 |
International Education MattersA
Forum for Issues Pertaining
to |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
International Educator "Language Requirements: Problem or Opportunity?"
by Robert B. Kaplan It seems apparent that at least one objective of all education is to help learners understand and deal with the phenomenological world in which they live. It seems equally apparent that learning about and dealing with the phenomenological world is in some sense tied to language knowledge, since language is the vehicle through which one comes to understand and deal with the phenomenological world. Ergo, the more languages an individual controls, the greater that individual's ability to understand and deal with the phenomenological world. International education --the transnational movement of students and scholars -- has been seen as potentially an important strategy for language diversification, among other things. The role of language in the "access to international education" is certainly a central issue. Much has been written about the value of language learning as an outcome of international educational experiences (Eide 1970, Lulat 1984). In the context of language acquisition, the international program may be viewed as either a grand opportunity or a serious problem -- rather like the classic half-full or half empty glass. International Education and Language Seen as Problem
Short-Term Programs Alternatively, if students were really expected to get a reasonable control over another language during the international education experience, the program would have to be lengthened to such an extent that the home institution would be unable to accept all the academic credit earned, and the student would have to violate all the residence requirements of the home institution. Extending the duration of a program to enable language learning would also increase its cost -- not merely in tuition fees, but in living expenses and transportation costs. Governments in the English-speaking world have been reluctant to provide subsidies to underwrite the costs of such programs.(1) Besides, given that most college students are conditioned to look ahead to the end of undergraduate education as the point of entry into the work force, that entry into the work force might have to be postponed by at least a year or two as the result of serious language study. While that might be good for unemployment statistics, it would be intolerable to student and parent expectations. In sum, the matter constitutes a classic "catch-22." In this context, by the way, nothing has changed over the past quarter century. English as a Second Language When large numbers of international students began to arrive in the United States after the end of WWII, in the late 1940s, the almost immediate response of US institutions was to create English-as-a-second-language courses (2) to provide those students with opportunities to acquire high-level proficiency in the language of instruction.(3) Over the past half century, those initial efforts at providing English-as-a-second-language instruction have spawned an enormous industry, ranging over:
Not only has the instructional materials market boomed, but the instructional technology market has also expanded dramatically with products ranging from inexpensive audio tape recorders, to 35mm cameras, slide projectors, copying machines, video cameras, videotape players, overhead projectors, CD-ROM players, and entire language laboratories; in some instances, even computer-based laboratories equipped to access e-mail and the World Wide Web (Grabe et al. 1996). (5) But it is not only English language programs that have contributed to the United States economically. NAFSA estimates that foreign students and their dependents contributed more than $11.95 billion to the U.S. economy during the academic year 2001-02. (6) But such an annual count of the fiscal contribution cannot take into account the long-term benefits to the nation from the learning that occurred and relationships that were established. Also, this analysis examines only the contributions of incoming foreign students; it does not examine the contribution of U.S. students going abroad, either in direct financial contributions and certainly not in indirect long-term contributions. Despite the quantity of relevant activity and the fact that ESL programs often constitute a "cash cow" for fiscally strapped U.S. institutions, the ESL program is typically regarded as "remedial" and not available for academic credit. (7) The Hegemony of English
Thus, part of the effort is intended to keep those English-speaking, fee-paying students happy and so to keep the flow going. But another part of the effort involves a recognition of the really awful foreign language instruction in the United States. Language-Trained Personnel Shortages
Language Investment The government commits money to language education only in a time of international crisis, and then interest lags, said Richard Brecht, Director of the National Foreign Language Center, a think tank in Washington. "We've never made that investment," said Brecht, a panelist at the meeting. The [combined] panelists said it's also important to promote foreign languages in America's public schools [Emphasis added]. Frankly, it is surprising that as many as 614 students are now studying Pashto, Dari, Farsi, and Uzbek at US colleges and universities; not many US institutions offer language instruction in languages other than the conventional ones -- French, German, Japanese, Spanish, perhaps also Italian, Portuguese, and Russian. Languages like Albanian, Aleut, Amharic, Arabic, Armenian, Burmese, Czech, Farsi, Hindi, Javanese, Mandarin, Sinhala, Tagalog, Thai, Urdu, Yoruba -- to name just a few -- are rarely available for study for several reasons. There are somewhere around 6,000 languages spoken in the world (9); obviously, it would be virtually impossible to offer instruction in all 6,000 languages. But surely it would be not only possible but highly desirable to increase the number of languages available for study. Some languages have rarely been taught because they employ a script not widely known in the English-speaking world (e.g., Arabic, Chinese characters, Cyrillic, Hangul, etc.). Some