LLED 360

Jeff Zweirs explains the role of academic language in his text on “Building Academic Language.” Academic language has the potential to be an incredible tool to aid us in communication, especially in the classroom. Unfortunately, it often leads to confusion and misunderstanding in both English language learners and native speakers with tragic frequency. Zweirs only covers the issue of clarity very briefly, but I believe clarity to be one of the largest barriers preventing youth from adopting academic language.

Unsurprisingly, academic language is used most heavily amongst academics, presumably more than any other population. Yet even within academia, mainstream English is the more comfortable of the two languages. Academic language is built upon a foundation of mainstream English, and no matter how advanced a given academic may be, it is still a learned register. In other words, academic language is a second language even to the most specialized and verbose of academics.

I would never argue that academic language is superfluous. We can use a single word to explain a concept that would otherwise take a great deal of communication to explain. It allows us to communicate concepts that are often abstract or complex in a more effective, concise, and salient manner. There is a tradeoff though: there exists a threshold where academic language ceases to be beneficial. In fact, it can be entirely counterproductive, decreasing the clarity, limiting the audience, and diluting the material. It is not necessarily an issue of vocabulary; even words that a well-educated person thoroughly understands may become overwhelming when packed into a single run-on sentence.

I wouldn’t necessarily argue that academic language standards need to be lowered across the board. It is simply my belief that academic language shouldn’t be used for its own sake; after all, we wouldn’t  say to a child: “Wouldn’t you like to relieve yourself in the lavatory?” We would simply ask “Do you need to potty?” When we use academic language, we must constantly be questioning our motives. Are we using a given term because we have enough experience in our field to know the specialized language required to describe it, or because we can actually use that term to better articulate ourselves to our audience?

I’ve created this fun graph to better visualize this notion. The main disagreement is upon when and where efficiency begins to decline.

An example of where I believe this ‘sweet spot’ can be found is with the celebrated TED series. Scientist, artists, and activists are able to effectively and concisely communicate their area of interest to one another, even when discussing very cutting-edge concepts, through the use of a very minimal amount of academic language. It is at a level that is likely universal amongst those with a basic, unspecialized secondary-level background.

In a post-modern world, what benefit is there to keeping this knowledge exclusive to our specialization, limiting the breadth of who can interpret and find meaning in what we are saying? I believe that the more we can communicate what we mean without losing our audience on the words we choose to express ourselves, the more culturally relevant our discipline can become.

In the chapter, Zwiers points out that the academic language for most teachers is their every language. Because university has gotten me more comfortable speaking in academic language, I may not able to pick out those big abstract words. For instance, the word “economy” has become part of my everyday language, and is no longer an abstract word. Like Zwiers emphasizes, we, teachers, must work on two dimensions – our own language and communication behavior and those of our students.

Another important aspect of academic language is that it is much more than memorizing the big words. Handing out a long list of vocabularies for students memorize for weekly quizzes is not sufficient to teach them the academic language. Students need to understand those words.  Many students simply memorize the new vocabularies, without understanding what they mean, without the ability to use these words in sentences. It is the responsibility of teachers to make sure that students understand the bricks and are able to use those bricks to express their ideas.

As a native speaker of mainstream English, I have found these chapters to be very revealing. One of my first revelations was the understanding of the great depth and breadth of the issues involved with the comprehension and use of academic English. I had not taken the time to fully explore all of the many ways in which the English language, especially academic English, can be confusing for English language learners. The uses of qualifying statements, prosody, clauses etc. present so many challenges that I now have an even greater respect for any level of success that ELL’s achieve on a daily basis.  I have also become much more aware of the ways in which I, unintentionally, may be confusing ELLs with my speech. It also helped me to identify the particular mechanisms that are breaking down when individuals who are ELLs seem to be having difficultly being understood and how I may be able to help repair those issues in an efficient way. Also, the first chapter clarified the way in which these seemingly minor difficulties in communication can have social and psychological ramifications that are much deeper than receiving a low grade.

