The Sociocultural Context of Hawaiian Language Revival and Learning
The purpose of this project is to examine the genesis, development,
educational practices and outcomes of Papahana Kaiapuni, the Hawaiian
Language Immersion Program. The project aims to describe the programs
inception and development and its academic and social outcomes in order
to assist other Native American communities who are interested in implementing
an indigenous language immersion program for language revival and school
reform. In comparison to national norms, Native Hawaiian students are
among the lowest scoring minorities on standardized achievement tests.
They are also under-represented in higher education and over-represented
in special education. Thus, in addition to seeking to preserve and maintain
a threatened indigenous language, Kaiapuni is an educational initiative
that aims to increase the academic achievement of Hawaiian students.
Kaiapuni is an early total language immersion program. That is, beginning
in kindergarten, instruction is conducted exclusively in the Hawaiian
language, as a means of teaching this second language. For most students
in this public K-12 school program, English or Hawaiian Creole English
is their first language. In Kaiapuni classrooms, as in other second language
immersion programs, the target language is used as the medium of instruction
rather than as the focus of instruction. Immersion education is based
on the premise that students can learn a second language in a manner that
is similar to the way they learned their first languageincidentally,
as it is used for meaningful communication (Genesee, 1996).
Kaiapuni is administered by the Hawaii State Department of
Education (DOE). For the 1997-1998 school year, over 1,300 students and
85 teachers participated in the program at 15 sites on five of the eight
major Hawaiian Islands. Although most of the sites also house a "regular"
English language program, there are two sites designated exclusively for
the immersion program.
Program evaluations indicate that the English language achievement
of Kaiapuni students is comparable to peers in non-immersion classrooms,
while students are also acquiring the Hawaiian language (Slaughter, 1993;
1997). One of the goals of this project is to discover how and why such
an ambitious and unique reform effort has been so successful, amidst strong
Kaiapuni is a major effort of the Hawaiian community to revive the
Hawaiian language. Prior to the programs implementation in 1987,
some estimated that there were only 30 Hawaiian speakers under 18 years
of age (Dunford, 1991). According to language experts, the viability of
a language can be gauged by the number and age of its speakers (Krauss,
1996; Reedy, 1982). According to these numbers, the Hawaiian language
in the early 1980s was significantly "at risk" for language
Following the overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy in 1893, a formal
policy was implemented in the territory which banned the Hawaiian language
from use in all governmental activities, including public education. Prior
to this time, most adult Hawaiians and many others who settled in Hawaii
were considered literate in the Hawaiian language (Kloss, 1977). Similar
to other Native Americans and their experiences in school, many native
speakers of Hawaiian recall being punished in school for speaking their
first language. Fortunately, there were a number of contexts in which
the language continued to be used. For example, a number of churches continued
to hold services in Hawaiian, and Hawaiian was also spoken privately within
some households (Huebner, 1985).
In 1986, the formal restrictions on the Hawaiian language were lifted
by a state constitutional convention, that established Hawaiian and English
as the two official languages of the State (Hawaii State Constitution,
Article XV-4; HRS 1-13). This lifting of restrictions coincided with what
has been called a "Hawaiian renaissance," or renewal in pride
and interest in the Hawaiian culture and language. Policy to lift the
ban of Hawaiian from classrooms followed. In 1987, Papahana Kaiapuni was
established by the DOE as an attempt to revive the Hawaiian language.
