INFORMATION TO USERS
The most advanced technology has been used to photo­
graph and reproduce this manuscript from the microfilm
master. UMI films the original text directly from the copy
submitted. Thus, some dissertation copies are in typewriter
face, while others may be from a computer printer.
In the unlikely event th a t the author did not send UMI a
complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will
be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyrighted material had to
be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
Oversize m aterials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are re­
produced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper
left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal
sections with small overlaps. Each oversize page is available
as one exposure on a standard 35 mm slide or as a 17" x 23"
black and white photographic print for an additional charge.
Photographs included in the original manuscript have been
reproduced xerographically in this copy. 35 mm slides or
6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for
any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for
an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order.

UMI

A ccessing th e World's Information sin ce 1938

300 North Z eeb Road, Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 USA

O rder N u m b er 8801821

C urrent foreign lan gu age in elem en tary sch ool program s in th e
sta te o f M ichigan
Heining-Boynton, Audrey Lee, Ph.D.
Michigan State University, 1987

Copyright ©1987 by Heining-Boynton, Audrey Lee. All rights reserved.

UMI

300 N. Zeeb Rd.
Ann Arbor, MI 48106

PLEASE NOTE:

In all cases this material has been filmed in th e best possible way from the available copy.
Problems encountered with this docum ent have been identified here with a ch eck mark V .

1.

Glossy photographs or p a g e s ______

2.

Colored illustrations, paper or prin t_______

3.

Photographs with dark b ack g ro u n d _____

4.

Illustrations are poor c o p y _______

5.

Pages with black marks, not original co p y ______

6.

Print shows through as there is text on both sides of p a g e _______

7.

Indistinct, broken or small print on several pages _

8.

Print exceeds margin requirem ents______

9.

Tightly bound copy with print lost in sp in e_______

10.

Computer printout pages with indistinct pri n t_______

11.

Page(s)____________ lacking when material received, an d not available from school or
author.

12.

Page(s)

13.

Two pages num bered

14.

Curling and wrinkled pages

15.

Dissertation contains pages with print at a slant, filmed a s received

16.

Other

seem to b e missing in numbering only as text follows.
. Text follows.

UMI

CURRENT FOREIGN LANGUAGE IN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PROGRAMS
IN THE STATE OF MICHIGAN
By
A udrey L. Heining-Boynton

A DISSERTATION

S ubm itted to
M ichigan S ta te U niversity
in p a rtia l fu lfillm en t of th e requirem ents
fo r the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
D ep artm en t of T e a ch e r E ducation
1987

C opyright by
AUDREY LEE HEINING-BOYNTON
1987

CURRENT FOREIGN LANGUAGE IN THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PROGRAMS
IN THE STATE OF MICHIGAN
By
A udrey L. Heining-Boynton

ABSTRACT

The purpose of th is study w as to describe basic c h a ra c te ris tic s o f Foreign
Language in th e E lem e n ta ry School ^FLES) program s in the s ta te of M ichigan.
G oals and o b jectiv es w ere id e n tifie d , and perceptions w ere recorded as to
w hether the indicated outcom es were being ach iev ed . Also a scertain ed w ere the
languages o ffere d , learning m a te ria ls and pedagogical techniques used, and tim e o n -task fo r various grade levels. O ther topics covered w ere program artic u la tio n
w ith th e junior high and

high school, program

stre n g th s and w eaknesses,

p erceived collegial and com m unity support, and ev alu atio n .
D ata were g ath ered through a questionnaire. The in stru m e n t was p re te ste d
and then sent to 28 FLES coordinators or head teach ers; 23 co m p leted the
questionnaire.
The two m ost in dicated program goals and objectives w ere to teach a
cultured aw areness of th e ta r g e t language and to te a c h verbal com m unication
skills.

All p artic ip a n ts f e lt th e ir program s had achieved th e firs t goal, and 83%

of th e

respondents believed th a t th ey

w ere successful in teach in g verbal

com m unication skills in th e ir program s.
Spanish is o ffere d in 57% o f th e schools surveyed; French has the la rg e st
stu d en t enrollm ent (2,643).

T h irty -n in e p e rc e n t of th e program s have been in

A udrey L. Heining-Boynton
e x isten c e five years or m ore.

E ig h t schools o ffe r FLES from kindergarten

through th e sixth grade. A rticu latio n w ith th e junior high and high school foreign
language program is available a t e ig h t schools. T im e-o n -task is alw ays a t le a s t
15 m inutes per c la ss session. T otal m inutes per w eek is program sp ecific.
A variety of m ethodologies and learning aids a re em ployed. F ifty p e rc en t
of the respondents rely a t le a st in p a rt on teac h e r-m a d e m a te ria ls.
Fellow te a c h e rs, ad m in istra to rs, and p aren ts and com m unity receiv ed th e
highest ratin g fo r program support a t le a st 43% of the tim e.

FLES teach ers

w ere listed by a larg e m ajority (70%) of th e respondents as a stre n g th ; 38% ra te d
textbooks and classroom m a te ria ls as a w eakness.
th e program s.

Evaluation occurs in 70% of

DEDICATION

To
D r. Melba W oodruff
and
D r. D avid B. Heining-Boynton

ACKNOV'LEDGEME NTS

My sincerest g ra titu d e and deep a p p reciatio n go to my m ajor professors.
Dr.

Peggy

R lethm iJler, ad v iso r and c o m m itte e

invaluable guidance and advice.

chairperson, has

provided

She, as well as D rs. G eorge F e rre e , C harles

Blackm an, and K enneth N e ff, have afforded a supportive, n u rtu rin g atm o sp h ere.
Expressions of thanks a re also ex ten d ed to th e M ichigan D ep artm en t of
Education fo r endorsing th is p ro je c t, and to Mrs. Lois F rick , M r. R obert H awkins,
and Dr. JoA nne Wilson for p re te stin g th e questionnaire. Finally, a special th an k
you goes to Dr. David B. Heining-Boynton.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

L ist of Tables

vi

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY
BACKGROUND
THE CONCERNS PROMPTING THIS STUDY
THE NEED FOR THE STUDY
THE IMPORTANCE OF THE STUDY
THE PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
DESIGN OF THE STUDY
LIMITATIONS
DEFINITION OF TERMS
ORGANIZATION OF THE STUDY
CHAPTER II: THE LITERATURE
CHAPTER III: THE PROCEDURES
CHAPTER IV: REPORTING OF DATA
CHAPTER V: SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION
CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
HISTORY OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE IN THE
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
GROWTH OF FLES
THE DECLINE OF FLES
Student Opinion
P a re n t Opinion
Hom ework and G rades
Pedagogy and O rg an izatio n of C urriculum
The T each ers
WHAT WE HAVE LEARNED
FLES Does NOT In te rfe re with A chievem ent in O th er Subjects
Second L anguage A cquisition
Who Should P a rtic ip a te in FLES Program s?
The Q uestion of Age
What L an g u ag e^ ) Should Be O ffered ?
C urrent Pedagogy
T im e-on-T ask
Program E valuation
The T each er
The A d m in istra to r
Task F o rces and R ep o rts
SUMMARY
iv

1
I
2
2
3
3
4
4
4
5
6
6
6
7
7
8
8
12
18
21
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
32
33
39
39
40
41
41
42
43
44

CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY
RESEARCH POPULATION
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
SELECTION OF DATA-COLLECTING TECHNIQUE
QUESTIONNAIRE DESIGN
PRETEST OF QUESTIONNAIRE
STATE DEPARTMENT ENDORSEMENT
REQUEST FOR PERMISSION TO CONDUCT THE STUDY
DISTRIBUTION OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE
CONFIDENTIALITY OF RESPONSES
PROCESSING OF THE DATA
SUMMARY
CHAPTER IV: DATA ANALYSIS

46
46
47
47
48
49
49
50
52
53
53
55

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
THE QUESTIONNAIRE
QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS
D em ographic C h a ra c te ris tic s
Scope C h a ra c te ris tic s
T im e-on-Task C h a ra c te ris tic s
Methodology and In stru ctio n al M aterials
A rticulation C h a ra c te ris tic s
Support of Program C h a ra c te ris tic s
P erceived S tren g th s and W eaknesses
Evaluation
Program Goals and O b jectiv es
A dditional C om m ents
SUMMARY
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION OF THE RESULTS
SUMMARY
CONCLUSIONS
RECOMMENDATIONS
REFLECTIONS

55
55
57
57
59
60
60
61
62
63
64
65
68
68
70
70
72
73
75

A ppendices

80

Bibliography

108

v

LIST OF TABLES

3.1

Responses to the R eq u est fo r Perm ission to C onduct Survey

50

3.2

Tim e T able fo r Survey A dm inistration

52

3.3

Response R a te to Invitatio n to P a rtic ip a te

52

4.1

D em ographic C h a ra c te ris tic s

57

4.2

Scope C h a ra c te ris tic s

59

4.3

M ethodology and In stru ctio n al M aterials

61

4.4

A rticu latio n C h a ra c te ris tic s

62

4.5

Support of Program

63

4.6

P erceived S tren g th s and W eaknesses

64

4.7

Program E valuation

65

4.8

Goals and O bjectives

66

4.9

Goal A chievem ent

67

4.10

Im pedim ents to Goal A chievem ent

67

vi

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY
The purpose of th is study is to describe c u rre n t F o reig n Language in th e
E lem en tary School (FLES) program s in the s ta te of M ichigan. FLES, th a t is, any
form al offering of foreign language classes before junior high school, will be
exam ined in order to docum ent the various c u rric u la .

The perceptions of

program

and

a d m in istra tiv e

are

the topics of

coordinators concerning

collegial, com m unity,

support given FLES will be chronicled.

Also tre a te d

m ethodology, learning m a te ria ls, ou tco m es, and ev alu atio n .
BACKGROUND
In th e U nited S ta te s , th e
C leveland, Ohio, begun in 1922.

firs t m ajo r FLES program

to

Program s grew in num ber during th e 1950s and

'60s (A ndersson, 1969, pp. 105-M ).
(M ildenberger).

is c re d ite d

A wide v ariety of languages were o ffered

Early second language learning was f e lt to be ed ucationally,

sociologically, neurologically, and psychologically sound (Donoghue, 1967, pp.
60-67).
By th e m id '60s, though, FLES program s w ere being te rm in a te d .

Some of

th e reasons given were lack of qualified te a c h e rs, u n re a listic goals, in c o rre c t
m ethodological assum ptions, lack of evaluation (M cLaughlin, 1978, pp. 137-138).
Today, foreign language ex p erien ces in th e elem en tary school are m aking a
com eback (Rhodes and S ch reib stein , p. 24 \

S ta te s such as New York and

L ouisiana are in stitu tin g e x ten siv e FLES e ffo rts (Larew ). Spokespeople like Paul

1

2

Simon, U nited S ta te s S e n a to r and au th o r of The Tongue-T ied A m erican, a re
expressing concern a b o u t A m ericans' g en eral lack of aw aren ess of o th e r c u ltu re s.
THE CONCERNS PROMPTING THIS STUDY
Many nations in tro d u ce foreign languages early in th e ir cu rricu la.

In

F ra n c e , fo r exam ple, th e f ir s t foreign language is begun when a child is 11 years
old.

He or she m ust choose a m odern foreign language a t th a t tim e.

th e age of 13, a second foreign language is se le c te d .

Then, a t

F ran c e 's second language

curriculum is well docum ented , p a rt of th e national ed u catio n al plan.
U p -to -d ate, d escrip tiv e inform ation seem s no t to be as easily av ailab le in
th e U nited S ta te s regarding c u rre n t fo reig n language offerings a t th e e lem en tary
school level.

The C e n te r fo r A pplied L inguistics (CAL) was c o n ta c te d fo r a

national lis t of program s.
FLES.

CAL has a lis t of im m ersion program s, bu t not of

It was explained th a t no such list ex ists since FLES program s appear and

disappear a t a very rapid r a te .

S ta te Foreign Language C oordinators fo r th re e

M idwestern s ta te s were c o n ta c te d , b u t no info rm atio n was provided p ertain in g to
existing program s. M ichigan had d a ta av ailab le from a 1985 study (M ansour\ y e t
many questions rem ained unansw ered.
THE NEED FOR THE STUDY
A part from th e re su lts of th e s ta te foreign language survey m ade av ailab le
in 1985, no inform ation is on hand concerning Michigan program s, nor have any
follow -up studies been conducted to c o rro b o ra te th e d ata from th e 1985 study.
H ence, th e need fo r this investigation was to follow -up, docum ent, and describe
in m ore detail th e c u rre n t ty p e s o f FLES offerings in th e s ta te of M ichigan.
Answers to the research questions will address th e in te re s ts of professionals and
"concerned others?' in th e field of e arly foreign language education. A lso, such a
query will provide d ata th a t can be com pared w ith th e findings of e arlier stu d ies,

3

furnish inform ation fo r schools in te re ste d in establishing FLES p ro g ram s, and
provide a vehicle of self-ev alu atio n fo r program s alread y in s titu te d .
THE IMPORTANCE OF THE STUDY
Basic d escriptive inform atio n m ust be g ath ered in o rd er to provide th e
necessary d a ta base to conduct fu rth e r stu d ies. Once th e program s a re described,
com parative and e v alu a tiv e research can ta k e place. F o r exam ple, c u rre n t FLES
program s could be com pared to those of th e 1950s; FLES in d istric t X could be
e v alu a te d fo r o v erall su ccess in te rm s of national co m p eten cy guidelines.
C urrent M ichigan FLES program s could be c o rre la te d to the program s of o th er
co u n tries w here early second-language learning has been an in teg ral p a rt of th e
curriculum .

But f ir s t, b e fo re th e se ensuing stu d ies tak e p lace, basic d escrip tiv e

inform ation m ust be m ade av ailab le.
Foreign language education has gone through a num ber of changes over the
years; a wide v a rie ty of m eth o d s, ap p ro ach es, and learning aids have com e in and
out

of

sty le, som etim es

causing confusion

and m istru st am ong te a c h e rs,

ad m in istra to rs, and th e com m unity. T he decisions fo r change w ere usually based
on the w ell-intentioned but nonem pirically-based judgm ent of classroom te ac h e rs
and/or th e textbook publishing industry and college lite r a ti, w ith little or no
a tte n tio n being given to the goals, o b je ctiv es, and needs of th e le arn ers, th e ir
p aren ts, th e ir com m unity, or our so ciety (Spar, p. 60). With m ore in fo rm atio n a t
one's disposal, m ore enlightened conclusions will be reach ed in the fu tu re
concerning second language education and acquisition in th e U nited S ta te s .
THE PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of th is study is to d escrib e FLES program s in th e s ta te of
M ichigan. Of p a rticu lar in te re s t a re the basics of the cu rricu la: the lan g u ag e^)
being o ffere d , th e num ber of in stru ctio n m inutes per w eek, teaching m a te ria ls

4

being em ployed, th e kinds and num bers of stu d en ts involved, te a c h e r ed u catio n ,
and evaluation.

Also tr e a te d a re th e goals and o b je ctiv es of th e program s and

perceived stre n g th s and w eaknesses.
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
The follow ing research questions a re asked in this in v e stig atio n .
1.

What a re the goals, o b je ctiv es, and c h a ra c te ris tic s of FLES
program s in th e s ta te of M ichigan?

2.

Are the s ta te d goals and o b jectiv es being m e t, as p erceiv ed by
th e program p a rtic ip a n ts?

3.

Are th e se program s supported by o th e r co lleag u es, th e schools'
ad m in istratio n , and th e com m unity?
DESIGN OF THE STUDY

The population of th is study w as all docu m en ted FLES program s in th e
s ta te

of

M ichigan.

Perm ission

to

conduct

the

study was

req u ested

of

superin ten d en ts whose d is tric ts w ere re p o rte d to hav e FLES program s in 1985.
From the su p erin ten d en ts, a list of c o n ta c t people, th a t is, FLES d ire c to rs, was
gen erated . The technique used to arriv e a t th e answ ers to th e research questions
was a questionnaire sent to d irecto rs of all known FLES pro g ram s in the s ta te .
The d ata

were c o lle c te d over a

th re e -m o n th

period.

Several

follow -up

techniques were utilized in o rd er to achieve a 100% reply r a te . R esponses w ere
ta b u la te d and recorded fo r each of th e 25 ite m s of th e in stru m e n t.
LIMITATIONS
In 1985, 31 school d is tric ts w ere re p o rte d to have FLES program s in th e
s ta te of Michigan; in 1986, 18 o f those d istric ts provided FLES ex p erien ces.
These 18 d is tric ts m ade up th e population fo r th is study.

As th e in v estig atio n

progressed and a netw ork was fo rm ed , FLES program s n o t am ong th o se originally
liste d cam e to light.

T h e re fo re , th e probability is strong th a t program s o th e r

5

than the ones included in this study e x ist. In addition, im m ersion program s, th a t
is, se ttin g s w here th e to ta l curriculum is ta u g h t betw een 50% and 100% of th e
tim e in the ta rg e t language, w ere n o t included in this research .
Some of th e d ata c o lle c te d a re th e p ercep tio n s o f th e p a rtic ip a n ts.
T h erefo re, th e opinions expressed are su b ject to w hatever d eg ree of personal
bias th e respondent brings to th e study.
rem ains

th a t

Also, although th e questionnaire was

p re te ste d , th e

fa c t

c e rta in

item s on th e

survey m ight be

m isin terp reted .

A dditionally, th e in stru m e n t m ay not be su ited to ad eq u ately

portray in g all types of FLES program designs. Steps w ere tak en to ensure the
highest degree possible of re lia b ility , v alid ity , and g en eralizab ility .
DEFINITION OF TERMS
The following te rm s a re used freq u en tly th ro u g h o u t th is study.

Every

e ffo rt will be m ade to use the te rm s co n sisten tly as defined below .
FLES or re v ita liz ed FLES.
A nderson,

Brega,

and

R hodes

The follow ing d efinition
(1983)

will

be

em ployed

given by M et,
throughout

this

in v estig atio n .
FLES is a program in which the foreign language is taught
b efo re, during or a f te r school fo r a sp ec ific num ber of days per week.
Today's re v ita liz ed language classes em phasize spoken language m ore
than FLES program s used to , and include a cu ltu ral aw areness
com ponent.
A ccording to R hodes and S ch reib stein (1983, p. 6), th e prim ary goals of the
re v ita liz e d FLES program s a re to m ake th e children a w are of th e c u ltu re of th e
ta rg e t language and to stre ss a c e rta in am ount of speaking and listen in g .
P ro g ram .

U se

of

th e

w ord "program "

will

m ean

th e

organization of a plan for accom plishing a specified goal or goals.

sy ste m a tic

6

Im m ersion program s. T otal im m ersion program s a re those in which ail the
in stru ctio n is conducted in th e ta r g e t language.

The study of English is usually

introduced in the th ird grade and is increased through th e six th grade.

By th e

sixth grade, usually 5096 of th e classes are conducted in English and th e o th e r
50% a re conducted in the ta rg e t language. The goal is fo r the stu d en t to becom e
functionally lite r a te in tw o languages by th e end of th e sixth grade (Rhodes and
S chreibstein, p. 17).
ORGANIZATION OF THE STUDY
CHAPTER H: THE LITERATURE
In C h ap ter II, th e lite ra tu re review will be concerned w ith FLES program s,
past and p re se n t, not only nationally, but in te rn a tio n a lly as well. An h isto rical
investigation of FLES in the U nited S ta te s will be p resen ted from its form al
inception in th e 1920s to th e p resen t.

P ercep tio n s of professionals and program

p a rtic ip a n ts on why FLES program s declined in num ber several decades ago will
be rep o rted .

Included with th e lite ra tu re review o f FLES will be a look a t

research on second language acquisition and how th a t inform ation applies to
early foreign language teachin g .
CHAPTER III: THE PROCEDURES
Perm ission

will be re q u e ste d of superintendents across the s ta te of

Michigan to conduct th e study in th e ir d istric ts and to o b tain th e nam es of
c o n ta c t persons for th e ir e lem en tary school(s). Q uestionnaires will then be sent
to th e se te a c h e rs or curriculum sp ecialists. E ach language a t each elem en tary
school across the s ta te is to be rep resen ted .
utilized.

Two follow -up techniques will be

7

CHAPTER IV: REPORTING OF DATA
The raw d a ta , th a t is, th e answ ers to the 25 questionnaire ite m s, will be
recorded.

T otal responses fo r each ite m will be ta b u la te d and re p o rte d a s a

p e rcen tag e of to ta l respondents.

The resu lts of each questionnaire item will

then be rep o rted on and discussed.
CHAPTER V: SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION
A num ber of fu rth e r studies and te sta b le hypotheses can be g en erate d from
th is study.

In C h a p te r V, sev eral suggestions fo r such studies a re given.

Conclusions from the d ata g a th ered a re provided. Also included in C h ap ter V are
re fle c tio n s on th e p a st, p re sen t, and fu tu re o f FLES.
An

extensive

bibliography

follow s

th e

te x t

m a te ria l,

preceded

by

appendices th a t contain th e questionnaire used in th e study, copies of various
com m unications with superin ten d en ts and respondents, answ ers to the openended questions, and various o th e r docum ents re la ted to th e study.

CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
T he review o f lite ra tu re will ad d ress th e FLES m o v em en t of th e p a st and
p re sen t, not only in the U nited S ta te s , b u t also in tern a tio n a lly .
values, and beliefs concerning early

foreign

language

The a ttitu d e s ,

in stru ctio n

will

be

discussed, as well as program stru c tu re and org an izatio n . Also exam ined will be
w hat was and now is known ab o u t second language acquisition and how th a t
inform ation pertain s to e a rly foreign language study.
HISTORY OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE
IN THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
O ften it is f e lt th a t th e problem s of th e p re sen t have no t touched o th e r
g en eratio n s. Upon closer exam ination, one discovers many tim es th a t concerns
of th e 1980s have actually been with us fo r a num ber of years. So it is with th e
discussion surrounding th e teaching of foreign languages in th e elem en tary
school. The d e b ate over w hether foreign languages should be o ffered to children
has been an on-going one, on-going fo r about 1900 years!
Evidence from as early as th e first c en tu ry A.D. illu s tra te s th e continuing
discussion. Roman rh e to rician Q uintillian is given c re d it fo r th e firs t sta te m e n t
on record justifying early foreign language study. T he R om ans, i t seem s, w ere
questioning th e ir prevailing p ra c tice of beginning th e study o f G reek a t a young
ag e. Q uintillian defended th e p ra c tic e by w riting th a t" b y n a tu re we retain b e st
w hat is learned in our te n d e re st years" (Q uintillian, I.I.5).
Beginning foreign language in stru ctio n a t an early a g e continued in to th e
Middle A ges.

In m edieval tim es, th e beginning of foreign language in stru ctio n

9

coincided w ith the beginning of a young m an’s e n tra n ce into the m onastic
schools.

H ence, som ew here betw een th e ag es of seven and te n , L a tin was

in tro d u ced .

The early hum anists low ered the age even fu rth e r, com m encing

foreign language education a t ab o u t th e ag e of five (Kelly, p . 317).
In 1529, Erasm us ^Opera V, 615-723) w ro te:
As fa r as languages are co n cern ed , th is a g e is so supple th a t
w ithin a few months a G erm an child learn s F ren c h unknowingly w hile
doing o th e r things. Such learning is n ev er m ore e ffe c tiv e th an when
c arrie d out in the e a rlie s t y ears.
Erasm us f e lt th a t this was due to the a c t th a t children find i t easy to im ita te .
During th e 18th c e n tu ry , foreign languages w ere in tro d u ced a t a la te r ag e,
even though people such as G erm an physician K arl von Basedow were against
teach in g foreign languages a f te r th e ag e of 16.

Basedow believed, as did C zech

theologian

e lem en ta ry education

and e d u ca to r C om enius and

the

designer

P estalo zz i, th a t th e prim a a e ta s , th a t is, th e firs t seven y ears of life , w as th e
best tim e for studies involving m em ory.

N ev erth eless, i t was during the 18th

century when in stru c tio n of th e m o th er tongue began in th e schools, and th e
study o f a foreign language was not p e rm itte d until the stu d en t was fam iliar w ith
th e gram m ar of his own language (Kelly, pp. 317-318 \
All of the early lines of reasoning fo r foreign language in stru ctio n a t a
young age were based on personal feelings and u n scie n tific observations.

T he

controversy continued to be desultory in to the 1900s. Wilder P en field , head of
th e In s titu te of N eurology of McGill U niversity, a tte m p te d to s e ttle th e dispute
scie n tifica lly . His previous ex p erim en ts had pointed to the flex ib ility of a child's
brain. So confident was he in his own th e o rie s, Penfield used his own children in
his experim ent to prove the positive resu lts of early foreign language learning.
H e sen t them to nursery schools w here only a fo reig n language was spoken.

10

PenfieicTs re su lts, published in 1953, showed th a t his ch ild ren learn ed English,
F re n c h , an d G erm an w ith a negligible am ount of in te rfe re n c e (Kelly, p. 31S>.
PenfieicTs a r tic le m e t w ith p ro te s t from M ichael W est, Belgian ed u cato r
F ra n z C lo sset, and Swiss psychologist P ia g e t. They m ain tain ed th a t only a child
of 12 o r 13 could an aly ze, sy n th esiz e, and com pare, and th a t those th re e skills
w ere crucial to foreign language learning.

P ia g e t f e lt t h a t early bilingualism

was harm ful, th a t two m ethods of co n cep tu alizin g w ere confusing. E xperim ents
in th e 1920s and 1930s using bilingual children co nfirm ed th is hypothesis when
considering developm ent of in tellig en ce.
contro lled fo r sociological fa c to rs .

W. E. L am b ert, though, in th e 1950s

H e o b tain ed op p o site re s u lts from P ia g e t

which c a st doubt on the v alid ity of those e arlier studies (K elly, p . 319).
FLES is n o t a new idea in th e U nited S ta te s. In th e 17th and 18th c e n tu rie s,
L atin and G reek w ere a p a rt of a youngster's ed u catio n al program .

Thomas

Je ffe rso n was an a d v o ca te of in stru ctio n in m odern foreign languages, and
Benjam in F ranklin believed

th a t studying th e an cien t languages should be

preceded by a study of m odern languages. B ecause of th e larg e c o n ce n tra tio n of
G erm an im m ig ran ts, G erm an began to be o ffered in som e schools in the 19th
c en tu ry , and those program s ev en tu ally becam e th e m ost num erous.

By th e

ou tbreak of World War I, n atio n al sen tim en t tow ard foreign languages was very
neg ativ e, especially tow ard G erm an.

A fte r World War II, though, th e re was a

resurgence of foreign language study, m any say in p a rt due to the R ussian's
orbiting of Sputnik.

T he N ational D efense E ducation A c t of 1958 provided

funding fo r the train in g of foreign language te a c h e rs , and a ll language program s,
including FLES, grew (M cLaughlin, p. 13<0.
The firs t m ajor FLES program in th e U nited S ta te s is c re d ite d to the
C leveland Public Schools.

