Integrating Language Skills: Week 11

This weeks readings include Kumar chapters 9 and 10 and Brown chapter 22.

Kumar discussed how little sense language would make if it was removed from the context. The book states, language is something that not only invokes content but it also provides context. As we have discussed in class, language is not simply a collection of words but much more complex.The chapter goes onto discuss the various contexts including linguistic context and provided the example of the meaning of the word "table" across different contexts. Reading how different the meaning of table can be used in English made me reflect on verbs and vocabulary that were difficult for me to learn in Spanish. It was confusing for me to understand that words could be used in different contexts until I realized how often this occurs in my first language. I can understand how difficult the concept of linguistic context can be on second language learners. Another difficulty for many student is the extralinguistic context which includes prosodic signals like stress and intonation in an linguistic environment. When reading about this, I thought of the first grade students I work with in reading. The biggest area of focus in their development is reading fluency which accounts for intonation, tone etc. This is very difficult for students to do in their native language when reading, so I can only imagine how difficult this must be for second language learners. Understand how to use and using these extralinguistic features like stress and intonation is a very difficult for task. Kumar points out that this is difficult for even advanced L2 learners. While we learn how to appropriately use these features in language implicitly, students' background knowledge from their first language. I also thought Kumar's discussion on extrasituational context was interesting as it proved that there are not only context influences from the language itself, but there are also social, cultural, political and ideological contexts that influence particular speech events. This is something that has always been very interesting to me- how much culture affects our interaction with others and how difficult this can be on L2 learners. I have experienced this myself when communicating with someone very different from myself, and expect to experience this in January when I arrive in Spain. Kumar provided an excellent (and humorous) example of such about an cross-cultural interaction between an American and a woman from Zambia. While the woman from Zambia may tell another "How are you? Oh, I see you've put on weight"- which is a normal greeting for this woman, to an American with different cultural values and expectations, this may be very odd or even offending. It truly is interesting how differently we interpret the things we say and do, because of our own cultural values.

Not only is there such a connection between language and context but there is also a connection between the way we use "primary skills of language" including listening, speaking, reading and writing. Kumar discussed this along with language being context-embedded. He discussed the concept of separating primary skills of language how important it is to instead, integrate language skills as learning and using any one skill will i effect, trigger cognitive and communicative associations with the others. It's interesting as he mentioned, that so many universities teach courses specific to one skill. Haven't we learned how complex language is, and how important it is that all domains me used and developed to have an authentic learning experience of the language?

Brown's chapter also gave us a better understanding of integrating language skills, as it discussed form-focused instruction. While not all theorists have agreed on what role form should take in the classroom, many researchers today support some form-focused instruction in the communicative framework. I learned Spanish with explicit instruction of grammar, and little time for communicative or authentic communicative tasks. While the idea of "form-focused instruction" originally came with a negative attitude, I do agree that there needs to be some focus on form of the language including organizational components for language and systemic rules that govern the structure. There seemed to a push for more of a natural approach to language teaching and a push away exclusive attention of grammar and vocabulary.  We went from too much focus on form, to the opposite end of the spectrum- barely any. Now attention to language forms was also ineffective but now it is understood that there needs to be attention to what brown calls the "basic bits and pieces of a language" provided in an interactive curriculum.

Brown did an excellent job discussing the different ways grammar can be taught and the effects it may have. Did his argument change your own ideas of teaching? What are you concerned about the most? Teaching seems to be a balancing act of some sorts, and while it may difficult to balance a focus on form, and focus on communication purposes, hopefully in time we will be able to do so to meet our students individual needs. Brown's examples of grammar techniques were especially helpful, would you consider using these in your own classroom?