Retelling

Elder Stories Digitally

Literature Review
Robin Hunt
University of Alaska Fairbanks

RETELLING ELDER STORIES DIGITALLY

Project Overview
The elder sat in a little chair as the first and second graders circled around her
on the floor. As the elder told a story, she dropped her voice and began to sing. Every
child leaned quietly forward as if mesmerized by the cadence of the Yupik song.
My masters project, Retelling Elders Stories Digitally, was a part of my quest
for meeting the needs of my first and second grade students in Kotlik, located in
Western Alaska. My students struggled with using Standard American English (SAE)
at a time when a strong emphasis was being placed on standardized test scores
throughout the state of Alaska. My students in this project are Yupik and
communicate fluently in Village English (VE-see description below). However, many
of the students at our site did not pass the state writing exams, which are assessed
by SAE standards. My masters project draws upon the underutilized knowledges
within the community, such as elders wisdom through storytelling, as a resource
within the school. Elders brought culturally relevant knowledge into the classroom
when they shared their stories with students, and I then had students retell the
story to practice using past tense in SAE. Past tense in SAE was a grammatical
concept that my VE students often struggled with each year.
In my project, students heard a story in the dialect of English they were
comfortable speaking every day: VE. Then students retold the story in VE before coconstructing the corresponding SAE forms. This is a means of bridging what they
were familiar with to what they needed to learn according to the Alaskan state
standards. I invited an elder to come to our classroom to share a story with my first

RETELLING ELDER STORIES DIGITALLY

and second graders. After listening to the story in VE, students recalled parts of the
story, which I wrote on sticky notes so students could arrange the events in
chronological order. Then students rewrote part of the story with a partner in VE
creating a final draft in SAE with help from the teacher. Finally, students illustrated
their part of the story and added their writing and voices to the digital class book
using an app called StoryKit.
Why Did I Choose to Focus on Both VE and SAE?
The recurring question for me throughout my teaching career had been,
"How can I be an effective teacher in my rural Alaskan setting?" As I began my
masters in Applied Linguistics, I have refined my question to, How can I be an
effective language arts teacher in my rural Alaskan setting while valuing my
students language and culture?
After marrying into the local culture, this became a personal issue for me
since my children are a product of two cultures with varying values and
expectations. My older children learned to speak SAE as their first dialect of English
and generally transition between the VE and SAE to match the setting they are in.
My youngest daughter, however, learned to talk in rural Alaska. She speaks VE. The
fact that she uses VE is endearing to me as I see it as a connection to our family and
who she is.
One summer while visiting family in the Lower 48 a couple family members
began correcting my daughters speech. One family member was concerned because
she dearly loves my daughter and does not want other people to look down on her
or think that she is uneducated because of the way she speaks. This made me

RETELLING ELDER STORIES DIGITALLY

acutely aware of the stigma placed on VE. It further fueled my desire to help
students develop SAE while validating their current dialect of English.
As a parent and a teacher I dearly love the children in my life that speak VE,
and I want others to know how sweet and bright they are. As a teacher, I have the
power to influence my students' learning and comfort level with who they are. I can
also offer them the freedom and tools to speak and write in VE within the culture in
which they live and in SAE to communicate with the wider world. My project goal
was that students would be comfortable communicating effectively in both VE and
SAE and be able to switch between the two when necessary based on context and
audience. I wanted to give my students the tools that would empower them to speak
and write effectively so they could be received with respect and valued for who they
are and what they have to contribute in various cultural settings.
What Is Village English (VE) and Why Do I Need to Address it?
Students and community members in Kotlik communicate effectively with
each other in VE. However, according to the Kotlik School Report Card 2013-14 97%
of students who took the Standard Based Assessment were not proficient in SAE
(Alaska Department of Education). While students need to be able to communicate
in VE within the culture in which they live, the state evaluates their education based
on their ability to communicate in SAE. Being able to communicate in SAE is a skill
that will be needed for future education, jobs, and interactions with the world
outside the village.
The childrens first language in our village is a linguistic variety of English
called Village English. VE, in our region, uses English words but follows some of the

