All right. Welcome back, everyone. How are you all doing? Good? Okay. So as promised and projected, what we're going to be doing this afternoon is building off of what we did this morning to really talk more about pedagogy and about teaching. So we'll be threading through some of the same concepts that you've already seen this morning, as well as introducing some other ones to work with, and then you'll be coming back to those texts that you started with this morning, as long as you're happy with them, and actually starting to work on a lesson. I know many of you were already going there, and that's pretty unsurprising because you've chosen these texts because there's something you might like to teach or because they're already part of your curriculum in some way. So I wanted to start by revisiting that a little bit with the same handout that you saw before, and just to check in on a couple of things there, because the stage that you did this morning is something that we sometimes call reading for teaching. It's not the same thing as lesson planning, and that's what we'll be doing this afternoon, and that's because when we get into a lesson, we start to have to make other particular kinds of choices. Some of those choices are tied to what are the objectives of our course, some of those choices are tied to time, some of those choices are tied to what we think our students will enjoy, what their expectations will be. So we have to zero things in a little bit more, but in the reading for teaching phase, you're still already thinking about teaching, right? Every group I went to, you were saying, well, I chose this one because I know my students are working on grammar, and they sometimes struggle with this, or I'm choosing this because it comes from a textbook unit where they're working with autobiography, and this is a text that's included in there, and we've never quite known what to do with it. So you were coming from that teaching space, but you were exploring all the different kinds of things that the text is doing before you have to zero and make those choices about, which ones are you going to focus on? How are you going to scaffold them for the students? One of the other things we were doing this morning, and I want to point this out and also use it as an opportunity to clarify something that came up in a couple of groups. What we were trying to get you to do with these, with the meta functions, is to think about the ways in which language can function on really different kinds of levels. And so we do care about grammar, but we're also interested in some of the ways in which grammar and vocabulary and these items that we tend to talk about do particular sorts of things, right? So we're interested in the ways in which they make texts. The way they help text hang together and we can recognize a text as something other than just one of those magnetic poem sets that you might buy at a gift shop where you have a bunch of random words thrown together but are not brought together in any kind of text. It also makes us feel in particular ways. It can address us in particular ways. It can establish relationships between people and it works with ideas and experiences and activities and expresses them and makes sense out of them in particular ways. So this is an invitation to think about all of these different levels and to not just think about language play as being the kind of thing we typically see in children's texts or rhymes or things like that, that we can work beyond that as we're working with that. When we get into this space with these kinds of play, there's a really bold line here. This is just formatting play in itself. Part of this bold, the bold line and they can work on multiple levels. These are caveats, right? Because we don't wanna suggest that these kinds of play are only affiliated with one level or with one kind of function. But what we were trying to do is get you to think a little bit about how certain kinds of play maybe often are associated with different levels or make a certain level more salient. So for example, if I'm playing with politeness and something, if I'm in a context where in German there's a formal and an informal, you, right? And if I use the other one, if somebody is expecting me to address them with an informal pronoun and instead of using Z and using formal language and playing with that, that sends some kind of meaning right away and it might be doing other things as well but it's probably most saliently gonna have an impact on this interpersonal level, on how it sets up a relationship. You might all of a sudden wonder why I'm distancing myself from you or why I'm being so cold or what has something changed and we're no longer on that level of do instead, we're like this. And so you'd ask those questions and that's not to say that couldn't be doing other things, right? If I use it a lot, it could have a cohesive function that's textual, it could do other things but the one that maybe is most salient is that interpersonal level. So a lot of these, if you see slipperiness, if you kind of notice one type of play and it feels to you like it's maybe, it's not a good fit, that's probably because you're just noticing this slipperiness that's there that is supposed to be captured with this very bold, bold line. Does that make sense? Yeah? Okay. So. Can I, can I state it even more? Yeah, I do. When I looked at that and I was talking to Corey about this too, it looks like it's static and it shouldn't be interpreted like this as a static. So from a functional point of view, a form in context is always multifunctional. Yes, yes. So it always has all of the functions but usually there's one function that predominates. So that's one thing to say. So it's think in terms of multifunction, not just one at a time. And number two, the notions of the play here that we're trying to kind of grapple with and define ourselves. And by the way, this is our own document. We keep coming back and kind of working on this. It really is more, I think of that in terms of relational. So a different text will construe the relations differently. So grammar play, she's got it there. It looks like it goes with ideational but grammar can function to make a text coherent. Just as you were talking about a grammatical construction can be of a particular register. So you could choose a grammatical construction for impersonal. So that has to do with the kind of text you're working on. So all of this is really relational and all of it's dynamic. So it really, that's good for a cheat sheet and that's what it's supposed to be, a tool. But this is much more dynamic and relational than what the, okay. Dynamic, relational and incomplete. And that was something that Joanna mentioned this morning is that these are things that we've noticed coming up in a lot of texts and our way of putting a meta language to them to help us to notice them on that micro level. But this is not a complete list and we'd love to hear as you discover other kinds of play that maybe we haven't thought about here. And you can actually see our own thinking process because this is an older version than the one that you have in the handout. And we then went through and we're... Oh, did I not update it? Ah, that's funny. Yeah, you didn't update. Because we went back and forth. Oh, yes, you're right. Right, these are not... That was intentional to show you the drafts. So... I already pointed out the visual play there because I was working on some of you with multimodal texts. Visual is not just about text in the sense of writing systems. Obviously, we haven't updated that too because interpreting the visuals... Oh, well, symbolism and symbolic play. Well, the reason... So that was actually intentional and that's because when we talked about visual here we wanted to focus on these aspects of the visual because a visual text will bring in multiple of these. And that's something where we haven't delved into the meta language for that as much, but we probably need to. If you look on the bottom of the handout you have that reference to Serafini whom Joanna mentioned this morning, I put that one on there as the resource because it's a great starter text, especially for teachers. It's got a lot of really concrete examples. If you're working with multimodal texts or visual texts in particular, I really strongly recommend that book. He draws from Holiday, but also from people like Chris and Finlervin for their models, but it's a nice primer with good concrete examples in the back. So if that's something you're wanting to delve even more into the meta language, that's a good resource. But since we're being honest here and open and transparent, so we've started pretty much with our home base which is text and language analysis and the multimodal is now, I think more and more on our radar, but we need to do more work I think on that area. We had talked about possibly changing visual play to formatting play, but we didn't wanna throw a wrench in the website yet. So yes, all of this means we have to go back through and change the website, but it's all the work in progress, just like your lessons, ha ha. Okay. The other thing that I wanted to, while we're kind of on this note that I wanted to hold on to is that when we talk about these things as play, we're purposefully not just talking about them as being present in a text. And that might be something some of you even noticed as you started working with a text that you brought in. Something can be present in a text, but maybe not the best choice for a flight lesson because it's not terribly playful. So one example might be maybe I come in thinking I'd like to teach a lesson on the past tense because that's something in my chapter. And I bring in a story that has the past tense. It might have in every single sentence a past tense construction, but it might not be played with in any way that allows me to bring out this subversiveness, this plasticity that we're talking about. So what I might be left within is very little to do with the text other than say, hey guys, this is what the past tense looks like, right? But if I find something like this group was working with a George Michael song, right? Maybe I have a text, a pop song that plays with the past tense and the present tense in really interesting ways. In this case to set up this missed opportunity at a love affair. Well, then I can get into something interesting because the past tense is being played with. It's not just present. It's something that has this meaningfulness that I can use to get beyond the literalness that, hey, this is an event that happened in the past. Does that make sense? Yeah, okay. All right, we're gonna keep working through these concepts with the text that you have, but we wanna start to bring in the pedagogical. And for me, it doesn't make sense to talk about the pedagogical without talking about, well, what are the goals of this? And this is, the next few slides are something that Joanne and I worked on together. We tried to decide where it went and this is where it ended up in the sequence of events, but really many of you've already been thinking about your goals and your objectives and your course anyway. So we're gonna try to couch this first within a larger flight framework. What are some of the goals that we're assuming in this project that we think are important? And then I wanna talk a little bit about possible ways to intersect this with curriculum development because it also doesn't make sense to me to talk about lesson plans without thinking about curriculum. So although we won't spend a lot of time about that, I do wanna bring it in a little bit. Then we're gonna talk about ways of conceptualizing and thinking through how we set up a lesson and how we make the choices that we make in a lesson to explore, to redesign, to work through the kinds of play that we've been looking