George Essay

YOUNG READERS SHOULD BE CORRECTED WHENEVER THEY MAKE A MISTAKE.

The process in which children learn to read is one that is considered to be vital for their further understanding of language, however there are different approaches in which children learn to read. One of the main obstacles that children encounter when they are learning to read are miscues, which often produces mistakes in children’s reading. One of the most foremost theories surrounding children’s cognitive development is that of Skinner’s operant conditioning, who theorises that children learn through positive or negative reinforcement. Throughout the text given, we can implement Skinner’s theory within the mother’s language, who uses both positive and negative reinforcement when correcting with George. For instance, the mother’s first utterance within the text is ‘yeah that’s right’, by praising George he is able to understand that he communicated the clause correctly. Yet later on in the conversation, the mother uses negative reinforcement with the response ‘nooo’, however what is most interesting about the response is the mitigation of ‘no’. If the mother were to directly respond with ‘no’, the child may become upset and unmotivated to read, perhaps suggesting that the choice of language by a caregiver is also vital when learning to read. This may suggest that the caregiver must be subtle in their language when correcting the child to allow them to want to continue. George then goes onto say ‘no we need’, here it is shown that George understands that he made a mistake and corrects himself to form the correct word. This reinforces the idea that children should be corrected when making a mistake, but also should be praised when they articulate or pronounce correctly.

Throughout the transcript, George’s mother frequently asks open questions, perhaps this could be to check that George is actually understanding what is happening and if he is understanding the book. This has some relevance to the bottom up theory, which shows that children decode the book, however they may not be able to actually understand what is going on. For instance, within the interrogative clause ‘whats happening’, this interrogative allows George to reflect back on what he has read and whether he has any connection with it. Here we can apply an Vygotskyan approach, with the mother using questions as a form of scaffolding to allow George to fully understand what is going on. It could be said that instead of young readers being corrected when making a mistake, they could actually be asked probing questions. However, the word that George has the most confusion with is ‘sandbags’, perhaps because the graphemes ‘b’ and ‘d’ are slightly similar visually. However, instead of the mother responding with ‘yes’ or ‘no’ responses, she instead uses scaffolding to allow George to articulate the word. By using the recursion of the concrete noun ‘sandbags’ and splitting the word into their separate morphemes, it allows George to be able to understand each section of the word. It could be debated that instead of actually ‘correcting’ the child, that instead the caregiver should use repetition to allow the child to understand and articulate the word correctly. It could be mentioned that negative reinforcement may have a bad impact on the child, discouraging him from reading further in the fear of being ‘told off’.

What makes reading so hard for children are the miscues within the text, however it is the ability for children to tackle these miscues to allow them to become competent readers. For instance, within the conversation George mistakes one word for another just by looking at the first few graphemes and guessing the rest of the word; word guessing errors. Later on in the conversation, George claims that ‘Mum looked upstairs’ yet the correct word in the clause was ‘upset.’ As well as this, text image cohesion in the book is used to show the mother walking up the stairs, therefore George intuitively deciphered that the two graphemes ‘up’ and the picture were to make the concrete noun ‘stairs’. Although George has made a ‘mistake’ here, it could be said that he is thinking imaginatively and is using the images as a tool for understanding the text, which can apply to Halliday’s heuristic language as George is thinking intuitively. Still, George’s mother corrects George ‘no (.) it looks like upstairs doesn’t it’, and through the process of correcting George, he is then able to recognise that he misinterpreted the word. Here it shows that correction is vital for children to be able to learn when they have made a mistake, otherwise they may be completely unaware of the mistake.

In conclusion, it is clear that without being informed that they have made a mistake, they may never be aware that they have made a mistake. The idea of positive and negative reinforcement is also prominent within the conversation, and this is what makes George to be able to recognise the mistakes he has made. However, instead of actually correcting the child, it could be debated that the caregiver could take on a phonic approach to teaching children specific words, as this will ensure that the child can fully articulate and understand the word. Whereas if the child was corrected without them being able to have another chance at articulating the word, then they may not be able to improve this when reading in the future. Perhaps it could be argued that scaffolding is a much easier way to allow the children to develop, as it could be mentioned that although negative reinforcement is a direct way of showing children that they have made a mistake, it could potentially dishearten the child and hinder their relationship with reading.