Exploring Change - KF, JW

8/13/2019 Exploring Change - KF, JW

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/exploring-change-kf-jw 1/25

Exploring Change 1

Exploring ChangeKevin Fisher, Jen WatsonEDUC 700 – Dr. Emilie Reagan

December 4, 2013



Exploring Change 2

Introduction to the Reform

While education metamorphoses, adapts, shifts, and changes, it is inevitable that

we, as intellectual leaders in the field, center our attention on the lack of competency in

secondary languages across the United States of America. After a handful of national

security issues, including the September 11 th attacks, leaders in governmental positions

have considered the inconsistency between English speakers and non-English speakers

within this country. One step to upholding our power force abroad is to provide students

fruitful, plentiful, and rigorous curricula in those critical languages spoken across the

world, implemented first at the elementary level and sustained through secondary andhigher instruction.

The National Security Language Initiative (NSLI) was implemented by George

W. Bush and his administration and “designed to dramatically incr ease the number of

Americans learning critical need foreign languages such as Arabic, Chinese, Russian,

Hindi, Farsi, and others through new and expanded programs from kindergarten through

university, and into the workforce” (2006). Based primarily on nat ional security and

homeland protection, NSLI assumes that the U.S. as a country is falling behind other

countries in the business world due to individuals’ inability to communicate comfortably

in a second language. NSLI was instated because the United States lacks in proficient

critical language acquisition.

U.S. Departments of Education, State, and Defense, as well as the Office of the

Director of National Intelligence installed the Initiative. Under NSLI, these “critical

need” languages are encouraged through new and expanded programs at the early

childhood level from kindergarten through university, and eventually into the workforce.



Exploring Change 3

Skills to engage in foreign governments and peoples, especially in critical regions, are

promoted through NSLI. The overall encouragement of reform and promotion of

understanding are maintained through the document. Also, NSLI states that it is essential

to respect other cultures and provide opportunities to learn more about America and its

citizens.

In practice, NSLI has two major branches by which programs were originally

anticipated. The Department of Education would disperse $57 million through three

major programs: The Foreign Language Assistance Program, Advancing America

Through Foreign Language Partnerships, and Language Teacher Corps. For example,through the construction of The Foreign Language Assistance Program, $24 million

would target the spread of critical-need language education through innovative

technology. For the Department of State, $26.7 million was available – some of their

programs to improve foreign language proficiency include the U.S. Fulbright Student

Program and the Gilman Scholarship, which would provide financial assistance to young

people interested in studying critical need languages overseas for college credit.

Those involved with homeland security are the stakeholders in implementing this

initiative. Teachers, educators, and students are the focus of the plan, especially in

NSLI’s many programs. With the backing and sup port of those involved with early

education, as well as politicians and governmental policymakers, NSLI can assist in

foreign language competency, which is beneficial to all aspects of society. Domestically,

in the fields of social work, healthcare, technology, medicine, law, education, and

hospitality, the advantages of language fluency are infinite. A nation as a whole benefits

when its citizens possess greater skills, capacities, and proficiencies in communication.



Exploring Change 4

Research on the Reform

This initiative , which is intended to “encourage reform, promote understanding,

convey respect for other cultures and provide an opportunity to learn more about America

and its citizens”, possesses the language and rhetoric to allow for domestic and

international development. Across collections of research, it is clear that many are in

favor of foreign language proficiency; however, many criticisms of the reform and

corresponding delayed action remain. There are three main arguments and purposes of

the reform that we have researched: for security, for cultural competency, humanity, and

globalization, and for educational growth.For Security

We found the language of NSLI to stress the importance of the security of our

nation. John Negroponte, our nation’s first director of national intelligence, is in favor of

NSLI. He believes that our country needs a plan to address the “persistent foreign

language shortfalls” and “notable gaps in foreign language capabilities that could hinder

U.S overseas operations, especially in cri tical counties such as Afghanistan and Iraq”

(Davidson, 2010). NSLI focuses primarily on languages that are of critical need in which

few domestic officials can use proficiently. After the terrorist attacks on September 11 th,

2001, the “House Permanent Sel ect Committee on Intelligence identified language as the

single greatest need in the intelligence community” (Malone et al., 2005). Frederick H.

Jackson, from the National Foreign Language Center at the University of Maryland,

supports this initiative as well but believes “to meet the need requires a comprehensive

long- term national strategy” and due to recent “international terrorism, it has never been



Exploring Change 5

more urgent to develop American citizens who fully understand and can communicate

effectively with peopl e of other cultures” (Jackson, et al., 2009).

