STUDENTS in the College of Arts and Sciences detest one particular competency requirement more than any other: the foreign language requirement. Perhaps this is because of the time it takes to complete the requirement, which can be up to four semesters. Or maybe it's because introductory language classes meet daily and require intensive labs or drills in addition to normal coursework. Finally, foreign language courses may simply fail to pique some students' interests. But a strong defense can be mounted in favor of such a requirement's inclusion in the standard curriculum. Arguably, educators should do more to encourage second-language fluency than they do already.
Why should we be so concerned with bilingualism to begin with? Frankly, the United States can no longer claim to be isolated from the rest of the world; it is inexcusable for Americans to make such a suggestion. Recognizing that nearly everything we do has some effect on the global order, it is increasingly important that we be able to interact competently with non-English speakers. Formerly, an Anglo-centric mentality held great sway with Americans. But the expectation that others should learn English as a means of relating to Americans nowadays is unrealistic and impractical.
Case in point, the United States is significantly lagging behind its Western peers in terms of its citizens' abilities to speak foreign languages. According to the Associated Press, a European Union survey released last Friday reported that half of European citizens consider themselves bilingual. Additionally, fluency in a second language was overrepresented among those between 15 and 24 -- almost eight of 10 students reported themselves fluent in at least one foreign language.
Not surprisingly, among individual country rankings, the United Kingdom finished second-to-last, reporting that only 30 percent of its citizens are bilingual. Geography appears to play a large role in this phenomenon. The fact that the British Isles are relatively isolated from other European countries, much like the United States, does not paint a hopeful picture with regard to promoting bilingualism. But geographic barriers must be overcome: The extensiveness of electronic communication has forced us all together, for better or worse, and it's time that Americans take this more seriously.
Our own statistics are laughable even when compared to those of the British. A U.S. Senate resolution reports that only nine percent of Americans "speak both their native language and another language fluently." Why have Americans been so slow on the uptake? It seems principally due to the prevalence of English as the native language of most Americans. Secondarily, the fact that we share little border distance with non-English speaking peoples has given us little incentive to learn their languages. Luxembourg provides a striking counterexample: bordered on all sides by France, Belgium and Germany, the E.U. reports that 99 percent of Luxembourg's population is bilingual.
Although it is not the national language of the United States, one would be remiss to suggest that knowledge of English is not expected of Americans and American immigrants. While our institutions appear to be slowly improving their efforts to provide opportunities for bilingual communication, it would be kind to deem current attempts lackluster. Officials are right to be disturbed by the current trend -- the AP reports that the Senate has declared 2005 the "Year of Foreign Language Study." But optimistic slogans are not enough to remedy the problem.
We've been concerned in the past that foreign students are advancing ahead of Americans in the hard sciences, giving other nations a competitive edge in the development of new technologies. But is it not true that having an otherwise uneducated population also serves to disadvantage the United States in international affairs? We cannot afford to be content with the status quo, especially when other languages threaten to challenge the dominance of English in the United States within a few decades.
For many reasons, a radically new approach to foreign language education is necessary. Secondary schools might do well to require a four-year intensive language tutorial, aiming at a proficiency level comparable to that which the University strives for with its own competency requirement. This preparation would allow an even more thorough education at the University level: Students would enter already prepared to take courses in advanced grammar, conversation and literature in translation. But according to Associate Dean of Academic Programs Richard Handler, this might be easier said than done. "We are already at the conservative end of the spectrum. Most schools have simply done away with their requirement," he said.
Requiring that college students take such courses is the first step to promoting widespread bilingualism among all Americans. No students should be exempted from this requirement if they are unable to demonstrate fluency in a non-native language.
Todd Rosenbaum's column appears Thursdays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at trosenbaum@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
BURSTEIN: Federal workforce cuts target Virginia — and Youngkin’s response falls short
By Carly Burstein | 3 days agoForcing employees to choose between uprooting their families or losing their livelihoods is not just callous — it is economically reckless.
HUYNH: Virginia’s proposed ‘whippets’ law is laughable
By Viet Huynh | 4 days agoAs people continue to be harmed by nitrous oxide abuse, Virginians will see this new law as the ineffective, ultimately harmful policy that it is.
EDITORIAL: We can demand more of our university presidents
By Editorial Board | 5 days agoWe hope for greater transparency because for the principles of solidarity in this statement to be enacted and effective, stakeholders must be treated as partners in resistance.
