The world must be authentic, in that it feels true. Even if it is clearly not real to the rest of their life, if we can get our students to buy in to the world we create in our classroom, to believe that this is all for a purpose other than just being silly, and that that purpose is a worthy one, then there is a great chance that they will agree to participate in what we propose. While believability is fundamental to all the lists I've seen on necessary components of worldbuilding, I have added here the idea of purpose which is so integral to hooking and engaging students in learning.
Even if our students think that it is corny at first, the goal is that after a stretch, they feel right in the room, and the room feels right to them; here I am using the room to represent the world, as it certainly does on a fundamental level. This feeling of rightness requires a complete and consistent creation and application, a full integration of the other worldbuilding elements into a cohesive atmosphere of purposeful language learning and strong community connection: The tasks and roles must feel necessary, true, not contrived (or if somewhat contrived, then with some other overarching factor that trumps that feeling); the language must feel natural and authentic and be mostly comprehensible; the atmosphere and the rules must reflect the values and the nature of the community. This can be a challenge, but without this sense of believability, all the rest is for naught.
Strategy: Building Up Plausible, Purposeful, Do-able Language
Always, always, always double-check activities for plausibility and purpose. Would people actually say these things, and if so, when and why? In terms of lesson and activity planning, I like to think through all the incarnations of the final goal, the ultimate language-learner conversation around this topic in which my students might engage. From there I pull back to decide what language is non-negotiable, what I can introduce to some students or the whole class but as enrichment options, and what will likely be better left out of this unit for now. In this way, I ensure that my students are equipped to actually do what I ask them to do, from where they currently are.
For example, if you want students to be able to ask and answer questions about having something, and you are doing this around the topic of animals vocabulary, you would think about all the realistic linguistic elements necessary to converse on the topic, envisioning all the directions in which the conversation could go. Then you would delineate the must-have language or foundations for talking about the topic, some of which might be:
The question – Est-ce que tu as un/une…? (Do you have a…?)
The affirmative singular response – Oui, j'ai un/une…. (Yes, I have a ….)
The negative substitution response – Non, mais j'ai un/une…. (No, but I have a….)
Next you would pull out the phrases that will entail more explanation or scaffolding, as they use more complex grammar structures or linguistic concepts:
The negative response – Non, je n'ai pas de … (with the understanding that there is no gender indicated in the negative here.) (No, I don't have a ….)
The affirmative plural response – Oui, j'ai # … (with appropriate plural ending.) (Yes, I have # …s.)
The expression of wanting – Non, mais je veux/voudrais un/une…. (Non, but I want/would like a ….)
The past tense affirmative – Non, mais j'avais un/une…. (No, but I had a….)
The "when" clarification to the previous statement - …quand j'avais x ans. (…when I was x years old.)
And so on. The balance comes in supplying enough options so that students don't feel the constraints of what they don't yet know, but not so many that it is all too much, too soon, and just plain confusing. For example, the past tense affirmative might be too much for a beginning language class; however, for a group with a particular confluence of interest and linguistic facility, it might work really well. This is where thinking about the do-ability of each activity, in terms of linked steps, is important.
Of course we already know this. As language teachers we are always making decisions about what to introduce when and what to revisit how, what to supply, what to encourage students to explore, and when to redirect them. The difference here is in the consideration also of a community contribution target. Students will now consider: How will my completion of this task or my participation in this activity affect my classmates?
Strategy: Community Contribution Targets
When framing an activity, as you consider its linguistic target and its do-ability in terms of the steps needed to achieve it, consider also its community contribution target. How can you achieve your language goals in as concrete a fashion as possible so that students are both linguistically prepared and physically engaged, but also poised to work together toward a common goal? And how can you attach a convincing reason to the activity, so that students are driven to participate in the classroom community as a whole, through contribution to a class endeavor?
In our example about animals, perhaps we are gathering data from our classmates about what animals they have because we are going to ultimately share that information in a newsletter to parents or the school, as a regularly occurring community snapshot of our class. Or maybe we will create a class mural (on paper) representing the animals we have or even those we want, like a wish list collage representing the character and choices of our classmates. Perhaps we will have a class bulletin board in the hallway that students would have an active role in creating, based on what and how they want to share with the school. Within this process and toward these goals, we could graph answers, experiment with hybrid animal creations, try to guess favorite and least favorite animals, find pictures to share with each other about them, record interviews, and so on. But "task completion" now will be vital to gathering necessary data or working on a project that not only involves people outside of myself, but also has an audience outside of this class.
Strategy: Every Day is a Mystery
I invite you to think of each day as a mystery, so that when students come in, they have a goal that they seek to achieve through the communication activities you've set up. At the end of the class (or several classes), there will be something required of students that they can only do if they've followed the progression of activities and requests. Perhaps students will need to share data collected through interviewing or questionnaires. We may have a goal of a weekly newsletter that comes from the work students do in class, and then maybe a monthly report. Perhaps students will create and film Public Service Announcements (PSAs) using what they practice in class! Students can create videos and idea or content guides to help others who are struggling. The end goals and products will be dependent on the nature, needs, skills, and interests of each particular classroom community.
Student Buy-In, Teacher Responsibility, and Community Contribution
Some students are motivated simply by the assigning of a task, and will do what you ask just because you asked it. Which is lovely for us when it happens and makes our lives easier as a result for sure, but I feel like when we accept that, we are inadvertently reinforcing the idea that authority figures should not be questioned, that we should all just do what we are told, regardless of how we feel about it or how much sense it seems to make. However, I think it's healthy for students to respectfully question the work they are asked to do, and fostering an environment in which they are safe to do so will give them the practice and confidence necessary to question people and actions later in life that may have consequences far more dire than are immediately imaginable in our beginning language classes.
So for our dear, diligent, and obedient students, I think it is our duty to (carefully!) interrupt their cycles of passive acquiescence, to shake them up (just a bit), by immersing them in this community accountability model, where I hope they can see the implications of both interrelatedness and personal agency. I hope this will help empower them to trust their understanding of the structures and processes in which they take part, as well as their voice and how it can articulate injustices and inconsistencies.
Some students will do what is asked out of fear of repercussions. In addition to my own philosophical disagreement with using fear as a motivating force, what we know about students and learning and the affective filter tells us that fear has no place in a productive language-learning environment.
4
Others will do what is asked only hesitantly, and still others may not do it at all.
So we have to be ready to answer for what we are doing, and to stand by our choices in the classroom. And the most common refrain from students, across content areas and grade levels and degree of willingness to participate, is Why are we doing this? Too often, the answer is little more than one of the following variations: Because: I said so; it's important; it will help you succeed; you will be tested on it; you are being graded on it. With this unit, now we can bypass those true but hollow reasons and simply say …Because we are going to use the information you gathered to do x, y, or z. We will now have some greater purpose to our work, to all our work, so that it really does matter whether or not someone participates beyond a grade, reprimand, or praise. Again, even if the overarching concept is imposed or less than realistic, by engaging students in community endeavors we can make each activity be and feel necessary and worthwhile.