Jameel M. Khan writes from the Institute for Cultural Diplomacy and agrees with

his aforementioned colleagues. He advocates “The United States has an alarmingly small

reserve of fluent speakers of foreign languages among its population, especially in the

critical lesser taught languages” (Khan, 2012). In addition, Khan argues, “foreign

language proficiency and cultural competence are vital instruments of U.S. national

security” (Khan, 2012). In his paper, he mentions that foreign language proficiency is a

dividing force amongst peoples. Khan states, “It is no surprise that several of theselanguages are the official languages of countries with which the United States has less

than strong relations” (Khan, 2012 ). According to Khan, many U.S. federal agencies,

including the Department of Defense and the Department of Education, must have

personnel that are fluent in these languages of critical need for national security. “The

gap in foreign language capabilities and the security threats that face the United States

must be filled” (Khan, 2012). The NSLI originates from a post -9/11 period of pressure on

the Department of Defense and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence – while

the U.S. was uneasy during this time, this initiative serves, as mentioned above, to

strengthen our K-12 foreign language programs, encourage study abroad opportunities,

and promote understanding about the critical need languages in efforts to protect our

nation.



Exploring Change 6

For Humanity, Cultural Competency, and Globalization

We found cultural competency and humanitarianism deeply rooted within our

plethora of sources. For example, Scott Wilbe, in his Composing Alternative to a

National Security Language Policy (2009), writes primarily in retrospect of the 2006

initiative and proposes varying perspectives. He states that there must be an overall

foreign language “policy that promotes humanist values” and indicates that this is a not

an easy task at hand – improving humanity while also bettering overall cultural

comprehension and deference takes a lot of work. The “stakeholders attempt to expand

definitions of the nation’s language needs to recognize non -English- speaking citizens’claims to equal access and civil rights, as well as to address the general lack of cultural

understanding for linguistic minorities” (Wilbe, 2009). Through NSLI, Wilbe hopes for

an increase in cultural acceptance and inclusiveness to those various language-speakers.

Wilbe says that defining our nation’s language problems in terms of the military’s

overseas concerns neglects to address day-to-day experiences of life within our own

borders. Further, a national progressive vision should be in place, not a national policy

“conceived solely on international concerns [that] may keep citizenry safe from enemies”

(Wilbe, 2009). But, while Wilbe believes NSLI to be a vehicle to improve overall

humanity and definitive life quality, he does not disagree with the pro-security intentions

of NSLI; instead, he wants NSLI’s stakeh olders to consider other global perspectives.

Leon E. Panetta, an American politician and past CIA Director from 2009 to

2011, believes that the nation is about to cross into new realms of globalization and

internationalism involving all things humanistic and economic. While the NSLI focuses

heavily on the efforts to protect national security, many believe the initiative lacks in a



Exploring Change 7

variety of perspectives. The purposes for foreign language education do not stop at

protecting people physically. For example, Panetta suggests, “ideally, language learning

should be a cumulative experience and a student’s passage through the various strata in

the system should be seamless, incremental and principled” (Panetta, 1999). Panetta

articulates that NLSI is too explicitly focused on national security. He believes that since

the United States invests heavily to teaching English in other countries, our country

continues to accept the United States’ failing efforts. Panetta uses historical allusions to

support his facts – our first 100 years of democracy represented flourishing language

diversity, and over the past 100 years, students have been taught to focus primarily onEnglish. So while recommendations to improve language proficiency have been made by

officials over the past 100 years, “most have gone into that large graveyard of

unimplemented federal studies, reports and commissions” (Panetta, 1999). Here, the

primary criticism of NSLI is that it is, yet again, another initiative to analyze our

country’s weakness in rela tion to the world around us – that is, too much discussion , and

not enough action .

In Lewis Heale’s article (2010), he critiques the current system of foreign

language. He connotes that those individuals sitting in the seats of power are working to

improve international relations with many less-explored countries abroad. He believes the

foreign language disparity between countries is still huge, but as the countries undergo

war and terrorists’ threats, it is “not surprising the federal study was co -sponsored by

U.S. Department of Defense and the director of the National Intelligence” (He ale, 2010).

