First of all, I'm a little hesitant about the data and how much of a conclusion we can reliably draw from it. As the authors themselves note, this is a small sampling of students from one university who are forced to take a language. The real facts could differ significantly.
Granted, Spanish is popular as ever, but I think it's a knee-jerk reaction to blame decreasing French enrollment on the (admittedly) very useful status of Spanish in American universities. It amounts to nothing more than perpetuating a (let's say) "urinating" contest between the two. I think you get the gist.
The authors point out on page 36 that French was one of only four languages to experience a decline in enrollment during a certain period of time. They then launch right away into the "classic explanation," that is, Spanish. I think the authors are missing a crucial point: all but 4 languages experienced an increase in enrollment. There's nothing in the data to suggest that any certain language (e.g. Spanish) directly caused the decline in French enrollment.
I think the fact is that besides Spanish, a large variety of foreign languages are just now being offered on the undergraduate (and even high school) level. Back in the day when students were given fewer options, we would have imagine a dichotomy between French and Spanish. These days, however, we have to compete with "niche languages," too. If Spanish is considered marketable, what about Kazakh? Bambara? (I'm looking at you, Betters.) Knowing these languages makes people marketable in very specific areas--and often booming ones, at that. Knowing Spanish, however, might give you an edge up on some of the competition, but not much anymore, not to mention the areas aren't as specialized.
So I imagine competition on two sides--Spanish, on one side, for being the most obvious/practical candidate; and smaller, less commonly taught languages on the other. As a whole, they make for a pretty fierce competition. So how to attract the students, especially the ones who feel they're forced to study a language against their will?
I agree first of all with Valdman's suggestion of offering more specialized classes like Business French. That, however, isn't enough, and I strongly disagree (as does everyone else here, it seems) with trying to present French as the "aesthetic transformational cultural beautiful intellectual better faster stronger" choice. That's a step backward, and I think other people have laid the groundwork as to why.
I think we need to present French as a kind of hybrid of our competition: show it to be useful but also in its own "niche markets" of sorts, i.e. you can do more than just travel, order sandwiches, and shop with French. Advertising Francophone countries/areas would be crucial to this strategy. We can present our strengths (e.g. French's place in international affairs, etc.) without vaunting them.
We don't need to be advertising ourselves as the language of beauty--we won't scare away "our clientele" that come to expect that from us, as the authors insist would happen. It's not as if these hopeless romantics will stop thinking French is the language of love just because we stop perpetuating that image. Rather, we need to stress its utility in its own domains: advertise to literature students, design students, journalism students, international affairs students. Let them know that they might actually get a leg up in job markets that either a) have a long-standing relationship with French or b) are arguably less saturated with French-speaking applicants than they are with Spanish-speaking applicants.
Most importantly, we need to stop seeing Spanish as "the enemy." (Or really stop seeing "enemies" in general, but that's another matter.) It's not the case anymore. It's popular, but I don't think it's as actively draining our sources of students as we would be led to believe. Rather than focus on outside forces (because they're not going to change), we should focus on how we present ourselves. And the way the authors would have us advertise ourselves is not the best option.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
It's true that there are generally more options for students today as far as languages, and if French is one of only four languages to experience a drop in enrollment, it can't just be assumed that Spanish is the reason. I do, think, though, that the article makes a fairly good case that it is.
ReplyDeleteMostly, I think the results of question 13, discussed on pages 47 and 48, are pretty telling. Students of French, when asked which language they would take if they could choose again and start over, most picked Spanish, and most cited its utility as the reason.
Granted, the study is very preliminary and it can't be taken to be general, but it's still rather suggestive. I can't imagine that the fact that the U.S. has one of the largest populations of Spanish speakers doesn't have anything to do with French's enrollment decline. Spanish is a huge asset, and sometimes a requirement on the American job market.
Yet, it doesn't really answer why French specifically has declined, whereas other languages like German, which I would've imagined to be in the same situation if not more so, have increased in enrollment. So a more sophisticated study certainly needs to be done. I think you're right that Spanish shouldn't be considered our problem. The problem is clearly how we're marketing ourselves. I think your ideas about focusing on la francophonie and advertising toward lit students are great. Perhaps then French wouldn't so often be assumed to be irrelevant.
I find Kelly's remark about German interesting... and I wonder if in the case of German we can talk about an "exotic" effect? After all French ( as the article suggest in some way)is when of the 'usual' choice of language,as Spanish, so maybe we should also look at the 'foreignness' effect of a language too. Some language being more advertised in media, like movies, lost that attractiveness, that 'outlandish' touch that lot of times is a seducing aspect. Don't you think?
ReplyDeleteI suppose that since I've been singled out by name in Mike's insightful comments on Siskin, I should be ready with a brilliant riposte...but in essence, I agree with your estimation Mike. If potential French students who are looking for transformational functions are being "lost," it isn't necessarily to Spanish, but also to the plethora of other niche languages which are now available.
ReplyDeleteI took Bambara as part of a language structure requirement and because I thought it would be interesting to study a language I'd never previously heard of (and it was. Transformative function? Check. Utility? Debatable.) There were several undergrads in the class, and they were all looking for something "different" - they wanted something to help them stand out in a tough job market, something to challenge them to explore cultures and worldviews beyond the American (I include Central and South America in this) and European perspectives. There may have been some utility functions involved (one student wanted to join the peace corps and Bambara would certainly help) but for the most part these undergrads were looking for instrumental and transformative functions. Given only the choice between French and Spanish, I think they'd choose French, so in that aspect I suppose they would be "lost" from French enrollments, but again, I can't really see that as a bad thing (I think I'm showing my bias here as a linguist....)
Overall, I agree with Mike again in that I don't think this issue has to be couched in fighting terms. Multilingualism should be encouraged, in fact, students taking Bambara would also greatly benefit from French since these are two of the major languages (and cultures) of the region. Perhaps we should encourage complementary language pairings: a major world language with a less-commonly spoken one. Let's turn all students into language majors, then none of us will have to worry about enrollments!
I think the notion of niche languages is a good one to bring up in this context too. I personally find the wide variety of languages offered here at IU surprising, but I think it's really great that students have so many opportunities to study a language that really has some relevance to them, and not just some language that happens to be offered. Trying to attract students back to more traditional foreign languages could be see as a bit regressive in that sense. However, I totally agree with Jennifer that students should be encouraged to study multiple foreign languages; that can really be a "best of both worlds" situation. Aline, I think your comment on foreignness, or student perception of languages, makes an important point as well. The authors don't include the results for it, but the case of Japanese really strikes me as more of an American cultural phenomenon than anything else. Of course, along with other Asian languages, Japanese is increasingly thought of as useful for students pursuing a variety of careers, but, in my own personal experience, students of Japanese often study the language for more strictly personal reasons (an interest in the culture, a desire to visit Japan, an animé addiction, etc.). It seems that, like most everything else, foreign language trends may be just that to some extent. I think that, in a number of cases, the choice of a major is really more of a popularity contest, so why not a foreign language?
ReplyDeleteI think you are perfectly correct to cite Valdman's suggestion that we offer more specialized courses in the French department, but as was discussed during the middle of the semester, there is still a substantial need for learning the basic language skills in generalized introductory courses. I really enjoy the idea that one could maybe take two semester of general basic French and the move into more specialized courses, but this would be an enormous burden on already diminishing resources. One could possibly argue that other departments should help in defraying the costs of such specialized courses, as it is their students who will benefit most, but I think this could be a hard sell. It may sound a bit authoritarian, but an easy fix to language questions would be to require more courses for degrees. If we maintain the myth of a liberal arts education in an increasingly specialization driven environment, why not require more courses in language, arts etc. It seems as though American universities are moving more towards a system in which students enter with a specific focus and limit their educational horizons to only those areas with direct bearing in their proposed course of study. We require many and varied classes at the undergraduate level, but there is no small amount of resentment on the part of students who do not see the utility of studying art or language or literature when their academic focus is in biochemistry or engineering. It is upon this realization that we must stake our claim. It is no longer sufficient to require courses in the hopes of affecting a sincere commitment to learning for knowledge's sake. We must instead insist on a paradigm shift in the perception of education in our university culture. Most students look at a college degree as an obligatory step in entering their chosen profession. The idea that students come to college for a well-rounded education may unfortunately be a ideal long since disappeared or even worse, a far off dream that will never be regained. I maintain that, in light of this climate of quid pro quo and cost-benefit analysis, we need to make apparent the functionality of French in the professional domain, not through direct competition with Spanish, but by lauding the merits of our program and language. Sorry for the rant, but I think we sometimes hide behind our rosy perception of the intentions of the average college student.
ReplyDeleteWow, lots of responses to this one, Mike; guess I'll jump on the band-wagon! I certainly agree that other “niche” languages should be taken into account in studies such as this; however, wasn’t the article written in the 90’s? I’m not sure, but the dates on their citations certainly imply that it was. At that point in time, perhaps the rise of these “tertiary” languages (don’t crucify me for calling them such) had not yet reached the levels they’re at today. It does bring another factor into the equation, adding more competitors to this marketplace-like environment.
ReplyDeleteAs long as students are required to take a four course foreign language sequence (which I believe is the case in most universities), language departments will be in competition with one another for students. Multilingualism, while certain the most personally enriching option for students, will likely remain an unrealized ideal. It seems much more likely that the vast majority of students will choose one and only one foreign language to study during their undergraduate careers. The perception, or “public image”, of a language then is of paramount importance. Unfortunately, French has taken a beating in the American media over the past decade, which makes our job that much harder.
I especially like your suggestion of advertising French as a hybrid instead of trying to tout old stereotypes. While the classic, romanticized image of France will always hold a certain appeal to certain personalities, it can probably be safely taken for granted. By reinventing the image of French we ACTIVELY present (and stressing the specifics of why it could be practically useful in one’s career) into something new and fresh with perhaps an allusion to more familiar imagery, public perception of the language could be greatly improved. Hopefully this would translate into higher enrollment numbers—and consequently, higher demand for instructors.