I.S.F.D.

N°21 Dr Ricardo Rojas

Language ant its Teaching II
Class Notes N°4
3​RD​ 2​ND
Rea, Andrea; Cueva, Emanuel Iván
Edition: Estela Medela
20-6-19

Lexicon​: ​P​edagogical ​I​mplications

On June the 11​th​, the evening shift class worked on the analysis of the pedagogical
implications of lexicon. The pedagogical activities were grounded on a text:
Grossology and You​, written by the scientist ,Sylvia Branzei, to inform native children
about a natural science affair. In this case, the text deals with the history of brain
surgery and then it deals with the features of the brain plus some advice given to
children. As the same text , from a linguistic perspective, will turn out to be complex
for Argentine 5​th grade students from a state-run school, it needs to be adapted in order
to make it comprehensible for them. The task on the pedagogical implications given by
the teacher has two teaching cases. Both cases have the same source, but the activities
in each one show different pedagogical approaches; different approaches to the teaching
of meaning.

In the pre -moment to the class in case 1, the teacher (T1) asks their students to
look at the pictures illustrating the text, and then asks what they can see. Whereas, the
teacher in case 2 (T2) draws the students’ attention to the text, not the pictures. In this
case ,T2 asks her students to focus on some para-textual elements. She focalises on the
form of the text; which the title or subtitle are ; and who the author is. Lately, T2 asks
the class what they think the text would be about while they have a look at the pictures
that come along with the text; she asks this in Spanish for she is working on
comprehension of information and not on linguistic input or ouput. Out of this
comparison, we have been able to see that the pre-moments are conceptually different:
T1 sets the focus on the pictures but does not help the students draw any inferences
from the text, while T 2 sets the focus on both the genre and the pictures from the text.
The pre -moment is the room a teacher provides her students (SS) with for them to infer
what a source of information may be about.

Then, we analysed the development- or while -moment- within each case. This is
the step within a class where a teacher goes deeper into the text. There are two steps
within this moment: first, SS are exposed to the text to check inferences ; and second ,
they are exposed to the text once more to get the main ideas from it. During this
moment, T1 asks students (SS) to read the text. It seemed to us that it was a
straightforward step taken precipitously. In this case, we noticed that T1 writes her
questions on the chalkboard ( CHB) but they are not sensible questions since the
questions she posits require “copy and paste” answers, as one classmate suggested.
True questions should guide readers to infer the coherent narrative within a text.

In the case of T2’s class , she asks SS to focus on the structure of the text. She is
working on genre. This focus on the structure of the text and on the author helps SS to
understand that the information they are exposed to has been created by someone, which
denaturalizes the idea that the flow of information has a natural essence. T2 also asks
her SS if they can imagine what the story is about after having a look at the pictures
from the text. She uses Spanish for this last question because she is focusing on the
inferences SS could make rather than on the linguistic side of the activity. She writes on
the CHB the students’ ideas. This will be useful for her to check comprehension in the
following activity but , at the same time , this will allow children to express themselves
without the constraints that a foreign language imposes onto them. T2 does not force
their students into reading in English, she does it herself since she has planned a class
on listening comprehension. She reads the text out loud. Then, she asks her students to
compare their inferences with the information from the text. By doing so, she does not
only give language input to SS but she also checks comprehension of general ideas from
the text. For that to happen she leads the class to relate what she has read in English
with what they have inferred in Spanish.

The analysis of the last part of each case - which is the after-moment - led us to see
the following differences.T1 finishes the class with an activity that consists of basically
SS’ translating some words from the text into Spanish. However, T2 asks SS to work on
a lexical chain from the text. She asks the SS to work in groups since the activity may
be worked out much more easily in that fashion. Working at the level of lexical chains
helps SS to reconstruct the coherence of the text lexically. The vocabulary from the
chain helps SS to pick up the author's intention. T2 closes her class up by asking SS
some other questions related to the text. She expects them to answer in Spanish. Again,
she is working on the comprehension of a piece of narrative rather than on the linguistic
aspect of English. The questions set the focus on the coherence of the text and the
answers to them should be linked to the concepts constructed out of the lexical chain.
Finally, T2 asks the SS to identify the correct lexical chain that matches the text they
have been working on. This activity has been designed in a chart and the aim is to guide
the SS into following the semantic thread of the written information:

Narrative Account:history of surgery - ( holes to ease pain - aspirin did not

exist) - skull painless
Description brain ‘s features - skull ( protect brain) //
 Prescription: advice : wear a helmet!

The approaches applied by the two teachers differ , mainly, in their ideas of meaning.
Meaning realised by words, basically. T1 uses words at a referential level since she
seems not to be concerned with the construction of concepts but with the labelling of
objects and actions; she has not help her SS to categorise information and construct
concepts. For example, when she asks the students to get the Spanish for some English
words, she lets her SS look them up but does not guide SS to link them semantically. If
a student is asked to look up ​surgery , ​holes and ​alive , and the T does nothing to help
them see that : ​In the past , holes were made in the skulls of people who were alive ,
which builds up the ​concept of brain surgery in the pas​t , these words are taught as
referring to ​a surgery,​ ​some holes and ​people alive.​ Unlikely, T2 tries to mediate
between students and information in English. She gets the students to draw their
attention to the construction of concepts when she puts this sort of question: “​Why were
the holes on the skull important in the past?”. This question will lead SS to link the
categories that make up the concept: “ Porque los agujeros curaban el dolor de cabeza” ,
SS may answer. The words surgery, ​hole​, ​skull a​ nd ​alive ​are retrieved from the exercise
on the lexical chain. In the past, ​surgery was like this: ​holes were made in the ​skulls of
people who were ​alive. The ​concept brain surgery in the past is constructed by linking
holes -skull , so the teacher mediates with a suitable question: “Why were the holes on
the skull important in the past? “

In conclusion, it has been clear cut that both pedagogical implications are different.
While T1 seems to apply a Behaviourist approach to the teaching of meaning, T2
attempts at applying a constructive approach to the teaching of meaning. She helps SS
construct the gist of the text which consists of their noticing the coherent thread realised
through the lexical chain in it. For her SS to attain this, she mediates all the time
between the genre and the SS; she is right there in the zone of proximal development.
Her SS’s current knowledge of genres on science plus their current knowledge of the
history of brain surgery is retrieved by questions and pictures. From there, T2 leads SS
into building up more complex ideas: how words can be linked semantically ,thus words
are grouped to construct concepts.We believe that this approach to the teaching of
vocabulary may strengthen SS’s intellectual activity.