IPA – 2

3 thoughts on “IPA – 2”

1. Eric Herman

   March 21, 2015 at 11:35 am

   Hahahahaha. That video was REE-DONK-U-LUS!
   I’ve uploaded an excellent review of authentic resources to my Google Drive (Gilmore, 2007). Reed Riggs sent me this bad boy. I wish I had had it during the ACTFL battle. Far from being a clear and good decision to use authentic resources, shows just how controversial and conflicted research is on the use of authentic resources.
   drive.google.com/file/d/0B2zMreg76o4paVh3X0JnTHR1NUU/view?usp=sharing
   Here’s what Paul Nation wrote me (I think this is part of the ACTFL thread):
   “Authentic materials are fine if the vocabulary load is not too heavy. However, for learners with a relatively small vocabulary size (less than 3300 word families for example), the vocabulary load is too heavy.
   “Learners need substantial input for incidental vocabulary learning (see the latest issue of the web journal Reading in a Foreign Language for my recent article about this). This input needs to be at the right level with not too much unknown vocabulary preferably less than 2% of the running words. Unsimplified texts do not provide this favourable density and they include hundreds of unknown words.
   “Authenticity can come from the text itself (it is written for native speakers) or from the interaction of the learner with the text (they enjoy it, comprehend it, criticise it etc as an authentic reading experience). Overly difficult texts do not provide authentic reading experiences.”
   I watched a Common Core documentary (“Building the Machine”) in which William Buckley is quoted as saying that he’d rather be governed by the first 100 names in the phone book than by 100 faculty at Harvard. In other words, the common person has more common sense. This is EXACTLY how we feel about FL teaching. The common person has more of a clue about the inadequacy of grammar rule instruction and use of resources written for native speakers.

   Log in to Reply
2. Alisa Shapiro

   March 21, 2015 at 1:37 pm

   Wow, this week has been packed with local and virtual colleagues crashing up against the legacy methods and assessment wall.
   Some Take Aways:
   1. Just because so many other teachers/departments/schools are doing ‘it’ doesn’t make it right. (Or as my mom used to say, “If your brother/sister was jumping off the bridge, would you do it, too?”)
   2. WE ARE RE-WRITING WL INSTRUCTION. Many ‘Grammar Grinders’ are teaching that way not because they believe in it, defend it, see results with it, or enjoy it. NO. They do it like robots with no other programming alternative in their system. They don’t know another way.
   3. ACTFL IS AN ISSUE. Even if Communicative or grammar-focused/textbook toting teachers observe little to no proficiency outcomes among their Ss year after year, most (?) do not question their efficacy, as they take umbrage from ACTFL. Textbooks claim alignment w/ACTFL, so teachers can claim alignment if they use the book. Only those a.) willing to admit the shortcomings of the current pedagogy; and b.) willing to learn about and try alternatives (i.e., T/CI) will make the change;
   4. CHANGE IS OFTEN HARD AND SLOW. Change is easier among a community, a department, a supportive supervisor/admin. It’s hard to make the change when you feel isolated and/or unsupported, and of course attacked.
   5. DECISION MAKERS MUST BE EDUCATED. Most admin and BOEs are ignorant about SLA and we must educate them, so that they can advocate for us and our unique place among the other disciplines.
   6. WE ARE SMART & CREATIVE PROFESSIONALS. We can and have exploited such documents as the 21st Century Skills to support our pedagogy. Among our ranks are language magicians and brilliant thinkers, able to align such behemoths as the Danielson Teacher Evaluation Framework (LAURIE CLARCQ!) and Common Core Language Arts Curriculum (I believe Martina Bex worked on this) for our use. Karen Rowan created some textbook- compatible T/CI materials for the widely used Realidades textbook; while strict adherence to such canned materials defy certain T/CI core values (Compelling, in-bounds), we can still whip up some great (healthier) recipes with these cheap ingredients.
   That’s it for now. I wish a calm and restorative Spring Break to those brothers and sisters who’ve taken heat for believing and acting upon their convictions in the classroom.

   Log in to Reply
3. chris stolz

   March 22, 2015 at 4:43 pm

   What Nation notes echoes Krashen: 95% of vocab must be known for reading to be anything other than displays of teacher ego (“Now, *I* will guide you through Don Quijote/Proust/Musil/that youtube vid where the guy talks for 25 min about Cézanne”).

   Log in to Reply