A three-course introductory Italian sequence was developed for architecture students planning to study in Italy during the first semester of their fourth year. The course was designed as an afterthought and for students who would need little or no academic Italian. Syllabus planning and student motivation were hampered by lack of time and low priority. However, a common discipline and professional goals created a homogeneous and cohesive group, making planning subsequent courses easier. The second course exposed the students to Italian through familiar subject matter, in part to reduce resistance, and without grammatical sequencing or syntactic simplification. The second class was homogeneous but not cohesive, reducing student receptiveness. The third course required two sections because of a larger enrollment. This situation provided an opportunity to test two approaches. One section was taught survival Italian, and the other was taught more architecture-related material. Although the two section groups seemed cohesive and homogeneous, their responses to the two course themes were different, with the survival language group very intense and the architecture group less so. It is suspected that students resent the teacher's use of architectural material, causing classroom conflict. (MSE)