![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
This was a reply to something on Latinteach that I thought I'd include here. Clearly I must be rested or something because I'm writing more of these posts again. (Feels good, feels more like my old self!)
The first two missive are from other folks on Latinteach, the last long bit is me rambling on.
***
>> Do most Latin teachers leave mention of grammar out of their daily
>> teaching objectives entirely?
> Even I, who am largely opposed to teaching grammar as if it were the
> same thing as teaching Latin, would say no. In any unit, I hold in
> mind what grammatical structures are going to be new, and I find ways
> to work with them in a meaningful context without focusing on them.
> When, after doing that, students begin to notice them and ask about
> them, I give brief, pointed instruction about them.
First, I want to applaud all of you who have daily objectives. I think about how really incredible I could be (you know what I mean) if I had the time to do all that I am *supposed* to do. This is the first year that I haven't been religious in filling out my lesson plan book--I hardly feel I have time to stop and do that in between prepping like mad for the next class! I guess some years are like that.
But, like Robert said above, it's not that I oppose grammar, I just don't find it as a means to an end. I center my teaching around my philosophy of learning to read Latin as a language (not a secret code) that can be read in word order. I introduce cases and function not with a noun chart, which we eventually get to, but with model sentences of my own design that work as a chart of sorts but which only include Nom Dat Acc--I add on Gen and Abl later when we hit it in unit 2 of CLC. But even then, I am talking not just about function in the context of the sentence but also case. It's a package deal to me. I don't want to teach "memorize these endings and then apply it in this way" because some kids will not make that leap from simple rote memory (knowledge level in Blooms Taxonomy) to higher level thinking skills (analysis and synthesis). I try to work the middle ground because there's no other way to grow a program if you don't (she says, determined not to teach split-level ever again!).
But for instance, today we were really working noun/adjective agreement. I did this in the context of metaphrasing during the warm-up. The students had such phrases as:
1) meAs amIcAs
2) duae OrnAtrIcEs
3) fEminae ROmAnae
4) marItum optimum
So I asked them to metaphrase first and THEN to label case, number, and gender, explaining that the sooner they understood CNG and noun/adjective agreement, the easier the little Latin lives would be. So, metaphrased you've got:
1) Someone verbed my (girl) friends.
2) The two hairdressers verbed someone.
3)--A. The Roman matrons verbed someone. OR --B. Someone verbed something to the Roman matron.
4) Someone verbed the best husband.
This they would do first, demonstrating that they are not only aware of case but also the FUNCTION of the case. Then it was easy to go back and walk them through case, number, and gender for each one. By the time we were done (I think I had 8 or 9), the majority of the class got the concept. (Frankly, it felt great.)
I know I'm kind of drifting off the topic here, that of objectives. If I were to write up formal objectives for today's lesson, it would have been something like, "SWBAT (students will be able to) demonstrate through metaphrasing and understanding of both case morphology and syntactical function, and develop an understanding of noun/adjective agreement; afterward, they will read a story with greater comprehension and understanding of such examples in context." (Ok, I'm not really good at writing these things, but you see the track I'm on.)
Actually, we are supposed to have our objectives posted in the room--and I fully appreciate and understand how useful this would be. I just don't have the space--I use my white boards almost completely. Where I do sometimes try to write them (ok, and then forget to change them) is high up--a stretch for me (for those who don't know me, I'm only 5 feet tall). That's my excuse. (Lousy, admittedly.)
In an ideal world--like with essays and all the things we want to do to be the best teachers that we can be--I'd have a large whiteboard devoted only to objectives--big and loud--and keep up with them every day. They say students who have objectives posted in their rooms achieve more than those who don't. (Of course, I wonder if it's because the objectives are there, or because the teacher, by writing the objectives, has fully articulated what he or she is after, which has helped in planning of a superior lesson!)
So grammar does indeed have its place. It can clarify points that usage sometimes can't, or help to consolidate material. But here's what's the most important thing of all: your objectives should reflect what YOU THE TEACHER think is important. We all teach in different ways, ways that work for us, ways that we think work for students. We are like artists--and my artwork is not better or worse than yours, just different.
So if you want to include grammar in your objectives, do it. Do what reflects what you are doing and what works for you.
***
For what it's worth, the students I've had in the past have been, well, lousy at noun-adjective agreement. There are often retakes on tests regarding this. And I'd like to say that I planned out this warm-up with lots of forethought. I don't get that sort of time to brainstorm anymore. (That's part of my problem--I love to brainstorm and I haven't been able to do much of that this year!) BUT the more I use metaphrasing, the better students seem to get at it and at the concept of case/function. So adding the new topic of noun/adjective agreement was easy. Most of the students balked a bit at first, struggling with the warm-up, feeling unsure. But as we reviewed and worked through each one, I heard more and more voices chiming in with the right answer.
Only time will tell if this has been as successful as I thought. But this is such a HUGE concept, one worth going slowly over. I was going to rush through this stage/chapter, because I feel like I'm so far behind, but I realized that SO MUCH ELSE depends on a solid understanding of this! Relative clauses, participles--especially participles!, pronouns/antecedants, perfect passives, indirect statements (depending upon the type of infinitive), etc.
I have Latin 2's that are still struggling with case--did I go to fast last year? Did I assume all were catching on? Are these just strugglers who hid it well last year? I don't know. BUT I want to do EVERYTHING in my power to make sure that this is not a concept that many struggle with next year. (One can dream!)
