This tour de force is from Lance: (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vHZ8hdXktVY8BBh8UFQJu3V6nkAEPVU0F5hZ25VtZ74/edit?usp=sharing) I’ll add it to the curriculum docs page. Thanks Lance. It’s bad ass.

From Robert: http://www.memes.com/meme/987169

Robert said today: …while I may criticize strategies, activities, methods, and approaches, I should not criticize (i.e. attack) motives; rather, I should attribute positive motives to others. Even the most rigorous grammar-driven teacher ultimately wants his students to be able to communicate in the language – or at least I need to assume that until

Robert supports Claire’s position: … you need “cognitively undemanding and context embedded” language. For beginning language learners, Cummin’s theories claim we must lighten the cognitive load, as well as their linguistic burden. This is not just for languages. Various articles and books that I have read on neuropsychology discuss the idea of cognitive load. Since

More from Claire on targetless instruction in TPRS. It is revolutionary. A few items that I find truly powerful are highlighted in orange, so that was me that did that. I’m just going to keep this thread going. For me it rings true and gets to the marrow of the issue of what is plaguing people

Claire calls out a whole bunch of people below. How will they react?  Ever wondered why ESL teachers are not using TPRS (except me, myself, and I)? It’s because we try to combine TPRS and CBI, despite the fact that CBI is inappropriate for beginning language learners. ESL teachers know content (like targets) is not appropriate

Claire shares below an idea that is of monumental importance in our work. What she says below describes an overarching position that actually aligns with the research, and thus conflicts badly with the way TPRS is currently done in our schools: Not only do we need to fix the assessment, we need to adopt targetless curriculum documents.

I don’t hold certain kids – you know the ones – accountable much anymore. In middle school I don’t need to – the stories are too interesting. In high school I don’t know – the culture in certain schools of doing the least that one can in order to graduate is a hard factor and

This is from Alisa: http://mobile.edweek.org/c.jsp?cid=25919971&bcid=25919971&rssid=25919961&item=http%3A%2F%2Fapi.edweek.org%2Fv1%2Few%2F%3Fuuid%3D0D79A9D0-0274-11E6-853F-71C9B3743667&cmp=eml-eb-popweek+4222016

Yesterday in the middle of a nice class I had one of those fear moments when I remembered I hadn’t tested them in a long time. I just can’t seem to be able to get myself to test them anymore. Granted, I won’t be in this school next year, and so I don’t care, but

On the topic of assessment, the invisible world dialogue between teacher/ACTFL and student is often: Teacher/ACTFL: “I want you to know this.” Student: “Well, I would rather just be able to do this.” Teacher/ACTFL: “Well, you have to learn this anyway.” Student: “OK, when is the test?” It makes for a rather long conversation. It’s like

Whenever we run out of room for comments I just start a new post. Picking the assessment discussion up on some things Russ said here yesterday: … I don’t like tying proficiency to grade but in Oregon and through ACTFL the standards are tied directly to proficiency stages…. Now that we are growing up, it’s time