The first thing to really interest
me while reading this chapter was when the author mentioned that when children
are as young as 3, their language development can determine their success in
reading in the eleventh grade, and how if students are behind they are more
likely to drop out. Being able to determine success of students when they are
that young seems crazy to me. How did you all feel about that? It shows how
very important it is for young children to learn language development early on,
and for us to have classrooms that enrich their language development. Page 116
of our textbook has lists center material for early childhood language development,
but I think that maybe having some of these items in other classrooms would be
beneficial and encourage curiosity and language development.
While
reading the textbook, I found myself agreeing in a way with many of the
theories, but not so much with the Nativist theory. The Nativist theory states
that children learn language internally and don’t need any sort of practice or
modeling. I really don’t think I agree with this. It’d be like in Judo class,
when you’re watching someone do a throw, and you’re listening to them as they
explain it, but when it’s your turn, you have trouble because you’ve never done
it, and you need to practice. I think that children really do need, models, and
practice and reinforcement. How far would a child’s language develop if every
time the child said “bear” you gave him his teddy bear, but there wasn’t any
other interaction or modeling for better language structure? The child whose parent interacts might learn more complex language quicker. So I agree more
with the behaviorist theory, Vygotsky’s theory, and Piaget’s theory. I like the
behaviorist theory because I believe that modeling and practice is very
important in learning a language, and Vygotsky’s, because a main component in
his theory is that that adults must interact and support children as they begin
learning language. Piaget’s theory is that children learn through their senses,
which is important. Through experiences, and interacting with adults who are
modeling correct language, I believe that students can thrive in learning
language. What did you all think about the theories? Was there any one that you
were drawn to?
Great post Michelle! It is kind of crazy to thing that a child's language development at the age of three can determine the success for the rest of their life. This shows how important it is for us as future parents and children to introduce our children to language and give them the proper education they need to excel. It is hard to believe that their language development can be determined so quickly and at such a young age. I also agree with you on the theories. I believe that children need positive reinforcement and models to develop their language skills further. Children need to be placed around other children and other adults to obtain and further their language development. Having children interact with other adults and speaking back and forth to the child is important for their language development. I believe they can not learn everything by themselves but rather need that positive reinforcement from a teacher or their parents.
ReplyDeleteMichelle,
ReplyDeleteI agree with your post in many ways. To answer your question about determining a child’s success based off their language development at the age of 3; I do also find this surprising and it also caught my eye while reading the chapter. You talk about the Nativist theory in your post and I have to say that the Nativist, in my opinion as well, expects too much of children right off the bat. I do believe that we are born with SOME rules of language because studies have been done that prove even children who have never been talked to can form some sort of language with one another. To me, the Nativist theory basically states that because one child knows how to say something and know what it means then every other child should know that as well even without having been taught about it. Children have a mind that can easily be imprinted onto, but it still takes a role model and some practice to get the hang of new things. This leads me to the second theory stated in your post, the behavioral theory. I agree more so with this theory because most people can read and read and read but not really understand exactly what something MEANS without being shown or physically doing it themselves. This shows how important guidance is for children, as future teachers we need to be aware of the positive reinforcement and help a child needs in language development. Children need role models to imitate and explanations to be successful in language development.
Michelle, I agree a lot with all you have posted and you seem to have comprehended what I believe this chapter was offering us. I worked in a Montessori preschool for about a year and as I have gone through my education and learned about different theorists outside of Maria Montessori. I have found that I agree with Piaget if I do not have Montessori to fall back on. Children learn through their senses, when educators make language more than something that we hear and see children learn better. When a child in a Montessori classroom traces a sandpaper letter they are feeling language. When a child eats an apple during A-Week they taste language. When a child smells a daisy during D-Week they smell language. I do also agree with Vygotsky because Maria Montessori says that we must prepare the environment and that the word we pertains to the educators of children which are the teachers and families. We have to prepare an environment for students that promote language learning. So I lean towards Maria Montessori but in the case of this chapter I agree with Vygotsky and Piaget.
ReplyDeleteMichelle, determining success of a student that young seems insane to me as well. The fact that at 3 years old their language development can determine their success in the 11th grade just seems unreal. I also agree that the Nativist theory just does not make since. I believe that children do need practice and modeling. They cannot just learn it on their own. I also agree with you on being drawn to behaviorist, Piaget, and Vygotsky's theories. Children need that practice and modeling and they need adult interaction and support.
ReplyDeleteMichelle,
ReplyDeleteI am astonishes me that what kind of language stimulus you get can determine if you will possibly drop out of school. Also, I agree 100% about the Nativist theory. Children need to be presented modeling and further explanation for them to gain a good understanding of the concept. It is very obvious how important not only our impact on children is but also the parents or guardians impact is on the children. That preparation plus the education we provide them with will help the children excel throughout their life we just have to help them by doing as much as we can and supporting them all the way.