Reading Finegan chapters 3 &4 proved somewhat difficult due to the nature of the content. Linguistics in general is a new area for me, but I really lack background knowledge in phonetics and phonetics and phonology other than basic knowledge in teaching beginning reading (which I studied many years ago and have never done in my teaching) and dabbling in choral music and singing.
Chapter 3 focused on sounds and describing them through the phonetic alphabet system known as the IPA. This I know from directing choirs. Oftentimes, song texts are described via the IPA. It's a helpful tool in the world of choir directing. Likewise, many of the terms related to airflow and mouth placements are important to the singer and to the choir director explaining to singers how to produce sounds. Reading the chapter reminds me how complex one seemingly little part of the body (the mouth) is. Trying to describe the sound production process takes a great deal of specific language and knowledge. I don't think I would want to become a speech pathologist.
Chapter 4 focused on phonology, the study of sound systems in languages. Keeping terms like phonemes and allophones straight in my head is proving difficult at this point. I'm hoping class tomorrow will help straighten that out. Again, it's interesting getting a taste of how linguists create language to explain what just happens naturally in people, even more amazingly to very young children. Even though this process is complex, young children uncover the phonological rules and underlying forms for word units in order to produce surface forms of the language simply by experiencing language in their environments. Amazing!
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Week 2 reflections
I am enjoying the synchronous aspect of this online class. I feel I have already gained more from this class than the previous asynchronous online class I took. I really feel that to a certain extent a synchronous course can offer even more benefits than a face to face course. I think in a face to face course, although people are physically present, they can hide and not participate. It's difficult to hide in a synchronous online course. This helps create good discussion among the whole group, which does not always happen in a face to face course.
I still have some frustrations with the technology. I had a headset with microphone, and it didn't function. I am having some IT people check it so that it will hopefully be working tomorrow, but it worries me a bit. I'm not very tech savvy as far as troubleshooting problems as they are happening. It makes me anxious.
I still have some frustrations with the technology. I had a headset with microphone, and it didn't function. I am having some IT people check it so that it will hopefully be working tomorrow, but it worries me a bit. I'm not very tech savvy as far as troubleshooting problems as they are happening. It makes me anxious.
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Week 1 reading reflection
If I could summarize chapter 1 of Freeman and Freeman, I would have to use the word "complex." Although researchers have studied this for decades, much is still unknown about how young children acquire their first language. The brain is a complex organ, and various disciplines (developmental psych, sociology, anthropology and education) bring a little bit different view and aspect to the ideas behind first language acquisition. Most experts would lean toward the idea that first language acquisition is to a large extent innate and built in.
Chapter 2's summary word would be "tension." A definite tension exists between the two camps as to how people acquire written language and languages other than their own. The behaviorists think these languages are learned while the constructivists believe they are acquired. Having trained as an el ed educator, I learned in my undergrad work about how children learn to read and how to teach reading and writing. I definitely was trained in the behaviorist part to whole model. While I taught, however, my learning and teaching evolved to the constructivist model.
As a second language learner myself, I learned but did not acquire German in my high school years. I knew the rules, the vocab, and conjugations and declensions; but I really could not speak or listen. Then I spent a year in Germany and it all came together. I feel very comfortable in all four skills of the language--reading, listening, speaking and writing. I do feel my structural knowledge helped me once I was immersed, but the immersion helped me truly acquire the language.
I recently took Elementary Spanish I at the college level and experienced major frustration. It was taught for acquisition and not learning. There were no vocab quizzes, no exercises to emphasize structures. It was basically learn through reading, writing and listening. I learned things, but I think I would have learned more if I could have asked questions in English and done some memorization and repeated practice of certain aspects of the language. To me as a teacher and learner, it's not either/or, it's both/and. I think that in teaching and learning a second language or writing, there needs to be a balanced approach to instruction. I think that I would let the constructivist view predominate, but at times the behaviorist practice can be helpful. I think to a certain extent, different students learn in different ways and the balanced approach will hit different students' learning modes.