languages have rarely been taught because their grammars are extremely difficult for English-speakers to grasp and would require much greater study-durations to learn (e.g., Korean, Mandarin, Thai, etc.). In reality, these rarely taught languages have seldom been taught because students are not lining up to learn them. Even granted the poverty of foreign language instruction, students have little motivation to study other languages because those languages are perceived to have little practical (i.e., economic) value. The intelligence agencies aside, and in the absence of international crises, the rarely taught languages have little or no economic value; there aren't many jobs for those who can speak them. The outcome, however, is that if only more widely studied languages were required of students in international education, the spread of international education would be severely restricted to those countries in which those languages are spoken; the rest of the world would necessarily be omitted.(10) There are also practical problems to be considered; the political and economic difficulty of putting programs in some countries (e.g., Cuba), the "hardship" for some U.S. students to live in some (third-world) countries, and the real physical dangers potentially involved. Various NAFSA publications have regularly addressed such issues as financing, recruitment, admission, legal status, and administration (Jenkins and Associates 1983). International Education and Language Seen as Opportunity
Twenty years later, in light of current events in North Korea, in the Middle East, in the Indian sub-continent, the quotation remains remarkably apt. In several languages, what is not said is at least as important as what is said. It might be useful to look at what Fulbright does not say. When he speaks of "nations of different cultures," surely he means to include nations of different languages. How else would it be possible to devise reasonable solutions to differences and how else demonstrate people's capacity for humane conduct? Presumably, those actually charged with diplomatic responsibilities need to know something of the language and culture of those with whom they are negotiating. In recent years, schools training diplomats and, in the process, analyzing diplomatic processes have begun to pay attention to language matters. There is a famous anecdote relating to the D Day planning between British and American military officers; apparently, discussions were temporarily interrupted because the two varieties of English use the verb "to table" in quite different ways. There are also dozens of examples of international negotiations breaking down because of linguistico-cultural misunderstandings between parties; When President Kennedy said "Ich bin ein Berliner," he was really saying that he was a pastry rather than establishing an emotional link with residents of Berlin. There is no need to pursue this avenue with further examples. It is not only political leaders, members of the diplomatic corps, and members of the security agencies who need to know other languages. The business community, for example, needs knowledge of other languages and cultures (Ulijn and Strother 1995). Perhaps a popular anecdote may best summarize the case. The exchange may be taken to have occurred in any number of cities in Africa, Asia, Europe, or the Middle East:
In recent history, a number of diplomats had been beneficiaries of international educational opportunities; e.g., UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, U.S. President William Clinton, Sen. J. William Fulbright, US Ambassador to Japan Edwin 0. Reischauer, to name just a few. These individuals participated in and subsequently championed international education. In many cases, it was the international educational opportunity that allowed the individual to live in another country/culture and to begin to learn the language. Can the Situation Be Ameliorated? In 1984, when the Olympic Games were held in Los Angeles, I had the opportunity to serve on one of the local committees. Given that the Games would bring to geographically dispersed and complex Los Angeles visitors from virtually every place in the world, it occurred to me that Los Angeles was at the time one of the most linguistically heterogeneous cities on earth and that such linguistic diversity was a resource that could be exploited. I proposed creating a corps of local citizens who spoke other languages, furnishing each of them with an armband and an identity tag identifying the language they spoke, and turning them loose all over the city. It seemed to me that such a corps could be staffed with volunteers, so that the exercise would incur no expense for the Games beyond the trivial cost of the armbands and the identity tags. The notion was flatly rejected on the basis of the official policy that the languages of the IOC were French and English, and on the unofficial assumption that all the visitors would be able to communicate in English. There is now a large group of scholars and administrators, under the leadership of the Center for Applied Linguistics, who are striving:
This activity has only been in process for a couple of years; it is much too early to estimate what its impact might be. In short, what is necessary is a sea change in the attitudes of US citizens about language. It is, however, unlikely that such a sea change can occur without some stimulation. As NAFSA has stated "the United States needs a comprehensive strategy to enhance the ability of international students to pursue educational opportunities." NAFSA has also urged the development of a national policy for international education. In addition to such a policy, the United States needs a national languages policy. Such a policy should not be a series of specific requirements locked in concrete; on the contrary, it should consist of a number of guidelines -- for example, suggesting when foreign language instruction in school should begin, how long it should continue, what criteria for successful completion might look like, who should be eligible to study, and who should be qualified to teach. The policy should not specify particular languages to be taught, since the language inventory is likely to vary from time to time depending on national objectives. Specifically with respect to tertiary education, colleges and universities should re instate undergraduate foreign language requirements.