RETELLING ELDER STORIES DIGITALLY

Yugtun grammatical structures. For example, He go store, referring to the past

tense, since past tense in Yupik is noted by context. Steven Jacobsen calls this
Yupik influenced English (1984). VE is its own variety of English that follows
consistent rules just like Standard American English, British English or any other
language or language variety. VE is another vernacular of English (Jacobsen, 1984).
In addition to purely grammatical differences, VE also uses its own system of
gestures, sounds, and body language. For example, a quick subtle raise of the
eyebrows communicates, yes or agreement. A slurping sound communicates that
the food mentioned in conversation sounds delicious to eat, or the thought of it is
puts them in the mood to eat it. Looking at the ground when being corrected is a
sign of respect.
As a teacher from another culture, becoming aware of the many different
aspects of meaning within the culture helped me to understand my students. When I
finally understood that VE was a valid dialect of English that my students spoke
fluently, I realized that my students were not handicapped linguistically. And that
they were not caught between English and Yup'ik without knowing any language,
as I heard different teachers state sadly. My students were very capable of learning
language. I explained to students that, in school, we needed to practice speaking and
writing using academic English. At home and around town people speak VE and that
is another way to talk.
One common SAE grammatical structure that challenges VE speakers is the
use of the past tense in SAE. Past tense in VE is known by context using what would
be considered present tense SAE verbs. Typical journal entries by first graders

RETELLING ELDER STORIES DIGITALLY

about what they did yesterday, for example, included, I play out, or I go store.
Another example is I slide down, referring to sledding or sliding down a snow
bank on their bottom. To address this challenge, my project focused on having
students retell elder stories using past tense verbs in SAE. Past tense is a very
difficult concept for my students to apply since they use VE in their everyday
speech.
Which Theories Support My Methods?
In this paper, I am going to talk about the theory and rationale that supports
using storytelling in my teaching. I will describe both Task-Based Language
Learning (TBLL) and the PACE Model as ways of helping my students meet the
learning objectives of this project. Other topics that I will cover include Funds of
Knowledge, Multiliteracies, Affective Filter, Comprehensible Output, Focus on Form,
Designing, and Languaging.
Funds of Knowledge: Why Should We Bring the Community Into the Classroom?
Funds of Knowledge are defined by Moll et al. (1992) as historically
accumulated and culturally developed bodies of knowledge and skills essential for
household or individual functioning and well-being (p. 133). Funds of Knowledge is
a very broad concept. An individual's Funds of Knowledge encompass his or her
experiences and knowledge. The term Funds of Knowledge generally refers to
specific knowledge that is usually not valued or recognized as valid in the Western
school setting such as subsistence skills, for example, being able to gather berries or
hunt animals and preserve them for the winter.
When I first moved to Kotlik, as a new teacher from the Lower Forty-Eight, I

RETELLING ELDER STORIES DIGITALLY

was unaware of the vast knowledge and resources within the Native community
that I could utilize. I became aware of the local Funds of Knowledge and which
community members were willing to share them as I happened upon people as they
worked on subsistence activities outside. I saw people cleaning salmon, hanging
meat to dry, cleaning a seal skin, or mending a fish net. I would introduce myself
and have a short conversation with them as they worked. Sometimes I would ask a
couple of questions or offer to help get something they needed. I also noticed which
elders our Yupik teacher, Theresa Prince invited into the school and I listened along
with my students when they visited.
When community members came into the classroom, students were often
curious and attentive to what they had to share. In a comfortable, safe environment,
students Affective Filter was low, allowing language learning to take place.
Krashen (1982) explains that ones Affective Filter is up when emotional factors
such as low self-confidence, motivation, and anxiety act as a screen or filter that
inhibits language learning by limiting the amount of information that reaches the
part of the brain that acquires language (p. 30-31). I saw my students Affective
Filters rising when I gave them a page with a lot of text on it, and when I started
teaching grammar explicitly from the front of the classroom. Some students started
to get a far away look on their face when I started talking about writing. With a
limited school day, students cannot afford to disengage from learning due to being
overwhelmed by an assignment. I realized that I needed a new approach, one that
would make students feel comfortable, engaged and ready to learn.
In the culture of a rural Native Alaskan village, storytelling seems to be a

