Stephen Krashen's Theories
Stephen Krashen on Language Acquisition
How to Learn a Language: INPUT (Why Most Methods Don't Work)
This video discusses the relationship between assumed conscious language knowledge and subconscious language knowledge. This video helps teachers become critical of ideas about language and language acquisition that some may not even be aware of. Professor Bill VanPatten introduces his research into this in an informational yet accessible manner.
Part 1: What Everyone Should Know about Second Language Acquisition
Part 2: What Everyone Should Know about Second Language Acquisition
Part 3: What Everyone Should Know about Second Language Acquisition
Part 4: What Everyone Should Know about Second Language Acquisition
Part 5: What Everyone Should Know about Second Language Acquisition
Part 6: What Everyone Should Know about Second Language Acquisition
Teaching Junior Secondary with Comprehensible Input (TCI-TPRS)
A Nail in the Coffin Part 1 – CI Increases ENROLLMENT
http://www.grantboulanger.com/a-nail-in-the-coffin-part-1-ci-increases-enrollment/
A Nail in the Coffin Part 2 - CI Increases Achievement
http://www.grantboulanger.com/a-nail-in-the-coffin-part-2-ci-increases-achievement/
The Story of TPRS and Blaine Ray
Blaine Ray Doing French
Teaching Spanish with TPRS in China
What Is the TCI-TPRS Method ?
For the best, most easy-to-read and most concise explanation of the TCI - TPRS Method, click on the Wikipeadia logo below.
Graphic Summary of the TCI-TPRS Approach?
The document below was provided during a workshop on TCI-TPRS facilitated by the Institute of Modern Languages at the University of Queensland.
| tci-tprs_approach_graphic_summary.pdf |
Teaching With Comprehensible Input (by Diana Noonan)
| teaching_with_comprehensible_input.pdf |
TCI FAQ Sheet (by Robert Harrell)
| teaching_comprehensible_input_faqs.pdf |
Checklist For Observing a Foreign Language Classroom by Bryce Hedstrom
| checklist_for_observing_a_foreign_language_classroom.pdf |
TCI-TPRS: A Basic Guide for Sequencing Lessons (adapted from Eric Herman)
| tci-tprs_lesson_sequence_guide.pdf |
What is TPRS?
TCI-TPRS Approach Links
| tci-tprs_approach___links.pdf |
TPRS 3 Basic Steps
StoryAsking & StoryTelling - TPRS in the Language Classroom
TPRS Storytelling - Circling
TPR Storytelling - The Best Way to Teach & Learn a Second Language
TPRS (Teaching Proficiency through Reading and Storytelling) Demo Class - StoryAsking & StoryTelling
Comprehensible Input: The Fastest Way to Fluency
Comprehensible Input: Teaching a Foreign Language
#1 TPRS Storytelling Teaching Spanish with Comprehensible Input
Language Acquisition With TPRS
HOW DO I EXPLAIN COMPREHENSIBLE INPUT?https://tprsquestionsandanswers.wordpress.com/2017/06/14/how-do-i-explain-comprehensible-input/
How to Write Comprehensible Texts
https://martinabex.com/2017/09/21/how-to-write-comprehensible-texts/
Articles on Language Acquisition & Comprehensible Input
http://www.sdkrashen.com/
Creating Comprehensible by Bill VanPatten
| creating_comprehensible.pdf |
More Resources on TCI-TPRS
http://beniko-mason.net/
TCI-TPRS CLASSROOM EXPECTATIONS (OPERATIONAL RULES)
| tci-tprs_classroom_expectations.pdf |
TOM McKENZIE'S TCI-TPRS CLASSROOM "RULES"
| tom_mckenzies_tci-tprs_rules.pdf |
RATIONALE FOR THE "RULES"
| rationale_for_the_rules.pdf |
ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE CLASSROOM "RULES" POSTER
| alternative_tci_class_rules_poster.pdf |
TCI-TPRS QUESTIONING CYCLE
| tci-tprs_questioning_cycle.pdf |
TCI-TPRS OTHER QUESTIONING SKILLS
| tci-tprs_other_questioning_skills.pdf |
Terry Waltz Teaches Circling for TPRS
Brain Break: Apple Banana Orange
http://palmyraspanish1.blogspot.com.au/2018/04/brain-break-apple-banana-orange.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed:+TprsWithSpanish1+(TPRS+with+Spanish+1)
Counseling Lesson Warm Up Activity
A Note to Language Teachers Who Use “MovieTalk”
Ashley J. Hastings June 24, 2018
You may copy and distribute this document
As the originator of MovieTalk, I am naturally interested in seeing how the technique is being used throughout the language-teaching community. It was always my hope that it would help language teachers everywhere promote language acquisition in their students by creating a flood of interesting comprehensible input in the classroom. And I see that this is actually happening in many places.
