








































Article 
 
 

 

Stephen Aram Guptill, Curriculum Design Associate, The Welcome Project, Somerville, MA; email 
saguptill@letterboxes.org. 
 

Engaging the Neighborhood: 
English Learning and Peace-
Focused Service in a Multilingual 
Community 

GATESOL Journal 
2022, Vol. 32(1), pp. 39–50 

doi:10.52242/gatesol.148 
ISSN: 2331-6845 

 

 
Stephen Aram Guptill 
The Welcome Project (Somerville, MA) 
 

Abstract 
Community-based organizations are a vital source of English language acquisition and 
community involvement for adult immigrants and refugee populations in the United States. 
By employing a framework of peace-oriented service-learning, educators can simultaneously 
develop English language skills while nourishing and sustaining students’ agency and 
empathy in localized civic engagement. This article provides practices and perspectives for 
educators and administrators to create a curriculum that promotes a Language for Peace 
Approach framework coupled with a service-learning framework to establish and advance a 
civically engaged community. 
 
Keywords 
immigrant education, civic engagement, Language for Peace Approach (LPA), Service-
Learning 

 
Introduction 
How can students, teachers, and community members work co-intentionally and collaboratively 
to create and sustain a civically engaged community? This article outlines a curriculum design for 
an adult English course titled Multilingual Community Peace Leaders (MCPL), providing 
pedagogical frameworks and teaching activities to develop students’ civic involvement. The 
purpose of the MCPL curriculum is twofold: Firstly, the course facilitates community involvement 
by incorporating service-learning and Language for Peace Approach frameworks into a class as a 
means for students to develop localized civic engagement while simultaneously increasing 
students’ agency and empathy. Secondly, the course aims to strengthen and develop English 
language skills alongside other spoken languages for multilingual students at community-based 
schools and organizations. 

In this instructional design, I will begin by reviewing the literature regarding several 
supportive foundational frameworks for the MCPL curriculum. I will provide an overview of the 
contexts for where an MCPL curriculum could be relevant in adult civic engagement or ELL 
classes. An outline for conducting a needs assessment with potential civic partnerships will follow. 
Finally, examples of suggested activities created from the foundational frameworks will give the 
reader ideas for incorporating civic engagement into their classroom. 
 
Curriculum Frameworks 
Critical Pedagogy and Language for Peace Approach (LPA) frameworks serve as a foundational 
base to shape the goals and vision of the MCPL curriculum. Emerging from these concepts is an 

mailto:saguptill@letterboxes.org


40 GATESOL Journal 32(1)  
 

emphasis on Service-Learning education. Finally, the multilingual students enrolled in the class 
will improve their English skills through a pedagogy that validates and emphasizes 
translanguaging in the classroom. 
 
Critical Pedagogy 
In Freire’s (1969/2018) seminal work Pedagogy of the Oppressed, the Brazilian activist and 
educator argued that liberation for marginalized groups can occur through communal education. 
A framework of “critical pedagogy encourage[s] students to identify inequalities in society and 
redefine their role in changing society” (Yep, 2014, p. 51) and allows students to think critically 
about the Englishes (both spoken or written) that they interact with, raising the learner’s awareness 
of their environment and allowing for liberation from oppressive political and cultural ideologies 
(Sichula, 2018). By bringing a critical pedagogy into a communal classroom, students can engage 
in a critical examination of societal injustices that immigrants or non-standard English speakers 
experience. This engagement can allow students to recognize that their marginalization is not 
absolute but rather that they have the agency to liberate themselves through transformative work 
(Freire, 1969/2018). 

Collaborative education is predominant in critical pedagogy, which states that both 
teachers and students are responsible for practicing co-intentional education and unveiling 
knowledge in a discerning and critical fashion (Freire, 1969/2018). With students, teachers, and 
civic partners working in tandem, communal education can take form both in classrooms and in 
the daily lives of the participants, transforming relationships and communities (Waterman, 2009). 

Transformative learning theory. Transformative learning theory (Mezirow, 1991) 
emerged from a critical pedagogy framework to capture the need for personal and internal change. 
Mezirow (1997) declares that transformative learning is the process of effecting change in a frame 
of reference—that is, as adults adjust their cognitive and emotive habits of mind and points of view 
to new thoughts, they are undergoing transformative learning. This shift in frames of reference 
occurs when individuals critically reflect on the assumptions upon which “interpretations, beliefs, 
and habits of mind, or points of view are based” (p. 7). 

Mezirow (1997) also argued that a core feature of civic engagement was the development 
of “thinking as an autonomous and responsible agent” (p. 7). In discussing the role of the educator 
in the classroom, Mezirow stresses the importance of developing both short- and long-term goals. 
Short-term goals tend to be at the forefront of a student’s agenda (e.g., graduate from this course, 
teach my child how to read in English, improve English pronunciation). However, long-term goals, 
such as nurturing critical thought or improved socio-civic engagement, are also tantamount and 
should be balanced alongside the short-term goals. 

