Live "Turn-based" Episode in Class

At the end of last week, I decided to do something special with my Latin I students when they reached Operation LAPIS episode 2.3b (in the villa of M. Maecenas). This is always one of my favorite episodes for the students and it is one that becomes a memorable experience for them as well (often they'll still talk about it as juniors and seniors). I've written about this episode before but this time I ran it "live" in class as a turn-based RPG throw-back. The results were so powerful that I don't think I'll ever not do it this way again.

Setup and "rules" in class:

1. Using a Google Drawing, I imported a copy of the map for episode 2.3 and using simple smiley-face icons to represent the Recentii and the guards in the house, I "moved" them around in real time as the operative-teams controlled their Recentius. You can see the map here: https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/164ul9w8CFV2F2rC39fO3WEiPxzJKj3Ys5n4ExZmzXX4/edit?usp=sharing
2. Using random.org to roll dice to determine order, we established the sequence in which the characters would move.
3. Operative teams were allowed to make one "action" per term (i.e., Bellator ambulat ad latrinam or Octaviana capit stolam.)
4. Operative teams were given two minutes to discuss what their action would be. When they were ready, one member of the team called out "Bellator movet!" and all the other groups would immediately fall silent and pay attention to the team whose turn it was to act. (This worked unbelievably well!)
5. One member of the team would say what they were planning to do while simultaneously posting it to the Edmodo thread for the episode.
6. Me (acting as the TSTT) would then post a response to their action. Some replies were on the fly, others came from stock descriptions provided for Agents in the Episode Guide (i.e., the room descriptions, etc).
7. As a class we would read the character's action and the TSTT reply together, checking for understanding.
8. Next team would then be on the clock to move.

Initial Thoughts:

• Engagement was through the roof. In between actions, I was walking around the classroom monitoring discussions. Through both periods that we ran this episode, there wasn't a single time when a single student was "off task." They were focused and plugged in. I attribute a great deal of this to the immersive qualities of the game-based learning environment. 
• Operative teams paid very close attention to what their allies were doing. When it was a team's time to move, the rest of the class was listening intently and looking for additional clues.
• There was an incredible amount of comprehensible Latin in both periods. This included the Latin that the students read, but also what they produced. Remember, output by one operative team became input for the three other teams. I'm becoming more and more convinced of the power that meaningful and relevant output by peers has on other students' ability to acquire more ability in the language. Hearing me speaking, reading things I've written is one thing -- it's something else entirely when it's done by a peer.
• Lots of repetitions with structures. It is so important to provide ample opportunity for modeling correct usage and for the students to see structures, words, and phrases repeated. Running the episode in this format, in class, with the limit of actions allowed for lots of practice with various structures even at this early stage in their Latin careers.
• The learning objectives for this episode (rooms and functions of a typical Roman villa) are now situated in context for the students. They were "moving" in and around the rooms, interacting with objects contained within. This experience becomes far more powerful for them and their ability to retain the information as opposed to simply reading about the rooms in a culture section of a typical textbook.
• I want to take a look at additional episodes throughout Operation LAPIS to see how I can replicate a similar experience at various other points throughout the year.

Transcript of the Episode:

(2.3.b)
>Vīlla of Marcus Maecēnās, Pompēiī, 79 CE<

tū in ātrium intrās. tū larārium dextrā vidēs. larārium est malīgnum. tū quoque lectum geniāle vidēs. ātrium est dēsertum. clāmōrem ē peristyliō in trīclīniō audīs.

Prompt: find the volūmen in vīllā of M. Maecēnās. You are free to explore any area of the house that you wish, but be on the lookout for Marcus and his guards.

Codex Link: http://lapis.practomime.com/index.php/104-hud023

Live Map: https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/164ul9w8CFV2F2rC39fO3WEiPxzJKj3Ys5n4ExZmzXX4/edit?usp=sharing

Bellator said Oct 16, 2014: Bellator festinat clam to ad Locum V

TSTT said Oct 16, 2014: Bellator ambulat ad locum V (tablinum) sed conspicit (catches sight) custodem extra (outside of) ianuam. custos non videt Bellatorem. revenit ad Recentiōs in ātrium. 

Octaviana said Oct 16, 2014: Octaviana clam ambulat ad cubiculum. 

TSTT said Oct 16, 2014: Octaviana ambulat ad cubiculum. in cubiculō est lectus. tunica et toga in lectō iacent. cista quoque est in cubiculō. cista est clausa. clāvem nōn habēs. aliquid nitidum sub lectō cēlat. 

Priscus said Oct 16, 2014: Priscus intrat in different cublicum, priscus quaerit est volumen 

TSTT said Oct 16, 2014: Priscus ambulat ad alium cubulicum. in cubiculō est lectus. stolla in lectō iacet. 

Tulliana said Oct 16, 2014: Tulliana ambulat ad peristylum et clam spectat around a column. 

TSTT said Oct 16, 2014: Tulliana ambulat at peristylum. lūna in peristyliō lūcet. via est in mediō peristyliō. frutex in viā est. lūmen ē trīclīniō venit. clāmor ē trīclīniō venit. custōs in iānuā stat. custōs tē nōn vidēt. aliquid nitidum prope fruiticum latet. 

Bellator said Oct 16, 2014: Bellator ambulat clam to ad locum VII 

TSTT said Oct 16, 2014: Bellator ambulat ad latrinam. in lātrīnā est multum stercoris. cavum est in mediā lātrīnā. aliquid nitidum prope cavum in lutō cēlat. 

Octaviana said Oct 16, 2014: Octaviana nitidum sub lecto capit. 

TSTT said Oct 16, 2014: Octaviana quaerit sub lectō. sub lectō est rōbīginōsus gladius. Octaviana capit gladium robignosum. 

Priscus said Oct 16, 2014: priscus valde quaerit sub lecto et in cubiculo 

TSTT said Oct 16, 2014: Priscus quaerit sub lectō. eheu! est nihil sub lectō in hōc cubiculō. 

Tulliana said Oct 16, 2014: Tulliana ambulat ad fruticem et capit aliquid nitidum. 

TSTT said Oct 16, 2014: Tulliana capit aliquid nitidum. ecce! est stola fulva! Tulliana ponit stollam in suō saccō. 

Bellator said Oct 16, 2014: Bellator quarit ad cavum for ad nitidum 

TSTT said Oct 16, 2014: in stercore Bellator invenit clavem! est sordidus. bellator capit clavem et ponit in suō saccō. 

