U.S. School district asks for public input on world language program

November 6, 2011

Andover public schools seek public inputThe Andover Public School board in Massachusetts, U.S.A. has established a World Language Task Force, reports the Andover Townsman. The purpose of the task force is to seek input from the community on what languages they would like to see taught in their schools and why. The task force is comprised of teachers, parents, community members, and administrators. The purpose of the task force is to:

Study the K-12 programming model and trends in world language teaching and learning.

Develop goals and strategies for a K-12 World Language program for inclusion in the Andover Public Schools Strategic Plan.

Produce recommendations relative to which one language will be taught on the elementary school level, which two languages will be taught on the middle school level, and which languages will be taught at Andover High School.

The task force is soliciting input from the public through a public online survey developed by the school board. The survey asks respondents to rank the importance of such factors as cultural competence, writing and testing skills in a first language and preparing students for global society. It also asks for input on what languages the board should offer, including popular languages such as Spanish and Chinese, as well as less popular languages such as Hmong, Khmer and Creolo Haitian.

I believe that this is a commendable initiative for a variety of reasons:

  1. Generating dialogue between school boards and the community promotes a culture of open communication. It gives a voice to parents, grandparents and even students about that is important to them. It gives a voice to the community.
  2. In addition to giving a voice to the community, it also seeks to uncover what is important to the community, digging deeper into the values, beliefs and opinions of those who live in the local area. Then, it would assume, the task force would consider these values as part of its criteria when it comes to making its decisions.
  3. It downplays the traditional authoritarian nature of school boards. Instead of propagating the ideas that “school boards know best”, it levels the playing field (at least in terms of the optics) and sends the message that “We’re here to serve you, not dictate to you.” This is a strategy that the Calgary Board of Education would have done well to employ when it arbitrarily decided to cut French programs without engaging the community in any dialogue about it.
  4. It generates community involvement and interest in language programs at the local schools. At a time when cutbacks to language programs, particularly in the United States, are mercilessly targeting world language programs, initiatives such as this will draw importance to language programs. After people have contributed to the discussion and have had some say into the decision-making process they are emotionally and psychologically invested in the outcome and are more likely to support foreign and world language programs in general.

One comment posted on the Andover news article pointed out that the survey is an imperfect tool, since respondents can answer as many times as they like, potentially skewing the results. This is relatively easy to overcome, depending on which survey tool is used. Nevertheless, the concept is brilliant. Opening up discussions about education and in particular, language learning, to the public and ultimately involving the community in the decision making process is innovative, respectful of the community and downright brilliant.

________________

Share this post: U.S. School district asks for public input on world language program http://wp.me/pNAh3-ZV

Update – January 2018 – This blog has had over 1.8 million views thanks to readers like you. If you enjoyed this post, please “like” it or share it on social media. Thanks!

Sarah Elaine Eaton is a faculty member in the Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary, Canada.

1 Comment | education, language program administration, languages, second languages, Uncategorized, world languages | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Sarah Elaine Eaton, Ph.D.

The new “F” word in language departments: Foreign.

October 5, 2011

A recent article in Inside Higher Ed offers insights into the political correctness of how we talk about language programs. If you’re like me, you started your career by taking or teaching “foreign languages” or “modern languages”. These terms are now, apparently, passé. These terms have been thrown out, replaced by designations such as “world languages”.

The article reports that “many educators also do not like the way “foreign” suggests a division of the world into the United States and everyone else” or that ” the word ‘foreign’ could imply different in a negative sense”, arguing that Spanish, in particular, is no longer a language foreign to the United States, but rather an officially un-recognized second language of that country.

What about the term “foreign word”? Does that now get replaced by “international word”? Or “world word”? (Try saying that one ten times fast in front of your class.)

Similarly, English as a Second Language (ESL), English as a Foreign Language (EFL) have also fallen out of favor, being replaced by English as an Additional Language (EAL) and English as and International Language (EIL).

