Wong Chapter 1

Chapter 1 of Dialogic Approaches to TESOL seemed to cover quite a bit of what we read in Saville-Troike, discussing the different language acquisition theories such as Behavorism and Chomsky's ideas on Universal Grammar. I did find that the way Wong presented the information seemed to give more examples and showed how they were used when each particular theory was popular.

What I found particularly interesting about this chapter was the discussion on the grammar-translation approach, the audiolingual method, the communicative approach, and dialogic pedagogy. In my own experiences in school I feel as though I have gone through each of these teaching methods. Early on, in late elementary school and middle school, we were taught with the teacher using the grammar-translation method of teaching. She merely translated things into English and were expected to memorize their meanings. It wasn't as if we were being taught to speak Spanish, it was more a mere memorization of rules and basic words to get us through basic conversation. I suppose, in the long run, it was helpful to know those rules and words but if I had been taught that way throughout my entire time learning Spanish, I doubt I would have the proficiency I experience today.

Once I hit high school, the first two years, our teachers seemed to want us to talk more but they also had us listen and repeat quite a bit of the information they gave us. We were made to parrot what they said until we had different phrases and information memorized for our speeches or homework or tests. We conversed in groups more so then when I was in middle school but at the same time we still spent time watching audio/visual tapes of movies or shows so that we could hear the language spoken as well. In some ways I think this method hinders and helps. I have never been a fan of memorization, it never seemed to help much when I would promptly forget it after the test but, at the same time, when you keep memorizing the same things, over and over again, you can't help but begin to recall them. There is good and bad to every approach.

After that my Spanish teachers began to focus even further on letting us discuss as we saw fit. They felt that the practice was extremely important in learning the language and working through what we may or may not understand. This seems to fit well with the Communicative Approach to teaching a second language. I am fully convinced that this practice with speaking the language and being forced to use the language I was learning helped me speak with more confidence and learn more quickly the topics brought up in class.

Finally, I was also intrigued by the idea brought up about methodology by Edward Anthony. He created three concentric circles for Approach, Method, and Technique; one inside the other to show how they related to one another. It was interesting to note that Technique was placed as the inner most circle. I was thinking it would be to signify importance? I could be wrong. The section some what confused me as to what it all had to do with each other. If anyone knows or would like to enlighten me, I'd be very grateful. :)

I think that's all for now.

Sometimes I Wonder

After reading the articles assigned on language learning and what makes some one a good language learner, I have to say I am a bit frustrated. It's annoying to find that those who are learning their L2 are treated as though they cannot communicate with English speakers around them.

They aren't given a fair chance to work things out and make head way in learning the language. It is assumed, immediately, that if they person cannot communicate quickly and efficiently then all they are is a burden to society. Imagine if all native speakers of whatever language, treated L2 learners this way... no one would ever take the time to learn a second language. It would be far too demeaning yet we treat L2 learners of English just that way.

It's sad and I wish there was a way to change it, to make people aware of the effect they had on L2 learners just by the way they act.

Under Construction - Scaffolding

In chapter 5 of Saville-Troike there is a discussion about the Zone of Proximal Development under which they bring up the idea of scaffolding. According to Saville-Troike:

Scaffolding is a method by which an expert or someone who better understands the language being learned, gives the L2 learner chunks of talk that the learners can then use to express concepts which are beyond their independent means.

I found this to be an interesting way of teaching an L2 learner. My first thought was that doing something like this doesn't make any sense since the learner is only given chunks of information to use without really understand why they are using it. This being my initial reaction, I have found that maybe my reaction was a bit off base. The idea of scaffolding can actually be helpful in that the L2 learner is, later in their learning, able to relate to what they learned early on. Maybe they didn't quite understand it at the time but as their learning continues they are then able to connect it all together.

Another side to scaffolding could be having the individual work in a group to come up with something that they could not come up with on their own. My initial reaction to this was positive and I stick by that. In this sense, working with others helps the individual learn parts of the L2 they did not understand or know before they grouped together. They are given a chance to gain knowledge from their peers, thus improving their own language.

This can, of course, backfire for those who may be more advanced in the L2 or if they are the most advanced of the group then they are no longer learning new things, they are teaching. This maybe a good leadership opportunity but I don't see it as a good way to learn more of a language. It may even further confuse the L2 learner since they are having to teach something they may not fully understand.

Anyway, I shall stop my rambling. Those were just my thoughts.