RETELLING ELDER STORIES DIGITALLY

natural way to draw elders knowledge of the local environment into the classroom
while keeping my students Affective Filter low. Storytelling has been a tool used for
passing on knowledge by Alaskan Natives for centuries. A. O. Kawagley (2006)
described this beautifully: The human values that make me uniquely Yupiaq in
cadence with the circadian and life rhythms of the universe are all slowly unfolded
as my grandmother and other elders teach me through myths and legends (p.27).
Likewise, students in my classroom absorb human values relative to the rhythms of
life in their environment as they listen while elders share stories.
In the Yupik culture in our region, there are two types of oral stories:
qanemcit and qulirat. Qanemcit are stories about personal life experiences and
individual Funds of Knowledge. Qulirat are stories with moral rules to guide a
persons life now and in the future (Wanda Kaganak, personal communication, July
17, 2015). Orr and Orr (1997) explained that qulirat often begin with, A long time
ago and are considered fictional (p. 214). Theresa Arevgaq John (2010) offers a
detailed explanation for the purposes of storytelling within the Yupik culture:
Qulirat and qanemcit1 are the profound words of wisdom or qanruyutet that
embody traditional values and principles that serve to direct human ways of
being that include sharing, humor, spirituality, family, hunting traditions,
knowledge of the language, respect for nature, humility, compassion,
resolution of conflict, cooperation, love and respect for our elders and one
another (p. 87).

The elder story shared with my class was a quliraq2 story. In the story a boy
went hunting and ended up being hunted by a bear. To escape the bear he drank the
river dry, including all the animals in it to get home to his grandmother. He was

1 Qulirat and qanemcit are plural forms of the Yupik stories
2 Singular form of the Yupik story

RETELLING ELDER STORIES DIGITALLY

then too fat to go through the window or door of the house. He was able to escape
the bear by entering the house through the eye of a needle his grandmother gave
him.
This quliraq is rich in moral lessons. One lesson was that even though there
may be things that sound impossible, like going through the eye of the needle, you
should listen to your elders because your survival may depend on it. The second
lesson was that sometimes, simple tools, as basic as a needle, might be used to solve
difficult situations. The lessons gained from elder stories will vary based on the
listeners Funds of Knowledge and interpretation. While the lessons from our elders
story were clear to Kaganak (personal communication), another person who heard
the same story thought that the cultural value being taught was to not be greedy or
stingy. Since the boy could not fit through the door after drinking all the animals in
the river, without sharing them, the bear almost ate him. I have been told by various
people native to Kotlik and other villages in Western Alaska, Theyll learn when
theyre ready. When stories are shared, lessons reveal themselves when the
listeners are ready for them, such as when they relate to a stage of life. In this way
the same story can reveal many different lessons to the same person at different
times in his or her lifetime. The knowledge and values are then available for the
listener when they are needed (George, 2015).
By inviting elders into the classroom throughout the year, I hoped to validate
the culture and support the community by providing another space for elders to
share with students an important aspect of their heritage: the art of storytelling.
Storytelling is a fund of knowledge that is central to the Yupik culture in multiple

RETELLING ELDER STORIES DIGITALLY

10

ways. For example, there is the content of the story, the process of storytelling, and
the fact that it is the traditional platform for teaching (Wanda Kaganak, personal
communication).
In trying to be culturally relevant, I followed our Yupik teachers example
when she had elders come into the school to share stories. I asked elders if they
would like to share a story with our class, without requiring a specific format or
story. Elders hold a position of honor in the Yupik culture, so when elders shared
their stories both adults and children were expected to listen (Prince, 2010).
For some non-Native teachers, inviting elders to share in the classroom can
be viewed as an intimidating and time-consuming event. It can also be difficult to
release control over the outcome of the lesson when the outcome depends on the
story the elder selects. However, I have been rewarded with different Funds of
Knowledge that my students and I would have never learned about if I had
restricted the elders to predetermined topics that I had suggested. Some stories
revolved around winter safety. One story taught me not to eat snow if I get stranded
and become thirsty. This is because it can speed up the process of hypothermia by
lowering your body temperature. The elders recommend melting the snow in your
hand first and then drinking it a tiny bit at a time (Martina Aparezuk and Mary Lucy
Andrews, personal communication). They also recommend taking some seal oil
(uquq) in a jar on long trips. Using uquq as a dip for dry meat can warm a hunter
who has been traveling outside in the elements for days because of the high calorie
content of the oil (Joe Aparezuk). These are all examples of ancestral knowledge
that I could not provide and my students only gained when I chose to invite elders