The description of the initiative is weighted heavily on military/national security means

instead of the developmental, humanistic, and progressive value of citizens via secondary



Exploring Change 8

language implementation. Heale is not necessarily against NSLI, but he, like Panetta,

believe there to be too much talk and not enough action on the humanistic and

educational matters. Both long for change and reform of our nation’s secondary language

proficiency, but simply creating initiatives without putting in the work will not guarantee

more equipped people to enhance this country’s communication skillset.

For Education

Last, but certainly not least, we learned that many believe the key to foreign

language proficiency is the educational process instated within NSLI. According to anarticle from the Center for Applied Linguistics, one pathway to proficiency is to “start

language learning early”, but certain challenges exist such as “many language teachers

lack adequate training in language teaching”, “early language programs are not widely

available, and study abroad is financially difficult for many students” (Malone et al.,

2005). As we see in practice today, a foreign language is typically introduced during

middle school. Most students need not meet fluency requirements in order to graduate.

While some schools begin secondary language learning at the elementary level, our

research shows this to be a rarity. Heale is frustrated with NSLI’s goals and results

because, for example, “the program currently focuses on sch olarships to send American

high school students overseas to study Arabic”, but “their numbers are measured in the

hundreds” (Heale, 2010). As mentioned above, NSLI encourages early language

learning, but “despite the rhetoric and language about starting in kindergarten,” our

research does not show significant progress directly due to the 2006 Initiative.



Exploring Change 9

In 2006, NSLI provided $115 million that would “focus resources towards

educating students, teachers, and government workers”. (NLSI) This emphasis is o n less-

taught languages of critical need – these include Arabic, Chinese, Hindi, and Farsi. But,

“many more middle and high school students are studying the dead languages spoken by

Cesar and Nero than such critically important tongues as Chinese, Arabic, Hindi, Farsi,

Japanese, Russian and Urdu combined” (Heale, 2010). Panetta even adds that the United

States “may be the only nation in the world where it is possible to complete secondary

and postsecondary education without any foreign language study whatso ever” (Panetta,

1999). NSLI includes select programs that encourage professional development andtraining for foreign language teachers. These include The Foreign Language Assistance

Program and U.S. Fulbright Program, which previously existed before 2006. The intent

was to develop these programs by encouraging advancement and studies in critical-need

languages. Nevertheless Heale (2010) says, “There is no certification system for teachers

of Arabic, and curriculum materials are lacking.” While further rese arch may be required

to discover those parties specifically against NSLI’s educational efforts, much

commentary exists on the need for some kind of all-inclusive reform on the education of

languages.

Conclusion of Our Research

It is unclear how foreign language instruction has been implemented as a result of

NSLI. The abovementioned research does not include individuals solely against these

reform efforts. Instead, critics of the initiative bring forth many different angles by which

the acquisition of critical-need languages is so vital – it is vital for security, humanity,

and overall educational growth. As previously mentioned in our analysis of the need for



Exploring Change 10

foreign language education, the academic “core” is heavily present i n the majority of our

findings. Wilbe notes foreign language education should be a “core academic subject

because the study of another language enhances learning through improved cognitive

development, transferable reading skills, and reinforcement of othe r subject areas”

(Wilbe, 2009). The No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001, which was signed five

years before NSLI, is paradoxical with the goals of President Bush’s means by his

language initiative. The stress of NCLB is on math, science, and reading – how could a

vast national act that focuses heavily on the above-mentioned subjects also wholly

include foreign language education? Perhaps NSLI is, in fact, a realization by its writersthat there are missing pieces to the reform puzzle. The task at hand is heavy and

burdensome, and while the initiative was written by both the U.S. Department of

Education and the U.S. Department of Defense, it may be unclear as to who is

responsible for the writing of NSLI and who is responsible for the doing of NSLI.



Exploring Change 11

Educator Interviews

In order to understand the current educational structure within schools, it is

crucial that we, as researchers, incorporate and consider primary source interviews in our

findings. Our reform, the National Security Language Initiative (NSLI), is one that is less

popular amongst advocates of education. While language, in general, surrounds us in so

many different ways, it is curious to note how such efforts to improve the cultural

understanding and advancement of fluency can occur without such reform efforts as a

backbone.

