Home Language and Literacy Experiences of Young Children - Essay Example

?Early Language Learning Introduction Although years have been spent in research to answer the questions of how, when, and where do humans first learned language, linguists could only stop with formulating theories, but none was considered an absolute law. An infant’s mind is the subject of John Locke’s Tabula Rasa Theory. Locke believes that an infant’s mind is a blank slate which acquires information as he interacts and develops with the physical environment. In this note the role of sociocultural approach to language learning becomes essential, since it deals with “human activities take place in cultural contexts” (Steiner & Mahn, 2010, par. 4). Since the mind is believed to be a blank slate, the culture or the behavior prevalent in the child’s surroundings may affect the way he learns language. The infant can learn through social interaction and transmitted learning, which is largely behavioral in a sense that what he observes dictate the way he learns language. However, the behaviorist theories on language were criticized by Noam Chomsky saying that the mind is already structured and that language learning is highly psychological through his theory of Universal Grammar. Chomsky believes that children’s language acquisition is “closely tied to the theory of the mental mechanisms children use in acquiring language” (Pinker, n.d.). A part of the brain which Chomsky called “learning acquisition device” is part of the “human genetic endowment” which makes the person involuntarily and innately learn his natural language (Kellog, 1997, p. 242). If Chomsky’s theory should be followed, there would be no formal pattern as to how children learn how to talk, since they do it “their” way and not because of behavioral ‘patterns.’ Since each child is unique in his way of learning the language, there could be no one way to teach it nor there is one process which stood above all others in terms of effectiveness and accuracy. Children are born with their own facet of learning the language and the environment’s role is just to aid the development of language learning through experience; the idea of Chomsky reveals to be more relevant if basing on the effectiveness of teaching strategies following such principle. Language Learning in the Early Years One of the most unique characteristics of humans apart from other animals is the use of language in many ways, aside from communication. Through language, people were able to build civilizations with sophisticated culture and arts which were innovated by the present age for utility and fashion. Truly, human’s leap towards the development of language leads them to discover more about themselves and their surroundings. The transformation of language is magnificent, but what truly is amazing is how people learn the language in the early years of life considering that babies are born without a language. This idea wonders linguists from different times; they explored a human’s language development and made theories about it, but still, no absolute principle is governing the process of language acquisition. Bock (2005) revealed more interesting findings about babies and their language. She reported the findings of Patricia Kuhl, a university professor, found out that the babies’ mind is set by birth to distinguish different sounds that they have “no trouble hearing distinctions and sorting out sounds” (Bock, 2005, p. 4). The same claim was made five years earlier through an experimental research by Professor Peter Eimas of Brown University. In the experiment, Professor Eimas took advantage of the baby’s habit of sucking. The baby subject, Jean-Paul, is French exposed to French culture and language. The recorded sound pattern of his sucking became the basis of comparison along the process. When he was initially exposed to the Russian language, he sucked the rubber nipple more vigorously and began to subside as he tend to ‘get bored’ with the Russian sound. When the researcher exposed him back to the French language, he showed again the same vigor when he first heard the Russian language (Golinkoff & Pasek, 2000, p. 8). The changing sucking pattern of Jean Paul upon hearing different languages indicates that he was able to distinguish varying sounds. Such evidence would prove that the mind is actually pre-programmed to learn the language. This finding particularly debunks Locke’s Blank Slate Theory. Although the baby has been exposed to French language and culture, which is behavioral in a way, there was no direct behavioral model that the baby followed. Professor Eimas’s research could be one concrete example to prove the accuracy of Chomsky’s claim. Additionally, recent studies in The University of Georgia state that “the baby’s brain cells connect with other cells to form complex pathway” (Bales, 1998, par. 3) which explains why Jean Paul responded upon hearing other language. Locke’s and Chomsky’s theories are based upon the battle of nature versus nurture in the field of language acquisition. Learning through behavioral approach may seem valid in a lot of ways, such as performing the right way of uttering consonant sounds. On the other hand, logic also exists in the innatist’s point of view. Finding the two theories valid in their respective aspects, the task of unfolding the ways on how children learn language becomes more complex. Unlike speaking, teaching reading and writing requires more teacher involvement which particularly guides the child as he goes along with the process; although it can also be taught at home but with minimal concentration. In schools, literacy is taught in various ways, integrating arts, music, and other disciplines which