CEC STANDARD 6 // LANGUAGE

Throughout LRC 516, “Introduction to Structured English Immersion,” I learned a great deal about language acquisition theory. To demonstrate my understanding of language acquisition, I have attached a short quiz that I completed which discusses many aspects of language acquisition, including competing theories and teaching strategies related to each theory. I have also included a presentation from Dr. Combs, the course instructor, which was the basis for my learning.

Jennifer Stansel 16 March 2013

LRC 416/516: Foundations of Structured English Immersion (Fall2012) Due on or before November 6, 2012

Name: Jennifer Stansel Date: 11/6/12

Quiz #3 (1st & 2nd Language Acquisition)

Part One: First Language Acquisition [ ~pts.]

lp. the last few weeks, we have discussed a number of learning theories about how children acquire and develop their first language (for example, humanistic, developmental, social interactionist, cognitivist, and behavioral theories). We also talked briefly about how teachers can extract useful information from each theory in order to apply it to their own classroom practice. This quiz challenges you to think about what kind of instructional strategies most closely parallel each theory. For example, if a teacher followed a humanistic learning theory, he or she would probably organize a highly collaborative classroom in which students had multiple opportunities to interact in problem-solving activities that, at least in part, were designed to develop their self-esteem. A brief description of each learning theory is provided in a table on the next page.

In this part of the quiz, you have two tasks:

(1) Under each description, make a list of the instructional strategies that teachers could develop to match that particular theory of learning. Seriously - a list is fine, you don't have to write a long narrative. Please type out your lists inside the table columns.

(2) Provide two or three paragraphs that describe your own [future] classroom. In other words, select your preferred theory or theories (good teachers typically pull from more than one), describe what your classroom looks like (how you would arrange it to facilitate academic development), what kind of activities you would plan for your students, including English language learners, your teaching strategies and your overall philosophical/theoretical approach(es).

Note that chapter 2 in Echevarria and Graves (Sheltered Content Instruction) provides you with teaching ideas for each theory; which you are welcome to include in each list. However, I also want you to go beyond their suggestions and develop some of your own.

Please type (single or double-spaced is fine- your choice). Use this page as a cover sheet. Print out your quiz and bring it to class on or before November 6, 2012. You can also put it in my faculty mailbox anytime (located on the 5th floor of the College of Education, in the corridor outside of room 512 [west wing]).

1

Humanistic

This theory suggests that high self-esteem and a healthy identity promote language acquisition.

-Overcome inhibition to speak -Ability to laugh at one's own mistakes -Preparing for difficulties -Give feedback to avoid repeating mistakes -Reading things that are familiar -Reading texts at the beginner's level -Teacher is silent and allows students to learn cooperatively -Community language learning -Total physical response (TPR) -Positive reinforcement -Activities that allow students to succeed -Foster an engaging environment -Allow students to take a leadership role/model or demonstrate activities for their peers -Allows students to participate in activities they enjoy and in which they demonstrate proficiency

Developmental

This particular theory argues that learning and language acquisition occur in naturally occurring stages. Students progress at their own pace and in­born factors account for their development over time.

-Using prior knowledge -Emphasize fluency over accuracy -Using circumlocutions -Diversified lessons -Discovery education -Increased wait time -Teach just beyond competency level -Allow ELL students to have their silent period -Support in Ll -One-on-one support in remedial activities

Social Interactionist

This is a sociocultural view of learning that recognizes the social side of learning and the unique roles that adults and older children ("more capable others") play in learning. In this view of language learning, the role of the environment is key and children are active participants in their own learning.

-Re-telling events -Describing activities -Giving personal opinions -Talking about experiences -Give context clues (facial expressions, body language, hand gestures, modeling or demonstrations, visual cues) -Group projects and activities -Class discussions -Practice -Experiments with new sounds -Listens carefully and tries to imitate -Repeats sentences until pronounced easily -Initiates conversation with fellow students -Spends time in language lab -Watches TV/listens to radio, etc. -Communicates whenever possible -Writes to pen pals -Role playing -Jigsaw grouping strategy -Allow ELL students to interact with native speakers

2

Cognitivist

Cognitivists believe that language development is part of children's general cognitive development, and that stages of cognition parallel linguistic development. This theory emphasizes the importance of the cognitive process (how children process information) and how they develop their "metacognition" (the term literally means "conscious knowing about how to know").

-Comparing and contrasting -Listing, defining, classifying -Predicting, explaining, analyzing, justifying -Inferring, deducing -Integrating, evaluating -Arguing, persuading, defending -Clarification/ Verification -Guessing/inductive inferencing -Guessing meaning from key words -Deductive reasoning -Compares first language to target language -Using a dictionary when necessary -Think, Pair, Share

Behavioral

Adherents to behavioral theory believe that language learning is a skill like any other, learned through an elaborate system of stimulus, reinforcement, and response. Learners should be rewarded in some way, once language learning occurs.

-Memorization -Using mnemonics -Writing items repeatedly -Uses rules to generate possibilities -Reading something every day -Making up charts to memorize vocabulary -Coaches fluent English speakers to reinforce cognates with ELLs

As a special education teacher, I plan to utilize a variety of teaching strategies that will appeal to students with high incidence disabilities, particularly Attention Deficit Disorder and Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder. Because students with high incidence disabilities often have low self-esteem and are unwilling to participate in activities that call attention to their abilities and knowledge, I feel that activities that fall within the scope of the humanistic theories will best fit this need. However, I also understand that students with ADD/ADHD have a need for constant activity, and I feel that many strategies within the scope of the social interactionist theory also fit this need.

Some humanistic strategies that I would use include allowing students to read texts that are either familiar or at the beginner's level, in order to increase confidence. I would use humor, teaching students to laugh at their mistakes and also teaching them to expect difficulties, and utilize strategies that would help student cope with frustration. I would provide opportunities for students to be leaders and for them to model and demonstrate activities for their peers. I would also utilize total physical response, which I believe would especially engage students with ADD/ADHD by allowing them an increased level of activity. But more than any other humanistic strategy, I would give positive reinforcement and provide activities that allow the students to succeed. In terms of social interactionist teaching strategies, I would provide ask students to initiate conversations with other students during transition periods. This would keep the students constantly engaged. To increase the benefits of this strategy, I would pair ELL students with native speakers. I would also engage my students in discussions, asking them to give their personal opinions, talk about prior experiences, and describe activities. Some other strategies from other learning theories that I also believe would be useful are allowing students extra time to answer questions, emphasizing fluency over accuracy, and teaching just beyond the competency level (all developmental). Finally, I believe that the use of mnemonics (behavioral) would also be helpful for students with ADD/ ADHD, who often have memory problems.

In order to facilitate these strategies successfully, I would use circular desks that could accommodate multiple students at a time. These desks would be arranged in a circle, so that the whole class could sit around the outside of the desks, which would be useful during class discussions. ~~~tiS ~cP-il.r-L

3

Part Two: Second Language Acquisition

Directions: Read the passage below and identify as many theories of second language acquisition as possible. Explain your choices.-----..., __ _

Alejandra Duefias-Taylor teaches a second grade SEI classroom at Nopal Elementary School. Eighteen of her 24 students are Mexican origin English language learners with varying proficiencies in English. Ms. Duefias-Taylor teaches in English, but she supports her students' learning with Spanish. She also has a native Spanish speaking aide who often works one-on-one with students in remedial activities. When students arrive in the morning and begin to do bell work, Ms. Duefias-Taylor routinely has classical music pia ing softly on her radio. When students need s e o en plays a popular music CD and leads the class in a brie Jazzercise or Zumba/Yc§ivi}:y.

~ c{--;w -cf.-l t-'V" Ms. Duefias-Taylor habitually adapts the second grade curriculum and\ lieLiflstruction to better facilitate the students' developing P\~ency in English. She enunciates her speech, speaks slowly but aturally, increases her wait time, uses extensive visual clues, and

_ • .J)">l xaggerates her gestures and body language. Most of all, she tries to c,ll'·~ ~ each just beyond the English competency level of her students _ ~ ecause she wants them to "stretch cognitively" to meet her \ mstructional demands and to develop their academic English. Ms.

Duefias-Taylor arranges heterogeneous grouping on a daily basis, so that her ELLs can interact with English speakers. She encourages ELLs to use the English they have and not to worry about speaking perfectly ("it's about your ideas right now," she tells them, "not how well you say those ideas"). She also has coached her fluent English speakers to reinforce cognates with the ELLs (for example, in math: addition, subtraction, multiplication, digit, whole number, equation, etc.).

is particular week, she and her aide are working with three new English learners. Daisy has recently arrived from Mexico, and Omar and Mauro have transferred from another school in the district. Daisy has a "pre-productive" level of English proficiency; Omar and Mauro know "playground" English, but are still at a basic level of English

· roficiency. Daisy is quiet and seems reluctant to participate verbally in c ss activities. However, Ms. Duefias-Taylor believes that Daisy 1 isten· g carefully, and will be more willing to speak when she's re . mar reads and writes at grade level in Spanish and is eager to

ow off what he can do. He knows how to sound out words in

4

Theories Second Langua ~cquisition -Support in L -One-on-one support in remedial activities -Listening to music, such as classical and pop -Enunciates speech -Speaks slowly but naturally -Increased wait time -Visual cues -Exaggerated gestures and body language -Teaches just beyond English competency level -Develop academic English -Allows ELL students to interact with English speakers -Encourages fluency rather than accuracy -Coaches fluent English speakers to reinforce cognates with ELLs -Allows ELL students to have their silent period -Practice sounding out English words -Guided help -Inferring and deducing based on context clues -Allows students to participate in activities they enjoy and in which they demonstrate proficiency -Speaks to students in Ll -Allows students opportunity to take leadership role and model skills -Provide opportunities to increase self-esteem -Total Physical Response (Jazzercise or Zumba activity) -Groups students heterogeneously

r_ . n )vJtv~ rvtr+- -1--o-> vM-~· "-t(ft'L-es ~~'if~~~ ~~ ~oW~

Second Language Acquisition Theory

Prepared by Mary Carol Combs

Basic theories of L2 acquisition ► The differences between social and academic language

(sometimes known as BICS & CALP)

BICS: Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills

CALPS: Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency

Theorists:

Jim Cummins, 1981, 1994

Virginia Collier, 1987, 1995

Ana Chamot & Michael O’Malley,

1986

What is social language?

Language that develops [relatively easily] from

social activities (play, TV/movies/radio, informal

or conversational exchanges).

Incorporating social language in your classroom:

retelling events

talking about experiences

describing activities

giving personal opinions

Social language is context-embedded, that is,

comprehension is aided by context clues, like

facial expressions, body language, modeling or

demonstrations, visual clues and cues, etc.

Because it is embedded in social interaction,

social language is thought to be cognitively

undemanding.

What is academic language? The kind of abstract,

higher-level academic

discourse that might

be found in more

formal settings, like a

classroom for

example.

Forms of academic

language include Comparing and contrasting

Listing, defining, classifying

Predicting, explaining,

analyzing, justifying

Inferring, deducing

Integrating, evaluating

Arguing, persuading,

defending

Typically, academic language is context-reduced,

meaning that there are fewer clues or supports to

help students comprehensible content

information.

Because of the lack of environment clues,

academic language is thought to be more

cognitively demanding than social language.

Examples of social and academic language

Social language

What did you like about this

book?

Is there an easier way to do this?

What do you think will happen?

What do you mean?

Academic language

What appealed to you about the

characters in this book?

Can you propose and support an

alternative technique to facilitate this

procedure?

Can you formulate a hypothesis that

predicts the most probable outcome?

What is your reasoning here?

