O.K.’s root-word curriculum is designed for a long-term, full-time immersion program that enables students to become proficient advanced-level speakers.

It is structured to begin with the grammatically simplest forms of the language, gradually adding more complex and more expressive features. The curriculum is based on root-words (morphemes) to enable students to think in the language, to be able to understand and say things they never heard before.

To increase the likelihood that students with no previous knowledge of the language can succeed in the program, O.K. has established an admissions process that requires applicants to learn a list of forty words in Kanyen’kéha. Some of these words are presented in the table below; the complete list can be found on OK’s website.

The list uses the same verb root (to like something or someone) and forty “bound” personal prefixes. These were selected because they are the most-commonly used prefixes in the language.

The forty words are grouped in three colour-coded sets. The red prefixes express the subjective relationship of someone-to-something (ke-nòn:we’s– I like it), the blue prefixes express the objective relationship of something-to-someone (wake-nòn:we’s – it likes me) and the purple prefixes express the transitive relationship of someone-to-someone (kon-nòn:we’s – I like you). (There are an additional 21 transitive [purple] prefixes that are not on the list because they are used much less often in conversation.)

Colour-coding the prefixes performs two important functions:

1. It makes it much easier for prospective students to remember the words
2. It leads them to begin matching different actions with the appropriate set of prefixes.

As the curriculum unfolds and new linguistic elements are introduced, new features are highlighted in yellow to mark their place within a word and the different forms it can take.

The 40-word eligibility test is oral. Applicants are asked, at random, to translate the words from Kanyen’kéha-to-English and English-to-Kanyen’kéha. They are expected to answer all questions correctly and immediately.

Learning the 40 words does not ensure success in the program. It gauges two things:

1. It signifies an applicant’s commitment to studying and learning the language
2. It shows their ability to memorize and recall root-words (morphemes).

In the event that there are more successful applicants than there are program spaces available, preference is given to students with the following traits (in no particular order):

• live or work in the community
• are Six Nations band members
• are young
• have studied the language as an adult
• have small children at home
• attend longhouse
• are on a career teaching path
• completed the 40-word eligibility test quickly

1^ST YEAR PROGRAM CURRICULUM

The bulk of the 1^st Year Program is stative verbs – verbs that describe the state, condition or situation of someone or something. This is because stative verbs are much simpler to teach and to learn because they have fewer grammatical elements than active verbs. Active verbs describe actions that people and animals perform and events that occur in nature. Active verbs are much more complex and can have many more grammatical elements than stative verbs, making them much more difficult and time-consuming to teach and learn. Active verbs are introduced at the mid-way point of 1^st Year.

The program begins with the grammatically simplest parts of the language; parts that are always the same and do not change, and which allow simple but meaningful conversation to take place.

A new school year begins with a meeting of all students, instructors and staff to make introductions and outline procedures and policies (in English). The 1^st Year Instructor then meets with the 1^st Year students. They sit in a circle, with no desks and no books. The instructor leads the students through the following conversation using only Kanyen’kéha. Using a lot of repetition, gestures, body language and a positive and encouraging attitude, the instructor helps students to voice the appropriate answer in Kanyen’kéha. In the first few days we use students’ English names or a simple nickname to bypass the difficulty that beginning students will have remembering and pronouncing Onkwehonwe names.

It will take some time for all of the students to respond correctly and appropriately to the instructor’s questions, especially with a large number of students. OK’s 1^st Year Program has a maximum of 12 students.

In this first session (which may take more than one day to complete) students learn just 12 words:

• 4 free / stand alone personal pronouns (I, you, he, she);
• 7 particles (Hi, yes, no, and, who, a “specifier”, the yes-or-no question particle)
• 1 verb (is not)

While students learn 12 words in the first session, they learn other matters that are crucial in holding basic conversations. They learn:

• How to make a statement. (She is Mary.)
• How to link two thoughts. (I am Pat and he is John.)
• How to make a negative statement. (I am not John.)
• How to ask a yes-or-no question. (Are you John?)
• How to ask who someone is. (Who is she?)
• How to answer a ”Who?” question. (Who is she? She is Mary.)
• How to answer a yes-or-no question in the affirmative. (Is he John? Yes, he is John.)
• How to answer a yes-or-no question in the negative. (Is he John? No, he is not John.)
• How to add emphasis. (Is she MARY?) (HE is John.)

In addition to the 12 words, students learn the word order of Kanyen’kéha and the protocols of proper speech. These matters could be taught explicitly but the explanation would have to be in English. Students could be taught, for example, that in asking a yes-or-no question, the question particle is always voiced in second position and it follows the word or matter being questioned and in answering a yes-or-no question, the answer always goes first. The structure of the language, word order and protocols could be taught that way, but it is much more efficient and effective for students to learn them in context, in conversation.

