Ideally 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. 

Let'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!

The 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? 

This 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. 

1. Provide Visuals - This includes everything from visual vocabulary (pictures) to a visual schedule. Provide models, act things out yourself (don't rely on students to act for you), and let students provide visuals to you (see item 5). This will help and support students who are autistic/have ASD, are deaf/hard of hearing, have specific learning disabilities, ESL students, students with speech/language impairments, students who struggle with executive functioning, students with memory concerns, intellectually disabled students, and more. 
2. Provide Audio - Record yourself reading stories. Record yourself describing images in Latin and English. Record class if you can. Record Dictations. Let students provide you with audio as well (see item 5). This specifically helps blind/vision students, students with processing disorders, students with speech/language impairments, students with ADD/ADHD, and more.
3. Provide gestures/muscle memory - Our bodies remember things. It is part of what makes triggers so dangerous. Our muscles remember things. It is part of what makes "riding a bike" something you "can't forget". In my class, I use American Sign Language as a way to communicate with and help students communicate with me. You can also use hand created gestures, Total Physical Response (TPR), etc. Let students communicate in this way with you when appropriate. In addition to being a way to ensure understanding without requiring forced output, it is another form of expression (See item 5). This will help serve students with speech/language impairments, who are deaf/hard of hearing, autistic students/students with ASD, students with memory concerns, students with ADD/ADHD, students who are non-verbal, and more. 
   
4. Stop saying "it's easy..." - When we say things like this, students feel stupid. If it's easy, why aren't they getting it. If a student fails to understand something in my class, it's likely my fault... in that I didn't provide proper input for them. This is what drives students to say, "I'm no good at language". Further, I often this phrase followed by, "you just need to memorise Y" or "just make some flashcards and review them every night". For our students who work, who struggle with memorisation, who baby-sit their family members, who go home to situations that are dangerous, scary, and more,  these things are not easy. They are, at best, difficult and often impossible. Consider how these words affect your students who do not fit into the affluent, white student mold. Consider how this affects your disabled students who often have to face a label of "being stupid". Consider how this makes your students who suffer ACEs feel.
5. Provide brain breaks - All of our brains get tired. We all know that feeling. As teachers, especially if we don't see our students first thing, we need to take those breaks. There are a multitude of them out there, but I've provided some in my example below (marked with a green bb) and a link in my resources to some of my favourites. These help serve our kids with ADD/ADHD, intellectually disabled students, students with mental health issues and emotional concerns, students with ACEs, students with executive functioning concerns, and more. 
   
6. Provide multiple forms of engagement, representation, and expression. This sums it up. These are the three principles of Universal Design for Learning (UDL). When you consider it, providing CI is providing UDL. In order to provide true CI, you must also provide true UDL. Let's close with a quick example. I will mark various forms of engagement with a red e, representation with a blue r, and expression with a purple x. 
   

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:

• Monday - vents and brags, Vocabulary power point (Latin + English + picture E/R, TPR, circling), dragon breath BB, Vocabulary Power Point (dictation E/R), students turn in notes from dictation in translation, note, or drawing format X. 
• Tuesday - vents and brags, TPR vocabulary review (either with TPR or ASL E, R, X), dictation review (using kids' sentences and pictures from previous day E, R), Would you Rather BB, Task activity E, R
• Wednesday - vents and brags, Gimkit activity with vocabulary E, R, Story listening of full story (using Latin, English check ins where needed, and images) E, R, The Wave BB, Story Listening E, R, Exit Ticket - What happens next (show in writing, or drawing, X)