In order to thoroughly document critical milestones in the development
of this program, the different perspectives of many of the individuals
who were instrumental in developing the program are being sought. To accomplish
this, extensive, semi-structured interviews with teachers, administrators,
students and family members are being carried out. In 1996-1997 and 1997-1998,
a study of the programs history was conducted by interviewing people
who were involved in its early development and by conducting an analysis
of selected Board of Education (BOE) and DOE documents. The ten interviewees
for this historical study were nominated by the DOE Hawaiian immersion
program specialist, C. Puanani Wilhelm. Two hundred and seven documents
BOE and DOE documents were also collected and analyzed. In addition, two
extensive literature reviews were conducted. The first involved a review
of the literature on other indigenous language immersion programs in order
to compare Kaiapuni with other similar educational programs and to place
the program within a larger context of indigenous language and cultural
revival. The second literature review focused on the Kaiapuni program
itself and involved collecting different kinds of documents including
unpublished papers, newspaper and newsletter articles, and Kaiapuni program
In 1997-1998, the project focused on assessing the multiple perspectives
of various stakeholder groups who are currently involved in the program,
and this focus continues through 1999-2000. In 1997-1998 and 1998-1999,
27 teachers and five principals were interviewed by the principal investigator
and two graduate student researchers. (Three additional teachers are currently
being interviewed, so that teachers from every Kaiapuni school will eventually
be represented in the sample.) Each 1 1/2 hour interview was audiotaped
and later transcribed for analysis. Interviews focused on participants
roles in the program, their reasons for being involved, and their perspectives
on the programs goals and challenges (see Appendix for the interview
questions). Potential interviewees were identified through contacts in
the schools. In some cases, focus group discussions were conducted instead
of individual interviews, when interviewees included three or teachers
at the same school. Results from the educators interviews will be presented
in April, 1999 to the Special Interest Group on Bilingual Education at
the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association (Yamauchi,
Ceppi, & Lau-Smith, 1999). The target audience for this presentation
includes researchers, teacher educators, and policy makers who are interested
in bilingual education. The results will also be written as a research
article and as a CREDE report.
Adding to our study of teacher perspectives on the program, this
project also includes classroom research conducted by immersion teachers.
Since 1998, five teachers at one of the Kaiapuni sites, have been meeting
with the principal investigator and a graduate student researcher, who
is also a parent of a student in the lead class at the school. These teacher
research projects include a study of family involvement through family
language classes and a study of the effects of various literacy practices
in a third grade immersion classroom. These classroom research projects
will assist in documenting effective practices in immersion classrooms.
Finally, in order to examine the programs impact on students
and their families, 40 students and 40 family members will be interviewed
in 1998-1999 and 1999-2000. The participants in this study have been nominated
by teachers, principals, and other program contacts. This will be the
first in-depth study of participation by Kaiapuni students and their families,
regarding their roles in the program and the ways the program has impacted
their lives. The study will also examine students achievement and
their beliefs about themselves, their schooling, and their language learning.
Given the strong and consistent involvement by Kaiapuni parents in the
programs inception and development, these results will be particularly
helpful in understanding the role of successful family involvement in
language programs for minority students.
Relation to the Plan of Work
There have been some modifications to this project in relation
to its description in the Plan of Work. First, the Plan places
the project in Program 5, Integrated Reform; however, in 1997, CREDE moved
this project to Program 1 in order to be able to compare the outcomes
and practices of second language immersion education to that of other
second language models. The Plan of Work also describes this
projects theoretical foundation as based on Brofenbrenners
ecological perspective. However, the projects theoretical perspective
is rooted in sociocultural theory, rather than Brofenbrenners theory.
The project description in the Plan of Work was based on an earlier
draft of the project description, which was inadvertently included in
Originally, the Plan of Work called for semi-structured interviews
with 15 teachers. However, the project researchers decided to double the
sample size in order to increase representation of more teachers and of
all 15 Kaiapuni sites. This has led to a delay in completing the teacher
interviews. The Plan of Work specifies that teacher interviews
were to be conducted in 1997-1998. Although the majority of the interviews
were conducted that year, the last three teacher interviews will be conducted
by December, 1998, and data analysis will not be completed until March
1999. Consequently, the technical report of preliminary findings of the
educator interviews (Deliverable for 1997-1998) will not be submitted
until June, 1999.
Finally, the Plan of Work did not include the classroom research
conducted by immersion teachers. This aspect of the project was added
to better document classroom practices.
Relation to Program 1 Themes.
The current project is part of Program 1: Language Learning and Academic
Achievement. Program 1 is unified by the following three themes:
1. Diverse educational programs for linguistically diverse students.
2. Programmatic features and instructional strategies that facilitate
the acquisition of English for academic purposes among LEP students
so that they can benefit fully from instruction through English.
3. Professional development for teaching linguistically diverse
This project contributes to our understanding of Program 1s first
theme. Kaiapuni is the only K-12 immersion program in the world that uses
Hawaiian as the target language. Our research contributes to Program 1s
agenda by providing a unique example of indigenous immersion education.