In 1922, a French program was begun th e re through

th e cooperation of a group o f school o fficials and m em bers of the Women's C ity

11

Club of C leveland.
years!

F rench was tau g h t in grades one through six fo r over 50

T he program w as designed fo r th e g ifted stu d en ts o f th e d is tric t

(A nderson, 1953, p . 16). S tudents w ere se le c te d fo r th e program by I.Q . scores;
th o se with an 1.0. of 115 or b e tte r could p a rtic ip a te in an e n rich m en t program ,
and th o se w ith an I.Q . of 125 o r higher receiv ed "m ajo r work" in a m odern foreign
language (p. 32). The program w as said to provide a co n tin u atio n o f F ren ch study
for those stu d en ts in the junior high and high schools as well fp. 16).
In 1943, a Spanish FLES program was begun in Los A ngeles.

AH children

from k in d erg arten through the sixth g rad e w ere to receiv e foreign language
in stru c tio n on a city-w ide basis.

I t was decided th a t th e classroom te a c h e rs

would be the FLES in stru c to rs. Since m any of them did not know Spanish, th e
plan was th a t they should learn along with th e children (A ndersson, 1969, pp.
88-89). The goals of the program w ere term ed "m odest": the children w ere to
be a b le to carry on sim ple co n v ersatio n s and acquire an ap p reciatio n fo r and
understanding of Spanish-speaking people (D reier).
A nother program th a t was considered to be ex cep tio n al was begun in 1949
in S om erville, New Je rse y .

Beginning in g rad e th re e , F rench was o ffered one

y e ar and Spanish th e next. A rtic u la tio n was provided in th e high school so th a t a
student could have a 10 y ear sequence of foreign language (A ndersson, 1969, pp.
89-92).
A part from the C leveland, Ohio, p ro je c t begun in 1922, Brooklyn and N iagra
Falls, New York, both began program in 1930.

O th e r m ajo r pioneer FLES

program s in the U nited S ta te s w ere lo cated in San A ntonio, T exas, begun in 1940;
Los A ngeles, C alifo rn ia, s ta r te d in 1942; San D iego, C alifo rn ia , in 1945; and in
1949, one in El Paso, T exas, and another in Som erville, New J e rs e y .

Some feel

th a t th e strongest im petus fo r FLES cam e in 1952 when Dr. E a rl J . M cG rath,
then U. S. C om m issioner of E d u catio n , d eliv ered a speech in support of foreign

12

languages and FLES at a m eetin g of th e C en tral S ta te s Modern Language
T each ers’ A ssociation.

The m eetin g was then follow ed up by a national

conference in W ashington, D .C ., in 1953 which d e a lt with the role of foreign
language in th e nation's schools 'Levenson and K endrick).
Momentum took hold, and the m ovem ent grew by leaps and bounds.

A

m ultitu d e of program s m a te ria liz e d . Several c itie s w ith highly publicized FLES
program s in the ’50s and ’60s w ere Y ork, Pennsylvania; H ackensack, New Jerse y ;
New York C ity ; B ellevue, W ashington; and Beverly H ills, C alifo rn ia (A ndersson,
1969, pp. 105-114).
GROWTH OF FLES
The FLES m ovem ent was very successful during th e 1950s and 1960s if
judged by th e large num ber of program s which cam e in to being. W hat w ere the
ratio n ales, goals, and o b jectiv es of th e se program s? The following sectio n will
take a look a t th e ir s tru c tu re .
A num ber of professionals in th e '50s and '60s expressed rationales fo r
FLES, and, w ith a few m odificatio n s, all w ere sim ilar.

M ildred Ponoghue 0967)

expressed her ra tio n a le for FLES by th e use of four sorts of basic reasons:

(a!

educational, ftO sociological, 'c), neurological, and (d) psychological 'pp. 60-67L
Each of the above four reasons will be exam ined individually.

F irst,

Donoghue supported FLES fo r ed u catio n al reasons by citing a study published in
1963. The re p o rt s ta te d th a t FLES does not a f f e c t ad v ersely stu d en t progress in
the basic skills (Geigle, pp. 418-419). A lso c ite d as proof of its beneficial n atu re
was a study done in C ham paign, Illinois, w ith fo u rth g ra d e rs.
children

who

had

20

m inutes

of foreign

language

daily

Those school
showed

higher

achievem ent in reading, vocabulary, and reading com prehension on th e Iowa
E very-Pupil T e s t of Basic Skills th an th e control group who had no foreign

13

language (Johnson, e t al., pp. 8-11). It was also believed th a t FLES was beneficial
sociologically since i t would help build em pathy fo r eth n ic groups and th e
children would le arn an appreciatio n fo r o th er c u ltu re s (Donoghue, 1967, p . 62).
PenfieicTs study on th e p lasticity of a youngster’s brain was f e lt to be
overw helm ing neurological evidence th a t the period of elem en ta ry schooling was
th e ideal tim e to begin a foreign language.

The fo u rth m ajor ra tio n a le , th a t

FLES was a sound idea fo r psychological reasons, was based on the research of
E arl J . M cG rath.

His in v estig atio n s showed th a t FLES had no n eg ativ e

psychological e ffe c ts on stu d en ts (Modern Language A ssociation of A m erica,
195ft, p . 16). A dditional reasons as to why FLES was psychologically sound w ere
the follow ing.
1.

The curve of learning by im itatio n is highest in the firs t decade
of life.

2.

C hildren a re curious about people in o th er lands due to the
im pact of televisio n , m otion p ic tu re s, new spapers and radio, and
through th e m a te ria l studied in o th e r subject a re a s.

3.

C hildren m em orize easily.

ft.

Success in the new a c tiv ity o f learning a second language o fte n
p e rm e a te s o th e r learning a c tiv itie s and gives th e child renew ed
in te re st in school.

5.

R esults of a seven-year survey show th a t students with speech
d e fe c ts in English do n o t display th e sam e te n d en c ie s in F rench
or Spanish (G eissinger, p. 29).

6.

There is increasing evidence th a t learning a foreign language has
a positive tra n sfe r e ffe c t upon th e m o th er tongue and enables
the child to understand h is/h er m other tongue b e tte r
(In tern atio n al A dvisory C o m m itte e on School C urriculum , p. 9).

Program

planners

listed

elem en ts

they

elem entary school foreign language ex p erien ces.

regarded

as

necessary

fo r

In 196ft, G erm an te a c h e r

George S ch erer f e lt th a t to produce the m ost sa tisfa c to ry re su lts, th e following
w ere sine qua non fo r FLES program s:

J.

com m unity support,

2.

c o m p eten t te a c h e rs,

3.

linguistically o rie n te d m a te ria ls and m ethods,

4.

a rtic u la tio n ,

5.

supervision,

6.

ev alu atio n , and

7.

education of p aren ts and public (pp. 506-515).

R esearch showed th a t p aren ts were gen erally in fav o r of foreign language
in the e lem en ta ry schools (Modern Foreign Language T eaching in the E lem en tary
G rades:

A F easib ility Study, pp. 11-12).

P a re n ts did n o t w an t th e ir children's

other subjects to su ffe r, y e t th ey seem ed to be concerned about the need in the
fu tu re for know ledge of m ore than one language. They w ere m o st in favor of a
conversational approach. Also, expense was n o t an issue 20 y ears ago (p. 38).
K enneth M ildenberger rep o rted in 1956 t h a t a t le a s t 271,617 elem en tary
public school students in k in d erg arten through grade six w ere studying a foreign
language. Spanish had th e la rg e st num ber of stu d en ts, w ith French and G erm an
placing second and th ird .

C ath o lic schools rep o rted 156,000 e le m e n ta ry school

children studying a foreign language w ith F ren ch leading th e lis t, follow ed by
Polish,

Italian,

L ithuanian,

U kranian,

Spanish, and

L a tin .

M ildenberger

recognized th a t his figures w ere n o t absolutely a c c u ra te since his study w as not
exhaustive and not all questionnaires were re tu rn e d .

By 1960, how ever, all 50

sta te s had FLES, and 1,227,000 pupils w ere enrolled in an e lem en tary school
foreign language program in 80 00 e le m e n ta ry schools (A ndersson, 1969, p. 101).
G overnm ent support was provided to train language in s tru c to rs through th e
N ational D efense E ducation A c t of 1958 (M cLaughlin, 1978, p. 134).
A t th e beginning of th e e arly '50s as th e m ovem ent was gaining m om entum ,
educators raised questions typified by th o se of T heodore A ndersson of Yale

15

U niversity.

In his book T eaching of Foreign Languages, he posed questions such

as, w hat languages should be ta u g h t? who should te ac h them ? w hat q u alificatio n s
should the teach ers have? a t what age should foreign language in stru ctio n begin?
w h at students should study a second language? how should th e program s be
co n stru cted ?

The issues of fittin g a foreign language into the curriculum and th e

im p o rtan ce of continuity w ere also raised .
Carol F isher of D earborn P u b lic Schools suggested th a t program goals
needed to be liste d .

Using such a lis t, ed u ca to rs could th en n o te som e

ap p ro p ria te way(s) to m easure w h eth er those goals had been m e t, a th e o re tic a lly
sound approach to program ev alu atio n . L isted below a re som e of th e o b je ctiv es
suggested in 1968 fo r a f ir s t year foreign language study program

in the

e lem en tary school.
I.

ABILITIES AND SKILLS
A.

A bility to use audio-lingual skills
1.

2.

B.

To liste n with purpose, th e stu d en t can:
a.

follow d irectio n s given o rally , and

b.

com prehend oral questions.

To respond orally in a v a rie ty of situ atio n s, th e stu d en t
can:
a.

answ er questions in a group o r individually,

b.

p a rtic ip a te in dialogues, and

c.

re c ite a poem o r som e v e rse.

A bility to use the foreign language
1.

To d e m o n strate a p a rtia l control of the basic sound
system , th e stu d e n t can:
a.

d iffe re n tia te betw een and reproduce vowel
sounds,

16

2.

3.
II.

b.

reproduce nasal sounds, and

c.

id e n tify consonant sounds.

To speak a t
stu d en t can:

a norm al tem po

in co n v ersatio n , th e

a.

discuss topics such as everyday a c tiv itie s,
fa m ily , hom e, and school;

b.

use vocabulary and expressions such as
num bers from 1 to 50, tim e by ev en hours and
h alf hours, com m on expressions of co u rtesy ,
sim ple expressions
of
w e ath e r,
color,
cloth in g , food, an im als, and o th er vocabulary
re la te d to dialogues; and

c.

em ploy g ram m atical stru c tu re s of the
follow ing in oral situations: d e c la ra tiv e and
in te rro g a tiv e sen ten ces, a ffirm a tiv e and
n egativ e s e n te n c e s, various pers'ons of som e
p resen t ten se, reg u lar verbs and common
irre g u la r verbs, num ber and gen d er, and
possession.

To read and w rite in lim ited q u an tities do no t apply a t
th is lev el.

UNPERSTANDINGS
A.

The essen tial sam eness of man
1.

2.

To show his u n derstanding of th e n a tu re
common basic needs, th e stu d en t can :

of m an's

a.

id e n tify ty p ical m eals and discuss shopping
and eatin g custom s, and

b.

converse about fam ily m em bers and p e ts and
describ e a ty p ical day fo r children in th e
foreign co u n try .

To show his understanding
in stitu tio n s, th e student can:

of th e n a tu re

of social

a.

d escrib e a regular school day, th e subjects
studied, and school custom s and dress; and

b.

recognize common holidays in th e foreign
country and our country and te ll how th ey a re
c e le b ra te d .

17

B.

The diverse influences th a t co u n tries and c u ltu re s have upon th e
world
1.

2.

To show his understanding of th e a r tis tic contributions
of c o u n tries w here th e language is spoken, th e stu d en t
can:
a.

sing som e folk songs in the foreign language,
and

b.

recog n ize sto rie s and fables th a t children in
th e o th e r co u n try would know.

To show his understanding of the n a tu re of the foreign
co u n try 's econom ic in flu en ce, th e stu d en t can id en tify
several m ajo r in d u stries of th e co u n try (F isher, pp. 3439).

The preceding o b je ctiv es w ere typical desired outcom es of schools across
th e country in th e 1960s.

A lthough th e goals a p p ea r to be very sp ecific ab o u t

w hat the child will be able to do, som e of the s ta te m e n ts , esp ecially th o se under
th e heading of "U nderstandings,'' w ere am biguous.

Would th e child be ab le to

"id entify, converse, d escrib e, o r tell" in th e ta rg e t language or in English?
A m biguity was not th e only problem with som e of th e above s ta te m e n ts of
program goals. A m ajor goal of FLES was th a t ch ild ren would be able to "speak
a t a norm al tem po in conversatio n and discuss topics such as everyday a c tiv itie s,
fam ily, hom e, and school" (Fisher, p. 361.

E ducators, a d m in istra to rs, p a re n ts,

and even th e students looked fo rw ard to an A m erica of bilingual children who
would be able to speak a second language as flu en tly as English.

It just never

happened.
Evaluation was discussed in the lite ra tu re in term s of stu d en t a ch iev em en t.
One source liste d four m ain ways to te s t w hether o b je ctiv es such as th o se ju st
m entioned had been m et:

w ritte n te s ts c re a te d by classroom te a c h e rs, oral

te s ts , dialogue p erform ance or grades on classroom p erfo rm an ce, and oral or
w ritte n rep o rts (Fisher, p. 37).

S tudent, fa c u lty , and p a re n t satisfactio n with

program achievem ent w ere n o t m easu red .

18

The objectiv es of FLES program s in th e '50s and ’60s can be sum m arized as
follows: to te a c h first hearing and speaking, th en reading and w riting. C u ltu ral
understanding was to be an outcom e as w ell (Andersson, 1969, p. 146).
This prom otion of an understanding of and positive a ttitu d e tow ard o th e r
c u ltu re s

was

a

h u m anitarian

goal

of

th e

m ovem ent

(Modern

Language

A ssociation o f A m erica, 1956, p. 6). It was believed th a t th is o b jectiv e would n o t
be d iffic u lt to achieve, th a t m erely o fferin g a foreign language would have th is
resu lt. R eality did not m irror belief. N ot until th e FLES m ovem ent began losing
ground did its supporters realize th a t reliab le and valid evaluation tools w ere
required and th a t m ore a tte n tio n should have been paid to stu d en ts' goals. Yes, a
call for evaluation was m ade, bu t i t seem s th a t the em phasis of educators was on
prediction of a ch iev em en t, no t on ev alu atin g th e "goodness" or "badness" of th e
program s them selves (A rendt, pp. 15-22).
THE DECLINE OF FLES
The ratio n ale and goals fo r FLES program s in th e '50s and '60s were based
upon

th e

then

cu rren t

b eliefs

and

desires

of

the

ed u cato rs,

linguists,

psychologists, and p arents. Noam Chomsky and his follow ers, fo r ex am p le, w ere
convinced th a t children could learn foreign languages easily , th a t the younger
th e b e tte r to in tro d u ce children to second languages. E d u cato rs w anted stu d en ts
to learn an appreciation of foreign c u ltu re s.

P a re n ts eag erly ag reed th a t th e ir

children needed to be equipped w ith a foreign language in o u r rapidly shrinking
world (M cLaughlin, 1978, pp. 135-136).
Today i t is known th a t some of the e a rlie r th eo ries and logic on language
learning w ere fa u lty .

FLES peaked in th e early '60s and th en began to lose

ground fo r the following reasons.

19

1.

There was a lack of qualified te a c h e rs .

2.

Some teach ers w ere assigned to te ac h languages in which they
had no background.

3.

E xpectations fo r stu d en t progress w ere u n re a listic.

4.

The audio-lingual m ethod was not th e p an acea i t was proclaim ed
to be. S tudents w hose learning sty le was visually d om inated
w ere a t a disadvantage.

5.

C hildren of all ages were taught in th e sam e m anner, and no
consideration was given to th e ir co gnitive lev el.

6.

Evaluation was overlooked. (McLaughlin, 1978, p p . 137-138^

FLES program s were c ritic iz e d fo r a v ariety of reasons.

As in tim a te d

above, FLES teach ers were poorly tra in e d , if a t all, in the foreign language.
O th er critic ism s focused upon th e f a c t th a t som e program s were conducted o v er
the loud speaker system during lunch, and others consisted sim ply o f songs and
gam es to am use th e children (Sim ches and Bruno, p . 1).
A m ajor p a rt of the problem w ith th e FLES program s of the '50s and '60s
had to do with th e dialogues th a t th e audio-lingual m ethod m an d ated be
m em orized.

Many if not m ost of the stu d en ts m em orized th e dialogues w ithout

knowing w hat they were saying. It could be com pared to how an ad u lt having to
m em orize nonsense syllables would fe e l. Most stu d en ts could see no point in it.
Also, even if th e children knew w h at th e dialogues m e an t, th e re is a good chance
th a t they re a lize d the a rtific ia l and sim p listic n atu re of many of them (Spaar).
An exam ple of a F rench dialogue th a t was used a t th e tim e has been tra n s la te d
below .
Professor:
Thomas:
Professor:
Helen:
P rofessor:
Jean:

Medor (a dog) has two eyes.
H ere th ey
T hom as, does your dog have two eyes?
Y es, sir, m y dog has tw o eyes.
H elen, does your c a t have tw o eyes?
Yes, s ir, m y c a t has two ey es.
Jea n , do you have two eyes?
Yes, sir, I have tw o . (Anderson, 1953, p. 105).

are.

20

The above ex ce rp t is a portion of Lesson F ifte e n of 30 suggested lessons.
A lthough th e a u th o r m ade it plain th a t th e se lessons w ere simply suggestions, no
indication was given as to w hat age level would be ap p ro p riate t o use them .
N ot until th e mid '70s did e d u cato rs a t th e elem en ta ry schools, a s well as
a t the secondary and college lev els, re a lize a n d /o r ad m it th a t m em orizing
dialogues was an im p e rfe c t way to learn a fo reign language.

T he th o u g h t th a t

students would be able to e x tra c t dialogue lines and use them in a personally
m eaningful conversation w as a to ta lly in c o rre c t assum ption.

N o t even th e v a st

m ajority o f older children o r a d u lts with m ore developed cognitive skills are able
to m ake th a t quantum leap fSpaar).
In the spring of 1961, th e follow ing conclusions w ere m ade a fte r v isitatio n s
to 62 rep o rted ly good FLES program s.
1.

A m ajority of th e FLES program s th a t we observed do not fu lfill
th e prim ary aim o f such a pro g ram —teach in g th e four language
skills—even when this is clearly s ta te d as th e ir objective . . . .
S om etim es th e te a c h e r is w eak; ju st as o fte n th e w eakness lies
beyond th e te a c h e r's co n tro l, in the m a te ria ls or the scheduling.

2.

Many program s em phasized such aim s as "w orld understanding"
or "broadening horizons?' to th e e x te n t th a t i t is a c le a r
misnom er to c all them language program s. We saw no evidence
of e ffe c tiv e ev alu atio n of th e te ach in g d ire c te d to w ard th e se
ob jectiv es.

3.

There is such a d iv ersity of linguistic co n ten t th a t a general
evaluation of results using a single te s t o r se rie s of te s ts a p p ea rs
to be im p ra c tic a b le .

4.

From the w idespread em phasis upon learning lists of words, we
conclude th a t a m ajo rity of th e FLES te a c h e rs think of language
as words to be learned in isolation and then stru n g into
"conversation." They show ed no aw aren ess of th e in te ra c tin g
system s of s tru c tu re o r p a tte rn th a t a re basic to each language.

5.

Many program s, s ta r te d w ithout planning and provision fo r
m a te ria ls, in stru c tio n , and e v en tu al in te g ra tio n with junior
senior high school courses, a re considered "ex p erim en tal,"
th e re is no c le a r s ta te m e n t of th e conditions and te rm s of
experim ent and no provision fo r an evaluation of its resu lts.

the
and
but
th e

21

6.

The m ost obvious w eakness is lack o f te a c h e rs w ith su fficien t
skill in th e language and training in m ethods.
(This is no
re fle c tio n on th e sin cerity , en th u siasm , o r good will of the
in stru c to rs. How m any of us, with no knowledge of m usic and
unable to play th e piano, could successfully te a c h a room ful of
little children to play th a t in s tru m e n t? '

7.

In m any schools—c e rta in ly in the m a jo rity o f th o se we v isited —
FLES is conceived of as m erely a preview or prelude to "real"
language learning (which w ill begin in the high school) ra th e r
than as a serious, sy ste m a tic a tte m p t to develop a ttitu d e s and
skills.

8.

Few program s a re planned as an unbroken, cu m u lativ e sequence
from th e prim ary through th e junior high school, p a rtly because
of th e lack of ap p ro p ria te teach in g m a te ria ls fo r the junior high
school, b u t m ore because o f th e inadequacy o f th e FLES work
its e lf.

9.

The evidence—s c a tte re d in bits and pieces throughout the
c o u n try —m akes it p e rfe c tly c le a r th a t with an e n th u sia stic
te a c h e r who has an ad eq u ate com m and of th e foreign language,
m a te ria ls th a t r e fle c t th e n a tu re of language and how i t is
learn ed , and e x p e rt supervision, A m erican youngsters can learn
and a re indeed learning foreign languages very well in o ur
e lem en ta ry schools (Alkonis and Brophy, pp. 213-217).

S tu d e n t Opinion
The FLES undertak in g was n o t th e first in the h istory of education in which
th e needs of th e stu d en t w ere ignored, nor will it probably be th e la st.

I t w as

also not the firs t or la st v en tu re in which pedagogical m ethods would be
a c c e p te d w ithout any em pirical d ata to support th e ir e ffe ctiv en e ss.
Some em pirical d ata were known, though.

For exam ple, Roger A. P illet

from th e U niversity of C hicago pointed o u t th a t c re a tiv e children can and will
to le ra te only lim ited am ounts of drill and re p e titio n ; som e stu d en ts a re m ore
problem orien ted than o th ers, and some pupils a re m o re visually th an audi tori ally
o rien ted (Pillet). For FLES to have been su ccessfu l, th e ex p erien ce needed to be
a m eaningful one. S tudents' feelings and sty les of learning had to be tak en in to
account (R a tte , 1968, p. U7).

22

Y et stu d en ts were not consulted regarding th e ir e x p ectatio n s of foreign
language learning.

If they w ere given o p p o rtu n ities fo r in p u t, th e ir req u ests

w ere unheard or th e ir needs sim ply w ent unm et.

S tudents were ex cited and

m o tiv a te d to learn an o th er language, and to th em learning an o th er a n o th e r
language m eant learning to express orally things th ey w anted to say. The failu re
to achieve th e children’s goals is fe lt by som e to be due to a lack of planning
(Spaar, p. 62).
A sum m ary of stu d en t opinion was th e follow ing.
Many stu d en ts ex p ressed a need fo r tex tb o o k s, workbooks,
hom ew ork, individual w ork, v a rie ty ; in sh o rt, ev ery th in g th ey and
th e ir te a c h e rs e x p e c te d from any course. N o tex tb o o k , no workbook,
no hom ew ork, like no g rad es, m ake the study of a foreign language
"d iffe re n t" from all o th e r su b jects and, in th e estim atio n of som e
stu d en ts, less w orthy o f re sp e c t. fSpaar, p. 63).
In a 1968 a rtic le , V irginia Spaar from C olum bia U niversity showed an
in te re s t in the re tro sp e c tiv e p ercep tio n s and a ttitu d e s of stu d en ts who had
studied a foreign language in th e e lem en tary school.

The responses to a

questionnaire in S paar's work re p re se n te d 38 d iffe re n t schools in 17 com m unities
of eig h t s ta te s . The findings w ere re p o rte d , in p a rt, as follow s.
As m ight be e x p ec te d , o n e-h alf of th e stu d en ts who responded to
the questionnaire in d ic a ted th a t th e y liked th e foreign language
period in e lem en ta ry school "just about as well as m ost other
su bjects." A pproxim ately o n e-th ird w ere "very en th u siastic" and onesixth found i t "boring o r otherw ise d ista ste fu l." One m ight wonder
a b o u t th e seem ingly high p e rc e n ta g e of stu d en ts who responded th a t
they w ere very e n th u sia stic about th e ir foreign language stu d y in
elem en tary school, especially w hen, in m ost c ase s, i t was com pulsory.
In a group o f unselected stu d e n ts, a m ajo rity o f stu d en ts responding
th a t th ey like th e foreign language ab o u t as well as m ost o th e r
subjects would seem to be w hat we should e x p e c t. Two fa c to rs m ust
be considered in looking a t th e s e responses. F ir s t, among th o se who
were enrolled in program s fo r g ifted stu d en ts, th re e -q u a rte rs of the
students w ere en th u siastic. H ow ever, i t is q u ite possible th a t th e
student who was e n th u siastic about or satisfied w ith his FLES
e x p erien c e w as m ore likely to ta k e th e trouble to fill o u t th e
questionnaire and retu rn it , w hile those fo r whom i t had been an
unpleasant ex p erien ce would choose no t to be rem inded of it. This
c e rta in ly m ay be tru e in m any cases, b u t even those who responded

23

w ith enthusiasm w ere fran k in th e ir critic ism s of the program s in
which they w ere enrolled , (p. 57)
S tudents whose responses were e n th u sia stic regarding FLES m ade som e of
th e follow ing com m ents.
The te a c h e r was a lo t of fun.
The children who w ere good in th e language liked it, and th o se who
were poor in th e language h a te d it.
In the gram m ar school, alm o st all the stu d en ts w ere e n th u siastic.
This died o u t in junior high when we "began receiving grades.
I liked i t very m uch. This was due to th e v ariatio n in everyday
English assignm ents and th e te a c h e r’s personality. Those who had
above average ap titu d e enjoyed i t , b u t those who did not ad ap t to it
lo st in te re s t, (p. 58)
The

students

who

ra te d

th e ir

elem en ta ry

school

foreign

language

experience as one th ey liked "ab o u t as well as o th e r su b jec t^ ' m ade th e following
com m ents.
The m ajo rity of the class was bored b ecau se they didn't understand
th e m a te ria l.
Basic gram m ar should have been taught b efo re ju st m em orizing fa c ts
so as to understand b e tte r.
We spent very little tim e studying th e language and very little
in te re s t was aroused in th e language.
Most of the other stu d e n ts looked a t it as a period w here th e y didn't
have to do anything but fool around.
The te a c h e r was uninspiring and boring w ith poor pronunciation. I
couldn’t m im ic well and couldn't see a word of w ritten fren ch until
the fo u rth y e ar.
It was not taught for as much tim e as we would have liked. There
was in su ffic ie n t tim e to learn th e language. C lasses w ere m ixed.
The f a s t kids w ere held back by th e slow ones. The slow ones were
pushed.
T here was no sincere a tte m p t to m ake th e class truly enjoyable and
in te re stin g or to provide any in itia tiv e to m ove ahead. From th ird
grade to sixth, th e class was kept a t p ra c tic a lly th e sam e level of
m a te ria l—w asted years, (pp. 58-59)

2k

Som e te llin g com m ents cam e from th e stu d en ts who rep o rted th a t th e ir
ex p erien ce had been boring or o therw ise d ista ste fu l.
We ju s t said hello and goodbye to everyone—th a t's all we had tim e
fo r.
The knowledge given to us about th e language was so slim . We w ere
only able to point to a few o b jects and say th e ir nam es. We never
learned enough to be able to do anything w ith it.
The te a c h e r ta u g h t us very little th a t would be of la te r use.
Progress was slow. I t w asn't tak en to o seriously by anyone; th ere was
no pressure for grades. We didn't do anything b u t see film s and h e ar
ta p es. Most of the o th ers were bored, to o , b u t som e liked it. <p. 59)
When evaluating th e n eg ativ e com m en ts, th e fa u lt seem ed to be a disliking
of the FLES program , and no t a dislike of foreign languages. To su m m arize, th e
fa u lts of FLES program s th a t Spaar's study found, liste d in o rd er of freq u ency of
response are:
1.

insufficiency o f th e am ount of foreign language ta u g h t,

2.

poor teaching tech n iq u es,

3.

in su fficien t tim e devoted to foreign language study,

k.

o b jectionable te a c h e r p ersonality,

5.

lack of standards of discipline,

6.

lack of standards of p erfo rm an ce, and

7.

no use or unwise use m ade of audio-visual aids. (p. 59)

P a re n t Opinion
Not only th e students w ere disappointed with FLES re su lts.