Octaviana said Oct 16, 2014: Octaviana ambulat ad tablinum cum robiginosus gladius. 

TSTT said Oct 16, 2014: Octaviana ambulat ad tablinum. habet gladium in suā manū. custōs videt Octavianam. custos nunc est iratus. custōs capit gladium ā Octavianā. dicit, "hic gladius est mihi! custos vocat alium custodem quī ducit Octavianam ad ianuam. 

Priscus said Oct 16, 2014: priscus clam intrat in another cubilicum 

TSTT said Oct 16, 2014: in cubiculō est lectus. tunica et toga in lectō iacent. cista quoque est in cubiculō. cista est clausa. clāvem nōn habēs 

Priscus said Oct 16, 2014: priscus capit tunicam 

TSTT said Oct 16, 2014: Priscus capit tunicam et ponit tunicam in suō saccō. 

Tulliana said Oct 16, 2014: Tulliana ambulat ad columnam prope tablinum. Tulliana videt custodem in ianua of tablinum 

TSTT said Oct 16, 2014: Tulliana spectat custodem. custos ambulat in tablinō. via ad culinam est vacua! 

Tulliana said Oct 16, 2014: Tulliana ambulat ad culinam et spectat in culina 

TSTT said Oct 16, 2014: Tulliana ambulat ad culinam. mēnsa est in mediā culīnā. in mēnsā est cēna optima. ecce! coquus est in sellā. coquus tamen in sellā dormit. prope coquum est mappa ōrnāta. litterae “SP” in mappā sunt. 

Octaviana said Oct 16, 2014: (two actions at once since their similar and so you dont need to type more) Octaviana atrium quaerit et Octaviana lararium quaerit. 

TSTT said Oct 16, 2014: In the corner of the atrium stands the Larārium.
larārium Marcī est malīgnum et antīquum. statua in larariō est frācta. statua lapidem in manū tenet. statua gladium in aliā manū tenet.

Octaviana quoque quaerit lectum genialis. lectus geniālis est in ātriō. lectus est līgneus et imāginem Iūnōnis habet. litterae ‘SP’ in lectō sunt. strāgulum in lectō iacet. aliquid nitidum sub pulvīnō cēlat. 

Bellator said Oct 16, 2014: (Also 2 actions) Bellator festinat clam to ad locum III. Bellator aperit cistam with the key. 

Tulliana said Oct 17, 2014: Tulliana clam intrat culina et vero tacite capit mappa 

TSTT said Oct 17, 2014: Bellātor tenet clavem in manu et aperit cistam. *click* Bellator cistam inspectat. in cistā est rōbīginōsa galea. Bellator capit galeam et gerit in capite. 

TSTT said Oct 17, 2014Tulliana capit mappam et ponit mappam in suo sacco. coquus movet sed non excitat se. coquus dormit adhuc (still). 

TSTT said Oct 17, 2014: custos exit ē tablinō et ambulat ad latrinum. tarde. (slowly.) 

Bellator said Oct 17, 2014: Bellator crepit clam to ad other locum III 

TSTT said Oct 17, 2014: Bellator intrat cubiculum et videt pallium in lectō. 

Tulliana said Oct 17, 2014: Tulliana ambulat ad tablinum. 

TSTT said Oct 17, 2014: Tulliana ambulat ad tablinum et circumspectat. The tablīnum is empty of people, but full of papers. 

tū in tablīnum intrās. tū mēnsam vidēs in tablīnō. stat mēnsa māgna in tablīnō. in mēnsā est lumen. in mēnsā est tabella. in mēnsā est lapis. in mēnsā est volūmen. 

in tablīnō quoque stat mēnsa parva. 

Priscus said Oct 17, 2014: Priscus clam intrus the final cubuiculum 

TSTT said Oct 17, 2014: cubiculum est vacuum. mane! (wait) est cera et stylus in cubiculō! 

Octaviana said Oct 17, 2014: Octaviana capit nitidus aliquid sub pulvino. 

TSTT said Oct 17, 2014: Octaviana quaerit sub lectō et invenit (discovers) multam pecuniam! Octaviana nunc habet quinque (V) denarios! 

Bellator said Oct 17, 2014: Bellator capit pallium 

TSTT said Oct 17, 2014: Bellātor capit pallium cinereum et gerit pallium in tergo. 

Tulliana said Oct 17, 2014: Tulliana quaerit volumen et tabella. 

TSTT said Oct 17, 2014: Tulliana legit tabellam. tabella est negotium de equiis (about horses). Tulliana legit volumen. estne volumen verum? 

Link to the volumen: http://links.practomime.com/volumenrg 

Priscus said Oct 17, 2014: Priscus quaerit per cera et capit cera 

TSTT said Oct 17, 2014: est nihil in cerā. Priscus capit ceram et ponit in suo sacco. 

Octaviana said Oct 17, 2014: octaviana capit lapidem in staue manu 

TSTT said Oct 17, 2014: Octaviana capit lapidem sed, ecce, non est lapidem. est aquila! Octaviana capit aquilam et ponit in suo sacco. 

Bellator said Oct 17, 2014: Bellator Ambulat to ad locum IV 

TSTT said Oct 17, 2014: Bellator ambulat ad culinam sed coquus nunc surgit e sellā. Bellator currit ad tablinum et spectat at rimam quod Bellator amat rimās. 

Tulliana said Oct 17, 2014: Tuliana quaerit rimam in muro 

TSTT said Oct 17, 2014: Priscus currit ad tablinum. Octaviana currit ad tablinum. 

TSTT said Oct 17, 2014: Tulliana quaerit rimam et invenit volumen! Tulliana capit volumen! 

Link to volumen: http://links.practomime.com/volumenmarci

TSTT said Oct 17, 2014: quisque Recentius currit per villam et exit. tua persona revenit (returns) ad villam Sexti.

An Example of the Classroom Flow of Operation LAPIS

I'm always asked what the flow of Operation LAPIS looks like in a typical classroom over a typical few days. Since I was adding a page for the equivalent of the teacher's guide, I figured that I would also post this here. Each episode has two parts (A and B), each mission has 3 episodes, and there are 28 missions across the entire curricula. LAPIS can be used as a stand-alone source or in conjunction with most popular textbook series. The generic example here is in a stand-alone setting.

