LANGUAGE IN THE COLLEGES THE SITUATION IN COLLEGES When permitted to do so, the faculty of any American liberal arts college expresses its belief or lack of belief in the importance of foreign language study by setting up entrance or degree requirements or both. (In California, faculties of the 11 State colleges are not permitted to do so.) Of 830 accredited institutions currently granting the B. A. degree, 254 (30.6 percent) have a foreign language entrance requirement, 694 (83.6 percent) have a language degree requirement, and an additional 12 with no formal degree requirement are among those with the entrance requirement-making a total of 706 (85.1 percent) that consider foreign language study an essential element in liberal education. Some of the institutions lacking the entrance or degree requirement do, of course, have a foreign language degree requirement in most of the major fields. Some have never had a degree requirement. Since 1952 there has been a trend toward restoration, or institution, of the language requirement for the B. A. At least 15 colleges or universities in 11 States have taken this step; at least 4 have restored the foreign language entrance requirement; still other places, notably Cornell, Idaho, and Michigan, have recently strengthened or extended their former degree requirements. Of the 57 accredited liberal arts colleges in New England, only two lack a foreign language degree requirement. In Arizona, Mississippi, South Carolina, Utah, Virginia, and Wisconsin-to mention States in other areas-all colleges granting the B. A. require foreign languages for the degree, as does the one accredited institution of higher learning in Delaware, Nevada, and Wyoming. There are 10 other States, plus the District of Columbia, with a total of 179 liberal arts colleges, in each of which only a single accredited institution lacks a language requirement for the B. A. It is a nice question whether or not the degree requirement in most institutions is sufficient to make the proficiency acquired meaningful enough in terms of the national interest. In only about 50 places is the requirement expressed solely as a test of proficiency; in most it is, conventionally, a matter of hours and credits. Of the institutions without a foreign language entrance requirement, most of them abandoned it or came into existence without it because of the decline of language study in the public high schools during the 1920's and 1930's. However, the idea that foreign language study is an important part of preparation for college has not died. A 1952-53 survey of 216 institutions revealed that in half of them at least 50 percent of the freshmen offered 2 or more high school units of foreign languages, and in 41 of them between 90 and 96 percent of the freshmen did so. Upon admission to college, a student may be placed in college language courses or exempted from further study on the basis of high school units offered or a placement test. If we turn from quantity to quality of college foreign-language instruction, we abandon statistics and objectivity. Much of the instruction appears to be literary and scholarly in its objectives. Perhaps college teachers, particularly those also giving graduate instruction, tend to see future college teachers in their students and therefore give insufficient stress to the aural-oral foreign-language training needed by the future elementary or secondary school teacher, or by the student who will not become a teacher. We lack accurate figures on the number of students of foreign languages among the nearly 3 million persons now enrolled in our various colleges and universities. At a guess, there are about 500,000. Assuming that this proportion does not change, and assuming the accuracy of predictions that total college enrollments will reach 6.4 million by 1970, it would seem that a considerable number of additional college language teachers need to be trained at once. What has been happening to language enrollments in colleges can be illustrated from an area in which language study has been relatively free from the damaging effect of its decline in the public high schools. Of the 28,801 students in 28 New England colleges in 1925, 18,629 (64 percent) were studying modern foreign languages; but 24 years later, in 1949, of the 94,546 students in these same 28 colleges, 24,859 (26 percent) were studying modern foreign languages. In other words, although there were 6,230 more students in language classrooms, there had been a 59 percent drop in proportion of students learning foreign languages. A development in college curricula that has tended to limit foreign language enrollments is "general education" or the "core" curriculum, which prescribes a planned, integrated program for the first 2 years, leaving but few electives, and often putting foreign language courses not in the "core" but among the electives. But in a few institutions, notably at Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the University of Chicago, students may elect to do their core "humanities" course in a section