Early in the fall of 1992, in my first grad school course at Oklahoma State University I first heard of Stephen Krashen. His famous Theory of Second Language Acquisition posits that “acquisition requires meaningful interaction in the target language - natural communication - in which speakers are concerned not with the form of their utterances but with the messages they are conveying and understanding” (Krashen, 1992). In essence, meaningful communication is what produces any learning, not just English language learning.
That fall, discussions rambled about Krashen’s notion of comprehensible input, expressed as i + 1. Simply put, this formula states that learners should always receive input (i) that is just one (1) level of difficulty above their current understanding. In theory, you cannot quantify i or 1, but we know something like i + 20 is suboptimal. In the classroom, you can open the lines of communication so students can feel safe expressing gaps in knowledge and communication breakdowns. But how?
The BARNGA simulation, created by Sivasailam Thiagarajan in 1980, offers a partial answer. The game has an online version and a version for in-person classes. It engages students in critical reflection on communication breakdowns, cultural or otherwise. Thiagarajan realized conflict stems mostly from slight cues (visual or audible). In this simulation, students silently play a card game, but unknown to all participants, each student has a slightly different set of rules. The simulation is best played early in the semester, and one of the key teaching moments comes in the debriefing at the end. Students accuse others of cheating or otherwise not playing by the rules and some heavy discussions can take place. All this allowing you to intervene and point out model behavioral practices your students must practice ensuring a proactive, safe learning environment. In the debriefing, you may be reminded of group work or grading discussions. The point is to make all realize that understanding is more subjective than objective and that we are constantly in need of reframing, paraphrasing, and refocusing on solving the learning task, not the conflict at hand.
While the game is complex, this should not stop you from considering playing a version of it. Simulating a communication breakdown opens the hidden walls of communication.
We are all going through i + 1 in the educational setting and everywhere else. Students know how to study; professors know how to teach, but can they do it on Zoom? Even for Zoom pros, disaster can strike, as you, the host, lose your internet and cannot reconnect back into your meeting. Preparing for that panicked moment requires foreword-thinking communication. Upon entering computer labs, I used to tell dazzled and confused ESL students that if the technology failed, they would not get the F, the technology would. That allowed for a calmer environment when the inevitable tech disaster struck. So, take the chance to review the BARNGA simulation or search around for other alternatives. The point is that in the virtual realm, and in the in-person classroom, communicating at a more profound level is more essential than ever. Breaking through the barriers of communication is often times the most important factor in determining student success.
Stephen Krashen’s Theory of Second Language Acquisition. (n.d.). Retrieved December 12, 2020, from https://www.sk.com.br/sk-krash-english.html
Tuitt, F., In Haynes, C., & In Stewart, S. (2016). Race, equity, and the learning environment: The global relevance of critical and inclusive pedagogies in higher education.
Post Author:
John Ball is a Senior Instructional Designer for CogBooks. He provides adaptive expertise and technical support for CogBooks to the School of Life Sciences at Arizona State University. Previously, he worked as Sr. Instructional Designer and Development Analyst for Pearson and as a Lecturer for Global Launch (formerly AECP) at ASU.
That fall, discussions rambled about Krashen’s notion of comprehensible input, expressed as i + 1. Simply put, this formula states that learners should always receive input (i) that is just one (1) level of difficulty above their current understanding. In theory, you cannot quantify i or 1, but we know something like i + 20 is suboptimal. In the classroom, you can open the lines of communication so students can feel safe expressing gaps in knowledge and communication breakdowns. But how?
The BARNGA simulation, created by Sivasailam Thiagarajan in 1980, offers a partial answer. The game has an online version and a version for in-person classes. It engages students in critical reflection on communication breakdowns, cultural or otherwise. Thiagarajan realized conflict stems mostly from slight cues (visual or audible). In this simulation, students silently play a card game, but unknown to all participants, each student has a slightly different set of rules. The simulation is best played early in the semester, and one of the key teaching moments comes in the debriefing at the end. Students accuse others of cheating or otherwise not playing by the rules and some heavy discussions can take place. All this allowing you to intervene and point out model behavioral practices your students must practice ensuring a proactive, safe learning environment. In the debriefing, you may be reminded of group work or grading discussions. The point is to make all realize that understanding is more subjective than objective and that we are constantly in need of reframing, paraphrasing, and refocusing on solving the learning task, not the conflict at hand.
While the game is complex, this should not stop you from considering playing a version of it. Simulating a communication breakdown opens the hidden walls of communication.
We are all going through i + 1 in the educational setting and everywhere else. Students know how to study; professors know how to teach, but can they do it on Zoom? Even for Zoom pros, disaster can strike, as you, the host, lose your internet and cannot reconnect back into your meeting. Preparing for that panicked moment requires foreword-thinking communication. Upon entering computer labs, I used to tell dazzled and confused ESL students that if the technology failed, they would not get the F, the technology would. That allowed for a calmer environment when the inevitable tech disaster struck. So, take the chance to review the BARNGA simulation or search around for other alternatives. The point is that in the virtual realm, and in the in-person classroom, communicating at a more profound level is more essential than ever. Breaking through the barriers of communication is often times the most important factor in determining student success.
References
BARNGA – Inclusive Teaching. (n.d.). Retrieved December 12, 2020, from https://sites.lsa.umich.edu/inclusive-teaching/sample-activities/barnga/Stephen Krashen’s Theory of Second Language Acquisition. (n.d.). Retrieved December 12, 2020, from https://www.sk.com.br/sk-krash-english.html
Tuitt, F., In Haynes, C., & In Stewart, S. (2016). Race, equity, and the learning environment: The global relevance of critical and inclusive pedagogies in higher education.
John Ball is a Senior Instructional Designer for CogBooks. He provides adaptive expertise and technical support for CogBooks to the School of Life Sciences at Arizona State University. Previously, he worked as Sr. Instructional Designer and Development Analyst for Pearson and as a Lecturer for Global Launch (formerly AECP) at ASU.
Comments
Post a Comment