For the Wong Filmore, Lily piece, Expectations in diversity
1. Fillmore explains how Cummins' argues that language proficiency is multidimensional (language skills), what is your perspective on Cummins' theory and why.
2. What does Fillmore suggest teachers should do in order to effectively teach students and for them to understand the material and what support/encouragement do they need.
I agree with Cummins and Fillmore that there are many different kinds of language proficiency. After I graduated from high school, I spent some time in the Dominican Republic working for an NGO that was providing medical care to many of the rural villages. I had received a 4 on the AP Spanish exam and expected to be nearly fluent in my communication skills. One of the most difficult jobs was working with children with possible risk of diabetes. When I talked to older residents, I was able to stumble along, often the biggest sticking point being the novelty of medical spanish. However, when I spoke with younger children, even about something as simple as their eating habits, I found myself almost unable to use or understand more than rudimentary verbs or phrases. After about 3 days of this, I realized that while we were at similar stages in language development (novice speakers) they were excelling at language for communicating and colloquialisms while I was stuck with literary and book language. After I figured this out, I started a habit listening to my friends in the area and trying to copy their mannerisms. Within about a week I was much better at understanding and being understood by younger children. I think this demonstrates exactly what Fillmore is taking about with a separation between what one needs to be understood in person, and what ones needs to understand literature. Language is not multi-modal!
1. Cummins's view that language proficiency is multidimensional is certainly valid and one that I agree with. For example, when it comes to Chinese, I consider myself fluent only in conversational Chinese, which I learned because of the basic need to communicate with my grandparents. However, I have not developed the "academic" language skill because I have not had enough exposure to "academic" Chinese. My written Chinese reflects this is, as what I write reads like my spoken Chinese and is often filled with more colloquialisms. After taking a few Chinese classes at Berkeley, I am now able to consciously make my writing sound a little more academic through the increased use of "written language" phrases (as opposed to "oral language" phrases), but it is still easier for me to communicate conversationally.
2. Fillmore suggests that teachers blend the teaching of academic language into their curriculum in order to promote students' awareness of this different type of language. She does not want teachers to formulate entire lessons focused on learning academic language, but rather taking certain passages from the curriculum's texts, for example, and having the class look at how the authors used certain words, phrases, constructions, etc. to get their points across. One might say that she is encouraging mini-lessons on rhetoric.
Cummins’ argues that language is multidimensional, meaning different skills are gained with learning a language, which in my opinion is true. The first which Cummins’ mentions is the ability to “manage basic interpersonal communication”. With this skill, people can communicate easily and socialize with their surroundings, and is supported with such contact between individuals. Just like when I was younger, I was not formally taught Spanish because my elementary school did not enforce bilingual education, therefore I learned Spanish at home with the everyday interactions and conversations between my parents and I. The Spanish I was able to speak was not “proper” as I then realized but it allowed me to successfully communicate my ideas, reactions, and feelings to my parents and other family members. In addition to this first “dimension”, Cummin discusses a second type of language skill, which is more rigorous to learn because it is more in tune with the academic language, rather than just the simple oral, and basic components of the language. Again, by the time I reached high school, I began talking Spanish courses, which taught the language formally. It was difficult adjusting to the changes of the proper Spanish language. Learning to read lengthy texts in depth and analyzing was difficult because I was not familiar with the vocabulary, etc. But to my surprise I was able to do well learning the proper or “academic” language, which has expanded my oral discourse as well.
Filmore suggests that teachers incorporate academic language into their everyday teaching style so that the students become accustomed to academic language they way they become accustomed to social uses of language. The goal is not to teach this language to students, but to foster an understanding of the way certain words and phrases are used. Any student can mechanically read a complex paragraph effectively, but how much of the paragraph is comprehended and understood? Teachers can help students understand these connections by pointing out certain phrases and asking the students to explain their thoughts on what these phrases mean and how they tie to the story as a whole. Filmore suggests taking this approach in steps, meaning not analyzing every word of a story, but analyzing parts of the story here and there. By asking them questions at every step and encouraging them to share their thoughts, the students will start to develop an automatic response to reading and comprehending. I have tried such a strategy with my five-year-old nephew, and it is interesting to see the way he thinks and how he imagines specific words. He does not understand that one word can mean different things just yet, so sometimes he becomes very confused about what he is reading and will ask me if the sentence makes sense. In the long-term, using such a strategy is likely to increase reading comprehension at a fast pace.
