As a teacher of Pre-school, I have had little exposure to the demands that NCLB appears to place on educators today. My son is in a parochial school which consistently boasts standardized test scores above average for the majority of its students. I should add that this is a very diverse school with a demographic make-up of 30% African America, 10% Latino, and 2% Asian. In addition the socio economics varies widely. That being said, I have never heard a concern being expressed by the faculty or administration regarding the effects of NCLB. However, I do know they do preparation for tests each year for a brief time before the exam. This has only been a mild concern of mine since it appears that there is still so much crammed into the curriculum throughout the year that I do not feel these children are really cheated in other subjects and extra curricula. However, as I commenced this degree last September I was immersed in literature and lecture at Montclair State about this subject manner and its effects on public edcuation today. I saw first hand during an observation at a small elementary school in Newark what NCLB meant for them and how it had changed the education they were providing. First on a bright note, the school was a delightful community with and incredibly nurturing staff that truly were passionate about teaching. The principal was an excellent leader and for the most part attempted to weave together a curriculum that would keep them on track with the requirements of NCLB while keeping the students interested and not at the expense of an exciting social studies and science curriculum. The school has proven themselves with a continuing rise in tests scores over the last few years to the point that they will now be removed some watch list they had been on for some time. I guess where I am going with this is Yes there was a lot sacrificed as a result of the drilling that was taking place in class as preparation for the test, but this staff seemed to use every resource and creative bone in their bodies to continue to build a well rounded curriculum for their students. They are not thrilled with the impact that NCLB has had on their teaching abilities, but have seemed to rise to the occasion and with the help of a flexible leader have managed to still make learning fun while raising the test scores. So yes NCLB has limited them but challenged them to think outside the box.
While reading the links within the NCLB, I have to agree that yes there needs to be accountability on all levels including administration, faculty, students and also parents. Again it goes back to the famous quote "it takes a village to raise a child," and if it is the NCLB that has forced educators and parents alike to realize that it is a community effort that is needed then NCLB may not be as bad as we criticize it to be. On the other hand, the actual design of the tests leave a lot to be desired. The students at that lovely Newark elementary school were lost at times trying to understand the text in the reading comprehension portion of the sampletests and were further confused by a picture prompt that many associated with the Disney story Cinderella. The picture appeared to be a colonial woman washing clothes on a washboard with a hearth behind her. None of the 17 students in that class had any idea about colonial life or how to respond to this prompt in a way that would be deemed correct by those grading the exams. Furthermore these student's social studies classes had been significantly reduced in an effort to accomodate the test prep time. Perhaps children that take regular trips to the museums or that have been on vacations that have included historic sites (Boston, Williams burg, Philadelphia, etc.) might have no problem with this picture prompt. But children from this school, many that had never left Newark their whole life were challenged greatly by the prompt. So, yes I agree that the tests are slanted towards a particularly small segment of the population.
I also take exception to the idea that teaching techniques must be based on "scientifically based research." It seems that NCLB may be taking away many of those treasured "teachable moments" when teachers are forced to stifle any ideas they may want to try in class if they have not been tested on a controlled group and proven as acceptable. However, again on a positive note, I agree that NCLB is raising the standards of teaching by requiring teachers to continue learning themselves. Of course they need to provide the funding for this too which seems to be one of the criticisms also.
The idea that parents can remove their children from one school and use another although as a parent seems appealing, also seems like it would only feed the problem of a struggling school if you begin to remove all those students that are capable of achieving their academic goals.
Another problem that I think is particularly challenging with the NCLB, is the gray area of special education within the NCLB guidelines. It seems difficult to think that after all we have achieved to date in understanding the many learning disabilities facing our children today, we are now going to impose these requirements that are so hard to tailor for our learning disability population.