I Am How I Learn

Chapter four from Saville-Troike had some interesting points about what affects learners have on themselves as far as critical period hypothesis and information processing but what I found most pertinent to me was the section on learning strategies and the discussion on how a person personality can legitimately affect their ability to learn a language.
They talked about three specific strategies:

Metacognitive: which is previewing a concept or principle in anticipation of learning the activity.

Cognitive: which is a repetition of information, use of inference, and relation to the native tongue to learn.

Social/affective: getting involved in opportunities to speak the language with native speakers. Obtaining feedback, questioning to get clarification, etc.

Most interesting to me is finding myself in these definition. Considering I am a much more introverted person I find myself being meta cognitive about learning the Spanish language but, at the same time, I try, to the best of my ability, to reach out and practice with native speakers to keep up my Spanish. This more extroverted side may have been brought out after my study abroad experiences but I find it interesting that a learner can be a part of all three learning strategies which all have their differences based on the individual personality and cognitive style.

Wild Child

6. What are some of the social attitudes of the villagers who met/heard of Victor? Do you find them problematic? If so, why?

A lot of the villagers and city folk that met or heard of Victor made fun of him, hit him with rocks, would gawk and stare at him as he passed. They would crowd him like he was a zoo animal to stare at instead of treating him with dignity.
I think this was very problematic as far as treating some one as a human being and not just a freak of nature. It could have caused quite a few problems in getting Victor to open up and trust whomever he came in contact with. He was treated as a show instead of given a chance to grow into his lost childhood. It's unfortunate that he spent any time in the deaf and dumb institute with those mean children who hit him and ran him down. It only made his transition that much harder.

Universal Grammar

For all the information we are given in the chapters we read for the week in Saville-Troike and Lightbrown/Spada, I have found the most interesting topic is that of Universal Grammar.

Universal Grammar, as we have read, is part of Chomsky's theory on second language acquisition. It is one of three major theories that, in their turn, have each been replaced by the more recent. These three were, according to Saville-Troike:

Contrastive Analysis
Error Analysis
and
Monitor Model (which was based off Chomsky's metaphor for children's innate knowledge of language.)

Universal grammar plays a role in the Monitor Model of SLA theory but it is not entirely explained. According to Chomsky, universal grammar is the innate knowledge of children to acquire language. We all have the ability to acquire language, outside of the poverty of stimulus. The book by Saville-Troike discusses the idea that universal grammar is what all languages have in common but from what I've learned, and this is where my confusion comes in, universal grammar is an 'innate knowledge of language'. I suppose my idea of innate knowledge of language is that a child has the ability to learn any given language if they are exposed to said language, thus universal grammar is not necessarily what all languages have in common but it lays the framework for the child to focus in on a certain grammar of a certain language. When a child is born, it may be entirely possible that they have a grammar of all languages but as they grow older, those other grammars are faded out to make way for the native tongue. This being my own personal views on universal grammar, it then confused me quite a bit to read about how they believe universal grammar is what all languages have in common when it never seemed that way to me.

Do I have to relearn universal grammar now or am I on the right track?

peace & grace,
Kiersten

Second Language Acquisition

As a second language learner I never spent much time on the theories behind learning language. It was all about learning the language itself. I never really wanted to know how I was learning that particular language, I was just happy to learn it.
In the readings over the past week I have learned a lot about language and language acquisition and it turns out it's actually a fairly interesting topic. There is so much that goes into learning any given language that I never knew about. There are even critical learning periods that I was never aware of.
Language has always come naturally to me so finding out that there is a more complex process behind it is an odd discovery.
I really liked learning about Language Dominance because I find that happening in my own life. After all the time I spent learning spanish, I find myself mixing up Spanish words into my English vocabulary. There have been times where I can't think of the word in English, only in Spanish. I never really understood why this happen but it makes more sense now, after the readings and class work.
The second thing that really stood out to me was the different terms used for different ways we use a second language. There are terms such as Language for a Specific Purpose or Library Language. Sometimes a language, or pieces of a language, are learned for specific things whether that be to cook or to read a book or to study. I find it interesting that this was the case for quite some time in a lot of the European countries where they would study, write, and read in Latin but speak in their native tongue (e.g. Spanish, French, Italian, etc.)
Even after taking 341 Linguistics this is all coming as very new to me, at least, the terms are new.
It's definitely an interesting topic to get involved in. :)
Until next time.