This section of the document will describe NTLP’s curriculum. The first sub-section describes the history and timeline of NTLP’s curriculum development, focusing on the process through which NTLP adopted and adapted the curriculum of Onkwawenna Kentyokhwa (OK), a Mohawk language program, to NTLP’s specific circumstances. The second sub-section includes detailed information about the adaptation process, describing how it was performed. The third sub-section describes some of the differences between Tuscarora and Mohawk relevant to the operation of NTLP. The fourth sub-section describes some aspects of NTLP program administration.

History of OK curriculum adaptation process

NTLP began pursuing implementation of OK’s curriculum after project members witnessed Owennatekha, a founder of OK, demonstrate the Root Word Method language education conference in 2006. NTLP project members were impressed by the theoretical framework of the Root Word Method, and by the Mohawk language proficiency of Chandra Maracle, an OK graduate who NTLP members had known before she learned Mohawk. NTLP sought to collaborate with OK in order to implement the Root Word Method for Tuscarora language revitalization.

NTLP and OK began to collaborate in 2006. Bonnie Maracle, an OK instructor, visited NTLP on a weekly basis to explain and demonstrate the Root Word Method, and to communicate parts of OK’s curriculum. In this initial period. NTLP project members realized that they lacked sufficient linguistic understanding of Tuscarora to immediately apply the Root Word Method to it, even as they were able to understand how it was applied in the context of Mohawk. Tuscarora is a well-documented language, having a variety of dictionaries and grammars, but theoretically adept interpreters were still necessary.
In order to fulfill the need for linguistic expertise, some members of NTLP attended graduate school for linguistics, while other NTLP members attended a one year Mohawk program in Buffalo which uses the Root Word Method. Once theoretical linguistic expertise was developed, it was necessary for NTLP to study Tuscarora and establish what correspondences existed between it and Mohawk. This process was performed primarily by Betsy and Howard Hillkęęheʔ, a native speaker of Tuscarora, with additional participation by Lynette, Dr. Monty Hill, and John Anderson. The process initially had problems with under-defined roles and goals, resulting in the project taking on an unfeasible amount of additional work, such as documentation work, without sufficient central organization. Over time, these issues were resolved as project members became familiar with each other’s capabilities and identified appropriate roles to operate in.

After the analysis of Tuscarora was complete, NTLP began to translate OK’s curriculum from Mohawk to Tuscarora. This translation was performed by 5 graduates of the OK program who were hired by NTLP for this purpose in 2018. These translators had no doubts about the effectiveness of the Root Word Method or its applicability to Tuscarora. Some new organizational conflict emerged from this process, as OK graduate translators brought ideas about how the Tuscarora curriculum should develop that differed from those of established NTLP project members. This organizational conflict organically resolved over time as familiarity developed.

At present, all of OK’s year 1 curriculum has been translated and adapted into Tuscarora, and has been taught by NTLP. The entire year 2 curriculum has been adapted, but has not yet been taught by NTLP due to issues with hiring and retaining sufficient instructors. Planned instructor training and continued teaching of the year 1 program should lead to consistent teaching of the year 2 curriculum by 2025. NTLP project members say that while they will always be self-evaluating, it is unlikely that they will have cause to replace the adapted OK curriculum, as it is currently functional and known to be effective.

Details regarding the adaptation process

As described above, the adaptation process involved two primary phases. First, NTLP needed to develop a strong grammatical understanding of the Tuscarora language in order to be able to apply the grammatical terms and principles of the Root Word Method to it. Then, NTLP needed to use their developed grammatical understanding to translate the OK curriculum into Tuscarora, creating a Tuscarora curriculum that applies the Root Word Method.
The first phase, the phase of analyzing the Tuscarora language, was reliant on several types of information and expertise. Information involved included existing Tuscarora grammatical information from Tuscarora grammars and dictionaries, but also included English and Mohawk grammatical information, as well as linguistic theory. Expertise involved included linguistic analytical skills, and language skills in English, Mohawk, and Tuscarora, including the knowledge of a native speaker of Tuscarora, Howdy Hillkęęheʔ.

