LANGUAGE LEARNINGI. Introduction There is an important distinction made by linguists between language acquisition and language learning. Children acquire language through a subconscious process during which they are unaware of grammatical rules. This is similar to the way they acquire their first language. They get a feel for what is and what isn’t correct. In order to acquire language, the learner needs a source of natural communication. The emphasis is on the text of the communication and not on the form. Young students who are in the process of acquiring English get plenty of “on the job” practice. They readily acquire the language to communicate with classmates. Language learning, on the other hand, is not communicative. It is the result of direct instruction in the rules of language. And it certainly is not an age- appropriate activity for your young learners. In language learning, students have conscious knowledge of the new language and can talk about that knowledge. They can fill in the blanks on a grammar page. Research has shown, however, that knowing grammar rules does not necessarily result in good speaking or writing. A student who has memorized the rules of the language may be able to succeed on a standardized test of English language but may not be able to speak or write correctly. Learning is a conscious activity. It’s what we do when we look a word up in the dictionary. It’s also what happens when we learn rules about how language works or purposefully study lists of vocabulary and grammar forms. There are certain intervals which make learning new material more efficient and first meeting a word in context can provide higher retention rates for learned material over time. II. Discussion 1. Theories of Language Learning 1.1 Behaviorist Theories (include The Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis) Basic Tenets o Based on Skinner o The idea that animal and human learning are similar based on Darwin’s theory. o All behavior is a response to stimuli. o No innate pre-programming for language learning at birth (Hadley 2001, pg. 57) o Learning can also occur through imitation. o Corrective feedback to correct bad habits o Language is learned just as another behavior Critique o Chomsky criticized this theory. o Does not explain the creativity of children in generating language. i.e how can kids overcome grammatical errors without their parents’ correction? Behaviorist Theory on Language Learning and Acquisition There are some basic theories advanced to describe how language is acquired, learnt and taught. The behaviorist theory, Mentalist theory (Innatism), Rationalist theory (otherwise called Cognitive theory), and Interactionism are some of these theories. Of these, behaviorist theory and mentalist theory are mainly applicable to the acquisition of native languages while the rest can account for foreign language acquisition. Yet, these four fundamental theories of language acquisition cannot be totally divorced from each other, for "the objectives of second language learning are not necessarily entirely determined by native language competence inevitably serves as a foil against which to set second language learning." (H.H. Stem, .1983; 30). Mother Tongue and Foreign Language Learning These five basic theories are, furthermore, very much complementary to each other, serving different types of learners or representing various cases of language learning. They must not automatically make us presume that first and second language learning are identical or alike processes, though second language learning is strongly tied up with first language acquisition. Obviously, native language growth must pave the way for foreign language growth. Then these five basic language learning theories are fundamental pillars of language learning whose relevance to education is undeniable. The Principle of the Behaviorist Theory The behaviorist theory believes that “infants learn oral language from other human role models through a process involving imitation, rewards, and practice. Human role models in an infant’s environment provide the stimuli and rewards,” (Cooter & Reutzel, 2004). When a child attempts oral language or imitates the sounds or speech patterns they are usually praised and given affection for their efforts. Thus, praise and affection becomes the rewards. However, the behaviorist theory is scrutinized for a variety of reasons. If rewards play such a vital component in language development, what about the parent who is inattentive or not present when the child attempts speech? If a baby’s language learning is motivated strictly by rewards would the speech attempts stop merely for lack of rewards (Cooter & Reutzel, 2004)? Other cases against this theory include “learning the use and meaning of abstract words, evidence of novel forms of language not modeled by others, and uniformity of language acquisition in humans” (Cooter & Reutzel, 2004). The major principle of the behaviorist theory rests on the analyses of human behavior in observable stimulus-response interaction and the association between them. E.L.T. Thorndike was the first behaviorist to explore the area that