The Socio-Cultural theory
The socio-cultural theory developed by Lev Semenovich Vygotsky (1896-1934) emphasises developmental analysis, the role of language and social relations (Santroch date p36).
Vygotsky believed that children are born with a range of perceptual, attentional and memory capacities which are substantially transformed when surrounded by culture, socialisation and education.
Three major parts within Vygotsky’s socio-cultural theory are the Zone of Proximal Development, Scaffolding and Self-talk.
The Zone of Proximal Development
The Zone of Proximal Development is defined by Vygotsky as the “distance between the actual development level (of the learner) as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined by the level of problem solving under adult supervision or in collaboration with more capable peers.” (Vygotsky 1978:86, Hammond 2001, p.9).
This means that the difference between the work a child can accomplish on it’s own and that which it can accomplish with the assistance of an adult or advanced peer is its Zone of Proximal Development. The lower limit of zone of proximal development refers to the highest level of problem solving achieved by the child working alone, and the Upper limit of the zone of proximal development refers to the level a child can reach with the assistance of others. (Santroch 2001, p.277). According to Denis and Valentina McInerney there are three key principals underlying the effectiveness of the zone of proximal development to facilitate cognitive development:
- Education must be holistic.
- Education must be situated in social context.
- Education must allow for change and development in the child.
(McInerney and McInerney 1998, p.39)
Scaffolding
The idea of scaffolding can be related to Vygotsky’s socio-cultural theory as it focuses on the assistance of teachers to a student in a social context. Scaffolding in a language context can be compared to the scaffolding of a building (Hammond 2001, p.1) “once the building is able to support itself, the builder removes the scaffolding”. The teacher adjusts the amount of guidance to fit the child’s current performance level (Santroch 2001, p.227) over a period of time, as the child’s ability increases, the level of teacher support decreases.
Self talk
Vygotsky viewed self-talk or private speech to be a natural transition into becoming socially competent. He believed language and thought initially develop independently of each other, and then merge (Santroch 2001, p.227). Private speech is used by children to make sense of their thoughts and the world around them. It is used to monitor and guide their actions. “The transition of external to internal speech occurs over a long period of time from 3-7 years” (Santroch 2001, p.227) and involves self-talk as the transitional function.
Contributions to Educational Practice
The Systematic Functional Linguistics Theory along with the Socio-Cultural Theory have had significant contributions to current educational curriculum practices.
Teachers applying Halliday’s Systematic Functional Theory mainly need to focus on learning about language. Throughout much of our education, learning about language is not concerned with grammar, but with registor variation, language and society and different media of expression within a language (Halliday 1980, p.22)
Field, tenor and mode are taught within a classroom to expand the childs understanding of separate texts and the many ways in which text can be presented.
In Vygotsky’s socio-cultural theory the teacher in a classroom must observe and work carefully with the students to determine their zone of proximal development. They then start at the child’s lower limit and through close collaboration, finally reach the child’s upper limit at which the student is capable of working with others at their highest level.
Scaffolding is used within the classroom to help children at this upper limit achieve the same results or higher without the assistance of the teacher. The teacher must adjust the amount of guidance given as the student shows signs of increased ability until finally the student is able to work successfully alone.
Self-talk should be encouraged in the early primary years as it helps children make sense of their thoughts. This must be altered as the student advances through the grades, and the teacher should encourage private internal thought.
In conclusion we are able to see that Halliday’s Systematic Functional Linguistics Theory has indeed influenced today’s current educational curriculum in such a way that it is giving students a broader view of textual structures as well as enhancing meaning within texts. Halliday’s theory not only demonstrates the learning of language in an educational surrounding, but emphasises that learning language begins long before the formal education of a child begins, through parents and older siblings, and continues throughout their life.
As with the Systematic Functional Linguistics Theory, Lev Vygotsky’s Socio-Cultural Theory has had a major influence on educational practices. The introduction of the zone of proximal development and scaffolding into teaching practices has helped teachers develop a better understanding of what level to teach at to suit individual needs. The acceptance of self-talk within younger classrooms has enabled higher order thinking to be developed by the students.
Overall the influence of Vygotsky and Halliday has been positive towards the teaching-learning environment of the common classroom
Piaget vs. Vygotsky? Maybe there is no winner
As Piaget and Vygotsky are both cognitive theorists, both theorized about thecognitive development of children but with opposing views. Piaget strongly suggested that children are builders of knowledge and thus shouldn't be pushed to learn, as they will use the cognitive processes such as organization, adaption, and schemes to further their own understanding and knowledge. Because he believed all normal children learn in the same sequence, he developed stages of development in his theory. These include the sensorimotor period, preoperational period, concrete operational period, and finally, the formal operational period. Each stage has its respective age span, and Piaget believed that it was within these periods of development that all children learned very age specific movements, abilities, and concepts rather naturally without much social influence.
