How the Military Promotes Language Learning

October 21, 2011

Dr. Sarah Eaton's blogThe U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) recently released an article about how they strive to preserve and promote language skills. The article talks about how the DOD trains thousands of employees a year in over two dozen languages. They make some interesting points such as:

Recruits often wait 2 or 3 years for assignments in a location requiring a foreign language, in order to get their skills up to snuff.

Language skills can atrophy over time. It’s a “use it or lose it” kind of thing.

The military uses a variety of means of teaching including face-to-face classes, distance education, video training, virtual classrooms and mobile learning teams.

The Defense Language Institute (DLI) has over 26 language training facilities around the world.

Last year the program provided 21,000 hours of instruction to nearly 1,300 students. That’s almost ten times what it provided in 2009, which was 2400 hours of instruction.

I find it ironic that while government ministries, school boards and universities are drastically slashing the budgets for language programs, the U.S. military has increased its language teaching programs dramatically. Wouldn’t it stand to reason that if those in charge of education invested in language training for younger students, that those students would become more employable in their early adult years?

Could it be that the military has more insight into the value of language learning than educational policy makers?

_______________________________

Share this post: How the Military Promotes Language Learning http://wp.me/pNAh3-Y8

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.


Google Translate with Conversation Mode

October 17, 2011

I am not a fan of online translation.

Or rather, I was not a fan of online translation.

For years I’ve been vehemently vocal about the pitfalls of leaving language translation up to a mechanical device.

I’ve just seen something that is making me reconsider. This is quite possibly the coolest thing I’ve seen in a while. Computer-based translation has come a long way in the past 15 years or so.

Check it out and let me know what you think.

___________

Share this post: Google Translate with Conversation Mode http://wp.me/pNAh3-Xv

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.


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.


Literacy and Language Listservs – My favorites

August 22, 2011

Do you subscribe and participate in professional listservs? Though some say listservs are outdated, I still find tremendous value in the tips, information and ideas that are exchanged. Here are the publicly available lists I subscribe to:

#1. Literacy Information and Communication System (LINCS) –  They have lists on:

  • Adult English Language Acquisition
  • Adult Literacy Professional Development
  • Assessment
  • Diversity and Literacy
  • Health and Literacy
  • Learning Disabilities
  • Math and Numeracy
  • Reading and Writing
  • Transitions to Post-secondary Education
  • Technology and Distance Learning
  • Workforce Competitiveness

Subscribe to any or all of these lists here: http://lincs.ed.gov/lincs/discussions/subscribe_all.html

#2. Foreign Language Teaching Forum (FL Teach) – I’ve been on this list for years, possibly over a decade. Definitely worth it for teachers of second, foreign or world languages.
http://www.cortland.edu/flteach/

#3. Edling list – This is more of a research list for people interested in linguistics and language teaching methodology and other research related questions. I met the listserv administrator, Dr. Francis Hult, at a conference last year and he invited me to subscribe. I enjoy it and keep up on the messages. If you’re in a scholarly or research field, check it out: https://lists.sis.utsa.edu/mailman/listinfo/edling

Tip: I always choose the “digest” option to receive messages, so my inbox doesn’t fill up.

All of these lists are free, public professional exchanges of information. They are all moderated, so there is no spam, profanity or sales pitches. (Bless the list administrators!)

If you know of other content-rich lists, feel free to offer your contribution to the list by leaving a comment.

___________

Share this post: Literacy and Language Listservs – My favorites http://wp.me/pNAh3-Ra

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.


Does language learning make us racist?

August 18, 2011

Language and culture are often lumped together, spoken of in the same breath, as if they were one in the same. Language teachers revel in the cultures of the languages they teach. But does learning another language really make you any less racist? Some researchers caution that if we rely on cultural stereotypes, we may be adding to our students’ myopic view of the world and that we’re not really doing them any favours.

Researchers Byram and Feng (2004) say that language teachers need to get out there and connect with those who work in the field of cross-cultural training in the business world.  They argue that language and culture are value-laden and socially and politically constructed, and that language teachers often rely heavily on stereotypes to teach culture.

