On the classics list we've been having a discussion the spun off of an initial note I sent about NLTRW (National Latin Teacher Recruitment Week). NLTRW is the first full week in March. For more, see www.promotelatin.org/nltrw.htm.
Anyway, the discussion ended up being about teacher suitability, university work and expectations, and other things...
***
> That is a problem, but, of course, many people do not finish their
> dissertations because what they are not cut out to do is be a research
> scholar, whereas they still could be a very enthusiastic and very
> competent Latin teacher.
Yes. I agree. And here's where I see a BIG problem with what happens at the university level: there is rarely any discussion of true pedagogy. I was lucky enough to have as a professor the late Gareth Morgan, who had taught at all levels of education. He was an amazing teacher and professor and took the time in our methods course to expose us to a wide variety of textbooks and teaching methodologies. How many of you know of the UK texts out in the 60s/70s (I think) called Principia and Pseudolus Noster by Peckett and Munday? Brilliant texts--for teaching via the "direct method".
In many ways these texts would be totally appropriate in the current climate of language acquisition discussions going on with modern languages (Krashen, Rassias, et al.).
But because of a lack of discussion of pedagogy there is this assumption that teaching Latin is all about memorizing endings and then--IF YOU ARE SMART ENOUGH--putting it all together later on. So we have at one end on Blooms Taxonomy "knowledge" level learning (rote memorization) and then we have this assumption that kids can just suddenly go to synthesis and analysis level learning with reading and composition. There's rarely an in between. Teaching Latin is a sink or swim situation--either you have a natural gift for it or you don't. Or that's how it's been presented.
Now, why has it been like this for the last several decades? Probably in great measure because of costs. Who can afford to devote resources to the one or two students doing student teaching? So mostly, methods courses are just thrown together. There is no serious discussion or focus on the skills students should be acquiring while at university until the methods course, and often that's too late.
For instance, very little attention is paid to pronunciation.
Understandably--when are you going to do this? You have your 50 minute hour, you have to cover X number of lines of Y author and deal with problems of grammar and translation. You can't just stop class to devote it to pronunciation. Fair enough. But when, then? Perhaps you don't think it's important--but I think it is critical for true appreciation of Latin. If we are ever to get to a point of fluency in reading--WHICH SHOULD BE OUR GOAL instead of covering X number of lines of Y author--we have to be able to speak the language outloud. How can you acquire vocabulary if you make it all cerebral? How can it ever flow like a real language if it is all a puzzling out meaning sort of game?
What about teachings students HOW to read from left to right? How can you become a teacher and hope to teach students how to do these things if you were never taught yourself?
This is where I get on my soapbox and ask you, as professors, to consider adding a reading lab and a pronunciation lab--it could be combined all in one. A 1 hour lab to have a place where students focus on nothing but reading outloud, reading with fluency, and learning how to read from left to right. No one in your department with great pronunciation (always a possibility)? Then get those new Wheelocks CD's from Bolchazy Carducci. They are impeccable. What to practice with reading that's simple enough for the beginning student but long enough to build up skills? Why not Oerberg's Lingua Latina. Have students reading WHOLE CHAPTERS of Latin at a go.
And then, back to the methods courses, why aren't we using Distler's _Teach the Latin, I Pray You_? It may be dated but there's a LOT of good information there about teaching the language. Lots of solid pedagogy. And why aren't we paying more attention to Krashen and Rassias and what others are doing with modern languages?
If you are bemoaning the quality of reading of your GRAD students, then maybe you should also consider what is happening at the undergraduate level, and why we aren't creating better readers to go into the PhD programs.
And, yes, perhaps we do have too many PhDs. Not a bad thing if we simply value education for what it is: knowledge. I heard it said at a CAMWS grad student panel that to make yourself more marketable as a young PhD, you need to be a good teacher as well as researcher. Well, there we are again, back at teaching. And you can't say, "well, I'm really good at Cicero, that's my specialty, and I just have to wait until the students are ready for Cicero."
No, you have to figure out how to get MORE STUDENTS ready for Cicero to begin with, and you're not going to do that unless you arm those undergraduates with an ability to READ LATIN in word order and to APPRECIATE the sound of Latin. You can't tell me that Cicero wanted his speeches to be read in a quiet corner of the library or in a small classroom tucked away behind the big lecture hall filled with mythology students.
We can MAKE GOOD TEACHERS. Ok, that last quality--that "people" quality--is not something you can make. But you can arm undergrads and grads with all the tools to teach most anyone how to read Latin from left to right.
Damnit, if I can do it with a large number of my inner city students, then you can do it with college students.
> This is unfortunate, and it seems to be a recent phenomenon.
> A decade ago it was still largely possible to get Latin teachers
> alternatively certified in most states.
Thank President Bush and "No Child Left Behind."
> Not all secondary teachers are capable of becoming Ivy League
> professors, but most Ivy League professors would not make good public
> hs teachers, either.
True, to a certain extent... But even at an Ivy League school you have to teach beginning students, and you can't tell me that there aren't a few dullards that get in because of mommy and daddy's connections with admissions. It wouldn't hurt for everyone to be exposed to more pedagogy and language acquisition theory. Or we can just exclude ourselves as privileged and above it all and watch our programs continue to shrink or be absorbed by other departments.
> You still should have set him straight.
Oh, it wasn't worth it. He didn't mean ill. And besides, I have plenty of colleagues at the secondary level who treat me as "just a middle school teacher" and assume that I don't have issues that they have with AP Latin, etc. Hey, I teach my courses as if all of my students will take AP Latin (as unlikely as it is), which is why I do emphasize the importance of pronunciation. It certainly makes reading Vergil and understanding meter so much easier if you begin with a knowledge early on of pronunciation and syllabification.
Another problem that
> I see here is that, while there *may* be a shortage of Latin teachers
> at the jr/sr hs level, there most certainly is no shortage of PhD
> classics professors. Sadly, many classics PhDs will not be able to
> get gainful post-secondary positions, even as lowly adjuncts, and
> these people are a good potential resource for hs teaching, especially
> in more academically-motivated hs environments.
At this point WE are the ones that create academically motivated students.
Yes, some middle school and high school environments are better than others, but WE can inspire our students to stretch themselves beyond what they themselves think they are capable of doing. Ok, and sometimes there's not much we can do.
But also, part of the problem with keeping students motivated is in our own teaching--we inadvertently leap from knowledge level learning to analysis and synthesis without arming students to make that leap. When you understand Blooms Taxonomy (google it if you are unfamiliar with it), you can begin to understand where the misconnects happen. If we don't attend to those misconnects, what we end up with is a room full of students that just got left behind. They aren't academically unmotivated--they are lost and left to feel stupid.
As Father Foster has said/written, if a prostitute in Rome could learn Latin, so can anyone.
> Probably a good thing, too. Who cares what the test says?
Actually, it's a nosce te ipsum thing. You may not realize where your weaknesses are and such a test can point them out. Then you can decide how you want to deal with them.
I get frustrated with Latin teachers who say that they don't want to do oral Latin because they took Latin originally because it had no oral component and it makes them uncomfortable. Well, right there is a weakness--the teacher herself/himself is unwilling to leave his/her own comfort zone to address a weakness. Not quite the same as a psych test, but the point is similar. We have to be willing to honestly look at ourselves and how we teach and decide WHAT CAN WE DO DIFFERENTLY and not blame it all on the students. It can be humbling, but it can also be rewarding. I know if the whole class bombed an assignment that perhaps the problem wasn't the students, but perhaps my instructions or my assuming that they were ready for the assignment. And I have to be willing to answer up honestly in order to be a better teacher.
> Can it say how someone will deal with violent, disruptive,
> anti-motivated inner-city discipline cases?
Learn better classroom management skills. I highly recommend _The First Days of School_ for understanding how classroom organization and routines can truly cut down on disruptive behaviors. All things considered, I have pretty productive classes. It was not always the case.
No, you can't cure everything with classroom management skills, but you can limit many of the problems. The question is, are you willing to question WHAT YOU CAN DO ABOUT THE PROBLEMS or would you rather just say the fault is entirely with the students?
I designed a brochure a few years ago "So You Want to be a Latin Teacher?"
http://www.promotelatin.org/futureteacher.pdf which offers some advice for the undergraduate in order to help them take charge of their university preparation. Feel free to print and distribute to your undergrads. I also have a section on the NLTRW website on the FAQ page of advice for becoming a teacher, including suggestions for changes in teacher preparation. Feel free to take a look here:
http://www.promotelatin.org/nltrwrfaq.htm#adviceThe fact remains that if we continue to put little thought into the training of our future teachers, we will have more situations like I find locally--teachers who really aren't prepared to teach young people slowly kill programs so that there are fewer programs left. Fewer middle school Latin programs means fewer kids taking Latin in high school. Two years middle school equals 1 year high school credit, and if students start with Spanish or French in middle school, guess what they will take in high school? And if you have fewer taking Latin in high school, there will be fewer students reaching upper division Latin in college.
We can work together to change this cycle--we can consider cost effective ways to improve our university preparation for teachers that take into account the issues that colleges have (see my suggestions for changes in teacher preparation on the webpage above)--or we can continue as we have always done. Things may stay the same, or they may get worse. I can't imagine that they will improve.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
