This week we will look at the social aspects of language acquisition and how Vygotsky's ideas have been adapted to second language teaching. As you read, please focus on the concepts of mediation, ZPD, and scaffolding. These have the strongest connections to language teaching.
1. Please read SLLT - Sociocultural Approaches.
New reading circles groups this week. Please check the schedule.
This week I am the Discussion Leader for Group A.
ReplyDeletePlease find my questions below:
1. As stated in the reading, what is the difference between Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development and Krashen’s i + 1?
2. How does the socio-cultural theory interpret private speech? Furthermore, how does private speech, in Vygotsky’s view, plays a role in SLL?
3. Four limitations have been highlighted in this reading with regards to socio-cultural research carried out to date to support the socio-cultural view of language learning. What are these limitations?
I would like to conclude my blog post with the following discussion question:
Discussion Question:
Vygotsky defines the Zone of Proximal Development as “the domain where learning most productively takes place.” Would you agree with this view that knowing only the “width” of this domain/zone for a child would provide an accurate a picture of his/her learning ability? If so, please briefly explain why? If not, then is there a need to define a wider or a narrower zone to obtain a complete developmental picture of a child?
Hello! Thanks for the questions, Dee Dee!! Here are my answers!
Delete1. The of Proximal Development and Krashen’s i + 1 are often thought of being the same or similar ideas, however, socio-cultural theorists would disagree.
Krashen’s i + 1 theory suggests that learning takes place when learners are in a situation where input is just one step ahead of their understanding. He suggests that through interaction and comprehensible input, learners will acquire language.
The ZPD within Vygotsky’s socio-cultural theory suggests that learning is co-constructed by individuals through an interactive process. The learning is in the form of appropriation, whereby the learner uses the interaction to make sense of input at first, and finally is able to process and apply the learning on their own.
2. In socio-cultural theory, Private Speech is viewed as evidence of a child making sense of the world, through the use of language. It is the beginning of a regulatory system that will eventually develop into ‘inner speech’ where older children and adults are able to make sense of the world through tools they have appropriated. Rather than just ‘repetition’ – private speech is an indication that children (and even adults encountering something new or challenging) are making sense of the world around them. It is also an indication that they have not yet appropriated the language or the tools to mediate the input they are encountering yet.
In terms of SLL, private speech can (and should) be seen in a positive way – in that it is proof of a child testing the language input they are encountering. As the examples in the chapter suggest, when SLL hear something that they find strange, or even interesting, they may try private speech in a ‘monitoring’ way – or in an attempt to emulate or match pronunciation etc. In the case of the SLL, private speech shows an active attempt at appropriation.
3. Research concerned with SLA and socio-cultural theory has not been as ‘robust’ as some theorists may have hoped. Firstly, in some of the studies, the sample of subjects may have influenced the data gathered. For example, during the study of Kim and Rick and the effects of collaborative interaction and scaffolding, it is difficult to state that the learning was a direct result of their interaction, especially considering that they were labeled ‘strong students’ – also, other factors such as “length of exposure to new input” may have played a role in their success.
Secondly, in Aljaafreh and Lantolf’s study of tutor scaffolding – one cannot be sure that the improvement’s made are a direct result of the tutor, and not some other factor.
Next, when Ohta suggested that her students had shown evidence of co-constructing knowledge, it was criticized. She claimed that learning had taken place after students had ‘co-constructed’ knowledge during an activity together, however, skeptics suggested that the students’ ability to reproduce the ‘supposed’ learning may have been evidence of learning that was internalized previously.
Finally, (and I’m not sure about this one…) all except one of the studies have been short-term projects with small, local sample groups, and often revolve around ‘difficult to prove’ language points.
I’m the Applier for Group A.
DeleteI feel as though there were a few things from the socio-cultural theory that we, as English Teachers, could use to inform practices in our classrooms.
Socio-cultural theory has at its core the idea that learning is a collaborative process, and hinges off interaction with one or more people (who may, or may not be experts in the subject matter.)
