The Necessity of Background Language Knowledge for Reading in the CI/ADI Classroom

As I told you in an earlier blog post, I have been voraciously listening to (and re-listening to) Emily Hanford's podcast series "Sold a Story," a documentary about the shortcomings of the whole language/three-cueing approach to teaching students to read and why the science of reading matters. One of her earlier audio documentaries on the topic was "What the Words Say," and in it, Hanford discusses a reading hypothesis proposed by Wesley Hoover and Philip Gough in their article, "The Simple View of Reading" (1986). Hanford also interviews Hoover to discuss this further. Allow me this excursus to summarize this hypothesis (which has been verified in over 150 studies) - I promise that it will lead to a bigger application of what we do in our world language classrooms:

Hoover and Gough's Hypothesis

According to Hoover and Gough, learning to speak is a natural process for humans (unlike reading which is not), so by the time students begin school, they already possess a huge knowledge of spoken language in their L1. Gough writes:

“The average American 6-year-old has a mastery of English [that] would be the envy of any college graduate learning English as a second language.”

However, while these beginning students probably understand the majority of what is spoken to them, they cannot yet read those words which they already they know how to say. Hence, they must be taught those skills. In the podcast, Hoover states, 

"What happens when [students] come to school, their language comprehension is fairly high, and what they have to do is learn word recognition, and so if they're taught word recognition, they can read to the level at which they can comprehend language."

As a result, whenever we read, Gough and Hoover believed that two processes happen simultaneously in our brains for reading comprehension to occur:

• Word Recognition - the actual process of reading the individual words accurately. This happens through decoding, phonics, familiar word recognition, and sight words. 
• Language Comprehension - knowing what each individual word means (either through spoken, listening, or read). Essentially, this happens through the possession of background knowledge of vocabulary, inferring from context, and grammar. 

If one can do both of those processes when reading, then reading comprehension occurs. But if one lacks one (or both) of these processes when encountering a word, then comprehension cannot take place. For example, Marty is reading a sentence. A number of things can happen:

• Marty reads the words and possesses the language comprehension of these words. Successful reading comprehension has taken place.
• Marty cannot read the words. Language comprehension cannot occur; therefore, reading comprehension is not successful.
• Marty reads the words but does not possess the necessary language comprehension of them. Successful reading comprehension cannot fully occur. From here, Marty can infer meaning from the context of the sentence; however, this does not guarantee 100% correct overall comprehension.
• Marty cannot read the words nor possesses the necessary language comprehension even if he could have read them. Successful reading comprehension cannot occur.

Hoover explains,

“Word recognition is complex. Language comprehension is complex. But the big idea of reading is that if you can master those two complex skills, then you can master reading comprehension.”

(NOTE - as we know, poverty can greatly affect incoming students' language comprehension and background knowledge of possessed vocabulary. This is known as "word gap" - those children from lower socioeconomic families are exposed to fewer words earlier in life those from more privileged backgrounds).

So what does all of this mean in our world language CI/ADI classrooms? 

Application to the CI/ADI Classroom

We know that Krashen is a huge advocate of reading:

"Our reading ability, our ability to write in an acceptable writing style, our spelling ability, vocabulary knowledge, and our ability to handle complex syntax is the result of reading."

"The ability to speak is the result of listening [and] the result of reading." 

When students arrive in our classrooms in level 1, most likely they posses absolutely LITTLE to NO language comprehension of our L2 language. So on day 1, if we were to give students something to read in L2, students might be able to read/decode the words, but those words would have absolutely no meaning if there was not any L2 language comprehension involved. 

Hence, there is a great need for us as teachers to deliver comprehensible input to our students for them to acquire words to build up their L2 language comprehension. The traditional "introduce words on Monday, vocab quiz on Friday" does not build up true L2 language comprehension - that is considered conscious/active learning (see Eric Richards' blog post on the difference between language learning and language acquisition - it is GOLD!) and does not lead to acquisition; there is no true retention occurring (I call this the "cram and flush syndrome" - students cram for a quiz, take it and get an A, and then flush it from their minds).

When our students build up their language comprehension and then we introduce reading to them based on that, then the language acquisition process can continue. If we have students read material for which they do not possess the necessary language comprehension, then essentially we have set our students up for failure, because they are unable to understand and process what they are reading. However, this is based on the assumption that our students can engage in word recognition first.

Regardless of what side you are on in the Reading Wars, there are some truths about teaching students to read which can be applied to our CI/ADI classrooms.

