![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
This first bit is from a discussion on the Latinteach list about AP Latin. A person going through certification was teaching an AP Vergil class for the first time and was suddenly struck by the real problem with AP Latin:
***
>>>I went in with a head full of things to talk about, metrically, thematically, grammatically/linguistically, stylistically, etc. and found myself staring down the barrel of the tyranny of time. all seemed in conflict with the need to churn through the lines. My impression of the issue is that there has been a conscious design choice in the syllabus to prefer breadth to depth. Is this how the trade off appears to others here?
You've got it in one. This is what people complain about with regard to the AP syllabus, in particular the Vergil syllabus. It often covers more lines that the equivalent university course, the test, some have said, is more demanding than the typical university test for the 312 level class (I believe that's what the designation would be at UTexas), and there is such a drive to cover lines that there's no joy in reading it.
My niece took both AP Catullus/Ovid and AP Vergil before graduating. She liked the former, she hated the latter. I was stunned, but then she explained how they were always fighting to cover the lines.
The other thing that happens is that a handful of teachers will call their course AP but will never even approach trying to cover all the lines.
The worst part, to me, is that students are rarely taught reading and disambiguation techniques before they get to such a class and suddenly they are on their own to march through so many lines of poetry. And the usual technique is "write out a translation for the next 20 lines for homework" (or more lines, of course).
Some of these students are taught how to take the test, or have memorized enough of the story that if they come across a passage they don't know but can recognize a line or two and put it with the English they've memorized, they can get through the test.
Then they wind up at colleges with professors who wonder how they managed the score they got on the AP because their Latin grammar isn't solid at all, and thus they are put back in a Wheelock class.
Of course, this last big is the worst case scenario.
But the fact remains that we are rarely giving students any idea of a pleasure in reading Latin. And isn't that a shame?
***
This next bit was about the closing of a Latin program. The original note was titled "autopsy of a Latin program"--very fitting.
***
>>First of all, does anybody know of a Latin program that is NOT considered part of the language department?
Numerous. Look at the universities who dread being combined with modern language departments. Or here in Texas, our own Texas Classical Association has refused several opportunities to have a combined conference with the Texas Foreign Language Association. I could even outline how a join meeting could be done where we could maintain the way we do our usual schedule of papers AND have the opportunity to meet with our modern language colleagues. Nothin' doin'.
So it is no wonder to me when "outsiders" consider Latin NOT part of the language department. Time and time again we have set ourselves up as separate and unique.
>>>The main statement about incongruity, however, is understandable, given that it reflects common (though incorrect) opinions of Latin, as well as the reality in many Latin programs.
Well, that was what I was going to say.
I know too many Latin teachers who do very little oral Latin. Admittedly I currently do very little writing in Latin. But I have plans for totally restructuring that if/when I go to a new school (next year?). Too many teachers push Latin as an SAT prep. I am appalled that even here in a district that uses the Cambridge Latin Course--a reading based textbook--that students at JCL events will choose virtually any other test before reading comprehension even though the other tests require lots of studying to do well on them. We use a reading based textbook but most people do not teach reading skills. The reading comprehension test should be the one that everyone chooses first because it is based on what is learned in the classroom. What gets me is that I seem to be the only teacher alarmed at this. Is it me?
And if we don't even have the kids reading the language and communicating with the authors through the medium of reading, then perhaps we really shouldn't be considered a foreign language. Are we treating Latin as a language? No, no, it's like the new beautiful NCLG promotional brochure says quoting some student: it's fun to decode. (Oh please...) And it's our own fault as a profession that we have this problem.
This is, actually, one reason why I have done very little with the National Committee for Latin and Greek website. (Well, one of several reasons--the other main one being that the site needs a major redesign and I'm not sure what that interface should look like.) I have hit a point where I realize--and maybe this is just me--but I'm starting to see that while it's good to have all the SAT, learn other languages, etc, benefits out there, if we aren't giving our students as complete a language experience as possible then we are doing them no service.