Theater of the oppressed. One way to stimulate the development of agency and critical 
empathy in the classroom is by including theatrical exercises that encourage collaborative 
relationships and critical reflections. Heavily influenced by the work of Freire, Boal’s (1974) 
Theater of the Oppressed focused on a collaborative critical pedagogy in the public sphere by 
using theater activities. Boal’s theatrical framework sought to transform the spectator of drama 
from a passive to an active participant. By placing the viewer into the creation and production of 
theater, Boal’s goal was to provide an active viewer with the tools necessary to act against 
marginalization in their own lives, believing that, “theater is a form of knowledge; it should and 
can also be a means of transforming society. Theater can help us build our future, rather than just 
waiting for it” (p. xxxi). By encouraging agency through active participatory theater, the student 
and teacher can link performative theater exercises in the classroom with both short-term goals 



Guptill 41 
 

(e.g., expanding writing techniques while working on scripts or pronunciation while developing 
dialogue) and long-term goals (e.g., developing social empathy while engaging with scripts that 
may focus on controversial storylines) while also explicitly addressing localized issues through 
the lens of critical pedagogy. 
 
Language for Peace Approach 
A curriculum that draws heavily from a Language for Peace Approach (LPA) is another way to 
bring transformative peacebuilding strategies into a civically engaged classroom. First theorized 
by Oxford (2013), LPA’s purpose is to foster peace understanding and peaceful communication 
through peace language activities, peace-oriented art, multi-method research designs, and peace-
coded linguistic analysis (Oxford et al., 2020). The transformative essence of peace in promoting 
harmony, equality, justice, and agency within and among individuals, communities, nation-states, 
and the earth is employed to uproot the direct, structural, and cultural violence prevalent in 
societies (Galtung, 1969, 1990). 

A classroom dedicated to peacebuilding allows for a space where individuals can create a 
culture of peace. Students can move toward transformative change by developing awareness about 
managing conflict without resorting to violence and establishing practices that create dignity and 
secure rights for the community (Jakar & Milofsky, 2016). While Oxford (2013) outlines six 
strategies for peacebuilding (peace through military strength, peace through justice, peace through 
politics, peace through sustainability, peace education, and peace through transformation), 
classroom educators can approach peacebuilding through the route of peace education and peace 
through transformation. Peace educators focus on identifying and advocating for peaceful policies, 
guiding students on how to manage conflict non-violently, and challenging systematic violence 
and oppression in societies. To increase peacebuilding through transformation is to respond to 
“violence, injustice, and inequality with nonviolent action” (Oxford, 2013, p. 43).  

To foster peace understanding the LPA framework calls for the incorporation of peace-
oriented art to develop peace values and to consider creative ways to uproot violence in its many 
forms. Oxford (2013) and Oxford et al. (2020) describe innovative techniques to increase students’ 
awareness of peace through critical discourse analysis, peace poetry, visual imagery, peace 
journalism, and body movement. By employing creativity and empathy through art, students can 
approach issues of marginalization in their lives with creative solutions. 
 
Service-Learning 
Service-learning components of education have a long history of use in higher education 
classrooms across the country. While many different types of service-learning education exist, 
generally speaking, service-learning components consist of students spending time outside of the 
classroom working on neighborhood projects where they devote energy to serving community 
partners’ needs (Tinkler et al., 2014). In the language classroom, service-learning projects have 
been found beneficial in increasing students’ English skills in an EFL setting (Suwaed, 2018), 
improving self-awareness and adhesion of multicultural identity within immigrant youths (Knight 
& Watson, 2014), and raising students’ confidence in communicative language practice in an 
Intensive English Program (Douglas, 2017). Despite the varied research on service-learning in the 
past 20 years (Salam et al., 2019), and perhaps because of the many varied types of service-learning 
programs, substantial confusion still exists over what exactly service-learning entails. 

 Service-learning differs from community service in a couple of distinct ways. Furco and 
Billig (2001) highlight the distinction between the two, emphasizing that community service is 



42 GATESOL Journal 32(1)  
 

often considered to be acts of altruistic kindness carried out by elite individuals to benefit their 
communities. On the other side of the spectrum, the authors emphasize the notion that community 
service is often stereotyped as something that convicts or juvenile delinquents perform to satisfy a 
government-mandated sentence. Therefore, service-learning advocates follow a rigid set of 
parameters to lend credibility to their courses (Suwaed, 2018). 

