A Brief Review on Sociocultural Theory

A Brief Review on Sociocultural Theory
Abstract: Sociocultural Theory (SCT) has been more and more prevailing since the 1990s when it was introduced to the Second Language Acquisition area by Frawley and Lantolf, especially in L2 teaching and learning. This article aims to give a brief introduction of SCT and the empirical studies related L2 teaching and learning. It is hoped that this article would give some insights to language teachers when carrying out teaching activities from a sociocultural angle.
Key words: Sociocultural Theory, SCT, L2 teaching and learning, Language teaching
1.Introduction of Sociocultural Theory
There have been different theories or concepts regarding Second Language Acquisition(SLA) developed along the years and one of the theories which is prevailing now is the Sociocultural Theory(SCT). Sociocultural Theory is an integrative approach to human development and cognition built upon the work of Vygotsky, his students and colleagues, and contemporary scholars. Socioculturists, f or example, Leontiev (1981) , think that SCT is “the third generation of psycholinguistics”, since it pays more attention to “psychological analysis of the processes of communication and thought” (p. 96) than to the processing and perception of sentences a nd texts. This theory soon gains its place in SLA after Frawley and Lantolf brought SCT into the field, especially in L2 teaching and learning. The main concepts of SCT include mediation, regulation, internalization and ZPD, activity theory etc.
1.1 Mediation
Mediation is most central to sociocultural theory. Vygotsgy acknowledged that human lower mental functions (i.e. hearing, smell, involuntary attention, etc..) are biological, while the higher mental functions (i.e. problem-solving, voluntary memory and attention, rational thought, planning, meaning making activity, etc..) depend on sociocultural factors. The transform from lower-level mental functions to higher-level psychological functions is mediated by symbolic artifacts (higher cultural tools, i.e. language, literacy, numeracy, categorization, rationality, logic, etc.). “These higher-level cultural tools serve as a buffer between the person and the environment and act to mediate the relationship between the individual and the social-material world. ” (Lantolf & Thorne, 2009, p.199-200)
1.2 Regulation
Regulation is one form of mediation. By appropriating the symbolic tools to regulate psychological activity, an individual develop higher-level psychological functions gradually. At an early stage of development, children are often controlled by or using objects in their environment in order to think. This stage is usually known as object-regulation. For example, when a child is given a task by his/her parent to fetch a toy, the very young child is easily distracted by other objects along the way and forgets his/her task. At a slightly later age, children are capable to complete some tasks with the help from parents, care-takers, teachers, or more capable peers. This second stage is called other-regulation. Through interaction and varying levels of direction from more knowledgeable others, children develop higher mental functions and eventually being able to accomplish activities with minimal or no external support. This is the final stage - self-regulation. One sign of development from other-regulation to self-regulation is the use of private speech. A child may talk to himself while painting a picture or solving a puzzle, which is seen as an evidence of children’s growing ability to regulate their own b ehavior, and it eventually becomes inner speech, as a tool of internal thought.
1.3 Internalization
Lantolf (2006, p.90) states that “internalization is the process through which members of communities of practice appropriate the symbolic artifacts used in communicative activity and convert them into psychological artifacts that mediate their mental activity”. The individual is capable to accomplish the activity independently in the future through self-regulation. Vygotsky argues that everything internal in a higher mental function used to be external and it’s “internalized” during developmental activities. Internalization is realized through language. As the most important symbolic artifact, language is the commonly used stimulation and is the central skills to social connections and cultural activities. It is formed in cooperative and interactive activities, and then become personal psychological means. Therefore, internalization can also be understood as the process in which the external stimulus of an activity is replaced by the inner speech. According to Vygotsky, all development go through two stages, first is seen as inter-mental phenomena, shared between individuals; later, individuals develop their own consciousness, which become an intra-mental phenomena. In this sense, internalization is a developmental process from object/other-regulation to self-regulation.
1.4 The Zone of Proximal Development
The concept of the zone of proximal development (ZPD) begins with Vygotsky’s (1978) genetic law of cul tural development: any function in the Child’s cultural development first appears interpsychological (social and interpersonal) and then intrapsychological (intrapersonal) and it happens through internalization. In the zone of proximal development, a learn er’s maximum potential can be reached through power of language reinforced social interaction. Vygotsky is especially impressed with the complex effects that socioculturally and institutionally organized schooling activities had on cognitive development. He finds that collaborative learning in instructional settings precedes and shapes development. With the help from the instructor or more advanced peer, learners gain the potential for future development. To better understand learning processes, classroom interaction and human development, an analytic tool integrating assessment and instruction is developed, which is called Dynamic Assessment (DA).
1.5 Activity theory
Activity theory is an offshoot of SCT developed by Vygotsky’s successors, especially Leon tiev, and used as a holistic research methodology that sees all human actions (and ‘mediated action’ in particular) as configurations of influences, both social and individual, within a dynamic system. As stated by Leontiev (1981), activity theory distinguishes between social motives at the level of activity, individual goals at the level of actions, and concrete operations used to achieve goals. The personal objectives with which an individual executing a particular task or problem may vary due to the part icipants’ different social or historical experience, different entry levels of knowledge and skill, or even different subjectivity.
2.Applications of sociocultural theory to second language learning
In SCT theory, human higher mental function development is mainly mediated by semiotic artefacts. Language, as one of the tools, is used to convey meaning in collaborative activity with other members of a give culture. Similarly, the second language learner has an opportunity to create yet more tools and new ways of meaning, through collaborative activity with other users of the target L2. Many socio-cultural practitioners brought SCT into the field of SLL and conducted a series of research studies mainly on the teaching and learning activities inside the classroom. These studies are appealed to a number of key Vygotskyan ideas: microgenetic development, mediation, private speech, activity theory, and Dynamic Assessment within the zone of proximal development.
2.1Mediation and Microgenesis
A fair amount of SCT studies in the L2 field focus on the mediation in teaching and learning activities and the microgenesis of particular mental functions and processes over shorter periods of time. Vygotsky(1978) argues that ontogenesis of an individual happens over a life span, yet the
development in a local learning process can be “limited to a few seconds or even fractions of seconds” (p.61). It may happen quite incidentally if the activity is properly mediated. In van Compernolle’s (2010) research, during an end-of-semester oral proficiency interview, the teacher co-constructed an opportunity for the intermediate-level US university learner of French to learn the informal form t’aimes pas (“you don’t like”) as an alternative to the formal or full form tu
n’aimes pas. This learning happens in the effort of both the student and the teacher: they co-constructed a social-interactive context in which a specific form is expressed. Capturing the minute details of and qualitative changes in activity from moment to moment is an analytic means to understand the development of higher psychological processes. But this kind of study yells linking learners’ microgenetic development to their ontogenetic development. As the researchers argue, the lack of variation in learner-produced discourse following a one-time intervention does not necessarily indicate cognitive development with learners’ language skills.
2.2Private speech and self-regulation
SCT contends that humans use semiotic tools inwardly and cognitively to control and reorganize their biologically endowed mental processes for self-regulation and thinking. Language, as the most powerful and pervasive cultural artifact, is what humans possess to mediate their connection to the world, to each other, and to themselves. The inward or self-directed use of language as a semiotic tool for cognitive regulation is recognized as private speech (Lantolf & Thorne, 2006) It is defined as an individual’s externalization of language for purposes of maintaining or regaining self-regulation. Such use of language shares empirical features that include averted gaze, lowered speech volume, altered prosody, multiple repetitions and abbreviated syntax. Recent empirical studies on private speech has explored its social functions in contexts such as in-class group activities and collaborative play in L2 classrooms. Smith (2007) analyzed private speech uttered by groups of English as second language children while playing board games and spotted that their speech serves both as a facilitation to the activation of intramental activity and a call for group-relevant problem solving and support. Ohta (2001) also argued that “analysis reveals the extent to which covert learner activity is a centerpiece of learning processes, deepening our understanding of how learners appropriate language through interactive processes and how these linguistic affordances incorporated into the learner’s developing linguistic system.”
