In practice

If your goal is to address social, citizenship-related issues using fiction (or using fiction to address those issues), it is good to consider the following when thinking about the practical aspects in the class:

Make links between the texts you discuss: it's such a shame when you discuss a text in class, and then move on from it and never refer to it anymore. Each text you read enriches the other texts you read, have read, and will read: literature is a continuum, and a web of relationships, it's not a succession of unrelated texts. J. L. Borges famously said that the works of Kafka modify our reading of Cervantes, just like our reading of Cervantes influences our reading of Kafka: despite being centuries apart, our knowledge of those two texts enables us to interpret them differently. Our knowledge of those two texts enrich our interpretations of both. The same is true for your learners: by referring to texts discussed earlier, you can easily bring in elements of comparison and contrasts, both factual (e.g. setting, characterisation, narration, events and reactions to events) and thematic (how one theme is handled in one and the other text; how characters position themselves relative to a theme). 

Think thematically - or topically: you may have seen elsewhere on this page that we must keep a simple distinction in mind: topic vs theme. In this instance though, the difference matters less than the principle of linking and connecting texts. Any topic will be approachable through a number of themes - a number of perspectives, of takes on that topic. It's doubtful you can do full justice to a large or complex topic in one lesson, or by addressing just one theme connected to it. So it makes sense to connect the texts you handle in class by linking them to the same topic - or even the same theme. This enriches the reading, the discussing, and provides learners with alternative ways of looking (thinking) at one situation, idea, concept or question. Thematically organising the literature line naturally connects all texts, multiply angles and approaches, and - see above - reinforces the cohesion of your classes. 

Use short texts: A recurring problem for teachers is that, when asking the learners to read a particular text for the following lesson, most learners won't have done the reading. This could lead to different situations (for example, read it in class; leave out the learners who don't know the text; explain the text (which defeats the purpose of course)), none of which suits you. A solution here is to use very short texts that can be read in a few minutes in class: texts of around 300 to 500 words, for example. Minimising the reading before the lesson puts everyone on the same footing, gives coherence to the discussion (everyone has the same information), and gives you a chance to not only point things out to everyone at once, but also to see how learners read a particular passage (in interpretive terms, not in language terms).

Use extracts and specific passages on the whiteboard: close-reading skills are at the heart of everything - if you don't pay close attention to the text, you're unlikely to be able to make much of said text. Showing an extract/passage from a text on the whiteboard and going through it slowly with the learners not only enables you to attend to those close-reading skills, it also provides one single point of focus for all at the same time. on that basis, you can start asking factual questions about the text everyone can see, and then move on to interpretive questions. This modelling is accessible at once to all, and relieves the pressure on learners to come up with something immediately and on their own. This is not about reading out loud, or checking on pronunciation: it is about modelling how to close-read, how to pay attention, and what to do afterwards.

 Use visual aid/support related to the theme: approaching a theme from different angles and perspectives can only enrich that theme, and therefore your class. In that sense, there is no reason why you should stick to texts only: a photo, a painting, an advert, a song, a video can all add to your discussion of a text by providing a different take on the subject. Further, visual literacy (i.e. the ability to 'read', that is,  decode and interpret, visual material) is extremely important seeing how much everyone is surrounded by images today. A photo can provide a striking example of a theme, which can then be tackled more fully - or differently - by attending to a text. Mix it up, and the class will be the better for it.

Mix and mash - variation is good: short sessions, long sessions; half-sessions, full sessions; 15 minutes, 45 minutes, and everything in-between. If your goal is to develop critical thinking skills, and address social concerns, then plenty of small activities can be done that need not take the whole lesson: repetition is key, experiencing the approach multiple times is only good - remember that developing those skills takes time, and without regular practice you will see few results. You can interpret a advert or a simple picture for about 15 minutes, then move on with the rest of your lesson; you can discuss a very short text for 15 or 20 minutes, then link that discussion with English skills, or the rest of your programme. Nothing stops you from mixing up activities and goals: a good text can be used for a rich discussion and then for Writing skills, or Oral skills. A short examination of a picture, followed by a discussion of a text thematically related to that picture, will provide variety, reinforcement and rhythm for the learners, while allowing you to handle different areas of your own teaching.

Socratic dialogue - with you at its heart: this is already mentioned elsewhere on this site, but your role as a teacher is central to the process of interpretation. Putting learners in groups to discuss what they don't understand, see or think about is unlikely to produce great results (in terms of interpreting texts); asking learners who cannot make a difference between taste and judgement is unlikely to enable them to do so. That is why your presence, your questions, your preparation and your aims are central to this approach. You must facilitate discussions, enable learners to see - and reflect on - ideas, be able to nudge them in the direction of interpretations, ask follow-up questions, and generally be the enabler of discussions. Your role is central (but not your own interpretation!)

Language is only a vehicle: while it is relatively easy to incorporate aspects of language skills in literature lessons, there is no need in and out of itself to do so. That also means that you can make the choice of having discussions in the language most easily accessible to your learners - Dutch, for example. Some learners' level of English might impede the expression of their thoughts, so if you care primarily about those thoughts, nothing stops you from welcominng learners' contributions in Dutch instead of in English. This is part of the choices you, the teacher, make in relation to your goals.