I found chapter four to be very informational. It was
interesting reading about exactly what children know at certain ages and how
their language grows in their early years of life. One quote from the introduction that I liked was, “Children do not learn language passively; they actually construct – or
reconstruct – language as they learn.” From the moment that we are born, we are
already surrounded by oral language and reading through the different theories
I seemed to agree with most of them.
I liked how
in the behaviorist theory Skinner talked about thinking as the internal process
of language; both language and thought are initiated through interactions in
the environment, such as those between a parent and a child. I believe that is
a good way at looking at the development of language. The Nativist theory was a
bit different. They believe that language develops innately. I am not sure if I
believe that children can figure out how language works without the practice, reinforcement,
or modeling. I can see however why they might think that the ability of
language is innate to humans, even though I think that to really grasp language
and develop at a good pace one needs the practice, modeling, and reinforcement.
One thing that
popped into my head when reading about the Nativist theory was the fact that
sometime twins have their own language when they are very young. Many people
have probably seen a viral video of twins seeming like they are talking
gibberish but look like they are having a full on conversation. Apparently when
my brother and I were younger we did. He started talking a bit later than I did
and sometimes I would translate for him so that my parents understood what he
wanted or was trying to say. This is somewhat a Nativist idea. We had our own
language. It wasn’t the language that everyone else spoke but we did develop
some kind of language on our own. This just interests me. I wonder how this
happens with twins or even siblings sometimes. Does this confirm that the Nativist theory is correct in a way?
On another
note, when reading about language development when we are much younger it is
crazy how fast it can develop at that age. Age 2 to 3 is the most drastic in
terms of language. I also saw how socioeconomic status could affect one’s
vocabulary. The book states that children on public assistance have a
vocabulary of about 500 words at age 3 compared to those who are in
working-class families having a vocabulary of 700 words, and then compared to
those from homes with parents who are professionals have 1,100 words in their
vocabulary. That is quite a big difference. How as teachers could we help these
kids who might not start off with a big vocabulary because of their families
SES?
Sam,
ReplyDeleteYou wrote a really great post! :) I also liked Skinner's behaviorist theory because I believe that children do learn a lot of language from their environment and interactions. I also like Skinner's theory because he talks about offering positive reinforcement to children to encourage them. I understand what you are saying about the Nativist theory and I feel the same way, I do not think children can learn language without practice, reinforcement, or modeling. But you are correct that studies have shown children have developed their own languages in some cases, so in that sense I think the Nativist theory is correct we are obviously born with some form of language rules. I really found the facts in the book about SES and how it effects children's language development very interesting as well. I can say I have seen this first hand, the 3rd grade class I cadet taught in had a large range of students from very low SES to higher middle class. The children from lower SES did have more of a struggle in the reading area. This was mostly due to the fact that they were not provided with the materials at home to be able to practice language. But I do not think it is impossible by any means for children from a low SES to be good readers and have the same amount of language variety as a child of middle class. In my class I would try to find out what strategies would work best for an individual child to learn more vocabulary. I would attempt to provide the materials they are lacking at home like books, if the child does not have someone to read the books to them I would try to help them feel very comfortable with a book in class to the point where they could take it home and read aloud. Thank you for the interesting post! :)
Samantha, like you I had a language with one of my siblings. I think that the fact that so many sets of twins and siblings have languages only proves some of the nativist theory and that is the fact that humans have the innate want to communicate with one another. Without a language in place humans will come up with a way to communicate with others and that must have been the way the first language on earth was created. However, now that languages are in place I believe that it is important for students to learn about these languages and that this is beneficial. Even though it is innate in humans to want to communicate I believe that it is important to maximize on the innate want and the way to do that is by teaching. Now your last question I have no answer to but when you figure it out let me know because I believe this is extremely important. In the daycare I work there are many families with low incomes and it is so frustrating to me to see the different levels of students who are the same age or to see a whole family of children that struggle to communicate and it all seems to be connected to their families socioeconomic status. Someone please answer this questions because I desperately want to know the answer.
ReplyDeleteSamantha, I also liked the behaviorist theory bette, but I do see how the Nativist theory may have some truth. In high school, one of my best friends was a twin and she use to tell me about how her and her sister would communicate with their own language or sometimes just with hand gestures.I think your question at the end about how teachers can help the students who do not start off with a big vocabulary was a very good question because there is a big difference between 500, 700, and 1100 words.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteSamantha, I also agree with how children learn language from positive reinforcement, modeling, and practice. Children can not learn everything about language without the guidance from a care giver. The Nativist theory was also quite interesting to me as well. I believe children can obtain some parts of language on their own but they need the positive reinforcement and the guidance from their care takers. When children come into school at different levels of language, it can be difficult on us as teachers but we have to adapt to their needs as well. We do not want to point the students out who are struggling in their language but rather tend to their needs and adjust to the situation. I also think that is really awesome that you and your brother had a language of your own per say. I would have to agree that twins can share this special bond and create their own type of language but also adapt to the language around them.
ReplyDeleteSamantha,
ReplyDeleteIn an earlier post I was completely against the idea of the Nativist theory but now you have gotten me thinking. It is true that you and your brother were able to create your own language that was different than the one around you and you even realized it when you later interpreted for you brother. It is obvious that the Nativist theory can work in some cases but not in all cases. In different scenarios when something is presented to a child and they are asked to learn and understand it completely on their own they are usually unable to do it. When looking at what you and your brother did it was a situation that you and your brother created and you had control over what had to be learned if that makes any sense. I also found it interesting that in your post that you brought up SES and how it effects what language skills children are able to obtain. That critical time in a child's life, birth to 3 years, their needs to be that constant language support or the child will struggle. Our job as a teacher will be helping those children that didn't receive enough stimulus and need the extra help and I believe that the ideas provided in the book are a great start.