Operation LAPIS

Day 1 - Start of a new Mission

• Post the new episode (part A) to the TSTT Interface
• Teams collaboratively read through the new immersion
• Students utilize VERBA and GRAMMATICA sections for new words and constructions
• Monitor the teams as they work their way through
• Review the immersion as a group, reviewing any new or unfamiliar constructions
• If necessary, a small amount of direct instruction based on the content GRAMMATICA section
• Hypothesize about potential cultural and historical information needed for the immersion
• Teams read the CULTURALIA section of the CODEX and use the comprehension questions in the ATTUNEMENT section as scaffolding for the immersion response
• Monitor the teams as they read and work on the comprehension questions

Day 1 - Outside of Class

• Teams collaborate on a response by their character in their team-specific areas
• Monitor discussions and intervene as necessary
• Lead Operative posts their character's action in the main TSTT thread
• Respond in-character as other NPCs, or continue telling the story as linking narrative
• Award denariī (if after Mission 3.3)

Day 2 - In class

• Read the in-character responses of each team as a group
• Make minor corrections to Latin that are common mistakes with the intention to not "over do" the correction. Instead of emphatically correcting every small bit, continually model correct usage in order to not interfere or impact the willingness to compose in the target language.
• Excellent opportunity to utilize circling techniques to ask questions about each character's actions in the TL
• KEY-TEXT reading:
• Project the KEY-TEXT on a whiteboard, play accompanying audio file and ask students to listen and follow along
• Each team collaboratively reads the KEY-TEXT for meaning
• Utilize roll-over tooltips and visual walkthrough if needed for new vocabulary or constructions
• Monitor the teams as they read
• Each team then collaboratively responds to the reading comprehension questions in the ATTUNEMENT section
• Monitor the teams as they respond in the TL
• Come back together as a group, review comprehension questions
• Another excellent opportunity for circling techniques to ask additional questions in the TL
• Post the new episode (part B) to the TSTT Interface
• Teams collaboratively read through the new immersion

Day 2 - Outside of Class

• Teams collaborate on a response by their character in their team-specific areas
• Monitor discussions and intervene as necessary
• Lead Operative posts their character's action in the main TSTT thread
• Respond in-character as other NPCs, or continue telling the story as linking narrative to next Episode
• Award denariī (if after Mission 3.3)

Day 3 - In class

• Read the in-character responses of each team as a group
• Make minor corrections to Latin that are common mistakes with the intention to not "over do" the correction. Instead of emphatically correcting every small bit, continually model correct usage in order to not interfere or impact the willingness to compose in the target language.
• Excellent opportunity to utilize circling techniques to ask questions about each character's actions in the TL
• Teams collaboratively work on remaining ATTUNEMENT exercises
• Monitor teams as they work through the exercises
• Teams collaborate on the memoratio for the episode in the TL
• Using memoratio questions in the ATTUNEMENT if needed
• Acts a closure activity for the episode

As you can see, there are plenty of opportunities for composition, speaking, listening, and reading in the target language. Because all of the content is situated inside of the narrative, it also affords a level of cultural competency that tends not to be seen in a traditional textbook driven classroom.

Operation LAPIS: Virtue Trait System

What better way to kick off summer than by sharing a brand new trait system for the Recentiī player-characters in Operation LAPIS? As a little bit of a background, one common suggestion from students was that the player characters didn't quite feel like they were truly in an RPG. We solved this to a small degree last year with the introduction of the denarii rewards and gear system.

Points, traits, and levels are key components of most RPGs -- whether it be a pen and paper table-top game or a popular video game. However, given our insistence that learning objectives map onto play objectives, grafting on a superficial system of strength or charisma points just wouldn't be acceptable. I also wanted to find a way to bring the core Roman values into play in a meaningful way. 

Virtūtēs

Each character now has six different virtues that will not only shape their character in a more dynamic way, but also scaffold additional elements to the role-playing. These virtues will also help scaffold responses on the part of the Agent of the Demiurge (the instructor) when interacting with their students inside of the immersive world of the TSTT. 

Progress bars and rank increases should make the character feel more playful

There are a couple of neat technical features built into the character sheet. First, the progress bars, cost to next rank, and ability bonus based on the current level are all automatically awarded as the trait increases.

Each virtue, if the operatives choose to specialize, has a capstone ability and subsequently grants an additional agnomen to the character. For example, upon reaching rank 10 in 'auctōritās', the character is automatically granted the agnomen 'Aquilīnus', or 'Eagle-like'. From this point forward, he would be known as Gaius Recentius Bellator Aquilinus.

In addition, there is a dropdown menu selector that further describes what the Romans thought about each of these traits. Our hope is that the way the abilities are described, and the added description box, the students will understand that the Roman virtues were primarily based on how others perceived you (which, I think, is a bit different than traits and stats in most modern RPGs).

Puncta Virtūtis

So how do operatives gain points with which to advance their character's traits? This is where a new self-reporting system of 'Virtue Points' comes into play. In order to make a system where choice has meaning, the point system has to be balanced so that it would be incredibly difficult to max out everything. As a result, puncta virtūtis are tied to the entire team's participation in the discussion for each immersion.

If all members of a team contribute in some meaningful way on an episode, the character receives 3 puncta virtūtis. If the lead-operative fulfills his or her duty and posts the response of the character, the team receives an additional bonus of 2 puncta virtūtis. The intention here is to encourage full participation each immersion since so much of the student's success is driven by their engagement with the material. This incentive system, since it is tied in no way to evaluation or assessment, encourages and rewards engagement in an innocuous way. You'll also notice that the character level (gradus) also increases automatically as the trait levels are increased. Again, this is to make the character system feel a bit more playful without compromising the core values of practomimetic learning. 

Like the denarii system, self-reporting and management on the part of the operatives is also a very important aspect of this system since it encourages the type of responsibility for self that we'd like to see in all of our students.

If you'd like to play around with the sheet for Gaius Recentius Bellator, feel free to access a publicly viewable sheet here and make your own copy. However, there are still a few things to clean up and to add before all eight Recentii characters are updated to the new system and ready for the fall. 

Hope you enjoy the new trait system and it makes the characters feel more playful!

Simple PBL

PBL (problem or project) based-learning doesn't have to be a huge formal assignment. It is more of a state-of-mind than anything else. I just wanted to share a small example of this that spontaneously happened during class last week.

