Testimony on House Education Bills
January 26, 2006
Email and letters sent to members of the House Education Committee.
Michele Anciaux Aoki, Ph.D., International Communications Consultant
January 21, 2006
Dear Rep. Hunter,
I was just informed about your new bill HB
2706. Our International Education Coalition has been keeping an eye on
legislation that promotes our goal of preparing all students for today's
interconnected world. We are strong supporters of a rigorous high school
program and offering all students the opportunity to meet college admissions
requirements during their high school career.
That's why we're puzzled.
While the new "recommended" graduation
requirements (NEW SECTION 4) specifically increase the credits for English,
Math, Science, and Social Studies (as well as .5 credit in technology and 4
credits in an academic or career and technical concentration), they mention
nothing about the study of World Languages. As you probably know, there is a
college admissions requirement for World Languages in 4-year colleges in
Washington. To begin to align high school graduation requirements and
college admissions requirements, shouldn't two years of a World Language (or
equivalent proficiency) be included in the list of "recommended" graduation
requirements?
I'm hoping that leaving out World Languages
was simply an oversight. Surely, all of you who signed on
to the bill can't be advocating dropping World
Languages as a college admissions requirement. (That happened in the 1970's
and it was disastrous! I was teaching Russian at the UW at the time, and
you can't imagine how sad it was to encounter students in the early 1980's
who were studying their first World Language in college. They were at a
great disadvantage because they had never learned how to learn a language.)
Thank you!
Michele Anciaux Aoki
Bridget Yaden, President of Washington Association for Language Teaching
January 25, 2006
To: The House Education Committee
Re: Importance of World Languages in HB 2706
I write this letter of
initial support for HB 2706, which proposes a more rigorous high school
program for high school students who plan to continue their studies in a
college or university. I am a parent of two children in the Tacoma Public
Schools system and also an educator in higher education, and welcome a
stronger high school curriculum for our students.
I feel that the bill would
not be complete, however, without more explicit reference to world
languages. It is wonderful that the bill recommends allowing ASL and
American Indian Languages to count for the understood language requirement,
because these languages are linguistically and culturally as rich as the
more commonly taught “foreign” languages. However, I believe the bill must
be strengthened and I would give it my full support if the understood
language requirement were stated directly. I suggest that something along
the lines of the following be added to the section on recommended
requirements:
(g) At least two credits
(or equivalent proficiency) in a language other than English.
As our world becomes
virtually smaller and flatter, the study of other languages and their
cultures is crucial in the United States. Thank you for considering this
addition.
Sincerely,
Bridget E. Yaden, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor, Spanish
President, Washington Association for Language Teaching
Katy Armagost, College in the High School
My name is Katy Armagost . I’d like to give you a very brief idea of my
background so you have a context for my comments on the bills before you.
I’m a recently retired World Languages teacher here in Mount Vernon. In
fact, I had the pleasure of teaching with Dave Quall when I first arrived
here in 1990. Now, I work as the University of Washington’s liaison for all
the state’s high school Spanish classes in the UW’s college in the high
schools program. But my most important role is as a concerned citizen,
parent and grandparent and those roles are what led me to come out today to
talk to you.
First, I want to thank you for making this teleconferencing opportunity
available to those of us who live too far from the capitol to come in
person. I really appreciate the committee actively searching out public
opinion in this way. It definitely gave me courage to approach you with my
concerns.
Last Tuesday, at the OSPI High School Summit, I learned a great deal
about the pro-active planning we’re doing as a state to prepare all kids to
graduate with something meaningful and enduring instead of just with a piece
of paper called a diploma. I heartily endorse the WASL. Like many others, I
think it does need some tinkering, but the idea is sound and from what I can
see, it’s being implemented with care and intelligence. Kids have not had to
take it seriously until now, so they haven’t. They WILL be able to meet the
standards set by the WASL, but as long as they think a knight on a white
horse will arrive at the 11th hour to save them, they won’t give it the
effort they need to succeed. I have seen this over and over again in the
classroom.
