Dynamic assessment (DA)

Thinking about the form of assessment SCT offers for classroom interaction: Dynamic assessment.

Dynamic assessment aims to jointly construct the best performance with the learner. In this sense, DA tells us what students can do "with help" rather than "on their own" as traditional assessment does. DA is future oriented, in the sense that it stretches learners performance and mediates learners 'towards an independent performance...' (Swain et. al, 2010)

This concept was very controversial in my mind at the beginning, because it seemed a little bit unfair and loose. However, it makes a lot of sense to me now, if you think that every time we assess with the traditional methods -for instance, a multiple choice test- we are creating an artificial setting for performance, since it is not very likely to deal with those at work or when communicating with other people in a second language; and opposite to what your parents (and I myself) tell you, you are not alone in life. You interact with people and co-construct meaning in conversation, or aid yourself with books and teachers when creating a code for Astrophysics. 

Nevertheless, some issues of accountability emerge and also identity. How do we report results from DA and how we make them valid for other people or institutions? How do we deal with students' expectations of more traditional tests and their (my T_T) obsessive dependance on grades to understand their academic identity? 

Reflections about SCT and Vygotsky

During these weeks I have been feeling different when I come to my SCT class. I feel lost at the beginning of each class, but then suddenly, I feel I am making sense of this theory....and I am finding it more and more useful. However, after each class, I leave with more and more questions, which keeps me thinking all the way home...and sometimes all week!!!

So one of the things that's been in my mind these days, is that SCT and Vygotsky's theory could be a good starting point for inclusion in education. First, because, Vygotsky argues that development is the ulterior outcome of learning, and that this development can take unpredictable trajectories.

I interpret these two concepts in the way that education goes beyond simple learning, it has to do with development, so now I see learning as the vehicle for development...which changes everything for me, in the sense that now I REALLY understand some of the curricular objectives that begins with "understanding, comprehending, appreciating and even valuing".

Also, the unpredictable trajectories of development make me think that teachers have the responsibility to look for the appropriate mediation tool to achieve development in the trajectory that learners would drive it. It relate this critically with learning disabilities and other cognitive constrains. In this sense, a child might not be apt to achieve certain standars, but still might have the possibility to develop in a way different from curricular goals. Therefore, failing in attaining the curricular goal, does not necessarily mean failing in development. Different learners learn at different paces and might require different mediation tools.

The real tension is how do we regard this issues in a little flexible curriculum, with the demand for accountability and the schools and government pressure to attain curricular goals in set timeframes.

Well, these are my thoughts today. I'm reading an introduction to how the brain learns from a biological perspective and the simmilarities with SCT are amazing!!! I also borrowed Vygotsky's "Thought and Language" to help me better understand this. I'll post some comments on it as soon as I had read a few chapters.

:)

Analysis of my learning incident

First of all, I would like to mention that the narrative of my learning incident, previously published received a very interesting critique: whether it is or not learning itself!!

Well, I must acknowledge that that type of “fundamentals of definition” criticism is always welcomed, because I did have some hard time thinking what learning really is after all, though I don´t remember any good quote, I do remember that there is a bunch of theories that try to explain and describe how learning is achieved, so I imagine they could help me out….However, I decided to leave this discussion for later, since it seems to take a good time of memory refreshing.

Therefore, for the purpose of my assignment, I decided to characterize my Swedish learning incident, as one in which what I really learn, was not language itself, but a function of language, “how to ask permission” which I consider equally relevant.

Before proceeding to the analysis itself, I would like to point out that just “analyzing at my own style” does not really make me feel comfortable, maybe due to my background in sciences. So I would like to suggest the development of a model of SCT analysis. Perhaps this could be part of the analysis itself, or left to the “further discussions” part of the paper, when I really put this in a formal paper.

As a raw analysis and at a glance, I see the following elements of SCT in my learning incident: artifacts (signs), inner speech, mediation, genetic method, identity, ZPD.

I also see some other critical components of other theories, such as Krashen’s affective filter and any motivation theory in general.

Artifacts (signs): English and Swedish language, list of verbs.

Inner speech: The conscious effort of trying to memorize and associate.

Mediation: English language served as a platform, as a tool to aid associations from one language to another. Since English is not my first language, I see it more as a sign, a meditational mean that helped me bridge the gap between split pieces of knowledge and the actual performance of the sentences. 

Genetic method and identity: All my interests, personality and cultural background conform a unique setting for this learning incident. In other words, somebody else could have not struggle with the same elements as I did, or could have overseen other things that were really important for me.

ZPD: Basically, the whole incident triggered my ZPD in order to take my development in the language a little further.

Affective filter: A god deal of anxiety was put in the dialogue, due to the clerk´s attitude, which for a moment seemed distractive and discouraging.

Motivation: I would say that my particular motivation at that moment was purely instrumental, i.e. I needed something and the whole interaction became more like a problem-solving task. I really liked the bracelet and I wanted to see it on me!!

CTL3806 Sociocultural theory and second language learning

I took this course because I recall the scope of teacher training at my university in Chile UCSH very related to constructivist approaches, specially, Vygotsky's and Bruner's ZPD and scaffolding, respectively.

I definitely agree with most of SCT claims, however, I tend to think these approaches are taken to the extreme of neglecting some "old fashioned" ones, such as behaviourism (conductismo), which, although its premises are not 100% reliable, it does describe and explain many of the everyday phenomena we see in the classroom and even, in life.

This is why I decided to take this course, to give SCT the chance to persuade me. I want to explore how much of this approach really makes sense to me and in what way I can make the most of it for my thesis project.