Finally, I am not exactly sure how this can all impact reading. From what i have read in Routman it would seem that developing readings skills comes from a combination of many things including oral reading together, phonics, writing, and listening, and at no time a focus solely on phonics. Based on how NCLB currently designs their tests and creates accountability measures, it would seem that NCLB would favor worksheets and constant testing on phonics in the early reader and then a quick transition to an ability to comprehend, and synthesize complicated reading passages later in middle school. Unfortunately as I am now learning teaching reading is not just about sounds it is a lot more that perhaps NCLB needs to further investigate before setting standards.
In conclusion I am still confused about where I stand, it seems if nothing else, NCLB has given a jolt that was needed to many school districts. Unfortunately many will come out on the short end of the stick when all is done. It certainly has statistics to prove that it has narrowed the gap, but having worked 10 years in housing development with City funds, I am more than ware how those numbers can often be very inaccurate in reflecting the reality of the situation. Basically government plays with the number and puts the best spin on it to show how your tax money is working for you.
Monday, July 16, 2007
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
Thoughts on chapter 15
After nine years in a pre-school environment where the director has reminded us always to keep current our entries to children's log books which are used at the end of the year to evaluate, this chapter was to say the least enlightening. First of all I have often found myself scrambling to really get a handle on the children and where they stand at the end of a year or even earlier in November when we conduct our parent conferences. I relaize now as I reflect on this chapter, that perhaps my assessment and evaluation of some children may not have always been as "meaningful" as it should have been. As I started the chapter I thought this sounds great but the reality is it is for older children, and yet many of the examples cited were from classes as young as early kindergarten. Although I still am a big advocate of decoding and starting the practice as early as possible, I am starting to think about the many other practices mentioned that can be helpful in truly assessing the student of reading including retellings of stories, shared reading, listening activities and the many other suggestions. As I have said before, I am not a purist in that I do not fully follow one theory, and although I really do believe in Maria Montessori's philosophy on educating the young child, I am willing to accept alot of the practices that are being offered in chapter 15.
The whole concept of portfolios is a new one for me. I think now that how unrealistic is it to asssess the child without seeing any of their work in front of me and basically only going on my most recent encounter with the child to write an assessment. I started journal writing a few years ago after having seen it at another school during and observation, and the children delighted in sharing their stories. However, this still only appealed to a few students, but what I should have done was searched through trial and error to find some way of connecting with these children and engaging them in reading.This chapter was extremely helpful in suggesting the many other ways I can invove the students in participating in their own learning process.
The idea of self evaluation is a new concept for me in relation to students but I was certainly acquainted with it as an employee in the business world 15 to 20 years ago. I actually had a real problem with this idea and always was suspicious that their was some other motive for asking me to evaluste myself. I truly do beleive that students will be honest when evaluating themselves and can benefit from this exercise. I observed a 4th grade class in a small Newark elementary school a few months ago who were preparing constanly for the standaized tests. That was the unfortunate aspect of this observation, however, on a positive note, the students evaluated each other as they took turns reading their pieces that they had written in class. CLearly, this worked really well.
Far more radical than any thought in this capter was the idea of having children attend their own conferences that were traditionally held between teacher and parent. I think this is a fabulous idea and removes all the mystery around this meeting for all involved. I know my 13 year would love to attend these meetings than patiently await in fear of what is going to be communicated. As a parent I personally hate conferences where I sit before 5 teachers and have them rattle off a few comments and then rush me out before I ask questions. I guess these really are not conferences because there is no two way communication.
I appreciated how the author dealt with the issues of standars in that she comes right out saying, "standards are here to stay, so we need to understand what they are, and how best to deal with them.' There is much media coverage and literature out today about the poblems with educational standards, however, this chapter looks at it from a different angle. It examines what the standars are and provides concrete practices on how to meet these standards while still making the ducation process and enriching one for the students.
I appreciated the opportunity to read the story of Ms. Rodriguez and her class, It encouraged me to jump in and try these methods. It was nice to see the theory being put into practice and implemented with great success.