One of the Recentius teams in Operation LAPIS, while working on a particular collaborative task, strayed a bit off topic -- discussing giraffes of all things. They came to the decision that they wanted to buy a giraffe to keep as a pet (ignoring the logistics of such a thing, we'll just let it slide for now) and subsequently asked me how much denarii (a type of Roman currency) they would need in order to buy a giraffe. I haven't ever read an ancient source that listed a specific price for a giraffe (although we know they were sold and displayed around the empire), and so that would pose a problem to arbitrarily assign a price.

According to Dio, Caesar brought a giraffe with him back from Alexandria

Instead of declaring "No, you cannot buy a giraffe.", I explained to them how I set the price for some of the gear (see the post linked above), and then asked them how they could estimate what a giraffe might have cost a Roman in the time period of our adventure.

In a few minutes of discussion and problem solving, they decided that if the average salary of a Roman soldier was 225 denarii, and then they estimated the salary of a current soldier of around $35,000, they could use that ratio of denarii to dollars in order to estimate the cost of a giraffe. After some research, they discovered that (apparently) a giraffe costs around $30,000 on the open market and so if they saved up about 200 denarii, they could have their own virtual giraffe pet. (I suppose I'll have to let them know what the upkeep is after the initial purchase.)

There it is right there -- problem-based learning, not as a huge elaborate thing, but as an approach to how and why you learn new information. While there are obvious problems with the accuracy of the price that they figured out, nevertheless we have the ability to foster this kind of inquisitive knowledge on a daily basis. We should routinely embrace, not squash, these opportunities to model authentic exploration.

Practomimetic Learning in Full View

Presented without comment and unedited (other than removing student names.) This is a single night's worth of engagement from one of my Latin I sections utilizing Operation LAPIS as their only 'text'.

The background for this mission is the student teams-as-their-avatars are attempting to find a scroll hidden in the house of one of their first adversaries, Marcus Maecenas, a fictional grandson of the real Gaius Cilnius Maecenas. Each action that a character takes is discussed in a separate forum by the team before they make the action, and, obviously, the reactions are also discussed.

I apologize if you don't read Latin fluently. You'll have to trust me that the Latin, composed by students only a month in to the course, is pretty darn good.


(2.3.b) 

>Vīlla of Marcus Maecēnās, Pompeiī, 79 CE< 

tū in ātrium intrās. tū larārium dextrā vidēs. larārium est malīgnum. tū quoque lectum geniāle vidēs. ātrium est dēsertum. clāmōrem ē peristyliō in trīclīniō audīs.

Prompt: find the volūmen in vīllā of M. Maecēnās. You are free to explore any area of the house that you wish, but be on the lookout for Marcus and his guards.


Link to the CODEX for 2.3

embedded visual aid for the mission

Team 1: Agricola currit in cubiculo quietly.

TSTT Response: in cubiculō est lectus. tunica et toga in lectō iacent. cista quoque est in cubiculō. cista est clausa. clāvem nōn habēs. aliquid nitidum sub lectō cēlat.

Team 1: Agricola tunicam et togam capit. quoque, Agricola videt sub lecto.

TSTT Response: Agricola nōn potest ambō (both) tunicam et togam capere.

RESOLVE ACTION BEFORE PROCEEDING.

Team 1: Agricola chooses the tunic.

Demiurgic Edit: Agricola tunicam capit.

TSTT Response: Agricola tunicam capit et tunicam in saccō ponit.

Agricola must rest before taking another action.

Team 2: Recentia Octaviana intrat cubiculum et cistam capit.

TSTT Response: cista est gravis (quoque clausa). Octaviana cistam nōn potest capere. ubi est clavis?

Team 1: Agricola quiescit. quoque Agricola ambulat ad tablinum Marci

TSTT Response: Agricola ambulat ad tablīnum sed... ēheu! custōs stat extrā iānuam. Agricola revenit ad ātrium.

Team 3: Priscus ambulat ad tablīnum, et quaerit a key. priscus quaerit rīmam in murō.

TSTT Response: Priscus vīdet Agricolam et ad tablīnum nōn ambulat quod custōs est prope tablīnum.

Team 1: Agricola intrat alia cubiculum.

TSTT Response: in aliō cubiculō est lectus. stola in lectō iacent. aliquid nitidum sub lectō cēlat.

Team 3: Priscus ambulat ad culīam, et capit a sharp knife.

TSTT Response: mēnsa est in mediā culīnā. in mēnsā est cēna optima. ecce! coquus est in sellā. coquus tamen in sellā dormit. prope coquum est mappa ōrnāta. litterae “SP” in mappā sunt. nōn est culter (knife) in culīnā.

Team 4: Recentia Tulliana slowly runs to inanuam ligneus that lead to the cubliculum.

TSTT Response: Tulliāna est in cubiculō cum Agricolā. stola in lectō iacent. aliquid nitidum sub lectō.

Team 1: Agricola videt sub lecto.

TSTT Response: sub lectō est rōbīginōsus gladius!

Team 1: Agricola rōbīginōsum gladium capit.

TSTT Response: Agricola pōnit gladium rōbīginōsum in suō saccō.

Team 4: Recentia Tulliana videt sub lecto

TSTT Response: ēheu! est nihil sub lectō. stola est in lectō! fortasse Tulliana vult (wants) stolam capere?

Team 3: Priscus ambulat ad latrinam, et circumspectat gravis(important) objects.

Team 4: Tuliana capit stolam.

TSTT Response: Tulliāna stolam capit et stolam in saccō pōnit.

TSTT Response: Prīscus ambulat ad lātrīnam. in lātrīnā est multum stercoris. cavum est in mediā lātrīnā. aliquid nitidum prope cavum in lutō cēlat.

Team 4: Tulliana lente et quietly ambulat in desertum hallway ad culinam.

TSTT Response: Tulliāna est in culinā. mēnsa est in mediā culīnā. in mēnsā est cēna optima. ecce! coquus est in sellā. coquus tamen in sellā dormit. prope coquum est mappa ōrnāta. litterae “SP” in mappā sunt.

Team 1: Agricola ambulat lente ad custos in tablinum et inquit, "eheu! sum sordidus! sines ego intro?"

TSTT Response: custōs clāmat, "quid!!! iuvenis in villā? cūr ades? Marcus est iratus quod iuvenis eum vexāt (annoy)."

The custos grabs Agricola's newly found sword before he has a chance to react.

"et meum gladium habēs? fūr! (thief!)" inquit custōs.

Agricola is dragged across the house and thrown out the front door. Thankfully the guard was so distracted with the situation that the rest of the Recentiī went unnoticed and can continue their search for the scroll.

