7. What are the three foundational but contrasting theoretical perspectives on learning?

Mitchell et al. (2019) argued that discussions about SLA have always been influenced by broader and more general discussions about human learning. One such discussion is the so-called nature–nurture debate. This debate raises an important question in response to the initial question, how do students learn languages? As Mitchell et al. put it, “[h]ow much of human learning derives from innate predispositions, that is, some form of genetic pre-programming, and how much of it derives from social and cultural influences as we grow up?” (p. 11).

The classic text by Lightbown and Spada (2013) provided an excellent and detailed overview of various ways in which people have theorized and aimed to enhance language learning, whether as L1 (i.e., first language) or L2.

These are the three theoretical perspectives that have informed researchers’ and educationalists’ thinking, not only about language acquisition, but also, more broadly, about the acquisition of any knowledge or skill:

1.                   behaviourism, or, “it’s all about nurture”

2.                   innatism, or, “it’s all about nature”

3.                   interactionism, or, “it’s a bit of both.”

References: 

East, M. (2021). Foundational principles of task-based language teaching (p. 214). Taylor & Francis.

Mitchell, R., Myles, F., & Marsden, E. (2019). Second language learning theories (4th ed.). Routledge.

Lightbown, P., & Spada, N. (2013). How languages are learned (4th ed.). Oxford University Press.