Unlike Piaget, Vygotsky's theory claimed that in regards to development children will benefit through social interaction. He believed that while children can construct knowledge and lead their development, development cannot be separated from social context. Thus, a child will only learn things within their teachers' cultures. He also believed that language plays a central role in cognitive development, unlike Piaget who viewed language as a mere milestone in development. Language is the key to internalization, another important aspect of Vygotsky's theory. Because Vygotsky believed in the role of the teacher, he developed the idea of the Zone of Proximal Development, or the difference between what a child is capable of in aided and unassisted learning. This allows the teacher to determine how much a child can be challenged and when to incorporate the concept of scaffolding into the lesson.
Both Piaget and Vygotsky have made major contributions to the study of cognitive development and have influence the ideas used in education. To say one theory is better than the other is something that is still being debated, and I think that will continue for some time. When I think about being an educator I can easily see myself using aspects from both theories, as some of their points are very difficult to debate. Piaget's concepts of organization, adaption and schemes, including assimilation, accommodation, equilibration and disequilibrium are all a major part of the learning process and seem to work quite accurately as he has explained them. As someone going into education however, I would like to think that Piaget may be a little off when he suggested that a child doesn't necessarily need a teacher, and thus I side with Vygotsky and believe that children gain knowledge from peers, older children and adults who know more and have more experience.
In a classroom setting I would use a combination of these two theories. I feel that it is always important to assess prior knowledge and see where the learners stand, as it is a huge mistake to assume they know more than they actually do. After PK is assessed learning can begin as the teacher is now aware of any possible misconceptions. Because learning happens when children find themselves in disequilibrium, it is important that we address these misconceptions that obviously require some accommodation. It is here that I think Vygotsky's concept of internalization plays an important role.
When a child is in a state of disequilibrium it is important that he or she be able to "talk" themselves through learning a new scheme to regain equilibrium.
What is ESP?
ESP has had a relatively long time to mature and so we would expect the ESP community to have a clear idea about what ESP means. Strangely, however, this does not seem to be the case. In October this year, for example, a very heated debate took place on the TESP-L e-mail discussion list about whether or not English for Academic Purposes (EAP) could be considered part of ESP in general. At the Japan Conference on ESP also, clear differences in how people interpreted the meaning of ESP could be seen. Some people described ESP as simply being the teaching of English for any purpose that could be specified. Others, however, were more precise, describing it as the teaching of English used in academic studies or the teaching of English for vocational or professional purposes.
At the conference, guests were honored to have as the main speaker, Tony Dudley-Evans, co-editor of the ESP Journal mentioned above. Very aware of the current confusion amongst the ESP community in Japan, Dudley-Evans set out in his one hour speech to clarify the meaning of ESP, giving an extended definition of ESP in terms of 'absolute' and 'variable' characteristics (see below).
Definition of ESP (Dudley-Evans, 1997)
Absolute Characteristics
1. ESP is defined to meet specific needs of the learners
2. ESP makes use of underlying methodology and activities of the discipline it serves
3. ESP is centered on the language appropriate to these activities in terms of grammar, lexis, register, study skills, discourse and genre.
Variable Characteristics
1. ESP may be related to or designed for specific disciplines
2. ESP may use, in specific teaching situations, a different methodology from that of General English
3. ESP is likely to be designed for adult learners, either at a tertiary level institution or in a professional work situation. It could, however, be for learners at secondary school level
4. ESP is generally designed for intermediate or advanced students.
5. Most ESP courses assume some basic knowledge of the language systems
The definition Dudley-Evans offers is clearly influenced by that of Strevens (1988), although he has improved it substantially by removing the absolute characteristic that ESP is "in contrast with 'General English'" (Johns et al., 1991: 298), and has included more variable characteristics. The division of ESP into absolute and variable characteristics, in particular, is very helpful in resolving arguments about what is and is not ESP. From the definition, we can see that ESP can but is not necessarily concerned with a specific discipline, nor does it have to be aimed at a certain age group or ability range. ESP should be seen simple as an 'approach' to teaching, or what Dudley-Evans describes as an 'attitude of mind'. This is a similar conclusion to that made by Hutchinson et al. (1987:19) who state, "ESP is an approach to language teaching in which all decisions as to content and method are based on the learner's reason for learning".
3. Is ESP different to General English?
If we agree with this definition,, we begin to see how broad ESP really is. In fact, one may ask 'What is the difference between the ESP and General English approach?' Hutchinson et al. (1987:53) answer this quite simply, "in theory nothing, in practice a great deal". When their book was written, of course, the last statement was quite true. At the time, teachers of General English courses, while acknowledging that students had a specific purpose for studying English, would rarely conduct a needs analysis to find out what was necessary to actually achieve it. Teachers nowadays, however, are much more aware of the importance of needs analysis, and certainly materials writers think very carefully about the goals of learners at all stages of materials production. Perhaps this demonstrates the influence that the ESP approach has had on English teaching in general. Clearly the line between where General English courses stop and ESP courses start has become very vague indeed.