RETELLING ELDER STORIES DIGITALLY

11

into the classroom. With repeated exposure to storytelling, students absorb the
unspoken rules around a Native storytelling experience. Exact meaning and
grammar come later, but immersion in the context and unspoken guidelines of
Yupik culture and storytelling come first. A. O. Kawagley (2006) explains that in the
Yupik culture listening to a story is not merely listening: This quest for
knowledge is rigorously sought through the use of the five physical senses, well
sprinkled with intuition The person is always a participant-observer (p. 17).
Young students like mine naturally use their senses as participant-observers
and are attentive to Native stories that are relevant to the Funds of Knowledge they
are familiar with such as storytelling, kinship, local animals, and the land native to
the local environment. The close connection between Native skills and identity are
motivating factors that create authentic meaning for my students. These stories can
easily become a springboard for, or an extension of, classroom content. The stories
draw upon the childrens desire to connect with respected people and cultural
activities in their community. Elder stories were a positive introduction to teaching
the new skills that were required by state standards. I found this especially true
with difficult concepts that students had an aversion to, such as retelling a story in
past tense SAE. One reason elder stories keep student interest is because they do
not rely solely on words. Students are drawn into the stories through gestures,
animal sounds, songs, and facial expressions.
What are Multiliteracies?
There is a strong connection between Funds of Knowledge and
multiliteracies. Multiliteracies is a term coined by the New London Group (NLG,

RETELLING ELDER STORIES DIGITALLY

12

1996) that expands the definition of literacy beyond reading and writing. It refers to
the ability to understand and communicate meaning through images, symbols,
songs, dance, gestures, sounds, and sometimes spoken or written words.
Multiliteracies allow for Funds of Knowledge to be drawn out through two aspects:
the multilingual and the multimodal.
Multilingual refers to using more than one language, or in my project, using
more than one variety of English. The NLG expanded the definition of literacy in
hopes of accessing language in the context of work and social communities. They
saw that the world was getting smaller with the use of technology (1996). My
project incorporates the multilingual with my intention to not replace one language
system (VE) with another (SAE), but to see these two linguistic varieties as
beneficial resources for students as they engage in community life in the village
(using VE) and academic and professional life outside of rural Alaska (SAE).
Multiliteracies access multi-modal communication by incorporating different
modes of meaning making including linguistic, visual, aural, gestural and spatial
modes of meaning with language (New London Group, 1996). Later tactile was
added to the list of modalities (Cope & Kalantzis, 2009). My project included the
multimodal aspects of multiliteracies. Listening to the elders story, students
combined linguistic, audio, visual, and gestural multiliteracies. As students listened
to the meaning, they took in the story in the form of words (linguistic) as they
listened (aural). They watched the elder (visual) as the elder pretended she was the
little boy singing to the grandmother in the story. The storyteller used gestures to
communicate that the boy in the story went away, tried to squeeze through the

RETELLING ELDER STORIES DIGITALLY

13

window, and huddled close to the fire in a way that conveyed how cold he was
without using additional words to explain what he did or looked like (gestural).
When students used the elders oral story to create a digital story on StoryKit
the project integrated written words (linguistic), pictures (visual), and their
recorded voices (aural). Students typed their story (tactile) and arranged the
picture, words and icons on each page in a way that made sense to them (spatial).
Multiliteracies offer students more ways to draw on and represent their current
Funds of Knowledge while offering many different ways to connect with, create, and
retain new meaning and knowledge. The story that the elder told is an example of
what the NLG (1996) would classify as an Available Design.
An Available Design is a pre-existing lesson plan, material, or resource. Cope
& Kalantzis (2009) state, Available Designs are the found or discernable patterns
and conventions of representation (p. 10). In my project VE and the elder story
were the Available Designs that were resources for meaning that were drawn from
the local Funds of Knowledge in the community. An Available Design does not have
meaning until the learner interacts with it and creates new understanding from it.
This is the process of Designing (New London Group, 1996). Cope & Kalantzis
(2009) explain, Designing is the act of doing something with the available designs
of meaning be that communicating to others or representing the world to oneself or
others representations of it (p. 11).
Using the Available Designs (the traditional elder story, VE, and Funds of
Knowledge) students retold the story with a friend, which is an example of
Designing. Students took the existing elder story (Available Design) and

RETELLING ELDER STORIES DIGITALLY

14

communicated their understanding of the story by creating their new version of the
elder story using the digital app, StoryKit. The students new digital version of the
elder story was a new Available Design. Students became agents in their own
learning as they retold the elder story using their own words, pictures, and voice.
Both Available Designs, the elders original story (Design) and the students retelling
(Redesign), were multimodal, and the task as a whole was multilingual as students
took a story in VE and converted it to SAE.
The process of collaboration with a partner students participated in as they
recreated the elder story in their own words is called collaborative dialogue.
Collaborative dialogue is dialogue in which speakers are engaged in problemsolving, knowledge building, solving linguistic problems and co-constructing
knowledge about language (Swain 2000). This process is can be very important in
the language learning process.
Why is Task-Based Language Learning An Effective Method?