For example, Furco and Billig (2001) discuss how service-learning programs tend to have 
clear learning objectives, student agency in selecting an organization for collaboration, a solid 
theoretical framework, integration with an academic curriculum, and the opportunity for reflection. 
Recent use of service-learning as a tool has started to take root in English for Speakers of Other 
Languages (ESOL) classrooms, particularly in Intensive English Programs (IEP) for students 
matriculating into higher education, where it is presented as a beneficial addition to IEP classrooms 
(Douglas, 2017). Outside of higher education, recent arguments have been made for service-
learning elements to be incorporated into adult education as it increases the development of 
problem-solving skills and critical thinking in students’ additional languages while also creating 
reciprocal, authentic relationships in a space that is conducive to socialization and language 
acquisition (Riley & Douglas, 2016; Schneider, 2019). Meanwhile, some critics of service-learning 
argue that Service-Learning classes focus to strongly on student outcomes and meeting classroom 
goals and not on long-term community impact and sustainment (Burth, 2016).  

Unfortunately, there is a significant gap in civic engagement or service-learning classes for 
adult ELL immigrants throughout the United States (Wurr, 2018). When service-learning 
programs occur in the ELL classrooms, ELL students are the focus of service-learning projects 
with L1 English speakers performing the service of working with ELL students, creating a 
“native”/“non-native” English speaker power dynamic. Very rarely are ELLs in the position of 
“serving” during service-learning experiences but rather are the “served”. To that end, the service-
learning that the teachers, community partners, and students undertake should strive to be 
decolonized (Santiago-Ortiz, 2019). Stakeholders should interrogate the power and privilege that 
can be present in service-learning environments to create a holistic, transformational, and peace-
oriented curriculum that reframes student-teacher-community power dynamics. When coupling 
service-learning with a framework of critical pedagogy ELL students can take pro-active roles in 
service-learning programs helping to disrupt a power imbalance. By ushering in a critical 
examination of political and cultural ideologies in the civic realm, the students have the power to 
make both the classroom and the service-learning locations spaces for equitable transformation. 

 
Translanguaging 
As this is a multilingual classroom, a framework of translanguaging will be fundamental to the 
curriculum design. Translanguaging, first coined by Welsh linguist Cen Williams (Vogel & 
García, 2017), is a pedagogical practice where students are encouraged to alternate between 
multiple languages in their repertoire. Translanguaging allows students the agency to communicate 
using a complete set of linguistic features that are not fixed to “the socially and politically defined 
boundaries of named (and usually national or state) languages” (Otheguy et al., 2015, p. 281). 
Further explored by García et al. (2017), the act of translanguaging also provides students 
additional resources to secure their voice in organizations that are dominated by monolingual 
language policies and ideologies by giving space for students’ complex linguistic repertoire and 
personal identities.  

English has a long and troubled history as a form of colonization. The forced acquisition 
of the English language and Western-style education has uprooted and destroyed various diverse 



Guptill 43 
 

languages and cultures (Coelho & Henze, 2014; Sichula, 2018). “Named languages” (such as 
English, Kazakh, Spanish, or Basque) are social constructs arranged and maintained through 
political or social entities. By developing a critical awareness of what constitutes a named language 
and by encouraging students to bend the rigid barriers created by named languages, students can 
develop ownership of how they communicate their ideas and feelings (Otheguy et al., 2015, p. 
281). 

Students should be encouraged to employ their multiple languages collectively to scaffold 
their English acquisition. By using a translanguaging framework, the students are “emancipated 
from many negative ideas about bilinguals and bilingualism in the first half of the 20th century” 
(Lewis et al., 2012, p. 642) that are still prevalent in society today. Encouraging translanguaging 
helps protect and promote minoritized languages (Yilmaz, 2021) while also allowing for deeper 
academic participation and syntactic transfer (Dougherty, 2021). As multilingual students interact 
and collaborate with collective knowledge-building (Duarte, 2019), they can use their realities as 
a basis for development, allowing a reconstructing of their history and culture in tandem with the 
creation of a new culture (Rivera, 1999).  
 
Context 
The concepts laid out in this curriculum design are adjustable for adult language learners in various 
settings. The first focus of MCPL is to develop immigrant students’ relationships with their 
neighborhoods and communities. This engagement could occur in adult education schools or 
immigrant-focused non-profits in high-density urban areas, or likewise, in organizations and 
institutions in mid-size cities, small towns, or rural villages. The secondary focus of MCPL is to 
increase students’ targeted English language goals.  

Common at many adult English schools are students that have diverse language capabilities 
and are English users of varying degrees of proficiency. An MCPL curriculum is adaptable to 
courses containing students with low, intermediate, or high English skills. The collective students 
do not need to be from a monolingual background or share a common language within the class. 
English classes composed of multilingual and multicultural groups should be inclusive to 
immigrants, refugees, migrants, or second-generation immigrants. By implementing the targeted 
language goals of an educational site, or incorporating learning objectives of the students through 
a needs assessment, educators of the MCPL curriculum can tailor the foundational frameworks 
and teaching activities of the MCPL to help students meet learning objectives.  
 
