Defining issues in Ed Ling

[Dan Douglas]

Bernard et al.:  Well, that's partly why I suggested revisiting the
BICS/CALP distinction.  And while I agree that assessments aren't the
answer, they're likely to be part of the answer, particularly since
teachers and pupils are increasingly faced with often poorly designed tests
and unjustified interpretations of test performance.  The bottom line is
understanding the nature of language use in the educational context, it
seems to me, and, as you suggest, tests can be used to encourage teachers
to discover the complex language systems pupils already control.

Cheers,
Dan

At 07:00 PM 12/15/2003 +0200, you wrote:
>Dan, related, but in its labeling unfortunately encouraged the gap by
>encouraging the belief that one is inherently (as opposed to socially)
>better than the other. Nor am I convinced that assessment instruments are
>the answer, unless by that you mean finding a way to encourage teachers to
>to discover the complex language systems pupils already control, and find
>a way to motivate them to expand this control to other parts of the system
>(include e.g. writing).
>Bernard
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-edling at ccat.sas.upenn.edu
>[mailto:owner-edling at ccat.sas.upenn.edu] On Behalf Of Dan Douglas
>Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 6:42 PM
>To: edling at ccat.sas.upenn.edu
>Subject: Re: Defining issues in Ed Ling
>
>Regarding the re-examination of basic concepts defining educational
>linguistics, one such would be Cummins' BICS/CALP distinction (which is
>related to what Bernard and others have already mentioned as the "gap
>between school languages and home languages", I think)  We need a clearer
>understanding of precisely what we mean by "school language" and "home
>language", and this would underlie our need for up-to-date assessment
>instruments, particularly in bi/multilingual contexts.
>
>Cheers,
>Dan
>
>At 09:55 PM 12/14/2003 -0500, you wrote:
>>In a recent issue of Working Papers in Ed Linguistics (18,2), the editors
>>mull over proposed definitions of our field:
>>
>>>Spolsky's vision of educational linguistics was that it would be a field
>>>of (applied) linguistics, much like educational psychology or
>>>educational sociology are fields of their disciplines proper, that
>>>"start[s] with a specific problem and then looks to linguistics and
>>>other relevant disciplines for their contribution to its solution" (1978: 2).
>>>
>>>
>>>Following from a recent discussion about definition, I'm drawing up a
>>>list of the top "problems" in our field.  When you consider educational
>>>linguistics overall, what problems, theoretical or practical, most need
>>>to be tackled right now and why?  Is there a pressing need for a basic
>>>concept (such as communicative competence) to be re-examined?  What
>>>connections urgently need to be made?
>>>The following is one example:  I suspect that educational linguistics
>>>could benefit from an integrated model of sociolinguistic and cognitive
>>>approaches to SLA, not only to refine theory but for the sake of solving
>>>specific teaching questions, such as what ways are available to improve
>>>the grammatical accuracy of second language students' writing?  One such
>>>attempt is proposed by Dwight Atkinson ["Toward a Sociocognitive
>>>Approach to Second Language Acquisition."
>>>The Modern Language Journal 86 (4): 525-545.]
>>
>>
>>Leslie
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>Professor, TESL/Applied Linguistics Program
>Co-editor, Language Testing
>English Department
>Iowa State University
>Ames, IA 50011, USA
>Phone: (515) 294-9365
>Fax: (515) 294-6814

Professor, TESL/Applied Linguistics Program
Co-editor, Language Testing
English Department
Iowa State University
Ames, IA 50011, USA
Phone: (515) 294-9365
Fax: (515) 294-6814
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/edling/attachments/20031215/e9435aac/attachment.htm>