Social Emotional Learning (SEL)

One of our goals as CI teachers is to establish community in our classes; if students feel like they are a part of the class, their affective filters will lower, and as a result, they will be more apt to participate and to be more engaged in what is going on in the class. We try to do this through telling stories, doing PQAs, personalizing stories - anything which will get the message across to students "I see you, and I value you."

In many ways, those activities are just teacher-to-student. What about student-to-student? How can we make students feel comfortable with each other so that they will even want to participate in front of their peers?

Let me also say that by nature, I am not a touchy-feely emotions kind of guy. While I am incredibly social and gregarious, I am also not one who naturally dwells on feelings. I am your typical guy - if you were to ask me how I am feeling, I would probably respond either "Tired" or "Hungry".

When I was at NTPRS this summer, in my group's 5-hour session of learning Japanese with Betsy Paskvan, one of the activities was to do a paired translation of a story in Japanese. This was the first day of the conference, and quite honestly, I only knew one other person in the room (because we had shared an airport shuttle coming over). While we could have done a ping pong/volleyball translation activity, instead Betsy asked us questions in English such as "Between you and your partner, who has the longest hair? That person will read aloud the next two sentences in Japanese, and the other person will translate into English." Other questions included "Who has traveled to the most countries?" "Who has the darkest eyes?" "Who traveled the furthest to get to Chicago?" etc. It actually was a lot of fun, because I got to share and to learn information from others in my group that probably would not have come up in a conversation, and it certainly kept things from getting boring and repetitive.

What we did with Betsy was an example of Social Emotional Learning (thanks to Bess Hayles and her blog - Bess was in my group at NTPRS - for pointing out what we were doing and that Betsy was being intentional in doing this). Social Emotional Learning is the idea that students learn/acquire better and more quickly when they are emotionally engaged with each other in a low pressure atmosphere. Examples can be group projects, team-building exercises and even partner activities. Social Emotional Learning helps develop trust within the community of students. If students want to be in your class because of others there, then they will more likely to be engaged in your class.

Examples of CI-based SEL activities:
1) Circling with Balls
2) Word Chunk game
3) Running Dictation
4) Betsy's take on partner translation activity
5) PQAs

This year, I am teaching three Latin 1 classes and 2 AP classes. For the most part, my classes are pretty social: the AP classes know each other from having taken Latin together over the past few years, and two of my Latin 1 classes seem to enjoy each other and cannot get enough of each other and of me. THEN...I have another Latin 1 class which is very quiet. By no means is this a bad, disruptive class, but rather the opposite, I do not know if these students are just naturally quiet and are primarily introverts or if it is that they are not comfortable with each other enough to participate vocally or if it is the time of the day or if they are reacting to me or if it is a combination of all of the above. For these past three opening weeks of school, this is the class which has baffled me the most in using CI, because they seem so non-responsive. Doing Circling with Balls is almost painful to do with them! Quite honestly, they are the class which I dread teaching sometimes, because I cannot read them emotionally.

So three days ago, in doing a partner translation activity with my Latin 1 classes, instead of doing a ping pong/volleyball reading, I decided to do a SEL activity much like Betsy did with my group at NTPRS. During the activity, I asked five different questions in English - "Between you and your partner, ___________? That person will read the next 3 sentences in Latin, and your partner will translate into English.":

1. who has the latest lunch period?
2. whose locker is furthest away from my classroom?
3. who ate dinner the latest last night?
4. who has the longest hair?  
5. who has the most siblings?

As I expected, the two social Latin 1 classes really enjoyed it, but what I did not expect was that this particular quiet Latin 1 class started to open up some! After each of the partners had completed their sentence translations, I asked the class to tell me some of the responses which they got from their partners. I was surprised both by how many students volunteered to tell what their partner had said and by how much the class actually wanted to hear what others had said. It was almost as if the actual partner translation was incidental, and the activity was more about community building than reading (and in some ways it was, because the class was actually re-reading something which they had chorally translated the day before). 

The next day, however, that class reverted back to its normal quiet self, but for 20 minutes the day before, I saw glimmers of community begin to develop among those group of students. This semester, I will continue to do more SEL activities with that class and to chip away slowly at whatever is impeding them from feeling comfortable with each other. 

