Implementing the

Mutually Adaptive Learning Paradigm

Implementing the

Mutually Adaptive Learning Paradigm

Nan Frydland and Judy ZivanLong Island University, Hudson Graduate Campusnanfrydland@gmail.com judyzivan@gmail.com

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.