This week, we continued the discussion on social dimensions in L2 learning by focusing on foreign language education context on Tuesday, and we had discussed contemporary theories of second language acquisition based on Ortega (2007) on Thursday.
Social dimensions of L2 learning in foreign language education
We had three discussion questions that were prepared by Dr. Ortega. The first one was to define what context is in SLA and to identify social context of L2 learning. The second question was that pointed out how context matter in foreign language settings. The discussion was concluded by the last question, which asked the possibility and necessity of changing contexts of L2 learning in foreign language education.
First, the macro level of L2 learning context was discussed. We came up with broad dichotomous contexts: second language (SL) context and foreign language (FL) context. Such distinction is based on L2 learning environment from a perspective that how the target language(s) is(are) related to linguistic environment of the L2 learner(s). We also discussed smaller L2 learning contexts; classroom or school, home, and workplace was identified as existing L2 learning contexts, and school context includes different sub-contexts by its educational level like K-12 and college. The national policy, public discourses, and ideologies were also discussed in terms of their influence on constitution of the social context of L2 learning. Socioeconomic factors, ethnicity and race, neighborhood (e.g., urban vs. suburban) and a school district were also discussed as social contexts of L2 learning.
These numerous social contexts of L2 learning in FL settings matter in terms of interaction, use, and practice. The aspect of interaction, use, and practice in the target language are different and limited in the FL context. There is a problem of accessibility to resources like native speakers of the target language, materials, and motivating media since they are less available in the FL context. The degree of exposure to the target language and its authenticity are also much less in the FL context. Such limitations and insufficiency of the social context in the FL settings are easy to limit L2 learning. In the FL context, its linguistically homogeneity among the members makes elective bilingualism more salient than circumstantial bilingualism, and it leads to a situation that higher social status is given to the target language speakers or users in the FL setting society compared to the SL context that L2 learners are forced to use the target language.
Such social context in SLA is socially constructed, and they are contested against each other and interplaying within the society. The meaningful discussion point was how social context can be theorized. The theories related to the significance of social contexts in L2 learning were mentioned as Systemic-functional linguistics, conversation analysis, Vygotskian theory, language socialization, and identity theory. The context, education, and research in SLA connected to each other. The social context affects L2 education in FL settings, and SLA research needs to incorporate the values and social impact of the social context of L2 learning. To facilitate L2 learning in FL education, it is necessary to change the social contexts into more L2 friendly environment so that L2 learning can be facilitated in that social context.
Contemporary SLA theories
The discussion on contemporary theories of SLA covered nine theories: Universal Grammar Theory (UG), Autonomous Induction Theory (AIT), Associative-Cognitive CREED Framework, Skill Acquisition Theory, Input Processing Theory, Processability Theory, Concept-Oriented Approach, Interaction Framework, and Vygotskian Sociocultural Theory. We discussed their characteristics and main concepts based on Ortega (2007). Each theory or approach was examined in terms of how it views or understands cognition, interlanguage, the role of L1, linguistic environment, and instruction. These nine contemporary theories were matched with the main researchers in that area.
UG and AIT are very linguistic approach to SLA and cognition. Associative-Cognitive CREED is emergentist approach to SLA and it explains language learning as usage-based, input-driven, and statistical learning patterns. All of Skill Acquisition Theory, Input Processing Theory, Processability Theory, Concept-Oriented Approach, and Interaction Framework are cognitive-interaction SLA perspective. As most of these theories are very psychological, we added socio-approach theories in SLA research which are not mentioned in the chapter: Situated learning with language socialization and community of practice, poststructuralist, dialogism, conversation analysis, and systemic functional linguistics. These were already discussed somewhat in previous classes. These various theories help us to understand second language acquisition in depth. There is no absolute perfect and right theory, however, we can get some valuable insights from each theory and their own perspectives. We will continue the discussion on these theories in the next class.
Sunday, April 20, 2008
Thursday, April 10, 2008
Harklau
The main approaches to SLA research that have a social orientation identified by the article by Deters and Swain and complemented by Professor Ortega in class were: the sociocultural theory of mind, situated learning, poststructural theories, dialogism, conversation analysis and systemic functional linguistics. Although they are all emphatic on how sociocultural and contextual factors are part of language acquisition, each approach places a different component of language acquisition as being constructed and embedded in the social milieu.
“Cognition as a social phenomenon”: Sociocultural theory of mind
This approach originated in psycholinguistics by Vygotsky in the late 70’s, and argued that to understand cognition it was necessary to understand human culture and history. Human thought is no longer an independent process; it is a product of its social environment and it is manifested by our use of the mediational means available to the individual in a social context. For SLA, the most relevant mediational means are speaking and writing. So we use language as a means to interact and understand/ internalize the environment. For SCT it is also important to look at the history of a process, or in other words at how our meaning-making interaction with the environment changes over time.
Scholars who have done research in SLA using this framework: Lantolff, Swain, Hall.