Overall, this selection of readings gave me a whole new way of looking at the practice of evalustion and assessment. Once again I was brought back to my teaching roots founded in Montessori philosophy which outlines in itsguidelines for teachers the need to respect the child or student first and foremost. The elements of evaluation and assessment descibed in this chapter not only has evolved into a tool of teaching that empowers the student and helps them develop not only the specific skills being addressed by the subjects they are learning but also develops important quality characteristics important in life. They are learning responsibility, accountability, independence and many more beautiful traits. Along with these qualities students are hopefully able to learn in a more enriching environment.
The whole concept of portfolios is a new one for me. I think now that how unrealistic is it to asssess the child without seeing any of their work in front of me and basically only going on my most recent encounter with the child to write an assessment. I started journal writing a few years ago after having seen it at another school during and observation, and the children delighted in sharing their stories. However, this still only appealed to a few students, but what I should have done was searched through trial and error to find some way of connecting with these children and engaging them in reading.This chapter was extremely helpful in suggesting the many other ways I can invove the students in participating in their own learning process.
The idea of self evaluation is a new concept for me in relation to students but I was certainly acquainted with it as an employee in the business world 15 to 20 years ago. I actually had a real problem with this idea and always was suspicious that their was some other motive for asking me to evaluste myself. I truly do beleive that students will be honest when evaluating themselves and can benefit from this exercise. I observed a 4th grade class in a small Newark elementary school a few months ago who were preparing constanly for the standaized tests. That was the unfortunate aspect of this observation, however, on a positive note, the students evaluated each other as they took turns reading their pieces that they had written in class. CLearly, this worked really well.
Far more radical than any thought in this capter was the idea of having children attend their own conferences that were traditionally held between teacher and parent. I think this is a fabulous idea and removes all the mystery around this meeting for all involved. I know my 13 year would love to attend these meetings than patiently await in fear of what is going to be communicated. As a parent I personally hate conferences where I sit before 5 teachers and have them rattle off a few comments and then rush me out before I ask questions. I guess these really are not conferences because there is no two way communication.
I appreciated how the author dealt with the issues of standars in that she comes right out saying, "standards are here to stay, so we need to understand what they are, and how best to deal with them.' There is much media coverage and literature out today about the poblems with educational standards, however, this chapter looks at it from a different angle. It examines what the standars are and provides concrete practices on how to meet these standards while still making the ducation process and enriching one for the students.
I appreciated the opportunity to read the story of Ms. Rodriguez and her class, It encouraged me to jump in and try these methods. It was nice to see the theory being put into practice and implemented with great success.
Overall, this selection of readings gave me a whole new way of looking at the practice of evalustion and assessment. Once again I was brought back to my teaching roots founded in Montessori philosophy which outlines in itsguidelines for teachers the need to respect the child or student first and foremost. The elements of evaluation and assessment descibed in this chapter not only has evolved into a tool of teaching that empowers the student and helps them develop not only the specific skills being addressed by the subjects they are learning but also develops important quality characteristics important in life. They are learning responsibility, accountability, independence and many more beautiful traits. Along with these qualities students are hopefully able to learn in a more enriching environment.
Friday, July 6, 2007
Summary for Mary, Rachel M., Allison W. and Susan
It seems that both Susan, Rachel and I all were interested in the Maturation Theory and obviously in disagreement with it as most educators would be.Both Rachel and Allison seem to be able to draw and web together what some of the theories in these chapters state along with what they have learned in their child psychology courses. More specifically, Allison speaks about how she realizes that she is currently employing the Classical Conditioning theory in her own class as she teaches in a sequential order. Similar but different, Susan and I seem to be reflecting on our experiences with our own children in relation to these theories.
Allison brings up an intersting point as she dicusses Piaget's theories on the importance of play and how children learn through their direct experiences and social interactions with peers. The point she raises is that his research was done decades ago yet when you think about it his findings were the basis for what we still attempt to achieve today through pre-school education. Allison also points out that Piaget's theory regarding cognitive development is still useful today in helping teachers determine "age appropriate" activities. Susan touches on this same point as she relates a story about her daughter's experience in pre-school and the teacher's expectations for the class based on what she thought was age appropriate, even though Susan was skeptical. Susan was pleasantly surprised when the teacher turned out to be correct in determining what the class would be capable of achieving that year.
We all agreed strongly with The Theory of Literacy Development and Family Literacy Development. Rachel summed it up well when she said she that she felt there was a strong connection between home and school life and that children need to be exposed to reading and other forms of literacy at home as well as in school. Allison felt that in terms of these theories, "parents are not only needed to model fluency, but they should also model the practice of reading so that it becomes a habit to the child." Allison also liked the idea of giving a family survey so she could better understand where a child was coming from in terms of their literary exposure.
Rachel had some interesting comments on the Emergent Literacy Theory in that she said, "it makes sense that children who tend to be good listeners and speakers will be advanced when it comes to reading." She further added that "if they already have a strong foundation on a language, then being able to decode the written word will be easier because they can search their memory baks for words that they are already familiar with.
Vygotsky's Social COnstuctivism seemed to grab most of us in we all could relate as teachers or parents to understanding the "zone of prosimal development. Allison pointed out that this theory she feels is currently in the spotlight and I agree that in a system that is currently trying to become all inclusive, and understanding of Vygotsky's theory is critical. Allison pointed out that this is qute the challenge as a teacher being able to sucessfully differetiate instruction. I think we all concur with this point. Susan elaborated on this theory from another angle in relating how she as a teacher encourages group work in which she is able to act more as a facilitator and the students are able to assist each other or so to speak provide the scaffolding necessary when acknowledging the zone of procimal development. Allison stated that scafolding is part of her everyday teachin method, and Rachel believes that these practices take place even when you are not aware of them taking place.
Rachel, and Allison definitely agreed with the ideathat the process of decoding often bogs down the process of comprehension and ultimately the ability to improve reading skills. Susan complimented this with her comments on choosing texts as teachers that are neither to easy or too difficult, so that they are able to benefit the most from the content and have a pleasant reading experience, and ultimately that is what all these theories we have studies lead us to examine more, how do we make the reading process a most pleasant experience. I think we agree that it takes a mixture of a number of the ideas presented in these theories along with the collabrative efforts of educators, peers, and parents and all that interact with children.
Allison brings up an intersting point as she dicusses Piaget's theories on the importance of play and how children learn through their direct experiences and social interactions with peers. The point she raises is that his research was done decades ago yet when you think about it his findings were the basis for what we still attempt to achieve today through pre-school education. Allison also points out that Piaget's theory regarding cognitive development is still useful today in helping teachers determine "age appropriate" activities. Susan touches on this same point as she relates a story about her daughter's experience in pre-school and the teacher's expectations for the class based on what she thought was age appropriate, even though Susan was skeptical. Susan was pleasantly surprised when the teacher turned out to be correct in determining what the class would be capable of achieving that year.
We all agreed strongly with The Theory of Literacy Development and Family Literacy Development. Rachel summed it up well when she said she that she felt there was a strong connection between home and school life and that children need to be exposed to reading and other forms of literacy at home as well as in school. Allison felt that in terms of these theories, "parents are not only needed to model fluency, but they should also model the practice of reading so that it becomes a habit to the child." Allison also liked the idea of giving a family survey so she could better understand where a child was coming from in terms of their literary exposure.
Rachel had some interesting comments on the Emergent Literacy Theory in that she said, "it makes sense that children who tend to be good listeners and speakers will be advanced when it comes to reading." She further added that "if they already have a strong foundation on a language, then being able to decode the written word will be easier because they can search their memory baks for words that they are already familiar with.
Vygotsky's Social COnstuctivism seemed to grab most of us in we all could relate as teachers or parents to understanding the "zone of prosimal development. Allison pointed out that this theory she feels is currently in the spotlight and I agree that in a system that is currently trying to become all inclusive, and understanding of Vygotsky's theory is critical. Allison pointed out that this is qute the challenge as a teacher being able to sucessfully differetiate instruction. I think we all concur with this point. Susan elaborated on this theory from another angle in relating how she as a teacher encourages group work in which she is able to act more as a facilitator and the students are able to assist each other or so to speak provide the scaffolding necessary when acknowledging the zone of procimal development. Allison stated that scafolding is part of her everyday teachin method, and Rachel believes that these practices take place even when you are not aware of them taking place.