learning is the establishment of associations on particular process of behavior and consequences of that behavior. Basically, "the behaviorist theory of stimulus- response learning, particularly as developed in the operant conditioning model of Skinner, considers all learning to be the establishment of habits as a result of reinforcement and reward" (Wilga Rivers, 1968, 73). This is very reminiscent of Pavlov's experiment which indicates that stimulus and response work together. According to this category, the babies obtain native language habits via varied babblings which resemble the appropriate words repeated by a person or object near him. Since for his babblings and mutterings he is rewarded, this very reward reinforces further articulations of the same sort into grouping of syllables and words in a similar situation. In this way, he goes on emitting sounds, groups of sounds, and as he grows up he combines the sentences via generalizations and analogy (as in *goed for went, *doed, for did, so on), which in some complicated cases, condition him to commit errors by articulating in permissible structures in speech. By the age of five or six, or babblings and mutterings grow into socialized speech but little by little they are internalized as implicit speech, and thus many of their utterances become indistinguishable from the adults. This, then, obviously, means that behaviorist theory is a theory of stimulus-response psychology. "Through a trial-and-error process, in which acceptable utterances are reinforced by comprehension and approval, and unacceptable utterances are inhibited by the lack of reward, he gradually learns to make finer and finer discriminations until his utterances approximate more and more closely the speech of the community in which he is growing up (Wilga M. Rivers, 1968; 73). To put it in other words, children develop a natural affinity to learn the language of their social surroundings whose importance both over language learning and teaching must never be underestimated. In this respect behaviorist theory stresses the fact that "human and animal learning is a process of habit formation. A highly complex learning task, according to this theory may be learned by being broken' down into small habits. These are formed correct or incorrect responses, are rewarded or, punished, respectively'.(Hubbard Jones and Thornton Wheeler, 1983; 326). Thus it is clear that the acquisition of learning in infancy is governed the acquisition of other habits. Counterarguments on Behaviorist Theory of Language Learning Needless to say, language teaching anticipates certain theories on language learning because language learning as a fruitful area that embodies the working of human behavior and mental processes of the learners. Each theory may not be complete model for the investigation of language learning. The following counter- arguments can be made upon the working principles of behaviorist theory: 1) Basic strategies of language learning within the scope of behaviorist theory are imitation, reinforcement, and rewarding. However, researches made on the acquisition of learning have demonstrated that children’s imitation of structures show evidence of almost no innovation; moreover children "vary considerably in the amount that they imitate" (L.M. Bloom, L. Hood, and P.L. Lightbown, 1974; 380-420). Since children do not imitate such structures like words, phrases, clauses and sentences at the same rate they will naturally learn at different rates even though it must be admitted that imitation is very useful in the acquisition of new vocabulary items. As for reinforcement, "Unfortunately this view of learning receives little support from the available evidence" (Herbert H. Clark and Eve V. Clark, 1977; 336), for the parents only correct the sample structures, and complex structures are occasionally corrected. 2) In behaviorist theory, the process of learning relies more on generalization, rewarding, conditioning, three of which support the development of analogical learning in children. But it can be argued that a process of learning or teaching that encourages the learner to construct phrases, clauses and sentences modeled on previously settled set of rules and drills is thought to obstruct the instinctive production of language. Then, habit formation exercises may not naturally promote intrinsically oriented language learning. 3) Obstructions made on instinctively-based learning will doubtedlessly harm the creative way of learning. It takes a long time to be capable enough to master a language at least a bit intrinsically. There is a threshold level in language learning. This means that learners must learn consciously supported by repetition and drilling to build up an effective linguistic intuition, acquisition of which marks the establishment of threshold level. Before obtaining the threshold level, the language learner is not creative, cannot use the language properly in new situations in a real sense. it is, then, obvious that the intrinsic learning will be delayed, owing to the Iate acquisition of threshold level because of previously settled set of rules and drills. 