In addition to a little vocabulary and a lot of structure, students are also learning the prosody, the sound of the language in this first session. They learn, implicitly:

• the rhythm and flow of the language;
• proper pronunciation;
• the speed and tempo of the language; and
• the volume of conversation.

The 1^st Year’s second session builds on the first session’s grammar and vocabulary. Using, the instructor can lead students through a conversation like this (using name tags, photographs and a lot of repetition, gestures and modelling of correct answers):

This session expands the scope of the conversation from the first session using ten new words. The one new verb in this session uses the same purple (transitive) personal prefixes that students learned to pass the eligibility test.

• 2 nouns (man, woman);
• 7 particles (what about, this, a little, a lot, more, more than)
• 1 new verb (my/your/his/her name is)
• 1 “old” verb (I/you like him/her)

CONTENT

The content in each of the 1^st Year units was not selected because of its subject matter. It was selected because it allows real-life conversations to take place, building on material already learned. In the early units we use the grammatically simplest forms of some verbs that gets the message so that we can postpone teaching the more complex forms of the verb until later in the program.

The table below shows the content taught in Unit 1.

It takes about three weeks, on average, for an instructor to finished teaching this unit. At the end of each unit, students are tested on the vocabulary and grammar. It is an oral test. Students are asked to translate 10 sentences from Kanyen’kéha to English and 10 sentences from English to Kanyen’kéha. The following sentences are typical test questions from this unit:

• Why do you like Taylor Swift more than Justin Bieber?
• Those old men don’t know anything.
• Who knows what that young woman’s name is?
• Don’t you know the name of that boy who likes you?
• That old man really likes Betty, but I know she doesn’t like him the way she likes you.

We finish teaching all stative verb forms in Unit 5 and introduce the basic forms of a few everyday active verbs in Units 6 & 7. Only then, beginning in Unit 8, do we teach nouns – as whole words, root words, possessive forms, characteristics and the common active verbs used with them.

The 2^nd Year Program is devoted to teaching all the forms an active verb can take, including the prefixes at the beginning of a word and the suffixes at the end of a word that supplements and enriches a verb’s basic meaning. The difference between a stative and active verb can be compared to the difference between describing a photograph and describing a video.

While it may seem that the sentences learned in 2^nd Year are not much different from the sentences learned during 1^st Year, the 2^nd Year sentences contain additional grammatical elements that make them more difficult and time-consuming to learn. For example, in 1^st Year it is sufficient, for conversational and classroom purposes, for students to be able to say onkyó’ten’ (I worked) but in 2^nd Year, students learn to say that more skilfully – wakyo’tenhserónhne (I went to work).

Four aspects of the OK methodology will be described:

• A Good Space

The most important thing that programs must do if they want to create speakers is to create and maintain a positive and supportive environment for everyone involved in the program – students, instructors and staff. Creating a pool of speakers who can take over the teaching duties and who can raise children as first-language speakers will take years, many years. There will be problems, perhaps major problems, at the outset. Setbacks, perhaps major discouraging ones, will occur. These are inevitable but their impact can be minimized or dealt with more easily if everyone is working together with ka’nikonhrí:yo – a good mind – a cornerstone of Rotinonhsyón:ni (Iroquois) culture. Onkwawenna Kentyohkwa’s program supports and reinforces the culture while the culture supports and reinforces the program. It is especially important to incorporate and instill cultural elements since many of our students were not raised knowing our history, cultural teachings and protocols.

The effort to create a nurturing, positive supportive atmosphere begins in the opening minutes of every day. We begin with everyone seated in a circle and someone standing to deliver the Ohén:ton Karihwatéhkwen (the “Thanksgiving Address”). This happens at every gathering of traditional Rotinonhsyón:ni people in all our communities. Someone will stand and offer thanks for all the gifts of creation on behalf of everyone. The speaker will begin by greeting and paying respect to all of the people. They will then thank our Mother, the Earth and all of its blessings we’ve received – the waters; the fish life; the insect life; the medicines; the insect life; the fruits; the plant life that sustains human beings and all living creatures; the “wild” animals; the trees; and the birds. The speaker then thanks all the Sky Beings that continue to help human beings – the winds; the thunderers; the sun; the moon; and the stars. Lastly, the speaker offers thanks to Shonkwaya’tison (our Creator) for providing all of things that allow us to have a good life.

The Ohén:ton Karihwatéhkwen is spoken in Kanyen’kéha and can take many minutes to deliver depending on how eloquent and detailed the speaker is. Several times during the speech the speaker will say “So let us bring all of our minds together and make them as one on this matter.” And the people will respond “Yes.”

The Ohén:ton Karihwatéhkwen does more than signal the start of the day. It is a ritual of thanksgiving that teaches us to be grateful for what we have. It focuses everyone’s attention on the blessings of creation and brings people to the same mental and emotional starting point. We urge students and staff to think of these words as a medicine, a medicine that can help deal with the negative feelings that are an inevitable part of a difficult program that can be very stressful and frustrating.

