CUTSD PROJECT

Teaching and Learning of Ancient Greek and Latin

in Australian Universities

FEBRUARY 2001 BULLETIN NO. 3

Adelaide Workshop

This CUTSD Bulletin contains a Report of the discussions which took place at the Adelaide Workshop held just before the start of the AULLA Congress/ASCS Conference, on the afternoon of Monday 5th February in the pleasant and (eventually) air-conditioned surroundings of the Senior Common Room at St Mark’s College. I am grateful to the presenters (Brian Jones and Ian Plant in the first session, and Jane Bellemore and Kathryn Welch in the second session) and the respondents in the second session (Charles Tesoriero and Jane Bellemore), to the chairman of the panel-led discussion session (Greg Horsley) who kept us on track, and to the note-takers (Paul Tuffin and Marcus Wilson).

In all there were some thirty-two persons present, with representation from most Australian universities, and with some 5 or 6 from New Zealand universities (which allowed for some interesting comparisons). Those who had indicated their intention to attend the Workshop were sent a Dossier of Material beforehand, which contained the list of questions for discussion, and a large sample of examination question papers from a range of Australian universities (accompanied in some instances by comments from the examiners on their students’ performance on their papers).

The following Report is set out in terms of the Program and of the specific questions which were discussed.

First Session: Reports on Recent Developments

1. Terry Roberts(University of Sydney)

“What has CLARU been up to lately?”

Unfortunately Terry had to cancel his trip at the last minute, but he did make available to me a profile of the areas of CLARU’s activities since December 1996 which he would have commented on in his presentation:

A. Beyond Syd Uni

1. Conference (Oct 97)

2. Latin Reading Fluency Test - Sydney schools (March 98)

3. Latin Reading Fluency Test - Australasian Universities (Oct 98)

B. Within Syd Uni

a)Beginners

4. Initial English grammar testing - Latin (97-00); Greek (00); and re-testing - Latin (97)

5. Latin grammar testing (97-8, 00)

6. Latin cultural background testing (97)

7. Class profiling , satisfaction assessment (97-00)

b)Second year

8. Benchmark testing (basic sentences) (00)

9. Reading Exercises (00)

10. Morphology/Vocab Exercises (drawn up 00)

C. Tools

11. Target Structures - Sourcebook of Latin Passages (completed Jan 01)

12. Commentary/Workbook at second year level (in progress)

D. Further work

1. Expansion of data gathering to Greek beginners.

2. Further testing of 9 and 11.

3. Testing of 10 and 12.

The following information (written up by the CUTSD Project Officer) will give you some idea of what CLARU is (for those who don’t know), and some of its most recent activities:

The Classical Languages Acquisition Research Unit was established in the Department of Classics at the University of Sydney in October 1996. Its activities are co-ordinated by the part-time research officer, Mr Terry Roberts, and supervised by Professor Kevin Lee. It is funded by a generous grant to the University of Sydney from the Fairfax Foundation and Mrs Caroline Simpson which was made available in 1998.

The goal of the Unit is to facilitate research and scholarship associated with the teaching and learning of Classical Greek and Latin. University courses for beginners as well as more advanced courses which develop and rely on reading and comprehension skills will be the primary focus of investigation. The special needs of students in areas other than Classics, viz. Archaeology, History, Modern Languages and Philosophy, will be an important secondary focus. Teaching methods, curricula and assessment in schools will also be taken into account.

A number of tests had been administered to students in first-year Latin at Sydney University, as well as a Latin fluency reading test (which was also distributed to schools and other universities) and a cultural awareness test. The results of these various tests were tabulated by Terry Roberts and reported on at the CLARU Conference in October 1997, and in May 1998. Further tests are in hand.

A major conference was held at the University of Sydney in October 1997. There were seven sessions in all, covering themes relevant to teaching methods, aims, objectives and standards, primarily in tertiary institutions. There were 35 participants in all, from both schools and universities (interstate and New Zealand).

Plans are well advanced for the production of a series of booklets focussing on “Target Structures”. They comprise a set of passages, suitably graded, taken from standard Latin authors, used to illustrate, and give students practice with, various syntactical structures. Booklets 1 and 2 have been drafted, and a third is in preparation.

If you would like to have a look at a copy of the most recent draft of Target Structures, contact Terry Roberts (ClassicsA14, The University of Sydney, NSW 2006, or e-mail him at Terry. Roberts@antiquity. usyd. edu. au). As a quid pro quo for receiving a copy you will be asked to comment on its format, usefulness, etc. , to assist with the preparation of the final version.