Needs Assessment 
To incorporate the MCPL curriculum into a community, a needs assessment of the various 
stakeholders involved will need to be implemented. First, an examination of the adult school or 
organization needs to be completed. Meet with the administration and discuss the resources 
available to implement a service-learning class at their organization. It is important to understand 
the school’s educational goals to determine how a service-learning class can be adjusted to meet 
the needs of the school. Many U.S. colleges have toolkits that can be adapted to the adult ELL 
classroom to guide the teacher in implementing a service-learning course. For additional guidance, 
I recommend: Boston University’s Center for Teaching and Learning Service-Learning: A Guide 
(Cordner, n.d.) Additionally, if the organization cannot accommodate a stand-alone MCPL class, 
the following activities in the next section can be adapted to general English classrooms to increase 
civic engagement and as a creative approach to language learning. 

https://www.bu.edu/ctl/guides/service-learning/


44 GATESOL Journal 32(1)  
 

Since the MCPL curriculum allows students to be co-leaders and co-educators in their 
classroom, it is essential to conduct a needs assessment of the students who will be in the class. 
What is it that students hope to discover about themselves and their community during the course? 
Which language skills would students like to improve? What fears or anxieties may they have 
during a service-learning class? Consider other potential questions that may arise while discussing 
the MCPL curriculum with students.  

In a partnership between the school and a civic institution it is equally important that the 
partner organizations’ needs are being addressed and met. Partner organizations may have many 
different reasons for participating in a relationship; however, common reasons include feeling that 
it is part of their organization’s mission to mentor students, helping produce future non-profit/civic 
professionals, and satisfying short-term needs through extra staffing (Stoecker et al., 2009). To 
have a successful collaboration the partner organizations needs to be informed about the goals of 
the class and the student. Communication is one of the most important aspects of a community 
partnership. Other key elements, according to Tinkler et al. (2014), include: 
 

1. Be attentive to the community partner’s mission and vision.  
2. Understand the human dimension of the community partner’s work. 
3. Be mindful of the community partner’s resources. 
4. Accept and share the responsibility for inefficiencies. 
5. Consider the legacy of the partnership. 
6. Regard process as important. (p. 141) 

 
The civic engagement component of the course will have students engaging with various 

organizations in their community that have a strong vision for meeting community needs or 
shaping local policy. Organizations should be chosen due to their mission of advancing and 
advocating for their local community and should represent the many different forms of civic 
institutions. Examples of organizations where students can be partners are food banks and resource 
centers; art museums and local theaters; mosques, synagogues, and churches; libraries; NGOs; 
public health organizations; or environmental non-profits.  
 
Structure of Curriculum  
The Multilingual Community Peace Leader curriculum incorporates data from the needs 
assessment and the pedagogical frameworks to create a holistic course focused on collaborative 
education. The curriculum comprises of three units that contain critical reflection, communal 
education, and civic engagement. In unit one, the students and the teacher, together as co-
educators, will learn about different civic organizations in their community and the role of 
individuals in civic life. In unit two, they will spend time working at different organizations, with 
self-reflection being a key component of their in-class work. Lastly, in unit three, the students will 
think about their future roles in the city and what type of changes they want to witness in their 
lives and the lives of their neighbors. Within these three units, students will be encouraged to 
become transformational agents of change in their neighborhoods and communities through a 
curriculum built from the frameworks of critical pedagogy, language for peace approach, and 
service-learning. For a more general overview of the Multilingual Community Peace Leader 
curriculum, as well as sample lesson plans, visit here.  
 
 

https://docs.google.com/document/d/19HqZW46EbIqHpCLR-cD-CIYlCuYHQrGL/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=117405461703659645852&rtpof=true&sd=true


Guptill 45 
 

Overview of Curriculum Activities 
In creating a curriculum centered around critical pedagogy, LPA, and translanguaging, it is vital 
to have activities that support and deepen students’ critical thought and peace understanding. By 
incorporating LPA activities into a service-learning classroom, students will think critically about 
localized violence within the community. Furthermore, the LPA advocates for communicative 
practices that encourage critical and creative problem-solving in a safe and cohesive environment 
(Rothman & Sanderson, 2018). A bottom-up approach to creating and analyzing peace indicators 
in local communities will help participants take stock of their neighborhoods and become 
successful agents of transformational peace (Mac Ginty, 2013).  

The process of introducing community-based service-learning projects into the classroom 
can serve as a resource for broadening students’ points of view and counteracting preconceived 
thoughts leading to transformative learning (Mezirow, 1997). Students will have many 
opportunities to improve and reflect on their short- and long-term goals throughout the course. For 
instance, in unit two, as the students work on a biographical article of a person at their community 
site, teachers can guide students in improving writing skills, which can satisfy students’ short-term 
goals in English development while also meeting long-term goals of more substantial civic 
engagement. 