4) The rate of social influence on learning is not satisfactorily explained. To what extent and rate, does the social surrounding promote language learning? This question remains unexplained. 5) It is highly unlikely for learning to be the same for each individual; that is, each person cannot learn equally well in the same conditions in which learning takes place, for the background and the experience of the learners make everybody learn differently. In addition, according to Chomsky, there must be some innate capacities which human beings possess that predispose them to look for basic patters in language. 6) The main strategies of the behaviorist theory can only be true for the early stages of learning which takes place when the kids are in infancy and in early childhood periods. Moreover, this theory is fruitful for the most part on animal experimentation and learning. 7) Many of the learning processes are mostly too complex, and for this reason there are intervening variable s, which cannot be observed between stimulus and response. "That's why, language acquisition cannot take place through habit formation, since language learners are thrown between stimulus and response chain, for language is too far complicated to be learned in such a matter, especially given the brief time available. 1.2 Universal Grammar Theory Basic Tenets o A mentalist viewpoint related to nativism and cognitive theory. o The idea that of Chomsky that all children are born with Language Acquisition Device (Hadley 2001 pg 58). o Language learning depends on biological mechanisms. o Children are innately programmed to learn language. o Each language has its own “parameter settings”. o The principles that children discover represent their “core grammar” which relates to general principles that correspond to all languages. o All human brain contains language universals that direct language acquisition ( Horwitz 2008) o It can be tested Critique o Is based on first language learning so it may not apply to second language acquisition. o The way adults and children learn is different. o Does not consider social factors or individual differences that affect language learning. . o Motivation and attitudes towards the target language does not come into play in this theory. o It is very Complex o Only looks at product data Chomsky’s Universal Grammar During the first half of the 20th century, linguists who theorized about the human ability to speak did so from the behaviourist perspective that prevailed at that time. They therefore held that language learning, like any other kind of learning, could be explained by a succession of trials, errors, and rewards for success. In other words, children learned their mother tongue by simple imitation, listening to and repeating what adults said. This view became radically questioned, however, by the American linguist Noam Chomsky. For Chomsky, acquiring language cannot be reduced to simply developing an inventory of responses to stimuli, because every sentence that anyone produces can be a totally new combination of words. When we speak, we combine a finite number of elements—the words of our language—to create an infinite number of larger structures—sentences. Moreover, language is governed by a large number of rules and principles, particularly those of syntax, which determine the order of words in sentences. The term “generative grammar”refers to the set of rules that enables us to understand sentences but of which we are usually totally unaware. It is because of generative grammar that everyone says “that’s how you say it” rather than “how that’s you it say”, or that the words “Bob”and “him” cannot mean the same person in the sentence “Bob loves him.” but can do so in “Bob knows that his father loves him.” (Note in passing that generative grammar has nothing to do with grammar textbooks, whose purpose is simply to explain what is grammatically correct and incorrect in a given language.) Even before the age of 5, children can, without having had any formal instruction, consistently produce and interpret sentences that they have never encountered before. It is this extraordinary ability to use language despite having had only very partial exposure to the allowable syntactic variants that led Chomsky to formulate his “poverty of the stimulus” argument, which was the foundation for the new approach that he proposed in the early 1960s. In Chomsky’s view, the reason that children so easily master the complex operations of language is that they have innate knowledge of certain principles that guide them in developing the grammar of their language. In other words, Chomsky’s theory is that language learning is facilitated by a predisposition that our brains have for certain structures of language. But what language? For Chomsky’s theory to hold true, all of the languages in the world must share certain structural properties. And indeed, Chomsky and other generative linguists like him have shown that the 5000 to 6000 languages in the world, despite their very different grammars, do share a set of syntactic rules and principles. These linguists believe that this “universal grammar” is innate and is embedded