Communities of Practice: An Alaskan Native Model for Language Teaching and Learning

Introduction

1 Introduction Patrick E. Marlow, Marilee Coles-Ritchie, Sabine Siekmann, and Joan Parker Webster As Indigenous language communities struggle with language loss, many scholars (Hinton & Hale 2001; Johnson & Swain 1997) and community activists (Kipp 2000) now recognize immersion education as the primary means of restoring Indigenous1 and other heritage2 languages to community use. In the Alaskan context, Indigenous languages are limited to the twenty identified Alaska Native languages and their dialects. Heritage languages include both Alaska Native and immigrant languages. The dominant language is English. In Alaska, immersion programs are not the only or even the most common program type in place in public school contexts. Given the relatively small number of heritage language teachers and the complex issues involved in language maintenance and revitalization, creating any heritage language program within the public education system—let alone an immersion program—is a daunting task. This task is made all the more difficult by the lack of local professional development opportunities for potential language teachers. Of course, two nationally recognized programs offer professional development opportunities for heritage language teachers. The University of Minnesota’s Center for Advanced Research in Language Acquisition (CARLA) and the University of Arizona’s American Indian Language Development Institute (AILDI) offer opportunities for heritage language teachers to develop their expertise through summer programs. However, neither of these excellent programs is tailored to the Alaskan context. The CARLA summer institutes offer courses in immersion education and 2 • Marlow, Coles-Ritchie, Siekmann, and Webster other relevant topics in language teaching; however, classes focus largely on foreign language and English as a second language (ESL) instruction. The unique situation of Indigenous languages is not well represented in these courses. AILDI, on the other hand, was specifically designed for Indigenous language teachers, yet the program does not lead to advanced degrees. The Second Language Acquisition Teacher Education (SLATE) program at the University of Alaska Fairbanks is intended to be a bridge between these two approaches. By focusing on the specific needs of heritage language teachers and distance education, program faculty hope to build on the strengths of these and other nationally recognized programs and provide a workable model for other contexts. One challenge for an Alaskan program tailored exclusively to heritage language teachers is the small number of candidates. Such a narrow focus could make such a program unsustainable by excluding candidates interested in English-language programming. That is why we decided to develop a broader program that would allow both heritage and English language teachers an important opportunity to develop common understandings concerning second language acquisition, language teaching, and bilingualism. Such understandings, we hope, will allow heritage and English language teachers to work together to foster their students’ success in both languages. Through this model, they would be able to situate themselves in a more global context based on current notions of multilingualism within the frameworks of sociocultural theory and critical pedagogy. The purpose of this book is to share how the SLATE program, initially funded through a US Department of Education grant, was developed and implemented based on the stated goals of (1) improving Yup’ik and English education in Alaska’s Yup’ik region, (2) enabling local leadership in language programming, and (3) fostering community-driven research. Perhaps more important, it is also a story about how the initial cohort of English and Yup’ik language teachers from southwestern Alaska negotiated and ultimately completed the SLATE program and personally added to the accomplishment of these goals. Each chapter bridges theoretical concepts underlying second-language teaching and learning to practical applications in classrooms populated with linguistically and culturally diverse students. The larger theoretical frameworks informing our work are sociocultural theory and critical pedagogy . By “sociocultural theory,” we first refer to the work of theorists and researchers (e.g., Heath 1983, 1986; Norton 2000; Norton & Toohey 2004; Ochs 1988) situated within the broader sociocultural domain. In this view, sociocultural theory is concerned with socialization and the discursive nature of the construction of identities (e.g., gender, Native, Introduction • 3 child). We also use the phrase to refer to the work of Lev Vygotsky and theorists and researchers engaged in applied linguistics research (e.g., Appel & Lantolf 1994; Lantolf 2000; Lantolf & Thorne 2006; Swain 2000; Thorne 2005). As such, sociocultural theory is also a framework that focuses on how culturally formed and socially enacted meanings influence the development of mental activity. By “critical pedagogy,” we refer to the interactive relationship between...