(12) Every tertiary-level student should have the opportunity to learn at least one other and preferably two other languages.(13) Such a policy is now a part of European practice. As Baetens Beardsmore suggests: "A general policy goal [of the 1992 Treaty of Maastricht] is to place the highest priority on educational mobility, the objective is to enhance the level of familiarity of as many European students as possible with other European cultures and languages as an element of quality in education. Language learning remains a top priority, and to this end, member states are encouraged to promote trilingualism; they are advised to make language qualifications desirable for entry into, and compulsory for exit from, higher education; and they are requested to give particular attention to the learning of minority languages" (1994: 94). Not only should languages be placed again at the center of educational objectives, but attention also needs to be directed to faculty reward systems. At present, and in the proximate past, faculty have not been rewarded for participation in international education activities; on the contrary, they have sometimes been penalized for such participation. Significant activity in international education should be given due consideration in faculty promotion, tenure, and salary incrementation. However, these changes are beyond the capability of NAFSA or of international education activity, though support of these ideas through relationships with other associations and government agencies is certainly possible. It would be pointless to insist on foreign language proficiency as a condition of admission to any and all international educational programs, but international educational programs should be so structured that all participants in such programs are assured the opportunity to participate in language learning. Every participant should be encouraged to learn something of the language(s) of the sites to which their programs take them.(14) Such language learning should be rewarded with appropriate academic credit, depending on the fraction of program time allowed for such activities and the relative proficiency acquired. Administrators of international educational programs should be mindful of the language learning opportunities implicit in all such programs and should be encouraged to exploit those opportunities. In sum, at the present time, language is a casual add-on to many international programs. This need not be so. International educational professionals and their institution as well as professional associations like NAFSA have a responsibility to work for real improvement in the situation. Change is desirable and possible, but much remains to be done. -- Robert B. Kaplan is emeritus professor of applied linguistics Endnotes (2) In 1941, a series of courses in English as a second language were developed at the University of Michigan under the leadership of C. C. Fries. That effort quickly developed into the English Language Institute. (See, e.g., Kaplan )997.) (3) The mania to provide English language instruction seem, however, not to extend much beyond the undergraduate level. Graduate students are sometimes included, but often under constrained conditions on the basis that their educational time is more restricted and that their support grants are often quite specific in not allowing for language instruction. Visiting faculty and such categories as Fulbright grantees are rarely included at all, though there is evidence that some Fulbright grantees are disadvantaged by limited English proficiency. (See, e.g., Kaplan and Medgyes 1991.) (4) Buoyed by increased spending and growing student enrollment, publishers of textbooks and instructional materials registered the strongest gains in sales since 1997 in any category of the $21 billion US book market. With its purchase of the Simon & Schuster division in 1998 (and its earlier acquisition of Addison Wesley and Longman), Pearson PLC executives were speaking in glowing terms about future prospects for English-language textbooks, not only for the United States, but for the world. They were predicting 10 percent annual growth rates in the international and domestic markets, although analysts for the Book Industry Study Group have been more cautious in their projection for the United States. (5) The English-language teaching activity is not limited to foreign students in the United States; on the contrary, that activity is global, often as part of development grants sponsored not only by US agencies but also by agencies of foreign governments and by international organizations like the World Bank. These development-associated activities are tied to the transfer of appropriate technologies to underdeveloped countries. (See e.g., Kaplan 2001, Kaplan and Birnbaum 1980.) (6) This conservative figure is based on tuition figures from the College Board enrollment figures, from the Institute of International Education's Open Doors 2002 report, living expenses calculated from College Board figures and analysis of the data by Lynn Schoch and Jason Baumgartner at Indiana University, Bloomington Office of International Services. (7) Foreign language programs in the United States fare somewhat better in the sense that students can receive something on the order of 12 units of academic credit for such study. But instruction in elementary and intermediate level foreign language instruction is commonly delivered by graduate teaching assistants who perceive the activity as a right of passage to tide them over until they are qualified to teach literature; in other words, language teaching is viewed as a trivial activity, not part of the serious work of so-called "language" departments. The work of graduate teaching assistants may in some cases be supplemented by part-time faculty, poorly paid and deprived of benefits and job security. Clearly, language teaching is not perceived as a prestige function. (8) The term "linguist" here should not be perceived as implying technical knowledge about the languages involved, nor