Problems Arise With Too Much Circling
We must know that this circling vortex image is merely a template, something to work from, to riff on. If we were to actually follow it by circling our way down through all its possible layers, we would bore our students and our classes would not work.
The vortex is more a theme to which we provide variations. If our class clearly grasps the target structure that we are trying to teach after three rotations around the vortex, our adding in three more would be too much.
To demonstrate the truth of that statement, here is an example of taking the circling too far:
Rotation #1:
Statement: “Class, James works!” (ohh!)
Question: “Class, does James work?’ (yes!)
Either/Or: “Class, does James work or play?” (work)
Negative: “Class, does James play?” (no) “That is correct, class, James doesn’t play, he works.” (ohh!)
Throw In: “Class does James run?” (no) “Correct, class, James doesn’t run, he works.” (ohh!)
Here is where we would add in the first detail to complete the first rotation around the vortex:
Add a detail: “Class, where does James work?” (various cute suggestions are offered and the teacher ends up accepting Burger King)
With this adding of the detail about where James works, the teacher faces a decision to either start another rotation or to leave it and add another sentence with another target structure in it, or, if it is a story, to add in another event or character, as mentioned earlier. Whether you add in a) another sentence with another target structure or b) a new character or event depends on whether you are doing PQA or a story. This will all become clear as you get deeper into this work.
The mistake would come if everyone in the class first responded with strong choral responses (the words in parentheses above) but those strong choral responses started to fade and, failing to recognize that, the teacher would head off into another rotation of what is essentially the same information:
Rotation #2:
Statement: “Class, James works at Burger King!” (ohh!)
Question: “Class, does James work at Burger King?” (yes)
Either/Or: “Statement Class, does James work at Burger King or does Barry work at Burger King?” (James) “That’s correct, class, James works at Burger King!” (ohh!)
Negative: “Class, does Barry work at Burger King?” (no)
Throw In: “Class, does Antoine work at Burger King?” (no) “That’s right class, Antoine doesn’t work at Burger King; James works at Burger King.” (ohh!)
By now the students are getting tired of hearing the same verb all the time in class. There is no interest being generated, and this is only the second rotation around the vortex. Asking for a detail at the end of this second rotation around the vortex would be a mistake. The structure has already been circled enough, the kids get it, and they want something new. To take it one more level down to a third rotation would just be too much:
Rotation #3:
“Class, with whom does James work at Burger King?” (various cute suggestions and the teacher ends up accepting the Ghost of George Washington, a character from a story done earlier in the year in that class)
Statement: “Class, James works at Burger King with the Ghost of George Washington!” (ohh!)
Question: “Class, does James work at Burger King with the Ghost of George Washington?” (yes)
Either/Or: “Statement Class, does James work at Burger King with the Ghost of George Washington or does Barry work at Burger King with the Ghost of George Washington?” (James) “That’s correct, class, James works at Burger King with the Ghost of George Washington!” (ohh!)
Negative: “Class, does Barry work at Burger King with the Ghost of George Washington?” (no)
Throw In: “Class, does Antoine work at Burger King with the Ghost of Thomas Jefferson?” (no) “That’s right class, Antoine doesn’t work at Burger King with the Ghost of Thomas Jefferson; James works at Burger King Ghost of George Washington.” (ohh!)
By now the students are getting dismally tired of hearing the same verb all the time in class. There is no interest being generated, and this is only the second rotation around the vortex! The vortex has bottomed out after only three rotations, and the instructor must move on to another structure or event or new character, anything to start a new circling vortex with a new verb.
One further note of explanation here: this entire process of going around the vortex and adding details at the end of each rotation is also called “parking” in TPRS. It is the same thing as the vortex image, which could very well be a parking garage in which the teacher drives around until the car arrives at the next ramp down. To gain access to the next lower level a ticket is needed – the detail serves as the ticket to move the gate up so the car can move on down to the next level of the parking garage.
Mark Mallaney in Denver Public Schools told me that the vortex image is what brought him clarity in circling. It is an excellent image to convey the idea and how circling works mechanically. As long as it is not overdone, and as long as the teacher uses it as a template from which to work intuitively only, it is a useful image to work from.