Team 3: Priscus capit nitidum object, et cleans it ad get a closer spectat.

TSTT Response: ecce! Prīscus invenit clāvem in lutō! Prīscus clāvem in saccō pōnit.

Team 2: Recentia Octaviana ambulat ad tablinum (now that the guards are distracted) et intro. Recentia Octavina quearit tablinum.

TSTT Response: The tablīnum is empty of people, but full of papers.

tū in tablīnum intrās. tū mēnsam vidēs in tablīnō. stat mēnsa māgna in tablīnō. in mēnsā est lumen. in mēnsā est tabella. in mēnsā est lapis. in mēnsā est volūmen.

in tablīnō quoque stat mēnsa parva.

TSTT Response: lectus geniālis est in ātriō. lectus est līgneus et imāginem Iūnōnis habet. litterae ‘SP’ in lectō sunt. strāgulum in lectō iacet. aliquid nitidum sub pulvīnō cēlat.

Team 5: Recentia Horatiana quaerit lectus genalis. she looks around in the lectus genalis and looks for the volumen.

Team 5: Recentia Horatiana quaerit sub pulvino

TSTT Response: Horātiāna invenit stolam fulvam sub pulvinō! Horātiāna stolam in saccō suō pōnit.

Team 4: Tulliana capit mappam et in sacco point

TSTT Response: ita vero! Tulliana mappam capit!

Team 3: Priscus ambulat ad cubiculo et aperit cistam clāve (priscus opens chest with key)

TSTT Response: ecce! Prīscus in cistā togam candidam et pallium fulvum invenit! Priscus eōs (them) in suō saccō pōnit.

TSTT Response: The custos turns around when he hears something in viā. This gives Agricola the opportunity to slip back into the vīlla unnoticed.

Team 1: Agricola currit in villa et latet.

Team 2: Recentia Octaviana capit volumen et lapidem

TSTT Response: Recentia Octaviana legit volumen: (link to the volumen). lapidem parvum est modo saxum.

estne volumen verum (true)?

Team 3: Priscus capit togam candidam et pallium fulvum.

Team 5: Recentia Horatiana quaerit lararium

TSTT Response: larārium Marcī est malīgnum et antīquum. statua in larariō est frācta. statua lapidem in manū tenet. statua gladium in aliā manū tenet.

Team 1: Agricola ad ceterus cubiculum ambulat.

TSTT Response: est nihil in certerīs cubiculīs.

Team 1: Agricola ad peristylum currit.

TSTT Response: As Agricola approaches the peristylum, he hears a large commotion coming from tricinlium. Marcus' cena is starting to break up. tempus fugit! Agricola currit ad tablinum cum ceterīs Recentiīs.

Team 4: Tulliana ego aperit ianuam to the tablinium et intrat

Team 2: Recentia Octaviana inquit "volumen est non verum."

Team 5: Recentia Horatiana quaerit rimam in muro

TSTT Response: Recentia Horatiana alium (another) volumen in murō invenit! est volumen verum! (link to the scroll)

omnēs Recentiī currunt ē villā ad Sextum.

Selling the Drama: the First Day of the New Year

We are now three weeks into the start of a terrific school year and I wanted to take just a few moments here to reflect on what day one looked like for my group of new Operation LAPIS recruits (that is, my two new Latin 1 classes.) Each year that I've run LAPIS in my classrooms, the initial presentation has become more straightforward and more "in-character." This year I attempted to stay entirely "in-character" -- as Demiurge Omega, the representative from Project ARKHAIA's Mission Control, for the entire time during the first day of school. It was unbelievably fun and, using the first few weeks as a comparison to the past, it worked incredibly well. Selling the narrative -- the ARG layer which is so important to Operation LAPIS -- is vital, I'm finding, to the initial buy-in of the students.

As the students filed in, I said very little to them. Only the "splash screen" with the Project ARKHAIA logo was projected up on the board. After the bell rang, I moved to the center of the room and begun moving down the list of students, calling them each by their name -- except adding "Recruit" before hand. Recruit Johnny. Recruit Beth. Recruit Cameron. The confused looks that they exchanged with one another was priceless. When roll was called, I began the "initiation process", which included a series of automated computer-terminal-like slides processing the new recruits. It concluded with asking all of the new recruits to rise and swear an oath to Project ARKHAIA. I was shocked to see every student immediately rise and prepare themselves to swear the oath without any delay. So much of the success hinges upon students willing to suspend belief, if only for a moment, and allow themselves to pretend to be recruits on a mission to save civilization as we know it.

With the oath sworn, and another series of automated slides pretending to analyze their responses, I begun discussing some of the more intricate logistics of the Operation. I discussed how we (Project ARKHAIA) have infiltrated Google and customized some of the components to fit our need. A few days later I actually prove this to them when we explore how to easily add macrons (long marks) in a Google Doc -- the "Insert Symbol" menu item has the omega character located next to it. The other major component is, of course, Edmodo, for the collaboration and discussion portion of the Operation.

Since our first day is comprised of shortened periods, it works out perfectly to give them enough information to spark some curiosity without overloading them with the sheer number of various components and aspects to Operation LAPIS or practomimetic courses in general. The key is to scaffold in the components over time, rather than trying to explain everything at once -- something important that I've learned over the last couple of years.

As the clock ticked down, I handed out their New Recruit Startup Guides and explained their first two missions:

1. create a Google Account and initiate contact with the Demiurge -- so that I can set up their first two documents in Google docs
2. create an Edmodo account and greet their new (and permanent year-long) teammates, in the process finding out which character they will be controlling in the immersions

I've never had a 100% success rate with new recruits on the first night. Inevitably there are always a few in each class who either forget or just don't create the accounts. That changed this year. By 8pm, all 46 new recruits had created their accounts and introduced themselves to their teammates -- excited and a little confused about how different this seemed from their other courses. In years past I've also lost a handful of students over the first couple of days who decided that all of this felt too uncomfortable being so different from business as usual in school. Not only did I not lose any students, I actually gained a couple whose friends convinced them that this was the class to take (although that means that they broke the secrecy instructions...but I think I'm ok with that.)

