If conventional language teaching is grammar-translation, then we’re all somewhat a group of heretics! Still, there are so many sub groups of CI that it warrants a bit of elucidation. At some point, John Bracey and I were talking about if either of us just started discovering CI right now, we’d have NO IDEA what to do or where to begin. Here are descriptions of all the different CI groups I’ve observed over the past 5 years already in existence, or just emerging:
It’s a good idea to have a “fluent” speaker accompany you on a trip. Of the ~56 hours of input I received in Madrid, about half of them were comprehensible, but about half of those were only comprehensible because they were made comprehensible to me by my Spanish-speaking wife.
In one of Bill VanPatten’s latest Tea with BvP episodes (which I’ve edited down to only his responses, see the CI Materials page for past edited episodes), he talked about how there are no errors when it comes to the expression, interpretation, and negotiation of meaning of our students, at least in terms of language acquisition. What we hear/read from students is a consistent representation of how they’ve construction the second language system in their mind. It is what it is, and there are very few factors besides time and comprehensible input. Thus, there are no errors.
This has HUGE implications for language teaching. Take the following comparison…