TPR – 1

5 thoughts on “TPR – 1”

1. whitney_bryan

   April 24, 2015 at 12:00 pm

   I’ve been experimenting with Reader’s Theatre and have definitely seen the connections between it and TPR. Just by giving commands and/or narrating what I want the actors to do I can subtly teach them a lot of verbs while still keeping it within the context of a narrative. Plus, they have a clear context for the verbs. Sometimes it seems like without that context my students can get a bit bored with doing actions.
   It can also be fun to have the students boss each other around. I and they get a kick out of it from time to time.

   Log in to Reply
2. Angie Dodd

   April 24, 2015 at 7:10 pm

   I’ve struggled for a couple years to figure out a good TPR gesture for the verb “buys” and this semester a foreign exchange student in my class came up with the idea of swiping an imaginary credit card and making a “shhkt” sound. It has worked well! Thought I’d pass that along! I love TPR and gesturing. I really love it when students gesture unconsciously while they are speaking or writing.

   Log in to Reply
3. Nathaniel

   May 24, 2015 at 3:24 pm

   The frequent mention of TPR lately caused me to dig out my 1988 (3rd ed.) copy of “Learning Another Language Through Actions” by James Asher. Dr. Asher is an amazing man. A psychology researcher, he was looking into the application of psychology to L2 learning. He had been a good student in languages. That is, he did everything his teachers asked. Yet he was still not able to learn languages. He was convinced that he could not. With this typical language (non-)learning experience he branched his psychological applications into the yet to be studied field of second language learning.
   I have a far greater appreciation for Asher than I had before. A lot of what I am reading makes me feel like I am reading from the blog:
   1. Some of the terminology/concepts he used include “the first skill is listening comprehension,” primacy of right brain operations, internal map of the language, cognitive map of the target language, input, “intake,” “production-oriented traditional classes,” acquiring in chunks, synchronizing language with body movement, no HW, need for non-verbal responses (touching, pointing) and one-word responses, including yes/no, “readiness to talk,” “focus on comprehension w/o repeating.”
   2. Need for video for people to “see” what TPR is about (in 1955, Asher took his Master’s in TV journalism).
   3. Research base. As a psychology professor/researcher at San José State University, his journey led from testing one hypothesis after another.
   Hidden in a thread somewhere it has been recently stated that we need more training in TPR.
   Berty Segal seems not be training any longer. On her website she says, “I highly recommend JASON FRITZE as a masterful teacher trainer, presenter and conductor of workshops.”
   I recommend the following interview with Dr. Asher produced by The Everyday Language Learner:
   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B7K0KctKJtc
   I have concluded this weekend that Asher should be up there with the other big names.

   Log in to Reply
   1. Eric Herman

      May 24, 2015 at 4:18 pm

      Started watching. I’m hooked. Nice find, Nate! And Ben, this is right up your alley! What Asher is saying is really going to resonate with this group 🙂
      He starts by saying all these teachers with a 19th c. model (teaching vocabulary lists, grammar, and speaking) and who are unaware of the input-dependent SLA process are committing a crime and he calls it malpractice!

      Log in to Reply
      1. Nathaniel

         May 24, 2015 at 8:35 pm

         19C model
         He calls it “slow-motion learning”…”word by word.” This contrasts with comprehension-based “chunking of words.
         Another interesting tidbit:
         We talk about the four-percenters and wonder where that comes from. This is not the exact answer but it is close. A school supt from Shaker Heights, OH (John Lawson, 1971) reported that the attrition rate for FL to be more than 85% by the third year and 95% by the fourth year. “…less than 5% who started in a second language–continue to proficiency” (I understand proficiency to be completing 4th year). He says that similar results are cited in Wollitzer, P.A., Foregin language and international studies in selcted Bay Area high schools: A preliminary assessment, 1983. (Report published as a joint project of The World Affairs Council of Northern California, 312 Sutter Street, San Francisco, CA 94108), if anyone can/wishes to track more percentages down.

         Log in to Reply