conducted in a foreign language and with readings chosen from the foreign literature. Source: The National Interest and Foreign Languages, revised edition, January 1957. NUMBER OF MODERN LANGUAGE TEACHERS IN COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES It was estimated by an official of the American Council of Learned Societies that in 1956 the number of full-time college teachers of French, Spanish, German, Russian, and other modern foreign languages was 6,750: French, 2,250; Spanish, 1,800; German, 1,650; Russian, 150; other, 900. STUDY OF RUSSIAN IN UNITED STATES It is also obvious that it is unrealistic to limit the choice of languages in high school to the traditional few. Interest in the Russian language at present is great, both among the pupils and the teachers. The United States Office of Education is receiving an increasing number of inquiries regarding the study of Russian. An editorial in the New York Times, November 26, 1957, states that "we need large numbers of people who can read the Russian language. It is estimated that some 40 percent of all Soviet students study English, and there are large numbers of Soviet citizens in all fields who can read our language. Yet only a few thousand American students study Russian, and the teaching of Russian in our high schools is a rare phenomenon indeed. To meet the obvious need, our high schools and colleges must look again at their language curricula and take steps needed to assure that we know Russian at least as well as we know French, Spanish, and German." At present there are only nine public schools in the United States known to be teaching Russian: Eveleth High School, Eveleth, Minn.; Washington, Jefferson, Cleveland, and Madison High Schools, Portland, Oreg.; Hicksville High School, Hicksville, Long Island, a New York suburb; the Maine Township High School, Des Plaines, Ill., a suburb of Chicago; Demonstration School, Kent University, Kent, Ohio, and University High School, associated with the University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, which presents a well-rounded 4-year course. Eight private schools are teaching Russian: Chatham Hall School, Chatham, Va.; Horace Mann, New York City; Phillips Academy, Andover, Mass.; Riverdale Boys and Riverdale Girls School, Riverdale, N. Y.; St. Paul's School, Concord, N. H.; Choate School, Wallingford, Conn., and St. Albans, Washington, D. C. Two New York City high schools are initiating Russian courses to begin in February 1958. A circular letter has been received from the head of the department of education of the State of South Dakota, indicating desire to introduce Russian in South Dakota high schools. The State Department of Education of Connecticut plans to undertake a survey, at the secondary level, as to what schools are interested in introducing Russian into their curricula. Oxnard and Camarillo High Schools in California are also considering the introduction of Russian next year. Several universities have started the program of teacher training in RussianBrooklyn College, University of Minnesota, Columbia University Teachers College. The University of Minnesota offers a training program for teachers with Russian language as a minor. Columbia University Teachers College has a summer language training program for Americans of Russian descent who received their academic training abroad. Yale University indicated its willingness to hold a summer seminar to selected well educated native speakers, preparing them to teach later in American secondary schools. New York City Department of Education announced that a group of 30 public school teachers will start their training in Russian in February 1958 (New York Herald Tribune, Dec. 1, 1957). There are 183 universities and colleges teaching Russian and about 4,000 students taking the language. Graduate work in Russian is being done in 12 universities: University of California, Columbia University, Fordham University, Harvard University, Indiana University, University of Michigan, University of Minnesota, University of Notre Dame, Syracuse University, University of Washington, Wayne State University, Yale University. Language laboratories are available for the use of Russian language practice in 38 institutions. There are also several special summer language training programs offered throughout the country: Yale University, University of Indiana, University of Wisconsin, University of Michigan, University of Chicago, University of California, George Washington University, Georgetown University, Colby College, Middlebury College, University of Minnesota, University of Washington, Fordham University, Alliance College, University of Montreal, and others. Source: Yakobson, Helen B.: The Study of Russian in American High Schools, January 6, 1958. THE WORLD'S LANGUAGES List issued by Modern Language Association, August 1956, and the number of American colleges and universities teaching them OFFERINGS IN MODERN FOREIGN LANGUAGE STUDY 11 11 10 12 12 12 13 12 13 12 12 12 12 13 13 12 13-14 11 11 12 11 13 13 11 13 14 Yugoslavia