Virtual Exchange in Creative Writing: Moomins as a Cultural Phenomenon

Lecturers’ collaboration:

Two teachers led the sessions: Jarosław Płuciennik from the University of Lodz and Pirjo Suvilehto from Oulu University (Finland). From time to time, special guests were also other specialists from the University of Gdańsk (prof. Hanna Dymel-Trzebiatowska) and the University of Łódź (dr Andrzej Kompa or Szymon Szul, MA).

Teachers complemented each other with knowledge from different perspectives (creative writing, bibliotherapy, Scandinavian and Nordic studies). At the same time, it should be emphasized that many of the lecturers mean a more significant dynamic of virtual meetings, which has translated into greater student involvement.

Learning objectives:

Upon completion of the UNIC course, students can list all of Tove Jansson's narrative works, all the film adaptations to date, and visual and theatrical works. They can characterize the differences between these works depending on the medium of preservation and dissemination. They know the content of individual works and often quote them during class discussions. They know the different names of Tove Jansson's characters in different languages. They can point to multimedia hubs related to the achievements of Tove Jansson (museums, amusement parks, etc.). They often speak in discussions on this topic. They can relate to other similar multimedia creations. They are able to create an original multimedia product using the experience of the Moomin phenomenon.

Procedure:

To prepare for classes, students had to listen to one-hour podcasts on selected topics, as well as to create an original reading of selected articles. During the session, teachers exchanged perspectives on selected problems, commenting on each other's speeches and paying attention to cultural differences in approach (Finnish, Nordic and East-Central European perspectives).

During the meetings, students were divided into groups; in groups, students discussed selected problems, often focusing on cultural differences and similarities from the Swedish-Finnish and Polish, as well as Ukrainian perspectives.

Evaluation:

Differences in using the English language could be noticed during the session. But basically, the level of knowledge of this language was extremely high. However, the involvement in the plenary discussions varied. Sessions in subgroups were much more engaging. This was also evidenced by the self-assessment of the students (students were asked to assess their commitment, but also the commitment of their colleagues).

Prof. Jarosław Płuciennik