In education and the educational literature, we also see
references to a “developmental approach” or “developmentally appropriate
practice.” (See, for example: https://www.naeyc.org/files/naeyc/file/positions/PSDAP.pdf
Before we continue to talk about oral language
“development,” we need to address some issues with the concept of development:
A.
Is language “development” due to nature or
nurture?
B.
Is there a developmental progression for all
domains of language growth?
C.
Are there accepted ages ranges for particular areas of development? Should we be concerned about the child’s “rate
or pace” of development if they are outside of those ranges, specifically in the
areas of oral language and in the relationship of oral language to literacy?
(A) Nature or nurture?
My position: Language Development is determined by both
nature and nurture.
Here are some sources that propose or suggest that it is
both: nature and nurture:
*How Babies Talk, Roberta Michnick Golinkoff and Kathy
Hirsh-Pasek, 1999
“So, is it [oral
language development] nature or is it nurture?
This question fuels a debate that has lasted for centuries, a debate
that affects our roles as parents, teachers, and caregivers. If language is inborn, then we can stand back
and watch the miracle unfold. If, on the
other hand, we teach language, we must be active partners in our children’s
language growth. All of us need to know
because children’s language abilities are intimately related to many aspects of
intellectual growth.
Those in the field of
language development are finally in a position to answer some of these age old
questions. There has been a revolution
within the study of language development in recent years. New methods can evaluate the language capabilities
of the fetus (yea, the fetus!} and newborn.
We can now see up close what newborns bring to the task of language
learning (nature). New methods also
permit an even clearer view of the ways in which parents’ teaching affects
their children. It turns out that nature
and nurture are involved in an intricate dance with each other….” Pp. 3-4.
*Language Development, Erika Hoff, 2005 “Communicative Interaction As a Contributor to the Process
of Language Development
“Even if the
communicative function of language does not explain how language is acquired,
communicative interaction is clearly the setting which children hear language
input. And, it turns out, properties of
the communicative interaction children experience affect their linguistic and
communicative development….´ P 96.
*The Achievement Gap and “Ready to Learn”
There is a vast literature that suggests that some children
arrive at kindergarten not as ‘ready
to learn” as other children. One of the
principal domains of growth that is highlighted in the differences in
“readiness” is language. Some children,
for example, have a far less extensive and sophisticated vocabulary than other
children. Some children are not as proficient
in communicating as other children; some children seem to know less about
sound/symbol relationships. See, for
example:
“Positive early language and literacy
development can give children a window to the world, helping to ensure that
each child can seize his or her potential for future success. During the first
3 years of life, the brain undergoes its most dramatic development and children
acquire the ability to think, speak, learn, and reason. When this early
development is not nurtured, the brain’s architecture is affected and young
children begin to fall behind. Many low-income children arrive at school
already behind in communication and language, a disadvantage that only persists
over time….”
Dr. Lesley Morrow -
Literacy Development Rutgers
University, 4 MinuteVideoDr. Morrow, a renowned expert on early literature talks about early literacy before school, the role that parents and preschool teachers play, and the importance of language.
*****
(B) Developmental Progression in all
oral language domains?
My Position: Yes, but…
and…Some domains are
mapped out completely. All domains of
language development are not
easily or completely mapped out sequentially, particularly during the preschool
years. And all children do
not follow the sequences that are mapped out at the “suggested” ages. Why is that? What difference does it make?
To some extent my answer is based on a distinction made by Hoffman,Paciga,
and Teale https://www.academia.edu/4622466/Common_Core_State_Standards_and_Early_Childhood_Literacy_Instruction_Confusions_and_Conclusions
Constrained and unconstrained skills
“In discussing the Common Core State Standards, the authors
point out that some Literacy standards (“Foundational Skills” which they call “constrained”
skills) are relatively easily conceptualized in terms of component parts that
follow a fairly linear trajectory. …. “(p.
8)
….“However for other components of literacy development—language acquisition, vocabulary, text comprehension, and written composition—measurement is much less straight forward. Theses aspects of early ELA learning continue to develop throughout life, thus having no measureable point of mastery (we never stop learning vocabulary, for example… Second, they are considerably more complex to acquire than the foundational standards…..” (p. 10)
Furthermore, attainment of such constrained skills are
easier to measure. “There already exist
several valid, reliable measures of foundational skills such as concepts of
print, phonological awareness, and phonics appropriate for preschool and kindergarten. In addition, for teachers, the data from these
measures tend to be reasonably straightforward to gather and interpret, and
teachers can fairly readily learn how to use the information from these measures
to differentiation instruction for young children….” (p. 10)
Although he is talking about cognitive development, I think
his ideas are relevant. He maintains
that “Children’s Cognitive Abilities Vary by Task and Day, Not Just by Age and
Individual Developmental Pace.” (p. 37) His position address issues of ongoing
assessment and pedagogy. He asks: “What Does This Variability Mean for
Teachers?” His answers:
1 Use information about (conceptual) principles but not in the absolute.
2 Think about the effectiveness of tasks.
3 Think about why students do not understand
4 Recognize that no content is inherently developmentally inappropriate.
2 Think about the effectiveness of tasks.
3 Think about why students do not understand
4 Recognize that no content is inherently developmentally inappropriate.
*****
(C) Accepted Age Ranges and Concerns
About Pace or Rate of Development
My Position: Yes, there are age ranges mapped out for some
aspects of language development, but not for all of them. We need to understand why some children are
not keeping “pace” for those “developmental” language skills that are mapped
out. And we need to find ways to monitor
progress for those language skills that are not as clearly sequenced.
Sounds. We have fairly good age range markers for a child’s ability
to recognize and produce the sounds of our language. We have fairly good age
range markers for a child’s phonemic awareness skills.
Sentences: We have fairly good age range markers for some
aspects of sentences: sentence length
and syntax are examples.
Words.
Words/vocabulary is a more complex skill (unconstrained). We continue to learn words, word meanings,
word relations, and about words throughout our lives. We do have important norms for how many
words different groups of children “know” in the 0-5 range.
Discourse.
We know when children begin to “communicate” with others and something
about what and how they communicate in the 0 to 5 range. But this is such a wide and deep skill that
we shave much more to learn. We continue
to learn how to communicate throughout our lives.
Despite that
fact that age related sequences are not completely mapped out for all domains
of oral language, we should use the knowledge we do have to monitor whether or not children are
mastering oral language skills at a pace that will allow them to become
successful learners, readers, and thinkers.
We want them to be “ready for school,” but we also want them to continue
to be successful throughout their school years.
No comments:
Post a Comment