Part of the annual monitoring at the School of LES includes a questionnaire at the end of each module, giving students the opportunity to assess the module on issues such as course content, teaching method, etc. For the seminar presented here, however, a three-step system was adopted.
A first questionnaire was administered half way through the semester to ensure that critical points could be taken up and the seminar improved to the benefit of all whilst it was still in progress. In the last session of the seminar, the uniform modular questionnaire was issued as well. In addition to this, though, and keeping with the spirit of the course, a third questionnaire was put together by the students themselves. This ad hoc questionnaire reflected the specifics of the seminar and ensured that students could focus on points they themselves considered relevant for the seminar in question. In the following section, a summary of all three questionnaires will be given.
Mid-Term and End of Term (official) Questionnaire
Asked about what surprised them most about the seminar, students’ responses focused on three major aspects. The first aspect mentioned was the multitude of taboos covered in class. Some of the students had not even been aware that so many taboos still do exist at the dawn of the 21st century. The second surprise to them was how much they got to talk – and that they really had something to say. Finally the students pointed out that even only six weeks into the seminar they could already distinguish between those eager to engage in controversial debate and the few whom they thought were ill-equipped to take up such an endeavour.
With regards to what they enjoyed most about the seminar, two main areas could be identified. First and foremost, students appreciated the chance to express themselves freely – to quote one of the students, “I enjoyed most about this course that we could really speak our minds for once, and did not risk castigation for our opinions and
expressions.” The other main opinion expressed in the students’ answers was that they appreciated the variety of topics and the openness with which they had to be dealt. This also meant that they were forced to participate, not by the lecturer but by their classmates and the topics themselves.
When asked what the students disliked most or would change about the seminar, their replies again focused on two key areas. Since one aim of the seminar was to let students themselves decide what would be an appropriate approach to the topic they had chosen for presentation, on a few occasions the ‘audience’ felt that some techniques had been inappropriate. Therefore some suggested that, in future, presentations should be double-checked by the lecturer first.15 This issue was resolved by introducing additional time for the discussion of methods immediately after presentations had taken place. The final point of criticism was the fact that each presentation was recorded on video, but this was – as mentioned earlier - due to university regulations requiring all assessed work during final year to be accessible for external examiners.
Although it seems that the vital points of seminar assessment from the students’ point of view were covered by these official questionnaires, the ad hoc questionnaire produced even more useful results for future seminars along the lines of the one presented.
“Ad hoc”Student Questionnaire16
When looking at the students' questionnaire the first striking aspect is the type of questions they asked. The purpose was not so much to grade certain aspects, but to give an individual account of one's own opinion. The students concentrated on two key areas, the first being the students themselves in relation to the lecturer / other students / the course (Q 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 16, 17, 18). This may indicate that students do not perceive standard questionnaires to be sufficient when it comes to their own person (e.g. the general tone of most university questionnaires seems to restrict the voicing of one's own thoughts, thus cutting short the potential for more student input). The second area of interest was the course itself, its content and teaching method (Q 1, 3, 4, 6, 8, 11, 13, 15, 16, 17).
15 This point led to yet another heated debate in the seminar since, in a way, what was being requested here was the reinstatement of a censoring, controlling body. However, in the end the class agreed that the best way for all to learn was for mistakes to be allowed to happen, not to be prevented, thus challenging the taboo of ‘failing’.
Most revealing was what people thought the ideal student for such a seminar should be.
The student would need to be open minded, have a good command of German, be able to speak their mind and back up their opinions, and “should not be faint-hearted since sooner or later, something will almost certainly shock you”. These comments underline what has already been stated in 4.2., namely that a seminar as presented in this article should only be offered to students in their final year.
Some colleagues might argue that a seminar concept like the one introduced here is going too far. Student feedback said otherwise. All the students agreed that for them, the course went far enough without ever overstepping the boundaries. One student's answer in particular illustrated the close relationship between student and course content:
“I believe the course went too far for some members of the group, but I also think that perhaps they should not have taken the course without expecting to be confronted with things they might not like. How can something be taboo if everyone feels comfortable, uninterested and unemotional about it? Therefore, excluding those students who were upset, I think the course went far enough.”
