Unlock with PatreonThe Problem with CI
To view this content, you must be a member of Ben’s Patreon at $10 or more Unlock with PatreonAlready a qualifying Patreon member? Refresh to
A Trend Toward More Output
Share:
Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
LinkedIn
Ben Slavic
Get The Latest Updates
Subscribe to Our Mailing List
No spam, notifications only about new products, updates.
Related Posts
CI and the Research (cont.)
To view this content, you must be a member of Ben’s Patreon at $10 or more Unlock with PatreonAlready a qualifying Patreon member? Refresh to
Research Question
To view this content, you must be a member of Ben’s Patreon at $10 or more Unlock with PatreonAlready a qualifying Patreon member? Refresh to
We Have the Research
To view this content, you must be a member of Ben’s Patreon at $10 or more Unlock with PatreonAlready a qualifying Patreon member? Refresh to
44 thoughts on “A Trend Toward More Output”
TPRS students have always been MEANT to speak….interactively!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! But because the instruction of the method has had such a focus on input, we have mistakenly created the idea….and the practice….that students do not say anything. From the beginning our goal should be for students to produce as much as they are comfortable naturally producing in a interactive setting. If yes/no is where they are at, then so be it. It has never been our job to discourage students from producing naturally.
I think that in trying to understand the new paradigm, many teachers thought that we should not ask students to produce for X amount of time….in any way….and then…boom….language would “fall out of their mouths.”
That can happen, but usually doesn’t on a large scale.
That is how folks who grew up in a home where parents spoke a language other than English can understand but believe that they cannot produce. They have never been involved interactively using the language. They have been “language bystanders.” Language bystanders generally do not produce.
If we do not address this issue, “CI” classrooms will become full of language bystanders. Checking for understanding IS key, but checking for understand, asking for details, looking for opinions, requesting new information etc. by interacting with students in familiar language is THE key.
I love that we are examining this issue. It will help present teachers, and future teachers, using this approach.
with love,
Laurie
This is something I’m doing a lot of thinking about. My present situation is much different from that of the classroom teacher I used to be. Most of my lessons are one on one, or maximum four students at a time. So my comprehensible input automatically becomes a conversation between me and my student. As long as I make them comfortable, the affective filter is down and we can have some good exchanges.
I encounter two problems. One is that some of my students have suffered so much in the traditional classroom that they have their own terrifying grammar Nazi in their minds that interferes whenever they stop thinking about content and start wondering How to say what they want to say. They actually have some good acquired language, but when they start worrying about it, it gets all messed up. They read and understand a passage, then when they start looking at it, start saying they don’t know the words, the very words that they just decoded correctly, using context.
The other problem is that their expectations are not realistic. They think they should be fluent speakers after a dozen lessons. They are like people who spend an hour jogging around the park once a week and expect to be able to run a marathon.
I’m fresh from our state Russian language competition. Kids have to recite a poem, read a text and answer questions, and talk about cultural areas. The tasks are reasonable, not over kids’ heads, but students who are taught through CI are usually the most successful ones, even though every year I feel guilty pressing the kids to practice output for this competition.
I’ve told you about how I got kids to put together powerpoints, finding information in Russian that they understood about topics and felt they could use to communicate information. My beginners taught one another cultural information in small groups, since I didn’t want to march the whole class through it, and they liked the change from me as “stage on sage.” We spent about two weeks learning the information; it was no longer about the language, but the content. At the higher levels, kids were using the same topics, but having learned them more deeply.
I overheard one of my kids talking about why he’d chosen his poem. It seems that the judge questioned him as to his choice. She was charmed, she said later, to hear a high school athlete swoon over a Russian poet. Many of the 38 judges at the event approached me to tell me that my kids were successful because they connected with the content they’d learned.
Then they all ask how I do “it.” I explain that Ben Slavic started me on a journey seven years ago and that I am grateful for every moment of exploration. I share information. They ask why every teacher doesn’t do it this way.
