Introduction

In recent decades, higher education has faced several problems, one of them being the setback in humanistic training. Integral formation has been impoverished by market demands, more formal and less human (^{Blázquez and Martínez-Lozano, 2012}). Thus, “the teaching of the sciences, the arts and the professions has been falling into mechanization, losing its humanistic nucleus and its spiritual dimension” (^{Hoevel, 2015}, p. 49). This situation has led to the neglect of the treatment of moral, social and civic competences, which will have the effect of training selfish professionals with minimal awareness of social responsibility (^{Licandro and Yepes, 2018}). Faced with this, the University has begun to design study plans based on the definition of competencies (^{Clavijo, 2015}). Thus, the National University of the Altiplano (UNA), since 2013, has assumed a socio-critical-cognitive educational model, aimed at the training of competent professionals (PEU, 2013). This approach seeks the integral formation of university students, which, according to ^{Tobón (2010}) refers to the development that the whole human being implies: physical, spiritual, social and mental dimension. The competency-based approach is aimed at developing capacities through the achievement of a diverse and complex professional profile, inextricably linked to the work environment and social space (Martínez, 2009). For this, the development of generic and specialized skills is proposed. Generic competences involve processes that never end, since they can always be improved and continue to develop them throughout life (^{Díaz, 2006}). In this regard, one of the features of the competences of the UNA Puno graduate profile refers to the oral and written communication capacity, directly linked to the set of curricular components that must develop the communication and learning aspect, as part of the general studies (PEU, 2013). These last features lead to address the issue of communicative competence, considered as knowledge that enables the comprehension and production of texts (^{Aguiar, 1980}). This competence becomes essential, leading to affirm that:

The most effective pedagogical paradigms in the formation of the new generations are those that are conceived in and from communication, because the formation of integral human beings is not possible outside of communication in the dialogical universe of language (^{Vargas, 2009}, p. 34).

Communicative competence is configured through the development of other competences, such as linguistic, paralinguistic, pragmatic, textual and literary. The latter is the subject of analysis in the present study, since it is considered to be a source of development of several essential capacities for the integral formation of the university student, providing social, philosophical, aesthetic, logical and cultural information, among others. Thus, for example, according to Rabuzzi (1982), novels allow us to know situations that are difficult to find in traditional medical textbooks. For his part, ^{Baños (2003}) affirms that including a course on literature can help students obtain a wealth of knowledge and useful attitudes to better practice their profession. For this reason, it is necessary to know how the university classrooms are working, to promote or strengthen their development.

The concept of literary competence entered the teaching of literature as early as the late 1960s. It supposes a very important change of orientation and objectives since students will cease to be considered, as a priority, as recipients of a historical legacy that makes them members of a community (^{Colomer, 2002}, p. 12). Literary competence is conceived as a process of development of capacities and skills achieved by the student as a result of the articulation between their literary knowledge, intercultural knowledge, expressive and comprehensive skills, habits and attitudes of the cognitive, linguistic and emotional domain through direct contact and the enjoyment of literary work in order to establish evaluations and associations in the literary order (^{Tiza, Campos y Castellón, 2016}, p. 120).

Literary competence is conceived as an element of communicative competence that contains the capacities of reading, comprehension, interpretation and evaluation of various literary texts; allowing to enjoy while reading or listening to the text, developing imagination and the ability to produce oral and written literary texts (^{Prado, 2004}).

Using literature to develop generic competencies in university students is an entertaining and fruitful tool; since, worked in a pertinent way, it helps us to get closer to the achievement of the four fundamental pillars of education: learning to know, learning to do, learning to live together and learning to be (^{Delors, 1996}), allowing the integral formation of the human being. Therefore, it is important to highlight the importance of relating literary competence with an adequate didactic model to work on in the classroom, which allows the use of dynamic strategies to develop reading, writing, expression and oral creation skills (^{Prado, 2004}).

