Meeting the Multi-Lingual Learners in Our Classes Where They Are - Guest Post by Miriam Patrick

The following is a guest blog post by Miriam Patrick, a CI/ADI Latin teacher who has also taught Multi-Lingual (ML - also referred to as ELL, ESL, and ESOL) students full time. I have asked her to write a post about what we teachers should know about how to best serve ML students in our World Language CI/ADI classrooms.

When I was first asked to consider getting my ELL (aka: ESOL, ESL, ML, etc) certification, I wasn’t sure I’d go for it. After looking into it (and realizing how much I already knew about it), I decided it would be worth it. Since then I’ve taught many ML students in my Latin classroom, taught ML students in an ESOL program, and even transitioned to an ESOL program exclusively before returning to my World Language classroom. What I discovered was that I already had the skills to work with these amazing students, I just needed to adjust the context.

Working with ML learners can feel intimidating, especially if we don’t have much (or any) knowledge on what language they do already know and where they are in their English learning journey, but the same knowledge applies to them, no matter if they are learning their second (like many of our native English speakers in our rooms), third, or fourth language: ML students acquire language when they receive understandable, compelling message in the target language in an environment of belonging.

While I could likely write a little novella on working with learners of all kinds, I want to focus this blog post on three areas: quick shifts, activities that shine, and daily practices. In each area, I’ll provide a quick introduction and 2-3 ideas (with links where I can).

Quick Shifts

Quick shifts are just that: quick and easy changes we can apply to what we are already doing. These can help support our ML learners without having to write multiple activities or make large changes to what we are already doing:

1. Allow your ML students to take notes in their native language… even if you are taking it for a grade. When it comes down to it, notes must be beneficial to the learner. Students who are acquiring extra languages need to be able to make connections to what they already know. Additionally (see points 2/3), consider letting students take portions of the test (vocabulary for example) in their own nativelanguage. If it is a simple vocabulary test, you can fairly easily get the vocabulary list in the TL and their native language and check their work with that.
2. Provide multiple forms of input. We already do this, but we often start to lessen that support earlier than we should (I’m guilty of it too). Provide a picture, a gesture, the English, and, if you can, the word in the ML student’s native language every time. If you are unfamiliar with the student’s language, give them the vocabulary list ahead of time (in the TL and English with a picture) and let them look up the word in their native language. Allow them to have that list out as you do your instruction.
3. Test without English. There are quick ways to adjust an assessment to allow for students of all kinds to show what they know. Consider doing a TPR quiz and give instructions in the target language. Allow your ML students to go a little later in the call and respond so they can see what is expected of them. Consider a vocabulary quiz with pictures instead of definitions. Students can draw a picture or match them to the TL vocabulary. Allow students to highlight within the passage and color code instead of writing proof for an answer.

Activities that Shine

These activities are ones that I’ve done with my ML students and they’ve remarked that they’ve enjoyed them or they were able to show me some great things in their work.

1.  Illustrated Texts - I love this activity for everyone. This could be done in a variety of ways, focusing on a variety of things, but I have found it most meaningful when students get to choose what to focus on and how to highlight what they’ve found important.
2.  Code Switched Passages - This activity, admittedly, takes some prep work, but it allows students and teachers to really focus on target vocabulary and/or structures using a known language. The research was done with ML students and they had very strong findings.

Daily Practices

These are things that I have started to ensure I do each day with my classes. I do not mark them as strategies for my ML students, but invite everyone to consider them.

1. Expand your cognates and derivatives list, but don’t assume cognates and derivatives are clear. I used to provide cognates and derivatives in English to show how Latin has influenced my own language. Now I offer them in multiple languages if I can, but, caveat emptor, make sure you are clear on those connections and you are clear on false connections. The Latin word nunc is a prime example. It means “now”. There is a Spanish word, nunca, that means never. I used to just simply give the English meaning, but now, if I know I have Spanish speakers, I provide that extra context.
2. Slow down, pause, point, as often as possible. I know that sometimes it feels like moving at a glacial pace, but remember that our ML students are filtering between more languages than many other students. If we aren’t (or can’t) provide input and support in their language then they are working, at best, in three languages: their own, our target language, and the English we provide. They need processing time!
3. Check in with them. We often put the onus on students to let us know when they need help. Our ML students have been “trained” (often unconsciously by the system, parents, and teachers) to stay quiet and not make a fuss. They sit in classrooms nodding and desperately needing help. A simple check in with your ML students can go a long way to finding out what support they actually need from you.

Dear Latin Novella Authors

Previously I had written a blog post to Novice-Level novella authors, praising them for why I felt successful reading their novice low/mid Spanish novellas. This one is now directed to Latin novella authors.

Dear Latin Novella Authors,

10 years have passed since the first Latin novellas Brando Brown Canem Vult and Pluto: Fabula Amoris came out. Since 2016, a great number of Latin novellas have since been published - I love that finally Latin novellas are on the scene! Thank you for writing these much needed readings which greatly support the acquisition of the Latin language. Krashen writes:

“More speaking or writing does not result in more language or literacy development, but more reading does.”

However, Latin authors, I have one request: we need more Latin novellas truly written for emerging/novice low level readers. We are leaving out a huge portion of our Latin student population. While many Latin teachers may feel that we need more upper-level novellas, hear me out.

My foundational argument is this: although our beginning Latin 1 students may be advanced readers of English, they are only emerging readers of Latin (not even novice yet). A huge false assumption which we Latin teachers have is that when we begin to introduce readings to our Latin 1 students at the beginning of first semester, our students should be able to read them. The reality, however, is:

1. many of our students do NOT possess a high reading level when they come to our Latin 1 classes due to having come through the balanced literacy approach and never actually learning to read or due to not being a native speaker of English.
2. one's reading level in one's primary reading language does NOT transfer immediately to reading in another language. It is not a 1:1 exchange. This includes the ability to decode words when reading. To say that a student who can read X number of words/minute in English should then be able to read that same number of words/minute in Latin is faulty. In the Winter 2026 edition of The Language Educator (ACTFL's magazine), in its article, "Leveraging the Science of Reading Research for Multilingual Success in Dual Language Immersion Programs," Budke and Showers note that we must "acknowledge that transfer between foundational skills in English and the partner language is not automatic and many phonemes and graphemes require explicit instruction."

In the beginning, level 1 students are dealing with a lot at once when reading Latin: they are still familiarizing themselves with how the Latin language appears as a written language, the sounds which the letters represent, the inflected nature of the language, that the verb usually appears at the end of the sentence, and that these words have a meaning attached to them.

In addition, what we think is level-appropriate readings for emerging/novice-level readers is actually not in reality. Latin textbooks have "told" us what are "level-appropriate" readings for Latin 1, but Latin 1 textbook readings are not aligned with any true acquisition theory but rather with a race to get students to translate classical literature by the 3rd year. 

Aspects of emerging/novice-low target language readings are:

• short sentences, with each primarily focusing on one idea
• predictable sentence patterns
• limited vocabulary AND grammatical structures (now is not the time to introduce "shelter vocabulary but not grammar")
• repeated use of sentences
• sentences are not written as paragraphs but rather as individual lines
• high usage of English cognates and proper nouns so that readers can then focus on the target language words
• pictures to aid students in their comprehension (I do feel a bit uneasy with this though due to how much "look at the pictures" played a role in balanced literacy and how students struggled to read when the pictures disappeared)

How often do we find our students never developing their Latin reading skills, because they are rather focusing their attention on stopping at every single word in a sentence to decode it? That does not develop reading.

Some of you may be saying, "Well, my Latin 1 students can read Latin right away with no problems." If that is you, go forth and prosper. However, I have students who STRUGGLE to read in English, let alone another language. I want these students to feel successful in reading Latin which is developmentally-appropriate in their Latin acquisition process.

I encourage you to check out Adam Giedd's Confidence Readers in Spanish. I began reading them in my quest to read novice-level Spanish. Along with Margarita Perez Garcia, both of these authors have a great understanding of what emerging/novice-level readers of Spanish need. They also are masters at creating compelling plots with limited vocabulary!

Many Latin teachers use novellas for Free Voluntary Reading (FVR), and this is to be applauded. Nation and Wang (2020) write, "The single most important way that a teacher could improve their language program would be to include extensive reading." A key feature of pleasure reading is that we tend to read materials which are BELOW our reading level. I always use the examples that People Magazine is written at an 8th grade reading level and that most newspaper articles are written at a 10th grade reading level. When we read for pleasure BELOW our frustration level of reading, our reading fluency will increase. (The converse is true: if we wish to increase our reading comprehension, we should read ABOVE our frustration level of reading. Yet, I would not suggest doing this with language learners - that will only raise the affective filter in students!). Therefore, even advanced readers of Latin will benefit from reading emerging/novice level Latin readings!  

And just so you do not think that I am not practicing what I say here, I have written about 8-10 drafts of emerging/novice-low, "Confidence Readers" in Latin for which I just need to get on the ball and start shopping around to novella publishers.

Keith

Retrieval Practice - Rotating Lists

Previously, I wrote a blog post about Retrieval BINGO, an activity involving retrieval practice which I learned from Liam Printer's "The Motivated Classroom" podcast. To restate Printer, retrieval practice is way to aid in the output process:

'Retrieval practice' is a study technique where mental effort is used to recall information. It focuses on bringing information to mind which enhances and boosts learning. Deliberately recalling information forces us to pull our knowledge “out” and examine what we know. 

Once again, Florencia Henshaw defines output as "expressing meaning retrieving from your (language) system."

So as a way to review a reading which we had been working on in Latin, I did a variation of Retrieval BINGO but based on Eric Richards' Rotating Desk activity.

1. I organized students into three groups of 9 students.
2. Each student had a whiteboard, marker, and rag.
3. I had students number 1-9 on their boards.
4. I then told students to write any Latin word which they remembered from the story for #1.
5. After that, I told students to pass their board to the person on their left.
6. Now, they had to read word #1 and write a new word for #2 (it could have been the word which they wrote for #1 as long as it was a different word).
7. I then had them pass it to the person on their left, read what was written for words #1 and #2 and write a new word for #3.
8. They did this routine until they got back their board and now they had to read what words had been listed.
9. Once they did that, a'la Liam Printer's Retrieval BINGO activity,  I had them all stand up and then I read off 5 words which I had chosen. If the word was on their board, they had to sit down. Whoever was left standing was the "winner".

Observations

1. Yes, this was a very guided, sheltered form of output, yet it was solely based on words from a previous reading with which students were familiar.
2. In re-reading the list of words each round, students got input, with the hopes of maybe using one of those words later if they got stuck and could not think of a word. 
3. Again, I was surprised at what words students recalled which I did not even consider when I made my list of five words.
4. Once again, the standing up at the end created a sense of suspense based on who sat down each time I said one of the words and who was left standing.
5. Yes, a student could write down the same word nine times (the probability is very low of this as the activity progresses), but at the same time, the student is receiving continued input in reading the lists of words each round. Hopefully, these words will start to take root in that student's mental representation of language.

Retrieval Practice - BINGO

In a recent post, I discussed how Liam Printer in his podcast series The Motivated Classroom spotlighted the importance of developing the "retrieval process" of language in students to aid in their output process. 

'Retrieval practice' is a study technique where mental effort is used to recall information. It focuses on bringing information to mind which enhances and boosts learning. Deliberately recalling information forces us to pull our knowledge “out” and examine what we know. 

This very much aligns with Henshaw's definition of output: expressing meaning retrieving from your system. However, we must also quickly understand that output in and of itself does not lead to language acquisition. We must build up students' language systems with input so that they have something from which to retrieve for the purpose of expressing meaning.

In that podcast episode, Printer lists 11 quick and easy activities which one can implement with students which are geared towards developing language retrieval in students and are very guided, sheltered "output" in nature. The first one is simply called Retrieval BINGO. I tried this out after the first two weeks of class, and it went very well. 

1. Every student has a whiteboard or piece of paper.
2. Have students number 1-5 on their whiteboard/paper.
3. Give students 1-2 minutes to write down ANY target language word which they remember from the current reading.
4. At the same time, you write down four words from the reading too.
5. After the time is up, have students stand up.
6. Tell students that you have written down four words yourself and will read them off one at a time.
7. If you read one of their words, then they have to sit down.
8. Whoever is left standing by the end is the "winner".
9. The winner reads aloud their list of words to the class.
10. Repeat the activity again.

Observations

1. I love this activity! What a great sheltered way for students to "output" (per Henshaw, "retrieving from their system").
2. Because it is based on the current reading, this gives necessary parameters for students.
3. I was absolutely surprised at what words students wrote down - many wrote down words which I was not targeting in the reading, but yet somehow students' brains had latched onto them in their mental representation of language.
4. The standing up and sitting down nature added a bit of kinesthetic learning to the activity.
5. Although this was a sheltered "output" activity, students still received A LOT of input with them writing down their known words, from me reading my list of words, and from the winner(s) reading their list of words.
6. It was a novel way to review the reading, because when a target word was said aloud, I said the context sentence from the story.
7. When we played the second time, now that students knew what the activity was, many really tried to come up with a new set of words from either their own memory or from what words they had just heard read aloud.
8. Yes, when we played the second time, students could have written the same list of words again. I will give students the benefit of the doubt and chalk it up to that these are the words which students are able to retrieve from their language system. This is okay - hopefully with more continued input to their system, the next time we play, these students will be able to retrieve additional words.
9. Students want to play this game again and again!

Thanks to Liam Printer for this fun yet quick "output" activity!

True/False PQAs using "Has"

At this past summer's CI Summit in Cincinnati, I had the privilege of watching Bryan Kandel demo a very simple, true/false purposefully communicative activity. Bryan is an absolutely master communicator, as he made this low-prep activity SO personable and compelling for us. This activity can be found in his book Give Them What They Want: A Guide to Increasing Enrollment in World Language Class, and it is so amazingly simple to facilitate.

1. Create a list of sentences in the target language about different students in your class. The sentences can be anything which is personalized about the students. These sentences can include target vocabulary or language structures. Examples: Joy wants a dog, Amayah has seen the movie Spiderman: No Way Out, Charlene went ice skating this weekend, etc.
2. Project the sentences. 
3. Have students write True or False for each sentence on paper/whiteboards to predict what they think the answer is. Students may not ask the specific students if their sentence is true or false.
4. Review each sentence with the class by asking the student in the target language about whom the sentence is if the statement is True or False. 
5. If students have predicted correctly, they give themselves a point.
6. Continue the activity by asking the student and class extension PQAs in the target language related to the statement.
7. Total points upon completion to determine a "winner".

In my Latin 1's a month ago, I recently did this activity on day 4 of class. Because I was targeting the word "has," I created the following statements in Latin for each of my three Latin 1 classes - yes, because it was day 4 of Latin 1, there were a number of words which I had to gloss for them such as "driver's license," "sister," "brother," and "job".

• ______ has an xBox.
• ______ has a brother.
• ______ has a dog. 
• ______ has an iPhone. 
• ______ has a driver's license.
• ______ has a sister. 
• ______ has a job.

Observations

1. Wow, I was surprised at how well this activity went with Latin 1 students, even with limited vocabulary! What a fun way to learn about each other in the target language!
2. Students were actually engaged in the activity - I think the predicting and running point total added to that.
3. I randomly picked students ahead of time for each sentence, so I personally did not know the answers. Plus, because it was the 4th day of class, I had no idea who the students actually were yet. 
4. This was a great example of purposeful communication, because students were learning about each other in the target language. I definitely learned a lot about them.
5. Extension PQAs seem so natural to do after finding out if the statement is true or false.
6. Students whose names were not used have asked me if we are going to this again, because they want to have a sentence about them!
7. I plan to do this activity again with the word "wants".

Get Bryan Kandel's book, because he has so many great communicative activities in it. Thanks, Bryan!

Grammar-Translation is the Way

The following blog post is directed solely at Latin teachers.

Yes, I said it. Grammar translation is the way. If your goal as a Latin teacher is to get students to translate classical literature as quickly as possible, then by all means grammar-translation methodology is the way to do it. Implementing a CI/ADI approach which is aligned with second language acquisition research will not get students there in the same amount of time at all. However, be aware: based on ACTFL proficiency guidelines, in a traditional Latin curriculum where the goal is to begin translating classical literature after just three years, you are asking students to jump from novice-level readings to Superior/Distinguished level literature, and only a select few type of students can do that. 

Let me state up front: I LOVE grammar. I learned Latin in high school from the good ol' Jenny book in the mid 1980's. I THRIVED in Latin because grammar-translation totally appealed to me and how my brain processed information. I was a quick processor and recognized patterns immediately. For my first years of public school teaching, I taught grammar translation out of Latin for Americans, and by 2005, my colleague Bobby Guarnella and I had built up our Latin program to over 350 students using a grammar-translation approach. I was a damn good grammar-translation teacher. I know all about grammar-translation quite intimately! 

