This is the final piece of this 6 part series. If you haven't, please go and read parts 1-5 first. They are on the first five principles of the Comprehension Hypothesis: Acquisition and Learning, the Natural Order Hypothesis, the monitor principle, the input hypothesis, the affective filter, and their role in social justice in the classroom. The Compelling HypothesisIdeally we all want our students to be interested in what we are saying, but just like we all have different tastes in foods, books, and music, so will the reaction vary as to how our students react to us. For a long time, teachers have relied on the idea of "motivation" as to how well students react to information. I hear a lot of times that "if students were just motivated.... X would happen", but that's not how things work. While "compelling" is not necessarily required to acquire language (simply put), it is required for fully successful SLA (Krashen, 2011; Patrick, 2019). When input is compelling, there is not need for "motivation" because one is so drawn in that they "forget" they are actually acquiring language and enter what Krashen (2011) calls a state of flow (Krashen, 2011). You don't have to want to improve, it will just happen because you find the material so compelling; the resulting progress may even be completely unexpected (Krashen, 2011). Patrick (2019) notes the immediate connection between this hypothesis and the affective filter, "choice may be one way of lowering the affective filter and inviting students into the understandable input that we have planned for them - if our planning has taken [student choices] into consideration" (Patrick, 2019, p. 42). This is why I said yesterday that the compelling input and affective filter principles are the most important, in my opinion, when it comes to being a teacher who truly understands and employs CI principles. Everything we do must be run through a CI filter. Every decision we make must be comprehensible, allow natural order, avoid the monitor until they are ready, provide input, lower the affective filter, and be compelling. If that list overwhelmed you, I get it. It can be a lot and no one is perfect. We adjust. In the next two sections, I am going to reflect myself on the questions I posed yesterday and then show how I might consider the 6 principles of CI when looking at a topic often covered in Latin classes. I hope you can see how this principle and all 6, when fully understood and applied, provide a classroom where students are valued and respected for who they are and included as people who belong in the classroom with me. Before I do. Thank you for coming with me on this journey. While my daily blogging pauses here for now, the conversation isn't over. I would love to consider a follow up post (or a few) addressing any specifics, questions, or ideas we share in our community. There has already been great discussion on various social medias about this. I'd like to see more. Reflection - Discussion
A quick work throughLet's look at a common topic taught in Latin classes, and one I previously discussed: the house and home. Here are some quick suggestions for how I consider the three CCCs of CI and the six principles. This is not exhaustive. Please, if you'd like, reach out and let's talk more!
ReferencesKrashen, S. (2011). The compelling (not just interesting) input hypothesis. The English Connection (KOTESOL), 15, (3). Retrieved from:
http://sdkrashen.com/content/articles/the_compelling_(not_just_interesting)_input_hyothesis.pdf Patrick, R. (2019). Comprehensible Input and Krashen's theory. Journal of Classics Teaching, 20(39), 37-44. doi:10.1017/S2058631019000060
0 Comments
This is part 4 in a 6 part series. If you haven't, please go and read parts 1-3 first. They are on the first two principle of the Comprehension Hypothesis: Acquisition and Learning, the Natural Order Hypothesis, the monitor principle, and their role in social justice in the classroom. The Input HypothesisThe input hypothesis is commonly referred to as the i+1 hypothesis. It states that we acquire language when we receive understandable input that is just outside of what we have already acquired (Krashen, 1983). This is not to be confused with forced output or immersion classes (Patrick, 2019). There is a distinct difference. Further, traditional grammar-translation teachers can also be guilty of this by forcing translation, exposure and engagement with grammar topics, or forcing composition before students are ready (Patrick, 2019). So, how can one ensure they are providing proper input? Krashen provides a few ways in his work. Caretakers restrict language to what is most important in the moment, use their desire to be understood, and simplify language (Krashen, 1983). Language teachers must provide support to students to establish clear meaning: visuals, slowing down, repeating, asking yes/no questions, and scaffolding questions (Krashen 1983). If you are thinking that this does not apply to you as a Latin teacher because your goal is not necessarily to get them speaking, you are not alone. Patrick (2019) makes a great note of this and points out that as Latin teachers we also want our students to read and access texts of various literature traditions (Patrick, 2019). So, how does this apply to a proper understanding of CI and its inclusion of equity? All Day Every DayThis is how you should be applying this principle: all day, every day. The input hypothesis, like them all, applied to language acquisition, but also to everything we do. This principle, in particular, speaks to our disabled students, and our students who work, who are needed for help in the home, or who suffer ACEs, to name a few. So, for today, I am going to do this piece as a list. I am going to do my best to provide resources for each, but you can see my References and Resources list for specific books and sites I've consulted and work with regularly.
Let's say that I am working with my students on reading some teacher created stories about the Roman gods and goddesses. I have already looked at considerations for vocabulary, culture, triggers, etc. Here is what the first 3 days might look like:
ReferencesCast, Inc. (2020). CAST website. Retrieved from: http://www.cast.org/
Krashen, S. (1983). The Natural Approach: Language Acquisition in the Classroom. Alemany Press. Patrick, M (2020, February 10). Every Day Ideas [Blog]. Retrieved from: https://removingbarriers2fl.weebly.com/lists-and-ideas/everyday-accommodations Patrick, M (2019, October 1). Quick Assessment Ideas [Blog]. Retrived from: https://removingbarriers2fl.weebly.com/lists-and-ideas/quick-assessment-ideas Patrick, R. (2019). Comprehensible Input and Krashen's theory. Journal of Classics Teaching, 20(39), 37-44. doi:10.1017/S2058631019000060 |
AuthorThis particular blog is dedicated to social justice workings in my professional and personal life. Archives
September 2020
Categories
All
|