Literature Circles in ELT

Literature Circles in E LT
Scott J. Shelton-Strong

Introduction

The aim of this paper is to provide an introduction to the overall structure
and processes inherent in Literature Circles (LCs) and put forward the
premise that they offer a pedagogically sound platform for language
acquisition to develop in the E LT classroom.
LCs are defined as small peer-led discussion groups, involved in reading the
same piece of literature, and who come together on a regular programmed
basis to share interpretations of what they have read. This is primarily
achieved through the assignment of various roles, or focused tasks, which
each student is given to carry out while they read and which provide a clearly
defined reason for reading. Their contribution to the post-reading
discussions stems largely from these prepared roles (Daniels 2002: 2).
From its beginnings in city schools throughout Chicago, USA, in the early
1990s, the idea has been taken up, adapted, and implemented by tens of
thousands of teachers (ibid.), and as its popularity has expanded, so have the
learning contexts in which LCs are successfully employed. While they are
a well-documented success in mainstream L1 teaching, there are now
reports of LCs being used successfully in teaching English as a foreign and
second language, with much of the activity stemming from interest in Asian
university E F L classes (Chiang 2007; Mark 2007).
That they have been implemented and researched in university settings
should come as no surprise. Not only do they serve as a powerful vehicle to
engage learners in extensive reading, but they are also, by their very nature,
a learner-led activity, encouraging a great deal of learner autonomy, an area

214

E LT Journal Volume 66/2 April 2012; doi:10.1093/elt/ccr049

ª The Author 2011. Published by Oxford University Press; all rights reserved.
Advance Access publication July 18, 2011

Downloaded from at Periodicals Dept., Hallward Library, University of Nottingham on October 19, 2012

While the intrinsic value of reading extensively for L2 learners has rarely been
questioned, practicalities of implementation and the existence of gains beyond
lexical enrichment have generated discussion. This article outlines and explores the
benefits which Literature Circles (LCs) offer to English language learning and
attempts to identify direct links to SLA through learner engagement. Practical
suggestions for setting up these learner-led reading and discussion groups in E LT
classrooms are given, and both learner and teacher roles are discussed. The
premise that LCs offer a pedagogically sound addition to E LT classrooms is
explored through an outline of the framework on which they are based and an
evaluation of the collaborative processes they involve. Qualitative evidence, from
both learner perspectives and teacher observation, is given to support this premise,
as are references to current theories of how languages are learnt and to the way in
which these relate to learner involvement of the kind fostered by LCs.


of considerable importance in ELT today (Cohen 2010: 172). However, the
apparent lack of interest or usage in the wider E LT community of private
language teaching institutions is puzzling.

Implementing LCs in
an ELT setting

The key elements of a successful LC are as follows (Daniels op.cit.: 18):

6
7

8
9
10
11

Students choose their own reading materials.
Small temporary groups are formed based on book choice.
Different groups read different books.
Groups meet on a regular, predictable schedule to discuss their reading.
Students use written or drawn notes to guide both their reading and
discussion.
Discussion topics come from students.
Discussion meetings aim to be open, natural conversations about
books, so personal connections, digressions, and open-ended questions
are welcome.
The teacher serves as a facilitator, not a group member or instructor.
Evaluation is by teacher observation and student self-evaluation.
A spirit of playfulness and fun pervades the room.
When books are finished, readers share with their classmates and
then new groups form around new reading choices.

Implementing LCs in the L2 classroom may necessitate a few minor
but important alterations to the L1 version which Daniels (op.cit.) first
promoted. These changes primarily concern Points 1–3 and 11, listed above,
and largely deal with issues surrounding the choice of reading material
and the forming of groups.

In an influential paper on the use of LCs in the EF L classroom,
Furr (2004: 5) makes the case for handing back the decision of choosing
the text to the teacher. He argues that:
For E F L students, the core of successful LCs is the fact they do allow
students to participate in ‘real-life,’ meaningful discussions about the
texts/stories that they’ve read; thus, it is important for the teacher to
choose materials which promote reading fluency for use in LCs.
However, while the teacher may indeed be qualified to choose the level
of reading material to allow for fluent reading and subsequent discussion,
reader motivation may increase if learners are allowed to exercise autonomy
in selecting the title or genre. This would require an appropriately sized
library, however, and a degree of teacher guidance may still be warranted.
A further change suggested is that reading and discussion groups are
formed based on the teacher’s discretion rather than on the learners’ choice
of books. Additionally, and in contrast to the model Daniels outlines, within
the ELT context, different groups are usually reading the same text. As
a result, instead of sharing and exchanging books as set out in Point 11
above, Furr (ibid.: 3) suggests that ‘readers prepare a group project and/or
the Instructor may provide additional information to ‘‘fill in some of the
gaps’’ in student understanding’.
It is suggested that, at least initially, guidance when forming groups and
allocating roles aids in achieving a balance of personalities and learning
LCs in E LT

