The traditional teachers who don’t get comprehensible input have been waging a kind of battle for more than a decade now in Denver Public Schools, where ten years ago only a few voices aligned with Diana Noonan and Krashen but, as Diana persevered and as new standards were written and as Krashen’s research became more known, things turned.
A conversation recently happened between Diana and one of these tradtional teachers, who strongly opposes in a vocal way the new ways of teaching that we represent. The conversation would be funny if it weren’t so true. When reading an appendix to the Colorado LEAP document that is based on the ACTFL text below, this person asked Diana if it was written by Blaine Ray. Of course, it was from the ACTFL document.
As I say, this is too tragic for this teacher’s students to be laughed at. Here is a teaching professional who, when reading the most crucial wording in a position statement written by a national parent organization for teaching professionals, thought it was written by Blaine Ray, and even voiced his thoughts in a sarcastic way to Diana. It is little things like this which make me think we have reached the tipping point on this issue in Denver Public Schools.
Here is the ACTFL document that was not written by Blaine Ray. A close reading of it will reveal that we are truly on the right track, excepting the asterisk:
Use of the Target Language in the Classroom
Members-Only > ACTFL Position Statements
Position Statement on Use of the Target Language in the Classroom
Research indicates that effective language instruction must provide significant levels of meaningful communication* and interactive feedback in the target language in order for students to develop language and cultural proficiency. The pivotal role of target-language interaction in language learning is emphasized in the K-16 Standards for Foreign Language Learning in the 21st Century. ACTFL therefore recommends that language educators and their students use the target language as exclusively as possible (90% plus) at all levels of instruction during instructional time and, when feasible, beyond the classroom. In classrooms that feature maximum target-language use, instructors use a variety of strategies to facilitate comprehension and support meaning making. For example, they:
1. provide comprehensible input that is directed toward communicative goals;
2. make meaning clear through body language, gestures, and visual support;
3. conduct comprehension checks to ensure understanding;
4. negotiate meaning with students and encourage negotiation among students;
5. elicit talk that increases in fluency, accuracy, and complexity over time;
6. encourage self-expression and spontaneous use of language;
7. teach students strategies for requesting clarification and assistance when faced with comprehension difficulties; and
8. offer feedback to assist and improve students’ ability to interact orally in the target language.
*Communication for a classical language refers to an emphasis on reading ability and for American Sign Language (ASL) to signed communicative ability.
Approved by the ACTFL Board of Directors 5-22-10