Robert made the effort to actually purchase and read the Content-Based Teaching and Learning book, so the least we can do is read this post slowly and reflect on what he says:
When we start talking about method, approach, strategy, etc., we quickly get into a quagmire of conflicting definitions and opinions with often little appeal to anything other than “it works for me in my classroom”. (I think we have seen what happens when we turn the tables and ask the traditionally dominant practitioners to provide research data for their practices. They certainly do not accept their own kinds of arguments as valid when used by someone who practices TPRS/TCI.)
Nonetheless, I think it is helpful for us to explain how we understand certain concepts and ideas. I want to do this for the PLC and have you give me feedback on it; some of this has crystallized as a result of the ACTFL discussions, and that means that at least some good has come from them. Pardon the ramble, I’m using the blog to think out loud.
In Haley and Austin’s book (Content-Based Instruction), they define an Approach as “a set of theoretical principles”. The term “set” implies coherence and not just an accumulation, so I see “Teaching with Comprehensible Input” as an approach. The set of theoretical principles includes the following
1. The single most important element in the acquisition of a language, whether first or second, is “comprehensible input”, defined as “messages containing ideas, advice or information that are intelligible to learners and sufficiently engaging or compelling to pique learners’ interest so that they attend to meaning, thereby acquiring the target language essentially unconsciously.”
2. Conscious attention to the rules of language (i.e. grammar) does not produce fluency in speech or writing, though it may aid in accuracy through the editing function of the brain.
3. Output is not necessary for acquisition, although it may be useful to the learner for prompting further input; testing hypotheses about the target language; expressing ideas, advice, emotions, and information; gaining confidence in use of the language; promoting a sense of belonging to the “club” of speakers of that language; achieving desired ends; and other tasks and useful to the teacher for assessment of acquisition and checking of understanding.
4. Since output is not necessary for acquisition, it should not be forced by the teacher but should proceed naturally from the learner’s desire to communicate and achieve certain goals possible only through the use of the target language.
[I invite comments on other principles that belong in the set of “TCI”.]
A method is a plan for implementing the approach. While one approach may give rise to more than one method, these methods will not differ radically from one another, and the set of possible methods arising from any set of principles will be limited (i.e., no set of principles will give rise to numerous methods). If Teaching with Comprehensible Input is an approach, TPRS is a method arising from it. The constituent parts of TPRS are
1. Establish meaning for new target structures
2. Provide oral/aural comprehensible input using the new target structures, any language required by the interests of the learners, and language already acquired (at least partially) by the learners, being mindful to provide sufficient repetition of language for processing.
3. Provide written/visual comprehensible input using the same parameters
Within this approach (TCI) and method (TPRS) there can be a great deal of variety and variation. Strategies include
1. Story telling and Story asking
2. Listening for comprehension
3. Dictation (in a variety of formats)
4. Reader’s Theatre
5. Look and Discuss
6. Read and Discuss
7. Embedded Reading
8. Movie Talk
[Please add more]
Distinct from but related to the method is the organizing principle for curriculum mapping. While there is some freedom in deciding on an organizing principle, and more than one principle may come into play over the term of a course of study, organizing principles need to align with the approach and method the teacher has chosen to follow. Some organizing principles that align with TCI and TPRS include
1. Student interest (often determined through survey)
2. Highest-frequency words
3. Stories
4. Films
5. Thematic units (as broadly understood; not semantic sets)
[anything else?]
An example of incongruity between the organizing principle and the approach would be to claim to Teach with Comprehensible Input but organize the course according to a grammar syllabus.
Many teachers and educators use the analogy of “choosing the right tool from the toolbox”. This is a useful analogy if we understand the limitations. Unfortunately most teachers use this analogy to mean that they feel free to borrow and use whatever practice or strategy looks inviting to them without regard for the method or approach to which it belongs. If we extend the analogy a bit, they are taking tools from a completely different toolbox. It is like taking tools from a plumber’s toolbox to do surgery. Could there be something useful to the surgeon in the plumber’s toolbox? Potentially (after all, surgeons sometimes use pen cases to do a tracheotomy in extreme situations), but isn’t it much better to use the tools in the surgeon’s toolbox to do the surgeon’s job? Borrowing practices and strategies from another method or approach is similar. Sure, there may be some ability to adapt them, but wouldn’t it be better to use the tools designed for the job? I fear that the “eclectic approach” generally results in a hodgepodge or jumble of quickly successive practices that lack cohesion.