Ormie the Pig - Movie Talk

Here is a fun Movie Talk which I had done many years ago, but I completely forgot about it. Just recently my colleague John Foulk reminded me about it. It is called Ormie the Pig (is he a character somewhere?) and his attempts to steal cookies from a cookie jar on top of a refrigerator. Again, the best movie talks are those with a lot of repetition in it in terms of action, and there is a lot of that here in this animated short. This is a good Movie Talk for words such as cookies, refrigerator, want, steal/take, in order to, on top of.

Ormie the Pig - Latin script

Ormie the Pig - English script

Who is It?

This is a great listening activity to do at the last 10 minutes of class, and it involves whiteboards - like bacon, in my opinion, everything is better with whiteboards! 

Planning

1)  Write 3 VERY short comprehensible descriptions in Latin of famous people (characters, historical figures, or real people), where the first description is most general and the third is most specific, i.e., by the third description, it should be obvious who the character is

Activity

1) Have students grab a whiteboard and dry-erase markers.

2) Have students number 1-3 on their whiteboards.

3) Explain to students that you are going to read a series of descriptions and after each description, they should write the name of the person/character whom they think it is. All three descriptions are about the same person/character.

4) Read the first description, and next to number one, have students write whom they think is the character/person.
5) Read the second description, and next to number two, have students write whom they now think is the character/person. If they think it is the same person/character as what they wrote for number one, they are still to write down that name.
6) Read the third description, and next to number three, have students write whom they now think is the character/person. If they think it is the same person/character as what they wrote for number one and two, they are still to write down that name.
7) After reading the third description, ask students “quis est?” and have them respond aloud. Ask them to hold up their whiteboards so that you can see their series of answers.
8) Start again with a new person/character.

Examples:
Beyonce
1) femina
2) cantatrix
3) uxor JayZis

Laocoon
1) Troianus vir
2) sacerdos
3) interfectus a serpentibus

Observations

1. This is a GREAT way to review characters if you are reading a story with lots of characters.
2. This is a wonderful, low affective filter, output activity, since it just requires students to write down the name of a character/person.
3. Because it is such an easy listnening activity, I have found students to be very engaged whenever I have done it.

Nugas!

This is a fun listening comprehension, partner activity to do with students as either a post-reading activity or as a review of known material. I learned this as a language lab activity, but it is not necessary to use one. 

For this, you will need sentences from a reading which you have been reviewing or sentences with which you know that students are very familiar - in other words, the sentences need to 100% comprehensible for students to hear aloud! 

Nugas (which is Latin for "nonsense") is a very short guided dialogue/listening activity between two students, where

1. one student is designated as Student A, and the other is Student B.
2. each student has a sheet of paper which has numbered sentences, which are specific for that student, i.e., neither student sees each other's sentences
3. student A will read aloud his/her first sentence to Student B 
4. student B will read aloud his/her sentence which is a response to student A  
5. students A and B will determine whether the dialogue made sense. 
6. If it does, then students will say “Recte!” If not, then students will yell “Nugas!” 
7. Students will continue with next set of sentences. 

Examples:

1) Recte examples

Partner A: ubi est Marcus?

Partner B: puto Marcum esse in Foro.

Partner B: quomodo te habes, Marce?
Partner A: bene me habeo.

2) Nugas example

Partner B: cur Metella in via festinat?

Partner A: mihi placet consumere crustula.

Partner A: Salve, Diana!
Partner B: quod ego sum iratus.

Unfortunately, on your end as the teacher, it takes quite a bit of prep, because you need to come up with a series of  2-sentence dialogues (both recte and nugas) and then to transfer those to both Partner A and Partner B handouts separately. For example, partner A's handout would look like this:

1) Partner A: ubi est Marcus?
    Parnter B: _____________

2) Partner B: _____________
    Partner A: bene me habeo.

Observations

1. This is a great partner, listening activity, but the key point is that the sentences must be 100% comprehensible and not too long.
2. My students LOVE yelling "nugas" when the two sentences do not make sense.
3. This is a fun way to get in practice of "memorized, life skills" sentences (greetings, salutations, textbook dialogues).
4. If you are using a story, this is a way to ask questions about a story and to get in repetitions of the story in a different way.