Post Scriptum: Yesterday, because it was a Friday, I played the Word Chunk game with my Latin 1 students. As expected, my two social Latin 1 classes absolutely latched onto this activity, but I also had a HUGE gnawing feeling in my stomach that the other Latin 1 class would not "enjoy" it as much as the others. Wow, to my amazement, that class really got into it! Hopefully, I can continue to ride this wave of community which has started in that class.

Read Dating

This CI reading strategy, which I got from friend and colleague Bob Patrick, is a variation of Ping Pong/Volleyball Reading  - my Rusticatio friend Justin Slocum Bailey calls it "Read Dating," and you will see why! This is a great reading activity, because it gets students moving around.

1. Organize student desks in pairs facing each other in a circular fashion around the room. You as the teacher are in the center. If there is an odd number of students, still line up desks this way.
2. The outer circle of students is labeled "A", while the inner circle folks are labeled "B". If there is an odd number of students, there will be one student who does not have a partner. Do not worry - it will all work out.
3. Every student has his/her own copy of the reading. The reading should be either a re-reading of something already read, an embedded reading or something which students can easily read at sight due to familiarity with vocabulary and language structures.
4. Like in ping pong/volleyball reading, "A" students read the first sentence aloud in Latin to their partner sitting across from them, and then immediately, "B" students translate the sentence into English
5. If "B" student needs help, then "A" student can help out. If neither student knows, then they ask you.
6. Once "B" student finishes translating, then he/she reads the next sentence in Latin aloud to his/her partner, and "A" student translates into English.
7. Partners alternate back and forth for 2 minutes. If there is an odd number of students, one student will not participate in this activity for the round. Tell him/her to read the story quietly.
8. At the end of 2 minutes, tell "A" students rotate one seat to the right. If you have a bell, ring it to signify that time is up - this make it really feel like speed dating!
9. If there is an odd number of students, now there will be a new student who does not have a partner.
10. Now that there is a new pair, the 2 students determine where they left off in the story, and they start up at the earlier of the two sentences. Yes, there is going to be repetition for one of the readers, but that is a good thing.
11. After 2 minutes, tell "B" students rotate to the right, and start up again.
12.  When students finish the story, they go back to the beginning and read/translate it again.
13. The length of time for the activity depends on the length of the passage. You want students to go through a story at least 1 1/2- 2 times.

Observations

1. As the teacher, I love this activity, because I am doing nothing but facilitating! Occasionally, I will be called upon to help with a sentence.
2. Students are helping each other out if there is something which they do not understand
3. It is a great way to to get students to move around and to interact with each other. If a student does not "prefer" his/her partner, he/she only has to spend two minutes with that person!
4. If you want to mix things up some, tell students to move 3-4 seats instead of just 1.

Ping Pong/Volleyball Reading

This is a great partner reading/translation activity, and it is a staple of the TPRS/CI classroom when it comes to reading. Ping pong/volleyball reading is easy to facilitate, and this works wonderful for a re-reading/post-reading of an embedded version or for a VERY easy sight passage (meaning, students are already familiar with all of the vocabulary/language structures):

1. Group students into groups of four. Depending on the number of students in your classroom, it may be necessary to have a few groups of three or of five.
2. Within each group, two students will be a #1 and two students will be a #2. If it is a group of three, you will not number the students. If it is a group of five students, there will be three students who are #1.
3. Have a #1 student pair up with a #2 student in the group. Again, in the group of three, these students will not be numbered and in a group of five, there will be one group which has three students.
4. Give each student a copy of a Latin reading.
5. In their pairs, student #1 will read aloud the first sentence in Latin and then student #2 will translate that sentence into English. Then student #2 will read the next sentence in Latin, after which, student #1 will translate that into English. Student #1 will then read the next sentence in Latin and so on. If it is a group of three, then students will rotate in a clockwork fashion whose turn it is to read in Latin and whose turn it is to translate into English. If it is a group of five, the two students who are #1 will alternate turns.
6. If a student does not know a word, he/she can ask his/her partner. If neither of them know, they are to ask you the teacher.
7. After two minutes, then tell students to switch partners in their groups. If there is a group of three students, it will not change partners.
8. Now with their new partners, students will determine where each of them left off with their previous partner. The new partners will begin to read/translate starting at the EARLIER stopping point of the two. 
9. The new partners will continue to alternate reading/translating.
10. After two minutes, switch partners again in the group. 
11. If partners complete the story, they are to start again from the beginning.
12. Continue switching every two minutes until the story has been read at least 1 1/2 times by the groups (depending on the length of the story, this could be anywhere from 5-10 minutes.

Observations

1. This is such a great activity for you as the teacher, because all you do is facilitate.
2. Though students hate having to start again at an earlier point or to start at the beginning again when they complete the reading, it is a great way to get students to re-read the story and to get in repetitions!
3. If a student does not know a vocabulary word, mispronounces a word wrong or translates something incorrectly, his/her partner will help him/her out. Your job is purely to walk around and to be available as an aid.
4. Students really do learn from each other through listening.
5. I would not do this activity for more than 10 minutes with the same reading, because it gets old for students. 
6. This is a great way to do an embedded reading if the first story is relatively short. When students change partners, they can switch over to the second version, which should be easy to read, since the first version which they just read is embedded in the second version.
7. It is a different way of doing a re-reading of a story. As noted TPRS/CI presenter Carol Gaab says. "The brain craves NOVELTY!' 

TPR (Total Physical Response) for the First Week of Latin 1

In Stephen Krashen's theory of Comprehensible Input, a "silent period" of active listening and of auditory language processing is needed in order for language acquisition to occur, e.g. think of how much input which babies take in before they begin to verbalize/speak. Therefore, it is not recommended for teachers to jump immediately into having level 1 students produce language right away at the beginning of the school year. As much as you may want to go around the room having students ask/tell each their names in the target language during the first week, rather consider doing Total Physical Response (TPR) with your level 1 classes instead.

TPR is essentially associating a vocabulary word with a physical action. It can be hand gestures, American Sign Language (ASL) signs or the actual physical action itself. The idea is that through enough repetitions muscle memory will aid in the acquisition process.

There are many different variations of TPR which can be used in the world language classroom, of which the most basic form is commands, where you as the teacher command a student/students to do something in the target language, and their task is simply to perform it. I will do TPR for the first 5 days of Latin 1 - I know that Bob Patrick does it for the first 10 days - and I will do it for about 20-25 minutes of class.

What kinds of words to teach? That is up to you, but for obvious reasons, the verbs need to be action words. You can pick classroom management words such as "sit down," "stand up," "shout," "be quiet," etc or words which have much action associated with them, e.g. "go," "open," "close," "pick up," "put down," "throw," etc. I usually pick 4-5 new words each day on which to focus, while continuing to recycle past words in order to get in repetitions.

The name of the game is to get in as many repetitions as possible in as many different ways! Students must hear the words in a meaningful context over and over again in order to acquire them. The number thrown around is 70 repetitions in a meaningful context in order for students to acquire vocabulary.

1) For the first 1-2 days, stick with only verbs as commands.Determine which words you will teach that day using TPR, and write the commands on the board in both the target language and in English in order to establish meaning. I usually write both the singular and plural form, because throughout the class, I will end up commanding both individuals and the class as a whole to do something.

2) When introducing a new command, I will usually "command myself' first by pointing to the word on the board in order to establish meaning and then I will demonstrate the action. I will then call upon multiple individual students to perform the action

3) Even though this is a silent period for students, the very completion of the command demonstrates comprehension and is a form of non-verbal output, i.e. it was necessary for students to understand you in order to complete the task.

4) Once students begin to understand the commands (maybe after a day or so), start introducing objects or places in the room for students now to use and with which to interact. Remember to write the nouns on the board both in the target language and in English in order to establish meaning and to point to the words and pause when you use them.

5) Feel free to introduce adverbs too, such as "slowly" and "quickly" to spice things up.

6) As students begin to acquire the language, you can also start making longer sentences, such as "Carlita, stand up and go to the table. Pick up the book slowly and bring it to me. Now go to the table, pick up a cookie and throw it to Barbara."

7) A variation is in the beginning to divide the class into groups, to give them a name (a number, animal, color, etc) and to command the different groups - this requires the class to listen, "Beatnicks, stand up! Hula Hoopers, stand up! Beatnicks, sit down! Hula Hoopers, turn around! Hula Hoopers, stop! Beatnicks, stand up! Beatnicks, walk to the Hula Hooper and sit on them!"