2. Brian Jones(University of Queensland)

“The Language-on-Line (Flexible Delivery) Program at UQ”

Brian described the project undertaken in the Department of Classics and Ancient History at the University of Queensland for putting “on-line” text and notes for some eleven set books in both Greek and Latin for senior undergraduate students. The aim of the exercise was to cut down on face-to-face teaching with classes of small enrolment, so that staff could be diverted to help out in classes with larger enrolments. Instead of the normal three hours per week of classes, the students were expected to work through sections of the text on-line, and come together for one hour per week to discuss the sections prepared for that week. A seeding amount was provided by the Faculty and outside donations to pay two “consultants” (retired members of the Department) approximately $5000 each to prepare the notes, which were then put into computer format by a Faculty IT person.

The courses involving this on-line presentation are currently available only to enrolled UQ students (because of the one face-to-face tutorial each week), and they require a pass-word to get into the program. It is not envisaged that they will be available for distance education students or for sale to other universities. It is also not envisaged that there will be further funding to support the preparation of other texts; if more are to be done they will have to be done by present members of staff as part of their ordinary teaching responsibilities.

A small number of student evaluation forms were made available by Brian earlier, but they were not included in the Workshop Dossier (aspects of confidentiality needed to be worked out). It is hoped that a future issue of the Bulletin will be able to present some of these evaluations. In general the students seem to have found the on-line presentation satisfactory; in particular they liked the flexibility of time, to fit in with other commitments (e. g. part-time work). There were some hardware problems encountered.

This was an interesting presentation which provoked a lively and lengthy discussion of the application of IT to the teaching of our subject. There is some way to go before the full potential of computer inter-activity (beyond putting words on a screen which is not much different from words on a page) can be realised, and before there is adequate provision for the great expenditure of time (and therefore money) which is required for the preparation of such software programs. It is planned that a future issue of the Bulletin will deal with these sorts of questions.

In the meantime, there is a sample of some pages from the notes on one of the texts covered by the UQ language-on-line program in the Workshop Dossier.

3. Ian Plant(Macquarie University)

“The Greek Parser”

Macquarie is developing IT tools including a Greek Parser, which can analyse word forms in texts and link analyses to electronic lexica. A Latin Parser is being developed independently in the UK. These tools greatly reduce the need for students to learn word forms and vocabulary before reading text. Thus less class/learning time has to be devoted to memory drills (low level skills); proportionally more can be profitably spent on explaining/ understanding syntax (a higher level skill), moving students more efficiently to a desired outcome (the ability to read an ancient text). The integration of these tools into teaching programs needs to be carefully planned and implemented, as the revolutionary nature of these tools means that teaching and assessment will need to be redesigned. A prototype of the Greek Parser is in use at Macquarie, but some additional development is necessary before it can be adopted nationally (and internationally?). Funds from the CUTSD Project have been allocated to undertake this additional development.

Ian then demonstrated the use of the Greek Parser. It runs as a simple Desk Accessory on a Macintosh computer: words for analysis are passed to the Parser via the Clipboard; when the Parser is activated (e. g. by clicking on its Window), whatever text is held on the Clipboard is interpreted as a Greek word form in the SuperGreek font, and submitted to morphological analysis. The result of the analysis appears in a separate Window on the computer screen. New lexical items can easily be added to the Parser’s data base. The Parser does not attempt to offer the comprehensive analysis available through Perseus; it is designed to give a quick response suitable for students who are new to reading Greek.

It would be a considerable improvement if the Greek Parser could operate with a dictionary, however short the word definitions might be. Another problem to be sorted out is to get the Greek Parser to work on a variety of computer platforms: at the moment it works only on a Macintosh platform, and not, say, on a Windows platform (this is currently being rectified). The major issue is the input and display of Greek characters from one platform to another, but a number of possible solutions are being investigated.

^vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv^vvvvvvvvvv

Second Session: Panel-Led Discussion of Teaching and Learning

The session was chaired by Professor G. H. R. Horsley (Professor of Classics and Ancient History at the University of New England). It began with two short presentations by Dr J. Bellemore (Department of Classics, University of Newcastle) and Dr K. Welch (Ancient History, University of Sydney); there followed two responses by the other members of the panel, Dr E. Minchin (Classics, Australian National University) and Mr C. Tesoriero (Classics, History and Religion, University of New England).

