Learner Profile Lets Talk Teaching Proposal

Linda Bond
1
Note: I often signed pretty quickly to try to keep my video short, but it still went
8 minutes when I included everything. As a result, I thought I better translate
(into English) what I was rapidly trying to express in the Vlog.

Keeping in mind that individual learner differences play an important role in L1/L2
language learning, do you think a particular learner profile might be more compatible with
one of the teaching proposals than another across grade levels (K- 12/postsecondary)?
Why?
The learner profile I chose for this assignment:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

motivated (either integrative or instrumental)

kinesthetic (hands on) learner
has a willingness to communicate
has communicative confidence
is a younger (vs. older) learner who is:
o open and has no pre-set beliefs/opinions about how instruction should be
delivered
o not easily embarrassed by a lack of mastery of the language

This learner would excel in the Lets Talk teaching proposal (a sociocultural perspective)
because s/he would be stimulated by and enjoy a class where the facilitator (teacher):
1. provides a supportive atmosphere where both comprehensible input and conversational
interactions abound
2. uses task-based learning teaching as s/he structures the class around group/pair work
3. carefully creates interesting, communicative purpose activities in which the students can
fully engage and converse with each other
4. plans tasks that are relevant to the students age and abilities
5. modifies speech to assure comprehension and match communication requirements
6. provides hands-on activities where students can encourage each other through
conversation related to the task at hand
7. arouses student curiosity
8. elicits peer corrections as students work toward a common goal (including during team
competition) as they make crucial connections between language form and meaning
9. encourages students to negotiate for meaning (express and clarify intentions) as they
engaging in interaction with their peers
10. use motivational strategies that align with the four categories in the classroom
observation scheme Motivation Orientation of Language Teaching (MOLT)
1) Teacher discourse: arousing curiosity and starting communicative purpose
activities
2) Participation structure: group/pair work

Learner Profile Lets Talk Teaching Proposal

Linda Bond
2
3) Activity design: team competition
4) Encouraging positive activity design: effective praise, elicitation of peer
corrections, class applause
----------------------------------------------How can specific ASL discourse strategies outlined in Quinto-Pozos and Reynolds article
be applied in your classroom?
When I finish the Teaching ASL program, my goal is to teach in an ASL Interpreter Preparation
Program. I know I will be teaching expansion techniques.
Recently I was able to teach expansion techniques. Students were translating songs into ASL in
preparation for performing them. Because songs are often redundant, the teacher encouraged
students to find different ASL techniques to say the same thing when a line or concept is
repeated. As an observer in the class, I was itching to say something, but knew it was not my
place. However, when the teacher asked me if I had any ideas. I jumped at the chance.
The sentence in question was I want only you. The students and teacher worked together to
come up with various ideas to express the sentiment. When suggestions ran dry, I suggested the
use of the negation expansion technique. I explained that ASL often compares two things
(contrasting) and then uses negation to explain or to emphasize.
ASL Gloss
Focus (left) want (listing down 5 hand) this, this, this, and this! Drool! Really-want! (Look up
and see desired person). Shake head and hand to indicate no. Push away left (two handed).
Want only you (honorific handshape).
The class sat silently staring at me; frozen, processing. Finally, a student cried, That! Sign it
again!
---------------------------------------Like Humphries and McDougall (1999/2000) noted (in the ASL Discourse Strategies article), I,
too, have observed that Deaf signers tend to use chaining more than hearing ASL signers do. In
the realm of educating educational interpreters who will be working with children from preschool through grade 12, I believe that instruction about the use of contextualization is vital,
particularly the use of chaining. Because 95% of deaf children come from hearing families, they
often have an infinitesimal vocabulary when they arrive at (a mainstreamed) school. As a result,
interpreters often assume the role of educators in that they teach d/Deaf students the meanings
and signs for English words. By chaining (e.g., DOG, D-O-G, DOG) students can learn new
vocabulary words in both languages.
Similarly, connecting-explaining (e.g., DOG, YOU KNOW ears-floppy, mime panting dog
DOG) can aid in comprehension. Connecting, or explaining, helps to link signs to real-world

Learner Profile Lets Talk Teaching Proposal

Linda Bond
3
concepts/experiences with which the d/Deaf child may be familiar. This, too, is an important
technique for interpreters to learn. Both chaining and connecting-explaining are important.