The College’s foreign language requirement epitomizes the worst aspects of bureaucracies. It exists primarily to serve its administrators rather than its users, and achieves few tangible results. To clarify, I am not arguing the foreign language department itself is worthless; I have tremendous respect and admiration for those who study other languages, just as I am rather in awe of physics majors. And yet the University did not mandate that I sit through two years of physics classes. Rather, the natural science and mathematics area requirement allows students to diversify their studies according to their own interests. The foreign language requirement should follow this example.
As it currently stands, the language requirement is fundamentally unfair to students as well as professors. Moreover, in spite of its good intentions it is often ultimately fruitless. While restructuring is necessary, there are many obstacles. Some argue exploring new languages is inherently valuable. Others assert students may become passionate enough about a new language to strive for fluency, if only they receive that first nudge to try it out. Cosmopolitans will argue our responsibility as global citizens obliges us to achieve basic competency in at least one language other than English. More cynical observers will say the requirement exists only as a result of lobbying by the foreign language departments themselves, in order to receive more University funds and employ more professors. While each of these arguments holds some merit, they are not compelling enough to justify the current foreign language requirement.
To illustrate the failings of the requirement’s goals, I can speak from personal experience. During my final two semesters taking Spanish, I earned an A- in both “Intermediate Spanish” and “Advanced Intermediate Spanish.” I note this not to brag, but to acknowledge that by the department’s own standards I demonstrated a high level of understanding of the language. However, the truth of the matter is that my alleged proficiency in Spanish was a complete illusion, a fantasy fed by positive test scores that disintegrated as soon as the outside world challenged my knowledge. This summer I spent my weekdays working directly with two El Salvadoran laborers, driving with them for extended periods of time and working side by side throughout the day. And my Spanish education proved utterly useless. Attempting to converse in Spanish was laborious, and my efforts to simply understand their conversations was a lost cause. Despite the University’s best efforts, its language requirement produced no discernible benefits. Rather than teaching me a valuable skill, it deprived me of taking other classes I find more engaging that instill lessons I carry beyond the biweekly chapter test.
Yet beyond my belief that the language requirement is unfair to students because of its relatively high opportunity cost, the requirement is also unfair to Spanish professors. The College mandate ensures that every classroom from the 1010 to the 2020 level is filled with a high percentage of students devoid of any desire to be there. This inflicts a devastating blow to classroom morale, as students typically excited to explore subjects of their choosing find themselves instead trying to decipher languages they know they will never fully understand. Lacking any motivation other than GPA preservation to excel in the course, students are incentivized to put in no more than the bare minimum to achieve the grade they want, hardly producing a positive atmosphere for a teacher. As any student of Lee Coppock can attest, people respond to incentives. The language requirement, unfortunately, incentivizes cramming over comprehension.
Fortunately there is a solution, one that bridges the gap between the two extremes of an outright abolishment, destined to elicit an uproar from language departments, and a mere expansion of the requirement to the 3000 levels in a quixotic attempt to coerce students into fluency. The College should restructure the foreign language competency requirement to resemble the natural sciences and mathematics area requirement. This proposal allows language departments to maintain their staffs, as it still requires students to take 12 credits in a foreign language field, but rather than mandate that each course belong to the same language department, it permits students to explore various languages. For example, instead of taking Spanish through the 2020 level, I could take Spanish 1010 and 1020, Chinese 1010, and German 1010. Not only does this dispense with the absurd notion that passing 2020 somehow bestows real world competence, it improves the chance that students enrolled in language courses are at least somewhat interested in the courses of their choosing.
While this proposal is not bulletproof, it addresses each of the other aforementioned arguments in favor of the language requirement. This proposal maintains the teaching staff sizes of language departments; it preserves the sentimentalist’s belief that exploring languages is inherently valuable; and it even expands upon the goal of nudging students into discovering new interests by encouraging students to study a greater range of languages. Restructuring the requirement is a simple step likely to vastly increase students’ and professors’ satisfaction in the classroom.
Matt Winesett is a Viewpoint writer.
Read More
ONIBUDO AND SAWAYA: Police, not students, were agents of chaos
By Naima Sawaya and Nathan Onibudo | 17 hours agoSaturday, the state, not students nor protesters, brought violence to this campus.
IYER: Sports stadiums should sport more benefit to Virginia residents
By Arjun Iyer | 3 days agoPast stadiums in other states show that Virginia has the potential to succeed at such a construction project, provided that proper measures are undertaken.
KURTZWEIL: True financial aid must be transparent
By Paul Kurtzweil | April 29, 2024The implications and revelations of the lawsuit should inspire greater transparency at the University in order to ensure that financial aid is properly and equitably distributed.
