Work set in absence

Who are the most popular children's authors for early years, infants and juniors?

Children aged 0-5

 Each Peach Pear Plum by Janet & Allan Ahlberg ,

The Jolly Postman or Other People’s Letters by Janet & Allan Ahlberg,

The Snowman by Raymond Briggs

Gorilla by Anthony Browne

Would You Rather? By John Burningham

Successful elements

Each Peach Pear Plum by Janet & Allan Ahlberg

-          Rhyming text as well as attractive illustrations, lots of hidden details in the pictures to keep the children engaged in spotting the detail

The Jolly Postman or Other People’s Letters by Janet & Allan Ahlberg,

-          Well-designed with  lots of small details for children to spot keeping them engaged, also having well drawn detailed pictures

The Snowman by Raymond Briggs

-          Stunning pictures and illustrations, story is well written conveying a story of a boy and his friendship with a snowman. This book is very successful for getting kids to use their imagination

Gorilla by Anthony Browne

-          Known for its ‘’ slightly surreal illustrations, it is a magical story to treasure’’ this book is popular for its sensitive story and beautiful pictures

Would You Rather? By John Burningham

-          Popular for getting children to use their imaginations. This book is filled with quirky ideas that children love as well as good illustrations, this book is perfect for an infant class room

Children’s books I remember

1)      The Snowman by Raymond Briggs

2)      The Very Hungry Caterpillar by Eric Carle

Why I remember them

 1 – I remember this picture book for forcing me to use my imagination due to the book not having any words. Having to imagine what was being said or what was happening was a different experience when reading at a younger age I was not used to this but did enjoy it very much.

2 – The simplicity of the story in the very hungry caterpillar helped keep my interest at a young age. How interactive this book was an experience that helped make reading fun when I was little. The amazing artwork and how interactive the book is, is what I remember the most about this story

How children are taught to read

Children are taught to read in primary school through phonics, phonics enables the reader to decode written words by sounding them out. Phonics is widely used in teaching primary school education and teaching literacy. Synthetic phonics is also another way used to teach reading, this method is similar to phonics but has the reader sounding out the letters first to then blend these sounds together to achieve pronunciation of the word

Phonics Debate and miscues children may experience

Using phonics and synthetic phonics can help children memorise the alphabet very quickly. There are many words that you can spell and identify by spelling them out phonetically, using the phonetic style to learn English can help children sound out words and gain a faster understanding of simpler words. The phonetic method of learning can help children identify a word they are not familiar with for the first time.

Although there are positives of learning through phonics children will often mispronounce words due to the way it is spelt, words like phone that uses the letters ‘p’ and ‘h’ to make the ‘f’ sound can confuse children. Children can sometimes lose track when sounding out words losing track can make reading repetitive and frustrating for a child at such a young age. When the teacher or caregiver is teaching and notices this they can help by scaffolding the word such as giving hints, instructing on pronunciation or simply explaining how the word is pronounced.

Bibliography

http://www.booktrust.org.uk/books/children/booklists/241/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Snowman

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/08/14/reception-reading-how-your-child-will-learn-to-read-at-school-and-what-you-can-do-to-help-at-home_n_7331438.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phonics

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_phonics

http://www.ehow.co.uk/info_8599845_advantages-disadvantages-phonetic-approach.html

Tom Transcript (unfinished)

Skinner's positive and negative reinforcement is a key feature throughout this transcript one example is when Tom starts off with referring to his bike as ''the dad bike'' and his Mother responds with the correct version saying ''Dad's bike'' it can be suggested that children that Tom contrasts Chomsky's theory that children do not learn from imitation when Tom responds with ''yeah (.) the dad (.) dad's bike (.) dad's bike mum (.) dad's bike''. Tom can see where his mistake is when he says ''the dad'' but he is quick to correct himself, Tom repeats the word ''dad's bike'' three times to ensure that he gets a clear understanding of it and fully remembers the word.
Tom's mother again continues to correct Tom through negative reinforcement through accuracy saying ''You're not on dad's bike (.) you're on your bike'' it becomes quite clear that Tom know's he is not on his fathers bike when he says ''I am on dad's bike but i not on dad's bike'' suggesting that this is just over extension of the word ''dad's bike'' meaning every bike.
Tom's mother uses negative reinforcement through actions when Tom notices the tape recorder, Tom's mother says ''don't touch (.) don't touch''.
In text B there is evidence of Tom supporting Chomsky's theory of children inheriting the ability to learn human language when he says ''is (.) dat your talker'' the micropause in the sentence can suggest that Tom needed a moment to think of the word used to describe the tape recorder Tom's mother attempts to help Tom learn this phrase when she reformulates what he says ''my talker? yeah (.) that's a tape recorder'' reformulation is method that is used to subtly correct the speaker without bringing any clear attention to the error. Another example of reformulation is when the Mother says ''what you squashed it'' and Tom responds saying ''yeah (.) I squashed it'' this is an example of Tom noticing the change and learning it through imitation, this contrasts Chomsky's theory of children inheriting the ability of learning human language.