Cummin’s multidimensional language is in my opinion, valid. From my years of watching my brother learn Chinese, he displays many quirks that show it is his second language. At first, he used many words and phrases joined together, sometimes merely translating his intent from English, similar to “encoding” his sentences. Unsurprisingly, his understanding of what others said to him was limited, as he couldn’t piece meaning out of our words. After a year of forcing him to speak Chinese, he started implementing native speaking habits into his usage. However, he is unable to understand anyone other than me and my parents or read long sentecnes. Whenever he is exposed to a unfamiliar word, his lack of experience renders him incapable of “filling in the blank” with something he does know. If we regard home-taught as “conversational” and everything else as “academic”, the fact that he knows next to no “academic” Chinese makes it nearly impossible to converse with anyone outside of his family. But when his Chinese progress is compared with his English schooling, the Chinese learning is clearly accelerated as Cummin’s suggests. It took him five to six years to be able to read, write and speak basic sentences in English; it only took a year and a half for him to perform the analogous in Chinese. His English foundation definitely complemented his second language learning.
I tend to agree with Cummins' view that the conversational register is very different from the academic register and the two can be viewed as a completely different languages in their own respects. The conversational register is much more informal and leisurely, and often advances the use of slang words (i.e. wazzup, hella, etc.) that wouldn't be seen in the academic register found in text. The academic register is much more formal, and often takes a lot of time to unpack the several different phrases and their referrants within the sentences. As Wong Fillmore emphasized, students (especially English Language Learners) should be made aware to the fact that each sentence contains a different meaning and that children must be immersed in literacy if they are expected to meet the reading levels that are pertinent to their education. Otherwise, students will adopt the habit of being intimidated by complicated text and they will view it has having no real significance outside of the classroom. Another difference between the conversational register and the academic register would be the lack of different contexts and scenarios provided in the conversational register that would make students (especially ELL's) feel unprepared for complicated text required for their reading levels. Cummins argues that this component is dependent on how much the family immerses the child in literacy and builds on their schemas so they can be prepared when reading texts that take on somewhat unfamiliar situations. For many students, it's their first time being introduced to a certain schema. And they have no experience to draw off of or relate to when reading. These are just a few examples of how students become comfortable with the conversational register and try to treat the academic register in the same manner- oftentimes, students fail when meeting up to the test of analyzing the academic register, as they do not realize the amount of difference between the two.
In order to teach students to effectively read and understand advanced texts, teachers must support and encourage students throughout the process. Encouraging students is one of the most significant ways a teacher help a child grow academically. One of the difficulties English learners have in America is a lack of self confidence in regards to their ability to understand what they read. This mind set English learns have about their inability to perform academically well is harmful and unnecessary. Teachers simply need to remind their students that they are equally as capable of learning how to read and understand texts as any other student. This kind of support from teachers empowers students with the motivation they need to learn English and move on to "normal" paced classes. In today's classrooms, students who are learning English as their second language do not have the self confidence to learn it well enough to move out of ELD classes. These students are stuck in a cycle and are unable to break free because they have to trained to think that they are intellectually incapable of learning English. With the support of teachers, however, these students can learn to believe in themselves again and realize that they are as capable as any other student. One of the most important factors in teaching students a new language is the encouragement teachers are able to provide. This boost in self confidence will help students believe they are capable of learning English and are capable of moving out of ELD classes. All ELD students should aspire to move forward in their school work, and they will be able to do this if teachers are able to provide the encouragement and support they need.
I agree with Cummin's theory that language is multidimensional. In order to make sense of the academic lanugage, one requires knowledge of the basis of the language through understanding the complex grammar structures and retaining such understanding of previous sentences in order to progress to understand a sentence, a paragraph, a page, and the book as a whole. More than anything however, understanding language entails confidence and belief in one's mind to understand the language. The biggest dilemma of the three students that had tutoring for three years, was their lack of confidence in their ability to understand the language. They believed they were not as "smart" as the other students in class who could understand the readings given. Language then, involves the mental state of students. It is not just a matter of knowledge, it is a matter of mindset. This leads into the help the Cummin believes should be given to the students. He believes that the school system should understand that implementing wide changes in "teaching techniques" intended to assist students better, is ineffective. This is largely due to the care each student needs individually to gain faith in themselves, and the student's need to realize that the sentences are not words strung together, but coherent thoughts building on one another to create a thought, a sentence. What students need is a teacher who could assist in first making the students realize that they are potential learners instead of problem learners. They need people to realize that the problems the children are having in school are "attributed not to the failure of assumptions about what would be helpful to children who face a language barrier in school, but to 'learning disabilities'". Once, as a student learning to read myself, it is important for the student at a young age to have more basic exposure to the academic language, language (English in this case) in order for each student to overcome the problem of understanding the academic language, and immersement to a higher level standard, and provided more help, rather than dropped to a lower level to attain the language proficiency.