somewhere in the neuronal circuitry of the human brain. And that would be why children can select, from all the sentences that come to their minds, only those that conform to a “deep structure” encoded in the brain’s circuits. Observations that support the Chomskyian view of language Until Chomsky propounded his theory of universal grammar in the 1960s, the empiricist school that had dominated thinking about language since the Enlightenment held that when children came into the world, their minds were like a blank slate. Chomsky’s theory had the impact of a large rock thrown into this previously tranquil, undisturbed pond of empiricism. Subsequent research in the cognitive sciences, which combined the tools of psychology, linguistics, computer science, and philosophy, soon lent further support to the theory of universal grammar. For example, researchers found that babies only a few days old could distinguish the phonemes of any language and seemed to have an innate mechanism for processing the sounds of the human voice. Thus, from birth, children would appear to have certain linguistic abilities that predispose them not only to acquire a complex language, but even to create one from whole cloth if the situation requires. One example of such a situation dates back to the time of plantations and slavery. On many plantations, the slaves came from many different places and so had different mother tongues. They therefore developed what are known as pidgin languages to communicate with one another. Pidgin languages are not languages in the true sense, because they employ words so chaotically—there is tremendous variation in word order, and very little grammar. But these slaves’ children, though exposed to these pidgins at the age when children normally acquire their first language, were not content to merely imitate them. Instead, the children spontaneously introduced grammatical complexity into their speech, thus in the space of one generation creating new languages, known as creoles. 1.3 Krashen’s Monitor Theory Basic Tenets o Adults have two ways of developing competence in the second language: acquisition (subconscious learning) and learning (conscious learning). o The natural order hypothesis: acquisition of grammatical structures follow a predicable order when is natural (Hadley 2001). o The monitor Hypothesis: Acquisition is responsible for all second language utterances and fluency. On the contrary, learning is the “editor” and “monitor” for the output (Hadley 2001). o The input hypothesis: speaking fluency emerges over time. Acquisition on language will happen when we are exposed to the language that is beyond our level. o Effective filter hypothesis: low effective filter contributes to good learning. o Error correction should be minimized and only use when the goal is learning. o Students should not be required to produce speech until they’ re ready. Critique o There is a debate between the distinction of learning and acquisition. Krashen’s claim cannot be tested. o Munsell and Cart (1981) criticized the implication of this theory that language learning is distinct from other types of learning (Hadley 2001). o There are not clear definitions for some of the terms implemented by Krashen such as “comprehensible input” and acquisition vs. learning. o Krashen does not explain how effective filters develops and does not take individual differences into account. Stephen Krashen is an educator and linguist who proposed the Monitor Model as his theory of second language acquisition in his influential text Principles and practice in second language acquisition in 1982. The Monitor Model posits five hypotheses about second language acquisition and learning: 1. Acquisition-learning hypothesis 2. Natural order hypothesis 3. Monitor hypothesis 4. Input hypothesis 5. Affective filter hypothesis However, despite the popularity and influence of the Monitor Model, the five hypotheses are not without criticism. The following sections offer a description of the third hypothesis of the theory, the monitor hypothesis, as well as the major criticism by other linguistics and educators surrounding the hypothesis. Definition of the Monitor Hypothesis The third hypothesis, the monitor hypothesis, complements the acquisition- learning hypothesis by claiming that the only function of learning within second language acquisition is as an editor, or Monitor, for language use produced by the acquired system as well as to produce grammatical forms not yet acquired. The Monitor allows a language user to alter the form of an utterance either prior to production by consciously applying learned rules or after production via self- correction. In other words, the learned system monitors the output of the acquired system. However, according to the monitor hypothesis, explicit knowledge of a language rule is not sufficient for the utilization of the Monitor; a language user must also have an adequate amount of time to consciously think about and apply learned rules. Additionally, the three conditions required by the Monitor—time, focus, and knowledge—are, as Krashen asserts, “necessary and not sufficient,” meaning that, despite