U pingakuneng: dynamic assessment in a 3 rd semester Yugtun class

1. Upingakuneng: dynamic assessment in a 3rd semester Yugtun class Walkie Charles, PhD University of Alaska Fairbanks April 4, 2013 Presented to Dr. Coles-Ritchie’s Class @ Westminster College

2. (when they are ready) • Principle that organizes teaching and learning • Form of apprenticeship Introduction: Upingakuneng

3. Success is not an individual pursuit • Model known as ‘qaruyun’ integrates teaching with assessing Introduction (Cont’d.)

4. Yugtun in schools in 1961 • ANLC – documentation and cultivation of ANL • Language shift in last 20 years • Most students have only latent knowledge of Yugtun Background: Heritage learners of an Indigenous language

5. Most students want to study Yugtun to talk with their grandparents • Instructor pool change over years • DA: making learning more congruent with Yup’ik culture • Addressing shifting needs of the learners

6. ‘actual level of development’ • ‘potential level of development.’ • DA integrates teaching and assessment DA with Yup’ik learners

7. Yaaveskaniryaraq (ZPD) Potential development Actual development Z P D

8. Math example: Multiplying 23x25 Two learners Both get wrong answer Learner A: 48! Teacher: No. Take another look. Learner A: 575 ----------------------- Learner B: 48! Teacher: No. Take another look. Learner B: 48 Teacher: Remember to multiply. Learner B: 125 T: How much is 20x25? Learner B: I don’t know. . . What DA reveals about a learner

9. Interactionist vs. Interventionist DA The focus of interventionist DA is to determine the degree of explicitness of mediation required to prompt a correct response from the learner. Interactionist DA understands performance as an ongoing negotiation between mediator and learner in which both contribute differently and through which learners come to participate in more agentive ways. (Poehner 2008, p. 85) Interventionist  standardized approach Interactionist  dialogic approach

10. The Study • Qualitative teacher action research • Part of a larger study • Three SAs • Three DA sessions • Dialogue journals • Arnold represents key target demographic: he is • Yup’ik • strong desire to learn ancestral language • struggling student • type of learner who can benefit from DA

11. The reason why I am taking this class is so that I can learn the language. Ever since I was a young child I would pick up words from the people around me. Another reason is because my Grandmother, [Name] of [Village]. She has done so much for me and to me I think that the least I can do is learn our language. She only knows Yup’ik and I want to be able to talk to her. (Dialogue Journal, September 26, 2008) Case study: Arnold

12. Table 1: Overview of Arnold’s test series

13. 1 M: Assirpaa. Tua-llu number 3-aaq piqarru. Good. Now number 3, please. 2 A: ‘iliita-qaaqimugtemaqilullruaten?’ [reading the prompt] ‘Did one of my dogs bark at you?’ 3 M: Assirpaa. ‘iliita-qaaqimugtemaqilullruaten?’ Tua-llu elpet change-aqatarluku to ‘which’ Good. ‘Did one of my dogs bark at you?’ And now you’re going to change it to which 4 A: ‘naliatqimugtemaqilullrusit?’ [reading his answer on the test] ‘which of my dogs did you bark?’ 5 M: ‘naliatqimugtemaqilullrusit?’ Tua-ll’ elpet change-aqatarluku ‘which?’ ‘which of my dogs did you bark?’ And then you’re about to change it to what? 6 A: ‘naliatqimugtemaqilullrusit?’ ‘which of my dogs did you bark?’ DA1: Identifying Arnold’s ZPD

14. 7 M: Tua-llu qailluncimirciqsiutauna? And how are you going to change that? 8 A: ‘naliat’? [‘which of them’?] 9 M: Assirtuq. [That’s good.] 10 A: I don’t know. . . 11 M: Okay, ‘it to you’ (turning to transitive interrogative chart) 12 A: You know what? I really don’t know how to read that chart. 13 M: Okay, okay. 14 A: I don’t really know what third, second person is.