But does grammar-translation work for every learner? I would have to say a very hard "NO," because if that were the case, then every student would be successful with a grammar translation approach. If we are truly honest with ourselves, we know for a fact that only some learners will succeed. If you are okay with that, then that is your choice.

I think that a huge misconception among many is that somehow CI/ADI instruction is a fast track to language acquisition and to getting students to produce language at a quicker pace. The reality is that CI/ADI instruction aligns with how a learner's brain acquires language on a "realistic timeline" for language acquisition, and I use that term "realistic timeline" loosely, because all learners will acquire language at different rates. Language acquisition is unlike any other subject area because it is not linear in nature. To quote Long (1997):

“the idea that what you teach is what [students] learn, and when you teach [x grammar topic] is when they learn it, is not just simplistic, it is wrong." 

Bill Van Patten states,  "Language acquisition is slow, piecemeal, and stage-like and follows a path not dictated by instruction or external forces.” However, what we can expect is that there will be an expected range of language development among learners at any point in time, which ACTFL has defined as its proficiency levels.

As I stated in my last blog post "Grammar Translation Origins," I will say that grammar translation is definitely efficient. Yet, by no mean is it practical or realistic to the way in which learners acquire language. If your goal is that students learn about the language for the purpose of decoding classical literature, then grammar translation is the way to go. Go forth and prosper.

Grammar Translation Origins

At the beginning of every school year, my goal is to daily read through Eric Herman's book Research Talks: Motivating Acquisition-Centered Classroom. The book's format is set up similarly to a daily devotional but instead of religious scripture, there is a research quote related to different second language acquisition topics such as input, communication, output, textbook grammar, etc. I have said before that I always mistakenly call this book Research Bites (much like the movie Reality Bites). I like calling it that though, because Eric presents this research in bite-size chunks and makes it very easy for my academic research-challenged brain to synthesize. 

In his Week 3 chapter, under the heading of Textbook Grammar, Herman addresses what many point to as the formal codification of the grammar-translation movement. While grammar translation had been employed throughout the ages prior, it was not until the late 16th century that it became a part of formalized language education. In 1540, St. Ignatius of Loyola founded the Jesuit Society, of which one of its primary focuses was the promotion of education. Its academic curriculum centered on the learning of humanities through classical literature and a heavy emphasis on Catholic theology as a response to the Protestant Reformation in 1517. In 1558, in the Constitutions of the Society of Jesus (Part IV, Chapter 15, Paragraph [471], Ignatius wrote: 

In the study of humane letters and the languages a definite period of time for their completion cannot be established, because of the difference in abilities and knowledge of those who attend the lectures, and because of many other reasons which permit no other prescription of time save that which the prudent consideration of the rector or chancellor will dictate for each student.

Essentially, Ignatius realized that when it came to a humanistic education of grammar, rhetoric, and language acquisition (immersive Latin), there could not be a prescribed timeline due to various factors which the students themselves brought to their education - wealth, previous education, natural abilities, etc. As a result, he advocated that learning could not be dictated by a timeline. Rather, the pace of study was something to be determined individually on a student-by-student basis with the student's teachers. Basically, Ignatius understood that when it came to language acquisition, not every student acquired language at the same rate; to state that in language learning that all students acquire something when one teaches it was wrong in his view. Therefore, Ignatius believed that the acquisition of Latin could not be bound to a designated timeline.

However, in 1599 (some forty years after Ignatius' death), in the Ratio Studiorum in "Rules of the Prefect of Lower Studies" in Rule 8, the Jesuit Society wrote:

All rules of Emmanuel (a standardized Latin grammar textbook written by Emmanuel Alvarez, a Portuguese Jesuit priest) must be divided into three books, of which each is appropriate for a single class...The master practically completes the book of each class during the first semester and begins from the beginning in the second."

Although the Jesuit Society did not invent grammar-translation methodology, it certainly standardized and streamlined it. However, while this made the teaching of Latin more efficient in spreading it over a 3-year period, it was neither practical nor realistic in terms of how language acquisition actually works and in truth was counterintuitive to the way in which one acquires a language.

So whatever your view is of grammar-translation, you can look to the Jesuit Society for its formal codification of this methodology and also see that its founder St. Ignatius of Loyola was a staunch opponent of the principle.