Presentation by Kathryn Welch (SU)

There was a need to understand the whole market: rarely is it simply a love of language study. In beginners courses there was likely to be a preponderance of students wishing to proceed in Ancient History. Some surveying could be undertaken to determine the range of interests within beginners classes [editorial note: such a survey has been undertaken by CLARU for SU; it may be useful to include the results of this survey in a future edition of the CUTSD Project Bulletin]. Kathryn suggested that students should be asked which texts they have enjoyed reading, and which they have learned most from. Her view on how early students should begin to read “real” Latin was “as early as possible” – with short selections to read from a wide variety of authors (so as to appeal to the wide range of interests among the beginning students). With candidates of lesser ability or who come to it as mature-age students, learning (and reading) has to be made relevant and appreciated. So texts should be studied that are immediately relevant to the students’ needs and interests. Relevance is more important than the degree of difficulty.

Response by Charles Tesoriero (UNE)

There is a wider range of interests within a beginners class than Ancient History students studying the language as a requirement. Students therefore should adapt to the course, rather than individual needs governing (or attempting to govern) the course content. There is a difference in attitude between mature-age and normal-age students, but it is difficult to cater for all of these different interest groups and age groups within the one class. We should stress what it is that makes our discipline unique, and let each student take away from it what it is that they each individually enjoy or acquire.

There should be co-operation between language and Ancient History teachers to make sure that students get something out of the course from their language study. Senior students could have some input into the choice of texts, but in the end it will be the teacher who decides. Charles agreed with Kathryn’s point about beginners starting to read “real” language as early as possible, but argued for extended texts rather than selections. There will still be a need in the choice of texts to consider their merits (literary, historical, etc. ) or their potential for illustrating grammar, style, vocabulary, etc.

Presentation by Jane Bellemore (Newcastle)

Jane argued for a “need to know” approach: concentrate in the first-year course on what occurs frequently. For example, 3rd person singular and plural past tenses (reducing verb part learning by approximately two-thirds); a vocabulary list which students are likely to recognise from English derivatives (say, 450 nouns ending in –atio). Teach syntax, but leave the learning of paradigms until second year. This first-year approach would lead to the reading of “real” Latin very early. The reduction in learning of “grammar” may lead therefore to a better retention rate into second year.

Jane also argued for more oral work: e. g. one hour per week working through tapes with prepositional phrases or dative case usages, etc. Above all the beginners course needs to be interesting, challenging – yes, but above all doable.

Response by Elizabeth Minchin (ANU)

Elizabeth had reservations about discarding paradigms in first year: it would be harder to fit, for example, the 3rd person forms into the fuller paradigms that will need to be learnt in second year. She agreed with the point about more oral work – not just passive, but active: this would help in students learning how to “phrase” their reading of the language. Her own approach of “reconstructing” grammar involved other ways of cutting down on rote learning of paradigms: at ANU the first semester focuses on “traditional grammar” (in which learning of both Greek and Latin are incorporated). The students do not learn much vocabulary in this first semester, but basic grammatical ideas and forms are taught. Rote learning can be made pleasant, but teachers have to assist students in breaking the back of how to do rote learning.

Following these presentations and responses, the session was then opened to general discussion. For ease of reference, I have summarised the discussions under each of the questions as set out in the original Dossier of Material. Where there is the indication “not discussed” this means that there was not time to consider this question fully, or the discussion was subsumed under one of the other discussion questions. The question printed in bold type was considered to be the main point for consideration in the relevant section.

General Issues(to be kept in mind while considering the other more specific questions):

1. Is it desirable to develop a parity of standards across universities?

Not discussed.

2. What are some of the ways to go about determining generally agreed objectives and outcomes (without in any sense impinging on a department’s desire to do what it wants to do or what it thinks appropriate for their students)?

John Davidson (VUW) began with a general comment: very few of us have been trained as teachers of a second language, so that places constraints on our ability to devise learning strategies. If we are to retain students, there is above all a need to convey enthusiasm. This poses a problem for on-line teaching which does not allow for displays of enthusiasm.

Ian Plant (Macquarie) suggested that we work out a list of objectives and desired outcomes and standards, and then design a course to produce what is wanted and to determine what we expect for the various grades of student assessment. Some models of objectives/outcomes and of standards-referenced testing could be presented in a CUTSD Bulletin, and comments invited.

Robert Hannah (Otago): recognised prior learning at NZ universities allows students to go straight into a second-year level. Some Australian universities allow this. Complex grammar in some modern languages is not introduced till second year. Students are more interested in “narrative” texts in their early reading.