(I'm not commenting specifically on the Finegan reading because many of the ideas were similar to those conveyed in American Tongues and the Freeman reading.)
Chapter 2's summary word would be "tension." A definite tension exists between the two camps as to how people acquire written language and languages other than their own. The behaviorists think these languages are learned while the constructivists believe they are acquired. Having trained as an el ed educator, I learned in my undergrad work about how children learn to read and how to teach reading and writing. I definitely was trained in the behaviorist part to whole model. While I taught, however, my learning and teaching evolved to the constructivist model.
As a second language learner myself, I learned but did not acquire German in my high school years. I knew the rules, the vocab, and conjugations and declensions; but I really could not speak or listen. Then I spent a year in Germany and it all came together. I feel very comfortable in all four skills of the language--reading, listening, speaking and writing. I do feel my structural knowledge helped me once I was immersed, but the immersion helped me truly acquire the language.
I recently took Elementary Spanish I at the college level and experienced major frustration. It was taught for acquisition and not learning. There were no vocab quizzes, no exercises to emphasize structures. It was basically learn through reading, writing and listening. I learned things, but I think I would have learned more if I could have asked questions in English and done some memorization and repeated practice of certain aspects of the language. To me as a teacher and learner, it's not either/or, it's both/and. I think that in teaching and learning a second language or writing, there needs to be a balanced approach to instruction. I think that I would let the constructivist view predominate, but at times the behaviorist practice can be helpful. I think to a certain extent, different students learn in different ways and the balanced approach will hit different students' learning modes.
(I'm not commenting specifically on the Finegan reading because many of the ideas were similar to those conveyed in American Tongues and the Freeman reading.)
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Our first class period
Our first online class period last week made me excited about this course. My first online course at MSU-M was asynchronous. I really liked the synchronous aspect of our first meeting. It was great to hear voices and see faces, even though it was electronic. I had a good vibe about our first meeting. Although there were moments of minor frustration (delayed speech, initial links not able to be accessed, etc.), I enjoyed the first meeting. I like the openness of the group and the energy. I look forward to learning more--from our professor, from my peers and from my personal study.
American Tongues
I have always been fascinated with language. I'm a pretty verbal person...my elementary and secondary teachers could attest to that (I got a C- in conduct in 3rd grade--ouch). My dad's parents emigrated from Germany in 1924 and never stopped using their mother tongue, although they became very proficient in English. I was especially close to my "Oma," who inspired me to learn German and love my German heritage. I spent a year living and working in Germany and miss having the opportunity to speak and listen in that second language.
The video held my interest throughout. Of course, as a Wisconsinite I took offense at the woman's comment about our "o" pronunciation. (Just kidding.) I feel, as most, that my form of English is standard English. (I have learned to laugh at our Midwestern accent.) Although I had thought or experienced many of the ideas in the video, it was a good reminder of how language is personal, political and a matter of pride for individuals and groups. As a teacher, I have mostly dealt with students of a similar demographic to my own. I'm looking forward to exploring and discussing the issues brought forth in the video.
The video held my interest throughout. Of course, as a Wisconsinite I took offense at the woman's comment about our "o" pronunciation. (Just kidding.) I feel, as most, that my form of English is standard English. (I have learned to laugh at our Midwestern accent.) Although I had thought or experienced many of the ideas in the video, it was a good reminder of how language is personal, political and a matter of pride for individuals and groups. As a teacher, I have mostly dealt with students of a similar demographic to my own. I'm looking forward to exploring and discussing the issues brought forth in the video.
Online learning
I haven't had much experience with online learning. I completed my first online course last semester. It was an asynchronous elementary education course that really focused on individual learning rather than building a community of learners. We basically had to read each chapter of the text and then react in the discussion area of D2L or in the drop box. Feedback from the professor was rare. The only other assessments were a couple of final projects related to text readings and the scope of the course. I learned things, but I think it could have been much more valuable had we interacted with each and with the instructor in a more regular and regulated way. I'm excited about this course based on our first synchronous meeting.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)