A way to engage students in collaborative dialogue is through Task-Based

Language Learning/Teaching. TBLT (Task-Based Language Teaching) proposes

that the primary unit for both designing a language programme and for planning
individual lessons should be a task (Ellis, 2009, p. 223). To give my students the
opportunity to become active designers of meaning and form, I provided a task for
them. According to Willis (1996), a task is an activity where the target language is
used by the learner for a communicative purpose in order to achieve an outcome
(p. 234). Ellis states,
There are four key characteristics of TBLL: 1. The primary focus of the

RETELLING ELDER STORIES DIGITALLY

15

learning is based on meaning. 2. There should be some kind of gap. 3.

Learners should largely have to rely on their own resources. 4. There should
be a clearly defined outcome other than the use of language. The language
serves as the means for achieving the outcome, not as an end in its own right
(p. 223).

My students focused on meaning as they retold the elder story. They had to

overcome a language gap when they collaborated with a partner to recreate the
story in VE and then convert it to SAE. Student partners were expected to rely on
their own resources as they created their rough drafts unassisted by the teacher.
The clearly defined outcome was a completed page in a digital book that included an
illustration, typed text and an audio recording. The process of creating the digital
page necessitated the use and negotiation of both VE and SAE.
Focus on Form
For years I taught SAE grammar skills using Daily Oral Language (D.O.L)
exercises. This included editing two isolated sentences with grammar errors, as well
as other grammar skills such as labeling a sentence as past, present, or future tense,
circling the misspelled word from a random list of different words, or circling a
word from a list that was a certain part of speech such as a verb. Researchers call
this method Focus on FormS (Long, 1988). More recently researchers such as Long,
have theorized the limitations of this approach. It did not work with my students.
When they wrote in their journals they still made the same errors after a year of
D.O.L activities. According to Long (1988), Focus on FormS is a synthetic approach
to language learning. The second language is broken down into words and

RETELLING ELDER STORIES DIGITALLY

16

collocations, grammar rules, phonemes, intonation and stress patterns,

structures(this approach is) still used in the vast majority of classrooms the world
over (Long, 1988, p. 15). Focus on FormS is decontextualizing grammar
instruction.
Jill Phillips, a teacher in rural Alaska, was candid when she shared her
dilemma that is indicative of many teachers. She explained how she spent years
teaching grammar using worksheets that often combined words into phrases or
manipulated a word in sentences in isolation. Some of her students who were able
to complete the worksheets with accuracy did not apply what they learned to their
writing. A Focus on FormS approach to grammar thus did not work for her students
either (Defense Presentation by Jill Phillips, July 20, 2015).
I needed a different approach that would make language learning more
meaningful and less intimidating. Long (1988) suggested that focusing on meaning
was important for language development. Long believes that Focus on Form (1988)
is a superior to Focus on FormS because it allows for meaningful language
interaction within a task.
Focus on form involves briefly drawing students' attention to linguistic
elements (words, collocations, grammatical structures, pragmatic patterns,
and so on), in context, as they arise incidentally in lessons whose overriding
focus is on meaning, or communication, the temporary shifts in focal
attention being triggered by students' comprehension or production
problems (Long, 1988).

RETELLING ELDER STORIES DIGITALLY

17

In an attempt to teach grammar skills while maintaining a primary emphasis

on meaning, I exchanged my D.O.L book for student journal entries. For the first
three quarters of the year, my first and second-grade students had mini-lessons on
SAE past tense. My students wrote in their journals daily. A couple of times per week
I asked for volunteers who wanted to share their writing and have the class help
edit one of their old journal entries. The entries were anything from one sentence to
a couple of paragraphs, usually written in VE. One entry would have been similar to,
I go stor with tyrone we got cande. Past tense was a difficult concept for them to
apply in an oral and written form. As a whole class, we looked at their VE sentences
and converted them to SAE past tense. While this practice seemed to help with
student interest and helped clarify meaning through mini lessons, I wanted my
students to focus on a real task so I had them retell an elder story digitally.
One way to implement Focus on Form in the classroom is through TBLL.
Creating StoryKit digital books from elder stories was a successful task based
project that met Willis definition of a task (1996) since students focused on
negotiating for meaning in the target language, SAE, as they retold the elder story.
My project also met Ellis (2009) key characteristics of TBLL displayed in this chart.
TBLL Characteristic

1. Focus on Meaning

2. Overcome a gap

3. Student relies primarily on their own
resources

4. Have a clearly defined outcome

What it looked like in my project

- Retelling the elder story
- Between VE and SAE past tense
- Students relied primarily on conversation
with their partner
- To retell their part of the elder story
digitally in SAE, adding pictures and voice.

