CALP article
“But it is up to teachers to recognize that children’s existing frames of reference are the primary raw material for new learning, rather than some static predetermined academic language”
The above quote, taken directly from “A culpable CALP: Rethinking the conversational/academic language proficiency distinction in early literacy instruction” by Maren Aukerman, is one that I absolutely agree with. While I was reading this article, I kept thinking to myself how arbitrary the CALP seems. I know it is useful in some respects, as we need some way to determine the language level of english language learners, but it also seems too restrictive. Language is such a broad concept that it is really hard to base someone’s knowledge off of how their language was at one certain point and time. Like the quote says, it is important to look at the child, their experiences, and from where they are coming, and base their language learning off of that, instead of solely on a score. I think it is still important to consider their CALP, just don’t neglect other factors that influence their language learning.
Yeah, I thought CALP was sort of the gold standard for ESL/ELL students after the reading we did on it in Dr. Wheeler’s class; however, after reading this article, I’m beginning to question that assumption. It does seem rather arbitrary, especially due to the fact that young bilingual children’s word-banks often include words of both languages, as the authors point out, while they might not know the English and the Spanish word for each object they encounter. Thus, if we look at each language individually, they might appear to have half the vocabulary they actually do. More importantly, especially at the young ages, is do they have the language to convey their thoughts and comment on their experiences in whatever language or combined language comes easiest to them.