Well, I have pretty much wrapped this series of posts up, though I won’t rule out adding some future interviews to it. I thought I’d take a moment to reflect on some things from the Interviews.

Although my interviews included some ‘clusters’, e.g. those involved or trained in part by Buth, and a small Rico-cluster, it’s clear that the ‘movement’ (not quite a ‘Movement’ yet, I would say) retains a diversity of people. Almost all participants felt or experienced a gap between their own language experiences in learning Greek/Latin/Hebrew, and other language acquisition processes. Moreover, several respondees wrote about their experiences in trying to produce better materials, for themselves and for others, and the general need to pull themselves up by their own boot-straps, for want of ready made materials. For some, the ability to use Buth’s Living Koine materials, and/or attendance at various immersion classes/workshops, proved very useful.

One other thing I would remark on, is that while my interviews were all with teachers, it certainly seems that it is those involved in teaching the language that are really ‘getting there’ in terms of fluency. Personally, this reinforces a working hypothesis that I have about language fluency and communities. Most students are not going to ‘arrive’ without considerable amount of time in the language, time that teachers get because they are the ones constantly teaching. If we want students to achieve anywhere close to these outcomes, we are going to need to keep raising the bar in this regard.