of using literature in class, as it allows students to think critically about their realities. Setyowati (2018) argues that critical thinking, in the use of literature, is mainly achieved when students contrast facts. This relates to Violetta-Irene’s (2015) thoughts, as she claims that students “open themselves” to new mentalities through literature, which we see as an opportunity for students to understand the challenges and problems of their own cultures.

Delving more into how culture can become part of language lessons through literature, we consider critical interculturality an active ground for promoting criticality (Walsh, 2009, 2018; Lucas, 2022). By viewing the increasing need to encourage essential intercultural practices – those of interculturalidad (Walsh, 2018 apud Lucas, 2022) – in language learning, Lucas (2022) claims that when in contact with literary texts, students not only learn an additional language but also learn about other cultures. In this sense, Walsh (2009) argues that, for critical interculturality to be promoted, people should not only be in contact with other cultures but, most importantly, understand the problems that involve different sociocultural groups.

This is why literature is a powerful authentic resource in promoting critical intercultural language teaching, as it depicts, through organized aesthetic genres, the problematic realities of different cultures. Mora et al. (2021, p. 153) present an overall view of critical papers in Colombia, among which some studies focus on reflexivity in analyzing literary texts. Moreover, as previously mentioned, literature is repleted with social, historical, and political aspects (Violetta-Irene, 2015), which can be explored by language teachers as accurate representations of social life, allowing students to think critically about the way they live in contrast with problems and realities of others.

The study: exploring its pathways and procedures

This study discusses teachers’ perceptions about their experiences of using literature at a language center in Goiânia, Brazil. The research was conducted with three English teachers at the language center of the Federal University of Goiás (UFG). To choose the study participants, the following criteria were established: 1) teachers should be working or have worked at the language center of UFG; 2) teachers should have been working with literature in their classes for a while. To get suggestions for possible participants for this study, the second author of this chapter suggested three teachers whose work with literature was supervised by her. She is one of the professors of the Faculdade de Letras Foreign Languages Department. She teaches English literature courses in the English major and supervises research about the use of literature in language teaching.

As a qualitative type of study, this research focuses on the subjectivity of the participants (Silva et al., 2006). This investigation concerns their beliefs and practices regarding using literature to teach language. The study was conducted with open semi-structured interviews (Rubbin; Rubbin, 1995; Queiroz, 1991 apud Silva et al., 2006). The participants were given three pre- determined questions, and they were answered freely without the intervention of the interviewer. The following chart shows the questions which the participants answered in the interviews:

Chart 1 – Interview Questions

Source: The authors, 2023

Question 1	Why do you use literature to teach English?
Question 2	When using literature to teach language, do you consider any theoretical perspective? Why (not)?
Question 3	How do you see the use of literature to teach language at the language center where you work?

The interviews were semi-structured in that the questions were elaborated before the moment of answering, and a few additional questions were asked to solve any doubts (Bogdan and Biklen, 1998). According to Queiroz’s (1991 apud Silva et al., 2006) guidelines, they might also be classified as a free process. The author suggests three types of interviews according to the interviewer’s intervention, namely “thoroughly oriented,” in which the interviewee is not free to conduct the process, “semi-oriented,” when the interviewer occasionally interferes to bring the interviewee closer to the goals of the study, and “free,” which involves the minimal intervention of the interviewer. In this study, the participants were completely free to answer the questions, and the limited interviewer intervention was minimal.

The questions were sent to the participants online on Whatsapp. Before answering them, the participants were provided with general information about the study and clarified their questions. After that, they sent audio messages answering each question, and every time they had a question, the interviewer provided them with insights into the study's goals. Therefore, the participants answered the questions freely, without any time restriction, and the interviewer only spoke when there were questions related to the study's goals. According to some participants, they would feel more comfortable answering the questions through audio messages. That is why we chose for the interviews to be conducted in such a format. Also, all the participants answered the questions in English.

We have asked the participants to answer the questions in English to value their agency as English teachers whose first language is Brazilian Portuguese. Kumaravadivelu (2012) claims that Western conceptions of language learning have been grounded in a hegemonic epistemic structure. This episteme has fostered the idea that native speakers genuinely master the language, thus based on a misconception that students should have native speakers as a reference in their language learning process. To confront this West-oriented conception and follow the path towards an epistemic break (Kumaravadivelu, 2012), we believe English teachers, whose first language is not English, should convey and use the English language as part of their own identity, which means saying that this language does not only belong to native speakers, but it is also part of who they are.

Teachers’ perceptions and beliefs about the use of literature to teach language

This part of the study is focused on discussing the participants’ perceptions and beliefs concerning the use of literature in language teaching. According to Nguyen (2022), investigating teachers’ attitudes provides essential information about their needs for professional development. Additionally, the author states that better understanding teachers’ attitudes help them improve their teaching skills. In that regard, the following discussion reflects on the teachers’ answers to the three questions used in the interviews. Pseudonyms have been chosen for the participants: Diamond, Daisy, and Pierrot.

The reasons to use literature to teach English

In regards to the first question of the interview, Diamond answered:

I think I began to use literature to teach English because I wanted to talk about stories and share everything produced in English with students, especially because they also consume this material a lot, either translated or in the language itself. It’s a good feeling for them, and… I have a good feeling also, when they read something in English that is famous, that they know, that they’ve heard before or they’ve seen, or they have watched the movie about it, and they understand it. So, when they read a short story, or when they read a book, or when they read something in the English class that they recognize from the media, and they understand it in English, without needing to read the translated version, or without needing to read an adapted version of it, I think they have a feeling of accomplishment. It’s very satisfying for the teacher to see the students, you know… learning and acknowledging that they learned as well because that happens for me when they learn something and understand; they recognize their learning through it. (Diamond, 2023)

Firstly, it is possible to see that Diamond uses literature in class due to a personal desire to discuss stories with students. While discussing reasons to use literature in language teaching, Violetta-Irene (2015) argues that motivation plays a vital role in this process. The author explains that learners may feel motivated when reading literary texts as they have contact with the writer's real feelings. In Diamond’s case, her motivation regarding literary texts led her to make it part of her language classes. Secondly, Diamond said that she enjoys the feeling of students' self- accomplishment when they understand stories they have sometimes heard or seen without using an adapted or translated version. In this sense, Violetta-Irene (2015, p. 75) says that “literature has a strong motivating power due to its calling on to personal experience,” which connects to Diamond’s interest in her students’ experiences when understanding literary texts.

Also, in regards to the reasons why she uses literature in class, Diamond adds that:

The other reason also was an attempt to show them materials other than the didactic books they already use in English. So, I started thinking: if I can share an authentic song in English, why not an authentic book, why not an authentic short story, why not an authentic poem? You know… (Diamond, 2023)

Another reason why Diamond uses literature in class is that she sees it as authentic material. Setyowati (2018) says that, as authentic material, literature brings real-life materials to class and promotes personal involvement from students. Also, the author claims that literature “enriches students’ language and cultural competence” (Setyowati, 2018, p. 42). This relates to what Diamond says when talking about the potential of literature as authentic materials:

By that also, we could share other cultures, lifestyles, ways of living, and people. It was an exciting way to complement the didactic books we already use, and it would also be interesting for them. It would make them talk more and be more enthusiastic about giving their opinions and discussing. (Diamond, 2023)

Diamond’s reasons for using literature in class – her motivation and because it is an authentic source of cultural material – relate to Daisy and Pierrot’s answers to the same question. When answering the first question, Daisy said:

Because I love reading, I’ve always loved it and keep loving it. So, I love reading, and literature is significant for us because it gives us a different perspective on many things, cultures… points of view, and values. I think it is essential for everybody, not just for people like us who study a language. And, also because it’s authentic material, I think it’s one of the most significant sources of authentic material that our students can have, so that’s why I use it. (Daisy, 2023)

When giving his reasons for using literature in class, Pierrot stated:

Well, at first, when I started using literature, it was basically because I enjoyed it very much, and I thought maybe my students would appreciate it as well […] Nowadays, I guess I use literature because students will have contact with authentic language. Also, the discussions are going to be much more profound, I would say, because normally the discussion we got from the textbooks, they’re quite shallow. Also, depending on the student, they may identify themselves with the content. (Pierrot, 2023)

Violetta-Irene (2015, p. 75) claims that “literary texts are a rich source of classroom activities and can surely prove to be very motivating for learners.” Considering the participants’ answers, it is noticeable that literature has somehow motivated them in life – all of them explained that they have always enjoyed reading. This motivation led them to make literary texts part of their classes, hoping their students would also feel motivated. More specifically, their basis for using literature in class was to provide their students with opportunities to contact different people and cultures. Violetta-Irene (2015, p. 75) argues that “literature opens a new world to students,” which can be associated with the participants’ desire to lead their students to relate their own realities with other peoples’.

