Zoo Paper Analysis Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Zoo Paper Analysis - Essay Example I think that you should have expounded it more instead of jumping right away to your thesis. As suggested in the Argument Lecture, the thesis sentence should not be placed in the beginning of the essay; instead a good argument should come at the end of the sentence. In your paper, you immediately stated your thesis statement at the second paragraph stating, â€Å"It is morally wrong to keep wild animals in captivity†. In fact, you already hinted at it already at the first paragraph when you said, â€Å"No amount of replication, no matter how convincing, is enough to make up for denying these creatures their freedom.† You also expressed, â€Å"The argument is simple: The fact that we are stronger or smarter than animals does not give us the right to ambush and exploit them solely for the purposes of our own entertainment.† Since your audience is adversarial, it is not right for you to impose your belief to them at the start of your essay. You should have establish ed your points of argument first before stating your thesis statement. You failed to take note of the point in the Argument Lecture which said that in a great argument, the thesis is never explicitly stated. A positive point of your paper is that you were able to use cause and affect language in your essay. An example of this is when you said that â€Å"most animals in captivity cannot go back in the wild†. The cause here is the captivity which resulted to an effect of not being able to go back in the wild. Another cause and effect statement which you presented is that because of inbreeding in zoos, the offspring is often weakened. Your essay also stated a very good Point of Agreement in the third paragraph when you stated, â€Å"We humans take our own freedom quite seriously.† I would commend this statement because indeed your audience will agree to it because it is a given fact. It does not even mention anything about your desire to abolish zoos. In the same paragrap h you also stated a Point of Disagreement, â€Å"But too many of us apparently feel no obligation to grant that same right to animals†¦Ã¢â‚¬  The third paragraph is a good example of AGREEMENT  --> DISAGREEMENT. Reading the whole paper though, I think that you lack statements of Agreements. You concentrated more on Points of Disagreement. Maybe you should add more Points of Agreement so as not to intimidate your audience especially at the start of the paper. Another point which I want to mention and remind you is that â€Å"an argument is not a debate†. You did not have to present both sides of the argument like what you did in discussing about the case Jackie, the dolphin. As I was reading through your paper, I got confused as to what argument you were really presenting. Especially in the last four paragraphs of your essay, I was beginning to think that what you were fighting for was about the preservation of endangered species. You deviated from your previous argum ent about zoos being abolished. You jumped to a new topic about the destruction of the natural habitats of animals. There are now so many issues being presented so much so that you are already confusing your audience on what you really want them to do. Is it to abolish zoos, protect the ecosystem or is it the preservation of endangered species? Maybe you should have written another argumentative essay on these topics and just concentrate on the abolition of zoos in your essay. It is hard to persuade your audience if you confuse them with too many issues. Based on the above comments, the grade that I will give you is F because you failed to follow some of the basic guidelines which was presented in the Argument Lecture. Because of that, I cannot give you a high grade since from the start of your essay you have been out

Dance Helicap Essay Example for Free

Dance Helicap Essay In 1967, Frank Dance proposed the communication model called Dance’s Helix Model for a better communication process. The name helical comes from â€Å"Helix† which means an object having a three-dimensional shape like that of a wire wound uniformly around a cylinder or cone. He shows communication as a dynamic and non-linear process. Theory Dance’s model emphasized the difficulties of communication. Frank Dance uses the form of a Helix to describe communication process. He developed this theory based on a simple helix which gets bigger and bigger as it moves or grows. The main characteristic of helical model of communication is that it is evolutionary. Frank Dance explains the communication process based on this Helix structure and compares it with communication. In the Helix structure, the bottom or starting is very small then it’s gradually moves upward in a back and forth circular motion which form the bigger circle in the top and it’s still moves further. The whole process takes some time to reach. As like helix, the communication process starts very slowly and defined small circle. Communicators share information only with small portion of themselves to their relationships. Its gradually develops into next level but which will take some time to reach and expanding its boundaries to the next level. Later the communicators commit more and share more portions themselves. Example When a child is born the only means of communication is crying, he/she cries for everything like hunger, pain, cold etc.. As the child grows the means of communication become wider and broader. He learns to makes noises then he learns language to obtain attention and to fulfil his needs. As a Helix the process of communication in this case started from crying and later it developed into a complex and compound means. The Helical model of communication is largely dependent on its past. A child learns to pronounce a word in his elementary classes and throughout his life he uses that word in the same way he learnt. Just like that we used to react to certain things in a certain way in our childhood and such reactions and habits lasts with us forever. The communication evolves in the beginning in some simple forms then the same process of communication develops based on the past activities. It develops further with modifications. Conclusion Frank Dance included the concept of time in his theory. Something happens over the other will always be based on the first event according to him. This theory of communication was a subject to a number of experimental researches. Even though this model of communication clarifies everything there is a problem of over simplification. According to this theory a communication process is the product of what we learnt. Let us understand the model with the help of an example. A child from the very moment he comes to this world starts communicating. When a baby is born, the nurse rubs his back to make the child cry. If the child doesn’t cry, it is an indication of a still born child. What does crying in this case refer to? It is actually a way the child is communicating to his parents that he is alive, absolutely hale and hearty and ready to face the challenges of the world. As the child grows up, he cries whenever he is hungry or expects something from his parents and sometimes simply for his parent’s attention. It is again a child’s own way of conveying his message to the whole world. When the same child grows up and starts going to school, he soon interacts with his parents, teachers, friends in the form of words. Now crying actually gets replaced by words or his speech but one thing which is common is the process of communication which existed since the child’s birth. Thus the child actually started communicating from the very first day of his life and has been communicating all through till the present day. This explains one part of helical model of communication. According to the Helical model of communication, the process of communication evolves from the very birth of an individual and continues till the existing moment. All living entities start communicating from the very first day of their origin. When seeds are planted, they convey the message to the gardener that they need to be watered daily and should be treated well with fertilizers and manure. When a plant emerges from the seed it also starts communicating its need for water, sunlight, manure and fertilizers, thus supporting the Helical model of communication. The same also applies for animals, birds, fishes and all living creatures. Now let us throw some more light on a real life situation An individual in his elementary classes learns to pronounce a particular word or react to a particular situation. It has been observed that even though the child grows up, he continues to pronounce that particular word in the same way as he did during his growing up days or for that matter, if the same situation arises again he would under all circumstances react in the same way as he did in the past. The fear of the child when suddenly the light goes off at night resulting in a complete blackout is present in his younger days as well as when he grows up. The above example again makes the Helical model of communication clear. According to the Helical model as the process of communication moves forward it also comes back and is largely dependent on the past behaviour of the individual. The model believes that communication process is just like a helix which moves forward as well as comes backward and is dependent on the behaviour patterns of the past definitely with some modifications and changes. As the child grows up, he does make slight changes in his past body movements or past pronunciation or facial expressions. He makes certain changes, modifications in his communication and tries to get rid of the communication errors. An individual will definitely get less nervous in his teenage days as compared to his childhood days, thus a slight change in his behaviour.