5. Summary
For decades traditional academic disciplines fed into the teaching and learning of a foreign language. And although new disciplines such as Media Studies appeared on the academic horizon, many topics still await their discovery for the foreign language classroom. Student feedback and the lecturer’s impressions suggest that especially in the context of the British educational system, universities should - and indeed can – offer new approaches to foreign language learning. In a time when applications for some types of university language courses are decreasing, new concepts need to evolve and adapt to the requirements of students. Learners today want more than ‘just’ language, or even
‘just’ culture, politics or history for that matter. The authors would like to encourage those responsible for curriculum design to (re-)evaluate existing topics or disciplines. As the seminar described in this article has shown, the new lies within the old. One cannot discuss for example the appropriateness of Spiegelmann’s comic “Maus” if one has no knowledge of the historical facts. One cannot grasp the impact and implications of taboos if one is unaware of their origins, or their mere existence for that matter.
16 For complete questionnaire see Appendix C.
If universities want to prepare their students for what is out there a logical step is to build bridges between academia’s safe haven and the students’ everyday life. The ‘real world’ as it presents itself today is anything but trivial. Students want to be able to interact effectively with their environment – and this need for effective communication often goes way beyond what traditional teaching scenarios, books and topics can offer, especially once really sensitive subjects – such as taboos – are touched upon. Therefore the authors of this article hope that many colleagues will follow them on their journey to boldly go where no one has gone before. The student is the limit.
Ignorieren ist der Königsweg des Tabuierens (Ludwig Marcuse)
References
Freud, Sigmund (1912/13) Totem und Tabu. Einige Übereinstimmungen im Seelenleben der Wilden und der Neurotiker. Fischer: Frankfurt/M..
Gemeinschaftswerk der Evangelischen Publizistik e.V. (1986) Das Verbotene Bild.
Tabu und Gesellschaft im Film. Frankfurt /M.
Riedel, Ingrid (1985) Tabu in Märchen. Walter: Olten.
Rogers, Carl (1988) Freedom to learn. Merrill Pub. Co. Ohio.
Rudas, Stephan (1994) Stichworte zur Sozialpsychologie der Tabus. In: Bettelheim, Peter; Streibel, Robert (eds.) (1994) Tabu und Geschichte. Zur Kultur des kollektiven Erinnerns. Piecus: Wien..
Schröder, Hartmut (1997): Tabus, interkulturelle Kommunikation und Fremdsprachenunterricht. – Überlegungen zur Relevanz der Tabuforschung für die Fremdsprachendidaktik -. In: In: A. Knapp-Potthoff und M. Liedke (Hrsg.): Aspekte interkultureller Kommunikationsfähigkeit. (= Reihe interkulturelle Kommunikation 3).
Iudicium, München. (also see: http://tabu.sw2.euv-frankfurt-o.de/Tabu_pdf/tabu-artikel_1997.pdf)
Seibel, Karin (1990) Zum Begriff des Tabus. Eine soziologische Perspektive.
(Dissertation) Frankfurt.
Seim, Roland (1997): Zwischen Medienfreiheit und Zensureingriffen. Telos: Münster.
Seim, Roland; Spiegel, Josef (eds.) (1998) “Ab 18”. Telos: Münster.
Seim, Roland; Spiegel, Josef (eds.) (1999) Der kommentierte Bildband zu “Ab 18”.
Telos: Münster.
Webster, Hutton (1973) Taboo. A Sociological Study. Stanford University Pressa:
Stanford.
Biodata
Daniela Hartmann: M.A. in English and German (Universität Konstanz); since 1997 DAAD Lektorin for Business German at Aston University, Birmingham. Research interests include curriculum design, Business German, teaching methodology and applied linguistics. Regional Winner (together with Dr. N. O’Mahony) of the 2001 Whitehead Mann Award for Innovative Curriculum Design, co-author (together with Prof. A.
Fearns) of the “Curriculum für die Prüfung Wirtschaftsdeutsch International”. Recent publications include articles on reported speech in intercultural communication, Business German in integrated university programmes, and innovative topics for the German as a foreign language classroom. Upcoming publications (together with Dr. N. O’Mahony):
“Managing German: The Theory in Practice” (a general overview on approaches of Business German in Ireland, Germany, the United States and the U.K.); “Business German a la Carte” (a teachers’ handbook).
Martin Faulkner: BSc in Modern Languages: German and French from Aston University, Birmingham. Was awarded the Aston University Prize and John Stagg Prize in 2001. Since 2001 financial translator at Fry & Bonthrone Partnerschaft Language Consultancy and Services, Mainz.
