The third step in preparing to adapt a lesson is to check its components: Does it include (1) a convincing sample of language use? Does it provide for both (2) lexical and (3) grammatical exploration beyond the sample? Does it suggest (4) ways in which the students can put their new, linguistic skills to work for non-linguistic purposes that they can accept as their own?
The lesson under consideration does contain two short samples of genuine use, in the form of the dialogs. The lists of words in the drills provide for lexical exploration, and the grammar drills themselves lead the student to explore a bit of English structure. The fourth component is not overtly represented in the lesson itself, and is only hinted at in the introduction.
Finally, one may look at the individual lines of the various components and judge them according to their lightness, (Chapter 3, pp. 45 - transparency, and strength. 49)
The sentences of this lesson, with an average of three syllables apiece, show up very favorably with respect to the first of these three qualities. Most of the meanings could be put across easily without translation, and the structures are lucidly presented; accordingly, the lesson also rates well on average transparency of sentences.
Where this lesson leaves most to be desired is in what we have called 'strength.' Here is a striking demonstration that high-frequency vocabulary may still produce sentences that are relatively weak. As the lesson now stands, the students can do very little at the end of Lesson I except introduce themselves, greet one another, and go on to Lesson 2.
90
