Sean Lawler made this comment last Sunday here in responding to skip crosby’s request for information on how many CI teachers use a textbook:
This 21st Century Skills Map is informative. However, many things there we take issue with. For example, this 21st Century Skills Map makes some comparisons we wouldn’t agree with:
In the Past
1) Teacher centered class
2) Emphasis on teacher as presenter/lecturer
3) Only teaching language
Today
1) Learner-centered with teacher as facilitator/collaborator
2) Emphasis on learner as “doer” & “creator”
3) Using language as the vehicle to teach academic content
We might even say that the big textbooks arrange conditions for the teacher to be more the facilitator/ collaborator, where students are more the “doer” and the “creator,” than in our CI classrooms.
But, I imagine that skip can spin this info together in ways he sees fit to make his argument.
Then Nathaniel responded to Sean:
You bring up a good point, Sean. People who do not understand CI need to have these comparisons interpreted for them from a CI point of view. Here is a shot:
1. We know that when the teacher is the center of the class, CI is less effective. The student interests, the student connection to the readings, etc. are the center. This learner-centered approach is only possible when the teacher collaborates with students by helping them to express their interests in the target language. The teacher further facilitates understanding of the language, interaction in the language. In the teacher-centered class, the teacher may speak too quickly, bring in unfamiliar vocabulary, not look into the eyes of the students, do comprehension checks, fail to ask students about themselves, fail pause and point, expect too much of them, assume they know more than they do. [Ouch. I am stepping on my own toes] Following this learner-centered approach will get in the way of completing the textbook scope and sequence in time for the scheduled textbook company exams.
2. In TPRS the teacher is neither a lecturer nor a presenter. The teacher establishes meaning by engaging the students in kinesthetic responses (TPR/gestures). The teacher challenges the students to own the meaning by becoming creators of word associations. The emphasis in PQA and stories is on making the students engaged doers and creators despite their minimal language acquisition. The goal of CI is for students to become fluent doers and creators of the language. The method is to engage them as co-doers and co-creators (at their level of acquisition) with sufficient understood, acoustical messages in the interpersonal mode. Following a textbook lends itself well to being a lecturer on and presenter of textbook grammar points.
3. It is hoped that all students would be able to use the language to facilitate their future interests and needs. For some this may mean “using language as the vehicle to teach academic content.” As such, our intention is to provide enough comprehended language input for a mental representation of the language to become established in the mind. The goal is fluent understanding, expression, and negotiation of meaning. For those who are at the point where they can learn academic content in the target language, the only useful textbook will be the one used in the academic subject. This approach obviates the need for a textbook to “learn” the target language.
