Post 3
Hello everyone!
For this assignment, my reflection and post will be a little different from what it would normally be. After submitting my original assignment, I was contacted by Dr. Avellaneda and he told me my interview was done incorrectly. When I should've asked questions about the student's journey through second language acquisition and learning, I made the mistake of focusing how the instructor teaching and not focusing on theology. This class is not about instructor teaching, but about second language acquisition theology and making connections between theory and real life. The biggest confusion that I had was in motivation theory because of how I was looking at the teacher's point of view and what the teacher does to motivate their students rather than the student's point of view and what motivates them. Ortega states that motivation "is usually understood to refer to the desire to initiate L2 learning and the effort employed to sustain it... " (Ortega, pg. 168) This definition of motivation again does not have anything to do what the teacher is doing, but what the student feels themselves motivates them. Whether it may be learning to speak to friends, learning for personal interesting, and many other reasons, it's what the learner themselves feel motivates them and not what the instructor does. In the textbook it says that "integrativeness is the one that has played the most central role in the development theory of foreign language motivation." (Ortega, pg. 170) What the instructor can do is realize what motivates the student and act on those ideas and theories. For an example, if the teacher sees that the student tends to speak more of the L2 among their friends, the teacher can group them together so the student can continue to speak the L2 and grow in skill level. These are some of the misunderstandings that was cleared up by Dr. Avellaneda and this has helped me clearly understand the focus of second language acquisition, motivation, and the class.
For this assignment, my reflection and post will be a little different from what it would normally be. After submitting my original assignment, I was contacted by Dr. Avellaneda and he told me my interview was done incorrectly. When I should've asked questions about the student's journey through second language acquisition and learning, I made the mistake of focusing how the instructor teaching and not focusing on theology. This class is not about instructor teaching, but about second language acquisition theology and making connections between theory and real life. The biggest confusion that I had was in motivation theory because of how I was looking at the teacher's point of view and what the teacher does to motivate their students rather than the student's point of view and what motivates them. Ortega states that motivation "is usually understood to refer to the desire to initiate L2 learning and the effort employed to sustain it... " (Ortega, pg. 168) This definition of motivation again does not have anything to do what the teacher is doing, but what the student feels themselves motivates them. Whether it may be learning to speak to friends, learning for personal interesting, and many other reasons, it's what the learner themselves feel motivates them and not what the instructor does. In the textbook it says that "integrativeness is the one that has played the most central role in the development theory of foreign language motivation." (Ortega, pg. 170) What the instructor can do is realize what motivates the student and act on those ideas and theories. For an example, if the teacher sees that the student tends to speak more of the L2 among their friends, the teacher can group them together so the student can continue to speak the L2 and grow in skill level. These are some of the misunderstandings that was cleared up by Dr. Avellaneda and this has helped me clearly understand the focus of second language acquisition, motivation, and the class.
Comments
Post a Comment