I am going to sticky this post at the top of the blog posts until we get a bunch of text bites as discussed in the comments below in pink bold. We need to do this. We only have until January 6th on this. They take the link down on Friday.
Another thing we need to do before taking the survey is to read the Ohio revised WL standards here:
They do have the interpersonal, interpretive and presentation three modes as the base of the revised standards, but I don’t see the 90% ACTFL position statement. If you do nothing else, take the survey or find the comment invitation link at the above web page, and simply ask them why they didn’t include it. That is what all people who read this blog should do minimally. Go to the link, take the survey and in the comment place just say something about the 90% use clause from ACTFL and why it isn’t there. That would be over 100 people doing that, and they will probably get about five people even responding to the survey in Ohio. For a refresher on the 90% use clause, see
This is the older blog post that most have read:
You may remember the guy at the state level in Ohio who spoke so unpleasantly and from some pretty deep ignorance, in my opinion, to Chris about a month ago. That blog link is here:
Now Chris shares with us that we may be able to impact the powers that be around that guy, to reach them with our message, at least. Here is what he says:
RALLY THE TROOPS!!!
I’m pasting a link that has a ppt on the new standards here in Ohio, a draft of the standards and a SURVEY to be filled out after looking at the standards.
This could be a chance for some of the the brightest people involved in TPRS to help us out here in Ohio.
This takes you to the survey:
I might add that these two people whose names appear on the site could be contacted by email or even by phone as well:
Debbie Robinson, Ph.D.
World Language Consultant
(614) 995-0232 (614) 995-0232 firstname.lastname@example.org
Ryan Wertz, M.Ed.
World Language Consultant
(614)728-4630 (614)728-4630 email@example.com
Let’s make Harrell and Jody and Laurie do that. They wouldn’t get snarky like some of us (moi!) would.
Isn’t it strange that as soon as we were to identify ourselves as comprehensible input people we would be labeled, not fifteen seconds into a conversation with one of those state level folks? At least, I would predict that. Maybe we should just do the survey. But the point is clear – when colleagues cannot openly discuss ideas affecting children’s lives and educations in a free and open forum, then there is a problem, and a deep one. I know that when I spent some time speaking with Jason Fritze in October, it was clear to me that he wants a universal forum, and we use the word forum on purose in IFLT, where anybody can come to discuss anything in an open way. That’s the way it should be.