![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Ever heard of this game? Well, I say it's a game but it's not fluff.
It works best with very simple sentences. I use it when the accusative case is introduced in Stage 2 of CLC with my middle school students. For what seems like a simple concept--the difference between subject and objects--I'm often surprised at how difficult it is for young students, esp those without decent academic skills to begin with.
On TWO sets of large index cards write the following:
ancilla (front) | ancillam (back)
servus (front) | servum (back)
canis (front) | canem (back)
est
videt
portat
Have two teams of three players each come up to the front of the room where you have these cards spread out on the chalk tray. Call out a sentence and the team to form the sentence accurately first wins a point.
I have a master set of 10 sentences but because of time constraints I usually don't do more than 7. These are printed on a transparency which I use after the game.
Because of the limit of the vocabulary, the sentences can be kind of funny:
The slave sees the slavegirl.
The slavegirl carries the slave.
The dog is a slave.
The slavegirl is a dog.
The dog carries the slave.
etc
So, when the first team forms the the sentence correctly, I yell freeze, and we discuss why that sentence is write and why, perhaps, the other team's sentence is wrong.
After we play the game, I put the transparency on the overhead projector and the students then have to compose the same sentences in Latin independently. This is the real test to see if they learned from the game, paying attention to the discussions, etc.
This year I really, really worked the understanding of the whole concept of subj/nom/doer vs direct object/acc/receiver of action and I think it paid off. That is, I worked VERY HARD to set the students up for success. I have had too many years when I discovered that the students really didn't get the concepts even though they enjoyed the game and seemed to get it during the game. I had much better results this year, I must admit. Not perfect. Admittedly 1/4 of each class bombed it, but that's surprisingly better than in previous years where I have scratched my head and truly wondered why students didn't get it.
But this is a great diagnostic tool; I can now focus on the kids that still don't get it before the test next Tuesday, instead of discovering that they don't understand AFTER the test.
I think the metaphrasing has helped. I've probably mentioned that before. It works like this:
canis:
The dog verbed someone.
canem:
Someone verbed the dog.
For kids who have serious difficulties or total mental blocks with grammatical terms, being able to metaphrase is very, very helpful. Extremely so.
A few more comments on other things before I close.
A few days ago I did a micrologue thing on the amicus story in stage 2--4 sentences with stick figure pictures that I taught to a volunteer orally while the rest of the class took dictation. This was followed by a substitution drill with the rows competing against each other and a little sample of a transformation drill.
THEN, the new bit, I asked students to read the whole story on their own and write a summary. This is actually a tricky skill and students usually want to translate, esp when the Latin is easy.
The next day I gave a quiz which the students could use their summary on. 5 questions were verum/falsum; 1 sentence to translate, 3 ID the cases of words in the sentence and the last one a question about the declension of a word. That is, half the test they could still pass even if they hadn't read the story.
The results weren't too bad at all, actually. I was very please.
My goal with this is to gradually build up their confidence in their reading skills so that when they advance in Latin that they don't fear reading longer stories on their own.
It's late, I have lots of grading still to go (but not tonight).
It works best with very simple sentences. I use it when the accusative case is introduced in Stage 2 of CLC with my middle school students. For what seems like a simple concept--the difference between subject and objects--I'm often surprised at how difficult it is for young students, esp those without decent academic skills to begin with.
On TWO sets of large index cards write the following:
ancilla (front) | ancillam (back)
servus (front) | servum (back)
canis (front) | canem (back)
est
videt
portat
Have two teams of three players each come up to the front of the room where you have these cards spread out on the chalk tray. Call out a sentence and the team to form the sentence accurately first wins a point.
I have a master set of 10 sentences but because of time constraints I usually don't do more than 7. These are printed on a transparency which I use after the game.
Because of the limit of the vocabulary, the sentences can be kind of funny:
The slave sees the slavegirl.
The slavegirl carries the slave.
The dog is a slave.
The slavegirl is a dog.
The dog carries the slave.
etc
So, when the first team forms the the sentence correctly, I yell freeze, and we discuss why that sentence is write and why, perhaps, the other team's sentence is wrong.
After we play the game, I put the transparency on the overhead projector and the students then have to compose the same sentences in Latin independently. This is the real test to see if they learned from the game, paying attention to the discussions, etc.
This year I really, really worked the understanding of the whole concept of subj/nom/doer vs direct object/acc/receiver of action and I think it paid off. That is, I worked VERY HARD to set the students up for success. I have had too many years when I discovered that the students really didn't get the concepts even though they enjoyed the game and seemed to get it during the game. I had much better results this year, I must admit. Not perfect. Admittedly 1/4 of each class bombed it, but that's surprisingly better than in previous years where I have scratched my head and truly wondered why students didn't get it.
But this is a great diagnostic tool; I can now focus on the kids that still don't get it before the test next Tuesday, instead of discovering that they don't understand AFTER the test.
I think the metaphrasing has helped. I've probably mentioned that before. It works like this:
canis:
The dog verbed someone.
canem:
Someone verbed the dog.
For kids who have serious difficulties or total mental blocks with grammatical terms, being able to metaphrase is very, very helpful. Extremely so.
A few more comments on other things before I close.
A few days ago I did a micrologue thing on the amicus story in stage 2--4 sentences with stick figure pictures that I taught to a volunteer orally while the rest of the class took dictation. This was followed by a substitution drill with the rows competing against each other and a little sample of a transformation drill.
THEN, the new bit, I asked students to read the whole story on their own and write a summary. This is actually a tricky skill and students usually want to translate, esp when the Latin is easy.
The next day I gave a quiz which the students could use their summary on. 5 questions were verum/falsum; 1 sentence to translate, 3 ID the cases of words in the sentence and the last one a question about the declension of a word. That is, half the test they could still pass even if they hadn't read the story.
The results weren't too bad at all, actually. I was very please.
My goal with this is to gradually build up their confidence in their reading skills so that when they advance in Latin that they don't fear reading longer stories on their own.
It's late, I have lots of grading still to go (but not tonight).
Your Activity
Date: 2005-10-22 10:15 pm (UTC)Re: Your Activity
Date: 2005-10-23 12:25 am (UTC)