THE CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

The most notable contribution of Vygotsky (1978) in relation to the focus of this study is the role of language in concept formation and development. Vygotsky asserts that there is a dynamic relationship between language and thought. This implies that the concepts that learners have to master cannot be fully realized or understood until they are represented in words (Tao, 1994). Vygotsky further points out that it is through the use of cultural tools of society like language, that the teachers intervene during the process of learning. Vygotsky (p. 81) uses the concept of “Zone of Proximal Development” (ZPD), which refers to the situation when the learner cannot solve a problem alone but can be successful under adult guidance or in collaboration with a more advanced peer so that he acquires and integrates the new knowledge into his existing knowledge. For example, in Physics, a grade 12 learner may have knowledge of simple application of the equations of motion in one dimension like ‘v2 = u2 + 2as’ studied in the previous grades. This implies that the learner can independently solve

simpler calculations that involve equations of linear motion because this is below his/her ZPD. However, more complex Physics tasks involving two-dimensional (2–D) kinematics like ‘x = (2v2sin2Ө)/g’ are above the ZPD and might need assistance from the educator or

another gifted peer member (Vygotsky, 1978). When a Physics educator assists a learner in developing an understanding in the calculations of 2-D projectile motion, he is scaffolding him from not being able to understand and calculate, to being able to understand and calculate. The Physics educator should provide instructional assistance (simplified language) or scaffolding for the learner during the mathematical calculations of 2-D projectile motion. In other words, the Physics educator guides or supports the learner’s understanding by building on this learner’s prior knowledge. This idea is imported to the new South African curriculum document where the educator assumes the position of a facilitator or mediator of

the process of learning. Consequently, the literature reviewed in this study views the teacher as the cornerstone to the use of appropriate language of instruction for learners to understand physics concepts. According to Oyoo (2009, p. 170), this is the teacher’s science classroom language. This becomes the most important resource in the learning process and communicates with the learners using understandable language. It is at this juncture that one may ask: ‘Is the language used by the Physics teacher understandable to the learners?’ As an example, when a physics educator assists a learner in developing an understanding of difficult physics concepts; he/she uses language by scaffolding the learner from a lower level of understanding to a higher level of understanding. This idea is also employed in the new South African curriculum document in which the educator is to assume the position of a facilitator or mediator of the process of learning (CAPS, 2008).

The language of the teacher depends on words which are used to construct knowledge. According to Oyoo (2012, p. 854), this implies that “the key to understanding a ‘subject’ is to understand its language…and what we call a subject is its language”. The way of understanding and knowing cannot be separated from the symbols or words used. Also, Hodson (1999, p. 242) in Oyoo (2012, p. 854) asserts that “whatever is known is inseparable from the …words in which the knowing is codified”. This ultimately leads to the cornerstone of this study, the pragmatic perspective on language by Wickman and Östman (2002), asserting that “the meaning of a word is its use and function in a specific activity” (Oyoo, 2010, p. 204). Assuming the Vygotskian stance, any learner with poor language skills will be handicapped in concept development and will suffer from misinterpretation of words (Tao, 1994).

The teacher would then be in a position to easily explain the meanings of words that assume new meanings in the Physics context using the learners’ native language. This is especially argued based on the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis about language where it is assumed that one’s thoughts and behaviour are determined or influenced by the language and culture. The language one speaks determines the world around him/her (Orwell, 1948). This implies that the learner brings into the classroom what he/she has already acquired in the outside world. The learner will then begin a journey of learning science by comparing what he knows with the new science classroom language.

It was mentioned earlier in this chapter that the educator’s classroom talk is important in achieving meaningful learning in the science classroom. Consequently, the use of language

cannot be avoided in effective teaching (Oyoo, 2010). According to Matthews (1998, p. 123), educators try by all means possible to explicitly explain ‘concepts and operations’ by the use of a variety of linguistic approaches like metaphors, demonstrations and debates. As a result, the educator talk or educator language may include the language used in the science text books as resources and this is an important source of knowledge for the learner. The science teacher’s classroom language was classified earlier as comprising of the technical component and the non-technical component. According to Oyoo (2009, p. 171), it follows that the learners’ understanding of the meanings of all words in this language “when used as science words…in the science context would enhance their understanding or internalisation of the concepts taught”. The correct use of this language in the learning process is very important because the meanings of everyday words when used in the science context may be a source of difficulties to learners in learning science.

The literature reviewed in this section views the teacher as the cornerstone to the use of appropriate language of instruction for learners to understand physics concepts. According to Oyoo (2009, p. 170), this is the teacher’s science classroom language. This becomes the most important resource in the learning process and needs to communicate with the learners using understandable language. This means that the language used by the physics teacher should be understandable to all the learners. This is guided by the third research question of this study:

Do the teachers’ explanations influence the learners’ understanding of some everyday words as used in the Physics context? In chapter 1, it was mentioned that the teachers’ PCK

involves the teacher’s need to understand that teaching is not about delivery of content knowledge only but that it is concerned with acquiring improved skills of helping the learners. One of these skills is to use the language of teaching and learning in a correct way in order to assist the learners.

2.7. CHAPTER SUMMARY

In this chapter, the researcher briefly reviewed the language problem and other language issues within the body of knowledge in literature. The literature reviewed has shown that there is indeed a problem with the science classroom language and that the difficulties the learners encounter are independent of their proficiency in the language of instruction.The conceptual frame work guiding this study was also presented. The next chapter will now explore the research design and methodology of this study.