However, it has come to my attention that some language teachers and teacher trainers are using the term “MovieTalk” to refer to adaptations of the technique that depart in significant ways from its foundational principles. By calling these adaptations “MovieTalk,” people are inadvertently misrepresenting the technique; and, to the extent that my name is associated with MovieTalk, I feel that I too am being misrepresented.
It goes without saying that people are free to teach in any way they see fit. Nevertheless, intellectual honesty and professional ethics require us all to respect each other’s work and avoid misrepresenting it. I have complete faith in the good will and integrity of language educators, so I am confident that any unintentional misuse of the term “MovieTalk” can and will be corrected.
If you are one of those who may be affected, please read the rest of this short note. Then you can decide for yourself whether your own classroom practices can appropriately be called “MovieTalk.” If the answer is “no,” then you can decide whether you want to change your practices so they adhere to authentic MovieTalk principles. If you do not want to do this, then I would ask that you refrain from saying that you are using MovieTalk.
What is MovieTalk?
In 2013, I published a short article1 in which I encapsulated the technique as follows:
The three essential components of MovieTalk are: selection, preparation, and presentation. Movies selected should be visually appealing, with an interesting plot that does not rely too much on dialogue. Preparation involves viewing the movie several times in order to divide it into coherent short segments, rehearse narration, and plan ways to deal with difficult dialogue. Presentation takes place in cyclic fashion: each segment is played once without interruption, then repeated with frequent pauses for narration, paraphrases, etc.
In the same article, I noted that while MovieTalk was originally developed for use in intensive university-level ESL (English as a Second Language) classrooms, it could probably be used in other environments, with suitable adaptations:
No doubt there will be many adaptations and modifications as MovieTalk finds its way into more and more language classrooms. In public schools, for example, it will be important to select age-appropriate movies; and because of the shorter class meetings, teachers may find materials such as cartoons, television shows, and internet videos to be more useful than feature-length films.
The essential feature of MovieTalk is comprehensible input through narration of interesting movies. As long as this feature remains front and center, I believe MovieTalk will continue to be a productive and enjoyable way to teach languages.
What is not MovieTalk?
Whatever distracts us from “comprehensible input through narration of interesting movies” is a departure from the foundations of MovieTalk. These days, it seems that “targeting” and “circling” have become, for some language educators, major distractions that vie for “front and center” position when attempting to use MovieTalk.
“Targeting” means that a teacher is following a syllabus of some kind, with a list of targets to be taught. Targets can be words, collocations, common phrases, grammatical structures, etc. “Circling” means that a teacher seeks and creates opportunities for multiple repetitions of a target during a classroom activity.
Targeting and circling are problematic for reasons that are independent of MovieTalk. As Stephen Krashen has pointed out, targeting presupposes that we know how the elements of a language should be sequenced and presented to students, even though we do not in fact know much about the proper sequence; and even if we did, it is not likely that all students in a classroom are equally ready for the target that is featured in any given lesson. Targeting also entails a “hidden agenda” that makes it difficult to present the “compelling messages” that can foster language acquisition.
Within the context of this discussion, I see targeting and circling as antithetical to the principles of MovieTalk, for the following reasons.
First, targeting complicates the task of choosing movies. It is hard enough to find movies that are of interest to students, of suitable length and content, with high narration potential, and with limited reliance on dialogue. When you add a criterion like “great for teaching the future tense,” you not only make it much harder to find candidate movies, you also make it more likely that you will have to settle for a movie that scores lower on the essential criteria of interest, narration potential, etc.