“Learning as a social phenomenon”: Situated learning
In this approach learning is social because it is the process of becoming part of a community by constructing an identity in which the individual is able to communicate using the community’s language and resources.
Situated learning uses two different frameworks: language socialization and community of practice. They differ in their explicitness about the power differential present in learning. Language socialization is concerned with the process experienced by novice acquiring the knowledge, orientations and practices to participate in a community, manifested primarily through the use of language. The community of practice framework brings the concept of peripherality and legitimacy into play to problematize the different degrees of access and acceptance an individual will have to participate in the community depending on their competence. It is also concerned with the construction of identity through membership, and the how participation is capable of changing the community.
Scholars who have done research in SLA using this framework: Toohey, Duff.
“Sense of self as a social phenomenon”: Poststructuralism
Poststructuralism sees language as a means to construct reality and identity; it implies that individuals have agency in constructing their identity and creating meanings but that they are constricted by discourses and social practices. Every time individuals use language they are reconstructing their subjectivity and depending on how they are positioned in the discourse they will be more or less audible to negotiate their identity.
Scholars who have done research in SLA using this framework: Weedon, Norton Peirce, Higgins
“Discourse as a social phenomenon”: Dialogism
In this view, language has the feature of heteroglossia, meaning that it can simultaneously have several meanings, perspectives and values which are contextually and historically constructed. This framework focuses more on the individual’s agency and the dialogue that he constantly participates in during any instance of language use, whether it is internal or public. And it is through this dialogue that individuals become subjects and author themselves. The voices that they choose are also in dialogue with the environment and history, so language use is an interaction in the present which is borrowing from the past and from other dialogues.
Scholars who have done research in SLA using this framework: Hall, Vitanova, Lee
The last two social frameworks which were omitted in the article were Conversation Analysis, which portrays interaction and conversation as a social phenomenon and communication as something that arises from the social event where it occurs. The other framework, Systemic functional linguistics, redefines grammar as a social phenomenon.
Scholars who have done research in SLA using CA: Kasper
Scholars who have done research in SLA using this Systemic Functional Linguistics: Haliday
Presentation on Harklau’s: From the “ Good Kids” to the “ Worst”: Representations of English Language Learners Across Educational Settings.
The presentation was about Harklau’s ethnographic study about non-native English speakers who have lived in the United States for an extensive period of time and how they are represented differently when they go from one educational context to another. The study was motivated by the “ invisibility” of these students regarding research, policy and pedagogy specially at the postsecondary context.
The author uses the concepts of identity, representation and discourse and she uses a poststructuralist approach. For Harklau, identities are variable, fragmentary and multiple; so in our desire to stabilize and homogenize the fleeting images of identity, we make representations. The range these representations can take is constricted by discourse, which determines what is normal, and it is also subject to the power differential that exists within. In the case of educational discourse, instructors and the institution may have a greater say constructing a student’s representation, and may also have more resources to enforce it (i.e. curriculum). As a representation is legitimized, it is taken for granted and it is through classroom interaction that we can see how representations are enacted and reconstructed, or resisted.
In the study we learn how the same students are represented in opposite ways as they transition from one educational context to another, and how the representation of them in the college setting negatively affects their attitude towards language learning.
During their high school years, the students were seen as hard-working, dedicated and well-behaved, especially when they were placed in low-track classes (classes for underachieving students). Yet, although their cognitive ability was still questioned partly because of their language proficiency, the prevailing representation of the students was positive and as a consequence they were engaged in classroom learning.
As the students entered college, their representation took a turn for the worst. Enacting their self-representation of being dedicated and determined, they enroll in ESL classes to further their language learning. To their surprise, in the eyes of the institution there were two possible representations they should fit into: the international student or the ESL student who has all the bad academic habits of an “American” student. Neither seems like a viable alternative and it seems that in their efforts to cope and resist the available representation of the international student, they seem to reinforce the latter negative representation of being a problem case.
Throughout her study we can see the power representations can have when they become unquestionable truths, and I think it takes very reflective individuals to question what appears to be obvious. In both contexts we see how the image of these students may lead to patronizing attitudes or to the rejection of behaviors the institution is planning to teach: these students already behave like Americans and yet, their behavior is rejected in a class that intends to teach about American culture.
At the college level the problem is especially serious because there is no presence of a positive representation for these students, because the existing one does not really include them, and the one that fits them is negative. If we claim that these students are somewhat invisible in that educational discourse, because the curriculum is ignoring what they have to bring to the classroom, they have no valid academic resources to resist their prevailing negative representation. If the needs of these students were identified and addressed, they would be able to construct and negotiate a more accurate representation of themselves, which would again improve their attitude towards continuing their language learning.
“Cognition as a social phenomenon”: Sociocultural theory of mind
This approach originated in psycholinguistics by Vygotsky in the late 70’s, and argued that to understand cognition it was necessary to understand human culture and history. Human thought is no longer an independent process; it is a product of its social environment and it is manifested by our use of the mediational means available to the individual in a social context. For SLA, the most relevant mediational means are speaking and writing. So we use language as a means to interact and understand/ internalize the environment. For SCT it is also important to look at the history of a process, or in other words at how our meaning-making interaction with the environment changes over time.