For that purpose, it is important to analyze how literature should be worked in university classrooms; Not without first reviewing the didactic models that have passed through the years for the approach to literature, which according to ^{Prado (2004}) are the following:

1) Rhetorical model, which corresponds to the Middle Ages. The classical text is used as an ethical and discursive model for saying and writing.

2) Historicist model, which extends until the 1970s. The purpose of working on literature is to know the literary movements, authors and main works, according to the history of literature, being a relatively simple model since the contents are organized considering historical axes.

3) Textual model. Use the text comment as reinforcement to improve reading comprehension, being a complementary activity to literary historicism.

4) Model based on knowledge of the text. From 1980 to the present day. It prioritizes the processes of understanding and elaboration of thought and intertextuality. It is based on the principles of cognitive psychology. Seeks understanding, interpretation and literary creation, motivating interest in reading. In this model we do not speak of didactics of literature but of a literary education, properly so called.

It can be deduced that in an educational approach based on competencies, the best way to approach literature is through the model based on knowledge of the text, that is, a literary education must be chosen, which is much more complex than “Teaching”, because “literature is neither taught nor acquired, but rather apprehended” (^{Luengo, 1996}, p. 15).

The space for literary education must be, above all, a space of imagination and creativity that allows the development of aesthetic sensitivity for the understanding of literary texts, creative writing of literary intention, and the critical and reflective study of literary works (^{Vargas, 2009}, p. 39).

Previous studies show that “literature, as one of the vital spaces of human communication, constitutes one of the most transcendental arts of everyday life and the aesthetic life of man” (^{Vargas, 2009}, p. 37). Furthermore, “in a time marked by globalization, fragmentation and the crisis of certain pillars from previous centuries, literature provides the human being with the greatest cognitive project that he can dream of: self-knowledge” (^{Ibarra and Ballester, 2016}, p. 307), being able to fulfill multiple functions: communicative, significant, cognitive, ethical and others (Vargas, 2009), emphasizing the aesthetic and educational functions, formative character (^{Kusá, Sladováb and Kopecký, 2014}). Likewise, literary education is not only related to the informative, formative and aesthetic function, but, thanks to its connection with other subjects of a formative nature, it is related to ethical, personal and social education (Kusá et al, 2014). Thus, one can even speak of a multicultural literary education, which is conceived as an educational area based on the training and enculturation function, common to both disciplines. (Kusá, Sladová, Kopecký and Mlčoch, 2014).

Furthermore, “literary education must be carried out through dialogic communicative actions: staging, reading and writing” (^{Vargas, 2009}, p. 39), considering that it seeks that the student understands literature as the reflection of a certain reality and through she develops a personal and social knowledge (^{Mata and Villarrubia, 2011}). These ideas lead us to affirm that a true literary education in university classrooms guides the development of several generic competences, considered in the proposal of the “Latin America Tuning Project”, as it helps to enhance oral and written communication, critical and self-critical capacity, interpersonal skills, appreciation of diversity and multiculturalism, ethical and civic commitment, among others; considering that:

The knowledge that the literary text provides transcends the limits of the apprehension of concepts or the mere proximity with respect to certain behaviors, because precisely from the experience of infinite possibilities and characters it provides its receiver an interpretation of the cosmos (^{Ibarra y Ballester, 2016}, p. 306).

In this sense, it is important to refer to the different activities and strategies that help to develop literary education, providing students with spaces for reflection, entertainment, creation and enjoyment of the text.

