I wonder what is thought of this idea right now. It explicitly says that "a shared reality that reduces the need for explicit linguistic elaboration of the message". Through out my college journey I have always though that exposure is crucial, especially for students who are learning English. What do you think about that? Should teachers limit exposure or just enhance the scaffolding techniques that are effective but still include exposure? How can differentiation also play a part here?

This is an important point that is discussed on page 53 as well. This source indicated that the major cause of why second language learners are falling behind is because they are learning two languages at the same time. Seeing this through a psychological approach can hinder the students because they are not seeing the "whole" student. They are seeing the biological/psychological aspect of why students can't learn. Yet we need to understand that the environment and exposure is what we should focus on. The strategies behind language acquisition are important.

Mastery in the languages that the student is being exposed to is KEY! I can't imagine thinking that students are expected to assimilate into a language that they are not familiar with. In one of my CLD courses we talked about how things in the US would have been so different if English was the official country language. Students would have faced so many challenges. Therefore, support in both of the languages is crucial so students can have a foundation and create connections with their native language.

It is no surprise that there is success in the quality of bilingual programs. There is also support for teachers. Having strong and extensive knowledge around WIDA and "Can Do" statements allow for students to work at a pace that is appropriate for them. Often, it is thought that students need to learn English as quickly as possible, but if we focus on encouragement first, they will learn and have time to appreciate their cultural identity.

I think that this is interesting misconception that is still thought of today. It's crazy to me that this was publishes in 1981 because it is still an idea that is present in some schools. I was touring a charter Elementary School when I was deciding what school my little brother should attend. We communicated our concerns with the staff member that we didn't want my little brother to lose his Spanish and she said that knowing Spanish was holding him back from learning other concepts. She then discussed how students who spoke two languages often had identities that limited them from showing their potential. It amazes me that this is still occurring in 2022, where schools see bilingual/ multilingual abilities as hindering students.

I actually don't think that is a positive outcome. I think that forcing children at a young age to be "mature" takes away from their mental well-being. While is important to be responsible, they are children, every child learns by making mistakes. Enforcing this idea that it makes children mature is only one way to cover up the fact that these children are being praised only when they contribute to something. Additionally with 1.Self-Esteem, praise may make the child feel good at first but then the child may depend too much on parent approval in the future, thus, having feelings of resentment towards their parents/guardians.

I will like to also add to Camryn's annotation about this being similar to Part 1 of Tongue Tied. It was mentioned in the book that sometimes there is resentment felt by the child who is translating to their parents. I think that I can understand why, They are expected to act like adults at a young age but when it comes to opinions or personal wants/needs, their contributions are put aside because they may be "too young" or unaware of the consequences. It is a situation where there is no mutual understanding.

This reminds me of the class that I am currently taking. My cross-cultural anthropology course talked about this specific term. We completed a module on code switching and the formalities behind it. When we are speaking to a person who is monolingual, this idea of using a mix of two languages would not be appropriate. However, when you use this form of language with others who are the same age as you or understand this mix of words, it is welcomed. I am wondering, does the overuse of mixing languages detrimental to learning and speaking abilities?

This is a perfect example of what I mentioned in one of my previous annotations that talked about familiarity and the balance of certain languages based on the use. This makes me think about the article I read for my writing class. AAE or African-American English, uses different structure and grammar rules that., while they are not common in Standard English, they are still cohesive and uniform. The continuous use of a language makes it the dominant language.

I think that this an interesting quote because I always struggle to answer when people ask me what language I like to speak the most. There is no doubt that based on the environment, the circumstances and the amount the language is used can determine where that in-balance is. For example if I spend too much time at school or doing school work, I would say that I feel a misbalance between my Spanish and English. I think that it is okay for this balance to change between languages. What do you think?