The backbone to Cummin's theory is that there are at least two different types of language skills that children must learn--conversational language and "academic language", the latter requiring a much longer time to develop. I moved to the US when I was in kindergarten and had plenty of opportunities to develop both--on the other hand, my mom has perfect conversational language but is somewhat lacking in "academic language". Despite having lived in this country for 15 years, she still occasionally asks me to check her grammar. With many of my friend's parents, the same situation holds true. Cummins states that "academic language" is more difficult to obtain because it requires growth through the context of formal education--which my mom did not have (all of her education occurred in a foreign language). However, I disagree with one point that Cummins makes: that "the more time students spent being educated in their primary languages, the better they performed academically and in the learning of English". This statement implies ungrounded assumptions: that the older you are, the easier it is to learn English; and that languages are smoothly parallel because 'linguistic knowledge provides a foundation for subsequent languages'. I would argue with this because previously established language skills for a foreign language can get in the way of new languages. There is less being commonly shared than there is knowledge that must be re-learned in a new way--for example, language syntax. Other than that, I agree with Cummins.
What Filmore sought to understand was why three siblings--two of which barely spoke their native language, were still struggling with English. The siblings that Filmore worked with had difficulties in three areas: prior knowledge of vocabulary used in literary contexts, background knowledge, and the linguistic knowledge to understand the meaning of a text. One of the first and foremost things that instructors must do is simple: remove labels. By being labeled as having "learning disabilities and language delays" and continually being placed in ELD classes, they acquired assumptions about their abilities. They even verbalized that they weren't as "smart" as their peers. Another important approach is to rectify any misconceptions about learning. Even a simple misconception can have a serious impact on the way you approach material--for example, the brothers thought that once you learned something, you could metaphorically check it off your list instead of revisiting it or using it as a basis for further learning. One aspect that instructors are powerless against is previous exposure--this is what places certain students ahead to begin with. Filmore mentions that 3-year-olds of higher SES had been exposed to 30 million more words than those of lower SES parents. The main problem that the three siblings had was reading comprehension--they had difficulties in connecting sentences and extracting meaning. Therefore, as an instructor it is imperative to teach students cues that reveal how the ideas are connected.
I agree with Cummins and Fillmore that there are many different kinds of language proficiency. After I graduated from high school, I spent some time in the Dominican Republic working for an NGO that was providing medical care to many of the rural villages. I had received a 4 on the AP Spanish exam and expected to be nearly fluent in my communication skills. One of the most difficult jobs was working with children with possible risk of diabetes. When I talked to older residents, I was able to stumble along, often the biggest sticking point being the novelty of medical spanish. However, when I spoke with younger children, even about something as simple as their eating habits, I found myself almost unable to use or understand more than rudimentary verbs or phrases. After about 3 days of this, I realized that while we were at similar stages in language development (novice speakers) they were excelling at language for communicating and colloquialisms while I was stuck with literary and book language. After I figured this out, I started a habit listening to my friends in the area and trying to copy their mannerisms. Within about a week I was much better at understanding and being understood by younger children. I think this demonstrates exactly what Fillmore is taking about with a separation between what one needs to be understood in person, and what ones needs to understand literature. Language is not multi-modal!
ReplyDelete1. Cummins's view that language proficiency is multidimensional is certainly valid and one that I agree with. For example, when it comes to Chinese, I consider myself fluent only in conversational Chinese, which I learned because of the basic need to communicate with my grandparents. However, I have not developed the "academic" language skill because I have not had enough exposure to "academic" Chinese. My written Chinese reflects this is, as what I write reads like my spoken Chinese and is often filled with more colloquialisms. After taking a few Chinese classes at Berkeley, I am now able to consciously make my writing sound a little more academic through the increased use of "written language" phrases (as opposed to "oral language" phrases), but it is still easier for me to communicate conversationally.
ReplyDelete2. Fillmore suggests that teachers blend the teaching of academic language into their curriculum in order to promote students' awareness of this different type of language. She does not want teachers to formulate entire lessons focused on learning academic language, but rather taking certain passages from the curriculum's texts, for example, and having the class look at how the authors used certain words, phrases, constructions, etc. to get their points across. One might say that she is encouraging mini-lessons on rhetoric.
