Sergio, this is simply brilliant. I could see how much language could emerge from that. The "lack of control" paradoxically leads to greater command of the language in the long run, because learners are actively constructing meaning rather than just following a script.
One thing I particularly liked about what you proposed is that you're giving students a simple, open question, without providing bullet-point prompts. I feel that students preparing for the C2 exam often feel pressured to address the three given bullet points, and in doing so, end up racing against time to produce language without really thinking about what they’re saying.
To me, this approach creates a win-win situation: students are more engaged and free to express themselves authentically, while also developing the kind of flexibility and depth that the C2 exam ultimately rewards.
Hey, Fernanda! I really like how you framed the “lack of control” as a long-term benefit. I see the open-question task as "controlled improvisation": students still have a clear goal, but they choose the route. That choice forces them to manage time and discourse, which is half the C2 battle, right? By the way, I’ve just finished your chapter in Dogme in Practice, and your comment here echoes a line that jumped out at me:
"Despite the lack of linearity in the way grammar was approached, it helped the student feel a sense of direction and progress."
Relinquishing control is tough, but if teachability hinges on learnability, we never had that much control to begin with, did we?
Thank you for your kind words, Izabel! They mean a lot. I’m delighted the lesson resonated with you, and it’ll be great to have you in an upcoming course!
Sergio, this is simply brilliant. I could see how much language could emerge from that. The "lack of control" paradoxically leads to greater command of the language in the long run, because learners are actively constructing meaning rather than just following a script.
One thing I particularly liked about what you proposed is that you're giving students a simple, open question, without providing bullet-point prompts. I feel that students preparing for the C2 exam often feel pressured to address the three given bullet points, and in doing so, end up racing against time to produce language without really thinking about what they’re saying.
To me, this approach creates a win-win situation: students are more engaged and free to express themselves authentically, while also developing the kind of flexibility and depth that the C2 exam ultimately rewards.
Hey, Fernanda! I really like how you framed the “lack of control” as a long-term benefit. I see the open-question task as "controlled improvisation": students still have a clear goal, but they choose the route. That choice forces them to manage time and discourse, which is half the C2 battle, right? By the way, I’ve just finished your chapter in Dogme in Practice, and your comment here echoes a line that jumped out at me:
"Despite the lack of linearity in the way grammar was approached, it helped the student feel a sense of direction and progress."
Relinquishing control is tough, but if teachability hinges on learnability, we never had that much control to begin with, did we?
Dear Sergio,
Thank you so much for sharing with us this much precious lesson.
I’m looking forward to joining one of your courses soon.
Best regards from a teacher and forever a student eager to learn and evolve🙏🏻
Thank you for your kind words, Izabel! They mean a lot. I’m delighted the lesson resonated with you, and it’ll be great to have you in an upcoming course!