Robert’s email discussing scope and sequence with his district World Languages representative continues. Has anyone noticed that the guy hasn’t responded yet? He doesn’t respond to Robert until the 17th of these posts. There is a reason for that. I won’t go into it now except to say that this professional district level advisor to WL teachers doesn’t appear to grasp what Robert is saying.
Robert continues:
Now some related observations:
A. Whether one accepts the distinction between learning and acquisition proposed by Krashen or thinks more along the lines of short-term vs long-term memory (Van Patten), the fact remains that varied repetition is necessary for retention.
B. While most language teachers are familiar with the concept of i+1 as a “formula” for language acquisition, the reality in the classroom is that what constitutes i+1 is different for every student. Teachers cannot be so narrow in their focus that they fail to provide i+1 for everyone. Perhaps counter-intuitively (but reflecting real life first language experience), the teacher must cast a net or web of language that is comprehensible so that students are able to catch what is right for them. That is also part of the reason why the teacher cannot shelter grammar but must use the whole language. As Hart Crane puts it, “One must be drenched in words, literally soaked in them, to have the right ones form themselves into the proper pattern at the right moment.”