Appendix A:
Overview: “Aspects of Contemporary Germany in the so-called Light Media”
Note: Italics denote student presentations
Week Topic / Content Material provided
1 Introduction Boehse Onkelz: “Scheißegal”
[music]
2 Theory I (terminology; introduction to relevant theories)
Freud (1912); Hutton (1973) [books]
3 Theory II (“working definition”) BT-Cellnet Advert [print]
4 Research Seibel (1990) [book]
5 Child abuse “Marienhof” [video];
“Stern-TV” [video]
6 Birth defects / abortion “Lindenstraße” [video]
7 Freedom of speech (the press) “Kulturzeit” [video];
“auslandsjournal” [video]
8 READING WEEK
9 Holocaust, Third Reich W. Moer: Adolf [comic book]; A.
Spiegelmann: Maus [comic]
10 Censorship Seim / Spiegel (1999) [book];
Seim (1999) [book];
“Nachtgespräch” [Video]
11 Popular Music Collection of songs [music]
12 Final discussion
Appendix B:
Song Excerpts
DIE ÄRZTE: Schrei nach Liebe
(Die Bestie in Menschengestalt. Metronome/Universal 1993) Warum hast du Angst vorm Streicheln? Was soll all der Terz?
Unterm Lorbeerkranz mit Eicheln, weiß ich, schlägt dein Herz Und Romantik ist für dich nicht bloß graue Theorie
Zwischen Störkraft und den Onkelz steht 'ne Kuschelrock-LP Deine Gewalt ist nur ein stummer Schrei nach Liebe
Deine Springerstiefel sehnen sich nach Zärtlichkeit Du hast nie gelernt, dich zu artikulieren
Und deine Eltern hatten niemals für di ch Zeit Arschloch!
RAMMSTEIN: Spiel mit mir (Sehnsucht. Motor/Universal 1997) Wir teilen Zimmer und das Bett Brüderlein komm sei so nett Brüderlein komm fass mich an Rutsch ganz dicht an mich heran Unterm Nabel im Geäst
Wartet schon ein weißer Traum Brüderlein komm halt dich fest Und schüttel mir das Laub vom Baum Spiel ein Spiel mit mir
Gib mir deine Hand Und spiel mit mir, weil wir alleine sind Spiel mit mir ein Spiel Vater
Mutter Kind
PUR: Kinder sind tabu
(Mächtig viel Theater. Intercord/EMI 1998)
Die jungen Opfer sind zerbrechliche Wesen, sind hilflos, sie haben nichts getan
Opfer, die man leicht beeinflussen kann Sie sind völlig schutzlos, ausgeliefert
Laßt die kleinen Menschen in Ruhe ihr Leben versteh’n
Ohne Angst und Gewalt sich wachsen seh’n Kinder sind tabu
RAINER BIELFELDT: Willi (Nachtzug. Bielfeldt Records 1991)
Denk' ich an Liebe, denk' ich meistens an den Regen und auch an Willis kleine Bude unterm Dach
Wir haben oft dort oben auf der Couch gelegen Der Tropfentrommelwirbel hielt uns Nächte wach Denk' ich an Liebe, muß ich niemals überlegen Ich denk an Willi - meinen Willi - und den Regen Denk' ich an Liebe, dann besonders an die Nächte und Willis Körper, naß und schön und stark und nackt Der Regen schenkte uns, was nie die Sonne brächte denn tausend Wassertropfen schlugen uns den Takt Und seh' ich aus, als ob ich was Frivoles dächte, muß ich an Willi denken und die nassen Nächte
TIC TAC TOE: Warum?
(Klappe die 2te. RCA Local/BMG 1997)
Ab und zu mal einen rauchen, mal in and’re Welten tauchen Das war ja noch OK, was ich gut versteh’
Doch dann fing es an mit den Sachen, die waren weniger zum Lachen Doch du mußtest sie ja machen
Ich stand nur daneben, konnte nicht mehr mit dir reden Alles, was du sagtest, war: “Das ist mein Leben! Mein Leben, Das gehört mir ganz allein, und da mischt sich keiner ein!
Laß es sein, laß es sein, das schränkt mich ein!”
Ich sah dir in die Augen, sie waren tot, sie waren leer
Sie konnten nicht mehr lachen, sie waren müde, sie waren schwer Du hattest nicht mehr viel zu geben, denn in deinem neuen Leben Hattest du dich voll und ganz an eine fremde Macht ergeben Geld, Geld, Geld, nur für Geld hast du dich gequält
Um es zu bekommen, wie gewonnen, so zerronnen Dafür gingst du auf’n Strich, aber nicht für dich
Sondern nur für deinen Dealer mit dem lächelnden Gesicht Und warum? Nur für den Kick, für den Augenblick?