2.3Activity theory and teacher-learner interaction
Donato and Mccormick (1994, p.455) defined activity in sociocultural settings as where collaborative interaction, intersubjectivity and assisted performance occur. Vygotsky argues that the development of human cognitive functions derives from social interaction and that through participation in social activities individuals are drawn into the use of these functions. Lantolf and Genung (2002, p.193) acknowledged that communities and activities within learners are rarely stable and smoothly functioning entities. Their motives, goals and rules of behavior are often shifted and need careful guidance, which largely rely on the instructor and the social environment. According to Vygotsky, humans are socially connected and to engage the learners in effective learning, teachers should build a social relationship with the learners and create organized environments and activities for them. Entering into a social relationship with the learner and functioning as the director of the social environment is “the only educational factor” teachers should value (Vygotsky, 1997, p.339).
2.4 DA and L2 learning in the zone of proximal development
A persistent issue in the L2 field, as in educational research more generally, concerns the role of assessment and its relation to teaching. Standardized tests are often criticized for focusing on the current level of test-takers and offers little assistance for learner’s future learning potential. Dynamic Assessment, on the other hand, is assumed to provide a powerful framework for integrating assessment and teaching as a dialectical activity aimed at diagnosing and promoting learner development. DA derives from Vygotsky’s conceptualization of the ZPD, and is applied to
“move beyond judging learner performance as correct or incorrect and to reveal the processes underlying performance so as to provide a more nuanced picture of learner abilities” (Lantolf et al., 2015). Thorne (2005, p.399) argued that an examinee’s performance should be dynamically assessed through sets of interactions and fostering development through those interactions for independent functioning in the future.
However, a major challenge to implementing DA concerns the feasibility of dialogic interaction when classroom teachers may see dozens or even hundreds of learners. Vygotsky (1998) recognized this problem and proposed the possibility of constructing a ZPD with groups of learners instead of individuals. In a group DA (G-DA), individuals cease to make sense while the dynamics of learners’ cooperative activity becomes more relevant. SCT practitioners agree that it is possible for the mediator to negotiate simultaneously with a group of learners in co-constructing several ZPDs and moving the entire group forward in their ZPD (Poehner & Lantolf, 2005). Van Compernolle and Williams (2012) also provide evidence that tea ching within a group’s ZPD has the potential to lead to deeper, more conceptually based understandings of language variation in French.
3.Evaluation
We have introduced a brief introduction of sociocultural theory and some empirical studies regarding the SCT concepts in this article. And we have to admit that SCT indeed have shed some lights on SLA, especially on second language learning and teaching. However, comparing to other theoretical perspectives on SLA, such as the Universal Grammar theory, the cognitive approaches, etc., SCT is still a relative newcomer to the field. The theory seeks to view language learning as a whole - not compartmentalized, which is good for language classrooms, but may not be welcomed by cognitivists, socialists and psychologists, who want to look at the details of SLL and SLA. There has been a prolonged, heated controversy between cognitivists and sociocuturists over issues such as view of language, conception of learning, research object, research method, philosophy tendency and others.
As an SLA theory, it seems that sociocultural theorists offer little thorough or detailed view of the nature of language as a system -a “property theory” is lacking (Mitchel & Myles, 2004). What is the relative importance within the language system of lexical, of pragmatics, or of syntax? Is language a creative, rule-governed system, or a patchwork of prefabricated chunks and routines, available in varying degrees for recombination? This limitation is recognized by researchers in the field, but still may not be valued enough. After all, SCT theorists do not see SCT as a theory of language, language learning, or language processing (Lantolf, 2007). Therefore, to gain a standpoint in SLA research, it will need to locate itself more explicitly with respect to linguistic theory(Mitchel & Myles, 2004).
At all events, SCT is a theory that can be applied to, though with its limitations. SCT practitioners have done a series of researches to bring a generally applied learning approach in other social and education fields into the field of second language learning. Concepts like private speech, activity theory, scaffolding and the zone of proximal development are most welcomed by language educators, who can find that sociocultural theory offers an exhilarating agenda for the renewal of second language classroom practice. These theories provide them with appealing alternative interpretations of the SLL and developmental opportunities afforded by classroom basics such as teacher-student interaction, problem-solving and communicative tasks, learner strategy training, focus on form and corrective feedback. However, as we have discussed earlier, language educators still have to find a way to implement SCT concepts in a large size classroom. SCT theory values teacher-student interaction and peer interaction and claims that it is through these mediated activities that an individual learn and develop from an interpsychological plane to an intrapsychological plane (Vygotsky, 1978). But for a class size ranged from 40-60 students, it’s a big challenge for the teacher to provide assess every learner correctly and provide “just enough” support for them. And for peer collaborative activities, it’s also important for the teacher to guide and motivate group members to actively engage in the activity and scaffold each other. There are studies(Kne?i? et al, 2013; Mustafa, 2012) have shown that some learners may just not be a team
player. Teacher education is the same important for conducting SCT concepts in classroom. “The level of learner engagement may relate to the extent to which a learner partakes in a whole-class ZPD”(Yoshida, 2010). So teachers need the experience and guidance as well to engage all learners to participate fully in classroom cooperative activities.
All in all, SCT brings a new perspective to how researchers and teachers understand and promote language learning and teaching. Though there are still imperfections, and it has not yet found its way into applied linguistics and in particular language pedagogy, SCT in the L2 field is still at its early stages of development (Lantolf, 2007). There is still time for language researchers and practitioners to explore more possibilities in the future.
References:
Carney, & N. (2015). J. p. lantolf and m. e. poehner: sociocultural theory and the pedagogical imperative in l2 education: vygotskian praxis and the research/practice divide. Applied Linguistics, 36(1), 143-146.
Donato, R. & McCormick, D. 1994: A sociocultural perspective on language learning strategies: the role of mediation. Modern Language Journal 78, 453-64.
F.Mustafa, R. . (2012). Feedback on the feedback: sociocultural interpretation of saudi esl learners’ opinions about writing feedback. English Language Teaching, 5(3).
Kne?i?, Elbers, E. , Wubbels, T. , & Hajer, M. . (2013). Teachers' education in socratic dialogue: some effects on teacher–learner interaction.?Modern Language Journal,?97(2).
Lantolf, J., & Genung, P. (2002). “I’d rather switch than fight”: An activity-theoretic study of power, success, and failure in a foreign language. In C. Kramsch (Ed.), Language acquisition and language socialization. Ecological perspectives (pp. 175-196). London: Continuum.
Lantolf, J. P. (2007). Sociocultural theory: A unified approach to L2 learning and teaching. International handbook of English language teaching, vol. 2.
Leontiev, A. A. (1981). Psychology and the language learning process. Oxford: Pergamon.
Lantolf, J. P . (2006). Sociocultural theory and l2: state of the art. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(01), 67---109.
Lantolf, J., & Thorne, S.L. (2006) Sociocultural theory and the genesis of second language development. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Mitch, R. & Myles, F. (2004). Second language learning theories (2nd edition). Hodder Arnold: London.
Ohta, A. (2001). Second language acquisition processes in the classroom: Learning Japanese. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Poehner, M. E. and Lantolf, J. P. (2005). Dynamic assessment in the language classroom. Language Teaching Research, 9(3), 1-33.
Smith, H. J. . (2007). The social and private worlds of speech: speech for inter- and intramental activity. Modern Language Journal, 91(3), 341-356.
Thorne, S. L. (2005). Epistemology, politics, and ethics in sociocultural theory. The Modern Language Journal, 89, 393-409.
van Compernolle, R. A. (2010). Incidental microgenetic development in second-language teacher-learner talk-in-interaction. Classroom Discourse. 1:1, 66-81.
van Compernolle, R. A., & Williams, L. (2012). Promoting sociolinguistic competence in the classroom zone of proximal development. Language Teaching Research, 16(1), 39–60
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978) In M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman (Eds.), Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1997). Educational psychology. Boca Raton, FL: Nova Science.
Yoshida, R. 2010. How do teachers and learners perceive corrective feedback in the classroom? Modern Language Journal 94:293-314
作者简介：姓名：蔡双利出生年：1983 性别：女民族：汉籍贯：湘学历：本科职称：二级教师研究方向：英语教育。