Zach Transcripts

Both Zach transcripts contain strong evidence supporting and contrasting Chomsky's theory. Zachy drawing a banana transcript has evidence of Zach speaking grammatically incorrect ''I think I don't'' backing up Chomsky's idea that it's not possible that children have learnt ungrammatical sentences through imitation alone. However in the Zach and the healing robot transcript there is clear evidence of Zach learning through imitation when Zach says ''an I'm sitting here to for waiting to get so it could feel better'' Zach has realised that this sentence is incorrect as he includes ''to get better for it'' Halla responds saying ''waiting for the robot to get better?'' Zach understands the correction replying with ''yeah/yeah'' this can be evidence that contrasts Chomsky's theory of children not learning through imitation. Chomsky's theory says that children are quick to figure out grammatical errors from adults such as when Halla said ''we don't have breakfast?'' and Zach responding with ''we're not gonna have breakfast'' supporting the idea that children do not learn from imitation.

Throughout the Zachy drawing a banana transcript although Halla is the more submissive partner in conversation often responding with questions for Zach to answer, Halla sets the agenda of the conversation as well as topic shifting such as when she asks what Zach is drawing and what he's eaten today. Although Halla sets the agenda she uses more features of being the submissive partner rather than the dominant, Halla would often respond rather than initiate, avoid interrupting by being less assertive and say lots less than Zach. In the Zach and the healing robot transcript Zach controlled the topics and reinforced the required behaviour when Halla asked ''it's a good idea to have some breakfast while we're waiting'' with Zach responding saying ''we don't need breakfast'' Halla would proceed to ask for breakfast whilst Zach would set the agenda to waiting for the robot to heal.









Bibliography:
https://revisionworld.com/a2-level-level-revision/english-language/language-and-power
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooperative_principle
http://www.simplypsychology.org/vygotsky.html
http://www.simplypsychology.org/operant-conditioning.html
https://aggslanguage.wordpress.com/chomsky/
http://www.simplypsychology.org/language.html

Accent and Dialect Revision

Martha's Vineyard theory
- Even if you come from the same place you can speak different due to other reasons
- Covert prestige
- An island lying about 3 miles off New England on the East Coast of the United States of America
-  Population of about 6000
- Over 40,000 visitors
-  2.5 per cent of the population still involved in the fishing industry, most lived in the Chilmark area
- fishermen formed the most close-knit social group on the island and the group opposed to the summer people
-  the younger (31-45 years) speakers a movement seemed to be taking place away from the pronunciations associated with the standard New England norms, and towards a pronunciation associated with conservative and characteristically Vineyard speakers

Giles Matched Guise Techniques
- Experiment to see peoples views and feelings towards certain dialects or accents
- Received pronunciation was the most impressive and influential 
- Whereas Brummie was least inspiring and convincing

Peter Trudgill's Norwich study
- A study done in the 1970's to see how peoples way of speaking varied
- Trudgill studied the final consonant in words such as words like walkING, runnING, 
- He found that in Norwich's pronunciation of these words sounded like they ended with N 'walkin' 'runnin'
-  "Nearly everywhere in the Eng-speaking world we find this alternation between higher-class/formal ng and lower class/informal n. It goes back to the fact that in Old English (and later) there were two forms, a gerund ending in -ing (walking is good for you) and a present participle ending in -end (he was walking). The -end form was the ancestor of -n' and -ing (obviously) of -ing. "
- Trudgill's study found that in all social classes the more careful the speech the more likely they are to say 'walking' rather than 'walkin'
- The proportion of walkin' type forms was higher in lower social classes.
- The nonstandard -in' forms occurred much more often in men's speech than in women's, and this was true for all social classes.

BBC Podcast Task

Small Talk

Michael Rosen, Dr Laura wright and psychotherapist Philippa Perry talk about how meaningless small talk can be such as the subject on weather describing it as unimaginative however arguing that it can be seen as imaginative as they think you are saying you're a person they would like to stay friends with. However they think it is a terrible shame that people belittle it as it is a gateway to bigger talk as both parties are friendly, willing and open to getting deeper into their acquaintance in an exchange of words that may be meaningless however it’s a doorway to conversation on a more specific common ground, they believe that you can get to big talk via ritualised small talk.