8) As acquisition furthers during TPR, you can start to narrate the action of a student, e.g. "Susan, walk to the door slowly. O class, Susan is walking to the door slowly (you write "is walking" on the board in the target language and in English in order to establish meaning and then point/pause). Susan, touch the door. O class, Susan is touching the door (you do the same for "is touching") In this manner, you have gone from the singular imperative to the 3rd singular present form, but don't get into a full-on grammar discussion about it just yet. If you do this enough, students will start to predict the pattern and actually say it with you.

Your first instinct may be to jump into the grammar of it all but wait for a student to say something. Usually, I will have a student ask, "Why did 'ambula' go to 'ambulat'?" and my first response is, "Even though the form of the word changed, did you understand what I said? I used 'ambulat' because I am narrating the action of Susan, not commanding her," and I will leave it at that - this is an example of pop-up grammar. The same goes for if your nouns change forms too based on their function.

9) As noted CI/TPRS publisher and presenter Carol Gaab is fond of saying, "The brain craves NOVELTY," so change up the commands/objects by having students do wacky and funny tasks with different combinations of known words, e.g. "Julio, pick up the cookie and eat it slowly. Now turn around slowly and eat the cookie loudly and slowly. Marsha, walk to the board, pick up a pen and write 'I love Justin Bieber' on the board slowly." This is what will keep the class engaged!

After 5 days or so, students should have 25-30 words, which you specifically targeted for them, in addition to maybe another 10-15 words which were incidental words.

10) After the 20-25 minutes of TPR, I will review the new words which were TPR'd. This is a good time to introduce any derivatives which come from the words.

11) I sometimes give students 5 minutes at the end of class to command me around the room. Because the words are written on the board with their English meaning, I am not asking them to output on their own (although many will have acquired those words purely due to the massive amount of input).

I was absolutely scared the first time I ever did TPR a few years ago, because I was 100% sure that it was going to bomb. Instead, I had one of my best experiences with CI, because I was completely floored by how engaged the students were and by how much these Latin 1 students understood what I was saying (due to establishing meaning), even though I was speaking in Latin.

Embedded Reading, part 2

This is part 2 of a series on Embedded Reading.


An earlier post ended with a dilemma regarding Embedded Reading. During the 6th week of 1st semester, in one of my Latin III classes, we had just finished reading version #1 of a story from the textbook and now I was ready for the class to read version #2 of that embedded reading, a slightly more difficult version but still readable and comprehensible. When I told the class this, one of my students yelled out, "Again? It really was not that interesting the first time we read it!'

And he was 100% correct. Though the reading was comprehensible and understandable, one incredibly necessary factor had been left out: the story itself was not compelling, i.e. the plot was not interesting enough to keep students' attention. Noted CI/TPRS writer and presenter Carol Gaab says, "COMPELLING input is just as important as COMPREHENSIBLE input." So I found myself in a dilemma: I wanted students to read in a scaffolded manner, but what to do since, even though the stories were now easier to read, students found the stories themselves boring? 

Meanwhile, at the same time, I found that students really liked the short stories which I had written as dictationes (I will admit, I have a weird sense of humor. And since in a dictatio, I am trying to force rather random vocabulary words in a story for the purpose of previewing those words in a context, the story itself seems rather random yet compelling). A number of students truly began to ask for the "back story" and wanted me to "fill in the gaps" about some of the characters and plot, and quite honestly, I had never thought of doing anything further with the plots in dictationes. Plus, with a dictatio, I was bound by keeoing the plot to 8-9 sentences - what if I were to expand the dictatio into a form of embedded reading?

So there began my own experiment with embedded readings - what if the dictatio itself served as version #1 of the story, and version #2 expanded upon the dictatio, with the actual sentences of the dictatio embedded in it, and the final version had version #2 embedded in it? if this were the case, then the compelling factor would have to be the new parts of the plot which students hopefully were anticipating?

Meanwhile, unbeknownst to me, what I was wanting to do was actually part of what Embedded Readings are! New details are added in subsequent versions, because 

1. students are ready to read longer versions after reading shorter versions and 
2. the new information is what keeps the various versions compelling. 

Even though I had come to this conclusion on my own, I felt so much better when I learned this and that I was not going "rogue" by doing this experiment. So Laurie Clarcq and Michelle Whaley (co-developers of this strategy), embedded readings have been verified by an outside independent source!

Essentially, there are two different types of Embedded Reading: 

From the Top Down - this is taking a longer, more complex reading and "whittling" it down to a base version, which is easier to read (grammatically, number of sentences, superfluous details are left out), and then building from that base version to a more complex version and so on until students are ready to read the original unadapted version.

From the Bottom Up - this is creating a base story of a few sentences or so and then building upon that version by adding more details and language structures and so on until students come to the final version of the story.

My first attempts at embedded readings were From the Top Down, and my students did not seem to enjoy those because of the lack of compelling plot. What I began to do instead were From the Bottom Up, which allowed for me to control the structures and to create a compelling plot.

Here is an excerpt of a From the Bottom Up embedded reading which I created:

Version #1

olim Abby pessimum morbum habebat, sed non remedium habebat. Abby nunc maximos oculos et maximas aures habebat. Merlena erat crudelis puella et semper Abbyem deridebat. 

Version #2

olim Abby pessimum morbum habebat sed non remedium habebat. Abby non pecuniam habebat. Abby nunc maximos oculos et maximas aures habebat. Abby temptavit celare suos maximos oculos et maximas aures. Merlena, quae erat crudelis puella, semper Abbyem deridebat. Merlena Abbyem derisit, dicens, “tuae aures sunt maximae, sicut aures elephanti! tui oculi sunt maximae."

Version #3

olim Abby pessimum habebat, sed non remedium habebat. Abby non multam pecuniam habebat, quod autoraedam emerat. propter pessimum morbum, Abby nunc maximos oculos et maximas aures habebat. propter maximas aures, Abby temptavit gerere petasum, sed aures erant maximi. propter maximos oculos, Abby temptavit gerere perspicilla, sed oculi erant maximi. propter maximas aures et oculos, Abby discedere domum noluit. Merlena, quae erat crudelis puella, semper Abbyem deridebat. Merlena Abbyem deridere solebat, dicens, “tuae aures sunt maximae, sicut aures elephanti, sicut Dumbo! tui oculi sunt maximi, sicut plena luna! nemo te amat!"

Observations

1. The addition of new bits of the plot and personalizing the story by making students the characters for each version definitely made it more compelling for students to read.
2. Because the original versions were embedded in the final version, the final version was much easier to read, and students read it at a much faster pace. Even though the story appeared to be longer, the length of the story due to its apparent "ease" did not deter students.
3. Even though my stories were embedded, I need to do a MUCH better job at limiting the amount of vocabulary in the stories. Although the reading is embedded, in many ways, it is still an intensive reading (too much vocabulary and language structures) instead of an extensive reading (limited vocabulary and language structures with much repetition)
4. The embedding allowed for more meaningful repetitions of the language

So how does one create a From the Bottom Up embedded reading? As Laurie Clarcq and Michelle Whaley presented last week in their workshop:

1. Pick 3 language structures/vocabulary words on which you want to focus.
2. Write a short story of 3-4 sentences involving them - that will serve as your base story
3. Now WITHIN your base story, add 3-4 more sentences with new details. Do not just add the new details to the very end, because then students will not read the beginning, and the purpose is for students to re-read the story in order to get in more repetitions of the language. Try to repeat those language structures. Also, change the wording some of your first sentence so that students think it is a new version/story.
4. Now with the new version, add 3-4 more sentences with new details. You can start combining sentences/varying up the already existing sentences with new structures, as students are already familiar with the vocabulary, but again try to repeat those 3 language structures in the new details.
5. Continue until you feel the version which you have is complete. In my opinion, four versions are enough.

So give embedded readings a try - they actually do work! So what are some ways to get students to read them? I'll save that for future posts.

NTPRS 2014 Report (LONG)

This post is long, so take a seat if you wish to read this to the end...

I have returned from my first NTPRS (National Teaching Proficiency through Reading and Storytelling) Conference in Chicago. I had a wonderful experience, and whew, my brain is absolutely full from everything which I learned. 

Quite honestly, I was kind of tentative about attending NTPRS, because although I use TPRS in my classroom, it is not my primary CI method of teaching, as I implement many other CI strategies/techniques as well; folks had cautioned me that NTPRS was directed specifically at TPRS and not other CI strategies. I had wanted to attend the iFLT Conference in Denver the week before, but it conflicted with SALVI's Pedagogy Rusticatio which I was attending, so I decided to attend NTPRS and to glean whatever I could for my TPRS usage. Wow, was I wrong! Yes, TPRS strategies were addressed, but that seemed to be only a part of the entire conference, as CI was the overall theme.

Now going into the conference, I had felt that I already possessed a pretty good knowledge about teaching CI, but gosh, this was like a full-week of graduate school on CI. I have a MUCH fuller and deeper view now on CI and how to use it more effectively in my classes. 

What I enjoyed most was how friendly everyone was but more importantly that I was with other world language teachers who shared the SAME pedagogical view as I did. I did not have to defend my use of CI/TPRS to anyone, because all of us were on the same page! I could openly discuss what I was doing in my classroom, ask others how to do something specific and encourage folks who were just beginning to use CI/TPRS.

I was surprised by how well run the conference was. Participants pre-self rated themselves based on their familiarity/usage of TPRS, so there were three tracks: Beginner, Intermediate and Advanced - I was on the Advanced track. For the first three days, the morning/afternoon sessions were dedicated to one's particular track, and participants had the chance to learn and to be coached according to their levels. Following that, there were elective sessions which folks could attend based on specific CI topics. I will address much of what I learned in later posts, but here are the basics:

• Learning Japanese with Betsy Paskvan - My first day's morning/afternoon sessions were with Betsy, where she taught us Japanese using only CI. Because I am of Japanese descent, I think that most folks in my group (and the instructor too) thought that I already knew Japanese or at least some other Asian language, but the the truth is besides English, I can only speak Latin - I know absolutely no Japanese. In the beginning of Betsy's session, I was lost, because Japanese is such a technically specific language (Latin seems like a cakewalk compared to Japanese), and it took me awhile to get accustomed to the sounds of Japanese, but Betsy patiently brought us along slowly through LOTS of repetitions and of meaningful interactions with the language through listening, questioning and reading. Suddenly, somehow, during those 5 hours, it began to all click and by the end, I was able to speak Japanese (albeit it was limited) and to read/write Japanese (using English letters). It has been 5 days since I had that session, and I have still retained ALL of that Japanese, which I acquired subconsciously through CI. Because I got to experience learning another language via CI, now I know how my own students must feel and just how important it is that I implement these CI strategies both to aid in language acquisition and to keep the affective filter low. I want to move to Alaska so that i can learn more Japanese from Betsy!
• Session with Blaine and Von Ray - Wow, what could be better than 5 hours with the developer of TPRS and his son? Too much to discuss, so I'll leave that for a future post, but I have definitely added a lot more to my TPRS arsenal.
• Embedded Reading - I attended two elective sessions on Embedded Reading led by Laurie Clarcq and Michelle Whaley, the developers of this CI strategy. When I entered their first session, Laurie saw my nametag and immediately said to me, "Keith Toda, can I have permission to use your blog post about embedded reading on my website?" I was absolutely floored that Laurie even knew who I was; that she knew I had a blog post about embedded reading, which I had just written last week; and that she wanted to use it as a link on her blog! I was on Cloud Nine after that! Anyhow, I can listen to Laurie and Michelle present on embedded readings for hours, because first off, they are a hoot to see present in person but more importantly, this strategy addresses so many issues. Even Blaine Ray is a huge believer now in embedded readings! I do not know why English/Language Arts teachers do not use this strategy, since it addresses literacy.
• Research on TPRS - This was an important session to me, because as data now drives our schools, we as CI/TPRS need actual statistical results to validate our methodology; anecdotal evidence (such as student enthusiasm, fewer failures and higher student retention in the upper levels) is nice but that does not prove anything big picture. The presenter, who is a professor at North Indiana University, presented current statistical research which compared results of TPRS students vs. traditional-methods students on standardized language tests and how the TPRS students fared much better. Although this presenter only focused on TPRS and not on other CI strategies, the statistical data showed that this form of CI truly had an impact on learning.
• Reading Strategies with Carol Gaab - Wow, this 5-hour session alone was worth the price of the entire conference. I cannot put into words what I learned from Carol,  because she gave us all such a incredible treasure trove of CI reading strategies/techniques and presented it all with an incredible amount of energy, humor and humility. Carol had me fully engaged during those 5 hours. She gave us reading strategies using excerpts from her CI-based novel Brandon Brown Wants a Dog (which is actually written in Spanish), and now I want to learn Spanish, purely so that I can read that book - I have a bunch of theories about the plot and how it ends, but since I do not know enough Spanish, I cannot read it! Most importantly, Carol imparted the following gem of CI wisdom which has now become one of my CI mantras:

The brain craves NOVELTY - Comprehension/circling questions can get old REALLY fast for you and your students, so change it up with a new activity every two minutes or every 4th question 

The downside of the conference: While it was absolutely wonderful to be surrounded by fellow teachers who were also pursuing a deeper knowledge and practical application of CI, at times, I felt like a total minority/bastard child at the conference; I was the sole Latin teacher there, so in some ways, I never felt like I "fit in" when it came to specific language discussion/sessions. 

At the exhibitors' tables, all of the CI materials/readers were geared towards the modern languages - absolutely nothing for Latin. When I asked an exhibitor if there were future plans for any Latin materials, the person said, "Even if we were to publish readers in Latin, there just aren't enough Latin teachers out there using TPRS to make it cost effective." Well, buddy, maybe it is time for me to write some original TPRS readers in Latin and sell them myself!

So I write this not out of bitterness but more to say "Watch out, NTPRS. I plan to return next summer with a number of Latin teachers hungry for CI in tow, and we will make our presence known!" I really want there to be a Brandonus Fuscus Canem Vult novel! Any other Latin teachers want to join me next year ?

Embedded Reading, Part 1

The following is the first of a two-part series

One of Krashen's main tenets is the importance of reading and how that is a major contributor in language acquisition. Now in modern language classes, reading is not addressed enough, but in Latin classes, it seems like that is ALL WE DO!

I use CLC, which is a textbook based on reading methodology. I love the stories in stages 1-9, as they are fun passages and something which students can read easily. Students like the characters, and these particular readings are quite comprehensible and compelling. Somewhere, however, around stage 10, the readings suddenly become long and actually quite complex grammatically and vocabulary-wise for students, and what ends up happening is that students go from reading the stories to now translating/decoding them. Definitely by the time students reach the Unit 2 and 3 books, the readings are quite long, and students immediately become overwhelmed by the sheer length of them.

About a year ago, I learned about something called embedded readings, which are simply scaffolded versions of the same story, beginning with a simplified version, with progressively more difficult versions in between and eventually ending with the original text; in other words, in each of the versions, the previous text has been "embedded" in it. At ACTFL last November, I had the opportunity to see Laurie Clarcq, who has a website dedicated to embedded readings, present on this topic. 

Now prior to having a class read a passage, the understanding is that you as the teacher have already previewed any new vocabulary or structures so that nothing "new" pops up in the reading, thereby allowing students to read and not translate/decode.

Creating embedded readings is actually quite easy: 

1. Take the original text, and create the most simplified version of it, grammatically, vocabulary, etc. Now it may be that you do not include every single point of the original version but what you want is a very comprehensible and understandable version of the original version. 
2. Now create a version which is between the simplified version and the original text in terms of difficulty. The simplified text is "embedded" in this version but maybe now appears in a more complex grammatical construction or as part of a subordinate clause in a longer sentence.
3. End with the original version of the story. It may be that another interim version is needed before having students read the original version depending on the complexity.

Here is an example of an embedded passage from stage 29 CLC (passive voice is the language structure being introduced):

Embedded Version #1

Erat nox. luna et stellae fulgebant (were shining) in caelo. homines quiescebant (were resting). sed erat non quies (quiet) in Roma; erat non silentium in Roma. dives (rich) homines habitabant in magnis domibus, et consumebant cenas splendidas. servi cibum sumptuosum offerebant. ancillae optimum vinum fundebant et cantabant carmina. sed in altis insulis (apartment buildings), homines non cenas splendidas consumebant. homines audiebant non carmina. 

Embedded Version #2

nox erat. luna et stellae fulgebant (were shining) in caelo. erat tempus quo (when) homines quiescere solent (are accustomed to rest). Romae (in Roma) tamen erat nulla (not any) quies, erat nulla silentium. in magnis domibus, dives (rich) homines habitabant: 

• homines consumebant cenas splendidas; cenae splendidae consumebantur a (by) hominibus; 
• servi offerebant cibum sumptuosum (sumptuous); cibus sumptuosus offerebatur a servis; 
• servi fundebant optimum vinum; optimum vinum a servis fundebatur. 
• homines cantabant carmina; carmina cantabantur ab hominibus

in altis insulis (apartment buildings): 

• homines non consumebant cenas splendidas; nullae cenae splendidae consumebantur; 
• nemo audiebat carmina; nulla carmina audiebantur. 