During the first few months of the year, an instructor or a 2^nd Year student will deliver the Ohén:ton Karihwatéhkwen. Later in the year, 1^st Year students begin delivering shortened versions of the Address.

When the Ohén:ton Karihwatéhkwen is completed, students and staff then stand and, in turn, address the group. They offer a traditional word of welcome to one another. They then give a brief report on how they are at the time, their frame of mind and physical condition. At first this is little more than, “Greetings everyone. I’m happy and I’m healthy.” These reports soon become more detailed – I had a bad headache yesterday but I feel good now.” They later offer simple descriptions of their activities – “I studied, I cooked, I ate, I watched tv.” By year-end, 1^st Year students report on much more than their frame of mind and physical condition. They share their personal stories. They talk about their family, friends and pets. Students quickly learn each other’s likes and dislikes, hobbies, and part-time jobs. Story-Time helps them celebrate good news and provide help and support when there is bad news. They become a family.

This is achieved by providing time every day for students to talk about what is interesting or important to them. As such, Story-Time is the second-most-important segment of the day.

• The Routine

After the Ohén:ton Karihwatéhkwen, Story-Time and a break, the main lesson of the day is delivered. The lesson introduces new grammar, new vocabulary or both. The lesson will build on the material already covered and allow students to extend their conversational abilities.

Students and staff break at noon for the most-important segment of the day – a lunch they eat together at one table. Small-group conversations unfold around the table and cover almost any and every subject. The 2^nd Year students, staff and visiting speakers involve 1^st Year students, who get to have one-on-one chats, all in the language, that provide answers to their questions on grammar and vocabulary. The students get coaching during this time to improve their sentence structure, pronunciation and polish their speaking ability. They learn a lot of material that has yet to be studied or may not be in the curriculum.

The afternoon is spent in small group drills, exercises, games and self-study.

• Feedback

A major part of teaching the O.K. program is providing feedback, which takes many forms.

The first scheduled feedback of the day comes after the morning’s Story-Time when students greet one another and report on their physical and emotional well-being. After everyone has spoken, the instructor comments on common issues in the students’ reports, correcting mistakes in grammar, vocabulary and pronunciation. The instructor also makes suggestions on new or more appropriate vocabulary for students to use when talking about their personal situation.

While the feedback provided by the instructor after Story-Time is generally directed to the class as a whole, students receive small measures of individual feedback throughout the day. Most of it takes place in the dozens of interactions that students and the instructor have throughout the day, in the back-and-forth interactions during class presentations, drills and discussions and during the casual one-on-one chats occur before class starts, during breaks and after class.

All of the instructors are O.K. graduates so they know what students need to know. They can also anticipate what students don’t know or understand, allowing for smoother, more effective learning.

Feedback at Onkwawenna Kentyohkwa is a two-way street, provided to and by instructors and students. Much of this takes place at the end of each program unit (about every three weeks). This is when students are formally tested on their comprehension and speaking ability regarding the grammar and vocabulary within the unit. Students are asked to orally translate ten sentences from Kanyen’kéha to English and ten sentences from English to Kanyen’kéha The test questions and answers (and other possible correct answers) are later discussed in class so students fully understand the matter. The test results provide the instructor with valuable feedback on how to address student shortcomings, whether certain elements within the unit need to be reviewed or re-taught.

At the end of each unit, after the test results are reviewed and discussed, students meet with the Program Director (the instructor’s supervisor) for a private one-on-one conversation. Their talk can include some discussion of the test results but the conversation is meant to provide students with a chance to talk about anything involving the program. It also provides the Program Director with an opportunity discuss the student’s progress and participation in the program.

In addition to the regular unit tests on grammar and vocabulary, there is another year-end “test” that assesses students’ conversational ability. It is modelled on the Oral Proficiency Interviews (OPI) conducted by the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL). A Kanyen’kéha speaker (an O.K. graduate who did not teach the student) interviews the student for about 20 minutes. Students may be asked about their background, their future plans, their family, their job, their hobbies, their interests and opinions. Students may also be asked to engage in a role-play, taking part in a hypothetical problematic situation.

O.K. has adopted ACTFL’s assessment levels. Simply put, the three main levels are:

• Novice – The student can speak only in memorized words, phrases or sentences. The student can name things but can’t speak in sentences.
• Intermediate – The student can speak in whole sentences and may be able to link them together to create a simple narrative.
• Advanced – The student can speak easily and at length in whole paragraphs, providing details, reasons, contrasts, similarities, causes and effects.

The goal of this year-end assessment is to see how well students can express themselves: How long they can talk about these topics; how much detail they provide; at what point do they struggle to express themselves; how they deal with a lack of specific vocabulary; when do they revert to English. The interviewer’s task is to determine at what level of language students perform consistently. Each of the three OPI levels has three sub-levels – Low, Mid and High. 1^st Year students must achieve an Intermediate-Low level assessment to be eligible to attend 2^nd Year and 2^nd Year students must achieve an Advanced-Low level to pass the program.

