New Idea

I realize that this is super early, but I came up with another idea for a possible project topic. I am a fan of video games. One of the ones I play is a massively multiplayer online role playing game, World of Warcraft (WoW). I know that some people have played WoW on different servers (instances of the game) where the players speak other languages. I was considering looking into this type of possibility and the potential these types of games have for language learning. I've started a character on one of the Spanish-speaking servers, and my plan is to keep a journal of my experiences. (I should remind you that I've only got two years of high school Spanish in my background, so I already feel very unprepared for this. I'm hoping that the immersion into the language will help me to pick up more of the language.) I also have the Rosetta Stone program for Japanese, which I was considering analyzing its potential/effectiveness as well. What I find interesting about this/these idea(s) is that WoW includes interaction in a virtual environment, removing the problem of peoples' accents being noticed. However, this brings up the possibility of other prejudices - such as misspelling, etc. The Rosetta Stone, on the other hand, doesn't have any interaction, but does include sections of the program dedicated to each facet of language (reading, writing, speaking, listening). These two forms of technology seem to test the theories of the interactionists and behaviorists.

Any thoughts on this is greatly appreciated. :)

Dialogic Approaches to TESOL Chapter 1

I felt like this chapter was a lot of review of key terms and theories from prior readings. I really liked the structure of the text and its branches. I found myself wondering about the inclusion of the work of Prator, seeing as he was Wong's professor. I realize that professors and students can share common research interests, but I wonder about her biases in including his work in her book. That being said, I found his approach to be a little theory (taking two areas of study (psychology and linguistics)) and a lot of common sense (adding in an element of teaching goals/aims). As teachers shouldn't we be considering this on a regular basis? Do we really need another theory to tell us to consider our teaching goals and objectives?

The chapter includes many different approaches and shifts in thinking about language learning. As I read these I began to think about my own experiences learning languages. The natural approach I found particularly interesting. Specifically, I liked the fact that learners can have "silent periods" during which they don't speak. This was definitely not the way my language classes have been. From day one of my Japanese class, I was expected to participate in pronunciation exercises and reciting greetings and goodbyes. While the natural approach may seem great in theory, it doesn't seem practical in a classroom setting where time is limited. Learners don't get the privilege of absorbing the sounds of the language before being expected to start producing on their own.

I've also been thinking about a few ideas for my final project. I found that as I read this chapter from Wong a few points really interested me. Her discussion about how native English speakers are not likely to learn a second or third language, using the metaphor of English being a one-way door. She also mentioned the idea of English becoming (more likely already is) a world language. I'm considering studying this concept for my final project. Including, possibly, the question of where the "power" of English came from.

Bakhtin's place in Norton and Toohey's article

As I read Norton and Toohey's article, I thought of the part where they say they use Vygotsky and Bakhtin as support for their research. I could understand how Vygotsky's ZPD fits into their study, but I was (and still am) a little unsure of how Bakhtin's ideas fit. Norton and Toohey explain Bakhtin's theory as language learners "try on" different voices, practicing their language abilities, until they are able to develop their own voices. How does this work with Julie and Eva's situations? I'm not entirely sure how this works with their language development. Are Norton and Toohey trying to apply this theory to explain how Julie and Eva adopted different social roles until they found a comfortable place in their environments?

I really like the stance they take here. That the environment needs to be taken into consideration when discussing SLA. (Though I feel this is a repetition of the nature vs. environment argument.) Having a supportive environment helps when learning a second language. We've discussed this issue in class as well - the idea of a risk-free, encouraging atmosphere where people can speak, make mistakes, and learn.

Differences Among Learners

I started this weeks' readings with Lightbrown and Spada's chapter three. I expected to find a list of characteristics that successful L2 Learners have, but I found myself extremely disappointed as I read. I began to feel as though the whole chapter was saying that there isn't any formal list - it depends on the individual. While this is a fine conclusion, I still would have liked a list. When I got to the similar section in Saville-Troike's chapter, I began to feel a little better about it. Though she too took the basic stance of "it depends on the individual," I thought she had at last a better way of explaining it. At some points, she does say something like "the x group are better at y because of z."

I also found Saville-Troike's discussion on sex interesting. It made me think about my Japanese class. I took it with my husband because he didn't want to learn Spanish, and I didn't want to lean French. (The languages we started learning in high school.) Thus, Japanese was our compromise. I quickly realized that the course was much more difficult for me than it was for him. He didn't need to study or take notes in class. Meanwhile, I was frantically scribbling down everything the teacher said and would spend hours studying and making flash cards for all the words and characters/letters. We actually had a discussion about this once. He mentioned his experience with learning languages - computer programming languages. He mentioned that computer programming languages are languages that aren't as complex as English or Japanese are for example, but they do have their own version of grammar rules and structures. He explained how he managed to see Japanese in these terms. With very little knowledge of computer programming languages (and with no desire to learn them in addition to Japanese), I went on my merry way to make flash cards. While this may not have anything to do directly with sex, I think it does have something to do with the fields of study people go into.

Week Three Readings

As I read, I quickly came to the conclusion that I like Lightbrown and Spada's book better than Saville-Troike's. I think they present information in a more clear way. Though it might have been the fact that they focus on a few theories instead of attempting go through each of them. Regardless, I was amazed at the number of different theories. I found the Interaction Hypothesis to be the most useful and clearly relevant to teachers. The methods mentioned in Lightbrown and Spada's book (slower speech rate, gesture, elaboration, etc.) are all strategies that teachers use on a regular basis. The theory seems like common sense that people would use different methods of interaction depending on who they were talking to and what they were doing.

The developmental levels of the information organization method was also interesting. From my own rather limited experience learning a second language, I can see these come into play as I learned. I would first start off naming things and then move on to produce sentences. My second year of learning Spanish, I was just starting to add morphemes to show tenses and point of view/person. I don't think that I've learned enough of a second language to make it to the Finite Utterance Organization yet. These theories make me wonder how a class would be structured if it chose a theory as it's guiding principles for instruction. Perhaps, I will dig out my Rosetta Stone disks and see if I can determine which theory is behind its organization and methods.

The more strategies I read about the more I realize that there is so much more research to be done. No one seems to have all the answers. I wonder if we ever will find a single answer.