I found today's readings quite interesting, being able to attribute much of that fact to the lengthy discussions on the social aspects of second language acquisition. In my own time studying Spanish, I have always felt that this was much of what was lacking. Vygotsky's Sociocultural Theory states that interaction not only facilitates language learning but is a causative force in acquisition. Yes, one can learn a great deal in the classroom (and become quite skilled, one argument that the article we read for today made against Vygotsky's Sociocultural Theory). However, to become highly skilled I would only imagine how important it is to truly interact with people speaking that language, particularly native speakers rather than one's peers in a classroom setting. I find it interesting that most foreign language classes in the U.S. are set up like that. Yes, they really don't have any other choice, but asking a student to learn a language simply within the walls of a classroom for 45 minutes a day really does no good.
One point in the article was particularly intriquing to me: "According to Vygotsky's formulation of teh ZPD, one "cannot arbitrarily assume that any two learners who attain identical scores on a test are necessarily at the same stage... if all we assess is their actal developmental level. It is imperative to assess the learners' potential level of development as well"" (217). The article goes on to say that two students can make the same error, but the cause of that error, or mistake, may be two completely different things. Perhaps one simply circled the wrong answer; maybe the other truly did not understand the material. Treating these two students the same would not do either of them any good. This idea made me think about how I grade things, how I look at all wrong answers the same, when, in fact, they could have very different causes.
No comments:
Post a Comment