Sociocultural Theory and SLA

Mlanie Lawlor
100083925

EDUC 4863 Second Language Acquisition

09/12/13

Introduction
Sociocultural Theory was first proposed by Lev Vygotsky as a response to the commonly
accepted behaviourism theory at the time. (Scott & Palincsar, 2006) Vygotsky proposed
the idea that it is not what happens solely inside ones mind that stimulates learning, but
it is the social interaction that a learner experiences that is the causative force in language
acquisition, and that all of learning is seen as essentially a social process which is
grounded in sociocultural setting. (Saville-Troike, 2006) The whole focus, then, is not
on the individual but how the individual participates in social interactions, which are set
in a cultural setting, influencing development.
Vygotsky (1978) proposed the idea of an area in which learning occurs, and he named it
the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD). This area would have two bounds, the lower
and the upper, being the actual learner level and the learners potential level, respectively.
The actual level is that a learner could do individually, or alone, and the potential level is
that which a learner could accomplish with assistance. According to Sociocultural
Theory, mental functionings that are beyond an individuals current level must be
performed in collaboration with other people before they are achieved independently.
(Saville-Troike, 2006)
Observable Pheomenon in SLA
1) SLA is Systematic
The idea of a ZPD shows that there is some systematicity or progress through the
language learning in Sociocultural Theory. S-C Theory suggests that no matter a learners
L1, the process of development from actual to potential is consistent. We can predict that
if placed with an expert, or with peers, a learner will progress in his learning through
interaction and collaboration. The idea of an area of development implies that there is a
natural progression that occurs when a learner is assisted.
In addition to the concept of the ZPD as it relates to the systematicity of SLA, Vygotsky
also proposed the idea of scaffolding, the actual term then coined by Wood et al. (1976)
to describe the support a mother provides while helping her young in building a pyramid
from a set of wooden blocks. (Wells, 1999). Scaffolding, in the context of the ZPD, is a
metaphor for the assistance provided by an expert or by peers to the learner to perform a
specific task. (Saville-Troike, 2006) When we imagine a pyramid, we must start from the
bottom and work our way up, which is also how we would set up scaffolding for painting
our house. The same idea applies to SLA, where we must build up a learners knowledge
from the bottom to the top. This also justifies the notion of a predictable progress of
learning. Therefore, the Sociocultural Theory does account for the fact that SLA is
systematic.
5) SLA Requires Input

As Sociocultural Theory is concerned primarily with the social contexts and interactions
of learners and how those learners assist in SLA, it seems quite obvious that this theory
accounts for the fact that SLA requires input. In this situation, we can consider input to be
not only the conversation and oral interaction from others in a social situation, but we can
also consider written directions and activities, guidance from teachers, classmates, etc. as
well as the social context itself as input. In our textbook, on page 118, Saville-Troike
talks about how commonality in cultural situations can aid in understanding and
scaffolding. In fact, she explains that a lack of linguistic knowledge can be aided with an
understanding of cultural similarities, and further, communicative events cannot be
completed without a common language in the absence of familiar context and props, or
where nonpredictable information needs to be conveyed (Saville-Troike, 2006) This
shows that SLA does indeed require input, whether in the form of conversation, written
guidance, or cultural similarities.
7) Effects of Instruction are Limited for SLA
Saville-Troike, on page 116, points out two distinct challenges to Sociocultural Theory if
we are to believe that social interaction is the causative force driving SLA. She points
out, Some individuals engage in extensive interaction with speakers of another language
without learning that language to any significant degree. (Saville-Troike, 2006) With
regards to this limitation, if we accept that there needs to be a commonality in cultural
contexts, we can assume that the absence of familiar contexts and props could be a factor
that would limit instruction in a social setting. Therefore, a learner could spend a fair
amount of time in a social setting with native speakers of the language and not learn
anything, if the cultural context were so foreign or absent as to not provide any
scaffolding for understanding.
Critique
In my opinion, Sociocultural Theory is an excellent theory with regards to SLA as I am a
firm believer of its methods, and I have personally seen the positive results this approach
has on second language learning. During the spring, I teach French as a second language
at the 5-week immersion program at the University of Sainte-Anne in Church Point,
Nova Scotia. During these 5 weeks, learners are not to speak in English at any point, nor
may they watch TV in English or listen to music with English lyrics. Essentially every
aspect of life for five weeks is done in the second language. Jean Douglas, director of the
immersion program and its creator, once told me that yes, the students would learn in my
classroom, however 75% of the language learning would be done outside of class, in the
common rooms, in the cafeteria, on the softball pitch, and at the local liquor store, just to
name a few. Whether this statement was statistically accurate or not, he was right in
saying that most of the learning done during the five weeks was happening outside the
classroom, through the interactions learners were having with one another and also with
the many teachers, facilitators, and native speakers who surrounded them. It was evident
that these learners were achieving leaps and bounds more than what they would be able
to do on their own, or in a formal individualized classroom setting. I even had a student
comment that she had learned more in my class and through the program in five weeks

than she had during her whole undergrad, during which she majored in French. The idea
of collaboration, scaffolding, and guided learning is an effective strategy in second
language learning, especially for those who are more socially inclined and who are
motivated to learn.
That being said, there are some challenges to Sociocultural Theory, as pointed out by
Saville-Troike. In addition to the challenge mentioned above with regards to instruction
in SLA being limited, Saville-Troike also points out that some learners can achieve an
advanced level of L2 without having interpersonal communication or opportunities to
negotiate meaning with others. (2006) Although interpersonal interaction helps learning,
in some cases, it is not imperative and learners are able to develop their language
competencies on their own. That being said, perhaps we could then consider textbooks
and inner speech as the necessary scaffolding for this type of learning. (Saville-Troike,
2006)
Example in Research
The article Interlanguage pragmatics in the zone of proximal development by Ohta, 2005,
discusses a many examples of research done using ideas of Sociocultural Theory, if not
explicitly stated at the time. Throughout this article, Ohta examines some previous
research on pragmatics and seems to imply that clearly defining and including
interpersonal constructs as well as the zone of proximal development could improve upon
these experiments.
For example, Ohta examines an investigation done by Satomi Takahashi (2001) on the
effects of explicit versus implicit instruction on learners use of biclausal request forms
in English (Ohta, 2005) In her observations, Ohta concluded that the results of
Takahashis investigation showed the importance of a teachers expertise and that a
lecture given by a teacher could be used as scaffolding, thus going along with the idea of
a ZPD. However, in this investigation, students were not given the opportunity to work
collaboratively on their tasks without the teacher, or expert. Therefore, Ohta questions
whether an opportunity for collaboration would show higher results than working
individually. Perhaps Ohta suggests that if Takahashi would have clearly defined the
ZPD and used sociocultural theory as part of his investigation, then results would have
been different.
According to Ohta, because the ZPD is intrinsically relevant to design and effectiveness,
it is unavoidable in human learning situations and thus cannot be left out, nomatter the
investigation. She goes on to say that in terms of research methodology, methods, which
are sensitive to classroom and interactional processes, are needed. Examples of these
would be discourse analysis, stimulated recall, and collection of students written
production and classroom materials. (Ohta, 2005)
Classroom Implications

In addition to the situation I had mentioned above with regards to the five-week
immersion program at the University of Sainte Anne, there are other classroom
implications for those who are believers of the Sociocultural Theory. If we believe that
learning happens when collaboration, negotiation, and interaction happen, then we will
try to implicate these practices into our teaching methods and practices. The goal, then, is
create lessons that support students to engage in activities, talk, and use tools that are
consistent with the practices of the community around them. These ideas are indeed
consistent with inquiry-based learning, where students and teachers are co-inquirers and
where teachers are mediating among students personal meanings, which emerge from
the collaborative and collective thinking and talk of the students, and the culturally
established meaning of the wider society. (Scott & Palincsar, 2006) Indeed, it seems that
any lesson plan that allots time for collaboration, either with the expert, with peers, or
with community follows the ideas of the S-C Theory.

Lantolf, J.P. (1994) Sociocultural Theory and Second Language Learning: Introduction to the Special
Issue. In: The Modern Language Journal, 78, iv, 418-420
Ohta, A.S., 2005. Interlanguage pragmatics in the zone of proximal development. System 33 503-517
Takahashi, S. 2001. The role of input enhancement in developing pragmatic competence. In: Rose,
K.R.G. Kasper, G. (Eds), Pragmatics in Language Teaching, Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, 171-199
Saville-Troike, 2006, Introducing Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, 111-119
Scott, S. & Palincsar, A. (2006) Sociocultural Theory. The Gale Group. www.education.com.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1978) Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. M. Cole,
V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, &E. Souberman (Eds.) Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
Wells, G. (1999) Using L1 to Master L2: A Response to Anton and DiCamillas Socio-Cognitive
Functions of L1 Collaborative Interaction in the L2 Classoom In: The Modern Language Journal,
83, ii 248-254
Wood, D., Bruner, J.S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem-solving. In: Journal of Child
Psychology and Child Psychiatry, 17, 89-100