high-level academic training in the fields of linguistics or applied linguistics; rather, the term translates simply as competent bilinguals. (9) It is predicted that about 8O percent of these 6,000 languages will disappear within the next century (Crystal 1997). There are, nonetheless, a number of scholars who discuss the spread of English in triumphant terms (Graddol 1997, Graddol and Meinhof 1999) as there are scholars who depict English as a "killer language" (Skutnabb-Kangas 2000). (10) The Peace Corps has done more for the learning of rarely taught languages than the entire US academic establishment. (11) The desire to designate English the official language of the United States must be based on an assumption that English is somehow in jeopardy. To declare English an endangered language would be akin to designating crab grass an endangered species. (12) By way of illustrating the need, George Mason University in Virginia has targeted for extinction degree programs in German, Russian, and classics, among other humanities areas, on the basis that consumer demand has declined. (See, e. g., Lears, 2003:26.) One budget-reduction approach under discussion at some institutions is the reorganization of traditional departments into larger structures such as a division of humanities, or a department of languages and literature. English departments are almost universally understaffed, and modern languages departments are often overstaffed in every language except Spanish. Until now, pressure to merge them was felt primarily in small liberal arts colleges and in community colleges; in some institutions such mergers have already taken place. But even some large state universities have such declining enrollments in French, German, and Russian that the tenured faculty in those areas do not have enough students to justify the cost of programs (Pratt 2002:37). Pratt, L. R. 2003. "Will budget troubles restructure higher education?" Academe. 89 (1): 33-37. (13) This is not to suggest that every student should reach a universal level of proficiency in some particular language. It is rather to suggest that the opportunity to study languages is at issue. After all, language aptitude distributes in any normative population along a bell shaped curve. Universal foreign language requirements (as in Japan, for example) are unrealistic, wasteful, and non-productive. (14) This suggestion remains valid whether international educational programs transport participants to another country or to sites in their own country; in other words, it doesn't matter whether English-speaking participants are resident in Japan, or in Italy, or in minority communities in New York or Los Angeles. Consideration might be given to increasing the frequency of international educational activities that exploit minority communities in their own countries. References Crystal, D. 1997. English as a Global Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. De Angelis, C. and S. Steen. Eds. 2001. Intensive English USA 2000. New York: Institute of International Education. Eide, I. Ed. 1970. Students as Links Between Cultures: A Cross-Cultural Survey Based on UNESCO Studies. Paris: UNESCO. Fulbright, J. W. 1983. Foreword. In H. M. Jenkins and Associates. Educating Students From Other Nations, (pp. ix-x.) San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Grabe, W., et al. Eds. 1996. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 16: Technology and Language. New York: Cambridge University Press. Graddol, D. 1997. The Future of English. London: British Council. Graddol, D. and U, H, Meinhof. Eds. 1999. English in a Changing World. Guilford: Biddies on behalf of AILA. Jenkins, H. M. and Associates. 1983. Educating Students from Other Nations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Kaplan, R. B. 1983. "Meeting the Educational Needs of Other Nations." In H. M. Jenkins and Associates. Educating Students from Other Nations. (pp. 253-276.) San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Kaplan, R. B. 1984. "English as a Second Language: An Overview of the Literature." In E. G. Barber, P. G. Altbach and R. G. Myers. Eds. Bridges to Knowledge: Foreign Students in Comparative Perspective, (pp. 247-258.) Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Kaplan, R. B. 1997. "An IEP Is a Many-Splendored Thing." In M. A. Christison and P. L. Stoller. Eds. A Handbook for Language Program Administrators. (Pp. 3-19.) Burlingame, CA: Alta Book Center. Kaplan, R. B. 2001; "English-The Accidental Language of Science?" In U. Ammon. Ed. The Dominance of English as a Language of Science: Effects on Other Language Communities, (pp. 3-26.) Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Kaplan, R. B. Ed. 2002, Oxford Handbook of Applied Linguistics. New York: Oxford University Press. Kaplan, R. B. and H. Bimbaum. 1980. "Language, Information and Technology Transfer." Address at the 15th American Studies Association of the Philippines. Laguna, Philippines. Kaplan, R. B. and P. Medgyes. 1991. "Language-Related Problems of Advanced Non-Native English Speakers During an Extended Stay in the United States." Journal of Intensive English Studies. 4:21-45. Lears, J. 2003. The Radicalism of Liberal Arts Tradition. Academe 89 (I): 23-27. Lulat, Y. G-M. 1984. "International Students and Study-Abroad Programs: A Select Bibliography." In E. G. Barber, P. G. Altbach and R. G. Myers. Eds. 1984. Bridges to Knowledge: Foreign Students in Comparative Perspective, (pp. 207-246). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. President's Commission on Foreign Language and International Studies. 1979. Strength Through Wisdom: A Critique of U. S. Capabilities. Washington, D.C: US Government Printing Office. Rocca, F. X. 2003. "Study Notes an Uptick in Programs Taught in English at European Universities." The Chronicle of Higher Education. January 3. Skutnabb-Kangas, T. 2000. Linguistic Genocide in Education: Or Worldwide Diversity and Human Rights? Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Ulijn, J. M. and J. B. Strother. 1995. Communicating in Business and Technology: From Psycholinguistic Theory to International Practice. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
This file was updated on November 8, 2003 |
|