The Art of Point and Pause

In a couple of my blog posts, I have referenced a CI strategy called Point and Pause, so allow me an excursus in this post to explain what it is. Point and Pause is part of establishing meaning, and it is done exactly how it sounds: you point to the word and meaning which you have written on the board, and you pause to allow processing time.


Writing the word on the board with the English meaning and then Pointing and Pausing allows the following:

• it allows time for all students to process the word
• a reference for students whenever I use that word again in the lesson
• it levels the playing field for all, as comprehension of the word is now immediate for all, not just the 4%rs and fast processors

The irony is that Point and Pause is not as easy as it sounds, and it is a skill which I am still trying to master. My biggest problem is that whenever I point and pause, I actually forget to pause. I point and then rush to go back to the story which I am telling. By not pausing I am denying adequate processing time. I now have to remind myself constantly to count to 5 whenever I pause. Five seconds may seem like a long time, but some students need that processing time. 

A few months ago, I was co-facilitating a CI inservice for teachers in my district. I was giving an example of circling in Latin since the majority of the teachers did not know the language. I was demonstrating Point and Pause, but since I was among language teachers, I figured that I did not have to slow down too much. One of the French teachers in attendance raised her hand and said, "I need you to slow down. I am the barometer student in the room. I am a slow processor. I am that student who needs LOTS of repetitions and LOTS of processing time." Even language teachers need adequate time to process! 

From my own experience at NTPRS last summer, when learning Japanese via CI from Betsy Paskvan, she had our target vocabulary written on the board, and she implemented Point and Pause. I immensely appreciated that she did this, because it helped slow things down a bit so that I could process everything. 

Some may argue that establishing meaning/Point and Pause is counterproductive to language learning, as students need to construct their own meaning in the target language.

We need to remember though that our goal is that all students acquire the language. Not every student will be able to construct their own meaning correctly or at the same time - the 4%er probably can do this, but what about the other 96%? Establishing meaning/pointing and pausing lowers stress and confusion, thus lowering the affective filter and thereby allowing students to learn. 

If you ever get the chance to see a teacher demonstrate Point and Pause as part of their lesson and if they do a good job with it, let him/her know. That teacher will definitely appreciate it!

How to Write a CI Story

Many teachers have asked me how to write a CI story so that they can do the same and use it with their own students in class. Quite honestly, my response is: I do not know. Maybe I should rephrase that. I know how to write a CI story, but I do not know how to write a good complelling CI story - that is what I am still working on.

I actually do enjoy writing. When I was in the 3rd grade, I wanted to be an author when I grew up. I remember my 3rd grade teacher had us write a short story about anything we wanted, but the only stipulation was that the main character had to be a potato. I do not know why my teacher chose a potato (it was not like it was an extension of something we were studying), but I wrote about the richest potato in the world who one day decided to go visit the Nile River but because it was so hot there, he dehydrated and became a potato chip. Yes, that was the entire story - and that was about how long it was too. There was no moral to the story, and I have no idea why my character had to be so rich, because it had nothing to do with the plot. We had to illustrate the story too, and my potato looked more like Mr. Peanut (complete with top hat and monocle) than a potato.

My school uses CLC, but I do not use those stories. Not that they are not interesting - oh, they are! My students always enjoyed reading the stores in Unit 1, especially anything involving Grumio. They loved the readability of the stories, plus they were light-hearted and somewhat humorous. The main issues, however, are that there is too much vocabulary in the stories (so at times it turns into decoding/translating instead of reading), too many language structures going on at the same time too quickly, and the stories themselves are just too long. 

Starting last year, I began to write my own CI stories but this year, I feel like I am doing a much better job at limiting vocabulary and getting in repetitions, but also personalizing the stories.

When crafting a CI story, one has to be incredibily deliberate, because there are so many factors involved: 

• limited target vocabulary/language structures
• repetition of target vocabulary, and in many ways, repetition of actual sentences
• an actual plot itself, which needs to include all of the above but yet be comprehensible AND compelling

I have heard Blaine Ray say that stories must have the following:

• a problem of some kind, and that you must incorporate the actual phrase "But there is a problem" in the target language in every story
• a character must go somewhere to resolve the problem, as motion is important to a story
• there must be an unsuccessful resolution the first time so that the character can go somewhere else, which is where the resolution will take place. 

According to Blaine, incorporating these elements will allow for natural repetitions of target vocabulary/language structures.

I will admit that I agree with Blaine to a degree, but I also feel like keeping to this strict pattern causes the stories to become predictable after awhile. Therefore, I tend to adhere to the principles, not necessarily the "rules" per se.

