Posts
“He who is ignorant of other languages is ignorant of his own,” said Goethe, a German novelist. His fellow Europeans have heeded him well: more than 50 percent of adults report being able to speak a second language fluently. Americans, alas, seem to have muddled the translation: only 9 percent can say the same.[1] They much prefer Joubert’s plea that “in the commerce of speech use only coin of gold and silver.”
A tour of classrooms in Thailand would find English as a compulsory subject starting in first grade; in Morocco French begins in third grade, English in fifth; in Luxembourg, German begins in first grade, French the next.
A peek into American schools, by contrast, would find foreign languages available predominantly in the secondary level alone, and by no means required. Nevermind those that would disregard it: after all they say, it is estimated that one fourth of the world is competent to some extent in English including some forty percent of Europeans.[2] This fundamental disregard is an undeniable failure. Americans themselves recognize it: almost half report that there is “too little” foreign language instruction in schools.
What little there is, as your correspondent reports, is not much to be proud of. Colleges, in their attempt to filter student applicants, have required, on average, two years of study in foreign language. The result: a great many serve their time, doing very little to weed out the competition.
The sheer mass of students—very few of them all together passionate about their language of study, which is typically a choice between the old standard of French, German, and Spanish, makes for an inevitable dilution of classroom standards.[i]
An anecdote aptly captures the dilution: one schoolyear began with orientation entirely in Spanish—to blank faces. The first weeks of the year were filled with rigorous dialogues, readings, impromptu speeches, and writing. As the year progressed, English, packets, and videos won out. Quizzes and worksheets— no more than copying down conjugated tenses—took the place of immersion and context. Rote is by no means the route to learning a language. It is, however, the preferred method of acquiring a class credit with minimal expenditure of effort.
Students quickly abandon ship after their two—or if mildly ambitious, three—years are complete. The highest class offered in your correspondent’s school could boast only 9 students from the hundreds enrolled in the earlier levels. Their sheer scale causes a curriculum that caters to their needs at the expense of true teaching. No surprise then, when looking back on their decision to leave, do they respond that they didn’t learn anything—a few dirty words aside—anyway.
Indeed the discrepancy between public secondary students taking the language (51% in 1997)[3] and adult fluency (9%) is indicative of different intentions. Perhaps, it was because they couldn’t learn the language.
It’s all in your head
“Gone are the days of thinking of a child’s mind as a blank slate upon which meaningless dialogs might be imprinted. From the first day that the child begins learning another language, all the higher order thinking skills are in play – all at once,” says Christine Brown. [4] Research has long demonstrated the benefits of early childhood learning in foreign languages including long-term proficiency, and ease of acquisition.[5] Promisingly, elementary instruction has increased significantly from 22 to 31% from 1987 to 1997. Elsewhere research has demonstrated a positive correlation between foreign language instruction and increased scores in reading and mathematics. Bilingualism also facilitates greater verbal, spatial, and problem solving abilities.[6]
Yet, more than 60 percent of public school students do not have the chance to study any language other than English until their secondary stage of study. The likes of Glastonbury, Connecticut's public school system that Ms. Brown profiled are a rarity: for fifty years, an elementary language program has been mandatory. In first grade every student is required to learn Spanish, and can add other languages – Japanese, Latin, and Russian among them – as they choose. Even then, it is not enough: “When can I start Hindi?” one girl asks.
Mission critical, not impossible
“Americans’ incompetence in foreign languages is nothing short of scandalous. The United States requires far more reliable capacities to communicate with its allies, analyze the behavior of potential adversaries, and earn the trust and, and earn the trust and sympathies of the uncommitted,” or so says Strength Through Wisdom, a 1978 report commissioned by the White House.[7]
Not much has changed. Where Russian was the cause célèbre before, Arabic is the concern now. On January 5, 2006, President George Bush proposed the National Security Language Initiative, a $114 million program to expand the study of ‘critical languages’: Arabic, Chinese, Russian, Japanese, Farsi, Hindi, among them.[8]
The deficiency is just as much the fault of fond imaginings “that all foreign languages were codes for English” as it is a failure to compete. [9] Certainly, a greater emphasis on primary foreign language instruction is essential. This emphasis can assist in stabilizing the flood and exodus of students in secondary study while, through early exposure, encouraging further, advanced study in the secondary years.
Increasing the diversity of languages will require additional funding and extensive partnerships. The Economist newspaper has reported on thousands of individuals taking personalized language lessons online via internet telephony.[10] Innovative software, such as Rosetta Stone and podcasts herald the advancements in foreign language education.
Progress is attainable. Will it be sought? Certainly, for too long, as Strength concludes, have “our schools graduate a large majority of students whose knowledge and vision stops at the American shoreline, whose approach to international affairs is provincial, and whose heads have been filled with astonishing misinformation.”
A tour of classrooms in Thailand would find English as a compulsory subject starting in first grade; in Morocco French begins in third grade, English in fifth; in Luxembourg, German begins in first grade, French the next.
A peek into American schools, by contrast, would find foreign languages available predominantly in the secondary level alone, and by no means required. Nevermind those that would disregard it: after all they say, it is estimated that one fourth of the world is competent to some extent in English including some forty percent of Europeans.[2] This fundamental disregard is an undeniable failure. Americans themselves recognize it: almost half report that there is “too little” foreign language instruction in schools.