Link:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07wby0n

Author- Deborah Tannen
Year Published- 1992
Title- You just don't understand men and women in conversation
City Published- St. Ives
Publisher- Virago
Pages Used- 336

“It is natural in interaction to assume that what you feel in reaction to others is what they wanted to make you feel. If you feel dominated, it’s because someone is dominating you''

Opinionated article

Audience: Guardian readers of comments is free
Stop chatting jargon!
Jargon, the use of specialist words and expressions by a professional group is difficult for others to understand.

Would talking about Laver's phatic tokens in this sort of context be necessary?



Using specialist language in your occupation is necessary as there are people around you who understand the language and the language genuinely tends to be specific to the context. However it immediately becomes unnecessary in everyday situations, using jargon in everyday situations can be seen as the most pretentious thing to do, I mean seriously who in their right mind would like to talk about the synthetic personalisation used in a restaurants menu?


Famous linguist Howard Giles' theory argued that when people interact they adjust their speech, their vocal patterns and their gestures to accommodate others this is known as converging your language and diverging your language being the opposite of converging your language.  Giles also said that people who converge can end up over accommodating it and be seen as condescending.


Bringing specialist language into everyday conversation can make simple conversation difficult for people who are not of the same job field as you, although all the specialist terms used for you may seem understandable other people may find it difficult to understand making it much harder for you to get your point across.

Stereotypes and sexism (gender class work)

Audience: 16 year old students

Sexism in language is the tendency to speak of people as cultural stereotypes of their gender, some people feel insulted by sexist language as it creates an image of society where women have lower social status than men. The English language can be seen to reflect the power that men have historically. Language can also reflect social power by treating words to refer to women as 'marked' where as those that refer to first men are 'unmarked' some examples of marked terms are:
Poet - Poetess
Actor - Actress
Waiter - Waitress
Peoples way of thinking can often be influenced by theories Deborah Tannen's difference theory explores the ideas that males and females engage in conversation differently, Tannen's theory believes that the differences begin at childhood she suggested that there are six main differences these differences are (men - women):
Status vs. Support
Independence vs. intimacy
Advice vs. understanding
Information vs. Feelings
Orders vs. Proposals
Conflict vs. Compromise
These six differences directly support common stereotypes among men and women these stereotypes being women are emotional whilst men are strong.

Transcript

Callum: Junior talk about your job in the co-op




Junior: I work at the cooperative in Bath (.) what else am I suppose to say?


....




Junior: Well I have to (.) when there is a delivery I have to put stock out on the shelves (.) you have to do this thing called stock rotation this is when all the new stock you have to move all the old stuff to the front and all the new stuff to the back to make sure the sell by date doesn't run out before it is sold


In this conversation I did not take control of the conversation as suggested in Zimmerman and wests dominance model, this can be backed up by my tag question in my first bit of speech it could be interpreted as me looking for guidance on what else to say. However once the topic of the conversation was set I began to confidently speak about my job and what I do, when speaking I was being straight to the point informing only about my job and what has to be done,

Still I Rise - Poem by Maya Angelou 1978

You may write me down in history
With your bitter, twisted lies,
You may tread me in the very dirt
But still, like dust, I'll rise.

Does my sassiness upset you? 
Why are you beset with gloom? 
'Cause I walk like I've got oil wells
Pumping in my living room.

Just like moons and like suns,
With the certainty of tides,
Just like hopes springing high,
Still I'll rise.

Did you want to see me broken? 
Bowed head and lowered eyes? 
Shoulders falling down like teardrops.
Weakened by my soulful cries.

Does my haughtiness offend you? 
Don't you take it awful hard
'Cause I laugh like I've got gold mines
Diggin' in my own back yard.

You may shoot me with your words,
You may cut me with your eyes,
You may kill me with your hatefulness,
But still, like air, I'll rise.

Does my sexiness upset you? 
Does it come as a surprise
That I dance like I've got diamonds
At the meeting of my thighs? 

Out of the huts of history's shame
I rise
Up from a past that's rooted in pain
I rise
I'm a black ocean, leaping and wide,
Welling and swelling I bear in the tide.
Leaving behind nights of terror and fear
I rise
Into a daybreak that's wondrously clear
I rise
Bringing the gifts that my ancestors gave,
I am the dream and the hope of the slave.
I rise
I rise
I rise.

Maya Angelou's message in this poem is to stand up with your head held high. The first word 'You' is a self assertive word suggesting that this poem is addressed to others strongly backed up by the date of when the poem was written. In the third stanza Maya Angelou is writing in the future tense to implies that her and all African American women's rise is inevitable. Maya Angelou also says that 'i'm a black ocean, leaping and wide' this verse is a powerful metaphor for Angelou overcoming the oppression of white people in 1978. The use of the repetition of 'I rise' at the end of the poem helps the reader become aware of the main theme of this poem which is Maya Angelou and African American people overcoming the oppression of society in that time and to stand proud.