The work included tasks like identifying grammatical particles and affixes of Tuscarora, such as pronominal and pre-pronominal prefixes, as well as describing their functions, identifying which ones have matches in Mohawk, and developing strategies for translation of those particles into English. Howdy, as a native speaker of Tuscarora, was able to identify when Tuscarora sentences or structures seemed directly wrong to him as a speaker, but was also able to assist in detailed linguistic analysis. Howdy was able to create novel Tuscarora descriptions of scenarios and assess the aptness of translations from Tuscarora to English, allowing NTLP’s trained linguists to better understand the grammatical function of various features of Tuscarora. For example, where existing Tuscarora dictionaries only give the English “in” as a translation for the Tuscarora positional affix, Howdy and other NTLP members were able to identify other prepositions which could correspond to the positional affix, and figure out what contextual factors affect how the affix could be translated. NTLP members suggest native speakers are generally disinterested in formal linguistic analysis, and that if there were more native speakers of Tuscarora present there may have been pushback against its use in the adaptation process. Formal linguistic analysis relies on detailed treatment of isolated components of the language, while native speakers of Indigenous languages typically prefer holistic and intuition-based understandings of language. NTLP members agree that it would still be beneficial to have more native speakers involved in the program.

For the second phase of the adaptation process, NTLP hired several OK graduates to translate the OK curriculum from Mohawk into Tuscarora. Apart from necessary grammatical adaptations caused by linguistic differences, the translators made as few changes to the content of the original OK curriculum as possible, attempting to translate as directly as possible. Because of this, the Tuscarora version of the curriculum is largely unchanged from the original Mohawk version. NTLP initially decided to use the OK curriculum as is for at least 2 years before considering changing the curriculum, but found after that period that the curriculum did not need any changes, and so the curriculum NTLP uses today remains largely unchanged.

Data for the adaptation process was initially coordinated through Dropbox, but was eventually moved to Google Docs due to the availability of storage space already secured by NTLP for other purposes. Google Docs was found to be a more effective host for data, as it allowed multiple people to work simultaneously on a single file. This allowed for easier collaboration and prevented accumulation of multiple copies of documents as had occurred when using Dropbox. Google Docs also allowed NTLP to share files and information with the language teachers working within the Niagara Wheatfield School district. And as a non-profit organization, it was free to use.

The complete adapted NTLP curriculum is used by instructors in the classroom in the form of a printed spiral-bound book. This format, only implementable once the adaptation process was finished, is noted by NTLP instructors to be an improvement over previous formats. Instructors no longer need to print new copies of sections of the curriculum for each lesson, reducing classroom-external organizational burdens. Live correction of the curriculum no longer distracts from instruction, as any errors in the printed curriculum may be noted for later correction outside of the classroom with less likelihood of being lost among accumulated distinct versions of small sections of the curriculum.

2.3 Differences between Tuscarora & Mohawk Tuscarora and Mohawk are both Haudenosaunee languages, and so are similar enough that the curriculum largely functions as is, directly translated from Mohawk to Tuscarora. There are some minor linguistic differences which impacted the curriculum. Most significant differences between the OK program and the NTLP program arise due to the current language situation of Tuscarora, i.e. the amount of native speakers and the overall level of community interest in Tuscarora revitalization. An example linguistic difference can be found in negation. Negation in Tuscarora functions differently than in Mohawk, being more complicated with more context-sensitive alternate forms. This makes negation somewhat harder to teach and learn in Tuscarora than it is in Mohawk. Negation is introduced early in the OK curriculum, which poses a small problem in Tuscarora, as the greater complexity of Tuscarora negation means students face difficult grammatical material earlier in the Tuscarora curriculum than they would be in the Mohawk version of the curriculum.

Differences in language situation between Mohawk and Tuscarora

The differences in language situation between Mohawk and Tuscarora result in NTLP handling several aspects of program administration differently from OK. OK and NTLP are similar programs with similar goals, both seeking to create adult speakers and increase community use of their target languages. However, NTLP is much more recently established program than OK is, and operates in a smaller community, in which there are fewer native speakers and fewer individuals interested in learning. Because of these factors, NTLP cannot afford to be as selective as OK in terms of what program applicants are accepted. Thus, NTLP has no current plans to implement age-based preferences on student acceptance or create separate age-based cohorts, as OK and other programs do in order to make use of established higher performance by younger learners. NTLP also originally attempted to implement an admission test like OK uses, requiring students to demonstrate memorization of some simple grammatical features of Tuscarora in order to be accepted to the program. In the first implementation of this admission test, the pass rate was too low for it to be viable to require that applicants pass the admission test. NTLP has since developed night classes which teach the content of the admission test to potential applicants, but test pass rates remain low. The admission test is still administered, as it helps to ensure that applicants are aware of the NTLP program’s difficulty and expectations, but there is no specific performance benchmark which applicants must meet to be accepted into the program.

The OK program runs its program over the regular school year, from September to May. NTLP, because it is a newer program, is not able to cover the entirety of the OK year 1 curriculum within one regular school year, and so runs over the summer as well. The 2023 cohort is finished unit 9 of 11 by the end of their regular school year, with much of the cohort continuing over the summer to cover the rest of curriculum. This is a necessity to cover all the material of the year 1 curriculum, but it also serves to mitigate some risks posed by only running the program through the regular school year. When language courses cease over the summer, the program risks deterioration in student’s language proficiency, possibly necessitating program delays to catch up at the start of next school year, or loss of students entirely as they find jobs away from the language program over the summer. Because the Tuscarora speaker population is low, these risks could pose a serious threat to the future health of the Tuscarora language, leading NTLP to prefer to run the program year round.

Program administration

NTLP project members emphasize a few aspects of program administration which they have found important to the success of NTLP. These aspects are largely informed by the current health of the Tuscarora language and NTLP’s attendant need to function consistently and effectively with a small staff.
First, NTLP project members have found it is beneficial to the organization overall if program administrators have linguistic knowledge comparable to that of teachers and curriculum translators. Due to the small size of the organization, input on a decision from any member, regardless of their formal role, may help to quickly resolve hesitance or indecision in the organization. This means that it is beneficial for quick and effective decision-making if project members have some expertise and awareness regarding issues faced by other project members.

Secondly, NTLP project members emphasize the importance of effectively working with whoever is willing to participate in the program, and of ensuring that people remain willing to participate in the program. It is rare to find people who are interested in working on language revitalization, so it is important to be willing to accommodate and find organizational processes that fit with any person who is willing to participate, otherwise the program may otherwise have difficulty finding sufficient staff to fulfill all the program’s needs.

Conversely, it is also important for NTLP members to be willing to remove collaborators from the program if they harm overall project morale, and to be able to maintain functioning of the program after the removal of such people. Poor project morale may eventually lead to more loss of staff than the project faces by removing problematic collaborators. Program resilience helps to ensure that loss of staff does not compromise NTLP’s language teaching and slow the development of their Tuscarora speaking community. Amicable separation is also important, as later changes in the organization may require or render viable the return of previously removed program participants.

This section of the document will describe some aspects of NTLP’s methodology. The first sub-section describes NTLP’s use of oral and written language drills in class, including descriptions of several drills. The second sub-section describes various issues related to the management of instruction difficulty and social conflict which NTLP instructors identify as relevant to successful teaching. The third sub-section describes some additional matters relating to the number of instructors necessary to run NTLP’s classes, and the uses of non-instructional time.

Uses of language drills & language drills used

NTLP’s instructors report that the majority of class time is spent on oral and written language drills. Any class time not spent on teaching new concepts or storytelling will be spent on language drills, varying throughout the year according to the amount of teaching necessary in each unit. Drills occupy the largest part of class time in order to ensure that students spend the amount of time practising generative language skills necessary to achieve fluent speaking ability.

Instructors report that the most effective drills are those that require students to speak full novel sentences to each other, as those drills offer the most comprehensive language practice. However, other types of drills are still used, especially earlier in the school year, when students do not yet have sufficient language skill to perform such drills. In these earlier stages, repetition drills, where instructors speak portions of language for the students to repeat, are used to help students to memorize verb conjugations or other grammatical paradigms. Instructors also report that students respond well to language drills that include physical components, such as gestures, or movements.