What I'm continuing to find is that the more the students see me "buying in" to the narrative (that is, not breaking from character as much as possible), the more that they will continue to do so. The role that the teacher plays in a practomimetic course is much different than that of one in a traditional classroom and that perception shift (from a student's perspective) needs to happen, and continue to happen, starting with day 1. When they see me as a facilitator and guide (sent from Mission Control), rather than an instructor, their attitude and approach to the activities shifts in a positive direction -- something that the 100% success rate indicates. Even as I'm writing this now, after three weeks, I still see nearly 100% participation each night on the new immersion episodes. This, frankly, is uncharted territory based on past experiences. Selling the ARG narrative in a way that I haven't before, I believe, was vital to making this happen.

More on Badges

Having returned from THATCamp Games hosted at the University of Maryland this past weekend, I wanted to open the "Badges Done Right" discussion to a wider audience after a very productive session. You can view the notes from the session here at this link: Google Docs: Badges Done Right

Here's the session as I proposed it for THATCamp Games:

I’d like to propose a session, or at least a conversation, on the topic of badges and achievements in education. It seems to me that many of the “trend-settters” of gamification are using badges in a very unfortunate way: badges as simple extrinsic motivators that have very little value for creating intrinsic motivation. For example, take a look at the ready-made badges provided by one course-management company.

From my point of view, none of those badges is indicative of the student achieving meaningful progress towards the course objectives. They aren’t tied to any real learning activities and at a glance tell me nothing about the student other than that s/he might have not missed a class or that she “worked hard.” However, the kind of small sample shown here is generally what I see whenever I look around at the badge and achievement systems which are being grafted onto pre-existing learning-management-systems by the major players in the education industry.

Before we embrace badges in education, I’d like us to discuss ways we might be able to move past badges-as-21C-gold-stars and to consider how we might craft meaningful badge systems that are a true record of accomplishments towards the learning objectives for the particular course, curriculum, or program.

There seemed to be two different conversations happening: badges on the macro-level as credentials across disciplines or institutions and badges on the micro-level in the individual classroom as records. Naturally I'm more interested in the latter discussion but both are worthwhile ones to have. So what are your thoughts? Are we able to effectively remove the "gold star" nature of badges and instead use them to accurately represent accomplishing learning objectives in a way that will motivate our students intrinsically rather than extrinsically? 

Reflections, Part 1

The first full year run of Operation LAPIS is in the books. The final mission was finished on Monday. The exam was completed yesterday. I've learned a great deal over the past academic year and in a series of posts, I plan to reflect upon and share some of the anecdotal pieces of evidence on just how powerful practomimetic learning can be. Next week we'll be traveling to Madison, Wisconsin to the Games, Learning and Society Conference and I'm very excited to share LAPIS with a wider game-based learning audience.

So where to begin?

Originally I started the year teaching one section of Latin I that was presented in the traditional format while the other section came in on the first day to find out they were tasked with saving western civilization as we know it. As the year went on and the other section caught wind of what their peers were up to, eventually I had to cave and in the middle of March, I brought the other group into the fold; albeit on the fast track through the missions and the storyline. This proved to be a fortunate decision because the newer group proved to me something that I had long thought would be true -- the full narrative is indeed vital for thorough and meaningful fulfillment of the learning objectives.

While the newer group was clearly impacted positively in terms of engagement with the material, because they were on such a fast track, they just didn't have the deeper understand or connection with the material as the original full-year LAPIS group. This became most evident on their prompt responses for the final mission. After reading and translating a passage of decent length, the students (as part of their final assessment) had to do what they've done all year: respond to the immersion prompt, taking into account the world-view of their character. The only difference was this one was a solo mission.

Over the past few weeks, as I noted in previous posts, they were researching and giving speechs as part of the trials to gain access to the headquarters of the Societās Potentium. All of those speeches were intentionally laying the foundation for them to understand the collapse of the Roman Republic and the establishment of the Principate under Augustus. They did a great job at understanding how the Gracchi led to Marius which lead to Caesar... but could they tie it all together for Antony and Octavian?

The answer was that in a timed exam, under pressure, the results were very mixed. But at the very least they could demonstrate their awareness of how Octavian fit into the big picture. However, I do want to show an example of one of the best responses from the newer LAPIS group (the third of the year group) and the original full year group.

Example from the newer group:

If I could align myself with either Octavian or Anthony I would align with neither of them. Octavian although a great leader, used his power to persuade the Roman senators into a fight that didn’t nessasarily need to occur. When he wanted to start the war, he made sure to persuade the senators to declare war, so it was official and couldn’t be argued against. He started the conflict that would end the lives of both Anthony and Cleopatra. Because my Recentius’s view is very political, Octavian persuading the senators to start this war seems very harsh and it almost seems as though he wanted a war for no reason, but turned the senators against Anthony. Now Anthony on the other hand isn’t perfect either. He left Rome to be with Cleopatra and told her he would give her land that the Romans owned. This is completely going against the idea that he wanted to help Rome at all. I think that him making a decision like this was a good reason for the Romans to be upset but maybe not so upset that a war turned to the outcome, because the land was still technically owned by the Romans. It wasn’t Anthonys to be giving away. So in the end I believe that both sides had mistakes that they seemed to make and in the end the both chose the wrong decision to stick with. They both could have thought their decisions through before they made them.

This is a great, thoughtful, and thorough response to the question of whom would they align themselves with. This particular student was the only one who chose to aid neither man. I love the risk taking that happened here that I'm not sure would happen in any other setting.

Now, for those wondering what true practomimetic learning looks like, here's something that I would love to make into a poster:

Titus thought for a moment on what would be the correct choice, tapping his chin in contemplation of the matter while he considered the story that Sextus had just relayed to him. It certainly did clear some things up, that much was true. With a heavy sigh, Titus turned his eyes from the ground up to the image of Sextus and declared. “I align myself with Octavius.” he stopped to collect his thoughts and became just slightly distracted by the annoying sting of the arm wound he acquired earlier in the day, a bit sickened by the fact that he had only earlier engaged in mortal combat and was now supposed to work up the mind to make a firm decision. Ah, saving the world is quite a fair burden, eh? Shaking his head of further complaint, he cleared his throat and continued “Having been the true heir of Caesar, it was only natural that the late Augustus seized power. ‘Tis the goal of all men who have ambition, it seems. And the conflict with Antony could be seen as inevitable, since Rome has been through the same sad song-and-dance time and time again. The Second Triumvirate’s rather rocky relations made it far too unwieldy to properly oversee the internal functions of Rome, so in some way it was best for the three, that is, Octavius, Antony, and Lepidus, to break off from each other and better place power in a more resolute, single direction. While one may see Octavius’s actions to dispose of Antony as being of rather underhanded political maneuvering (i.e, having the war declared on Cleopatra rather than on Antony, thereby circumnavigating the slippery slope of official civil war entirely), perhaps it was for the best. One can only imagine how different things would be in the event that Rome was taken under the clutches of Antony, assisted by Cleopatra. Personally, all I can say is that the aftereffects of Octavius’ victory led to the Pax Romana. And if anything good were to come of the Battle of Actium, then that would be the primary thing. For it was about time that Rome set down its weapons and embraced peace, if only for a time.” Titus explained, looking a little bit weary of having had to explain himself. Right now, all he wanted was a nice nap. But there was no time for such matters. There were still things that he and his cousins had to do. So, he stood straight and watched the other Recentii closely. ‘Well, Titus. You’ve already killed a man.’ he thought, furrowing his brow. ‘And it looks like you might need to man up and do it some more.... So that no one needs to resort to violence again.’

