When a teacher shows by example how much can be done with CI, others in the department or district sometimes call in trainers. It becomes a tug of war between those who want to change the program and those who don’t. In the latter category, there is a typical litany of questions they ask. One of our PLC members is being considered to do such a training, but has been asked to answer certain school related curricular questions first. For the benefit of all in our group, it would be nice to get a discussion going here on the PLC to address the concerns listed below by the school, which is at the very beginning of its journey in exploring T/CI.
Feel free to respond at length to any or all of the points with a short phrase or at length. The preliminary comments from the PLC member are in italics below:
- “How would you respond to someone saying that there is ‘no curriculum’ for a CI classroom?”
In the response I’m crafting, I say that high frequency language, in narrow/manageable doses, coupled with the cognates and all the connecting and transition words, IS the curriculum. But they are looking for a more more pre-fabricated road map/security blanket, and I want to be able to answer succinctly and convincingly….
- “Is Martina Bex’s curriculum aligned w/CI, & if so, what are it’s strengths/shortcomings?”
It’s completely unnecessary IMO. So, I’ve been hammering the importance of COMPELLING input, so that MB’s curriculum, since it’s fabricated by the T, is more of a crapshoot on compelling, since it doesn’t necessarily take student ideas and interest/personalization into account. Any angle on her stuff would be greatly appreciated. I do concede that her materials are comprehensified – they are created specifically for novice-intermediate learners, with attention to narrow and high frequency words and reps, with plenty of literacy extensions….I fear that the school won’t hear me out or hire me or transition to CI without an articulated proscribed curriculum to follow…I’ve been explaining our own district WL department transition, but I think they may not to do the deep reflective work necessary for a real revisioning/makeover…nor do they seem interested in emergent lessons…
- “How do we apply data driven decision-making for World Language?” (measurable benchmarks, etc.)
I’m answering that beginning in the middle grades (5th and up) we can use timed and free writes for a quick look at vocabulary acquisition, expansion and usage, as well as videotaped footage of retells, and other conversations…I’m hesitant to include anything about the SOPA (‘normed’ assessment) we did in my school, other than my opinion that an output assessment is a bad fit for an input-based program. I could mention unannounced quizzes, but they I think are looking for something more ‘turn-key…’
- They are also interested in knowing where the kids will be by the end of each grade level – K-12, so I’m trying to explain how it’s not as linear as say, a math class where mastery of one concept allows application of the next…
As an illustration I was considering explaining that when we kickoff TCI instruction across the grades, everyone will be working with much of the same foundational vocabulary at the same time (grades 4 and 9 could all be working with the super 7 or sweet 16!); the differentiation will be in the stories themselves, as well as the complexity of the language as you move up the grades…