Second, targeting complicates the task of preparing to use a movie in the classroom. Planning ways to circle on your target is categorically different from planning ways to narrate the movie in the MovieTalk manner. What about all the potential comprehensible narration that does not involve your target? How much of that will be left out of your preparation because of the focus on the target?
Third, MovieTalk narration in the classroom should be driven by the dynamics of the movie itself, not by your plan to circle on a target. Your students are supposed to be attending to the plot, the settings, the characters, and the actions: the things that make your narration comprehensible. If you keep breaking into the flow of the movie in order to circle on a target, rather than providing timely narration that grows out of the movie, you are likely to disrupt your students’ attention to the very elements that give MovieTalk its intrinsic power and appeal.
What to do?
If you have a principled commitment to targeting and circling, then you must of course act on your convictions. Or, if you are required by those who employ you to follow a curriculum that involves targeting and circling, then perhaps that is what you must do. Although I disagree with targeting and circling, I am sure that movies are still great tools for providing comprehensible input, and your teaching will be more effective because you use them.
In either case, though, I would ask you not to call what you are doing “MovieTalk.” Please find a more appropriate term that truly belongs to you.
Otherwise, if you want to use MovieTalk as originally intended, but are not sure how to do so, I invite you to study the materials at http://www.glesismore.com/movietalk/ (Please be aware that this site will go down permanently on February 7, 2019. Feel free to copy or download anything you find there. Also, be aware that not all of the links still work.)
References
1 Hastings, Ashley. 2014. MovieTalk: 25 Years Old and Still Going Strong. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, January 2014.
https://tinyurl.com/movietalk2014
2 Krashen, Stephen. 2013. The Case for Non-Targeted, Comprehensible Input. Journal of Bilingual Education Research & Instruction, 15(1): 102-110. https://tinyurl.com/krashen2013
In response to the ensuing conversation and related questions to the above, Hastings added this follow up post ...
"Rather than trying to address individual questions and comments, I would prefer to conclude my part in this discussion by distilling the essential points as I see them.
Here, again, is MovieTalk in a nutshell: (1) Language is acquired through comprehensible input. (2) Pictures and stories help make input comprehensible. (3) Movies have thousands of pictures and tell compelling stories. (4) We can provide comprehensible input to students by narrating the scenes they see in movies. (5) We must select movies on the basis of their ability to hold our students' interest and their suitability for narration. (6) MovieTalk preparation consists of becoming familiar with the movie and planning what to say about the scenes, keeping narration tied to the visible and dealing with difficult dialogue when it is crucial to the story. (7) When presenting the movie in class, we allow the movie itself to determine the flow of our narration.
A basic assumption underlying MovieTalk, and indeed all "non-targeted" approaches, is that when we give our students many different samples of naturally occurring language, the structures, collocations, vocabulary, etc. of the language will be included in proportion to their natural frequency, and students will acquire them naturally. Therefore, we don't need to target. In fact, targeting will probably lead us to present a statistically inaccurate sample of the language.
To me, all this means that our MovieTalk work is independent of any predetermined language syllabus. I believe that if we select, prepare, and present movies in service to any sort of grammatical or lexical agenda, we make MovieTalk more difficult for ourselves and less effective for the students. To be sure, such teaching will still be much better than traditional methods, because it will still contain lots of comprehensible input. If you use movies in a "targeted" way, it's fine to say that your method is an adaptation of MovieTalk, but all I am asking is that you don't create the impression that MovieTalk was originally designed that way.
My only purpose in the posting yesterday was to clarify how I would like the term "MovieTalk" to be used. I don't want to adjudicate the details of your teaching practices. Reading all your questions and comments made me realize how retired I've become! You are a wonderful professional community and you can make your own decisions.
I am saying goodbye to language education. I am now a creature of the opera! In fact, I've just accepted a second three-year term on the Board of Directors of Eugene Opera. But I can't say goodbye without a movie, so here is one of opera's most beautiful farewells: "Soave sia il vento" from Mozart's Così fan tutte."
The text for this response post can be found here. It is a closed group, so membership is needed to view the original:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/IFLTNTPRSCITEACHING/permalink/10155540492247108/
Hasting’s original post can be found here:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/IFLTNTPRSCITEACHING/10155538495497108/
However, it has come to my attention that some language teachers and teacher trainers are using the term “MovieTalk” to refer to adaptations of the technique that depart in significant ways from its foundational principles. By calling these adaptations “MovieTalk,” people are inadvertently misrepresenting the technique; and, to the extent that my name is associated with MovieTalk, I feel that I too am being misrepresented.