Another reason pointed out by the participants to use literature in their language classes is that they see literature as authentic materials. In this context, Dio and Estremera (2022, p. 3) claim that the “majority of literary works are not written primarily with the intention of teaching a language”, demonstrating that, when reading literary texts, students are in contact with genuine and realistic language phenomenon. This also relates to what the participants said about going beyond textbooks, as Diamond claimed that she tries to provide students with materials other than only textbooks. Pierrot stated that one of the reasons why he uses literature is because he seeks to have deeper discussions with students, which is something he claimed not to find in textbooks.

Any theoretical perspectives?

When answering the second question, Diamond said she uses literature in her classes considering a decolonial perspective:

When I share literature in class, I try to share decolonial texts. First, I think it’s important for students to acknowledge that English is spoken in many other countries, not only in England and the United States, as students usually think. Also, because I like to point out to students that we don’t study, necessarily, one type of pronunciation, or when they enter my class, they are not learning American English or British English, you know… that they’re learning English as a foreign language, English as a non-native speaker, and not necessarily one accent or the other accent. And I also tell them that they shouldn’t look forward to speaking in this “perfect” accent; of course, we should try to pronounce the words in standard pronunciation, but we don’t have to aim to have a native accent because that’s impossible for us, and that shouldn’t be the aim. (Diamond, 2023)

Mignolo and Walsh (2018) claim that we still live under the influence of a colonial heritage, which determines how we think and make decisions. Due to Eurocentric conceptions of being, the authors explain that we now live in “Western geopolitics of knowledge” (Mignolo; Walsh, 2018, p. 2). It means that knowledge production is commonly west-centered, which neglects the sociocultural diversity of our world. In this process, other voices, those not part of the “Western world,” are never at the center of debates. Diamond’s answer, which suggests that literature be used to bring these other voices into language classes, confronts this colonial structure. More specifically, Diamond’s praxiologies, using literature, attempt to rupture the binary logic that supports power relations in the Eurocentric – nowadays, U.S.- centrism (Mignolo; Walsh, 2018) – in the world we live.

Walsh (2009) explains that coloniality is sustained through “relations of inferiority and superiority” (Walsh, 2009, p. 15). These relations are grounded in “binary categories,” such as “east-west, primitive-civilized, irrational-rational” (Walsh, 2009, p. 15). These binaries articulate the excluding logic of coloniality in a way that those who do not match the Eurocentric demands of modernity do not stand a chance of being heard, seen, or understood. Diamond mentions one of these binaries, the duality American-British, which fundaments a West-oriented conception of language proficiency. Diamond confronts this overestimation of the native speaker by using literature to provide students with different linguistic and cultural repertoires, thus criticizing the imperialistic foundations of the English language.

When answering the second question, Daisy said she uses literature in class considering the reader-response perspective and discourse analysis:

I usually consider the readers-response theory when it says that, you know… our students have to be involved when they’re reading something, their opinions count as well, and it’s not only about the text. I think it’s really about context. I think discourse analysis also counts a lot because you must consider everything, you know… social context, historical context, cultural context, and so on. So, I usually think about those when I teach literature. (Daisy, 2023)

Dio and Estremera (2022) say that the reader-response theory is based on the reader’s participation in literary texts. According to the authors, it “allows students to use their perspectives, ideas, and emotions in interpreting literary works” (Dio; Estremera, 2022, p. 2). This relates to what Daisy said about the reader-response theory, as she said that the classes are about the text and the students. Daisy’s answer demonstrates that her classes are student-centered, as she tries to get students involved in reading literary texts. By doing it, students’ motivation may be enhanced, which leads them to become better learners. In this context, Violetta-Irene (2015) states that active reading allows students to be creative and use their ideas, which “encourages personal growth” (Violetta-Irene, 2015, p. 76).