Rather ironically, while many General English teachers can be described as using an ESP approach, basing their syllabi on a learner needs analysis and their own specialist knowledge of using English for real communication, it is the majority of so-called ESP teachers that are using an approach furthest from that described above. Instead of conducting interviews with specialists in the field, analyzing the language that is required in the profession, or even conducting students' needs analysis, many ESP teachers have become slaves of the published textbooks available, unable to evaluate their suitability based on personal experience, and unwilling to do the necessary analysis of difficult specialist texts to verify their contents.
4. The Future of ESP
If the ESP community hopes to grow and flourish in the future, it is vital that the community as a whole understands what ESP actually represents. Only then, can new members join with confidence, and existing members carry on the practices which have brought ESP to the position it has in EFL teaching today. In Japan in particular, ESP is still in its infancy and so now is the ideal time to form such a consensus. Perhaps this can stem from the Dudley-Evans' definition given in this article but I suspect a more rigorous version will be coming soon, in his book on ESP to be published in 1998. Of course, interested parties are also strongly urged to attend the next Japan Conference on ESP, which is certain to focus again on this topic.
5. References
Dudley-Evans, Tony (1998). Developments in English for Specific Purposes: A multi-disciplinary approach. Cambridge University Press. (Forthcoming)
Hutchinson, Tom & Waters, Alan (1987). English for Specific Purposes: A learner-centered approach. Cambridge University Press.
Johns, Ann M. & Dudley-Evans, Tony (1991). English for Specific Purposes: International in Scope, Specific in Purpose. TESOL Quarterly 25:2, 297-314.
Strevens, P. (1988). ESP after twenty years: A re-appraisal. In M. Tickoo (Ed.), ESP: State of the art (1-13). SEAMEO Regional Language Centre.
The Systematic Functional Linguistics Theory
The Systematic Functional Linguistics Theory was developed by Michael Halliday through his work on language development. He believed that language development begins naturally with every child long before the child reaches the age where formal education commences (Halliday 1980, p.1). Language is a part of everyday life and through the child’s close relations with parents, siblings and other constant figures, the child learns to communicate through three main stages: Learning language, Learning though language and Learning about language.
Learning Language
Halliday believed that learning language is a process of construction made up as a three-layered model (Halliday 1980, p.1). Halliday believes that there are three levels of language:
Semantic- refers to the meaning of the language
Lexicogrammatical – refers to the level of language and the way words are structured in sentences and clauses.
Graphophonic – refers to the sounds and symbols of a language.
- (Cusworth 1995, p.3)
In early infancy meanings are conveyed through three main expressions. The first of which is gestures. These are used in infancy as well as throughout life, and are developed into sign language for the hearing impaired. Sounds are the formulation of noises and words through the use of the movement of the tongue and vocal cords. Written language often has a different structure than spoken language, for example a formal essay or an informal note or list.
Protolanguage is a term used by Halliday to describe the sounds that precede spoken language as we know it (Love, Pigdon, Baker, Hamston 2001, unit 2a, screen 4).
This occurs in two stages:
5-7 months is when a child uses gestures to symbolise their intended meaning for another person to interpret. At approximately 9 months children use a system of signs directly relating to objects.
The learning of language takes place mostly at an unconscious level and varies according to the different circumstances to which the child is exposed (Hammond 2001, p.22).
Learning Through Language
“Learning through language refers to language in the construction of reality: how we use language to build up a picture of the world in which we live.” (Halliday 1980, p.14). Learning through language can be thought of at two levels: the outside language (in consciousness), and the inside language (the imagination).
A child decides for itself which experiences and events in its life are important to talk about. These events are called micro-encounters and learning takes place through the recounting of these with corrections made by peers or adults if those recounts are inaccurate or imagined. This knowledge is then stored as common sense to the child.
The two basic functions of language in this stage are ‘pragmatic’ and ‘mathetic’.
Pragmatic refers to the ‘doing’ function – when a child wants something done. This function often demands a reply from those around the child. Mathetic refers to the ‘learning’ function. When a child is sorting out his use of language for himself for example self talk, and does not expect a reply from anyone.
Learning About Language
Halliday (1980, p.20) states that “coming to understand the nature and functions of language itself are the key elements in learning about language.”
Throughout much of our education, learning about language is not concerned with grammar, but with registor variation, language and society and different media of expression within a language (Halliday 1980, p.22)
In education there is an emphasis on functional language rather than formal, and language is seen as a flexible resource.
“Field, Tenor and Mode within language describe how a text makes meaning within the context of a particular situation” (Cusworth 1995, p.2)
Field refers to what the content of the text is actually about. Its function of language is ideational as it puts forward information as to what ideas the author is trying to get across.
Tenor refers to the relationship between the speaker/writer and the listener/reader. This is an interpersonal metafunction as the speaker is communicating to the listener either through informal or formal language.
Mode refers to how the text is constructed, for example which media is used to convey the message of the text. This is called the textual metafunction.
Halliday recognises that “these three functions vary according to the context in which they are presented” (Hammond 2001, p.22)
دعوت به همکاری
"Be happy this moment. This moment is your life...". 
تبادل لینک هوشمند 
ورود
اعضا:
