The Sociocognitive Imperative of L2 Pedagogy

Abstract

As a new century begins for The Modern Language Journal, we argue that highly effective pedagogy requires viewing language and language learning as both cognitive and social phenomena, and that teachers who seek to truly understand the nature of their responsibilities do not have the luxury of choosing one perspective over the other. We first identify what we consider to be theory‐neutral nonnegotiable boundaries within which pedagogical decision making takes place, including (a) participants’ background knowledge, (b) the nature of the object of instruction, (c) the nature of human cognition and social interaction, and (d) available time. Then we discuss learning goals, learning means, and instructional support as the negotiable elements that teachers may manipulate through their instructional decisions. At the heart of the article, we describe in greater detail cognitive versus social perspectives on the dynamic relationship between teaching and learning, and we identify ways in which they diverge and converge in characterizing linguistic development. We then synthesize these perspectives in a holistic, sociocognitive view of pedagogy, which we define as ‘a meeting of minds within social worlds.’ We conclude by outlining current pedagogical proposals that exemplify sociocognitive pedagogy by engaging learners in iterative cycles of modeling, guidance, and handover to independent language use.

A case for a functional linguistic knowledge base in world language teacher education

“…Revisions to the ACTFL/CAEP Standards (ACTFL, ) could thus more explicitly define the linguistics knowledge and skills that aspiring teachers need to demonstrate by taking into account linguistic features beyond semantics, phonology, morphology, and syntax—that is, by requiring world language teachers candidates to demonstrate an understanding of the way that genre and context impact language options and choices. This suggestion corroborates Toth and Davin's () recommendation that world language teachers understand meaning beyond the sentence level and learn to apply a functional, context‐sensitive grammar in the design of standards‐based learning activities.…”

“…Thus, despite the shift toward and emphasis on contextualized language instruction, a theory of language that defines how language users enact language choices within a communicative context has been largely absent from most discussions, including teacher preparation. As noted by Toth and Davin (), world language teachers must not only design meaningful communicative learning tasks but must also design those tasks based on an understanding of:

how the linguistic structures that are required to “do” and “be” in the language tasks that they have envisioned map onto the learners’ prior knowledge, cognitive processes, and social relationships. (p. 163)

…”

Exploring the Dynamic Long‐Term Interaction Between Cognitive and Psychosocial Resources in Adult Second Language Development at Varying Proficiency

“…These pervasive assumptions have led to problematic conceptual dichotomies, such as the cognitive/affective dichotomy that currently frames aptitude and motivation (Dörnyei, ), arguably the two most robust and influential IDs theorized and investigated to date. This dichotomous approach can be seen in research as well with a strong tendency to study different IDs in isolation from one another (Segalowitz & Trofimovich, ), revealing contrasting views of what language is and what factors facilitate or impede L2 learning (e.g., Dörnyei, ; Firth & Wagner, ; Hulstijn et al., ; Larsen–Freeman, ; Toth & Davin, ). However, some researchers have long questioned treating motivation as independent of cognition (e.g., Schumann, ) and have argued for the need to consider the multiple ways IDs and their sub components dynamically interact with one another and with the external environment (e.g., Dörnyei, ).…”

Second Language Acquisition and world Englishes: Dialogue and engagement

“…The editors of this seminal article – Hulstijn, Young, and Ortega (, p. 415) – conclude by stating that ‘genuine attempts to build bridges constitute attempts to understand views on the other side, which cannot but lead one to reflect on one's own stance. Other SLA researchers as Toth and Davin () have asserted that highly effective pedagogy requires viewing language and language learning as both cognitive and social phenomena, and that teachers should not privilege one perspective over the other. One promising example of such bridge building can be seen in the work of the Douglas Fir Group (), who consider SLA from micro, mesa, and macro levels, with an aim to: (a) advance fundamental understandings of SLA; (b) promote the development of ground‐breaking transdisciplinary research agendas; and (c) serve as a platform for the development of practical, innovative, and sustainable solutions that are responses to the real‐world challenges of second and foreign language teaching and learning.…”