When the students are at their service-learning locations, they could be called upon to 
utilize their multilingual language skills to engage with the community. The linguistic features, 
(lexicon, register, cadence), will differ when talking to a monolingual English speaker in an office 
versus a neighbor with the same linguistic background versus their local shop cashier. 
Translanguaging allows them to pull the specific linguistic features they need, from a myriad of 
languages, to achieve their communication goal. Through pre- and post-service activities, teachers 
can work with students to create communicative links between their multiple languages that are 
brought into the service-learning site (see Table 1 in Dougherty, 2021) for ways to infuse 
translanguaging into the general content of a lesson plan).  

While teaching a class that incorporates translanguaging, key resources and lessons could 
be in English; however, students should be encouraged to strengthen cognitive and emotive skills 
in all their languages. Teaching lessons in additional languages, focusing on overlapping linguistic 
features in multiple languages, and allowing students to express themselves in a deviation from 
standardized English are ways a teacher can promote peace linguistics in their classroom. In 
advocating for and allowing translanguaging in the classroom, “one can imagine a positive peace 
through language, one that can be achieved by long-range respect for and maintenance of linguistic 
rights, the ecology of languages, cultural and linguistic diversity, and language education” 
(Friedrich, 2007, pp. 74–75). Through a joint use of critical pedagogy and multilingualism, 
students can produce new forms of knowledge accessible to themselves and their community. 

The following examples of activities are created using LPA, translanguaging, and critical 
pedagogy while also keeping in mind adaptability to different art teaching contexts and needs 
assessments. These activities encourage personal and collective agency while also increasing 
English capabilities through in-class exercises and service-learning projects. Lastly, like a ripple, 
they are designed to encourage peace to oneself, one’s family, one’s community, and one’s 
environment.  
 
 
 
 



46 GATESOL Journal 32(1)  
 

Examples of Curriculum Activities 
 
Service-Learning Sites 
A significant component of the course are service-learning sites where students can develop a 
broader understanding of the multi-faceted elements of civic life. Organizations such as non-
profits, food banks, resource centers, religious institutions, libraries, art institutions, and 
government agencies are excellent sites for student placement. Allow for a partnership that lasts 
several weeks to promote interpersonal community-building (Tinkler et al., 2014). After creating 
clear guidelines and community expectations, incorporate self-reflective exercises to guide 
students’ service-learning experiences. See below for activities that include reflective practices or 
visit Kansas University Center for Service Learning Community Engagement Toolbox (2022) for 
an adaptable guide to implementing reflective practices in the classroom.  
 
Everyday Peace Indicators 
During unit one, conduct alongside students an analysis of peace indicators in your neighborhood 
or community by using the research outlined in Mac Ginty (2013). Through group work, have 
students consider what elements in their neighborhoods indicate a peaceful community. This 
exercise could be a simple in-class discussion, or students could be encouraged to do field research 
in their neighborhoods. Use the collecting and analyzing of data as a jumping-off point to consider 
what the community values and how the city may be marginalizing individuals or communities. 
For example, ask your students if these indicators change from neighborhood to neighborhood in 
your city, and if they do, what might be some reasons for that change? This activity will develop 
students’ critical empathy of their community and help them name aspects of direct, cultural, or 
structural violence in their communities.  
 
Reflection Journal 
Students can write a reflection journal during the three units about their role in the community and 
their plans for civic engagement. The reflection journal can be composed of individual and 
collective entries that address prompts centered around civic engagement. Instead of writing, 
students can also answer prompts via voice or video recorder if desired or can even be encouraged 
to answer via multimedia collages, drawings, or photography (Oxford, 2013). Students can reflect 
in multiple languages, encouraging the translanguaging aspect of the curriculum and providing a 
space for linguistic justice. By reflecting, not only will students work on language development, 
but students can also consider the dynamics of service-learning.  
 
Biographical Article 
Students can choose an individual in the organization to interview at their service-learning site. 
The focus of the interview could be a biographical article on the individual and their choice to 
work in a civic role. Partner with a local community newspaper or news website to publish the 
interviews and raise awareness about important individuals and institutions in their neighborhoods, 
while simultaneously increasing the bond between student, teacher, and the community as co-
educators. A sample lesson plan that introduces a biographical article activity can be found here.  
 
