Source of Learning Differences in Second Language Acquisition - Coursework Example

Title: The Effect that Age, as a Source of Learning Differences in Second Language Acquisition, has on Learning Processes, Outcomes and Teaching Topic Number: Student Name: Student Number: Unit Name: Unity Code: Total Word Count: 2779 Every single human being is unique and different. No two human beings, including identical twins, can ever be exactly the same. They may have certain similarities with respect to appearance, physique, temperament and so on but they will also have several differences in other areas of their being. One area where these differences that separate one individual from one another are very apparent is with respect to the learning of languages, particularly Second Language Acquisition (SLA) (Baker, 2006, p. 630). Research within SLA has long incorporated the concept of individual difference variables in their field of study. That said, while SLA researchers are considered to appreciate the central role that individual differences play in the learning process, there has been little consistency and unity when it comes to the definition of concepts and development of theoretical foundations. Nevertheless, SLA does acknowledge the very basic fact that there do exist fundamental individual differences in L2 (second language) acquisition (Saville-Troike, 2012, p. 77). Ellis (1985) categorized these individual differences into two main categories: personal factors and general factors. Personal factors are those factors intrinsic to an individual and include things such as attitudes to the teacher and/or subject being taught; group dynamics, and individual learning methods. The general factors are the universal considerations that come into play in the learning process and include intelligence, motivation, aptitude and age (Ellis, 1997, p. 73). It is against this backdrop that the following discussion will therefore analyse the various individual differences in second language acquisition with particular emphasis on age and its impact on learning processes, outcomes and teaching for a comprehensive overview of this most critical topic in linguistics. The Effect that Age, as a Source of Learning Differences in Second Language Acquisition, has on Learning Processes, Outcomes and Teaching Human beings belong to the same species and as a result, they share the same anatomical framework. Despite this fact, they differ significantly with regard to a number of parameters. These parameters are referred to as individual differences (ID) in SLA. Whereas several individual differences are very obvious and visible, others can only be determined by systematically observing behaviour. One common observation stemming from this is that certain people appear to be better at learning L2 and using it than other people are. The question that therefore requires answering is— why? What is the reason behind the fact that two learners could be in the same classroom; attending the same classes during the same time frames; and being taught by the same teacher with the same learning materials and yet they are not equal with respect to their L2 acquisition? Traditional ID experts have arrived at a number of internal characteristics to explain these individual differences and they include factors such as personality, motivation and intelligence. A more dynamic viewpoint, however, is slowly developing which highlights the very fundamental complexity of SLA. They posit that, while internal characteristics do play a role in SLA, this contribution only takes place in relation to the context. Individuals are rarely ever in the same context from the start to the end of their lives and as such, their previous histories shape their future directions (Ritchie and Bhatia, p. 623). The researcher’s further point out that brains are unique as a result of genetic and epigenetic factors, just like fingerprints, but unlike fingerprints, brains are constantly changing and adapting during the entire course of life (Schumann, 2004). This points to the plasticity of the brain and as such, skills and behaviour easily change within anatomic, physiological, and genetic limits. This plasticity also indicates that the shape and connections in a person's brain are affected by the person’s actions (Ritchie and Bhatia, p. 623). The changes to the brain of a second language (L2) learner are therefore without a doubt very considerable. In a study conducted by Mechelli et.al on bilingual and monolingual learners (2004), it was discovered that there was a growth in the density of gray matter in the left side of the brain of people who spoke two languages when compared to those who only spoke one. This particular area of the brain has been discovered to become activated when verbal-fluency tasks are being done. From these findings, it is evident that the brains of people who have started to learn an L2 differ from each other, that the process of learning results in a physical change to the brains, and that individual differences in the brain contribute towards their being individual differences in the rate of development of the L2 (Ritchie and Bhatia, p. 624). Age is one major source of individual differences in L2 learning that causes such changes in the brain. The prevailing belief in relation to age and L2 learning has been that younger children are better at L2 acquisition than older people. It is largely felt that children are not as inhibited as adult learners, their sense of identity with people who talk their native language (apart from relatives and caregivers) is less, and their capacity to intake simplified language is greater than that of older people which acts as a boost to their learning (Saville-Troike, 2012, p. 84). This certainly has implications for the teaching of L2 to children as it indicates that children have a greater receptiveness towards learning a second language than older people are. As such, the teaching of second languages should be done when the individual is a child as this will allow them to be more receptive to the language without any biases or preconceived notions. Saville-Troike (2012, p. 82) nevertheless points out that while this common belief does have some merit, the evidence for it is in fact amazingly vague. One reason for the ambiguity in this area is that some researches consider success to be the initial rate of learning (where, despite the prevailing beliefs, older learners are actually at a greater advantage than children). Another reason is that other studies equate success with the ultimate achievement (where individuals who started learning L2 as children appear to be at an advantage). Other studies further differ, some gauging “success” based on the proximity of the learner’s pronunciation to that of a native speaker’s while others consider success to be measurable by their fluency or functional competence. These findings and opinions are clearly conflicting and confusing and require further in depth probing since the question the impact of age on L2 outcomes has been a major problem in SLA for many years. Saville-Troike (2012, p. 84) further explains the concept of the critical period with respect to L1 language acquisition which is the idea that children only have a short period of time within which normal acquisition is possible. After this time period, various changes in the brain cause it to lose its plasticity (the ability to take on the new activities that learning language requires). People who for whatever reason lack the linguistic input that is required to offset L1 acquisition within this critical period will not be able to learn any language the way other people do. One notable example that offers rare evidence for this is the story of one girl called Genie who had been abused and cut off from all sources of language input until the age of 13. Despite many years of efforts to teach her, the girl did not acquire the language skills for her first language that her peers who acquired it in early childhood had. Lenneberg (1967) earlier posited that the critical period is likewise applicable to SLA just as it is in L1 acquisition and that it is the reason behind why nearly all L2 speakers, if they start learning the language after the cut-off age, have a “foreign accent”. Long (1990), on the other hand, argues that there are several periods that impose restrictions on different areas of language and as such, there are different cut off ages for the learning of phonology, syntax, and so on. Long (1990) however argues that these cut-off points are not absolute—it is just that the likelihood for L2 acquisition to be complete is greater if commenced in childhood as opposed to an older age. This claim is quite plausible considering the fact that a few older L2 learners are able to attain native-like proficiency though they are certainly in the minority (Saville-Troike, 2012, p. 83). The implication for this with respect to L2 teaching is therefore clear— to increase the chances of L2 learners acquiring native-like proficiency in their second language especially as pertains to pronunciation, it is best to start teaching it at an earlier age. Starting at an older age will more than likely lessen the completeness of the acquisition. That said, it is not so clear cut. As mentioned earlier, L2 acquisition is very dynamic and complex and can thus not be reduced to the simple idea that young people acquire L2 faster than older people. Whereas the majority are unanimous with regard to the view that younger learners generally attain greater levels of proficiency in the second language, there is equally compelling evidence that show that older learner grasp faster in the initial stages. And, whereas “brain plasticity” is considered to be an advantage that younger learners have, older learners have an edge since they have a bigger learning capacity in addition to having a superior analytic ability in the short term as older learners can better comprehend and apply grammatical precepts (Saville-Troike, 2012, p. 84). Newport (1990) is nevertheless of the opinion that “less is more” with regard to grammar because learners in childhood acquire more grammatical intuitions that are similar to that of their native tongue since children are at a non-analytic processing stage. He further points out that a child L2 learner is more likely to succeed in informal and natural learning settings while older learners succeed in formal instructional settings. The implication on teaching of this is that for children, teachers do not have to focus too much on grammar a children acquire it almost naturally. The emphasis on grammar should therefore be more with respect to older learners who have to unlearn the grammatical rules of their native language. In addition, older people need to be taught in formal set ups unlike children who can learn even in informal set ups such as the home. Home schooling/ teaching of the L2 is therefore more applicable for children than it is for adults. The age dynamic for L2 learning processes and outcomes is however much more complex than that and as such, two concepts have been developed with respect to evaluating age and L2 in a much deeper manner, i.e.: the concepts of the ‘end state’ and ‘initial state.’ According to Ritchie and Bhatia (p. 403), the initial state corresponds to the postnatal development at the neurological, cognitive and linguistic (L1) levels. In L2A, however, the initial state and age go hand in hand. To understand this concept, a comparison of the initial state of a child who starts learning a second language at 3 years old and the initial stage of a learners who starts at the age of 18 is necessary. The initial state of the child shows that their knowledge of the L1 is still developing and at this point, there is limited cumulative use of cognitive systems for perceiving, processing and producing the first language. Unlike this 3 year old, the 18 year old L2 learner already possesses a completely developed neurological representation of the L1 grammar in addition to automatized neuromuscular routines for pronouncing the first language, and a well tuned auditory system that allows accurate perception of L1 sounds. As this example shows, differences in the age of L2 learning reveal variations in the initial state of acquisition and vice versa (Ritchie and Bhatia, p. 403). Due to this, the age of acquisition is taken to be the equivalent or alternative for the initial state of L2 acquisition. The age of acquisition is effectively a quantitative measure for the initial state, an intricate metalinguistic variable (that includes previous linguistic knowledge, the level of cognitive development, attitudes towards L2 learning, and so on) that is hard to quantify. Second Language Acquisition researchers use age of acquisition in regressions to predict performance at the L2A end state. According to their research, out of all the all biographical variables, the age of acquisition is often the strongest predictor of end state performance. The "earlier is better" adage is the rule of thumb that suggests this relationship, indicating the L2 should be taught to individuals at the earliest age possible (Ritchie and Bhatia, p. 403). In addition to this, there are physiological factors affecting the ability of older people to learn that need to be considered when considering age as a source of ID’s. As someone ages, there are several physical changes such as the deterioration in vision and hearing all of which compromise learning of the L2. Furthermore, other age related factors such as reduced blood circulation and age- related diseases affect the cognitive function (Merriam, 2001). Empirical evidence, however, seems to suggest that this is not entirely true. In 1927, research findings by Edward Thorndike revealed that an individual’s learning capacity decreased at very slow pace of only approximately 1% annually after the age of 25. Previously, adult teachers had believed that teaching adults was a waste of time. Later research by Thorndike and Lorge however showed that the only deterioration in learning was with regard to the pace of learning, not intellectual ability, and that even the decline in the speed of learning can be reduced through the habitual and regular use of the brain (Knowles, 1980). As such, while the idea that an individual’s ability to learn climaxes during childhood and then declines slowly is true for a majority of people, it is however too simplistic and essentially inadequate in explaining how aging impacts the learning process which is now acknowledged as being very complex and dynamic. The implication of this for teaching and classroom instruction is therefore that teachers should not generalise but they should instead consider all their learners as individuals, regardless of age, because some older learners defy age to emerge as proficient in their second language acquisition. Individualised styles of teaching should therefore be adopted. A final research finding that dispels previous beliefs reveals that whereas younger people perform better with respect to rote memorization, older learners make up for this since they have advanced verbal abilities and judgment (Merriam, 2001). Therefore, while younger people generally learn faster than older people, older people can often make up as a result of their cumulative life experiences which result in better reasoning and judgment abilities. Additional advantages that adult learners may possess are greater pragmatic skills and understanding of L1 which often translates to enhanced L2 use; a greater understanding of the real world which allows adult learners to undertake more difficult tasks even in instances where they have few linguistic resources (Saville-Troike, 2012, p. 84). The implication of all these research findings is that they provide backing for the practise of lifelong learning in healthy individuals even into their 70’s and beyond. Teachers should therefore not decline to teach any individual on the basis of age alone. Any deterioration associated with the aging process can be slowed down through exercise, good health and mentally stimulating activities (Merriam, 2001). In conclusion, it is evident that age is a major source of Individual Differences in L2 learners. Younger learners and older learners differ in a number of ways— younger learners learn faster, have greater brain plasticity and have less inhibitions which makes them more open to a second language while on the other hand, older people have the advantage of enhanced analytic skills, greater learning capacity and a wealth of life experiences with which to draw from and use in their learning process among other differences. A summary of the advantages that both younger and older learners have is outlined in the table below and should be understood by all teachers when considering the students and their ages: Age Differences in SLA Younger Advantage Older Advantage Lack analytical skills Possess analytic skills Possess brain plasticity Higher learning capacity Have less inhibitions Are more pragmatic Less sense of group identity Better knowledge of the first language Are more likely to take in simplified input Possess greater real- world knowledge Source: Saville-Troike (2012, p. 82) The findings may lean towards the notion that the best age group to teach L2 is at childhood but existing literature proves that adults are very capable of learning well into old age and as such, teaching of L2 should be done to learners of all ages. References Baker, Susan C. (2006). The Psychology of the Language Learner: Individual Differences in Second Language Acquisition (review). The Canadian Modern Language Review, 62 (4) Birdsong, D. (ed.) (1999). Second Language Acquisition and the Critical Period Hypothesis: Second Language Research and Methodological Issues. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The Psychology of the Language Learner: Individual Differences in Second Language Acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Ellis, R. (1985). Understanding Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ellis, R. (1997). Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. King, J.E., Anderson, E.L., Corrigan, M.E. (Eds.). (2003). Changing Student Attendance Patterns. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Knowles, M. S. (1980). The Modern Practice of Adult Education. Chicago: Follet Publishing Company. Lenneberg, E. (1967). Biological Foundations of Language. New York: Wiley and Sons. Long, M. H. (1990). Maturational Constraints on Language Development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12: 251–85. Lowy, L., O'Connor, D. (1986). Why education in the later years? Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath and Company. Merriam, S. B. (2001). The new update on adult learning theory. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Newport, E. (1990). Maturational constraints on language learning. Cognitive Science, 14:11–28. Ritchie, William C and Bhatia, Tej K. (2009).The New Handbook of Second Language Acquisition. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited Saville-Troike, M. (2012). Introducing Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Second Edition Sheppard, T. (2002). The learning journey. Navy Supply Corps Newsletter. Retrieved online from http:/findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0NQS/is_3_65/ai_90624361 Singleton, D. (2001). Age and Second Language Acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 21:77–89. Read More