As a concerned citizen, truly worried about our educational slippage, I
want to ask you to hold the line. My initial reading of the 5 bills under
consideration makes me think that only two of them are heading in the right
direction: HB 2902 and HB 2998 both address the need to provide alternative
assessments, which is a valid concern. I don’t think academic record (HB
2923) is a good idea because it doesn’t measure actual learning. In some
classrooms, as you know, it’s possible to get high grades by just sitting in
a seat and completing low level tasks and I don’t think that’s what we’re
after.
The two bills extending the deadline are both knights on white horses. If
we truly need some ‘play’ in the effective dates of the WASL as a graduation
requirement, I would be supportive of enacting legislation that doesn’t
extend past 2010. After all, we have already had a very long preparation
period and many years of piloting the WASL’s various subject area tests so
I’m worried we’ll do more harm than good by passing HB 2764 or HB 2941 in
their current forms.
But there is a loose end that could unravel the whole school improvement
effort and absolutely has to be addressed. According to remarks by Terri
Bergeson at the High School Summit, an unwanted consequence of taking the
WASL seriously is that many districts around the state are directing such a
large amount of resources toward the needs of the at-risk WASL students that
the programs serving the rest of the student body and the economic needs of
the state of Washington are in danger of being dismantled.
Like thousands of parents and business people across our state, I am
particularly concerned about opportunities for the study of World Languages.
At the summit, I heard repeated references to the need for a global outlook
for our graduates. In the last few weeks, the federal government has begun
pushing for more world language study. The importance of intercultural
awareness to the business community in Washington state can’t be ignored.
But why is the study of world languages, which teaches cultural skills like
no other area, rarely directly addressed in the work of the education
committee? I totally support the need to focus on helping our kids get
competent in English. In fact, that was one of the chief reasons I became a
world language teacher, because I loved English. A shamefully underreported
fact is that learning a second language and especially starting at a young
age, provides the contrast the human brain needs to fully understand
Language, with a capital L. This foundation makes direct and powerful
contributions to almost every one of the language skills required by the
Communications portion of the WASL. And it’s a tool that can be used by
every learner, not just the college-bound. As a constituent, I respectfully
request that this committee give a serious look at how direct support to the
study of World Languages can contribute to the success of our students on
the WASL. Thank you for hearing me today.
Lynn Klausenburger, UW College in the High School
Dear Rep. McIntire,
I am a member of your district and am writing to thank you for sponsoring
HS 2706 (A more rigorous curriculum for high school graduation). I worked in
education my entire life until I retired last July 1, as a teacher of French
language and as director of the UW in the High School Program. I firmly
believe students will rise to expectations and that they are all capable of
more than is currently demanded of them for high school graduation. I am
very concerned, however, that the area of world or foreign languages is not
mentioned in your bill and urge you to see that language including this
subject area is included in current and future editions of the act.
I am old enough to remember Sputnik and the National Defense Education
Act which set up intensive summer institutes for language study and spurred
intense interest in Russian. In subsequent decades language study fell off
the radar screen. It always seems to take some crisis for us to realize the
value of a study that is an integral part of the curriculum of other nations
for students at all levels and of all abilities. We seem to be in such a
crisis mode again, precipitated this time by violent attacks on the nation.
We should use this moment to establish, once and for all, languages as an
enduring part of the curriculum so that we are not unprepared for the
necessity to deal carefully with cultures and languages very different from
our own and, of course, for a global economy and a changing citizenry.
It is clear that knowledge of another language is a distinct asset in
today's job market--and that includes jobs from McDonald's to banking. It is
equally clear that such knowledge actually helps our national security.
Students of languages acquire an inkling of what the immigrant experience is
like and become more accepting of diversity in their civic life. Learning
another language requires a diversity of skills, including analysis, which
is very helpful in other areas of the curriculum. Modern teaching methods
made language study accessible and attractive to a wide variety of students.
For all these reasons, it should not be left out of any curriculum that
aspires to rigor or value to society.
My children are grown and working, I am retired--i.e., I have no self
interest in promoting language study--just my experience and conviction that
this is an essential skill for students in this century.
Thank you for "listening."
*********************************************************
* Lynn Klausenburger, Ph.D. *
Bill Center, President, Washington Council on International Trade
Excerpt from keynote address to the Pacific Northwest Association of
Independent Schools "All Schools Conference," Oct 8, 2004.
Used with permission.