Community Panel 
Consider hosting a panel with community members centered around a specific theme relevant to 
your students. Have students participate, ask questions, and discuss their personal histories with 

https://servicelearning.ctb.ku.edu/
https://docs.google.com/document/d/19HqZW46EbIqHpCLR-cD-CIYlCuYHQrGL/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=117405461703659645852&rtpof=true&sd=true


Guptill 47 
 

prominent community members. For example, by hosting a community panel focused on gender 
inequality, community members (such as domestic violence responders, female government 
leaders, and local business leaders) can discuss wage discrepancy, domestic violence, or legal 
protection for Lesbian, Bisexual, or Trans individuals. Multinational students should feel 
encouraged to share differences in gender inequality in past locales where they lived compared to 
their current residence, allowing for fresh and differing perspectives. By hosting a panel of 
community members, the students will be able to learn more and discuss specific topics and 
become connected to new individuals and agencies in their community. 
 
Theater Activities 
Self-reflective monologues. To develop students’ critical opinions on specific topics participants 
can be given the same prompt and asked to write a monologue. Open-ended prompts such as, 
“How have you changed in the last five years,” “Write a letter to your teenage self,” or “What do 
I want most in life?” work well. Afterward, participants compile their monologues and, after 
coding them for similar themes, can shape and combine the monologues together in a process 
similar to documentary theater. While doing so, the participants cultivate self-reflective practices 
and simultaneously understand the multidimensional relationship between inner peace and 
interpersonal peace. For a deeper look at verbatim/documentary theater and additional resources, 
visit Council of Ontario Drama and Dance Educators: Verbatim Theater (n.d.). 

Participatory theater. Adapted from Boal’s Theater of the Oppressed (1979), participants 
will choose a prevalent issue in their community. Small groups will write and create a scene about 
the issue and how it could or could not be solved. They will present the scene to the rest of the 
group once. Then, they will perform the scene again, but this time, the spectators can pause and 
enter the scene with their own version of how to resolve the issue. This activity encourages agency 
and critical problem solving, could stimulate translanguaging, and would allow for full integration 
of comprehension skills to meet students’ targeted language goals. For additional information, a 
detailed sample lesson plan can be viewed here.  

On the street interview. Students can interview individuals in their community about a 
particular localized issue, such as new housing developments, increased fare rates, or pollution 
from local infrastructure. After interviewing the community, students can create dialogue from the 
interviews to highlight the multiple sides of the issue. After completing a script, students can take 
turns acting out different points of view. Following this, students can reflect on different solutions 
for each person’s viewpoint. This activity encourages peaceful solutions to disrupting patterns of 
cultural or structural violence while allowing students to consider long-term goals for their 
community. 

Environmental field trip. The class can reflect on their relationship with the earth and the 
natural or urban environment around them by going on an environmental field trip. The students, 
in small groups, will reflect on their relationship with well-known landmarks or neighborhoods. 
Each group will then write a scene placed in a different setting around the community. Then the 
class can visit each location (a park, a river, an alleyway, a prominent landmark, the public market) 
and present their scene to the rest of the group (and, perhaps, curious onlookers) at that location. 
Connecting person to place expands the element of peace into the neighborhood and can highlight 
the intersectionality of individuals with the environment around them, highlighting how the same 
spot can hold different values for individuals. This activity becomes a critical practice that draws 
upon the reflective nature of both Oxford et al.’s (2020) and Boal’s (1978) frameworks.  
 

https://www.code.on.ca/resource/verbatim-theatre
https://docs.google.com/document/d/19HqZW46EbIqHpCLR-cD-CIYlCuYHQrGL/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=117405461703659645852&rtpof=true&sd=true


48 GATESOL Journal 32(1)  
 

Conclusion 
In developing this instructional design, Multilingual Community Peace Leaders, I hope to present 
a peace-focused curriculum that encourages personal and collective agency in adult learners of 
English as they navigate being active members of their neighborhoods. The overarching 
frameworks of critical pedagogy, language for peace approach, service-learning, and 
translanguaging can be adjusted and formatted to serve the short- and long-term goals of students 
and civic institutions in various neighborhoods and municipalities throughout the United States. It 
is my hope that this curriculum design can improve the multilingual language skills of adult 
English language learners while increasing civic engagement at the local community level and 
allowing students, teachers, and civic partners to co-intentionally and collaboratively create and 
sustain a transformed neighborhood. 
 