It goes without saying that people are free to teach in any way they see fit. Nevertheless, intellectual honesty and professional ethics require us all to respect each other’s work and avoid misrepresenting it. I have complete faith in the good will and integrity of language educators, so I am confident that any unintentional misuse of the term “MovieTalk” can and will be corrected.
If you are one of those who may be affected, please read the rest of this short note. Then you can decide for yourself whether your own classroom practices can appropriately be called “MovieTalk.” If the answer is “no,” then you can decide whether you want to change your practices so they adhere to authentic MovieTalk principles. If you do not want to do this, then I would ask that you refrain from saying that you are using MovieTalk.
What is MovieTalk?
In 2013, I published a short article1 in which I encapsulated the technique as follows:
The three essential components of MovieTalk are: selection, preparation, and presentation. Movies selected should be visually appealing, with an interesting plot that does not rely too much on dialogue. Preparation involves viewing the movie several times in order to divide it into coherent short segments, rehearse narration, and plan ways to deal with difficult dialogue. Presentation takes place in cyclic fashion: each segment is played once without interruption, then repeated with frequent pauses for narration, paraphrases, etc.
In the same article, I noted that while MovieTalk was originally developed for use in intensive university-level ESL (English as a Second Language) classrooms, it could probably be used in other environments, with suitable adaptations:
No doubt there will be many adaptations and modifications as MovieTalk finds its way into more and more language classrooms. In public schools, for example, it will be important to select age-appropriate movies; and because of the shorter class meetings, teachers may find materials such as cartoons, television shows, and internet videos to be more useful than feature-length films.
The essential feature of MovieTalk is comprehensible input through narration of interesting movies. As long as this feature remains front and center, I believe MovieTalk will continue to be a productive and enjoyable way to teach languages.
What is not MovieTalk?
Whatever distracts us from “comprehensible input through narration of interesting movies” is a departure from the foundations of MovieTalk. These days, it seems that “targeting” and “circling” have become, for some language educators, major distractions that vie for “front and center” position when attempting to use MovieTalk.
“Targeting” means that a teacher is following a syllabus of some kind, with a list of targets to be taught. Targets can be words, collocations, common phrases, grammatical structures, etc. “Circling” means that a teacher seeks and creates opportunities for multiple repetitions of a target during a classroom activity.
Targeting and circling are problematic for reasons that are independent of MovieTalk. As Stephen Krashen has pointed out, targeting presupposes that we know how the elements of a language should be sequenced and presented to students, even though we do not in fact know much about the proper sequence; and even if we did, it is not likely that all students in a classroom are equally ready for the target that is featured in any given lesson. Targeting also entails a “hidden agenda” that makes it difficult to present the “compelling messages” that can foster language acquisition.
Within the context of this discussion, I see targeting and circling as antithetical to the principles of MovieTalk, for the following reasons.
First, targeting complicates the task of choosing movies. It is hard enough to find movies that are of interest to students, of suitable length and content, with high narration potential, and with limited reliance on dialogue. When you add a criterion like “great for teaching the future tense,” you not only make it much harder to find candidate movies, you also make it more likely that you will have to settle for a movie that scores lower on the essential criteria of interest, narration potential, etc.
Second, targeting complicates the task of preparing to use a movie in the classroom. Planning ways to circle on your target is categorically different from planning ways to narrate the movie in the MovieTalk manner. What about all the potential comprehensible narration that does not involve your target? How much of that will be left out of your preparation because of the focus on the target?
Third, MovieTalk narration in the classroom should be driven by the dynamics of the movie itself, not by your plan to circle on a target. Your students are supposed to be attending to the plot, the settings, the characters, and the actions: the things that make your narration comprehensible. If you keep breaking into the flow of the movie in order to circle on a target, rather than providing timely narration that grows out of the movie, you are likely to disrupt your students’ attention to the very elements that give MovieTalk its intrinsic power and appeal.
What to do?