What little there is, as your correspondent reports, is not much to be proud of. Colleges, in their attempt to filter student applicants, have required, on average, two years of study in foreign language. The result: a great many serve their time, doing very little to weed out the competition.
The sheer mass of students—very few of them all together passionate about their language of study, which is typically a choice between the old standard of French, German, and Spanish, makes for an inevitable dilution of classroom standards.[i]
An anecdote aptly captures the dilution: one schoolyear began with orientation entirely in Spanish—to blank faces. The first weeks of the year were filled with rigorous dialogues, readings, impromptu speeches, and writing. As the year progressed, English, packets, and videos won out. Quizzes and worksheets— no more than copying down conjugated tenses—took the place of immersion and context. Rote is by no means the route to learning a language. It is, however, the preferred method of acquiring a class credit with minimal expenditure of effort.
Students quickly abandon ship after their two—or if mildly ambitious, three—years are complete. The highest class offered in your correspondent’s school could boast only 9 students from the hundreds enrolled in the earlier levels. Their sheer scale causes a curriculum that caters to their needs at the expense of true teaching. No surprise then, when looking back on their decision to leave, do they respond that they didn’t learn anything—a few dirty words aside—anyway.
Indeed the discrepancy between public secondary students taking the language (51% in 1997)[3] and adult fluency (9%) is indicative of different intentions. Perhaps, it was because they couldn’t learn the language.
It’s all in your head
“Gone are the days of thinking of a child’s mind as a blank slate upon which meaningless dialogs might be imprinted. From the first day that the child begins learning another language, all the higher order thinking skills are in play – all at once,” says Christine Brown. [4] Research has long demonstrated the benefits of early childhood learning in foreign languages including long-term proficiency, and ease of acquisition.[5] Promisingly, elementary instruction has increased significantly from 22 to 31% from 1987 to 1997. Elsewhere research has demonstrated a positive correlation between foreign language instruction and increased scores in reading and mathematics. Bilingualism also facilitates greater verbal, spatial, and problem solving abilities.[6]
Yet, more than 60 percent of public school students do not have the chance to study any language other than English until their secondary stage of study. The likes of Glastonbury, Connecticut's public school system that Ms. Brown profiled are a rarity: for fifty years, an elementary language program has been mandatory. In first grade every student is required to learn Spanish, and can add other languages – Japanese, Latin, and Russian among them – as they choose. Even then, it is not enough: “When can I start Hindi?” one girl asks.
Mission critical, not impossible
“Americans’ incompetence in foreign languages is nothing short of scandalous. The United States requires far more reliable capacities to communicate with its allies, analyze the behavior of potential adversaries, and earn the trust and, and earn the trust and sympathies of the uncommitted,” or so says Strength Through Wisdom, a 1978 report commissioned by the White House.[7]
Not much has changed. Where Russian was the cause célèbre before, Arabic is the concern now. On January 5, 2006, President George Bush proposed the National Security Language Initiative, a $114 million program to expand the study of ‘critical languages’: Arabic, Chinese, Russian, Japanese, Farsi, Hindi, among them.[8]
The deficiency is just as much the fault of fond imaginings “that all foreign languages were codes for English” as it is a failure to compete. [9] Certainly, a greater emphasis on primary foreign language instruction is essential. This emphasis can assist in stabilizing the flood and exodus of students in secondary study while, through early exposure, encouraging further, advanced study in the secondary years.
Increasing the diversity of languages will require additional funding and extensive partnerships. The Economist newspaper has reported on thousands of individuals taking personalized language lessons online via internet telephony.[10] Innovative software, such as Rosetta Stone and podcasts herald the advancements in foreign language education.
Progress is attainable. Will it be sought? Certainly, for too long, as Strength concludes, have “our schools graduate a large majority of students whose knowledge and vision stops at the American shoreline, whose approach to international affairs is provincial, and whose heads have been filled with astonishing misinformation.”
[1] Fostering Foreign Language Proficiency: What the U.S. Can Learn From Other Countries. Donna Christian, Ingrid Pufahl, Nancy C. Rhodes. Phi Delta Kappan. Volume 87, No. 3. November 2005.
[2] Improving Students Capacity in Foreign Languages. Myriam Met. Phi Delta Kappan. Volume 86, No. 3. November 2004.
[3] Foreign Language Instruction in the United States: A National Survey of Elementary and Secondary Schools. Nancy C. Rhodes, Lucinda E. Branaman. 1997.
[4] Early Language Learning: A National Necessity. Christine L. Brown. Basic Education. April 2002.
[5] Why, How, and When Should My Child Learn a Second Language? Center for Applied Linguistics.
[6] Research in Support of Elementary School Foreign Language Learning. American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages. Discoverlanguages.org.
[7] Lost in America. Douglas McGray. Foreign Policy. May, June 2006.
[8] Strides in ‘Critical Languages’ Remain Small. Jay Mathews. Washington Post.
[9] Pilgrim at Tinker Creek. Annie Dillard.
[10] Mandarin 2.0. The Economist. 7 June 2007.
[i] The American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages first published its National Standards for Foreign Language Education in 1996, believing that “language and communication are at the heart of the human experience.” Its standards focus on communication, cultures, connections with other disciplines, comparisons, and communities. http://actfl.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=3392
No comments:
Post a Comment