There is also a feedback loop between the instructors and the Program Director. They meet after class each day to discuss the day’s events, the successes and problems involving the whole classes and individual students. The Program Director also meets periodically with OK’s Board of Directors to discuss, among many other things, the successes and challenges of the immersion program and the changes that may be necessary in the curriculum or teaching procedures in the years to come.

• Teaching in Immersion

Kanyen’kéha is the only language used in OK’s classroom and dining area beginning on Day One. (Staff and students do use English to introduce themselves at the very beginning.) This is achieved by following a curriculum that allows a student with no background in the language (apart from the 40 word eligibility test) to succeed in the program.

It is also achieved by conducting the program entirely in the language. In the first few days students will ask, in English, “What does … mean?” and “How do you say …?” They are immediately taught and coached how to voice those questions in Kanyen’kéha. The instructor then gets everyone to repeat the Kanyen’kéha question multiple times. And, when another student inevitably asks one of those two questions again, the instructor will ask the class, in Kanyen’kéha, “How do you say …?” until someone says it in Kanyen’kéha. When a student finally asks in Kanyen’kéha, “What does … mean?” the instructor will tell them, in Kanyen’kéha. They will then use a variety of techniques to help the student, and the rest of the class, understand what the word means. They will use gestures, charades, diagrams on the whiteboard, or photos from the internet to get the meaning across.

The O.K. program is narrowly focused on creating speakers, not readers or writers. Unlike English, the Kanyen’kéha writing system is based entirely on its sound system so that students who know what different vowels and consonants sound like, can read new vocabulary correctly and consistently. Although O.K. uses its own textbooks, they are not used as teaching vehicles. They are used for reference, to list vocabulary and to demonstrate how personal prefixes, noun roots, verb roots and verb suffixes are assembled as whole words. Learning and knowing how the sound system is perfectly represented by the vowels, consonants and clusters in the writing system is a major help in learning to voice new vocabulary. Similarly, if students can properly pronounce a word, they can also spell it correctly. Although knowing the writing system is a major help in pronouncing and writing the language, students are only assessed on their speaking ability.

Instructors guide students to become speakers in much the same way that babies learn to speak. They first concentrate on oral comprehension. This is done using visual aids – gestures, drawings, photographs – while repeating the object word. When learning new vocabulary, for example, the names of objects – shoe, belt, hat, etc., students are shown a dozen different pictures of them are displayed on a wall or screen. Using a laser pointer, the instructor points at each one and says the name aloud and students repeat it. After several repetitions, the instructor gives the laser pointer to one of the better students and asks them, in Kanyen’kéha, to point at the shoe. If the student can not answer correctly, the instructor says the name aloud and all students repeat it. When the student is correct, the instructor asks them to point at the belt, and then the hat until the student shows that they know the sound and the image of each word. This is repeated until every student has learned the sound of each object’s name.

With students enabled to recognize the sound of the object’s name, the next step is to enable them to say the name of the object. The instructor then points at the shoe, for example, and asks one of the better students to say the name aloud. If the student is incorrect, the instructor says the name and students repeat it. If the student is correct, the instructor continues until all the students can correctly name all the objects on the wall.

Most parents of toddlers who are just beginning to speak do not obsess over a child’s mispronunciation. O.K. instructors similarly, do not stress perfectly correct pronunciation right at the start. Most students self-correct their mispronunciations over time so that corrections from the instructor are not a constantly recurring feature of classtime.

It is difficult for students to learn to speak Kanyen’kéha if they don’t have the opportunity to speak. It is not enough for students to hear, read or write the language. They must have the chance to think “on their feet” in making a declarative statement or asking or answering a question. They must have time to think through what to say, how to say it and then to voice it. It is time-consuming for all students to have this opportunity. This means that over the course of a day, the total time that students spend speaking should be longer than the time the instructor spends speaking. If the instructor spends most of the day talking, students are not learning to speak. They are learning to listen. Students don’t become speakers by studying, although it helps. They become speakers by speaking.

Fortunately, OK’s daily schedule allots a lot of time for students to speak about their personal interests and situation at Story-Time and during the lunch hour.

Getting students to practice speaking or to ask questions and get them answered requires them to get an instructor’s or someone else’s attention. Not all students are inclined to push to get this attention because they are shy. And many other students who are not shy are very reluctant to speak because they don’t want to make mistakes in front of others.

Students must be able to overcome shyness and fear of embarrassment if they want to become a good speaker. They must encourage themselves to speak at every opportunity. Instead of waiting to be asked a question, students must take the initiative to begin a conversation with another student or instructor.