Jacque Clarke (Adelaide) remarked that German courses there do not require translation, but rather comprehension of set texts.

Doug Kelly (ANU) remarked that it is the duty of teachers to tell their students what they need to know. “Relevance” derives from ignorance, so students’ views of “relevance” should be challenged. Students who only want a basic grounding in the language so as to read “sources (e. g. Ancient History students) have to be told that they underestimate what is needed to understand ancient culture fully. The teacher’s task is to widen the students’ horizons. He did not agree therefore that students should have input, for example, into the choice of texts.

Greg Horsley (UNE) agreed: you have to lead the student to grasp the need for a greater understanding of languages and texts. He also argued that attrition rates can be misunderstood or exaggerated, and we should not be so defensive. A number commented that beginning students do not know how hard learning Greek and Latin is, and this may explain why there is an apparently high attrition rate. John Penwill (La Trobe, Bendigo) noted that students are initially highly motivated, but we set the bar too high in the first year and try to get them to take in too much information. He favoured Jane Bellemore’s idea of restricting the amount of grammar taught in the first year.

Elizabeth Minchin (ANU): students have no idea what is involved in learning a language – we as teachers have to tell them and to build up their confidence. One way is to make comparisons with the difficulties of other languages, including Asian languages. John Davidson (VUW) pointed out that modern languages have high drop-out rates also. Doug Kelly (ANU) felt that the multiplicity of arduous tasks is the reason for the higher drop-out rates in languages compared to other subjects; language teachers are not appreciated by university administrations.

3. Do departments have statements of objectives and outcomes for their courses at each level?Would it be useful to students to have them?

A “straw poll” taken around the room revealed that most university departments have only “bland” statements about course objectives and expected outcomes. Some will be tightening up (e. g. Otago). John Penwill (Bendigo) pointed out that textbooks often set out objectives and outcomes on their contents pages or introductions. It was suggested that in the present situation of students paying fees more detailed statements will need to be issued to them. This will be a matter for the CUTSD Project to pursue (see above).

Teaching at the Beginners’ Level

4. What are the objectives and expected outcomes of the beginners’ courses?

John Penwill (Bendigo): only a first-year course is taught at Bendigo, and after that students need to enrol in distance education courses elsewhere. Elizabeth Minchin (ANU): the first year is taught differently in different places, so a parity of standard cannot be achieved. But by the end of a major there could be a reasonable parity expected. Bruce Marshall (Macquarie) remarked that de facto a sort of parity is assumed to exist because universities regularly give credit for courses in our languages done elsewhere; as more credit transfers are likely to occur in the present university system, there will be more need to establish some sort of parity between our courses.

5. To what extent should the needs of, for example, Ancient History students be kept in mind in formulating the aims, objectives and standards of such courses?

Not discussed (already covered above).

6. What is an appropriate number of contact hours at this level?How much time can we fairly expect students to put in to assimilate these difficult languages in these days of part-time jobs?

Hours vary (in Australia and New Zealand) between 3 to 5 hours per week; Haijo Westra (Calgary) said they had five hours there. Quite a few mentioned that students had to spend an additional three hours per week minimum to keep up, but that it should be pointed out to them that language study requires regular hours whereas other subjects probably require the same number of hours but the time commitment is more spasmodic (e. g. preparing for the writing of a History or English assignment). Bruce Marshall (macquarie): there is also the increasing problem of students working part-time in order to have enough money to live on and fitting their timetabled classes into their available hours (hence the appeal of UQ’s flexible on-line delivery or of Macquarie’s timetabling of classes for a particular course all on the one day).

7. Course content and course material:

(a) The choice of teaching material. Is there a place for the preparation of in-house material, or are available course-books the most suitable?

Marcus Wilson (Auckland): in-house material suits the writer’s style of teaching and is not easily transferable. He asked why produce more course books when there are too many around already. Charles Tesoriero (UNE) commented that in-house material was less expensive for students.

(b) What is the place for tapes, audio-visual material and computer-assisted learning in language teaching?What are the experiences of people who have used these different forms of delivery?

Anna Silvas (UNE) called for more oral/aural tapes. See discussion above.

See discussion above. A number of departments introduce texts through Reading Greek; UNE moves away from Reading Greek at chap. 13 onto a “real” text. UQ does not introduce real texts until the end of the third semester.

8. Is it desirable for a beginners’ class to have one teacher only, or can it be team-taught successfully?

Some team teaching at SU; most do not. A change of teacher was not seen as a difficulty for students. Charles Tesoriero (UNE): the team should work through the year, not one person in first semester, and a second person in second semester; it should be a genuine team, which requires a lot of consultation. Elizabeth Minchin (ANU) commented that team-teaching is time-consuming because it requires much consultation.

9. Should there be a minimum standard of achievement by students before they are allowed to go on to second-year courses?What should that standard be?

10. How can we ease the transition between the beginners’ level and intermediate/ advanced level?

Qns 9 and 10 were considered together. Some Australian universities use a conditional or conceded pass to reward students for time spent, even though they have not shown enough aptitude to be encouraged to go on with the language. How do we reward students for their effort, when they will say that they spend far more hours on Greek and Latin than on other subjects. Elizabeth Minchin (ANU) uses a scheme of increasing marks for continuous assessment exercises if the students correct them; this helps to boost their final mark and so their “extra” hours are rewarded. Charles Tesoriero (UNE) claimed that students felt better about a Pass in Latin because of the sense of achievement with a difficult subject, compared to the Credit or Distinction in an “easy” subject like Sociology.

11. Is there a place for collaboration between university departments in teaching and curriculum design?

Not discussed.

Teaching Advanced Courses

12. Contact hours:How many face-to-face teaching hours are desirable at advanced level(s)?How many hours are practicable in the present staffing situation?To what extent can we expect that students will work on their own (reading texts, for example)?Can CAL be utilised satisfactorily?

Not discussed (already partly covered in a number of sections above).

13. What do we hope students will achieve, in terms of linguistic competence, in the second year of study?

Not discussed at length. Brian Jones (UQ) described their practice: by the end of the second year their students have covered all the basic Latin grammar and syntax, so that a student can read a text of the level of difficulty of, say, Aeneid 4. This raised the question of whole text perspective vs translation in detail, and of assessment in general – whether to set pure language questions, or questions of literary/historical significance, context, etc.

14. What are the criteria for the choice of texts to be studied at advanced levels?Should we broaden the range of texts studied?

15. What quantity of text can we realistically expect a student at each level to read (beginners, advanced, honours)?

Taking qns 14 and 15 together, Jacque Clarke (Adelaide) commented that the decision on the quantity of text to be read can be a difficult issue within a department.

16. Assessment:

(a) Are we over-examining?

Kathryn Welch (SU) remarked that it depends on what the students are being tested for; she thought that they should not merely be tested for ability to translate. Elizabeth Minchin (ANU) recommended that various forms of assessment be used besides tradition end-of-course examinations.

(b) Are there ways of spreading the traditional (and often large) number of traditional end-of-year written examination papers?Are other forms of assessment being used?

(d) Is there a place for the use of external examiners (to achieve comparability of standards, for example)?

These last three questions were not discussed.

Other questions which were raised:

Greg Horsley (UNE) raised the question of what should be an appropriate minimum language requirement for entry to honours and postgraduate study. This issue is alive at UNE. Bruce Marshall (Macquarie): Ancient History students often discover too late in their degree patterns that they need Greek or Latin to proceed to Ancient History honours, and even if they can fit it in they also discover that one year of the language is not really enough. Marcus Wilson (Auckland) commented that the demand for entry to the Auckland M. A. is driving the content of the first year language course.

But wait – there’s more!Over the page®

Still Available

There are some spare copies of the Dossier of Material prepared for the Adelaide Workshop still available, for those people who could not get to the Workshop but who would like to have a copy.

Contact the CUTSD Project Officer, Bruce Marshall, at –

Department of Ancient History

Macquarie University

North RydeNSW2109

bmarshal@hmn. mq. edu. au

Wanted for the Next Issue

Two of the issues which came up at the Adelaide Workshop were the suggestion that a draft model of a statement of objectives and outcomes for various courses be drawn up and circulated for discussion, and that there be further discussion of the application of IT to our teaching and learning. So I am seeking your help in collecting material for inclusion in the next Bulletin on these two issues.

1. If you have statements of aims, objectives and outcomes for any of the courses at your university, I would appreciate receiving a copy of them, to assist in the preparation of several draft models, which can then be considered for adoption by departments for issue to their students.

2. Any information on software programs that you have seen (especially on the Web), or even used in your courses. Details of their content and target audience would be helpful, as well as any comments from you on your reaction to using them and your students’ reactions to working with them.

Send items for either of these requests in hard copy, or on a floppy disk (either PC or Mac format is acceptable), or by e-mail, or as an attachment to an e-mail. Addresses as above.