Importance of Teaching Listening Skills

Importance of Teaching Listening Skills Listening comprehension is an important language skill to develop. Language learners want to understand target language (L2) speakers and they want to be able to access the rich variety of aural and visual L2 texts available via network-based multimedia. Furthermore, listening comprehension is at the heart of L2 learning and the development of L2 listening skills has demonstrated a beneficial impact on the development of other skills (e.g. Dunkel 1991; Rost 2002). Therefore, it is important to develop L2 listening competence; yet, in spite of its importance, L2 learners are rarely taught how to listen effectively (e.g. Mendelsohn 2001, 2006; Berne 2004; LeLoup Pontiero 2007). In addition, listening is an essential skill which develops faster than speaking and often affects the development of reading and writing abilities in learning a new language (Scarcella and Oxford, 1992; Oxford, 1993). According to them, the main reason is that one receives input through listening to instructions or explanations prior to responding orally or in writing. Listening is not an easy skill to acquire because it requires listeners to make meaning from the oral input by drawing upon their background knowledge of the world and of the second language (Byrnes, 1984; Nagle Sanders, 1986; Young, 1997) and produce information in their long term memory and make their own interpretations of the spoken passages (Murphy, 1985; Mendelsohn, 1994; Young, 1997). In other words, listeners need to be active processors of information (Young, 1997). Meanwhile, Vandergrift (1996, 1997, and 2003) asserts that listening is a complex, active process of interpretation in which listeners try to su it what they hear with their prior knowledge. According to Richards (1983), this process is more complex for second language learners who have limited memory capacity of the target language. Therefore, it is necessary for them to utilize various listening strategies. As most English teachers Iran believe, although we have learned a lot about the nature of listening and the role of listening in communication, L2 listening has been considered to be the least researched of all four language skills. This may be due to its implicit nature, the ephemeral nature of the acoustic input and the difficulty in accessing the processes. In order to teach L2 listening more effectively, teachers need a richer understanding of the listening process. Research into L2 listening is important because a better understanding of the process will inform pedagogy. According to Vandergrift (2007), students who learn to control their listening processes can enhance their comprehension; This, in turn, affects the development of other skills and overall success in L2 learning. 1.2. Statement of Problem Listening comprehension may seem relatively straightforward to native language (L1) speakers but it is often a source of frustration for second and foreign language (L2) learners (e.g., Graham, 2006). Further, little attention has been focused on systematic practice in L2 listening (see DeKeyser, 2007) i.e.; on the integrated instruction of a sequential repertoire of strategies to help L2 learners develop comprehension skills for real-life listening (Berne, 2004; Mendelsohn, 1994; Vandergrift, 2004). A review on recent research on second or foreign listening instruction suggested a need for an analysis of the effectiveness of metacognitive instruction for developing L2 listening comprehension. Current approaches for effective L2 listening are toward real-life authentic ample-input listening with more of top-down approaches and process instruction. Most of the studies, support real-life listening with authentic materials (Buck, 2002; Goh, 2008; Richards, 2005; Vandergrift, 2007; Veenman et a1., 2006). Top-down approaches have drawn more recent favors than bottom-up approaches (Goh, 2008; Rost, 2002; Vandergrift, 2004). Process listening was favored to product listening (Vandergrift, 2004; Field, 2003; Buck, 1995; Krashen, 2008). Interest was also indicated in raising student awareness of the listening process (Vandergrift, 1999; Mendelsohn, as cited in Vandergrift, 2004). Among the approaches to L2 listening, metacognitive instruction for L2 listening was noted to be a most recent trend (Annevirta et al., 2007; Beasley et al., 2008; Chen, 2007; Derwing, 2008; Field, 2008; Goh, 2008; Graham et al., 2008; Lee Oxford, 2008; Vandergrift, 2007; Veenman et al., 2006; Zohar Peled, 2008). In general, comprehension historically has received only minimal treatment in the teaching of English as a Second Language (ESL), but it is, in fact, one of the most important skills a second language (L2) learner must master to succeed in academic studies (Jung, 2003, Thompson Rubin, 1996). For learners to become proficient in listening comprehension, they must receive comprehensible input (Vandergrift, 1997, p. 495) as well as have ample opportunity to practice using, or producing, the language. In second language acquisition, listening comprehension used to be considered a passive activity; thus, it did not merit researchers attention (Jung, 2003; Thompson Rubin, 1996; Vandergrift, 2004). It had been assumed that a learners ability to comprehend spoken language would develop entirely on its own in an inductive way through repetition and imitation. As recently as the 1970s there were no textbooks devoted to teaching the skill of listening in a second language. It was assumed that the ability to comprehend spoken language would automatically improve because learners with exposure to the oral discourse would learn through practice. Listening texts are a relatively recent addition to the ESL or ESL curricula; the focus of earlier second or foreign language learning texts which included a focus on listening comprehension was primarily on testing students ability to listen to oral discourse and then answer comprehension questions based upon the information (Carrier, 2003; Field, 1998). Today, however, a growing body of research indicates that the focus has shifted to actively and intentionally teaching strategies for learning how to process, comprehend, and respond to spoken language with greater facility, competence, and confidence (Rost, 2007). Despite, recognizing the importance of listening strategies for the development of foreign language proficiency, very limited studies have been performed in Iran concerning the strategies employed by Iranian EFL learners in relation to listening proficiency levels. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to determine how strategies training may benefit L2 learners in their development of listening comprehension. 