How Teachers Use Language Strategies to Control Pupil's Behaviour - Essay Example

? How Teachers use language Strategies in Schools to Control Behaviour Increase Pupil Participation and to Facilitate Learning. Inserts His/Her Name Customer Inserts Grade Course Customer Inserts Tutor’s Name 9 May 2011 Language strategies will increase the learning process. The research focuses on the use of language as a means of increasing learning in the classroom environment. The research focuses on the importance of incorporating culture and other inputs to the classroom learning environment. “Life is largely a process of adaptation to the circumstances in which we exist. A perennial give-and-take has been going on between living matter and its inanimate surroundings, between one living being and another, ever since the dawn of life in the prehistoric oceans” (Morgan, 1997;9). Teachers use language strategies in schools to control student behavior, increase pupil participation, and to Facilitate Learning. Teachers use language strategies in schools to control behavior, increase pupil participation, and to facilitate learning. Gary Clabaugh (Clabaugh, 2010) emphasized Lev Vygotsky emphasized that children with special learning needs need special education teaching strategies. Katharine Butler (2002) proposed children with special learning needs include the deaf-mutes and students with Down syndrome. With proper education, every person’s need is supplied and one’s life fulfilled. Lev Vygotsky believes that the child’s development is grounded social learning through internalization of culture and social relationships. Lev Vygotsky believes that the development of language, originate in social interaction and that the social relations organize them, have shown to be of great practical use. Specifically, the ruling class continues to decide which knowledge and skills are worth studying inside the classroom. The ruling class, government leaders and other top rank officers want to preserve the current status quo by teaching the students what the leadership wants to be taught, not to rebel against the current leadership. Lev Vygotsky proposes that the current teaching strategy should be stopped. The classroom environment should be geared towards metamorphosing the current classroom topics in terms of social and economic injustice into utopian righteousness. Lev Vygotsky believes the children who are mentally challenged should be taught in a classroom environment that is comprehensive, inclusive, and humanitarian in nature. The best way to teach a child is to internalized skills or psychological tools must be harnessed to gain mastery over one’s behavior and cognition. Thus, learning will increase if the person develops one’s speech and its relation to thought. The child relies on one’s own perception to make sense of objects that appear to them to be unrelated. For example, the child creates one’s subjective relationship between objects and then mistakes one’s egocentric perspective for reality. This falls under incoherent coherence. Thus, the child learns by committing mistakes along the way. The child corrects one’s mistake until the goal or objective is finally achieved. The child includes all inputs, both successful and unsuccessful, are gathered and used to determine the proper way of doing or seeing things. Thus, the teachers must accept mistakes as part of the child’s learning process. The child’s mistakes are used as a stepping stone to generating the proper result in any activity. Social interaction plays a major role in transforming prior knowledge. Thus, specific functions are not given to a person at birth but given as cultural and social patterns. Lev Vygotsky believes that it is human nature for a person to learn best with the cooperation of other human beings. The child’s learning is grounded on one’s reaction to environmental inputs. Thus, the child’s and the teacher’s ability to adapt to any given situation separates humans form the lower animal forms. Language increases the child’s and the teacher’s learning capacity. Basically, the child learns through interaction with the teacher and other persons on the social level. To explain, a child will learn faster if one studies with a more capable student. In addition, Virginia P. Richmond, James C. McCroskey (1992;19) reiterated “It is ironic that although communication educators and teacher educators view oral communication as critical for effective instruction, communication educators and teacher educators have not merged their knowledge bases to prepare teachers for the work of teaching and learning. The very assumptions that underlie the classroom management theories taught in current education courses have their bases in the literature of group communication and interpersonal communication”. Forecasting the future, the classroom as a group that has a responsibility to complete, yet made up of diverse personalities who need to come together to create a significant influence on the learning or activity output, requests s on the teacher to model principles of effective communication and effective leadership style. The classroom communication model centers on the learning children as vital contributors. Essential contributors to the children’s own and others' learning, rather than the teacher as the source of all knowledge and as the only one responsible for creating the opportunity to learn, may be new to some people. Nevertheless, the organization and management of the classroom as a learning community has been proven to be a more powerful structure for enhancing the students' academic, social, and personal knowledge and thus has become the model taught in many current education courses. In addition, Virginia P. Richmond, James C. McCroskey (1992) the teaching communication perspective is an important facet of the management of communication messages and the enhancement of learning. Frequently, effective instructional communication is a delicate balance of implement learning strategies that control perceptions, that control behavior, and that ultimately maximize students' potential to learn. Berlo was one of the pioneering communication scholars to acknowledge the interrelationship between communication and learning. The general significance of communication in instruction had not been widely recognized until the 1972 International Communication Association (ICA) convention centered its focal point on the communication