TEACHING ALASH FIGURES IN HIGHER EDUCATION THROUGH STORYTELLING AND DRAMATIZATION

2026

Closed access Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.32014/2026.2518-1467.1292
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

This study investigates the use of storytelling and dramatization in university teaching of Alash figures and works of early twentieth-century Kazakh literature. The aim was to assess whether these methods contribute to students’ historical-literary comprehension, interpretive analysis, creative writing, and motivational-emotional engagement. The research followed a quasi-experimental pretest–post-test design involving 48 second-year philology students at Kazakh National Women’s Teacher Training University. Two intact academic groups were designated as the experimental group (n = 24) and the control group (n = 24). Over eight weeks, students attended sixteen 50-minute sessions. Both groups studied the same literary texts and worked toward the same learning objectives; however, the experimental group completed structured storytelling and dramatization tasks, while the control group was taught through lectures, teacher-guided discussion, and conventional textual analysis. Data were collected using a 20-item historical-literary comprehension test, analytic rubrics for interpretive and creative writing, and a ten-item five-point questionnaire. Descriptive results showed that the groups were comparable at the pretest stage across all four indicators. At the post-test stage, the experimental group obtained higher mean scores in historical-literary comprehension (16.8 ± 1.7 versus 14.6 ± 1.9), interpretive analysis (9.4 ± 1.2 versus 7.8 ± 1.3), creative writing (9.7 ± 1.1 versus 8.5 ± 1.2), and engagement (4.31 ± 0.46 versus 3.58 ± 0.51). In addition, 22 students in the experimental group (91.7%) reported that narrative presentation helped them remember historical information. The findings suggest that the combined use of storytelling and dramatization may support contextual understanding, evidence-based interpretation, creative involvement, and emotional engagement. Given the limited sample, single-institution setting, and absence of inferential statistical testing, the results should be regarded as preliminary.