Visual representations of social and academic language

The “iceberg” model

Source: Cummins, J. (2000)

Language, power, and pedagogy:

Bilingual children in the crossfire by

J. Buffalo, NY: Multilingual

Matters, Ltd.

Cognitively Undemanding (BICS)

Cognitively Demanding (CALP)

Context

Embedded

Context

Reduced

Beginning ESL

Total Physical Response (TPR)

Following Directions

Face-to-Face Conservation

Getting Absence Excuse

Buying Popcorn

Oral Presentations

Content Classes (Art, Music)

Telephone Conversations

Refrigerator Notes

Written Directions

Instructions (No Diagrams

or Pictures)

Demonstrations

Experiments

Multi-media assisted-lessons

Basic Math Computations

Plane Geometry

Projects & Activities

Health Instruction

Social Studies (sheltered)

Science Experiments

Standardized Tests

Reading & Writing

Math Concepts & Applications

Explanations of Abstract Concepts

Lectures with few or no illustrations

Social Science Tests

Mainstream English Tests

Most Content Areas

Cummins’ Four Quadrants Source: jillrobbins.com/gwu/cummins_quad.jpg

Other theories from Cummins

Common Underlying Proficiency

Skills/abilities in different language inhabit the

same part of the brain, reinforcing each other

at the base while differing at the surface.

Separate Underlying Proficiency

L1 & L2 function and and develop independently

in the brain, and knowledge and skills acquired in

one language are not transferable to the other. L1

confuses kid while they’re learning L2

(DISCREDITED) Cummins proposed the CUP theory as a reaction to the SUP

idea.

Linguistic Interdependence Hypothesis Related to the theory of Common Underlying

Proficiency because it has to do with language transfer.

That is, literacy skills developed in L1 will transfer to L2.

This hypothesis predicts that a child who has mastered the basics of reading and thinking in L1 will perform well on entering a second-language environment (like a classroom).

Threshold Hypothesis (Controversial)

Cummins argues that for the positive effects of bilingualism to be realized and for “cognitive deficits” to be avoided, that children must reach a threshold level of proficiency in their L1 -- i.e., a certain degree of academic language or CALP-- before academic achievement can occur in the second language.

Bicultural Ambivalence When an English language learner manifests shame of

the first culture but hostility toward the second

for example, a student who is embarrassed to speak

Spanish with her parents or extended family members

(who may not speak English), but resists learning

English or performing well academically in English.

Often takes the form of inappropriate classroom

behaviors like self-silencing, acting out or speaking back,

surliness, a general unhappiness, malaise, or alienation.

Semilingualism

A bogus theory that some children lack competence

in any language.

Discredited and repudiated by linguists and L2

acquisition theorists, including Cummins (although

he advanced the idea in his early work)

Rooted in deficit theory.

►Comprehensible Input*

The idea that humans acquire language in

only one way - by understanding messages or by

receiving comprehensible input (Krashen 1985).

The i + 1 formula symbolizes how

comprehensible input works: messages in the language must make sense, ideally, just beyond the competence of the learner, who must strain a bit cognitively to understand.

i = input; also, where the learner is

1 = a symbolic place you want to bring your students, so that you’re constantly pushing them forward

*Input (what the learner hears and processes)

An Interesting Comparison… ►Zone of Proximal Development*

The [symbolic] distance between

a learner’s actual developmental level

as determined by independent problem

solving, and the level of potential

development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more

capable peers.

I + 1?

*Lev Vygotsky (1978).

►Affective filter

An emotional-mental block or barrier that interferes

with or prevents input from reaching the cognitive

and language centers of the brain.

This symbolic “wall” may be caused by learner

anxiety, stress, lack of self-confidence or motivation,

physical discomfort, hunger, etc.

Interaction of comprehensible input

and the affective filter

From Chomsky: The LAD reflects the idea that there is a kind of “device” in the brain

specifically dedicated to language acquisition.