Rachel, and Allison definitely agreed with the ideathat the process of decoding often bogs down the process of comprehension and ultimately the ability to improve reading skills. Susan complimented this with her comments on choosing texts as teachers that are neither to easy or too difficult, so that they are able to benefit the most from the content and have a pleasant reading experience, and ultimately that is what all these theories we have studies lead us to examine more, how do we make the reading process a most pleasant experience. I think we agree that it takes a mixture of a number of the ideas presented in these theories along with the collabrative efforts of educators, peers, and parents and all that interact with children.
My comments on Chapter 5,6, and 7
Well first of all these readings are certainly not something that can be read once. Rather I think I will need to read it again, again and then again. This book is really helping me make sense of much of what I have observed and practiced in our language area of my pre-school class for the last several years. It was interesting to learn that we still need to remain mindful of Piaget's theory regarding cognitive development when developing our lesson plans in order that we can sucessfully meet the needs of each inidividual learner. I guess if we use these theories as a foundation for how we teach instead of just as isolated theories then perhaps the theories can better serve us and the students that we are supoosed to be serving.
I could not help but laugh as I read about the Maturation Theory which was very much in keeping with the idea that "children should be seen and not heard." This was how my parents had often explained the nature of their relationships with those around them as they were growing up. They were to remain silent and stay out of the way and if they did not there were consequences. CLearly this is a theory foreign to us today as a society that has just come out of the "century of the child" with great focus on how to improve the lives of children everywhere through education and health reform. It is interesting to specualte how society may have been somewhat different if in fact educators and parents had not supported the beleif that literacy instruction should not be taught before the age of six. Fortunately, the Theory of Literacy was developed and an understanding that children could not be harmed by being taught to read at an earlier age.
While I agree with much of Holdaway's theory, that the child's environment needs to be literary rich with labels about the classroom, and a great deal of interaction with their peers and parents both verbally and through reading with adults, I still have problems with associating the word natural to reading. I don't know if I am wrong, however the dictionary meaning for natural is "growing spontaneously, without being planted or tended by human hand or arising easily or spontaneously" This being said, I do not agree with Holdaway's description of literacy development as natural. However, I am going off on a tangent and I do not think it is necessary, so back to the theory blog.
I can fully support the Stage Model Theroy in that I completely agree with Stahl and Murray that "word recognition goes through three stages as Ehri called "visual cue reading, phonetic cue reading, and phonological cue reading." I have witnessed this in practice with children as young as 3 to 4 yeas of age and agree that this most reflects the development of literacy in young readers. I recall as a child being able to recognize the Pathmark sign and Sears sign each and every time we passed it on our daily walk. When we travelled on the subways that were elevated outside in the city, I was able to recognize these same words throughout all the boroughs and on all the advertisements. I certainly was in no manner able to read at that time,but I thought I could because I knew those words. Similarly, our family found it humorous when our three year old could recogize the word Starbucks everywhere in the tri-state area.
I also agree with the Emergent Literacy Theory that states that a child's development in listening, speech, reading, and writing are all interrelated and so literacy development starts at birth and is a contiuing process. I do not know if I would have agreed with this two weeks ago, but as I read further and understand wach theory, I think there is a strong correlation between all of these and so yes literacy growth probably does begin at birth.Similarly, I can say without any reservation that the family literacy theory is important to recognize and understand as a teacher trying to make a connection with children from a variety of backgrounds.
I think even more interesting than the theories in this chapter were the suggestions made such as giving parents information about how to engage their children in developing literacy, developing an instruction approach emphasizing visual and auditory readiness along with phonics instruction. More specifically, I found the activites suggested extremely helpful and something I think I would like to employ in our class.
