1. 1 Linguapeace Europe Materials SLP2 - SLP3

2. Linguapeace Europe 15/10/04 - Krakow 2 Target population Arenas of interaction Outcome levels Content by theme Content by skill Content by performance outcome Progression Discussion

3. Linguapeace Europe 15/10/04 - Krakow 3 Target Population Peacekeepers on international missions Military personnel Border Police NGO personnel and aid workers

4. Linguapeace Europe 15/10/04 - Krakow 4 Arenas of Interaction Within the Services - Joint peacekeeping mission (English lingua franca) –communication among service personnel –situational reports –orders and instructions –summarising information –socialising –planning and procedures

5. Linguapeace Europe 15/10/04 - Krakow 5 Arenas of Interaction Liaising with non-military organisations who are part of a peacekeeping mission –NGOs –Red Cross –Other humanitarian organisations –Aid organisations –Relief workers

6. Linguapeace Europe 15/10/04 - Krakow 6 Arenas of Interaction Dealing with civilians, militia etc. where the only common language is English –interrogation –extracting information –controlling crowds –explanation of procedures and rules –resolving conflict –negotiation

7. Linguapeace Europe 15/10/04 - Krakow 7 Outcome Levels - listening show an understanding of the English used in media presentations, briefings and public presentations. language spoken at less than normal speaker speed with little or no background interference

8. Linguapeace Europe 15/10/04 - Krakow 8 Outcome Levels - speaking take part in conversations and discussions, conduct business. Communication of the message achieved in spite of grammatical error, choice of vocabulary, accent or undue hesitation and rephrasing.

9. Linguapeace Europe 15/10/04 - Krakow 9 Outcome Levels - Reading show an understanding of the English used in general texts, articles on news and current affairs, and military briefings.

10. Linguapeace Europe 15/10/04 - Krakow 10 Outcome Levels - writing write social/business correspondence summarise military reports communication of the message achieved in spite of grammatical error, choice of vocabulary, accent or undue hesitation and rephrasing.

11. Linguapeace Europe 15/10/04 - Krakow 11 Content by theme Accidents Manoeuvres Relief operations Weapons collection Managing personnel Managing civilians Checkpoints and borders Undercover ops International Liaison Reconnaissance

12. Linguapeace Europe 15/10/04 - Krakow 12 Content by theme Vocabulary and expressions are related to one topic – easier to store Demonstrates the skills and competences needed to operate in one area Units can develop organically

13. Linguapeace Europe 15/10/04 - Krakow 13 Content by skill By section Within thematically based units Students and trainers can focus on the skill that they need the most

14. Linguapeace Europe 15/10/04 - Krakow 14 Content by performance outcome Debriefing soldiers Planning Investigating accident reports Finding out the requirements of a relief agency Arranging transportation Summarising military briefings Correspondence Giving instructions Understanding radio news Negotiating

15. Linguapeace Europe 15/10/04 - Krakow 15 Content by performance outcome Focus on specific skills that students require for a particular task Demonstrate the combination of skills needed to achieve a given task Highly focussed lexis and syntax Easy to locate what you need Work on each area in isolation to build up competence at SLP3

16. Linguapeace Europe 15/10/04 - Krakow 16 Progression Stepped level of difficulty through the book –Complexity of grammar –Complexity of discourse –Range of vocabulary

17. Linguapeace Europe 15/10/04 - Krakow 17 Progression Increase complexity within each unit The end of the unit corresponds to SLP3 –Student can achieve SLP3 in one performance outcome before moving to the next –Student can easily locate points to revisit –Don’t need to know one set of vocabulary to move on to the next unit

18. Linguapeace Europe 15/10/04 - Krakow 18 For discussion Which structure does the project prefer? Which form of progression does the project prefer? Does the project feel that explicit syntax, discourse and pronunciation models need to be included? Is the project happy with discourse examples (which allows trainers to present the other features as they already know how to do)?