And we have to get over the fact that we weren't taught the skills that we need to be that new generation of Latin teachers that strives to return Latin to a more natual state as a language. We just need to get over it, make asses of ourselves in class trying new things, and try demanding more in areas that make us nervous, like oral work or even composition (and by that I do not mean putting English into Latin; I mean having students write somewhat freely about a picture, etc).
I love CLC. I love the story line. I love the way certain concepts are introduced and even the order in which they are introduced. It seems natural; it flows and you feel like you are reading a story that doesn't seem stilted by odd language. But even as much as I like CLC, Oerberg's Lingua Latina seems absolutely brilliant to me the way he teaches with opposites and contrasts. I have been particularly impressed by how adverbial conjunctions are handled (nam, for instance). THESE BOOKS show Latin as a language.
But we get hung up with morphology, do we not? With our thoughts of what the next teacher will demand or respect? I will not be returning to my current school next year and I'm thinking about how I need to make sure that my 7th graders can decline a noun, something I don't really do until they are 8th graders. They only know nom, dat and acc--why bother with extraneous information? I provide model sentences of my own design in order to master the case endings, but I don't make them decline.
I had one of my students switch to another middle school last year who would have been an 8th grader. His teacher was outright astonished if not blown away that I did not require them to decline a noun. (Well, and the kid she got wasn't that studious either so who knows how he really would have done?)
The point is this: we can be appalled when schools shut down Latin programs but we can't stomp our feet and say, "Don't you know how important Latin is? Don't you know how good it is for you? Don't you know we're above being like a normal language?"
>>>If we teachers continue to think that we are exempt from the standards which apply to the other modern languages, then we had better prepare to be ousted from those language departments.
Exactly.
>>>If that happens, however, where will we go?
Good question. I think it is unlikely anyone will force Latin into extinction because of the strength of the Junior Classical League. But even I have found my current situation curious in that my school is closing (and falling apart) but my district has closed 2 programs in the last 5 years so there's no place for me to go within the district (which may not be that bad a thing, actually). Hard to talk about teacher shortages and that I should have a job when the shortages caused the closing of programs thus meaning that there is no job availability. (If you followed that....)
There is only one direction we can go. (Suddenly Star Trek music is playing in my head....) We must boldly go where no one has gone before...or at least very few relatively speaking. We have to do what we are doing on this list and then some. We have to discuss ways to change teacher training to address many of these issues and present at workshops to address these issues as well.
I'd like to see someone do a Latin workshop on just Rassias/TPRS style Latin teaching. I'd like to see someone work up a slick one-day workshop that can go on the road. We rarely get decent inservice folks around here.
We have to teach each other and in turn teach the younger generation of Latin teachers who are rising now.
What I'm beginning to dread is a desire to return to more traditional textbooks because people feel the reading based texts aren't getting them the results they want. But how can these textbooks get the intended results if people are never truly instructed how to teach from them most effectively?
There's so much work to be done. But the first thing we have to admit is where we have gone wrong as a profession.
***
>>>I went in with a head full of things to talk about, metrically, thematically, grammatically/linguistically, stylistically, etc. and found myself staring down the barrel of the tyranny of time.
You've got it in one. This is what people complain about with regard to the AP syllabus, in particular the Vergil syllabus. It often covers more lines that the equivalent university course, the test, some have said, is more demanding than the typical university test for the 312 level class (I believe that's what the designation would be at UTexas), and there is such a drive to cover lines that there's no joy in reading it.
My niece took both AP Catullus/Ovid and AP Vergil before graduating. She liked the former, she hated the latter. I was stunned, but then she explained how they were always fighting to cover the lines.
The other thing that happens is that a handful of teachers will call their course AP but will never even approach trying to cover all the lines.
The worst part, to me, is that students are rarely taught reading and disambiguation techniques before they get to such a class and suddenly they are on their own to march through so many lines of poetry. And the usual technique is "write out a translation for the next 20 lines for homework" (or more lines, of course).