The effects of this model can be contrasted with those of other bilingual
education models included in Program 1 projects. Although most Kaiapuni
students are not second language English learners, most students speak
a non-standard variety of English, Hawaiian Creole English, as their first
language. The majority of Kaiapuni students are also members of a minority
group (Hawaiian) that is significantly at-risk for academic failure and
face similar challenges to those observed among second language English
learners. In addition, there are many misconceptions about foreign/second
language immersion for English language learners. This project will assist
our understanding of the goals, practices, and outcomes this educational
Documentation of the Kaiapuni program is also important because many
other indigenous communities are considering indigenous language immersion
education for native language revitalization. These communities need assistance
in deciding whether immersion education is a feasible alternative given
their communities goals and particular situations. This project
will provide information to these communities about what is needed and
the potential outcomes, including effects on student achievement, academic
motivation, and family involvement in their childrens education.
Integration of the Sociocultural Theoretical Perspective.
In the Plan of Work, CREDE stated that all Center projects
would be unified by a common theoretical perspective. The Center proposed
to conduct its work from a sociocultural theoretical perspective that
highlights the three planes of analysis described by Rogoff (1995). The
sociocultural perspective has its historical roots in Vygotskys
theory of development. According to Vygotsky (1978), all psychological
phenomena originates through interpersonal interactions. Thus, the social
and cultural context is crucial to understanding how students learn (and
why they may have failed to do so). The current project is based on a
sociocultural perspective in that it seeks to understand the beliefs,
values, and other perspectives of various Kaiapuni stakeholders and how
these perspectives have influenced program development. One of our primary
goals is to understand Kaiapunis development over the last 11 years.
To achieve this, project researchers are interviewing different stakeholders
about their participation in various Kaiapuni activities. Interviews focus
on how participation in the program has influenced individuals ideas
and beliefs. This information will enhance our understanding of the effects
of more specific language program practices on outcomes such as students
academic motivation, achievement, and self concept and minority family
members involvement in their childrens education. This can
assist policy makers and educators in their planning of effective language
programs for minority and second-language learners.
Rogoff (1995) suggests that one implication of sociocultural theory
is that there are three planes of analysis that researchers can bring
to the foreground of their investigations. These three planes are: (a)
the personal or individual plane, which has been the focus of much traditional
research in psychology; (b) the interpersonal plane, which highlights
the interactions between two or more people; and (c) the community/institutional
plane, which focuses on the activities and values of groups of people
across time (this plane also includes a historical dimension).
While all CREDE projects highlight at least one of the planes of
analysis, this project focuses on all three. The personal plane becomes
important when we analyze the beliefs, values, and actions of the individuals
we interview, and the development of individual student competencies.
The interpersonal plane is highlighted in our analysis of teacher-student
and student-family interactions and how they influence both individual
and program development. (This plane is particularly important for our
work in the Teacher Study Group activities.) Finally, we focused on the
community/institutional plane in Year 1, through our analysis of the historical
and political influences on Kaiapunis initiation and early program
Relation to CREDE s Unifying Themes.
In addition to a common sociocultural theoretical orientation,
CREDE projects are united in addressing five generic principles for effective
education. These five principles are:
1. Facilitate learning through joint productive activity among
teachers and students.
2. Develop competence in the language and literacy of instruction
throughout all instructional activities.
3. Contextualize teaching and curriculum in the experiences and
skills of home and community.
4. Challenge students toward cognitive complexity.
5. Engage students through dialogue, especially the instructional
The current project focuses on Principles 2 and 3. Second language
immersion education is based on the premise that students can learn a
second language incidentally, through its use as the medium of instruction.
The goals of the Kaiapuni program include competency in both Hawaiian
and English languages. Students are expected to develop literacy skills
through their participation in all instructional experiences (Principle
One of the challenges of an indigenous language immersion program
is the development of appropriate curriculum in the target language. Much
of materials in Kaiapuni classrooms are Hawaiian translations of text
that were originally in English. Currently, many Kaiapuni educators are
rethinking this approach to curriculum development and working toward
developing a culturally appropriate curriculum that originates in the
Hawaiian language. In this way, much of the current developments in Kaiapuni
curriculum is focused on Principle 3: contextualizing teaching and curriculum
in the Hawaiian community and traditions. This projects documentation
these efforts will provide a model for other educators and policy makers
who are interested in cultural contextualization. Project activities will
also provide documentation of the effects of cultural contextualization
on student motivation, achievement, and family involvement.