1.3. Significance of the Study The current study addresses the need for further research in the area of systematic teaching of listening strategies. Accoding to Carrier (2003), for L2 learners, the ability to use strategies effectively in their academic listening is crucial (Carrier, 2003). He believed that learners need to be able to actively and selectively choose the strategies most applicable for a given listening situation and evaluate strategy effectiveness in their everyday learning tasks. As Carrier (ibid) indicated in her study, students can benefit from instruction in strategies for academic listening in a variety of settings and incorporating many types of media. This study adds to the growing body of research of how adult EFL students pursuing academic study may benefit from explicit, systematic teaching of listening strategies. Doing this research contributes a method to introduce and model L2 listening strategies. Results of the study provide insight into participants self-perceptions of their use of listening strategies both before and after systematic classroom instruction. 1.4. Research Questions The following research questions formed the basis of the study: 1. Does explicit listening comprehension strategy training based on CALLA instructional model increase Iranian EFL learners listening comprehension 2. What metacognitive listening strategies, based on Metacognitive Awareness Listening Questionnaire (MALQ), do Iranian EFL learners report before and after metacognitive training program? 1.5. Research Hypotheses Based on the above questions, the following hypotheses will be estimated: 1. Explicit listening comprehension strategy training based on CALLA instructional model cannot play any role in increasing Iranian EFL learners listening comprehension. 2. There is no significant difference in using metacognitive listening strategies, based on Metacognitive Awareness Listening Questionnaire (MALQ) by Iranian EFL learners before and after metacognitive training program. 1.6. Limitations of the Study One limitation of this study relates to the selection of participants. It was anticipated that the body of participants was likely to be of predominantly one language and cultural background. While this could provide insights into the strategy use of that particular language group, it might preclude broader multicultural generalizations of the study. In addition, it was impossible to randomize the selection of participants because of the structure of the research. The study needed to be conducted as a component of regularly scheduled EFL coursework. Limited randomization was provided in the anonymity of participant responses on the research instrument questionnaires as well as with proficiency leveling. Participants prior exposure to listening strategies instruction or to the manner in which such instruction may have taken place is another area that was impossible to determine. Indeed, students may consciously or unconsciously use strategies transferred from their learning and listening experiences in their first language. In addition, instructors may offer strategies instruction without intentionally planning to do so. If students have friends who are native speakers of English, spend much time watching American movies or listening to news broadcasts, or in other ways have a lot of exposure to English outside of class time, they may have adopted a variety of listening strategies that their classmates who do not engage in such activities have not. 1.7. Definition of Key Terms The following terms are used throughout this study and are defined as related to use in this research. Listening: an active process in which listeners select and interpret information that comes from auditory and visual clues in order to define what is going on and what the speakers are trying to express (Thompson Rubin, 1996, p. 331). For this study, the focus is on listening for academic purposes. That might include listening during academic lectures, seminars, group work, or any other aural discourse that is likely to occur in an academic classroom setting. Metacognition: Metacognition refers to the learners knowledge of whatever strategies s/he might use for specific tasks and under what conditions those strategies will be most effective (Pintrich, 2002). Strategy training: teaching explicitly how, when, and why to apply language learning and language use strategies to enhance students efforts to reach language program goals (Carrell, 1996; Cohen, 1998; Ellis Sinclair, 1989, as cited in Chen, 2005, p. 5). CHAPTER TWO REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 2.1. Overview This chapter presents a brief historical timeline of the teaching of listening comprehension in EFL and ESL context. Of note is that listening research and teaching has a relatively short history as compared to that of reading, writing, grammar, and speaking. Certainly, the process of learning how to listen in a second language shares features with learning to listen in ones mother tongue; however, some features are different. The literature provides insight into these similarities and differences. Within this section, top-down and bottom-up processing as they function in the L2 listening process are explained, as is the interaction between the two processes. Finally, learning strategies, in particular, those used in the L2 listening process are presented. In most of the research accomplished to date, strategies have been classified in a descriptive manner. Researchers agree to the dearth of studies showing what types of intervention-or instruction-of listening strategies will help L 2 students to improve their listening comprehension. It is to this end that the current study was undertaken. 2.2. History of Teaching Listening Comprehension Though one of the most important but also most difficult skills a second language (L2) learner must master to succeed in academic studies, L2 listening comprehension has not received the research attention it deserves (Jung, 2003, Thompson Rubin, 1996). Though the focus in teaching today is on presenting listening as an active receptive skill which needs special attention in language study (Morley, 2001, p. 72.), listening was traditionally considered to be a passive skill, unlike speaking or grammar (Vandergrift, 2004). Even as recently as the 1970s there were no textbooks devoted to teaching the skill of listening in a second language. One hundred and fifty years ago, it was thought that speaking and writing in a second language were productive, or active skills, while listening and reading were receptive, and thus passive. In some of the earliest recorded language classes, listening was not taught at all. In one of the earliest of the language teaching approaches, Grammar Translation (Felder Enriquez, 1995; Flowerdew, Miller, 2005), teaching was conducted in the learners native tongue, and only the grammar, sentence structure and vocabulary of the foreign language, generally Greek or Latin, were taught so that learners could translate texts. The