3. Highly intelligent people are good language learners:
This idea about language learning is not new to our English 344 class; that there are "good" language learners. I found this interesting because it incorporated students' IQ tests as a predictor for success on learning about a language, such as grammar and vocabulary. The text states that, "research has shown that learners with a wide cariety of intellectual abilities can be successful language learners. This is especially true if the emphasis is on oral communication skills rather than metalinguistic knowledge" (Lightbown and Spada 185). This research reminds me of how musically inclined students tend to do better on their math portion (?) of standardized tests too. I find this very interesting because it shows how some people's brains have tendencies to work better with learning certain types of materials. It shows preference. I have friends that are in Spanish, currently, and they frequently say that they, "hate Spanish," which I think just sounds funny because it's a language! It sounds odd to say that one hates something so abstract. But, maybe their brains aren't as inclined to learn another language? It's not the language, Spanish, but learning another language itself; learning another set of vocabulary, sentence structure, sayings, exceptions, etc. So on their IQ tests, would their scores show more metalinguistic knowledge rather than oral communication skills?
I also appreciate how the text is respectful to students who might not have this IQ score that shows they are a good/bad language learner by stating that, "Students should not be excluded from opportunities to learn another language on the grounds that they do not have the academic ability to succeed" (Lightbown and Spada 185). It further addresses the importance in language learning; that a teacher must find ways to engage different kinds of ability.
Tuesday, April 19, 2011
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
Discourse, Communication, and Concepts
From the article "On Discourse, Communication, and (Some) Fundamental Concepts in SLA Research," I found the Chomskyan paradigm most interesting. It has roots in Plato and Descartes's rationalistic theories of the mind. This "was to manifest and subsequently establish itself within SLA as a central concern with language as an aspect of individual cognition (759)." Chomsky said that "linguistics is simply the sub-field of psychology that deals with these aspects of the mind." This approach is less focused on the problem of what language is for as its used as communication and involves/concerns more than the individual.
I really like this approach because of the psychology aspect. For my final project, I am focusing on individual learner differences (in English language learners). Cognition, motivation, age, etc. are all part of these differences, which is where psychology comes into play. Language as an aspect of individual cognition seems to click with my thoughts of it as communication. There is so much to the mind that is unknown. We learn a lot about language acquisition but I don't believe it is the most central to cognition; that it influences how we think. I think that the psychology of the learner is the umbrella as to how a person would learn a second language, and that goes for other concepts as well. I don't believe that someone who has less knowledge of a language or language itself is unable to think in similar ways as another who has a higher knowledge of language. When reading this article, I thought of the movie we watched in class; The Wild Child. This boy showed his intelligence in learning certain behaviors, the number system, alphabet, etc. I think it was so difficult for him because he had never been introduced to these concepts before. Not having spoken yet was even more difficult for communication with him and by him. However, it did not show that he was unable to learn. Also, when his caretaker found things he was interested in (the psychology of the learner; motivation, etc.), such as going for walks, the wild child was more interested/willing to learn. There are many other things to consider in this approach, but I think it's very important to incorporate psychology and language learning together.
I really like this approach because of the psychology aspect. For my final project, I am focusing on individual learner differences (in English language learners). Cognition, motivation, age, etc. are all part of these differences, which is where psychology comes into play. Language as an aspect of individual cognition seems to click with my thoughts of it as communication. There is so much to the mind that is unknown. We learn a lot about language acquisition but I don't believe it is the most central to cognition; that it influences how we think. I think that the psychology of the learner is the umbrella as to how a person would learn a second language, and that goes for other concepts as well. I don't believe that someone who has less knowledge of a language or language itself is unable to think in similar ways as another who has a higher knowledge of language. When reading this article, I thought of the movie we watched in class; The Wild Child. This boy showed his intelligence in learning certain behaviors, the number system, alphabet, etc. I think it was so difficult for him because he had never been introduced to these concepts before. Not having spoken yet was even more difficult for communication with him and by him. However, it did not show that he was unable to learn. Also, when his caretaker found things he was interested in (the psychology of the learner; motivation, etc.), such as going for walks, the wild child was more interested/willing to learn. There are many other things to consider in this approach, but I think it's very important to incorporate psychology and language learning together.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)