France Spain Dom. Rep. Japan N. Ireland Uruguay Australia New Zealand Sweden England Finland Honduras Iceland Italy United States Compulsory study Elective only Source: Parker, William R., The National Interest and Foreign Languages, revised edition, January 1957, p. 50. EDUCATION of Language TEACHERS TRAINING THE LANGUAGE TEACHER On this subject a book, a very sad book, could be written. Back in 1892 an NEA committee on the curriculum of the secondary school reported: "The worst obstacle to the progress of modern language study is the lack of properly equipped instructors." That statement is still true. There are other obstacles, but none more basic. Those who determine policy in our public schools have, on the one hand, effectively objected to foreign language instruction because it is poorly done and achieves little in 2 years, and, on the other hand, have persistently required an insufficient minimum of foreign language training of the teachers actually hired. Unfortunately, no amount of work in how to teach will increase the fluency or improve the accent or reading knowledge of a foreign language teacher who has not studied languages long enough. In respect to the amount of training he needs in order to be barely adequate, he may or may not be (as some think he is) unique; but it is certain enough that his deficiencies will be readily apparent, and his teaching ineffectual, if he has had no more than the minimum amount of study presently required of him by the department of education in most of our States. Such unpleasant generalizations need to be clarified and illustrated. They sound like bitter accusations instead of the statement of a complex truth which they are. Part of the trouble has been the general tendency, remarked in a number of recent books and articles on American education, to require more and more college work in "professional education" and hence to minimize all traditional "subject matter" courses. For example, the Michigan State Board of Education a few years ago appointed a special committee to propose improvements in the teacher certification code. Its proposals (as of February 1954) required for B. A. and B. S. degrees with certificate "at least" 30 hours in professional education courses and "at least" 40 hours in "general education" (defined as "communication arts," social science, and science) with 15 of these in interdisciplinary courses. Nothing in the humanities was required, but the applicant for certification "may present" as much as 20 hours, in his "subject matter" field (e. g., foreign languages). The proposed code would, of course, require the compliance of all Michigan institutions, including private liberal arts colleges, that train teachers. The reader may figure out for himself how much French or Spanish or German the future teacher of these subjects in Michigan schools can know. As in many other States, he is presently required to have only a "minor" (15 semester hours of college work) in order to teach a foreign language. To put this another way, in many States high school teachers of a foreign language are required to have a minimum of 225 "contact hours" of language instruction-as compared with the 612 or more hours in the wartime "intensive language program." A consequence of this policy is that the language teacher in a second-year high school class has often reached the practical limit of what he himself has been taught, his only advantage over the class being the number of times he has taught it. Little wonder that the 2-year course has come to be considered terminal in so many high schools. Although the State requirements for the certification of language teachers have greatly improved in recent decades, they still leave much to be desired. At least 3 States (Maine, Utah, and Washington) still require no more than 2 years (or 10 or 12 semester hours) of college work. Most States requires a college major or minor in the language to be taught, but the average number of semester hours in a minor is, as we have remarked, about 15. In an increasing number of cases the prospective teacher has not begun the language in high school, and there is a great difference between the minimum college preparation in languages and that in, say, English or mathematics or American history, fields in which the teacher has already a foundation of elementary training. Moreover, and most unhappily, because of the great shortage of teachers in recent years, State certifying boards have had to relax already low standards. It was estimated late in 1956, that 80,209 teachers were employed on substandard or emergency certificates (an increase of 10,000 over the 1953 figure). Even in the States where the paper requirements for a teaching certificate are the highest (e. g., Georgia and North Carolina), the language teacher is rarely treated as an expert and a specialist in one subject. Except for the older teachers in the larger cities, it is very uncommon for a teacher to have classes in only 1 subject, the great majority of high school teachers (perhaps 7 out of 22201-58-24 |