1. Wonderings & Questions
1.1. Who is concerned about the threatened status of the Penobscot dialect?
1.2. Who is actively focused on revitalizing the Penobscot dialect?
1.3. What is the apparent structure of the exising Penobscot language progam?
1.4. Has anyone assessed the strengths and weaknesses of the existing Penobscot language program?
1.5. Why has the Siebert writing system become the de facto writing system of the Penobscot dialect?
1.6. What is the quantitative data of proficient Penobscot speakers who have completed the language program?
2. Themes
2.1. Community Engagement: Who will conduct outreach and engage the Penobscot community?
2.2. Assessment: Who will assess the existing Penobscot language program?
2.3. Redesign: Who will create and implement a revamped language program?
2.4. Strategic Plan: What are the strategic goals for a reimagined language program?
3. Inquiry Plan
3.1. Who are the leaders in the field of Indigenous language revitalization?
3.2. What are the case studies that are most promising to emulate and incorporate into the Penobscot languagae program?
3.3. What assessment tools are appropriate to evaluate the current Penobscot language program?
3.4. Is the Siebert writing system an effective tool to adopt or should it be replaced, in Penobscot language revitalization efforts?
3.5. Are there teaching models that can be used to meet the unique learning styles of adults and children?
3.6. How will the Penobscot language program collaborate and integrate with the Wabanaki language program in the Indian Island School curriculum?
3.7. How can the Penobscot language program collaborate with other Algonquian language programs?
3.8. Who will have oversight of a reimagined Penobscot language program?
3.9. How will the revitalization program be evaluated, and what measures will be used?
4. Focused Learning Questions
4.1. What are the strategies used by successful efforts by Indigenous communities to revitalize an endangered language?
4.2. How might case studies of successful Indigenous language programs inform the restructuring or redesign of the Penobscot language program?
4.3. How can the existing components of the Penobscot language program be modified and reassembled into a comprehensive, community based, teaching curriculum?
4.4. How might current and emerging technologies be used to support a Penobscot language revitalization strategy?
5. Readings
6. Research Paper: Overcomimg Challenges and Embracing Oppportunities for Indigenous Language Revitalization
7. Key Learning and Findings
7.1. Penobscot Culture & Historic Preservation Department
7.1.1. Unclear Relationship with Penobscot Cultural & Historic Preservation Committee
7.1.2. No Active Language Education Program
7.2. Language Program
7.2.1. No Champion or Leader
7.2.2. Lacks Curriculum
7.2.3. Lacks Organized Strategy
7.2.4. Passive Resources (webpage posts)
7.2.4.1. Designed for Rote Learning
7.2.4.2. Limited
7.2.4.3. No current activity or updates
7.2.5. No Record of Evaluation
7.2.6. Penobscot Dictionary
7.2.6.1. Centerpice of Language Program
7.2.6.2. Based on Siebert Manuscript of Words and Phrases
7.2.6.3. Assumes User to be Literate with Siebert system
7.2.6.4. Design Not User Friendly
7.2.6.5. Translation Search Function
7.2.6.5.1. Rarely Generates 1:1 Translation
7.2.6.6. Audio recordings rely on Siebert system and introduce pronuncation variations
7.2.6.6.1. Need verification with archival recordings of Penobscot elders and living language speakers
7.2.7. Siebert Writing System
7.2.7.1. De Facto Writing Method for Penobscot Language
7.2.7.2. Siebert Heirs Claim Penobscot Language as their Intellectual Property
7.2.7.3. Barrier for Learners to Attain Fluency and Literacy
7.2.7.4. Needlessly Complicated
7.2.7.5. Flawed Use and Placement of Diacritics, e.g. accent marks
7.2.7.5.1. Generates Mispronunciations
7.2.7.5.2. Causes emphasis and rhythm inconsistencies compared to way Penobscot elders spoke
7.2.8. No Apparent Coordination with Language Program at Indian Island School
7.2.8.1. Wabanaki Dialects (Passamaquoddy, Maliseet) Taught at II School
7.2.8.1.1. Pedagocial Design for K to 8th Grade
7.2.9. No Apparent Coordination with Other Wabanaki Language Programs
7.2.10. No Apparent Interaction and Learning from Other Indigenous Language Revitalization Programs
7.3. Decision Point
7.3.1. Abandon Siebert writing system
7.3.2. Modify Siebert writing system
7.3.3. Create New Orthography System
7.4. Fishman Continuum of Language Loss
7.4.1. Penobscot Language Status: Stage 8: Extinction
7.5. Eight Points of Language Learning
7.6. Potential Collaborative Wabanaki Partners
7.6.1. Passamaquoddy Language Program
7.6.2. Passamaquoddy-Maliseet Portal
7.6.3. Wolastoq (Maliseet) Language Program
7.6.4. Mi'kmaq Language Programs
7.7. Successful Indigenous Language Programs
7.7.1. Cree Language Programs
7.7.2. Attikamekw Language Program
7.7.3. Mohawk Language Program
7.7.4. Native Hawiian Language
7.7.5. Maori Language Program
7.8. Indigenous Language Assessment Tools and Resources
7.8.1. Indigenous Language Institute
7.8.2. NAU Indigenous Language Symposium
7.9. Penobscot Language Program: Has Not Produced a Single Proficient Penobscot Language Speaker in 30 Years
7.10. Driving Question
7.10.1. How might we reverse the trend of language loss at Indian Island and restore the Penobscot dialect to common usage?
8. Goal
8.1. Create a community based language curriculum to restore Penobscot dialect to daily usage
9. Language Program Framework
9.1. Oversight
9.1.1. Penobscot Chief and Council
9.1.2. Penobscot Cultural & Historic Preservation Committee
9.1.3. Community engagement and participation in program design and implementation
9.2. Curriculum Design
9.2.1. Establish committee or delegate to Penobscot Cultural & Historic Preservation Committe
9.2.2. Conduct assessment of current language program
9.2.3. Evaluate findings of assessment for program redesign
9.2.4. Consider case studies as potential candidates for emulation
9.2.5. Inventory and assess archival resources for continued use in language program
9.2.6. Revise and update archival language resources, and organize and migrate into a curriculum
9.2.7. Research use of AI Tools for Language Learning
9.2.8. Develop new educational materials (analog, digital, AI) and incorporate into curriculum
9.2.9. Beta test new curriculum
9.2.10. Evaluate test ressults and revise language curriculum
9.2.11. Implement new curriculum
9.2.12. Ongoing evaluation and curriculum improvement
9.3. Penobscot language speakers
9.3.1. Support language immersion and transmission of oral traditions
9.3.2. Cultural and linguistic context
9.3.3. Advisors in revitalization strategies
9.4. Resources
9.4.1. Penobscot Culture & Historic Preservation Department
9.4.2. Penobscot Museum
9.4.3. Archival materials (various media types)
9.4.4. Physical space (classroom, library, and multimedia work room)
9.4.5. Other Indigenous language revitalization programs
9.4.6. Financial
9.4.6.1. Tribal funding
9.4.6.2. Private grant funding
9.5. Collaboration
9.5.1. Other Indigenous Language Programs
9.5.2. Indian Island School Wabanaki Language Program
9.5.3. Passamaquoddy Language Programs
9.5.4. Wolastoq Language Programs
9.5.5. Other Algonquian Language Programs
9.5.6. Indigenous nonprofit organizations
9.5.7. University of Maine and other universities
9.6. Evaluation
9.6.1. What tool(s) will be used to assess progress?
9.6.2. What measures will be adopted?
9.6.3. Will independent subject matter experts be engaged to support evaluation?
9.6.4. Modify language program, as deemed appropriate, to meet goals