@Jason / Ἰάσων "benefits of one-on-one." I have a theory about the benefits of one-on-one instruction. When you sit with one person, you can use easier, less inherently "communicative" methods, and they will still be effective. An example would be demonstration. Let's say I'm demonstrating the Nominative and Accusative. I take a ball, and say in Greek "αὕτη ἐστιν σφαῖρα. ἔχω σφαῖραν. Τί ἔχω; ἔχω σφαῖραν! [This is a ball (Nom). I have a ball (Acc.). What do I have? I have a ball. What is this? It's a ball!] Strictly speaking, this is not communication. The learner knows it's a ball. He knows what I have. I am not really communicating anything to him/her. I am only demonstrating language. But when you do this sort of thing with one other person (or maybe two), it still feels like communication. The teacher can engage one person with eye contact and he/she really feels it. That's almost impossible with a group, unless you are an exceptional person (In a Biblical Languages Center workshop I attended, the amazing Jordash Kiffiak engaged a room of 30 with demonstration, but he's wildly exceptional). In teaching a group, a teacher has the huge challenge of coming up with some sort of activity that requires learners to use the target language to really communicate (negotiate meaning). So, for example, I just had my students using Greek to find out some information about their classmates' family and spiritual history. They are using the target language to truly communicate. Leading up to that exercise, I used demonstration, some explicit instruction (reviewing forms), and made some comparisons between Greek, English and Chichewa (a Bantu language all my students know). But it was all leading up to and aiming at using language for communication.

@Jason / Ἰάσων " We are doing one-on-one twice a week for an hour and a half. I don't feel that this is enough." Aside from a true immersion language learning environment, classroom type language instruction (ISLA - Instructed Second Language Acquisition) will never provide enough exposure (Comprehensible Input) to get beyond a beginner or intermediate-low level. It can be enough to though for a learner to continue on his/her own to become proficient. So, for example, learning Spanish in school for many years will not mean that a learner can land in a Spanish speaking country, walk onto the streets and strike up a conversation with confidence and fluency. But that person has enough language in his/her head to begin communicating and advance. In the case of Hebrew and Ancient Greek, ISLA can bring a learner to a level that he/she can begin "communicating" with a text and advance to higher levels.

Jason, Great fun to see language building in a learner's head. Kudos on NOT forcing output. One on one works the best.

This is copied from my reply to Longhorn on B-Greek... Starting points might be listening to the podcast "Tea With BVP" by Bill Van Patten and reading Shawn Loewen's book, Instructed Second Language Acquisition (ISLA). Links below. Total Physical Response (TPR), TPR Storytelling (TPRS), are Where Are Your Keys (WAYK) are communicative methods I use. Learning about ISLA has greatly sharpened my understanding of whythese methods work and allowed me to be creative in using them and coming up with alternate strategies. A hasty list of concepts that are useful to understand, include: How vocabulary is acquired in ISLA settings versus immersion settings, The debate on whether explicit instruction can result in implicit knowledge. The value of constructing situations in which learners must use the target language to negotiate meaning (which is the basis of the biggest new method in ISLA, Task Based Teaching and Learning - TBLT). Language learning assessment. http://www.teawithbvp.com/ https://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Instructed-Second-Language-Acquisition-ebook/dp/B00LPK9DPW/ref=as_sl_pc_tf_til?tag=-20&linkCode=w00&linkId=&creativeASIN=B00LPK9DPW

How would we go about asking Mcquinn to share his MA thesis?

In general, communicative methods and the use of textbooks are incompatible. Browse some living language forums (or Latin Best Practices forum) about "dumping textbooks" and you'll hear many comments about how the learning zoomed ahead when the teacher was free from the textbook. Textbooks and explicit lessons can be used to shore up what has already been encountered via communicative methods. That puts a huge burden on the teacher. He/she reacts to the communicative needs of the learners. That requires pretty good mastery of the language. If a teacher is not at that level, he/she can still employ communicative methods. This becomes a joint learning venture where the teacher is responding to his/her own needs, creating activities that will meet those needs, and sharing the experience with students.

I'll be a bit categorical here, to make a point. Direct, explicit learning of vocabulary doesn't work. We learn vocabulary by reading. That said, there is a case for limited use of things like vocabulary lists. Learners might review a list in preparation for a communicative encounter or a short reading. Teachers might maintain a list (as I do!) to guide what they put in front of students in stories or activities. My list is about 600 words long. See... https://drive.google.com/file/d/11VWNbleyHdmQ2ajFxiwySbc_PZSG5DUI/view?usp=sharing

I just have to emphasize this point. Consistent stress is vitally important for a teacher to get right. As an illustration, when you hear an English word mispronounced - with the accent in the wrong place, it doesn't sound like the same word. An old saying goes, "Put the right emPHASis on the right sylLABle."

Here is a spreadsheet with core vocabulary and a phrasebook for commonly used words in teaching Greek. https://drive.google.com/file/d/11VWNbleyHdmQ2ajFxiwySbc_PZSG5DUI/view?usp=sharing

Pedagogically speaking, this is the one choice that was made in the creation of the Restored Koine scheme that I might disagree with. I think retaining the rough breathing mark might have helped to distinguish forms.