Starkey (2007) agrees with that point, only he takes it a step further by saying that language teachers may unintentionally promote stereotypes or narrow views of other cultures by talking only about “food, fashion, festivals and folklore” as representations of culture. He even goes so far as to say that language teachers can become so enamoured with the positive aspects of the target culture (particularly if they have lived or studied in that culture) that they develop a kind of cultural idealism, to the extent that they dismiss their students’ latent prejudices.

That article struck a chord with me. As a Spanish teacher who has lived in Spain and worked for short periods in Mexico, Honduras, Venezuela and Cuba, I can honestly admit that I am somewhat enamored with the people and cultures of the places I have personally visited. In my classes, I have tended to focus on the “positive” aspects of these places and I have been known to avoid or gloss over questions around poverty, drug cartels, the Basque separatist group ETA, or lack of clean water and electricity in some of the areas I have been.

Rarely do I tell students about the time I was working alongside a Cuban professor and when coffee was served, I asked if he drank his coffee with milk. He replied that he loved milk, but that he saved his weekly ration for his two year old daughter because he felt she needed it more than he did.

Nor do I tell them about being in Honduras a year after Hurricane Mitch and seeing shelters made of twigs where houses had been instantly destroyed. The makeshift shelters were hardly enough to protect anyone from the elements.

Nor do I tell them about the homeless man at the bottom of the stairs in a Madrid metro station who started to smell after three days because while passers-by thought he was drunk or asleep, he had in fact died, with thousands of people (including me, I am ashamed to say) passing him by. None of us knew… and personally, it had never occurred to me as a young, naive 20-something student from abroad, that someone could actually die in a subway station. Such a thing was so far out of my personal experience at that point in my life, that the shock of the nameless Spaniard’s death is something I’ll never forget.

I don’t share those stories with my students. Not ever.

I try to present the happy side of culture in my classes. I only start to “dig deep” or share stories that could be shocking or distressing when I am working one-on-one with students or in small groups with students whom I think can “handle” the other side of the reality I have lived and seen.

As I read these articles, I can’t help but ask myself if I have done the right thing all these years? Who am I to judge what my students can and cannot “handle”? Should I have pushed “the dark side” a little more, I wonder? Have I glossed over some of the more complex realities of real world culture in order to encourage my students to become as enamored with language learning as I am?

Starkey paired up with another scholar, Audrey Osler and together they wrote an article about how representations of culture in language learning textbooks has an effect on students’ understanding of that culture. While positive representations of culture can often be found in textbooks, culture goes beyond photos depicting national dress or typical food.

Researchers who specialize in the area of intercultural education and competence are calling on us language teachers to engage our students in deep conversations about identity, cultural integration, race and social values. They are also calling on us to engage with teachers of global citizenship and cross-cultural trainers who work in the business world, to help our students develop deeper understandings of culture and the idea that a person can have multiple cultural identities.

I grew up in a bi-cultural family, with a Canadian father and a British mother. I have lived in Canada, England and Spain. I’ve studied Spanish, French, German and American Sign Language. I sometimes rely on my national Canadian identity, which is firmly grounded in multiculturalism, to explain my own sense of multiple cultural identities. I think I do this sometimes just because it is easier than trying to “drill deep” into questions of identity. I am starting to realize that having parents from different cultures may very well have influenced my own cultural identity and fascination with the world outside the small city of 65,000 where I was born.

What about you? What elements have constructed your sense of culture and identity? If you’re a language teacher, are you enamored with language(s) you teach and the cultures you have experienced? Is it important to you that your students develop the same love of language that you have?

How do we “dig deep” into culture in a beginner-level language courses and engage our students in critical and reflective dialogue to help them develop true intercultural sensitivity and competence?

References

Byram, M., & Feng, A. (2004). Culture and Language Learning: Teaching, Research and Scholarship. Language Teaching, 37, 149-168.

Osler, A., & Starkey, H. (2000). Intercultural Education and Foreign Language Learning: Issues of racism, identity and modernity. Race Ethnicity and Education, 3(2), 207-221.

Starkey, H. (2007). Language Education, Identities and Citizenship: Developing Cosmopolitan Perspectives. Language and Intercultural Communication, 7(1), 56-71.

_________________________

Share this post: Does language learning make us racist? http://wp.me/pNAh3-QS

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.