►Acquisition-Learning

Distinction

Krashen argues that adults

have two distinctive ways of

developing competences in

second languages: (1)

acquisition, by using language

for real communication; and

(2) learning, or conscious

"knowing about" language

(Krashen & Terrell 1983).

Acquisition Learning

implicit,

subconscious

explicit,

conscious

informal

situations

formal

situations

uses

grammatical

'feel'

uses

grammatical

rules

depends on

attitude

depends on

aptitude

stable order of

acquisition

simple to

complex order

of learning

►Silent period

A variable period of time when the learner is

listening to and processing the second

language (aurally and cognitively), may not yet

verbalize it.

How long? It depends on the child, but

typically anywhere from 3 to 6 months,

sometimes less, sometimes more time.

More Theories from Krashen

►The monitor

An internal grammatical “editing” function that

regulates or alters the way that a person uses the

second language verbally.

Related in some cases to how confident or inhibited

a learner feels (e.g., he/she doesn’t care about

making grammatical errors and just wants to

communicate or cares so much about making

mistakes that he/she is afraid to speak).

Criticisms of some of these theories

Whenever interesting and important

theories are proposed, people have a

chance to think about them, observe them

in practice, refine or re-conceptualize them,

or even to criticize or rebut them.

This is a good thing!

Critique of a theory doesn’t necessarily

reduce its value for us as teachers.

Conversations about how theory helps us

help our students; they also improve our

understanding of our own teaching

practices.

Criticism of social-academic language

proficiencies

The distinction between these proficiencies ignores the

effect of social practices and power relations (in linguistic

minority and majority communities, for instance). (Edelsky

et al., 1983; Wiley, 1996)

How do we know that academic language proficiency isn’t

simply “test-wiseness.” (Edelsky et al., 1983)

If we claim that academic proficiency is only developed in

school settings, are we saying that schooling in and of itself

improves our language? (MacSwan & Rolstad, 2004)

Similarly, does that mean that the kinds of language exchanges occurring in one’s home are not abstract, higher level, or complex? Is this a deficit perspective? (MacSwan & Rolstad, 2004)

Does the social-academic language distinction actually promote a deficit view of children’s first language (whether intentional or not)? (Edelsky, 1990; Edelsky et al., 1983; Martin-Jones & Romaine, 1986)

Criticism of comprehensible input, the monitor, acquisition-learning (all part of the Input Hypothesis)

I + 1 is a nice concept, but it sounds a lot like Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development. What’s the difference?

The Input Hypothesis is too complicated, trying to make one theory from many ideas: a combination of “a linguistic theory (through its natural order hypothesis), social psychological theory (through its affective filter hypothesis), psychological learning theory (through its acquisition-learning hypothesis), discourse analysis and sociolinguistic theory (through both the comprehensible input hypothesis and the monitor hypothesis),” Lightbown (1984, p. 246).

Sounds logical, but it can’t be proven.

(Ellis, 1990; McLaughlin, 1987)

Krashen implies that true acquisition

of a language means reading, reading,

speaking it. But what does acquisition

really mean? How does Krashen define

it? (Mason, 2002)

The distinction between acquisition and learning

is oversimplified. If you learn something about a

language really, really well, have you acquired it,

or have you learned it? (McLaughlin, 1987)

Krashen “seems to be wrong when he suggests

that learned language - the rules of grammar -

are only of much use when writing - people do

seem to need the rules in order to speak in well-

formed sentences.” (Mason, 2002)

Criticism of the silent period How does the silent period differ from what

might be called a pre-production period?

Are kids really being “silent” in their silent

period? (Their brains are certainly not silent, but

working actively)

How do we balance the need to respect a child’s

silent period with the need to encourage her to

use the language verbally in our classrooms?

Why do we need to know this stuff?

Theory matters

It has implications for how we teach, and how we

organize our classrooms.

Theory helps us plan curriculum and pedagogy.

Theory helps us understand how children learn (and

learn languages in particular).

Theory is interesting! It can even be fun to digest,

argue about, deconstruct, praise or criticize it in ways

that help us understand it.