technical analysis of poetry

8/8/2019 Technical Analysis of Poetry

1/9

Technical Analysis in Teaching PoetryAuthor(s): Boyd M. BeagleSource: The English Journal, Vol. 21, No. 6 (Jun., 1932), pp. 468-475Published by: National Council of Teachers of EnglishStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/805079

Accessed: 27/08/2010 02:47

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ncte.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

National Council of Teachers of English is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to

The English Journal.

http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=nctehttp://www.jstor.org/stable/805079?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=nctehttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=nctehttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/805079?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ncte


2/9

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS IN TEACHING POETRY'BOYD M. BEAGLE

INTRODUCTIONOneof the mainobjectivesin the teachingof literature is the de-velopmentof appreciation,ortheelevationof tastes. If anelevationof tastes is securedin a group of pupils, it simply means that thegrouphas beenled to discriminatebetweengoodandpoorliterature,and to preferthe former.Whether appreciationcan be specifically taught, or whether itmust come as a contagion from the teacher, is a matter that for

long has been a subject for prolific argument. Some believe thedirectmethod of approach s preferable. Hayward2has particularlytaken this view. On the other hand, there are probablymore whohold the opposite viewpoint; that is, that appreciationcannot betaught directly, and that it must comeas somewhatof a side-issue,eminatingevidently fromthe enthusiasmor appreciationwhich theteacherherself feels.Such a differenceof opinioncan be resolvedonly upon the basisof scientific experiment. The purposeof the study hereinaftersetforth, then, was to determinescientificallywhich of the two afore-mentioned methods of approachsecures the greater developmentof appreciationor elevation of tastes. More specifically, the prob-lem resolveditself into an experimentperformed n the ninth gradeof the public schools at Sayre, Pennsylvania,to discoverthe valueof technical analysis in teaching an appreciationof poetry. Theunitof timecoveredby the experimentwas one semester.

By "technicalanalysis"is meant the discussionof verse in termsof suchthingsas its rhythm,alliterationorassonance,onomatopeia,figuresof speech, etc. However, it should be emphaticallyunder-stood that technical analysis in this study does not mean "tearingandhacking"a poem,disposingof it piecemeal,or in singlephrases,so that no continuouswaveof apperceptionandappreciation s pos-sible.

1A recent Pennsylvania State College Master's thesis.2 Frank Herbert Hayward, The Lesson in Appreciation (Macmillan Co., 1929).

468


3/9

TECHNICALANALYSISIN TEACHINGPOETRY 469As to "appreciation,"of course there are variouskinds,8but the

twomost commonlyacceptedones are "aestheticappreciation"and"technical appreciation."' The former may be defined briefly as"pure enjoyment," and the latter as "a recognition of artistic orskilled workmanship."But the two arevery closely linked,and thelatter often induces or increases the former.

To measureobjectively the amountof aesthetic appreciationanindividual feels is extremelydifficult,but to measure the quality ofit is an easier undertaking. However, in measuringtechnical ap-preciation, little or no difficulty is encountered. The author feelsthatby theuse of recentlydevised tests he has succeeded n measur-ing both technical appreciationand quality of aesthetic apprecia-tion with a fair degreeof reliability.No seriousattemptwas made in this experimentto go into suchmatters as sincerity versus sentimentality, and other problemsofa similar nature. The author, thinking it best not to scatter hiseffortsover too wide a field, did not considersuch questionswithinthe realm of the present study. Here, of course, might lie oppor-tunity for furtherexperimentation.

FINDINGSThe conclusionsdrawn from the data hereinafter set forth maybe stated brieflyas follows:

I. Technical analysis offers a distinct advantage over the non-technical meth-od in teaching appreciation of poetry. Chances against reversal of ad-vantage are sufficiently high to indicate that continued experimentationwould, on the whole, undoubtedly favor the experimental group.

2. The experimental evidence in this study being opposed to what is perhapsgeneral opinion, there would seem to be indications that more scientificinvestigation should be applied to untested popular beliefs.