at. And then we're probably gonna set you free for a little while again so you can work on your lesson plans and then we'll talk a little bit about assessment as well, which I know is something that is often on people's minds. That's the plan. All right. So I'm gonna start with actually a couple of inspirations just so you can kind of see where I'm coming from, where I think we're in the project coming from of people out there in the field who are talking about shifting paradigms, shifting goals in foreign language teaching in ways that have had a really profound influence on my work for certain and I think on the project in some cases as well. And so this first one comes from Richard Kern who's written a wonderful book on literacy and language teaching as well as a more recent book that kind of builds off of that earlier work. And I come back to this quote again and again because it's so simple but it says so much. He's written that students should not be using language simply to practice vocabulary and structures but to explore a different world and to relate that world to their own thinking and experience. And sometimes it's paraphrased as not just words but worlds that they're exploring. And I think you saw this in some of the examples that we had this morning that part of what we're trying to do is not just get students to see this is what the form of a particular grammatical construction looks like like the past tense. These are the vocabulary I need to talk about family life or something, right? The typical ways in which we construct textbooks and curricula around these thematic units but to see that these things also that language opens up new ways of understanding the world and relationships and of setting those up. And so if they can see that that's also a way to get them excited about this new language as not just sort of noise that they can translate from English into German or Arabic or French but something that has new potentials for making meaning in ways that they can't with the languages that they already have. The second one comes from a scholar who's actually in English as a foreign language scholar named Judith Zerkowitz and she comes from a pedagogical stylistic approach but I love this quote as well. She says one could even say that language teaching that overemphasizes the communicative function. So this exchange of information against the expressive and the integrative functions and so here she's talking about these interpersonal relationships the way that it sets it up and the aesthetic and the emotive and the emotional aspects of language. So if we just focus on that communicative and not on those others this paves the way for some sort of advanced pigeon a language to do business in. And this may be obvious but she's suggesting that's not a good thing. We wanna offer our students much more than an advanced pigeon sort of language where they can maybe get information across and understand somebody else's information but that's all that they've been left to do. And then the third and final inspiration this one actually comes from Sarah Feeney which I brought in more recently as I've started to work more with multimodal texts and I know that many of you are also interested in that and I love this quote because it does two things that I really like. So I'll read it and then I'll show you which ones. The new world is a multimodal world. Language is one mode. Images, actions, sounds and physical manipulations are other modes. From all these modes alone. Well, I've lost my place sorry. Today's students need to thank you to know how to make meaning and get meaning from all these modes alone and integrated together. They must be able to handle multimodality critically since without critical analytical skills a multimodal world of games, ads, news and other media is a world where it's easier than ever to lie, scam, dupe and manipulative people. So the first half of the quote what I love is that it reminds us to take multimodality seriously. I was struck this morning with the conversations when we realized that that's a text message exchange. Where are all the emojis, right? How would you have that conversation without emojis and text messaging, right? We communicate in a very multimodal world. And so if we even though we're language teachers if we pretend like language ever just exists in a world where all these other modes aren't present that's also a pretty impoverished view of language that we're giving our students. But I've also come to really love the second part because it brings in this idea that language lures us into beliefs about the world into ways of feeling and understanding. Sometimes ones that we don't even know that we have that we kind of take for granted. And so one of the wonderful things about learning a new language and about exploring the literariness and the poetics of that new language is that it maybe makes us a little more savvy about what we question or about what we take for granted in particular ways of speaking, a ways of viewing, ways of describing the world, ourselves and others within it. So we won't be scammed and duped, et cetera. All right. So those are inspirations. Now let's get into what are the goals that we've started to kind of state and pull together for this approach. The first one, learners should be able to recognize but also analyze, problematize norms and conventions and their new and known languages. And this is something we already saw this morning, right? We were talking about, well, what are the norms for a conversation like this? And that's everything from how do you talk to also things like adjacency pairs. If you ask a question, you probably get an answer and things like that, right? So we want students to be doing all that kind of good work. That's the kind of work we're often usually good at in language teaching and that textbooks can help us to do, right? What are the norms? What are the conventions in a language? And we still wanna keep doing that but we want them to not only recognize that but also to analyze it, problematize that and question them to even play with them. The second one, learners should be able to interpret and engage with foreign language use as multiplicity. And this means multiplicity as meanings. So we might be reading the same text. I'll stick with the conversation. Some of you said that the people that it was sort of sad. Corey and I thought they were kind of coy and flirtatious as well, right? And this is not because one of us is wrong and one of us is right but because with the same text, people can make multiple meanings. Now this isn't relativizing anyone can mean anything.  It's in the eye of the reader. We wanna take them back to the language and ground them in the fact that there are things going on there in the text but nevertheless, we can't just pin it down and say this is what that text means, right? That language doesn't work that way. Literary language definitely doesn't work that way. We want them to also explore multiple media and I know many of you were working with film and songs and images as well as a linguistic text so we're already doing that and we want them to be working also with multiple modes so images, linguistic but also sound in some cases. I think a couple of you were bringing sound in deliberately into your lesson and we want them to do this as they expand their repertoire of potential meanings. So we're not just concretizing those norms. We want them to expand their understanding of how they can make meaning. All right, learning goals for flight lessons number three. Learners should be able to use language to communicate but also to interpret, analyze, and transform discourse and that's something that's gonna come up in the lessons that we're gonna talk about later because we're gonna be talking a lot about modeling but we don't want students just reproducing the model. We want them seeing also what are the limits of that model? Can they change things up? What can they do? Where can they give it their creative spin? So we want them analyzing and problematizing the relationships among particular genres of specific works and this includes their purposes, conventional forms, conventions of use, interpretations and evaluations, et cetera, et cetera. And sometimes this brings in these rich points. One thing I noticed this morning with the, I'm gonna stick with conversation again, with the text messaging is I heard a lot of people assume that the first person speaking is a woman. That's fascinating, right? I mean, that's in some ways a rich point. So what are their expectations about who speaks and what way, right? Not just what is appropriate use of the language but who speaks in what way, who gets to speak in what way. We want them thinking about that. We want them analyzing and problematizing the meanings and associations inherent in their own responses and that brings us back to this not being duped or scammed in some ways, right? We want them to question if they think that one of the people in this conversation is annoying, why do you think that's annoying? Kind of what does that mean to find somebody annoying in a love conversation? What does that tell us about our expectations about gender and relationships and how people should communicate? Some of you said they shouldn't even have this conversation on text messaging, who does that, right? What does this tell us about our own expectations of the world so that we can also critically examine those as we're learning about maybe norms in another culture or subculture in another language. And then last but definitely not least because it sort of encompasses all of them, learners should be empowered as authentic users of the language and this is something that Joanna hit on this morning with this questioning this idea of authentic texts that the standard definition of an authentic text being a text that is created by a native user or a native speaker for native purposes, that basically means our students can never, ever, ever write an authentic text and I'm not willing to accept that. So part of this is also putting students in the position to be ever authentic users of the language as writers but also as readers to have responses that matter that aren't just evaluated vis-a-vis native norms or native expectations. And so that's something that we wanna do through this. All right, pausing there for a moment. I'm gonna have you with the people at your table. Just take a couple of minutes and think about in what ways, if at all, did these learning goals resonate with goals in your own curriculum? Are there any that are unfamiliar or any that seemed off base or kind of odd to you or just that you hadn't heard before? Do you have any friction with them? Are there any that just don't make sense to you? Are there any you're excited about but you've never really thought about before? And yeah, how do you see these vis-a-vis your own curriculum in the way that you teach? So if I give you maybe three or four minutes, will that feel okay? Yeah, okay, and then we'll come back together. All right, I know that wasn't very long. I promise you'll have more chances to talk but can we go ahead and check in? I got to listen in a little bit but maybe I'll look for volunteers before I pick on somebody. Anyone wanna go ahead and share? What were some of the things that sounded familiar? Was there anything that felt familiar? Yeah, so I was just thinking that, for instance, my students need to learn Spanish in three semesters. So there's this time, this worry about time and then they need to learn a lot. So what about if I'm planning this fantastic class with like, oh yeah, just think outside of the box and be creative about all those things and it is amazing. Just think about brawls and tether and defy gender structures and think about loving five different whales and then they're like, but is this going to be in the test? You're not in the club. Yeah, yeah. That might be a very quick thing. Yes, yes. So there's the question of how does this sounds great? How does this relate to the other kinds of objectives I have in the course? How would you say like, oh, this is valuable. You need to learn the skill. Well, part of the answer. I believe it, but how would you answer to that question? I'm going to give the short answer and then hopefully we'll keep building on that and one is, yes, it's going to be on the test, but the question is how? But also, because I think that actually does matter, but the other is that you have to help them to see, it can't just be, hey, we're going to play because it's play time now. That part of that question I read as, how is this helping me to develop my language? So some of it is making that transparent for the students and the ways in which you approach the lesson. Doesn't mean always write off the bat, you tell them what you're doing, but as we talk about lesson planning, I think we can also talk about when do we hold our cards close and when do we lay them out on the table? And I think there's space for doing both of those.  