Dwight Atkinson

Toward a sociocognitive approach to second Llanguage acquisition

This article develops the notion of a sociocognitive perspective on second language acquisition (SLA), proposed as an alternative to the cognitivism pervading the field. By sociocognitive, I mean a view of language and language acquisition as simultaneously occurring and interactively constructed both “in the head” and “in the world.” First, I develop a view of language and its acquisition as social phenomena—as existing and taking place for the performance of action in the (socially-mediated) world. Second, I describe the cognitive nature of language and its acquisition, focusing especially on recent developments in connectionism. Third, I introduce sociocognitive views of language and posit a social interpretation of connectionism as bridging the gap between cognition and social action. Fourth, I discuss sociocognitive perspectives on first language acquisition. Fifth, I describe the cognitivist biases of much SLA research, then suggest how sociocognitive approaches can help overcome them. I end by considering implications of the perspective I develop in this paper.

TESOL and Culture

Culture is a central yet underexamined concept in TESOL. In comparison to other fields such as anthropology and cultural studies, there has been little serious discussion and critique of the concept in TESOL over the last two decades. This article offers a reassessment of the notion of culture in TESOL, taking recent work in critical anthropology and cultural studies, and to a lesser degree TESOL itself, as a starting point. It proposes a revised view of culture that is intended to serve TESOL practitioners into the 21st century, or that can at least provide a takeoff point from which such a view may be developed.

L2 writing in the post-process era: Introduction

Abstract In this introduction to the special issue, I attempt to lay out a coherent if still-heuristic notion of “post-process.” I do so by first investigating four components of Trimbur’s (1994) definition of “post-process”: the social; the post-cognitivist; literacy as an ideological arena; and composition as a cultural activity. Next, I review studies in first and especially second language writing/literacy research which have attempted to move beyond process pedagogy and theory, and which for me, at least, provide a sound conceptual basis for further developments in that direction. I then conclude by stating my own summative definition of post-process, and briefly introducing the main contributions to this special issue.

Writing and culture in the post-process era

Abstract Does the notion of culture, currently under wide-ranging critique across the social sciences, still have a future? In this paper I discuss three possible uses of the culture concept in the field of second language writing for the 21st century: (1) Turning the cultural lens back on ourselves (where “ourselves” means the very academics who have found the concept most useful in the past); (2) Investigating continuity, universality, and hybridity, whereas the culture concept has traditionally been used to investigate difference, localization, and cultural “purity”; and (3) Expanding, contracting, and complexifying the scope of the culture concept. I conclude by arguing for a view of L2 writing that takes into account the full range of social and cultural contexts impacting L2 writing, rather than focusing narrowly on skills and processes of writing (in the classroom) in themselves.

Differing Reading- Writing Relationships in L1 and L2 Literacy Development?

0 The complex nature of L2 literacy has recently become an area of special concern to applied linguists and second language acquisition researchers. Carson, Carrell, Silberstein, Kroll, and Kuehn (1990), for example, studying reading and writing relationships for ESL students from two different L1 backgrounds, found that although measures of reading and writing proficiency were significantly related for their Japanese subjects in Japanese, a similar relationship held among Chinese subjects only in English. Likewise, Eisterhold (1990), in a theoretical comparison of L1 and L2 literacy development, noted two conceptual complexities in the case of the latter: Many L2 acquirers come to the task of second language literacy acquisition with well-developed L1 literacy skills; and L2 acquirers typically do not have full oral competence available in the second language to support acquisition of its literacy. Even without considering the question of spoken language influence, however, the process of L2 literacy development is a highly involved one. Studies of reading-writing relationships such as those mentioned above suggest that L2 literacy acquisition may result in varying outcomes depending on the nature of Li literacy and/or the extent to which it has been mastered (see, e.g., Alderson, 1984; Carrell, 1991; Carson, 1991). In this short report, we describe parallel studies of LI and L2 schoolbased literacy development in order to point out differences between study results which appear to highlight the complex nature of L2 literacy acquisition.

Language Learning in Mindbodyworld: A Sociocognitive Approach to Second Language Acquisition.

Based on recent research in cognitive science, interaction, and second language acquisition (SLA), I describe a sociocognitive approach to SLA. This approach adopts a non-cognitivist view of cognition: Instead of an isolated computational process in which input is extracted from the environment and used to build elaborate internal knowledge representations, cognition is seen as adaptive intelligence, enabling our close and sensitive alignment to our ecosocial environment in order to survive in it. Mind, body, and world are thus functionally integrated from a sociocognitive perspective instead of radically separated. Learning plays a major part in this scenario: If environments are ever-changing, then adaptation to them is continuous. Learning is part of our natural ability to so adapt, while retaining traces of that adaptation in the integrated mind-body-world system. Viewed in this way, SLA is adaptation to/engagement with L2 environments. Interaction also plays a central role in sociocognitive SLA: We learn L2s through interacting with/in L2 environments. Founded on innate, universal skills which evolutionarily preceded language and make it possible, interaction supports SLA at every turn. Having presented this argument, I illustrate it by analyzing a video clip of an EFL tutoring session, indicating various ‘sociocognitive tools’ for interactive alignment which undergird L2 development.

Homo Pedagogicus: The Evolutionary Nature of Second Language Teaching.

Second language (SL) teacher educators tirelessly teach others how to teach. But how often do we actually def ine teaching? Without explicit definitional activity on this fundamental concept in second language teaching (SLT), it remains implicit and intuitive – the opposite of clear, productive understanding. I therefore explore the question, ‘What is teaching?’ in this paper. First, I establish the claim that the SLT literature rarely defines teaching explicitly, in part because of its technical ‘how-to’ focus. Second, I offer a heuristic definition of teaching as evolutionarily adaptive behavior (TEAB) – as existing in humans because it enables adaptation to varied and complex ecosocial circumstances. In contrast, animals have quite modest adaptive powers, so it may come as a surprise that TEAB is not uniquely human. Therefore, third, I review research comparing animal and human teaching in order to help us understand the latter better. Fourth, I describe teaching as studied by anthropologists – as it varies across human groups. Formal teaching is relatively rare from an anthropological perspective, and relatively recent at that. Fifth, I employ the results of this definitional exercise to exploratorily examine what happens in SLT classrooms. Finally, I discuss implications and future directions for the ideas presented here and conclude.

Colloquium--Alternative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition.

Presented at the American Association for Applied Linguistics Annual Conference, Denver, Colorado, USA; 23 March 2009.

From Student to Scholar: Making the Leap to Writing for Publication

Whether non-native English speaking students (NNES) are fundamentally disadvantaged by their NNES status is a major concern in English for Specific Purposes, English for Academic Purposes, and English for Research Publication Purposes. To investigate this question, we present a comparative study of six early career scholars—three “native” and three “non-native”—who are actively publishing in international peer-reviewed journals. Findings indicate that these scholars shared the same basic experiences in writing for publication, and that the “non-native” scholars did not feel significantly disadvantaged due to their NES status. These results question the usefulness of binary NES–NNES distinctions in explaining the complex activity of publishing for academic purposes.This is the abstract we would like to use for the printed version of the chapter.