International and Language Education for a Global Future: Fifty Years of U.S. Title VI and Fulbright-Hays Programs

6. Language Competence—Performance, Proficiency, and Certification: Current Status and New Directions

Introduction Throughout the first fifty years of Title VI legislation, reauthorizations, and funding appropriations, the U.S. Congress has charged the Department of Education with establishing a national capacity in foreign languages, cultures, and international and area studies. The companion chapter in this section documents the extensive successes of Title VI in developing a widespread infrastructure which serves as the foundation for this national capacity. In her chapter, Professor Tarone identifies the essential building blocks of this infrastructure: the many centers (e.g., National Resource Centers, Language Resource Centers, and Centers for International Business Education), fellowships (e.g., Foreign Language and Area Studies), and materials grants (e.g., International Research and Studies Program) that collectively have significantly increased the number of languages, courses, and materials developed and made available; offered teacher training; and initiated dissemination networks such as web sites, blogs, and online, peer-reviewed journals. Furthermore, Title VI program status has attracted matching funds from universities that have continued teaching a wide range of previously unoffered languages beyond the initial Title VI funding period, firmly establishing less commonly taught languages (LCTLs) in the national infrastructure. Nevertheless, despite all these C H A P T E R 6 Language Competence—Performance, Proficiency, and Certification: Current Status and New Directions Catherine J. Doughty 111 accomplishments, Professor Tarone’s review of the history and impact of Title VI programs led her to conclude that too few Americans have been able to benefit from these programs, and that “at the national level, more foreign language knowledge is essential if we are to effectively implement ‘soft diplomacy.’” I join with Professor Tarone in commending the tremendous Title VI effort to date; however, although the infrastructure may now be firmly in place, the point of departure in this chapter, which assesses current status and looks to the future, must be the clear-sighted observation that there is still much more Title VI work to be accomplished. As we shall see, building successful language programs on the foundation of national infrastructure will require more time, sustained effort, increased resources, and better oversight. Moreover, meeting the increasingly more critical foreign language demands of these uncertain times cannot be accomplished efficiently and effectively without implementing the scientific advancements made over the past three decades in understanding how foreign languages are learned and systematically documenting foreign language learning outcomes. Current Status of America’s National Foreign Language Competence Recently, Congress asked the National Research Council to “review the adequacy and effectiveness of the Title VI programs in addressing their statutory missions and in building the nation’s foreign language expertise—particularly as needed for economic, foreign affairs, and national security purposes” (O’Connell and Norwood 2007, p. 24). The council convened a committee to conduct a formal evaluation of the Title VI and Fulbright-Hays International Education Programs.1 In this section, I draw from the relevant findings of this National Research Council evaluation to assess the current status of foreign language competence2 and, later on, extend the discussion to put forward new directions in which I believe Title VI must lead. The overall finding of the National Research Council Committee (NRCC) was that the Department of Education “has not made foreign language and culture a priority, and its several programs appear to be fragmented” (ibid., pp. 3–4). The report also notes the larger context of a nation and its educational system that have “placed little value on speaking languages other than English or on understanding cultures other than one’s own” (ibid., p. 1). Although a similar inward focus was the original catalyst for Title VI in 1959, during the most recent decade of Title VI funding , increased terrorism, a global economic crisis, and new health risks to the nation have only worsened the inward focus in some sectors. Clearly, the Title VI mission is more vital than ever before; thus, it is essential that we determine through an analysis of the current status how to prioritize foreign language competence 112 C A T H E R I N E J . D O U G H T Y successfully and ensure the production of more American foreign language knowledge at expert levels. The NRCC, on its own and through commissioned research, made a concerted effort to uncover indicators of successful foreign language achievement by Title VI grant recipients and by students in language programs funded or supported in some way by Title...