I do think that we need to keep looking at how to get kids talking, so that they’re aware of their proficiency and develop speaking. How many of us do the group story presentations that Susie taught us? I actually count sentences as part of individual grades during those presentations. It’s really the only time I pressure kids into talking during the year, and it’s not frequent. I don’t do nearly enough “tell your hand,” but I do use Betsy’s “blind retells.” Laurie and I came up with a way of retelling an embedded reading at different levels of proficiency one year; I haven’t used that in a while but need to trot it out again.
On the other hand, I don’t like to push reluctant speakers. One of my kids wouldn’t talk for almost three years. He ended up with a bronze medal yesterday, because Russian’s finally coming out. I’m not sure what would have happened to him in a school where there was more than one Russian teacher! I’m so proud of him for stepping up now, in his third year of study.
Michele,
Can you explain the group story presentations?
I’ll try to get it right: Once the class has worked its way through a story, and I’m certain that we’ve played with it sufficiently, I hand out white boards to groups of three or four. I might put structures they must include in the story on the board, or I might say that they must use dialogue, or (in more advanced classes) I might require a specific grammatical form, disguised as a structure. Or not.
I also set a required minimum “chunks” of language, rather than sentences, that each student must contribute when speaking. That’s because the kids who risk more complicated sentences need credit for that. Since I have three levels in every group, I also set a required minimum per level. They’re allowed to exceed, of course. If they do the minimum, and the group includes the structures, they get the B.
The class is to retell the class story with tweaks. They may change one piece or many. They have a limited time (Susie gave them ten minutes; I end up giving them 12-13) to draw a storyboard. At five minutes in, I tell them they should start practicing. That gets the perfectionist artists to speed up. They aren’t allowed to use letters, unless it’s to label a store, for example, with the name. They aren’t allowed to use notes.
They get up in front of the group and tell their story as a group. When they’re done, they bow or curtsy to applause, and I tell the class everything they did well. (I find something about each kid and try to find something about the group. It’s like Laurie’s version of coaching. It raises the bar for the next groups, and makes kids realize I will never let them down in front of the group.)
Susie taught me to listen carefully as I circulate through the groups in preparation. The weakest group goes first, and the strongest one goes last. That way we aren’t setting anyone up for an act that’s hard to follow.
It occurs to me that one class has been begging to do this. I’ll try filming this week.
Of course we want our Ss to speak, but I am cautious about rushing the process, applying pressure/expectation esp at the novice level. I feel awful when my Ss want to provide a detail and/or cannot share their excitement in the TL during a session, and I feel downright guilty when I ‘shut them down.’ So I’m not against output, but we must temper our enthusiasm with realistic expectations. Occasionally we get glimpses of their potential- when a volunteer pulls out a monster retell or answer…and we can extrapolate the power of what we’re doing. The fast processor/speakers with low filters will not be deterred; but I worry about the rest of the kids…
“invite lots of output from the kids” – that’s what we should do. We encourage and we create the space for output to happen.
“The strongest benefits of TPRS over traditional teaching are on speaking . . .” – Lichtman from the handout of comparative studies. TCI-taught kids are much more confident and willing to speak L2.
And I think it’s okay to occasionally ask students to interact with each other in L2. But I don’t include activities that require everyone to output (more than 1-word answers) in front of the class. And it’s okay to assess individual speaking, including in level 1. A kid who has received more CI will have more fluent and proficient output!
While CI is all that is necessary to acquire, kids in a TPRS class are FAR FROM silent and NOT only getting input.
Haven’t posted in a while… Still adjusting to parenthood.
I learned Spanish largely in a TPRS classroom in the early 2000s. We read lots of stories (Anyone remember the stories in Dime: dos?) and had oral “tests” which were just retells using only pictures we had drawn as notes. We had practiced some target structures using TPR, seen and heard the language vocab in various contexts, etc. In other words, we were set up to successfully complete the desired task, and the “tests” were easy as a result. It gave such confidence to be able to produce something in Spanish.
Looking back, I know it was the CI that was the root of acquisition (and my amazing teacher provided LOTS of CI). But the output was what let me monitor the progress I was making.
Enjoy the adjustment…it is all about adjustment from here on out.
Thanks for your TPRS student perspective. What was the adjustment like at the university level (I am assuming it was not TPRS there)?
Univerity Spanish was my easiest subject because almost everything they were teaching (very communicative and grammar heavy) I had already been exposed to in my CI highschool classroom.
Andrew, you need to shout that to every HS !
So, did your college Spanish experience put a heavy stress on grammatical accuracy in class and on tests?
And if they did, you felt prepared and able to easily learn any grammatical language and rules you may not have been ever explicitly taught?
The college classes were heavily based in the communicative approach. The tests were largely grammar focused, but they were easy if you focused on meaning and not form.
My HS class focused a lot on oral input. I remember that my teacher would tell us lots of stories (short stories, anecdotes about his life, etc.). I felt a little unprepared for the readings in college, but I only took three years in HS, two of which were an older version of TPRS.
When I read Blaine’s book I remember thinking over and over again… Oh so THIS is where my teacher got that great idea.
Thanks for sharing this Andrew. I did not see this spelled out as clearly on your website.
Are there others who have gone into language teaching via TPRS language learning?
So timely! My Spanish 4/5 class has just had a week full of grammar lessons. Their first “true” grammar. We addressed regular and irregular present tense, reflexive verbs, “shoe” verbs, positive informal commands (regular and irregular). Then they had two days in the computer lab ‘playing” with a number of online practice programs and games. It’s part of our curriculum since 4/5 is considered a “College Prep” class. (we don’t offer college credit ) and only 1 student chose the independent study AP option. The only thing that they had a problem with was working with the new verbs that are not high frequency: ie to comb
Next week is positive Ud. commands, negative tu and Ud commands and the subjunctive. :o) It will be easier for them than this week was.
with love,
Laurie
Another output activity could be Sentence Frames. Depending on how we frame it, we could pick the one structure and a few details and then prompt them to fill in the blanks to create a ton of mini stories. Collect the stories and then do a ton of reading activities with the stories.
For example, here’s one in English.
One Day (structure) __________ and I were going to ___________ in order to _________ the ________. When we arrived there (structure), We saw __________ people eating ___________. One of the people said that he (structure) was eating __________. Terrified by this (structured) We ___________ him.
This gives them reading and output AND creates readings for the entire week! Then with the readings we can do a listen and draw or read and discuss or some silent reading with a comprehension quiz. Endless possiblities.
Another idea that we could do to help lower levels is to give them a sheet with a list of nouns/verbs/adjectives that fill the blanks accurately and then they can choose from that list. Make the list outrageous or throw in some high frequency stuff. If we make a number of lists with possibilities, students will have choice, yet it will be limited. I’ll see if I can mock up an idea in Latin and send it in. It could be really great, especially for lower levels because they are producing yet in controlled environment.
Printing this out right now, just what we are working on. Thanks, Jeffrey!
My guideline is super simple and flexible. My PQA is basically, ask the class members the questions I ask the actors. If a spark flies, I’ll interrupt a story and run with it.
For me, the bottom line will ALWAYS be QUALITY input. So, I just use my superstars– today Fahim and I discussed his Tim Horton’s mollete for 3 min, and then Jasmin and I discussed her Starbucks coffee for 3 min– for modeling good output. The slower/weaker ones get asked the same questions, and all I expect is a y/n or one-word answer.
So, if they *want* to talk– at length– they can. My 2s can now do stuff like diss each other (“Fahim, tú eres estúpido. — No, Jasmin, tú eres fea.” is what they sometimes say). But I have an automatic “no” gut reaction when I hear a teacher say “I want them to talk more.” I take the looooooong view: if they can talk, they will, and in any case, input will serve them well in the long run. When they getnto Paris or México or college, it will all be wired in, and it will kick in.