Cummins’ argues that language is multidimensional, meaning different skills are gained with learning a language, which in my opinion is true. The first which Cummins’ mentions is the ability to “manage basic interpersonal communication”. With this skill, people can communicate easily and socialize with their surroundings, and is supported with such contact between individuals. Just like when I was younger, I was not formally taught Spanish because my elementary school did not enforce bilingual education, therefore I learned Spanish at home with the everyday interactions and conversations between my parents and I. The Spanish I was able to speak was not “proper” as I then realized but it allowed me to successfully communicate my ideas, reactions, and feelings to my parents and other family members.
ReplyDeleteIn addition to this first “dimension”, Cummin discusses a second type of language skill, which is more rigorous to learn because it is more in tune with the academic language, rather than just the simple oral, and basic components of the language. Again, by the time I reached high school, I began talking Spanish courses, which taught the language formally. It was difficult adjusting to the changes of the proper Spanish language. Learning to read lengthy texts in depth and analyzing was difficult because I was not familiar with the vocabulary, etc. But to my surprise I was able to do well learning the proper or “academic” language, which has expanded my oral discourse as well.
Filmore suggests that teachers incorporate academic language into their everyday teaching style so that the students become accustomed to academic language they way they become accustomed to social uses of language. The goal is not to teach this language to students, but to foster an understanding of the way certain words and phrases are used. Any student can mechanically read a complex paragraph effectively, but how much of the paragraph is comprehended and understood? Teachers can help students understand these connections by pointing out certain phrases and asking the students to explain their thoughts on what these phrases mean and how they tie to the story as a whole. Filmore suggests taking this approach in steps, meaning not analyzing every word of a story, but analyzing parts of the story here and there. By asking them questions at every step and encouraging them to share their thoughts, the students will start to develop an automatic response to reading and comprehending.
ReplyDeleteI have tried such a strategy with my five-year-old nephew, and it is interesting to see the way he thinks and how he imagines specific words. He does not understand that one word can mean different things just yet, so sometimes he becomes very confused about what he is reading and will ask me if the sentence makes sense. In the long-term, using such a strategy is likely to increase reading comprehension at a fast pace.
Cummin’s multidimensional language is in my opinion, valid. From my years of watching my brother learn Chinese, he displays many quirks that show it is his second language. At first, he used many words and phrases joined together, sometimes merely translating his intent from English, similar to “encoding” his sentences. Unsurprisingly, his understanding of what others said to him was limited, as he couldn’t piece meaning out of our words. After a year of forcing him to speak Chinese, he started implementing native speaking habits into his usage. However, he is unable to understand anyone other than me and my parents or read long sentecnes. Whenever he is exposed to a unfamiliar word, his lack of experience renders him incapable of “filling in the blank” with something he does know. If we regard home-taught as “conversational” and everything else as “academic”, the fact that he knows next to no “academic” Chinese makes it nearly impossible to converse with anyone outside of his family. But when his Chinese progress is compared with his English schooling, the Chinese learning is clearly accelerated as Cummin’s suggests. It took him five to six years to be able to read, write and speak basic sentences in English; it only took a year and a half for him to perform the analogous in Chinese. His English foundation definitely complemented his second language learning.
ReplyDeleteI tend to agree with Cummins' view that the conversational register is very different from the academic register and the two can be viewed as a completely different languages in their own respects. The conversational register is much more informal and leisurely, and often advances the use of slang words (i.e. wazzup, hella, etc.) that wouldn't be seen in the academic register found in text. The academic register is much more formal, and often takes a lot of time to unpack the several different phrases and their referrants within the sentences. As Wong Fillmore emphasized, students (especially English Language Learners) should be made aware to the fact that each sentence contains a different meaning and that children must be immersed in literacy if they are expected to meet the reading levels that are pertinent to their education. Otherwise, students will adopt the habit of being intimidated by complicated text and they will view it has having no real significance outside of the classroom. Another difference between the conversational register and the academic register would be the lack of different contexts and scenarios provided in the conversational register that would make students (especially ELL's) feel unprepared for complicated text required for their reading levels. Cummins argues that this component is dependent on how much the family immerses the child in literacy and builds on their schemas so they can be prepared when reading texts that take on somewhat unfamiliar situations. For many students, it's their first time being introduced to a certain schema. And they have no experience to draw off of or relate to when reading. These are just a few examples of how students become comfortable with the conversational register and try to treat the academic register in the same manner- oftentimes, students fail when meeting up to the test of analyzing the academic register, as they do not realize the amount of difference between the two.
ReplyDeleteIn order to teach students to effectively read and understand advanced texts, teachers must support and encourage students throughout the process. Encouraging students is one of the most significant ways a teacher help a child grow academically. One of the difficulties English learners have in America is a lack of self confidence in regards to their ability to understand what they read. This mind set English learns have about their inability to perform academically well is harmful and unnecessary. Teachers simply need to remind their students that they are equally as capable of learning how to read and understand texts as any other student.
