ПРЕПОДАВАНИЕ РУССКОЙ ЛИТЕРАТУРЫ (ПЬЕСЫ А.П. ЧЕХОВА) АМЕРИКАНСКИМ ПЕНСИОНЕРАМ: ОПЫТ ПРОГРАММЫ ОШЕРА «ОБУЧЕНИЕ НА ПРОТЯЖЕНИИ ВСЕЙ ЖИЗНИ» (TEACHING CHEKHOV’S DRAMAS TO AMERICAN PENSIONERS: THE OSHER LIFE LONG LEARNING EXPERIENCE, PROS AND CONS)
Харрис Д. Г. (Harris Jane Gary)©
В статье автор рассказывает о Фонде Ошера и о программе «Обучение на протяжении всей жизни», по которой сейчас ведется обучение в 120 университетах США. Автор делится своим опытом работы с американскими пенсионерами и обосновывает выбор пьес А.П. Чехова для обсуждения в данной аудитории.
After reading about the European UTA movement [Formosa M. «Lifelong Learning in Later Life: The Universities of the Third Age in The LLI Review», 2010], and various pieces on Russian lifelong learning programs (Chernysheva, Kononigina, Toporkov, Zajda, among others), I began to collate common elements, and to wonder both what the American experience might have to offer, and what Americans might learn from our Russian counterparts.
They all seem to share certain common assumptions and goals, and to serve a similar population base. Most important, perhaps, the lifelong learning experience is promoted as more than an educational one. Such programs provide an opportunity to use and structure older person’s free time. They endeavor to connect like-minded individuals interested in improving their minds and stimulating their emotional capacities. They emphasize social integration and harmony of older persons in society by developing what Formosa terms «a lofty and progressive delight in life». They offer opportunities to be active, creative, and to volunteer, thus helping to make older persons more visible in society. Such courses not only improve their abilities to comprehend their culture and the objective world by helping them to understand it, but help maintain their health by mastering knowledge of disease prevention, nutrition, and appropriate physical exercise. Thus, they address a variety of intellectual, emotional, physical, leisure and spiritual needs, in addition to giving older persons an opportunity to organize and coordinate social and cultural activities, contributing to making their lives more useful, active, healthy, and meaningful.
I would like to share my experience teaching older students in the OLLI program and learn some «best practices» and new ideas from Russian colleagues doing similar work.
I have been teaching Chekhov’s Dramas to American pensioners in the University of Pittsburgh’s Osher Life Long Learning Institute (OLLI) for the past three years. While the course and program have been considered successful, both the experience of teaching older adults and the program’s parameters and goals raise some general questions with respect to teaching techniques for older adults, increasing student numbers, making the program more inclusive, fundraising, and anticipated outcomes.
First, a few words on the Bernard Osher Foundation and the Osher Lifelong Learning Institutes. The foundation is a philanthropic organization, active for over three decades stimulating and supporting lifelong learning. While initially it offered start-up grants to universities in all 50 states to participate in an Institute, it currently serves a network of 120 OLLIs as a national resource center through a national research journal LLI, a website, and an annual conference. It is «not a governance body», but each participating university agrees to certain common goals and principles. In exchange for offering older adult learners a university sponsored public arena in which to create a «community of engagement and collaboration», university faculty, graduate students, and visiting scholars are given an opportunity «to teach what they love» in classrooms of highly motivated older students. Thus, a broad array of educational offerings in a wide variety of disciplines is available. Each affiliate institute is also encouraged to put the principles of healthy aging into practice by reflecting the culture of its own university and learning community. In addition to membership dues, course fees, and private donations, each institute must do its own fundraising, by using volunteers engaged in fundraising and boosting membership.
The University of Pittsburgh’s OLLI was established in 2005. OLLI courses are offered during three terms – fall, spring, and summer – each term includes two five-week sessions. Courses meet for five 2-hour sessions. OLLI membership is open to anyone over 60. Members can enroll in as many 5-week OLLI courses as they wish and/or they may audit 2 regular undergraduate semester courses (with instructor permission) per term. Members are encouraged to meet other adults with similar interests and to participate in volunteer programs. In addition, there are discounted tickets for cultural events and OLLI-sponsored symposia and field trips. There are also opportunities for volunteer leadership. At the end of each semester, there is a mechanism for evaluation and assessment of courses and the program as a whole.
An example of an OLLI course: The whys and hows of teaching Chekhov’s dramas to older Americans.
Selection: Why Chekhov’s Dramas? First, to meet criteria for courses with international or intercultural content, appealing to the psychosocial dimension of older students. Second, among Russian authors, Chekhov is a favorite. Third, teaching drama requires structuring a short but intensive course including a variety of interactive techniques: Mini-lectures, discussions, plus reading performances of Act One.
Educational and psychological outcomes of performance. The experience of acting breaks the ice; participants get to know each other and be creative in a pleasant, amusing way. Laughter seems to stimulate freely shared responses. This atmosphere also aids efforts to comprehend the comic as well as the serious aspects of Chekhov’s work, which can be problematic. Acting also encourages empathy. The discussion is enriched with real world experience – personal knowledge of love, death, betrayal, marriage, family – deepening the level of recognition, empathy, and understanding of the play.
Day Two combines a film version of the play with brief discussion. Day Three uses a mini-lecture on the second play, with references to the first play, followed by a brief discussion and a second performance: Act I of the second play. This broadens the discussion: a comparison of Russian and American society at the turn of the century, remarks about Russian character, stereotypes, generalizations about human nature, relationships, themes of beauty, love, loss; the significance of family and the home as a focus; and of Chekhov’s universal appeal. Day Four: a film version of the second play, with a brief discussion. Day Five: Comparisons: discussion of characterization, acting, production, and staging of both plays plus the viewing of excerpts from Russian and other American or British productions for further contrasts. Comments flow on the different versions, the Russianness of the Russian versions vs the changes required for the success or failure of Chekhov’s dramas for a foreign audience. Also, some discussion of Chekhov’s influence on American playwrights and productions, and concluding comments.
Problems: Optimal course length, and expectations of social as well as educational outcomes. Chekhov’s cross-cultural appeal. How to appeal to greater numbers of older adults? How to finance lifelong learning? Training teachers and volunteers.
Course length: positive attributes: Concentrated, focused involvement; Good attendance; Appropriate expectations; Interactive work is possible; Psychological reward: seeing plays after studying them; psychosocial support via fictional themes and characters.
Cons: Not enough time to cover Chekhov or interact sufficiently.
Difficulties in attracting more students to lifelong learning programs.
Access: transportation or parking difficulties; bad weather; illness; family obligations.
Psychology: how to admit one is old and a participant in a program designated for older people.
Funding: Pros and cons of private vs public financing.
Training and the use of volunteers.