first of the language teaching methods that touched upon the importance of listening comprehension is known as the Direct Approach (Felder Enriquez, 1995), in which learners were immersed in the target language, with the L2 being the language of instruction (Flowerdew Miller, 2005). Taught inductively, learners mastered the grammar by creating rules based on their ever-growing experience with the language. Correctness in all aspects of the language was emphasized. In the Direct Approach, by necessity, listening comprehension played a major role. However, the development of listening comprehension was not actively taught; it was assumed that learners would pick up this skill in an inductive way, through repetition and use. Certainly, with its focus on inductive learning, no listening strategies were actively taught in the Direct Approach. Although listening comprehension was a component of the Grammar Approach also, students were constantly tested on their listening ability only as it related to their ability to simultaneously read and listen to a recorded piece of discourse and make sense of the grammatical and lexical rules of the language. One major drawback of this method was that the classroom activities did not relate in any meaningful way to everyday listening activities outside of the classroom (Flowerdew Miller, 2005). Students using this method were called upon to fill in missing words, a task they could easily perform without having any idea of the actual meaning of the discourse. The Audiolingual Approach (Larsen-Freeman, 2000), which became popular in the 1960s and 1970s, required the listener to recognize and practice utterances and then create similar utterances patterned after the ones they had heard in a dialogue. It was during this time and with this approach to teaching languages that the audio-cassette language labs became widely used (Ross, 2003). The language lab focus was based on drill and practice, requiring much repetition and error correction with the goal of instilling in students correct patterns of discourse. Developing listening comprehension strategies, again, was not the focus of this approach; rather listening skill was taught only as it pertained to the manipulation of newly learned grammatical and lexical structures. An unfortunate result was that in their learning process, students interacted much more with machines than with other humans. Then focus shifted toward student interaction in authentic language situations so that students could have exposure to comprehensible input as well as practice using the target language in real life situations. While cassette language laboratories are still in use today, many of these have been replaced or supplemented with computer laboratories and digital language laboratories. Emphasis on authentic tasks and projects, particularly those using the Internet, has become highly regarded (Ross, 2004). In the 1980s and 1990s, the Communicative Approach (Oxford et al., 1989)-one in which error was tolerated, provided the learners intended message could be conveyed and understoodbecame popular. The Communicative Approach, in which the focus is on use of authentic language, places the learner in a real exchange of meaning; the learner must process input and produce output such that each participant can understand the other. Once again, we see that listening strategies are assumed but not actively taught. Within this method, two schools developedthose who embrace the Cognitive Approach (Ellis, 1999) and those who embrace the Sociocognitive Approach (Warschauer Meskill, 2000). Another approach which came into existance was Cognitive Approach, the first of the two schools, which focuses on the view that all language learning is a unique psycholinguistic process (Warschauer Meskill, 2000, p. 3). Learners are said to have a built-in cognitive ability to interact with and communicate in language that is both meaningful and comprehensible to them and construct their own meaning. Making errors is seen as a positive learning process through which learners construct the rules of the target language based upon input/output. Technologies that support this learning theory/style include text-reconstruction software, concordancing software, telecommunications, and multimedia simulation software (p. 4). Teachers can easily manipulate authentic text to create meaningful exercises (cloze-type), and students can use all sorts of software and Internet access to discover computer microworlds that, at their best, simulate an immersion or a linguistic bath environment (p. 5). They can experience the target language by conducting searches, interacting with and manipulating their findings. In many cases, students need not actually interact with other humans at all. The other school within the Communicative Approach embraces Sociocognitive Approaches. This school of thought contends that learners benefit greatly from interaction with people. Students need to interact with other humans in authentic language situations so that they can have comprehensible input as well as exposure and practice in the types of speech acts in real life outside the classroom. Authentic tasks and projects, particularly those utilizing the Internet, are highly regarded in this approach. Teaching methods that exploit computer-assisted discussion have become accepted. We see synchronous and asynchronous chat becoming a major component of language learning. While this medium is seen as somewhat artificial, it is still said to give students authentic practice in extended discourse and to provide an extra layer of language practice for students, one that is democratic. Students who are hesitant to use oral language in the classroom have greater opportunity to use language w ithout fear of making mistakes and thus losing face. The result can be class discussions that are both highly democratic and collaborative. Next in the progression of accepted language teaching approaches is one known as the Task-Based Approach (Brown, 1987; Bruton, 2005). This approach requires the learner to listen and, based on the input, complete some sort of task, perhaps note-taking or filling in a chart or form. The tasks tend to be oriented to real-world needs of the learner but are frequently based upon discourse (lectures or passages) that is at least partially contrived. While not exactly authentic, these types of activities provide practice in completing the types of tasks students might be called upon to use in real life, such as noting information or completing forms. In current language learning approaches, we have the Learner-Strategy Approach (Floweredew Miller, 2005; Mendelsohn, 1994). This approach accounts for learners needs to initiate and recognize their own listening strategies what works for each individual learner. The Learner-Strategy approach examines listening comprehension from the