Some of these students are taught how to take the test, or have memorized enough of the story that if they come across a passage they don't know but can recognize a line or two and put it with the English they've memorized, they can get through the test.
Then they wind up at colleges with professors who wonder how they managed the score they got on the AP because their Latin grammar isn't solid at all, and thus they are put back in a Wheelock class.
Of course, this last big is the worst case scenario.
But the fact remains that we are rarely giving students any idea of a pleasure in reading Latin. And isn't that a shame?
***
This next bit was about the closing of a Latin program. The original note was titled "autopsy of a Latin program"--very fitting.
***
>>First of all, does anybody know of a Latin program that is NOT considered part of the language department?
Numerous. Look at the universities who dread being combined with modern language departments. Or here in Texas, our own Texas Classical Association has refused several opportunities to have a combined conference with the Texas Foreign Language Association. I could even outline how a join meeting could be done where we could maintain the way we do our usual schedule of papers AND have the opportunity to meet with our modern language colleagues. Nothin' doin'.
So it is no wonder to me when "outsiders" consider Latin NOT part of the language department. Time and time again we have set ourselves up as separate and unique.
>>>The main statement about incongruity, however, is understandable, given that it reflects common (though incorrect) opinions of Latin, as well as the reality in many Latin programs.
Well, that was what I was going to say.
I know too many Latin teachers who do very little oral Latin. Admittedly I currently do very little writing in Latin. But I have plans for totally restructuring that if/when I go to a new school (next year?). Too many teachers push Latin as an SAT prep. I am appalled that even here in a district that uses the Cambridge Latin Course--a reading based textbook--that students at JCL events will choose virtually any other test before reading comprehension even though the other tests require lots of studying to do well on them. We use a reading based textbook but most people do not teach reading skills. The reading comprehension test should be the one that everyone chooses first because it is based on what is learned in the classroom. What gets me is that I seem to be the only teacher alarmed at this. Is it me?
And if we don't even have the kids reading the language and communicating with the authors through the medium of reading, then perhaps we really shouldn't be considered a foreign language. Are we treating Latin as a language? No, no, it's like the new beautiful NCLG promotional brochure says quoting some student: it's fun to decode. (Oh please...) And it's our own fault as a profession that we have this problem.
This is, actually, one reason why I have done very little with the National Committee for Latin and Greek website. (Well, one of several reasons--the other main one being that the site needs a major redesign and I'm not sure what that interface should look like.) I have hit a point where I realize--and maybe this is just me--but I'm starting to see that while it's good to have all the SAT, learn other languages, etc, benefits out there, if we aren't giving our students as complete a language experience as possible then we are doing them no service.
And we have to get over the fact that we weren't taught the skills that we need to be that new generation of Latin teachers that strives to return Latin to a more natual state as a language. We just need to get over it, make asses of ourselves in class trying new things, and try demanding more in areas that make us nervous, like oral work or even composition (and by that I do not mean putting English into Latin; I mean having students write somewhat freely about a picture, etc).
I love CLC. I love the story line. I love the way certain concepts are introduced and even the order in which they are introduced. It seems natural; it flows and you feel like you are reading a story that doesn't seem stilted by odd language. But even as much as I like CLC, Oerberg's Lingua Latina seems absolutely brilliant to me the way he teaches with opposites and contrasts. I have been particularly impressed by how adverbial conjunctions are handled (nam, for instance). THESE BOOKS show Latin as a language.
But we get hung up with morphology, do we not? With our thoughts of what the next teacher will demand or respect? I will not be returning to my current school next year and I'm thinking about how I need to make sure that my 7th graders can decline a noun, something I don't really do until they are 8th graders. They only know nom, dat and acc--why bother with extraneous information? I provide model sentences of my own design in order to master the case endings, but I don't make them decline.
I had one of my students switch to another middle school last year who would have been an 8th grader. His teacher was outright astonished if not blown away that I did not require them to decline a noun. (Well, and the kid she got wasn't that studious either so who knows how he really would have done?)
The point is this: we can be appalled when schools shut down Latin programs but we can't stomp our feet and say, "Don't you know how important Latin is? Don't you know how good it is for you? Don't you know we're above being like a normal language?"
>>>If we teachers continue to think that we are exempt from the standards which apply to the other modern languages, then we had better prepare to be ousted from those language departments.
Exactly.
>>>If that happens, however, where will we go?
Good question. I think it is unlikely anyone will force Latin into extinction because of the strength of the Junior Classical League. But even I have found my current situation curious in that my school is closing (and falling apart) but my district has closed 2 programs in the last 5 years so there's no place for me to go within the district (which may not be that bad a thing, actually). Hard to talk about teacher shortages and that I should have a job when the shortages caused the closing of programs thus meaning that there is no job availability. (If you followed that....)
There is only one direction we can go. (Suddenly Star Trek music is playing in my head....) We must boldly go where no one has gone before...or at least very few relatively speaking. We have to do what we are doing on this list and then some. We have to discuss ways to change teacher training to address many of these issues and present at workshops to address these issues as well.
I'd like to see someone do a Latin workshop on just Rassias/TPRS style Latin teaching. I'd like to see someone work up a slick one-day workshop that can go on the road. We rarely get decent inservice folks around here.
We have to teach each other and in turn teach the younger generation of Latin teachers who are rising now.
What I'm beginning to dread is a desire to return to more traditional textbooks because people feel the reading based texts aren't getting them the results they want. But how can these textbooks get the intended results if people are never truly instructed how to teach from them most effectively?
There's so much work to be done. But the first thing we have to admit is where we have gone wrong as a profession.
AP
Date: 2006-03-15 05:27 am (UTC)Anyway, the thing that really caught my eye was where you said, "It often covers more lines that the equivalent university course, the test, some have said, is more demanding than the typical university test for the 312 level class...." One of my students has really been struggling in the AP class this year. His parents have finally started looking in to getting him a tutor. I gave them the tutor list from the UT Classics Department. His mother let me know that he met with one of the undergraduate students on the tutor list, and that after having looked over a few of my student's tests and the syllabus, he decided he was not comfortable with that level of Latin. Now, I don't know what level that UT student was--for all I know he could have been a first or second year student--but it was interesting that this high school course was at so seemingly high a level. And it made me wonder if the parents thought I was some kind of crazy lady teaching high school students as if they're grad students!
Westwood also has the International Baccalaureate program, which I definitely prefer to the AP program. You still have to translate a passage on the exam, but you get to use a dictionary, and the passage is from a prescribed offer (Ovid, the past few years), so in class you just read anything you want from that author to get used to his style and vocabulary so you're comfortable reading something (anything) of his on exam day. But then there are more meaningful questions and essays, and at the higher level (and soon to be at the standard level, too), the students have a choice of doing an expressive reading of a passage with a commentary on why they chose to read the way they chose to, or a research dossier (kind of like an annotated bibliography), or a Latin composition written in the style of a classical author with a commentary. Now that EXCITES me!
-Jeanine
Re: AP
Date: 2006-03-15 01:45 pm (UTC)Yes, AP has gotten political. It is now what is expected on the college transcript, for better or worse.
Frankly, I think these programs all have their merits, but it is assuming that all teachers and all students are alike, learn at the same pace, etc.
Even right now I'm changing how I teach certain things, feeling like I must in case my school somehow does find a replacement teacher. Maybe some of the things I've been doing all along have been bad ideas. (My model sentences instead of a noun chart until the end of 8th grade.)
If I end up teaching at schools that feed into Westlake, I'll have to conform more than ever to what is expected of pre-AP students, won't I?!
Well, there is how we teach, how we want to teach, and that middle ground in between the two that we strive to shrink.