So how do I write a story?

1. Pick target vocabulary/structures first, i.e. what do I want students to acquire? Take a look at the vocabulary list for your textbook or if the purpose of this story is to "preview vocabulary" for a future reading, then select words from that reading.
2. Limit the target vocabulary/structures. I have found that 3-5 new vocabulary/structures is a good amount for students to learn per week.
3. Pick vocabulary/structures that are a good fit for a story. For example, I found that videt, vult and capit work perfectly together in a CI story. Using those target words, I wrote a story about Kim Kardashian who wanted various things, and Yoda (who loved her) saw those things and took them so that she would love him (she did not).
4. Keep the story comprehensible! Though you may want to recycle some previous vocabulary/structures, there is no need to overload your story with them; you can always create an embedded version which will use those words. Instead, focus on the your target vocabulary/structures.  
5. Personalize the story. Include students, celebrities or events in students' lives as part of the story. Students will find that much more compelling than a story to which they cannot relate.
6. The story needs to have a conflict/problem of some kind. This is true of any story.
7. Repeat the target vocabulary and language structures as many times as possible. An unsuccessful attempt at the solution to the conflict with further attempts is a good way for natural repetitions. Dialogues also allow for repetitions.
8. Keep the story short. Some folks will start with a version which is just 20-30 words and then expand from that. I have found that a story between 50-75 words is good for students, because it allows for a good number of repetitions. If the first draft of the story is longer than that, consider whittling it down to create two separate embedded readings.
9. A unexpected plot twist at the end helps so that the story is not predictable. 

For me, this story will serve as the primary lesson by which I plan to teach these target vocabulary/structures. I usually spend 3-4 days on the story, having students review it in 6-7 different ways, each time with a different focus to preserve the novelty, but each time with the goal of getting in necessary repetitions and input. After 3-4 days, then I have the class read through version #2 (embedded reading) of the story, which I call the real version.

Latin 1 example - this was based upon my students' outrage that regular Poptarts were no longer being sold in the school vending machines due to Michelle Obama's initiatives. I figured that this would make for a personal, compelling story.

Target vocabulary

1) vendit

2) iratus

3) ego + volo

Version #1

Jack poptartem vult. schola poptartes non vendit. Jack est iratus. Jack clamat, "ego poptartem volo!"

Jack ad Publix it. Publix poptartes vendit. Publix poptartes non habet. Jack est iratus. Jack clamat, "ego poptartem volo!"

Jack ad Michelle Obamam it. Michelle Obama poptartes vendit. Jack est iratus. Jack clamat, "ego poptartem volo!"

Jack poptartem capit. Michelle Obama clamat, "ego poptartem volo!" Jack poptartem consumit, et non est iratus.

Version #2

Jack poptartem vult. Jack ad scholam it. sed schola poptartes non vendit. Jack dicit, "O Mr. Toda, cur schola poptartes non vendit?" Mr. Toda dicit, "Michelle Obama poptartes in schola non vult." Jack est iratus. Jack clamat, "ego poptartem volo." quod Jack est iratus, Jack fit (becomes) Hulk. Hulk Mr. Todam sumit. Hulk Mr. Todam iacit. Hulk non est iratus, et fit (becomes) Jack.

Jack ad Publix it. Jack dicit, "Publix poptartes vendit." sed Publix poptartes non habet. Michelle Obama poptartes in Publixe non vult. Jack est iratus. Jack clamat, "ego poptartem volo." quod Jack est iratus, Jack fit (becomes) Hulk. Hulk Publixem sumit. Hulk Publixem iacit. Hulk non est iratus, et fit (becomes) Jack.

Jack ad Michelle Obamam it. Michelle Obama dicit, "Haha - ego omnes (all) poptartes in America habeo. ego omnes (all) poptartes in America vendo." Jack est iratus. Jack clamat, "ego poptartem volo." quod Jack est iratus, Jack fit (becomes) Hulk. Hulk Michelle Obamam sumit. Hulk Michelle Obamam iacit.

Hulk poptartem capit. Michelle Obama clamat, "ego poptartem volo." Hulk poptartem consumit, et non est iratus. Hulk fit (becomes) Jack. Jack omnes (all) poptartes capit. Jack ad scholam it. Jack omnes (all) poptartes dat. Jack est hero! sed Michelle Obama est iratus et fit (becomes) Hulk, et displodit.