the convenement of all three conditions, a language user may not utilize the Monitor. Criticism of the Monitor Hypothesis The major critique of the monitor hypothesis expands on the critique of the acquisition-learning hypothesis. According to the monitor hypothesis, the main purpose of language learning is to function as a Monitor for output produced by acquired system. However, as critics reveal through deeper investigation of the acquisition-learning distinction, to separate language learning clearly and adequately from language acquisition is impossible. Consequently, determining that the function of the learned system is as a Monitor only remains likewise impossible to prove. Additionally, that the claim of learning-as-Monitor applies only to output after production invites further criticism of the hypothesis; second language learners can and do use the learned system to produce output as well as to facilitate comprehension. Such questions and evidence, therefore, invalidate the central claim of the monitor hypothesis. Therefore, in spite of the influence of the Monitor Model in the field of second language acquisition, the third hypothesis, the monitor hypothesis, has not been without criticism as evidenced by the critiques offered by other linguists and educators in the field. 1.4 Cognitive Theory (Ausubel, McLaughlin, Bialystok, Ellis, Anderson, and others) Basic tenets o Based on internal and mental processes. o Focuses on transferring, simplification, generalization, and restructuring that involve second language acquisition. o Language learning is the result from internal mental activity. o Emphasizes that knowledge and new learning is organized in a mental structure. o Learner acts, constructs, and plans its own learning o Analyzes own learning o Positive and negative feedback is important for restructuring. o Proficiency develops trough practice and then it becomes automatic. o Once new information it’s acquired, existed knowledge is reorganized. o Ausubel emphasizes that learning language needs to be meaningful in order to be effective and permanent (Hadley 2001, pg 69). Critique o Needs more clarification when referring to complex cognitive skill. o Does not explain when and how some features of the first language are transfer to the second language and why some don’t transfer. Sometimes, when someone calls us, we immediately hear it. Then, we give the response from his or her calling. From the phenomenon, unconsciously there is a process happens in our brain or thought. The process is called cognitive theories or cognitivism. According to Mergel (1998) cognitivism is a process based on the thought process behind the behavior. Changes in behavior are observed, and used as to what is happening inside the learner’s mind. Cognitive theories emphasize the children conscious thought (Hebb, 2003:3). From the two definitions, it can be inferred that a process can be called cognitivism if a process happens in conscious thought(inside the learner’s mind). Principles of Cognitivism Cognitivism involves the study of mental processes such as sensation, perception, attention, encoding, and memory that behaviorists were reluctant to study because cognition occurs inside the” black box” of the brain (Jordan, Carlite & Stack, 2008:36). In this case, sensation perception, attention, encoding, and memory are the principle of cognitivism. The followings are the explanation of them. The first principle is sensation. It shows how the stimuli derived from external stimuli is registered in sensory before it being sent to the following process. The second principle is perception which shows as the process to interpret and make sense something which can be seen through our sense. It consists of pattern recognition, object recognition, bottom up or top down processing, and conscious perception. The third principle is attention which stresses in the concentrating to one thing, that the most importance than the others. It is important to determine the conscious awareness. The fourth principle is encoding as the principle of cognitive theory focuses on the importance of encoding information, after something being perceived and attended to stimuli. The way to encode the information can be done through organizing and then form it in the form of schema. In this case, to encode the information in the form of experience can be conducted through two ways. They are bottom up and top down (Jordan, Carlite, & Stack 2008:43). Bottom up is the way to encode experience by transferring the information that is gained through the external world. It is mediated through attention and perception. While top down is another way to encode experience. It is in the form of action prior knowledge in order to help in interpreting the bottom up. The fifth principle is memory. Memory is the ability to keep and remind the information in our mind. It consists of short term memory, long term memory, and sensory. Short term memory consists of limited amount of data and short duration. It is also known as the working memory because it consists of some functions. They are rehearsal (repetition), coding, decision making, and