Peer scaffolding is something that really stood out for me, and is something I think could be readily applied in classrooms. Essentially, it is using pair work within the classroom so that peers with (potentially) different strengths or knowledge can scaffold learning for each other. After reading about Information processing last week, I was struck by the idea in this article about how partners can help each other: one student may be too busy, and held up in working memory to come to an answer, or solution to a problem, however, with a partner able to use their working memory to process, and evaluate what the first student is saying or struggling with, makes real sense.
Another idea from the reading that I felt was useful, was the idea of microgenesis as a series of steps, beginning with more implicit scaffolding, and seeing how well the learner responded. The idea of starting with more implicit methods meant the teacher, and the learner were able to work through a collaborative process, rather than a teacher just “highlighting the answer.” While I would imagine that this would be more effective with smaller, or even one-on-one lessons, I do think it is something that could be implemented.
The concept of “private speech” is something I had never really heard of before. On reflecting about it, I think I myself do this when I’m learning another language – mainly as a way to practice pronunciation, or in a ‘monitor hypothesis’ type of way. Realistically – I’m not sure one can “encourage” this in a classroom. What I had in mind was that – when I hear children “muttering” under their breath – I may have assumed it was an indication they weren’t listening, or were having their own conversation, so usually I would ask them to be quiet, or to listen to other talking etc. I’m curious to listen out for any instances of private speech, and see them in a more positive way.
1. As stated in the reading, what is the differenve between Vygotsky's Zone of Proximal Development and Krashen's i+1?
DeleteThe reading states that Krashen's i+1 focuses on the level of the input being just ahead of the learner's current developmental stage. Since the new input is familiar in some way, the learner is able to build from their lexical memory for meaning. Where as the ZPD doesn’t focus on the level of input being introduced, instead the manner that the new input is co-constructed with their interlocutor, appropriated and then internalized by the learner. For me the big difference between these two is that ZPD requires output for the co-construction of the meaning and the i+1 is primarily input based.
2. How does the socio-cultural theory interpret private speech? Furthermore, how does private speech, in Vygotsky's view, plays a role in SLL?
Socio-cultural theory interprets private speech as being a way for the learner to self-regulate during task performances. The amount of private speech a learner uses is related to the difficulty of the task. Vygotsky viewed private speech to SLL as a way for the learner to problem-solve and self-regulate language in the process of appropriating new lexical input. Also, that the learner will apply the same amount of effort for self-regulation, as they will for actual L2 conversations.
3. Four limitations have been highlighted in this reading with regards to socio-cultural research carried out to date to support the socio-cultural view of language learning. What are these limitations?
Socio-cultural studies to date haven't been conducted on a large scale. Research has just been qualitatively and interpretively analyzed recordings of classroom activities. From this naturalistic approach, the theories are looked at as more of causal explanations and generalizations rather than hard evidence. There isn't any cemented evidence that 'B' happened because of 'A", cause and effect. The arguments against the studies by Swain/Lapkin, and Aljaafreh/Lantolf don't necessarily say that they are wrong in their hypotheses, however that there are too many extenuating circumstances that could've also contributed to the positive outcome for skeptics to be convinced in the validity of the socio-cultural theory.
Me again!
DeleteHere is my (rather short) response to our discussion question! Hope I was on the right track! xx
I agree that the ZPD can be used to describe the ‘space’ where children’s learning takes place most productively. Peter Russell suggests that pre-adolescents are able to process input effectively for up to 10 minutes (in their working memory). With this in mind, we could assume that a child’s ZPD may fall within these 10minutes. However, given that motivation may increase the amount of time children have to process input, it’s possible to assume that a child’s ZPD could become ‘wider’ if they are processing information with either an adult, or someone their age (peer scaffolding). In this case I feel that teachers should be aware of the need to include shorter, more engaging and collaborative activities into their lessons in order to maximize the potential retention of content presented.
Hi Amy... It is nice to see that you managed to put together two very different approaches to SLA in a meaningful way. We all need to aim for engaging and collaborative classes broken down into short segments, if you will, to keep students focused and enable them to get the most out of what is presented.