and the learning process. One year later, this academic facet of study within the communication discipline had been acknowledged by the establishment of the Instructional Division in ICA which was revised in 1982 to include developmental communication. There are three conclusions about learning that can be drawn from the discussion by Virginia P. Richmond, James C. McCroskey on the subject of power and communication. First, there is a certain amount of power rooted in most relationships. That power can be established in any relationship (e. g., teacher-student, supervisor-employee, opinion leader-follower, wife-husband, husband or wife). Second, power is a perception. One person offers the other power over her or him. If power is not distinguished, power cannot be exerted by another. Third, power and communication are inextricably related. For example, in almost all relationships there is a point when one person will try to exert power over another through communication. According to Virginia P. Richmond, James C. McCroskey (1992; 67) “The teacher plays a vital role the communication process within the classroom learning environment. The above authors stated “Over the last decade we have been examining how teachers employ power in the classroom to manage student on- and off-task behaviors and thus, student cognitive and affective learning. Our research team discovered early on that these issues are both difficult to delineate conceptually and to untangle empirically”. The teacher and students are comfortable, however, that people have a better comprehension of the issues at hand (languages as vital part of the maximization of the learning process after ten years of investigation. By taking into account the teaching environment’s programmatic efforts after almost ten years suggests that people have made substantial progress in both the theoretical and the empirical explication of what had transformed a well-recognized area of instructional communication research. The researchers feel that from what the same team had discovered thus far we can comfortably draw several conclusions for teachers, researchers, and other interested consumers regarding teachers' communication of power and influence in the classroom and correspondingly, students' feedbacks to the teachers' attempts at being under control. Part of being able to implement what had been recommended to teachers by a body of literature includes they should also comprehend the process the research had been crafted and implemented. Unfortunately, practitioners are not typically assisted by investigators to understand the origins, evolution, or the actual implementation of the research activity. In an effort to reorganize this hurdle, the main purpose of this research is to overview in general terms the origins and the continuing development of the program of research referred to in the instructional communication literature as authority in the classroom environment. One such language strategy is the use of questions to increase interest in the topic at hand. Ference Marten (Marten, 2004;113) theorized “questions is perhaps the most thoroughly researched area of classroom learning. This is probably because it is the most distinctive feature of classroom discourse. A lesson is a speech event where people come together and engage in an activity referred to as “learning.” Lessons are organized in such a way that there is at least one person in the classroom who is the primary knower and who is responsible for disseminating knowledge to the others. The knowledge gap between the primary knower—that is, the teacher—and the secondary knower—that is, the students—vests authority in the former in determining the direction that the lesson will take, the activities that will be conducted, the questions that will be asked, and what constitutes appropriate answers to these questions”. When a classroom tutor or instructor asks a question, the teacher’s main aim is not to obtain information that the teacher does not currently posses, but to determine if the students have the lacking data indicated in the question. When a teacher queries, “What time is it, Johnny?” Johnny knows that he is instructed to tell the teacher the current time even if there is a big clock hanging on the wall within the four walls of the classroom environment that everybody can see. In addition, Ference Marten (2004; 165) opined “the qualitatively different ways in which learning can be experienced: The learner may focus largely on the situation in which the phenomenon is embedded, or on the phenomenon as it is revealed in the situation. They observed that the aspects of the phenomenon and the relationships between them that are discerned and held in awareness simultaneously determine the way the phenomenon is experienced by the individual”. Therefore, the same observable data that can be observed in qualitatively diverse ways by persons is due to the aspects and the relationships that they distinguish to be diverse, and what is should be set into place within the confines of classroom or other learning condition is held in awareness of the different learning styles. When this happens, the object of the learning process will differ from the enacted object of learning. To bring about the successful learning process in the classroom environment, it is compulsory that the professor or tutor and the student must share a large common ground in relation to the object of learning. The common ground clearly includes the use of a common language to facilitate transfer of information from one person to another. The task before the classroom professor, therefore, is divided into three important sections. First, the teacher should make sure that the classroom learning conditions are there for the student to maximize one’s learning prowess. The successful classroom environment must learn to understand and similarly hold in awareness the critical aspects of the object of learning, and the relationships between these aspects. Secondly, the teacher must be made to understand the students’ experience of the object of learning, and be attentive to signals from learners indicating a lack of common ground. Thirdly, the teacher should try to widen the shared common ground. These three classroom learning responsibilities have very little probability of being successfully implemented of each other; the three are evidently intertwined. In addition, Myron Dembo (Dembo, 2000;97) proposed “Problems in time management can be related to one or more of the following: uncertainty of what is to be accomplished (i.e., lack of goals), failure to break down the goals into a series of tasks, or lack of awareness about how to manage time or how much time is needed to complete a given task. One of the most important factors influencing the attainment of goals is the efficient use of time”. In the high school classroom setting, a majority of the teacher’s and the students’ school time had be set up because the students are within the portals of the school environment within a majority of each school day. For a majority of the time period, the teacher’s time management technique is focused on structuring one’s study time after school. Also, college learning life is more strenuous compared to studying in the elementary classroom environment. The class schedule can differ greatly; for example, the teachers can be allowed to open classes three or four times a week and can also finish the students’ lessons. In general, you have to manage more hours of time and often do not have their parents around to offer "suggestions" for how one learn the subject discussed in the classroom. In short, to be successful in studying at higher levels includes, the parents must play a vital role in encouraging and tutoring the children. Beth Haslett (Haslett, 1987;3) theorized “Both communication and pragmatics, as fields of study, may be typified as pre-paradigmatic. Pragmatics -- the use of language in context -- has emerged as a serious research area in several disciplines. Linguists have concentrated primarily on syntax and semantics, and have only recently focused increasing attention on pragmatics. However, most linguists now acknowledge that an adequate understanding of language itself will rely heavily on pragmatics. Psycholinguists have focused on the role language plays in information processing, memory and learning. And sociologists now emphasize the role of verbal communication in social organization and social cooperation”. A separate discipline, that centers on prioritising verbal communication, has become an increasingly focus of research. Thus, from a different set of perspectives, the focus of learning language usage is currently being understood as a necessity and not a luxury. Since language is the major symbolic code implemented in the transfer of information from the sender (teacher) to the receiver (student), pragmatic teaching strategies could be usefully implemented to the research of communicative processes. It is suggested that pragmatics be explained as the study of the important basic principles of meaningful language use -- that is, a research on how verbal communication works and how to enhance the verbal communication activity. The study of how the students and the classroom lecturer maximize language to discover how the teacher and the students converse in oral fashion (Haslett, 1987). Janet Movies (1992) emphasized it is typical for most classroom to have fast learners and slow learners. In addition, Beth Haslett (1987) reiterated despite the difference of views on the nature of how communication travels, most scholars define them in terms of the knowledge that humans have about how to interact in a specific setting. That knowledge may differ from background commonsense knowledge in a particular culture to very particular, personalized knowledge about a determinate type of context, which indicates an individual's extensive experience in that context. Even though it is commonly presumed that background knowledge contributes a role in interpreting utterances, Gumperz (1982; 85) notes that “still very much a matter of dispute are the questions of what form the background knowledge, in terms of which we react to what we see and hear, takes, to what extent it is shared, how it enters into situated meaning assessments, and how the relevant cognitive processes are to be represented”. Further, Joan Hall (Hall, 2000;1) opined “In the field of second language acquisition (SLA), interaction has long been considered important in language learning. However, much of this research has been based on a traditional psycholinguistic perspective of language and learning”. In this point of view, language is presumed to be a discrete group of linguistic systems that is external to the learner of the message or language, whereas learning is seen as the process of collecting the structural components of these systems into prearranged mental activities. Likewise, Robert Blake (2008) opined incorporating the time to second language use in learning the class lessons is time consuming and sometimes frustrating. Often the second language student finds it an uphill battle to learn the native language. However, the students’ and the teacher’s perseverance and dedication will spell the difference between the onset of either success or failure within the classroom situation (Ohta, 2001). Based on the above discussion, language learning use strategies will increase the learning process. The research centers on the use of language as a medium of increasing learning in the classroom environment. Culture and other inputs are important to enhance the classroom learning environment. Indeed, teachers use language strategies in the classroom scenes to control student behavior, increase pupil participation, and to Facilitate Learning. REFERENCES Blake, R. (2008) Brave New Digital Classroom. London, University Press. Butler, K. (2002) Speaking, Reading, and Writing in Children with Language Learning Disabilities. London, Lawrence Erlbaum Press. Clabaugh, G. (2010) The Educational Theory of Lev Vygotsky. London, J Wiley & Sons Press. Dembo, M. (2000) Motivation and Learning Strategies. London, Lawrence Erlbaum. Hall, J. (2000) Second and Foreign Language Learning Through Classroom Interaction. London, Lawrence Erlbaum Press. Haslett, B. (1987) Communication: Strategic Action in Context. London, Lawrence Erlbaum Press. Marten, F. (2004) Classroom Discourse and the Space of Learning. London, Lawrence Erlbaum Press. Morgan, H. (1997) Cognitve Styles and Classroom Learning. London, Praeger Press. Movies, J. (1992) Organising for Learning in the Primary Classroom. London, University Press. Ohta, A. (2001) Second Language Aquisition Processes in the Classroom. London, Lawrence Erlbaum Press. Richmond, V. (1992) Power in the Clasroom: Control, and Concern. New York, Lawrence Erbaum Press. Read More