retrieval. The information that can be maintained approximately 5-9 bits. According to Vinci (2000: 18) long term memory can hold a huge amount of information-facts , data, and rules for how to use and process them and the information can be maintained for long period. It means that long term memory consists of very large amount of data and very long duration. The way to keep the information can be maintained in this type of memory is by using cues. The Educational Implication of Cognitive Theories According to Suharno (2010:60) the cognitive view takes the learner to be an active processor of information. It means that the cognitive theory tries to create the people to be active to think. The implication of cognitive theories in educational field is try to produce the students to find the problem solving.do discovery learning, cognitive strategies, and project based learning. Problem Based Learning The application of the learning is try the students to find the solution of the problem. For example the student conducts a research. It means that he or she must find the solution to solve the problems of his or her research that consists of identifies the problem, collects and analyzes the data, draws the conclusion. The strength of problem based learning are it focuses on the meaningfulness not the facts, it can improve the students’ initiative, it can improve the students’ learning achievement etc. Discovery Learning Discovery learning is one of the applications of cognitivism . According to O’Donnell(1997) “Discovery Learning is an instructional method in which the students are free to work in learning environment with little or no guidance”. This assumption from O’Donnell is also supported by Ryan & Muray (2009) who assume that discovery learning is problem based learning with minimal guidance”. It means that through discovery learning the teacher gives opportunity to students to explore their selves by learning through the environment with little guidance from the teacher. There are some structures that must be paid attention in applying discovery learning. They are readiness to learn, intuitive and analytical thinking, motivates for learning. These structures must be moved from basic to advanced step. 1.5 Conversation Theories Basic Tenets o The idea of learning a second language by participating in conversations o Importance use of scaffolding o Gives feedback and suggest ways of improvement o Does not require production of full sentences but encourages speaking o Errors should be corrected Critique o Does not focus on teaching grammar Conversation Theory (Gordon Pask) The Conversation Theory developed by G. Pask originated from a cybernetics framework and attempts to explain learning in both living organisms and machines. The fundamental idea of the theory was that learning occurs through conversations about a subject matter which serve to make knowledge explicit. Conversations can be conducted at a number of different levels: natural language (general discussion), object languages (for discussing the subject matter), and metalanguages (for talking about learning/language). In order to facilitate learning, Pask argued that subject matter should be represented in the form of entailment structures which show what is to be learned. Entailment structures exist in a variety of different levels depending upon the extent of relationships displayed (e.g., super/subordinate concepts, analogies). The critical method of learning according to conversation theory is "teachback" in which one person teaches another what they have learned. Pask identified two different types of learning strategies: serialists who progress through an entailment structure in a sequential fashion and holists who look for higher order relations. Application Conversation theory applies to the learning of any subject matter. Pask (1975) provides an extensive discussion of the theory applied to the learning of statistics (probability). Example Pask discusses the application of conversation theory to a medical diagnosis task (diseases of the thyroid). In this case, the entailment structure represents relationships between pathological conditions of the thyroid and treatment/tests. The student is encouraged to learn these relationships by changing the parameter values of a variable (e.g., iodine intake level) and investigating the effects. Principles 1. To learn a subject matter, students must learn the relationships among the concepts. 2. Explicit explanation or manipulation of the subject matter facilitates understanding (e.g., use of teach back technique). 3. Individual's differ in their preferred manner of learning relationships (serialists versus holists). 