It takes many things for all the factors to come together for someone with no language background to become a Kanyen’kéha speaker. It requires a curriculum that starts with the easiest forms of the language and gradually adds grammatical complexity so that students can express themselves easily on everyday matters. It requires teaching methods that respect, support and encourage students to develop the mental, auditory and vocal skills to become a speaker. And it requires students to exercise great determination, patience and perseverance.

Introduction
This document details the curriculum, methodology, and assessment techniques used by Onkwawenna Kentyokhwa, a Kanyen’kéha or Mohawk language program. The information in this document is taken primarily from three papers written by OK program operators (Richards & Maracle 2002, Maracle & Richards 2002, Green & Maracle 2018).

OK program curriculum
2.1 Section introduction
This section primarily describes the Root Word Method as used by the OK program, including the theoretical basis of that method. The adoption of the Root Word Method by other language programs and the results which the Root Word Method have yielded will also be discussed. A variety of problems
which the OK program has encountered in structuring the program will also be described.

2.2 The Root Word Method
The Root Word Method, described in detail by Green & Maracle (2018), is a method originally made for the purpose of describing, documenting and teaching the Kanyen’kéha language, which has now been applied to other polysynthetic languages, including other Haudenosaunee languages. The Root
Word Method is predicated on various theories by linguists about language acquisition, which generally state that successful learners of languages develop an internal understanding of a language’s structures and grammatical features, starting with comprehension of simple structures and gradually including
more complex structures. Following these theories, the Root Word Method aims to develop a linguistic understanding of a target language’s word and sentence formation processes which can be efficiently taught to students in a way which orders the introduction of concepts from simple to complex.

Polysynthetic languages like Kanyen’kéha typically have complex word-formation processes, allowing there to be many more grammatical variations of a single verb or noun than is common in a non-polysynthetic language like English. The Root Word Method teaches learners root words, grammatical affixes, and the processes of word-formation which allow roots and affixes to be combined into the real words which appear in natural language use. This gives students the linguistic tools necessary to decompose, interpret, and construct a very large amount of distinct complex words. While it is still necessary to memorize root words and large paradigms of grammatical affixes, the necessary amount of memorization is greatly reduced compared to previous education methods for Kanyen’kéha, which required students to individually memorize whole words.

The Root Word method first teaches simple grammatical principles, and gradually builds up to more complex concepts. Despite this, the method is still constructed so that students are quickly equipped with the theoretical knowledge necessary to produce and comprehend novel speech, so they are able to start accumulating language practice early in the learning process. Students also quickly become able to function during classroom activities primarily using the target language, making the Root Word Method well-suited to immersive language education.

The Root Word Method as developed for Kanyen’kéha is now supplemented by a large variety of language resources, including dictionaries, teaching exercises, and grammatical resources. Many of these resources utilize colour coding and other types of marking to distinguish and categorize the grammatical features which students are taught to recognize. Due to the centring of grammatical structures and processes, it is often necessary for the Root Word Method to use technical language taken from linguistic theory. Wherever possible, such terminology is replaced with terminology coined in the target language, allowing for language immersion to be maintained, or with simple terms in the first language of learners. Learnability and the ability of students to begin speaking the language is valued over technical linguistic precision.

2.3 Adoption and results
Green & Maracle (2018) report that the Root Word Method was originally developed in the 1980’s for use in Kanyen’kéha language teaching at the University of Western Ontario. Since then, the Root Word Method has been adopted for use in Kanyen’kéha language courses at many other universities, and by many adult immersion education programs. This includes primarily Kanyen’kéha programs, such as Onkwawenna Kentyokhwa, and other Haudenosaunee language programs, but Green & Maracle report that non-Haudenosaunee Indigenous language programs across Canada and the U.S. are investigating the possibility of using the Root Word Method. The Root Word Method has also been used to teach children both immersively and non-immersively at the elementary and high school level.

Green & Maracle report that the elderly number of first-language Kanyen’kéha speakers at Six Nations of The Grand River, where OK is based, declined from 74 in 1996 to 4 in 2016. The establishment of OK has resulted in the creation of around 50 second-language speakers and 10 first-language speaking children within the Six Nations community over a similar time frame. The Kanyen’kéha language proficiency of OK students is assessed according to the standards of
the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL). The program intends that students reach the Advanced-Low proficiency by the end of the two-year program. Green & Maracle report that around 80% of first-year students achieve at least Intermediate-Low proficiency, the minimum proficiency to enter the second-year program, and that around 90% of second-year students achieve at least Advanced-Low proficiency.

Since the OK program began, the Kanyen’kéha language has started to be used again in a variety of contexts across Six Nations, especially notably in traditional longhouse ceremonies. OK program graduates have established Skaronhese’kó:wa Tsyohterakentkó:wa Tsi Yontaweya’tahkwa, a
Kanyen’kéha language pre-school and elementary school.