References 
 
Boal, A. (1979). Theater of the oppressed (C. A. McBride, Trans.). Theatre Communications 

Group. 
Burth, H. P. (2016). The contribution of service-learning programs to the promotion of civic 

engagement and political participation: A critical evaluation. Citizenship, Social and 
Economics Education, 15(1), 58–66. https://doi.org/10.1177/2047173416658504 

Coelho, F. O., & Henze, R. (2014). English for what? Rural Nicaraguan teachers’ local responses 
to national educational policy. Language Policy, 13(2), 145–163. https://doi.org/10.1007/ 
s10993-013-9309-4 

Cordner, S. (n.d.). Service-learning: A guide. Boston University Center for Teaching & Learning. 
https://www.bu.edu/ctl/guides/service-learning 

Council of Ontario Drama and Dance Educators. (n.d.). Verbatim theatre. https://www.code.on.ca/ 
resource/verbatim-theatre 

Dougherty, J. (2021). Translanguaging in action: Pedagogy that elevates. ORTESOL Journal, 38, 
19–32. https://ortesol.wildapricot.org/resources/Documents/Publications/Journals/2021/ 
Translanguaging_in_Action-Rev-Vol38.pdf 

Douglas, V. (2017). Service-learning as a useful supplement to intensive English programs. 
Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 8(6), 1090–1099. https://doi.org/10.17507/ 
jltr.0806.09 

Duarte, J. (2019). Translanguaging in mainstream education: A sociocultural approach. 
International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 22(2), 150–164. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2016.1231774 

Freire, P. (1969/2018). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Bloomsbury. 
Friedrich, P. (2007). English for peace: Toward a framework of peace sociolinguistics. World 

Englishes, 26(1), 72–83. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-971X.2007.00489.x 
Furco, A., & Billig, S. H. (Eds.). (2001). Service learning: The essence of the pedagogy. 

Information Age Publishing. 
Galtung, J. (1969). Violence, peace, and peace research. Journal of Peace Research, 6(3), 167–

191. https://www.jstor.org/stable/422690 
Galtung, J. (1990). Cultural violence. Journal of Peace Research, 27(3), 291–305. https://www. 

jstor.org/stable/423472 
García, O., Flores, N., & Spotti, M. (2017). The Oxford handbook of language and society. Oxford 

University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190212896.001.0001 

https://doi.org/10.1177/2047173416658504
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10993-013-9309-4
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10993-013-9309-4
https://www.bu.edu/ctl/guides/service-learning
https://www.code.on.ca/resource/verbatim-theatre
https://www.code.on.ca/resource/verbatim-theatre
https://ortesol.wildapricot.org/resources/Documents/Publications/Journals/2021/Translanguaging_in_Action-Rev-Vol38.pdf
https://ortesol.wildapricot.org/resources/Documents/Publications/Journals/2021/Translanguaging_in_Action-Rev-Vol38.pdf
https://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.0806.09
https://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.0806.09
https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2016.1231774
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-971X.2007.00489.x
https://www.jstor.org/stable/422690
https://www.jstor.org/stable/423472
https://www.jstor.org/stable/423472
https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190212896.001.0001


Guptill 49 
 

Jakar, V. S., & Milofsky, A. (2016). Bringing peacebuilding into the English language classroom. 
In C. Hastings & L. Jacobs (Eds.), Social justice in English language teaching (pp. 39–46). 
TESOL International Association. 

Kansas University Center for Service Learning. (2022). Community engagement toolbox: Toolkit. 
https://servicelearning.ctb.ku.edu/#toolkit 

Knight, M. G., & Watson, V. W. (2014). Toward participatory communal citizenship: Rendering 
visible the civic teaching, learning, and actions of African immigrant youth and young 
adults. American Educational Research Journal, 51(3), 539–566. https://doi.org/10.3102/ 
0002831213512517 

Lewis, G., Jones, B., & Baker, C. (2012). Translanguaging: Origins and development from school 
to street and beyond. Educational Research and Evaluation, 18(7), 641–654. https://doi. 
org/10.1080/13803611.2012.718488 

Mac Ginty, R. (2013). Indicators+: A proposal for everyday peace indicators. Evaluation and 
Program Planning, 36(1), 56–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2012.07.001 

Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. Jossey-Bass. 
Mezirow, J. (1997). Transformative learning: Theory to practice. New Directions for Adult and 

Continuing Education, 1997(74), 5–12. https://doi.org/10.1002/ace.7401 
Otheguy, R., García, O., & Reid, W. (2015). Clarifying translanguaging and deconstructing named 

languages: A perspective from linguistics. Applied Linguistics Review, 6(3), 281–307. 
https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2015-0014 

Oxford, R. L. (Ed.). (2013). The language of peace: Communicating to create harmony. 
Information Age Publishing. 

Oxford, R. L., Olivero, M. M., Harrison, M., & Gregersen, T. (Eds.). (2020). Peacebuilding in 
language education: Innovations in theory and practice. Multilingual Matters. 