P aren ts

thought th a t th e ir children would becom e functionally flu e n t in th e language.
P aren ts would ask th e ir child ren to "say som ething in th e foreign language." The
child would r a ttle off som e u tte ra n c e s and th e p a re n t would ask, "W hat does th a t
m ean?"

If the child were unable to answ er (which was o fte n th e case), th e

25

p aren ts would conclude th a t the child did not know w hat s/h e was saying
fSpaar).
E ducators would c o n tra d ic t, saying th a t of course the child was incapable
of tran slatio n ; th e second language was an in d ep en d en t m ean s of com m unication
which had nothing to do w ith English! (Scherer). P a re n ts, as well as te a c h e rs and
stu d en ts of th e tim e , w ere unaw are of th e f a c t th a t one y ear o f FLES did n o t
e q u ate one year of foreign language study in th e high school.

The 15 to 20

m inutes daily w as only ab o u t o n e -th ird of th e tim e th a t junior high and high
school stu d en ts were exposed to an o th er language.

Also, m ore re c e n t studies

in d ic a te th a t older children learn m ore quickly (Scherer).
The discontent am ong stu d en ts, p a re n ts, te a c h e rs , and ad m in istrato rs was
ultim ately w hat brought to an end th e e a rlie r FLES program s.

No m a tte r how

w orthw hile a p ro je c t is in th eo ry , i t m ust have th e support of its p a rticip an ts in
o rd er to succeed.
Homework and G rades
Many e d u cato rs once f e lt th a t i t was v irtu ally ou t of th e question to assign
hom ew ork in FLES during th e prereading y ears (S cherer).

Y et, as stu d en t

rem arks revealed, assigned tasks would have m ade an early foreign language
experience m ore credible in th e minds of m any students. H om ew ork, as we know
now, is considered n ecessary fo r tw o reasons.

One, i t reinforces the foreign

language betw een class sessions, and, tw o, i t gives im p o rtan ce to th e su b jec t
(Rhodes and S hreibstein, p. 26).
D r. B arry M cLaughlin w ro te in 1978 th a t a fte r several years in the
program , th e a v erag e child who a sso c ia te d "real" learning w ith books and w ritte n
exercises "ten d ed to b e little th e language class as frivolous and not w orth serious
e ffo rt" fp. 138\

26

In m ost in stances, foreign language experiences w ere not graded, y e t
students

were con stan tly

rem inded by p aren ts an d te a c h e rs alike o f th e

im portance of grades. Is i t any w onder, th e n , th a t stu d en ts regarded th e ir FLES
classes as less im p o rtan t and less w orthy of th e ir serious a tte n tio n (Spaar, p. 62)?
As we also know, grades give the stu d en t an indication and evaluation,
su b jectiv e as i t m ay be, of progress.

As was in d icated by sev eral o f th e

preceding rem arks of form er FLES stu d en ts, th e y in m any cases needed a sign
th a t ad vancem ent was taking place.
Pedagogy and O rganization
of C urriculum
Foreign language educato rs have been introduced
pedagogical m ethods o v er th e p ast 30 years;

to wide v a rie ty of

tran slatio n m ethod, audio-lingual

approach, individualized learn in g , T otal Physical R esponse, th e R assias M ethod,
to nam e som e of th e m ore well-known ones. O nce a m ethod has been ad o p ted , it
is very d iffic u lt fo r the te a c h e r to " le t go" if the need a rise s.

The view th a t

th e re is one single m ethod of foreign language in stru c tio n th a t is m o st e ffe c tiv e
with all children was and in som e cases still is the prem ise under which som e
ed u cato rs o p e ra te .
exam ple of th is.

The ag e of th e audio-lingual m ethod was perhaps th e b e st
The theory was th a t since a child's first language is acq u ired

through rep e titio n of words, a second language could be acquired in th e sam e
way. Several things, how ever, w ere no t acco u n ted fo r in th is m ethod such as the
boredom

of

excessive

ro te

rep e titio n ,

an d

th e

e ffe c t

of th e

co gnitive

developm ent th a t had taken place since the n ativ e language acquisition had
begun (M cLaughlin, 1978, pp. 203-204).
It took m any years to discover th a t exclusive use of the audio-lingual
m e th o d —th a t is, m em o rizatio n of dialogues or lists of w ords—was not th e way to
learn a foreign language, nor did i t lead to stu d en t satisfa c tio n (Spaar, p. 60).

27

Also, m any

stu d en ts

w ere

involved

w ith poorly

developed

television

in stru ctio n . T he c o n te n t of th e b ro a d c asts was very w eak, and th e re w ere o ften
equipm ent m alfunctions.
Through
a d m in istrato r.

all

of

th is, one

can

a p p re c ia te

the

d iffic u lt

task

of

the

H is/H er job w as to reorganize th e school day in ord er to

accom m odate up to 30 e x tra m inutes a day fo r foreign language in stru ctio n
(Spaar, p. 60L
A nother d ifficu lty in program o rg an izatio n was a rtic u la tio n w ith junior
high and high school fo reig n language classes. Many children ex p erien ced a lack
of such coordination or a rtic u la tio n . C oordination problem s also o ccu rred when
te ac h e rs a t th e sam e grade level p re sen te d d iffe re n t co n cep ts a n d /o r th e am ount
of m a te ria ls presen ted d iffered d ra stica lly from one te a c h e r to a n o th er. When
artic u la tio n provisions w ere not m ade in th e junior high a n d /o r high school, th e
FLES student was fo rced to re p e a t much if not ev ery th in g h e/sh e learned in
elem en tary school.

The stu d e n t becam e d isen ch an ted , disillusioned, and bored

fSpaar, p. 6*0.
T he T eachers
In the 1950s, FLES te ac h e rs w ere e ith e r tra v e llin g sp ec ia lists, classroom
te a c h e rs, college students, p aren ts and o th e r c itiz e n s, n ativ e sp eak ers from th e
com m unity, su p erin ten d en ts, or principals.

The d ifficu lty in finding qualified

te a c h e rs was th a t th e s p e c ia list m ay have had n ativ e o r n e ar-n ativ e fluency b u t
had little knowledge of how to te ac h children.

T rained te ac h e rs were prepared

in elem entary school pedagogy, but fo r th e m ost p a rt w ere d e fic ie n t in th e
foreign language (Andersson, 1969, p. 99).
A study done in Pennsylvania and New J e rs e y in the e arly '60s was probably
re p re se n ta tiv e of th e conditions th ro u g h o u t th e U nited S ta te s .

Som e te a c h e rs

28

had

high

school

foreign

ex p erien ces abroad.

languages;

o th ers

had

college

in stru ctio n

a n d /o r

Only 17% of th e 300 elem en ta ry school te a c h e rs surveyed

w ere able both to read and speak a foreign language; only six te a c h e rs in all
d istric ts had college m ajors o r minors in fo reign languages (Modern Foreign
Language T raining in the E lem e n ta ry G rades: A F easib ility Study, pp. 46-49). In
1960, requirem ents fo r foreign language te a c h e rs w ere very lax.

No s ta te

required a te a c h e r to be able to understand and speak th e language h e/sh e taught
fA ndersson, 1969, p. 143).
What was happening th en was th a t te ac h e rs with little o r no background
w ere being called upon to provide in stru ctio n in a fo reign language.
.resen tm en t f e lt by a num ber of te a c h e rs .

T h ere w as

They looked upon teach in g a foreign

language as an o th er assignm ent piled upon th e m , having to be squeezed in to an
alread y crowded day. Many te ac h e rs w ere fru s tra te d , and th e youngsters picked
up on th e negative feelin g s of th e ir te a c h e rs. Som e te a c h e rs and stu d en ts grew
to strongly dislike foreign languages (Andersson, 1969).
In a Pennsylvania/N ew Je rse y study of th e early '60s, 41% of th e te a c h e rs
indicated a fav o rab le a ttitu d e to w ard FLES, 29% a negative a ttitu d e , and 27%
sta te d they w ere n eutral.

These figures w ere in d icativ e of th e le ss-th a n -

overw helm ing support to FLES given by e d u cato rs (Modern Foreign Language
T raining in th e E lem e n ta ry G rades: A F easib ility Study, p. 86).
WHAT WE HAVE LEARNED
During th e '70s, a research e ffo rt began to look fo r s c ie n tific answ ers to
the follow ing questions:

which pupils should be sele c ted fo r language study?

w here will te a c h e rs be found? w hat will have to be rem oved from th e curriculum
in order to accom m odate a foreign language? in which grade should language
in stru ctio n begin? how should th e problem of a rtic u la tio n be addressed9 which

29

language(s) should be taugh t? how can stu d en ts receive c re d it fo r language
study?
Since

how can th e cost be ju stifie d to th e com m unity? (Finocchiaro, p. 5).
the la te '60s, in tro sp ectio n by FLES program

p a rtic ip a n ts and m ore

research have a tte m p te d to answ er the preceding questions. The following pages
discuss the d ata th a t have been g ath ered during th e p a st 20 y e ars.
FLES D oes NOT In te rfe re w ith
A chievem ent in O th e r S ubjects
When p a re n ts and ad m in istrato rs

w ere bem oaning low te s t scores on

standardized m a th , English, and science te s ts , m any FLES program s w ere
dropped. The b elief was th a t the tim e spent on foreign language in stru ctio n was
leading to low er levels of a ch iev em en t in th e basic cu rriculum . Y e t studies have
rep eated ly shown th a t c u ttin g m inutes from o th er subject a re a s in order to o ffer
foreign languages in th e e lem en ta ry school does not lead to less ach iev em en t in
those subjects (Donoghue, 1979, p. 8). It was shown th a t not only did FLES not
have an adverse e ffe c t on general ach iev em en t, b u t also th a t in som e c ase s,
a f te r the addition of a P LES p ro g ram , th e re was a g re a te r ach iev em en t in some
a re a s of language a rts O ohnson, e t al., p. 8).
A study was conducted in 12 schools lo cated in the S t. Paul, M innesota,
a re a . It was discovered th a t shortening th e am ount of class tim e of a rith m e tic ,
language, and social studies classes in order to o ffe r Spanish had no negative
e ffe c t on th e m easured ach iev em en t in th o se th re e su b jects fThe T eaching of
Spanish in the E lem en tary Schools and th e E ffe c ts on A chievem ent in O th er
S e le c te d Subject A reas, p. 29).
A nother popular notion was th a t bilingualism in children has adv erse
cognitive and psychological e ffe c ts .

Studies have been conducted during th e

ensuing years, b u t a t present no claim s of th e n eg ativ e e ffe c ts of bilingualism in
children have been convincing. In 1978, M cLaughlin concluded th e following.

30

In sh o rt, alm ost no general sta te m e n ts a re w arran ted by re sea rc h
on th e e ffe c ts of bilingualism . It has not been d em o n strated th a t
bilingualism has positive or negative consequences fo r in tellig en ce,
linguistic skills, educational a tta in m e n t, em otional a d ju stm en t, or
cognitive functioning. In alm ost ev ery case, th e findings of research
a re e ith e r c o n tra d ic te d by o th e r research o r can be questioned on
m ethodological grounds. The one s ta te m e n t th a t is supported by
research findings is th a t com m and of a second language m akes a
d ifferen c e if a child is te ste d in th a t language—a no t very surprising
finding (p. 206).
Second Language A cquisition
Probably the a re a of m ost in te re s t and intrigue is th a t of second language
acquisition. E xperts in th e realm of language learning and linguistics have been
exploring th is m a tte r over the past d ecad e.

The one f a c t th a t th ey would m ost

likely a g re e on is th a t a lo t m o re work needs to be done in th e field.
Suzanne Izzo did an extensive com pilation of studies regarding foreign
language acquisition. She grouped h er review of th e studies in to ones th a t d e a lt
w ith personal fa c to rs, situ a tio n al fa c to rs , and lin g u istic fa c to rs .

Personal

fa c to rs w ere then broken down into general in te llig e n c e, language a p titu d e ,
a ttitu d e and m o tivation, psychological tra its , a g e, socioeconom ic s ta tu s , and
gender. S itu atio n al fa c to rs considered th e foreign language learning s e ttin g , th e
tim e -o n -task , form al versus inform al acquisition, m ethodology, and te ac h e r
influence.
d ifferen ces

S tudies on linguistic fa c to rs w ere c a te g o riz e d by th o se studying
betw een

the

n ative

and th e foreign ta rg e t

language, and the

c h a ra c te ris tic s of th e second language (Izzo, pp. 1-2).
Studies have shown th a t in tellig en ce is an im p o rtan t fa c to r in language
learning, y e t as H alsall rep o rted in 1969, "one can hardly call th is conclusion
unexpected.

If intelligence is defined as the cap a c ity to le a rn , i t should include

th e c ap acity to learn languages" fp. 19).

Most research ers a g re e , though, th a t

intelligence is not

of prim ary im portance in

language learning.

O th er fa c to rs , such

determ ining success in foreign

as m o tiv atio n , can

o v erru le

th e

31

im portance

of

in tellig en ce.

F o r exam ple,

A ngiolillo's study of

m entally

handicapped girls learning F rench as a second language supports this b elief
(Angiolillo, pp. 266-271). In addition, a p titu d e to w ard foreign language learning
seem s to play a role in th e acquisition process.

A lso, th e re is ev id en ce th a t

learning a second language seem s to aid in subsequent foreign language learning
(Izzo, p. 7). B urstall (1975) and Savignon (1976), fo r exam ple, have found a close
association b etw een students' achievem ent in foreign language and teach ers'
a ttitu d e s tow ard th e foreign language.
Intelligence and language ap titu d e are considered to be relativ ely sta b le
throughout life ,

but

a ttitu d e

and m o tiv atio n

th e re fo re , can be changed Ozzo, p. 16).

a re

learn ed

behaviors

and,

R eportedly, stu d en ts who have had a

positive second language e x p erien ce have a m ore positive a ttitu d e tow ard o th e r
c u ltu re s.

C onversely, stu d en ts

who

have

had

negative

foreign

language

exp erien ces carry those feelings and opinions with th e m , and th ey ten d to possess
negative sen tim en ts tow ard foreign c u ltu re s (Izzo, pp. 16-17).
An im p o rtan t c h a ra c te ris tic of successful foreign language le arn ers is th a t
they be uninhibited (Rubin, 1975).
acquisition is anxiety.

An adverse fa c to r in second language

A significant negative c o rrelatio n has been discovered

b etw een achievem ent in a second language and an x iety ^Gardner, e t al.).
A nother significant c h a ra c te ris tic o f successful foreign language le a rn e rs
is th a t they be risk ta k ers and not be a fra id to make m istakes (Omaggio). Selfm otivation and self-co n fid en ce are im p o rtan t in g red ien ts fo r th e efficacio u s
student (K rashen, 1982a, pp. 213-215).

Successful second language learn ers are

able to to le ra te a c e rta in am o u n t of am biguity and a re willing to m ake inform ed
guesses Ozzo, p. 27). A dditionally, according to R ubin (1975) and O m aggio 0978),
successful foreign language stu d en ts have insight in to th e ir learning styles and
they a re able to v ary th e ir learn in g s tra te g ie s .

32

Socioeconom ic s ta tu s is a fa c to r to be considered in foreign language
learning.

P a re n ts of higher socioeconom ic statu s have m ore positive a ttitu d e s

tow ard foreign language learn in g , and th ey a ssist in m o tiv atin g th e ir children to
study an o th er language. P a re n ts belonging to low er socioeconom ic classes do not
see the need fo r th e ir child ren to pursue foreign language study. They do not
fe e l foreign

language study is useful or

re le v an t

to

fu tu re o ccu p atio n al

opportunities (Hawkins, p. 326).
The te a c h e r's role in the second language acquisition process is highly
consequential.

T each ers m ust be skilled in th e language, u tilize a v a rie ty of

techniques, and understand th e needs and feelings o f stu d en ts flzzo, p. 50).
T im e-o n -task is e x tre m e ly im p o rtan t. It was discovered th a t stu d en ts who
began foreign language study in the e le m e n ta ry school w ere d istin ctly superior a t
graduation from college to stu d en ts who began in high school (C arroll, 1967a,
p. 202).
Who Should P a rtic ip a te
in FLES Program s?
T here have been and still are tw o b asic schools of thought as to which
students should becom e p a rtic ip a n ts in a FLES program .

Som e o rg an izers

believe th a t the program s should be o ffered to the g ifted and ta le n te d stu d en ts,
th a t a v erag e and below a v erag e stu d en ts should spend additional tim e on th e
basics. O thers fe e l th a t all youngsters should have the opportunity to be exposed
to a foreign language.

As th e research has in d ic a te d , all stu d en ts a re a b le to

learn a foreign language. Only level of m astery w ill d iffer.
These broad schools of thought can then be broken down fu rth e r in to a
v a rie ty o f d ifferen t philosophies regarding which children should study foreign
languages. O ne group has contended th a t foreign languages should be av ailab le
to all children (Finocchiaro, p. 6).

A nother group fe e ls th a t FLES is not for

33

everyone; they s e le c t p a rtic ip a n ts by using a stu d en t's I.Q . as the scree n device
(A rendt, p. 16). A sizeable num ber of program s have chosen th e ir p a rtic ip a n ts
based on verbal

ab ility scores; still o th ers use num erical ab ility .

Three

additional m ethods fo r sele c tio n have been (a) grade point a v e ra g e , (b) foreign
language a p titu d e te s ts , and fc) speaking, reading, and w riting su b te sts of the
MLA C o o p erativ e F o reig n L anguage T e sts and an MLA C o o p erativ e T o ta l Score
(A rendt, pp. 17-19).

None of th e m easu rem en t devices w ere proven to be

foolproof in d ic a to rs of foreign language p o te n tia l in a stu d en t.

F o r ev ery

em pirical study th a t suggested th a t one m ethod was a reliable in d ic a to r, an o th er
in v estig atio n would c o n tra d ic t th e findings.
In 1955, all pupils in a given g rad e w ere included in th e FLES program in
76% of th e schools reporting to h av e FLES program s, 15% of th e schools had
program s w here the stu d en ts v o lu n teered , and stu d en ts w ere sele c ted on some
o b jectiv e basis in nine p e rc e n t of th e program s (M ildenberger).
Although intellig en ce and success in a foreign language a re strongly
c o rre la te d , it does n o t m ean th a t stu d en ts o f low er I.Q. c an n o t learn and enjoy
foreign languages ^Modern Foreign L anguage T eaching in th e E lem e n ta ry G rades:
A F easib ility Study, pp. 8-9).

Success in foreign language learning depends on

the le a rn e r's (a) a p titu d e , (b) g en eral in te llig e n c e, (c) p e rsev e ra n ce , Id) tim e-o n ta sk , and (e) quality o f in stru c tio n (C arro ll, 1967b, pp. 71-72).
The Q uestion of Age
O f m ajor co n cern fo r c e n tu rie s has been the issue of th e ideal age to begin
second language study. T h ere have been th re e schools of th ought.

T he first is

the tra d itio n a l view th a t a child should be in tro d u ced to a foreign language as
soon as possible.

The second group finds fa u lt with th e

tra d itio n a lists,

m aintaining th a t second language in stru c tio n should no t begin until la te r on in a

34

child's form al ed ucation.

Y et if we consider th e history of foreign language

education to have begun around 500 B.C., th is m o v em en t a ro se "only" 400 years
ago.

The th ird school of thought has been m ade up of people who are not

co m m itte d to one side or th e o th e r (Kelly, pp. 316-317).
The need ex isted fo r em p irical studies th a t supported th e contentions borne
by su b jectiv e o b servations th a t e ffe c tiv e FLES program s w ere m e rito rio u s.
R esults from studies concerning optim um age to begin a foreign language were
not available until th e e arly 1970s. P rio r to th a t tim e , th e follow ing w ere f e lt to
be physiological and psychological advantages th a t child language learn ers had
o v er adults.
1.

A child's speech organs a re flex ib le and cap ab le of producing new
sounds w ith little e ffo rt.

2.

C hildren have a g re a te r power of p>honetic d iscrim in atio n .

3.

C hildren can learn linguistic p a tte rn s
a sso ciativ e netw orks to aid th e m em ory.

4.

C hildren are in te re ste d in learning about foreign peoples, and
th e ir in te re s ts a re so basically c o n c re te th a t producing su itab le
m a te ria ls poses few problem s.

5.

C hildren a re essen tially anom ic, th a t is, th e y have not y et
established strong links with th e ir own c u ltu re and have not y e t
developed prejudices about others and, th e re fo re , can readily
id e n tify th em selv es with oth er peoples.

6.

C hildren are capable of learning a new language in its own
c o n te x t w ithout re fe re n c e to th e ir n a tiv e languages.

7.

C hildren learn fo r th e sake of learning, and th e re is no more
pow erful m otiv atio n .

8.

C hildren have a rem ark ab le a b ility to infer m eaning and to
to le ra te vagueness until m eaning is sharpened by subsequent
c o n tests.

9.

C hildren do not have to reason about language.

10.

w ithout

the need of

C hildren do not have stro n g habits of v isu alizatio n . T h erefo re,
th e audio-lingual m ethodology w ith i t s e x ten d e d period of
reading w ork is ideally su ited fo r them .

35

11.

C hildren are uninhibited in p ra c ticin g th e new language.

12.

C hildren are n o t fru s tra te d by a larg e gap betw een w hat they
w ant to say and th e m eans they have to say it.

13.

C hildren can save valuable tim e la te r in life by learning a
language a t a period in th e ir lives w hen th e y have tim e to sp are.
(Scherer)

The feeling was th a t since the n ative language is "se t" by th e age of four,
th e optim al ag e fo r beginning second-language learning is betw een th e ag es of
four through eig h t, w ith th e highest d eg ree of p erform ance occu rrin g a t th e ages
of eig h t, nine, and ten (MLA, 1967, p. 58).
In 1964, e d u c a to r and FLES proponent Mary F inocchiaro w ro te th a t many
schools began a foreign language in th e th ird grade.

It was h er view th a t th e

third grade was an a p p ro p ria te level since E uropean nations began a t th a t age,
and by then all A m erican youngsters have learn ed to read and w rite English fp.
12). The assum ption was th a t Europeans had e ffe c tiv e second language education
cu rricula.
Many of the views of proponents of FLES believed in w ere based on
in tu itio n , feelings, and em otions, no t on em p irical fa c t. A lso, people who used to
m aintain th a t children learn ed another language fa s te r than adults were basing
th e ir assum ptions on th e o bserv atio n s th a t children a re usually ab le to pronounce
a foreign language m ore a u th en tically th an adults can (C arro ll, 1969, p. 62).
The '60s and 7 0 s w ere years when serious problem s regarding firs t and
second

language

acquisition

began.

From

th o se

queries

cam e

th re e

generalizations concerning th e e ffe c t of a g e on ra te and ev en tu al a tta in m e n t in
second language acquisition.
1.

A dults proceed through the early stag es of sy n ta c tic and
m orphologic developm ent fa s te r th a n children fw here tim e and
exposure a re held co n stan t).

36

2.

Older children acquire fa s te r than younger ch ild ren (again, in the
early s ta g e s o f s y n ta c tic and m orphological developm ent w here
tim e and exposure are held co n stan t).

3.

A cquirerers who begin n atu ral exposure to second languages
during childhood generally achieve higher second language
proficiency th an those beginning as adults (K rashen e t a l., p. 161).

Experim ents have uncovered sev eral erroneous id eas of th e p a st. D r. Barry
McLaughlin from the U niversity o f C alifo rn ia rep o rted th a t th e re a re several
m isconceptions regarding second language acquisition.

One such s ta te m e n t is

th a t "th e young child acquires a language m ore quickly and easily th an an ad u lt
because th e child is biologically program m ed to acquire languages, w hereas th e
a d u lt is not." On the c o n tra ry , a child's firs t language acquisition is not a quick
process (M cLaughlin, 1978, pp. 197-199). As sev eral research ers have pointed o u t,
first language acquisition is n eith er fa s t nor easy .

Assuming th a t a child is

exposed to language five hours a day, and th a t s/he is also p racticin g th e
language during th a t tim e , a youngster accu m u lates ap p ro x im ately 9100 hours of
a c tiv e language learning during th e first five y ears of h is/h er life (Burke).

Even

in an im m ersion program where the child would be tau g h t up to th re e hours a day
in th e foreign language, th e to ta l num ber of c o n ta c t hours p er school y ear is only
slightly over 500.
Also, fo r a child to becom e com m unicatively c o m p eten t, s/h e does not
have to learn as m uch as an ad u lt m ust.

In ord er to co m m u n icate, children

utiliz e few er words and g ram m atical stru c tu re s than ad u lts.

F u rth erm o re,

children a re m ore likely to have few er fe a rs and inhibitions tow ard using foreign
languages, th e y may be m ore m o tiv ated to speak th e languages, and th ey a re less
em barrassed than adults.

F e a r, inhibition, m o tiv atio n , and em b arrassm en t a re

social and psychological fa c to rs .

H ence, assum ing th a t a child does acquire a

language m ore quickly and easily th an an a d u lt, one c an n o t ru le o u t th e

37

psychological

and

social

fa c to rs

involved

in

second

language

learning

(M cLaughlin, 1978, pp. 197-199).
A nother m isconception is th a t "th e younger the child, th e m ore skilled he
o r she is in acquiring a second language" (p. 199). R esearch actu ally shows th a t
older children are co n sisten tly fa s te r learn ers of syntax and m orphology when
th e duration of th e exposure to th e second language is sim ilar ^Krashen e t al.,
1982b, p. 162).