Ms. Racheal Dowhan of York, Maine teaches 8th

grade Earth Science atTimberlane Regional Middle School in Plaistow, New Hampshire. This is Ms. Dowhan’s

first year at Timberlane, while she has previous held a position in the biology department

at Exeter High School in Exeter, New Hampshire. She holds a Master’s of Education

with a certification in Secondary Life Science, as well as a Bachelor of Science in

Nutrional Science from UNH. She also holds a part-time front-of-house position at the

British Beer Company in Portsmouth, New Hampshire. Her foreign language experience

is minimal, having only taken Spanish in college for a year and French in middle school

and high school. She currently works closely with Timberl ane’s foreign language

department, but is not fluent in any secondary language herself.

Dr. Carmen Garcia de la Rasilla is an Associate Professor of Spanish at the

University of New Hampshire, Durham. She held positions at St. Mary’s College in

Notre Dame, where she began teaching in 1998. She also taught at Bowdoin College and

Bard College. She earned a PhD at La Universidad de Valladolid in History and a second

PhD in Spanish Literature from Johns Hopkins University. She currently teaches



Exploring Change 12

advanced courses in Spanish literature and poetry with a specialization in 20 th Century

Spanish Literature.

Please refer to Appendix A for the set of questions asked of Ms. Racheal Dowhan on

October 25 th at 2:00pm.

Appendix A

1. What is your experience (if any) with foreign language education?2. Are you fluent in any languages other than English?3. Do you think foreign languages should be implemented in the "core" curriculum?4. Do you have any prior knowledge of the National Security Language Initiative

(NSLI)?5. 50% of Europeans consider themselves in a non-native language (Americans are onlyat 9%) Do you think we should be keeping up with our competitive, foreign counterparts?Why or why not?6. What do we value more: military security of our country or inclusiveness of variouslanguages? (This may be a dichotomy)7. Should high schools require foreign language proficiency in order to graduate?8. Should college students have a foreign language requirement?9. Should critical need languages (such as Arabic/Chinese/Hindi) be the focus? Whatabout more traditional "foreign" languages such as Spanish, French, etc.?10. What do you predict will happen if Americans continue to fall behind other countries'success in foreign language fluency?11. What are the benefits of fluency in a foreign language?12. Do you think subjects such as science and math should be taught from a culturallydiverse lens?13. Why do you think students lose interest in studying foreign languages?

Summary of Appendix A Interview

Ms. Dowhan is not fluent in any languages other than English and she did not

have any previous knowledge about NSLI before our interview. When asked about

“core” academic disciplines, she believes foreign languages should be implemented with

as much focus on subjects such as math and science. As a science teacher, Ms. Dowhan

spoke logically about our competitive world and realized wholly the benefits of learning



Exploring Change 13

foreign languages. She said learning a foreign language can improve spelling,

comprehension, fluency, and transferable skill acquisition in the English or native

language. Ms. Dowhan believes education is in a complicated place and that foreign

language should be a part of every school’s curriculum. She fears that as a nation, we

could lose our communication skills with others countries that may inevitably hinder our

national security and relations with these countries abroad. As a science teacher, Ms.

Dowhan incorporates famous scientists from other countries into her lessons and also

discusses how other famous discoveries have influenced us today. Though, the goal for

taking such a culturally aware approach, as Ms. Dowhan says, needs to be clearly definedfor the educator as well as for the students.

Please refer to Appendix B for the set of questions asked of Dr. Carmen Garcia de

la Rasilla on October 28 th at 6:00pm.

Appendix B

1. What is your experience with foreign language curriculum?2. Do you think foreign languages should be implemented into the core curriculum? Whyor why not?3. 50% of Europeans consider themselves fluent in a non-native language while only 9%of Americans do (Kahn). What can we do, as a nation, to keep up with our foreigncounterparts in terms of learning a second language?4. What knowledge do you have about the National Security Language Initiative (NSLI)?5. Do you think we should encourage acceptance of other cultures or should we“Americanize” the immigrant/foreign children? Why? 6. Do you think there should be requirement for American students to completesecondary education with a language course(s)? Why or why not?7. What about a post-secondary requirement?8. How do you think stakeholders are being affected by the implementation of NSLI? Inorder words, who is benefiting from this initiative and who is not?9. Wh at do you predict will happen with this “pressure” we are receiving for our studentsto learn a critical need language, especially after the war has ended?10. Do you think things will actually change and the federal government will beinterested in funding other language programs?



Exploring Change 14

Summary of Appendix B Interview

As a trilingual educator, Dr. Rasilla believes that knowing a foreign language is

an essential part of intellectual growth. She emphasizes that foreign languages help to

broaden one’s intellectu al perspectives in order to understand less-familiar cultures. Dr.

Rasilla had previous knowledge about this post-September 11 th plan and she thinks that

we need to promote, cherish, and celebrate the learning of other cultures. Dr. Rasilla

declared that i t is crucial to learn a foreign language during ones early education. “The

sooner the better”, she said. Dr. Rasilla explained military -based language-learning as a

cycle – that is, the interest in learning a critical-need language will increase dramaticallyduring times of conflict. Contrastingly, when there is no conflict or war, the interest will

subsequently decrease. She predicts that this will happen with NSLI. The government is

the ultimate beneficiary of NSLI in that America will have a mass of people that know

how to communicate with those countries that are “politically -hot” if this initiative is

successful. Those countries can, in turn, benefit from our knowledge of their language

because Americans can travel there to promote better relationships among nations.

Synthesis

We found Ms. Dowhan’s responses to be extremely insightful even though she

did not have any prior knowledge of the reform. She brought forth similar ideas as

addressed in our research. For example, she believes that improving foreign language

proficiency can only happen when teachers and students are well informed of the needs

and steps to increase fluency. Frederick H. Jackson from the National Foreign Language

Center supports NSLI but says “to meet the need requires a compreh ensive long-term



Exploring Change 15

national strategy”. Also, Ms. Dowhan, a middle -school biology teacher, says that we can

improve our own language skills by studying another language. This statement is

consistent with the majority of our findings. There is much research that states there are

cognitive and intellectual benefits to studying a foreign language without even

considering national security and protection. We did not ask Ms. Dowhan extended

questions regarding NSLI as a response of the September 11 th attacks because she seemed

most interested in the non-defense ways of incorporating foreign language into our

educational system. Ms. Dowhan realizes the importance of foreign language education

and notes that students could become confused with learning a different language becauseit is “out of the box”. Perhaps if this “box” or “knowledge set” had been created with a

foreign language in mind at an early age, young people could obtain the information

collectively like a sponge, as opposed to already having a set way of learning and

throwing curveballs by adding a “foreign” entity of language. She is not aware of the

controversial topics regarding foreign language and thinks that the government is

primarily concerned with protecting our nation as a whole without regard to protection of

our didactic and educational advancements. Like Dr. Rasilla, Ms. Dowhan looks at the

bigger picture when considering future careers. She believes the skills we learn in this

country can help young people in the U.S. succeed across the board, not just in the high

school Spanish classroom. Ms. Dowhan believes a multitude of languages should be

offered at the secondary level. Intriguingly, both interviewees neglect going into explicit

details about instruction at the elementary level. Our research states that the key is to

“start language learning early”, which was noted in an article from the Center for Applied

Linguistics. Ms. Dowhan’s opinion is consistent with the majority of our findings: She



Exploring Change 16

understands the need for foreign language proficiency, the transferable benefits, and the

government’s lack of emphasis on educational development and collaboration of

instruction.

Dr. Rasilla was aware of the reform efforts regarding foreign language education

and the need for “high -need” language in struction; however, she did not specifically

know the terminology of our specific reform, NSLI. This, still, is from a different

perspective than Ms. Dowhan’s – she is originally from Spain. This provides for us an

interesting dichotomy – her background as a European influences her views on

Americans’ abilities to communicate in secondary languages. She believes it is crucial tothe overall success of students. Like Dowhan, she realizes the transferable skills that

foreign language education provides for young people; however, unlike Dowhan, she is

trilingual and believes students should not have to completely assimilate into a new

culture, but to unremittingly appreciate their own multiculturalism while adopting the

present norms. Our interview focused primarily on language education at the post-

secondary level, or at least the path to post-secondary education. Like Ms. Dowhan, they

are both advocates of the “bigger picture”; however, NSLI states that the instruction of

high-need languages is to begin at the early childhood levels. Leon E. Panetta, the United

States’ CIA director from 2009 to 2011 says that “language learning should be a

cumulative experience and a student’s passage through the various strata in the system

should be seamless, incremental and principled” (Panetta, 1999). Dr. Rasilla says that

administration should redirect their focus to conclusive foreign language education and

that our current system is not sound. When all is said and done, Dr. Rasilla, a trilingual

professor of Spanish, says young people should have at least some knowledge of a



Exploring Change 17

foreign language. In regards to national security, she believes language learning is a cycle

due to our past, (and to-be), historical happenings. Dr. Rasilla and Ms. Dowhan see our

relations with other countries as crucial to the overall success of young Americans in the

globalized economy.