Personally (and I accept the risks of ticking off some colleagues as a I say this), I wonder about all these name changes. If we keep changing perfectly respectable words and phrases in order to be politically correct, then are we not at the mercy of fear mongering and negativity, anyway?

I’m not talking here about heinous and derogatory racial or religious verbal aberrations that belong in the toilet bowl. I am talking about professional nomenclature, used by trained and credentialed teachers, researchers, professors, students and government agencies.

If we keep changing professional terms are we not lowering them to the same status as derogatory slang that refers to race, religion or sexual preference? Those terms are intended to ridicule, insult, defile and debase others. Those terms should most definitely be dropped from professional (and even personal) vernacular, in favour of more respectful and less emotionally-charged terminology.

But as far as I know, professional nomenclature was never intended to be emotionally charged. Its purpose, as with all scientific and professional nomenclature, is intended to be objective and even clinical. It is designed to stand the test of time, be searchable in research works throughout the ages and signify the tradition and pride of a the profession.

How often do we see other disciplines fretting about what they call themselves? Physics, for example. One could argue that the word is archaic, dated and hard to spell. It is! Yet physicists around a proud and vigilant bunch who revel in the ancient Greek tradition from which it hails.

Should the word “Physics” be dropped because it’s hard to spell? (I hear my physicist friends snorting in disgust at the very thought of such a ludicrous proposition.)

Or Mathematics. Though it is sometimes shortened to “Maths” or “Math”, we really haven’t seen great changes to name of the discipline in centuries.

Moving away from the hard sciences, “Philosophy” retains its name and its tradition, as well, as does “Fine Arts”, or even “Education” (which I’m surprised hasn’t been banished in favour of “Learning”… but give it time.)

I agree that words are important and wording is highly important. But I do wonder what happens to our sense of identity and pride as language teaching professionals if, every decade or so, we change the name of our discipline to suit what is politically correct at the time?

I’m not saying that “World Languages” is wrong and “Foreign Languages” is right. I am suggesting that we, as professionals, settle on what to call our discipline and stick with it for a century or two.

We lament about cuts to funding and the marginalization of our programs within the institutions in which we work. At the same time, I suspect that colleagues in other disciplines quietly snicker at us. While we bicker and fret about what to call ourselves, they methodically and strategically move forward, claiming funding and research dollars, unapologetically going by the same name they’ve had for centuries.

___________

Share this post: The new “F” word in language departments: Foreign. http://wp.me/pNAh3-Wi

Update – January 2018 – This blog has had over 1.8 million views thanks to readers like you. If you enjoyed this post, please “like” it or share it on social media. Thanks!

Sarah Elaine Eaton is a faculty member in the Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary, Canada.

Comments Off on The new “F” word in language departments: Foreign. | education, ESL, second languages, Uncategorized, world languages | Tagged: , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Sarah Elaine Eaton, Ph.D.

EU Warns that Britain’s growing trend towards monolingualism is a problem

September 15, 2011

According to a recent article from Public Service Europe European Commission warns that Britain risks losing influence in the European Union if the nosedive in foreign language skills is not redressed. Over the past decade, enrollments in language courses in the UK have plummeted by a whopping 45%. So, when the rest of Europe is embracing and promoting multilingualism, Britain seems to be pushing the notion that English is the lingua franca of business.

While French used to be the language of diplomacy, certain French diplomats have horrified high-level politicians such as former French President, Jacques Chirac, with use of English in major EU gatherings.

The article goes on to talk about the growth of two seemingly opposing movements: one towards the accepting of English as a universal language of business and another movement that seeks to elevate the status of regional languages such as Catalan and Basque.

This strikes me as fascinating, given that in the U.S. there also seen to be two opposing movements: one towards accepting Spanish as an unofficial second language, an idea that is vehemently countered by the growing English-only movement.