As I read the socio-cultural and socio-linguistic theories I found myself going back again to the thoughts I had when I read the first chapters of this book that as a teacher I do not think that I can possibly associate myself with only one theory as I approach teaching. I think both the socio-cultural and socio lingusitic throies are key to understaniding the child as an individual learner. These theories somewhat overlap with the family literacy theory and also seem somewhat part of the foundation of Vytgotsky's Social Constructivisim theory. As a future teacher of an inclusion class I think the zone of Proximal development is critical to understand before attempting to teach any child.How can we teach without understanding what the child knows and what they do not know. It is only with this information that a teacher can make the learning process an optimal one for all her students. I loved the term scaffolding. When you think about the support necessary for the constuction of a reader it really is appropriate to call the assistance scaffolding, because it encompaases all the elements of support needed to build the reader.
While I liked how the Automatic Information Processing Method described reading as a skill that is learned by building up from the bottom I am not sure I agreed with its criticism of the problems associated with word decoding. Yes decoding may slow down the process and at times derail the process, but with the right guidance I think it is still very necessary to place emphasis on decoding.
In conclusion, I think I now need to reread all of this information again.
I could not help but laugh as I read about the Maturation Theory which was very much in keeping with the idea that "children should be seen and not heard." This was how my parents had often explained the nature of their relationships with those around them as they were growing up. They were to remain silent and stay out of the way and if they did not there were consequences. CLearly this is a theory foreign to us today as a society that has just come out of the "century of the child" with great focus on how to improve the lives of children everywhere through education and health reform. It is interesting to specualte how society may have been somewhat different if in fact educators and parents had not supported the beleif that literacy instruction should not be taught before the age of six. Fortunately, the Theory of Literacy was developed and an understanding that children could not be harmed by being taught to read at an earlier age.
While I agree with much of Holdaway's theory, that the child's environment needs to be literary rich with labels about the classroom, and a great deal of interaction with their peers and parents both verbally and through reading with adults, I still have problems with associating the word natural to reading. I don't know if I am wrong, however the dictionary meaning for natural is "growing spontaneously, without being planted or tended by human hand or arising easily or spontaneously" This being said, I do not agree with Holdaway's description of literacy development as natural. However, I am going off on a tangent and I do not think it is necessary, so back to the theory blog.
I can fully support the Stage Model Theroy in that I completely agree with Stahl and Murray that "word recognition goes through three stages as Ehri called "visual cue reading, phonetic cue reading, and phonological cue reading." I have witnessed this in practice with children as young as 3 to 4 yeas of age and agree that this most reflects the development of literacy in young readers. I recall as a child being able to recognize the Pathmark sign and Sears sign each and every time we passed it on our daily walk. When we travelled on the subways that were elevated outside in the city, I was able to recognize these same words throughout all the boroughs and on all the advertisements. I certainly was in no manner able to read at that time,but I thought I could because I knew those words. Similarly, our family found it humorous when our three year old could recogize the word Starbucks everywhere in the tri-state area.
I also agree with the Emergent Literacy Theory that states that a child's development in listening, speech, reading, and writing are all interrelated and so literacy development starts at birth and is a contiuing process. I do not know if I would have agreed with this two weeks ago, but as I read further and understand wach theory, I think there is a strong correlation between all of these and so yes literacy growth probably does begin at birth.Similarly, I can say without any reservation that the family literacy theory is important to recognize and understand as a teacher trying to make a connection with children from a variety of backgrounds.
I think even more interesting than the theories in this chapter were the suggestions made such as giving parents information about how to engage their children in developing literacy, developing an instruction approach emphasizing visual and auditory readiness along with phonics instruction. More specifically, I found the activites suggested extremely helpful and something I think I would like to employ in our class.