The emergent findings from this project come primarily from our historical
analysis of the events that led to the initiation and early development
of the Kaiapuni program. The results of the historical study have been
presented in a number of formats and to different audiences. They appeared
in two journal articles targeting policy makers, teachers, and teacher
educators (Yamauchi & Ceppi, 1998; Yamauchi, Ceppi, & Lau-Smith,
1999b) and in two CREDE reports (Yamauchi & Ceppi, 1997; Yamauchi,
Ceppi, & Lau-Smith, 1998b). The results were also disseminated through
four presentations by project researchers. Presentations were made at
three conferences, two aimed at researchers and teacher educators (Yamauchi
& Ceppi, 1997; Yamauchi, Ceppi, & Lau-Smith, 1998a) and one aimed
at Pacific Island educators (Rutherford, Yamauchi, & Ceppi, 1998).
A presentation was also made at a research colloquium in Hawaii
In brief, results of the historical study indicated that many of
educational problems facing Native Hawaiians are similar to those of other
Native American groups. For example, Hawaiians, like other Native Americans,
are significantly at-risk for educational failure and dropping out of
school. Kaiapuni program evaluations suggest that compared to English
program peers, students perform at a comparable level with regard to English
language achievement, while also learning Hawaiian as a second language.
In addition, students report positive attitudes about their culture and
their developing bilingualism. These outcomes suggest that other indigenous
and minority groups may be able to improve education for their children
through a second language immersion program
Hawaiians are also very similar to other Native Americans with regard
to their native language. Krauss (1996) conceptualized four stages of
language endangerment. The majority (72%) of indigenous languages spoken
in the United States and Canada fall into the least healthy stages of
survival. Before the initiation of the Hawaiian immersion program, the
Hawaiian language was considered seriously at-risk. However, 11 years
after its initiation, the program has significantly reduced this threat.
Other indigenous people may want to implement an indigenous language immersion
program for language preservation and maintenance.
Historically, the Kaiapuni program can be traced to the resurgence
of interest in the Hawaiian culture and language that originated during
the 1970s. Initiation of the program was also closely linked to the political
activities of parents and language activists who founded a private Hawaiian
medium preschool. Many who were involved at a grassroots level view the
program as a way to perpetuate the Hawaiian language and culture. Family
involvement in the program continues to be very strong. Parent groups
are organized at every site and representatives from these families also
participate in policy making through their membership on a statewide advisory
board. The program has had a positive impact on family members educational
endeavors. Many Kaiapuni family members attend language and culture classes
associated with the program. Involvement in the program has also prompted
some family members to pursue higher education. These results have implications
for other communities wanting to implement an indigenous immersion program.
An indigenous immersion program provides a number of ways to encourage
involvement among families of minority groups who may have felt alienated
from schools. Families can be involved through organizations at both the
school and broader policy making levels. Immersion education can also
promote family education for minorities, who have not traditionally done
well in school.
Contribution to increasing knowledge of practice and theory. This
project contributes much to our understanding of indigenous total language
immersion education as an educational model for language revitalization
and minority education. This project will assist other indigenous people
whose native language is threatened with language extinction. A language
immersion program is one way a native community can take proactive steps
to revitalize its language. Documentation of Kaiapuni's successes and
challenges can be helpful to other indigenous groups who choose language
immersion education for language revitalization.
The project will also contribute to our understanding of foreign/second
language immersion for English language learning. Second language immersion
is often misunderstood as an educational model for English language learners.
Documentation of the Kaiapuni's program development, practices, and outcomes
can be helpful to policy makers and educators interested in the goals,
practices, and outcomes of this educational model.
Finally, this project contributes to understanding parental activism
and involvement in public education. Many may find it incredible that
a relatively small group of parents could effectively lobby a state
BOE to initiate such a revolutionary program. The project will assist
in understanding the circumstances that allowed this to come about.