Bordering on Daisy’s answer, Pierrot also mentioned the reader-response theory. Also, he claimed he appreciates Freire and Krashen’s conceptions of the use of literature:

I would say I identify myself with the reader-response theory because, as my goal is having students speak, so… I guess this method provides them the opportunity to talk, and I also feel much freer, I would say. However, I find myself much more attached to other theorists, Paulo Freire and Krashen. Paulo Freire is, in fact, a philosopher, and there’s a phrase he said once… I will translate it; we have to read the world before reading the word; or something like that. When you have this kind of discussion, I guess people… see themselves as protagonists. As for Stephen Krashen, he says that the best way of learning vocabulary, for example, is through reading. So, I try to use these two perspectives much more than the reader-response; I try to have this philosophical approach with me, providing students with much more than a simple text, much more than lots of words they read, and then have a test. (Pierrot, 2023)

Pierrot’s answer demonstrates his effort to use literature to broaden his students’ view of the world. Although he acknowledges literature as a source of language input, as he mentioned

Krashen’s (2003) conception of literature as “the best way to learn vocabulary,” Pierrot supports the philosophical domain of literature. Also, Pierrot brought Freire’s (1982) thoughts on the importance of reading to explain his approach when using literature in class. According to Freire (1982), reading is more than just understanding codes of a written language, as “language and reality are dynamically interconnected” (Freire, 1982, p. 5). The author adds that critically understanding a text involves understanding the relations between the text and its context. This relates to Pierrot’s desire to provide students with more than just words, thus using literature to allow students to look critically at their realities.

The use of literature to teach language at the language center

Talking about the use of literature at the language center where she works, Daisy answered:

I think at CL [language center] we could have… We’re free to do whatever we want, with or without literature. I guess maybe… especially in our area, the English area, it should be discussed more, how we should use it in class, or introduce it to our students; I think there should be something regarding that, maybe, involving literature in class, or how to use it, that’s what I believe CL lacks. (Daisy, 2023)

Here, Daisy claimed that using literature in language classes should be a more recurrent topic among teachers at the language center where she works. On the contrary, Diamond said she did not have much contact with how to use literature to teach language while in her undergraduate course:

No, I did not. I mean, I had literature classes in the undergraduate course, which gave me lots of ideas, dynamics, lead-ins to the story, and how to introduce a literature text, so it was essential, the literature classes I had, but none of them were focused on using literature to teach the language because… I don’t know if they have this in the course, but I didn’t do English 1 to English 4, which is focused more on the language, in my undergraduate course, learning the language. I only did English five to English 8, and through English 5 to English 8… in English 5 and 6… there’s a considerable discussion of language and culture. Those two courses focus on discussing language and culture, and English 7 and English 8 are focused on teaching. […] but I had never had like… literature concentrate on language learning in the undergraduate course. My only experience was with teachers that used to teach at the same place I do, which is at the language center of the university I studied. They used literature pieces to teach English, and I learned a little bit with them and from their experience, so I had this opportunity, but it wasn’t on my course itself. (Diamond, 2023)

When talking about the use of literature at the language center where he works, Pierrot explained that:

I could notice that the students usually don’t have contact with literature with the other teachers. I don’t know how much they use it, and I don’t ask them about it. Actually, at the beginning of the semester, I usually ask them if they have contact with it; some of them were my students previously, so they had contact with it, but I don’t know about the other teachers, and I don’t think it’s something primarily used, at least where I work. I’m glad there’s room for using this kind of text, even though some teachers… might feel insecure when it comes to literature because, sometimes, they didn’t like it much when they were taking their majors, or they’re not comfortable when it comes to analyzing a literary text. However, I imagine it’s just a matter of starting… doing it, because if you don’t start, you won’t have your way of doing this. (Pierrot, 2023)

We intend to address two issues to discuss Daisy, Diamond, and Pierrot’s answers. Firstly, problematizing the reasons why only a few teachers use literature in language classes (Choudhary, 2016) and, secondly, discussing the language-based approach to reflect on the use of literature to teach language (Hismanoglu, 2005).