So I think we'll be talking about that throughout this session, yeah. But there's a question, why does this relate to the other objectives of the course? Yeah. What were some of the other issues that came up? Yeah. And these are definitely our goals for the end of our language program, but so Lauren has just come out of teaching in the first year of the program and she said, oh, I don't think we're doing this, right? So like, but I think when I go into those second year classes, we are doing it there. So there's, within our own program, it's not cohesive yet, right? We're still working towards these goals and how do we do that from the beginning? Yeah, that's a great question. Yeah. Did other people have that same sense? Or is there an extent to which you felt like, well, that's great, but when we get to that sort of thing, right? And that's, I think, part of the case that we're trying to make and why we keep bringing in examples from the lower level, even though I know many of you are teaching at multiple levels, is that if you feel like you can do it at the lower level, sometimes that opens up space for saying, well, I can definitely then do this in the third year, right? Other things that have come up? Are there any of them that just didn't make sense or felt completely off base? Like, no. Any of them felt so obvious? I heard some of you talking, the tables I went by, there was a lot of talk around the issues of authenticity and that question of authentic texts. And I'm looking at you two tables here, yeah. I feel like the definition of what is an authentic text has come up a lot, especially now that we are in a more multimodal society. And the question, especially with some older faculty in our department is what qualifies as an authentic text and whether a YouTube video or a poster or something like that can qualify as an authentic text or even our own students work, we were talking about that as being an authentic text to compare and discuss and break down. And so we were just kind of saying that, like all of these things are playing more and more into the way that we design lessons and that we wanna view an authentic text and so on and so forth. Yeah, thank you. There's something I hear there and tell me if I'm putting something that you didn't mean to put there. But there's one aspect of that when we say is a YouTube and authentic text, part of that is an authentic text that's appropriate for the classroom, right? And so I think there's something that maybe hasn't been mentioned explicitly yet but is that we're also subverting what is an appropriate text for the classroom in ways that pushes back on some of our understandings of what the literary is. So it's not just about bringing literary texts down to the lower levels, but saying, well, can we find literaryness in lots of other kinds of things at every level? Yeah, yeah, absolutely. And I think that does maybe tie into this goal of empowering, right? Is that maybe the level for our students' aspirations isn't quite Grotta or Proust, but that doesn't mean they can't be wonderful creative composers of texts as well. All right. The other thing I wanna touch upon fairly briefly, although I hope maybe we can keep carrying this on as a conversation, but I feel like it's important to at least touch upon before we start really thinking about lesson planning. Is this question of how does it connect to the curriculum? This is a partial answer, not a full answer, but it's heading in that direction. And so when I sat down to think about how do we kind of in our own curriculum or with other people I've worked with closely, how do we tend to come into a flight lesson as something that isn't just a standalone, you haven't just sort of materialized in a classroom with no context, in a vacuum, right? But instead you have something like 16 weeks if you're in a semester, some of you are more like 10 or something, right? If you've got quarters, right? But you've got all these weeks of expectations that are set up in other objectives that you have to meet and things you have to do, how does this fit in there? And I think it tends to kind of work through three different points of entry and this is another place where I don't want to say these are disconnected. I think really what we're saying is these are all interconnected but the motivation is often led by one of these in the first moment. So sometimes it's linguistic especially at the lower levels, right? If we have a textbook that's introducing a new grammatical concept we say, I want a text that does this, right? And so our point of entry is this particular linguistic element, how it makes meaning. So we have, for example, a lesson that was actually created by Chelsea Timlin for the German classroom called Infantour and it's a poem that has a lot of possessive pronouns and plays with what does ownership mean and what does it mean to own very little in a given moment. And so maybe the entry point there is we know we want to do something meaningful with possessive pronouns but possessive pronouns is our starting point. Sometimes it's more of a thematic or a generic entry. This often happens if you have standard communicative language teaching textbook where you have, let's say, the chapter on myself, right? Where I have to talk about myself and my hobbies and my free time maybe a little bit and a little bit about my identity, right? That's kind of a standard thematic chapter. And so we want to bring in something that helps us to expand beyond that thematic discussion. So one of the examples that you'll find on the flight website is, and we'll be looking at it a little bit later, is a lesson that was also co-constructed with Chelsea that's around singles ads which are kind of an interesting, funny text where you have to introduce yourself, right? But with very particular motivations and purposes in mind and so you have to catch the fancy and the attention of a particular person so that pushes you maybe to be more creative in certain ways. And then sometimes, and I would say, often this happens more intermediate, advanced level because of how curricula tend to be set up in language programs but sometimes our motivation is historical or cultural so it's motivated by a particular historical moment that we're teaching about. I'm teaching about the fall of the wall in Germany, right? So I want a text that does something with this or a cultural practice which the text represents. For example, we have a lesson that brings in things from an epistolary novel so maybe if I'm working with the practices of writing epistolary novels in the 18th century, I might bring in excerpts for that but by seeing these things as interconnected whatever your entry point it kind of pushes you to say, well what are the other levels that I can bring in here? So I want you to see these so you can see those tie-ins but then also at each moment to be thinking about even if my motivation was this linguistic entry point how can I also think about the particular thematic aspects the particular generic aspects the cultural practices that are shaping around this linguistic structure? And so in order to try to make that little more concrete I like to have an example and so I wanna look at one poem with you and first I'm gonna show you the poem and we're gonna talk a little bit about these points of entry then I'm gonna choose just one for the sake of time and we'll walk through some of the stages of the lesson I'm curious, do any of you do German? Do you know this poem? This, Müschtemte Salverta? No, okay, good, nobody knows it, good. All right, so I need a German I know you don't all speak German I'm doing this on purpose so but could I have somebody who does speak German read the poem so we can hear a different voice?  Do you mind? All right, thank you, it's your literary debut. Alle haben gewusst, viele haben gewusst, manche haben gewusst, einige haben gewusst, ein paar haben gewusst, wenige haben gewusst, keiner hat gewusst. Very nice. Yeah, I think that was where, I heard a little, yeah, that was the right instance, yes. Yeah, and I wanted you to hear it first because now if you speak German be quiet for a moment. Those of you who do not speak German what do you notice about this text? Wow, yeah, there's a lot of repetition. You've noticed something literary about the text without speaking any German. Wow, right, so there are things you can pick up on without understanding any or every word, right? All right, but you probably want to know what it means too. Can I have an, you're all English speakers but can I have somebody else maybe read this one? Do you want to do it? Everyone.  Thank you. Everyone knew, many knew, must knew, some knew, a couple knew, a few knew, no one knew. Thank you. All right, I want to take a moment before I talk a lot about this poem. I want to give you a moment to respond to it and I'm gonna have you do that in your groups again and if you've got that hand out from this morning, handy, the one with the tables. I have too many pieces of paper up here. Cory, can I borrow yours because I saw you have it on top. Yeah, if you have this one, using the guiding questions there might be helpful. Thank you. But just in your group, brainstorm a little bit, don't worry about getting to every level. What are some of the things you notice about this poem right away? All right, I'm hearing quite a few different kinds of things so I'm excited to hear what comes up in the discussion because I know some of you are focusing much more on kind of parsing the language a bit and thinking about that but I also heard some of you starting to think about, well, what else is going on here, right? So maybe let's start with, what are some of the things that you noticed about the language play? Are there any kinds of play that stand out? Yes. Yes. Okay, first we notice the structure. There is a kind of parallelism because the same structure is repeated from the beginning to the end. And especially with the word new which is considered to be a repetition because the word is repeated and because of repeating it, there is a rhyme that the same rhyme goes on from the beginning to the end. And concerning the language also, there are no cohesive ties except for the use of tense because tense also contributes to the cohesiveness of a text which is the past tense. And we notice that there is a kind of decrease. Like first we start with everyone in new which is kind of generalization. Then step by step we move to nothing like no one knew. So there is a kind of general decrease and then maybe percentage of people who know something. Yeah. Yeah. Thank you. Yeah, so we have the repetition which you already noted but now we see also, well, some of you already saw it.  