However, the next few chapters have given me much hope. As a theatre teacher, it seemed like an onerous task to try to teach the content of my courses, as well as continually scaffolding the use of academic language. However, the strategies that are given are not unlike some of my current teaching methods. I believe, through some minor changes and deliberate planning, I can effectively teach, both academic language and content. For instance, analysing the way in which a particular character speaks and how this reflects their thinking are essential parts of an actor’s preparation for a role. Therefore, discussing metalinguistic and metacognitive processes can be easily done in relation to course content. Furthermore, theatre emphasises using the whole body and voice to communicate and is not limited to the verbal realm. Therefore, students who are experiencing language difficulties may feel safer and freer to express themselves in these ways. Consequently, I, as well as their fellow students, will be better able to scaffold their language development, as we assist them in finding the right academic language to express the ideas they have presented.

There are many more examples of the many ways I have been inspired to bridge the content of my courses with the acquisition of academic language and I am excited to try them out with students in the field.

Something that appealed to me from the third chapter titled “Cultivating Academic Language Acquisition” was the section describing the use of gestures and facial expressions as tools to demonstrate the meaning of language. I am a huge advocate of using physical movement in education, and I am intrigued by the notion of intentionally using it as a tool to promote learning.

I’m familiar with the natural tendencies to use gestures and facial expressions, being a person that “talks with my hands” frequently. I’m encouraged by the idea of making a conscious effort to utilize these tactics the same way visual aids would be used in the classroom. Zwiers explains how one teacher “often emphasized the words however and yet as she moved one hand in an arc in the opposite direction” (Zwiers 49). I can appreciate this action as a powerful way to reinforce meaning thereby aiding in the acquirement of academic language. It also seems to be a relatively simple way to enrich any lesson plan. Whether I am in the drama class or the English class, there will always be a certain amount of time given to lecturing and facilitating discussion. If I can plan to incorporate the use of gestures and facial expressions into my part of the discussion, it will surely provide one extra layer of communicating language use in a fairly efficient manner.

As I am typing this response, I have become very self-conscious of the words and organization of this blog post. I found this chapter fascinating as I am highly interested in the “invisible” and “hidden” curriculum in the classroom––and the very language we use in school does need to be critiqued and explored. Despite being an English Language Learner from an immigrant Taiwanese family, it is difficult to recall exactly what it felt like to grasp and pick up a new language when I was in my younger years. By now English has become my dominant language. Yet it is interesting to reflect on my experiences, and the experiences of some of my friends who had more difficulty grasping “academic English.” I find it particularly troubling that some students “remain underneath our radar” because it appears at first glance that they are getting by adequately (Zwiers, 2).

I found Zwiers discussion on academic entrapment as a good warning that I wish to internalize early on in my teaching career. I do not want to demand of my students what I do not teach them––and to especially do this subconsciously and through the mode of language. I hope that I can do my best to acknowledge what my students already know and what they bring into the classroom, and then come together and agree on what is important in what we are studying. As Zwiers highlights, the shifting that occurs between students’ experiences and the subject/text is important––and I want to be able to use language effectively to do that well.

After reading the section on the types of academic capital, I hope to invest some of my time and energy to engage with the students’ families and parents. Despite the varying familial and home circumstances that students come from, to the best of my ability I want to be a teacher that can get the parents involved and excited about what their children are learning. It appears that so much learning happens outside of the classroom (such as in homes, among social networks, religious traditions, cultural spaces) and language is the avenue in which all that learning travels. So I hope to help my students become more cognizant of the way they are speaking and the words they are using.

Michael Yang

Language, more specifically the English language, is fascinating form of communication. English is not a tonal language; rather the intonation and inflection of words are vital components in the construction of meaning in our sentences. Chapter two discusses the use of “prosody” (page 33) and gives a clear example of how improper emphasis of words in a paragraph muddles the message. I can imagine this being extremely difficult for English language learners, especially ones whose native languages are tonal or do not stem from any of the Germanic languages.
One of the interesting points brought up in the first few chapters was the idea of capital (social, cultural, knowledge, and linguistic) and how our institutions value them to varying degrees. It seems that without the proper tools of communication (linguistic capital) other admirable types of knowledge capital could be easily overlooked or under-appreciated, not only in school systems but in the job force, as well as social settings and navigating everyday life. If a student’s communication skills are weak or slow, they could very easily be lost in the shuffle or rushed along in an attempt to keep up the pace of a lesson, even if they have many valuable things to contribute.
When I taught preschool I had a very bright, innovative, and creative colleague who was interested in teaching English to some of our young ESL learners by engaging them through music. At the time we used a phonics program called “LetterLand” that leaned heavily on the use of narrative and song to teach basic letters, as well as blending short sounds. Perhaps these types of tools could be very useful in older classrooms as well in a more sophisticated way, especially for those who are still acclimatizing to the language. I feel that these sorts of strategies need not be limited to ESL students, but rather to any individual struggling with learning to speak and write academic English.
http://www.letterland.com/

