I cannot help but see how a correlation exists among world language teachers. We primarily tend to teach the way in which we ourselves were taught. In and of itself, this is not bad or wrong, because how we ourselves were taught is what we know, as we learn by example. Because of the manner in which we were taught, that is probably why we were successful as language students, and in many ways, this led to our desire to become language teachers. The problem, however, lies in in that in replicating these methods in the classroom as teachers, only students who are like us will be successful.
Whenever I see folks get into lengthy debates online or in person about Comprehensible Input, many times I just want to say to those who disagree with it, "Have you truly experienced learning a language which you do not know using Comprehensible Input?" To me, I feel that experiencing CI like a student in your classroom will make a huge world of difference. However, I also add some parameters to this:
- Do not learn a language which is related to one which you already know, e.g., if you know Spanish, do not learn French or another Romance language, because they are too similar. You will not experience CI to its fullest, because there are too many language connections of which you are already familiar.
- Learn the language over an extended amount of time. Yes, you can experience learning another language in a conference presentation, but in my opinion, that is not enough time. Yes, you can get a taste of language learning, but it is too limited in scope.
In the summer of 2017, I had the experience of learning Mandarin from Linda Li in a 20-hour Fluency Fast course held prior to IFLT. That experience completely changed me as a teacher! I have written three blog posts about my time learning Mandarin.