So somehow that makes it feel cohesive in a way even though they look like disjointed lines on another level. And then there's the movement and I heard some of the other groups talking about this as well. There's the movement between how inclusive or exclusive getting all the way down to no one. The pronouns are. The indefinite pronouns is the title. So that's, I don't know if anyone else has anything else to say about that but that's the actual title. Yeah. Yeah. At our table we noticed that the person who was not a native English speaker was the person that pointed out and it took us a couple of minutes to realize it that they're making nouns out of the pronouns or the many, she was saying like why didn't many people and we're like no it acts as the same thing and we didn't even pick up on that as native speakers and she as a non-native speaker immediately went to that. Yeah. So what is, I mean it's interesting because you could have a poem that would probably not be called indefinite pronouns then but right, you could have everybody in the room knew, many in the room knew right and then you're specifying right but the fact that we have just the pronouns standing there and that way means it's indefinite right. That's exactly what these kinds of pronouns do. It's indefinite exactly where these people are, who counts as everyone, who is it we're talking about right. Are there other things that feel kind of indefinite? I heard some groups talking about this. Yeah. We talked about how the whoever the poet is is kind of indefinite or at least the voice and perspective because if no one knew then how's this person writing this is kind of like a reflection on a realization that something was unknown and maybe realizing it in the present like you realize that something was unknown in the past. So yeah. Yeah, thank you. So there's two things and I think they might be interconnected but one is that we don't know who's speaking right. It's not clear but then the very way in which this is structured almost pushes some of us at least I don't know if other people have this experience to try to almost read it like a progression, like a narrative right. Our brains try to make it a narrative and so is this a realization? Is it a process of forgetting right. What exactly is going on here but the fact that many of us are inclined to even read this as some kind of narrative sequence is itself interesting because it's not there right but we read it that way. Any other final thoughts? Yeah, we'll all be trained by tomorrow. We also brought up too that in the original language in the German the verb form is in the perfect tense versus the imperfect tense which is usually used in conversation or in speaking whereas the perfect tense is in a historical report or in storytelling and narrative. And so there's a femorality with the way this language is being conveyed in speaking. There's a connection between the narrative speaker of the poem and the reader that is different than a historical story. Yeah, you could say Alewusten right. Yeah. Why was it translated as in like using fast and not present perfect in English? Because we would also use like present perfect. Because they don't function the same way. And so this is an example of where something is lost to be cliche. Something is lost in the translation right and where something like this can make an interesting another moment to point out to students. Actually, this poem kind of works differently in German because you can say things differently in German than you can say them in English. You had another example of that didn't you? When I see the haben gewusst, I just, I'm sorry, is this on? Yeah, when I see the haben gewusst, the alle haben gewusst, it really sounds like it's some, these are spoken words by someone, right? And so this is reported. Each one of these lines is reported. And we also talked and I think some people kind of touched on this too, but the singular form here of Kainau, no one hat gewusst, there's a singular voice that's constructed at the very end. This is the excuse that is then given by the community, by society. And it's very powerful instead of having the multiple voices, right, that are conveyed through the plural, basically in the verb form. Yeah, because the German, oh, I think I've already got mine. Oh, that's right. Double mic, right, because the German force is a singular here that doesn't work in the same. It doesn't, it's not as foregrounded as a deviation in the pattern that's established in the poem, right? In the way that it is in the English. So now you all want to learn German, right? The indefinite pronouns? Counting words, yeah, so yeah, so it's the translation of the concept, but it's not a literal translation, right? So the counting words also then really pushes the number aspect in a way that isn't there in the English term indefinite pronouns. I put this up because this is, something we haven't mentioned is the genre play of this, right? In the very title, indefinite pronouns. Where would you expect to see a text called indefinite pronouns? In a textbook, right? It's a grammar lesson. It's a, you know, lesson 10. Now we're gonna do indefinite pronouns. These are the indefinite pronouns in German. Maybe here's their translation in English. Okay, now learn the indefinite pronouns, right? This is a, in some ways it's playing off a very typical grammar lesson and part of what I love about this text is that it's playing with that genre to also reveal to us something additional that indefinite pronouns do other than just sort of stand in for things in an innocuous sort of way. And that might take us back to what some of you were picking up on your groups of what does this gradation mean? Is this a change? What's happening here exactly? Oh, something no one's mentioned. The other thing that's indefinite is new what? Right? New what? New, there's sort of some kind of direct object that's missing from these sentences, right? Which of them poses some interesting questions. All right, so we already talked about that gradation. So this is a poem where you could talk about indefinite pronouns. Wow. Right, it lends itself to that and that's something, because you asked over here, we have used this in second semester, some instructors to exactly work with thinking about indefinite pronouns and how do they mean? And you'll see a little bit of that lesson in a second. But you could also focus on in a different class where maybe different objectives were foregrounded on thematic and generic aspects. So I could imagine this from my own personal perspective and kind of the courses you were saying you teach, let's say I'm teaching a more of an upper-level grammar course. They've already learned the indefinite pronouns, but let's focus on what are these grammar paradigms that we see just standing so innocently in our textbooks? Is there maybe more meaning to them than we originally thought? Can we talk about the ways in which these also reflect things like collective knowledge and responsibility and maybe parse apart grammar paradigms and grammatical examples as being more than just a little myth of this is the German language, but instead doing other kinds of meaning that are interesting, can we play with that? And then if we wanted to bring in the historical and the cultural, we could talk about post-war German collective memory. I don't know if any of the other people in the room who work in German, if their first thought was, well, this has got to be about the Holocaust and about World War II, right? Because what else do you repress memory of in German history, right? So there's an element in which you could bring this in as a poem and talk about that moment in history as well by thinking about the ways in which pronouns can carry a whole lot of meaning or a whole lot of things we don't wanna talk about because we want to not know them within that kind of cultural context, which is also a way of saying a simple poem like this can also be taught on multiple levels of a curriculum because you're gonna do really different things with them as well potentially. All right, we're gonna come back to the poem in a second. I wanna hit on something that we've talked about but not exactly in this way. So part of what we're trying to do in this approach is look at language use as designing meanings. And so this is one way of thinking about this, but we've already seen several examples of it. So language has designs. What we mean by this is it has resources for meaning making. And these are the things that we tend to teach. We talk about them as grammar and vocabulary, maybe also image and sound for bringing in multimodal aspects, but it has these resources for making meaning. And that's part of what we're wanting to teach the students as well, right, is give them these resources for making meaning. What we do with these resources and we're meaning making is we design meaning. And this brings in this active element that when we bring a text into a room like this, when I bring a poem like this into a room, it has a form that we can talk about, we can transpose it from place to place. It's a text, but what you do with it, what you read, how you respond to it, you're engaged in this process of designing it. It's very active and it's very dynamic. And then one of the other things that we do with language is we redesign meanings. Sometimes this is talked about in terms of intertextuality, right? So somebody like a poet can take a grammar paradigm, this very familiar sort of little mini text structure, and can take that and redesign something so that a grammar paradigm no longer has the meaning that it did before he had written this poem. So there's this active process of continually taking those resources that we have, the norms and conventions that we can draw from, existing texts, existing genres, but then engaging students in processes of designing so that ultimately they can be engaged in processes of redesigning. And so, and I wanna highlight this again because the aim isn't for them just to follow a model or follow a paradigm and get it exactly right and appropriate, but for them also to test its boundaries somewhat. That doesn't mean that they're not always coming straight back to working with those designs, right? They are working with those norms and conventions, but also by pushing their limits a little bit in some ways. And so, if this is what language use is, the question is how do we bring that into a classroom? This is where we're gonna start to talk about the pedagogy more concretely. This is a fairly new formulation of thinking about this, so bear with me and we'll see if it works. We've been talking about these things in terms of what we call borrowing from multi-literacies approaches, pedagogical acts. Sometimes they're also called knowledge processes. So we'll talk about some examples of those in a minute, but we've realized that they're also, we wanna try to view these within a sort of sequencing. So I'm gonna talk about these in terms of recognition literacy first. This is gonna involve experiencing text, working with models. So if we have something like, I'm just gonna keep stealing things from you, Joanna. So if we have something like conversation number one, right, and I've given you this as a model, one of the first things we might do is read it, and then we might think about, well, what kind of genre is this? Where might you see a text like that, right? So this ties into that recognition literacy, but then we want students to go in a little deeper with the language and a lot deeper in some cases, and this is gonna draw in what are sometimes called reproduction literacy or critical literacy in terms of pedagogical acts. These will be processes of analyzing, conceptualizing how texts mean, and this involves, oh yeah, thank you, the kinds of meta language that we've been starting to