1.6 Schumann’s Acculturation Theory Basic Tenets o Based on a Social Theory o Focuses on the multiple perspective of the learner o Learning a language to function in the target language culture. o Examines how social forces affect language learning. o Attitudes and stereotypes towards the target language affect learning. o Lower social and psychological distance will lead to successful learning o Errors can be corrected for better acculturation o There are external factors that affect language acquisition Critique o Does not focus on teaching specific grammar Schumann’s Acculturation Model Explained Schumann’s (1978) research argues that social and psychological distance between the second language learner and the target language community is a major factor in determining the degree to which the language learner will acquire the target language without the development of pidginization. The simplified form of speech characterized in a pidgin language, according to Schumann, “shows that social and psychological distance exists and the speech of the second language learner is restricted to the communicative function” (Schumann, 1978 p. 76). The model proposed by Schumann includes the following eight social variables which affect the quality of contact that second language learners have with the target language community (simplified from Schumann, 1978): 1) Social dominance: When the English Language Learning (ELL) group is politically, culturally, technically, or economically superior to the target language (TL) group, then it will tend not to learn the target language. On the other hand, if the ELL group is inferior to the TL group, they may resist learning the target language. 2) Assimilation, preservation, and adaptation: If the ELL group chooses assimilation as the integration strategy, it gives up its own lifestyle and values and adopts those of the TL group. Similarly, preservation means that the ELL group maintains its own lifestyle and values and rejects those of the TL group. Adaptation means that the ELL group adapts to the lifestyle and values of the TL group, but maintains its own lifestyle and values for intragroup use. 3) Enclosure: Enclosure refers to the degree to which the ELL group and TL group share the same social constructs such as schools, churches, clubs, recreational facilities, crafts, professions, and trades. If the two groups share these social constructs, enclosure is said to be low, and the L2 acquisition is facilitated. 4) Cohesiveness: If the ELL group is cohesive, it will tend to remain separate from the TL group. 5) Size: If the ELL group is large, the intragroup contact will be more frequent than contact with the TL group. 6) Congruence: If the two cultures are similar, social contact is potentially more likely and L2 learning is more easily facilitated. 7) Attitude: If the ELL and TL groups have positive attitudes toward each other, L2 learning is more easily facilitated. 8) Intended length of residence: The longer an L2 learner plans to remain in the TL environment, the more likely it is that they will feel the need to learn the target language. There are also four affective variables included in Schumann's acculturation model, they are: 1. Language shock, or the degree to which speaking the new language makes the learner feel foolish or comical; 2. Culture shock, the extent to which the learner feels disoriented and uncomfortable with extended residence in a new culture; 3. Ego permeability, the ability of the learner to accept a new identity associated with the belonging to a new speech community, and 4. Motivation, the degree and type of desire experienced by the learner to acquire the L2. Of these, only motivation seemed particularly applicable to the situation involved in Criticisms of Schumann’s Model There are many criticisms on the acculturation model, including Schumann’s work beginning with its formal incompleteness. First, Freeman & Long (1991) state that Schumann did not specify the combinations and/or levels of social and psychological factors to predict language outcome. Various social and psychological factors can be used to account for learner’s acquisition, and it is impossible to determine what is the most significant one of these factors or the degree to which one factor contributes to the acquisition. Also, Schumann did not explain how these factors affect the rate of attainment. (Freeman & Long, 1991 p. 264) Next, Schumann did not account for the change of the social or psychological distance over time (Freeman & Long 1991, Baker 2001). One important difference in the comparison of the Acculturation Model and Giles and Byrne’s Accommodation Model is that Giles and Byrne (1982) point out that the relationships between the two groups are constantly changing (Baker, 2001). Naturally distance changes as a learner acquires the target language. The current social and psychological distance while the learner acquires the language and how it correlates to the learners’ proficiency is not taken into account in Schumann’s model. Furthermore, the model does not show how these social and psychological factors vary from individual to individual. Freeman and Long (1991) pointed out that the model is unable to be tested because no reliable and valid measures of social and psychological distance exist. Some researchers like Stauble (1978) and Kitch (1982) found rough correlation between psychological distance and ESL proficiency, others like Kelley (1982) and Stauble (1981) found no relationship between acculturation and proficiency (Freeman & Long, 1991). Researchers have concluded that individuals go through the stages