DeleteAs I was reading about Lev Vygotsky's socio-cultural theory, I could not help but think about how all his work (and maybe some not even yet) has been translated into English and perhaps other languages out of the original language it was written. Who knows even some may have been lost or altered in translation...
John & Amy... Thank you very much for taking your precious time to really think about my questions and compose well-written answers. To tell you the truth, it was quite difficult to come up with questions for this reading perhaps.
DeleteJust a side note... From the reading, I realized that Lev Vygotsky died at age 37. I wonder how much more he had accomplished if he had lived until his 50s or even longer...
Discussion question
DeleteI agree with Vygotsky and how he defines the ZPD in relation to the width of a child’s domain/zone. Working in early childhood education, I believe it’s the teacher’s responsibility to manage the amount of input a student is exposed to at a particular moment. This is why schema activation and previewing of new material is crucial to a child’s L2 acquisition. I feel that this sequence helps to ensure that the student/child are not on input/information overload. First by having them recall background information (schema activation) helps to easily connect and make meaning with the old to the new, subsequently moving it to long-term memory. Then by previewing the new material, the student/child have time to sift through the unnecessary information and move the important information to the working memory while getting rid of the other.
Sorry it's a little late. I'm the summarizer..
DeleteSociocultural theory grew from the work of Lev Vygotsky. He developed his theories around the same time as Jean Piaget, but died at the age of 38 with his theories incomplete. All of his writings left behind are in Russian, some of which are still being translated. Sociocultural theory considers learning as a process where participation in socially-mediated activities is essential to language development and learning. The theory regards interaction as crucial to cognitive development in the classroom. Instructions should be geared to the Zone of Proximal Development that is beyond the learner’s actual development level. Also that private speech helps the learner problem-solves and self-regulates language in the process to appropriate new lexical input. That the learner needs to be directed with supportive dialogue and then co-construction of the meaning happens through scaffolding.
I'm sorry I'm late and behind, but here are my answers:
Delete1. As stated in the reading, what is the difference between Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development and Krashen’s i + 1?
The difference is that with ZPD, new language knowledge is learned from the help of others, which is then appropriated by the learner for their own development. Krashen’s input hypothesis is assumed that the learner learns when they have input that is above their level of understanding or current developmental stage.
2. How does the socio-cultural theory interpret private speech? Furthermore, how does private speech, in Vygotsky’s view, plays a role in SLL?
In socio-cultural theory, private speech is seen as evidence of one’s growing ability to regulate their own behaviour. For example, a person talking to himself while doing something. For Vygotsky, it eventually becomes inner speech, which is a use of language that regulates internal thought without any external articulation. In SLL, an adult can give a new lexical item to a child and the child can re-use the word in private speech. The child appropriates the new item.
3. Four limitations have been highlighted in this reading with regards to socio-cultural research carried out to date to support the socio-cultural view of language learning. What are these limitations?
The four limitations of the studies to date is that studies has only been small scale, they have generally employed qualitative and interpretive research procedures, they concentrated on the recording and analysis of classroom activity, and providing compelling evidence regarding cause and effect was hard.
4. Discussion Question:
Vygotsky defines the Zone of Proximal Development as “the domain where learning most productively takes place.” Would you agree with this view that knowing only the “width” of this domain/zone for a child would provide an accurate a picture of his/her learning ability? If so, please briefly explain why? If not, then is there a need to define a wider or a narrower zone to obtain a complete developmental picture of a child?
I agree with Vygotsky’s ZPD because I believe a child cannot learn unless they have someone to help them. In regards to assistance, it doesn’t necessarily have to be verbal assistance. A child can learn visually. A child may look at a bottle and not know how to open it. But if they watch someone use their hands, then they now know how to do it. Their ZPD will continue to increase. However, I don’t think it applies to only children. I think it applies to everyone. I believe everyone helps each other in one way or another.