work with. How can we pull the language apart? How can we describe what's actually going on there? How can we also think about what that's doing functionally, but also critically, what are the kinds of particular interests that are being described, whose points of view are being expressed, et cetera? And then what we'll be leading them towards is what's sometimes called transform practice, where they're applying these and applying them both in terms of conventionality, so drawing from models that are out there, but also applying them creatively, and these are the redesigned tasks that Joanne already mentioned this morning. All right, I'm gonna break this down a little bit, but I wanted you to see these kind of in part of a staging and a cycle. What I wanna break down is the pedagogical acts. So this is another, the formatting looks static, but it is not, that's just the best way for me to fit it on the slide. You've seen the circle, you know it's meant to be dynamic, but on the slide it's gonna look very static because it's easier to fit it on the slide, all right? So starting with the experiencing, and each of these has kind of two poles in the way that they talk about it, and I'm drawing extensively from Copin-Colensis, although there are others who've also worked on this vocabulary. So they talk about experiencing as something that, basically the students are getting to engage with a text or a bit of language in a sort of situated practice. And this involves on the one hand experiencing something that's familiar, drawing on their previous experiences, those of you who said, hey this looks like it might be text messaging, you must know what text messaging is, right? But at the same time we want them to be immersed in new and unfamiliar experiences, and there's gonna be a lot of that because we're dealing with a foreign language, but it might also mean, well what does it mean to see a text message chain turned into a poem, right? That's experiencing something quite new. We wanna engage students in what they call conceptualizing by naming. This is something that's familiar to most of us as foreign language teachers.  I've given something a name, and then we're gonna lead from that name to thinking about, well what are those things and how do we recognize them and understand them? But sometimes we also want students to be conceptualizing by theorizing on their own, and this is where they're drawing from their own overt tacit understandings and mental models. So for example, if I ask you to categorize a bunch of texts by genre, you must have a mental model of what those genres look like, and I haven't given you a set of terms, you instead are theorizing, well what might these look like, what might these, how might we categorize these? We also want students engaging in analyzing, and here too we have two polls, so we want them to think about what language does functionally. This often ties into questions of appropriateness or conventional uses in a particular language and culture to understand what a text does, what its actions and effects might be, how might your average native speaker understand this text, those kinds of questions, but we want them also analyzing critically, so we want them to think below the surface at well whose interests are being served here, whose points of view, what's being left out, what language is being used, what does that erase from something? So for example, when we have the indefinite pronouns chart, but we don't know what is it that they knew, right? Then the question is well, what does that do critically, what kinds of interests and intentions does that serve there? And then we want them, leading back up to the corner, we want them applying this and these acts of transform practice and these redesign tasks, and we want them doing this both appropriately, so we want them to know when they're getting the standardized language right, and I know that's something that's come up in a couple of the groups is, well they have to know what the ideal is as well, right, they have to know what the language expectations are, what it would look like in a particular text, we want them to do that, but we want them also exploring that by applying it creatively and figuring out well, where are the boundaries of that, where can they rub up against those limits a little bit, and also to act on this in ways that are less conventionalized, a little bit more creative, and sometimes that's by transposing something from one context to another, like text messaging into a poem, sometimes it's playing with grammar and really overt ways, all of these different aspects, we want them also exploring them. So these are what we call pedagogical acts because these are choices of what we can be asking students to do in a given moment in a classroom, and I think the reason they're helpful for me and also in talking with my instructors is that sometimes the top two are the go-tos, and we see that in a lot of text book kinds of lessons, so we might have a text, we read the text, we say, hey everybody, how do you respond to the text? And then we say, okay, we'll now write a new kind of text, and we haven't necessarily worked through these steps, and these are part of what for our students is gonna help to scaffold them into being able to create those texts in that creative and very aware kind of way, because we're gonna have led them through this cycle of really thinking about what is it that these texts do, how can they mean, what are the effects of those kind of meaning choices? Yeah? All right, let's look at an example. I think concepts are always better if you have an example. We're running a little behind, but I think that's okay, right? We'll go, okay. All right, so I'm gonna take us back to the poem that we've already spent a little time with in definite pronouns, and what I'm gonna do is describe a potential lesson. It's very similar to one that we've used in our curriculum and the kinds of choices that have gone into making that lesson. This is just an example. This is not the only way to approach this text. For this one, the entry point is gonna be linguistic. This was from a second semester course, and so we were working with a textbook that has indefinite pronouns as one of the things that's being taught in a particular unit, and so this was a way of bringing in indefinite pronouns as something that are not just formal structures, but have particular kinds of meaning that you can do different things with. That choosing between those indefinite pronouns has an effect. It really can say something. So this, in some ways, these first three steps are almost the pre-lesson to the work with the literary texts, but I wanted to bring this in to show how it connects, because what we've had them do is start with the fake text. So not the poem. This is an altered text, but instead this lesson 10 indefinite pronouns, or you can call it lesson whatever you want, and they're given this as the text first. And so first students look at this, what I'm gonna call the transform text, because I've altered it. It is no longer authentic. I'm okay with that. We can argue about it later. And instead they're gonna work with this and think about what do they see? Where might they expect to find this? They get pretty quickly textbook. What is this doing? Then to have them conceptualize and think about, well, what are the indefinite pronouns in German? How do these contrast with definite pronouns? This is a grammar lesson, right? But we're setting up something a bit more. So what do these indefinite pronouns do that the definite pronouns don't do? Why are they indefinite? Why are they called that? And then analyzing, thinking about how are the pronouns organized in this text, which is something that you all noticed as well, right? There's definitely a gradation. There's a movement from more inclusive everyone to know one. So then we move to the original version. So again, that's the poem. There it is again. And the students are gonna do a similar sort of gesture, describe what they see, speculate about where they would encounter this kind of text, what might it be? And one thing they notice is that, whoops, sorry, wrong direction. Something about taking off the word lesson, but also about adding the author's name down like this, right? Subtle difference in formatting, but it makes it, they recognize it right away as being a poem. That does something different than a grammar text. And so they start to become already a little attuned to seeing this genre play that's going on there. These grammar paradigms as being meaningful in different dimensions. That we can take one, put it in a different context, and all of a sudden does something differently. Then the analyzing, so we ask them what kinds of information or message does the first text? So the grammar paradigm, convey, and what kinds of information or message does the second text convey? Who would it be talking to? Maybe another way of asking questions is kind of what function or purpose would it have? To whom, right? And this pushes them to think about these indefinite pronouns as a paradigm, as a reference in the world. They're not just a list anymore, but there's something that somehow refers to something going on in the world. And then a question of what do the silences and gaps? So these are these, this information that's left out that you already picked up on. Everyone, who's everyone? Who are we talking about? What is it that they knew or didn't know toward the end? What do these reveal and conceal? Who might be the reference of the pronouns, right?  Who is this pointing to? What might do they know? And then we go back to that ordering, right? Well, if we think that these refer to specific people in a different context, if we think we have a sense of what it is that they knew or didn't know, then what does the ordering now suggest? Because it's more than just gradation. There's something else going on here, which some of you picked up on as maybe a narrative, progression changes out of opinion, maybe a historical progression, maybe repression in some ways, right? So we talk about that. And then having them apply, and this is that redesign task in a new way by remixing or recontextualizing what they've learned. And we've worked with a couple of different variations of this. So one is to have them do a similar grammar poem with a different grammatical concept, something like possessive pronouns or something like that. Can they do something with mine and yours? And also work into a context where the poem isn't just a grammar paradigm, but means by structuring things in slightly different ways. I'll admit that works a little bit better with slightly more advanced students, but some of the beginning level students have worked with it. One thing we've done with the very beginning level students is the second one, where they have to rewrite or reorder or change the tense even of the poem or even just changing the verb to refer to a different sort of event. So some of them have, for example, transposed it to refer to events in US history, but have changed the verb or have kept the verb but changed it to current tense no and have changed the order a little bit. And then to talk to about their poem and the choices that they made there so that they can start to see even just moving these pieces around creates a really different kind of story or really different sense in the poem. So this is a very simple example of redesigned task, but I wanted to start with it. I know many of you will be doing something much more complex, probably, but one of the things it points out is at these beginning levels, by giving students this poem as a set of designs, of design resources, and then asking them to kind of work through looking at them closely, thinking about what they do, engaging them in this act of designing and then redesigning that same