Reading and writing literary texts are the axis of actions aimed at using and enjoying literary communication. For this, there are different activities that can be carried out in the teaching process; thus, reading and dramatization are aimed at generating experimentation in communicative exchange, forming the student's self-image and developing their awareness of cultural identity. In this regard, ^{Tejerina (1994}) defines dramatization as an organized practice that “uses dramatic language in order to stimulate creation and as an educational means to promote the full development of the person” (p. 8), helping students in the construction of their own reality from a personal vision (^{González, 2015}). On the other hand, activities such as debating, carrying out comprehensive and expressive exercises on the texts read and specifying some guidelines for analyzing literary works are aids for students to progress towards achieving interpretive learning. Also, actions such as the analytical systematization of textual elements or stylistic resource exercises generate useful practice and reflection spaces for the above aspects (^{Colomer, 2010}). Additionally, other concrete strategies are the following: text commentary, which is oriented to interrelate the background and the form to discover the author's intention (^{Lázaro and Correa, 1970}); creative writing, which according to ^{Morote (2014}) enables imaginative play to create, recreate or express the fundamentals of a discourse with words or images, adding ^{Dueñas (2013}) which is a playful and intellectual tradition; The preparation of essays is another very useful activity, considering that the essay is a type of argumentative text that is written in prose, with the purpose of defending a position or thesis and convincing the recipients of its relevance (^{Zambrano, 2012} ).

With the above considerations, it has been proposed as a general objective to describe the panorama of literary education in the classrooms of the National University of the Altiplano of Puno - Peru, identifying the subjects that promote a literary education, the model assumed in the use of literature, the strategies used and the level of comprehension and production of texts of the students.

Methodology

A quantitative research methodology has been proposed, with a descriptive scope, since “it seeks to specify important properties and characteristics of any phenomenon that is analyzed” (^{Hernández, Fernández & Baptista, 2014}, p. 92). It corresponds to the non-experimental transectional design, whose purpose is to “describe variables and analyze their incidence and interrelation at a given moment” (Ibídem, p. 154).

The accessible population has been made up of the students of the National University of the Altiplano de Puno, during the academic semester 2019-I. A non-probabilistic sample was selected intentionally or for convenience, considering the characteristics of the research and the purposes of the researcher (^{Hernández, Fernández, & y Baptista, 2014}). This selection responded to the following criteria: students who are studying the first two cycles during the 2019-I semester, since in these cycles communicative competence is addressed with emphasis, through curricular components such as Text Comprehension and Text Production, the which help to develop the communication and learning aspect, as an element of the general training of students. The total of the selected sample amounted to 1,225 students, considering a single group, per cycle, in each of the 35 professional schools of the UNA.

For data collection, the following techniques were used: the survey, the documentary analysis and the examination. The instruments were: the questionnaire, the document analysis file and the written test. These were analyzed and reviewed by a group of experts in the area, ensuring their content and construct validity. The description of these instruments is detailed below:

The questionnaire consisted of 18 questions and was divided into two parts: the first was aimed at discovering the model assumed in the use of literature, considering 10 mixed questions, 4 of them referred to the purpose and 6, to the skills that develop when use literary texts; The second part sought to identify the strategies most used in literary education that takes place in university classrooms and to know its usefulness in the lives of students, considering 8 questions: 3 multiple alternatives and 5 mixed. This questionnaire was applied to all the students that made up the sample.

The document analysis file was used to review the study plans of each Professional School and the syllables of the two curricular components mentioned in previous sections, in order to identify how many Schools these components work in, as well as to know how they approach education literature from the curriculum planning process.

The written test measured the comprehension and production of texts. The first part considered 10 text comprehension questions, combining 5 multiple alterative questions and 5 open questions, which were derived from a single literary text for all professional schools. These questions were scored using a vigesimal scale, considering 0 or 2 points for each multiple alternative question and a categorization of 0, 1 or 2 points for the open questions, based on a rating scale. The second part measured the production of written texts, considering 5 open questions, which were scored with a vigesimal scale, considering a categorization of 0 to 4 points for each question, based on a rating scale with specific specifications. The obtained scores allowed establishing three levels: low (0-10), medium (11-15) and high (16-20). This test was applied for 1 hour at different times to each Professional School.

The data were analyzed using, mainly, the frequency distribution, which allowed organizing the quantitative data. Likewise, the information categorization procedure was used to analyze the open questions of the questionnaire.