Scholars who have done research in SLA using this framework: Lantolff, Swain, Hall.
“Learning as a social phenomenon”: Situated learning
In this approach learning is social because it is the process of becoming part of a community by constructing an identity in which the individual is able to communicate using the community’s language and resources.
Situated learning uses two different frameworks: language socialization and community of practice. They differ in their explicitness about the power differential present in learning. Language socialization is concerned with the process experienced by novice acquiring the knowledge, orientations and practices to participate in a community, manifested primarily through the use of language. The community of practice framework brings the concept of peripherality and legitimacy into play to problematize the different degrees of access and acceptance an individual will have to participate in the community depending on their competence. It is also concerned with the construction of identity through membership, and the how participation is capable of changing the community.
Scholars who have done research in SLA using this framework: Toohey, Duff.
“Sense of self as a social phenomenon”: Poststructuralism
Poststructuralism sees language as a means to construct reality and identity; it implies that individuals have agency in constructing their identity and creating meanings but that they are constricted by discourses and social practices. Every time individuals use language they are reconstructing their subjectivity and depending on how they are positioned in the discourse they will be more or less audible to negotiate their identity.
Scholars who have done research in SLA using this framework: Weedon, Norton Peirce, Higgins
“Discourse as a social phenomenon”: Dialogism
In this view, language has the feature of heteroglossia, meaning that it can simultaneously have several meanings, perspectives and values which are contextually and historically constructed. This framework focuses more on the individual’s agency and the dialogue that he constantly participates in during any instance of language use, whether it is internal or public. And it is through this dialogue that individuals become subjects and author themselves. The voices that they choose are also in dialogue with the environment and history, so language use is an interaction in the present which is borrowing from the past and from other dialogues.
Scholars who have done research in SLA using this framework: Hall, Vitanova, Lee
The last two social frameworks which were omitted in the article were Conversation Analysis, which portrays interaction and conversation as a social phenomenon and communication as something that arises from the social event where it occurs. The other framework, Systemic functional linguistics, redefines grammar as a social phenomenon.
Scholars who have done research in SLA using CA: Kasper
Scholars who have done research in SLA using this Systemic Functional Linguistics: Haliday
Presentation on Harklau’s: From the “ Good Kids” to the “ Worst”: Representations of English Language Learners Across Educational Settings.
The presentation was about Harklau’s ethnographic study about non-native English speakers who have lived in the United States for an extensive period of time and how they are represented differently when they go from one educational context to another. The study was motivated by the “ invisibility” of these students regarding research, policy and pedagogy specially at the postsecondary context.
The author uses the concepts of identity, representation and discourse and she uses a poststructuralist approach. For Harklau, identities are variable, fragmentary and multiple; so in our desire to stabilize and homogenize the fleeting images of identity, we make representations. The range these representations can take is constricted by discourse, which determines what is normal, and it is also subject to the power differential that exists within. In the case of educational discourse, instructors and the institution may have a greater say constructing a student’s representation, and may also have more resources to enforce it (i.e. curriculum). As a representation is legitimized, it is taken for granted and it is through classroom interaction that we can see how representations are enacted and reconstructed, or resisted.
In the study we learn how the same students are represented in opposite ways as they transition from one educational context to another, and how the representation of them in the college setting negatively affects their attitude towards language learning.
During their high school years, the students were seen as hard-working, dedicated and well-behaved, especially when they were placed in low-track classes (classes for underachieving students). Yet, although their cognitive ability was still questioned partly because of their language proficiency, the prevailing representation of the students was positive and as a consequence they were engaged in classroom learning.
As the students entered college, their representation took a turn for the worst. Enacting their self-representation of being dedicated and determined, they enroll in ESL classes to further their language learning. To their surprise, in the eyes of the institution there were two possible representations they should fit into: the international student or the ESL student who has all the bad academic habits of an “American” student. Neither seems like a viable alternative and it seems that in their efforts to cope and resist the available representation of the international student, they seem to reinforce the latter negative representation of being a problem case.
Throughout her study we can see the power representations can have when they become unquestionable truths, and I think it takes very reflective individuals to question what appears to be obvious. In both contexts we see how the image of these students may lead to patronizing attitudes or to the rejection of behaviors the institution is planning to teach: these students already behave like Americans and yet, their behavior is rejected in a class that intends to teach about American culture.
At the college level the problem is especially serious because there is no presence of a positive representation for these students, because the existing one does not really include them, and the one that fits them is negative. If we claim that these students are somewhat invisible in that educational discourse, because the curriculum is ignoring what they have to bring to the classroom, they have no valid academic resources to resist their prevailing negative representation. If the needs of these students were identified and addressed, they would be able to construct and negotiate a more accurate representation of themselves, which would again improve their attitude towards continuing their language learning.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)