of adjustment in another culture at different rates and can ultimately combine elements of the psychological distance variables. Schumann does not include important personal factors such as age, family separation, previous educational experiences, or the traumatic experiences of the refugee. These additional stress factors can determine how well a student performs in a new school environment. “The extent to which the ‘host’ society and its institutions are responsive to the needs of recently arrived immigrants, and the effects of other stress factors that may exist, will have an effect on the adjustment and acculturation process” (Coelho, 1998 p.31). We may conclude that this model serves only as a rough outline of the relationship between social and psychological variables in second language acquisition. Graham and Brown (1996) researched the reasons why native Spanish speakers in a small town in northern Mexico developed native-like proficiency in English. A sample of the Spanish-speaking population was asked questions related to Schumann’s acculturation variables. They concluded that the proficiency being acquired by native Spanish-speaking was due to three factors: favorable attitudes toward the English-speaking community, enrollment in a two- way bilingual program in school, and the development of close friendships with native English-speaking peers. This high level of achievement in two languages may not be that unusual in communities where minority language students are learning the majority language. “The unusual thing about Colonia Juarez is not so much that the English-speaking minority would be developing high levels of competence in Spanish, but that the Spanish-speaking majority would be developing native-like ability in English” (Graham & Brown, 1996 p. 236). Although Schumann’s acculturation model has been applied mostly to situations unlike Colonia Juarez, it is exactly this kind of application that may help in determining the accuracy and efficacy of the model itself. Finally, it helps to prove the importance of social factors in second language acquisition. Implications for Teaching It is important for teachers to understand the backgrounds and attitudes of all the students they teach. This survey is one way to take a look at their motivation, attitudes, and rationale for studying English. Researchers have suggested a strong connection between these social variables and the successful learning of another language. Teachers can understand some of the factors that affect their students. While working at the academy, I hypothesized that the social environment inhibited English language acquisition. Upon closer examination, this seems to be true. The students are enclosed in an environment that does not motivate them enough to speak English. By looking at data results from this survey, or instruments like it, teachers can evaluate the social conditions in the classroom and school, evaluate the social conditions in the lives of the students outside of school, and make professional adjustments to the curriculum. These adjustments may include special activities for students after school, field trip opportunities, and home visits. Teachers may also do some community investigation that provides students with information on opportunities for involvement in local clubs, groups, or teams. Additionally, arrangements could be made to bring local professionals into the classroom to speak to students about their lives in certain careers. By bringing the community to them, students may become more open and motivated to learn. This can also be achieved by introducing lessons involving local newspapers. Cartoons, advertisements, and classifieds provide a rich array of cultural topics and help to informally lead to language acquisition at the same time. This supports Schumann’s theory that language is really one aspect of the culture of a particular ethnic group and that the relationship of that to the learners’ language community is extremely important. While research continues in the relationship between socio-psychological distance factors and second language learning, it is important for educators to be aware of the issues affecting students in different social environments. REFERENCES Pask, G. (1i975). Conversation, Cognition, and Learning. New York: Elsevier. Asiaeuniversity, 2012. Learning Theories-behaviorism. Chapter Five. http://peoplelearn.homestead.com/BEduc/Chapter_5.pdf. Accessed on 20 October 2012. Collentine,J. 1993. Cognitive Principles and CALL Grammar Instruction: A Mind-Centered, Input Approach. CALICO Journal. 15(1-3) .Available on http://www.calico.org/html/article_439.pdf.Accessed on 4 January 2013. Green. 2003. From Theory to Practice: Cognitive Principles of Learning and Instruction. The Office for Teaching and Learning Newsletter.7(3). Available online on http://www.otl.wayne.edu. Accessed on 4 January 2013. Hebb. 2003. Chapter 2. Available on. highered.mcgraw- hill.com/sites/dl/free/0070905738/80324/LSDChap02_1.pdf. Accessed on 20 October 2015. Jordan, A., Carlite O., & Stack, A. 2008. Approaches to Learning: A Guide for Teachers. New York: The McGrow Hill Companies.