Chris and Jeffery can you both email me at benslavic@yahoo.com permission to add parts of the above comments to my book?
Sure thing. I’m glad that I could contribute.
Jeff
Go for it– just attribute it to me
New book? When? When? 🙂
Ben you need an editor? ???? heh heh
Chris if you got a hold of it I would have to revise in favor of accuracy and I’ve never let that stop me before. Marc after I wrote Stepping Stones I realized that so much good stuff has been created since then, right here on the blog and in our classrooms over the past two years especially, that I wanted to try to get it all down in one place.
Now I kind of I wish I hadn’t because this new book – The Big CI Book, A Survival Guide for Foreign Language Teachers – has totally kicked my butt. I’ve averaged at least five hours a day for the past year and a half on this bad boy, with days off for good behavior. That’s what retirement does – creates more work for you.
But it’s done. The stuff from Chris and Jeff above are the very last things I’m putting in there until the next cool new idea. It’s a 403 page monster and I kept new people at the forefront of my mind when I wrote it.
It’s got everything in it. But if you’ve been reading here you don’t need it because it’s really all the best stuff from here and also some updated stuff from TPRS in a Year! and Stepping Stones to Stories! (nothing was borrowed from PQA in a Wink! which is kind of a stand alone book). It’s the book I would have wanted when I first started teaching and the book I would want when I teach again, because everything is at my fingertips and since I am an insecure person I need that instant availability of information. There is also a section with those magic boxes that Diane thought of for ease of reference in class. (She just spent twelve days in Thailand if you have been wondering where she was lately.)
Below is the Table of Contents, and you will see much of the group’s voice in it. One important point on copyright. At this point I think I have permission from everyone I drew ideas from at this point but if you see in the contents anything you did and I haven’t yet asked permission pls. send it to me so I don’t have to take that part out. I only chose to include the very best stuff from this blog and from my classroom over the past two years.
Those who have Stepping Stones to Stories! can see a shadow of that book in it but this is just so much bigger and badder it’s really a kind of Stepping Stones on steroids for those who want to consume the hard stuff. Stepping Stones might be a little Bichon Frise pre-requisite to this junk yard dog.
Can you tell I’m proud of it? I’m so proud of it that I don’t mind having to walk around with welts all over my body from the way it bitch slapped me for the past two years.
Table of Contents
Introduction 6
Overview 8
The Language is the Curriculum 11
Acknowledgements 12
Section 1 – Fifteen Skills 13
Skill #1: Circling 13
Skill #2: SLOW 28
Skill #3: Staying in Bounds 39
Skill #4: PQA 44
Skill #5: Checking for Understanding/Choral Responses 65
Skill #6: Point and Pause 70
Skill #7: Teaching to the Eyes 72
Skill #8: The Barometer Student 73
Skill #9: TPR 73
Skill #10: Pop Up Grammar 75
Skill #11: Recycling 77
Skill #12: Almost! 77
Skill #13: Comparing Colors 78
Skill #14: TPR the Prepositions 79
Skill #15: Class, A Secret! 82
Section 2 – Twenty-Six Strategies 83
Strategy #1: Word Associations 83
Strategy #2: Circling with Balls 89
Strategy #3: One Word Images 102
Strategy #4: Word Chunk Team Game 106
Strategy #5: Dictée 109
Strategy #6: Look and Discuss 111
Strategy #7: Verb Slam Activity 118
Strategy #8: Super Mini Stories 120
Strategy #9: Textivate 138
Strategy #10: Writing Strategies 141
Strategy #11: Sentences Frames 148
Strategy #12: Interactive Whiteboards 153
Strategy #13: Three Ring Circus 155
Strategy #14: Jobs for Kids 156
Strategy #15: Reading Strategies 161
Strategy #16: Listen and Draw 169
Strategy #17: MovieTalk 172
Strategy #18: The Special Chair/La Silla Especial 179
Strategy #19: Star of the Week 184
Strategy #20: Animal Parade 192
Strategy #21: Visual PQA 199
Strategy #22: The Class Poem 227
Strategy #23: Running/Drawing Dictation 230
Strategy #24: Tric a Quiz 231
Strategy #25: Three Locations 233
Strategy #26: Teaching Greetings 234
Review of the Strategies 237
Section 3 – Eight Classroom Management Tools 240
Classroom Management Tool #1: The Classroom Rules 240
Classroom Management Tool #2: The Ten Minute Deal 248
Classroom Management Tool #3: Starting Class on Time 251
Classroom Management Tool #4: Addressing Student Apathy 257
Classroom Management Tool #5: Brain Breaks 269
Classroom Management Tool #6: Personalization via Naming 272
Classroom Management Tool #7: What’s Your Name? 274
Classroom Management Tool #8: The In-Class Phone Call 275
Section 4 – Three Assessment Tools 277
Assessment Tool #1: Assessment using Quick Quizzes 277
Assessment Tool #2: Assessment using jGR/ISR 282
Assessment Tool #3: Comprehension Checks 294
Section 5 – Four Bail Out Moves 295
Bail Out Activity #1: Dictée 295
Bail Out Activity #2: Math Brakes 296
Bail Out Activity #3: Walk-in 298
Bail Out Activity #4: How is that spelled? 302
Section 6 – Krashen’s Five Hypotheses 303
Hypothesis #1: The Input Hypothesis 303
Hypothesis #2: The Acquisition–Learning Hypothesis 303
Hypothesis #3: The Monitor Hypothesis 303
Hypothesis #4: The Natural Order Hypothesis 303
Hypothesis #5: The Affective Filter Hypothesis, 304
Afterword 304
Appendix A: TCI/TPRS Fact Sheet 305
Appendix B: A Philosophy of Language Instruction in High School 308
Appendix C: On Mixing TPRS/CI with the Textbook 310
Appendix D: Responding to Colleagues 312
Appendix E: A Few Thoughts on Where and How to Stand in a TPRS Classroom 313
Appendix F: Sample Content Objectives 314
Appendix G: Rigor 316
Appendix H: Scope and Sequence Thoughts 319
Appendix I: Thoughts on Elementary TPRS Instruction 328
Appendix J: Can ELA and CI Instruction Be Brought Together? 339
Appendix K: Suggested Classroom Schedules 341
Appendix L: Teaching Culture 347
Appendix M: A Trend Toward More Output/Class Retells 350
Appendix N: Thematic Units 352
Appendix O: Administrator Checklist 367
(and then at the end there are sections devoted to using thematic units to make people think we give homework and tests and also a big section on stories. Both of those sections have DVD/CD content from previous programs that goes with them in both the hard cover and ebook forms.
J’aimerais vous demander quelquechose: quand est-ce que Prof Slavic va avoir assez de temps pour fair du velo? 😉
omg!!!
Prof Slavicx est en train d’ecrire une encyclopedie
AWESOME!
When is it being published Ben? I want it.
Congratulations!
I usually say that less is more, but probably not in this case Ben. Congrats on the big accomplishment!
Yes Jim I agree that less is not more in this case. I updated a lot of stuff that needed to be added to some of the tried and true strategies we already have, plus there are many new strategies that, if not captured in a book would scroll out and be lost. A lot of the updating was a result of the general discussion here as we keep redefining things as we go along. But this book at 400 pp. is the slim model. Strange but true. I am thinking of adding a two or three minute video explanation to each chapter. I’ll probably do that before putting it out there so it may be a few weeks before I put it up on the site.
Just catching up on articles I missed while overseas — what a great list of contents your upcoming book has, Ben. And no wonder it’s been a huge undertaking. Wow. It seems it morphed into its own new thing instead of an update to Stepping Stones.
So excited about the new book! Congrats, Ben!
Back to the output question…
I’ve been thinking about this lately. I am (mostly) teaching adults these days and it is interesting b/c they have been asking for more output. I have them for short-term classes (a 10-hour weekend, or a 7-week session, once a week) so of course I try to maximize the input. But they LOVE the times I let them retell, have conversations, etc… so now I’m “feeding the need” as Laurie calls it and giving them more time for this– while at the same time telling them that while trying to speak is “fun,” what will most help them is to hear and read comprehensible Spanish. (Since people all seem to think they will learn by speaking.) And reminding them that speaking comes miles and miles after understanding- so the ones who aren’t ready yet know that feeling tongue tied at that point is totally normal.
It’s also interesting b/c even though most of the speaking the class does is in choral answers, across the board students say that the thing they most get out of the class is confidence speaking… just goes back to the power of CI combined with a relaxing, fun environment that gets people out of their heads and just present with the language.
Elissa I also heard Suzy Livingston use that “feed the need” expression. I wrote it down. I still wouldn’t advocate that we work on output more than 10% of the time in our CI classrooms but here is what Suzy said:
…output feeds the need of the students to speak and write. Output is a personal need and not an option in learning a language….
Just in the categories here in our PLC, we have at least six ways that can create meaningful output in our CI classrooms:
1. Free writes (writing – Blaine Ray)
2. Dict̩e (writing Рme)
3. OWATS (writing – Bob Patrick)
4. vPQA (speaking – Julie Soldner)
5. Group Retells (speaking – Jeff Brickler here in a comment a few days ago)
6. Sentence Frames (writing – Robert Harrell)
I’m coming in at way under 10% output at this point, but I’m seeing the value with my students… and am open to creating more opportunities for it…
Ben,
Like Blaine’s ‘Green Bible’ was before it, this will be THE TCI compendium. Future T/CI writing will refer back to it – serious practitioners will tote their dog-eared copy back and forth to work, and take it to Starbucks all summer long….
Are you prepared for the paparrazzi and late-nite talk show gigs? Do you have disguises so that you are not accosted at Costco or while you’re riding your bike thru downtown Denver?
Congratulations on this labor of love, determination, commitment, organization and tribute to all your groupies…
Alisa
Dude Alisa that is so nice of you to say but really I did it for myself and those here who know the jargon and, indeed, were part of the creation of those strategies and acronyms. I don’t think that non-PLC members would really get it, do you, based on the Table of Contents I included above? That is why just today I decided to make a two or three minute video for each of the ten skills, twenty-six strategies and four bail out moves, just because people don’t read much any more. That will be done in by the end of April at the latest.
Amazing to have the video visual. I can imagine other Ts subsequently taking video of themselves and being able to categorize/refer to the skills within your named skills & strategies framework. It’s such an incredible resource for T’s at every level. You are establishing a lexicon and showing examples of it…
So exciting!
I agree, I think having video is a really big deal and a great help to learning something like this — something that is a skill and not up in our heads. For me, seeing video clarified & correcting understanding I sort-of had based on a one-day training plus reading I did on my own.
I may be redundant here, but I think it’s worth repeating something I heard Carol Gaab say at IFLT Denver last Summer: “We TPRS teachers do output, we do grammar and we do reading.” She went on to say that the stereotype of the TPRS teacher who does no output and no grammar is reinforced by teachers who have bought into this stereotype, or at least are not explicit with colleagues, admins, and students that grammar, reading and output are just as central to a CI curriculum as they are to a more traditional approach. We need to qualify those statements when pressed, that :
1. output is not forced, but it happens, (or should be happening, even if in limited ways, or only by some students)
2. grammar is implicit and/or pop-up
3. reading follows auditory input, but reading proficiency is a if not the goal in our programs too
TGIF!
