Form Follows Function – 6

It’s the lists that caused much of the confusion out there today about CI instruction. The traditional teachers couldn’t believe that lists weren’t needed to acquire a language. They couldn’t handle the radical thought that just CI is all that is needed for people to learn a language. Why?

It’s because comprehensible input is the way people acquire languages. Word lists have nothing to do with it. 

But the resistance to TPRS, started in earnest by the deer-in-the-headlights traditional language teaching community, turned into a full-fledge adoration of word lists. Even the TPRS movement started to embrace the lists in terms of “high frequency verb lists” and other semantic or thematic lists with “words that had to be learned” in them.

What is the problem with that? Learning lists of words is not how people acquire languages! People don’t acquire languages by memorizing lists of targeted words, but rather by listening to the language in ways that are interesting to them and in ways that they can understand.

Perhaps that heavily researched idea is too simple. Perhaps the lack of guard rails (structure or form) is too much for the old guard kind of language teacher, and so they tried to provide that structure by using CI to force their kids to memorize word lists. No blame. The ignorance is thick. 

The BIGGEST problem is that CI is an unconscious process and memorization involves the conscious mind.

It doesn’t matter. A proper balance between form (a CI curriculum that works) and function (the language as a whole) has not yet happened.

The real winners of this eroding away of the CI research by the well-intentioned traditionalists – the unfortunate splitting of the CI world into different “camps” with various “experts” representing each camp – were the textbook companies.

Well, standing next to the textbook victors on the podium of WL curriculum design – so long now after having been delivered that first great gut punch by Blaine Ray – is the idea of testing. Testing continues to provide a neat way to blow apart the fledgling CI movement.

Testing and the textbook – victors. And notice that both podium winners are about profits more than what kind of language instruction is best for kids. Hmmm…. 

Share:

Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
LinkedIn
[searchandfilter fields="search," types="daterange,daterange,daterange" headings="Search"]
Get The Latest Updates

Subscribe to Our Mailing List

No spam, notifications only about new products, updates.

Related Posts

The Problem with CI

Jeffrey Sachs was asked what the difference between people in Norway and in the U.S. was. He responded that people in Norway are happy and

CI and the Research (cont.)

Admins don’t actually read the research. They don’t have time. If or when they do read it, they do not really grasp it. How could

Research Question

I got a question: “Hi Ben, I am preparing some documents that support CI teaching to show my administrators. I looked through the blog and

We Have the Research

A teacher contacted me awhile back. She had been attacked about using CI from a team leader. I told her to get some research from

$10

~PER MONTH

Subscribe to be a patron and get additional posts by Ben, along with live-streams, and monthly patron meetings!

Also each month, you will get a special coupon code to save 20% on any product once a month.

  • 20% coupon to anything in the store once a month
  • Access to monthly meetings with Ben
  • Access to exclusive Patreon posts by Ben
  • Access to livestreams by Ben