• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content

site logo
The Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language
search
  • Home
  • About TESL-EJ
  • Vols. 1-15 (1994-2012)
    • Volume 1
      • Volume 1, Number 1
      • Volume 1, Number 2
      • Volume 1, Number 3
      • Volume 1, Number 4
    • Volume 2
      • Volume 2, Number 1 — March 1996
      • Volume 2, Number 2 — September 1996
      • Volume 2, Number 3 — January 1997
      • Volume 2, Number 4 — June 1997
    • Volume 3
      • Volume 3, Number 1 — November 1997
      • Volume 3, Number 2 — March 1998
      • Volume 3, Number 3 — September 1998
      • Volume 3, Number 4 — January 1999
    • Volume 4
      • Volume 4, Number 1 — July 1999
      • Volume 4, Number 2 — November 1999
      • Volume 4, Number 3 — May 2000
      • Volume 4, Number 4 — December 2000
    • Volume 5
      • Volume 5, Number 1 — April 2001
      • Volume 5, Number 2 — September 2001
      • Volume 5, Number 3 — December 2001
      • Volume 5, Number 4 — March 2002
    • Volume 6
      • Volume 6, Number 1 — June 2002
      • Volume 6, Number 2 — September 2002
      • Volume 6, Number 3 — December 2002
      • Volume 6, Number 4 — March 2003
    • Volume 7
      • Volume 7, Number 1 — June 2003
      • Volume 7, Number 2 — September 2003
      • Volume 7, Number 3 — December 2003
      • Volume 7, Number 4 — March 2004
    • Volume 8
      • Volume 8, Number 1 — June 2004
      • Volume 8, Number 2 — September 2004
      • Volume 8, Number 3 — December 2004
      • Volume 8, Number 4 — March 2005
    • Volume 9
      • Volume 9, Number 1 — June 2005
      • Volume 9, Number 2 — September 2005
      • Volume 9, Number 3 — December 2005
      • Volume 9, Number 4 — March 2006
    • Volume 10
      • Volume 10, Number 1 — June 2006
      • Volume 10, Number 2 — September 2006
      • Volume 10, Number 3 — December 2006
      • Volume 10, Number 4 — March 2007
    • Volume 11
      • Volume 11, Number 1 — June 2007
      • Volume 11, Number 2 — September 2007
      • Volume 11, Number 3 — December 2007
      • Volume 11, Number 4 — March 2008
    • Volume 12
      • Volume 12, Number 1 — June 2008
      • Volume 12, Number 2 — September 2008
      • Volume 12, Number 3 — December 2008
      • Volume 12, Number 4 — March 2009
    • Volume 13
      • Volume 13, Number 1 — June 2009
      • Volume 13, Number 2 — September 2009
      • Volume 13, Number 3 — December 2009
      • Volume 13, Number 4 — March 2010
    • Volume 14
      • Volume 14, Number 1 — June 2010
      • Volume 14, Number 2 – September 2010
      • Volume 14, Number 3 – December 2010
      • Volume 14, Number 4 – March 2011
    • Volume 15
      • Volume 15, Number 1 — June 2011
      • Volume 15, Number 2 — September 2011
      • Volume 15, Number 3 — December 2011
      • Volume 15, Number 4 — March 2012
  • Vols. 16-Current
    • Volume 16
      • Volume 16, Number 1 — June 2012
      • Volume 16, Number 2 — September 2012
      • Volume 16, Number 3 — December 2012
      • Volume 16, Number 4 – March 2013
    • Volume 17
      • Volume 17, Number 1 – May 2013
      • Volume 17, Number 2 – August 2013
      • Volume 17, Number 3 – November 2013
      • Volume 17, Number 4 – February 2014
    • Volume 18
      • Volume 18, Number 1 – May 2014
      • Volume 18, Number 2 – August 2014
      • Volume 18, Number 3 – November 2014
      • Volume 18, Number 4 – February 2015
    • Volume 19
      • Volume 19, Number 1 – May 2015
      • Volume 19, Number 2 – August 2015
      • Volume 19, Number 3 – November 2015
      • Volume 19, Number 4 – February 2016
    • Volume 20
      • Volume 20, Number 1 – May 2016
      • Volume 20, Number 2 – August 2016
      • Volume 20, Number 3 – November 2016
      • Volume 20, Number 4 – February 2017
    • Volume 21
      • Volume 21, Number 1 – May 2017
      • Volume 21, Number 2 – August 2017
      • Volume 21, Number 3 – November 2017
      • Volume 21, Number 4 – February 2018
    • Volume 22
      • Volume 22, Number 1 – May 2018
      • Volume 22, Number 2 – August 2018
      • Volume 22, Number 3 – November 2018
      • Volume 22, Number 4 – February 2019
    • Volume 23
      • Volume 23, Number 1 – May 2019
      • Volume 23, Number 2 – August 2019
      • Volume 23, Number 3 – November 2019
      • Volume 23, Number 4 – February 2020
    • Volume 24
      • Volume 24, Number 1 – May 2020
      • Volume 24, Number 2 – August 2020
      • Volume 24, Number 3 – November 2020
      • Volume 24, Number 4 – February 2021
    • Volume 25
      • Volume 25, Number 1 – May 2021
      • Volume 25, Number 2 – August 2021
      • Volume 25, Number 3 – November 2021
      • Volume 25, Number 4 – February 2022
    • Volume 26
      • Volume 26, Number 1 – May 2022
      • Volume 26, Number 2 – August 2022
      • Volume 26, Number 3 – November 2022
      • Volume 26, Number 4 – February 2023
    • Volume 27
      • Volume 27, Number 1 – May 2023
      • Volume 27, Number 2 – August 2023
      • Volume 27, Number 3 – November 2023
      • Volume 27, Number 4 – February 2024
    • Volume 28
      • Volume 28, Number 1 – May 2024
      • Volume 28, Number 2 – August 2024
      • Volume 28, Number 3 – November 2024
      • Volume 28, Number 4 – February 2025
    • Volume 29
      • Volume 29, Number 1 – May 2025
      • Volume 29, Number 2 – August 2025
      • Volume 29, Number 3 – November 2025
  • Books
  • How to Submit
    • Submission Info
    • Ethical Standards for Authors and Reviewers
    • TESL-EJ Style Sheet for Authors
    • TESL-EJ Tips for Authors
    • Book Review Policy
    • Media Review Policy
    • APA Style Guide
  • Editorial Board
  • Support

Making Meaning, Making Change: Participatory Curriculum Development or Adult ESL Literacy

Vol. 1. No. 3 — March 1995

Making Meaning, Making Change: Participatory Curriculum Development or Adult ESL Literacy

Elsa Roberts Auerbach (1992)
Washington DC: Center for Applied Linguistics
Pp. 140. ISBN 0-93-735479-1 (paper)
US $15.95

While many aspects of the ESL profession have acquired a certain glamour, or even panache, with their foreign travel and university affiliations, the same cannot be said for adult ESL literacy. Dependent on external funding sources, such as “soft money” grants by government agencies, and thus condemned to uncertain long-range prospects, adult ESL programs have acquired in many places an unsavory reputation of being the bailiwick of political “educators” (i.e. bureaucrats). Salaries are seldom high enough to attract teachers to make a professional commitment to the program; instead, full-time professionals tend to congregate in the materials development and assessment end of the field. Thus, on the instructional side, turnover is high, reliance on adjuncts excessive and morale low.

Nonetheless, it is precisely in the adult ESL sector of the profession that demand for trained teachers can be expected to grow the fastest. With the increased emphasis on workplace literacy, and local demands for greater English proficiency (often accompanied by xenophobic attacks on native language use among immigrants), enhancement of the professional status of non-academic adult ESL educators is urgent. Furthermore, it is precisely in the adult education ESL sector that the nostalgic ideal of English instruction as a vehicle for acculturating immigrants into the democratic values of the United States finds the strongest resonance.

Elsa Auerbach has made a major contribution to this cause in her book, Making Meaning, Making Change. Based on the experiences of the University of Massachusetts Family Literacy Project, of which she was the coordinator, the book is at once an authoritative and persuasive polemic for what she calls the “participatory” vs. the more traditional “ends-means” approach to curriculum design and a practical manual for carrying out this participatory adult literacy curriculum.

Auerbach begins with an overview in which she establishes the theoretical foundations of the practice of the Family Literacy Project. In the ends-means model, curriculum development is driven at all stages by experts who are external to the process of educating the target population. Competencies, skills and information are defined by independent research; materials are written (at great cost to the taxpayer, I might add) by developers who are in touch with the experts; assessment guidelines and measurable outcomes flow naturally from this deductive corpus. At the tail end of this process, the teacher is handed a syllabus and a [-1-] set of materials and instructed to impart this knowledge to the eagerly-awaiting students. That any learning at all occurs in this process is a tribute to the motivation and creativity of the teachers and students who, in Auerbach’s view, are actually battling great odds to produce any real results.

In the participatory model, the teacher and students collaborate to produce a context-specific curriculum based on the needs and desires that the students themselves experience. This is emphatically not to say that the teacher simply abdicates the leadership role in the classroom; rather she becomes a completely different kind of leader, finding ways to induce the students to identify their own needs and interests, introducing topics and activities in the class which allow students to use language to further their needs and interests, and marshalling educational resources to deepen students’ knowledge of the language as a result of their use of it.

Two features of Auerbach’s method are central to this approach: a) strategies for turning students into the most vital resources for language learning, and b) action as the practical outcome of language learning activities.

Rather than presenting the students with synthetic materials developed outside the classroom, Auerbach advocates that teachers combine “conscious listening,” namely a sympathetic awareness of what students’ real concerns are, with “catalyst” activities, i.e. language activities that get students to open up and express their real thoughts and feelings. Making Meaning contains an impressive inventory of such activities, which can include what are often called “icebreakers” to get students talking, class newspapers, picture albums, class rituals, or student-produced graphics.

Once the teacher has identified major themes in students’ lives with these “ways in,” she can use a variety of ready-to-hand “tools” to draw students into the deliberate use of language to address the issues they see as important. These tools can include fables, proverbs, published works of fiction, even childrens’ books. One of the most powerful tools is what she calls “codes,” carefully scripted dialogues in which characters reveal very controversial attitudes towards pressing social questions, such as racism, crime, or sexual harassment. By involving students in discussion about these codes, they not only acquire the language to address these issues, but they also begin to learn how to take positions on these issues themselves.

The concept of action in Auerbach’s program is no less central, although somewhat more problematic. As she herself admits, the expectations of the founders of the Family Literacy Project underwent some evolution during the life of the project. At the beginning, the organizers tended to view organized social action as [-2-] the most relevant evidence of success in teaching practical literacy to their students. However, as she puts it, “Measuring our practice by this narrow standard, it seemed that instances of action were few and far between” (p. 101). At the same time, she notes that their program’s definition of action gradually eased to include more personal participation in activities which linked students to the society at large, and thereby changed the students’ lives. Thus, “Rosa went to a community college; Hilda became more active in her school’s PTA; Angel had many of his writings published…” (p. 101).

One of the most significant chapters in Making Meaning is the chapter on assessment. In my opinion, assessment is one of the weakest links in the rusty chain of mainstream adult ESL education. Due to the seemingly unassailable claim that funding authorities have a right to expect quantifiable results in return for their money, the language testing industry has come into its own as an independent force which in many ways dominates the education profession. Auerbach subjects this fetishism of “objective” test instruments to a withering critique, based on well-documented pedagogical reasoning. In place of objective, machine-scored tests, she proposes a battery of “alternative” testing methods, including interviews, reading and writing samples, teacher conferences, and peer evaluation. Most importantly, teachers are encouraged to make the evaluation ongoing throughout the course, abandoning the impersonal psychometric pre- and post-test model which dominates so-called “scientific” assessment today.

Making Meaning, Making Change is written for the committed teacher, but Auerbach’s conception of the teacher differs sharply from that of the typical “soft-money” administrator in today’s adult education program. Her book is not simply a “cookbook” of helpful classroom hints, patched together by comforting Freirian truisms (a reference to the revolutionary Brazilian educator who is the inspiration of much that goes on in adult literacy education). Auerbach devotes an entire chapter to analyzing the major policies that shape a program before the first teacher ever steps into the classroom. Hers is one of the few books to recognize the integral role that the institutional setting of a program plays in the effectiveness of its instruction. Decisions regarding teacher workload, qualifications, staff development, course length, location, recruitment, support services, intake procedures, and orientation are all described in detail, along with the implications of each decision on the future shape of classroom interactions. For me, this chapter is one of the most fascinating, and Auerbach is sending a clear message to administrators and teachers alike that major program policies that affect instruction should not be made in isolation from teachers; and, conversely, that teachers should make an effort to inform themselves of the administrative factors that influence their professional lives. [-3-]

In a sense, though, there is a sad irony in Auerbach’s vision of the adult ESL teacher. So many of the techniques described as “ways in” or “tools” require considerable outside preparation– transcribing oral speech into stories, drawing graphics to illustrate student narratives, gathering realia from the local media, and, most delicately, crafting “codes” for stimulating language-rich social discussion–all of these things require considerable time out of class, to say nothing of the time and effort needed to guide a participatory curriculum from beginning to end without allowing the class to degenerate into pure spontaneity. Yet how many teachers are willing to exert that much effort in return for the paltry salaries that most adult education teachers are paid nowadays?

Therefore, perhaps the most important lesson which Making Meaning, Making Change can teach us is the necessity of rethinking the professional status of the adult education ESL teacher and her role in the entire curriculum development process. Whatever the lesson, however, all teachers will benefit from reading this excellent and invigorating book.

David A. Ross
Houston Community College
<ross_d@hccs.cc.tx.us>

[-4-]

&copy Copyright rests with authors. Please cite TESL-EJ appropriately.

Editor’s Note: Dashed numbers in square brackets indicate the end of each page in the paginated ASCII version of this article, which is the definitive edition. Please use these page numbers when citing this work.

© 1994–2025 TESL-EJ, ISSN 1072-4303
Copyright of articles rests with the authors.