Preparation is Key...
As
I prepare for my English teaching abroad experience, it is useful for
me to read a collection of material I can use in helping English
Language Learners (ELLs) establish a solid foundation for reading and
communicate competence, in their writing. David and Yvonne Freeman’s
(2004) book Essential Linguistics: What You Need to Know to Teach Reading, ESL, Spelling, Phonics, and Grammar
describes useful theories, techniques, and practices to aid instructors
in effectively educating ELLs. As the title suggests, there is a focus
on phonics, spelling and reading, within developing a student’s phonetic
schema. Throughout the text there is a consistent comparison of two
theories, which concentrate on developing ELLs’ linguistic skills, for
academic reading and writing.
World and Sociopsycholinguistic Recognition theories believe in two distinctive, opposing methods all students use to cultivate their language skills. World Recognition (WR) expresses the belief that language must be learned. WR focuses on explicit instructions that are attentive to phonics, sight words, and word parts. Preteaching vocabulary for background building is a major competent of this method. The authors address some of the challenges with preteaching vocabulary in the absence of background building for reading, such as: a difficulty in deciding which words to teach. Choosing particular words that all students are not familiar can be a waste for students that do know the vocabulary. In preteaching words, effective teachers create activities that build concepts connecting to vocabulary, without that, students may learn to spell words and even the definition of words but not how to properly incorporate words into their communication.
This figure provides a breakdown of the two theories.
World and Sociopsycholinguistic Recognition theories believe in two distinctive, opposing methods all students use to cultivate their language skills. World Recognition (WR) expresses the belief that language must be learned. WR focuses on explicit instructions that are attentive to phonics, sight words, and word parts. Preteaching vocabulary for background building is a major competent of this method. The authors address some of the challenges with preteaching vocabulary in the absence of background building for reading, such as: a difficulty in deciding which words to teach. Choosing particular words that all students are not familiar can be a waste for students that do know the vocabulary. In preteaching words, effective teachers create activities that build concepts connecting to vocabulary, without that, students may learn to spell words and even the definition of words but not how to properly incorporate words into their communication.
This figure provides a breakdown of the two theories.
Word Recognition View
|
Sociopsycholinguistic View
|
Goal: Identify words to get to the meaning of a text
|
Goal: Use background knowledge and cues from three language systems to construct meaning from a text
|
Method: Use phonics rules to sound out words and learn a set of sight words to identify words that do not follow phonics rules
|
Method: Use graphophonics as just one of three language cueing systems to gain meaning from a text
|
Learn to break words into parts to identify them
|
Study words parts only during linguistics investigations
|
Classroom activity: Learn vocabulary in advance of reading
|
Classroom activity: Read to acquire vocabulary by encountering words in context
|
Read orally so the teacher can help students learn to identify words and can supply words students don’t know
|
Read silently using the strategies the teacher has helped students internalize to construct meaning from a te
|
Figure 2 – 1.Two views of reading (Freeman & Freeman, p25)
Sociopsycholinguistic Recognition (SR) claims the ability to use written language is to some degree, innate, and can only be acquired (Freeman & Freeman, p24). The SR theory emphasizes vocabulary development through reading, in contrast to exercises that focus on words themselves. Educators with the sociopsycholinguistic views of reading provide opportunities for students to read. Reading accounts for an extensive amount of vocabulary development, as the average person learns approximately 720 words a year. ELLs need to learn or acquire three times as more words per year than the average native speaker for language proficiency (Freeman & Freeman, p200). The Deborah Short’s (2007) article Developing Academic Literacy in Adolescent English Language highlights foreign-born learners have fewer resources at the secondary level and less time to learn English and master academic content. There is a significant amount of language instruction and practice that must occur for ELLs to be successful in their academics. Therefore, educators must plan carefully when incorporating time for in class reading sessions. Time constraints, as well as meeting standard requirements are essential factors whether reading material is assigned by the teacher or selected by the reader.