Benefits for the work in relation to cost. The budget for
this project is modest, considering its goals. Documentation of the program
will be accomplished with a relatively small staff, primarily paid by
the hour. Personnel costs are also minimized because the principal investigator
is able to devote half of her time to this project, at the minimal cost
of replacing her teaching assignment with lecturers (rather than a percentage
of her salary). Teacher research projects are being conducted as part
of the teachers graduate degree requirements. As such, these activities
are conducted at a minimal cost. Recently, the principal investigators
recruited two graduate student researchers who will conduct their dissertation
research on topics related to the project. One dissertation is a study
of the literacy activities in Kaiapuni classrooms. The other is a policy
analysis of the Kaiapuni program. The graduate student researchers have
agreed to include their research in the project activities, without compensation
for their time. These kinds of cooperative arrangements expand the scope
of the project, while minimizing costs.
Connections to other CREDE programs. This project also relates
to Program 5: Integrated Reform. In particular, we focus on the third
theme in that program: Contexualized School Reform: Latino, Native-American,
African American, Hawaiian, and Appalachian settings. Indigenous language
immersion education will be compared to other reform efforts studied by
Program 5 researchers. In addition, cooperation with Program 5 researchers
promotes communication with the two other CREDE projects that focus on
The activities of this project have the potential for impact
both locally and nationally. The DOE immersion specialist agreed that
this project can assist Kaiapuni itself, as a means of self-reflection
and dissemination of ideas and perspectives within the program. Project
researchers are also discussing the possibility of assisting the Kaiapuni
program in developing a series of documents that describe the program
and its theoretical foundation for interested parents, teachers, and community
members (including the media).
The project will impact the community of other indigenous peoples
in the U.S. and elsewhere, who are interested in indigenous language immersion
as a means of revitalizing a native language. One of the major products
of this work is a monograph that summarizes the project findings for practitioners
and others interested in Kaiapunis developments over the last 11
years. Project researchers attended conferences targeting indigenous educators
and focusing on language revitalization for the purpose of planning how
to best present this material to educators in indigenous communities.
Currently, project researchers are continuing to conduct our interviews
with educators in the program and are analyzing this data for a publication
and conference presentation in Spring 1999. Researchers are also beginning
to contact students and parents to be interviewed this year and in 1999-2000.
Teachers who will be conducting classroom research are meeting with the
principal investigator to plan and implement their projects. Project researchers
are also continuing to study the needs of indigenous communities in order
to plan for dissemination activities.
The project recently moved its program affiliation from Program 5
to Program 1. Researchers are continuing to shape their efforts so that
they better coordinate with other Program 1 activities. Recently, project
researchers collaborated with Program 1 researchers in developing a publication
that will assist educators and policy makers in considering the array
of alternatives in bilingual education. Project researchers will continue
discussions with other Program 1 researchers to plan for other potential
projects around which they can collaborate.
Dunford, B. (1991, December). Language and heritage: A controversial
language immersion program in Hawaii is preserving the native
culture. Executive Education, 38-39.
Genesee, F. (1996). Second language immersion programs. In H. Goebl,
P. H. Nelde, Z. Stary, & W. Wolck (Eds.) Contact linguistics:
An international handbook of contemporary research (pp. 493-502).
Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Huebner, T. (1985). Language education policy in Hawaii: Two
case studies and some current issues. International Journal of the
Sociology of Language, 56, 29-49.
Kloss, H. (1977). The American bilingual tradition. Rowley,
MA: Newbury House.
Krauss, M. (1996). Status of Native American language endangerment.
In G. Cantoni (Ed.), Stabilizing Indigenous languages (pp. 16
- 21). Flagstaff, AZ: Northern Arizona University.
Reedy, T. M (1982, December). Fostering the growth of indigenous
languages. Paper presented at the meeting of the Indigenous Peoples
International Conference, Honolulu, HI.
Rogoff, B. (1995). Observing sociocultural activity on three planes:
Participatory appropriation, guided participation, apprenticeship. In
J. V. Wertsch, P. del Rio, &A. Alvarez (Eds.), Sociocultural
Studies of Mind. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Slaughter, H. (1993). Learning to read English outside the school:
Patterns of first language literacy acquisition of Hawaiian language
immersion students. Educational Perspectives: Journal of the College
of Education University of Hawaii Mänoa, 28, 9-17.