can be enjoyed by primary school children. For example, “Mrs. Lansbury’s teaching was the use of information technology” (Chamberlin, Wragg, & Haynes, 1998, p. 189). Since the children are also computer literate, the teacher made use of this knowledge by integrating it to their new knowledge. According to Whitebread (2002, p. 181), “children also need teachers to be sensitive to and respectful of their existing literacy practices”; the level of literacy they possess should serve as a guideline for teachers on what and how to teach. Juel (1999 cited in Whitebread, 2002, p. 181) asserted that the learning environment of primary schools should not be too far from what it is at home. In the same way, they are “warm and supportive,” provides "hands-off" assistance, and portrays "explicit cognitive modelling of reading and writing process.” This is essentially important as the child would adapt to the home school transitions every day. Especially during the child’s primary years, home-school transitions poses a challenge for the child to adapt with the physical environment and the role he has to portray for each (e.g. as a pupil at school, as a family member at home) (Ecclestone, Briens, & Hughes, 2009, p. 29). Not only for language learning, a sound transition from home to school and vice versa is significant when dealing with the child’s emotional and psychological being. Environment plays a crucial role in the development of a child’s language learning capability. Demerezen (1988) explained that according to behaviorists, there are five basic tenets of language learning using the behaviorist explanation. First, he contends that “behaviorist theory dwells on spoken language” (Demerezen, 1988, p. 137). Since language was first developed through talking and some languages do not have written forms, it is thought that language learning is basically learned through imitation. Second, “behaviorist theory is the habit formation theory of language teaching and learning” (p. 137). The learner undergoes a “mechanical process leading to habit formation and performance of habits” (p. 137). The third tenet is basically founded by the conditioning theory of B.F. Skinner and Ivan Pavlov where it follows a traditional stimulus-response process. The learner learns clauses and phrases “linearly” in the same way that he learns simple behavioral process to a more complex one. The fourth tenet states that “all learning is the establishment of habits as the result of reinforcement and reward” (p. 137) which means that the same process would be employed in language learning, only that it involves with the development of language learning. The fifth tenet asserts that people can learn language equally “due to its socially conditioned nature” (Demerezen, 1988, p. 138). All these were questioned by Demerezen himself saying that each tenet is flawed; it is easy to spot the questionable ideas. According to him, the tenets are basically constructed with three main concepts which are “imitation, conditioning and reward,” but the “extent and rate” remain to be unexplained which makes these unreliable. The fifth tenet seems to be an obvious questionable statement and is a direct opposite of what Chomsky contends. To say that it is possible for people to follow a similar manner of learning a language would be neglecting the unique capability of each person to learn independently. In other words, the tenets of behaviorism do not comply with the modern learning theories which are basically learner-centered. In a behaviorist point of view, the exact time when babies start to learn language is uncertain, since it poses that learning though imitation, observation, and rewarding takes experience and exposure to the language. The role of the community and family is crucial as they are the prime molders of the child’s learning. Crain and Martin (1999, p. 34) do not agree that it is the environment that makes the people learn rather, it is “acquired through the interaction of innately specified linguistic principles and exposure to language in the child's environment.” In other words, environment is just a tool in developing language and not the ultimate explanation of language acquisition. Although behaviorism once gained the title of being the answer to language acquisition mysteries, the study is just concerned of the “overt observable behaviors” and consequently rejecting the biological aspect of learning, which therefore is “unscientific” (Crain & Martin, 1999, p. 34). Behaviorism failed to acknowledge the mental abilities and processes involving ‘influence’ and stuck to the notion of the environment-driven learning, which is rather short sighted. What behaviorists in the past failed to do is to look into other possibilities, and failed to ask the question of how humans are capable of being influenced. Figure 1 of Appendix A shows the interconnectivity of thought and the environment in the development of language. It is seen in that diagram that there is a “process” in which both mind and environment are actively participating in the performance of linguistic tasks. A sociocultural explanation of language acquisition was conceptualized by Vygostky. Vygosky’s claim is somehow behavioristic in nature, but is also dynamic as the learner begins to mingle to other aspects of his natural culture. According to VanPatten and Williams (2006, p. 201), the sociocultural theory explains that “humans are understood to utilize existing cultural artifacts and to create new ones that allow them to regulate their biological and behavioral activity.” Language acquisition becomes more than an innate and behavioral issue, concentrating more on the culture in which a person has to conform. This seems to be