TRACES OF THE KONSTANZ SCHOOL IN VIETNAM’S 2018 LANGUAGE ARTS AND LITERATURE CURRICULUM

Nguyen Phuoc Bao Khoi1,
1 Ho Chi Minh City University of Education, Vietnam

Main Article Content

Abstract

This article looks at how ideas associated with the Konstanz School of reception aesthetics are taken up in Vietnam’s 2018 Language Arts and Literature Curriculum, focusing in particular on how literary reading is framed. Based on a qualitative analysis of the curriculum framework and key policy documents, it examines the ways in which reception-oriented perspectives appear in the stated aims, expected learning outcomes, and broader pedagogical orientations. Two tendencies become visible, although they do not always operate consistently. The curriculum places clear emphasis on historical and social context while acknowledging the learner’s active role in interpretation – an orientation that can be read in relation to Jauss’s notion of the “horizon of expectations.” It also adopts a competency-based view of literary reading that foregrounds interaction between text and reader, echoing central assumptions in Iser’s work. However, these theoretical resonances remain uneven. In many instances, they are sustained at the level of curricular language but only weakly translated into concrete guidance for classroom practice. Rather than simply tracing theoretical influences, the article therefore asks how far such ideas can actually inform teaching. This shift in focus brings into view a more persistent issue: the distance between reception-oriented intentions and their pedagogical realisation is not incidental, but structurally embedded in the way the curriculum articulates its aims. Seen in this light, the article contributes to curriculum studies by clarifying the selective incorporation of reception aesthetics in Vietnam’s current reform, while also problematising the assumption that theoretical alignment necessarily leads to pedagogical transformation.

Article Details

References

Becker, S., & Matz, F. (2023). Reader response revisited: Literary interpretation, pedagogy, and the limits of openness. L1 – Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 23, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.21248/l1esll.2023.23.1
Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27–40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027
Iser, W. (1978). The act of reading: A theory of aesthetic response. Johns Hopkins University Press.
Iser, W. (1980). The reading process: A phenomenological approach. In J. P. Tompkins (Ed.), Reader-response criticism: From formalism to post-structuralism (pp. 50–69). Johns Hopkins University Press.
Jauss, H. R. (1982). Toward an aesthetic of reception (T. Bahti, Trans.). University of Minnesota Press. (Original work published 1967)
Kunjanman, S., & Aziz, N. A. (2021). Reader‑response theory: A systematic literature review. Malaysian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 6(7), 1–10.
Ministry of Education and Training. (2018). Literature curriculum (Chương trình giáo dục phổ thông môn Ngữ văn). Vietnam Education Publishing House.