Kathy Zhang

Strategies for teaching ESL students – Video about teaching ESL students effectively

Teaching students “how to do school things in school ways” can be challenging, especially if they are ESL students. Every year, 250,000 immigrants come to Canada, with minimal English language skills. The teachers need to access the needs of these immigrant students, and help them learn the academic language to succeed. It is not just the responsibility of ESL teachers to help these students; it is the responsibility of all the teachers to make sure that every single student understands them and learns something new every day.

While reading this chapter, I had a moment to think back to my high school days and how diverse it was with students of hundreds of different backgrounds. Every student is unique and has different learning process. Some students learn fast with minimal help; some students are slow in learning and need much more effort from their teachers.

The conversation from sixth-grade language art class got me thinking a lot. During the summer, I had the opportunity to teach English in Korea. While I was teaching, I often corrected their oral English while they talked. I realized that this can discourage them from speaking and take away their confidence. I got to reflect on my teaching methods and look for ways to improve them.

As an English Learner myself, I never realized the kind of background learning that needed to take place in order for me to succeed.  I understand the importance of parents in the child’s ability to grasp and comprehend the “academic language”.  I always felt that there were different kinds of “Englishes” and wondered why the “academic English” was not really “taught” in school.  Watching a lot of television and reading certainly helped me to learn English. The “English” that we hear spoken in the classroom, even by the teacher, is often considered colloquial and does not teach us what  “academic English” is.  How then does a student of English, let alone new English Learners, understand or even try to begin articulating in this form?  Zwiers made a good point about cultural “common sense”.  Certain students do not find it appropriate to speak in specific situations or find that they do not understand certain words or concepts that are specific to North America only.  Teachers must be sensitive to these cultural differences but it is very easy to forget.  Learning English for me has never proved to be too difficult, but reading this chapter has really shown me that there are many people struggling silently and who are unable to help themselves because the system here favors and works for those who are already rich in linguistic, knowledge, and social capital etc.

When I read the first three chapters from the text, I was a little taken aback by many of the things Zwiers brought up that I had not previously considered. As an individual who was born in Canada, grew up in an English-speaking household, and who has spent years immersed in an academic setting with the language that that entails, many of the issues presented, such as figurative expressions, have, as far as I can recall, always been a part of my life. After growing up hearing things like “on the same page” and knowing or quickly picking up on what they meant, reading about the problems and misunderstandings these sayings can create really opened my eyes. I found the first few chapters very helpful in outlining who diverse learners might be, the problems they could potentially face, and possible solutions to these problems, particularly relating to English the subject.

In the second chapter, in the section on clarity, Zwiers cautions that “[s]tudents can try and be overly academic at the expense of clarity,” (39) by writing overly long sentences and selecting too many words from a thesaurus in order to sound, in their minds, more academic. This really struck me as I, while in high school, had instances where I would do exactly what Zwiers described. For much of the opening chapters I was reading with someone in mind who did not speak English as his/her first language, and this section shook me out of that. While many of the points made in the text might, for example, relate to a diverse student learning English, it is important to keep an open mind when considering the issues discussed and the students they might involve, something I will strive to do as the course continues.

Before reading the first few chapters in the text, I had never given much consideration to the difficulty of learning new academic languages for students who have not fully mastered the English language. I was born and raised in Canada and grew up in an English speaking home which meant that I never had to experience the struggles of learning multiple languages at the same time. Reflecting on the language used in math (my area of specialization) I can see how this could become especially tricky for some students. Words such as “prime”, “difference”, or “product” have a completely different meaning in the context of math than they may have in a persons’ every day life. After being made aware of the many possible traps waiting to confuse students I was surprised to see some of the solutions that were listed in the book. Suggestions to overcoming these obstacles such as using facial expressions, hand gestures, and metaphors seemed so obvious and yet I had never thought of them as tools that a teacher could consciously take advantage of to aid in the education of their students. Previously, I had thought of these things as a natural part of conversation that was given very little thought. This made me realize that there are some seemingly small things that teachers are able to make a conscious effort to do that can make a world of difference for students.