Unlock with PatreonThe Problem with CI
To view this content, you must be a member of Ben’s Patreon at $10 or more Unlock with PatreonAlready a qualifying Patreon member? Refresh to
Tina’s Three Proposals – 2
Share:
Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
LinkedIn
Ben Slavic
Get The Latest Updates
Subscribe to Our Mailing List
No spam, notifications only about new products, updates.
Related Posts
CI and the Research (cont.)
To view this content, you must be a member of Ben’s Patreon at $10 or more Unlock with PatreonAlready a qualifying Patreon member? Refresh to
Research Question
To view this content, you must be a member of Ben’s Patreon at $10 or more Unlock with PatreonAlready a qualifying Patreon member? Refresh to
We Have the Research
To view this content, you must be a member of Ben’s Patreon at $10 or more Unlock with PatreonAlready a qualifying Patreon member? Refresh to
9 thoughts on “Tina’s Three Proposals – 2”
Could you, please, clarify for me what exactly is T1 and T2?
This is going to be too big a topic for the PLC, for two reasons:
(1) It isn’t decided yet. Imagine a 15-20 year period of time during which a teaching method evolves. It grows and changes. The teachers turn it into one thing. The researchers look on from the sidelines and throw in their two cents. It is a big messy dialogue right now. Tina is deeply involved with it.
(2) This part of the answer will make a little more sense but must be kept short here. T1 is what TPRS became in classrooms: stories in the service of thematic unit/semantic set/high frequency lists/etc. T2 is an attempt by Krashen to rein in T1. But it wasn’t properly defined. Tina’s definitions are the latest. That’s all I can say on that here.
Bottom line: I don’t know about anybody else, but Tina and I will soon have time to make a video on it, explaining it. We are going to start making videos – video blogs as well as articles – for use by readers here and on the CI Liftoff page. The reason is that nobody has time to read anymore and we don’t have time to write like we want to.
One last point for now: The T1/T2/NT discussion is one of the truly exciting discussions in the CI world right now. Krashen is changing fast on TPRS, away from TPRS as T1. His support of CI in a way that more reflects his own research and in particular Dr. Mason’s research is going to throw a wrench into the current established order of TPRS and the sparks will be seen as far away as Jupiter.
We think that the topic of NT, which is so closely related to this topic, is so huge that we are dedicating an entire conference to it this summer. Supporters of T1 who want to come won’t be welcome if all they want to do is argue. The old way is over. The stress on teachers is over. Here comes the sun.
Related: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rh298ITCHm8
Whoa. I am very confused. I thought T1 was when you focused on a grammar point or rule in the circling. I thought that Blaine eschewed T1 in the Green Bible. Am I wrong?
Alisa if I understand your question correctly my reply is that TPRS has slowly edged into, morphed into being T1. People are mainly using stories to teach things that are specific items that they feel they need to teach in their curriculums bc they are afraid that if they don’t teach them their students won’t learn them. This conflicts with lots of Krashen, for example his Natural Order of Acquisition hypothesis. People in TPRS are not doing what is in alignment with Krashen. They listen to people like Terry Waltz. That is blowing up over there on the moretprs list right now, by the way. Does this address your comment above? I’m not sure.
In NT+T2 light circling would be used (I do, asking two or three questions) to reinforce new language elements.
If we establish meaning – with translation and other things like props ( i dont use any), actors than what is the point of circling? I have built in a student job for repetition: The Rewinder — Students have 3 minutes between classes to go to the bathroom. So when they ask to leave, the rewinder signals me to rewind the story back so that the student catches up. It has a purpose and everyone gets input. This is not circling en masse. It is maintaining the meaning as it is HOT and NEW when introduced. However, I am not concerned if students mastered it by the lesson. Each kid is different.
Originally, circling is taught as language manipulation. At least at the conferences I went to. Sometimes I get some nice new suggestions like “He didn’t like the sandwich” then I ask students “Who doesn’t liek sandwiches here?” Then I count the number of students. I say Class, 3 people do not like sandwiches. Then I pick an extroverted or semi-extroverted student “what to you prefer instead of a sandwich?” I am doing an NT PQA. Then we go back into the story. I don’t circle with the intention of a structure or word. I want to know more about the students. During story asking, if it related to the story then I will ask them questions.
To echo some of what Steven is implying in his comments above, I am against questions that interrupt FLOW (search that term here if you want). To me that is 90% or more of questions. Kids are wise to it. It doesn’t work. It’s kind of insulting to them, and makes them into little yes/no parrots. They aren’t that stupid and anyway why would we ask all those questions when we already know the answers?
Yes. Those 90% of questions found in traditional circling are ones that repeat the sentence being worked on. BORING! Sometimes, i forget and do it reading days. I just move on. Both of my levels are focusing on audutory input. Ill ramp up the reading for year 2 next year.
Ben, you mentioned getting rid of the stop signal. I have done so unintentionally i stopped reminding them. They gave it up. In the beginning of the year i had choral responses. Now i don’t. During my recent observation only 2 kids responded to my questions. That’s ok theyre a very focused group.
I seem to use circling most with weak students who are trying to understand but are not certain they have really grasped the message. By asking another question about what I just said, I give them a chance to hear it all again and to realize, yes! they did understand. And if I ask a third question they are much more confident. In a natural conversation with native speakers we often ask questions like this to verify comprehension. I used to try to get in all those reps. Now I do only as much as feels … conversational.