2.4 Problems encountered
This section will describe problems encountered by OK relating to the curriculum and structure of the OK program, as reported by Green & Maracle (2018) and Richards & Maracle (2002). Richards & Maracle primarily report problems concerning students’ preconceived understandings of language, and
the dominance of English in those understandings, while Green & Maracle report problems relating the experience of graduates from the OK program. Problems related to daily classroom operation will be described in the section on methodology.

Richards & Maracle (2002) report that learners assumed a greater deal of similarity between Kanyen’kéha and English than truly exists. This causes students to overrely on one-to-one translation and expect word order and sentence structure to affect meaning in Kanyen’kéha similarly to how it
does in English. This problem was solved by carefully sequencing the order of grammatical elements introduced to students to ensure they attain an understanding of Kanyen’kéha word-formation early. This demonstrates to students how one-to-one correspondences are rare between Kanyen’kéha and
English, and enables students to understand how word-formation processes in Kanyen’kéha fulfill many grammatical functions performed in English by word order.

Richards & Maracle (2002) also report that many OK students had insufficient grammatical knowledge of English to understand some distinctions between Kanyen’kéha and English explained in lessons. This resulted in students incorrectly identifying which English structures correspond to which
Kanyen’kéha structures. This problem was resolved by the development of grammar lessons which point out relevant structures in both English and Kanyen’kéha in greater detail.

A final problem that Richards & Maracle (2002) report concerns writing and pronunciation of Kanyen’kéha. OK’s program students were orally taught the distinct phonology of Kanyen’kéha at the start of the program, but once written forms were introduced, students became overly focused on
writing down and memorizing words and forms. This caused students to neglect developing their ability to decipher spoken Kanyen’kéha and accurately pronounce Kanyen’kéha from written forms. This problem was resolved by increasing the amount of time spent on verbal review of forms, and on spoken dialogues exercises between students, as well as by delaying the introduction of the students to written Kanyen’kéha of any kind, relying initially on learning vocabulary by ear.

Green & Maracle (2018) describe two problems which OK have encountered more recently in program operation. The first concerns how students are not exposed to significant natural Kanyen’kéha language use. Because students primarily speak to each other within the classroom setting, with a focus
on accurately using the grammatical forms they are taught, they end up lacking knowledge of colloquial forms of Kanyen’kéha, such as idioms, contractions, and of the norms of casual speech.

The second problem concerns the development of program graduate’s language proficiency after they leave the program. Program graduates often experience a decrease or stagnation of their Kanyen’kéha language proficiency. Some students do manage to continue to develop their proficiency, through extensive self-study or language practice with first-language speakers of Kanyen’kéha.

These two problems both appear to be caused in large part by the low number of Kanyen’kéha speakers, especially first-language speakers, in the Six Nations community, and the attendant low level of community usage of the Kanyen’kéha language. If there were more speakers and community
contexts where Kanyen’kéha were spoken, then OK students could be more easily exposed to natural Kanyen’kéha language use as learners, and could more easily find more advanced speakers to practice with after they graduate from the program. Green & Maracle (2018) suggest that OK should develop
self-study materials to support graduates in the absence of sufficient first-language speakers, and that expansion of employment opportunities related to Kanyen’kéha language proficiency would also improve the potential outcomes of graduates.