My role for this week is the highlighter. Here are some terminology:
DeleteScaffolding – the support given during the learning process that a student needs in order to achieve their learning goals.
Self-regulation – when someone is capable of autonomous functioning, or do a task or activity on their own
Other-regulation – when someone needs guidance to carry out a task or activity
Phylogenesis – the development or evolution of a particular group of organisms
Ontogenesis – the development or development history of an individual organism
Private speech – talk apparently to and for themselves rather than with someone else
Inner speech – a use of language to regulate internal thought without any external articulation
Appropriation – the act of setting apart or taking for one’s own use
I am also late to this party! Apologies! ^^
ReplyDeleteI am Discussion Leader for group C.
1) What is other-regulation and self-regulation and how does it relate to ZPD?
2) Name two benefits of scaffolding for the learner.
3) What is task engagement and why did Platt and Brooks think it would create a more favorable language learning environment?
Discussions Question:
As mentioned at the end of this article, there is a debate as to what constitutes "learning" (acquisition) of language. From the definitions given in the article, or your own definition, state what you think would demonstrate acquisition and why.
1) other regulation- the way that children carry out tasks, under the guidance of more skilled individuals
Deleteself-regulation- the way mature, skilled individuals function, autonomously, without need for guidance
2) Scaffolding directs the attention of the learner to key features AND prompts them through successive steps of a problem.
3) Task engagement is when learners are motivated to solve difficult problems. Students take control of the classroom tasks, and make maximum use of second language.
Applier:
DeleteI think sociocultural theory is something that is very applicable in our classes here in Korea. The idea that a teacher can help students attain a level of production that they couldn't otherwise perform on their own is somewhat intuitive.
However something that the article points on is peer assistance. A higher proficiency classmate can also help pull a student up the ZPD.
Some practical applications;
1. encourage students to help each other
2. assemble pairs and groups of mixed proficiency, and allow the higher proficiency students to help the lower.
Regarding the discussion question. I don't expect a lot of discussing will take place at this point, given that it is already Friday evening.
DeleteHowever I will say that what I think demonstrates acquisition is when a learner can use language with ease, fluently, without having to think or monitor their output. Personally there is a lot of Korean that I have acquired, I can produce it without having to think about it. While there is probably other Korean that I have "learned" but would have to monitor it while I strain to produce it.
Discussion Questions:
ReplyDelete1.) Other Regulation is when learning (or doing something) occurs under the guidance of another. Self Regulation is when the learner is able to do it on their own (hence the Self part of the word). Being able to do it on your own is the ideal.
2.) It provides a focus for the learner and enables them to tackle a learning point that may seem overwhelming at first. Building them up to the task, instead of throwing them in the deep end.
3.) Task Engagement is as the name implies: Being engaged in a task. In other words, a learner is focused on what they are doing. This is vitally important if a learner is going to learn anything.
Discussion: For me, Acquisition is when a student is comfortable, confident (fluency), able to use the language in a variety of settings and situations, and their meaning is communicated effectively.
ReplyDeleteThe three types of private speech are repetition, vicarious responses, and manipulation. Repeating a new word to oneself allows the learner to wrap their mind and tongue around a challenging word or expression. Vicarious responses gives the learner the chance to test their response before receiving judgement from others. Finally, manipulation lets learners practice the language. All three of these can give the learner more confidence when attempting the target language with others later.
Current socio-cultural theorists have expanded the concept to include pair and group work among peers. Learners can prompt and scaffold others with language material which they are not capable of producing reliably themselves. The listening partner is not burdened with the attention demands of actual production freeing them up to both analyze what is being said and predict what might be coming up.
Phylogenesis, ontogenesis, and microgenesis are the three types of “genesis” mentioned. Microgenesis would be the type of most interest to social-cultural theorists because it is acquired through social or interactional means. Therefore, it would be the easiest for social-cultural experts to actually observe and study.