Choudhary (2016) claims that literature is not usually included in language teaching syllabi. Pierrot and Daisy’s answers can exemplify it, as they said that using literature in class depends on the teachers themselves; it is not a mandatory part of the curriculum. Also, Choudhary (2016, p. 2) affirms that “earlier, literary experts were unwilling to draw on English language teaching (ELT), and ELT trainers usually considered literature as a secondary tool for language pedagogy.” As explained by the author, literature and language teaching have been treated separately for a long time – especially by the end of the 20^th century. This conception that establishes a scissure between literature and language learning affects teacher education nowadays. As Pierrot answered, although teachers study literature in their undergraduate courses, many still feel insecure about using it in their classes. In this sense, teacher education courses and language schools could explore the pedagogical aspects of literature. Choudhary (2016, p. 1) explains that “structuring language lessons around the reading of literature introduces a profound range of vocabulary, dialogue, and prose”; thus, maybe, we should be more concerned with how to use this range of benefits that literature may provide us with so that the methodological domain of using literature in class be more discussed and practiced.

Diamond’s statement, which claims she did not have much contact with using literature to teach language, reverberates that “there is a lack of preparation in the area of literature teaching in TESL / TEFL programs” (Hismanoglu, 2005, p. 65). However, reflecting on what Diamond said about her experience while taking her major is essential to have a broader view of the relationship between literature and language teaching. When talking about her literature classes, Diamond said they gave her “lots of ideas, dynamics, lead-ins to the story, how to introduce a literature text, " and she added that they were significant to her. Hişmanoğlu (2005, p. 65) explains that when in contact with literary texts, “students learn practically the figurative and daily use of the target language, " demonstrating the potential of literature as a language input resource. This language- based conception of using literature is grounded in the idea that students can learn a language by experiencing the several linguistic artifacts that a literary text may offer, namely “figures of speech” and “communicative intentions” (Hismanoglu, 2005, p. 65), for instance. This relates to the “dynamics and lead-ins” Diamond said she could learn in her classes. Therefore, considering her experience, it is possible to say she had contact with the use of literature to teach language – specifically concerning strategies to use it –, but in a way in which the teaching techniques were not grammar-based, where usage was prioritized over form. She learned these techniques through observation.

Final thoughts

Language teaching has always been a “practical concern” as society is marked by a multilingual dynamic (Richards; Rodgers, 1999). Consequently, language teaching methodologies have evolved according to the way people live and interact with each other. Over the past decades, it has been acknowledged that language teaching should be focused on meaning instead of form so that the students’ learning process is more realistic and, thus, more effective (Richards, 2006). In this process, teaching materials do not remain static since language teachers need to think of what resources to use to promote classes based on real-life situations. Using literature is an effective way to achieve it, as it contains a wide range of authentic examples of language in use and, when used appropriately, provides students with various speech and intercultural input, thus setting the ground to promote critical thinking as well (Violetta-Irene, 2015; Setyowati, 2018).

In this study, we discussed teachers' perceptions about the potential of using literature in language teaching. Therefore, the participants of this investigation answered three questions regarding their beliefs and experiences with the use of literature in their classes. More precisely, these questions concern why the participants have used literature in their ranks, their contact with theoretical material on this subject, and their impressions about using literature at the language center where they work. While sharing their thoughts, the participants referred back to their experiences as undergraduate students by relating them to their professional realities nowadays. Also, they mentioned some experiences with their students to exemplify their answers.

Firstly, when explaining why they use literature in class, three reasons stood out among the participants:1) they have used literature out of personal motivation, 2) they have used it because of its authenticity as a language resource, 3) because they see literature as a way to promote more critical lessons. Concerning the first reason pointed out by the teachers, this study explored the role of motivation when using Literature in class, considering that both teachers and learners might feel more motivated when in contact with literary texts (Violetta-Irene, 2015). As far as authenticity is concerned, this study discussed the participants’ answers by considering the potential of Literature as authentic material, thus pointing out that students benefit from the realistic representations that literary texts have (Dio; Estremera, 2022). Finally, concerning literature as a way to promote critical thinking, this study reflected on the potential of literature to broaden students’ perspective of reality in a process that moves beyond the text itself (Freire, 1982).