poem, they can draw a lot from what's there but still be really creative, a gentle sort of actors with that same text. All right, I think I'm gonna skip that because I wanna move into your lessons and we'll come back to assessment later. So if I can figure out how to do it again, I'm just gonna close this. I'm just gonna leave it. Ignore the screen. The screen is meaningless to you right now. What I'm gonna go ahead and have you do after a short break. So at your leisure, go ahead and take your 10 minutes. You have earned it. But what we're gonna do in the next session is have you go back to the text with you work this morning. And if at that point you have any questions, I'll be moving around. So I think we'll tie the two together and start to stage a lesson. So you've got the handout with those terms again to work with, use them as concept should be, which is tools to think with. So use them to the extent that it's productive for you but start thinking about in that text, you're gonna have to limit now. You won't be able to take on all those kinds of play that you possibly discovered. You're all savvy, savvy readers. I heard you finding a lot. Which ones are you gonna focus on? How does that tie into other entry points in your lesson? How might you start to stage this lesson? What choices might you make in terms of the pedagogical acts that you're going to do? And then ultimately, because I feel like fair is fair tomorrow, the ultimate goal is tomorrow we're gonna be having you sharing some of those lessons. So if you're a person who likes to know that in advance, know that we will be asking you to share some and to get some feedback and really kind of workshop those lessons. For the next stretch until, keep me on my feet. There's supposed to be a break. We're gonna blend it together. So we're looking at 415 when we come back, right? Yes. So we have until 415? Yep, they're gonna let me know. Oh, oh. Yep, yep, yep. So at 415, we're gonna come back and wrap up because you'll be working with those same lessons tomorrow but basically the next chunk of space is for you to work in your groups with the three of us coming around as you start to pull together a lesson from what you started on this morning, okay? Okay everyone, I'm going to pull you back together, not because I don't think that you could keep working or keep having wonderful discussions that I've been able to hear just a little bit of but because we wanna keep moving and we'll be coming back to these tomorrow in part to start workshopping them and I hope maybe relieve a little tension that I've heard from a couple of you in your minds. We're not expecting anyone to have a fully polished lesson by now or by tomorrow even or maybe even by a week from now. So please don't feel like that's the bar that's been set. That would be unrealistic. I don't want anyone staying up till 4 a.m. in the morning with some sort of false expectation placed upon themselves. So this is a workshop, so we're gonna meet you where you are. I know there were a couple of people at least who started a lesson with one text and then realized, oh, that's not the right text. I want to work on this instead. So you've started all over again. You're gonna be in a different place than a couple of you who came in with a lesson that you're now tweaking and refining and thinking through in a different way through the concepts. So we know that people are in different places and that's okay, that's part of the process. And so we're gonna meet you where you are tomorrow. So just kind of keep working at the pace that you're working. This is important stuff, this digging in and reading for teaching and reading deeply and then thinking really carefully about staging the lesson. These things take a lot of time. It's time we don't often have to take for ourselves. So instead view this workshop not as another pressure point in your life but as an invitation to make a little space to slow that process down around a lesson so you can kind of really think through those concepts in a different way, okay? Ah, deep breath, okay. So this is framed as a wrap-up discussion. We might also, if there's space, come back to a couple of the things about assessment that I had already flagged earlier. But I wanted to start by just giving you space to chime in. You've been sitting and thinking carefully and deeply and in some moments elatedly and in some moments frustratedly about your lessons. Can anyone share just sort of general? What were some of the things that you found most exciting as you got working? What were some of the things that you found most frustrating or some of the challenges you hit that you think other people in the room might share or might be good to get off your chest right now? Anyone have anything burning? Yes, please. And one of the things that was really good was the peer review or just discussing it with my table and with you about what I'm trying to work with some of y'all and just having more ideas built up and just having more of a clear idea, image of what I'm really trying to work on and expand my work and take it to the next level with the feedback I was getting from everyone that I was talking to. Yeah, thank you for that. Yeah, I heard a couple of you say, oh, I actually want to work on something like that to the person across the table. So that's the great thing about a collaborative space like this. Yeah, other aspects, experiences, thoughts, frustrations. Ooh, Dean. Something I'm having trouble with is needing to find like another text to go along with my text. Like it's just not enough on its own. And I think it's because I recognized like in a really quick way, like a linguistic or like, yeah, like a linguistic need that it would, that was my entry point. And then that kind of was like, okay, got it. And then it was like, okay, now I have to take this into a more cognitive, like deeper, critical, analysis, and I think I need to find another text to do a comparison or to do like a critique of it or something. And now I'm like trying to find something else. Yeah, and I heard that something similar, some variation of that theme coming up in a couple of groups. So on the one hand, there's the, just that value in pairing texts that sometimes having a comparison between texts or some of you are working with intertextuality where one text is a riff off of another text or multiple examples of the same genre that show how far those deviations in that genre can be. So those are all good causes to pair texts. Then before you know it, you have a module instead of a lesson, which is not necessarily a bad thing. And something, tomorrow we'll have a chance to show you the website, which we haven't really done yet, but we created a section in there that is like collections because we also had similar problems of once we got excited working with one text, finding that actually we needed a cluster of texts. And so sometimes those are set up in there as collections. So you can see this lesson plan pairs very nicely with this lesson plan. There's another, those are the kind of excited parts of that. There's the other aspect, which is some of you were discovering, and I don't know if this pertains to your example, but that you have to make hard choices, which is one of the other things that sometimes you have to say, these are all the things I could do with this text that I got really excited about, but I have to pick two or three maybe to focus my lesson on, and then you have to really have a serious conversation with yourself about, okay, well, what are the objectives of this course or the unit within which I'm placing this lesson and where do I really need to kind of direct attention? What do I need to make salient for my students in that way? Yeah. Of course. Yeah, I mean, even in my original textbook, a lot of my approach was almost kind of hypertexting, right, because you do then, you want to link or associate, oh, there's this aspect I need to bring in a little bit more background. So one of the questions that you can ask yourselves, and this is something that we were talking about is, how much do you want to make explicit to your students in your text and how much do you want them to then maybe find information on their own outside of the class time or whatever? You need to identify certain parameters around that because otherwise they can stay up until four in the morning or whatever it is, which they might do anyway, but if they're American students. But yeah, it's about those decisions, but ask yourself those are those kinds of questions you have to build in as you're developing your lesson. How much information do they need? How much do I want to provide? And how much do I want them to kind of come to on their own? And that's gonna start to help you to better identify how many other texts that you might want to bring in. And text again can be an image. It doesn't have to be a linguistic or written text. It can be an image. It can be something that just very quickly it captures a concept or a linguistic feature that they can then continue on their path with having had that input. Other thoughts? All right, I think it's, we're reaching that point in the day. Is there anything, I think we need to, we'll skip this for later, because we don't have five minutes. Anything else you wanted to have before I turn the mic over to Devin? In terms of wrap up? I wanna see one thing about- Yeah. Oh, you're mic still, why? The question of finding the right text is I've watched this, I've done this workshop now four years running and there are different places to come into it. Some people find a text that they love and they figure out, how am I going to exploit this because this text is really rich? And that's a good point, that works. Other people have this kind of goal, a pedagogical goal in saying, I want them to, I have this grammar item, typically a grammar item. This grammar item I need to teach. And that seems to me less of a good entry point because you end up with grammatisized, that's a text that has a grammatical agenda and those usually aren't as interesting basically. I mean, it's basically, we were talking about it earlier or I was talking with Devin, it's contextualized grammar. It's the concept of a text is basically contextualized grammar and we wanna go a little bit beyond that. So what I've noticed in doing this for a couple of years now is I'm starting to see text around me that are, that's the intersection of the literary in the everyday.  But just to be open to, you have a good text and they're gonna, I'm sure they're other related texts. And maybe another way is to play a little bit with the frame of the relationship of those texts because thinking about the text with the Louvre, the great, you've got a really cool video, the new video by Beyonce and Jay-Z, right? Everybody's talking about with the Louvre. Okay, there's so many ways you can take that. So part of it is like right now, you've got too many good ideas and that's a good place to be. So I don't know, I'm not saying anything particularly, intellectual or thoughtful, but I've just watched this process and people come at the concept of text from a different place and trying to get text to work differently. My thing is like just keep exploring the options of a text because it's like this kaleidoscope and finally the pieces do kind of fit and it's gonna be cool when it does, it'll happen, it'll happen. Okay, just, I'm not sure if I have to wait. Just to kind of add to that, I'll share with you and I know the question of how do you find text has come up. I do think part of this is awareness raising for yourself as well. I'm very impatient.  So the flight starts to haunt to your brain and warp it into ways and so sometimes the text do start to find you when you start opening your eyes. But that's a real phenomenon. The idea of you learn a new concept and suddenly the concept is everywhere. I give the example. I learned it took an art history class and I learned this idea of chiaroscuro or chiaroscuro.  Oh look, there it is and there it is. It's gonna happen to you too.


