Hall, Chapters 7-10

chapter seven touches on some interesting points. Section 2 defines the types of data in terms of qualitative vs quantitative. I would assume that most collected data is represented in quantitative terms, like number of occurrences a particular phrase/word has within texts. I like how Hall points out (pg 133) that building analysis on a frequency basis (quantitative) offers less counter claims that the chosen examples are used to illustrate claims that represent the researcher's personal gains. This is why I prefer quantitative data. Sometimes, I feel that research data is swayed to support the claim, even if it doesn't.

Hall also points out that quantitative data doesn't reveal meanings behind patterns in speech, saying, "without some form of qualitative evaluation of the data, the numbers remain meaningless." I agree with this to an extent, but I bring up my previous argument. How are we sure that the data hasn't been swayed to reflect biased opinions?

Which brings me to the following section on research ethics. It was nice to see attention paid to ethical standards associated with research. Hopefully, the guidelines are followed so data isn't used in ways that may alter the outcome. There is one aspect of ethical behavior towards patients that I thought was left out. Researchers have the responsibility to their participants to ensure that the data isn't used in a way that violates the participants beliefs or identity. The participants should be aware of the uses their data will have.

Chapter eight was interesting, in that the discourse analysis section is relevant to another class. A good point (pg 151-152) is that "telling a story about one's life affords the individual the chance to foreground what they consider significant... their representations of themselves provide narrators with examples of how the self wants to be." It's important to let individuals express themselves within their own comforts. It will allow learning to become easier by making it a self exploration type thing... (bad word choice). I mean, that if you let students reflect on their past experiences, it'll help cultivate better future ones. Discourse analysis is a great way of doing this. I would assume that it would open up all sorts of boundaries and help ease understanding and knowledge.

Chapter nine was pretty self explanatory. Although the graphic was a nice touch.

Chapter ten allowed for some things to be better defined. In particular, the use of individual experiences as a research context. This helps shift focus to the ways individuals construct and place their social identities and roles with relation to ascribed or socialized placed positions. It offers a chance to look into the feelings and emotions associated with language learning. I think a lot can be learned from listening to an individual's experience. It can help determine what methods are working and what needs altered.

Just some thoughts on the readings. Hope everyone had a great break.

Farr, Seloni and Song, "Ethnolinguistic Diversity in Language and Literacy Education"

I'm taking that the article's main point is that ethnolinguistic diversity in public schools will help students with language and literacy education. This is a great idea. Using students as a resource will help education because it will make material relevant to students. I feel, though, that this may lead to a snowball effect in educational standards. If teachers are required to include cultural background from all their students, this may strain the teacher's ability to teach students to the best of their abilities. I agree that their must be a common ground for students to relate to the material presented. I also agree that teachers should be aware of their students needs in regards to learning. I am just wondering whether or not this will have an effect on their teaching abilities. Yes, there will be more training and inservice education. Yes this will create a better educational environment. Yes it will (possibly) lead to less drop outs among students but is idea plausible in regards to teacher's abilities and education? I'm not sure.

I agree that the education system needs some work. More attention should be paid to addressing students' needs. I think that the conventional wisdom idea needs to be throw out the window because, obviously, it isn't working. Standardized tests prove nothing in regards to ANY students' abilities, other than they can fill in holes completely. I can't remember one time when I learned anything from standardized test taking. They create stress for students and add extra, usually unnecessary, work for teachers. A pretty silly idea all around.

I also agree with the idea of Americans being monolingual. I think this stems from the idea that any where you go, someone will speak enough English for you to order food or get a hotel room. I've been to a couple of countries in Europe and I never had to know the native language. Granted, I do know German and would use German at any available moment, but as soon as my English accent was herd, they would speak English. It rests in minds that there isn't a point to learning another language because a lot of people speak English. In fact, I remember my friend Pat telling us about his adventure to Japan and not needing to use the Japanese he learned because everyone just spoke English to him from the get go. I think that American schools should pay more attention to foreign language learning. I think that we should require our students to learn a different language, just like every other country requires of their students. The only issue is that Americans aren't afforded the same opportunities to practice their learned foreign language. Think about it, if you live in France, you can learn German, Spanish, Swiss or Italian and be in those countries within a few hours. In the sates, however, it's a little harder. Yeah, you can practice Spanish by going to Mexico but if you live in Pa, that's a two day drive. You can practice French by going to parts of Canada, but that, too, is a far trip. Yes we have speakers of those languages here but in certain areas, they may be hard to locate. For instance, if I want to practice my German, I have to go to the German club in Pittsburgh. I have to be a member too and pay $100. It's not practical.

Anyway, now that I've rambled on for a while...

There are definitely issues with the education system in America, as the article points out so many times. There are issues with education systems all over the world. It's hard to change something that has been in place for so long. It will take the voices of a lot of students to change the way things work. I think that students should take a more active role in their education. They should bring their issues to the school board and demand change. If our parents, during the 60s and 70s were able to do it, I don't see why we cant.

Vivian Cook, "Going beyond the native speaker in language teaching"

This article makes it's points.

I think it's hard to determine what makes a language user native. The text says that native users acquire language from birth and thus learners would need to be reborn. This is true. A lot of brain power is expended while learning languages. It takes brain space to store language parts and unless you've grown up with them all your life, it'll probably be really hard to get all of the target language parts in your head, while simultaneously being able to use them to their full potential.

The idea of multicompetent language users is pretty nifty. These users grow up in a dual language society, acquiring two languages. Although, it may be noticeable to see the disadvantages of this, especially as the article states, in vocabulary, l2 words affect their twin l1s. My Latvian friend Sanda tells me about growing up with Latvian at home and Russian in school and how if Latvian was spoken in school, it was punishable. The article's example isn't as extreme but it shows the same issue.

I agree where the article says l2 learners should be treated as people in their own right, not as deficient native speakers. This is a resonating fact in all language learning and teaching. If you view your students as deficient, then they will be so. Students should be viewed as seekers of information and teachers should aid their quest. I do not agree with the measure of l2 learning being about their accent. Languages are full of accents. They keep languages interesting and changing.

The ways of shifting to a l2 user model are valid. Setting goals for your students that are both attainable and relevant to their world couldn't be a better idea. Using situations and roles that are authentic for learners will give them their own goals. Materials that use l2 language will help them in their acquisition. I like the idea of using situations that reflect students' lives in classrooms. This will allow students to present their ideas and also create conversations for resolution. Code switching is another interesting thought for classroom activities involving the native language of learners. Reciting in one language to a student and then in the other back will help create registers in the brain.

I have an issue with the letting students use their native language in the classroom for more than activities. In my experience, this doesn't help learning the target language. Students are more apt to speak in their native language if they feel the activities are too simple or hard.

The final sentence, before the conclusion, is a good sum up of using l2 users as examples: "Nevertheless, taking the description of the native speaker as the basis of language teaching is in a sense a temporary shortcut that avoids describing what l2 users are like and postpones the more satisfactory solution of tackling the descriptions of l2 users themselves."

This is a good message because, as stated above, it sets goals for students that are reasonable and attainable.

One last point, "If students are convinced of the benefits of learning an l2 and recognise their unique states as standing between two worlds and two cultures, more students may go on higher levels of l2 use; those who give up may feel more satisfied with the level of l2 use they achieve." All about being comfortable in your own skin, or in this case, your language.