Secondly, when discussing their contact with theories regarding the use of literature in language teaching, the teachers mentioned the reader-response perspective, interculturality, and Freire’s thoughts on the importance of reading. Two participants mentioned the reader-response theory, of which they claimed to be fond. In this sense, the teachers said they like having their students involved in reading and discussing literary texts. To discuss it, we focused on the benefits of promoting student-centered classes, allowing students to participate more in their learning process (Dio; Estremera, 2022). Boarding on it, we reflected on the relation between literary texts and their contexts (Freire, 1982) to discuss one of the teacher’s thoughts, which was grounded in the idea that using literary texts in classes should involve more than just looking at their written content. Moreover, one of the participants claimed that literature is an excellent resource for fostering intercultural learning. To discuss it, we considered Mignolo and Walsh’s (2018) claims on decoloniality to point out literature as a way to confront colonial practices in modernity.

Finally, the participants claimed that literature should be used more often at the language center where they work. Daisy stated that, although she felt free to deliver classes as she pleased, using literature in class was not broadly discussed among teachers. Accordingly, by considering his students’ perceptions, Pierrot believes that a few teachers use literature to teach language. To discuss it, this study problematized the use of literature in language teaching by considering Choudhary’s (2016) thoughts, which claim that literature is not included in course curricula. It also criticizes the scissure between literature and language teaching. Also, Diamond answered that she had little contact with discussions concerning using literature to teach language in her undergraduate course. To reflect on it, we briefly discussed the nature of language to problematize grammar-based conceptions of language regarding the use of literature in language teaching (Hismanoglu, 2005).

Therefore, the teachers’ answers demonstrate that, although literature is a powerful teaching resource, using it in language teaching involves many challenges. Firstly, language schools do not encourage using literature to teach language, which is related to the fact that it is not even included as part of teaching curricula (Choudhary, 2016). Moreover, it results in a lack of resources to use literature to teach language since, in most cases, teachers have only textbooks available. Secondly, it is possible to state that there must be a rupture in conceptions regarding the use of literature, considering that many teachers still convey literature and language teaching separately (Choudhary, 2016). In consonance with it, the teachers’ beliefs and experiences shared in this study show that besides letting teachers be free to deliver their lessons, language schools should also have an active role in fostering the use of literature in language teaching.

References

AKBARI, Omid; RAZAVI, Azam. Using authentic materials in the foreign language classrooms: teachers’ perspectives in EFL classes. International Journal of Research Studies in Education, [S.L.], v. 4, n. 5, p. 105-116, 6 jun. 2015. Consortia Academia Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.5861/ijrse.2015.1189.

BOBKINA, Jelena; STEFANOVA, Svetlana. Literature and critical literacy pedagogy in the EFL classroom: towards a model of teaching critical thinking skills.Studies In Second Language Learning And Teaching, [S.L.], v. 6, n. 4, p. 677-696, 30 dez. 2016. Adam Mickiewicz University Poznan. http://dx.doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2016.6.4.6.

BOGDAN, R. C.; BIKLEN, S. K. Qualitative research for education: an introduction to theory and methods. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1998.

CANDIDO, Antônio. O Direito à Literatura. In: CANDIDO, Antônio. Vários Escritos. 5 ed. Rio de Janeiro: Ouro Sobre Azul, 2011.

CHOUDHARY, Sanju. A Literary approach to teaching English language in a multi-cultural classroom. Higher Learning Research Communications, [S.L.], v. 6, n. 4, 31 dez. 2016, n.p. Walden University. http://dx.doi.org/10.18870/hlrc.v6i4.352.

CRUZ, José Hernández Riwes. The role of literature and culture in English language teaching.Relinguística Aplicada, [s. l], v. 7, p. 1-16, 2010. Disponível em: http://relinguistica.azc.uam.mx/no007/no07_art09.htm. Acesso em: 12 mar. 2023.

DIO, Ann D; ESTREMERA, Michael. an essential tool in language teaching. No prelo, [S.L.], dez. 2022. n.p.http://dx.doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.10939.90401.

