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
It's To Set Up Reading
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
13 thoughts on “It's To Set Up Reading”
I am not disagreeing. But I have gone the other way with this (no right or wrong here) with my middle school beginners. Probably 80% auditory CI and 20% reading. The step 3 reading of TPRS is more like an excuse to get more auditory CI. I do have a class novel going with grades 5-7. Changes the pace. Takes some of the heat off the teacher. We read a chapter a day, almost strictly read-aloud (no follow-up activities) and that is totally separate from the rest of the class activities. Grade 8 is doing 10 minutes daily of FVR, but there are newbies and unmotivated kids in that group that I’m going to start a mini-reading group with.
Eric,
I think you are right on…people can acquire language from mostly auditory exposure to CI. This happens for all human beings on the planet that speak a language. I think reading helps learners interact with input apart for the CI teacher. For me, historically, I have tried to lead my students to read after aural input because I knew they would be going off to a non-CI teacher and I wanted them to be prepared.
I find myself in a more unique position now where I can simply provide aural input for a 75 minute period and nobody is bothering me about doing my job correctly.
Getting kids ready to read is getting them ready to leave us and learn on their own if they decide that is what they want to do…to me this is the importance of reading in my 180 day school year.
Thanks for the comments on this guys!
Eric,
When you say read-aloud for your 5-7 graders, do you mean the kids translate chorally one chapter or are you reading them a chapter in the TL. If so, what do they do if they don’t understand something? I always struggle with how to read a novel together as I just want them to enjoy it and reading a chapter a day sounds appealing. Thanks!
We have enough copies for everyone (sometimes kids share). I read. Superstars volunteer to read for the characters (silly voices encouraged). No choral translation. I pick an easy book – Berto for 7th grade, Isabella/Congo for 6th, Brandon Brown for 5th. My “signal” in my class is a stomp, so the kids stomp if they don’t understand.
I don’t remember where I read this strategy, but if I snap, then the whole class choral translates the last word I said. I will snap on words I know are new and sometimes on easy words to check that everyone’s with me. I make a different sound (bark for BB) if I want kids to chorally read me the next word in the target language in the text. Keeps everyone together.
I sometimes ask parallel PQA questions, easy comprehension questions, or act out a chapter, but usually we just try to enjoy the chapter. If I have an audio recording, then the next class we sometimes start by re-listening to the chapter from the previous class, because now they are hearing a different voice.
Only 8th graders are reading on their own and even then, not all of them (can) take advantage of that time.
Thanks for sharing these strategies
…the step 3 reading of TPRS is more like an excuse to get more auditory CI….
Sweet point. Auditory and reading input serve each other, for sure. And yes, now with beginners we don’t read much. More and more as they get older is the way I see it happening.
I do what Eric does, especially in first year… hammering at auditory understanding because that’s what we need so desperately to develop, imo. I’m not saying reading isn’t the end goal. But we need to make sure they are pronouncing those words in their heads correctly while they’re reading. And can comprehend instantly any questions we ask about the reading.
Good things from both perspectives. I wrote about how important reading is (http://magisterp.com/2015/08/24/school-isnt-even-close-to-an-l1-environment-why-reading-is-key/), but recognize that students can read at home. Still, there’s no way to guarantee reading at home.
Controlled aural input (as opposed to the community, radio, etc.) really only comes from class time.
Via reading you can acquire anything non-auditory: vocabulary & grammar. If the kids took full advantage of reading and given the resources, then kids can get the most exposure to language on their level from reading (they can read at their own pace – faster than auditory input).
If the kids already have the words and structure acquired from auditory input, then reading matches sounds to text, which makes reading a lot easier due to everything the auditory input has already done for the students.
Krashen is obviously big on FVR/ER. And rightfully so. But remember, in all those comparative studies showing reading to be superior, how many were with middle school/high school FL students in the US? And when you compare ER to grammar drills and the audiolingual method, then yes, kids acquire more from reading and enjoy it more. But how many studies have compared FVR to TPRS or to TPR or Natural Approach or MovieTalk? None that I know of. My money is on TPRS.
Eric, I think the last question comes from teacher choice. Some may have a preference or philosophy towards more reading or tprs. It depends on style and personality.
I remember a simpsons episode (yeah im from that generation) where Flanders is asking what bible verse to read. The reverend tells him “oh its all good”.
Absolutely a teacher choice. But not likely both tools (TPRS & FVR) give equal results. One is better. For your goals (oral or written mode). Which is better for you. For your students.
And if compelling really makes a big difference, then a storyasking session is it.
FVR, echoing a point suggested above by Eric, is weak and flabby in schools. In my view if FVR is going to work the student must actually care about learning the language. That lets out over 80% of American secondary school WL students and skews any resesarch. Just my opinion. Stories bring the interest to even unmotivated kids. Stories bring the gains. FVR – not so much.
I believe that fresh teachers should develop skills in aural ci such as circling and other strategies. in my district newbies get the lower levels so auditory ci is important but should always include reading. In levels iii or iv there should be a major switch to more reading especially if they are veteran teachers who may have had their share of wild tprs moments. This builds on having to release dedicated students towards independence.