Exploring Change 18

Our Roles as Change Agents

As future educators, we propose inclusion of secondary languages into all aspects

of school – this includes curriculum, the image of our classrooms, interdisciplinary

practices, intellectual advancement, and humanitarianism. NSLI connotes foreign

language learning for the purpose of bettering national security – but why did it take until

the September 11 th attacks to realize the vitality of communication between diverse

peoples? We are diverse peoples and we appreciate the objectives of the National

Security Language Initiative; however, in order to act on the goals of NSLI, we believe

small but progressive steps should be taken at the commencement of education. There iswhere we, as upcoming educators, come in. This “bottom -up” proposal suggests the

changing of attitude within educational communities. We are members of this community

and can make small strides towards excellence in cultural acceptance and the appreciation

of diversity.

First, we will consider foreign language education as a “core” subject in our

respective disciplines, music and Spanish, promoting diversity across cultures as by the

missions and values of the school. We will encourage all new language learning, not just

those of “critical -need”. On paper, NSLI seems like a great idea, but change through

action is much more difficult than change through discussion. NSLI fosters foreign

language learning but it is up to us, as educators, to act on this broad outline for

conclusive change. NSLI provides goals but lacks processes by which educators can

reach for these goals in their classrooms daily.

As new educators, we will examine closely the mission statement and values of

our prospective school districts. A school’s mission is similar to NSLI in that it



Exploring Change 19

establishes, in writing, goals and visions for long-term development. We believe a well-

formulated mission is crucial to improving foreign language proficiency. As noted in our

research, Scott Wilbe (2009) believes in a “policy that promotes humanist values”, and

these should be included in a well-formulated mission statement. We are not suggesting

by any means a definitive way to achieve the missions and values of our school

community. NSLI’s goals are not preventative, they short -term and panic-driven – we

believe foreign language learning should happen before, during, and after national

security threats. Stakeholders are therefore responsible fo r adhering to the school’s

mission and teaching lessons with those operations in mind – our ideal mission statementfor a school is one that weighs heavily on foreign language, diversity, cultural awareness,

and global consideration.

Next, we envision the aura of our classrooms as a compendium of the cultures of

each individual involved in the learning process. We will, as educators, consider culture

every day into our lesson plans. For example, in a foreign language class, students should

be required to p artake in “all -Spanish” or “only -Japanese” days. Also, culture show -and-

tell activities should happen, where each student explores and shares their own

backgrounds and cultures with their peers. When teaching the basics, such as grammar

and vocabulary, we will instruct through a cultural lens, and not for the sole purpose of

learning words and syntax rules. We believe in “bottom -up” development - learning the

specifics of a language can assist students in becoming more well rounded and ready for

life after leaving our microcosmic space. Ms. Racheal Dowhan from the Timberlane

Regional School District, whom we interviewed, believes much can be learned about our

own language and culture through learning a foreign language. It is important, too, that



Exploring Change 20

we as English- speakers appreciate our own abilities while valuing others’ as well. Music,

in a sense, is another form of communication – so while NSLI focuses on foreign

language education and proficiency, it is crucial to consider general forms of

communication. As educators teaching music, we can run rehearsals completely in a

foreign language, play music by composers from across the globe, and realize the higher-

order reasons by which pieces were composed. We will work closely with teachers of

other disciplines to incorporate transferable skills into our lessons that connect well with

the values and missions of our educational philosophies.

Outside the classroom and from a more administrational perspective, we willwork intently both privately and publicly on deeming foreign language education as a

“core” academic subject. This means all foreign languages, not just those of critical need

to protect national security. This means starting at the elementary level and continuing to

post-secondary education. And, this means offering a wide range of languages for

students to choose from. Another idea that we believe could be beneficial is to promote

teachers’ development in these foreign languages. Dr. Rasilla, as noted from our

interview, spoke about learning some form of foreign language. She stressed that heavy

instruction is not necessary for all students, but all students need heavy inclusion. Thus,

our proposal is not for more foreign language classes , but for similar “core”

consideration of foreign languages as those subjects including math and science. Like

Leon. E. Panetta (1999) mentioned, “ideally, language learning should be a cumulative

experience and a student’s passage through the various strata in the system should be

seamless, incremental and principled”.



Exploring Change 21

We will, as educators, join professional organizations focused on the

advancement and methodology of foreign language education in our school system.

Educators are ever so busy preparing students for the material on standardized tests.