Original

nox erat. luna stellaeque in caelo fulgebant. tempus erat quo homines quiescere solent. Romae (in Roma) tamen nulla erat quies, nulla silentium. magnis in domibus, ubi dives homines habitabant, cenae splendidae consumebantur. cibus sumptuosus a servis offerebatur. optimum vinum ab ancillis fundebatur. carmina cantabantur. in altis insulis (apartment buildings), nullae cenae splendidae consumebantur. nulla carmina audiebantur.

Another form of embedded reading is an enodatio (an untying of a knot), where the Latin passage is put back into an English word order. This is a technique which I learned from Nancy Llewellyn.

Embedded Version #1 of Aeneid, Book 1, lines 419-429, 437 

Aeneas miratur molem in Karthagō - molēs erant quondam magalia, sed nunc sunt moles. Aeneas quoque miratur portās, strepitum urbis et strata viārum. Tyriī sunt ardentēs, et instant: pars Tyriī ducunt murōs, pars Tyriī aedificant arcem, et pars Tyriī subvolvunt saxa manibus; pars Tyriī quaerunt locum domō, et concludunt locum sulcō. Tyriī legunt iura, magistratūs et sanctum senatum. Hic, aliī effodiunt portus. hic, aliī locant alta fundamenta theatrīs. Tyriī excidunt immanēs columnās e rupibus. columnae sunt alta decora scaenīs futurīs. Aeneas dicit, “O fortunatī sunt homines quorum moenia iam surgunt!”

Embedded Version #2 of Aeneid, Book 1, lines 419-429, 437

I. Aeneas miratur

A. molem (quondam magalia) et
B. portas et

C. strepitum(que)

D. et strata viarum

II. ardentes Tyrii instant

III. pars (Tyrii)

A. ducere muros
B. et moliri arcem et

C. subvolvere saxa manibus

IV. pars optare locum tecto et concludere sulco.            

V. (Tyrii) legunt

A. iura et

B. magistratus et

C. sanctum senatum

VI. hic, alii (Tyrii) effodiunt portus

VII. hic, (alii Tyrii) locant alta fundamenta theatris

VIII. (alii Tyrii) excidunt immanis columnas (e) rupibus scaenis decora alta futuris

IX. Aeneas ait, “O fortunati (homines), quorum moenia iam surgunt!”

Original version of Aeneid, Book 1, lines 419-429, 437

miratur molem Aeneas, magalia quondam,
miratur portas strepitumque et strata viarum.
Instant ardentes Tyrii: pars ducere muros,
molirique arcem et manibus subvolvere saxa,
pars optare locum tecto et concludere sulco.               5

iura magistratusque legunt sanctumque senatum;        

hic portus alii effodiunt; hic alta theatris
fundamenta locant alii, immanisque columnas
rupibus excidunt, scaenis decora alta futuris.

'O fortunati, quorum iam moenia surgunt!'...               10
Aeneas ait, et fastigia suspicit urbis

Now some may argue that I have destroyed the original Latin word order by forcing an English word order on it and that students need to learn how to read Latin from left to right - I will grant you that. BUT my primary concern is establishing meaning FIRST. Above all, that is of utmost importance.

Observations

• Due to the scaffolding nature of the stories, it greatly lowers students' affective filters regarding the reading itself. Handing students the original text probably would overwhelm them if it were too difficult or too long.
• Because students are reading multiple scaffolded versions of the same story, they are already familiar with what they are reading, thereby, they can anticipate vocabulary and language structures
• Due to the re-reading, students are getting plenty of meaningful/contextual repetitions of the language

So this past year, I began doing embedded readings with my students. In one particular Latin III class, after they had read a simplified version of a story, I told them that they were now going to read the same story but the next version was just a bit more complex grammatically and longer in length. As soon as I said that, a student yelled out, "But the first version really wasn't that interesting the first time we read it!" As I thought about what he said, I realized that he was right...so I began to put my own twist on embedded readings

What did I do? This will be addressed in my next posting.