Results and Discussion

The first result (table 1) shows that 77% of the Professional Schools develop curricular components of text comprehension and / or text production; specifying that in 12 Schools the two curricular components are worked on in different semesters; in 9 Schools, only text comprehension is worked; in 2 Schools, only text production is worked; and in 5, both are merged into a curricular component. This information allows us to deduce that the study plans of these Schools promote the development of generic competencies, specifically communicative competence. On the other hand, there are 8 Professional Schools (23%) that do not consider in their study plans any component that promotes literary education.

Likewise, it is striking that of the 27 Professional Schools in which these components are worked, 20 of them have oriented the denomination only to the academic aspect, leaving little space for literary work; thus, for example, a component is called: “Comprehension of academic texts”. However, in practice, as expressed by the students surveyed and after reviewing the corresponding syllables, it is recognized that teachers use literature as a basis to reach other types of text, encouraging the student to read, analyze, comment, criticize and produce literary texts, since these provide them with the basic tools to develop cognitive, ethical and fundamentally aesthetic aspects. This information shows us that the teachers in charge of these curricular components recognize the importance of literature in the development of communication skills and strive to work on them, even when the system wants to obscure them. This implies that literature is part of the hidden curriculum in most curricula.

To affirm that the study plans of 77% of the Professional Schools of the National University of the Altiplano promote the development of generic competences is a very positive aspect, since it is framed in a competency-based approach, whose purpose is the integral development of the human being, that “does not refer to the activation of skills and the formation of habits to achieve excellence, but to that development that involves the whole of the human being: the physical, the spiritual, the social and the mental” (^{Tobón, 2010}, p 30). This shows that the curricula of the National University of the Altiplano de Puno are geared towards the search for the comprehensive training of its students, considering that “international requirements have required educational institutions to redirect their goals” (^{Barrales, Villalobos, Landín, Pérez, Cruz and Rodríguez, 2012}, p. 38). However, the way in which some generic competences are worked turns out to be insufficient, either due to the number of curricular components, the hours dedicated to them or the strategies used; there is little that can be done, since the actions have no continuity. This situation supports the idea of conceiving that generic competences include:

Processes that never end, since citizen competence or tolerance can always be improved; in the same way, reading ability is found in an incremental qualitative process not only throughout schooling, in the event that the subject concludes with higher studies and even postgraduate studies, but throughout her life (^{Díaz, 2006}, p. 22).

This leads us to think about the need to develop generic competences throughout all vocational training and, autonomously, after it.

On the other hand, it is necessary to analyze the fact that the curricular components of text comprehension and production have been oriented, for the most part, only to the approach of academic texts, diminishing the importance of literary texts. This situation would confirm the idea of maintaining that “the teaching of sciences, arts and professions has been falling into mechanization, losing its humanistic core and its spiritual dimension” (^{Hoevel, 2015}, p. 49), in addition to being neglected “the development of moral and social competencies and citizen awareness […], which limits the possibility of having leaders committed to inclusive and sustainable development in the future” (^{Licandro and Yepes, 2018}, p. 14). This reality makes a wonderful opportunity to develop various generic competencies missed; since literary texts allow the development of communicative, cognitive, affective, personal, interpersonal, ethical and aesthetic capacities that are essential for the development of all professionals, reaffirming that “in an era marked by globalization, fragmentation and the crisis of certain pillars from from previous centuries, literature provides the human being with the greatest cognitive project that he can dream of: self-knowledge” (^{Ibarra and Ballester, 2016}, p. 307). This last idea is implicit in the actions of the teachers in charge of working on the curricular components of comprehension and production of texts and for this reason they have chosen to promote the reading and writing of literary texts, before analyzing the academic ones. This factual result reinforces the idea of ^{Mata and Villarrubia (2011}) who propose that literary education aims for the student to know that literature is the reflection of a historical moment, has links with other artistic manifestations, recreates themes to analyze, is a means of personal and social knowledge, it manifests language with its great variety of stylistic and expressive resources, it is present in various types of text, forming part of the processes of production and social transmission. Therefore, it is confirmed that literary education is based on the formative and socializing function of the literary-educational process (^{Kusá et al, 2014}).