Overall this book is a tool educators can use in teaching Ells; however, the limitations of the text include: lack of explicit suggestions on how to assist secondary educators in teaching ELLs methods to increase communicative competence and differentiate instruction techniques/supplemental aids for mainstream classes. There is an overwhelming amount of phonology information, along with the development of student’s phonetic skills that concerns me, because of the time that is lost if this is the primary focus, for the duration of the semester. In order for ELLs to comprehend word meanings and figure out the pronunciation of unfamiliar words found in literature, basic phonetic knowledge is essential. Intensive phonetic instruction at the start of an academic year, in unison with background language content would be useful for ELLs, which will raise students’ phonemic awareness for reading and spelling (writing) purposes. There was not enough focus on grammar instruction, from the WR or SR perspective, for elementary or secondary learners. The text could have included more details regarding how to teach secondary students content vocabulary, while students are learning academic skills in a nonnative language.
Personally, I believe both theories are accurate to some degree; students can both learn and acquire language. Students benefit from WR and SR instruction, which up to a teacher’s discretion. Educators help students say what students want to say and also give them strategies so they can continue to communicate when they don’t have the linguistic resources yet (Freeman & Freeman 34), supports my teaching philosophy. Our job is to the use the tools available to create memorable learning experiences, especially to build upon all students’ reading and writing skills.
Works Cited
Freeman, D. E., & Freeman, Y. S. (2004). Essential Linguistics: What You Need to Know to Teach Reading, ESL, Spelling, Phonics, and Grammar. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Short, D. (2007). Developing Academic Literacy in Adolescent English Language. Center for Applied Linguistics.
Sociopsycholinguistic Recognition (SR) claims the ability to use written language is to some degree, innate, and can only be acquired (Freeman & Freeman, p24). The SR theory emphasizes vocabulary development through reading, in contrast to exercises that focus on words themselves. Educators with the sociopsycholinguistic views of reading provide opportunities for students to read. Reading accounts for an extensive amount of vocabulary development, as the average person learns approximately 720 words a year. ELLs need to learn or acquire three times as more words per year than the average native speaker for language proficiency (Freeman & Freeman, p200). The Deborah Short’s (2007) article Developing Academic Literacy in Adolescent English Language highlights foreign-born learners have fewer resources at the secondary level and less time to learn English and master academic content. There is a significant amount of language instruction and practice that must occur for ELLs to be successful in their academics. Therefore, educators must plan carefully when incorporating time for in class reading sessions. Time constraints, as well as meeting standard requirements are essential factors whether reading material is assigned by the teacher or selected by the reader.
Overall this book is a tool educators can use in teaching Ells; however, the limitations of the text include: lack of explicit suggestions on how to assist secondary educators in teaching ELLs methods to increase communicative competence and differentiate instruction techniques/supplemental aids for mainstream classes. There is an overwhelming amount of phonology information, along with the development of student’s phonetic skills that concerns me, because of the time that is lost if this is the primary focus, for the duration of the semester. In order for ELLs to comprehend word meanings and figure out the pronunciation of unfamiliar words found in literature, basic phonetic knowledge is essential. Intensive phonetic instruction at the start of an academic year, in unison with background language content would be useful for ELLs, which will raise students’ phonemic awareness for reading and spelling (writing) purposes. There was not enough focus on grammar instruction, from the WR or SR perspective, for elementary or secondary learners. The text could have included more details regarding how to teach secondary students content vocabulary, while students are learning academic skills in a nonnative language.
Personally, I believe both theories are accurate to some degree; students can both learn and acquire language. Students benefit from WR and SR instruction, which up to a teacher’s discretion. Educators help students say what students want to say and also give them strategies so they can continue to communicate when they don’t have the linguistic resources yet (Freeman & Freeman 34), supports my teaching philosophy. Our job is to the use the tools available to create memorable learning experiences, especially to build upon all students’ reading and writing skills.
Works Cited
Freeman, D. E., & Freeman, Y. S. (2004). Essential Linguistics: What You Need to Know to Teach Reading, ESL, Spelling, Phonics, and Grammar. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Short, D. (2007). Developing Academic Literacy in Adolescent English Language. Center for Applied Linguistics.
Comments