FREIRE, Paulo. A importância do ato de ler. São Paulo: Le Livros, 1982. 60 p.

GANDIN, Luís Armando; HYPOLITO, Álvaro Moreira. Dilemas do nosso tempo: globalização, multiculturalismo e conhecimento: entrevista com Boaventura de Sousa Santos. Currículo Sem Fronteiras, [S. L.], v. 3, n. 2, p. 5-23, 2003.

HIşMANOğLU, Murat. Teaching English Through Literature. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies , [S. L.], v. 1, n. 1, p. 53-66, abr. 2005.

KUMARAVADIVELU, B. Individual identity, cultural globalization, and teaching English as an international Llanguage: the case for an epistemic break. In: Alsagoff, L. et al. (editors). Principles and Practices for Teaching English as an International Language. Abingdon: Routledge, 2012. p. 9-28.

KRASHEN, Stephen. Three roles for reading for language-minority students. In: GARCIA, Gilbert. English learners: reaching the highest level of English proficiency. Newark: International Reading Association, 2003. p. 55-70.

LUCAS, Ana Luisa Martinez Burguillo Mendonça. O uso de literatura africana na sala de aula de língua inglesa: uma proposta intercultural. 2022. 102 f. Dissertação (Mestrado) - Curso de Mestrado em Letras e Linguística, Faculdade de Letras, Universidade Federal de Goiás, Goiânia, 2022.

MIGNOLO, Walter; WALSH, Catherine. On decoloniality : concepts, analytics. praxis. Durham: Duke University Press, 2018. 305 p.

MORA, Raúl Alberto. CAÑAS, C.; GUTIÉRREZ-ARISMENDY, G.; RAMÍREZ, N. A.;

GAVIRIA, C. A.; GOLOVÁTINA-MORA, P. (2021). Critical literacies in Colombia: Social transformation and disruption ingrained in our local realities. In: PANDYA, J. Z.; MORA, R. A.;

ALFORD, J. H.; GOLDEN, N. A.; de ROOCK, R. S. (Eds.). The Handbook of Critical Literacies . New York: Routledge, 2021. p. 151-158.

NGUYEN, Duy Binh. EFL teachers’ perceptions of professional development activities and their effects in a non-Anglosphere context. Focus On Elt Journal, [S.L.], p. 70-86, 2022. Kare Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.14744/felt.2022.4.2.5.

RICHARDS, Jack; RODGERS, Theodore. Approaches and methods in Llanguage teaching : a description and analysis. 15. ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999. 90 p.

RICHARDS, Jack C. Communicative language teaching today. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006. 52 p.

SETYOWATI, Lestari. In what way is literature seen as authentic materials for language Teaching? Conference: Eckll. Surabaya, p. 41-47, 2018.

SILVA, Grazielle Roberta Freitas et al . Entrevista como técnica de pesquisa qualitativa. Online Brazilian Journal Of Nursing, Rio de Janeiro, v. 5, n. 2, p. 246-257, 2006.

TANTAWY, Nesrin. Investigating teachers’ perceptions of the influence of professional development on teachers’ performance and Ccareer progression. Arab World English Journal, [S.L.], v. 11, n. 1, p. 181-194, 15 mar. 2020. AWEJ Group. http://dx.doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol11no1.15.

VALÉRIO, Kátia Modesto; MATTOS, Andrea Machado de Almeida. Critical literacy and the Communicative Approach: gaps and intersections. Revista Brasileira de Linguística Aplicada , [S.L.], v. 18, n. 2, p. 313-338, jun. 2018. FapUNIFESP (SciELO). http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1984-6398201812252.

VIOLETTA-IRENE, Koutsompou. The use of literature in the language classroom: methods and aims. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, [S.L.], v. 5, n. 1, p. 74- 79, jan. 2015. EJournal Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.7763/ijiet.2015.v5.479.

WALSH, Catherine. Interculturalidade crítica e pedagogia decolonial: in-surgir, re-existir e re- viver. In: CANDAU, Vera. Educação intercultural na América Latina: entre concepções, tensões e propostas. [S. L.]: 7Letras, 2009. p. 12-42.