I agree with that John, and the qualification is necessary lest others transpose their understanding of output/grammar/reading on what we say we do.
Re oral output with early learners, if it’s mostly spontaneous and not too trying (i.e. a student who wants to output so much before she is ready can really put a damper on the amount of CI we are able to provide as teachers, not to mention annoy other students who get the point), I think that’s totally fine. But I try to limit most of it to the ‘scaffolded output’ we all do when we ask for one word answers or yes/no answers. Or to ‘guided output’, where for example they are completing my sentences for me or filling in gaps based on what comes next or what sign I’m giving them or picture I’m pointing at.
I agree that we need to be clear….almost to the point that I hesitate to use the word output. In MANY teachers’ minds “output”=repeating, parroting in skit form, using provided phrases (ie reading them aloud) in role plays, A/B partner practice, etc.
That is NOT output in a TPRS/CI classsroom at all!!!!!!!!!!
What we are expecting is quite different:
*clarification
*language that indicates a level of comprehension
*details recalled from a shared experience
*details shared about a personal experience (true or invented)
*responses to personal questions in a discussion (not a scripted conversation)
*opinions based on personal preference in the context of a natural conversation
*ideas or suggestions about details in story (video,picture, memory etc.)
*conjecture about person’s/character’s motivation
*spontaneous reactions to an idea or an event
COMPLETELY DIFFERENT!!!!!
The difference I see, and maybe other language identifies it in a better way (I’m only on my first cup of coffee!!) is that we are using SCAFFOLDED language and they are using STAGED language.
While some may see co-created stories differently, I see them as a background for natural interactions (what did he say? what did she do? how did he feel? what happens now?) vs a non CI class where there are few, if any, natural interactions. EVERYTHING is artificial. This is why when a non CI teacher uses a simulation activity like being in a restaurant, market or airport, it is a BIG deal….it’s the only time there are interactions that actually make some sense….although they are staged.
I hope that I am making some sense. I think that we have to be careful about our use of the word output. Without meaning to we could be implying that simply speaking/writing is output….and in our case…I don’t think that is what we mean.
with love,
Laurie
I agree with what both Laurie and Jim are saying. My perspective is that of self-interest and in retaining one’s job. If we are being reviewed/evaluated by teachers and administrators who are looking for traditional output, we need to show them the WE TOO are doing output. Also, if we need to incorporate some activities which involved scaffolded output (parroting?) so that students, parents, admins PERCEIVE that learning is happening in our classrooms, so be it. Maybe, those activities can be one more instance of input in disguise.
Being in a big and traditional FL department, I’m seeing how important it is to be able to code switch. This means: 1) making sure the talk we do here on the PLC does not leak into our interactions with non-CI colleagues; and 2) being able to “translate” and explain what we do into terms that they are thinking and defining as best practices in FL classrooms . If we can educate them with our observation checklist, great, but if they are not receptive to thinking differently about language learning/acquisition, we need to protect ourselves.
I am going to have a new principal next year, and so I will be doing my homework over the summer, not only learning about his background and perspective, but also making sure I can explain CI practices in terms that align with the school’s stated priorities.
A few of our colleagues on this PLC have done great work in translating ci practices into alignment with state/district/ACTFL standards, and these documents are of great value to us in justifying what we do. I will be consulting those docs once the Summer begins.
Now, I’m the only elementary Spanish teacher at my school and have a supportive admin that I have been educating in SLA for 2+ years now. So my situation is different, so what I would do may not transfer to others’ situations. . .
I have a pre-year, mid-year, and final exam assessing global competency listening, reading, and writing. I have evidence from kids’ speed writes that they can output. So I don’t put on a show or cater to ignorance when observed. The admin sees kids more engaged and more immersed in Spanish than ever seen before. And if they were to ever believe there needed to be more output, I’d show them the results I get on the tests and fluency writes and send along more research to back up what I do.
We can’t write before we can read. We can’t talk before we can listen.