If you have a principled commitment to targeting and circling, then you must of course act on your convictions. Or, if you are required by those who employ you to follow a curriculum that involves targeting and circling, then perhaps that is what you must do. Although I disagree with targeting and circling, I am sure that movies are still great tools for providing comprehensible input, and your teaching will be more effective because you use them.
In either case, though, I would ask you not to call what you are doing “MovieTalk.” Please find a more appropriate term that truly belongs to you.
Otherwise, if you want to use MovieTalk as originally intended, but are not sure how to do so, I invite you to study the materials at http://www.glesismore.com/movietalk/ (Please be aware that this site will go down permanently on February 7, 2019. Feel free to copy or download anything you find there. Also, be aware that not all of the links still work.)
References
1 Hastings, Ashley. 2014. MovieTalk: 25 Years Old and Still Going Strong. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, January 2014.
https://tinyurl.com/movietalk2014
2 Krashen, Stephen. 2013. The Case for Non-Targeted, Comprehensible Input. Journal of Bilingual Education Research & Instruction, 15(1): 102-110. https://tinyurl.com/krashen2013
In response to the ensuing conversation and related questions to the above, Hastings added this follow up post ...
"Rather than trying to address individual questions and comments, I would prefer to conclude my part in this discussion by distilling the essential points as I see them.
Here, again, is MovieTalk in a nutshell: (1) Language is acquired through comprehensible input. (2) Pictures and stories help make input comprehensible. (3) Movies have thousands of pictures and tell compelling stories. (4) We can provide comprehensible input to students by narrating the scenes they see in movies. (5) We must select movies on the basis of their ability to hold our students' interest and their suitability for narration. (6) MovieTalk preparation consists of becoming familiar with the movie and planning what to say about the scenes, keeping narration tied to the visible and dealing with difficult dialogue when it is crucial to the story. (7) When presenting the movie in class, we allow the movie itself to determine the flow of our narration.
A basic assumption underlying MovieTalk, and indeed all "non-targeted" approaches, is that when we give our students many different samples of naturally occurring language, the structures, collocations, vocabulary, etc. of the language will be included in proportion to their natural frequency, and students will acquire them naturally. Therefore, we don't need to target. In fact, targeting will probably lead us to present a statistically inaccurate sample of the language.
To me, all this means that our MovieTalk work is independent of any predetermined language syllabus. I believe that if we select, prepare, and present movies in service to any sort of grammatical or lexical agenda, we make MovieTalk more difficult for ourselves and less effective for the students. To be sure, such teaching will still be much better than traditional methods, because it will still contain lots of comprehensible input. If you use movies in a "targeted" way, it's fine to say that your method is an adaptation of MovieTalk, but all I am asking is that you don't create the impression that MovieTalk was originally designed that way.
My only purpose in the posting yesterday was to clarify how I would like the term "MovieTalk" to be used. I don't want to adjudicate the details of your teaching practices. Reading all your questions and comments made me realize how retired I've become! You are a wonderful professional community and you can make your own decisions.
I am saying goodbye to language education. I am now a creature of the opera! In fact, I've just accepted a second three-year term on the Board of Directors of Eugene Opera. But I can't say goodbye without a movie, so here is one of opera's most beautiful farewells: "Soave sia il vento" from Mozart's Così fan tutte."
The text for this response post can be found here. It is a closed group, so membership is needed to view the original:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/IFLTNTPRSCITEACHING/permalink/10155540492247108/
Hasting’s original post can be found here:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/IFLTNTPRSCITEACHING/10155538495497108/
The Motivated Classroom Podacasts
A weekly podcast for language teachers and learners hosted by Dr. Liam Printer talking all things education, languages, motivation and engagement; linking current educational research to your classroom practice and providing a few ideas for some easy to implement, zero-prep, motivational strategies you can try out right away! Join the conversation on social media using #MotivatedClassroom. To access theMotivated Classroom podcasts, click on the logo below.