In 1975 a study was done involving sev eral thousand children

studying F rench in e lem en tary school. The findings re p o rte d th a t th e re was no
significant

d ifferen ce

betw een a tta in m e n t am ong th o se stu d en ts beginning

F rench a t ages 8 and 11 and th o se sta rtin g F ren ch a t a g e 16 (B urstall, 1975).
K rashen, S carcella, and Long re p o rte d in 1982 th a t the above d ata w ere
c o n sisten t with th e resu lts o f sim ilar studies " th a t older children acq u ire second
languages fa s te r than younger children."

B ecause younger children acquire

an o th er language a t such a slow er p ace, th e e x tra tim e acco u n ted fo r very little .
A nother possible explanation, though, is th a t those who had FLES in the
e lem en tary school, w ere placed in junior high and high school classes w ith non
FLES stu d en ts, and th e FLES students had to w ait until th e others caught up to
th e ir level (p. 163).
M cLaughlin's (1978) thoughts on the issue a re as follow s.
The desire is not to d e n ig ra te th e young child's ach iev em en t or
to dow ngrade the adv an tag es of early introduction to a second
language. O lder children and ad u lts do not have th e am ount of tim e
a t th e ir disposal for learning a second language th a t th e young child
does. T here is no reason no t to u tiliz e th is ad v an tag e and to begin
language in struction early . The p ra c tic e of . . . introducing children
to a second language in k in d erg arten through gam es, songs, rhym es,
and so fo rth , has produced ex tre m ely fa v o rab le resu lts and is in all
likelihood a m ore p leasan t way to acquire a second language fo r th e
child than the re p e titio u s drills th a t o fte n c h a ra c te riz e la te r
classroom in stru c tio n , (p. 200)
A study was conducted in 1964 w here college g ra d u a tes who m ajored in
foreign

languages

w ere

given

an exam ination.

T h ree

thousand

stu d en ts

38

p a rtic ip a te d , and i t was found th a t those stu d en ts who re p o rte d having had a
FLES ex p erien ce did considerably b e tte r th a n those beginning a t any o th e r point
in th e ir educational c a re e rs (C arro ll, 1969, pp. 62-63).
McLaughlin 0977, fo r a review of th e lite ra tu re ) an d S tern and Weinrib
0977, p . 16) o ffe r w hat seem s to be th e m ost reasonable answ er to the question
regarding th e m o st favorable age to in itia te second language study. T h ere is NO
overall optim al age to begin a foreign language.

There a re advantages and

disadvantages fo r each a g e.
An advantage to beginning a second language study w ith children is th a t
they a re less likely to have n eg ativ e options fo rm ed regarding th e ta rg e t c u ltu re .
E arly s ta rte rs are able to acquire a level of m a stery closer to th a t of native
speakers. A lso, they a re less in h ib ited , less a fra id to m ake m istak es th a n ad u lts
(Izzo, p. 37).
In w hat seem s to be a m ajo rity o f nations w ith organized educational
sy stem s, early foreign language study is o ffere d , if not com pulsory. Even as la te
as 30 years ago, second language study was considered prestig o u s.
o th e r countries it has becom e a m a tte r of econom ics.

Today in

In creased foreign tra d e

and in te rn a tio n a l relatio n s have in ten sified the m otivation to know another
language (O 'D oherty, pp. 48-491.
A fairly large portion of th e A m erican population places little im portance
on learning a foreign language (C arroll, 1969, p. 57).

This is probably in la rg e

p a rt due to the fa c t th a t th e re is little need or opportunity fo r A m ericans to use
an o th er language.

Y e t, an early foreign language program th a t in c o rp o ra te s

cu ltu ral inform ation can help to produce a m ore to le ra n t, less prejudiced child.
The older th e child, th e m ore d iffic u lt it becom es to e f f e c t any changes on th e
biases

children

acquire

(Donoghue, 1979, p. 9).

through

th e ir

p a re n ts,

frien d s,

and

o th e r

adults

39

W hat L an g u ag e^ ) Should Be O ffered ?
In answ er to the question "w hat language should be tau g h t?" professionals
suggested th a t th e m ajo r foreign language of th e com m unity was th e b est choice.
A nother fa c to r of im p o rtan ce, though, w as av ailab ility of te ac h e rs (Finocchiaro,
p . 19).
Some FLES advocates
reso u rces and national need.

suggested

th a t

th e

choice be based on local

O th e rs recom m ended th a t n o t only W estern

European languages be taught; R ussian, C hinese, Jap a n e se , and A rab ic were
endorsed as well (A ndersson, 1969, p. 9).
These view s a re ad v o cated to d ay as w ell. When a school or school d istric t
is sele c tin g a foreign language to be o ffe re d , it is suggested th a t th e answ ers to
the follow ing th re e questions should be considered:

(a) w hat is the m ost

com m only spoken language of th e com m unity? (b) w h at is th e social u tility of th e
foreign languagefs) under consideration? and fc) w hat is the av ailab ility of
qualified, c o m p eten t te a c h e rs in th e la n g u a g e ^ ? (Donoghue, 1979, pp. 16-18).
The final decision m ust be a co m m unity-specific one if th e program is to
succeed.
C urrent Pedagogy
What has been learn ed over th e years is th a t th e b e s t, m o st e ffe c tiv e
m ethod of teach in g and learning a second language depends in larg e p a rt on th e
individual sty les of the te a c h e r and stu d en t.

T here are eig h t psychological

foundations dealing with th e a sp e c ts of language acquisition and learning th eo ry
of which ed u cato rs and program developers need to be aw are.

They are

m o tiv atio n , exposure and p ra c tic e , in te rfe re n c e , m eaningfulness, re in fo rce m e n t,
physical a c tiv ity and involvem ent, m ultisensory learn in g , and review .
th e eight foundations will be d e a lt w ith b riefly .

Each of

M otivation to learn a second

language depends g reatly on p a re n tal as well as te ac h e r a ttitu d e s . Exposure and

p ra c tic e re fe r to th e issue of tim e -o n -task .

Also re la te d is w hether th e re is

e ith e r a real or perceived need to use th e language. In te rfe re n c e o ccu rs w hen,
due to the native language, d ifficu lties a rise in learn in g th e second language.
Does w hat is being learning re la te to and have m eaning fo r th e stu d en t? If th e
answ er is "yes," then the a c tiv itie s satisfy th e need fo r m eaningful ness. Positive
rein fo rcem en t is an essen tial p a rt of successful foreign language learning.
Physical a c tiv ity and involvem ent as well as m ultisensory learn in g r e ite r a te what
we know ab o u t learning styles and learn ers' needs.

S ta tic en vironm ents do n o t

prom ote perm anent, positive learning in m ost stu d en ts. F inally, review is of the
essence.

W ithout p ra c tic e , w h a t has been learn ed will not be

re ta in e d

^D ono^iue, 1979, pp. 51-53).
T im e-on-T ask
How many m inutes per w eek should be spent on foreign language learning?
R esearch confirm s th e m ost obvious hy p o th esis—th e m ore exposure to a second
language, th e g re a te r the opportunity fo r language acquisition.
In th e p a st, e x p erts f e lt th a t 15 to 20 m inutes daily in th e th ird , fo u rth , and
fifth grades was adequate; the bare minimum was th re e days a w eek.

In the

sixth grade, th e tim e should be increased to 30 m inutes daily. The sen tim en t was
th a t two to th re e m inutes could be cut from the other seven o r eig h t subjects
w ithout serious consequences. A lso, i t was f e lt th a t
. . . teac h in g could s ta r t as soon as w raps a re rem oved in the
m orning, th e milk b reak could be sh o rte n ed by sev eral m inutes.
S tudents and te ac h e rs usually re p o rt a t 8:40, b u t in stru ctio n does not
com m ence until 9:00. Those tw en ty m inutes could b e tu rn e d to good
advantage. (F inocchiaro, p. 12'
Most FLES lessons w ere 15 to 20 m in u tes long and o ccu rred from tw o to
five tim es a week. A s h o rte r tim e period was f e lt to be th e best because (a' a
child's a tte n tio n span will not go much beyond 20 m in u tes, and fo) o th e r subjects

41

could not a ffo rd to give up much m ore tim e .

F req u en t lessons w ere deem ed

m ore im p o rtan t than long er ones (A ndersson, 1969, p. 141).

N ev erth eless,

according to studies conducted in the 1960s, 15 m inutes a day was f e lt to be the
bare minimum to be sp en t on early foreign language in stru c tio n (Modern Foreign
Language T eaching in the E lem e n ta ry G rades: A F easib ility Study, p. 15).
Today's FLES classes seem to be follow ing tim e -o n -ta sk plans sim ilar to
those of 15 to 20 y ears ago.

F ifte en m inutes a day is the suggested am ount of

tim e to be spent on foreign language in stru c tio n , beginning in k in d erg arten .
Once in the second grade, i t is suggested th a t th e am ount of tim e be in creased to
20 m inutes. A nother suggestion is th a t th e ta r g e t language then be used during
an o th er class period each day, such as physical ed u catio n .

The second class

period should be one th a t th e children enjoy so th a t foreign languages a re
equated with pleasurable a c tiv itie s (Donoghue, 1979, p. 40).

A discussion of

c u rre n t p ra c tic e s in th e s ta te of Michigan will be covered in C h a p te r IV of th is
study.
Program Evaluation
Program evaluation is c ritic a l to the success of a p ro je c t.

Not only is it

im p o rtan t to a sc e rta in w h eth er students a re m eetin g s ta te d goals and o b jectiv es;
it is essential to assess the level of satisfa c tio n am ong stu d en ts, te a c h e rs ,
a d m in istrato rs, and p a re n ts (Rhodes and S chreibstein, p. 14).
The m ain purpose of evaluation should be to discover if the program is
m eetin g its goals (A ndersson, 1969, p . 146). W ithout regular program app raisal,
one cannot be sure w hether s ta te d goals and objectives a re being ach iev ed .
The T each er
As set fo rth e arlier in this c h a p te r, one of th e co n trib u tin g fa c to rs to the
decline in th e num ber o f FLES program s was th e lack of qualified te a c h e rs.

42

What is a qualified te a c h e r?

O f th e num erous c h a ra c te ris tic s th a t make up an

ideal te a c h e r, th e follow ing are f e lt to be th e m o st n ecessary .
1.

The te a c h e r is flu e n t in the ta rg e t language.

2.

S/H e a p p re c ia te s th e n ecessity o f cu ltu ra l com ponents included
in th e study.

3.

S/H e is e n th u siastic .

4.

The te a c h e r is a good public relatio n s person M onoghue, 1979,
p. 19\

W ithout a qualified te a c h e r, th e chances a re th a t a negative a ttitu d e
tow ard foreig n ers and foreign language study will re s u lt (p. 21).

C onsidered by

many to be even m ore im p o rtan t for a teach er than knowledge of a foreign
language and its pedagogy is th e knowledge of child developm ent and b asic
school curriculum M e t, 1985, p . 4 7 2 \
T he A d m in istrato r
How do ad m in istrato rs fe e l about o fferin g and supporting second language
ex p erien c e s in th e elem en ta ry school?
elem en tary

school

principals and

Baranick and M arkham did a study of

th e ir

a ttitu d e s

tow ard foreign

language

in stru ctio n . The d ata suggested th a t when p aren ts, te a c h e rs , stu d en ts, and o th e r
a d m in istrato rs a re positive tow ard second languages, th e principal's a ttitu d e
becom es m ore positive. B aranick and M arkham found t h a t m ore th an half of th e
ad m in istrato rs th a t they studied in the s ta te of Maryland f e lt th a t foreign
language in stru ctio n was im p o rta n t, and th e m ajo rity s ta te d th a t a second
language should be required a t som e level during th e stu d en t's school c a re e r.
N ev erth eless, many of th e principals did not rank fo reig n languages in th e
elem en ta ry school as a high p rio rity fp. 480.

43

T ask F orces and R eports
In 1974, a task fo rce was form ed to study and m ake a rep o rt on minim al
perform ance objectiv es fo r foreign language ed u catio n in th e s ta te of M ichigan.
A guide of recom m ended stan d ard s was developed by 29 p rofessionals from the
S ta te D e p artm en t of E ducation, in stitu tio n s of higher ed u catio n , th e A rchdiocese
of D e tro it Schools, and public schools from acro ss the s ta te .

T est item s and

vocabularies w ere also developed fo r F ren ch , G erm an, L a tin , an d Spanish.

T he

p ro ject was a m ajor undertaking, designed fo r th e junior high/high school
student. In th e intro d u ctio n to th e docum ent, th e re ap p eared an en d o rsem en t fo r
FLES.

"One way of developing such understanding is to expose children to the

language and c u ltu re of o th er peoples early in th e school ex p erien ce" (Minimal
P erform ance O bjectives fo r Foreign Language E ducation).

Although FLES was

acknow ledged in th e docum ent, no provisions w ere m ade fo r th e developm ent of
standards fo r an elem en ta ry school foreign language ex p erien ce.
T he Modern L anguage A ssociation published a docum ent e n title d "Language
Study fo r the 1980s."

T here are num erous recom m endations for secondary

schools and in stitu tio n s of higher education, bu t none fo r elem en ta ry school
instruction (Language Study fo r the 1980s).
In 1983, a rep o rt from the G overnor's Task F o rce on Foreign Language
Studies and In te rn a tio n a l E ducation in Iowa was published. S en tim en ts from th e
H eartland (not dissim ilar to those expressed elsew here in the U nited S ta te s) w ere
as follow s: "No one ev er uses a foreign language." "Learning a fo reig n language
is a w aste of tim e and money" (Iowa G overnor's T ask F o rc e , p. 11). Not all Iowans
nor A m ericans, though, feel th a t way.

In 1976, fo r exam ple, a co n cern ed group

of parents in A m es, Iowa, organized an enrichm ent Spanish program which took
place before th e regular school day. The p aren ts paid $50 fo r 36 hours of class

44

during th e school y ear. C lasses m et tw ice a week fo r 45 m inutes during a period
of 24 w eeks. Within tw o years, 466 children w ere enrolled fRosenbusch, p . 175).
Also in the Iowa T ask F o rce R ep o rt on Foreign Language Studies was th e
recom m endation

th a t a

com prehensive

foreign

language and in te rn a tio n a l

education program "should extend from k in d erg arten through college and beyond,
in a coo rd in ated e ffo rt to reach all Iowans" (p. 19'.
SUMMARY
D ecline o f FLES in th e '50s and '60s was due to a lack of qualified te a c h e rs ,
unsuitable m a te ria ls, and u n re a listic, p o o rly -fo rm u lated goals and o b jectiv es.
Also to blam e w as th e "re tu rn -to -b asic s" cam paign by p aren ts and a d m in istra to rs
as well as lack of artic u la tio n a t th e junior high and high school levels (Rhodes
and Schreibstein, p. 23'.
There s till rem ains a p au city of em pirical knowledge regarding FLES and
second language study and acquisition.

J u s t a few o f th e still unansw ered

questions are th e follow ing.
1.

To w hat e x te n t do children d iffer in th e ir a p titu d e s fo r second
language learning?

2.

To w hat e x te n t and fo r w hat reasons do children d iffer in th e ir
m otiv atio n s to learn a second language7

3.

How do children from th e dom inant c u ltu re develop th e ir
a ttitu d e s tow ard th e language and c u ltu re of eth n ic m inorities?

4.

How can positive a ttitu d e s tow ard oth er languages and cultures
be fo ste re d ? (M cLaughlin, 1978, p. 164'

Two of th e m ajor goals of th e FLES program s of th e '80s--com m unicative
com petency and cultural a p p re c ia tio n —a re th e sam e as th o se sta te d by M cG rath
in his address of 1953 a t the C en tral S ta te s ' C onference.
From th e e lem en tary school through college th e spoke language
should be em phasized. M oreover, unless language study is re la te d to
h istory, sociology, a r t, geography, and th e o th e r a sp e c ts of life which
m ake up th e to ta lity o f a c u ltu re , i t will not achieve th e principal

45

objective I now have in mind, to prep are our people fo r life in a world
civ ilizatio n which can be sav ed by only one m eans, understanding
am ong peoples. (M cG rath, p. 9)
The

considerations

generally c ite d by re sea rc h ers

and sp ecialists as

essential befo re beginning a FLES program a re th e av ailab ility and num ber of
qualified te a c h e rs , th e needs of th e com m unity, and th e assu ran ce of artic u la tio n
a t th e high school level fl-evenson, pp. 18-19).
One FLES ad v o cate of over 30 y ears s ta te s su ccin ctly w hat the concerns of
th e 1980s’ FLES te a c h e r should be:

have reasonable goals, stay c u rre n t w ith th e

lite ra tu re , and m ain tain one's language skills and knowledge of th e cu ltu re
through trav el (L arew , p. 701).
R ea listic goals m ust be set fo r each school d is tric t, and p a re n ts m ust be
m ade aw are of them (Rhodes and Schreibstein, p. 7). What are ap p ro p riate goals
and objectives fo r one school are not necessarily w ell-su ited fo r an o th er.
Evaluation is c ritic a l fo r th e su ccess of FLES program s.

N ot only is i t

fittin g to e v alu ate stu d en t progress in light of program goals and o b jectiv es, but
it is also c ritic a l to m easu re th e level of sa tisfa c tio n of th e ad m in istrato rs and
p aren ts involved (Rhodes and S ch reib stein , p. 14).
The R eg en ts in th e s ta te o f New York have d eclared th a t, beginning w ith
the class of 1992, e a c h stu d e n t fexcept fo r special education stu d en ts) w ill have
a t le a s t one unit of foreign language during th e ir K-9 years; and startin g w ith th e
class of 1994, tw o units will be required fLarew , p. 699).

O ther sta te s —for

exam ple, L ouisiana—are in stitu tin g ex ten siv e , w ell-planned, w e ll-a rtic u la te d
FLES e ffo rts . A t low er levels, m any com m unities and school d istric ts across the
country a re rev italizin g early second-language ex p erien ces.

CHAPTER ni
METHODOLOGY
The goal of th is study was to describe all known FLES program s in th e
s ta te of M ichigan.

Through the use of a questio n n aire, answ ers to the study’s

th re e re sea rc h questions w ere sought.
RESEARCH POPULATION
T he M ichigan S ta te D e p a rtm e n t o f E ducation had av ailab le th e re su lts of a
1985 sta te w id e survey by M ichigan S ta te U niversity and th e S ta te D e p artm en t of
E ducation regarding fo reig n language program s from kin d erg arten through higher
education.

T hirty-one school d istric ts were id e n tifie d in th a t in v estig atio n as

having som e ty p e of FLES program . T hese school system s com prised th e ta r g e t
population. The decision was m ade to include th e e n tire population in this study
ra th e r than do a sam pling, since th e num ber of schools m aking up th e population
was re la tiv e ly sm all. A list of th ese 31 school d istric ts can be found in Appendix
A.
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
The goal of th e study was to answ er th e follow ing research questions.
1.

What are the goals, o b je ctiv es, an d c h a ra c te ris tic s of FLES
program s in th e s ta te .o f M ichigan0

2.

A re the s ta te d goals and objectives being m e t, as perceiv ed by
th e program p a rtic ip a n ts?

3.

Are th e se program s supported by o th e r co lleag u es, th e schools'
ad m in istratio n , and th e com m unity?

The re sea rc h questions w ere fo rm u lated to address th e concerns and
in te re s ts of th e re s e a rc h e r and o th er professionals, to provide d a ta th a t could
th en be com pared with th e findings of e arlier studies, to furnish info rm atio n fo r
schools in te re ste d in establishing FLES, and to provide a vehicle o f s e lfevaluation fo r program s alread y in s titu te d .
SELECTION OF DATA-COLLECTING TECHNIQUE
The questionnaire was chosen as th e m o st e ffe c tiv e m ethod to arriv e a t th e
answ ers of the th re e basic research questions. The decision was m ade to design
a predom inantly closed form in stru m e n t so th a t q u an tificatio n and analysis of
the

resu lts

could be carried ou t in th e

m ost e ffic ie n t

m anner possible.

S tan d ard izatio n of inform atio n w as deem ed highly im p o rtan t.

Space w as

provided throughout the in stru m en t fo r respondents to make com m ents and
clarify th e ir answ ers if th e y so desired.

Four survey ite m s w ere c o n stru cte d in

the open form design.
QUESTIONNAIRE RESIGN
Every e ffo rt was m ad e to devise as n o n th reaten in g an in stru m e n t as
possible, recognizing th a t the response ra te would be considerably low er if th e
persons answ ering f e lt in tim id ate d .
critic ism

of

com m unities.

individual

te a c h e rs ,

The in te n t w as

And th e survey tried to avoid suggesting
c u rric u la , co lleag u es, a d m in istra to rs,
simply

to

affo rd

e d u cato rs

a

m eans

or
of

co nfidentially sharing basic inform ation regarding th e ir program s.
Also of g re a t concern when co n stru ctin g th e survey w as th e tim e fa c to r.
Tim e is a precious com m odity fo r te a c h e rs , and they are quick to re p o rt th a t
th e re are not enough hours in th e day to comply w ith all of th e dem ands of th e
profession. T h erefo re, a sh o rt, co n cise, e a sy -to -fill-o u t form had to be designed.
The goal was to arriv e a t a fo rm a t th a t could be com pleted w ithin 10-12 m inutes.

48

O pportunities

w ere

provided

throughout

the

in stru m en t,

though,

and

encouragem ent given to th o se respondents who w ished to provide additional
inform ation.
Who was to receiv e th e questionnaire?

One of the goals of th e study was

to g en erate a lis t of th e to ta l num ber o f FLES program s fo r each foreign
language in the s ta te . To best a rriv e a t this goal, as well as discover the answ ers
to th e research questions, th e decision w as m ad e th a t one survey was to be
com pleted fo r EACH foreign language tau g h t a t EACH elem en tary school across
M ichigan.

In th e directions to th e questionnaire, i t w as explained t h a t each

e le m e n ta ry school of a d is tric t where foreign language in stru ctio n is o ffered
should receive a survey, and one questionnaire per language per school building
should be retu rn ed .
The goal was to c r e a te as nonbiased, valid, and reliab le a questionnaire as
possible.
R esearch:

S everal sources such as W alter Borg and M eridith Gall’s E ducational
An Introduction and S tan ley Payne’s The A rt of Asking Q uestions

w ere carefu lly consulted.

N um erous p relim inary d ra fts w ere developed; checks

w ere m ade to lo c ate any am b ig u ities, and changes w ere m ade to fa c ilita te d ata
tab u latio n . The survey was then p re te ste d .
PRETEST OF QUESTIONNAIRE
A sam ple of th re e ed u cato rs know ledgeable in FLES w as se le c te d to
preview the questionnaire.

They w ere asked to answ er the questions and give

th e ir im pressions of th e survey's s tru c tu re and co n ten t. They w ere encouraged
to m ake com m ents on how the item s and the in stru m en t could be im proved.
They were s e n t th e questionnaire and given a w eek to respond. C om m ents w ere
receiv ed from the th re e individuals by m ail, along w ith telep h o n e a n d /o r personal
interview s.

A dvice was given concerning item in te rp re ta tio n , d a ta rep o rtin g ,

49

and distribution of the q uestio n n aire. The suggestions w ere in co rp o rated into th e
final version of th e in stru m e n t.
STATE DEPARTMENT ENDORSEMENT
D r. J a m e s Phelps, A sso c ia te Superintendent fo r R esearch a t th e Michigan
S ta te D ep artm en t of E ducatio n , w as sent the proposal fo r th is forthcom ing
study. A req u est w as m ade fo r th e M ichigan S ta te D e p a rtm e n t o f E ducation's
endorsem ent of this in v estig atio n .

A fte r review ing th e proposal, th e S ta te

D e p artm en t g ra n te d its end o rsem en t, and a l e tt e r signed by S ta te Superintendent
Phillip E. Runkel was forw ard ed . A copy o f the le tte r is to be found in Appendix
B.
R E Q U E ST FOR PERMISSION TO CONDUCT THE STUDY

A le tte r requesting perm ission to conduct th e study w as se n t to th e
su p erintendents of th e 31 previously id en tified school d istric ts acro ss the s ta te .
Along

w ith

th e

le tte r

requesting

perm ission

w as

a

copy

of th e

S uperintendent's endorsem en t le tte r and a sam ple of the questionnaire.
of th e se docum ents a re found in Appendix B.

S ta te
Copies

T he 1986 M ichigan E ducation

D irectory and Buyer's Guide was consulted fo r superintendents' nam es and
addresses. If perm ission was g ra n te d , th e su p erin ten d en ts w ere asked to re tu rn
w ithin two weeks the name^s) and addressees) of the FLES c o o rd in ato r or head
FLES te a c h e r fo r each foreig n language o ffered in each e lem en tary school in th e
d is tric t.

F ifte e n su p erinten d en ts responded to th e in itial le tte r .

Follow-up

phone calls were m ade to th e 16 o th e r a d m in istra to rs. Perm ission to conduct th e
study was received from all 18 school d istric ts rep o rtin g to have FLES program s.
A list of th e se schools a p p ea rs in Appendix C . R esu lts to th is prelim inary step
a re p resen ted in T able 3.1.

50

T able 3.1
Responses to th e R eq u est fo r Perm ission to C onduct Survey
Response

Number of School D istric ts

FLES program (s) in the d is tric t

18

No FLES program (s)

12

B efore-school enrichm ent; no
te a c h e r nam e available

1

TOTAL:

31

Responses from the 12 su p erin ten d en ts whose d istric ts do not have FLES
program s ranged from "it's under study" to "w e a re su rp rised to have been
included in th e original s ta tis tic s since we do not and have not had a FLES
program !"

A num ber of th e se school d is tric t lead ers expressed th e s e n tim e n t

th a t foreign language in th e e le m e n ta ry school is im p o rtan t, b u t, as one
ad m in istra to r in tim a te d , he had M ichigan E d u catio n al A ssessm en t Program
^MEAP) scores th a t showed a need to spend m ore tim e on the basics. The feelin g
of this p a rtic u la r a d m in istra to r was th a t including anything e x tra

in th e

curriculum a t th is point was out of th e question.
DISTRIBUTION OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE
N am es and addresses of 27 FLES co o rd in ato rs a n d /o r ed u ca to rs w ere
provided by th e 18 su p erinten d en ts who in d ic a ted th e ir d is tric ts had e lem en ta ry
school foreign

language ex p erien ces.

A t th e

M ichigan F o reig n L anguage

A ssociation S ta te C onvention, a n o th er FLES e d u c a to r whose school was not
among th o se on th e original list v o lu n teered to p a rtic ip a te in th e study.

E ach

individual was assigned a code num ber to p ro te c t h is/h er anonym ity. All 28 w ere

51

sent

(a) an

individually

typed

le tte r

of

tra n s m itta l,

fb> a

num ber-coded

questionnaire, fc) a copy of th e S ta te S uperintendent's le tte r of en d o rsem en t, fcO
a stam ped re tu rn envelope, and fe ) a num ber-coded, stam p ed , re tu rn post c a rd
fo r those choosing not to p a rtic ip a te in th e study. R etu rn of th e q u estionnaire
was requested w ithin tw o w eeks.

C opies of th e le tte r of tra n s m itta l and

questionnaire are found in Appendix C .
Two weeks a f te r th e original deadline, a follow -up le t te r , q u estio n n aire,
and re tu rn envelope w ere s e n t, ag ain requesting a tw o w eek tu rn -aro u n d tim e. A
copy of th is le tte r is also included in A ppendix C .

A pproxim ately th re e weeks

a f te r th e follow -up le tte r deadline, phone calls w ere m ade to th e individuals who
had not responded.

A fter arriv in g a t the f a c t th a t th ey did indeed wish to

p a rtic ip a te in th e study, th ey w ere o ffered th e option of responding to th e
questionnaire a t th a t tim e over th e phone o r retu rn in g th e survey by m ail.
Several p artic ip a n ts chose to answ er by phone, w hile th e rem aining resp o nd en ts
e le c te d to retu rn the questionnaire by m ail. With the le tte r of tra n s m itta l and
th e tw o follow -up tech n iq u es, a 100% response ra te was achieved.

C onducting

the questionnaire survey was done over a period of th re e and one-half m onths.
The tim e ta b le can be found in Table 3.2 which provides a breakdow n of th e
response ra te s.

52

Table 3.2
Tim e T able fo r Survey A dm inistration
P rocedure

D ate
O ctober 1,1986

L e tte r
to
d is tric t
superintendents
requesting perm ission to co n d u ct study

O ctober 20-28, 1986

Telephone
call
follow-up
to
su p erin ten d en ts' requesting perm ission to
conduct study

Novem ber 5, 1986

F irst m ailing to
a n d /o r te a c h e rs

FLES

coordinators

D ecem ber 1,1986

Second m ailing to
a n d /o r te a c h e rs

FLES

coordinators

Jan u ary 5, 1987

Telephone c all follow -up
co o rd in ato rs a n d /o r te a c h e rs

to

FLES

Table 3.3
R esponse R a te to In v itatio n to P a rtic ip a te
C o n ta ct

% o f R eplies

C um ulative %

F irst m ailing

54 (i 5)

54 (15'

Second m ailing

29 (8 )

83 ^23)

Telephone follow-up

18 ( 5)

100 (28)

CONFIDENTIALITY OF RESPONSES
The plan for conducting th is study w as described in w ritte n form and
subm itted to th e C o m m itte e on R ese arch Involving H um an S ubjects a t Michigan
S ta te U niversity in com pliance w ith U niversity regulations statin g th a t all
research involving hum an sub jects m ust receive c o m m itte e approval. A p etitio n

53

was m ade and a c c e p te d fo r an exem ption from full c o m m itte e review (see
Appendix n ) . The p ro je c t was c a rrie d o u t as o u tlin ed in th e plan.
All sup erin ten d en ts, FLES co o rd in ato rs, and teach ers w ere assured of
com plete co n fidentiality; no one would be id e n tifie d by nam e o r in stitu tio n .
They w ere advised th a t all resu lts would be tre a te d w ith s tr ic t co nfidence, and
p a rtic ip a n ts and th e ir responses would rem ain co m p letely anonym ous.

I t w as

explained th a t p articip atio n was on a volunteer basis, and th e re would be no
penalty fo r not taking p a rt in th e study. Those choosing no t to p a rtic ip a te w ere
provided with a return post c ard th a t would rem ove them from subsequent
m ailings or telephone calls.
PROCESSING OF THE DATA
O nce all p a rticip an ts w ere h eard fro m , th e raw d a ta —th a t is, th e answ ers
given by each respondent—w ere reco rd ed item by ite m . Responses fo r each item
w ere ta b u la te d and, w here a p p ro p ria te , rep o rted as a p ercen tag e o f th e sum
to ta l for th a t ite m . In C h ap ter IV will be an in -d ep th item in te rp re ta tio n of th e
results.
Several places on th e q u estionnaire allow ed each respondent to give
additional inform ation in an open-ended fo rm a t.

All rem ark s and responses to

open-ended item s a re recorded in A ppendix E. In a few cases, words th a t might
identify a person or school a re o m itte d from th e responses.
SUMMARY
The goal of th e study was to poll foreign language c o o rd in ato rs and
te ac h e rs

and gain inform ation concerning FLES program s in the s ta te of

Michigan. Perm ission was receiv ed from all school d is tric ts in th e s ta te known
to o ffer e le m e n ta ry school foreign language. The nam es of 28 FLES coordinators
or head FLES te a c h e rs w ere obtained.

Each was s e n t a questio n n aire, s tric t

5k

co n fid e n tia lity being assured . P a rticip atio n was to be on a vo lu n teer basis; th ere
would be no p enalty fo r not tak in g p art.
req u est to p a rtic ip a te .
questionnaires receiv ed .

All resp o n d en ts acknow ledged th e

The raw d a ta w ere ta b u la ted and analyzed from the

CHAPTER IV
DATA ANALYSIS
This c h ap te r contains a review of th e purpose of th e study and is th en
follow ed by th e
in v estig atio n .

answ ers

to

the

th re e

research

questions

sought by th is

T he answ ers w ere arriv ed a t through th e analysis of d a ta

c o lle cte d by m eans of a questionnaire. A sum m ary concludes th is c h a p te r.
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of th is study w as to g ath er basic inform ation concerning FLES
program s in the s ta te of M ichigan.

Of in te re st w ere the languages tau g h t; the

num ber of students p a rtic ip a tin g and how they w ere chosen; fo rm a t, m ethods,
and m a te ria ls in use; the goals and objectives of th e program ; evaluation; and
perceptions of stren g th s and w eaknesses. The answ ers to th e following research
questions w ere sought.
1.

What are the goals, o b jectiv es, and c h a ra c te ris tic s of FLES
program s in th e s ta te of M ichigan?

2.

Are the sta te d goals and objectives being m e t, as perceived by
th e program p a rtic ip a n ts?

3.

Are th ese program s supported by o th e r co lleag u es, th e schools'
ad m in istratio n s, and th e com m unity?
THE QUESTIONNAIRE

A to ta l of 28 questionnaires w ere s e n t to th e id e n tifie d FLES co o rd in ato rs
or FLES

head

te ac h e rs.

In th e

le tte r

of tra n s m itta l

(see Appendix C)

accom panying th e survey, it was req u ested th a t one questionnaire be co m p leted
for each foreign language o ffe re d a t each e lem en ta ry school w ithin a given
55

56

school d is tric t.

This was done to discover if th e re w ere any d ifferen ces to the

research questions' answ ers when com paring d iffe re n t languages a t th e sam e
school or d iffe re n t schools and id en tical languages w ithin the sam e d is tric t.
Foreign language co o rd in ato rs or h ead FLES te a c h e rs w ere asked to d u p licate
th e in stru m en t when one of th e above situ atio n s occurred; one such duplication
w as needed.
In the le tte r of tra n s m itta l, i t was also explained th a t th e re was no penalty
fo r not p a rtic ip a tin g in th is study.

Along w ith th e q u estio n n aire was se n t a

retu rn post card fo r th o se individuals choosing not to ta k e p a rt in the study.
T hree people chose not to p a rtic ip a te .

T h ree o th e rs did not fill o u t th e

questionnaire; they re p o rte d th a t th e ir school system s a re not c u rre n tly o fferin g
FLES. H ence, th e d ata p re sen te d are based on th e answ ers to 23 questionnaires.
Not all questions w ere answ ered by all resp o n d en ts.

In som e cases,

respondents w ere in stru c te d to skip an ite m , depending on th e ir answ ers to a
preceding question; in o th e r c ase s, respondents chose no t to answ er questions fo r
unknown reasons. T h e re fo re , a n o tatio n was given of th e num ber of respondents
(N) who answ ered each survey ite m . W here ap p ro p riate, p e rc en ta g e s of the sum
to ta l w ere c a lc u la te d fo r th a t ite m .
A num ber of respondents included clarific atio n s to answ ers or additional
com m ents concerning th e program s w ith which th e y a re involved.
com m ents will be included in this c h ap te r and in A ppendix E.

Those

In a few cases,

words th a t m ight id en tify an individual w ere changed to ensure th a t no responses
could be a ttrib u te d to a sp e c ific individual.

57

QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS
D em ographic C h a ra c te ris tic s
S everal questions provided inform ation concerning basic fe a tu re s of the
known FLES program s acro ss th e s ta te . Table 4.1 p resen ts sum m ary d a ta fo r th e
dem ographic c h a ra c te ris tic s .
Table 4.1
D em ographic C h a ra c te ris tic s
C h a ra c te ris tic

Frequency

Foreign Languages T aught fN=23)
French
Spanish
L atin

P e rc e n tag e

9
13
1

39
57
4

2,643
1,858
32

58
41
1

3
20

13
87

C hoice o f L anguage A vailable to S tu d en t (N=4)
Yes
No

0
3

0
100

Foreign L anguage Study fo r ALL S tu d en ts fN=23)
Yes
No

15
8

65
35

Y ears in E xistence of Program (N=21)
F irst
Second
Third
F ourth
F ifth
Sixth
Seventh
T en th and Beyond

1
4
5
3
2
2
1
3

5
19
24
14
10
10
5
14

1
19
3

4
83
13

N um ber o f S tu d en ts (N=20)
French
Spanish
L atin
M ore Than O ne L anguage O ffe re d fN=23)
Yes
No

Program M odeled A fte r Known Design fN=23)
Yes
No
D on't Know

58

More than h alf of th e schools (57%) surveyed o ffer Spanish.
L atin w ere th e only o th e r languages rep o rted to be ta u g h t.

French and

A lthough o ffered in

few er schools and d is tric ts , a m ajo rity (58%) of th e to ta l num ber of FLES
students in M ichigan are studying F ren ch . When asked if m o re th a n one language
w ere o ffe re d , th re e of the 23 surveys w ere m arked "yes”; of those schools, none
allow ed a stu d en t to choose th e foreign language to be studied.

Four of th e

schools u tilize high school foreign language stu d en ts to te a c h FLES classes.

In

one of th o se c a se s, th e language o ffered depends on en ro llm en t figures in
advanced classes a t the high school.
The d iv ersity of responses to th e question on educational background
proved unm anageable when trying to p re sen t a clear p ic tu re of degrees and
te a c h e r p re p a ratio n .

O f th e

18 th a t

a tte m p te d

to answ er th e question,

explanations of th e teach in g c e r tific a te s or title s and to whom th ey belonged
proved to be to d iffic u lt to quantify and then in te rp re t in a m eaningful m anner.
O ne item on th e questionnaire asked if all stu d en ts could p a rtic ip a te in th e
FLES p ro g ram .

F ifte e n respondents rep o rted to ta l p a rtic ip a tio n .

Two of th e se

individuals clarified th e ir responses by w riting th a t special education students
are included as well; two others w rote th a t a few learn in g disabled stu d en ts do
not ta k e p a rt.

Several o th e rs elu cid ated th e ir answ ers by rem arking th a t all

stu d en ts w ere p a rtic ip a tin g a t th e grade lev els a t which FLES is o ffere d , th a t is,
FLES ex p erien ces a re not o ffere d a t all grade levels in th e ir school.

Those

responding th a t not all stu d en ts could p a rtic ip a te in FLES listed seven d ifferen t
ways or a com bination of ways fo r placing youngsters in to th e program .

(See

Appendix E on S election of S tu d en ts fo r P a rticip a tio n in FLES.>
O ver one-half (62%) of th e FLES program s have been in e x isten c e fo r four
years or less.

From com m ents received during th e course of th is study, FLES

59

experiences appear to be under stu d y in a t le a s t four M ichigan school d istric ts,
and a t le a s t tw o others hope to re in stitu te program s th a t were te rm in a te d .
O f th e 23 p a rtic ip a tin g program s, one is m odeled sifter the FLES designs of
o th e r M ichigan d istric ts. In co rp o rated in th a t one program a re portions of th e
Flint and F ern d ale, M ichigan, c u rric u la .
Scope C h a ra c te ristic s
A v a rie ty of approaches su rfaced when respondents were asked to describe
a t w hat grade th e ir program s begin and th e span of years covered. R esponses to
th ese questions are rep o rted in T ab le 4.2.
Table 4.2
Scope C h a ra c te ristic s
C h a ra c te ris tic

Frequency

P e rcen tag e

Beginning G rade Level for FLES f N=23)
K indergarten
F irst G rade
Third G rade
F ourth G rade
F ifth G rade
Sixth G rade

9
7
1
2
3
1

39
30
4
9
13
4

N um ber o f G rade L evels Encom passed W =23'
One
Two
T hree
Four
Five
Six
Seven

4
2
3
2
1
3
8

17
9
13
9
4
13
35

N um ber of S tudents w ith Seven Y ears o f FLES
Program A
500
Program B
670
Program C
400
Program D
58
Program E
230
Program F
No figure
Program G
435
Program H
60
,L:

2,353

60

Nine program s begin in k in d erg arten and eig h t of th o se program s c arry
through th e sixth grade. The dem ographics of th e eight program s w ere analyzed
and showed th a t over one-half (52%) of all FLES stu d en ts in Michigan are
receiv in g seven y ears of e le m e n ta ry school foreign language ex p erien ce.
Tim e-on-Task C h a ra c te ris tic s
N um ber of m inutes per w eek and num ber of weeks per year v aried from
program to program . U nless th e respondent in d ic a ted o th erw ise, program s w ere
assum ed to be one school year in len g th .

One sixth grade program is a 12 w eek

exposure class fo r 45 m inutes per day, five days per w eek.

Two program s

u tilizing high school stu d en ts run six and eig h t weeks resp ectiv ely .

Two o th e r

surveys re p o rte d ex p erien ces o f less th an a full year fo r e ith e r a p a rt or all of
th e ir FLES o fferin g s.

Appendix E c ite s the com m ents of the respondents

concerning tim e -o n -ta sk fo r th e ir individual situ atio n s.
rem arks on scheduling.

Also included are th e

What can be g en eralized from this inform ation is th a t

FLES program m ing is sch o o l-sp ecific and t h a t a wide v a rie ty of approaches a re
being used.
With one ex ception, a ll program s a t the fo u rth grade level and below run 30
m inutes or less per session. T h e re fo re , a school th a t o ffers 60 m inutes p er week
in the th ird g rad e would have two m eetings e a c h a t 30 m in u tes, th re e m eetings
a t 20 m inutes, or fo u r m eetin g s each a t 15 m inutes. None of th e re p o rte d classes
is o ffered for less than 15 m inutes per session.

A visual display of this

inform ation is in Appendix F.
Methodology and In stru ctio n al M aterials
O f all the m ethods suggested, 86% o f th e respondents use th e audio-lingual
m ethod, e ith e r alone or in com bination with o th e r approaches.
freq u en tly em ployed m ethod is T o tal Physical R esponse (T.P.R .).

The n ex t m ost

61

When questioned abou t what te x ts or in stru ctio n al m a te ria ls were being
used, 50% of th e responden ts replied th a t th e y w ere using m a te ria ls th a t th ey
personally have c re a te d . T h ree respondents said th ey used no m a te ria ls, b u t they
m ay have in te rp re te d th e question to m ean com m ercially produced learning aids.
T hree other respondents said th ey use te x ts o r portions of te x ts in conjunction
with th e ir self-designed m a te ria ls.

In to ta l, 78% of th e respondents suggested

th a t in stru ctio n al m a te ria ls m ust be g ath ered from a v a rie ty of sources. Table
3 highlights th is in fo rm atio n , and Appendix E lists in d etail th e o th e r classroom
techniques, te x ts , and in stru ctio n al m a te ria ls being used by respondents.
T able if.3
M ethodology and In stru ctio n al M aterials
Frequency

C h a ra c te ristic
Methodology f N=22>
Audio-lingual
Individualized in structio n
Rassias Method
Total Physical R esponse
O th e rs )

19
7
2
9
8

In stru ctio n al M aterials (N=22)
None
T eacher-m ade m a te ria ls
C om bination (te a ch e r m ade &: te x t)
S p ecific C om m ercial M aterials

3
11
3
5

P ercen tag e*

50
Iif
23

♦D oes n o t equal 100% due to rounding.

A rtic u la tio n C h a ra c te ris tic s
Fight of the

schools a n d /o r d istric ts

responding to

th e

question on

a rtic u la tio n have m ade arran g em en ts fo r th e FLES stu d en t following elem en tary
schooling.

Half of th e se program s a re those th a t o ffer a seven year elem en tary

62

school sequence fo r stu d en ts to follow . Four of th e eig h t program s have been in
e x iste n c e five y ears or less. F ig u res fo r a rtic u la tio n provisions a re p re sen te d in
T able 4.4.

One respondent w ro te th a t ". . . m uch m ore work has to be done on

a rtic u la tio n , p articu larly a t th e high school lev el."
Table 4.4
A rticu latio n C h a ra c te ris tic s
C h a ra c te ris tic
A rticulation Provisions (N=2P
Yes
Only a t Junior High
No, but plans being m ade
None

Frequency

P ercen tag e*

8
1
2
10

38
5
10
48

*O oes n o t eq u al 100% due to rounding.

Support o f Program C h a ra c te ris tic s
An assessm ent of perceived support fo r th e FLES program was req u ested .
T he respondent w as to rank from one to te n , w ith ten being th e b e st, th e d egree
of endorsem ent s/h e sensed from fellow te a c h e rs, a d m in istra to rs, and p a re n ts
and com m unity.

A t le a s t 43% of th e respondents gave fellow te a c h e rs ,

a d m in istra to rs, and p a re n ts and com m unity th e highest ra tin g possible.

The

frequency and p e rc e n ta g e of responses fo r program support can be found in T able
4.5.

63

Table 4.5
Support of Program
Frequency

P ercen tag e*

O ther T each ers (N=22)
10
9
8
7
5

10
2
7
2
1

45
9
32
9
5

A d m in istrato rs (N=23)
10
9
7
6
5
1

15
1
2
3
1
1

65
4
9
13
4
4

P aren ts and Com m unity (N=23)
10
9
8
7
6
5
3

10
4
5
1
1
1
1

43
17
22
4
4
4
4

Ranking

*D oes not equal 100% due to rounding.

P erceiv ed S tren g th s and W eaknesses
R espondents were asked to m ark a ll ap p ro p riate stre n g th s and w eaknesses
of th e ir FLES program s and add any o th e rs th a t m ay have o m itte d from th e
q uestionnaire. A large m a jo rity (70%) of th e respondents listed th e te ac h e rs as a
stren g th ; 38% ra te d th e tex tb o o k s and classroom m a te ria ls as a w eakness.
M entioned by th re e p a rtic ip a n ts as a stre n g th is stu d en t m otivation.

O ther

w eaknesses c ite d w ere lack of tim e , fa c u lty , support s ta ff, and aides. Table 4.6

64

sum m arizes the responses to the perceived stre n g th s and w eaknesses questions,
and Appendix E provides th e additional com m ents respondents o ffered .
Table 4.6
P erceiv ed S tren g th s and W eaknesses
C h a ra c te ristic

Frequency

P ercen tag e*

S trengths (N=23)
Teachers
T extbooks/ M aterials
P aren t/C o m m u n ity Support
A dm inistrative Support
O ther

16
5
13
11
7

70
22
57
48
30

W eaknesses fN=21)
None
T eachers
Text books/ Mat eri al s
P aren t/C o m m u n ity Support
A dm inistrative Support
O ther

0
0
8
2
5
11

0
0
38
10
24
52

Evaluation
R espondents w ere asked several questions concerning evaluation.

The

ite m s did n o t specify "form al" or "inform al" ev alu atio n . Seventy p e rc en t rep lied
th a t th e ir program s are review ed; 81% of th o se individuals specified th a t th e ir
program s are e v alu a te d yearly.

O ne respondent sh ared th a t ev alu atio n fo r

him /her "is con stan tly changing," an o th er s ta te d th a t i t occurs "freq u en tly by th e
principal," and a th ird rep o rted th a t it ta k es place on a "daily basis."
building principal was listed the m ost o fte n as e v a lu a to r.
inform ation is found in Table 4.7.

The

A tab u latio n of this

65

Table 4.7
Program E valuation
C ategory

Frequency

P ercen tag e*

Program E valuation (N=23)
Yes
No
D on't Know

16
6
1

70
26
4

How O ften fN=16^
Every year
O ther

13
3

81
19

Evaluator(s) (N=16^
S uperintendent
FLES Supervisor
S tudents
Building Principal
Classroom T each er
O ther

1
3
1
12
8
5

Program Goals and O bjectives
R espondents were asked to a g ree o r disagree w ith suggested goals and
ob jectives fo r FLES program s.

N ext th e y were questioned as to w h eth er th e ir

goals and objectives a re being m e t. Finally, com m ents w ere so licited concerning
why some goals and o b jectiv es w ere not a tta in e d .
Teaching th e stu d en ts to co m m u n icate verbally in a foreign language and
teaching them an a p p re cia tio n of a foreign c u ltu re w ere th e m o st m entioned
goals and objectives of the Michigan FLES ed u cato rs p a rtic ip a tin g in this study.
N inety-one p e rc en t a g re e d th a t teach in g verbal com m unication is a d esired
outcom e, and 9896 said th a t teach in g an ap p reciatio n of a foreign c u ltu re is a
goal of th e ir program . A c o m p lete tab u latio n is in T able 4.8. In Table 4.9 a re
liste d the perceptions of respondents as to w hether or not th e ir goals a re being
achieved.

Most com m unicated th a t th e ir program s' goals and o b jectiv es a re

66

being m e t. For those goals and o bjectives n o t being m e t, lack o f monies was the
reason given th e m ost o fte n , follow ed by unavailability of qualified s ta ff and
lack o f tim e (see T able 4.10).

C om m ents th a t a re sch o o l-sp ecific a re liste d in

Appendix E.
Table 4.8
G oals and O b jectiv es
C ategory

Frequency

To T each Verbal C om m unication ^N=23)
Strongly A gree fSA)
A gree (A>
D isagree 03 >
Strongly D isagree (SP)
Not A pplicable fNA)

13
8
1
0
1

To T each R eading
SA
A
D
SD
NA

3
8
8
2
1

To Teach W riting
SA
A
D
SD
NA

2
6
7
5
1

To T each A ppreciation of C u ltu re
SA
A
D
SD
NA
NOTE: Two respondents did n o t answ er all portions of this question.

16
6
0
0
1

67

Table 4.9
Goal A chievem ent
Frequency

C ategory
To T each Verbal C om m unication (N=23^
Yes
No

19
1

To T each R eading
Yes
No

10
2

To T each W riting
Yes
No

8
2

To T each A ppreciation o f C u ltu re
Yes
No

21
0

NOTE: Some replies were given even if "SA" o r "A" had not been m arked on th e
preceding survey item ; oth er respondents did not answ er this question
com pletely.

Table 4.10
Im pedim ents to Goal A chievem ent
C ategory (N=9)
Lack of A dm inistrative C ooperation
Lack of C om m unity Support
Lack of Monies to Fund Program
Lack of C ollegial Support
Inadequate T each er P rep a ra tio n
U navailability o f O ualified S ta ff
Lack of T im e
Poor Program S tru ctu re

F reque ncy
0
0
4
0
0
2
2
1

68

A dditional C om m ents
A fte r the la st form al question on the survey, space was provided fo r those
respondents who f e lt th a t th e questionnaire did not allow fo r ad eq u ate description
of th e ir program s.

The re s t of th e in stru m en t was stru c tu re d with open-ended

questions or space fo r additional com m ents, hence th e
explanations in te rsp erse d th roughout.

clarific atio n s and

Several respondents asked if they "could

g e t a lis t of th e schools which have FLES program s." A n o th er w ro te th a t s/h e
"would be happy to ta lk . . . and give the needed input." Y et an o th er conveyed
t h a t "it is nice to see som e in te re s t in th e FLES program s in th e s ta te ."

A

co m p lete accounting of th e se com m ents and explications a re in A ppendix E.
SUMMARY
C h a p te r IV p resen ted th e re su lts of analysis of th e questionnaire d ata. All
m em bers

of

the

population

retu rn ed

p a rtic ip a te ) or a questionnaire.
surveys.

e ith e r

a p o stcard

(choosing

The d a ta w ere c o lle c te d from

not

to

23 w ritte n

D em ographics, scope and design of program s, and m ethodology and

in stru c tio n a l m a te ria ls w ere among th e c h a ra c te ris tic s discussed. T h ree foreign
languages a re re p o rte d ly o ffe re d , and a wide v a rie ty of program designs a re
u tilized .
Also rep o rted w ere th e responses to questions regarding tim e -o n -task ,
a rtic u la tio n , and support fo r FLES program s.
m inutes per session.

No FLES class is less th an 15

N early half of the p a rtic ip a tin g program s do not have

provisions fo r a rtic u la tio n a t th e junior high or high school. G enerally, it is f e lt
by th e

respondents

th a t

fellow

te ac h e rs, a d m in istra to rs, and p aren ts and

com m unity support FLES.
N ext program evaluation and goals and o bjectives w ere discussed.
Seventy

p e rc en t of th e

program s a re e v alu a te d , m o st o fte n

by building

69

principals.

The tw o goals and o bjectives m entioned th e m ost o ften fo r FLES

program s a re
com m unication.

to

te a c h

an ap p reciatio n

of c u ltu re

and

to

te ac h

v erbal

It was f e lt by a m ajo rity of th e respondents th a t individual

program goals are being m e t. L ack of m oney w as m arked m o st freq u en tly as th e
reason th a t goals and objectives a re not being achieved.

CHAPTER V
CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION OF THE RESULTS
Basic c h a ra c te ris tic s o f FLES program s in th e s ta te o f M ichigan w ere
described in this inquiry. C h ap ter V will begin w ith a sum m ary of the research ,
follow ed by conclusions drawn from th e d ata.

A final discussion of th e resu lts

will lead to recom m endations fo r fu rth e r study.
SUMMARY
Of concern was th e co llectio n of info rm atio n describing FLES cu rricu la in
M ichigan.

From an e arlier study (M ansour, 1985), 31 school d is tric ts acro ss th e

s ta te w ere rep o rted to have foreign language in stru c tio n a t th e elem en tary
school level. Of those 31 d is tric ts , a to ta l of 18 c u rre n tly have FLES ex p erien ces.
The su p erin ten d en ts from

th e se d istric ts w ere asked fo r th e

namefs) and

addressees) of one c o n ta c t person per language per e lem en tary school. A to ta l of
28 nam es was acquired.
The e n tire population of 28 FLES coordinators a n d /o r te ac h e rs received a
questionnaire.

A com p leted survey was req u ested fo r each foreign language a t

each e lem en tary school in a d is tric t. If not enough surveys were se n t, th e FLES
c o o rd in a to r/te a c h e r was asked to m ake a photo copy; one such copy was m ade.
T hree individuals chose not to p a rtic ip a te in the study.

T hree o th ers w rote to

say they would not be p a rtic ip a tin g in th is research p ro je c t since th e ir schools
w ere not p resen tly o fferin g FLES.

A to ta l of 23 individuals com pleted the

survey.

70

71

F rench, Spanish, and L a tin w ere specified as the languages o ffere d , w ith
F rench having th e highest stu d en t en ro llm en t and Spanish having th e g re a te s t
num ber of program s.

Eight of th e 23 program s span seven years of e lem en tary

school.

s tru c tu re is diverse; scheduling depends on individual

C urriculum

situations and circu m stan ces of each school.

One g en eralizatio n th a t can be

m ade is th a t no school o ffers a foreign language fo r less th an 15 m inutes per
session.
O f all the m ethodologies nam ed, th e audio-lingual approach, used e ith e r
alone or in com bination w ith an o th er m eth o d , is th e one m o st em ployed by
Michigan FLES ed u cato rs.
classroom m a te ria ls.

A t le a s t half of the te a c h e rs are c re atin g th e ir own

A rtic u la tio n of foreign language classes through th e high

school occurs in 38% o f the program s.
A dm inistrators received th e stro n g est v o te fo r supporting FLES. Sixty-five
p e rc en t of th e respondents ra te d ad m in istra to rs with th e highest rating possible.
Perceived stre n g th s and w eaknesses w ere disclosed, and FLES te ach ers
were m arked m o st often as a program stre n g th .

The categ o ry of tex tb o o k s and

learning m a te ria ls was th e m o st freq u e n tly nam ed w eakness. Seventy p ercen t of
all respondents say th e ir program s a re e v alu a te d , m ainly ev ery year.
Teaching verbal com m unication and an ap p reciatio n of the foreign cu ltu re
are th e two goals and objectiv es comm on to ev ery program bu t one. N early all
respondents f e lt th a t th e ir program s’ goals and objectives are being achieved.
L ack of m onies was sta te d th e m o st often as a hindrance to m eeting desired
goals.

72

CONCLUSIONS
T he following sectio n sum m arizes th e conclusions based upon th e d a ta
g ath ered through th is study. They provide the answ ers to th e original research
questions which follow .
1.

What a re the goals, o b jectiv es, and c h a ra c te ris tic s of FLES
program s in th e s ta te of M ichigan9

2.

Are the s ta te d goals and objectives being m e t, as perceived by
th e program p a rtic ip a n ts?

3.

Are th e se program s supported by o th e r colleagues, th e schools'
ad m inistrations, and th e com m unity?

Conclusion one;

FLES program s in M ichigan appear to have the sam e

em phasized goals and o b jectiv es suggested by th e c u rre n t lite ra tu re .
N early all respondents in this study "strongly agreed" or "agreed" th a t
teaching an a p p reciatio n of c u ltu re and teach in g verbal com m unication skills a re
desired outcom es of FLES.

R ecent lite ra tu re supports th ese choices (M et,

A nderson, B rega, and R hodes, p. 14). R eading and w riting a re em phasized by less
than half of th e p a rtic ip a n ts in this in v estig atio n .
c u rre n t, national

This, to o , is in d icated as a

trend (Rhodes and S chreibstein, p. 6).

A dditionally, all

p a rtic ip a n ts responded to the question on goals and o b jectiv es, suggesting th a t
th e ir program goals a re not only known, but c le a r and w ell-stated .
Conclusion tw o ;

T here are a diversity of FLES cu rricu la p resen t in the

s ta te .
The wide v a rie ty of cu rricu la is ap p aren t when considering th e scope of the
program s and th e num erous designs fo r accom m odating tim e-o n -task .

An

asso rtm en t of m ethodologies and classroom m a te ria ls a re being em ployed.
Conclusion th r e e :
perceived as being m e t.

Goals and o b jectiv es in th e m ajo rity of cases a re

73

As was s ta te d above, th e p rim ary goals of c u rre n t FLES p rogram s a re to
te ac h an a p p re cia tio n of c u ltu re and speaking skills. FLES program s of th e '50s
and '60s were fa u lte d fo r not achieving th e ir goals and o b jectiv es (Alkonis and
Brophy, pp. 213-217).

W hat has since been d eterm in ed is th a t th o se o utcom es

w ere u n re a listic for the am ount of tim e -o n -ta sk (M et, p. 471). R espondents feel
th a t th e ir goals and o b jectiv es a re being m e t, ag reein g unanim ously with re sp e c t
to the goal of teach in g an ap p reciatio n of c u ltu re .
Conclusion fo u r: M ichigan FLES program s a re generally well a c c e p te d by
fellow te a c h e rs, a d m in istra to rs, and p a re n ts and th e com m unity.
Program sa tisfa c tio n on th e p a rt of p aren ts (as well as a d m in istrato rs)
increases when goals are understood (Rhodes and S ch reib stein , p. 8). One of the
d ifficu lties with e a rlie r FLES program s was a d isen ch an tm en t on th e p a rt of
p a re n ts.

U nclear, u n re a listic goals and o bjectives w ere a large p a rt of the

problem fp. 7). Having estab lish ed th a t th e goals of th e program s exam ined in
th is investigation are clear and a re p erceived as being m e t, i t m ight be ex p ected
th a t they would also be generally well a c c e p ted . Such is th e case d em o n strated
by th is study.
RE CO MME NDA TIONS
A num ber o f fu rth e r studies and te s ta b le hypotheses can be g e n e ra te d from
th is study such as a com parison of M ichigan's FLES pro g ram s to th o se of o th er
sta te s.

A nother study could com pare c u rre n t FLES program s with th o se from

before 1970. Several te s ta b le hypotheses resu ltin g from th is investigation a re fa)
P rogram

X is m ore

e ffe c tiv e th an P rogram

Y due to th e

te x ts

a n d /o r

in stru ctio n al m a te ria ls being used, and Os) Program A is m ore successful than
P rogram B because of stronger com m unity and p a re n t support.

R ep licatio n of

7k

th is study is also recom m ended.

Trends of program grow th and developm ent

could be follow ed.
As M cLaughlin (1978), Izzo 0981), and o th e r ex p erts in the fie ld of language
acquisition have sta te d , little is y et known a b o u t how a child learns a second
language.

Much m ore em pirical d a ta need to be g a th ered not only on how the

language is acquired, b u t also on oth er a sp e c ts such as th e developm ent of
a ttitu d e s tow ard foreign c u ltu res and m o tiv atio n al d ifferen ces am ong children.
T h ere ap p ears to be a need fo r netw orking am ong FLES ed u ca to rs and
in te re ste d "others" across the s ta te of M ichigan.

Several of th e respondents

requested th e nam es of o th e r FLES schools in M ichigan.

O th e rs o ffere d th e ir

e x p e rtise in assisting schools in startin g -u p FLES p ro g ram s.

In discussions

occurring during th e p ro je c t, a d m in istra to rs, board m em b ers, te a c h e rs , and
p aren ts have

req u ested

a sum m ary of the final resu lts of this research .

Suggestions such as a s ta te n e w sle tte r or workshops o ffe re d fo r FLES ad v o cates
a re ideas fo r satisfying th is perceived need. Such netw orking could be a p a rt of
th e role of th e M ichigan D e p a rtm e n t of E d u catio n .
In order fo r a netw ork to be developed, a n accounting of c u rre n t FLES
program s in th e s ta te needs to be m ain tain ed . The lis t should be updated yearly.
A c en tral clearinghouse such as the Michigan D e p artm en t of E ducation o r a
foreign language association could a c t as th e fa c ilita to r.
More foreign language te x ts and learning aids need to be designed w ith th e
young le a rn e r in mind. S ev en ty -eig h t p e rc e n t of th e respondents noted th a t th ey
e ith e r had no ap p ro p riate m a te ria ls or th a t th ey w ere w riting th e ir own.
Several topics in tro d u ced in th is in v estig atio n need fu rth e r ex am in atio n .
The m a tte rs of artic u la tio n of foreign language classes a t th e junior high and
high school and evalu atio n a re tw o realm s requiring additional in v estig atio n .

75

S till other questions rem ain to be answ ered.

What a re stu d en ts' goals fo r

an early foreign language e x p erien ce? A re th e ir goals being m e t?

Do stud en ts

in Michigan program s receiv e grades? Is hom ew ork given fo r FLES?
REFLECTIONS
This study, like any d escrip tiv e study, provides answ ers to questions and, a t
the sam e tim e, raises a num ber of additional issues.

These issues provide the

bases fo r fu rth e r studies and th e continuing agenda which needs

to be addressed.

One such

deals w ith the

issue raised

e arly in th e

course of this study

disappearance of M ichigan FLES program s betw een th e 1985 and 1986 stu d ies. O f
in te re s t would be why th o se FLES ex p erien ces are no longer in e x isten c e. W hat
s e t of conditions brought a b o u t th e te rm in a tio n of th e se program s?
A nother a re a to be explored is th a t of te a c h e r p rep aratio n .

Numerous

issues need to be exam ined closely. What kinds of c e rtific a te s are held by FLES
te ac h e rs?

How much teac h in g experience do they have and a t what levels? A t

w hat level of com m unicative co m p eten cy in th e foreign language a re FLES
te ac h e rs?

How aw are and know ledgeable is the ed u ca to r of the ta rg e t cu ltu re?

Does th e te a c h e r keep c u rre n t with th e cu ltu ral tre n d s and issues of th e ta rg e t
language?

How aw are is the te a c h e r of pedagogical tren d s

m a te ria ls?

and classroom

What is th e te a c h e r doing to m aintain and im prove h is/h er level of

com m unicative com petency in the foreign language?

Once th ese and other

questions a re answ ered, com parisons can be m ade with e a rlie r program s to
discern if th e re are any differen ces betw een c u rre n t te a c h e r p rep aratio n of
FLES in stru c to rs and th a t of 20 years ago. Also possible would be fu tu re studies
to a sc e rta in if te a c h e r preparatio n is fulfilling th e needs of FLES ed u cato rs and
w h eth er one te a c h e r education curriculum is m o re e ffe c tiv e th an a n o th er.
A nother

research

pro ject could probe

the

re la tiv e im portance of te ac h e r

76

enthusiasm and exam ine w hether i t is as im p o rtan t a s , less im p o rtan t th an , o r
m ore im p o rtan t than knowledge of th e ta r g e t language and c u ltu re .
What in th e past decade has been learned ab o u t second language acquisition
in young children has com e m ainly from re sea rc h ers in bilingual education. T he
children used in the studies a re youngsters whose n ative language is not English.
W hat a re th e d ifferen c es, if any, betw een English and non-English speaking
children when acquiring a foreign language?

What kinds of in te rfe re n c e does the

native language cause fo r th e young second language learn er?
pedagogical approaches have on individual children?

W hat e ffe c ts do

These issues should be

explored to provide data concerning th e m o st e ffe c tiv e , e ffic ie n t m eans of
p resenting a foreign language to native English-speaking children in the U nited
S ta te s .
A way m ust be discovered to a le rt authors and publishers th a t a need exists
fo r learning m a te ria ls fo r FLES program s.

T each ers a re spending enorm ous

am ounts of tim e c re a tin g learning m a te ria ls, tim e th a t could be devoted to o th er
a sp ects of th e FLES ex p erien ce.

The concern, though, is th a t te a c h e rs be

consulted so th a t the m ost a p p ro p ria te m a te ria ls possible be developed.
E valuation, both form al and inform al, is a n o th e r issue th a t m ust be
exam ined m ore closely.
children being te s te d ?
reliable?

How are th e FLES program s being evaluated?
And if so, how?

A re

A re th e e v a lu a tiv e tools valid and

The agenda of stu d en ts is of e x tre m e im p o rtan ce. Are th e ir goals and

objectiv es being m e t, and how a re th o se being m easured?
te a c h e r evaluation.

Also of in te re s t is

A com parison needs to be m ade of evaluation p ra c tic e s of

FLES today and th a t of tw o decades ago.
A rticulation w ith foreign language classes a t the ju n io r high and high
school continues to be of concern.

C oordination and com m unication am ong

foreign language ed u cato rs, ad m in istra to rs, and curriculum sp ecialists a re of the

77

e ssen ce.

C arefu l thought and planning are necessary to provide the m ost

cohesive,

w ell-rounded,

fulfilling

ex p erien ces

possible

fo r

th e

stu d en t.

Provisions m ust also be m ade fo r stu d en ts joining th e program la te , such as
tra n sfe r students, and fo r stu d en ts who a re n o t a t th e

c u rre n t level of

achievem ent as the rest of the class. If th e skills of reading and w riting are not
to be em phasized during th e e lem en tary school y ears, th en secondary te a c h e rs
need to be a le rte d to this f a c t so th a t th ey m ay plan th e ir c u rric u la accordingly.
One very im p o rtan t f a c t m entioned only occasionally in th e lite ra tu re is
th a t FLES students tend to continue on w ith foreign language study. They also
tend to be b e tte r language stu d en ts in high school and in college, in p a rt because
they have becom e acquainted w ith language learning techniques early in life . It
would seem th a t fo r th e se reasons, all foreign language ed u cato rs and ad v o cates
concerned w ith program grow th would be in te re ste d in supporting FLES cu rricu la
across th e country. Of co u rse, as w as s ta te d in th e lite ra tu re , i t is cru cial th a t
the FLES experiences be w ell-organized, positive ones fo r th e children.

Since

children's a ttitu d e s and b elief sy stem s a re being fo rm ed during th e elem en tary
school years, i t is v ital th a t o th e r c u ltu re s be p resen ted positively.
Also im p o rtan t is th a t stu d en ts' needs and e x p ec ta tio n s be m e t.

Many

stud ents will feel as if th ey have learn ed nothing if they are not touched
personally be th e topic. P erhaps th a t is why a g re a t num ber of a d u lts who have
studied foreign languages a t som e points in th e ir lives in sist th a t they know
nothing. Maybe w hat th e y learn ed did no t touch them personally.
FLES coordinators say th a t th e m ost asked question is, "How many m inutes
per w eek should th e FLES ex p erien ce be?"

Probably th e b e st answ er is "th e

m ore, th e b e tte r," with 15 m in u tes per day being th e m inim um . The am ount of
tim e-o n -task should in c re a se as th e age o f th e child in c re a se s.

Michigan

78

te ac h e rs indicated th a t teach in g verbal com m unication and cu ltu ral aw areness
are top p rio ritie s, and to do both well requires larg e am ounts of tim e.
C am pbell,

G ray,

R hodes, and

Snow

0985)

re p o rte d

th a t

im m ersion

program s a re superior to FLES program s, and th e im m ersion stu d en t can reach
the highest level of proficiency.

Also, study a f te r study has shown th a t older

students are m ore successful than younger stu d en ts, th a t is, th e y a re a b le to
learn a foreign language m ore quickly. Then why should we concern ourselves a t
all with th e issue o f FLES9

To begin w ith, im m ersion program s ta k e strong

com m itm ents from te a c h e rs, a d m in istra to rs, and com m unities, w hereas FLES
program s can be m ore inform al.

To say th a t an early foreign language

experience should be an im m ersion one o r nothing a t all would be denying
thousands of children th e exposure to and e x p erien ce of second language
learning. L earning about oth er languages and cu ltu res can help to te a c h children
an ap p re cia tio n of and re sp e c t fo r o th e r ways of living. The sam e argum ent also
holds for those who s ta te th a t older stu d en ts a re able to learn a foreign language
m ore quickly. Learning a second language can help to fo ste r positive a ttitu d e s
tow ard foreign cultures and foreign language learn in g .

Since children are less

likely to have negative opinions form ed regarding th e ta rg e t c u ltu re , th e e a rlie r
they begin to study foreign languages, th e b e tte r.

In light of our p resen t w orld

conditions, elem en tary education needs to be approached in a global w ay.
During th e past century —m ore p recisely , during th e past th re e decades—
language educators have becom e preoccupied if not obsessed with d iffe re n t
theories and pedagogical approaches to second language learning. What m em bers
of th e profession are finally coming to te rm s with is th a t appreciably m ore
research

m ust

be

conducted

before

anything

conclusive

can

be

decided

concerning th e e ffe c tiv e n e ss of p a rtic u la r foreign language teach in g m ethods.

79

L earning

styles

research

is

indicating

th a t

probably th e

m ost

e ffe c tiv e

approaches depend on th e sty les of individual te a c h e rs and le arn ers.
Foreign languages have not been in the re c e n t past a universally a cc e p ted
p a rt

of

th e

curriculum

in

th e

U nited

in te lle ctu alism continue to be w ith us.

S ta te s .

Isolationism

and

a n ti-

The banishm ent of G erm an from the

elem en tary and secondary schools during World War I is b u t one ex am p le of our
xenophobia.

Foreign language ed u cato rs a re not blam eless.

Too m any of them

have been unable to convey th e im p o rtan ce or relev an ce of th e discipline.
On the o th er hand, th e r e a re people aw are of our m onolingual, e th n o c e n tric
sta tu s.

Many a re concerned p aren ts who believe in exposing th e ir children as

early as possible to as m any cu ltu rally p lu ra listic experiences as possible. O thers
are governm ent o fficials who address th e issue of foreign language learning and
support program developm ent.

More of th e se individuals m ust be id e n tifie d and

encouraged to speak o u t.
Perhaps the biggest question th a t rem ains is, "H ave th e c re a to rs of c u rre n t
FLES program s learn ed from th e m istakes of th e ir pred ecesso rs?" Only tim e and
fu rth e r research will provide the answ er.
In conclusion, th is study was an e ffo rt to describe FLES program s in the
s ta te of M ichigan. A w areness of conditions and c ircu m stan ces is p re re q u isite to
e xperim entation and com parison. The desire is th a t fu rth e r d a ta will continue to
be g ath ered in o rder to address th e m a tte rs still a t hand.

APPEN PICES

APPENDIX A

SCHOOL DISTRICTS REPORTING FLES, 1985

SCHOOL DISTRICTS REPORTING FLES, 1985

Albion Public Schools
A uT rain-O nata Public Schools
A vondale School D istric t
Beaver Island C om m unity Schools
Belding A re a Schools
Birmingham C ity School D is tric t
Boyne C ity Public School D is tric t
C arm an-A insw orth Schools
C o v e rt Public Schools
Davison C om m unity Schools
D e tro it C ity Schools D is tric t
Elk Rapids Schools
Falm outh E lem e n ta ry School D is tric t
F arm in g to n Public School D is tric t
Flint C ity School D istric t
G aylord Com m unity Schools
Grosse lie Township Schools
G rosse P o in te Public Schools
Hopkins P ublic Schools
L es C heneux Com m unity School D is tric t
Ludington A rea School D is tric t
M ount M orris C onsolidated Schools
Munising Public Schools
N o rth p o rt Public School D is tric t
Novi C om m unity Schools
R ock R iv er-L im esto n e School D is tric t
Saginaw C ity School D istric t
Shelby Public Schools
Troy School D istric t

80

81

W est O tta w a Public School D is tric t
W hitmore L ake Public School D istric t

APPENDIX B

LETTER OF REQUEST TO CONDUCT STUDY SENT TO SUPERINTENDENT
LETTER OF PR O JEC T ENDORSEMENT FROM STATE SUPERINTENDENT
SAMPLE SURVEY ACCOMPANYING REQUEST LETTER

MI CHI GAN STATE U NI V E RS IT Y
COLLEGE OL EDUCATION • DEPARTMENT O f TEACHER EDUCATION

EA ST L A N S IN G • M IC H IG A N • AHK2AICH.

October 1, 1986

<firstname> <lastname>
<title>
<school>
<address>
Dear Superintendent <lastname>:
Your school district was identified through a study conducted in 1985 by the State
Department of Education and Dr. George Mansour of Michigan State University as one of
thirty-one districts in the state of Michigan having a Foreign Language in the
Elementary School (FLES) program. Another 217 districts indicated an interest in
including foreign language instruction in their K-6 curriculum. Your district is on
the breaking edge of this wide-spreading commitment to a globally sound education for
our youngsters.
Our goal is to continue that study, hopefully providing useful information regarding,
for example, program structure, that would then assist in the operation of other
present and future programs, not only statewide, but also nationally. He request
your permission to assist us in that endeavor. He ask you to please send by
October 15 the name(s) and address(es) of your FLES coordinator or head FLES teacher
for each foreign language that you offer in each of your elementary schools. A selfaddressed, stamped envelope has been included for your convenience. Also included
for your information is a copy of the questionnaire that will be used to survey your
FLES teacher/coordinator(s), as well as a copy of State Superintendent Phillip
Runkel's letter of endorsement of our program. You can be assured that neither you
nor your FLES coordinator(s)/teacher(s) will be identified by name or institution.
The next several years are going to be exciting ones in foreign language education.
Our country has become aware that the twenty-first century will demand increased
understanding among nations, and our schools are being called upon to prepare our
youngsters for that kind of world. The results of this survey will be very helpful
in future program development and innovation. Every effort will be made to
disseminate the results so that others may benefit by these experiences.
Anticipated thanks for your cooperation.
Sincerely,

Audrey Heining-Boynton
Director of Foreign Languages
Olivet College

Dr. P. Riethmiller
Professor of Education
Michigan State University

A W u i s A fftr m a m t Action/E qusl Opporlt

82

lion

STATE O F MICHIGAN

D EPA RTM EN T
k B IIS IIiy i

P H IL L IP E. R l'N K E L
S u p erin ten d e n t
o f P ublic In stru c tio n

OF

E D U C A T IO N

IVIIlrfl l i y a i I R U 9 V 9

September 12, 1986

state board of education
N O R M A N O T T O S T O C K M E Y E R . SR
President
B A R B A R A D U M O t’C H ELLE
I ice President
BA R B A R A R O B E R T S M A S O N
Secretary
D O R O TH Y BEARDM ORE
Treasurer
D R . E D M U N D F. V A N D E T T E
AA S B E D elegate
CA RRO LL M. H U TTO N
C H E R R Y JA C O B I S
A N N E T T A M IL L E R
G O V . JA M E S J . B L A N C H A R D
E.x-Off'icio

Professor Audrey Heining-Boynton
Professor Peggy Riethm iller
c/o P.O. Box 71
O livet, Michigan 1)9076
Dear Professors Heining-Boynton and Riethm iller:
Thank you for providing me the opportunity to review your proposed
Foreign Language in the Elementary School (FLES) study th a t w ill take
place th is F a ll, 1986. Studies such as yours w ill e sta b lish a body
of knowledge th a t w ill lay the necessary groundwork fo r fu rth er
program development a t both the s ta te and national le v e l.
In 1982, the S tate Board of Education adopted a policy statement and
several recommendations to encourage foreign language study. One
such recommendation was th a t foreign language in struction should
begin in grade schools. Then, in 1984, th e Michigan S tate Board of
Education published B etter Education fo r Michigan Citizens:
A Blueprint fo r Action. Recommendation 8 of th is document encouraged
every school d i s t r ic t to "develop foreign language programs a t the
elementary le v e l to enable students to acquire or maintain knowledge
and s k i l l s in language(s) other than English." The 31 school
d i s t r ic ts in the S tate reported in 1985 to have FLES programs are
leading the way along th e road toward excellence in education.
I encourage the Michigan school d i s t r ic ts th a t have FLES programs to
cooperate with you in conducting th is study, and I support your
e ffo rts in th is important project.
Sincerely,

^ P h i lT i p E. iunkel

83

A SURVEY OF FLES PROGRAMS
in the
STATE OF Ml CHI GAN

othcr(s)

E a c h e l e m e n t a r y s c h o o l i n y o u r d i s t r i c t w i t h s FLES p r o g r a m
s h o u l d b e r e c e i v i n g on* q u e s t i o n n a i r e p e r l a n g u a g e p e r
school.
I t i s important t h a t each language in each
i n d i v i d u a l s c h o o l r e t u r n i t s own q u e s t i o n n a i r e .
Please
d u p l i c a t e t h i s f o r m when n e c e s s a r y s o t h a t e v e r y l a n g u a g e
tau g h t in a p a r t i c u l a r elem entary school i s r e p r e s e n t e d .

9 . Uh at a r e t h e names o f t h e
m a t e r i a l s t h a t you a r e u s i n g ?

F o r e x a m p l e ) i f you h a v e two l a n g u a g e s a t y o u r s c h o o l ) y o u r
s c h o o l w o u l d r e t u r n t wo q u e s t i o n n a i r e s .
And, i t a n o t h e r
e l e m e n t a r y s c h o o l i n y o u r d i s t r i c t t a u g h t t h e same ( o r
d i f f e r e n t ) l a n g u a g e s , th e y would r e t u r n a q u e s t i o n n a i r e f o r
each language ta u g h t .

11.
Have s p e c i a l p r o v i s i o n s ( i . e . a d v a n c e d f o r e i g n l a n g u a g e
c l a s s e s ) b e e n made a t t h e j u n i o r h i g h a n d h i g h s c h o o l
l e v e l s t o a c c o m o d a t e t h e FLES s t u d e n t s ?
yes

I s mor e t h a n one l a n g u a g e o f f e r e d a t y o u r s c h o o l ?

2a.
the

I f yo u a n s w e r e d ‘ y e s * t o 4 2 , may t h e s t u d e n t s c h o o s e
language they wish to study?

3.

yes

no

How l o n g h a s y o u r p r o g r a m b e e n

no

by g r a d e s
level

5.

How ma ny g r a d e s d o e s y o u r FLES p r o g r a m e n c o m p a s s ?

i n t h e FLES p r o g r a m a t

by t e a c h e r recommendation

years
At w h a t g r a d *

t h i s t i me

13.
I f you a n s w e r e d ‘ No* t o # 1 2 , how a r e t h e s t u d e n t s
s e l e c t e d ? (Check a l l t h a t a r e a p p r o p r i a t e )

in e x i s t e n c e ?

4.

the ju n io r high level

n o , b u t p l a n s a r e b e i n g made a t

no

yes

only a t

12.
Can a l l s t u d e n t s p a r t i c i p a t e
your s c h o o l ?

2.

instructional

10 . U h a t e d u c a t i o n * ’ t r a i n i n g o r b a c k g r o u n d d o y o u r FLES
t e a c h e r s have?

1.
How many s t u d e n t s a t y o u r s c h o o l a r e s t u d y i n g t h e
l a n g u a g e t h a t you i n d i c a t e d a b o v e .
( w i t h w h i c h yo u a r e
involved)

yes

te x ts and/or

in p r e v i o u s Language A r t s c l a s s e s

b y an a p t i t u d e

d o e s y o u r FLES p r o g r a m b e g i n ?

test

other(s)

6.
How much t i m e p e r week i s a l l o t e d f o r f o r e i g n l a n g u a g e
i n s t r u c t i on?
_______ d a y s p e r week 9 _________ m i n u t e s

14.
On a s c a l e o f 1 - 1 0 , w i t h 10 b e i n g t h e b e s t , how w o u l d
y o u r a t * t h e s u p p o r t o f y o u r p r o g r a m by o t h e r t e a c h e r s i n
your s c h o o l ?

6a.

15.
On a s c a l e o f 1 - 1 0 , w i t h 10 b e i n g t h e b e s t , how w o u l d
you r a t e t h e s u p p o r t o f y o u r p r o g r a m by y o u r
admi n i s t r a t o r ( s ) ?

If

the

time v a r i e s from ye ar

to year,

please explain.

7.
B r i e f l y d e s c r i b e how s c h e d u l i n g o f FLES c l a s s e s o c c u r s
a t your s c h o o l .
B.
Ch e ck a l l
used.

the a p p ro p ria te classroom te c h n iq u e (s)

audio-lingual
individualized

Rassias
instruction

being
Method

T.P.R,

16.
On a s c a l e o f 1 - 1 0 , w i t h 10 b e i n g t h e b e s t , how w o u l d
you r a t e t h e s u p p o r t o f y o u r p r o g r a m by p a r e n t s a n d t h e
cormuni t y ?
17 .
all

Uhat a r e y o u r p r o g r a m ' s p e r c e i v e d s t r e n g t h s ?
that are appropriate)
the

teachers

( Ch e c k

oo

the

t e x t b o o k * and c l a s s r o o m m a t e r i a l s
2 1 . Th e g o a l s a n d o b j e c t i v e s o f t h e FLES p r o g r a m a t y o u r
school a r e ■
DN SA A D SD

parent/community support
acfcninIstratiwe s u p p o r t
o t h e r _______________________________
Uhat a r e yo ur p r o g r a m ' s p e r c e i v e d w e a k n e s s e s ?
al 1 t h a t are a p p r o p r i a t e )
no n e

te.

the

teachers

the

tex tb o o ks and classroom m a t e r i a l s

parent/community support
a d m in istra tiv e support

19 .

to teach the s tu d e n ts to v e rb a lly
communicate in a f o r e i g n l a n g u a g e .

b.

to teach the s t u d e n t s to r e a d in a
foreign language.

c.

t o teach the s t u d e n t s to w r i t e
foreign language.

d.

t o t e a c h t h e s t u d e n t s an a p p r e c i a t i o n
of a f o r e i g n c u l t u r e .

in a

e.

o t h e r ____________________________________

______ o t h e r _______________________________

f.

o t h e r ____________________________________

I s your prog ram modeled a f t e r

22.

yes
If

20.

a.
(Check

no

the answer

another?

d o n ' t know

20a . I f

YES

i s * y e s * t whose?

I s your prog ram e v a l u a t e d ?

yes

a.

to teach the stu d e n ts to v e rb a lly
communicate in a f o r e i g n l a n g u a g e .

b.

to teach the s t u d e n t s to r e a d
f o r e i g n language

c.

to teach the s tu d e n ts to w r ite
f o r e i g n language

d.

t o t e a c h t h e s t u d e n t s an a p p r e c i a t i o n
of a fo re ig n c u l t u r e .

e.

o t h e r _______________________________________

f.

o t h e r _______________________________________

23.

For t h o s e g o a l s and o b j e c t i v e s n o t b e i n g m e t , p l e a s e
i n d i c a t e why n o t .
(Check a l l a p p r o p r i a t e r e a s o n s )

no

" y e s " , how o f t e n ?
every year
o t h e r __________________________

20 b . I f

’yes",

by whom?

( Ch e c k a l l

I f yo u m a r k e d a n y o f t h e g o a l s SA o r
A in q u e s t i o n *21, are th ey b e i n g m et?

appropriate)

super intendent
building principal

in a
in a

FLES s u p e r v i s o r

lack

of a d m i n i s t r a t i v e co o p e r a tio n

classroom teacher

lack

o f communi ty s u p p o r t

students

lack

of monies to

other

lack

of c o l l e g i a l support

F o r t h e f o l l o w i n g q u e s t i o n , t h e s y m b o l s DN, SA, A, D, SD a n d
NA s t a n d f o r D N - D o n ' t Know, S A - S t r o n g 1 y A g r e e , A - A g r e e ,
D - D i s g a r e e , S D - S t r o n g l y D i s a g r e e a n d NA- Not A p p l i c a b l e .

inadequate

a d e q u a te ly fu n d the program

teacher preparation

u n a v a i l a b i l i t y of q u a l i f i e d s t a f f

NO

APPENDIX C

LIST OF SCHOOL DISTRICTS REPORTING FLES, 1986
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
OUESTIONNAIRE INSTRUMENT
FOLLOW-UP LETTER

SCHOOL DISTRICTS REPORTING FLES, 1986

Albion Public Schools
A uT rain-O nata Public Schools
A vondale School D is tric t
Beaver Island C om m unity Schools
Bel ding A rea Schools
C overt P ublic Schools
D e tro it C ity Schools D is tric t
Elk R apids Schools
F alm outh E lem en tary School D is tric t
F lin t C ity School D is tric t
Les C heneux C om m unity School D is tric t
Ludington A rea School D is tric t
Mount M orris C onsolidated Schools
N o rth p o rt Public School D is tric t
Novi C om m unity Schools
R ock R iver-L im estone School D is tric t
Saginaw C ity School D is tric t
Shelby Public Schools

86

MI CHI GAN STATE UN I VE RS IT Y
COLLEGE OE ED l'C A TIO N • DEPARTMENT OF TEACHER EDl'C ATIO N

EAST LANSING • M ICHIGAN • 4B 824I0A4

November 5, 1986
<name>
<address>
Dear <sal>:
Your school district was identified through a study conducted in 1985 by the
State Department of Education and Dr. George Mansour of Michigan State
University as one of thirty-one districts in the state of Michigan having a
Foreign Language in the Elementary School (FLES) program. Another 217 districts
indicated an interest in including foreign language instruction in their K-6
curriculum. Your district is on the breaking edge of this wide-spreading
commitment to a globally sound education for our youngsters.
The goal of this dissertation is to continue that study with the hope of
providing useful information that would then benefit our state and beyond. Your
participation is crucial and can greatly assist in the successful operation of
present and future programs. We encourage you to take the few minutes necessary
to complete the enclosed questionnaire. If your school offers more than one
foreign language, please duplicate the questionnaire and forward it to the
appropriate teachers(s)/coordinator(s) in charge of those languages. All
results will be treated with strict confidence, and participants and their
responses will remain completely anonymous. Participation is on a volunteer
basis, and there is no penalty for not taking part in this study.
Please return the questionnaire in the return envelope provided by NOVEMBER 15,
1986. If you choose not to be a part of this research project, simply return
the enclosed post card.
The next several years are going to be exciting ones in foreign language
education. Our country has become aware that the twenty-first century will
demand increased understanding among nations, and our schools are being called
upon to prepare our youngsters for that kind of world. The results of this
survey will be very helpful in future program development and innovation. Every
effort will be made to disseminate the results so that others may benefit by
your experiences.
Anticipated thanks for your cooperation.
Sincerely,

Audrey Heining-Boynton
Ph.D. Candidate and Director of
Foreign Languages, Olivet College

Dr. P. Riethmiller
Professor of Education
Michigan State University

MSL' u am A ffirm a ttvt Action/Equal O pportunity institution

87

#

A SU R V E Y O F FL E S PR O G R A M S
in th e
S ta te o f M ichigan
Each e le m en tary school in y o u r d istric t w ith a FL E S program sh o u ld be receiving o n e q u estio n n aire per language
p er school. It is im p o rta n t th a t each language in each individual school re tu rn its ow n q u estio n n aire. Please
d u p lic a te th is form w hen necessary so th a t every language ta u g h t in a p a rtic u la r e le m en tary school is represented.
F or exam ple, if you have tw o languages a t y o u r sch o o l, y o u r school w ould re tu rn tw o questio n n aires. A nd, if
a n o th e r elem en tary school in y o u r d istric t ta u g h t th e sam e (o r d iffe re n t) languages, th e y w ould re tu rn a q u e stio n ­
naire fo r each language tau g h t.

t.

W H A T F O R E I G N L A N G U A G E ( S ) D O Y O U T E A C H ? ________________________________________________________

2.

HOW MANY S T U D E N T S A T Y O U R SC H O O L A RE S T U D Y IN G TH E L A N G U A G E T H A T Y O U IN D IC A TED
A B O V E ? ______________________

3.

IS M O R E T H A N O N E L A N G U A G E O F F E R E D A T Y O U R S C H O O L ?

YES

NO

3-A . I F Y O U A N S W E R E D " Y E S " T O N U M B E R 3, M A Y T H E S T U D E N T S C H O O S E T H E L A N G U A G E
T H E Y W ISH T O S T U D Y ?
YES
NO
4.

H O W L O N G H A S Y O U R P R O G R A M B E E N IN E X I S T E N C E ?

5.

AT W HAT G R A D E LEVEL DOES Y O U R FL E S PR O G R A M BEGIN?

6.

HOW MANY G R A D E S D O ES Y O U R F L E S P R O G R A M ENCOM PA SS?

7.

HO W M U C H T IM E P E R W E E K IS A L L O T E D F O R F O R E I G N L A N G U A G E I N S T R U C T I O N ?
DAYS PER WEEK AT

YEARS

M INUTES

7-A. IF T H E T IM E V A R I E S F R O M Y E A R T O Y E A R . P L E A S E E X P L A I N .

8.

».

B R I E F L Y D E S C R I B E HOW S C H E D U L I N G O F F L E S C L A S S E S O C C U R S A T Y O U R S C H O O L .

CHECK ALL THE A P P R O P R IA T E C L A SSR O O M TEC H N IQ U E (S) BEIN G USED.
AU D IO -LIN G U A L
IN D IV ID U A L IZE D IN STR U C TIO N
O T H E R ( S ) ___________________________

RA SSIA S METHOD
T .P . R .
___________

88

10.

W HAT A R E T H E NAM ES O F THE T E X T S A N D /O R IN STRU CTIO N A L M A TE R IA LS T H A T YOU A R E
USIN G ?

II.

1 2.

W HAT E D U C A T IO N A L T R A IN IN G O R B A C K G R O U N D DO Y O U R F L E S TE A C H E R S H AVE?

H A V E S P E C IA L P R O V IS IO N S (I.E . A D V A N C E D F O R E IG N L A N G U A G E C L A SSE S) B E E N MA DE A T T H E
J U N IO R HIGH A N D H IG H S C H O O L L E V E L S T O A CC O M M O D A T E T H E F L E S S T U D E N T S ?
YES
____O N L Y A T T H E J U N I O R H I G H L E V E L
N O P R O V I S I O N S A T T H I S T IM E

13.
14.

N O . B U T P L A N S A R E B E I N G M A D E A T T H I S T IM E

C A N A L L S T U D E N T S P A R T I C I P A T E IN T H E F L E S P R O G R A M A T Y O U R S C H O O L ?

YES

NO

I F Y O U A N S W E R E D " N O " T O N U M B E R I 3. HO W A R E T H E S T U D E N T S S E L E C T E D ? ( C H E C K A L L
T H A T A R E A PPR O PR IA T E)
______ B Y T E A C H E R R E C O M M E N D A T I O N
B Y G R A D E S IN P R E V I O U S L A N G U A G E A R T S C L A S S E S
BY AN A PT IT U D E T EST
O T H E R ( S ) ___________________________________________________________________________________

15.

O N A S C A L E O F 1-10. W I T H 10 B E I N G T H E B E S T . HOW W O U L D Y O U R A T E T H E S U P P O R T O F Y O U R
P R O G R A M B Y O T H E R T E A C H E R S IN Y O U R S C H O O L ?

16.

O N A S C A L E O F 1-10. W I T H 10 B E I N G T H E B E S T , HOW W O U L D Y O U R A T E T H E S U P P O R T O F Y O U R
P R O G R A M BY Y O U R A D M I N I S T R A T O R ( S ) ?

17.

______

O N A S C A L E O F 1-10, W IT H 1 0 B E I N G T H E B E S T . H O W W O U L D Y O U R A T E T H E S U P P O R T O F Y O U R
P R O G R A M BY P A R E N T S A N D T H E C O M M U N I T Y ?

I 8.

______

______

W HAT A R E Y O U R P R O G R A M 'S PE R C E IV E D S T R E N G T H S ? (CHECK A L L T H A T A R E A PPR O PR IA T E )
THE TEACHERS
THE T EX T BO O K S AND CLASSROOM M A TERIA LS
______ P A R E N T / C O M M U N I T Y S U P P O R T
______ A D M I N I S T R A T I V E S U P P O R T
______ O T H E R ________________________________________________________________________________________

89

19.

W HAT A R E Y O U R P R O G R A M 'S PE R C E IV E D W E A K N ESSE S? (CHECK A L L T H A T A R E A PP R O P R IA T E )
NONE
THE TEACHERS
THE TEX TBO O K S A ND CLASSROOM M A TERIA LS
P A R E N T/C O M M U N ITY S U P P O R T
A D M IN IS T R A T IV E S U P P O R T
______ O T H E R _________________________________________________________________________________________

20.

IS Y O U R P R O G R A M M O D E L E D A F T E R A N O T H E R ?

YES

NO

D O N 'T KNOW

I F T H E A N S W E R IS " Y E S , " W H O S E ? ________________________________________________________________________
2 1.

IS Y O U R P R O G R A M E V A L U A T E D ?
2 1 -A . I F " Y E S . " H O W O F T E N ?

YES

NO

EVERY YEAR

O T H E R _________________________________________

2 1-B. I F " Y E S , " B Y W H O M ? ( C H E C K A L L A P P R O P R I A T E )
SU PER IN T EN D EN T
FLE S S U PER V ISO R

____ B U I L D I N G P R I N C I P A L
____ C L A S S R O O M T E A C H E R

STUDENTS

____ O T H E R _____________________________________________

F O R THE FOLLOW ING Q U E STIO N . T H E SYM BOLS " D N ," "S A ." " A ," " D ." " S D " AND " N A " STA N D FO R :
D N - D O N 'T KNOW, S A - S T R O N G L Y A G R E E , A - A G R E E , D - D I S A G R E E , S D - S T R O N G L Y D ISA G R E E .
AND N A - N O T A PPLICA B LE.
2 2.

THE GO A LS AND O B JEC TIV E S O F THE F L E S P RO G R A M AT Y OU R SCH O O L A R E :
DN

SA

A

D

SD

NA

□

□

□

□

□

□

□

□

□

□

□

□

□

□

□

o

□

□

D. T O T E A C H T H E S T U D E N T S AN
A PPRECIA TIO N O F A FO R E IG N C U LTU RE

□

□

a

a

□

□

P

otm fb

□

□

□

□

□

□

F

OTHER

o

□

□

□

□

□

A. TO TEA C H T H E S T U D E N T S TO V E R B A L L Y
C O M M U N I C A T E IN A F O R E I G N L A N G U A G E
B. T O T E A C H T H E S T U D E N T S T O R E A D IN A
FO R E IG N L ANGUAGE
C. T O T E A C H T H E S T U D E N T S T O W R I T E IN A
F O R E IG N L A NGUAGE

23.

I F Y O U M A R K E D A N Y O F T H E G O A L S " S A " O R " A " IN Q U E S T I O N N U M B E R 2 2 , A R E T H E Y B E I N G
MET?

A.

YES

NO

£3

13]

T O T E A C H T H E S T U D E N T S T O V E R B A L L Y C O M M U N I C A T E IN A
F O R E IG N LA N G U A G E

90

YES

NO

B. T O T E A C H T H E S T U D E N T S T O R E A D IN A F O R E I G N L A N G U A G E

□

□

C . T O T E A C H T H E S T U D E N T S T O W R I T E IN A F O R E I G N L A N G U A G E

□

□

D. T O T E A C H T H E S T U D E N T S A N A P P R E C I A T I O N O F A F O R E I G N C U L T U R E

□

□

E . O T H E R _______________________________________________________________________________
F . O T H E R _______________________________________________________________________________
2 4.

F O R TH O SE G O A L S A N D O B J E C T IV E S N O T B E IN G M ET. P L E A S E IN D IC A T E W HY N O T . (CHECK
A LL A PPR O PR IA T E REA SO N S)
LACK O F A D M IN IS T R A T IV E CO O PE R A T IO N
LA C K O F C O M M U N IT Y S U P P O R T
LACK O F M O N IE S T O A D E Q U A T E L Y FU N D T H E P R O G R A M
LACK O F CO LLEG IA L SU PPO RT
IN A D EO U A TE T E A C H E R P R E PA R A T IO N
U N A V A IL A B IL IT Y O F Q U A L IF IE D S T A F F
O T H E R _________________________________________________________________________________________________

2 5.

IF YOU F E E L T H A T T H IS Q U E S T IO N N A IR E WAS N O T A P P R O P R IA T E T O A D E Q U A T E L Y D E SC R IB E
Y O U R F L E S P R O G R A M O R C E R T A I N A S P E C T S O F IT . P L E A S E U S E T H E F O L L O W I N G S P A C E T O
S H A R E Y O U R S I T U A T I O N W I T H US.

T hank you fo r y o u r p a rticip a tio n in this stu d y . Please check below if you w ould like to receive a prin ted
sum m ary o f th e stu d y .
Yes, send m e a c o p y o f th e resu lts w hen tab u la te d .

91

M I CHI GAN STATE U N I VE RS IT Y
COLLEGE O f ED I CATION • DEPARTMENT O f TEACHER EDL'CATION

EAST LANSING • MICHIGAN • 4 M M -I0M

December 1, 1986

<name>
<address>
Dear <sal>,
Several weeks ago you were sent a questionnaire as a part of a state-wide study
regarding Foreign Language in the Elementary School (FLES). He are particularly
desirous of obtaining your responses because your experiences as a FLES teacher
will contribute significantly toward creating a data base of information that up
to now has been lacking.
You are among a very elite group of Michigan educators, and your response to the
questionnaire is critical for U 6 to present as correctly as possible the current
condition of FLES in the state of Michigan. In the event you have mislaid the
original questionnaire, we have included another copy as well as a reply
envelope.
It would be appreciated if you would return the questionnaire in the enclosed
stamped envelope by December 15. Please remember that your responses will be
held in the strictest confidence.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely,

Dr. P. Riethmiller
Professor of Education
Michigan State University

Audrey Heining-Boynton
Director of Foreign Language
Olivet College

M S V u an A fftrm a tt* * A c tio n /E q u a l O p p o r tu n ity In s titu tio n

92

APPENDIX D

PERMISSION LETTER FROM MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
COMMITTEE ON RESEARCH INVOLVING HUMAN SUBJECTS

M IC H IG A N STATE U N IV E R SIT Y
UNIVERSITY COMMITTEE ON RESEARCH INVOLVING

EAST LANSING • MICHIGAN • 48824-1046

HUMAN SUBJECTS (UCRIHS)
238 ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
(517) 355-2186

M s . Audrey Heining-Boynton
P.O. Box 71
Olivet, Michigan 49076
Dear Ms. Heining-Boynton:
Subject: Proposal Entitled, "Current Foreign Language in the
_________ Elementary School Programs in the State of Michigan"
I am pleased to advise that I concur with your evaluation that this
project is exempt from full UCRIHS review, and approval is herewith
granted for conduct of the project.
You are reminded that UCRIHS approval is valid for one calendar year. If
you plan to continue this project beyond one year, please make provisions
for obtaining appropriate UCRIHS approval prior to October 6, 1987.
Any changes in procedures involving human subjects must be reviewed by the
UCRIHS prior to initiation of the change. UCRIHS must also be notified
promptly of any problems (unexpected side effects, complaints, etc.)
involving human subjects during the course of the work.
Thank you for bringing this project to my attention.
future help, please do not hesitate to let me know.

If I can be of any

Sincerely

enry E. Bredeck, Ph.D
Chairman, UCRIHS
HEB/jms
cc:

Dr. Peggy M. Riethmiller

93
MSU t5 an A ffirm ative A ction/E qual O pportunity Institution

APPENDIX E

COMMENTS AND REMARKS MADE BY RESPONDENTS:
SELECTION OF STUDENTS FOR PARTICIPATION IN FLES
SCHEDULING AND TIME-ON-TASK
CLASSROOM TECHNIQUES, TEXTS, AND INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS
PERCEIVED STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES
PROGRAM GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS AND REMARKS

SELECTION OF STUDENTS FOR PARTICIPATION IN FLES

The following a re m ethods used e ith e r alone or in com bination fo r placing
students in FLES program s.
T eacher recom m endation (this was m entioned th re e tim es)
G rades in previous language a rts classes
A ptitude te s t
C om bination of availab le high school foreign language stu d en ts with
e lem en tary school schedule
S ta te Law #294, T itle VII, Open M agnet
P rincipal selection and recom m endation
E lem en tary school te a c h e r req u est

95

SCHEDULING AND TIME-ON-TASK

R em arks w ere as follow s.
If we have m ore than four k in d erg arten s, as is the case this year,
th e ir tim e period is only once a week (as opposed to tw ice a w eek'.
Tim e varies according to number of classes (of a c e rta in grade level)
and school population.
Our program is fo r 12 w eeks in th e sixth grade only.
m e e t five days per w eek fo r 45 m inutes.

The students

TV schedule determ ines (tim e).
We te a c h a six w eek in tro d u cto ry course. C lassroom te a c h e rs grades
1-5 request if they w an t th e e x p erien c e . My th ird y ear high school
foreign language stu d en ts do the teach in g . They w ork in pairs. They
te a c h 10-15 m inutes daily. W hether we o ffe r Spanish o r French
depends on the num ber of my high school stu d en ts in th ird y ear.
The program s ta rte d th re e years ago with one first grade class. The
second y e ar, th e firs t class continued and a new first grade class
began. This y ear th e tw o advanced classes w ere com bined (with som e
drop-outs), and I hope to s ta r t th e new firs t graders a fte r C h ristm as.
^Whether tim e v a rie s from
scheduling.

year

to

y e a r'

depends a

little

on

Third and fo u rth graders study Spanish fo r only nine weeks each y ear.
F ifth and sixth grade Spanish are fu ll-y ear courses.
We ta ilo r our program to m e et th e schedules of local schools in the 21
school d istric ts we cov er.
The FLES program runs from m id-N ovem ber through the end of
school.
(FLES is) a u to m a tic a lly included in the cu rricu lu m , K -6.
K-2 classes a re scheduled on Tuesdays and Thursdays; th ird through
sixth grades on Monday, W ednesday and F rid ay . It is a "pull-out"
program from th e language a rts block. I go to K-2 bu t th ird through
sixth grades com e to my room .
T eacher establishes schedule from hom eroom classes a t beginning of
each year. F o r students in grades fo u r through six, th e tim e block is
taken from language a rts block.
O riginally sixth grade was p a rt of the seven through eig h t middle
school. Due to en ro llm en t, th e seven through eig h t stay ed in one

96

building and th e fif th and sixth w ent to an o th er. Sixth grade has 12
w eeks o f Spanish as p a rt of an ex p lo rato ry program which includes 12
weeks each of a r t, vocal m usic and foreign language o ffe re d . All
sixth graders p a rtic ip a te in this program .
Follow TV schedule—1:15 e ac h W ednesday. E nrichm ent tw ice a w eek.
C lasses a re scheduled as a required course one day a w eek fo r 45
m inutes (K-6).
College students
schedules.

do

the

teach in g , and

we

work

around

th e ir

Tim e fo r Spanish is "released tim e" fo r regular classroom te a c h e rs.
G rade one and grade tw o te a c h e rs d eterm in e th e day and tim e fra m e ;
te ac h e rs a t the e lem en ta ry level are second, th ird and fo u rth year
French students from high school classes. The program is for one
se m e ste r.
Six high school stu d en ts a re the te a c h e rs . T hree go to one class,
th re e to another. Spanish is being ta u g h t now; we used to te a c h
French.
Full bilingual m agnet program .
S tudents com e from 31 schools.
C e rtifie d te a c h e rs in all classroom s.
Principal does scheduling of FLES.
The six e le m e n ta ry schools in the d is tric t are served by one te a c h e r.
She visits th e th ird and fo u rth grade classroom s. Each school has th e
Spanish te a c h e r fo r one m arking period.
F ifth and sixth grade
Spanish is an e le c tiv e and m eets b efo re or a f te r school a t one c e n tra l
location. Students are bussed.
G rades 1, 2, 3—15 m inutes per day, five days a w eek. G rade 4—20
m inutes per day, four tim es a w eek (Monday, Tuesday, T hursday,
Friday).
G rade 5 is Tuesday, Thursday and ev ery o th e r F rid ay .
G rade 6 is Monday, W ednesday and ev ery o th e r F rid ay .
Each class (K-6) scheduled fo r tw o 30-m inute periods per w eek.
Usually a f te r a r t and m usic.
I have 15 m inutes with each grade (K-2). We work on vocabulary,
tran slatio n from English to Spanish and from Spanish to English.
For nine weeks, th e follow ing occurs: G rades 1-2, tw o days fo r 20
m inutes; grades 3-4, tw o days for 30 m inutes; grades 5-6, 45 m inute
sessions.
French is o ffered fo r 20 m inutes, th re e days a w eek fo r firs t and
second grade; 30 m inutes, tw o days a week fo r th ird grade. A h alf­

97

tim e te ac h e r covers one elem en ta ry school and a fu ll-tim e te a c h e r
covers th e tw o rem aining e lem en tary schools.
Students a re te s te d (and then th e re is a) m eetin g w ith principal and
te a c h e r (for placem ent).
All fo urth graders tak e Spanish. F ifth graders take (the) class as an
option before school. Sixth (graders) ta k e i t as an option a f te r
school.

