Citation
Functions of the foreign language laboratory in the junior colleges of Florida

Material Information

Title:
Functions of the foreign language laboratory in the junior colleges of Florida
Creator:
Sorensen, Catherine Hennessey
Publication Date:
Language:
English
Physical Description:
vii, 146 leaves. : illus. ; 28 cm.

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
College instruction ( jstor )
College students ( jstor )
Foreign language learning ( jstor )
Junior colleges ( jstor )
Language ( jstor )
Language laboratories ( jstor )
Language teachers ( jstor )
Nonnative languages ( jstor )
Second language instruction ( jstor )
Teachers ( jstor )
Curriculum and Instruction thesis Ed. D
Dissertations, Academic -- Curriculum and Instruction -- UF
Junior colleges -- Florida ( lcsh )
Languages, Modern -- Study and teaching -- Audio-visual aids ( lcsh )
Genre:
bibliography ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

Thesis:
Thesis--University of Florida.
Bibliography:
Bibliography: leaves 143-145.
General Note:
Manuscript copy.
General Note:
Vita.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
This item is presumed in the public domain according to the terms of the Retrospective Dissertation Scanning (RDS) policy, which may be viewed at http://ufdc.ufl.edu/AA00007596/00001. The University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries respect the intellectual property rights of others and do not claim any copyright interest in this item. Users of this work have responsibility for determining copyright status prior to reusing, publishing or reproducing this item for purposes other than what is allowed by fair use or other copyright exemptions. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder. The Smathers Libraries would like to learn more about this item and invite individuals or organizations to contact the RDS coordinator (ufdissertations@uflib.ufl.edu) with any additional information they can provide.
Resource Identifier:
029444564 ( ALEPH )
14264080 ( OCLC )

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

FUNCTIONS OF THE FOREIGN LANGUAGE LABORATORY IN THE JUNIOR COLLEGES OF FLORIDA By CATHERINE HENNESSEY SORENSEN A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE COUNCIL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF EDUCATION UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA June, 1964

PAGE 2

ACKNOWIEDGMENTS The writer of this dissertation wishes to extend heartfelt thanks to the many individuals who have aided in the various stages of her work. Special recognition is due to Dr. Peter F. Oliva, chairman of the writer*s supervisory committee, for his patient understanding, continuous inspiration, and effective guidance, which have made possible the acceptable completion of this study. Appreciation is due to the members of the writerÂ’s supervisory committee for their effective performance of the normal duties of graduate supervision. The writer wishes to acknowledge their individual, specialized contributions by extending thanks to the following I Dr. Douglas E. Seates, for his aid in developing an awareness of an inspirational concept of research and his assistance in the formulative stages of this study; Dr. Robert R. Wiegman, for his stimulation of the writerÂ’s undertaking a study in the junior college field and his aid in the development and criticism of the questionnaire used in the study; Dr. Willis A. LaVire, for his help in planning the practical aspects of the visitation of the junior colleges and in working out datagathering techniques; Dr. Maxwell J. Wallace, for his suggestions and criticisms of the study from the standpoint of a professor in the Department of Foreign Languages; and Dr. Sylvestre Fiore, for graciously accepting a position on the writerÂ’s supervisory committee after the resignation from the University of Dr. Arthur L. Kurth, who had ii

PAGE 3

worked closely with the writer as a committee member representing her area specialization. Recognition is also due to Dr. John H. Ifo orman, who first encouraged the writer to enter upon graduate studies at the University of Florida, for his continued friendship and his many valuable suggestions in the course of this study. Appreciation is also expressed to the following : Dr. James L. Wattenbarger, Director of the Division of Community Colleges of the State Department of Education, for his aid in arranging admission to the junior colleges for the purposes of this study and his inspection of the questionnaire sent to the junior colleges; Mr. 0. E, P^rez, State Supervisor of Modem Foreign Languages, for his help in the planning period of this study; I-frs. Elizabeth Boone, Supervisor, Foreign Languages, Dade County, Florida, for her criticism of the questionnaire used in the study; the junior college instructors who so graciously consented to give of their time and energy as subjects for the interviews necessary to the completion of this dissertation; the junior college faculty members who filled out the questionnaires; and the junior college administrators who cooperated in making this study possible. iii

PAGE 4

table of contents Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ii LIST OF TABLES vi Chat) ter I. INTRODUCTION 1 Need for the Study 1 Statement of the Problem 6 Definition of Terms . 7 Delimitation of the Study 8 Organization of the Study 8 Procedures for the Study 9 II. AN ANALYSIS OF THE USE OF LANGUAGE LABORATORIES AS SHOWN IN REIATED BACKGROUND LITERATURE 13 Introductory Statement 13 Development of the AudioLingual Philosophy 13 The language laboratory as a Device in the Implementation of the Audio-Lingual Philosonhy of language Instruction ••...... .... 33 Concluding Statement 51 in. PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS AND GENERAL UTILIZATION OF THE LANGUAGE LABORATORIES OF THE JUNIOR COLLEGES OF FLORIDA 53 Introduction 53 Physical Characteristics and History of the Language Laboratories. ..... 53 General Utilization of the Language Laboratories .... 59 Relationship between the Physical Characteristics of the Laboratories and Their Scheduling 66 iv

PAGE 5

TABLE OF CONTENTS— Continued Chapter Page IV. AN ANALYSIS OF THE BELIEFS OF THE JUNIOR COLIEGE IANGUAGE TEACHERS REGARDING FOREIGN LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 69 Introduction 69 Objectives and Goals of the Junior College Instructors • 70 Implementation of the Objectives of the language Instructors of the Junior Colleges Regarding’ Instruction in Modern Foreign language ... 78 Baliefs of the Modem Language Instructors of the Junior Colleges Regarding the Values of a Language laboratory .................. 93 Opinions of the Junior College Language Instructors Regarding Some Practical Problems of Laboratory Operation 107 Summary 109 V. SUMMARY, FINDINGS, AND IMPLICATIONS 110 Introductory Statement 110 Summary of the Study HO Findings ...... Ill Implications ............ ..... 117 APPENDIX A 12 o APPENDIX B 123 BIBLIOGRAPHY ^3 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH 146 v

PAGE 6

TABLE OF TABLES Table Page 1* Student Rasitions in the Language laboratories . . 55 2. Number of Channels in the Language Laboratories • • • • • 56 3. Age of the language Laboratories • 56 4. Summary of Cost of Original Equipment of IistenSpeakRecord Laboratories . . 58 5. Summary of Cost of Original Equipment of IAstenSpeak Laboratories . ••••••*• 58 6 Summary of the Data on the Physical Aspects of the language laboratories of the Junior Colleges 60 7* Number and Ftercent of Students Using Language Laboratories by Languages 61 8 Number and Par cent of Students Using Language laboratories by Levels of Instruction 61 9. 'types of Materials Used in the Language laboratories 64 10 • Details of General Utilization of the Language laboratories 65 11. Beliefs of the Junior College language Instructors Regarding Specific Objectives of Instruction in I-bdem Foreign Language , 75 12. Junior College Instructors Who Are Native Speakers of Foreign Languages with Languages Represented . 77 13 Curricular Offerings in Modern Foreign Language of the 29 Junior Colleges Having language Programs in the School Year of 1963-1964 J 78 vi

PAGE 7

TABUS OF TABISS — Continued Table Page 14. Materials Used in First-Year Courses in Madera Foreign languages in the Junior Colleges Having language Laboratories .. ....... 89 154Values of a language laboratory Ifentioned by the Instructors of the Junior Colleges that Have language laboratories 95 16. Reasons for Instructors* Dissatisfaction with Their Language laboratories ...... 100 17. Student Recording in the language laboratories That Have Recording Facilities 102 18. Fbtential Values of a Language Laboratory Mentioned by the Instructors Desiring Laboratories in the Junior Colleges without language Laboratories ..... 104 19. Itypes of language Laboratories Desired by the Instructors of the Junior Colleges Where Plans Are BBing Fade For the Installation of Language laboratories ..... 105 20. Itypes of language Laboratories Expected 105 21. Reasons for Not Wanting a Language laboratory Jfentioned by Instructors in the Junior Colleges without Language Laboratories 106 vii

PAGE 8

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Need for the Study Msmbers of the teaching profession and the general public today are expressing marked interest in foreign language teaching in the schools of the United States. This interest arises from changing world conditions. One striking phenomenon of these times is a rapidly shrinking world due to the recent improvements in communication and transportation. The economic interdependence of nations, brought about by technological advance, contributes also to the need for mutual understanding among nations. The need for mutual tinderstanding of peoples of all nations has become more important than at any other time in history. Foreign languages can make their contribution to mutual understanding among peoples. It is recognized at present that, in order for a student to derive lasting profit from his experience with a foreign language, he must learn to understand, speak, read, and write that language. It is no longer enough that a student be able merely to read a foreign language or to translate simple sentences from English into that language. In certain periods of time and in certain sections of the United States even today, the objectives of reading or of grammartranslation have been accepted as valid major objectives of language teaching. However, there have been 1

PAGE 9

/ / 2 teachers at all tines in this country who believed that practice in speaking and hearing a foreign language is essential to mastery of that language. In the years since World War II, speaking and understanding of the language have become primary objectives of language teaching. The development of modern electronic devices has coincided most appropriately with the shift in objectives of language teaching. The National Defense Education Act of 1958 has made possible the installation of electronic equipment in hundreds of schools to aid in the teaching of language. There is wide variety found in the type of equipment and its utilization. Hutchinson writes as follows of the physical variation of the equipment I The installations vary greatly, from simple listening corners having a playback machine to fully equipped laboratories in which each pupil has a semiprivate booth complete with microphone, activated earphones, and facilities for recording and playing back his imitations of the model. Great variation is to be expected because of the diversity in our school systems and the autonomy of the local district as well as the wide range of teaching situations in foreign language classes. -* The use made of the equipment varies with the physical potentialities of the type of equipment, the skill and the training of the teacher in its use, and the objectives of the teacher as grounded in his philosophy of language teaching. On the utilization of language laboratories, Parker comments : Electronic laboratories can expedite audio-lingual language learning— but the effectiveness of a new, $15,000 language lab Hutchinson, Joseph C. Modern Foreign Languages in High School t The Language Laboratory U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Education. Bulletin 1961, No. 23. Washington, D. C. U. S, Government Printing Office, 1961. p. iii.

PAGE 10

depends, finally, upon the -proper preparation of the teacher operating it, and upon the quality of the programed material being fed into it. The variation in the nature and utilization of language laboratories throughout the nation and in Florida indicates that there are many areas in this phase of language instruction that reflect evidences of divergency in points of vim; of language teachers. Since language laboratories are relatively new in Florida, as they are in the nation as a whole, it seems appropriate at this time to conduct a study of the extent of their availability in public schools and of their use. In the year 19 58 according to a survey by Johnston and Seerley, there -were three laboratories in the secondary schools of Florida* Hialeah High School, Hialeah— Spanish; Ieon High School, Tallahassee— French and Spanish; and University High School, Tallahassee — 3 Spanish. This survey listed two language laboratories in Florida junior colleges. According to an informal unpublished survey, made in 1962 and prepared by the State Department of Education, there are now 120 laboratories in the public secondary schools of Florida, 57 of them in Dade 4 County and the remainder divided among 28 other counties. According to 2 Parker, William Riley. The National Interest and Foreign Languages: A Discussion Guide prepared for the U. S. National Commission for UNESCO. Department of State Publication 7324. Third edition. Washington, D. C. U. S. Government Printing Office, 1962. p. 9. 3 Johnston, Nhrjorie D. and Seerley, Catharine C. Foreign Language laboratories in Schools and Colleges U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Education. Bulletin 1959# No. 3. Washington, D. C. U. S. Government Printing Office, 1959* p* 73* 4 Florida State Department of Education. Unpublished informal survey on enrollment prepared under the direction of 0. E. P6rez, State Supervisor of Modern Foreign Languages. 1962.

PAGE 11

4 an unpublished survey of the junior college language departments sent out to the junior colleges by the Division of Community Colleges of the State Department of Education, "Most of the institutions have some sort of language laboratory which is used, for the most part, as a library situation." 5 The institutions referred to in this report are the fourteen white state-supported junior colleges in existence in April, 1962, and Orlando Junior College. Enrollment figures for the school year of 1962-63 show that there is a rise in the number of students who are studying foreign languages in Florida. According to the figures submitted in an informal report to the Department of Education in the fall of 1962, 6 there were 44,818 students studying Spanish in grades 7 through 12; 10,271, studying French; 1,221, studying German; and 127, studying Russian. The total number of students studying modem foreign languages in Florida in grades 7 through 12 was 56,437 in the fall of 1962. Barker, presenting a tabulation of percentages of students enrolled in foreign languages out of all students enrolled in all subject areas in junior and senior high schools, listed the following figures for Florida* 18.0 percent in r% 1959, 13.1 percent in 1958, and 10.3 percent in 1954/ ^Funke, Francis J. "Junior College Foreign language Departments." Unnublished report prepared for J. L. Wattenbarger by an instructor of the Department of Communications in ;9.ami-Dade Junior College. Miami, Florida! April, 1962. pp. 15-16. ^Florida State Department of Education. Unpublished ^informal survey on enrollment prepared under the direction of 0. E. Fterez, State Supervisor of Modem Foreign languages. 7 Parker, op. cit p. 27-

PAGE 12

5 A comparison of the figure of 37,93^ students studying Spanish in grades 9 through 12 in the fall of 1962 with a figure of 27,718 students studying Spanish in grades 9 through 12 in the year I960' indicates a definite increase in the number of students studying Spanish in the last two years. This increase should be even more marked in the years to come as the present elementary school language program in Florida continues to develop. Last year*s enrollment figures in grades kindergarten through 6 indicate that an increase in the number of students who will take modern foreign language in high school and in junior college may be expected in the next few years. These figures are as follows* Spanish, 215,389; French, 559? Total, 215,9^. The increase in language enrollment in Florida presages continued emphasis on language teaching in the schools of Florida. The increase in the number of language laboratories indicates that language laboratories are becoming a functional part of the language program of the secondary schools and junior colleges of Florida. Consequently, a study of their type and use appears significant at the present time. Of equal importance with a study of type and use of language laboratories is the philosophy of the teachers who use these laboratories, as the type and utilization of language laboratories are dependent upon the objectives of the language departments involved in their planning and use. Iodiee stresses the need for arriving at a well-defined set of objectives for a language department. In discussing the importance of Bandy, Ollie Sherman. rt An Appraisal of the Administrative and Organizational Arrangements for Programs of Spanish in Florida High Schools. Ed. D. dissertation. Gainesville* University of Florida, I960, p. 32.

PAGE 13

6 attitudes and philosophy, he writes as follows* Many supervisors have adopted a laissez-faire attitude with regard to their instructors, feeling that close supervision and rigorous adherence to policy will limit the creativeness of the teacher. To some degree this is true, and inflexible policy has sometimes hampered effective teaching. language chairmen realize that it is difficult to impose a methodology and procedure in which the instructor does not wholeheartedly believe. Yet one fact is altogether too obvious* the multiplicity of methods within the language departments has often impaired learning. ... After continuous exposure to a mixture of methods and procedures, the average student has a rather inadequate control of the language. ... Recognizing the dangers inherent in rigid enforcement of policy, it would still seem preferable to establish a general philosophy and methodology for all members of the language faculty. . The methodology^ chosen will govern the extent and range of student achievement. Thus, the philosophy of the members of the language departments of the junior colleges must be considered along with the type and utilization of the language laboratories. Statement of the Problem The purpose of this study of the foreign language laboratories of the junior colleges of Florida was threefold* (a) To make a survey of the physical equipment of the language laboratories in the junior colleges of Florida; (b) To make a study of the utilization of these laboratories; (c) To make an analysis of the philosophy of language instruction of the junior college language teachers as they state their beliefs and show these beliefs in their teaching practices. 9 Iodice, Don R. Guidelines to Language Teaching in Classroom and laboratory Washington, D. C. Teaching Research and Technology Division, Electronic Teaching Laboratories, 1961. p. 4.

PAGE 14

7 Definition of Terms For the purposes of this study, the following terras are defined as indicated : LANGUAGE IABORATORY: According to Johnston and Seerley, "the laboratory, as it is now, generally consists of mechanical and electronic equipment by means of which the student, individually or in a group, hears and repeats prerecorded material in the foreign language. He may listen with headset and hear his own voice, either simultaneously through the earphones as he speaks into the microphone or by recording on disc or tape and playing back his recording. In this manner he hears himself as others hear him, and he is able to judge and correct his speech by comparing it with the model he is imitating. The laboratory usually has individual serai-soundproof student booths; it may be a separate room or a modernized Â’electronic classroom. LISTEN IABORATORY (L lab) I This laboratory is referred to as a "passive** laboratory. It is described by Holton et alter! as consisting of a series of headphones (one set per student) that provides one-way electronic communication from a master program to the 11 studentsÂ’ ears. For the purposes of this study, the writer accepts HoltonÂ’s definition with one modification! The definition of a listen laboratory will be extended to include the use of minimal electronic equipment, such as one tape recorder and 10 Johnston and Seerley, op. pit ., p. 6. 11 Holton, J. S., et al. Sound language Teaching New York! University Publishers, 19(xL. p. S.

PAGE 15

8 playback machine with or without a separate speaker or individual headphones, provided that this equipment be used as part of a regularly planned program integrated with basic language courses. LISTEN-SFEAK LABORATORY (L-S lab) I This laboratory is referred to as an "active” laboratory. With this laboratory the student has the opportunity to hear his own voice through the headphones by means of which he hears the master program. LIS TEN-S PEAKRECORD LABORATORY (L-S-R lab)* This laboratory is referred to as the "full" or "complete" laboratory. Each student position is equipped with a magnetic recorder (tape, magazine, or disc) that permits the student to record all or a part of his listenspeak activity. Delimitation of the Study The study deals with the functions of the foreign language laboratory in the junior colleges of Florida, both state-supported and non-state-supported. The Florida Educational Directory of October, 1963* lists 28 state-supported and 5 non-state-supported junior colleges. A list of the 33 junior colleges included in the study is found in Appendix A. Organization of the Study The study is divided into five chapters, two appendices, and a bibliography. Chapter I includes the introduction, statement of need for the studji statement of the problem, and the planned procedure for the study. Chapter II is an analysis of the utilization of language

PAGE 16

9 laboratories as shown in related background literature. Chapter TTT gives a description of the physical equipment of the language laboratories and shows the relation of the type of equipment to the potential utilization of the laboratory. Chapter IV presents a treatment of the utilization of the laboratories with an analysis of the philosophy of language teaching of the instructors of the junior colleges, as the instructors express their philosophy by their teaching practices as well as by verbalization of their beliefs. Chapter V presents a summary of the findings and implications of the study. The appendices contain a list of the junior colleges included in the study and the instruments used for gathering data for the study. Procedures for the StudyInspection of Background Literature In order to gain a basic understanding of the background of current languageteaching philosophy and methodology, the writer surveyed publications of selected authors in the fields of linguistics, psychology, and language instruction. Selected writings were then summarized to give a picture of the current milieu in which the language laboratory functions. Questionnaire A questionnaire was constructed to gather data on the nature of the physical equipment available in the foreign language laboratories of the junior colleges and on the general phases of the utilization of the laboratories. In order to structure this questionnaire, the writer inspected the questionnaire used by Johnston and Seerley in their

PAGE 17

10 1957-58 survey of language laboratories and also studied the suggested specifications of language laboratories found in three bulletins on language laboratories, those written by Hutchinson, ~ Jodice, J and Hayes. Items that were stressed by several of these sources as important were chosen for inclusion in the questionnaire. The questionnaire was then sent for suggestions as to modifications to individuals recognized as authorities in the field of the teaching of modern foreign language and in junior college education. The questionnaire was sent to the following consultants t 0, E. Perez, State Supervisor of Modem Foreign Languages; James L. Wattenbarger, Director, Division of Community Junior Colleges, State of Florida; and Mrs. Elizabeth Boone, Supervisor, Foreign Languages, Dade County Public Schools. This questionnaire was sent out to the president of each Florida junior college with a covering letter requesting that the questionnaire be transmitted to a representative of the language department so that the information might be filled in and the questionnaire be held for delivery to the writer at the time of a visit to the junior college. This questionnaire is found in Appendix B together with the covering letter. The covering letter was preceded by a letter that reminded the president that the study had been approved by James L. Wattenbarger, Director, Division of Community Junior Colleges. The preliminary letter outlines the general nature 12 Hutchinson, op. oit 13 lodice, op. cit 14 Hayes, Alfred D. New Madia for Instruction! Language Laboratory U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Education. Bulletin 1963* No. 37* Washington, D. C. U. S. Government Printing Office, 1963.

PAGE 18

11 of the study and was accompanied by a card requesting certain information, sucn as a list of the names of the language teachers with languages taught and approval of a suggested date for visiting the junior college. The preliminary letter and card are found in Appendix B. Interview The first letter to the presidents of the junior colleges requested an interview with the language instructors and outline! the general subject matter of the interview. The second letter to the presidents requested specific appointments with the instructors on the dates for visitation approved by the return card already sent out. The interview was designed as a loosely structured interview, in which the teacher could be stimulated to discuss his beliefs and practices in regard to the philosophy and methodology of the teaching of foreign language. Interview A was used with Instructors in colleges having a language laboratory, and Interview B, used with instructors in junior colleges planning to install a laboratory, was modified to include questions on planning for the installation of a language laboratory. The instructors were also asked for certain background information on their training and experience. These instruments are found in Appendix B. All of the language instructors in the junior colleges were interviewed, A list of the number of teachers interviewed with the languages taught and junior colleges represented is found in Appendix A. Presentation of the Findings of the Study The findings of the study are presented in three sections in accordance with the three parts of the study as stated earlier. In

PAGE 19

12 Chapter III data are presented in tabular form on the number of junior colleges having language laboratories, physical characteristics of these laboratories, and plans for projected laboratories of new junior colleges. The x-ray in which the laboratories are functioning in the language programs of the various junior colleges is also treated in the third chapter. In Chapter IV, an analysis is presented of the relationship between the philosophy of language instruction and the utilization of language laboratories in the several language programs of the individual junior colleges. In Chapter V is found a summary of the findings and implications of the study.

PAGE 20

CHAPTER II AN ANALYSIS OF THE USE OF IANGUAGE IABDRA TORIES AS SHDl'JN IN REIATED BACKGROUND LITERATURE Introductory Statement To understand the function of the language laboratory, one must begin by analyzing the relation of the language laboratory to the currently accepted philosophy of foreign language teaching, a philosophy that emphasizes the audio-lingual approach to language instruction* It is appropriate first to outline briefly the development of this philosophy with its implied methodology and then to show how the language laboratory has become an effective device for aiding in the implementation of this philosophy. Development of the AudioLingual Philosophy The Status of t he Teaching of Modem Foreign Language ip. the U nited States in the Twentieth Century According to Birkmaier, the position of the teaching of modern foreign language in the schools of the United States showed a steady decline in enrollment in the 1920 s and in the 1930* s. Although high school enrollments were rising, the percentage of the students enrolled in high school courses in modem foreign languages was falling. In 1934, 195 percent of the students enrolled in high school took modem foreign language; in 19^9, only 13.7 percent took foreign language. Also

PAGE 21

14 83 percent of the students enrolled in modern foreign language completed only two-year courses. ^ language came to be regarded as a subject of potential value only to those students who were planning to enter college. The commonly stressed objectives and methods failed to arouse the interest of many students. The grammartranslation method, borrowed from the study of Latin, was the most popular. The Coleman Report of the Modem Language Study, appearing in 1929* stimulated emphasis upon the goal of the acquisition of a reading knowledge of language, to be gained through a program of intensive reading, ^ Trends were also noted toward the teaching about language, the studying of the structure of language in general, and the 17 discussing of foreign cultures in English. World War II had a marked impact upon language teaching. Both educators and the general public awoke to the fact that the country showed a serious deficiency in the number of individuals with skill in foreign languages adequate for communication with other peoples of the world. In commenting on the situation at the beginning of the war, Cioffari writes as follows! "The trouble was that language was treated as a body of knowledge rather than the skill which it is. The Second World War Qirkmaier, Emma M. "Modem Languages." Encyclopedia of Educational ^asearoh Â’"bird "dltion, "dited by Chester W. Harris. New York: Macmillan Co., I960, p. 863 16 Coleman, Algernon. The Teachingof Ibdera Foreign languages in the United States New York: Macmillan Co., 1929. pp. 107-10. 17 Birkmaier, op. clt .. pp. 863-64.

PAGE 22

spotlighted the need for languages as skills and caused drastic change in teaching methods. 1 *^ A recognition of the need for nation-wide eraohasis upon language as a basic communication skill resulted from the publicity given to the Army Specialized Training Program, involving the training of 15*000 Army enlisted men. Carroll states* Although this program has been widely supposed to have been closely supervised by linguistic scientists, the latter actually played only a small oart in it. Cowan, it is true, was consulted on its planning, and the directive which set the tone of its instructional methods bore evidences of the notions of the linguists. J&nphasis was to be given to the spoken, colloquial form of the language, grammar was to be explained only when necessary, and, above all, practice and repetition were to be used almost to the point of exhaustion. The languages studied included common ones like French and German as well as a number of unusual ones. 1 Since the time that World War II first called the attention of the people of the United States to the need for individuals trained in language skill, several other events have contributed to an ever-increasing realization of the continued importance of this need. The technological advances that have improved transportation and communication have brought ordinary citizens as well as career diplomats and Army personnel into contact with other peoples speaking other languages. Today many Americans travel to foreign countries both for business and for enjoyment. 0* Connor makes an interesting point in relation to language and foreign travel* This agreement [the initial stages of school learning of a foreign language must have focus on oral-aural practice] is IQ Cioffari, Vincenzo. "The Influence of the language Institute Program— Past, Present, and Future." Modem Language Journal 46*63; February 1962. 19 Carroll, John B, The Study of language Cambridge* Harvard University Press, 1953* p 190.

PAGE 23

16 in harmony •with theoretical arguments based on the nature of language* It also recognizes a practical fact of American life* in the late 1950's hundreds of thousands of Americans each year were taking their first trips to countries where English is not the national language. When that statistic is projected over a half-century of life expectancy for present school children, even without any assumption of a rising rate of travel, we conclude that a sizable fraction of the population will have a use for a foreign language. And common sense suggests that the fraction will include the more influential and useful Americans of the next decade. 20 The launching of Sputnik was oerhaps the most dramatic event that increased the tempo of change in language instruction. The launching of Sputnik, of course, emphasized the need for improvement primarily in instruction in the fields of science and mathematics. However, the I'bdem language Association investigation had already emohasized the necessity for change in language philosophy, methodology, materials, and teacher training to such a point that provisions for improvement in these areas were incorporated into the National Defense Education Act along with the programs for improvement in science and mathematics instruction. Parker stresses the faot that the Mo dem language Association began in 1952 to reassess the objectives of language teaching in the light of the national ax-rareness that language was being neglected in the schools of the United States. The Foreign Language Program of the Modem language Association of America was supported for six years by the Rockefeller Foundation, beginning in 1952 and continuing through August 31, 19 5^ • The Modem Language Association investigation laid the groundvrork for the 20 O'Connor, Patricia, and Twaddell, W. K. “Intensive Training for an Oral Approach in language Teaching." Modem Language Journal. 44 1 1; February I960.

PAGE 24

17 Government's language Development Program, which went into effect with the signing of the National Defense Education Act on September 2, 19 5R. 21 Title IH of the National Defense Education Act is of especial significance in the nation-wide spread of the installation of language laboratories. Parker states that under Title III, which provides for direct financial assistance to the states for strengthening instruction in science, mathematics, and modern languages in the elementary and secondary schools, more than $11 millions were scent on foreign language projects, such as laboratories, audio-visual materials and equipment, and remodeling of classrooms, during 1958-1960. This amount was matched by local funds, thus raising the expenditure for language projects to 22 around $22 millions for these years. As a result of Title III, electronic equipment has been installed in more than 2,500 high schools throughout the nation in contrast to 64 prior to the National Defense 23 Education Act. This widespread use of electronic equipment necessitated trained personnel for its operation as well as suitable materials. Both Title IV and Title VI contribute to the improvement in training of language teachers. It is Tinder Title IV that fellowships are made available to selected students for periods of study not to exceed three academic years at certain approved institutions. The purpose of this program is to contribute to improvement of instruction in institutions of higher education, as preference in the selection of students is given to those teachers of 21 Parker, op. cit . p. 10. 22 Ibid ., p. 12 23 Ibid. p. 13.

PAGE 25

18 college or university level. Title VI also contributes to the improvement of teacher training because it provided for the creation of the national language institutes. Of this language institute program Cioffari writes as follows* "The program constitutes the greatest mass retraining of language teachers in the history of American education. The continuation of this retraining program is assured for the immediate future, and 2*5 the prospeets are good for years to come. w J Cioffari states further that in 1959 there were 12 summer language institutes; in I960, 37 institutes; in 1961, 68 institutes; and in 1962, 117 institutes. These institutes trained 6,087 high school and 911 elementary school teachers of foreign language. He remarks also that 16 full-year institutes would train an additional 374 teachers by the end of 1962. In 1963 there were 69 summer language institutes and 4 full-year institutes. In 1964 there will be 69 summer institutes in the United States, 11 summer institutes 27 abroad, and 3 full-year institutes. Another program under Title VI, which Parker calls the tt lifeblood of the NDEA Language Development Program ” provides for projects of 28 research and experimentation and also surveys and special studies. 24 25 U. S. Statutes Vol. 72, 85 th Congress, 1958* p. 1589* Cioffari, Vincenzo. “The Influence of the Language Institute Program-Past, Present, and Future. H ?fodern Language Journal 46* 62; February 1962. 26 IbLd. 27 National Defense Language Institutes 0E 27011-65* Washington, D. C, U. S. Government Priniing Office, 1964. 28 Parker, op. cit . p. 15.

PAGE 26

19 This program develops materials for instruction in uncommon languages as well as for those commonly taught in the schools of the United States. Still another program under Title VI has provided money for expanding language and area centers at selected universities. The local institutions must match the funds that they receive under Title VI. Parker states that in the first three years of operation under Title VI facilities were expanded and faculty additions made in hy language and area centers in 31 universities. These centers specialize not only in a group of languages but also in the "geography, history, economics, and politics of the coun29 tries involved." Under Title VII provision is made for research and experimentation in the utilization of television, radio, films, and other 30 related media for the purposes of education. The Impact of Linguistics on the AudioUngual Philosophy The development of descriptive, or structural, linguistics has also had significant impact upon the teaching of modem foreign language. linguistics is the scientific study of languages. Carroll writes as follows of linguistics, linguistic scientists, and language I linguistic scientists are engaged in developing a sound body of scientific observations, facts, and systematic theory about language in general and about languages in particular. This body of scientific knowledge is properly referred to as linguistics or linguistic science But it must net be thought that linguistics is concerned with all phases of human communication. Instead, it narrows its attention to the study of languages conceived as what may be called "linguistic codes." A linguistic code may be regarded as a system of 29 Ibid 30 u. s. Statutes Vol. 72, 85th Congress, 195B, pp. 1595-96.

PAGE 27

20 s f nbols underlying the manifest speech behavior of the individuals comprising a speech community In regard to the matter of the development of the study of linguistics in the United States, Carroll states that Franz Bbas of Columbia University, who collected material on American Indian languages from 1897 to 1908, -set the stage for the development of modem linguistic science in America.” 32 Following Boas, two men, Edward Sapir and Leonard Bloomfield, were most influential in the develooment of the methodology of the study of structural linguistics in America. 33 Carroll points out that there has been much refinement in method in modem work in Unguistics in this country and that this has been due to the continued influence of the sound methodology developed by Sapir and Bloomfield as well as to -various circumstances associated with World War II, such as government-sponsored languageteaching programs.34 Ieonard Bloomfield brought out the idea that it is the spoken code of language expression that is really language. Written expression is only a secondary manifestation of this spoken code. He comments as follows : Ivriting is not language, but merely a way of recording language by means of visible marks. In some countries, such as China, igypt, and xfesopotamia, writing was practised thousands of years ago, but to most of the languages that are spoken today it has i n relativel 3 r recent times or not at all. f^7f^£il^5 dayS f literacy was confined to 31 Carroll, op. cit p. 2. 32 Ibid.. p. 20. 33 Ibid. p 34 Ibid pp. 20-21. and WinstonTtS^lr^ ^

PAGE 28

21 The importance of the emphasis upon language as speech is that it leads to the emergence of the aural-oral, later termed the audiolingual approach to language instruction. Audio-lingual a term that does away with the puzzling spoken effect of aural-oral refers to the emphasis upon listening, the audio phase of language, and upon speaking, the lingual phase of language. Early suggestions as to practical imple* > mentation of this theory are those of Bloomfield, who recommends the ac36 tive use of the language, the use of native speakers or "informants," and the development of accurate pronunciation of the sounds of the target language different from those of the studentÂ’s native language.^*' 7 In his chapter on "language and Education," Carroll discusses some of the early efforts of linguistically oriented men in the field of language instruction. In a section of this chapter on developments in secondlanguage teaching, he writes on the Army programs of World War II, the Cornell language Program, language teaching at the Foreign Service Institute, Department of State, Georgetown UniversityÂ’s Institute of language and linguistics, and the English language Institute at the 38 University of Michigan. In this chapter while discussing the contribution of linguistics to the teaching of a second language, Carroll makes the following generalization* "linguistic analysis is not intended as a Bthod of instruction linguistic analysis merely has something to say 36 Bloomfield, Leonard. Outline Guide for the Practical Study of Foreign Languages Baltimore* linguistic Society of America, 1942. pp. 2-5. ^Ibid. pp. 5-8V 38 Carroll, op. cit .. pp. 173-85.

PAGE 29

22 about what is to be taught. ” ^ He explains that psychological factors of 40 Motivation and learning theory are also involved. In addition to structural, or descriptive, linguistics, there are two other branches of linguistics that are of importance in the field of language instruction! historical, or comparative, linguistics, and applied linguistics. In writing of descriptive and historical linguistics, Carroll states! ... the primary business of linguistics is to study the living and the recorded language systems of the world. This enterprise is usually considered under two major headings, descriptive linguistics and historical or comparative linguistics. Descriptive linguistics studies the characteristics of language systems or dialects at given points in their histories, while historical and comparative linguistics describes changes in language systems over periods of time and consid^js the familial and genealogical relationships of the languages. Historical linguistics does have some significance for language instruction in that it helps to answer questions as to why certain phenomena exist in a language, as, for example, why certain verbs are “irregular" in appearance. It is structural linguistics, however, that has contributed the most to language instruction, as structural linguistics is currently applied to language instruction try the applied linguists. Be las co explains that the applied linguists take over where the structural linguists leave off. He speaks of the ways by which linguistic analysis may help the language teacher and explains the role of the applied linguist as follows! The findings and predictions of linguistic analysis can reveal to the language teacher those essential structural differences 40 3 9 Ibid p. 190. 41 Ibid p. 2. Ibid ., pp. 191-92

PAGE 30

23 between his native tongue (the source language) and the foreign tongue (the target language), which must be recognized so that he can stress the basic features of the language that t f a ? hin f* 0f course, the responsibility of the structural linguist ends when he uncovers the patterns. But whose responsibility is it to take the patterns and eresent them so they can be taught effectively to the student of a foreign “tf *****1 if the language teacher could do it. ff ^ntH that time someone acquainted with methods of linguistic analysis will have to do it for him. • J* 0 th teacher’s standpoint, however, an applied linguist rrast be one who can reveal the structural rationale behind pattern situation?^ PreSe ” t f r effective WHeation to the teaching Belasco emphasizes that there are at least four ways in which the systematic techniques of linguistics can be adapted to foreign language instruction I formal contrast, structural marking, transformation grammar, and tagmemics 43 Formal contrast is mentioned by other writers. For example, fblitzer and Staubach use an analogy of building blocks in discussing this technique of contrast. They write that a speaker uses "building stones" to build a bridge of communication between himself and other speakers. "A speaker of Spanish is asked* JDo'nde est£ su libro? ~ QuiGkly he turns a s t available to him and answers* lAqui lo tiene us ted I A speaker of English in the same situation might have answered* 44 Here it is I" Iblitzer uses a similar analogy, that of building stones, in writing of the teaching of French .^ 3 He explains that the difficulty tww* ^f ldlna ”* Albert ; Applied Un guis tics French* A Guide for Sim0n S 1 500 General Editor, with an introduction by Simon Belasco. Boston* D. C. Heath and Company, 1961. pp. ii-iii. 43 . .. Fbl ^ t ? er Bohart !*• and Staubach, Charles N. Teaching SnanlsM A J Anguistic Orientation Boston* Ginn and Company, 1961.' p. 4 44 Ibid ., p. 3. 45 T ... Po2i ^ e ^t Robert L. Teaching Fr ench* An Introduction to Applied Boston* Ginn and Company, i 960 pp. 4-11.

PAGE 31

for students whose basic language is American English lies in the fact that they want to equate the stones in a set of building stones in English with those in a set in French in all cases. In many cases there is a word-for-word correspondence between sets in the two languages, and this fact makes it most essential for the teacher to emphasize strongly those cases in which this is not true. As one example Folitzer states that "% friend is intelligent* vises a parallel set of building stones to "Mon ami est intelligent," However, the sentence, sister is thirsty," is different. In the sentence, "Ma soeur a soif," the building stone est does not fit the arch in French, and the contrasting a. must be stressed by the teacher with the added point that the noun, soif is not equivalent hA to the adjective, intelligent Bfelaseo explains that structural marking "involves words or parts of words functioning as signs which indicate the grammatical relationship 4 7 of words having lexical meaning," To illustrate what he means by structural marking, BbIasco uses a sentence paralleling English structures but formed largely of nonsense words lie examines this sentence: The nomely zuggs unzacked the koaler steffnessly He points out that the word the marks two nouns, that the ending ly and the position of nomely indicate that it is an adjective, that the ed of unzacked marks it as a verb, that the a of zuggs marks it as a plural, and that position in the sentence ha marks zuggs as subject and koaler as object. Transformation grammar according to 3elasco "investigates the formal or syntactic properties of 46 Ibid , p, 5* 47 Valdman, oo, cit . p, iii. 48 Ibid , pp. iii-iv,

PAGE 32

25 4q sentences. ’ He states that all sentences in a language are '•derivatives of basic type sentences called •kernel* sentences, if they are not already 50 basic sentences. These sentences may be used as models for transfoming other sentences into related types of sentences depending upon relationships such as active-passive or assertion-question. He uses three French sentences as an example: Ie garcon embrasse la femme. Ie garcon ob£it a la femme and Ie gargon parle a la femme Only the first two of these sentences can be transformed into the passive voice. Tagmemic analysis involves the concept of the tagmeme. which is defined as "The smallest meaningful unit of grammatical fora (Bloomfield)." 1 Belasco writes as follows < Tagmemic analysis is perhaps more closely related to the concept of substitution drills in pattern practice than any of the three techniques mentioned above. It has as its basis the relationship between a "slot" in a grammatical structure and the units of speech which "fill" the slot. The technique is referred to as slot-class correlation. By a slot in grammar is meant *a position in the structure at which substitution of one element for another may take place, and a point at which new words may be introduced to the system. Thus in the sentence The big boy came home there is a slot where boy may be replaced by girl man etc *52 This device is used for practice in vocabulary by supplying words of different lexical meanings for each other in a uniform position in the sentence. Politzer, like Belasco, writes that applied linguistics contributes to the preparation of materials for use in language instruction, and 4 9 Ibid. p. iv. 5 0 Ibid -^Fei, lario, and Gaynor, Frank. New York: Philosophical library, 1954. 52 Valdman, op. cit pp. iv-v. Dictionary of linguistics p. 213.

PAGE 33

26 he also states that it contributes to "the actual presentation and drill of teaching materials in the classroom and laboratory. He mentions that "linguists have realized that language is 'behavior* and that behavior can be learned by inducing the student to 'behave' — in other words to 54 perform in the language," Psycho logical Basis of Audiolingual Approach to Instruction irTibdem Foreign language There appears to be a definite need at present for concentrated emphasis upon experimental work in the field of the psychology of language instruction. In 195^ the following statement appears in the proceedings of a seminar on psycholinguistics* language is perhaps the most complex behavior displayed by the human organism, and, in the main, it is learned behavior. Although linguists have for many years refrained from 'psychologizing* their science, it now appears that more interaction between psychologists and linguists would be fruitful. Today this statement still seems appropriate. An inspection of an article by Kjeldergaard surveying the psychology of language learning indicates that there is much work to be done in this field. Kjeldergaard states that interest in the area of psychology of language instruction has intensified in the last four years with most emphasis being upon the topic of mediated generalization. He explains mediated generalization as follows i Mediated generalization is what takes place when learning in one situation has a facilitation effect on the learning in a second situation, even though there is no direct connection between the elements of the two learning experiences. Such transfer effects are presumably due to a connection between the stimulus elements established via a common response in some prior learning; the ^Politzer, op. cit p. 1. eh. Ibid . p. 2. Osgood, Charles E. editor. "Psycholinguistics t A Survey of Theory and Research Problems." Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 49* 20; October 195^.

PAGE 34

27 common response (or Its stimulus properties) is said to mediate the new learning. >0 In an article on the psychological approaches to the study of language, Iambert outlines briefly psychological theories that he feels should be familiar to language teachers today. He states that two theories of learning have specific relevance to language teaching* the classical conditioning theory and the theory of instrumental, or operant, conditioning. He states that the classical conditioning theory depends upon the pairing of two stimuli in almost simultaneous presentation so that an unconditioned response normally elicited by the one stimulus will now become conditioned as a response to the other stimulus. When fully charged by pairing repeatedly with the unconditioned stimulus, the conditioned response can be paired with a second conditioned stimulus in order to Iicii another conditioned response.^ For example, in language learning, the stimulus of the sight of a house calls for the conditioned response of the word house on the part of a student, a native speaker of English. The Spanish word casa may be paired with a picture of a house or with the English word house so that the word casa will come to evoke in the student the same concept as the word house In his theory of operant conditioning, Skinner places emphasis upon the almost simultaneous pairing of stimulus or response and resultant reward. Skinner is concerned with this psychological phenomenon, which he 56 Kjeldergaard, Paul M. "The Psychology of language." Review of Educational research 31* 119; April 1961. 57 T Iambert, Wallace E. "Psychological Approaches to the Study of Language, Part I* On Learning Theory, Thinking, and Human Abilities." Modern language Journal 51; February 1963.

PAGE 35

28 calls reinforcement and which he defines as follows* J h L!rr t i?L 0f ^ reinforceraent is defined as the presentation of c rtain kind of stimulus in a temporal relation with either a stimulus or response. A reinforcing stimulus is defined as such mv P the 4 resulti g change... A stimulus th ST* reinforce when 11 is first presented (when it is usually the stimulus of an unconditioned respondent) or it may acquire the power through conditioning.^* Osgood states that most human learning is obtained under conditions of reinforcement, such as money, praise, smiles, or approval, and that it seems likely that reinforcement plays an important role in language learning. Skinner writes as follows A common generalized reinforcer is Â’approval. It is often difficult to specify its physical dimensions. It my be little more than a nod or a smile on the part of someone who characteristically supplies a variety of reinforcement. Sometimes, . it has a verbal form* Right or Good 60 Lambert explains that there are two problems in language learning that require psychological insight* meaning, or the symbol-referent problem, and verbal behavior, or the way in which words are used in communication either as units or as elements in larger response sequences.^ Osgood makes the point that Gestalt psychology with its emphasis on perception might contribute to an understanding of these two problems. He states that the phenomena of perceptual organization are important for Skinner, B. F. The Behavior of Organises New York* Apple tonCentury-Crofts, Inc., 1938. pp. 19-21. 59 Osgood, loc. cit .. p. 24. 60 Skinner, B. F. Verbal Behavior New York* Apple tonCenturyCrofts, Inc., 1957. p. 54. L Lambert, loc. cit .. p. 51. 62 Osgood, loc. cit .. pp. 50-60.

PAGE 36

29 developing listening skills, or decoding, and nay also be important for developing speaking skills, or encoding. He says that perceptual constancies in language are learned and that they are basic to the operation of a language as a code. Rsrcentual constancy implies that a person reacts to a stimulus in varying situations as though it were the same, because, although its absolute value varies, its value in relation to the other stimuli occurring in conjunction with it is constant. Osgood explains that a person recognizes a question in English from the cue of a rising intonation at the end of a sentence whether the voice of the speaker be deeo and full or high and thin in tone. Other illustrations of constancies that he uses are the recognition of the /d/ and /t/ as a signal of past tense in English verbs and of /s/ and /z/ as a signal of the plural in English nouns. Osgood makes a point of the necessity for overlearning and stresses that experimental work in visual sensory perception may be extended to auditory perception. In this connection he states* In general, stimuli which frequently occur together in close sequence tend to be perceived as wholes. The same thing can be illustrated in language* the sequence thelittlegirlrodeonahorse is presumably easier to decode than a sequence of less familiar units, e. g., ti teb^j^lopedon^re ~ ^ Osgood emphasizes the importance of the nervous system and the past perceptual experience of the organism when he writes* It is apparent that for the most part responses are not made to unorganized masses of stimuli or to stimuli in isolation, but rather to patterns or groups of stimuli. This patterning of stimulus input is not dictated by physical properties of ^ Osgood, loc. cit . p. 52.

PAGE 37

30 the stimuli themselves but is imposed upon physical events by both innate and learned properties of the organism. looking about us, we see objects (books, pictures, hands, doors, and so on) not conglomerations of color points, i. e., sensory input is organized into wholes by perceptual processes. Similarly, when we listen to speech, we hear significant signals, words, not conglomerations of sounds. These psychological theories have several implications for the language laboratory. First of all, the language laboratory offers the student an opportunity for the overlearning that is necessary to gain facility in recognizing speech signals and in reproducing their pattern. Next, the use of a tape can provide continual reinforcement of the studentÂ’s performance, as the tape uniformly gives the correct response immediately after a brief pause for the student to respond to a taped stimulus. Then, the tape may include the voices of a number of different speakers so that the student may hear more than just the one voice of the teacher and may thus learn to recognize language cues as perceptual constancies when heard with the varying absolute values of the different voices. Finally, the language laboratory may help to compensate for differences in the learning rate of individual students by making possible additional practice on taped materials for those students that need it. Nature of the AudioLingual Approach to the Teaching of Modem Foreign language As its name indicates, the audio-lingual approach to the teaching of modern foreign language emphasizes the development of the listening and speaking skills as the most important objectives of beginning language 64

PAGE 38

31 instruction. The basic concept underlying the audio-lingual approach then is that language is primarily speech. The written form of language is only a substitution for the primary oral form and is secondary to it. Nelson Brooks conceptualizes the flow of language as light passing % through a prism and separating into three bands i the gesturalvisual the audio-lingual and the graphic-material The gestqralvisual band includes facial and bodily movements of the speaker that are perceived by the hearer, and the graphic-material band refers to the recording bysymbols of the flow of language sounds. The eye is required to transform these symbols into comprehensible images, ^ Brooks writes as follows of the audiolingual bands In the central band, the audiolingual language is on its own. In this area the speaker-hearer process can operate quite without assistance from the eye, and may be carried on in the dark or, with mechanical aid, at distances far beyond the range of the natural voice. It is to this audio-lingual band, then, that language teachers today give their primary attention. Another concept underlying the audio-lingual approach to initial instruction in foreign language is the belief that language is a skill to be acquired rather than a body of knowledge or information to be studied. The behavioristic psychology that favors stimulus-response theory of learning has influenced the methodology of language instruction in this instance. As Brooks brings out, however, language instruction has been influenced both by this psychology that emphasizes a purely 65 Brooks Nelson. language and language learning New York; Harcourt, Brace EWorld, Inc., i960, pp. 17-18. 66 Ibid ., p. 17.

PAGE 39

32 behavioristic view and by the psychology that emphasizes the fact that the learner contributes to perception and therefore to learning "certain raw materials that interact with the phenomena received by the senses and that together these produce the forms, patterns, and wholes with which we 67 feel ourselves to be surrounded." In writing of the goals of language learning, Brooks makes the following statement* Language is a highly complicated activity, and it is wholly learned. It involves both neural and muscular tissue, and it has psychological, interpersonal, and cultural aspects that are indispensable to its acquisition and use. We may now consider what dominates the perspective when learning moves into the classroom and turns its attention to a second language. The single paramount fact about language learning is that it concerns not„problem solving but the formation and performance of A final basic concept of language instruction is that language involves communication between two or more individuals. While the linguists are concerned with how the members of a speech community communicate with one another rather than with what they communicate, teachers of modern foreign languages must also be concerned with the problem of what members of a speech community choose to communicate to one another. language teachers must turn to the anthropologists and the social scientists as a source of help in dealing with problems of meaning and of culture in the anthropological sense of the learned and shared life experience of a community. One point of view on language as communication is that expressed by Stack in the following statement* "The function of language is to communicate ideas. When we speak the same language as someone 67 Ibid ., p. h5. 68 Ibid . pp. *1-6-47,

PAGE 40

33 else, that common language is a force for unity and sympathy on every level— from individuals and families to national and ethnic groups." 69 The J^anguage lab oratory as a Device in the Implementation Aigiiolingual Philos o phy of language Instruction Objectives of langu aj^ Instruction The four basic skills recognized by language teachers are listening, speaking, reading, and writing of the foreign language. Brooks summarizes the specific objectives of the initial chases of language instruction when he writes (a) that the first objective is training in listening, for the ear dominates the learning and use of speech sounds; (b) that the second objective is the reproduction of the sounds that the ear has learned to recognize; (c) that the third objective is the training in recognition of speech symbols in their graphic form; and (d) that the fourth objective is training in the ability to reproduce these 70 written symbols in an acceptable manner. In addition to the development of these four basic skills, there are three implied objectives of language instruction. Brooks describes these as follows* These immediate objectives imply three others* first, control of the structures of sound, form, and order in the new language; second, acquaintance with vocabulary items that bring content into these structures; and third, meaning in terms of the significance these verbal symbols have for those who speak the language natively. 71 69 Stack, Edward M. The Language Laboratory and Mem language Teaching New York* Oxford IM^rsity Press, I960, p. 3. ^ 70 Brooks, op. cit .. p. 107. 71 Ibid ., p. 108.

PAGE 41

34 There are divergent points of view in regard to the development of cultural insight in the early phases of language instruction* Parker raises the question as to whether language teachers should be asked to teach a foreign culture in the light of their alleged present lack of training in other disciplines, such as the social studies and cultural 72 anthropology. He mentions, however, that there is a beginning of interdisciplinary study and states that "many teachers have already had some experience in crossing departmental lines, and the teaching of cultural insights through language instruction is currently an avowed aim in some 73 institutions." An example of the opposing point of view is shown by this quotation from Stack* Language and culture are inextricably woven together, and a comprehension of one without the other is impossible. The logic of one language is not necessarily that of another, yet both may lead to the same conclusion. ... Language and culture should be taught together. Through this instruction we gain tolerance and understanding of another point of view, another system of logical reasoning, and another texture of civilization. Even where this insight does not lead to acceptance or agreement, at least it gives us the knowledge necessary for an understanding of the other culture and its members. If one thinks beyond the objectives of proficiency in understanding and speaking a language and of an elementary interest in cultural insight, one must consider the development of appreciation of literature and of deeper cultural insight as long-range objectives of language instruction. Brooks writes to this point as follows* When focus is shifted from the foreground to points at a greater distance, the long-range objectives appear in sharp outline. One of 72 Parker, op. clt .. p. 148. p. 149. ^tack, jojs.^ csit p. 3

PAGE 42

35 these is the great promontory, literature, the art of words, which looms so large in the academic world within which the learnings we are discussing take place. Another is cultural insight; by cultural we mean all the belief and behavior patterns of the societal group as they appear in arts and crafts, in tales and norths, in work and play, and in religion and everyday life.' 7 ^ The point of view of those who stress the development of cultural insight as a major long-range objective of language instruction was further expressed in the report of the Interdisciplinary Seminar in language and Culture, composed of language and social science teachers and sponsored by the Modem language Association of America at the University of Michigan during the summer of 1953* It was the conclusion of this seminar that the teaching of foreign language should have for a principal objective the reduction of the student*s "culture-bound attitude." Specifically, the student must gain an understanding of the nature of the culture, his culture-bondage to his own culture must be reduced, and he must achieve 76 a fuller understanding of his own cultural background. Brooks makes the following statement in regard to the outcomes of language instruction* From these immediate and long-range objectives there are outcomes that benefit the learner as an individual while he is a student and in later life. His returns are in the development of skills, attitudes, and sensibilities. The first represent what he may know and be able to do with regard to the way the foreign people use the language. The second represent his informed and sympathetic appraisal of the cultural patterns of the new country, especially when they differ from his own. The third comprise such humanistic ideals as enjoyment of the literature and other art 75 Brooks, op> cit p 108. 76 Modern language Association, "Developing Cultural Understanding through Foreign language Study* A Report of the Modern Language Association Interdisciplinary Seminar in Language and Culture." Publications of the Modern language Association 68* 1217; 1953

PAGE 43

36 forras of the foreign country, a keener awareness of the qualities of his own language and culture, and a deeper insight into the nature of meaning and the role of verbal symbols in the functioning of the human mind, 77 Implications of O bjectives for Curriculum The objective of developing real proficiency in language skill implies a longer language experience than the former conventional twoyear course. The FIE3 program, beginning in 1952, has brought experience with language into elementary schools throughout the country. Parker writes that in the fall of 1959 in the 50 states, 646,41 7 children in 3,988 public (plus 97 "lab" schools) were involved in FLES language experience and that another 536,517 in at least ?,342 nublic schools in 36 states were learning a foreign language by means of television.^ 8 In the matter of a longer language sequence, the problem of continuity of experience arises. Brooks expresses the opinion that there are three points at which the student may enter the stream of language experience. These points are the following* grades three or four in the elementary, grade seven in the junior high school, or grade nine in 79 the junior high school. Brooks accepts the beginning of a second language at college level although he does not seem to favor it. He writes as follows* The beginning of a second language in college is "school work" that must somehow be done at college level? it must follow the 77 drooks, op. cit p. 109. 78 Parker, op. cit .. pp. 18-19. ^Brooks, op. cit .. p. 116.

PAGE 44

37 program outlined for schools as best it can. The beginning of a third language in college is an entirely different matter. This is a responsibility the colleges have always willingly accepted and they will continue to do so. But they have every right to expect that the learnings in the second language shall have been of substantial quantity and quality;Â’* The junior college will have the responsibility of providing initial language experience for those students who are beginning a second language or a third one and of providing more advanced language experience for those students who are continuing instruction in a second language. An emerging curricular concern of the junior college pertains to the language sequence and experiences to be offered to those students who enter junior college with previous experience in a second language. As the impact of the longer language sequence is felt increasingly in the junior college with more and more students entering college after four or six or eight years of language study, adjustments in course content and methodology will need to be made. Implications of Objectives for Methodology As Mathieu states in his article on language laboratories, the acceptance of speaking proficiency as a fundamental goal of language instruction and the application of methods derived from the field of linguistics and from stimulus-response learning theory have contributed directly to the increase in the number of language laboratories in the 81 country. He makes the point, however, that the mechanical aids are helpful in the audio-lingual approach, but not absolutely essential to it. 80 Ibid ., pp. 116-1?. 8l fkthieu, Gustave. "language Laboratories." Review of Educational Research 3 2: 168; April 1962.

PAGE 45

38 lie writes as follows: According to the science of linguistics, language is, basically, a complex set of sounds and habits. Such speech habits are acquired most efficiently when the four language skills are developed in the following sequence: (a) understanding by ear, (b) speaking only what is understood, (c) reading initially only what is understood and spoken, and (d) writing only what is easily understood and spoken, as reinforcement of the three other skills. ... These procedures, which constitute the heart of the audiolingual method, can be used without any electromechanical aids. But they imparted tremendous momentum to the search for "hardware* that would give the student_ore and better acoustic practice hours with the target language. After commenting that language laboratories have been described in current publications as everything from "miracle tools" to **mechanical monsters," I'fethieu writes that according to the prevailing view "the key to the newer approaches lay in the methods and materials rather than in go the equipment.* He continues with the following statement: The language laboratory clearly made its greatest contribution when it was used as an integral part of a program in which instruction in hearing and speaking formed the basis for the sequential, cumulative, and carefully recycled development of language skills, each small step building deliberately on the preceding steps. The activities suitable for the language laboratory fall into three main categories according to the statement of Mueller. These are imitative 85 practice, manipulative practice, and creative practice. He describes these three types of practice as follows: 1. Imitative practice consists in repeating as accurately as possible a set of utterances following a definite pattern. 82 83 84 85 Ibid p 169 • Ibid. liueller, Theodore. "The Teaching Concept in the ForeignLanguage laboratory." Journal of Teacher Education l 9 ^"lo; September 19ol

PAGE 46

39 2. fenipulative practice consists in repeating as accurately as possible a set of utterances following a definite pattern. 3. Creative pattern practice consists in the student* s using the pattern as a new ggeation. Answering a set of questions is such an exercise. Hathieu describes three types of activities also but he does not mention the creative type of activity although he separates listening into two categories. His statement, which mentions materials as well as activities, follows Eddy (1956) and others classified materials and activities for the laboratory into basic categories: (a) for listening only, in which the learner builds up aural comprehension and speaking readiness} (b) for repetition or "echoing," in which the learner mimics what he hears,, improving his pronunciation and memorizing unconsciously; and (c) for the manipulation of forms and patterns, in which the learner reacts vocally to an audio stimulus and in responding manipulates the syntactical and/or morphological structures of the target language. The last activity, called pattern practice, was the most thoroughly researched, since it focused directly on the problem of how to teach correct grammatical usage through the formulation of automatic habits rather than through memorization of rules and their conscious application. There are many areas of disagreement in regard to details 01 the use of the language laboratory in the implementation of audiolingual methodology, because the audio-lingual approach has different connotations to different teachers. The divergent points of view on cultural information 88 and insight have been mentioned above. Another area of divergence in point of view involves the amount of time to be spent in developing skill in the four areas of listening, speaking, reading, and writing in the early courses. Connected with this matter is the question of when and 86 Ibid 87 lathieu, loc. cit p. 170. 88 Supra pp. 15-16.

PAGE 47

40 how to introduce reading materials. It is the opinion of writers with a very strong linguistic orientation that reading should be postponed for varying periods of time. These writers counsel against the use of written materials in the language laboratory. They do not quote research in support of their point of view, but, like many other writers, they seem to be expressing merely their opinions. As examples of this view, one may quote Ike ller and Politzer. Mueller states* Ihe s^ent wiH want visual support for what he is supposed to hear and say. Je tail want his book or at least some sheets with the labors topr text. Wide use of printed visual help, however, delays the ear training, and may even prevent the student from understanding when this prop is withdrawn. Where the most advanced teaching techniques are used the student is not permitted to see in print what he is taught to hear and say. % is made to read it only after considerable delay, when the teacher feels that the student has mastered toe material in its spoken form. In general, toe textbook should not be used in the laboratory. A textbook is designed to teach toe written code of the language and should therefore not impose its philosophy upon toe oral procedures. 39 Politzer even goes to the point of suggesting for the future the possibility of teaching grammar patterns before the introduction of the meaning of words. He calls this technique “one of the new possibilities and new frontiers of language teaching which have been opened up as a result of linguistic analysis especially because of toe increasing availability of' 90 language laboratories. w A multiple sensory, rather than a purely audiolingual, approach is exemplified by that suggested by Huebener, who emphasizes toe visual techniques of instruction. Huebener stresses the importance of toe printed words as well as pictorial material. He writes of toe importance of the 89 Mueller, loc. clt .. p. 318 90 Politzer, op. cit .. p. 19.

PAGE 48

41 visual as follows : The impression is undoubtedly deeper, for most people seem to be visual-minded. Formerly it was thought that over 80 per cent of what we learned came through the eye. Experimentation, however, has led to the belief that all senses are more or less involved in learning. In fact, they are so interlinked that it is difficult to separate one from the other. The multiple-sense appeal theory rests on a sound base.^ In a section on separation of skills, Brooks writes t Good language learning is not likely to result from a heterogeneous mixture of the four skills from the start, so different are they physiologically and psychologically, Of fundamental importance, as pointed out so often in this book, is the separation during the early stages of hearing-speaking from reading-writing in order that the former may not be hampered by the latter. And when the transition is made from audio-lingual to gestural-visual and graphic-material, it must be in terms of areas of meaning with which the student is familiar. Since these are skills which— like all skills— are subject to a degree of mutual interference when only partially learned and to a weakening through disuse no matter how well they are eventually learned, it is important not only to introduce them in the proper order but to keep them up to pitch and to maintain them in the proper proportion to each other. Once they have bera learned, all should play their role in every language class. 93 Huebener does not rule out textbooks from the language laboratory. He suggests that good use may be made of a language laboratory by providing listening to the reading of the selections from the textbook. He also states that there are types of textbook exercises such as lists of ques94 tions that lend themselves to excellent nractice in the language laboratory. In the matter of the teaching of vocabulary, another controversial matter 91 Huebener, Theodore. Audio-Visual Techniques in Teaching Foreign languages New York* New York University Press, i960, p. 7 92 P rooks, on, clt pp. 140-41. 93 Huebener, op, cit .. p. 84. 94 Ibid .. p. 85.

PAGE 49

42 as regards the role of the language laboratory, Hue bene r stresses his belief that the language laboratory with a combination of visual and audial appeal can contribute to vocabulary understanding as well as cultural insight. He writes as follows* Ejjr and large, the audial aids seem to be reserved for the linguistic aspect and the visual aids for the cultural. In most discussions of the language laboratory, for instance, the motion picture and the film-strip are not mentioned. The strength of these two visual aids undoubtedly lies in their ability to give the student a simulated experience in the foreign country. On the other hand, the picture, the film, and the motion picture can be used effectively for the linguistic aspect. The visual aid strengthens the impression of the foreign word by showing what the object or action looks like. Furthermore, it will be more authentic. A French fenetre looks quite different from an American •‘window**; a German Dorf is not an American "village.'* In the elementary school, in high school, and in college the visual representation will enrich concepts and facilitate language learning. The use of a combination of audio and visual appeal is advocated by Morton, who has been interested in experimental work with the language laboratory at the University of Michigan. He suggests the development of an "acculturation booth." This would be a darkened booth with a large video screen on one wall so that the student could receive combined audial 96 and visual stimuli at the same time. As more students enter college with the intention of continuing courses in a language in which they have already had experience in precollege work, emphasis must be placed upon providing mature language experience for them. M>rton gives one projected plan for this mature 95 Ibid.. p. 63. ^Ibrton, F. Rand. The Language Laboratory as a Teaching Machine. Ann Arbor, Michigan* Publications of the Language Laboratory, The University of Michigan, 1961. p. 61.

PAGE 50

43 experience, beginning with the assertion that proper methodology of instruction and proper use of the language laboratory should develop in the student sufficient language proficiency as to render him capable of this mature work in college. He writes as follows* Under such circumstances, what might be this "new" college language requirement? Obviously, it should be a "literature requirement" demanding the same amount of exposure time and of overall achievement as the present "language requirement" generally specified by the majority of better liberal arts colleges. The language student would then be doing~and be able to do— college level language work in college. No compromises would be necessary. His language courses would be able to demand from him the same approach and the same respect as his courses in philosophy, history, the social sciences or psychology. • • with which they are usuallv paired today. And they would contribute as much or more to his general humanistic education. In a word, the college "language requirement" would become finally meaningful as a "foreign literature requirement. It would also become a unique, unsubs titu table one. 97 As regards the possible contribution of the language laboratory to literature courses in foreign language, Morton presents the idea that the audio phases of the language laboratory coupled with visual aids, largely in the firm of video tape, could make a major contribution to a 98 real understanding of foreign literature and culture. Marty also suggests uses of the language laboratory in Advanced courses. In the matter of literature, he mentions a number of techniques for the use of the language laboratory, such as having the students listen to commercial or teacher-made recordings of selections from literature and comments in the language upon these selections, and having the students listen to 99 taped lectures in the language made by their professor. The laboratory 97 Ibid ., p. 59. 98 Ibid^, p. 62. 99 Marty, Fernand L. language Laboratory learning Wellesley, Massachusetts* Audio-Visual Publications, I960. pp. ll?-20.

PAGE 51

nay also contribute to experience in the area of phonetics and diction'*'^ and in the areas of civilization and simultaneous interpretation.^ forty stresses another point that has implications for the use of the language laboratory in advanced courses when he writes that "native-like 102 audio comprehension is the hardest skill to acquire." Ke states! "We believe that in a discussion about objectives, audio comprehension should be the key factor, since it is the only skill where speed is important.^' He explains that in "public audio manifestations such as lectures, plays, films" the rate of delivery of the lecturer or the actor is at native speed. In listening to a group of natives converse, the American also must have native-like audio comprehension. The language laboratory can provide opportunity for students to work to acquire or maintain this proficiency while enrolled in advanced language classes. Types of Language Laboratories for Implementin': Different Programs Modem language laboratory installations vary from simple listening installations to complex listen-speak-record laboratories. When Johnston and Seerley undertook their study of language laboratories during the school year of 1957-58, they found a "great variety of facilities and 100 Ibid ., pp, 120-22. 10 W, p. 123. 102 Warty, Fernand L. Methods and Equi Laboratory MLddlebury, Vermont! Audio-Visual pp LQorat >. 33 37 103 Ibid.

PAGE 52

45 a wide divergence of opinion concerning what constitutes a language 104 laboratory.” They found that the laboratories reported were of all sizes with many different tyoes and combinations of equipment used in various ways. Johnston and Seerley give a brief history of the development of the language laboratory up to the time of their survey. They write that the language laboratory had as a predecessor phonograph records and films used by many teachers to supplement work in their classes. The incorporation of audio-visual materials into the main content of a course was not extensive before World War II when phonograph records were preoared to accompany basic language texts. These records "provided active drill rather than passive listening by leaving pauses on the record during which the student repeated the phrases. Several colleges built simple language "studios" with phonographs, headsets, and records. In 1947 and 1948, articles appeared in professional journals suggesting that audio-visual aids should be used as an Integral „ 107 part of language courses. Johnston and Seerley write as follows of the next ten years: In the decade 1948-58 there was increased interest in the use of mechanical and electronic equipment in modem foreign language teaching and the word "laboratory" came into general use. The Education Index for June 1955 to May 1957 carried for the first time a classification "language laboratories" and listed under 104 Johnston and Seerley, op. cit . p. 1. 105 , Ibid ., pp. 1-2. 106 Ibid.. p. 2. 107 Ibld.. pp. 3-5.

PAGE 53

46 this heading 10 articles dealing with instruction in foreign languages. These articles appeared in 7 educational journals.-*0 ” According to a table prepared by Johnston and Seerley, there were 304 language laboratories in public and private schools and colleges in 1957* 109 The National Defense Education Act was responsible for the installation of language laboratories in more than 2,500 high schools according to Parker as mentioned above. . .... .. . i I Kayes states that modern language laboratories may be broadly t classified into two groups according to their method of operation. He writes: One group includes all class systems; according to this plan of operation, laboratory work is scheduled by classes. The second group includes all library systems; according to this plan of operation, laboratory work is conceived as comparable to library work, students attending at their own convenience, or scheduled at times unrelated to their language class mee tings* Functional and budgetary considerations make it necessary that many different features in many different physical arrangements be available to either type Of system. ^ In a chapter on languagelaboratory systems, he describes five systems, dividing laboratories into two types of simple Iisten-Respond labs, one audio-active Lis tenRespond Lab, one audio-active Iisten-Respond Lab with individual recording facilities for students, and one Iisten-RespondCompare with Intercommunication and Monitoring. 108 SM p. 6. 109 Ibid. p. 7 ^Parker, on. cit . p. 13. in Hayes, op. cit .. p. 1. 112 Ibid . pp. 29-40

PAGE 54

47 In a discussion of the rationale of the language laboratory, Hutchinson writes that "decisions on equipment to help implement a foreign language program cannot be made properly until the program itself has been carefully planned, for the language laboratory is not an end in itself. He further expresses the opinion that planning for a language laboratory must take into consideration the objectives of the course the methods to 114 be used, and the training and attitude of the teachers involved. Ife believes that one must consider carefully what electronic equipment would contribute to the language program and what it could not be expected to contribute. ^ ^ In a chapter entitled "Why a language laboratory," Hayes makes the statement that "practice is essential to understanding and speaking a foreign language.""^ He stresses the point that a competent teacher equipped with good materials can provide the type of practice required for learning a language but that it would be exhausting for a teacher to have to provide the endless repetition which successful language learning requires. He states! "To provide this practice is the fundamental role of the language laboratory. In his chapter on languagelaboratory systems, Hayes lists the following twelve specific advantages provided by the language laboratory! (1) In a language laboratory all students present can practice aloud simultaneously, yet individually. In a class of JO students, 29 are not idle while one is busy. ** 'Â’ihitchinson, op. cit . p. 6. ^Ibid . pp. 6-7. 11 5 Ibid . pp. 7-8. Hayes, op. cit .. p. 16.

PAGE 55

48 (2) The teacher is free to focus his attention on the individual studentÂ’s performance without interruoting the work of the group, (3) Certain language laboratory facilities can provide for differences in learning rates. (4) The language laboratory provides authentic, consistent, untiring models of speech for imitation and drill. (5) The use of headphones gives a sense of isolation, intimate contact with the language, equal clarity of sound to all students, and facilitates complete concentration. (6) Recordings provide many native voices. Without such variety it is common for students to be able to understand only the teacher. (7) The language laboratory facilitates testing of each student for listening comprehension. It has generally been impracticable for the unaided teacher to test this skill. (8) The language laboratory facilitates testing of the speaking ability of each student in a class. It has generally been impracticable for the unaided teacher to test thus skill. (9) Some teachers, for reasons beyond their control, do not themselves have sufficient preparation in understanding and speaking the foreign language. The language laboratory provides these teachers with an opportunity to improve their mm proficiency. (10) The language laboratory makes it possible to divide a class into teacher-directed and machine-directed groups. (11) Certain language-laboratory facilities can enhance the studentÂ’s potential for evaluating his own performance. (12) Given specially-designed instructional materials, the language laboratory can provide technical facilities for eff cient self-instruction. 11 In an earlier bulletin (1961) than that of Hayes (1963). Hutchinson also writes a statement on what a language laboratory my contribute to language instruction. He lists the following as 118 Ibid pp. 16-17.

PAGE 56

4 9 contributions that a language laboratory can make to a teaching situation: 1. Provide for active simultaneous participation of all students in a class in listening and listening-speaking practice in or out of class, 2, Provide a variety of authentic native voices as consistent and untiring models for student practice, 3. Provide for individual differences through guided practice in individualized-group small group, or individual study situations with facilities for student self-instruction and selfevaluation at his own learning rate. 4, Free the teacher from the tedious task of presenting repetitive drill material, thus allowing him to perform a dual role simultaneously, 5* Afford the teacher an opportunity and convenient facilities for evaluating and correcting the performance of individual students without interrupting the work of others, 6. Provide intimate contact with the language, equal hearing conditions for all students, and facilities for simultaneous grouping of different activities through the use of headphones. 7. Provide a reassuring sense of privacy, reduce distractions, and encourage concentration through the use of headphones and partitions. 8. Provide facilities for group testing of the listening and speaking skills. 9. Provide for special coordination of audio and visual materials in sequential learning series or in isolated presentations. 10. Provide aid to some teachers, who for various reasons do not have adequate control of the spoken language, in improving their own audio-lingual proficiency. y The language laboratory then presupposes a belief in the audiolingual approach to language instruction with the skills of listening and speaking constituting primary objectives and also forming the basis for the later acquisition of the skills of reading and writing. Hayes stresses the point that the "selection of electronic and mechanical 119 Hutchinson, op. cit .. pp. 8-9

PAGE 57

50 equipment to complement the work of the teacher is only one of prior 120 decisions to be made. He makes certain pedagogical assumptions that are basic to the choice of laboratory equipment and materials when he writes the following statement* A detailed consideration of the nature of language and language learning, the teaching methods consistent with it, and the kinds of teaching materials most likely to implement these methods effectively, lead to certain assumptions which are basic to the planning, use, and maximum exploitation of languagelaboratory equipments (1) Optimum learning requires native or near-native models of the foreign language for imitation. (2) Optimum learning calls for frequent, regular practice with these models, with overlearning to the point of automatic behavior in the foreign language. (3) Optimum teaching emphasizes extensive imitation and memorization of authentic, productive patterns of speech, extensive structure drills designed to foster the students* powers of analogy, immediate confirmation of correct responses, and immediate correction of incorrect responses. (4) The teaching materials, therefore, must provide authentic speech patterns, arranged in some form which permits them to be used as models for imitation and memorization. . • (5) There is usually an initial period of exclusively audiolingual ( understandingspeaking ) instruction; books and other printed materials are not used, and no reference is made to the written forms of what the student is learning to understand and say. • (6) The audio-lingual skills can be maintained and increased only by continued practice throughout all the years of foreign-language study. The level of difficulty of audiolingual practice materials should increase in keeping with the difficulty of the reading and writing materials. 121 i Hayes, op. cit .. p. 18. Ibid . pp. 18-19*

PAGE 58

51 Hayas states that there are four criteria for the selection of language laboratory equipment based on these assumptions. They are the following: criterion of adequate practice time, criterion of evaluation of progress, criterion of extended practice, and criterion of teacher IP? readiness. The criterion of adequate practice time implies that whenever budgetary limitations are present a larger quantity of simpler and less expensive equipment may be indicated in a laboratory situation. The criterion of evaluation of progress implies that whenever it is impossible to provide recording facilities for students at all student stations enough tape recorders should be available for scheduling of tests of student performance. The criterion of extended practice implies the possibility of arranging for individual practice on the part of the student outside of class hours. The criterion of teacher readiness implies competency in the pedagogical and mechanical skills necessary for operating 123 the machines but not maintenance skills. Hayes also expresses the thought that a language laboratory installation should be planned with the idea of making possible the later installation of additional compatible components to the system, as more money becomes available, shifts in needs occur, or new electronic ad124 vances make new equipment available. Concluding Statement This chapter gives a brief presentation of the background of the thinking of selected current writers in the field of modem language 122 Ibld.. p. 20. 12 3 Ibid pp. 20-21. 124 Xbi d t 9 p* 21

PAGE 59

52 methodology. It can be seen from this presentation that much of the writing consists of the expression of the opinion of the writers and that there is urgent need for experimentation and research to substantiate many of their points of vievx. In order to consider the philosophic outlook of the teachers currently working in the foreign language departments of the junior colleges of Florida, some consideration must be made of the opinions of writers in the language field. These points of vievx form a possible potential background for the philosophic beliefs and theories on methodology of present day teachers, who may, or may not, accept the audiolingual approach to language instruction with their own shadings of interpretation •

PAGE 60

CHAPTER III PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS AND GENERAL UTILIZATION OF THE LANGUAGE IABORATORIES OF THE JUNIOR COLLEGES OF FLORIDA Introduction This chanter is divided into three parts* (a) A presentation of the factual data concerning the physical characteristics and the history of the language laboratories of those junior colleges of Florida having language laboratories; (b) A description of the general utilization of the language laboratories; (c) An analysis of the relationship between the physical characteristics of the language laboratories and their utilization. This chapter is based upon data from 16 junior colleges. Of the 33 junior colleges— public, private, Negro, and white— existing in Florida at the time of this study, 29 now have language programs ; of these 29, 16 junior colleges have language laboratories. Since one junior college has two language laboratories, 17 language laboratories will be discussed in this chapter. Physical Characteristics and History of -the language laboratories Classification of Laboratories by Types According to the definitions stated in Chapter I, language laboratories are classified for the purposes of this study in the following 53

PAGE 61

54 types: listen laboratory, Listen-Speak laboratory, and listen-Speak-Record 125 laboratory. Of the 17 laboratories in the junior colleges, 8 are of the listen-Speak-Record type; 3 of the listen-Speak type; and 2, of the listen type* Four are basically of the listen-Speak type with the inclusion of some recording positions, making a total of 7 of the listen-Speak type. Details of the Physical Characteristics of the language Laboratories With the reception of the two listening installations, which use regular classroom chairs, the laboratories have permanent booths. One of these listening installations consists of a tape recorder alone; the other consists of two tape recorders, one with 12 head phones and the other with one. The number of positions varies from 10 to 30 with a mean of 22.9* The number of channels ranges from 1 to 8 with the listening installation consisting of one tape recorder listed as one channel. The mean is 3*8. Table 1 and Table 2 on the next two pages show the frequencies of the numbers of positions and channels, respectively. History of the Language laboratories Only one language laboratory has been in operation for five years. Six language laboratories are now in their first year of operation. The average age of the language laboratories is 2.5 years. This information is summarized in Table 3* Supra pp. 7-8

PAGE 62

55 TABIE 1 STUDENT POSITIONS IN THE LANGUAGE LABORATORIES Positions Number Percent 30 27 25 24 23 20 15 13 10 5 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 31.00$ 6.25 6.25 6.25 6.25 25.00 6.25 6.25 6.25 Totals 3 67 15a Average 22.9 100 00 $ 1 j j The listening installation with one tape recorder is not included, as it does not have a definite number of student positions. One junior college has two language laboratories with 30 student positions and 27 student positions.

PAGE 63

56 TABUS 2 NUMBER OF CHANNELS IN THE LANGUAGE LABORATORIES Channels Humber Percent 8 1 5.88$ 5 4 23.52 4 5 29.41 3 4 23.52 2 2 11.76 1 1 5.85 Totals 65 17 100.00$ Average 3*8 TABLE 3 AGE OF THE LANGUAGE LABORATORIES Years in Operation Number 5 1 4 3 3 5 2 2 1 6 The Information on the questionnaires returned by the Junior colleges indicates that all of the language laboratories were installed after joint planning by instructors and administrators and this fact was confirmed by statements made by instructors in the various junior colleges at the time of their interviews.

PAGE 64

57 Source of Money Spent for the Original language Laboratory Equipment Fourteen of the language laboratories were paid for through the use of NDEA Title III money with matching funds, but in the case of two of these language laboratories additional money was paid by the county involved. Three installations used no NDEA Title III money. These installations included the two Listen labs and one IAs ten-SpeakRecord lab, the only language laboratory in a nonstate-supported .junior college. Cost .of the Original Bqtdpment, Recordings, and Maintenanc e, pjf the .language Laboratories The cost of the original equipment of the language laboratories ranges from $400 for a listen lab with a tape recorder to $20,000 for the most expensive Lis ten-SpeakRecord lab. The cost of the ListenSpeak-Record labs ranges from $3*500 to $20,000, and that of the lis tenSpeak labs ranges from $4,000 to $10,000. The average cost of the basic equipment of the Listen-Speak-Record labs is $9,530.12, and that of the Listen-Speak labs is $7,120. The two Listen labs cost $474 and $400, respectively. The total cost of the basic language laboratory equipment in all the junior colleges combined is $126,966, and the average cost of the equipment is $7,468*56. These figures represent the cost of original laboratory equipment of the junior colleges through the first semester of the school year of 1963-1964. Table 4 and Table 5 present a summary of this information. The total cost of recordings used in the language laboratories in all junior colleges combined is $12,078. The range in cost of recordings used in individual junior colleges ranges from $4,198 down to $100. It cannot be determined from these figures for cost of recordings what

PAGE 65

58 TABIE 4 SUMMARY OF COST OF ORIGINAL EQUIPMENT OF LISTEN-SPEAK-RECORD LABORATORIES Cost of Equipment Number of Positions Average Cost per Risition $ 20,000 30 $ 666.66 13,031 27 482.63 12,000 24 500.00 10,500 20 525.00 7,410 23 322.17 6,000 20 300.00 3,800 10 380.00 3,500 15 233.33 TABIE 5 SUMMARY OF COST OF ORIGINAL EQUIPMENT OF LISTEN-SPEAK LABORATORIES Cost of Number of Average Cost Equipment Ibsitions per Position $ 10 000 30 $333.33 10 000 b 20 500.00 7,850 30 261.66 6,000 30 200.00 6 000 d 25 240.00 6,000 30 200.00 4,000 20 200.00 f^IMs figure includes 10 recording positions. b This figure includes 5 recording positions. This figure includes 2 recording positions. “This figure includes 4 recording positions.

PAGE 66

59 quantity of recordings is available in the junior colleges* The subject of recordings is discussed in further detail in Chapter IV, which deals with the interviews with the junior college instructors. In the case of commercial recordings, many of the tapes being used in the junior colleges are taros that 'were duplicated from commercially recorded tapes lent to the junior colleges for this ouroose at a time when many companies were extending this service to schools that adopted their texts. These recordings represent then merely the cost of the tape required for duplication* Also, in the case of teacher-made recordings, the cost of the tape alone is involved. In the matter of the cost of maintenance of the language laboratories, the average cost of maintenance is higher for the more electronically complex Idsten-Speak-Record labs than for the Us ten-Speak labs, as the average cost of maintenance each year is $223,25 for the former as against $ 176.67 for the latter. Table 6 on the next page summarizes these data on the physical aspects and cost of the language laboratories. General Utilization of the language laboratories Use of the language laboratories by Students of Modern Foreign languages The language laboratories of the junior colleges are used by students of 5 languages* French, German, Italian, Russian, and Spanish. The figures for individual students using the laboratory for these languages during the first semester of this school year of 1963-1964 are as follows* French, 1,072; German, 516; Italian, 3; Russian, 82; Spanish, 1,533; Total 3 >206. The following table shows the percentage of the

PAGE 67

60

PAGE 68

61 use of the language laboratory by students of each language. TABLE 7 NUMBER AND PERCENT OF STUDENTS USING LANGUAGE LABORATORIES BY LANGUAGES Language Number of Students Percent French 1,072 33.4 # German 516 16.00 Italian 3 .09 Russian 82 2.5 Spanish 1,533 47.91 Total 3,206 100.00# The use of the language laboratories is predominantly by firstyear students as indicated by the figures in Table 8 below. which shows the use of the language laboratories by students of different levels of instruction. TABLE 8 NUMBER AND PERCENT OF STUDENTS USING LANGUAGE LABORATORIES BY IEVEIS OF INSTRUCTION Leval of Instruction Number of Students Percent First year 2,464 Second year 648 Advanced Conversation 94 76.8# 20.3 2.9 Total 3,206 100.0#

PAGE 69

62 Pso of the language laboratories bv Students of Other Disciplines The use of the language laboratories by students of other disciplines is very limited at the present time. One junior college uses its two language laboratories for 179 speech students on an irregularly scheduled basis. Another uses its language laboratory for 15 music theory students on a regularly scheduled basis. A third opens its language laboratory for use by students of music theory and English as a foreign language, A fourth permits limited use of its language laboratory by students in first semester English. One junior college is working on plans for the use of its language laboratory as an "alljunior college work center" with a committee from the faculty as a whole participating in this planning. According to the proposed plan, the three functions of a laboratory — listening, listening-speaking, and listening-speaking-recording— might be used by students of different disciplines. For example, the listening function of the laboratory might be utilized by listening to' recordings of literature, music, or lectures by professors of different disciplines. The listen-speak function would entail repetition by students of material designed for improvement of diction or by answering of questions taped with pauses followed by the reinforcement of the correct answer. The listen-speak-record function would involve work for the area of speech or perhaps practice in preparing for the delivery of oral reports in various areas. Scheduling of the language laboratories The scheduling of the language laboratories is predominantly by groups rather than by individuals. Two of the language laboratories are used only in regular class periods as a part of integrated class activity.

PAGE 70

63 Three other language laboratories are used basically in this way although students may come in for voluntary additional practice without any record of their attendance being kept. Seven language laboratories are scheduled for use by classes for one or two periods each week with the instructors of the classes as supervisors. Two language laboratories use a system of group assignment, but not of classes as such. In the one case, members of a class may come into the language laboratory in several smaller groups at different times when this extra practice nay be fitted into the students* schedules to best advantage. In the other case, in a junior college that used the language laboratory only for first semester classes during the fall semester, students were scheduled in groups by languages, but students from several instructors* classes might be mixed into one scheduled group with an instructor who teaches that level in charge of j 1 • •-* group supervision. Only three language laboratories use a strictly individual type of scheduling. In these instances, the students are required to sign Tip for two periods of language laboratory practice per week and may come in for additional periods. In one case the students sign for definite appointments for the semester, and their attendance is checked by laboratory supervisors. In the other two cases, the scheduling is on a more flexible basis and may be changed, but a record of weekly attendance is still kept. In the twelve junior colleges in which a definite number of periods of practice in the language laboratory is required, five junior colleges require two periods of practice, and seven require one period, per week. Oily tiro junior colleges require a fee for student use of the language laboratory. The one charges a fee of $2 per semester, and the other charges a fee of $2.50 per semester.

PAGE 71

64 Types o f_, Materials Used in the language Laboratories Commercially made recordings, rather than teacher-made recordings, are most frequently used in the language laboratories. I-bst of these recordings consist of tapes that accompany the basic texts adopted for use in firstand second-year classes. Some of these texts and tapes are also accompanied by workbooks with exercises to be filled out by the students during laboratory periods. These materials and their use in the language laboratories will be discussed further in Chapter IV in connection with the interviews with the instructors of the junior colleges. The answers on the questionnaire indicated that in 12 of the language laboratories printed materials were normally used by the students in the language laboratories. In 5 of the language laboratories printed materials were used by the students only at times. As is shown in Table 9# slides, film strips, and films are used to some extent, but not frequently, in the language laboratories. The use of these media of instruction will be further discussed in Chapter IV. TABUS 9 TYPES OF MATERIALS USED IN THE IANGUAGE IA BORA TORIES Types of i'feterials Number of Labs Indicating No Use Some Use Frequent Use Almost Exclusive Use Commercial recordings 0 3 10 4 Teacher-made recordings 0 7 9 1 Slides 3 11 3 0 Film Strips 5 10 2 0 Films 2 11 4 0

PAGE 72

DETAIIS OF GENERAL UTILIZATION OF THE LANGUAGE LABORATORIES 65 Use by Students as Individuals X X X h H *1 M 1 I K X Use by Group as a Class XX X X X X X Number of Periods Extra CM“I H CM NNrH HHHWrl l 111 xx X X XXX MX XXX Class and Required Use K XXX I co ;> i? w rt sn s X XX m C* Vi >4 ! O |H JD rH t)S< X X TVp Of Lab Code of lab H CM C r '\-3 P C^-CO *nvO ff>0 rl N N *r\\£> hhhh h h lab has sorae recording positions

PAGE 73

66 Relationship between the Physical Characteristics of the Laboratories and Their Scheduling In the matter of language laboratory scheduling, it becomes evident upon an inspection of Table 10 that the language laboratories are utilized predominantly upon a basis of scheduling by class groups. Two of the language laboratories are scheduled for use by regular class groups in regularly assigned class time only, and three others are scheduled only in regularly assigned class periods with the additional provision that students may come in for voluntary extra use by special arrangement with their instructors. Of the 12 language laboratories mentioned previously as having required assigned laboratory periods in addition to class instruction in the laboratories, 5 are scheduled for two required periods a week; and 7 for one period a week. Two of these 7 laboratories are in one institution, however, and students are assigned to one period in one laboratory, a Listen-Speak-Record laboratory, and one in another laboratory, a ListenSpeak laboratory, each week, resulting in two practice periods for these students. The use of the two laboratories, one of 30 student positions and one of 27 student positions in one junior college, instead of one large installation, is in keeping with the expressed objectives of the instructors of that junior college to the effect that experience in the language laboratory should be under the supervision of the class teacher and should be an integrated part of the total language experience of the student. Next semester the ListenSpeakRecord laboratory in that junior college will be opened one day a week on Friday, a day on which it is not scheduled for group activity, so that students may spend an extra period of practice on whatever material they choose.

PAGE 74

67 Two language laboratories remain open during the regular periods of the school day with student assistants in charge of laboratory supervision. Students are scheduled individually for regular required periods at any time that fits into their schedules. They work on the tapes that are laid out for them by the laboratory assistants in accordance -with the listing of tapes being used that week by the various instructors. Students may also provide their own tape for duplication by the laboratory assistants so that they may engage in additional practice at home. These two laboratories are Iisten-Speak-Record laboratories with individual tape recorders at each student position. A listen-Speak laboratory with five recording positions with individual tape recorders uses another type of individual rather than group scheduling. In the case of this laboratory, students of different languages and levels of instruction are scheduled for the laboratory at whatever times may fit in with their schedules whenever the laboratory is not scheduled for class periods. B7 using the regular channels of the laboratory and the five individual tape recorders, provision is made for students to work simultaneously at a variety of different materials. Group scheduling of students for laboratory periods is used in five listen-Speak laboratories with a limited number of channels available for student programs. The listen laboratories with one channel are, of course, using their equipment in the only possible way when their students are scheduled as a group listening to the same programmed material. Only one of the listen-Speak laboratories is not scheduled for extra required periods of practice by students, and it was brought out in the interviews with the instructors using this laboratory that this is not a matter of their philosophy of language instruction. It is a practical

PAGE 75

68 matter of lack of available money for financing necessary supervision for scheduling laboratory periods outside of regular assigned class periods in order to increase the contact hours of the students with the language. This same practical consideration was involved to a lesser extent in the situation in four junior colleges with listen-SpeakRe cord laboratories that are not scheduled for extra periods of practice except on a very limited voluntary basis. The problem of supervision then limits the extent of use of the language laboratory facilities in these institutions.

PAGE 76

CHAPTER IV AN ANALYSIS OF THE BELIEFS OF THE JUNIOR COLLEGE LANGUAGE TEACHERS REGARDING FOREIGN LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION Introduction This chapter is based upon interviews with the instructors of the 29 Florida junior colleges— -public, private, Negro, and white— that offer programs in modern foreign languages, The 70 instructors interviewed were those who teach in the day programs of the junior colleges visited and who are regarded as regular faculty members of those junior colleges. Of this number 50 are faculty members of junior colleges having language laboratories, and 20 are faculty members of junior colleges having no language laboratory facilities. The interviews were loosely structured so that the instructors might be stimulated to express their beliefs freely and discuss how they implemented these beliefs in their instructional practices. The chapter is divided into the following four parts to correspond to the divisions of the interviews: (a) A discussion of the beliefs of the instructors interviewed as to the objectives and goals of language teaching with a brief reference to some aspects of their training and experience that may have bearing upon these beliefs; (b) A discussion of the implementation of these goals and objectives, including treatment of the topics of programs and materials; (c) A discussion of the beliefs of those instructors who 69

PAGE 77

70 have language laboratory facilities available for use as to the values of their own laboratories and a presentation of the opinions of those instructors who have no language laboratories as to the potential values they see in a language laboratory and the kind of a laboratory they would like to have; (d) A discussion of the practical aspects of the implementation of a language laboratory, including a discussion of the practical problems of laboratory supervision, scheduling, and maintenance and of the preparation of materials for the language laboratory. When an individual instructor is quoted in this chapter, he is designated as being an instructor from a specific junior college mentioned by its code number. Ihese code numbers are from one through 29; they do not correspond to the order of junior colleges in the alphabetical list found in Appendix A. Objectives and Goals of the Junior College Instructors Regarding Instruction in Modern Foreign Languages General Objectives of Language Instruction The material in this section is based upon the responses by the instructors to the items listed under A I and A, II in Interview A for instructors in Institutions with language laboratories and Interview B for instructors in institutions without language laboratories. In the matter of general objectives of modern language instruction, the junior college instructors interviewed showed agreement on certain basic beliefs that determined their teaching practices. In freely expressed statements, of course, the wording varied from one interview to another; however, the basic concepts that emerged reflected fundamental uniformity of belief. Ihe three most prevalent beliefs were the following:

PAGE 78

71 (a) Language is fundamentally speechj (b) Language is a communication skill to be acquired by the student; (c) Instruction in language also entails the development of an understanding of the culture of the peoples who speak that language. Examples of instructors 1 statements that show certain typical expressions and opinions are quoted in the following paragraphs. Two examples of statements that stress the recurring expressions of ’’spoken-type language," "communication," "skill," and "culture" are quoted below. An instructor in junior college 1, a non-native speaker of the language, made the following statement; I believe in developing skill in living language as opposed to the old grammar-translation approach. In all phases of skills— listening, speaking, reading, and writing— I emphasize a spokentype of language. Communication is the thing in language. Culture is, of course, a feature of language work from the beginning. An instructor in junior college 2, a native speaker of the language taught, expressed his opinions as follows; I stress the idea of language as communication and as a skill to be acquired. First, I place major emphasis upon understanding and speaking, and then I emphasize reading and writing of a spokentype of language in the first two years of language work. I try to make the students feel at ease with language and try to communicate. I try to help than from the beginning to understand other peoples and other cultures. The opinion that language is speech is exemplified in the following two quotations. The first statement was made by an instructor in junior college 14, a non-native speaker of the language, who said: My main objectives are to help the student acquire the basic communicative skills, emphasizing the spoken language, for language is speech, and to enlighten the student about the past and present culture and civilization of Spanishspeaking peoples.

PAGE 79

72 The second opinion, that of an instructor of junior college 7 a native speaker of Spanish, is as follows s I believe in an active use of the language from the beginning, for language is speech, and I emphasize all the skills in first-year work, beginning with understanding and speaking. I also believe in emphasis on culture from the beginning although I increase emphasis as I go on and students have more vocabulary etc., to work with. Only one instructor, a non-native speaker, from junior college 17, expressed a frank belief in the traditional objectives of the grammartranslation approach to language instruction. He stated that the objective of the study of a foreign language is to contribute to an increased understanding of language in general and to improve the skill of a student in his own language. He believed, as did the other instructors, that reading is an important objective of second-year or other advanced work in language. Specific Objectives of Language Instruction In the matter of specific objectives of modem language instruction, the junior college instructors almost unanimously mention the four skills of listening, speaking, reading, and writing although there is disagreement as to the relative emphasis to be placed upon the development of these skills as will be brought out in the next section of this chapter. In addition to these skills, a number of instructors mention the implied objectives of development of pronunciation, acquisition of vocabulary, and acquaintance with the structures of fora and arrangement in the foreign language. Cultural insight is stressed as an objective from the beginning by all instructors; however, a number of than feel that its importance as an objective increases as the students progress through their language courses. Also, in intermediate and advanced courses the goal of literary

PAGE 80

73 / appreciation begins to emerge and receives increased importance along with the already mentioned culture in its anthropological sense and with culture in its artistic sense. The following statements by some of the instructors touch upon various combinations of these specific objectives. An instructor in junior college 21 covered several of these objectives when he said: My specific objectives are to develop the four skills as suggested by the Modern Language Association and to develop an adequate pronunciation and facility in using structures of French and Spanish and a minimum vocabulary for handling these structures and most important to develop an understanding of foreign peoples to help eliminate race prejudice. An instructor in junior college 23, also a teacher of French and Spanish, made the following statement: These are my specific objectives: Speak the language and understand the spoken language, read it without translation, and write a simple spoken-type language, develop a minimum active vocabulary of 1,000 words and recognition vocabulary of 1,500 in the first year of language instruction, develop a basic knowledge of grammar and an adequate pronunciation, and develop a basic knowledge of the country and its people and its civilization. These are listed in the order of importance as I see them. Another instructor of French and Spanish, from junior college 12, stated his specific objectives as follows: VSy specific objectives are the following: To give a basic foundation in the four skills, to help in understanding of foreign peoples and cultures, to Improve students' understanding of their own language, to help them to understand concepts of language different from their own, and to develop basic vocabulary and pronunciation. An instructor from junior college 2, a native speaker of Spanish stated: t^y goals are the four skills. I aim for native-like pronunciation by students and to have a student carry on a conversation commensurate with his vocabulary and ability to use structures. Culture is correlated with development of language skill from the beginning as we use cultural films that are correlated from the beginning. In advanced work I also stress literary appreciation and cultural appreciation in the narrow sense of the word.

PAGE 81

74 An instructor from junior college 3 made the following statement as to his specific objectives! I believe in teaching skills with culture interwoven throughout. I try to develop a simple and then increasingly complex vocabulary by areas such as foods, clothing, etc. and develop in connection with this, as vocabulary is most important for skills of comprehension and speaking. I believe in only as much grammar and structure as situations require. Reading and writing shoul be of a simple type, such as is found in everyday speech. In advanced and intermediate work appreciation of literature, arts, and music are added to the other objectives as well as the skill oi native-like comprehension. A minority of the instructors, principally teachers of German, showed a marked emphasis upon formal grammar as one of their specific objectives. This orientation was shared equally by native and non-native speakers of the language. It was the opinion of 9 of the 15 instructors of German in the junior colleges that the major objective of first-year work in German is to acquire familiarity with grammar, as German is an inflected language, and that the principal specific objective is translation of English to German. They stated that other specific objectives are pronunciation and reading and that it is only in second-year work that understanding and speaking become major objectives. Table 11 on the next page summarizes the beliefs of the junior college instructors regarding objectives of modem language instruction. Some Aspects of Training and Experience of the Modern Language Instructors Data were gathered from the junior college language instructors as to three items that were considered as of possible interest in relation to their beliefs regarding objectives of language instruction and the potential values of a language laboratory. Information was obtained in regard

PAGE 82

75 TABLE 11 BELIEFS OF THE JUNIOR COLLEGE LANGUAGE INSTRUCTORS REGARDING SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES OF INSTRUCTION IN MODERN FOREIGN LANGUAGE Objectives Mentioned by Native Speakers Non-Native Sneakers Total Four skills 3 with culture 1 3 4 Four skills with pronunciation and culture 2 7 9 Four skills with pronunciation, vocabulary, and culture 2 5 7 Four skills with pronunciation, structure, vocabulary, and culture 15 21 37 Four skills with special emphasis upon grammar and culture 1 2 3 Grammartranslation with pronunciation, reading, and culture 5 5 10 Total 26 44 70 a The term, "four skills," refers to the following skills: listening, speaking, reading, and writing.

PAGE 83

to the following three questions: (a) Were the instructors native speakers of a foreign language that they were teaching? (b) Had they studied in a foreign country? (c) Had they participated in language institutes or summer language programs emphasizing development of audio-lingual skills either as students or as instructional or administrative personnel? In the case of the NDEA language institutes, the participation as students would have taken place at some time prior to an instructor's employment in a junior college, as NDEA institutes are open only to teachers in secondary schools. In answer to the question as to whether they were native speakers of a foreign language, 26 instructors answered that they were native speakers of a language that they were teaching. Seven other instructors stated that they were native speakers of a language that they did not teach. This information is summarized in Table 12 on the next page. In the matter of foreign study, 10 native speakers of a language stated that they held degrees from a foreign university, and two others had studied more than a year in a foreign country. Among the non-native speakers eight had studied a year or more in a foreign university, five had spent one or more summers in foreign study, and one instructor had spent summers in three different countries. In the matter of language institutes, seven instructors had been students in NDEA summer institutes before entering upon full-time employv ment as junior college instructors. Two had participated as students in summer language programs emphasizing development of audio-lingual skills. One instructor had been a student in an NDEA summer institute abroad, and another had been a student in an NDEA academic year institute. One instructor had served as a native informant in an NDEA institute; another, as an

PAGE 84

77 TABLE 12 JUNIOR COLIEGE INSTRUCTORS WHO ARE NATIVE SPEAKERS OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES WITH LANGUAGES REPRESENTED Native language Spoken Country of Origin Number of Native Speakers language Now Teaching Chinese China 1 Spanish Czech Czechoslovakia 1 French and German French Alsace 3, 1 French and German French Canada 1 French French France 2 French Dutch Holland 1 German German Alsaee a 1 French and German German Germany 6 German Italian Italy 1 French and Spanish Polish Poland 2 Spanish Russian Russia 1 Russian Spanish Colombia 1 Spanish Spanish Cuba 6 Spanish Spanish ISexico 1 Spanish Spanish Nicaragua 1 French and Spanish Spanish Puerto Rico 3 Spanish Spanish Spain 1 Spanish Spanish United StatesG 2 Spanish Turkish Turkey 1 French Total 34 a One instructor of French and German from Alsace is a native speaker of both languages.

PAGE 85

78 administrative assistant in one; and another, as a teacher in an institute of critical languages. Implementation of the Objectives of the Language Instructors of the Junior Colleges Regarding Instruction in Modern Foreign Language The material in this section is based upon the responses of the junior college instructors to items 4 through 15 of Interview A and 4 through 10 of Interview B, found in Appendix B. Methodology in Modem Foreign Language Instruction The comments upon methodology apply principally to first-year and second-year courses in modern foreign language. Table 13, which follows, indicates the curricular offerings in the regular language program of the junior colleges. TABLE 13 CURRICULAR OFFERINGS IN MODERN FOREIGN LANGUAGE OF THE 29 JUNIOR COLLEGES HAVING LANGUAGE PROGRAMS IN THE SCHOOL YEAR OF 1963-1964 Language Junior colleges offering courses in 1st year 2nd year Advanced conversation Advanced literature French 23 23 2 2 German 11 10 1 0 Italian 1 0 0 0 Russian 5 3 0 0 Spanish 29 29 4 4 As is brought out above in the material on objectives, 60 of the 70 instructors interviewed stated that they emphasize the four skills—

PAGE 86

79 listening, speaking, reading, and writing— recommended by the Modern Lan125 guage Association. Even the 10 instructors who stated that their principal emphasis was upon grammar stated that they do stress these skills but with variations in emphasis and approach. The 60 instructors who stress the four skills as major goals of instruction in modern foreign language vary as to the proportions of emphasis they place upon them and the types of activities they use in developing than as well as in the statements as to what in their opinion constitutes an audio-lingual approach to modern language instruction at the junior college level. Forty-nine of the junior college instructors state that they follow a "modified audiolingual" approach or a "modified aural -oral" approach in their teaching. Eleven instructors stated that they follow the "audio-lingual" approach to language instruction. A number of instructors stated their belief that the audio-lingual approach means different things at different instructional levels, and this belief they felt was a controlling one in shaping their methodology. For example, an instructor in junior college 9 who has previously taught at the junior high school and the senior high school levels of instruction expressed this opinions I use a modified audio-lingual approach for junior college students. In junior high school I used & completely audio-lingual approach, but junior college students are inhibited, have lost their imitative facility, and also look at a course as a "snap" if they do not have plenty of definite written assignments, for grades furnish their controlling motivation. Therefore, I introduce reading and writing in the second week after presentation of sounds in individually presented words and in sentences. Last year I tried a four-week audio-lingual period with students* writing of reports in English on cultural background material for grades. To me the terra, "audiolingual," is bad on the college level, for people equate it with 126 Supra, p. 75

PAGE 87

80 "conversation, that is mimicry-memorization of dialogues. To me, on coiioge level, it means listening while reading, then listening without reading, and then doing pattern drills on verbs and grammatical structures, and then writing these pattern drills, too, from the beginning. Another instructor in the same junior college expressed a similar viewpoint when he said: The pendulum is swinging back from a mistaken notion of the audiolingual method, but many high school teachers in our feeder sohools where the audio-lingual method with certain audio-lingual materials is used misinterpret what it means. These teachers use these audiolingual materials but they don't know how to use than and the students memorize and don't learn grammatical structures. They are lost in college. My methodology in class from the second semester on where we get these students is influenced by the background of these students. One difficulty is that these materials are designed for a complete four-level program, and a student who takes only two levels hasn't enough background for college work in language. These materials can t be used in junior college, for you can*t do all four levels in one year as you would have to do as the material is too elementary for second-year classes in college. We need more local workshops and coordination of methods between high school and junior college. An Instructor in junior college 19, a private junior college, expressed a similar opinion in the following statement on misinterpretations of the audio-lingual approach to language instruction: I follow a modified audio-lingual approach in the matter of my methodology. That is to say, I follow an audio-lingual approach that is, in my opinion, suitable to the maturity level of students who are young adults. There are as many mistaken ideas about what constitutes an audio-lingual approach as there were about, oh say, progressive education. Just as many people equated progressive education with total permissiveness, many people today equate the audio-lingual approach with parrot-like repetition and mimicrymemorization. This is a false concept. I tell my students that memorization is pointless. When you go to France, you will not find that the Frenchmen have memorized the other half of the dialogues in French 101. Twenty-one instructors stated that their audio-lingual approach was modified by the maturity level of their students, who are obviously older than high school students and who should therefore do more reading

PAGE 88

81 and writing at earlier levels. However, 19 instructors stated that their own modification of the audio-lingual approach is due to the fact that they feel that typically the students in their junior college are not so ’’motivated” toward their work as their counterparts in universities and four-year colleges. Consequently, they feel that they must require written homework of assigned exercises from textbooks or workbooks from the very beginning and even stress written exercises or frequent tests in connection with their language laboratory work if they have a laboratory. All instructors use dictations as practice and also testing devices. An instructor in junior college 4 made a typical statement on this point when he stated*. I try to develop all skills in the accepted order of importance, but I work on all of them fromthe beginning, for these students that we have here are not motivated and have to have writing from the beginning. They have to have something concrete to do or they do nothing at all. It is impossible to keep them working in the lab unless they have constant tests. Our goals are thus affected and also our methods resulting from our goals by the class of students we have in junior college. We simply do not have time for much cultural material outside of our textbooks, such as slides, films, etc., as we can't even develop the background foundation of skills that is our major objective. The instructor who made this statement is a native speaker of the language taught. An instructor from junior oollege 5t non-native speaker and a former teacher in a university, made the following statement on the same subject : I believe theoretically in beginning with listening and speaking and going on to reading and writing and presenting cultural material at all levels. This is what I did in the university where I taught in another state. Actually, it has turned out here that I have had to modify my point of view. We not only use reading of spoken-type language from the beginning but we have students writing exercises and dictations from the beginning. We do this because of the type of student we have here as our predominant type. There are exceptions, of course. I had to modify my oral approach because our students feel they are not learning if they do not have something to write and they do not study. They are also timid in lab, and at

PAGE 89

82 first they not only use books in lab but use written notes on the practice material. Then after a while I try to get them away from this use of books as crutches by making tapes myself, using substitutions in a different order from the book. Many of our students are in remedial English classes, where they take two extra periods of English 101 with a programmed book. When we get them, they canÂ’t even give examples of nouns or pronouns, etc., and donÂ’t understand about tense as time, etc. They have to develop a feeling for structure and analogy, and we must work very hard every way we can. Of the 70 junior college instructors interviewed, 48 stated that they emphasize all four skills from the beginning although 40 said that they put more emphasis upon speaking and understanding than upon reading and writing in their first-year work. Some of these instructors allow students to read the dialogues from their textbooks while the instructors pronounce them orally and also to read the dialogues and exercises ftrom their textbooks and workbooks during laboratory periods. Others believe in presenting new material in class with the students listening to the oral presentation and then reading the basic material while listening to the instructorÂ’s pronunciation and then repeating the material while looking at their books. In the laboratory periods they use either workbooks or textbooks. In the matter of pattern drills, which all of these instructors use, they permit students to use their textbooks and workbooks in the laboratory for the exercises which are accompanied by commercially recorded tapes. Sixteen of these instructors urge, but do not require, the students to practice the exercises part of the time without looking at their books, and 15 allow the students to go through the exercises once with their books open and once with them closed. Thirty-four instructors use as supplementary practice tapes with manipulative type drills that are not accompanied by any written material for student use although they are

PAGE 90

83 coordinated with a printed teacher's manual. Twelve instructors use these materials in their firstand second-semester courses, and 22 use them in secondand third-semester courses. One instructor of German among this number stated that she is having the teacher's manual material duplicated with the publisher's permission in order to pass it out to the students for use in the laboratory as she believes that they should read and listen simultaneously. In one junior college with a program that is coordinated as a matter of uniform departmental policy, the laboratory work is always one week behind the class work upon which it is based and the students are expected to work much of the time in the laboratory without help from pjrinted material. In another junior college with a coordinated departmental program, there is a similar approach except in the case of the instructors of German. One instructor from this junior college stated: We teach the basic skills of the language including the grammatical structure, and we emphasize aural comprehension. We have materials that are coordinated with the text or are a part of the text that emphasize the oral aspect of the language. We keep as much as possible to use of the language being taught, and culture is as much as possible incorporated with the material we do use. Our laboratory work always lags a week behind our class presentation. We have films that are well coordinated with our text. We have a reader which goes along from the standpoint of structure and vocabulary with our textbook, and we are fortunate indeed to have films that coordinate almost perfectly with our reader. In addition to the basic text in first-year work, we use a book of pattern drills that reinforce the structure in the textbook as we progress. We allow the students to use the basic book and the supplementary books in the lab. We have at least one written assignment with each lesson from the beginning. In the larger junior colleges there is a marked coordination of approach that has been attained by the various instructors working together to arrive at consensus in regard to methodology. There are, of course, variations in methodology even in these junior colleges. This occurs

PAGE 91

84 principally, as has bscn wentloned before, in the case of the instructors of German whose implementation of their goals varies because their goals differ in certain respects from those of the other instructors. Two instructors who teach another language along with German said that their methodology differs in the teaching of the other language, as they stress translation only in German. In the junior colleges with smaller language departments there is less coordination of approach to methods. In one junior college with two language instructors, for example, these Instructors vary markedly in the implementation of their objectives although their statements of objectives are markedly similar. One described his methods as follows i I work at developing all skills from the beginning with culture interwoven throughout by means of the texts chosen which have a real cultural orientation. My work is based upon my chosen texts. X seldom ask even advanced students to do any original writing or speaking. All my work is of a manipulative type of practice or answers to questions— also a controlled, manipulative type of activity. I start out with simultaneous listening and reading of dialogue type material. The students do written homework exercises from their text from the beginning. They keep their textbooks open during the laboratory periods and do simultaneous listening and responding. The other instructor, who uses a six-week pre-textbook period of audiolingual instruction, stated that he disagrees with his oolleague because the latter places emphasis upon books and the written word from the beginning even though the reading material used emphasizes colloquiax expression typical of speech. This instructor made the following statement: I try to develop all the skills with culture interwoven from the first, but in the beginning X emphasize only listening and speaking. I begin with a six-week pre-textbook period when I train students in pronunciation and develop simple structures and vocabulary by means of pictures with development of vocabulary by areas— food, clothing, etc. I believe that vocabulary is of tremendous importance for comprehension and speaking, and I introduce at first only as many structures as are necessary to help students to use

PAGE 92

85 simple vocabulary. At the end of the pre-textbook period, I give the students duplicated material with the words spelled out. For example, 1*11 give them a picture of a man with numbers indicating clothing items and then give the names for the clothing items. I spend much time in developing my own materials of pictures and tapes. In addition to the instructor just quoted, 11 other instructors use a pre-textbook period of audio-lingual instruction. The length of this period varies, but the most common length is six weeks. Five of them use a pre-textbook period of this length. Three instructors use a tiroweeks pretextbook period of instruction; two, a three week period; and two, an eight-week period. This period is devoted to practice on pronunciation, development of skill in handling some basic structures, and acquisition of simple vocabulary. After this period these instructors begin to use textbooks and allow students to read and also to write simple pattern drills and dictations except in the case of one instructor, who does not introduce writing until the second semester of work although his students begin to read in-gie first semester. The other instructors in this junior college, including two native speakers, are among those instructors who use textbook material with some reading and writing from the beginning. This instructor, a non-native speaker, described his methods as follows* In first eight weeks we do only audio-lingual work. We work on pronunciation, listening and repeating of conversations, learning simple vocabulary in such areas as weather, food, numbers, and days of the week. Then we begin to use the textbook, and students read dialogues and do pattern drills, and only in the second semester do we begin writing. In the secondand third-semester work there is continued use of such activities as repetition, pattern drills, answering of questions on material in textbooks and readers, and dictations. However, there is

PAGE 93

86 increasing emphasis upon free creation of sentences as the student progresses through secondand third-semester work. There is stressing of question and answer between teacher and student and between student and student and of oral reports in the language on cultural topics, and in some cases there is discussion of pictorial material. Reading from textbooks and workbooks is supplemented in many instances in first-year courses by cultural readers or cultural readings included in the basic text. These are written in x-jhat the instructors call a "spoken type of language. A number of instructors, who feel that there is need for more emphasis upon "creativity of activity" on the part of students, feel that this reading material may be used as an excellent basis for free composition of a type that stresses writing of simple 0 0 resumes in the target language. An instructor at junior college 2, a native speaker of the language, stated; "About a third through the first semester we introduce reading that is coordinated with the vocabulary and structures of the dialogues and begin some manner of free composition on the content of this material. Instructors in the second-year language courses mention even more emphasis upon reading and free writing and speaking. They stress "creation of sentences" rather than manipulation of structures. There was also mention of development of comprehension by listening to talks by instructors and students. In the fourth semester courses reading materials begin to show literary elements, and the instructors also had the students listen to recordings of literary value. The advanced conversation courses include conversation with instructors and students, oral reports in the language, lectures on civilization and culture in the language along with study of more complex structures of the language.

PAGE 94

87 Eight instructors use practice, both in class and laboratory, on vocabulary lists from their textbooks and also give tests on these lists. The students in these cases associate the word in the target language with an English equivalent in the list. The following three statements are examples of opinions expressed by instructors who favor the use of translation from English to the target language. An instructor from junior college 17 said: I try to develop an understanding of grammar first of all with practice on translation from English to Spanish and with memorization of paradigms and practice on them like old synopses of verbs. I always use daily tests on vocabulary lists. Last year I tried certain audio-lingual materials and then went back to ray old belief in translation this year. An instructor of German in junior college 2, a non-native speaker who has studied abroad stated: In the first-year course I feel that students need grammar and reading skills more than speaking, for I believe that the first year gives then a basis and they can go on from there to either speaking or reading, whichever they want, for their major secondyear emphasis. In the first-year course we translate from German to English and from English to German. In the second year we have a review grammar with tapes. They do written translation for homework and come to the lab and compare their translation with the tapes. Another instructor of German in the same junior college, a native speaker, qjade the following statement: Our first-year material this year stresses grammar. The students write— that is, translate sentences into German~at home. In lab periods they compare their translation with the taped versions of the translation. On non-lab days we put the work on the board in the old-fashioned way and discuss and correct it. In the second-year language courses instructors mentioned more emphasis on reading and free writing and speaking. They stressed creativity in utterances rather than manipulative practice on structures. Instructors of second-year courses all stressed also development of comprehension by listening to talks by instructors and students and to recorded materials.

PAGE 95

88 In fourth-semester courses selections of reading material showed attention to literary qualities. The advanced conversation courses included conversation with instructors and students, oral reports in the language, and practice in more complex structures. Materials in Use in the Junior Colleges In first-year language courses in the 16 junior colleges having language laboratories, 48 of the 50 instructors interviewed stated that they use tapes or discs coordinated with their basic texts. These tapes or discs all include pronunciation of basic dialogues of the text with pauses for student repetition. Most of them also include questions and answers on the dialogues and pattern drills for each lesson. Two texts in German and one in Spanish also contain translation exercises with versions of this material on the tapes. Three texts in Spanish, two in German, and one in French are accompanied by workbooks used for homework and also in the laboratory. One junior college uses a first-year course in Russian that consists of coordinated tapes and film strips used with a workbook rather than a text. Table 14 summarizes information on audiolingual materials used in first-year language courses. According to the instructors interviewed, 10 of the junior colleges own and use the commercially prepared tapes designed to accompany all of their first-year texts. Three junior colleges lack the commercially prepared tapes only for one of their three languages. One institution has commercially prepared tapes only for supplementary practice as the instructor prefers to make his own tapes basad upon his basic texts. One junior college has tapes to accompany the basic text in one of its three languages. One instructor interviewed in this junior college, one of the two mentioned above who do not use coordinated tapes, stated that he has ordered, but not

PAGE 96

89 TABLE 14 MATERIALS USED IN FIRST-YEAR COURSES IN MODERN FOREIGN LANGUAGES IN THE JUNIOR COLLEGES HAVING LANGUAGE LABORATORIES Number of Types of Materials Junior Colleges Using Basic Materials Textbooks with commercially prepared coordinated tapes in all firstyear courses 9 Textbooks with commercially prepared coordinated tapes and films 1 Textbooks with teacher-made coordinated tapes 1 Textbooks with commercially prepared or teacher-made tapes 3 Textbooks with coordinated tapes in only some of its first-year courses 2 Total 16 Supplementary Materials Tapes or discs for repetitive practice and for pattern drills 8 Tapes or discs for repetitive practice 5 Tapes or discs for pattern drills 3 Total 16

PAGE 97

90 received, tapes for his texts and, as he had no time to make his own tapes, he uses the laboratory during regular class periods by addressing the students through a microphone while they listen and repeat in the booths. The other instructor uses only supplementary records for repetitive practice during the junior college's required laboratory periods. Eight of the sixteen junior oolleges have at least two sets of supplementary tapes or discs that are used at the first-year level of instruction, One set in each case consists of pattern drills of a manipulative type and the other of dialogues with pauses for repetition. One of these junior colleges has a large inventory of supplementary material including coordinated films and tapes of a cultural nature available for use at the first-year level of instruction in all the languages that it offers. The other eight junior colleges all have one set of supplementary discs or taped material for used in first-year courses. In second-year courses all instructors use basic texts — intermediate level texts or review grammars—with either commercially prepared or teacher-made tapes. In 12 of the junior colleges supplementary tapes or discs are used. In 10 of the junior colleges literary recordings are used in intermediate courses and courses in advanced literature. In 10 junior colleges instructors prepare tapes of questions and true and false statements to be used for practice with their cultural or literary readers. In 12 of the junior colleges instructors make recordings to use in testing the comprehension of their students. In two of the 16 junior colleges each language student buys one 5-inch reel of tape for recording purposes; in another, each student buys one disc for recording. In three other junior colleges students are encouraged to buy their own tapes and have practice tapes duplicated for

PAGE 98

91 work at home with their own tape recorders. Twenty-one instructors make some use of cards or posters or transparencies for vocabulary presentation and conversational practice. One instructor presents grammar in a fourth-semester course by means of a set of 200 pictures illustrating grammar concepts. In the interviews with the 20 instructors in the 13 junior colleges that do not have language laboratories, the following information was obtained. ELeven of the instructors have the commercially prepared tapes that accompany their first-year texts in one of the languages they teach. Seven of these instructors use the tapes in regular class periods by means of a tape recorder. Four of the instructors do not use the tapes as they dislike operating the necessary mechanical equipment. One instructor, who is one of the seven mentioned above, uses an integrated program of tapes, film strips, and workbooks in one of the two languages that he teaches. Three instructors have discs with recordings of the dialogues of their basic texts, and they encourage their students to listen to these for extra voluntary language practice. One of these instructors reported that his students all have these discs for home practice. Nine instructors use records that emphasize listening or listening and repeating either in class or in extra voluntary practice sessions. In 11 of the junior colleges some use is made of recordings of cultural and literary materials in second-year courses. In response to the question regarding their satisfaction with the materials they were currently using, the instructors of French and Russian expressed the opinion that they were satisfied with their present materials but that they constantly examine new materials to see if they would prefer them to the ones they have already chosen. Only one instructor of