OK program methodology
3.1 Section introduction
This section describes the daily schedule, classroom activities, and instructional techniques used by the
OK program. This concerns primarily the practical application of the Root Word Method, but also
includes details related to the maintenance of an immersive and welcoming language environment.
Problems the OK program has encountered in the running of classes will also be described.
3.2 Daily operation of OK
Green & Maracle (2018) describe the regular functioning of OK’s daily classes. These daily classes run
from September to May, Monday to Friday, totalling approximately 1000 hours of language contact
time each year. At the beginning of each day, at 8:30 a.m., the first and second year classes gather
together for a traditional opening speech, and to share thoughts and commentary in Kanyen’kéha about
various casual topics, such as the weather, or how they feel about the day. Pantomimes are used to help
the first-year students to understand what is being shared after the opening speech. As the year goes on,
first-year students become capable of contributing more elaborately during this morning sharing. After
the sharing is finished, the classes separate and begin class proper.
The first half of morning class consists of storytelling done by students regarding recent or
future events, with feedback regarding vocabulary or grammar being given by an instructor. Formal
language lessons are delivered after this, pertaining to vocabulary or grammar or both as fits the
curriculum. A half-hour lunch period separates the day, during which students continue to speak to each
other in Kanyen’kéha, primarily about food and cooking.
A longer lunch period is also held each week, during which more storytelling is performed, by
instructors, second-year students, or even by guest speakers. Visual material accompanies these stories,
to help first-year students to understand.
The second half of the day may involve continuation of formal lessons, or may be focused
primarily on ensuring that students master and retain the material introduced by formal lessons. This
may consist of translation exercises, oral drills, games, or creative exercises. Classes end at 3 p.m., with
a traditional closing address.
Effort is made everywhere in the program to ensure that students are able to comprehend as
much of the language that they are exposed to as possible; this is done through pantomiming and
illustration as described above, but also by introducing new grammar and vocabulary only when
current material is well-understood.
The program also aims to maximize the amount of time students spend speaking Kanyen’kéha;
this is done through heavy use of storytelling as a teaching device, and also by quickly equipping
students with phrases they are likely to need to use in classes, such as descriptions of moods and states
for use in storytelling, and questions related to language, so that students can request clarification of
difficult concepts without lapsing into English.
Maracle & Richards (2002) describe how native speakers of Kanyen’kéha have participated in
the OK program. They find that although native speakers enriched OK as language resources and
storytellers, they were not especially well-suited to be dedicated instructors, as native fluency often
renders speakers unaware of the challenges faced by learners. When native speakers acted as
Kanyen’kéha teachers, they tended to simplify their vocabulary to a degree that curtailed development
of expressive language in students, while simultaneously failing to constrain the grammatical
complexity of their speech to remain comprehensible to students. Maracle & Richards also describe
how native speakers of Kanyen’kéha will often give forms they do not themselves use when asked how
to say things in Kanyen’kéha, which they connect to the low number of native speakers, and their
attendant infrequent use of Kanyen’kéha.
Richards & Maracle (2002) describes how the presence of fluent and native speakers of
Kanyen’kéha at the OK program exposed students to Kanyen’kéha conversation, rather than
exclusively Kanyen’kéha instruction. This helped to develop student’s ability to listen and comprehend
Kanyen’kéha and demonstrated to students what natural Kanyen’kéha conversation sounds like. Green
& Maracle (2018) emphasize how highly successful students are often those who have sought native
and fluent speakers for language practice outside of the program. Within the OK program, Green &
Maracle describe the current participation of native speakers primarily as guest storytellers, rather than
as instructors like earlier in the program’s operation.
3.3 Immersiveness of the language environment
Although OK is an immersive Kanyen’kéha program, English is not entirely absent from the program.
Green & Maracle (2018) report that ninety-nine percent of all instruction is delivered in Kanyen’kéha,
while Richards & Maracle (2002) and Maracle & Richards (2002) both describe how the OK program
did not at the time use Kanyen’kéha near-exclusively, due to a variety of challenges and issues related
to such near-exclusivity.
Richards & Maracle (2002) describe how it was not entirely accurate to call OK an immersion
program at that time, suggesting that the program should be called “intensive” instead, as it was outside
of OK’s capabilities to use exclusively Kanyen’kéha. While the intent of the program was to use
primarily Kanyen’kéha, it was found that students wanted to have strong understandings of what they
were taught to say, necessitating use of English for grammatical explanations and translations. Maracle
& Richards (2002) describes how students’ frequent requests for English translations and explanations
hindered the instructors’ ability to focus on speaking Kanyen’kéha primarily, causing them to begin to
use English even when not requested by students. This resulted in English supplanting Kanyen’kéha as
the primary language of instruction, causing students to spend too little time speaking and hearing
Kanyen’kéha.
Richards & Maracle (2002) describes how OK developed an approach which initially uses
English, so that students can understand grammatical topics being discussed, but gradually includes
more and more Kanyen’kéha. As students become more proficient as Kanyen’kéha speakers, they
become more capable of operating in the program without the support of English. Green & Maracle
(2018) appear to describe a further evolved version of this approach, in which students use almost no
English after the first month of class. This is facilitated by quickly teaching students important phrases
related to language and comprehension, such as “How do you say…?” “What does that mean?” etc.,
enabling them to ask and answer questions about Kanyen’kéha grammar and vocabulary without
lapsing into English from very early in the program.
3.4 Encountered problems
Apart from the problems creating and maintaining an immersive language environment described
above, OK has encountered a few other problems in the running of its classes.
Maracle & Richards (2002) report that although chalkboard lessons were an effective means of
teaching grammar, they also at times produced “non-language activity.” Students would sometimes
become more concerned with copying down material from the board that they did not pay attention to
the attendant grammatical explanations or pronunciations, slowing down the class overall and slowing
down the development of their speaking skills. This problem was resolved by reducing the inclusion of
written material in lessons, as by writing down only the root form of a verb, and demonstrating various
grammatical changes out loud, rather than writing out large sets of forms on the board.
Maracle & Richards (2002) also describes an issue with student’s expectations about
translations. As previously described, students expected more similarity between Kanyen’kéha and
English than truly exists, expecting one-to-one translation between Kanyen’kéha and English. This
resulted in students expecting that Kanyen’kéha translations of a given word would be usable in the
exact same set of circumstances as in English, which does not always occur. In order to mitigate this
issue, OK instructors de-emphasized the translation of particular English sentences into strict
Kanyen’kéha equivalents and its attendant implied literal correspondence, instead focusing on
demonstrating how an English speaker and a Kanyen’kéha speaker each might describe a particular
situation. This allows the instructor to communicate how English and Kanyen’kéha each explicitly
communicate different aspects of a situation, which renders direct translations difficult, while teaching
students how that particular situation would actually be described by a Kanyen’kéha speaker.
Richards & Maracle (2002) describe how OK’s Indigenous students are often difficult to
motivate to perform well in the OK program. They report that Indigenous students are often less
concerned with marks, and so it is difficult to encourage Indigenous students to perform well on tests.
They suggest instead that Indigenous students would be better motivated if they can see their
Kanyen’kéha learning as an important social pursuit, such that it helps them to participate in traditional
cultural activities, such as longhouse ceremonies or traditional medicine, or if they believe they will be
able to raise their children speaking Kanyen’kéha.