Right. I'm rambling again. Time to go do something more productive. Or differently productive.
The first two missive are from other folks on Latinteach, the last long bit is me rambling on.
***
>> Do most Latin teachers leave mention of grammar out of their daily
>> teaching objectives entirely?
> Even I, who am largely opposed to teaching grammar as if it were the
> same thing as teaching Latin, would say no. In any unit, I hold in
> mind what grammatical structures are going to be new, and I find ways
> to work with them in a meaningful context without focusing on them.
> When, after doing that, students begin to notice them and ask about
> them, I give brief, pointed instruction about them.
First, I want to applaud all of you who have daily objectives. I think about how really incredible I could be (you know what I mean) if I had the time to do all that I am *supposed* to do. This is the first year that I haven't been religious in filling out my lesson plan book--I hardly feel I have time to stop and do that in between prepping like mad for the next class! I guess some years are like that.
But, like Robert said above, it's not that I oppose grammar, I just don't find it as a means to an end. I center my teaching around my philosophy of learning to read Latin as a language (not a secret code) that can be read in word order. I introduce cases and function not with a noun chart, which we eventually get to, but with model sentences of my own design that work as a chart of sorts but which only include Nom Dat Acc--I add on Gen and Abl later when we hit it in unit 2 of CLC. But even then, I am talking not just about function in the context of the sentence but also case. It's a package deal to me. I don't want to teach "memorize these endings and then apply it in this way" because some kids will not make that leap from simple rote memory (knowledge level in Blooms Taxonomy) to higher level thinking skills (analysis and synthesis). I try to work the middle ground because there's no other way to grow a program if you don't (she says, determined not to teach split-level ever again!).
But for instance, today we were really working noun/adjective agreement. I did this in the context of metaphrasing during the warm-up. The students had such phrases as:
1) meAs amIcAs
2) duae OrnAtrIcEs
3) fEminae ROmAnae
4) marItum optimum
So I asked them to metaphrase first and THEN to label case, number, and gender, explaining that the sooner they understood CNG and noun/adjective agreement, the easier the little Latin lives would be. So, metaphrased you've got:
1) Someone verbed my (girl) friends.
2) The two hairdressers verbed someone.
3)--A. The Roman matrons verbed someone. OR --B. Someone verbed something to the Roman matron.
4) Someone verbed the best husband.
This they would do first, demonstrating that they are not only aware of case but also the FUNCTION of the case. Then it was easy to go back and walk them through case, number, and gender for each one. By the time we were done (I think I had 8 or 9), the majority of the class got the concept. (Frankly, it felt great.)
I know I'm kind of drifting off the topic here, that of objectives. If I were to write up formal objectives for today's lesson, it would have been something like, "SWBAT (students will be able to) demonstrate through metaphrasing and understanding of both case morphology and syntactical function, and develop an understanding of noun/adjective agreement; afterward, they will read a story with greater comprehension and understanding of such examples in context." (Ok, I'm not really good at writing these things, but you see the track I'm on.)
Actually, we are supposed to have our objectives posted in the room--and I fully appreciate and understand how useful this would be. I just don't have the space--I use my white boards almost completely. Where I do sometimes try to write them (ok, and then forget to change them) is high up--a stretch for me (for those who don't know me, I'm only 5 feet tall). That's my excuse. (Lousy, admittedly.)
In an ideal world--like with essays and all the things we want to do to be the best teachers that we can be--I'd have a large whiteboard devoted only to objectives--big and loud--and keep up with them every day. They say students who have objectives posted in their rooms achieve more than those who don't. (Of course, I wonder if it's because the objectives are there, or because the teacher, by writing the objectives, has fully articulated what he or she is after, which has helped in planning of a superior lesson!)
So grammar does indeed have its place. It can clarify points that usage sometimes can't, or help to consolidate material. But here's what's the most important thing of all: your objectives should reflect what YOU THE TEACHER think is important. We all teach in different ways, ways that work for us, ways that we think work for students. We are like artists--and my artwork is not better or worse than yours, just different.
So if you want to include grammar in your objectives, do it. Do what reflects what you are doing and what works for you.
***
For what it's worth, the students I've had in the past have been, well, lousy at noun-adjective agreement. There are often retakes on tests regarding this. And I'd like to say that I planned out this warm-up with lots of forethought. I don't get that sort of time to brainstorm anymore. (That's part of my problem--I love to brainstorm and I haven't been able to do much of that this year!) BUT the more I use metaphrasing, the better students seem to get at it and at the concept of case/function. So adding the new topic of noun/adjective agreement was easy. Most of the students balked a bit at first, struggling with the warm-up, feeling unsure. But as we reviewed and worked through each one, I heard more and more voices chiming in with the right answer.
Only time will tell if this has been as successful as I thought. But this is such a HUGE concept, one worth going slowly over. I was going to rush through this stage/chapter, because I feel like I'm so far behind, but I realized that SO MUCH ELSE depends on a solid understanding of this! Relative clauses, participles--especially participles!, pronouns/antecedants, perfect passives, indirect statements (depending upon the type of infinitive), etc.
I have Latin 2's that are still struggling with case--did I go to fast last year? Did I assume all were catching on? Are these just strugglers who hid it well last year? I don't know. BUT I want to do EVERYTHING in my power to make sure that this is not a concept that many struggle with next year. (One can dream!)
Right. I'm rambling again. Time to go do something more productive. Or differently productive.