Slaughter, H. (1997). Indigenous Language Immersion In Hawaii:
A case study of Kula Kaiapuni Hawaii, and effort to save the indigenous
language of Hawaii. In R. K. Johnson & M. Swain, (Eds.),
Immersion education: International perspectives (pp. 105-129). Cambridge,
UK: Cambridge University Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
Yamauchi, L. A. (1998, November). Research from the National Center
for Research on Education, Diversity, and Excellence (CREDE): Sociohistorical
influences on the Hawaiian immersion program. Presentation for the
College of Education colloquium series, Honolulu, HI.
Yamauchi, L., & Ceppi, A. K. (1997a, March). The Sociocultural
Context of Hawaiian Language Revival and Learning. Paper presented
at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association,
Yamauchi, L. A., & Ceppi, A. K. (1997b). Indigenous Language
Loss and Revitalization: A Review of Language Immersion Programs and
a Focus on Hawaii. Technical report submitted to the Center
for Research on Education, Diversity, & Excellence. Santa Cruz,
Yamauchi, L. A., & Ceppi, A. K. (1998). A review of indigenous
language immersion programs and a focus on Hawaii. Equity and
Excellence in Education, 31, 11-20.
Yamauchi, L. A., Ceppi, A. K., & Lau-Smith, J. (1998a, April).
A Sociohistorical Analysis of the Hawaiian Language Immersion Program.
Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research
Association, San Diego, CA.
Yamauchi, L. A., Ceppi, A. K., & Lau-Smith, J. (1998b). Sociohistorical
Influences on the Development of Papahana Kaiapuni, the Hawaiian Language
Immersion Program. Technical report submitted to the Center for
Research on Education, Diversity, & Excellence. Santa Cruz, CA.
Yamauchi, L. A., Ceppi, A. K., & Lau-Smith, J. (1999a, April).
On the Threshold of Language Revitalization: Educator Perspectives
on the Hawaiian Language Immersion Program. Paper accepted for presentation
at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association,
Yamauchi, L. A., Ceppi, A. K., & Lau-Smith, J. (1999b). Sociohistorical
influences on the development of Papahana Kaiapuni, the Hawaiian language
immersion program. Journal of Education for Students Placed At-Risk,
Rutherford, W. B., Yamauchi, L. A., & Ceppi, A. K. (1998, August).
Five Standards for Effective Practice. Workshop presentation
at the annual meeting of the Pacific Resources for Education and Learning
(PREL), Kapaa, HI.
1. Would you state your name and spell it for us?
2. If you dont mind, would you tell us your age?
3. What is your ethnicity? (If multiple, is there one that you particularly
4. Where did you grow up?
5. Do you speak Hawaiian?
a. If yes, when and how did you learn the language? And from whom?
b. In what contexts do you use the language?
6. You were named as someone who would have a unique perspective on
the development of the Hawaiian Immersion program. Could you describe
your role in the programs development?
7. Are you still involved in the program? In what capacity?
8. What were your goals or reasons for getting involved in the program?
a. In what ways are the program goals similar to or different from
your own goals for the program? (Show list of program goals.)
9. What have you learned about the program since you have been (or
were) involved in it?
a. How, if at all, have your feelings about the program changed
over this time?
10. We are interested in documenting the history of the program. What
do you think led to the creation and development of the program?
11. Who are some of the people that you think were instrumental in
getting the program started and developing it to where it is today?
12. What do you think are the most successful program outcomes so far?
In other words, what has the program been able to do best?
13. What do you see as the most difficult challenges of the program?
a. How do you think the program can move to overcome these challenges?
14. From your perspective where and when in the curriculum do you think
the English language should be introduced and used? Why?
15. In what ways, if any, do you think the program influences students
and their families when they are outside of the school setting?
16. In what ways, if at all, do you think the program influences how
Hawaiian students in the program think about themselves as Hawaiians?
17. In what ways, if at all, do think the program is important for
people who are not of Hawaiian ancestry?
18. In what ways, if at all, do you think the program is important
for people who are not Hawaiian speakers?
19. How supportive do you think the general public is of the program?
20. What advice do you have for other Native American communities who
are considering developing an indigenous immersion program?
21. What are important points for such communities to consider in making
a decision to start an immersion program?
22. Are there any other comments that you would like to make regarding
your perspective on the programs history and development?
23. Are there other people that you recommend that we talk to about