After taking a look at the Fluency Fast courses in the fall, I decided that this semester would start out with a TPR phase. Some say that it lacks personalization and I would agree that it can. However, there are strategies to make it personal and once you do, it is incredibly engaging for the students. They acquire a large quantity of language, but it lacks grammatical structures and holistic language development.
Well, I started out doing it in 3rd quarter with great results. In fact, the results were so great that I almost didn’t know what to do next. I considered just doing TPR for a while. But I decided against it because I knew that students would acquire more from the stories, if I could do it right. I mean, Blaine doesn’t really do TPR that much any more and the reason is that he knows that he can teach more language with stories rather than TPR. I am not at that level yet and I still have a lot of skills to learn.
I had success with TPR, but once I bridged into stories it has been fair. I think that I have lost some classes because I have not effectively personalized enough. I started doing this more and it has improved the stories drammatically. I keep thinking about why the TPR went so well. Why was it so engageing, but the stories are lacking? There are several answers to this. Some of them are: the stories were too long, not enough personalization, poor use of student actors, and telling the story rather than asking it.
I have a new chance with the 4th quarter group and I am interested to see where they go with it. So far, the bridge into stories has been great! I am hoping that I can keep it going. It seems to get stronger each time that I do it.