valid, however, it is limited to second language learning because realization of culture is not so apparent within the primary years of life, and thus subject to the exposure of the outside environment. Sociocultural theories would not be relevant to first language acquisition since the child is yet to explore his culture; language in the primary years would be more of achieving what the child wants. It is true, that the child speaks because there is a need for him to do so, but is unaware of the structure of the culture he has. Therefore, it would not be relevant to associate first language acquisition with sociocultural theories. Case Studies: Three Stories of Literacy Case 1 McGlothin (1997) conducted an observation of a child’s language learning process through his own son. The change of the baby’s linguistic capability is dramatic as it changes gradually with the influences his environment brings. McGlothin (1997, n. pag.) also noted important observations that would help in finding out how children could possibly learn to speak their language. The process was gradual and involved various repetitions which aided the child to remember what he was doing and what it was actually called. The home as a learning environment does not require him to have a specific word that he should learn within the day. No one could tell about how he should go with the pacing; he was in control about everything. One characteristic that is innate with every child and is also apparent with McGlothin’s son is the feeling of enjoyment while he unconsciously learns. The speaking abilities of the child develop naturally, with no one teaching him how to do it. He learns it is his own way with no pressure surrounding him. It is the same principle with teaching young children at primary schools; learning is made effective without making the children feel that it is such a heavy obligation, or else they would find learning to be traumatic. Case 2 Inan (2010, p. 371) examined a case of Mary, a young ESL learner, and her language literacy using methods which would measure her writing, speaking, and reading competency. Mary is just 3 and half years old, but she already shows mature characteristics of an ESL learner. Although her father translates English words to Chinese sometimes, Mary is considered above than what is expected as she only had few mistakes with the three activities. Unlike the first case presented, Mary’s experience and her interaction with the researcher is for an observation survey and not based on candid experiences. Mary’s literacy is above average considering her age, but just like other ESL learners, she undergoes the same process in learning the language. The above average performance of Mary during the said observation survey may have been due to two things: effective parent involvement and genetics. Case 3 Tom’s literacy experience is “active and autonomous” (Bisby, Brooks, & Wolfendale, 1995, p. 207). As what his mother observes, Tom is more comfortable in dealing with learning on his own. His new vocabulary mainly comes from his environment and is “highly aware of language appearing in different forms in his environment...and reconstructs language in ways that informed and pleases him” (p. 208). The process in which he learns language is coming from what he observes from his environment. He does not want to be directly assisted and finds it a bit annoying. Although Tom has shown good writing skills, he does not write the words taught at school, instead, “[he] continued using his favorite writing strategy to find and use new words in his stories” (p. 208). Case Study Analysis All three cases presented unique ways how a child learns a language. Mary and Tom were both studied with the researcher, and their parents, whereas McGlothlin’s son was just with his father, considering that he is not of school-age yet and has just begun uttering simple words. All subjects began their language acquisition through the basic skills such as translation, repetition, and imitation. There are two prevalent differences among the three cases which affected their literacy experience: purpose and environment. The first subject, which is hardly on his school age years, has slower pace when it comes to developing speaking skills. Since he still is making initial attempts to speak, there would be no required amount of language to be learned in a day. Children on cases two and three are of preschool age and are already capable to writing and reading simple words. However, the child in case 2 is more mature than that of the child in case 3 even though case 3 subject is half-year older. Although family practice is not directly associated with this difference, it is still an influence that needs to be considered. The two children may have possess the same level of literacy, only that the other has more practice and guidance from teachers and parents, while the other prefers to work alone which made him have “a low degree of autonomy, authenticity, integration, and social interaction” (Bisby, Brooks, & Wolfendale, 1995, p. 209). The knowledge and attitude they have would be very important in school since there would be proper guidance as to how to use this knowledge effectively. In Tom’s case, it is a good thing that he exhibits good writing skills; however, he should also be properly guided in using the competency. Using language in schools through active learning poses wider opportunities for literacy development. The interaction and participation to guided activities are significant in making literacy efficient. In the aforementioned case studies, there is an obvious link between the environment and the innate capacity of the children to perform linguistic task. In a superficial point of view, the inputs were from the existing behavior and environment; however, some instances within the study would negate this entirely behavioristic explanation. For example, the case of McGlothlin’s son suggests that babies have their own way of expressing themselves. From babbling, they tend to utter simple words until such time that they are able to speak clearly. Observably, the initial stages of the child’s attempt to make sentences would not have correct syntax, but changes as the child grows without explaining to him what proper grammar should be. The change is a natural process, which makes Chomsky’s study reasonable. The concept of Universal Grammar might have explained this, which states that the Grammar of the first language does not have to be taught and is wired within the brain. For example, a toddler might say “baby milk want,” but after several years, he would be able to say “I want milk” without having to teach him. As what McGlothlin (1997, n. pag.) noted, “The child is not interested in language for its own sake” and simply undergoes natural, mental transitions and in time, he would be able to utter language just like adults do, not unless if he has communicative disabilities. Conclusion First language acquisition is a natural process that all humans should undergo at the first stages of their lives. There are different theories attempting to explain how infants are able to babble and eventually talk like other people do as they grow up. The concept of Universal Grammar and the existence of language acquisition device in the brain would be the most reasonable among them; although other theories are also valid in their own right. However, other theories tend to have certain limitations on their explanation, and there are various gaps that need to be filled up to make it more sound. For example, the behaviorist theories rely on imitation, reward, and response but do explain the extent of which it is most effective and do not explain the mental processes behind it; more so with sociocultural approach. The sociocultural theory is only valid for second language learning and not with first language acquisition, where the child should be first exposed to his culture and then adapts a new one in order to learn a foreign language systematically. Such theory would require first language to have an initial step towards learning other language. What makes Chomsky’s theory ideal is that it is not one sided. It considers other theories and integrates it to his own concept. Behavioral theories were part of Chomsky’s study; only that, he does not believe that it is the sole explanation of language acquisition. He thought beyond what is apparent to the physical eye and asks why humans can be influenced. An interesting thing that could be explored further is the role of parentese in first language acquisition. If the study should be done, then there would be more evidences of the existence of LAD in the brain. Since parentese imitates the language of the baby, then it would be hard for babies to develop mature language utterance, if behavioral principle should be the basis. However, present studies shows the opposite since parentese is known to help the child acquire first language efficiently. References Bales, D., 1998. Building baby's brain: learning the language. Better Brains for Babies, [Online] Available at: http://www.fcs.uga.edu/pubs/PDF/FACS01-6.pdf [Accessed 24 March 2011]. Bisby, B.R., Brooks, G. & Wolfendale, S., 1995. Developing language and literacy in the english national curriculum. London: Trentham Books Limited. Bock, P, 2005. How do babies learn to talk? Pacific Noethwest, [internet] 1 Mar. Available at: http://ilabs.washington.edu/news/Times_Pacific_3_6_05.pdf [Accessed 25 March 2011]. Chamberlin, R.P., Wragg, E.C. & Haynes, G.S., 1998. Improving literacy in the primary school. London, Routledge. Crain, S. & Martin, D.C.L., 1999. An introduction to linguistic theory and language acquisition. MA: Wiley-Blackwell. Demerezen, M., 1988. Behaviorist theory and language learning. Hacettepe universitesi E~tim Fakultesi O~retim uyesi, 3, pp. 135-140. Ecclestone, K., Biesta, G. & Hughes M., 2009. Transitions and learning through lifecourse. Oxon: Taylor & Francis. Golinkoff, M.R. & Pasek, K.H., 2000. How babies talk: the magic and mystery of language in the first three years of life. NY: Penguin Books. Inan, H.Z., 2010. Literacy development of a preschooler: an exemplary case. The Journal of International Social Research, 3 (11), pp. 365-371. Kellog, R.T., 1997.Cognitive psychology. London: SAGE Publications. McGlothin, D.J., 1997. A child's first steps in language learning. The Internet TESL Journal, [Online]. 3 (10), Available at: http://iteslj.org/Articles/McGlothlin-ChildLearn.html [Accessed 24 March 2011]. Pinker, S., (n.d.) Lanuage acquisition. In L. R. Gleitman, M. Liberman, and D. N. Osherson, eds. An invitation to cognitive science. MA: MIT Press. Ch. 6. Steiner, V.J. & Mahn, H., 2010. Sociocultural appraoches to learning development. The Vygotsky Project, [Online] Available at: http://nateweb.info/johnsteiner.htm [Accessed 24 March 2011]. Suharno, 2009. Cognitivism and its implications to second language learning. [diagram] (blog entry). Available at: http://staff.undip.ac.id/sastra/suharno/2009/07/21/cognitivism-and-its-implication-in-the-second-language-learning/ [Accessed 25 March 2011]. VanPatten, B. & Williams, J., 2006. Theories in second language acquisition: an introduction. NY: Routledge. Whitebread, D., 2002.The psychology of teaching and learning in the primary school. London: Routledge. Appendix A Figure 1: Process in which the mind and environment actively works together (Suharno, 2009, n.pag.) Read More