215

Downloaded from at Periodicals Dept., Hallward Library, University of Nottingham on October 19, 2012

1
2

3
4
5


styles, thus leading to a more dynamic exchange within the post-reading
discussions (Furr op.cit.: 2). The remainder of Daniels’ points, however, are
considered essential for the full potential of LCs to be reached and exploited.

Roles for reading and
discussion

The roles vary and can be rotated for each new reading cycle. In this way,
learners exercise a different focus each time they read and prepare for
discussion, thus raising awareness of reading for different reasons.
The central roles are as follows (Furr op.cit.; Daniels op.cit.):
n Discussion leader: maintains the interaction of the discussion through
questions and invitations to participate;
n Summarizer: responsible for giving or eliciting an oral summary of the
reading;
n Word master: responsible for choosing new, important, or interesting
words and multiword expressions to share, define, and contextualize;
n Passage person: chooses key passages, explaining reasons for choice, and
offers and elicits comment;
n Connector: makes connections between real-life people and events with
the story content and prepares questions to invite similar comments;
n Cultural collector: looks for cultural similarities and differences between
story and own culture and brings them to light, inviting comments
through questions to circle members;
n Artistic adventurer: draws or creates something to represent an element

of the story, sharing and communicating the rationale to the group.
These individual roles provide learners with a clear reason for reading, while
simultaneously breaking down the overall reading strategies of a fluent L1
reader into individual parts. These parts, when regrouped in the postreading discussion, unite the group of L2 readers into one, which through
a combined effort of negotiated meaning, sharing of views, and regular
reference to the text, resembles more closely the interpretations and insight
available to a fluent L1 reader, who had read the same text (Furr op.cit.;
Chiang 2005).
The groups, as a necessity for fluent exchange of ideas and information,
should be kept small. I have found that a number of five to six learners per
group work well and that three or four should be the minimum.

An alternative to role
sheets

As discussed, the roles are cited as a major component of LCs. However,
it is also suggested that over-dependence on the role sheets may lead to
discussions becoming mechanical and repetitive, thus disturbing the
motivational factor and perhaps lessen the degree to which real interaction
takes place (Daniels op.cit.: 57).
A suggested alternative is that learners be introduced to literature response
logs, where they make their own notes; jotting down words, phrases,

216

Scott J. Shelton-Strong

Downloaded from at Periodicals Dept., Hallward Library, University of Nottingham on October 19, 2012

Daniels’ fifth point, which deals with role preparation, is a key one. The

fulfilment of each role, while learners read and are involved in discussion, is
often considered to be a major contributor to the success of LCs in terms of
scaffolding communicative competence. This scaffolding is believed to aid
in creating the necessary conditions for the further development of learners’
interlanguage as they move towards a fuller understanding of the text.


feelings, questions, or comments while they read (Daniels ibid.). Each
group is then either assigned or invited to choose a selection of the text they
can deal with within an allotted time frame for reading and discussion and
continuing as with the roles, but with increased freedom to notice and
comment as they wish.

The teacher’s role

Once the discussion circles have begun, the teacher’s role reverts to one
of quiet but attentive observation. It is up to the particular teacher to decide
what he or she will be observing, and this may alter for each discussion.
It may be desirable to observe individual role performance and interaction
or each group as a whole. It may be that the teacher observes language
usage, focuses on turn taking, or procedural concerns, for example.
While many teachers will be accustomed to being more fully involved with
their classes, it is important that learners understand that they carry the
responsibility for managing the interaction and content of their discussions
and in this way are led to rely on themselves and each other for language
needed or pragmatic issues which may arise. This in turn allows learner
autonomy to develop and is vital for the development of the learner-centred
collaborative element of LCs to flourish.