Sometimes they forget that in order to be good teachers, they must also be good learners.

We will share, examine, and attempt new methods at incorporating foreign languages and

cultures in our lesson plans in effective ways. According to Malone et al. (2005), “many

language teachers lack adequate training in language teaching.” Professional

organizations facilitate the discussion of teaching methods and in a greater sense, aid the

action part of NSLI’s original goals. While NSLI (2006) aims to “encourage reform, promote understanding, convey respect for other cultures and provide and opportunity to

learn more about America and its citizens”, these learning and sharing platforms

smoothen out the process to meet these goals.

The consensus is, as we have seen through research, that foreign language

proficiency is a good thing. We, like others, are critics of NSLI and believe it to be a

scare-tactic for American citizens. It reinforces the slippery-slope fallacy that if we do not

learn to communicate with these people from less-understood cultures, our nation will

suffer worse than the September 11 th attacks. In addition, we will suffer in ways of

academic incompetence, lack of reliable occupations, and less-than-quality social

understanding. But, while the syntax of NSLI hastily generalizes the weaknesses of our

secondary-language abilities, it is crucial that young, upcoming educators put their foot

down and start making small, but worthy changes within all of levels of schooling. The

goal is to promote the learning of complex and multi-faceted cultures and languages in all

disciplines and subjects. Foreign language education is much more important than a



Exploring Change 22

failing national security system. Language learning is transferable to all aspects of a

happy and successful life and should, no, will be unmistakably present in our 21 st-century

classrooms.



Exploring Change 23

REFERENCES

Beale, L. (2010, May 17). U.S. Students Hurting in Foreign Languages. Pacific Standard

- Politics, Health, Economy, Environment, Culture, Education. Retrieved October

9, 2013, from http://www.psmag.com/culture-society/u-s-students-hurting-in-

foreign-languages-13529/

Davidson, J. (2010, April 8). Joe Davidson - Language proficiency is Foreign Service's

'greatest challenge,' Negroponte says. The Washington Post: National, World &

D.C. Area News and Headlines - The Washington Post. Retrieved October 8,2013, from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-

dyn/content/article/2010/04/07/AR201004070

Kahn, J. M. (2012). Our untapped reserve and necessity for strengthening national

security through foreign language proficiency: "do you speak ____? . Manuscript

submitted for publication, John Hopkins University, Retrieved from

http://www.culturaldiplomacy.org/academy/content/pdf/participant-papers/2012-

06-iscd-usa/Our-Untapped-Reserve-And-Necessity-for-Strengthening-National-

Security-Through-Foreign-Language-Proficiency--Jameel-Khan.pdf

Malone, M. E., & Jackson, F. H. (2009). Building the foreign language capacity we need:

Toward a comprehensive strategy for a national language framework . Informally

published manuscript, University of Maryland, Retrieved from



Exploring Change 24

http://www.nflc.org/publications/Building_The_Foreign_Language_Capacity_We

_Need.pdf

Malone, M. E., Rifkin, B., Christian, D., & Johnson, D. E. (2005). Attaining High Levels

of Proficiency: Challenges for Foreign Language Education in the United States.

CAL Digest, 1. Retrieved October 8, 2013, from the Center For Applied

Linguistics database.

Marmolejo, F. (2010, 11 09). Retrieved fromhttp://chronicle.com/blogs/worldwise/deficiency-in-foreign-language-

competency-what-is-wrong-with-the-u-s-educational-system/27558

Panetta, L. E. (Director) (1999, June 2). Foreign Language Education: If 'Scandalous' In

The 20th Century, What Will It Be In The 21st Century?. State of Foreign

Language Studies in Universities. Lecture conducted from Stanford University,

Stanford.

Parks-Kirby, R. (2010, July 20). NEA stresses the importance of foreign languages and

global competence. NEA - NEA Home. Retrieved October 9, 2013, from

http://www.nea.org/home/40402.htm



Exploring Change 25

Skorton, D. & Altschuler, G. (n.d.). Retrieved from

http://www.forbes.com/sites/collegeprose/2012/08/27/americas-foreign-language-

deficit/

U.S. Department of Education. (2006). National Security Language Initiative (NSLI) .

Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office

Wible, S. (2009). Composing Alternatives to a National Security Language Policy.

JSTOR, 71(5), 460-485. Retrieved October 7, 2013, from the NCTE database.

Exploring Change - KF, JW

Documents

Transcript of Exploring Change - KF, JW