That's what practomimetic learning looks like. That's the power of the narrative. 

Text-based Compassion

Something curious happened in the final few days of Operation LAPIS that piqued my interest greatly. As I implied in the previous post, the Recentiī were faced with large (and intentional) moral dilemma. After defeating Marcus' first batch of guards, another group shows up. However, seconds later their companion in Egypt, Tertius, shows up to lend a hand... quickly followed by the enigmatic Sinistrus to further complicate matters. The take away is this: the door to the final chamber is about the close and Tertius is hopelessly outnumbered. The Recentiī can either proceed forward, hopefully in a dramatic Indiana Jones style duck and roll under the door, or they can stay and fight a battle in which they surely will lose. The side effect of the latter decision is that they, too, will lose access to the final chamber and risk not discovering the fate of the Lapis Saeculōrum.

So what's a team of operatives to do?

Well, initially the teams all got together and decided that the strongest fighter (Bellātor) and maybe one other would stay with Tertius outside of the chamber while the other Recentiī would duck under the door and try to uncover the Lapis. However, from my perspective, that proposal presented a little bit of a design challenge -- the plot almost demands that all five Recentiī go into the final chamber for a variety of reasons. In game terms, while I like to describe that it's a "sandbox" to the students, in reality, it's a series of mini-sandboxes on rails. This was one of the times when the cart was moving.

Through a series of fun posts back and forth as "Demiurge Omega" and "Sinistrus", I dropped a bombshell on the students: their former companion from Pompeiī, Sextus (and brother to Tertius), was dead. He was killed by Sinistrus and with the way things were going, he was about to do the same to the Recentiī and Tertius. To illustrate his point, Sinistrus linked an exemplum for them -- the scene from Star Wars: The Phantom Menace where Darth Maul kills Qui-gon Jinn. Most of the operatives knew exactly what Sinistrus was implying. The immediately likened themselves to Obi-Wan; powerless to stop him.

That's when things got very interesting. Quite a large number of students displayed genuine concern for what was going to happen to Tertius. Was he going to die? Why would he stay and fight against Marcus and Sinistrus only to buy them some time? Was there anything they could do that would save him and allow them to gain access to the final chamber? In fact, on the next day when they had already gained access to the chamber but the text told them that they could still hear the sounds of fighting on the outside, students again asked what was going to be the fate of Tertius.

I shrugged and simply said, "I don't know... all we have are his final words before the door shut: I'll buy you some time. Go! The Lapis is more important!"

What does it mean when a group of students cares so much about the digital characters that they meet in a Latin I course? I'm not sure I know the full answer to that question right now but it sure as hell gave me chills as it was unfolding before my eyes. I think part of the answer does indeed lie in the power of play -- the very thing that we've been hoping to tap into since the very beginning.

Authentic Engagement (in June)

I just wanted to take the opportunity to comment about some authentic engagement and ownership of content that I observed in the past week.

The students (as operative-teams roleplaying the Recentiī) had at long last gained entry to the headquarters of the Societās Potentium and were now going through a series of tasks. After composing a series of three defense speeches about some of the most important figures in the late Repbulic (from Tiberius Gracchus to Juilius Caesar), the door to the final chamber began to open. At that moment, Marcus Maecenas and his cronies rushed in to attempt to thwart the Recentiī’s plans. For many of them they have been waiting the whole year for this moment; a real battle.

Prompt: You have no where to run. Five guards are present. Fight for your lives.


Describe in vivid detail your fight with one of the guards. You should make the fight exciting and engaging.

I turned them loose to compose their own narratives of their individual fights with the guards (five Recentiī - five guards.) As they were beginning to work out the details in class, I also decided to throw in a couple of extra objectives: most exciting narrative as determined by the Demiurge was to be awarded the Mars CARD and the best attempt at Latin composition was to be awarded the Apollo CARD.

The results were absolutely incredible, especially at a time when most students are checking out because, “hey, it’s June, man.” One group roleplaying Recentia Octaviana decided that a direct confrontation was not to their advantage, so (entirely in Latin) they described how they winked, blushed, and blew kisses at the guard to get him to come close to her. When he did, Octaviana pulled out a dagger (which was holding up her hair) and dispatched the guard, while exclaiming a witty line worthy of any action move, “Time to get you... out of my hair!” I should also add that they made great use of the emoticons along with the Latin verbs to help their classmates out with some of the vocabulary.

Another group described their “epic” battle, trading blows back and forth, even receiving a serious wound on one of their arms. Yet another group took a wound to the face that will become a permanent scar. One of the most inventive descriptions came from a group that composed two narratives: one from their point of view and one from the point of view of their opponent.

They researched how Romans would fight and used appropriate vocabulary. These battles were meaningful because they were their own creations -- not some passage that I gave them to translate. A few groups even included a few present participles, their most recent grammatical addition, demonstrating the desire to continue working at their full potential even in June.

When the dust settled and the opportunity to move into the final chamber again presented itself, the Recentiī would soon find themselves in major moral dilemma...

On winning the day before break...

While certain quantitative evidence points to the various success of Operation LAPIS, and I’ll elaborate on those more this coming week, a great deal of the success can be illustrated best through the plethora of anecdotal evidence that continues to pile up each and every day. As an illustrative point, I want to spend today taking you through the last few minutes of my LAPIS class on this past Friday. Oh, by the way, this was the last period of the day before April vacation. Anyone who has ever taught high school can attest to the usual attention and enthusiasm of the last day before a break (nevermind the last period of the day.)