Classroom

procedure

Over the past year, I have conducted LCs with classes of primarily
Vietnamese learners, at different levels of proficiency, with a variety of
genres, and for different lengths of time. I will discuss two of these classes
briefly below with the view of exploring the potential for language learning,
building of learner self-confidence, and creating enthusiasm for reading.
Prior to starting out, questions surfaced regarding how these learners would
take to this different approach to utilizing classroom time. These questions
were later reflected in a self-evaluation questionnaire which learners
returned once the reading and discussion cycles had been completed.
n Would they find collaborative group work to be an effective way to improve
their reading and speaking skills?
n Would new, unknown lexis prove to be a barrier, discouraging students
from truly enjoying the text and discussions?
n Would the learners find that they could expand their knowledge and use of
grammar and lexis as well as reading strategies and cultural insight?
As an introduction, learners were given time to discuss their roles in groups.
Following this, a selection of the text (or chapter of the book) was read in
class. Learners then prepared their roles and engaged in a discussion based
on what they had read, directed by the roles they had prepared. This allowed
the teacher to be on hand to observe and later initiate constructive feedback
on both the preparation 2010: 184).


Once each full reading and discussion cycle was concluded, students
completed a self-evaluation questionnaire to inform further LCs and
provide me with an idea of their personal perceptions.
How effective was my contribution?
table 1

Self-evaluation sample
questions

How has my English improved?

What have I discovered about myself in What have I learnt about working in
relation to reading and sharing ideas? a group?

I tend to think that I have contributed quite a bit to the circles. Maybe not
much, but I have done the best I could. Because all of the stories you’ve
chosen for us are suitable enough for our reading skill, so I think there’s
nothing unmanageable yet. The thing I have enjoyed the most probably is
that you have introduced us to George Orwell. (Male, aged 15)
My reading skill has improved a lot. When I started reading this story, it
took me 30 minutes to finish one chapter, but now in 30 minutes I can
finish 2 longer chapters and it is easier for me to guess the meanings of
new words. (Male, aged 16)
Personally, I think my English has improved a lot after taking part in
different circles. I have learnt a huge amount of new words. I have learnt
to co-operate with my friends and I have understood them better. And
most importantly, I’ve found it a lot more comfortable to discuss things in
English, and now I’m more confident when I have to speak in English.
(Female, aged 17)
I like to compare the culture between my country and the position in the
story. It makes me know more and deeper about my own culture.
(Female, aged 16)

Working with lower
levels

Another class which took part in LCs consisted of a group of 18 young
learners aged 13–15 years of intermediate level. A graded reader3 at Level 5
was used, and pre-reading activities were set up to create interest in the
theme of the story and the setting in which it took place.
The class was divided into four groups who met twice a week, over 16 weeks,
having post-reading discussions for approximately 40 minutes of a twohour class. The remainder of the hour was spent on feedback and noticing
activities related to language in the story, while the final hour dealt with the
regular syllabus of the school.
Although learners at this age found it initially challenging to maintain and
develop a discussion rather than a simple exchange of facts and
opinions—with encouragement and post-circle awareness raising
discussions—they eventually found their footing and began to show
increased sophistication in both language and behaviour. In fact, several
students, previously reluctant to speak out in class, became quite animated
and began to interact to a level not previously observed. This appears to be
a predictable outcome of LCs, as others have reported similar reactions as
quieter students find their voice and enjoy participating in the circle
discussions (Furr op.cit.; Mark op.cit.).

LCs in E LT

219

Downloaded from at Periodicals Dept., Hallward Library, University of Nottingham on October 19, 2012

Some of their comments follow:


One of these learners offered this insightful comment in her selfassessment:

Evaluation

Learners are constantly involved in peer evaluation, in a natural sense, as
they comment on and discuss each member’s contribution. Self-evaluation,
in the form of a simple set of questions leading each student to comment on
and show awareness of their own progress, performance, and participation,
allows for a useful period of reflection. This can be extended to having
learners keep reader response journals and to peer evaluation where
groups evaluate performance regarding work habits, role preparation,
and participation (Lopez 2010).
As the teacher’s role is observational while learners are involved in
discussion, there is ample opportunity to assess language use and evaluate
overall task performance. These observations may lead to discussions
concerning desired improvement of the LC and to further work to be
done on language use, pronunciation, or lexical patterns for example.