RETELLING ELDER STORIES DIGITALLY

18

The reason I implemented a task is because I wanted the students to use the
language authentically, and TBLL facilitates natural communication. Students
negotiated for meaning and form when they worked on retelling the story together.
Students refined each others language as the conversed and created
comprehensible language or output
Comprehensible Output
Comprehensible output has three functions in the TBLL process. These features
include: 1. The Noticing/triggering function 2. The Metalinguistic (reflective)
Function and 3. Hypothesis testing function (Swain, 1995).
In the noticing/triggering function, the student notices a gap in his language.
This gap might be that his partner does not understand what he is saying orally or in
writing. The other person may correct him and he might notice that what he is
saying does not sound right. One student, noticed and tried to fill a gap in his
learning as he questioned his own writing after he read it aloud with his partner.
He go? He goed? As he listened to himself read, he tried to fill the gap as he
searched for the correct word. This is a perfect example of how output or the
process of talking increases noticing when a student seeks feedback. The student
then has to search the recesses of his mind for other words and concepts that may
relate to the missing words in the second language in which he is trying to
communicate. As students noticed their need for clarification or another student
commented on their speaking or writing errors, their attention was focused on the
form of their language. When students pay attention to a particular form, they are

RETELLING ELDER STORIES DIGITALLY

19

more likely to remember it and transfer the language concept to their language in
the future (Ellis, 2009).
In the hypothesis function, clarifying questions are made as the second
language learner modifies his response. Swain (2000) has shown that learners
modify their output in response to these sorts of clarifying questions within the
conversation. Students actively seek feedback from the interlocutor through this
hypothesis testing. In VE a student sought feedback from a classmate by asking, He
drink the seal? Another student replied, He drank the seal.
The third function of comprehensible output is reflective, the metalinguistic
function, where the student thinks about their language. The goal is to improve
communication through the change these three steps of authentic output can foster.
In dialogue with others we see learning take place (Donato & Lantolf 1990, Lantolf
2000, Swain 2001, Swain 2007). My lesson fostered comprehensible output as
students discussed and then wrote their part of the story together. One boy spoke
as he wrote,
The boy went in the (pause).
House, replied his partner.
Oh, how to spell house? the little boy asked.
H-O-U-S-E.
The children were uninhibited when conversing with each other one-on-one.
Not only did the partner pairing allow all of the students to have more time to talk
(output), but one of the students in my example is shy and never volunteered to talk
in the whole class setting. Altogether the three functions of authentic

RETELLING ELDER STORIES DIGITALLY

20

comprehensible output allowed for more competent dialogue.

When I began my masters project, I wanted to use the TBLL approach since
it was an effective technique I had used with my students in the past. However, as I
continued my research classes I was introduced to the PACE model of teaching
meaning and grammar through storytelling. I realized that PACE specifically
addressed the elements of the Task-Based Learning goals that I was trying to
achieve in my classroom. I wanted to focus on storytelling and learning language by
focusing on meaning (not grammar rules).
What is the PACE Model & How is it Beneficial to My Students?
My project follows an adapted PACE Model with TBLL as the Extension stage
of the PACE model.

Image created by Candace Branson (2015)

Figure 2: Pace Model

The PACE Model was introduced by Adair-Hauck & Donato, (2002), and is an
acronym for 1. Presentation 2. Attention 3. Co-construction 4. Extension. In the
Presentation phase, students are drawn into participation through a short oral
story, about five minutes in length. Students can engage through multimodalities
such as observing or creating gestures, sounds, or songs. When I asked my students
what they remembered about the story, they responded orally as I wrote the events

RETELLING ELDER STORIES DIGITALLY

21

on sticky notes for students to put in chronological order. Once I asked when that
event happened in the story, they pointed to the correct place in the sequence of
events they had already put in order. Students were allowed to contribute input
without having to rely solely on words. With the Affective Filter down, learners
engaged in learning. Grammar and form were present in the context of the story, but
it was not a focus at this point.
In the Attention phase, attention is brought to form or grammar. Parts of the
story can be highlighted or circled to focus on parts of speech or the form as
students focus on form. The intent is to trigger noticing in the student in hopes that
it will transfer to retention and use in their language usage (Adair-Hauck & Donato,
2002).
Then, through Co-construction, students are prompted to create their own
meaning and ties to the forms that were introduced in the Attention phase as they
create their own output (Adair-Hauck & Donato, 2002). The teacher might point to a
couple of words with ed at the end and ask, What is the same about these words?
What do you think the ed means? What happens if we take the ed off? Does it
change the meaning?
My project varies from the PACE model. I did not perform the Attention or
Co-construction phases with my students. Instead, I did a mini lesson that focused
on comprehension and sequence by having my students share what they
remembered about the story. I wrote down what they remembered on sticky notes,
which were key words that each represented a step in the sequence of the story.
Then I had the students arrange the events in order by rearranging the sticky notes