ReplyDeleteThis kind of support from teachers empowers students with the motivation they need to learn English and move on to "normal" paced classes. In today's classrooms, students who are learning English as their second language do not have the self confidence to learn it well enough to move out of ELD classes. These students are stuck in a cycle and are unable to break free because they have to trained to think that they are intellectually incapable of learning English. With the support of teachers, however, these students can learn to believe in themselves again and realize that they are as capable as any other student.
One of the most important factors in teaching students a new language is the encouragement teachers are able to provide. This boost in self confidence will help students believe they are capable of learning English and are capable of moving out of ELD classes. All ELD students should aspire to move forward in their school work, and they will be able to do this if teachers are able to provide the encouragement and support they need.
I agree with Cummin's theory that language is multidimensional. In order to make sense of the academic lanugage, one requires knowledge of the basis of the language through understanding the complex grammar structures and retaining such understanding of previous sentences in order to progress to understand a sentence, a paragraph, a page, and the book as a whole. More than anything however, understanding language entails confidence and belief in one's mind to understand the language. The biggest dilemma of the three students that had tutoring for three years, was their lack of confidence in their ability to understand the language. They believed they were not as "smart" as the other students in class who could understand the readings given. Language then, involves the mental state of students. It is not just a matter of knowledge, it is a matter of mindset.
ReplyDeleteThis leads into the help the Cummin believes should be given to the students. He believes that the school system should understand that implementing wide changes in "teaching techniques" intended to assist students better, is ineffective. This is largely due to the care each student needs individually to gain faith in themselves, and the student's need to realize that the sentences are not words strung together, but coherent thoughts building on one another to create a thought, a sentence. What students need is a teacher who could assist in first making the students realize that they are potential learners instead of problem learners. They need people to realize that the problems the children are having in school are "attributed not to the failure of assumptions about what would be helpful to children who face a language barrier in school, but to 'learning disabilities'". Once, as a student learning to read myself, it is important for the student at a young age to have more basic exposure to the academic language, language (English in this case) in order for each student to overcome the problem of understanding the academic language, and immersement to a higher level standard, and provided more help, rather than dropped to a lower level to attain the language proficiency.
The backbone to Cummin's theory is that there are at least two different types of language skills that children must learn--conversational language and "academic language", the latter requiring a much longer time to develop. I moved to the US when I was in kindergarten and had plenty of opportunities to develop both--on the other hand, my mom has perfect conversational language but is somewhat lacking in "academic language". Despite having lived in this country for 15 years, she still occasionally asks me to check her grammar. With many of my friend's parents, the same situation holds true. Cummins states that "academic language" is more difficult to obtain because it requires growth through the context of formal education--which my mom did not have (all of her education occurred in a foreign language). However, I disagree with one point that Cummins makes: that "the more time students spent being educated in their primary languages, the better they performed academically and in the learning of English". This statement implies ungrounded assumptions: that the older you are, the easier it is to learn English; and that languages are smoothly parallel because 'linguistic knowledge provides a foundation for subsequent languages'. I would argue with this because previously established language skills for a foreign language can get in the way of new languages. There is less being commonly shared than there is knowledge that must be re-learned in a new way--for example, language syntax. Other than that, I agree with Cummins.
ReplyDeleteWhat Filmore sought to understand was why three siblings--two of which barely spoke their native language, were still struggling with English.
The siblings that Filmore worked with had difficulties in three areas: prior knowledge of vocabulary used in literary contexts, background knowledge, and the linguistic knowledge to understand the meaning of a text. One of the first and foremost things that instructors must do is simple: remove labels. By being labeled as having "learning disabilities and language delays" and continually being placed in ELD classes, they acquired assumptions about their abilities. They even verbalized that they weren't as "smart" as their peers.
Another important approach is to rectify any misconceptions about learning. Even a simple misconception can have a serious impact on the way you approach material--for example, the brothers thought that once you learned something, you could metaphorically check it off your list instead of revisiting it or using it as a basis for further learning.
One aspect that instructors are powerless against is previous exposure--this is what places certain students ahead to begin with. Filmore mentions that 3-year-olds of higher SES had been exposed to 30 million more words than those of lower SES parents. The main problem that the three siblings had was reading comprehension--they had difficulties in connecting sentences and extracting meaning. Therefore, as an instructor it is imperative to teach students cues that reveal how the ideas are connected.