Noticing and S L A

Apart from the gains made in self-confidence through working
independently and collaboratively in preparation for and participation
within the discussion circles, the opportunities for incidental learning
and self-directed noticing to take place through meaningful input, notably
through reading (and listening), are many. As learners revisit the text,
while preparing individual roles, they meet, often in a very focused way,
words, phrases, and whole passages several times.
This is also true while groups are engaged in discussions, with peer-initiated
noticing and correction being a common element of the post-reading
discussions. This focused and regularly repeated learner-led interaction,
as Long (1985) hypothesizes, allows these interactional adjustments to
improve comprehension, which may then more easily allow acquisition

to take place (Spada and Lightbown 2010: 114).
While incorporating LCs in E LT may encourage reading for pleasure and
lifelong reading habits, noticing activities, believed to be crucial in
transforming input into language acquisition (ibid.: 112), can be prepared
by the teacher in advance, using authentic language from the assigned
reading. This awareness raising, which leads learners to analyse and
focus on language culled from the original text, can act as a guide to salient
language features once there has been ample opportunity to deal with
the text as meaning focused input. This can serve as a language
enhancement period (post-reading and discussion), directing learners to
focus on areas such as language choice and style for example. There are
several appropriate task types detailed in Literature (Duff and Maley 2007),
which are easily adapted to any text.

220

Scott J. Shelton-Strong

Downloaded from at Periodicals Dept., Hallward Library, University of Nottingham on October 19, 2012

I found out that English is more interesting than I thought. I’ve
discovered about my leadership. My reading is now much better. I’ve
thought again after I heard my classmates supported me. My English
grammar is better. I feel comfortable speaking and listening to others. I’ve
been able to help my classmates. Working in a group was amazing. It
helped me to be more confident, more friendly and I’ve become an
extremely different person, I think. (Female, aged 14)


Additionally, once the assigned reading and post-reading discussions have

been completed, while interest is high and learners receptive, post-circle
tasks can act to round up, consolidate, and extend understanding and
interpretation. Pyramid, or plot summaries, character poems (Yeh 2007),
and other collaborative tasks allow learners to further creatively invest in the
story, expressing themselves independently and collaboratively, and sharing
their outcomes with other members of the class, allowing for an opportunity
to further exercise and experiment with language.
As LCs are possible with many levels of language learner groups, the choice
of reading material is equally as varied. As suggested previously, reading for
pleasure in a second language normally requires the level of the text to be
well within the reader’s range of easy comprehension.
Graded readers are an appropriate choice for many reasons, among them,
the fact that they can be read without the constant need of dictionary
reference and can be chosen for relative ease of comprehension. For upper
levels (B2–C2), unabridged novels, short stories, poems, or essays offer the
motivation of challenge and can open up new worlds beneath the multilayer
construct of texts written for an L1 audience. The scaffolding inherent in the
role preparation and in the discussion circle itself can lend the necessary
guidance and support an L2 reader might require to successfully connect
with the subtleties of such writing.

LCs and
methodology

LCs appear to share with both the Communicative Approach (C LT) and
Task Based Learning and Teaching (TBL) elements which create genuine
learning opportunities, which is a strong, identifying feature of these
established approaches.
One of the shared goals of CLT and LCs is to create opportunities wherein
learners are led to develop fluency in language use (Richards 2006: 14).

In LCs, this takes place within the discussion circle, where natural and
meaningful interaction take place and through the negotiation of meaning,
correction of understanding, and the use of communication strategies,
while learners discuss their reading with peers within the group.
Proponents of TBL suggest that for a language to be learnt, and for
acquisition to take place, the following are required:
n exposure to rich comprehensible input
n use of the language to get things done (for example the exchange and
negotiation of meaning)
n motivation to listen, read, and to speak the language (Willis 1996).
LCs may provide access to these conditions as learners are motivated to
read, given time, space, and choice to complete a clearly defined task and
a genuine motivation and arena for communicating their ideas.
Comprehensible input is provided through reading and interaction
within the discussions. Peer-initiated feedback to language choice and
usage, coupled with teacher-led feedback on task performance, is an
important element of LCs and considered vital in the process of language
acquisition (Larsen-Freeman and DeCarrico 2010: 29–30).