RETELLING ELDER STORIES DIGITALLY

22

before they went and wrote about one of the events with a partner. This was
effective in practicing with sequencing which was another skill I needed to address
with my students.
Finally, the Extension phase allows time for the story to be redesigned as
students engage in creating output. Here is when there is more time for
collaborative dialogue and peer learning extensions, such as acting out the story,
retelling it orally, illustrating, creating a bound book, or a digital storybook (AdairHauck & Donato, 2002). This is when my students engaged in the process of
retelling the elder story in writing and then digitally using StoryKit.
As my students collaborated, they participated in problem-solving as they
practiced creating language together. As students wrote they corrected each other
and sometimes argued over which part of the story came next or which form of a
verb should be used in a sentence. I saw students modify their sentences as they
noticed that they did not make sense or sound correct. Sometimes I saw them test
their hypotheses as to how something should be said. A student would repeat the
sentence they were saying and then look at their partner for affirmation or
correction before writing. As researchers have noted, student communication was
improved through the process of dialogue and the metalinguistic reflection that the
discussion initiated within the individual learners (Donato & Lantolf 1990, Lantolf
2000, Swain 2001, Swain 2007).
Most children are natural storytellers and often come to school with a story
they are anxious to tell. I encouraged sharing orally in my classroom. The process of
sharing a story aloud supported the development of language as students listened to

RETELLING ELDER STORIES DIGITALLY

23

their classmates stories and asked clarifying questions in both VE and SAE and
added details to the stories. There was no perceived pressure, so no Affective Filter
was erected to hinder the process of sharing, comprehending, or questioning the
story. This process necessitated languaging.
Swain (2000) defines languaging as a dynamic, never-ending process of
using language to make meaning (p. 96). Students naturally negotiated for meaning
and form when they worked on retelling the elder story together. Swain (2000)
conveyed that a major source of learning a second language occurs through
languaging when students engage in producing and comprehending language. Rich
language discussions and negotiations for meaning can occur during the storytelling
process, and Funds of Knowledge can be tapped and developed as students share
experiences from outside the classroom. Task-based projects lend themselves to
activities that access students Funds of Knowledge and their personal interests.
Students can contribute what they know to the task. Students had the freedom to
practice speaking and creating language without being restricted to focusing on a
specific grammar rule. I saw students confidence grow as they were drawn into
languaging around the process of retelling the elder story digitally.

Where Do We Go From Here?
I would like to continue to invite elders and their stories into my classroom
as a way of exposing students to their wisdom and Funds of Knowledge. I have seen
that when I tap into what students have already experienced and their current
Funds of Knowledge, they are often able to engage in learning more fully. By letting

RETELLING ELDER STORIES DIGITALLY

24

them employ valuable real-life applications of knowledge, they can cognitively reach
for new Funds of Knowledge from the platform of their current understanding.
Allowing students to share what they have experienced at home and in the
community, validates who they are and empowers them.
When I get the opportunity to conduct this project again I will be eager to
include all four PACE steps including Attention to Form and Co-Construction
activities to see how they influence student learning past tense SAE. For this process
to be successful in my classroom, students needed to be given the time and direction
necessary to learn how to engage in peer dialogue properly. This skill would need to
be taught implicitly and situationally practiced in growing increments. Modeling and
role-playing activities such as, Turn and tell your neighbor could be a good way
to introduce this concept to a class.
Until I am able to conduct this project again, I would like to be intentional
about giving my students more agency in their learning. This will draw students into
the learning experience. As a teacher I would like to be the perpetual learner Healy
(2008) discusses. I would like to learn to become a facilitator who allows for
discovering various ways of knowing, being, and doing as a way of ensuring
language has meaning for my students without diminishing or replacing my
students Funds of Knowledge (p. 80). Through this synergistic process both the
students and the teacher can expand our learning.