Riley, T., & Douglas, S. R. (2016). The multicultural café: Enhancing authentic interaction for 
adult English language learners through service learning. TESL Canada Journal, 34(1), 
25–50. https://doi.org/1018806/tesl.v34i1.125 

Rivera, K. M. (1999). Popular research and social transformation: A community-based approach 
to critical pedagogy. TESOL Quarterly, 33(3), 485–500. https://doi.org/10.2307/3587675 

Rothman, J. R., & Sanderson, S. (2018). Language and peace: Using global issues in the English 
language classroom to create a more sustainable dialogue. TESL Reporter, 51(2), 53–76. 
http://lir.byuh.edu/index.php/Issue1/article/download/1132/1084 

Salam, M., Iskandar, D. N. A., Ibrahim, D. H. A., & Farooq, M. S. (2019). Service learning in 
higher education: A systematic literature review. Asia Pacific Education Review, 20(4), 
573–593. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-019-09580-6 

Santiago-Ortiz, A. (2019). From critical to decolonizing service-learning: Limits and possibilities 
of social justice-based approaches to community service-learning. Michigan Journal of 
Community Service Learning, 25(1), 43–54. https://doi.org/10.3998/mjcsloa.3239521. 
0025.104 

Schneider, J. (2019). Teaching in context: Integrating community‐based service learning into 
TESOL education. TESOL Journal, 10(1), Article e00380. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.380 

Sichula, N. (2018). Pedagogical practices in non-formal adult literacy classes [Doctoral 
dissertation, University of Pretoria]. Institutional Repository of the University of Pretoria. 
http://hdl.handle.net/2263/67904 

https://servicelearning.ctb.ku.edu/#toolkit
https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831213512517
https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831213512517
https://doi.org/10.1080/13803611.2012.718488
https://doi.org/10.1080/13803611.2012.718488
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2012.07.001
https://doi.org/10.1002/ace.7401
https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2015-0014
https://doi.org/1018806/tesl.v34i1.125
https://doi.org/10.2307/3587675
http://lir.byuh.edu/index.php/Issue1/article/download/1132/1084
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-019-09580-6
https://doi.org/10.3998/mjcsloa.3239521.0025.104
https://doi.org/10.3998/mjcsloa.3239521.0025.104
https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.380
http://hdl.handle.net/2263/67904


50 GATESOL Journal 32(1)  
 

Stoecker, R., Hilgendorf, A., & Tryon, E. A. (Eds.). (2009). The unheard voices: Community 
organizations and service learning. Temple University Press. https://tupress.temple.edu/ 
book/0534 

Suwaed, H. (2018). The path less taken: Incorporating service-learning in the English language 
curricula. IAFOR Journal of Language Learning, 4(1), 25–40. https://doi.org/10.22492/ 
ijll.4.1.02 

Tinkler, A., Tinkler, B., Hausman, E., & Tufo-Strouse, G. (2014). Key elements of effective 
service-learning partnerships from the perspective of community partners. Partnerships: A 
Journal of Service-Learning and Civic Engagement, 5(2), 137–152. https://libjournal.uncg 
.edu/index.php/prt/article/view/944 

Vogel, S., & García, O. (2017). Translanguaging. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education. 
https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.181 

Waterman, R. (2009). Communication is more than language: Adult ESL classes foster parent–
school collaboration. Bilingual Research Journal, 31(1–2), 227–250. https://doi.org/ 
10.1080/15235880802640698 

Wurr, A. J. (2018). Advances in service-learning research with English language learners. Journal 
of Service-Learning in Higher Education, 8, 1–16. https://journals.sfu.ca/jslhe/index.php/ 
jslhe/article/view/171 

Yep, K. S. (2014). Reimagining diversity work: Multigenerational learning, adult immigrants, and 
dialogical community-based learning. Metropolitan Universities, 25(3), 47–66. https:// 
journals.iupui.edu/index.php/muj/article/view/20581 

Yilmaz, T. (2021). Translanguaging as a pedagogy for equity of language minoritized students. 
International Journal of Multilingualism, 18(3), 435–454. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 
14790718.2019.1640705 

 
____________________________________________________________________________ 
 

Received: November 2, 2021 | Accepted: February 22, 2022 | Published: April 18, 2022 

https://tupress.temple.edu/book/0534
https://tupress.temple.edu/book/0534
https://doi.org/10.22492/ijll.4.1.02
https://doi.org/10.22492/ijll.4.1.02
https://libjournal.uncg.edu/index.php/prt/article/view/944
https://libjournal.uncg.edu/index.php/prt/article/view/944
https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.181
https://doi.org/10.1080/15235880802640698
https://doi.org/10.1080/15235880802640698
https://journals.sfu.ca/jslhe/index.php/jslhe/article/view/171
https://journals.sfu.ca/jslhe/index.php/jslhe/article/view/171
https://journals.iupui.edu/index.php/muj/article/view/20581
https://journals.iupui.edu/index.php/muj/article/view/20581
https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2019.1640705
https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2019.1640705

	GATESOL Journal2022, Vol. 32(1), pp. 39–50
	Engaging the Neighborhood: English Learning and Peace-Focused Service in a Multilingual Community
	doi:10.52242/gatesol.148
	ISSN: 2331-6845

