In this article, they discuss the need for an integrated theory. They start by addressing the fact that no theory includes all aspects of SLA. They say that new technology hasn't been addressed and that we could use new technology to re-evaluate SLA. They propose that we research SLA again and come up with an integrated theory.
I really liked this article. I hate when people try to make you choose a theory. If I had to make a theory of my own, I would have to include aspects of many different theories. This is, in a way, what I think they are suggesting. Why do we need to stick with the old theories? Why not just use them and new research/technology to come up with a new theory that integrates all of the aspects of language. I also see the need for this new theory to be completely flexible. After all, that is a major problem of some of the other theories we have studied in this class. Things change and so it is necessary for theory to change as well. I think the argument for an integrated theory is very valuable. However, at the same time, I can also see that there may not be such a strong need for a new theory as long as we use the integrated parts of old theories to make a new practice. Practice is by far more important than theory, in my opinion.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I agree, I like the fact that Hatch began to talk about integrating theories. Although it seemed as if right after he talked about integrating theories, he focused solely on AI and cognitive processing theories. If he was going to really integrate theories, why didn't he talk about communicative competence, socio-cultural factors, cross-linguistic factors/transfer, etc. etc.? Perhaps he was talking a talk, but not ready to walk the walk. Or maybe I just got bogged down with all that AI stuff.
great dialogue
Post a Comment