RETELLING ELDER STORIES DIGITALLY

25

References
Adair-Hauck, B., & Donato, R. (2002). The PACE model actualizing the standards
through storytelling: Le bras, la jambe et le ventre. The French Review, 76,
278-296.
Alaska Department of Education and Early Development. (2014). Kotlik School
Report Card, 2013-2014. Retrieved from
https://education.alaska.gov/ReportCardToThePublic/Report/20132014/32/320080.
Branson, C. (2015). Qulianguanek litnauwilita lets teach from stories (Unpublished
masters thesis). University of Alaska Fairbanks, Fairbanks. Retrieved from
http://letsteachfromstories.weebly.com
Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (2009). Multiliteracies: new literacies, new learning.
Pedagogies, 4(3), 164-195.
Donato, R., & Lantolf, J. P. (1990). The dialogic origins of L2 monitoring. Pragmatics
and Language Learning, 1, 83-98.
Ellis, R. (2009). Task-based language teaching: Sorting out the misunderstandings.
International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 19, 221-246.
George, K. (2015). Qanemcitgun elitnaulleq. (Unpublished masters thesis).
University of Alaska Fairbanks, Fairbanks. Retrieved from
ktgeorge.weebly.com
Healy, A. (2008). The intersection of aboriginal knowledges, aboriginal literacies,
and new learning pedagogy for aboriginal students. In A. Healy,

RETELLING ELDER STORIES DIGITALLY

26

Multiliteracies and diversity in education: New pedagogies for expanding

landscapes (2-29). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Jacobsen, S. A. (1984). Central Yupik and the schools: A handbook for teachers.
Juneau, Alaska: Alaska Native Language Center, Alaska Department of
Education Bilingual/Bicultural Education Programs.
John, T. A. (2010). Yuraryararput Kangiit-luu: Our Ways of Dance and Their Meaning.
(Doctoral Dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest. (3421513)
Kaganak, W. J. (2015). Yuuyaraq indigenous traditional knowledge handed down from
generation to generation. (Unpublished masters thesis). University of Alaska
Fairbanks, Fairbanks. Retrieved from http://wjkaganak.weebly.com/
Kawagley, A. O. (2006). A Yupiaq worldview: A pathway to ecology and spirit.
Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press Inc.
Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Lantolf, J. P. (Ed.) (2000). Sociocultural theory and second language learning. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Long, M. H. (1988). Instructed interlanguage development. In L. M. Beebe
(ed.), Issues in second language acquisition: Multiple perspectives (pp. 11541). Cambridge, MA: Newbury House/Harper and Row.
Moll, L. C., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & Gonzalez, N. (1992). Funds of knowledge for
teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms.
Theory Into Practice, 31, 132-141.

RETELLING ELDER STORIES DIGITALLY

27

Nelson-Barber & Trumbull. (1995). Issues in cross-cultural assessment: American

Indian and Alaska Native students. (12) Far West Laboratory.
New London Group. (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures.
Harvard Educational Review 66(1), 60-92.
Orr, E. C., & Orr, B. (1997). Ellangellemni: When I became aware. Fairbanks, AK:
Lower Kuskokwim School District and Alaska Native Language Center.
Phillips, J. (2015). Its all in the past. (Unpublished masters thesis). University of
Alaska Fairbanks, Fairbanks. Retrieved from
http://jillphillipsproject.weebly.com
Prince, T. (2010). Elder in a classroom. (Unpublished masters thesis). University of
Alaska Fairbanks, Fairbanks.
Swain, M. (1985). Communicative Competence: Some roles of Comprehensible Input
and Comprehensible Output in its Development. In S. Gass & C. Madden
(Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235253). Rowley, MA:
Newbury House.
Swain, M. (1995). Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: A
step towards second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 16, 371-391.
Swain, M. (2000). The output hypothesis and beyond: Mediating acquisition through
collaborative dialogue. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second
language learning (pp. 96-114). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Swain, M. (2001). Integrating language and content teaching through collaborative
tasks. Canadian Modern Language Review, 58 (1), 44-63.

RETELLING ELDER STORIES DIGITALLY

28

Swain, M. (2007). The Output Hypothesis: Its history and its future [Keynote slides].
Retrieved from
http://www.celea.org.cn/2007/keynote/ppt/merrill%20swain.pdf
Willis, J. (1996). A Framework for Task-Based Learning. Harlow, UK: Longman
Addison-Wesley.
Webster, B. (2015). Utilizing Funds of Knowledge to Engage Students in Meaningful
Writing. (Unpublished masters thesis). University of Alaska Fairbanks,
Fairbanks. Retrieved from http://bradwebster.weebly.com