TCI-TPRS Stimulus Video
WONKY DONKEY SONG UNOFFICIAL MUSIC VIDEO
Indonesian Specific TCI-TPRS Section
The Indonesian Super 7
The following list of verbs is based on Terry Waltz's Super 7 and has been modified slightly to incorporate the vagaries of the Indonesian language. The list is not set in concrete and can be modified or added to to suit the level of learners.
| the_super_7.pdf |
The Indonesian Super 7 Cognates
| the_super_7_cognates.pdf |
Essential Vocabulary for Proficiency
For many years I have been using the accompanying Table of Essential Vocabulary with adult students at the Institute of Modern Languages at the University of Queensland with the inkling that I was sitting on something special with this resource. It was inspiring to have my effort validated at a workshop presented by one of the gurus of TCI-TPRS in the United States, Laurie Clarcq, who produced a similar Table in English (and Spanish) which, when mastered, would ensure that students would pass the New York State Proficiency Examination in Spanish.
| essential_vocabulary_for_proficience_in_indonesian.pdf |
The following contribution has generously been provided by Bits of Bahasa. It is an Indonesian High Frequency Word List which provides a good mix of natural language used by native speakers everyday, and language that is essential in a school setting. The end results, should students acquire all 100 words, should be proficiency.
| high_frequency_words_and_definitions.pdf |
Bu Cathy's Blog
https://bucathydotcom.wordpress.com/
Bu Anne's Blog (Indonesian)
https://buannesblog.com/category/indonesian/
Teaching Indonesian With TPRS
The link below provides a comprehensive summary of the TCI-TPRS Conference that took place in Melbourne in January 2018 by Anne MacKelvie. Although it summarizes the contents of the conference in general terms, the specific audience is Indonesian educators as it clearly focuses on Indonesian vocabulary in the examples presented throughout the summary.
https://buannesblog.com/2018/01/20/tci-conference-melbourne-2018/
https://buannesblog.com/2018/01/20/tci-conference-melbourne-2018/
Picture Talk
The link below will you to a comprehensive summary by Anne MacKelvie of the Picture Talk lecture presented by Amy Vander Deen during the Comprehensible Online workshops.
https://buannesblog.com/2018/04/04/picture-talk/
https://buannesblog.com/2018/04/04/picture-talk/
Five Cool Ideas for Your CI Classroom
https://buannesblog.com/2018/05/13/five-cool-ideas-for-your-ci-classroom/
Indonesian TCI Classroom Posters
A reminder that elsewhere on this site the is a large selection of Indonesian-language classroom posters which are ideal for providing comprehensible Input these can be accessed and download at the link below:
http://www.resourcefulindonesian.com/give-me-a-sign.html
http://www.resourcefulindonesian.com/give-me-a-sign.html
Anne MacKelvie's Rejoinder Posters & More
Aduh!
| aduh.docx |
Astaga!
| astaga.docx |
Hore!
| hore.docx |
Kasihan!
| kasihan.docx |
Wah!
| wah_.docx |
Your Job My Job
| my_job_your_job.pptx |
CCLT Student Jobs
| cclt_student_jobs.pptx |
Ollie Mau Makan Pisang
| ollie_mau_makan_pisang_.pptx |
Ollie Suka Olahraganya
| ollie_suka_olahraganya.pptx |
Kegiatan Favorit Ollie
| kegiatan_favorit_ollie.pptx |
Kegiatan Favorit Bart Simpson
| kegiatan_favorit_bart_.pptx |
All About Lisa Simpson
| all_about_lisa_simpson.pptx |
Thor Mencari Pacar
| thor_mencari_pacar.pptx |
Kisah Seekor Wonky Donkey
| kisah_seekor_wonky_donkey.pptx |
Tiga Srigala dan Kerundung Merah oleh Bu Cathy
The following converted PowerPoint Presentation was shared by Ibu Lily Lim of the TCI/TPRS Indonesian Facebook Group.
| ani_mau_anjing.pdf |
Songs With TCI Potential
Atas Bawah Goyang-Goyang
| atas_bawah_goyang-goyang.pdf |
Baik Baik Saja
| baik_baik_saja_lyrics.pdf |
TCI/TPRS Lesson Observation Template (1)
| lesson_observation_template__1_.pdf |
TCI/TPRS Lesson Observation Template (2)
| lesson_observation_template__2_.pdf |
TCI/TPRS Possible Assessments By Skill
| possible_assessmentsby_skill.pdf |
TCI/TPRS Creating A Story Guide
| creating_story_guide.pdf |
TCI/TPRS Circling Strategies
| circling_strategies.pdf |