As I read the socio-cultural and socio-linguistic theories I found myself going back again to the thoughts I had when I read the first chapters of this book that as a teacher I do not think that I can possibly associate myself with only one theory as I approach teaching. I think both the socio-cultural and socio lingusitic throies are key to understaniding the child as an individual learner. These theories somewhat overlap with the family literacy theory and also seem somewhat part of the foundation of Vytgotsky's Social Constructivisim theory. As a future teacher of an inclusion class I think the zone of Proximal development is critical to understand before attempting to teach any child.How can we teach without understanding what the child knows and what they do not know. It is only with this information that a teacher can make the learning process an optimal one for all her students. I loved the term scaffolding. When you think about the support necessary for the constuction of a reader it really is appropriate to call the assistance scaffolding, because it encompaases all the elements of support needed to build the reader.
While I liked how the Automatic Information Processing Method described reading as a skill that is learned by building up from the bottom I am not sure I agreed with its criticism of the problems associated with word decoding. Yes decoding may slow down the process and at times derail the process, but with the right guidance I think it is still very necessary to place emphasis on decoding.
In conclusion, I think I now need to reread all of this information again.
Monday, July 2, 2007
Language Acquisition
I think it may have been easier for me to answer how children acquire language prior to reading the language acquisition articles. While studying the Maria Montessori's method of teaching I was fascinated by the concept of "the sensitive period for language." Similar to the Nativist Theory, Montessori's views on language agreed with Chomsky in that she felt that children were endowed with special powers that help them acquire language. She believed that the sensitive period for language begins long before the child is able to speak supporting this with the example of how a child of four months can be observed intently watching the mouth of a another person speaking. Although these sounds may be senseless to a child, they begin to grasp the concept that moving there lips and mouth together eventually vibrate resulting in sound. Children then begin to practice a variety of sounds and do not only mimic what they hear in their environment but attempt to make the sounds that they are most attracted to in their environment.
I bring up Montessori and her theories on language only because it helps me make sense of the nativist therory and the non-nativist theory. However, that being said I feel I am on the fence about accepting one specific theory that explains language acquisition. I strongly agree with Chomsky's belief that children are hard wired with a language acquisition device and how or why this is a beautiful mystery to me. This belief is supported by Montessori's studies that indicate there is a sensitive period in which children have this innate ability to absorb and learn language. This theory is also supported by Eric Lenneberg who proposed the Critical Period Hypothesis claiming that language acquisition ends at 12 years of age. However I think the lines of all these theories are gray and can overlap with the competition model and social interaction model of non-nativists. Children may have an innate ability to acquire language during a very specific period of their early life, but equally as critical to acquiring this skill is their exposure to social interaction. Evidence in recent years has indicated that children possibly hear sounds when in the womb, and quickly recognize their mothers voices shortly after birth. Therefore, the need for verbal interaction is absolutely necessary for young children, and one without the other would not result in full language development.
I recently had a family of four children that attended our pre-school and were able to speak Spanish and English fluently by age 3 even though neither of their parents spoke Spanish. The explanation is an easy one when you consider the three factors that they had a Spanish speaking nanny and both parents worked long hours as attorneys in the city maximizing the children's exposure to Spanish everyday assuring the critical sensitive period of their lives for learning language. Yes they had an innate ability to learn language during this critical period, but they also needed the social and verbal interaction with their Spanish speaking nanny.
In conclusion, I believe language is acquired by the child's innate ability as well as their interactions in their environment. However, I do believe that language can still be learned at a later period in a person's life, but as illustrated in Ciaran O"Riodan's article, it is not an easy task. Clearly the critical period of language acquisition has passed which requires the individual learner to expend a lot more effort in acquiring a new language.
I believe that this all ties in with reading in that both language acquisition and reading are similar in that interaction is a key element in order for either to be facilitated in a child. Obviously a child has to have some understanding of language and words before they are able to read. However, adult modeling is as critical to reading as it is to language acquisition. Children need the social interaction of adults reading to them or watching adults read as they earlier watched the mouths of adults move and heard sounds come from the movement as they developed their own language skills.I think that reading builds on the development of language skills, so if you lack in language acquisition, there will probably be a lag in reading achievement. However, I do not think that good language skills necessarily assures good reading skills. Reading is not an innate skill that is nurtured from birth. As has been the case evidenced over and over by many literacy organizations, reading can be learned at any age and late readers can achieve the same skill level as readers sho began fluently reading at an early age. In addition there are many other factors that can affect a child's ability learning to read among which include a variety of learning disabilities. So, yes there is a strong connection but there are differences in the characteristics of both and how they are developed.