15. Today I want to talk about me in this class. I feel as if I am not understanding a lot. I am having difficulty with the endings and I don’t even know where to start. It is very hard for me to read the charts as well. (Dialogue Journal 10/22) Soon I have to meet with you to talk about the endings chart… (Dialogue Journal 10/29) DA1 (Cont’d)

16. 1 M:…But ‘to wake up’ is. . . 2 A: ‘tupag-’[to wake up] 3 M: Assirpaa. ‘tupag-’ [Good. ‘to wake up’] 4 A: (mumbles) ‘makluten’ [‘get up’] 5 M:and then if it has a consonant you add an ‘a’, then what happens to 6 ‘a-g-a’? 7 A: ‘a-a’ 8 M: ‘a-g-a’ becomes ... (writes on scratch paper) ‘a-g-a’, ‘a-g-e’, and ‘a-n-g-a’ 9 all these endings become ‘i-i’. 10 A: Oh! I didn’t know that. 11 M: And that’s from last year. Mm-hmm. (watching A’s correction on his 12 test). So what would that be? 13 A: This one? 14 M: Mm-hmm. 15 A: ‘tupii’? [‘wake up’] 16 M: Assirpaa. ‘tupii’. [Good. Wake up.] DA2: Fine-tuning mediation to Arnold’s ZPD and culturally-appropriate modeling

17. 17 M: Now, #29 is kind of different . . . because this one has a special ‘t-e’ 18 A: Yeah. 19 M: And every time you have an ‘-nrite-’ it’s a special’t-e’. And with a special ‘t-e’, you drop 20 the ‘l’ and the ‘-luk’ becomes ‘-lluk’. (writes ‘anenrite-’) ‘anenri. . .’ then you’re gonna drop 21 these two (the ‘t’ and ‘e’) and then that ‘-luk’ (@luk). This (@) tells me that with special ‘t-e’ 22 I’m going to drop the ‘t-e’ and double the ‘l’ 23 A: ‘anenri-’ . . . [3 sec] ‘anenrilluk’ [‘let’s2 not go outside’] 24 M: Assirpaa. Kitakigausgu. [Then write it down.] DA2 (Cont’d)

18. 1 M: But what do we do with the ‘t-e’? 2 A: Drop it? 3 M: Mm-hmm. Drop it… 4 A: #7 5 M: Oh, yeah. It’s missing something . . . ‘aturpegnak. . .’ [‘without wearing. . .’] 6 A: ‘-kek’ [them] 7 M: Assirpaa. [Good] DA3: Upingaluni (He is ready) – moving the charts into Arnold’s ZPD

19. Insights into language development • The charts become focus of interaction • Arnold gained partial control over these cultural artifacts • Changes in learner reciprocity through mediation • Making sense of charts were difficult for students and how to help them understand their use • Chance to guide Arnold through use of charts Discussion and conclusion

20. I was a slow learner in this class, but with the support of the class and you [the instructor], getting help was great. Not all instructors will allow time for students to come in and talk and get help. I am really glad that I was a student in your class this semester, I enjoyed it and learned so much. Quyana [thank you]. (Dialogue Journal, 12/15) Discussion and conclusion (Cont’d)

21. Study not a claim that DA solved problems of class • DA brings teaching and assessing together • Modeling emerged as meaningful form of mediation • Process became one of collaboration rather than displaying individual knowledge Discussion and conclusion (Cont’d)

22. Use of psychological tools plays key role in Vygotsky’s theory of mind (Vygotsky 1994). Poehner (2008) summarizes: ‘education can be thought of as the activity of helping learners to develop psychological tools, thereby enabling them to interact with the world in increasingly complex ways’ (30). Discussion and conclusion (Cont’d)

23. Quyana Cakneq! Thank You Very Much! Drs. Marilee Coles-Ritchie, Sabine Siekmann, Patrick Marlow, Joan Parker Webster Second Language Acquisition Teacher Education (SLATE) University of Alaska Fairbanks Alaska Native Language Center UAF Linguistics Program UAF Graduate Program Andrew W. Mellon Foundation Yukon Delta Fisheries Development Association

24. References Charles, W. (2011). Dynamic Assessment in a Yugtun L2 Intermediate Adult Classroom. Unpublished Dissertation. Fairbanks, AK: University of Alaska Fairbanks. Poehner, M. E. (2008). Dynamic Assessment: A Vygotskian approach to understanding and promoting L2 development. NY: Springer Science and Media Press. Siekmann, S. and Charles, W. (2011). Upingakuneng (when they are ready): Dynamic Assessment in a third semester Yugtun class. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice. Vol. 18, No. 2, 151-168.