Major Theories Of Literacy Learning And Language Development

Introduction

There are a lot of different learning methods. Behaviorist, cognitive constructivist, and social constructivist are the three main forms of learning theories. The concepts of child development concentrate on how children evolve and grow in their childhood. Everyone has a personal development experience, but it is sometimes hard to understand how and why people grow, learn, and act as they do. This paper’s motivation is to examine three theories, constructivism, social constructivism and interactionism. Also, reflect on my encounters as a student and an educator with language and literacy learning.

Compare and Contrast Theories

Constructivism, social constructivism, and interactionist are theories aimed to improve teaching and the learning process. The theories consider the students’ previous knowledge in determining what should be taught. The theories share many of the same explanations and involves how children and adults learn and acquire languages. A combination of these theories is still used in today’s classroom to teach more effectively.

Save your time!
We can take care of your essay

• Proper editing and formatting
• Free revision, title page, and bibliography
• Flexible prices and money-back guarantee

Place an order

The learning theory of constructivism arises from the evolution of cognitivism, transforming it into a new theory of education. Constructivists think individuals learn best when they consciously create their sense of new content presented to them (Clark, 2018; Jia, 2010). Learners process or create new knowledge by applying it as a guide to their perceptions, attitudes, and beliefs. The learning, therefore, can be real. When students enter a classroom, they enter with experiences from their daily life and universal issues. Teaching should therefore take the previous knowledge and experience of students as the point of growth of new knowledge and incorporate students to generate new information from the former.

The constructivist viewpoint of Piaget is focused on radical constructivism, focusing on the human mechanisms of thought, combined with social interaction. Piaget suggests that individuals need to adapt to their surroundings and explains two adaptation, assimilation and accommodation processes. Accommodation involves reframing the new experiences into the adequately present mental point of confinement. Assimilation makes it possible for an individual to incorporate new experiences in the old ones (Blake, 2008). In other words, the instructor is the educational environment planner, the learning guide for students, and the instructional advisor. The teacher organizes and directs the entire process of teaching.

On the other hand, social constructivism encourages that because of social interaction and language use, all knowledge develops, and consequently is a mutual encounter as opposed to an individual one (Lynch, 2016). The learning process requires the learner to participate actively in creative activities and self-organization. Teachers should enable their students to ask their own questions, develop their own theories, and test them for viability. Instructors should promote, instead of reducing or preventing, mistakes arising from the ideas of the learners. Students will be forced to perform open-ended inquiries by their instructors, interacting with practical and concrete examples to solve problems. This allows the learner to explore possibilities that are either supportive or conflicting (Lynch, 2016).

Social communication plays significant role in student learning. Students, as well as adults, gain from one another through social collaboration. Vygotsky believed that social interactions allowed students to find deeper meaning in new information that was provided to them (Clark, 2018). The zone of proximal development (ZPD) is a concept in the theory of social development developed by Vygotsky. The ZPD is characterized as the distance between the level of actual understanding and the higher level of potential development resulting from social interactions with other individuals (Blake, 2008; Clark, 2018). It is within the ZPD where learning occurs. Scaffolding is provided by the instructor or a more competent peer when there is encouragement and guidance. Scaffolding is achieved by discussion, assistance with an activity or task that offers appropriate assistance and encouragement for the learner.

In the main language point of view, interactionist, in opposition to constructivism and social constructivism, believes that nature is important and nurtures in the process of children’s language acquisition. The children develop more vocabulary through meaningful conversations with the help of instructors. Instructors often question, reply, challenge and contradict in meaningful conversations to build the complexity of the children on the language. As children make progress in developing the meaning of the language, they are encouraged to learn and use the vocabulary in the right context. Social collaboration is one of the keys to creating language skills for children. The approach to managing their language acquisition is the social environment. Interactionist also focuses on the process of acquiring second language between native and non-native speakers or learners of the first and second languages (Mulyani, 2019). The communication between the two sides would allow the learner of the second language to learn the language.