To set the scene up, the Recentiī (the characters the students are playing) have been cornered by Salvius and strong-armed into joining the Societās Potentium (the equivalent of the optimatēs) although they been working previously for the Militēs Lapidis (the equivalent of the popularēs). This, in of itself, was posing a huge moral dilema for them. With their very lives seemingly on the line, they had a real good debate in their teams about the pros and cons of “switching sides”. Some decided it might be in their best interest to truly join the Societās Potentium, others decided that they might try to become double agents, while one group openly defied Salvius’ not-so-veiled threats.

After working dilligently on polishing their team’s response in Latin, each group posted one by one. When all five Recentiī had stated what their decision was going to be; whether or not they were going to swear the oath to join the Societās Potentium, I immediately posted the conclusion to the episode (and mission). Salvius, outraged at the open defiance of at least one Recentius, flew into a fit of rage, issuing orders for them to be punished. As the guards came rushing into the room, the ground began to shake and the colors and sounds began to fade in an out.

There was a disruption in the mechanism of the TSTT. A disruption they’ve known before.

A familiar voice appeared. The character they’ve had the strangest interactions with; Sinistrus. Simultaneously they received a broken communique from Mission Control at Project Arkhaia. Both messages were cryptic and of little help. 

Then darkness.

And a foul smell. A very foul smell.

And that’s how the class was about to end. The class right before a break. A perfect cliffhanger. 

Well, they weren’t content with that at all. So after some badgering, they convinced me to at least to let them throw some guesses out as to where they actually ended up. We went around the room, all 22 students, trying to guess where they were just sent to. A few of them, unbeknownst to them, were mostly correct: Egypt. Specifically, they are in Alexandria, in a pile of dead fish near the harbor. 

But they don’t know that and after they were done guesses they said, “Ok, so where are we?” To which I responded, “Oh, you’ll find out on the Monday after break when Mission 11 begins. You don’t have any work to do over break, so there won’t be a new episode loaded into the TSTT until then.”

The almost universal reaction: “Nooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!! YOU HAVE TO TELL US!!!”

Minutes left in the day, talk about the proverbial music to a teacher’s ears. Talk about engagement. Thinking quickly, I made a deal with them. I told them that the TSTT’s global-temporal positioning device was damaged in the latest power flux and if 10 CARDs were collected over break, it might be just enough to recalibrate to determine their time and location. They laughed. Bell rang and vacation began.

Today, after getting back from coaching the freshman baseball team, I awarded 5 CARDs. Yes, on the first day of April break, students were doing unassigned Latin work.

Early Thoughts on Student Engagement

It would have been completely unrealistic of me to assume that LAPIS and practomimetic instruction would be the magic elixir for one hundred percent student engagement every time. In some parallel universe I had secretly hoped that it would happen, but the reality of the situation is that some students in any given setting are going to find themselves disengaged at various points for a variety of reasons, many of them not having anything to do with my class or their quest to save the world. I did, however, want to talk about some of the net gain in engagement that I've seen so far and what that means going forward with Operation LAPIS.

The engaged get more engaged. This sounds like something that is not even worth bothering to discuss. In fact one might say, "Well, that's great Kevin, those students who are already plugged in continue to excel, where's the excitement in that?" On the surface, that person would be correct in thinking that it isn't necessarily something to get excited about. However, I'd argue that the very fact that those students then are pushing themselves to go above and beyond the required expectations right out of the gate means that something important is happening in the dynamics as a whole. It is easy to take those students for granted; your A's, your pleasers, the ones with their hands raised for every question. But, when these students then are pushing themselves in the team discussions to not just frame their response in English but instead try phrase every response in Latin, it models the ideal learning environment for the rest of their team. If they are constantly pushing the limits of their Latin knowledge it will force the rest of their teammates to push themselves as well; both to be able to work with and contribute with the team and a bit of peer pressure to produce the same caliber of work in comparison. I firmly believe that if your top performing students are more engaged you will find that it has a snowball effect on everyone else in the class and that very potent effect is magnified in the practomimetic setting.

The moderately engaged step it up. The students that are traditionally the middle of the road have so far shown that they are capable and willing to stretch themselves further inside of the practomimetic setting. As evidenced by the frequency and amount of contribution to the team forums, these students are able to contribute to their team (partially because they are compelled to, partially because they are empowered to, especially as the Lead Operative) and thus feel, I believe, far more accomplished than they would otherwise feel in a traditional classroom setting. I can’t measure this with any rubric, test, or evaluation, but rather by their captive attention and energetic responses while in class. These group, arguably the largest in any class, is in stark contrast to their counterparts in the section that is not partaking in Operation LAPIS. I'll spend more time in a future post talking about the overwhelming difference in the first month between these two sections in terms of their "Engagement Gap."

Some not engaged become engaged. The most compelling aspect of LAPIS so far, to me anyway, has been the effect it has had on a very small minority of students whom I think would otherwise be totally disengaged in a language they care little about. One of the key examples of this is a student who has yet to finish a year in any language. At this point, and I'll admit that I know it is still very early, he's continued to play an active role in his team's decision making process. This particular episode he is acting as his team's Lead Operative, which has put external pressure on him to stay active. Will he continue to stay involved through the entire year? That's certainly yet to be seen, but, if he does make it through the course, I think it certainly could be chalked up to the captivating potential of practomime.

Those disengaged continue to stay disengaged. This is where I give an audible sigh and concede that neither practomime nor the Lapis is truly the silver bullet. At this point, I really only have one student that I'm overly concerned about because of their lack of participation in the team forums and in the collateral activities. I know that internet access and computer familiarity is not a limiting factor on account of initial surveys from the first night. So what could it be that's holding this student back from participation even when their grade depends on? I'm not sure right now what it is. It is my hope that in the next week or so I can figure out if it is something that can be remedied in the current structure or not. The other couple of students who were lagging a bit behind on the participation scale have really started to come around in the last week and they have become a lot more comfortable posting and contributing to their team's discussion.

Overall, the early returns are showing an incredible net gain with regards to participation and engagement both in and out of the classroom. The out of classroom engagement is easy to measure through their discussion posts. The in class engagement? Well, that's a bit more subjective (at this point) from my point of view. However, the ace in the hole on my end is that the two periods that I teach Latin I (both the LAPIS and non-LAPIS section) always fall back-to-back, four days a week. I have instant and direct observations of the performance, behavior, and engagement between the two sections. As noted above, will spend more time on these early observations in the next post.