perspective of individual learners and their independent learning with activities created to help learners discover what particular strategy works for them, including foci on schema activation, authentic tasks, presentation of many types of activities in many different contexts, and total interaction with the task. It is in this approach that metacognitive realization plays a significant role. Metacognition refers to the learners knowledge of whatever strategies s/he might use for specific tasks and under what conditions those strategies will be most effective (Pintrich, 2002). Pintrich pointed out that metacognition refers to knowledge of strategies; h aving the knowledge doesnt necessarily mean that the learner actually uses the strategies. It is important, however, for learners to identify which of their own listening strategies produce success, and it is helpful for them to share their strategies. Not only does the sharing help them to activate schemata and to recognize how the strategy works for them, their sharing may also serve to activate other learners schemata and be instructive for fellow learners. Both learner and fellow students become more autonomous and develop more control over their own learning, the goal of this particular approach. The more aware learners are of the learning process, more specifically, their own learning process, the greater the chance they can influence conscious learning (Nakatani, 2005, p. 77) and enhance their own strategic competence. According to Osada (2002), with the development of research, new theories, and development of second language curriculum, researchers interest in listening comprehension has grown. The 1990s showed a far greater interest in this skill than had previously been realized. Today, it is a widely accepted belief (Flowerdew Miller, 2005; Jung, 2003; Savignon, 2001; Wilson, 2003) that all skills, certainly including listening comprehension, require active negotiation with the language. Savignon (2001) likened the collaborative process involved in oral/aural communication to the game of football. The different strategies players use and the different moves they make as they avoid, block, or tackle the opposing teams players are similar to the strategies language learners use to negotiate meaning with their interlocutors in the new language. Not only do learners need to know the sound system, grammar, and syntax of the new language, but they also need to understand the pragmatic, or discourse meanings of the language. A final learning approach that is worth mentioning here is the Integrated Approach (Flowerdew Miller, 2005). Teachers of today recognize readily the need to actively teach strategies for developing accuracy in listening comprehension. The goal is to make students able to listen for and identify main ideas as well as details, to develop their critical listening and thinking skills, and to enable them to manipulate the language and show that they comprehend and can use what they have heard. An expected outcome is for students to be able to use heard information and present it in an intelligent and intelligible way. In the Integrated Approach, we see complementary strategies at play as students use aspects of the various approaches to language teaching and learning to comprehend, manipulate, and produce language in authentic, meaningful language tasks. 2.3. Different perspectives toward listening 2.3.1. Listening as Negotiation of Meaning That most peoples daily experiences are often not linked to reading and writing- but to situations where the spoken word is the dominant medium has already been noted in the context of first language (LI) listening (see, for example, Bohlken, 1999; Frest, 1999; Furnis, 2004). In academic contexts, for example, research on LI listening has shown that listening comprises more than 50% of college students total average communication day followed by reading (17%), speaking (16%) and writing (11%) (Emanuel et al, 2008). With the significant role that listening plays in our lives, therefore, it would be worthwhile to examine what facilitates and/or hinders listening. Changes in listening behavior have been associated with different factors including purpose for listening (Wolvin Coakley, 1996), types of interaction possible or required in a listening situation (Rost, 1990; 2002), personal dispositions (Sargent, Fitch-Hauser, Weaver, 1997), gender (Sargent Weaver, 2003), and cultural context (Keiwitz, Weaver, Brosius, Weiman, 1997). Imhof (2004) posits that, while listening, individuals tend to adjust swiftly to perceived characteristics of the [listening] situation (p. 43) such as the status they hold as compared to their speaking partner. In a study of listeners and speakers with English as a first language (ELI), Harms (1961) found that listeners comprehension was highest when listeners held the same status as the speakers. These findings accord with the results of the Varonis and Gass (1985) study on EL1-ESL and ESL-ESL interlocutor dyads, which demonstrated that meaning negotiations occurred less frequently between EL1-ESL interlocutors t han ESL-ESL. Varonis and Gass (1985) concluded that ESL speakers recognize the inequality of the conversation situation (p. 85) and thus are reluctant to attempt any further negotiation of meaning. In a critique of the cognitively-oriented L2 listening studies that have ignored the social context in which conversation occurs, Carrier (1999) argued that unequal status between ELI and ESL interlocutors hinders negotiations of meanings and thus has an adverse effect on comprehension. Carrier also suggested that status unequals may perceive their relationship as sharing no common base socially, occupationally, and economically (p. 74). In the context of L2 classroom settings, Pica (1992) reported that social relationships between teachers and students give them unequal status as interlocutors, which can hinder L2 comprehension, production and ultimately acquisition (p. 4). In an interesting case study of an intermediate level learners progress in listening comprehension during and after a pre-sessional English for Academic Purposes course, Lynch (1997) reported the discrepancies between performance within the sheltered setting of the language classroom and success in real interaction in the (non-sheltered) academic world. The study, which included evidence from performance (entry and exit listening tests), process (negotiation of meaning in the classroom) and perceptions (of listening difficulties after the course), pointed to the ways in which the listeners fears about being labeled as an ESL student hindered his negotiations of meaning in the classroom and ultimately his performance. When asked to make a conscious effort in applying meaning negotiation strategies (which he had learned in the sheltered language course) in his academic courses, the ESL listener replied, But I am the only foreign student and so I cannot interrupt very much (Lynch, 1997, 394). These results are in line with other work on first language listening, which demonstrate that inter-individ ual differences affect patterns of communication between listeners and speakers (Beatty, Marschal, Rudd, 2001; Imhof, 2004). 2.3.2 Listening as Comprehension Listening has been demonstrated to be one of the essentials of language learning (Rost 2002; Tafaghodtari Vandergrift, 2008; Vandergrift, 2007). Yet, with the diffusion of new technologies, which have particularly changed the ways in which university students spend their time (Emanuel et al., 2008), listening has become one of the most challenging aspects of L2 development for adult learners (e.g. Hasan 2000; Graham, 2003; Kim, 2002; Vandergrift, 2007). In a review of the recent developments in L2 listening research, Vandergrift (2007) rightly points to the significance that listening has in todays reality of L2 learners lives: Language learners want to understand target language (L2) and they want to be able to access the rich variety of aural and visual L2 texts available today via network-based multimedia, such as online audio and video, YouTube, podcasts and blogs (p. 191). Given its central role in the new media age, listening has remained surprisingly underresearched in the field of L2 education, and those studies which seem to address this neglected aspect of language development have been generally concerned with listening as an end-point, rather than an active process of meaning making. Many, for example, reduce listening to finding the right answer to a set of comprehension questions at the end of a passage. This focus, which reflects the nature of commercial and high-stakes tests, ignores the processes involved in any meaning making situation, listening being no exception. This trend has also fallen short of providing a framework for adequately taking account of the variables which affect listening ability (Tafaghodtari Vandergrift, 2008). 2.3.3 L2 Listening: A Cognitive Perspective Drawing on a wide range of disciplines (e.g., cognitive psychology, LI speech education, language pathology and artificial intelligence), current L2 listening theorists recognize that L2 listening draws on multiple sources of information such as linguistic, contextual, and schematic knowledge (e.g., Buck, 2001; Lynch, 1994; Vandergrift, 2006). A consequence of such recognition has been a focus on different textual, cognitive and affective variables such as memory, discourse markers, prior knowledge and anxiety which are believed to affect performance in L2 listening. Based on earlier work by Buck (2001), at least three types of variables are posited to be critical to L2 listening success: linguistic, strategic and learner variables. Linguistic variables entail knowledge of the sound system (phonological), grammar (syntactic), vocabulary (semantic) and contextual influences on interpretation (pragmatic) of the L2 (Flowerdew Miller, 2005). Listeners use L2 phonological knowledge to se gment the stream of sound into meaningful sound units. This includes knowledge about phonemes, stress, intonation, assimilation and elision. Grammatical or syntactic L2 knowledge helps listeners to process or parse the sound stream for meaningful units of language and contributes to comprehension by assigning semantic roles to words (Rost, 2002). L2 semantic knowledge helps listeners assign meaning to word-level units as well as the relationship between those words at the discourse level. L2 pragmatic knowledge helps the listener to infer the speakers intention, particularly if there is any ambiguity in the literal meaning of the utterance. This is closely related to sociolinguistic knowledge (e.g., formal/informal registers, idioms and slang) which listeners use to further interpret the utterance (Buck, 2001). These five elements of linguistic knowledge involved in speech perception are an essential part of any model of listening. Yet, research has shown that listening comprehension is more than speech perception (e.g., Rost, 2004; Schmidt-Rinehart, 1994). Comprehension includes matching what is heard with what is known. According to Rost (2004), the central component in the comprehension process is the activation of schemata in the listeners memory structures to anticipate and monitor,

To Kill A Mockingbird Essays: Great Courage -- Kill Mockingbird essays

Courage in To Kill A Mockingbird Courage is shown within the characters of To Kill A Mockingbird in several situations. The characters are challenged to face danger or pain without fear. The courage they display gives them strength and deepens their self-understanding as the novel progresses. Early in the novel, Scout illustrates the courage she embodies. On her first day of school, Scout acts as an ambassador for the entire class. She takes the duty of informing Miss Caroline of Walter Cunningham's situation. Miss Caroline had just scolded Scout for her ability to read, however, Scout still feels the classes' need for leadership. Most children at her age would fear speaking to the teacher is such a bold fashion. Scout shows advanced maturity for her age, and this allows her to successfully act upon her courage, rather than suppressing its existence. Walter Cunningham, himself, was shy and fearful of speaking to the teacher. Scout over came the petty fears that plagued the remainder of the class, and acted out of Walter's best interest. Her courage spoke in Walter's absence, and inability to express his monetary situation. Jem is faced with a courageous situation in regards to the Radley house. His courage stems from fear of receiving a whipping from Atticus, and more important, his disapproval. Jem is willing to risk his life in order to save his father from showing disappointment. The threat of Mr. Radley waiting for the intruder with his gun instils fear within Jem. However, Jem overcomes this fear in order to sustain Atticus' faith. Being the only and eldest son places pressure upon Jem to set an e... ...re you begin but you begin anyway and you see it through no matter what. You rarely win, but sometimes you do." (112). Within all the examples of courage there is not a situation when the courage did not stem from a need within the character. Courage is the inner desire to succeed and to do what is righteous, no matter what humiliation or consequences that plague you because of your decision. Scout, Jem, Atticus, Calpurnia and Mrs. Dubose understood the risks they faced but continued with their actions because it was moral. They did not all enter their personal situation expecting to win. Scout still faced further scolding from Miss Caroline. Jem eventually told his father what he had done to the Radley's. There were winners and losers but they do not regret the courage they showed for the sake of good intentions.

Bullying in School

Bullying: 1. I read the article, â€Å"Jury Orders School District to Pay $800,000 to Bullied Student. † This article was about a boy named Dane Patterson, who had been bullied all through middle school and his early high school career. He claims that the school failed to protect him from years of bullying, and it finally came to be enough when he was sexually harassed in the locker room. As a result to this, the Patterson family filed a lawsuit under Title IX of the Equal Opportunity in Education Act, using the sexual harassment story as the basis.This week, the jury ordered the school district to pay Dane $800,000 to make up for the damages and trauma caused by the ongoing situation. Anti-bullying experts argue that this verdict will send a clear message to schools that they are in fact responsible for sexual harassment and bullying, and that they must keep a constant eye out for such behavior. 2. In my opinion, I do not think schools should be held fully responsible for bul lying.I think that maybe they should make more of an effort to prevent it, but there is no way they can take care of all the bullying issues that happen in school. For example, some kids don’t even make an effort to ask for help, or let anyone know they are being bullied, so the school shouldn’t be held accountable for a situation they aren’t even aware is occurring to begin with. In Dane’s situation however, I believe the school should be held responsible because he clearly asked for help and didn’t receive any, and this had been going on since middle school!I think that schools should be fully accountable only if the child seeks out help numerous times and doesn’t receive it, or if the school doesn’t do everything in their power to make the bullying go away. On the other hand, there are some situations which the school cannot control, like I said in the first example; if that is the case, I don’t believe the school should be held responsible. 3. I believe that the parents of the bully’s should be held at least somewhat responsible for their child’s actions because then they could stop the bullying before it gets out of control.Ultimately, schools are responsible for keeping an eye out on bullying and regulating the behavior, but there are some cases in which they just cannot control, therefore they shouldn’t be held responsible. Obesity: 1. For obesity, I read the article, â€Å"Pepsi Initiates Move to Pull Sugared Soft Drinks from Schools in 200 Countries. † This article was about PepsiCo Inc’s announcement, as of Tuesday of this week, about how they planning to remove all of their full-calorie sweetened soft drinks from schools in more than 200 countries by the year 2012 to reduce the trend of obesity.The article also mentions that earlier this month, Coca-Cola made a similar announcement, but they feel they should only eliminate soft drink sales from schools only if parents make a request. Of course, both companies realize that eliminating soft drinks will not end the rising trend of childhood obesity, but they believe that learning better eating and drinking habits in schools are certainly a step in the right direction. 2. I don’t think that schools should be held accountable for obesity in any sense.Schools should strive to sell healthier food, but they are not the cause of obesity. The school is not responsible for the amount of food a child buys, so schools should not be responsible for obesity. 3. In my opinion, obesity is more caused by eating habits in life outside of school, such as home or going out and getting fast food all the time. It’s even genetic. I don’t believe schools should be responsible for obesity because the child controls their own eating habits, not the school. Bullying in School Bullying should be a crime. It is very cruel and unethical. â€Å"Each day an estimated 160,000 students miss school for fear of being bullied and 10 percent of students who drop out do so because of repeated bullying† (Dalton 1). The way it makes children feel isn’t fair. Imagine that happening to yourself. Bullying in schools presents problems to every age group therefore there should be more bullying prevention programs to help get rid of the problem. Younger age Bullying is a topic that needs to be talked about.Younger age is defined from kindergarten to seventh grade. Children bully because they feel they need to overpower people. They also bully because they think they are better than others or some people just have a low self-esteem. When Younger kids bully it is normally name calling, teasing, or making fun of them by the way they look, speak, or even how smart they are! Older age bullying is another one of my topics. Older age bullying is defined from the grade s of eighth to a senior in high school.People in the Older age group bully for mainly the same reasons. When older people normally bully, it is a lot more sever then younger age bullying. â€Å"Although most victims of bullying in schools are too meek to take matter into their own hands, a few of them can be pushed to certain critical limits. 60% of identified bullies during their grade 6-9 years eventually got involved in at least one criminal conviction by age 24. † Bullying in Schools (1). Older age bullying normally ends up violent and is a lot more severe then younger age bullying.They get into fights or harassment is filed, these are the main things that happen. People will take all of someones strength and will and harass or fight them just to make them feel better about themselves. This is bad because the children who are being bullied do not deserve what they are getting. Nobody deserves to be harassed and manipulated for no reason or any reason. Most of the time, th e people that are being bullied, it isn’t their fault at all. Prevention is another area of concern.According to the online article, â€Å"Bullying Academy,† every school needs a anti-bully website for students, educators, and parents. This world needs to realize what is going on with bullying in schools and take action(1). Every school should have monitors of bullying throughout the halls and classrooms all day long. This is just one thing you could do to prevent bullying. There are many things that you could do, depending on what one your school board would like the most. Every city or town should take money from their funds and put it into schools and bullying prevention programs.According to the online article â€Å"Caring School Community,† â€Å"prevention focuses on strengthening students’ connectedness to school—an important element for increasing academic motivation and achievement and for reducing drug use, violence, and delinquency. â⠂¬  Every school should have a bullying prevention program, where parents and students could come and learn about bullying. These programs could also talk about how it affects people. They should give statistics about what people who bully end up doing in their lives and what people that don’t bully end up doing in their lives. I also think we are making important progress towards discovering how successful anti-bullying programs can be† (Dr. Ken 1). Bullying in schools is wrong and we should have more bullying prevention programs. My main point in writing this paper is to inform people that bullying is wrong. Also I wish that everyone be more aware about the situation, and don’t deny it because it is happening whether you would like to admit it or not. People need to stand up and take charge and make a change in peoples lives. People who are being bullied would love if you took a couple hours of your week just to help them get over the struggles in life. Bullying in School Bullying: 1. I read the article, â€Å"Jury Orders School District to Pay $800,000 to Bullied Student. † This article was about a boy named Dane Patterson, who had been bullied all through middle school and his early high school career. He claims that the school failed to protect him from years of bullying, and it finally came to be enough when he was sexually harassed in the locker room. As a result to this, the Patterson family filed a lawsuit under Title IX of the Equal Opportunity in Education Act, using the sexual harassment story as the basis.This week, the jury ordered the school district to pay Dane $800,000 to make up for the damages and trauma caused by the ongoing situation. Anti-bullying experts argue that this verdict will send a clear message to schools that they are in fact responsible for sexual harassment and bullying, and that they must keep a constant eye out for such behavior. 2. In my opinion, I do not think schools should be held fully responsible for bul lying.I think that maybe they should make more of an effort to prevent it, but there is no way they can take care of all the bullying issues that happen in school. For example, some kids don’t even make an effort to ask for help, or let anyone know they are being bullied, so the school shouldn’t be held accountable for a situation they aren’t even aware is occurring to begin with. In Dane’s situation however, I believe the school should be held responsible because he clearly asked for help and didn’t receive any, and this had been going on since middle school!I think that schools should be fully accountable only if the child seeks out help numerous times and doesn’t receive it, or if the school doesn’t do everything in their power to make the bullying go away. On the other hand, there are some situations which the school cannot control, like I said in the first example; if that is the case, I don’t believe the school should be held responsible. 3. I believe that the parents of the bully’s should be held at least somewhat responsible for their child’s actions because then they could stop the bullying before it gets out of control.Ultimately, schools are responsible for keeping an eye out on bullying and regulating the behavior, but there are some cases in which they just cannot control, therefore they shouldn’t be held responsible. Obesity: 1. For obesity, I read the article, â€Å"Pepsi Initiates Move to Pull Sugared Soft Drinks from Schools in 200 Countries. † This article was about PepsiCo Inc’s announcement, as of Tuesday of this week, about how they planning to remove all of their full-calorie sweetened soft drinks from schools in more than 200 countries by the year 2012 to reduce the trend of obesity.The article also mentions that earlier this month, Coca-Cola made a similar announcement, but they feel they should only eliminate soft drink sales from schools only if parents make a request. Of course, both companies realize that eliminating soft drinks will not end the rising trend of childhood obesity, but they believe that learning better eating and drinking habits in schools are certainly a step in the right direction. 2. I don’t think that schools should be held accountable for obesity in any sense.Schools should strive to sell healthier food, but they are not the cause of obesity. The school is not responsible for the amount of food a child buys, so schools should not be responsible for obesity. 3. In my opinion, obesity is more caused by eating habits in life outside of school, such as home or going out and getting fast food all the time. It’s even genetic. I don’t believe schools should be responsible for obesity because the child controls their own eating habits, not the school.

Grey Wolves in America essays

Grey Wolves in America essays The wolves of North America have had a difficult time over the last several centuries. Starting from an estimated high of 400,000 when European Americans started settling on North American shores, wolf populations dropped to around 60,000 in the late 1960's and early 1970's. In the lower 48 states, the picture has been much weaker as bounty programs and government- financed trappers effectively removed wolves from all but two states. Today the range of the gray wolf has been reduced to parts of the United States such as Alaska, Idaho, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Wisconsin and Wyoming. The illegal killing of wolves has become a leading threat to their survival. Another serious problem is human movement into wolf territory, which leads to habitat loss for wolves. I do not think that it is right that the Grey Wolves were killed off in such a fashion by the ranchers and federal agents. The wolves were just doing what they needed to do for them to survive. Society has given the Grey Wolf a negative reputation that it doesnt deserve in the sense that the wolves are made out to look like the bad guys because everyone is worried about the wolves eating their livestock. If people have to be overly worried on that subject then they should keep their livestock in a safe place so that the wolves would not be able to get at them. There are many different pros and cons that justify this wolf situation. One pro would be that the wolves killing other animals are a natural process and thats how they survive. To kill them off and to not try and refill the population for that reason would be wrong. One con would be that the fewer wolves there are in an ecosystem then the more the food chain in that ecosystem would be balanced. So if people killed or did not replace the wolves then the wolves would not then be able to eat an abundance of other smaller species and possibly even kill them off. Another ...