LCs in E LT

221

Downloaded from at Periodicals Dept., Hallward Library, University of Nottingham on October 19, 2012

Appropriate reading
material


Conclusion

As a learner-led activity, LCs foster learner autonomy, while providing
opportunities for focused extensive reading and collaborative, purposeful
discussions. In the classroom situations described, appropriate scaffolding
was provided through role, peer, and teacher support, thus creating
opportunities for motivated language acquisition to take place in the E LT
classroom.

Using LCs within the greater E LT context appears to be not only feasible
but also largely compatible with established practice and within what is
widely considered to be a pedagogically appropriate approach to stimulate
language acquisition.
Final revised version received May 2011
Notes
1 1984, Animal Farm, and the essay ‘Shooting an
elephant’.
2 David Wellington.
3 East 43rd Street by A. Battersby (Cambridge
University Press 2006, second edition).
References
Chiang, M. H. and C. W. Huang. 2005. ‘The
effectiveness of Literature Circles in EF L setting:
a classroom investigation’ in Proceedings of 2005
International Conference and Workshop on T E F L and
Applied Linguistics. Taipei: Crane. Available at http://
192.192.169.250/edu_paper/data_image/
e0000884/0n0/20050300/p0000078.pdf
(accessed on 21 June 2011).
Chiang, M. H. 2007. ‘Improved reading attitudes
and enhanced English reading comprehension via

literature circles’. Lagos Papers in English Studies 1:
168–83.
Cohen, A. D. 2010. ‘Focus on the language learner:
styles, strategies and motivation’ in N. Schmitt (ed.).
Daniels, H. 2002. Literature Circles: Voice and Choice
in Book Clubs and Reading Groups (Second edition).
Portland, ME: Stenhouse.
Duff, A. and A. Maley. 2007. Literature (Second
edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Furr, M. 2004. Literature Circles for the E F L Classroom.
Available at />litcirclesforEFL.pdf (accessed on 5 May 2009).
Larsen-Freeman, D. and J. DeCarrico. 2010.
‘Grammar’ in N. Schmitt (ed.).

222

Scott J. Shelton-Strong

Long, M. H. 1985. ‘Input and second language
acquisition theory’ in S. M. Gass and C. G. Madden
(eds.). Input in Second Language Acquisition. Rowley,
MA: Newbury House.
Lopez, J. 2010. Teaching and Learning: Literature
Circles. Available at />index.cfm?section¼Teaching-andLearning&page¼Reading-Workbooks&cat¼MiddleSchool&viewpost¼2&ContentId¼1015 (accessed on
27 October 2010).
Lynch, T. and D. Mendelsohn. 2010. ‘Listening’ in
N. Schmitt (ed.).
Mark, P. L. 2007. ‘Building a community of E F L
readers: setting up Literature Circles in a Japanese
university’ in K. Bradford-Watts (ed.). J A LT 2006

Conference Proceedings. Tokyo: J A LT.
Richards, J. C. 2006. Communicative Language
Teaching Today. New York, NY: Cambridge
University Press.
Schmitt, N. (ed.). 2010. An Introduction to Applied
Linguistics (Second edition). London: Hodder
Education.
Spada, N. and P. Lightbown. 2010. ‘Second language
acquisition’ in N. Schmitt (ed.). Harlow: Longman.
Willis, J. 1996. A Framework for Task-based Learning.
Harlow: Longman.
Yeh H-C. 2007. ‘Multiple communication systems’.
English Teaching Professional Magazine 52: 12–14.
The author
Scott Shelton-Strong has been involved in teaching
and training over the past 20 years and has lived and
worked in Spain, Jordan, Tunisia, New Zealand, the

Downloaded from at Periodicals Dept., Hallward Library, University of Nottingham on October 19, 2012

I have argued that LCs provide a collaborative, multidimensional learning
platform, from which learners are led to a rich exposure of contextualized
language through reading for pleasure and to opportunities to negotiate
meaning and interpretation in the ensuing post-reading discussions, thus
increasing opportunities for learners’ interlanguage to develop naturally.


UK, and the U SA and is currently teaching at the
British Council Hanoi, Vietnam. His interests
include action research in the classroom with an

emphasis on building learner autonomy, teacher

development and training, and using literature
in E LT.
Email:

Downloaded from at Periodicals Dept., Hallward Library, University of Nottingham on October 19, 2012

LCs in E LT

223