My Personal Experience with Literacy and Language Learning

My initial recall of education and language learning appears to behaviorism as the theory utilized at that time. I attended a small elementary school with a minimal number of students in class. Rewards and prizes were given to students if the assignments were complete, but there was really no choice about completing the assignments, you had to, or you were in trouble. Stickers, sweet treats, bonus points, or seeing your work posted in class were considered prizes or acknowledgement for the work completed in class or homework. Discipline was tough such as students sat in rows so you cannot talk, raised hands to speak, received a paddling, was placed in a corner facing the wall, hit in the hand with a ruler or sent to the office for major discipline.

I really do not recall the reading program utilized in elementary besides reading Dick and Jane series and reading short stories from the reading textbook and answering comprehension questions. The teacher would introduce the vocabulary words and students define them. The teacher introduced the story and students would read the story aloud in class and answer questions at the end of the story and discuss the answers. Homework consisted of studying the vocabulary words and comprehension questions, and practice reading the story nightly for fluency. I also do not recall differentiation in class.

The program I recall from my experience with literacy learning was spelling, phonics, and English. Spelling, phonics, and English were taught as separate subjects from reading. Phonetics was embedded in the spelling textbook. As early as Kindergarten, alphabets and the sounds of the alphabets were taught. Phonetic sounds were taught all through elementary school. Spelling words were written three times each along with complete sentences as well. Each day spelling focused on a specific skill and phonics was one. Sounding out the words helped me to pronounce words correctly.

In my learning, the behaviorist approach used were effective because I learned how to read and comprehend what I read. The reinforcement of rewards enhanced me to continue to learn to strive for better grades weekly. The feedback from recognition boosted my self-esteem and maximized my learning. The structure of class and routines were effective behavioral approaches in instruction and practice.

Theories in my Classroom

I am currently an English Language Arts (ELA) and Social Studies Master Teacher at a middle school. So, I do not have a personal classroom, however, I do utilize two of the teachers’ class to field test strategies or just to team teach. Cluster meeting are weekly with the teachers to present and model the strategies I field tested in the classrooms. The classes I instruct with the teachers are comprised of majority African American students that struggles with reading. The procedures I fuse into the classes and cluster meetings suit the requirement and learning styles of all of the students and teachers.

Both ELA and Social Studies curriculum used by the state are scripted. So, planning consists of annotating lesson plans to ensure the lessons are taught with integrity for student achievement. After annotating lesson plans, a vast majority of the lessons require students to turn and talk with a partner or have whole class and small group discussions. Therefore, social constructivism and constructivism are implemented in the classroom. For instance, students are prompted with a question to discuss throughout which prepare them for writing prompt at the lesson in ELA or Social Studies. After reading and discussing, the students will take the information they learned from each other and produce a writing that will display what they learned. Through discussion, students are developing new knowledge and thinking critically by working with others.

With literacy being a problem at my school, motivating the students is important. This is when cognitive-behavioral approach come into play. This approach enables me to ensure students are active in their learning. In order for me to see any progress with the students, they set a goal to increase their comprehension using a computer program called iReady. Rewards are given to the students who reach the goal set.

All things considered, I believe social constructivist learning is the most beneficial to enhance student learning. Thinking and problem solving are two of the critical attributes my students struggle with. When students can build on their prior knowledge to construct new learning it becomes more relevant and meaningful for the students. The students become lifelong learners and build thinking and problem-solving skills as they learn from others to promote deeper learning.

References

1. Blake, B. R. (2008). Incorporating Piaget ’ s and Vygotsky ’ s Theories in Classrooms. 1, 59–67. Journal of Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives in Education.
2. Clark, K. R. (2018). Learning Theories: Constructivism. Radiologic Technology, 90(2), 180–182.
3. Jia, Q. (2010). A Brief Study on the Implication of Constructivism Teaching Theory on Classroom Teaching Reform in Basic Education. International Education Studies, 3(2), 197–199.
4. Lynch, M. (2016, November 19). Social Constructivism in Education. Retrieved November 23, 2019, from The Edvocate website: https://www.theedadvocate.org/social-constructivism-in-education/
5. Mulyani, P. K. (2019). Innatist and Interactionist Learning Approaches of Elementary School Students’ Language Acquisition. Humaniora; Yogyakarta, 31(1), 14–20. http://dx.doi.org.proxy1.ncu.edu/10.22146/jh.v31i1.33457