Foreign Language requirement revisited

[Barbara O'Dea]

Here are a couple of ideas. If you don't like them; just press "delete". I
won't take it personally.

1. I'm a hearing person and when I try to learn another spoken language I
cannot produce that new language at the same time I am producing my first
language. This is not the case for hearing people learning a signed
language. I think there is a much greater potential for making a sign and
simultaneously producing an English equivalent with our inner voice. This
is probably (I have no data to support this) detrimental to new ASL
learners.

2. There are so many misconceptions about signed languages that people
often begin courses expecting to learn a lot of signs to
correspond to English words. Before they are open to actually learning a
language like ASL, they must let go of this misconception.

3. ASL does not have a conventionally accepted written form. Students are
often prepared to do written homework and this helps them with learning a
second spoken language. They do not have this for signed languages.

4. Students cannot go to movies, view video-tapes, or visit areas of a
city to get access to those who use ASL - something which can be done with
many spoken langauges.

5. Hearing people take quite a long time recognizing cultural differences
between Deaf people and hearing people; and even with lots of exposure to
ASL, many never "get it". Courses often teach the more superficial aspects
of the culture; but a real understanding of cultural differences are much
more subtle and are generally recognized through interaction with more
than one or two instructors in a classroom setting.

I hope these are helpful ideas. odeeodee


On Tue, 22 Apr 2003, Mickey Jones wrote:

> I have experienced the same bias you expressed at both the collegiate and HS levels. Sam Supalla and I worked some years ago to pass a law to get ASL offered in Illinois for HS foreign language credit. Some HSs offer it in the English department (figure that one out) so the kids won't get F.L. credit. The only group to lobby against the bill was the F.L. Teachers' organization. They saw ASL as a definite threat to their departments.
>
> Instead of the dreaded "P" word, can you make a statement or describe a level of conversational fluency that would make sense to non-FL people?
>
> Or, state that after two semesters, students have elementary expressive skills, but they really need the third semester to raise receptive skills to the same level.
>
>
> Mickey Jones, Ph.D.
> Director
> Evaluation Center
> Illinois School for the Deaf
> 125 Webster
> Jacksonville, IL  62650
> 217-479-4274  V/TTY
> 217-479-4290  Fax
>
> Email: DHSVRCV at dhs.state.il.us
>
> Website: http://morgan.k12.il.us/isd/
>
> >>> grushkind at CSUS.EDU 04/22/03 01:21PM >>>
> Hi all--
>
> Our university is considering making a change in the Foreign Language
> requirement to eliminate the third semester requirement.  This is not just
> for ASL, but for all the F.L.s here at CSUS.  Their rationale is that since
> it is agreed by all that we cannot expect fluency from the students after 3
> semesters, and one of the points of the F.L. requirement is exposure to
> other cultures and ways of thought, two semesters is felt to be sufficient
> for this.
>
> In my own experience, while students are not anywhere near FLUENT after 3
> semesters, they are at the point where they are starting to become
> COMFORTABLE with the language, and able to express more higher-level
> thoughts.  My feeling is that two semesters is not enough for students to
> truly begin to understand the other world view through language; it happens
> with more exposure.
>
> We need to provide a rationale for keeping the third semester requirement by
> the beginning of May.  We do not want to use the "P word" proficiency, but
> we want an argument that makes sense to people not in the FL field.
>
> I have checked out Sherman Wilcox's site on academic acceptance, but it does
> not have what I need.  Can anybody give me some ideas on this?
>
> On a side note, I have noticed some comments from people at these meetings
> that sound a little biased toward ASL, primarily because our enrollments are
> so large in comparison to the other FLs.  From my discussion with people,
> I'm getting the impression that they feel people are taking ASL instead of
> other languages, even when they took other languages in HS, and that they
> think (fac and students) ASL is a "shortcut" of some sort (I KNOW it's
> not!).  Has anyone else experienced this kind of biased sentiment?
>
> Donald A. Grushkin, Ph.D.
> Assistant Professor/Coordinator, ASL Program
> Eureka Hall Rm. 312 (Campus Zip # 6079)
> California State University, Sacramento 95819
> (916) 278-6622 Voice; 278-3465 TTY
>