While proponents of multilingualism can present study after study on the benefits of learning additional languages including cognitive benefits, increased problem solving skills and even a deeper sense of compassion towards others, those in favour of English as a lingua franca talk about reducing costs for translation, decreasing the risk of legal implications of bad translations and unifying global communications, but I wonder if there are any studies that scientifically prove the benefits to the individual learner of being monolingual? I’ve yet to find one myself…

___________________________

Share this post: EU Warns that Britain’s growing trend towards monolingualism is a problem http://wp.me/pNAh3-S2 

Update – January 2018 – This blog has had over 1.8 million views thanks to readers like you. If you enjoyed this post, please “like” it or share it on social media. Thanks!

Sarah Elaine Eaton is a faculty member in the Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary, Canada.

2 Comments | ESL, languages, world languages | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Sarah Elaine Eaton, Ph.D.

Global Trends in Language Evaluation and Assessment

September 4, 2011

Next week I am team-teaching a block week course at the University of Calgary on Global Trends in Language Education. Part of my session has been structured as a public lecture that is open to the public. It is a morning presentation, which may not be ideal for teachers, but nevertheless, if you’re in Calgary you’re invited you to join us for the event.

Here are the details:

Public lecture: Global Trends in Language Evaluation and Assessment*

Thursday, September 8, 2011

Dr. Sarah Eaton

Major shifts in educational evaluation and assessment have been happening since the 1980s. There is an international trend (evidenced by the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages and the International Adult Literacy Skills Survey) towards asset-based or strength-based approaches to evaluating a person’s language competence.

These international frameworks point towards a major paradigm shift in how we value and assess competence. Traditional “deficit-based” models of evaluation are being replaced. Are we ready, as 21st century educators, to translate this policy shift into our teaching practice?

08:30 – Welcome
09:00 – 10:15 – Presentation

University of Calgary
Language Research Centre
Craigie Hall, D-420

This event is free of charge and open to the public.
* This presentation is part of the LANG 599 / 699 block week course.

Global Trends in Language Evaluation and Assessment – invitation

_______________

Share this post: Global Trends in  Language Evaluation and Assessment http://wp.me/pNAh3-Ry

Update – January 2018 – This blog has had over 1.8 million views thanks to readers like you. If you enjoyed this post, please “like” it or share it on social media. Thanks!

Sarah Elaine Eaton is a faculty member in the Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary, Canada.

Comments Off on Global Trends in Language Evaluation and Assessment | education, languages, teaching, world languages | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by Sarah Elaine Eaton, Ph.D.

Marketing tip: Ask your students where they heard about you

August 20, 2011

This is a simple way of determining which method of marketing works for your language or literacy program: Ask your students how they heard about you. Do most of your students find out about you through the Internet? …word of mouth? …your brochure? … trade fairs? Once you figure out what has proven most successful, you will know where to focus more of your marketing dollars.

I suggest getting this valuable information in writing. Whether it is through an evaluation form or an exit interview where the results are recorded, get the information in concrete written form. Compare it from year to year. See if your most successful marketing strategy changes over time.

Of course, we know that word of mouth is the most powerful way to market your program. If the majority of your students come to you through word of mouth, then you are very lucky. Most language schools need to combine word of mouth with other marketing efforts.

But what other marketing efforts are successful for you? You may be surprised. You may be pouring thousands of dollars into a fancy brochure and find out that 85% of your students used the Internet to find you. If that is the case, you would want to drive more of your marketing dollars into the Internet (maybe pay for a higher ranking on a search engine or get a banner ad onto other people’s sites). Once you know what has proven successful, you can use that information to generate even more interest and registrations.
Marketing materials: tools and tips to do the job better

This post is adapted from “Idea #18” in 101 Ways to Market Your Language Program

________________

Share or Tweet this post: Marketing tip: Ask your students where they heard about you http://wp.me/pNAh3-wA

Update – January 2018 – This blog has had over 1.8 million views thanks to readers like you. If you enjoyed this post, please “like” it or share it on social media. Thanks!

Sarah Elaine Eaton is a faculty member in the Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary, Canada.

1 Comment | 101 Ways to Market Your Language Program, branding, education, ESL, language program administration, languages, non-profit, recruitment, second languages, target market, Uncategorized, world languages | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Sarah Elaine Eaton, Ph.D.

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »