Monday, 2 January 2017

'YOUNG READERS SHOULD BE CORRECTED WHENEVER THEY MAKE A MISTAKE' [EVALUATE] - GEORGE/TEXT G TRANSCRIPT


As children develop a sense of written language and how it translates phonetically, it's evident that they won't instantly grasp the concept and will make virtuous errors along the way. However, by labelling them as mistakes that need immediate correction, it ignores the fact that these miscues create opportunities for learning and strengthening or weakening certain linguistic behaviours. Miscues could be issues with blending phonemes, differentiating between letters, tracking or whole word errors. An example of a whole word error from text G is when the text reads 'Mum looked upset', however George interprets it to say 'Mum looked upstairs'. Based on the cues given on the page of the book, it is clear why George assumed the word was upstairs. The illustration on the page is a drawing of Mum walking upstairs whilst carrying a chair and also upset and upstairs share the same 3 initial graphemes. However, as both words begin the same this could also be classified as a word guessing error as when George quickly read it he assumed that the word was upstairs, with reinforcement of this from the picture of the stairs. The mother's responds to George with 'no (.) it looks like upstairs doesn't it (.) but look at the word'. The use of the negative particle 'no' directly addresses what George has said lets him know that he needs to try again but alone would sound harsh and could dishearten him. Mitigation is used to soften the negative reinforcement and the use of the tag question 'doesn't it' indicates that the mother understands why George made that error. This example of hedging demonstrates how parents hint at which strategies to use next to reach the right answer but they don't directly tell them. This benefits the child as if each time they requested help it was simply handed to them they would never learn to self-correct. 

Mitigation is used fairly frequently by the mother in the transcript. In line 20 George makes another whole word error and his mother simply responds with 'nooo'. As mentioned previously, the negative particle 'no' is a very harsh sounding nasal consonant and since it's monosyllabic the blunted effect is emphasised. Skinner's theory of operant conditioning and reinforcement, as well as Brown and Levinson's research into politeness and face, could be used as an explanation of this. By elongating the chroneme of the vowel sound 'o' it removes negative connotations and instead signifies playfulness. If the mother were to bluntly state 'no' or 'wrong' every time then George would most likely eventually give up as he wouldn't feel as though he was gaining anything from the experience and it would feel like a punishment. Conversely, being constantly fed corrections would also result in giving up as he isn't learning for himself, thus he also isn't gaining anything. It's essential to find a balance between giving help and letting them figure it out alone as well as finding a balance between positive and negative reinforcement. If a child is constantly praised for tiny things in reading then they won't feel a need to progress as they get comfortable where they are, but if they receive no positive reinforcement or praise then they also won't move forwards as they don't feel they earn anything for their struggle. 

On the other hand, none of this means that correction is invalid and unnecessary. Children need a model for language and the parent acts as this model when they correct them and provide them with the skills and strategies needed to be able to read fluently. Between lines 12 and 18 George struggles with the compound word sandbags and his mother models the pronunciation for him. George's echoing back response indicates that he is paying close attention and that in this case, the correction is useful. George: 'to their house' Mother: '[e] [z] (2.0) watch the endings' - this is an example of scaffolding. Scaffolding is part of Vygotsky's ZPD theory and means assistance through strategies. By using phonics - as taught in schools - and telling George to watch the endings, the mother is helping George gather a variety of skills and techniques as well as showing him how to use them so he can self-correct. This self-correction is demonstrated later on when George phonetically sounds out the word 'upset' to get to the correct answer.

Overall, correction of virtuous errors is important if done occasionally and given constructively rather than constantly being told the answer. If no strategies are put in place or introduced by the adult reading with the child, or if the child isn't given an opportunity to self-correct then no progress will be made. 

1 comment:

  1. It's a wow opening paragraph in terms of subtlety and complexity and engagement with the issues but it doesn't quite address the declarative in the title or establish a protocol for dealing with the key vocabulary "mistake" and "corrected", so look to do that in an introduction.

    Check: no isn't only a nasal consonant but it does have one in it.

    You do develop a line of argument beautifully but don't forget to refer to theories at every opportunity to support it, or it comes across as your opinion.

    Really effective to notice patterns: "Mitigation is used fairly frequently..." but don't forget to link it back to the question to show relevance at the start as well as the end of the paragraph.

    Put quote marks even around single words: e.g. in "compound word sandbags", 'sandbags' needs highlighting. And "ZPD" needs using as a full phrase the first time - if you are going to use it again, bracket the initialism afterwards and then you can use that.

    Conclude with theories and/or relate to evidence from the data that you've already explored to support your views rather than your own opinion, although it's convincing. Tie more closely to the controversial statement throughout, evaluating how far theories and the data support and contradict it.

    ReplyDelete