While complex speaking drills have been found to be most effective as teaching tools, NTLP instructors report students best demonstrate their language proficiency in longer writing exercises. During such exercises, students will go out of their way to use new constructions and words to talk about topics they are interested in, producing more complex language than they otherwise use in speaking exercises. It is common for students to continue using the new language they learned for such exercises in their speech after. However, this effect is sensitive to topic; when students are not interested in some topic which they are asked to write about, they will not engage as deeply, and underperform.

NTLP instructors described several different drills used in the program, including dialogue drills, translation drills, writing exercises.

Dialogue drills are often performed in a circle format. Students and instructors organize into circle, and take turns describing themselves performing some action using recently-taught language content. Once each person has spoken, instructors and students begin to ask and answer various questions about the described actions. For example, students might first describe themselves as going to a store and buying things, and then ask about what other students bought. Initial descriptions and following questions may both be altered to focus on grammatical features such as plurality, tense, or mood, as fits current grammatical topics. NTLP instructors describe alteration of the drill to suit content topics, such as placing students in the distinct cardinal directions of a room to suit practising of words for directions.

Translation drills are performed using class blackboards. One student will write an English or Tuscarora sentence on the blackboard, and another student is tasked to speak an appropriate Tuscarora or English translation. This writing and speaking format could also be inverted, such that a student speaks a sentence and another produces a written translation. In either direction, this format tests comprehensive and generative language ability in spoken and written forms.

When new verbs or types of conjugation are introduced to the class, a five minute memorization drill is used. In this drill, after they have been taught the new content, students are given 5 minutes to freely study the material and attempt to memorize it by whatever means they prefer. After 5 minutes, students are called to attempt to recite the new paradigm in full in front of the class. Students find this drill very challenging, but engage actively and enthusiastically due to this difficulty.

Writing skills are specifically targeted by the use of short story writing exercises. For these exercises, students are asked to write a short story about some topic while using a certain amount of recently taught language content. As an example, students may be asked to write a story while using at least three distinct pronominal prefixes. This format helps to ensure that students do not only use language they are already comfortable using, though as described above it is common for students to best demonstrate their proficiency during these exercises.

Occasionally, NTLP instructors will use external software to run drills, such as the website Kahoot. These tools are useful to pad out days or relieve pressure on instructors, as they render it relatively simple to put together and run drills. As well, such tools are typically more game-like and fun for students than traditional drills, so they may also relieve pressure on students. However, it is important to be mindful of session length with such tools, as students may get bored quicker than with traditional drills.

Management of program difficulty, student affect, and social conflict

NTLP instructors emphasize the importance of monitoring and managing two secondary aspects of classroom instruction; these include the difficulty of the program material, including the emotional reactions of students to program material, and social conflicts between students. Instructors describe both predictive factors and techniques for mitigating negative effects related to these aspects of instruction.

Instructors say that they generally try to make sure the classes feels challenged, as students tend to engage more actively with difficult content. This approach risks exposing students to a level of difficulty they do not feel prepared for, potentially causing disengagement and overwhelm. In order to manage this risk, instructors must monitor students’ responses to course content, develop effective and open communication with students, and adjust instruction to accommodate overwhelm as necessary. Monitoring students’ responses to course content helps instructors to be aware of what level of difficulty the students are willing to take on, as well as of factors which influence that level.

Instructors describe that students occasionally have unpredictable responses, such that introducing a new concept similar to one that students had already learned is more confusing to students than instructors expected. In such cases, it is important for the instructors to recognize that this has occurred in order to apply active mitigation techniques and to identify potential causes to account for in the future. For an example of a relevant secondary factor, NTLP instructors have found that students are likely to be less willing to engage with difficult material in the same week that unit tests are administered, on the basis of which they prefer to administer tests on Fridays.

Open communication between instructors and students helps ensure instructors learn necessary information about student overwhelm and external stressors. NTLP’s students attend classes as a job, resulting in NTLP’s instructors acting in some sense both as instructors and employers. This doubled authority may cause reticence in students to openly speak about if they feel the class is too difficult, or if external factors are affecting their willingness to accept challenge. As such, it is important for instructors to encourage such communication and ensure that difficulties students communicate are acknowledged and accounted for. Communication breakdown may increase stress, cause development of resentment, and prevent the application of appropriate accommodations. This communication is also important to the management of conflict between students, as will be discussed shortly.

