Last year, I reported total words read up to holiday break, and it’s hard to believe that time of year is upon us again. Since part of my teacher eval goal is to increase input throughout the year, let’s compare numbers. 2018-19 students read over 20,000 total words of Latin by this time. However, this year’s students have read…uh oh…just 11,000?!?!
Something’s going on. I’m positive that students are reading more now, and for longer periods of time. Classes are now structured to be roughly half listening and half reading (i.e. Talk & Read), too. So…why don’t the numbers add up?! Surely there’s a reason. Let’s look into that, starting with this quote from last year’s post:
“Over the 55 hours of CI starting in September up to the holiday break, students read on their own for 34 total minutes of Sustained Silent Reading (SSR), and 49 minutes of Free Voluntary Reading (FVR)…“
This year’s independent reading time has skyrocketed to 99 and 233. That’s nearly 5x more independent choice reading! Now, last year’s 20,000 figure included an estimated 1,900 from FVR. Therefore, it’s not unreasonable to estimate that this year’s students have read something like 9,500 total words during FVR, which would be like reading a third of this paragraph worth of Latin per minute. If so, the year-to-year comparison would be very close (i.e. 20,000 vs. 20,500). However, I’d expect the numbers to be much higher now with even more of a focus on reading. Seeing as it’s really difficult to nail down a confident number during independent choice reading due to individual differences, then, let’s just subtract all that FVR time from both years, arriving at 18,100 to compare to this year’s 11,000, which is still quite the spread. Let’s do some digging…
Weeks ago, I wrote about the super fast process of collaborative storytelling, StoryGuessing. A year ago, I began looking for ways to hypermile classroom input. Here’s how to combine the two…
Teachers unaccustomed to speaking the target language in class are often a bit lost when it comes to providing input. Instead, the more familiar rule-based lectures and paired speaking activities of PPP (present, practice, produce), target culture projects, and perhaps target language movies all become quite alluring, seducing teachers back to the pedagogy of yore. Here’s a way to conceptualize class in a clearer way that maximizes input:
- Talk about something
- Read something
Now, from the student perspective, this would be “listen & read,” but the “talk” portion of class is very much led by the teacher, especially in beginning years, so it’s easier to think of this in terms of what you, the teacher, must do. Don’t get fooled by anyone thinking this is the kind of “teacher-centered” lesson that’s frowned upon. The content is student-centered, it’s just that students can’t express themselves fully in the target language. They don’t have to, and this is expected. They need input. Case closed. The “read” portion could be any reading activity, either independent, led by you, in pairs, groups, or all of the above…
This trick gets you immediate content to discuss, and then X new drawings (whereas X is the class size) used for other input-based activities.
- Get a picture.
- Crop it.
- Make copies, and have students draw the missing parts.
- Project several drawings, and describe them.
For those who have read Rūfus et arma ātra, here’s a large Crixaflamma to print out. Also, input hypermiling combos include:
- Write & Discuss (or type up on your own)
- Print and give to students to read (i.e. up to a complete Free Voluntary Reading (FVR) packet of drawings and descriptions).
- Project as Timed Write prompt (i.e. “Write a story about…”
- Print and give to students to read (i.e. up to a complete FVR packet of drawings and descriptions).
- Flyswatter Picture Talk (using two drawings side-by-side)
Last week, I shared the process of using writing to refocus students throughout class. Here’s how I’ve used them this week…
I’ve known for some time that ending class with Write & Discuss is a great way to focus students’ attention on the target language. I’ve also known that a simple dictation is pacifying, albeit boring (hence why I think I’ve done only one of these this year). Both of these activities require students to write, and both of these activities are nearly distraction-free because students have a writing task to do. It comes as no surprise, then, that we should be using writing as a MGMT tool…
The latest addition to my Quick Quizzes is the Tense Test. Rather than testing knowledge using multiple choice, form-manipulation, or fill-in quiz on tenses, stick to a simple either/or comprehension check, then get back to providing input and encouraging interaction…
Back in 2016, I wrote about five follow up activities based on one story. I’ve certainly been thinking differently since then, though I haven’t so much as changed my tune as I have changed keys. I’m now cautious of doing many activities over and over using just one story. Despite any novelty, the context remains the same. Surely, that can’t be ideal for acquisition, right? After a while, the student is probably just working with an understanding of the story from memory. Similarly, I’ve been highly critical of Latin teachers for remembering English translations they’ve studied and/or taught over the years instead of actually processing the target language itself. Because of that KEY change, I’ve been looking into creating new contexts with minimal planning effort. Here’s a workflow to hypermile your input:
1) Get a text
2) Read that text
3) Do a new activity that gets you a) more texts, b) drawings, or c) both
4) a) Read those new texts, b) Picture Talk the drawings, or c) both
5) Compile texts, drawings, and glossary into FVR packet
This year, I’m very on top of providing learners with texts. Each class section has been reading at least a half page of Latin every class, which I’ve also been able to print (all during my planning periods!), and give to learners as reading options at home. These texts also double as what some schools call “Do Now” or “Activators” as the first thing we read in class.
The texts include somewhere between 50-70 total words every day. Since I always print extra copies, I’ve shown learners where to go to get new texts if they’ve already read the ones from their own class. Why would they? Well, the texts from each section has different content written with frequent vocabulary that all learners understand. For those who have read all the texts available from other classes, that’s about 1300 total words after just one week! It’s worth noting that almost all of the content is the product of Card Talk, and a single Picture Talk. These are extremely low prep; the work is just typing up what happened in class, made even easier when doing a Write & Discuss at the end of class. Also, in typing up today’s events, I just stumbled upon a way to double the input from any X Talk (e.g. Card, Picture, Calendar, Item, etc.)…
Extending the concept of parallel texts to Card Talk is an easy way to double the input. Say the day’s prompt is “draw up to 4 things you don’t like, and circle them.” In class, 5-10min could easily be spent comparing two learners, their drawings, and the thoughts of others.
Now, instead of typing up what everyone heard and learned in class, review other drawings and type THOSE up. Project, and/or read using your favorite input-based strategy and activity, and you will have doubled the input in a more communicative and compelling way (vs. reading content that learners already know).
These are my updated presentations from the conference:
No-Prep Grading & Assessment 2018
Questioning Is Core
Optimizing Your Classroom Setup For MGMT
Here are my own takeaways organized by presenter, whether a) directly used by them during the conference, or b) inspired by something similar they did that got me thinking and I’ve adapted: