In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

CHAPTER 11 169 Institutional Bilingualism At was easier to secure approval for bilingualism at RMC in principle than to introduce it in practice. Dr Dacey, commenting to the Faculty Council on a report on second-language training issued on 12April 1973 by a study group in the Division of Education in DND'S Directorate of Language Training, said that "the real problem is reduced to a choice between militarytraining and language training." He argued that three yearsand eight months was too short a time for producing functional bilingualism and, at the same time, educating to an accepted degree standard. He noted also that many who stressed the importance of military leadership and professional skills, and who believed that language training could be acquired later, would not accept a preference for language training over military training. He agreed, however, that from an academic point of view, second-language training "would contribute to the future development of the individual." Dacey suggested that phase 1of the language training program should be moved to the summer before the recruits entered the college. If cadets needed further instruction , they should take second-language training courses after graduation. He confirmed the need for a more equitable balance between anglophones and francophones in RMC, and for more French-speaking faculty appointments, but said the report's proposal for training in French for nine hours a week in the first and second years was quite unrealistic. Dacey reminded the RMC faculty that Garneau had recommended an overall reduction of the amount of formal classroominstruction. The Blackburn-Duplantie report had held that 12001600 hours were needed to achieve functionalbilingualism , but this new report said only 500 hours would be required.1 Iri June, RMCcomplained to the EducationalCouncil that DND'S Directorate of Language Training had not provided it with clear objectives in functional bilingualism - a reference, no doubt, to the difference in hours between the tworeports. The council agreed.Atthe same time, Dacey announced that the RMCFrench department had rejected the proposal that it should undertake audiolingual instruction and disputed the possibility of achieving functional bilingualism in the time available. The choice, Dacey said, wasreallybetween makinga man bilingual and giving him a good engineering education. The Directorate of Language Training informed the Educational Council that the reduction in the number of hours required for second-language training stemmed from the fact that an individual in DNDwas now expected to reach level two instead of level four. The Educational Council left the question of second-language training at RMC for future decision. Royal Roads had at one time stressed "conversational knowledge" in its language teaching,2 and the council now agreed that audiolingual French teaching should be reintroduced there. Meanwhile , to prepare for an expected influx of francophones 170 TO SERVE CANADA into RMC, the Public Service Commission, under contract with DND, provided second-language instruction for thirty anglophone members of the RMCfaculty and administrative staff in summer courses in 1973, and arrangements were made for a series of more three-week courses to start in the fall. These courses were described loosely as "a correspondence course with students doing most of the work on their own time."3 Then, in July, General Dextraze circulated a letter throughout the forces instructing commanders at all levels to identify civilian positions that, by December 1978, were to be bilingual. The linguistic requirements in the military positions that supervised civilian personnel would also be examined. Since RMCcame under this ruling, here was another impetus towards institutional bilingualism. This could no longer be delayed once the CDS gave the incoming commandant, Brigadier-General Turner, direct orders to proceed without further delay.4 In the following session, after RMChad placed bilingual signs throughout the grounds and in the museum in Fort Frederick, the official language commissioner received a complaint about one that had been overlooked. Meanwhile, although many cadets disliked the program, the Cadet Wing had already organized bilingual squadrons , and the cadets themselves had sponsored a French weekend. The French department had used the special second-language funding provided for the promotion of bilingualism and biculturalism to publish a new periodical , Signum, in both languages. It had also purchased apparatus for a new language laboratory at a cost of $42,000, which was intended to "give more flexibility" in French courses in the third and fourth years. Simultaneously , RMCexplored ways to provide audiolingual French teaching for anglophones in the first and second years.5 What was more imperative, yet very difficult, was to duplicate...

Share