started a long time ago, actually before that, and it was nice to see Flippo up here earlier, so I was part of his project Mon Blanc 2, we did lots of work that kind of proved that this stuff should work, this should be a viable approach, and as my part of Mon Blanc 2 was finishing, I just felt that one of the next logical steps was to do this for real, build a real machine and run it as a service, so don't run it as an experiment or a prototype, run it as a real production science machine, and that's the last step to find out what the last kind of missing gaps were going to be. So we've been planning to do this for a long time, we've been dying to tell you all of the details, some of these details have been out for a while, but not very much, and so I was really thrilled when I heard that Cray were going to fully announce all of the product line today, so at last we can tell you some things, and we have some real performance numbers we can share as well, so hopefully this is going to be pretty exciting, so we all know why we're interested in this stuff, there's lots of advantages of having arms as one of the members of the Hypogemic Computing Community, and it really is thanks to Mon Blanc that a lot of this is ready to try, we can't emphasize that enough, a lot of the software stack that exists is because behind the scenes lots of people have worked on it for years to get it into a pretty good state, and you'll see the benefits of that in a minute, so this Ismbard project, it's a new, in the UK we call it a tier two Hypogemic Computing Service, it's named after this quite elegant gentleman who's a very famous British Victorian engineer, Ismbard Kingdom Brunel, which if you come to the UK and you travel around in the south of the country, you'll be going on his railways, you'll be going through his tunnels, you'll be going on his bridges, he was a real genius of his time, so we've named our machine after him, and the project is a collaboration of four universities all in the south west of England and Wales, Bristol Bath, Extra and Cardiff, we teamed up with the Met Office, who were very interested in trying this technology and could provide a home for the machine as well, we're funded by EPSRC, our main science research council in the UK, obviously we've involved ARM, the reasons for that should become clear over the next few slides, and Cray and ARM together have been quite key to making all of this happen, and just to clarify what I mean by tier two, so in our kind of categorisation, tier zero, the big international machines, tier one is our national services, so Archer in the UK is a tier one, and then Ismbard is one of the tier two centres in the UK, and we currently have six of those funded, they're all exploring different architectural approaches, there are dense GPU machines, there are regular GPU machines, all sorts of different things, and Ismbard is the only ARM system that we're exploring, and then tier three tends to be our local machine, so in Bristol we have our own 15,000 core cluster at the university, so that's what I mean by saying Ismbard is tier two, so when it goes live we're going to run it like any other supercomputer scientist in the UK will just apply for time to run their science codes and get science results, the fact that it's an ARM machine should be irrelevant, that's what we're aiming at, it's not just a play with ARM, it's just to do real science on ARM, that's our goal. So what is it? So at last I can tell you what it really is, it is one of the XC50 machines, we think one of the very first XC50 machines, which means it does have an Aries interconnect, we've not been able to tell you about that before, it's just over 10,000 cores, just north of 160 dual socket nodes, it is based on Kavium Thunder X2, we've not been able to admit that before either, the exact skew we're going to use is still being decided, but it's currently going to be 32 core processors and over 2 GHz, we'll know exactly what they'll be soon. It's got the full Cray software stack, that's another thing we haven't really clarified before, so that's including the Cray compiler, Cray math libraries, Cray profilers, Cray debuggers, MPI libraries, all of that kind of stuff, that's one of the reasons we really wanted to do this with Cray, so I have a different hat where I'm involved in the Archer UK national services, Archer is also a big Cray machine, and we really wanted to generate some good comparison data, we wanted to be able to do as apples to apples comparisons as possible, so that's why we really wanted to be able to have a shared software stack between ISM Barden Archer, a shared interconnect between ISM Barden Archer, it's really mostly the processes that are different, which is going to be very useful in generating lots of results, within ISM Bard we've also got a small number of other nodes, we have a few Xeon Fies, we have some X86, we have some Pascal GPUs, again just to aid doing some comparison exercises, and the first part of the machine is already there, so that's everything apart from all the really interesting ARM stuff, and the interesting 10,000 core part will arrive early next year, but we do have eight early access nodes, which we've had for about two weeks, so all the numbers I'm going to show you, we originally generated just in the last 10 days also, so this is all very much hot off the press news, and in fact we were still tweaking the numbers yesterday, and I expect them still to keep improving, so this is all kind of new stuff. So what are we trying to do, we're trying to take some of the most heavily used codes from Archer, our national machine in the UK, and get them running on ISM Barden, and experience how hard is it, is it easy, does it just work, experience how well does it work, do the codes run at good performance out of the box, do we have to spend a lot of time tweaking and tuning, so hopefully this experience will be useful to anyone who's interested in trying this, these are the top 10 most heavily used codes on Archer, ordered from most heavily used, so Vasp is the most heavily used code on Archer, over the last 12 months, many of the codes are in Fortran, so it's important to point that out, and there are other codes outside the top 10, which we also have interest in, things like OpenFoam, IFS, which is one of the other weather and climate codes, others that you would recognize, and we're not planning on trying to do all of this ourselves, in fact we'd really rather not try and do all of this ourselves, if anyone else is working on any of these codes, please let us know, if anyone would like to use any of the codes that we've been getting running, please come and ask us, we're going to share as openly as possible everything that we are doing to try and get all of this going, that's the plan. So, another part of the plan, about two weeks ago, we had a hackathon, it was the first Isambard hackathon, we got a bunch of smart people into the Cray offices in Bristol, we locked them in, we didn't let them out until they had all their codes working and optimized, and it turned out that was actually quite good fun, and it went better than we expected, and we were using our early access nodes, so they were Alpha hardware, it was Beta software, we only crashed a few nodes a few times, we thought that was pretty good, we had access to the Cray toolchain for the very first time, and it went kind of better than we expected, and we have some real performance numbers we're going to share. There's lots of detail, I won't go through all of the detail, but the detail is in the slides which are already on the going on website, so you can go and look at all of this, it's there, so that you can dig in and see what we've done. First thing we did was look at some mini apps, because you can learn a lot just from looking at that, so these are absolute performance results that we've been measuring for real on real systems, and then we've normalized it to the performance of Broadwell, so these are 18 core Broadwell parts, we had a short window where we had some remote access to some Skylake parts, and they are 22 core Skylake parts, and we had our own early access nodes of 28 core, but after we'd done some runs, we had access to a 32 core as well, we wanted to see what difference that made, so these numbers are actually from a 32 core, which is what we'll have in Isambard, so we've got, from left to right, stream, everyone knows stream, you'd expect that to scale roughly with external memory bandwidth, we've basically got four memory channels, six memory channels, eight memory channels, that is roughly what we would expect to see performance wise, but we've got it, great, so then we move on, then we look at the kinds of mini apps that are interesting for the people that my research group works with, so these are hydrodynamics mini apps, heat diffusion mini apps, neutral particle transport mini apps, again, they're mostly memory bandwidth bound, we would therefore expect to see performance increasing with more memory bandwidth, and that's pretty much what we see in almost every case, so that was really great, see what happened, we also used all three different compilers, so we had GNU, we had Clang and Flang, and we had Cray, and we tried all of them, and we just picked whichever one gave the best performance, and that's what we're showing, but later on, I've got the list of which compiler was best on which code, so you can have a look at that if you want, those are mini apps, that's great, but those are just mini apps, how about some real codes, so then we started to dig into our list of top 10s, top 10 codes from Archer, and we have some other numbers, now we don't have Skylake for these yet, because we didn't have enough time, but we should get that soon, over the next week or two, we should be able to add that, Gromax is an interesting case, we had one of the Gromax developers come and join our hackathon, he confirmed that that code is actually fairly compute bound, so you would expect that processes that have lots of more flops and wider vectors may do better on Gromax, and in this case, we actually didn't beat Broadwell, so that seemed to be playing out, but we weren't too far behind, that was with GCC, generally we're using the Intel compiler always on the Intel platforms, we wanted to make it as hard as possible for the comparison exercise, the next two codes I should emphasize were actually worked on by the UK's Met Office, so this is the unified model, which is the weather forecast code, if you come to the UK, you watch the weather forecast at the moment on the BBC, that's generated using the UM, this is the real production, millions of lines of nasty Fortran, which are hard to get compiled on anything, that's what the Met Office will tell you, this is a real challenge to get it working on anything, and NEMO is one of the ocean models which often gets coupled with the unified model, those codes again are fairly memory bandwidth bound, so we expected to do well, but we were very pleased with the results, in fact, I think one of the most impressive outcomes from the hackathon was the Met Office brought their production build system that they used day to day for the real weather forecast, they used all of their standard compile flags, all their standard make files, they didn't change anything, and they wanted to get that working, and I thought if in two days we get that working, that'll be a fantastic result, the first time they tried it, it just worked, the whole thing just worked, it correctly built, it built a binary that ran properly, that produced correct results, and the performance was good out of the box on a really nasty production