Thanks, Florencia, for another really nice video on a topic that is very near and dear to my heart! 😉 As you say, the thing that I think makes CBI so effective is that it takes learners beyond “just” learning the language. It helps them see that language has a real-world function. When they can use their growing knowledge of the language to learn about new content areas, e.g., the history, geography, etc. of the target culture(s), I have found that students tend to be much more engaged. And, as the instructor, I find it much more interesting to teach as I invariably learn something new myself along the way. Thanks again for all your hard work in putting these excellent videos together. Grazie mille!
Thank you so much for leaving such a lovely comment, Daryl! I also enjoy teaching content-based courses too. I admit I don't know what a novice-level course for adult students would look like if it were truly content-based. I wonder if it's inevitable to always stat at the language-driven end of the continuum.
THANKS for sharing such insightful summaries! 🙏 First Apart from learning L2 for specific purposes, I still think that CBI is the natural development after intermediate high and beyond. The ACTFL cone becomes so wide to be covered through communicative situations and language functions! At least this is what I feel 🤷♀️! Second Also, CBI seems smoothly compatible with the learner-centered approach. Students (especially adults) - as far as the assumption goes - will probably be self-motivated and thus find pleasure in seeking autonomy; selecting what they want to learn, and developing their own learning strategies. Another advantage is that intentional and incidental learning of vocabulary comes naturally in CBI. The terminology and words associated with certain contexts will often be recycled naturally across this field's books and materials. Third Why are you hesitant to consider grammar or linguistics as a topic that can be studied under CBI? Wouldn't this be similar to native speakers learning their L1 grammar? I think that's completely fine! Langauge at this point is not merely a means of communication but rather a key to higher or certain intellectual interests. Fourth As for authenticity, I can't wait to hear your thoughts about this issue. I remember I came across this point in Nunan's TBLT. He quoted five levels of text authenticity (I will poorly paraphrase them as follows): 1) Genuine: The original text is not created for teaching purposes. 2) Altered: The original is only enhanced by visuals, glosses, highlights, etc 3) Adapted: The original is simplified. 4) Simulated: The text is written by the teacher for the classroom but in a style similar to genuine texts. 5) Minimal / Incidental: The text is created by the teacher in a compromised language style. Fifth Maybe one problem with CBI is that since it's content-driven, it prioritizes fluency over accuracy (The continuum must be considered here of course). Students might MAINLY approach the language as an instrument to excel in narrow fields of knowledge. The result of this may be seen in excellent academic professors who are experts in their fields but their audience struggles to understand them clearly!
Thank you so much for sharing your thoughts and making these videos! Do you have any book recommendations on SLA researched-based instruction techniques?
Thank you for this comment! I certainly have one book recommendation: "Common Ground: Second Language Acquisition Theory Goes to the Classroom"! You can buy it on Amazon or directly from the publisher if you're in the US or Canada. It is currently on sale with the code SPRING22: hackettpublishing.com/modern-languages/common-ground-second-language-acquisition-theory-goes-to-the-classroom
@@Unpackinglanguagepedagogy Pues, mira pa'llá! Lo acabo de mandar a pedir. GRACIAS! Era exactamente lo que andaba buscando. Saludos y mucho éxito con lo que aportas.
Thanks, Florencia, for another really nice video on a topic that is very near and dear to my heart! 😉 As you say, the thing that I think makes CBI so effective is that it takes learners beyond “just” learning the language. It helps them see that language has a real-world function. When they can use their growing knowledge of the language to learn about new content areas, e.g., the history, geography, etc. of the target culture(s), I have found that students tend to be much more engaged. And, as the instructor, I find it much more interesting to teach as I invariably learn something new myself along the way. Thanks again for all your hard work in putting these excellent videos together. Grazie mille!
Thank you so much for leaving such a lovely comment, Daryl! I also enjoy teaching content-based courses too. I admit I don't know what a novice-level course for adult students would look like if it were truly content-based. I wonder if it's inevitable to always stat at the language-driven end of the continuum.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts. It was nice to reflect on my own ideas and how our program handles CBI!
Thank YOU for taking the time to leave such a nice comment!
THANKS for sharing such insightful summaries! 🙏
First
Apart from learning L2 for specific purposes, I still think that CBI is the natural development after intermediate high and beyond. The ACTFL cone becomes so wide to be covered through communicative situations and language functions! At least this is what I feel 🤷♀️!
Second
Also, CBI seems smoothly compatible with the learner-centered approach. Students (especially adults) - as far as the assumption goes - will probably be self-motivated and thus find pleasure in seeking autonomy; selecting what they want to learn, and developing their own learning strategies.
Another advantage is that intentional and incidental learning of vocabulary comes naturally in CBI. The terminology and words associated with certain contexts will often be recycled naturally across this field's books and materials.
Third
Why are you hesitant to consider grammar or linguistics as a topic that can be studied under CBI? Wouldn't this be similar to native speakers learning their L1 grammar? I think that's completely fine! Langauge at this point is not merely a means of communication but rather a key to higher or certain intellectual interests.
Fourth
As for authenticity, I can't wait to hear your thoughts about this issue. I remember I came across this point in Nunan's TBLT. He quoted five levels of text authenticity (I will poorly paraphrase them as follows):
1) Genuine: The original text is not created for teaching purposes.
2) Altered: The original is only enhanced by visuals, glosses, highlights, etc
3) Adapted: The original is simplified.
4) Simulated: The text is written by the teacher for the classroom but in a style similar to genuine texts.
5) Minimal / Incidental: The text is created by the teacher in a compromised language style.
Fifth
Maybe one problem with CBI is that since it's content-driven, it prioritizes fluency over accuracy (The continuum must be considered here of course). Students might MAINLY approach the language as an instrument to excel in narrow fields of knowledge. The result of this may be seen in excellent academic professors who are experts in their fields but their audience struggles to understand them clearly!
Thank you for your thoughtful comment!
Thank you so much for sharing your thoughts and making these videos! Do you have any book recommendations on SLA researched-based instruction techniques?
Thank you for this comment! I certainly have one book recommendation: "Common Ground: Second Language Acquisition Theory Goes to the Classroom"! You can buy it on Amazon or directly from the publisher if you're in the US or Canada. It is currently on sale with the code SPRING22: hackettpublishing.com/modern-languages/common-ground-second-language-acquisition-theory-goes-to-the-classroom
@@Unpackinglanguagepedagogy Pues, mira pa'llá! Lo acabo de mandar a pedir. GRACIAS! Era exactamente lo que andaba buscando. Saludos y mucho éxito con lo que aportas.
@@ungorlgorl Muchísimas gracias!!
50 Shades of CBI😂😂❤
mmsp lee bal nlmt myan myan pyaw saga ko may loe