Teaching Greetings Without Stereotyping
Mr. Novak is teaching a French II unit called “Les salutations” in a rural school where most students have limited contact with French speakers. He plans to show a short clip of two friends in Paris greeting each other with la bise and then ask students to practice it in pairs. A parent has already emailed that physical contact should not be required; meanwhile, a student whose family is from Martinique says, “We don’t do that.” Mr. Novak wants students to understand greetings as cultural practice without treating France as uniform or turning the lesson into a list of stereotypes. He has 40 minutes and access to short authentic audio of greetings in Paris, Dakar, and Montreal, plus a written exchange between colleagues using “vous.” He wants an assessment that goes beyond naming the gesture.
1. Redesign the lesson so that students learn greetings as practices connected to perspectives and variation, not as a single French gesture to copy. Describe the sequence and the role of the three audio samples and the written exchange.
Read the worked answer
Begin with a noticing task: students hear three short greetings-Paris friends, Dakar acquaintances, Montreal colleagues-and mark who knows whom, whether they touch, and whether they use tu or vous. They do not imitate yet. In pairs, they sort the examples by relationship and formality, then the teacher elicits the pattern: greeting choices index relationship, setting, and regional norms, not just “Frenchness.” Next, students read the written exchange between colleagues and identify how “vous” and formulaic phrases construct professional distance; they compare that with the audio.
The teacher introduces products, practices, and perspectives: la bise is a practice, the number of cheeks and who participates vary, and the perspective involves social closeness and reciprocity; a handshake or a verbal greeting can serve similar functions. Students then analyze a fourth unfamiliar example, such as a text message, and hypothesize what relationship it implies. The lesson ends with a short reflective task: “What would you need to know before greeting this person?” This avoids presenting culture as a costume and makes variation the content.
2. A parent has objected to required physical contact, and a Martinican student says, “We don’t do that.” How should Mr. Novak respond in the lesson and in communication with the parent, without othering the student or flattening cultural variation?
Read the worked answer
In class, he should immediately decouple the cultural objective from physical performance: “The goal is to understand how greetings work, not to require touch.” He can offer multiple participation options-practicing a verbal greeting, observing and analyzing, or using a handshake with consent-and never single out the Martinican student as the exception. When the student says “We don’t do that,” he can thank them and use it as evidence for the lesson’s point: greetings vary across French-speaking communities, and Martinique has its own norms. He should ask the student privately whether they want to share more or prefer not to be the spokesperson.
With the parent, he should explain the revised objective, the opt-out, and the consent norm, and invite questions. He should avoid saying “In France, everyone does la bise,” because that is false and turns a practice into a stereotype. The response should be calm and specific: no required touch, no penalty for observing, and an assessment that asks students to analyze rather than perform.
3. Design a 20-minute assessment task that measures cultural understanding rather than mimicry. Include the prompt, the evidence students produce, and two features of a strong response.
Read the worked answer
Prompt: “You receive three messages: a text from a French colleague you have never met, a voicemail from a host family you will stay with, and an invitation from a Montreal friend. For each, decide whether you would use tu or vous, choose a greeting, and write one sentence explaining your choice based on relationship, setting, and regional norm.”
Evidence: a three-row chart with choice plus justification, and a short oral follow-up in which the teacher asks “Et si la personne avait 20 ans de plus?” to check transfer.
A strong response (1) uses relationship and context evidence, not national labels-for example, “vous because professional and first contact, not because ‘the French are formal’”-and (2) acknowledges variation or uncertainty, for example, “in Montréal, tu might be normal among peers, but I would wait for the host to initiate.” The assessment measures analysis and transfer, not whether the student can perform a gesture. The teacher should accept more than one defensible choice if it is justified.