The second result shows the delimitation of which model is used to work on literature in university classrooms, implicitly or explicitly (Table 2).

Considering only the 27 Professional Schools that consider in their study plans curricular components of comprehension and / or production of texts, it is known that two models coexist, according to the proposal of ^{Prado (2004}): the textual model, aimed at the student uses text commentary to improve his reading comprehension; and the model based on the knowledge of the text, which specifically corresponds to literary education, focusing its attention on the processes of understanding and construction of thought and intertextuality, seeking interpretation and literary creativity. This last model is the one that is used the most. University students use literary texts to awaken and grow their sensitivity and identification with the current problem, since they affirm that what they intend to do when reading literary texts is to expand their knowledge, since literature brings culture and a totalizing vision of the facts in a magical way, which allows them to enjoy their analysis, develop their critical sense and, motivated by their teachers, not only read and comment out of obligation; but, in most cases they construct criticism, develop their ethical aspect and construct their citizenship; although, they emphasize that they enjoy these activities as long as the text is short; which shows a weakness that is also present throughout the Peruvian educational system: the lack of a reading habit. In this regard, it is encouraging to have found that the model based on knowledge of the text prevails, which specifically corresponds to literary education. This model, according to Prado (2004) focuses its interest on the understanding and elaboration of thought and intertextuality, trying to achieve the development of interpretive and creative literary skills. This statement makes sense when conceiving that “literature is neither taught nor acquired, but apprehended” (^{Luengo, 1996}, p. 15) and that apprehension implies acquisition, knowledge, analysis, reflection, appropriation and critical use of the content of the literary text. This conception fits perfectly into the competency-based approach that the National University of the Altiplano has taken; looking for the integral development of the student. In addition, this information is part of the idea of ^{Martín and Rascón (2015}), who affirm that literary education “favors the formation of values and the integral formation of future teachers” (p. 365). Additionally, with the model assumed as a priority, it is corroborated that for university teachers, literary education offers many possibilities to work with multicultural issues and prepare students for life within a culturally heterogeneous society (^{Kusá et al, 2014}).

The third result shows what are the strategies used in literary education that is promoted in the university. These are diverse, highlighting the comment of texts, creative writing, dramatization and the elaboration of essays (Table 3); These strategies are directly related to the models assumed in the use of literature, the first being a strategy of the textual model and the other three, of the model based on the knowledge of the text or literary education, properly speaking. It should be noted that to obtain this result, only the 27 Professional Schools that develop curricular components of text comprehension and production have been considered.

The text comment strategy is mentioned in 65% of the analyzed syllables, information that has been corroborated through the questionnaires applied to the students, indicating that making a comment leads them to read the full text, analyze its parts and issue opinions on the form and substance of the same, opinions that must be duly justified.

Creative writing, which has emerged as the famous literary workshops, is a strategy that combines intertextuality and imagination to be able to produce texts in a playful way, it is used by 92% of teachers who promote a literary education in university classrooms. In this regard, students say they feel very comfortable with this strategy, as it gives them freedom to create. This is related to the idea of conceiving creative writing as “a playful and intellectual tradition that becomes a didactic paradigm that finds its main support in the promotion of reading processes and in the development of literary competence” (^{Dueñas, 2013}, p. 144).

Dramatization is a strategy that is present in 52% of the syllables analyzed, it is used for the compression of texts as well as for oral and written production. This strategy gives students the opportunity to develop their cognitive, emotional, social and much more; since as stated by ^{González (2015}) “through dramatization we help students to build their own reality from their personal vision, in order to reach a consensus with the group in the face of a presented situation” (p. 101). This way of promoting literary education, according to the students, is useful and fun; Above all, it allows them to overcome their shyness and help them understand texts and produce them, according to different contexts.