NTLP instructors describe a few ways that they adjust their instruction to accommodate individual students and manage the responses of the class as a whole. When individual students are overwhelmed by difficult material or by external pressures, instructors attempt to call on them less or otherwise reduce class expectations placed upon them. When the entire class has responded negatively to too-difficult material, instructors have found that it helps to move the class outside when weather permits or take a short break and have students walk around the building classes are held in. These adjustments help to keep students engaged with class material and prevent the development of despair or overwhelm while allowing instructors to maintain a challenging curriculum.

It is common for some degree of conflict and animosity to arise between students over the course of the program, as students become stressed due to program difficulty and have limited interaction with people outside of their class due to the length of class sessions. Instructors have found that students will gradually work these issues out over the course of the program, provided appropriate accommodations are made quickly. Unchecked animosity between students will eventually begin to worsen. As noted above, open communication between students and instructors helps instructors to manage classroom conflict. Instructors must be aware of conflict in order to make accommodations, and so it is important to cultivate an atmosphere where students feel comfortable discussing conflicts with instructors. Once conflicts have been identified, instructors can alter classroom seating plans, adjust groupings of students during groupwork, and make other adjustments in order to prevent exacerbation of conflict.

Instructor count & non-instruction class time

NTLP’s first-year program is taught by a team of three instructors, rather than a single instructor as some other programs use. NTLP’s instructors describe many of the benefits of having multiple instructors, and suggest that NTLP requires a minimum of two instructors to function. While a sufficiently proficient instructor may be able to run the program alone, having even two instructor greatly reduces the labour required from each individual and improves the quality of instruction. NTLP instructors also suggest that four instructors may be better still than having three instructors. Having four instructors would allow for two teams of two instructors to run morning and afternoon classes, ensuring that classes always have multiple instructors present.

A single lesson requires planning, the lesson’s actual execution, including monitoring of how the lesson is progressing, and assessment of the lesson after the fact. These components are difficult for a single instructor to manage entirely on their own, but can be managed much more easily by a team of two instructors; one instructor may focus primarily on planning and executing a lesson, while the other instructor can focus on monitoring and assessing the effectiveness of the lesson. Instructors can also dynamically shift responsibilities during instruction as necessary, rendering instruction more resilient to internal and external stressors or crises. For example, if one instructor must leave the class due to some family emergency, the other instructor may continue to teach alone. NTLP’s instructors also report that working as part of a team reduces the otherwise significant mental stress of running classes.

Having multiple instructors allows instructors to spend more time doing work related to classes that is not actual instruction, while other instructors teach. NTLP’s instructors spend this time developing curriculum and exercises, planning lessons and community outings, and providing language services in the community. Community outings where students speak Tuscarora outside of the classroom allow for a distinct and important type of language practice which cannot be achieved in the classroom, and might not be achieved at all without the additional organizational labour available from having multiple instructors. Because NTLP operates in a community with very few Tuscarora speakers, NTLP’s instructors are asked to speak Tuscarora at community events and ceremonies; if NTLP had only a single instructor, the fulfilment of these requests would come at cost to the educational success of the program. NTLP’s instructors also report that they benefit from acting primarily as instructors, not also participating in program administration or direction, as instructors in other programs do.

NTLP’s instructors also discussed how NTLP can best make use of lunch periods. OK has students speak Mohawk during lunch, but NTLP has found this difficult to reproduce. Instructors attribute this to a lack of stronger speakers who could facilitate Tuscarora use early in the year before first-year students have sufficient proficiency to maintain Tuscarora use on their own. This difficulty might be circumvented in the future by the initiation of NTLP’s second year program, or by having stronger speakers visit NTLP during lunch. NTLP’s instructors have considered playing Tuscarora speech recordings or assigning language practice over lunch in order to continue exposing students to Tuscarora, but have also considered that it may be better to allow students to socialize and rest over lunch.