Discussion Question:
I believe Krashen’s i+1 model is the more logical and useful for SLLs. When linguistic ability is just beyond a learner’s grasp, it forces them to stretch to meet the new language. To be honest, if the ZPD is applied to SLLs, I don’t see a huge difference in the two. The reading leaned heavily toward Vygotskyan ideas.
Applier
ReplyDeleteWe can apply this reading in our classrooms in a variety of ways. First of all, we can encourage our students to express themselves quietly in Korean instead of keeping our strict No Korean! policy. Although I doubt any of us jumps on students for using their L1, we can now see the benefits of privately uttering in Korean. Second, from the activity with the zoo animals, it is clear that giving students word lists to use does not increase their vocabulary. Therefore, we might consider allowing students to reach for the words they need by asking us or peers when they have questions about vocabulary. This can allow for more actual retention of the new words. Although this reading was quite challenging, it was also interesting and at times exciting. I loved the practical implications of these studies.
Group B Highlighter:
ReplyDeleteZone of Proximal Development: this is the area of the student where they are not able to fully learn the skill or knowledge but with some focused help in the form from scaffolding from the instructor the student can get to the goal (or more simply out - learn).
Private Speech: most common among younger children. It is when they talk to themselves (not to another person) in order to help themselves complete a task or learn something new. It is like they are giving directions or praise to themselves.
Vicarious Responses: this is when a student finishes or fixes another students' comment/answer or when the student internally answers a question.
Activity Theory: this is the idea that context influences how one learns something. And to reach the goal of the learning people use different forms that are goal directed. For example: one person may learn to drive from their family members and another person may learn to drive from a driving school instructor. The goal is the same - to be able to drive. The learning action is different. And lastly: depending on the skill and ability of the instructor the outcome could be the same or different.
Group B Questions:
ReplyDelete1. The Ohta study recognized three types of second language private speech. They are: repetition; vicarious responses; and manipulation.
The benefits for repetition: through the repeating of a phrase or other lexical items the students can remember something. Practice makes perfect.
The benefits for vicarious responses: this leads to a lot of correction by the student of what others' say and self-correction is a great method to learn something. You hear/say what is wrong and make an adjustment to correct the error. Also, it encourages participation.
The benefits of manipulation: by putting some language into a new situation or new sentence a student can then fully grasp the meaning. Practice is great, but doing something a little different shows if you understand the skill/target language.
2. Socio-cultural research has been done not between a "Novice (learner)" and "Expert (teacher)" but instead among groups (pair and larger). Therefore, these studies have looked at how students (peers) help each other out in scaffolding.
The advantage of this form of scaffolding is that people will often listen to their peers and subtle feedback from a classmate helps things move along very quickly in the classroom. Sometimes the teacher cannot scaffold and/or help every student/pair/group. This also gives students the power to know that they can be experts too (know key information/skills).
A combination of peer and instructor scaffolding also allows for lots of feedback in the classroom and therefore quicker realization of the skill/goal.
3. The three types of genesis are: microgenesis; phylogenesis; and ontogenesis;
Microgenesis is local context based learning.
Phylogenesis is human learning over the centuries.
Ontogenesis is learning in the human infant stage of an individual.
Microgenesis is the one that social theorists embrace the most because it is very difficult to measure our learning over the centuries (too long of a time period and how do we measure something that took place 1000 years ago). And the infant stage is a short period which may be too quick to study and children are awfully fidgety. Therefore, we can study micro over the periods of people's lives as it is continuous and not long in the past.
4. Oh my. I like a little of both. Why? I agree with Krashen that you need input to improve in any skill (or anything you are learning). And the input should be understandable (comprehensible) as well as +1 - which means moving you up in your ability to do something or know something. Without input that is not too high you will not get better.
In order to get better at anything we also need feedback (scaffolding). A little nudge helps some learners grasp an idea or correct themselves to continue on the path to a greater ability in the target skill. Even if we learn the basics of something by ourselves at some point we will get feedback as to whether it is good, OK or not good enough. Also, others in the field or doing the same thing might suggest alternatives or we might see the other ways to do it.
Therefore, I feel that learners need input and feedback.