From my vantage point, this next century is going to put a premium on
three specific life skills, communication, conceptual ability and
cooperation.
You might choose to quibble with me over whether these particular
attributes are “skills” or “character traits” … and you may even be
skeptical about the degree to which they can be taught and learned.
I’m firmly convinced these are vital skills that we can teach our
students.
We put a lot of time and effort into teaching communication skills. But I
believe there are two particular aspects of communication that need more
work.
The first is “language.” As educators, many of us believe that mastering
a second language is a mark of academic distinction, one important component
in a truly well rounded education, perhaps even something that should be
part of the basic curriculum.
We know that the best time to start learning a second language is early
in life. We know that learning a second language enhances the learning
ability of most students … that learning a language is really an important
form of “learning how to learn.”
We also know that in the U.S. the option of a second language is not
widely available at the elementary level, and where it is, the choice of
language is limited.
English will continue to be an important – even dominant language – in
the years ahead. But most of our fellow humans will continue to be
non-English speakers.
Our ability to communicate effectively is directly related to our ability
to speak the language.
If you can speak the language you’ll likely get better service, better
food, a better hotel room, a better deal and you’ll be more likely to be
able to talk your way out of trouble or potential misunderstandings. It’s a
matter of basic communication. People can’t help you or give you what you
want if they can’t understand you. Or – importantly – it’s hard to help
others if YOU can’t understand THEM!
So, in order to help our students communicate in the world of 2050, which
languages should we be teaching them?
What language is spoken in China? That’s right … the official language is
Mandarin Chinese, already spoken by more than 1.3 billion people. China is a
surprisingly homogeneous nation. More than 93% of the population is Han
Chinese. Even so, China officially recognizes 55 minority nationalities and
200 different languages.
How ‘bout India? Who can tell me the language of India?
The official languages of the Republic of India are – in alphabetical
order – Assamese, Bengali, Gujarati, Hindi, Kannada, Kashmiri, Malayalam,
Marathi, Oriya, Panjabi, Sanskrit, Sindhi, Tamil, Telugu, and Urdu. And –
oh, by the way – they also have one “associate official language” … English.
There are still more than 800 different languages in daily use in India. Are
any of them offered at your school?
We’ll come back to the third largest nation – the USA – in a few moments.
The language of Indonesia interestingly enough is Indonesian and the
literacy rate in Indonesia is over 80%. Even so, more than 700 different
languages survive in that nation of many islands.
The official languages of Nigeria – in order of prevalence – are Edo,
Efik, Adamawa, Fulfulde, Hausa, Idoma, Igobo, Yerwa Kanuri, Yoruba, and
English. The literacy rate is around 50% and there are still about 500
different languages in daily use.
Many people are surprised to learn that the United States has no official
language. As both a world leader and a major English-speaking country, many
people assume that English is our official language. Some are dismayed to
learn that is not the case and have launched efforts over the years to make
it so. A constitutional amendment to that effect is proposed during almost
every session of Congress. From my vantage point, this would NOT be helpful.
As you know very well … many Americans are already mastering a second
language … and that language is English. Currently the largest minority
population in the U.S. speaks Spanish.
We need a dramatic increase in early second language education in our
nation’s schools … and we should be giving a lot of careful thought to which
languages we make available?
If you can’t speak or understand the language … it’s really difficult to
communicate!
The second – and most important – aspect of “communication” I want to
emphasize today is understanding … as in comprehension.
We’re really good at explaining things. We spend a lot of time teaching
our students to express themselves clearly and well … both orally and in
writing. We don’t often focus equal attention on the importance of
understanding the ideas of others and developing the ability to do that.
As Vaclav Havel, then President of Czechoslovakia, told the World
Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, in 1992, if anything, “we must try
harder to understand than to explain.”
Those are words to write on your heart.
How well do the Israelis understand what the Palestinians are trying to
tell them? How well do the Palestinians understand the Israelis?
Interestingly … we act as if we understand them both, and we’re quick to
offer our simple solutions to this terrible conflict. If only the Israelis
would do thus …
If only Arafat …
If only the U.S. …
The heartbreaking truth is few people are really taking the time or
making the effort to truly understand what any party to this enduring
tragedy is actually trying to say.
We’ve got to fix that. And our classrooms are a great place to start.