PROCEDUREThe parallel-groupexperimentalmethod seemed best suited tothe type of questionhere involved, and to the difficultiesto be en-counteredin the schoolwherethe experimentwas to be performed.a S. C. Parker, Methods of Teaching in High Schools (Ginn & Co., 1915), P. 242.'Douglas Waples, Procedures in High School Teaching (Macmillan Co., 1929),

p. 203.


4/9

470 THE ENGLISH JOURNALAccordingly, the six sections of pupils enrolledin the ninth-gradeEnglish workwere divided into experimentaland controlgroupsofthreesections each.In number,therewereapproximatelyone hundredand sixty pu-pils at the beginning of the year. But pupil-matchingdifficultiesconfronted as a result of an inconvenientgroupingover which theexperimenterhad no control,and also the matterof pupils' leavingschool,madeit possibleto havejust thirty-twopairsof cases.Great care was taken in the matching,which was done solely onthe basis of intelligence quotients, to see that the individualswereproperlypaired. Andthroughout he courseof the experimenteveryeffort was made to maintain identical conditions between experi-mental and controlgroups, varyingonly the experimentalfactor.The average I.Q. of the experimental group was Io02.03, whilethat of the control group was 1or.78, a differenceof only 0.25 of apoint.

Eight different standardizedtests were used. Six of them, com-prising one series, are known as "Tests for the AppreciationofLiterature." This series, devised by Hanna Logasa and MarthaMcCoy Wright,of the University High School, University of Chi-cago, mainly tests technical appreciation-that is, the ability todiscriminate between what is good and what is poor in literature.The othergroup,called "Exercisesin Judging Poetry," consists oftwo tests, SeriesX and SeriesY. Here inferiorpoetry is presentedwith that of superior quality, the idea being to determinewhetherpupils enjoy most that which is best; in otherwords, to determinethe quality of their aesthetic appreciation. These two tests werepreparedby Allan Abbott, professorof English, Teachers College,and M. R. Trabue, professor of education, University of NorthCarolina.In the seriesof six, the firsttest dealswith the discoveryof theme.Here the pupil reads a number of poetry selections, and decidesuponthe themeof each. The second is designedto test readerpar-ticipationby ascertaininghow wellor in whatmanner he individualreacts to poetry selections. The third tests reaction to sensoryimages by determiningwhat senses are appealedto by the quota-tions. In thenext test, thepurpose s to determine hepupil'sability


5/9

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS IN TEACHING POETRY 471to recognizetrue,far-fetched,or mixedcomparisons.The fifth testsdiscrimination of trite and fresh expression, and the sixth deter-mines the subject'sperceptionof rhythmand pitch pattern.The subjects having been paired, and the definiteprocedureforthe experiment decided upon, the initial tests were given to allgroupsand to all pupils. The entireeight tests wereused in order togain the highest measure of reliability it was possible to obtain.Fourclass recitations,on four consecutivedays,wereused in givingthem.

Following this, during the course of the experiment as manypoems werepresentedto both groupsas time wouldpermit. A fewof those used were: Coleridge's"The Rime of the Ancient Mari-ner," Masefield's"Cargoes,"Kilmer's "Trees," Sandburgs"Fog,"Miller's"Columbus,"Seeger's"I Have a Rendezvous with Death,"and Kipling's "Mandalay."In most cases, if the poem was not containedin a textbook usedby the pupils, it was mimeographedand then given to them. How-ever, before giving out the shorterpoems the experimenterusuallypresentedthem in an oral reading. This was done in orderto givethe class the best first impressionpossible. With pupils doing thereadingmuch harmmay be doneby improperpresentation."In the experimental sections the poems were discussed quitethoroughly, taking up such things as rhythm, alliteration, figuresof speech, and onomatopeia,not neglecting,of course, the thought.Although the same poems were presented to the control group,the workwas donewith a minimumamountof non-technicaldiscus-sion. There was just sufficientdiscussionto help the pupils under-stand the thought of the poem, and thus meet the regular schoolrequirements.An attemptwas madeto equalizethe time devoted topoetry in the two groups by presentinga little more of it to the con-trol group. The technical discussionnaturally took slightly longerto present than the non-technical.A conscious effort was made in the experimental sections tohave the pupils decidejust why they liked one poetry selectionbet-ter than another,or just why the poetry in one was better than inanother. For instance, in connection with "The Rime of the An-

' For a full discussion of this technique, see Hayward, op. cit.


6/9

472 THE ENGLISH JOURNALcient Mariner," the pupils were given selections taken from thepoemto comparewith slightly changedversions. It was interestingto note the thoughtful answers the pupils gave to the questionswhen asked to tell whetherthey liked the originalor changedver-sions better, and to give their reasons for the choices made. Thefollowingare two examplesof selections given for comparisonandjudgment. The original selections, as taken from the poem, aregiven firstin both cases, and are designatedby the letter a:

I. a) The fair breeze blew, the white foam flew,The furrow followed free.b) The fair wind blew, the white spray flew,The furrow streamed off free.

2. a) Alone, alone, all, all aloneAlone on a wide, wide sea.b) We were there just by ourselvesAlone on a wide open sea.

When it was time to bring the experimentto a close, the entireseries of eight tests was given again. These tests were exactly thesameones as givenat thebeginningof the experiment.Since the same tests were given at the begininngand at the endof the experiment, he differencebetweenthe two indicatestheprog-ress made duringthe courseof the study. The increasein learninginvolvedin theactualtakingof the first test wouldprobablybe verylow, andanywaywouldnot enterinto the results of the experiment,because both the experimentaland the control groups had equalchancesin this respect. Therefore,whateveradvantageappearsatthe end of the experimentmay legitimately be regardedas the re-sult of the difference n teachingtechniques.

EXPERIMENTAL DATATable I sets forth the main statistical results of the study.For both experimentaland controlgroupsthe initial scorerepre-sents the averagescoremadethe first time the tests weregiven, the

end scoreis the averagescoremade whenthe tests wererepeatedatthe close of the experiment,and the gain is the differencebetweenthe two. The differenceof gains representsthe amountthe averageimprovementof the experimentalgroupsurpassedthe averageim-provementof the control.


7/9

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS IN TEACHING POETRY 473It should be observedthat in every test the average gain of the

end score overthe initialscorewasgreater n theexperimentalgroupthan in the control. The differencebetweengains varies fromo.oiof a point in test 3, to the significant4.06 in the total for the Logasa-Wright tests. A negative gain, of course, means that there was aloss.

TABLE ISUMMARYOF AVERAGESCORESAND CHANCES AGAINST

REVERSAL OF ADVANTAGEEXPERIMENTAL CONTROL

TEST . . . . . C.R.I.S. E.S. G. I.S. E.S. G. D.G.

I............ 4.69 5.47 0.78 5.125 5.25 0.125 0.655 172............. 3.59 4.75 1.16 5.09 4.78 - .31 1.47 1,o303 ............ 5.33 5.09 -0.24 5.34 5.09 - .25 0o.o01 I.044 ............ 4.34 4.97 0.625 4.69 4.69 ....... 0.625 85 ............ 6.21 6.95 0.7 6.8 7.0 .2 0.5 496............ 2.44 2.94 0.5 3.44 3.25 -0-o.19 0.69 13Total.... 26.52 30.15 3.63 30.48 30.06 -0.43 4.06 20,000

X............ 3.41 4.25 0.84 4.47 3.78 -0.69 1.53 6,500Y............ 4.0 5.34 1.34 4.5 5.16 0.66 0.68 ioTotal.... 7.375 9.59 2.19 8.97 8.94 -0.03 2.22 876

C.R. = Critical Ratios*I.S. = Initial Score

E.S.= End ScoreG. = Gain

D.G.= Difference of Gains (all in favorof the experimental group)

* This represents he numberof chancesto i that furtherinvestigationwill not producea reversalofadvantage at present in favor of the experimentalgroup.

To be statistically significant it is conventionally held that theratio of the differencebetween means to the standarddeviation ofthe differencemust be such that chancesof 740 to I againstreversalof advantageareinvolved. This criterion s probablyunnecessarilyexacting. Chances much smaller than this would seem to furnishsufficient ndicationof continued results in the same direction. Es-pecially would this be true where the advantageis consistently onone side for a numberof experiments.In the eight tests given to determinethe amountthe subjectshad


8/9

474 THE ENGLISH JOURNALgained in appreciation,there is a consistent advantagein favor ofthe experimentalgroup. For somereasonrather difficult o explain,the chances against reversal of advantagevary widely among thetests. However, when the six Logasa-Wrighttests are consideredas a whole, the chances against reversal of the advantage for theexperimentalgroup are 20,000 to I. In other words, if this sameexperimentwere repeated,the chances are 20,000 to I that in theLogasa-Wright ests as a whole the experimentalgroupwouldagaingain more than the control. Such extremeodds may be consideredas certainty. The two Abbott-Trabuetests, when considered to-gether, give chances of 876 to I that the advantage would be infavor of the experimentalgroupin furtherexperimentation.Thusin both sets of tests the odds are decidedly in favor of the experi-mentalgroup.The small chances against reversal in several of the tests, how-ever, might indicate the desirabilityof furtherstudy. As it shouldbe possible to prophesyresultson the strengthof the experimentalevidence in general, the data would seem to indicate that the ad-vantage for the experimentalgroupwould be increasedin the testsnowhavingsomewhatsmall chancesagainstreversal.In case furtherexperimentation hould be attempted,the authorwould suggest the use of two experimental groups, both properlypairedwith the control. Then if one experimentalgroupshowedadecidedadvantageover the control,and the other did not, it wouldbe natural to suppose that some extraneous element had enteredinto the study. But in case both experimental groups showed ad-vantages, addedweightwould be given to the evidence.

PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONSLiteraturepertinentto the subject of this study was foundto be

relatively scarce.In I926 Helen V. Ruhlenperformedan experiment' n which sheattemptedto test pupil appreciationthroughthe study of Milton's"L'Allegro"and "I1Penseroso." But she conceivedof appreciationsolely in the sense of enjoyment,and no attemptwas madeto studythe value of technicalanalysis. There was no drill,no lingeringontechnique,or any "tiresomerepetition,"as she chose to call it.

6 "Experiment in Testing Appreciation," English Journal, Vol. XV (1926).


9/9

QUANTITYAND QUALITYIN ENGLISH 475But technical analysis of poetry does not go without its cham-pions. Fairchild' says that for purposesof the study of poetry inthe high school, verse form may consistently be regardedas an es-sentialpartof poetry. He also feels that trueenjoymentof poetry isinseparable from hard work-this in exact contradiction to theopinionheld by many authors and teachers.Baker' thinks that understanding s a condition to appreciation;and understanding,of course, must often come through a certainamount of hardwork.One of the best helps in teaching the technicalaspects of poetryis the previously mentioned book on the appreciation lesson byHayward. He has much to say in his book about rhythm, thebeautyof certaintypes of words, alliteration,and othermoreor lesstechnicalaspects of poetry.

QUANTITY AND QUALITY IN ENGLISHMAURICE W. MOE

A monthly grade of 95 or A or Excellent has in the past takenlittle or no accountof whether the studenthas done a barely accept-able minimum of work or completed twice that amount, so longas the quality of his work was high. Contractplans and differen-tiated assignmentshave tried to cope with this difficultyto recog-nize superior ability and initiative, but such systems call for indi-vidual and detailed workingout of every part of every course andinvolve an amount of organizationthe average teacher is unableor unwilling to attempt.Someyears ago the writer took the generalprincipleof the lateS. A. Leonard's dictum that different achievement levels must beset up for varied abilities, but at least 90 per cent mastery shouldbe demandedat every level, and attemptedto work out a skeletonplan for three-level organizationthat would do not only for any

' A. H. R. Fairchild, The Teaching of Poetry in the High School (Houghton Mif-flin Co., 1914).

8 Franklin T. Baker, "Studies in Appreciation," Teachers College Record, October,1926.

technical analysis of poetry

Documents