Implementing the Mutually Adaptive Learning Paradigm
description
Transcript of Implementing the Mutually Adaptive Learning Paradigm
Implementing the
Mutually Adaptive Learning Paradigm
Implementing the
Mutually Adaptive Learning Paradigm
Nan Frydland and Judy ZivanLong Island University, Hudson Graduate [email protected] [email protected]
Guiding the Autonomous Mind: Perspectives in TESOL and Applied Linguistics
NYS TESOL Applied Linguistics Winter Conference 2014Teachers College, Columbia University
New York City
Mutually Adaptive LearningParadigm: Culturally Responsive Teaching• Ways of Learning:
Western-style v. Informal
• Ways of Being: Individualistic v. Collectivistic
• The Intercultural Communication Framework:
Relationships, Priorities, and Associations
Mutually Adaptive Learning Paradigm (MALP)
Components of Learning
Struggling L2 Learners
Western-Style Education
ACCEPTS CONDITIONS from learners.
Immediate RelevanceInterconnectedness
Future RelevanceIndependence
COMBINE PROCESSES from learners and Western-style education
Shared ResponsibilityOral Transmission
Individual AccountabilityWritten Word
FOCUS on Western-style learning ACTIVITIES with familiar language and content
Pragmatic Tasks Decontextualized Tasks
MALP Teacher Planning ChecklistA. Accept conditions for learning:
1. Immediate relevance 2. InterconnectednessB.Combine processes for learning:
1. Shared responsibility/individual accountability
2. Oral transmission/written wordC.Focus on activities for learning:
1. Introduce new/academic tasks2. Make tasks accessible with familiar
language and content.
Judy’s Class: Northeast Suburban High School
• Ages: 14-17 years
• Education: 9th--12th grades in U.S.
• Origins: Brazil, India, South Korea, China, Dominican Republic, Mexico, Honduras, U.S.
• U.S. residency: 3 months--14 years
• English proficiency: high beginner--advanced
• Class size: 9 students
Suburban Public High School• Socio-economically middle-class• 25 ESL students in a population
of 2,500 students• 1 ESL teacher • Multi-level classroom • High beginners-advanced level
ESL proficiency
Teacher • Student teacher • TESOL graduate
student• 1 year teaching
experience in a Hebrew school and ESL adult education
• MALP trained
MALP Step 1: Project-based Survey is Immediately Relevant and Creates a Sense of Interconnectedness
MALP Step 2: Students’ Surveys Allow for Shared Responsibility & Individual Accountability
MALP Step 3: Students’ Tabulations and Analysis of the Data Focus on Academic Tasks Using Familiar Language and Content Academic objectives for critical thinking: •Students conduct, analyze and quantify the results of a survey;•Students draw conclusions and report on a survey.
MALP: Project-based Curriculum Meets All the Criteria:
1. Immediate Relevancy
2. Interconnectedness
3. Shared responsibility
4. Individual accountability
5. Focus on academic tasks
6. Tasks made accessible.
Nan’s Class: Northeast Urban/suburban CBO • Ages: 17-60
• Education: none--college (in home countries)
• Origins: Guatemala, Mexico, Honduras, Peru, Ecuador, South Korea
• U.S. residency: 1—16 years
• English proficiency: beginner--intermediate
• Class size: 4-10 students
• Volunteer
• TESOL graduate
student
• 3 years’ IEP and
CBO teaching
experience
• MALP trained
Teacher
MALP Step 1: Using a Scroll-based CurriculumLearners’ Texts Are Immediately Relevant and They Create a Sense of Interconnectedness
MALP Step 2: Students’ Scrolls Allow Shared Responsibility & Individual Accountability
MALP Step 3: Students’ Scrolls Focus on Academic Tasks Using Familiar Language and Content
1. Immediate Relevancy
2. Interconnectedness
3. Shared responsibility
4. Individual accountability
5. Academic tasks
6. Tasks made accessible
MALP: Using Scroll-based Curriculum Meets All the Criteria
MALP ResourcesWebsite: http://malpeducation.comWiki: http://malp.pbworks.comBook: Marshall, Helaine, and DeCapua, Andrea. Making the Transition: Culturally Responsive Teaching for Struggling Language Learners. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2013.
ReferencesAmanti, C., Gonzalez, N., and Moll, L., eds. Funds of Knowledge:
theorizing practices in households, communities, and classrooms. New York: Routledge, 2005.
Auerbach, E. Making Meaning, Making Change: Participatory curriculum development for adult ESL literacy. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics, 1992.
Bowers, C. A. Educating for an ecologically sustainable culture: rethinking moral education, creativity, intelligence, and other modern orthodoxies. Albany, N.Y.: State University of New York Press, 1995.
DeCapua, A., and H. W. Marshall. Breaking new ground: teaching students with limited or interrupted formal education in U.S. secondary schools. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2011.
References continuedDewey, J. Democracy and Education. NY: Simon and Brown, 2011.
Gay, G. Culturally responsive teaching theory, research, and practice. New York: Teachers College Press, 2000.
Greene, M. The dialectic of freedom. NY: Teachers College Press, 1988.
Hooks, B. Teaching to transgress: education as the practice of freedom. New York: Routledge, 1994.
Marshall, H. W., and DeCapua, A. Making the transition: culturally responsive teaching for struggling language learners. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2013.
Norton, B., and Toohey, K. Critical pedagogies and language learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. Print.
Shor, I., and Freire, P. A pedagogy for liberation: dialogues on transforming education. South Hadley, Mass.: Bergin & Garvey Publishers, 1987.