98

CLASSROOM TECHNIQUES, TEXTS, AND INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS

C lassroom techniques liste d as "otherfeV' w ere th e follow ing:
L earnables
System s 80
Visuals
C ostum es
Modified Lozanov
C oloring pages
Flash cards
Bulletin boards
K-3 em phasizes oral language; U-6 em phasizes read in g , w riting,
listening, and speaking
High school students plan lessons
T exts and in stru c tio n a l m a te ria ls liste d w ere th e following:
P rom enade I and II from A ddison-L esley
Vive le F ran cais from Addison-W esley
L 'Enseignem ent du F ran c a is au Moyen de I'A ction by B ertha Begal
F rench Is Fun by S tein and Wald
Econom y Com pany
Salut les Amis by V alette and Vedette
Tous Ensem ble
Bienvenidos
Spanish Is Fun
H ablan los Ninos
Basic C onversational Spanish by LaC.rone
C onversational Spanish by H ayes School Publishing Com pany
Peabody L anguage D evelopm ent K it
Audio visual ta p es
Opaque p ro je c to r
C oloring books
Workbooks
Television lessons

99

PERCEIVED STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES
L iste d "other" stren g th s w ere th e following:
A bility to "turn on" youngsters to a foreign language
The (high school) studen t te a c h e rs
Student m otivation (m entioned th re e tim es)
F lexibility to f i t e lem en tary te a c h e rs' schedules
Home room te ac h e r support
My willingness to volu n teer and te a c h th is class, even though I am not
a foreign language te a c h e r
The
presence
of
many
Spanish-speaking m ig ran t
dem o n strates th e p ra c tica l ap p licatio n of a second language

stu d en ts

Although I am not a n ativ e speaker, I have a good background in the
language and a good a c c e n t. L a s t sum m er, I took a re fre sh e r course
for five weeks
P a re n ts of stu d en ts in the program a re v ery supportive. O thers in the
com m unity are perhaps not aw are of w hat we a re doing.
L isted "other" w eaknesses w ere th e following:
Lack of ad eq u ate tim e with th e students. A lso, m any levels of
experience in each classroom —in sixth grade now we have stu d en ts
with 0 to m ore than 6 y ears o f FLES F rench
Instability of school population
(Lack of) u p d a ted TV lessons
The program is h it and m iss. O utlying schools are m issed. The
program depends on th e size of my advanced fo reign language classes
a t the high school
Lack o f s tru c tu re and language fluency
The program s e t up is th e biggest draw back
High school stu d en ts spend valuable class tim e preparing fo r the
e lem en tary school ex p erien ce
L ack of support s ta ff and aides
N ot hiring a n o th er te a c h e r to pick up th e overflow
Not enough tim e

100

PROGRAM GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
"O ther" program goals and ob jectiv es a re th e follow ing:
To te a c h listen in g com prehension skills
To te ac h in te rre la te d n e s s of c u ltu re s
To broaden horizons
To encourage fu rth e r language study
To te a c h use of phonics, c o n ten t to expand vocabulary

101

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS AND REMARKS

My program is only a pilot program o ffered to one fifth grade class one day
a week fo r 50 m in u tes. Its goals and objectives a re prim arily to expose stu d en ts
to a foreign language and c u ltu re and te ac h th em to a p p re c ia te th e relationship
which exists betw een English and th e Spanish language.
I'm sorry if th is info rm atio n does no t answ er m any of your survey's
questions, b u t I feel m any o f th e se ju st do not apply to this program a t this
p a rtic u la r tim e.
I began the FLES program four years ago, piloting th e p ro je c t w ith tw o
superior second y ear studen ts who ta u g h t F ren ch in one first grade and one
second grade room .
The elem en ta ry principal a t th a t tim e was som ew hat
s k e p tic a l, as w ere th e te a c h e rs , but all ag reed to try i t once. It w as decided th a t
stud ents could do a very e ffe c tiv e job of teach in g th e littl e ones (the classroom
te a c h e r is alw ays in th e room throughout th e French in stru ctio n ), and th e
program was expanded.
C u rren tly , m y th ird year high school F ren c h stu d en ts are teach in g a t th e
second g rad e lev el, and my second y ear high school stu d en ts will begin second
sem ester w ith all first g rad e stu d en ts. Second g rad e stu d en ts are learning to
sing "Rudolphe" in F ren ch and will perform i t as a p a rt of th e ir C h ristm as m usic
program for p aren ts. Each year e ith e r f ir s t or second grade stu d en ts have done a
F rench C hristm as carol as p a rt of th e ir m usic program .
F or regular weekly lessons, th e high school stu d en ts e ith e r te a c h by oral
m ethod (things like g re e tin g s, nam e, h a b ita tio n , e tc .), or by using p ictu res or
o th er illu stra tin g o b jects.
This program has been w ell-regarded by te a c h e rs , stu d en t te ac h e rs, and
p a re n ts of th e little ones. I feel th a t it has been an e x c e lle n t ex p erien ce fo r my
high school students—many of them have acquired m uch re sp e c t fo r the teaching
profession, and ail have found th a t th ey have to polish th e ir own skills to keep up
w ith questions and enthusiasm from the little ones.
The value of th is response m ay be questionable due to th e lim ited n a tu re of
FLES in our d is tric t. I am the F ren ch te a c h e r a t the high school and used th is
re p o rt as i t applied to FLES a c tiv itie s ta u g h t by m y fo u rth y ear stu d en ts in th re e
buildings.
The following is an explanation of all e lem en tary school a c tiv ity in foreign
languages in our d istric t:
1.
One elem en ta ry school has an occasional six w eek program a f te r
school open to all grades. A fe e is charged fo r th is program .
Classes m eet once a week fo r 45 m in u tes.
2. Two elem en ta ry te a c h e rs in the tw o o th er buildings in co rp o rate
foreign language phrases and songs in to th e lessons as
a p p ro p riate. Both of th e se te ac h e rs have a stro n g in te re s t in the
languages, F ren ch and Spanish, b u t a re no t train ed FLES
te a c h e rs.
3.
A French club is cu rre n tly m eetin g a t th e m iddle school for an
hour and a half each week.
4.
Fourth year F ren ch stu d en ts from the high school go w eekly to
th e th re e e lem en ta ry schools to te a c h students. T he e ig h t week
curriculum was w ritte n by th e high school F ren ch te ac h e r and

102

includes songs, p h rases, g am es. T here will be th re e sessions of
eig h t weeks during th e y ear and a to ta l of 28 classes will learn
som e conversation al F ren ch w ith the help of th e se stu d en ts.
This is th e program re fe rre d to in th e first paragraph above.
A k in d e rg a rte n te a c h e r w ith sev eral years of language study is in te re ste d
in in co rp o ratin g foreign language in to her daily program b u t would like som e help
in developing cu rriculum . The in te re s t is h ere and we would a p p re c ia te input
from o th e r d is tric ts regarding successful program s. P le a se inform m e of on­
going p ro jects th a t could be useful to us.
This questionnaire is not a p p ro p ria te in th a t we are involved w ith th e TV
lessons only. We had hoped th a t th e se film s m ight be updated. They a re a b o u t
10-15 y ears old.
The students do enjoy th e sessions in th e ir p ercep tio n s (sic) of the
derivations in language and c u ltu re of today.
Why n o t th e sam e in Spanish a n d /o r F rench?
Since th is is an in tro d u cto ry ex p lo rato ry program , our goals a re to provide
a successful language experience fo r stu d en ts. G ram m ar is tau g h t su itab le to
th e ag e level. O ral a c tiv itie s , dialogues and re c ita tio n are em phasized. Spanish
sound system is ta u g h t to help stu d en ts learn to read and apply to fa m ilia r and
unfam iliar w ords. C ognates and idiom s a re included. Film s and o th e r m a te ria ls
are used fo r c u ltu ra l in fo rm atio n .
Our program was begun in 180 under som e ideal c irc u m stan c es. Three
schools em barked on a FLES program and th e te a c h e rs (including m y self' w ere
given tim e to organize the cu rriculum , goals and o b je ctiv es. As we tau g ht and
tried o u t our id e as, we w ere allow ed one aftern o o n per w eek to share ideas,
revise, discuss, e tc .
Many m a te ria ls such as film strip s, g am es, c a s s e tte s ,
d ictio n aries, ta p e players, re c o rd players, e tc ., had been purchased b efo re we
w ere consulted. Some of th e so ftw a re was a t a level too d iffic u lt fo r elem en ta ry
stu d en ts, and we found ourselves m aking m any p ictu res, c h a rts, d itto s, gam es,
e tc .; and i t was w onderful to have tim e to sh are. We discovered a f te r one or two
years th a t we had been to o am bitious w ith a larg e vocabulary of nouns and had
not provided fo r in te g ra tin g u n its. We shortened our vocabulary lists and began
using TPR which g re a tly helped our program becom e less fra g m e n te d . We a re
moving tow ard m ore reading and som e w riting now th a t som e of our stu d en ts are
moving in to a seventh y ear.
Our program does not f i t into any organized one. It is one I have developed
with th e help of som e frie n d s in th e language d e p a rtm e n t a t th e local co lleg e. I
feel th ere is real hope if I can continue to som e day have language as a p a rt of
th e curriculum and n o t ju s t a v o lu n teer type program . T h ere is stro n g p a re n t
support. C ollege stu d en ts a re w onderful, b u t of course they a re not train ed
te a c h e rs. They need help and guidance, and th e y g ra d u a te and I have to keep
changing stu d en ts.
For the p a st five years we have had F ren ch fo r grades 1-6 fo r 15 m inutes
each per day . . .
F or five years I have tau g h t all 10 classes daily (first grade through high
school)—th e d iffering age lev els and co m p eten cies. T hey have reduced th e
num ber of days per w eek in grades 4, 5, and 6 fo r my san ity alone! I'm happy to
say Pm having my best year e v e r now t h a t I have fe w er classes and preps. But

103

m ore im p o rtan t, a f te r five years, I've finally been given a classroom by which all
students com e to m e in ste a d of tra v e lin g to all th e e lem en ta ry grades as I had
alw ays done in th e past. The job nearly killed me!! I c a n 't believe how w onderful
ev ery th in g is going now! The classroom is by fa r the m ajor p a rt of th is program .
I would be happy to ta lk and give th e needed in p u t from an ex p erien ced
te a c h e r such as m yself. I have ta lk e d w ith countless te ac h e rs acro ss the s ta te
and th e country. I feel t h a t I have th e e x p e rtise to advise school boards and
a d m in istra to rs who haphazardly decide to s ta r t th e se w onderful program s but do
not in any way know w here or how to begin.

APPENDIX F

FIGURES F.1-F.7, MINUTES PER WEEK FOR FLES INSTRUCTION

NUMBER OF PROGRAMS

KINDERGARTEN

•

20

Him
■

■

•

a

•

30

40

50

60

70

D

ii

at

80

100

ii

120

h

■

D

■

■

150

200

250

MINUTES PER WEEK
F igure F .1

NUMBER OF PROGRAMS

F IR S T GRADE
—

—

—

—

1

e
20

nnn

30

40

50

ai

60

M IN U T E S
F ig u re

70

80

n __n.
••

aa

100

120

P E R W EEK

F .2
104

150

—

200

250

105

NUMBER OF PROGRAMS

SECOND

GRADE

5
■
4
3
2
1

1

e
20

30

40

50

60

•

••

70

80

n u
II

■■

100

120

150

200

250

MINUTES PER WEEK
Figure F .3

THIRD

NUMBER OF PROGRAMS

ie

GRADE

8
6
4
2
8

t

■

a

•

20

30

40

50

<0

M IN U T E S
F ig u re

n

■

F .4

70

80

100

P E R W EE K

120

150

200

250

106

NUMBER OF PROGRAMS

FOURTH

GRADE

10
8
6
4
2
0

D
20

30

40

50

60

70

80

100

120

150

200

250

MINUTES PER WEEK
F igure F .5

FIFTH

NUMBER OF PROGRAMS

1 0

GRADE

8

4
2

frrrri

0

•a

20

30

40

50

M IN U T E S
F igure

F .6

60

70

80

aa

aa

100

120

P E R W EE K

••

n
150

200

250

107

NUMBER OF PROGRAMS

SIXTH

1
0

K
•

■

■

20

30

40

I

a

•

50

40

GRADE

Mi l l
70

80

100

MINUTES PER WEEK
Figure F .7

i i

120

JLJL
150

200

250

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alkonis, N ancy V. and Mary A. Brophy. "A Survey o f FLES P ra c tic e s ." In
R ep o rts of Surveys and Studies in th e T eaching of Modern Foreign
Languages. 1959-1961. New Y ork: T he Modern Language A sso ciatio n , 1961.
A m erican A ttitu d e s T ow ard Foreign Languages and Foreign C u ltu res. Ed. by
E dw ard D udley and P e te r H eller.
Bonn:
Bouvier V erlag H e rb e rt
Grundm ann, 1983.
Andersson, T heodore. The Teaching of Foreign Languages in the E lem en tary
School. Boston: D. C. H eath and C o., 1953.
___________ . Foreign Languages in the E lem e n ta ry School:
M ediocrity. A ustin: U niversity o f T exas P ress, 1969.
A ngiolillo, Paul F . "F rench fo r the Feeble-M inded:
L anguage Journal, 26 (1942), 266-271.

A S truggle A gainst

An E xperim ent."

Modern

A rendt, Jerm ain e . " C rite ria fo r Admission: A C all for R esearch ." T he FLES
S tu d en t: A Study. New Y ork: C hilton Books, 1967, pp. 15-22.
B aranick, William A. and Paul L . M arkham . "A ttitu d e s of E lem e n ta ry School
P rin cip als T ow ard F o reig n L anguage In stru ctio n ."
F oreign Language
Annals, 19, No. 6 (1986), 481-489.
Borque, Edward H ., e d . The FLES Student: A Study. New York: C hilton Books,
1967.
Burke, S. H. "Language A cquisition, Language L earning and Language Teaching."
In tern atio n al R eview o f A pplied L inguistics in Language T eaching. 12
(1974), pp. 53-68.
B urstall, C la re . "French in the P rim ary Schools: The B ritish E xperim ent." In
F rench from A ge E ig h t, o r E leven? Ed. H. H. S te m , C lare B urstall and
B irgit H arley. Toronto: O ntario In s titu te fo r Studies in E ducation, 1975,
pp. 7-36.
___________ . "P rim ary F ren ch in the B alance." E ducational R esearch , 17, June
(1975), pp. 198-199.
C am pbell, Russell N ., Tracy C . G ray, Nancy C . Rhodes, and M arguerite Ann
Snow.
"Foreign L anguage L earning in th e E lem en tary Schools:
A
Com parison of T h ree L anguage Program s." The Modern Language Jo urn al,
69 (1985), 44-54.

108

109

C arroll, John B. "R esearch on T eaching Foreign Languages." Handbook of
R ese arch on T each in g . C hicago: R and M cNally, 1963, pp. 1060-1100. R p t.
in R eadings in Foreign Languages fo r the E lem en tary School. Ed. Stanley
Levenson, and William K endrick. M assachusetts: B laisdell Publishing C o.,
1967, pp. 73-127.
___________ . "Trends and D evelopm ents in Second Language T eaching to Young
C hildren." A m erika-H aus, H am burg, 11 May 1966. R p t. "Psychological and
E ducational R ese arch into Second Language T eaching to Young C hildren."
In Languages and th e Young School Child. Ed. H. H. S te m . London:
O xford U niversity P ress, 1969, pp. 56-68.
___________ . T he F oreign Language A tta in m e n ts of L anguage M ajors in th e
Senior Y ear:
A Survey C onducted in U. S. C olleges and U niversities.
C am bridge, Mass:
L ab o rato ry fo r R esearch in In stru ctio n , H arvard
U niversity, 1967.
D eLorenzo, William E., and Lois A. G ladstein.
"Im m ersion E ducation a
l’A m ericaine: A D e sc rip tiv e Study of U. S. Im m ersion Program s." Foreign
Language A nnals 17, No. I (1984), 35-40.
D onoghue, M ildred R. "A R atio n ale fo r FLES." F oreign Languages and th e
Schools: A Book of R eadings. Ed. M ildred R. Donoghue. Dubuque: Wm.
C. Brown C o., 1967, pp. 60-67.
___________ , and John F. K unkle. Second Languages in P rim ary Education.
M assachusetts: New bury H ouse Publishers, Inc., 1979.
D reier, G race M. "D eveloping and Introducing a Program of C onversational
Spanish in th e E lem en tary Schools of Los A ngeles, C alifornia." S ubm itted
to the N ational C o nferen ce on the R ole of Foreign Languages in A m erican
Schools. W ashington, DC: Jan u a ry 15, 1953.
Funkel, H arold S., and P iile t, Roger A. French in the E lem en tary School. Five
Y ears E xperience. T he U niversity of C hicago P ress, 1962.
Educational S ervice B ureau.
Modern Foreign Language T eaching in
E lem en tary G rades. Texas: T em ple U niversity, 1962.

th e

Erasm us, D. C hristiani m atrim onium instituendis. O pera V pp. 615-723.
Eriksson, M arguerite, Ilse F o re s t and R uth M ulhauser. F oreign Languages in th e
E lem entary School. New Jersey : P re n tic e -H a ll, Inc., 1964.
Evaluation of th e E ffe c t o f F oreign Language Study in th e E lem en tary School
upon A chievem ent in th e High School. By Board of E ducation, Borough of
Som erville, New J e rse y , 1962.
Finocchiaro, M ary. Teaching C hildren Foreign Languages. New York: McGraw
H ill Book C om pany, 1964.
F isher, C aro l. "A ltern ativ e to N orm ative T ests." The FLES Student: A Study.
Ed. E dw ard H. Bourque. New York: C hilton Books, 1968, pp. 34-39.

110

G ardner, R obert C ., E. W allace, R. C lem ent and L. G liksm an. "Second-Language
L earning:
A Social Psychological P ersp ectiv e."
C anadian Modern
Language R eview , 32 (1976), 198-213.
G arry, Ralph, and Edna M auriello. Sum m ary of R esearch on "Parlons F ran cais."
Vol. I of th e M assachusetts Council fo r Public Schools, Inc. Boston, 1960.
G eigle, Ralph C . "Foreign Languages and B asic Learning."
School Journal. LVII, May (1967), pp. 418-420.

The E lem en tary

G eissinger, John B. "Foreign Languages in th e E lem en tary Schools."
A m erican School Board Jo u rn a l. CXXXIII A ugust (1956), pp. 27-29.

The

G ram er, Virginia.
"Kinds of Knowledge R elev an t to Foreign Language
In stru ctio n ."
F*L *E*S and th e O b jectiv es of th e C ontem porary
E lem entary Schools. Ed. Roger A. P ille t. New York: Chilton Books, 1967,
pp. 25-30.
H alsall, E lizabeth. "L inguistic A p titu d e." Modern Languages, 50 (1969), 18-22.
Hawkins, L e e E. "E xtra-S chool
Foreign Language E ducation:
Education. Vol. 4. E d. D ale
N ational T extbook C om pany,

F a c to rs t h a t Influence Language L earning."
A R eap p raisal. Review of Foreign Language
L. Lange and C h arles J. Jam es. Skokie, 111:
1972, pp. 321-340.

In te rn a tio n a l A dvisory C o m m itte e on School C urriculum . Foreign Language
Teaching in the P rim ary School. Paris; UNESCO, Septem ber 1958.
Iowa G overnor's T ask F o rc e . R e p o rt on th e G overnor's T ask F o rc e on Foreign
Language Studies and In te rn a tio n a l Education to th e H onorable T e rry E.
B ranstad G overnor, S ta te o f Iow a. D es Moines: 1983.
Izzo, Suzanne.
Second Language L earning:
A R eview of R elate d Studies.
Virginia: N ational C learinghouse fo r Bilingual E ducation, 1981.
Johnson, C harles E., Joseph S. Flores, Fred P. Ellison and Miguel A. R ie stra . The
D evelopm ent and Evaluation on M ethods and M aterials to F a c ilita te
Foreign Language In stru ctio n in E lem en tary Schools. Illinois: U niversity
of Illinois, 1963.
___________ , Joseph S. Flores and F red P. Ellison. "The E ffe c t of Foreign
L anguage In stru ctio n on B asic L earning in E lem en tary Schools." The
Modern Language Jo u rn al, XLVII Jan u ary (1963), 8-11.
K elly, Louis G. 25 C en tu rie s o f L anguage T each in g . M assachusetts:
House Publishers, 1969.
Klein, W olfgang.
Second Language A cquisition.
U niversity P ress, 1986.

C am bridge:

Newbury
Cam bridge

Ill

K rashen, S. "A ccounting fo r C hild-A dult D ifferen ces in Second Language R a te
and A tta in m e n t." C hild -A d u lt D iffere n c es in Second L anguage A cquisition;
Series on Issues in Second Language R ese arch . Eds. Stephen D . K rashen,
Robin C. S carcella, and M ichael H. Long.
R ow ley, M assach u setts:
Newbury H ouse Publishers, Inc., 1982, pp. 202-226.
___________ , M. Long and R. S carcella. "Age, R a te , and E ventual A tta in m e n t in
Second Language A cquisition."
C hild-A dult D ifferen ces in Second
L anguage A cquisition: S eries on Issues in Second L anguage R esearch . Eds.
S tephen D. K rashen, Robin C. S carcella, and M ichael H. Long. R ow ley,
M assachusetts: Newbury H ouse Publishers, Inc., 1982, pp. 202-226.
Language Study fo r th e 1980s: R ep o rts of th e MLA-ACLS L anguage T ask F o rc e s .
Ed. R ich ard I. Brod. New York, 1980.
L arew , Leonor A.
699-701.

"The T each er of FLES in 1986."

H ispania, 69, No. 3 (1986),

Leino, W alter and Louis A. H aak. The T eaching of Spanish in the E lem e n ta ry
Schools and th e E ffe c ts on A ch iev em en t in O th e r S e le c te d S ubject A re a s.
M innesota: S t. Paul Public Schools, 1963.
Levenson, Stanley. "FLES Is a R evolution." C alifo rn ia T each ers A ssociation
Jo u rn al. 59, No. 4, O cto b er (1963), 16-18. R p t. in R eadings in Foreign
Languages fo r th e E lem e n ta ry School. Ed. S tanley Levenson and William
K endrick. M assachusetts: B laisdell Publishing C om pany, 1967, pp. 17-21.
___________ and William K endrick.
R eadings in Foreign Languages fo r th e
E lem entary School. M assachusetts: B laisdell Publishing C om pany, 1967.
L ittlew ood, William T.
Foreign and Second Language Learning: LanguageA cquisition R esearch and Its Im plications fo r th e C lassroom . C am bridge:
C am bridge U niversity P ress, 1984.
M cG rath, Earl J . "Language Study and World A ffairs." A ddress delivered to
35th Annual M eeting of th e C e n tra l S ta te s Modern L anguage T each ers
A ssociation, St. Louis, 3 May 1952. R p t. in R eadings in Foreign Languages
fo r E lem entary School.
Ed. S tan ley Levenson and William K endrick.
M assachusetts: B laisdell Publishing C o., 1967, pp. 3-10.
M ansour, G eorge P . and R onald R apin. R e p o rt on Foreign L anguage E ducation in
Michigan Schools.
P rep ared fo r M ichigan S ta te Board of E ducation,
O c to b er 1985.
McLaughlin, B arry. "Second-Language L earning in C hildren."
B ulletin. 84 (1977), 438-459.
. Second Language A cquisition in C hildren.
E rlbaum , 1978.

Psychological

H illsdale, New Jersey :

112

M et, M yriam , Helena A nderson, Evelyn Brega and N ancy
School F oreign L anguage: K ey Links in th e C hain o f
Languages: Key Links in th e C hain of L earn in g .
M iddlebury, VT:
N o rth e a st C o n feren ce on th e
Languages, 1983, pp. 10-24.
___________ . "Decisions! Decisions!
No. 6 (1985), 469-473.

Decisions!"

R hodes. "E lem en tary
L earning." In F oreign
Ed. R obert G. M ead.
T eaching of Foreign

Foreign Language A nnals. 18,

M ildenberger, K enneth.
S tatus of Foreign Study in A m erican E lem en tary
Schools. W ashington, DC: U. S. D e p a rtm e n t of H ealth , E d u catio n , and
W elfare, O ffice of E d u catio n , C o m m itte e on Foreign Language T eaching,
F eb ru ary , 1956.
Minimal P erfo rm an ce O bjectiv es fo r Foreign Language E ducation.
M ichigan D e p artm en t o f E d u catio n , 1974.

Lansing:

Modern Foreign Language T each in g in the E lem e n ta ry G rades: A F easib ility
Study.
By th e School Boards of th e Union C ounty R egional School
D istric ts. Educational Service B ureau, Tem ple U n iv ersity , 1962.
M odern L anguage A ssociation o f A m erica. F o reig n L anguages in E lem en tary
Schools. New York: Modern Language A sso ciatio n , 1954.
___________ .
1956.

FL B ulletin No. 48.

New Y ork:

M odern L anguage A ssociation,

___________ . "Childhood and Second Language L earning." Foreign Language
B ulletin. No. 49. May 5-6, 1956. R p t. in R eadings in F oreign Languages fo r
the E lem en tary School.
Ed. S tanley Levenson and William K endrick.
M assachusetts: B laisdell Publishing, 1967, pp. 53-61.
O 'D oherty, E. F. "Social F a c to rs and Second L anguage Policies." In Languages
and th e Young School C hild. Ed. H. H. S te m . London: O xford U niversity
P ress, 1969, pp. 47-55.
O m aggio, A lice C . "Successful Language L earn ers: What Do We Know A bout
Them ?" ER1C/CLL N ew s B ulletin. May (1978), 2-3.
Q uintillian. In stitutionis o ra to ria e libri duodecim . Ed. E. Bonnel. Leipzig: 1861.
R apa port, B arbara and D avid W estg ate. C hildren L earn in g F ren c h : An A tte m p t
a t F irst P rin cip les. London: M ethuen, L td., 1974.
R a tte , E lizab eth .
'T h e R ole of FLES in D eveloping Skills f o r Social
C om petence."
F *L *E *S and the O b jectiv es of th e C ontem porary
E lem en tary Schools. Ed. R o g er A. P ille t. New Y ork: C hilton Books, 1967,
pp. 14-21.
. "C hildren's N eeds." The FLES Student: A Study.
Bourque. New Y ork: C hilton Books, 1968, pp. 43-47.

Ed. Edw ard H.

113

R hodes, Nancy C . and A udrey R . S ch reib stein .
Foreign Language in the
E lem en tary School: A P ra c tic a l G uide. W ashington, DC: C e n te r fo r
A pplied L inguistics, 1983.
R osenbusch, M arcia H. "FLES: An Im p o rtan t S tep in th e R ig h t D irectio n ."
H ispania, 68, No. 1 (1985>, 174-176.
Rubin, 3oan. "W hat the 'Good Language L e a rn e r’ Can T each Us."
Q uarterly. 9 (1975), 41-45.

TESOL

Savignon, Sandra 3. "On th e O th er Side of the Desk: A Look a t T e a ch e r
A ttitu d e s and M otivation in Second-Language L earning." C anadian Modern
Language R eview . 32 (1976), 295-302.
S cherer, G eorge A. C . "The Sine Qua Nons in FLES." The G erm an Q u arterly .
Vol. 37, N ovem ber (1964), pp. 506-515.
Shane, H arold G. and 3une G ran t M ulry. Im proving Language A rts In stru ctio n
Through R e s e a rc h . W ashington, DC: A ssociation fo r Supervision and
Curriculum D evelopm ent, NEA, 1964.
Sim ches, Seymour O. and 3osephine R. Bruno. "A Psycholinguistic R a tio n a le fo r
FLES." In terd iscip lin ary R esearch S em inar on Psycholinguistics. Sum m er
1961, pp. 1-10.
Spaar, Virginia. "FLES in R etro sp e c t." The FLES S tudent: A Study. Ed. Edward
H. Bourque. New Y ork: C hilton Books, 1968, pp. 57-72.
S te rn , H. H. Foreign Languages in P rim a ry Education: The T eaching of Foreign
or Second Languages to Y ounger C hildren. London: O xford U niversity
P ress, 1967.