OK program assessment techniques
4.1 Section introduction
This section describes the means by which the OK program assesses student’s language ability and
learning progress. This will include descriptions of assessment techniques developed by OK and of
tests developed externally and adopted by OK. This will also include description how OK selects what
students to accept when applicants exceed capacity, including factors OK has found make students
well-suited to the program, and OK’s use of an admission test.
4.2 Student assessment & tests
Green & Maracle (2018) describe two student assessment tools used by the OK program. The first of
these are regular oral unit tests, administered about every three weeks, testing students comprehension
of most recently taught vocabulary and grammar. For these tests, students are asked to translate 10
sentences between Kanyen’kéha and English, and assessed for the accuracy of their given translations
and the ease with which they produce translations. A high-performing student is able to translate both
quickly and accurately.
The other assessment tool Green & Maracle (2018) describe is the Oral Proficiency Interview
(OPI). OPIs are a formalized oral language assessment tool specified by ACTFL, administered to
students at the end of each year of the program. Green & Maracle do not describe the administration of
OPIs in detail. OPIs allow students to be assessed for their language proficiency level in the terms of
ACTFL (i.e. Novice up to Advanced-High), which are also the terms in which OK states their
minimum required proficiency to continue to the second year of the program or to graduate the
program, and in which OK states their overall program goals in terms of student language proficiency.
Neither Richards & Maracle (2002) nor Maracle & Richards (2002) describe any student
assessment tools previously used by the OK program.
4.3 Admission test & successful student factors
Green & Maracle (2018) describe how the OK program requires applicants to pass an admission test,
consisting of a list of words which must be memorized, in order to be eligible to apply to the program.
Richards & Maracle (2002) describe how this admission test was originally established in order to
ensure that applicants demonstrate a willingness to study and review Kanyen’kéha on their own time,
as solely learning and practising Kanyen’kéha within the class hours is insufficient for the best possible
educational outcomes. This admission test also allows the program to spend less time at the beginning
of the program covering the content contained in the admission test. Green & Maracle (2018) report
that although the admission test has increased the success rate of students in the program, success in the
admission test is still not very predictive of future success, so a new admission test should be
developed.
As the OK program has grown, Green & Maracle (2018) report that the number of applicants
who pass the admission test has now outstrips the program’s capacity. Because of this, the OK program
has begun to preferentially select applicants based on a number of additional factors. Green & Maracle
report that OK prefers younger students, students with young children, students who live or work in the
Six Nations community, students who have not previously attended the program, and students who
attend traditional ceremonies. These preference criteria are largely aimed at ensuring student success or
increasing the impact of a student’s Kanyen’kéha learning; younger students are often more successful
students, students with children might teach their children Kanyen’kéha as well, students who live in
the Six Nations community are likely to increase the size of the immediate Kanyen’kéha speaking
community, etc.
Some of these preferences rely on factors long established by OK to predict student success.
Richards & Maracle (2002) reports that younger students are often more successful than older students.
Richards & Maracle (2002) and Maracle & Richards (2002) both report that students with previous
academic training are likely to perform well, especially if they have previous experience with language
learning. Maracle & Richards (2002) and Green & Maracle (2018) both report that students with strong
English language skills are likely to perform well as Kanyen’kéha students. Green & Maracle (2018)
also suggests that students who have committed to Kanyen’kéha learning for the good of the
community or culture are likely to succeed as Kanyen’kéha students.
References
Green, J., & Maracle, O. B. (2018). The root-word method for building proficient second-language
speakers of polysynthetic languages: Onkwawén: na Kentyókhwa Adult Mohawk Language
Immersion Program. In Hinton, L., Huss, L., Roche, G. (eds.) The Routledge handbook of
language revitalization. 145-155. Routledge.
Maracle, D., & Richards, M. (2002). A native language immersion program for adults: Reflections
on year 1. In Burnaby, B., Reyhner, J. (eds.) Indigenous Languages across the Community.
Richards, M., & Maracle, D. (2002). An intensive native language program for adults: The instructors’
perspective. McGill Journal of Education. 37(3): 371-385.