code, that is a very interesting, very important data point I think that everyone should take on board, so that's very promising, and then last of all, open foam, which is one of the CFD codes, again, traditionally performance on open foam closely correlates with stream, so we hoped we would see good performance, and we do, again, open foam is a fairly hairy code to build, that one we use GCC for, because it's a fairly complicated C++ code, and that's worked really well as well, so we were very pleased with how all of this went in a very short amount of time, just two days of effort, and a little bit of effort from a few people since has got us to where we are, I think everything that we have tried, all of these codes has just worked out of the box, that is a very important thing for people to take away. Just to give you a little bit more detail, I won't go over this on the various process we had access to, what they are, so you can check these out, I've also listed for each benchmark which of the compilers ended up being best-reached one, so you can go and have a look at that, see how that worked out, I've also got in here some details of what the benchmark cases were, so you can go and try and reproduce these yourselves as well. Where are we gonna go next? So this is very exciting, we can finally tell you these things, so we have a whole bunch of codes, again from Archer that we want to start working on, we're starting to pick off some of these, we've got many of these already compiled and running, results are very early, the way I would summarize them so far is like the Gromax case, if you have a code that's more compute-bound, then processes that have more flops, you'd expect to do better, codes that are more memory bandwidth-bound, processes that have more memory bandwidth, you'd expect to do better, and that is what we are seeing, so that's quite good, it means we can kind of understand what we're seeing, fortunately we've got many codes that are suiting these kind of processes that have lots of memory bandwidth very well indeed, so that's very exciting. That's pretty much it, the last thing I'll leave you with is if you want to know more information, the top link is the Isambard website, you can go and have a look at that, if you Google search Isambard and HPC, I think you find everything about the project, there isn't really anything else called Isambard, so it's quite useful, craze press releases there, the one below is a GitHub page where we're keeping information about how to actually apply for an account on the system, if people would like to try that, in the UK you can let me know, and I generally just tweet about high performance computing related things if you are interested, so that's everything I had to say, I'm very pleased, we can finally tell you all about this, and there will be more to come, so watch this space, thank you very much.


First question from big country 92 when training for strength gains versus muscle gains What's the difference and how can you focus on one more than the other? Okay, so You can focus on one more than the other, but I want to say this. They are so closely connected That training exclusively for one is not going to both Both belong in each program. They do if your goal is strength training gains, right? You you shouldn't muscle size is connected to this how strong 100% how strong you are or training for strength builds muscle They're very very closely connected. Here's the big difference the big difference Besides rep ranges and all that stuff because we can get into that as well The biggest difference in my opinion is if you're training purely for strength You're probably gonna focus on the skill of strength. Yeah more than anything else in other words I want to be as strong as possible Let's be specific. I want to be as strong as possible in the squat That means I'm gonna practice the skill of squatting right because then you could sharpen up the technique You there's a lot of things that you can do to revisit to you know to allow you to lift more weight Because that's the only real goal like you want to be able to move the weight more effectively in the course That requires more strength, which then you end up building muscle But the the actual focus of it you could yeah, because it's just it's technique It's also the skill of how the muscles fire In you know perfectly for that particular lift. That's a lot of strength like you look at power lifters and they practice their lifts Constantly and just master the skill Well, I would say too that it's when when one is more of a goal the other So if it's more strength then you're you're just spending more time in that type of a phase Versus like a hypertrophy type training and when you're more focused on building muscle and the look Of your physique you're spending a little more time in hypertrophy than you are strength Like so, you know when I look at like bodybuilders for example Yeah, if there's a mistake that some of even the pros tend to make is they're so heavily focused on hypertrophy They don't get an they don't ever cycle in like a strength, but the good ones do the ones that really know what they're doing train a lot of hypertrophy But they Intermittently have strengths cycles that they they go in that those are some of your your best Bodybuilders know to do that where they have a a cycle of you know Four to six weeks that they run and they're training in the low rep range three to five repetitions because they know the importance But then they cycle back out and then they're staying more towards that eight to twelve rep range for a majority or the bulk of their programming and then the Reverse is true for strength training athlete not strength training athlete who's more heavily focused on strength They're going to spend a majority of their programming in that probably three to five rep range And then occasionally they're going to move they're going to move into the high Here's some of the similarities between training for strength and training for muscle and again remember they're very very closely Connected some of the similarities include a lot of the exercises the best strength exercises like squats and deadlifts and rows and Presses are also some of the best muscle gain exercises. Oh, this is where there's debate. They're also training They're also using Relatively heavy weight. That's very common. Although strength athletes like to train the lower rep ranges They both still train with resistance and the rep ranges aren't super super different, but now let's talk about the differences Let's get back to exercises trying to gain muscle you tend to utilize it more exercises That's really the big difference I would say if you're looking at yeah, someone just wanted strength and someone want to build muscle They're both going to squat But the guy wanted it or girl wanted to build muscles going to do other exercises on top of it They're looking for more variety more volume different angles Yeah, if you're a strength athlete, right?  If you're if you care about you know building and sculpting a physique and building a well-balanced muscle like the dealt Then you're going to be focused on an on reverse fly. So right that's right to me. That's really so although There is there is this this debate about People that are training for muscle that the best exercises aren't technically Squatting and deadlifting. This is an area where I think that we Disagree with some of the people that think that you know deadlifting like a bent over row versus like a deadlift Well, I just got tagged like a tag. I know you got tagged to you got tagged on it, right? They think the guy who's talking there's a handful of these guys The deadlift is not a back exercise It's working the hips and the glutes and the hamstrings and it's a Okay, a little rant here.   Isolation isometric isometric excuse me isometric exercise that you could possibly do yeah, that's the one Yeah, I mean where else can you where else are you gonna do something?  Yeah, right, right So just more variety different angles Rep ranges tend to be different building muscle people who want to build muscle I think you know they tend to spend more time in that eight to twelve over 15 rep range People wanting to build just strength will spend more time in the lower rep ranges And the truth is unless you are a bodybuilder or a powerlifter or Olympic lifter This really belongs in everybody's routine. There's value for everybody everybody no matter what even if you're like somebody who's like I care more about strength than I do muscle doesn't matter this both these phases and programming Belongs in your routine for max benefits the only people that I would say that should spend more time in one or the other Is somebody who's very sport specific whether it be bodybuilding or someone who is just a strength training athlete It's someone who is going to a powerlifting meet where they're only going to bench deadlifter squat Yeah, okay reverse flies don't belong that much into your speaking to the reverse fly I mean if you're thinking too of just being Corrective with it, right so like being able to address things like that that are like, you know deficiencies where I do need that support I need to develop those muscles to be able to you know hold my shoulder in place and to be able to track properly and not Create, you know impingements and things in the future Because I'm just like constantly just loading from one direction and so I'm building, you know these muscles like substantially But you know now you need to reinforce that and reinforce the joints and so going back into hypertrophy style phase like it helps to kind of address a lot Yeah, and and again, I'm like with Adam saying most people should train for both I've had athletes who I've trained who competed in Weight category type sports like jujitsu judo wrestling or boxing and they'll say to me I want to get a lot stronger But I don't want to gain any muscle because I have to stay in my weight class now I still train them in ways to make them stronger and build muscle It was just a function of our diet that prevented them from gaining lots of weight now Why is that important because I still want the loudest muscle-building signal so that you're lean and you have muscle So that we can preserve muscle through this process of getting you to you know meet your weight requirements So for most people The vast majority of you listening you should train for strength or strength classical strength training phases low reps Lots of sets of fewer exercises and the types of exercises that are that are the best for strength And you should also spend some time in that bodybuilding kind of style of training You bring up it actually another good point like the the CNS adaptation portion of this is a little bit different right so if you are if you're training for strength We're training where you are trying to generate the most output from your CNS versus training for muscle It's like more of a connection right and that's the skill component That really is the skill component like the more times you squat perfectly the better your central nervous system gets at Giving you the most ideal squat for maximum leverage maximum strength And it that's what that's what you're doing when you're going up And you're doing five or six sets of three reps of a squat and resting You know two minutes or whatever in between sets and just push it It's what you're doing you're training your the skill of squatting under heavy loads And you're gonna get you're right Adam that kind of adaptation versus I'm gonna go do more reps after three sets I'm doing my squats now. I'm doing leg press and lunges and leg curls and those other exercises getting a pump That's more of that muscle, but they both they both contribute You know and being mindful of your calorie intake. They'll definitely make a difference