Listen, I have something to say...

Authentic vs unauthentic source material 

Authentic texts/material are those which are not originally constructed for language teaching purposes.

 - General selection criteria for authentic materials:
language (pitch to ability),
purpose (aims and objectives),
speaker (accent, pronunciation, normal speed),
intended audience (type of audience, materials comparable to intellectual and maturity),
length (30 to 120 secs / break into segments),
visual support (pictures, maps, charts)

Things to consider when using authentic materials
- be familiar with materials & techniques
- learn to use equipment and tech supporting the materials
- spend time assessing, prepping, trying out the new materials
- copyright restrictions

What is the rationale for selecting a particular clip?
Just listening for details? Or does it go further to assess student listening for gist, inference, comprehension?

Does it encourage testing or teaching? What's the follow-up activity?



Advantage of using non-authentic material: controllable, directed

Using authentic radio program: many are poor pedagogical tools because they lack content. Advantage: real world; if more than two speakers, could be problematic for students if voices are similar

Using Video clips from films: authentic, find material such as sports (sportsmanship) that students can relate to [caveat: don't use material they are too familiar with], play-pause-predict-rewind if necessary  (a.k.a DRTA)

Use appropriate metalanguage to teach and discuss

-----

Representing: non-written product (audiovisual/ audio) to convey a message

-----

!!! Spiral progression - cuts across lessons, units, years. scaling not just difficulty within a particular skill, but more difficult skills - e.g. general inference to irony/sarcasm.