SIDE NOTE
On a side note, I think it is very disappointing that in the year 2007 in the incredibly global environment we live in, America still lags significantly in the education of other languages. Throughout the 1970's, I visited Ireland every summer for 3 months at a time where I saw my young cousins become proficient in at least three languages (French, Irish, and English). Many of them easily went on to pick up Italian, German and even a few Arabic as adults. Still today many American students are no exposed to a second language until middle or high school. This puts our society at a great disadvantage and is a major flaw in our education system.
I bring up Montessori and her theories on language only because it helps me make sense of the nativist therory and the non-nativist theory. However, that being said I feel I am on the fence about accepting one specific theory that explains language acquisition. I strongly agree with Chomsky's belief that children are hard wired with a language acquisition device and how or why this is a beautiful mystery to me. This belief is supported by Montessori's studies that indicate there is a sensitive period in which children have this innate ability to absorb and learn language. This theory is also supported by Eric Lenneberg who proposed the Critical Period Hypothesis claiming that language acquisition ends at 12 years of age. However I think the lines of all these theories are gray and can overlap with the competition model and social interaction model of non-nativists. Children may have an innate ability to acquire language during a very specific period of their early life, but equally as critical to acquiring this skill is their exposure to social interaction. Evidence in recent years has indicated that children possibly hear sounds when in the womb, and quickly recognize their mothers voices shortly after birth. Therefore, the need for verbal interaction is absolutely necessary for young children, and one without the other would not result in full language development.
I recently had a family of four children that attended our pre-school and were able to speak Spanish and English fluently by age 3 even though neither of their parents spoke Spanish. The explanation is an easy one when you consider the three factors that they had a Spanish speaking nanny and both parents worked long hours as attorneys in the city maximizing the children's exposure to Spanish everyday assuring the critical sensitive period of their lives for learning language. Yes they had an innate ability to learn language during this critical period, but they also needed the social and verbal interaction with their Spanish speaking nanny.
In conclusion, I believe language is acquired by the child's innate ability as well as their interactions in their environment. However, I do believe that language can still be learned at a later period in a person's life, but as illustrated in Ciaran O"Riodan's article, it is not an easy task. Clearly the critical period of language acquisition has passed which requires the individual learner to expend a lot more effort in acquiring a new language.
I believe that this all ties in with reading in that both language acquisition and reading are similar in that interaction is a key element in order for either to be facilitated in a child. Obviously a child has to have some understanding of language and words before they are able to read. However, adult modeling is as critical to reading as it is to language acquisition. Children need the social interaction of adults reading to them or watching adults read as they earlier watched the mouths of adults move and heard sounds come from the movement as they developed their own language skills.I think that reading builds on the development of language skills, so if you lack in language acquisition, there will probably be a lag in reading achievement. However, I do not think that good language skills necessarily assures good reading skills. Reading is not an innate skill that is nurtured from birth. As has been the case evidenced over and over by many literacy organizations, reading can be learned at any age and late readers can achieve the same skill level as readers sho began fluently reading at an early age. In addition there are many other factors that can affect a child's ability learning to read among which include a variety of learning disabilities. So, yes there is a strong connection but there are differences in the characteristics of both and how they are developed.
SIDE NOTE
On a side note, I think it is very disappointing that in the year 2007 in the incredibly global environment we live in, America still lags significantly in the education of other languages. Throughout the 1970's, I visited Ireland every summer for 3 months at a time where I saw my young cousins become proficient in at least three languages (French, Irish, and English). Many of them easily went on to pick up Italian, German and even a few Arabic as adults. Still today many American students are no exposed to a second language until middle or high school. This puts our society at a great disadvantage and is a major flaw in our education system.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)