The preparation of essays is the strategy that appears in 100% of the revised syllables, which indicates that all teachers encourage their production, considering that it is the best practice for the student to read and write. Whether the teacher promotes the writing of a literary essay or an academic-scientific one, the important thing is that the student seeks to develop his critical thinking through the presentation of arguments that give solidity to her position in relation to various topics. Furthermore, it is considered that the literary essay and the academic-scientific one is related, since scientific essays that use stylistic elements of the literary essay and literary essays that use scientific rigor in their expression are known (^{Zambrano, 2012}). This strategy is taken as a challenge for students, stating that it forces them to read, understand and propose new ideas, defending them with solid arguments, to show their position.

Having found that text comment, creative writing, dramatization and essay writing are the most used strategies in explicit and implicit literary education, which occurs in university classrooms, is an aspect that coincides with the idea of affirming that “literary education must be carried out through dialogical communicative actions: staging, reading and writing (^{Vargas, 2009}, p. 39), that is, literary education must use dynamic actions so that the student knows, feels and lives the experience of understand and produce texts. This supports the idea of indicating that with literary education “it is about placing young students in a long tradition of thought, hypothesis, explanations or doubts that can protect them in their lives and that provide them with parameters from which to understand the world and better understand themselves” (^{Dueñas, 2013}, p. 142).

The last result of the research refers to the level of development of the communicative capacities of comprehension and production of texts in university students. These are at a medium level, which on a vigesimal scale corresponds to an average of 12.4 (Table 4). It should be noted that students have better achievement in the ability to produce texts, showing that they are capable of issuing various messages with a specific purpose; although having several weaknesses, especially cohesive (punctuation and use of connectors). These results make it clear that actions aimed at developing communicative competence should be increased, since this is essential for the personal and professional development of all human beings; recognizing, in addition, that the skills of comprehension and production of texts are a fundamental tool to enhance the relationships of the person with oneself, with others and with the world, since surely, if understanding implies understanding the world, the production leads us to build a new one and that is what we need in professional training, literary education being a wonderful opportunity to achieve it.

Finding that the level of comprehension and production of texts of university students is medium, leads to the need to strengthen their communicative competence, understanding that this is not the entire responsibility of each student, since it must be recognized that several aspects influence their development: teacher, family, strategies, society and others; which agrees with the idea of conceiving that:

Difficulties in communication are not a personal problem, a problem that indicates the deficiencies of a subject who must be provided with resources to strengthen the development of their communication skills; on the contrary, they refer to a problem that is generated and constructed in social and institutional contexts, such as the family or school (^{Marín, 2014}, p. 61).

Likewise, this result is part of the idea of ^{Dueñas (2013}) who affirms that:

It is up to the education system to develop conducive environments, capable of provoking a love of reading in students, although it does not have the desired effects on all of them, because the decision to read outside of a mandatory framework depends on personal trajectory, on family stimulation, internalized social expectations, affective environments in which an individual develops, etc. (p. 142).

Conclusions

Literary education is present in 77% of the Professional Schools of the National University of the Altiplano, either explicitly or implicitly, through the development of the curricular components of text comprehension and production.

Two models coexist in the use of literature: the textual model and the model based on the knowledge of the text, which corresponds to literary education. The latter is the one most used and is aimed at developing processes of literary comprehension and production in, from and for life, building critical and creative thinking. It is also highlighted that literary education is part of the competence-based approach, assumed by the University.

The strategies most used in literary education in university classrooms are: text comment, creative writing, dramatization, and essay production; all of them aimed at developing processes of comprehension and production of oral and written texts in an entertaining and efficient way.

The level of development of capacities for comprehension and production of texts in university students is medium, evidencing the need to strengthen communicative competence through various actions, one of them being the implementation of a literary education throughout the University, leaving many aspects to be investigated in relation to this topic.