Und warum? Nur für ein Stück von dem falschen Glück?
Und warum? Nur für den Kick, für den Augenblick?
Und warum? Du kommst nie mehr zurück.
Komm zurück!
SPEKTACOOLÄR: Meine kleine Schwester (365 Tage. Hansa/BMG 1998)
Auf dem Klo wird gedealt, mit Drogen wird gespielt
Um die hohen Beträge, wer’s nicht bezahlt kriegt die Schläge
Denn die Macht hat die Gang, strenggenommen sind die Lehrer nur Statisten
hoffnungslose Optimisten in einem Spiel, das sie längst schon nicht mehr kontrollieren bewegen sich auf allen Viern, haben’s Lernziel nicht kapiert
Was steht auf dem Plan an der Wand, Sozi der Straße zum Anfachen Denn nach der letzten Stunde dreh’n die Mädchen noch ‘ne Runde In den fetten Wagen von den geilen Säcken, die vor der Schule steh’n und lecken sich die Finger nach jungen Dingern
Um an ihnen rumzufingern - und noch mehr Das ist der Anfang vom Ende, Karriere ohne Ende Blinde Wut macht sich breit und schreit und schreit Nach der Lösung des Problems
Zu groß der Schuh - Amerika kackt uns zu!
Sie ist meine Schwester und trägt ein Messer Sie sagt, in der Schule sei so was besser
Sie hat Angst vor dem Tag, hat Angst vor der Nacht Meine kleine Schwester wurde fertig gemacht
KNORKATOR: Ich will nur fickn
(The Schlechtst Of Knorkator. Rodrec/Indigo 1998) Ich will nicht mit dir nach Italien fahren
und nicht den Sonnenuntergang zugucken Ich will nicht deine Eltern kennenlernen und auch nicht auf deine Katze aufpassen Mich interessiert nicht, wann du geboren bist
oder was deine Tante von Beruf ist
Ich will nur ficken, ficken, ficken, ficken...
KNORKATOR: Ich bin ein ganz besond’rer Mann (Hasenchartbreaker. Mercury/Universal 1999)
Meine Suppe nicht essen wollend bekam ich von meiner Mutter gesagt, daß ich nicht zum Spielen raus dürfe, bevor der ganze Teller ausgelöffelt sei. Nun hatte ich aber keinen Hunger und so wandte ich einen Trick an, indem ich alles stopfte in meinen Po
und ich empfand es irgendwie als angenehm und konnte daraus schließen,
daß sich in meinen Anus
einige Geschmacksknospen befinden müssen Ich bin ein ganz besond'rer Mann,
der mit dem Arschloch essen kann Ich esse Fisch, ich esse Huhn, Ich brauch' es bloß hinein zu tun
KNORKATOR: Ich lass mich klonen
(Tribute to uns selbst. Mercury/Universal 2000) Der Schwanz, wenn die Erregung steigt,
grundsätzlich nur nach vorne zeigt, was mir in dem Moment nichts nützt, dieweil mein Arschloch hinten sitzt Hingegen, wenn er schlaff und dünn, dann reicht er nicht bis ganz dahin Auch blasen kann ich ihn mir nicht, weil sonst die Wirbelsäule bricht Wie ich es wende oder dreh' Es geht nicht oder es tut weh Ich lass mich klonen
Appendix C:
Students' “Ad hoc” Questionnaire
Note: Questions marked by (*) overlap with standard questionnaire.
1. Did the course meet your expectations? (*)
2. What was the atmosphere like between the students and the lecturer?
3. What did you get out of this course?
4. Did the course go far enough - or too far?
5. Do you think that students should have the opportunity to decide if they miss out on certain topics?
6. Was the teaching style / structure appropriate?
7. Should students have the opportunity to leave the room (without explanation)?
8. What do you like most about this course? (*) 9. Should students decide on the marking scheme?
10. Should students be able to suggest topics for the course?
11. Opinions - were they allowed / encouraged / valued?
12. Would you do this course again?
13. What did you not like about the course? (*)
14. Evaluate the availability of resources / materials from the lecturer and / or the library.
15. What would you change about this course? (*)
16. Do you think you learned something from the course? (*) 17. Do you feel you have learned transferable skills?
18. Describe the quality / abilities necessary in a student to take part in this course.