PAGE 99

92 German stated that he is fundamentally dissatisfied, with his first-year textbook, which is not accompanied by tapes, and is planning to make a change next year. Indications of dissatisfaction with materials was indicated in interviews with a number of the instructors of Spanish in the junior colleges that have language laboratories. The instructors in six junior colleges stated that they expect to change their adoption of a first-year textbook next year because of their dissatisfaction with this year's choice and their preference for other materials. The instructors in four of these junior colleges expect to adopt a new integrated program of textbook, tapes, and workbooks, stressing a "concept approach" to language instruction, which is already in use in three junior colleges this year, two of which do not have language laboratories. The instructors in the other two junior colleges would like either to adopt this program or return to the textbook with tapes that they had used in previous years. Sixty-nine of the ?0 instructors interviewed in the junior colleges stated that they were responsible for the decision in regard to the adoption of materials either as an individual decision in junior colleges with one language instructor or as a joint decision taken with the concurrence of department heads and colleagues who taught the same language in those junior colleges having more than one language instructor. In the case of 5 larger junior colleges, all the members of the language department worked together on a choice of materials for all languages, so that these materials would best implement their department's objectives. The choice of materials is also reconsidered each year in light of availability of new materials. Only one instructor among the 70 interviewed stated that the adoption of basic textbooks in the two languages taught in that junior

PAGE 100

93 college was influenced by the decision of the administration of that junior college. beliefs of the Modern Language Instructors of the Junior Colleges Regarding the Values of a Language Laboratory The material in this section is based upon opinions of the language instructors expressed in response to questions found under C of Interview A and C and D of Interview B. Opinions of the Instructors in the Junior Colleges That Have Language Laboratories Ihe 50 instructors in the junior colleges having language laboratories were not given any check list of possible values of a language laboratory but were merely asked the questions What do you believe are the values of a laboratory? They listed what they thought were the potential values of a language laboratory. Then in response to additional questions they gave the reasons why they thought that their own laboratory was either succeeding or failing in meeting the requirements of its role as an aid in instruction in modern foreign language. Potential values of a language laboratory mentioned by varying numbers of the 50 instructors interviewed fell into several general categories. First, there were values that had to do with the belief that a language laboratory provides an opportunity for "overlearning" of audiolingual skills. Second, there were values in providing for individual differences of students. Next there were values in reinforcement of the right responses on the part of the students. Then there were values connected with listening to different tjrpes of voices. Finally, there were miscellaneous values, less frequently mentioned, such as saving the

PAGE 101

94 teacher from endless repetition of drill material or testing by means of student recording. Opinions as to the possible values of student recording or of the use of the language laboratory in advanced classes were expressed by only a few instructors in response to the general question of potential values of a language laboratory. Most instructors only considered these values when they were asked specifically for opinions on these topics. Table 15 on the following page gives a summary of the potential values of a language laboratory mentioned by the instructors with the numbers mentioning each it an. Values of a language laboratory were mentioned in varying combinations and with varying emphases by different instructors. The most commonly recurring items had to do with the concept of overlearning of skills through the extra practice provided by a language laboratory. Instructors stated that this opportunity for extra practice was due to one or both of these factors, additional contact hours with the target language and increased practice since all students can perform in the language at the same time. Of the 50 instructors interviewed 48 mentioned this general potential value of a language laboratory. Also, the most frequently expressed reasons for dissatisfaction with the operation of individual laboratories touched upon this same topic. The most common complaint of the instructors interviewed was that their students were not receiving the benefit of enough extra contact hours with the language through laboratory experience. This feeling was expressed by the following number of instructors: 19 instructors in junior colleges requiring one extra period of laboratory experience; 9 instructors in junior colleges suggesting merely voluntary use of the laboratory; 3 instructors in junior colleges using the laboratory only in regular class periods; 9 instructors in junior

PAGE 102

95 TABLE 15 VALUES OF A LANGUAGE LABORATORY MENTIONED BY THE INSTRUCTORS OF THE JUNIOR COLLEGES THAT HAVE LANGUAGE LABORATORIES Potential Values r . •••':.• •; • **.•*: ( ‘ r • • Number of Instructors Mentioning Not Mentioning Total Extra Contact hours with the target language 48 2 50 Constant practice of all students at the same time 48 2 50 Provision for individual differences 24 26 50 Listening to native speakers 24 26 50 Listening to a variety of voices 24 26 50 Use in advanced classes through listening to recordings of literary material 23 27 50 Use in advanced classes through listening for acquisition of nativelike comprehension of the language 18 32 50 Reinforcement of correct responses 13 37 50 Avoiding of endless repetition of practice material by teacher 9 41 50 Student recording for testing purposes 16 34 50 Student recording for purposes of practice through students* comparison of recording with model 9 41 50

PAGE 103

96 colleges requiring two laboratory periods each week; 39 total instructors in all junior colleges having language laboratories. An opinion from an instructor in junior college 9 illustrates both points stressed in the preceding paragraph: that overlearning is an important value of a language laboratory and that it is not always an outcome of experience in individual language laboratories. Ibis opinion follows : As its most important value, the language laboratory gives intensive additional drill to add to student contact hours with the target language for overlearning of structural patterns. This overlearning also takes place because all the students can respond in the target language at the same time. . There is not enough extra use for overlearning in our junior college, because we have only one extra period a week in the first place. In the second place, our lab has become almost a listening station, as our students donÂ’t bother to repeat because they don't record and you can't monitor them all quickly enough to keep than repeating. We need a recording laboratory and another period of lab each week. An instructor in junior college 2 also spoke to the same two points: A laboratory exposes the student to more of the spoken language than is realistically possible in any other way. One must think in terms of the amount of added exposure of each student to the language and in terms of individual performance constantly carried out. ... I am satisfied with our lab, for it has added 100 minutes a week to students' active performance in the language. ... However, we need one additional period of required individual, rather than group, work each week. Twentyfour instructors stated that a language laboratory offers an opportunity to adapt practice to the needs of the individual student and also frees the individual student from the inhibiting effect of performing in the language in the presence of other students. All these instructors felt that their laboratory provided for isolation of the individual students, but 17 of them stated the belief that it failed to provide satisfactorily for meeting individual student needs in language

PAGE 104

97 practice. These instructors favored a combination of group and individual assignment to the laboratory each week. The following quotation from an instructor in junior college 5 is an example of this point of view. The main values of the laboratory are extra practice, providing for individual differences, and privacy so that the students are not inhibited in using the language. ... We need an extra period of laboratory each week of a library type of use to meet the individual needs of our students. Thirteen instructors mentioned as a value of a language laboratory reinforcement of a studentÂ’s response in the language by the immediate giving of the correct response on the tape. Two of these instructors also believed that their laboratory could contribute more effectively to the implementation of this value if all, or part, of the required extra periods of laboratory work each week were assigned on an individual, rather than on a group, basis. An instructor in junior college 5 stated* An important value of a lab is for the student to respond in the language and have the response reinforced by the correct response. Ideally, a student should progress at his own rate with constant reinforcement of correct responses. Tb do this, our lab should be a library type of installation. At the least, half of our lab time should be of this type. Twenty-four instructors stressed as a value of a language laboratory the advantages of listening to different types of voices, those of male and female native speakers from different countries or sections of a country where the language is spoken. Fifteen other instructors stated, however, that this value is not of controlling importance, for the benefit resulting from listening to native speakers could be achieved as easily, and much less expensively, by the use of tape recorders or record players in regular class periods or in listening stations. An instructor

PAGE 105

98 in junior college 9 made the following statement: A possible value of a laboratory is to listen to many voices of different native speakers, but you don't have to have an expensive lab for that. The place for tapes is in second-year work after the students know and can handle some grammar and basic pronunciation. Then at that time they need to hear other voices and are not confused by them. It is hard for students to understand taped voices, for gestures and facial expression are lacking. The teacher needs live contact with first-year classes and should have more live hours, not lab time. Nine instructors mentioned that a language laboratory saves a teacher from endless repetition of drill material, and four instructors spoke of the advantages of student recording in evaluation of students' audio-lingual skills. Seven instructors stated that they were satisfied with the operation of their laboratory because it was functioning as well as could be reasonably expected and they were constantly trying to improve its operation. An instructor in junior college 12 emphasized the responsibility of the individual teacher in the matter of the success of laboratory operation when he stated: I am basically satisfied with the operation of my lab. I feel the lab is doing what it is meant to do — aid me as a tool — and if I am dissatisfied, it is with ra^ limitations— not the lab's. I keep trying all the time to make better use of the lab. An instructor in junior college 1 expressed a similar opinion in the following statement: I am satisfied with the operation of our lab because a lab is not a "cure-all. It is a tool for a teacher who doesn't mind all the extra time it takes for planning, preparing, and collecting materials, and it is only as good as the teacher makes it. You have to keep striving constantly to improve your materials and methods. An instructor in junior college 2 stressed the importance of an integrated program in operating a successful laboratory. He stated: Our lab is successful, but a lab is only as good as its materials, which must be part of an integrated, planned program with printed and visual materials coordinated with audio-lingual materials.

PAGE 106

99 Eleven instructors stated that one of their reasons for a feeling of dissatisfaction with their laboratory was that they have used no scientifically constructed tests to evaluate the development of audio-lingual skills on the part of their students. Eight said that they were dissatisfied because they know of no technique for evaluating their laboratory operation. One instructor stated that her feeling of dissatisfaction on this score had impelled her to begin last year keeping a weekly record of laboratory attendance, voluntary and required, for all students and to attempt to correlate the extra time spent in contact with the language with the grades the students made in that language. Ten Instructors preferred not to have a laboratory but rather to use a tape recorder or record player in regular classes or for outside listening to native speakers. This use of a tape recorder would be especially important in advanced courses, they stated. They expressed the opinion that a machine does not interact with students and that therefore smaller language classes with live contact with a teacher is desirable. One of these instructors declared that in his junior college the real audiolingual work was done in the classroom, not in the laboratory, because books were constantly used in the laboratory so that what the student was really getting in the laboratory was extra practice in pronunciation and reading of the language. Table 16 on the next page gives a summary of the reasons for dissatisfaction with their language laboratories mentioned by the instructors interviewed in response to the general question on this topic. In response to the specific questions on student recording, the 24 instructors with Listen-Speak-Record laboratories and the 9 instructors with Listen-Speak laboratories having some recording positions displayed

PAGE 107

100 TABLE 16 REASONS FOR INSTRUCTORS* DISSATISFACTION WITH THEIR IANGUAGE LABORATORIES Number of Instructors Reasons for Dissatisfaction MsntionNot MenTbtal ing tioning Not enough extra contact hours 39 11 50 Failure to provide adequately for individual differences because of exclusive use of group practice 17 33 50 Failure to provide for individual as well as group practice 2 48 50 Preference for a tape recorder rather than an expensive language laboratory 10 40 50 No scientifically constructed tests for evaluating audio-lingual skill 11 39 50 No techniques for evaluating success of laboratory 8 42 50 Iffechine cannot interact with students 10 40 50

PAGE 108

101 considerable disagreement as to their beliefs as to the value of student recording or their satisfaction with their own recording practices. The instructors who were active in the laboratory planning in three junior colleges stated that they did not feel that they used the recording features of their equipment enough to justify its added expense but that they had agreed with the administration of their junior colleges as to the necessity for purchasing this equipment because they had to have better laboratory facilities than the high schools in their districts for prestige purposes. The instructors of only three junior colleges were completely satisfied with the use they were making of their recording equipment. The instructors of one junior college with some recording positions stated that they hoped to make use of them when their budget would permit the purchase of tape. The instructors of the other four junior colleges were basically satisfied with the use made of their equipment for student recording. Table 17 on the next page shows the use of the recording features for student recording as it was described by instructors in the junior colleges with recording facilities. Opinions of the Instructors in the Junior Colleges That Have No language Laboratories Of the 20 instructors who were interviewed in the 13 junior colleges without language laboratories, 15 instructors, representing 9 junior colleges, stated that plans were being made for installing language laboratories in their junior colleges as soon as their building programs made this possible. Of these 15 instructors 2, both native speakers, stated that they did not want a language laboratory. Five other instructors, representing 4 junior colleges, stated that there were no plans at the

PAGE 109

102 TABLE 17 STUDENT RECORDING IN THE LANGUAGE LABORATORIES THAT HAVE RECORDING FACILITIES Types of Recording Used Number of Junior Colleges Using Testing three times a semester Repetition for pronunciation evaluation, making sentences with words, and describing pictures 2 Tasting for ten minutes once each week Manipulative pattern drills 1 Recording of pattern drills for five minutes each day with students* playing back recording and with spot-checking of recording by instructors 3 Recording of all types of practice material for half of each period with playback for other half 3 a Not used at all for regular day classes 2 b Total 11 £ One Listen-Speak laboratory •with some recording positions alternates students at these positions a week at a time. b Qne Lis ten-Speak -Record laboratory uses its recording facilities only in adult night classes, because the adults insist upon recording.

PAGE 110

103 present time for installing language laboratories in their junior colleges and that they personally did not want any. fhe 13 instructors who desired a language laboratory mentioned the same potential values of a language laboratory as did the instructors in the junior colleges having language laboratories. Table IS gives a summary of their opinions. In the matter of the types of language laboratories desired by the instructors in the junior colleges where plans were being made for eventual installation of language laboratories, opinion was about equally divided on the question of whether facilities for student recording should be included. Seven of the instructors interviewed preferred listenSpeak laboratories for theoretical reasons as well as for the practical reasons of finance and maintenance. They stated that studentsÂ’ comparison of their own recording with that of models is useless, for students cannot hear their own errors of pronunciation and that teachers can correct students' pronunciation quite effectively through monitoring. They also stated that they believed that testing of oral performance can be done adequately without recording. Six instructors stated that they wanted Listen-SpeakRecord laboratories because they wished to use recording for testing purposes and they also desired having individual tape recorders in all booths so that all the students using the laboratory might work on different materials at the same time. Tables 19 and 20 give a presentation of the types of laboratories these instructors would like and the types that they expect to have. Enrollment and expense of equipment are factors that enter into their planning.

PAGE 111

104 TABLE 18 POTENTIAL VALUES OF A LANGUAGE LABORATORY MENTIONED BY THE INSTRUCTORS DESIRING LABORATORIES IN THE JUNIOR COLLEGES WITHOUT LANGUAGE LABORATORIES Potential Values Number Mentioning of Instructors Not Mentioning Total Extra contact hours with the target language 13 0 13 Constant practice of all students at the same time 13 0 13 Provision for individual differences 8 5 13 Listening to native speakers 8 5 13 Listening to a variety of voices 9 4 13 Use in advanced classes through listening to recordings of literary material 6 7 13 Use in advanced classes through listening for acquisition of nativelike comprehension of the language 7 6 13 Reinforcement of correct responses 6 7 13 Avoiding of endless repetition of practice material by teacher 13 0 13 Student recording for testing purposes 2 11 13 Student recording for purposes of practice through students' comparison of recording with model 2 11 13

PAGE 112

105 TABLE 19 TYPES OF LANGUAGE LABORATORIES DESIRED BY THE INSTRUCTORS OF THE JUNIOR COLLEGES WHERE PLANS ARE BEING MADE FOR THE INSTALLATION OF LANGUAGE LABORATORIES Type of Laboratory Desired Number of Instructors Number of Junior-Colleges Represented Listen-Speak-Record laboratory 6 3 Listen-Speak laboratory with some recording positions 1 1 ListenSpeak laboratory 6 a 4 Listen-Speak laboratory with portable console and activated headphones and without booths 1 1 Totals l4 a 9 a Qne instructor who is listed in Table 22 among the instructors not desiring a language laboratory but who had to begin planning for one is counted in this number. TABLE 20 TYPES OF LANGUAGE LABORATORIES EXPECTED Type of Laboratory Expected Number of Junior Colleges Listen-Speak -Record laboratory 1 Listen-Speak laboratory with some recording positions 1 Iisten-Speak laboratory 6 Listen-Speak laboratory with portable console activated headphones and without booths and 1

PAGE 113

106 Table 21 shows the combination of reasons for not wanting a language laboratory given by those instructors who would prefer not to have one in their junior colleges. TABLE 21 REASONS FOR NOT WANTING A LANGUAGE LABORATORY MENTIONED BY INSTRUCTORS IN THE JUNIOR COLLEGES WITHOUT LANGUAGE LABORATORIES Reasons Given 8 CD
PAGE 114

107 Opinions of the Junior College Language Instructors Regarding Some Practical Problems Of Laboratory Operation According to the opinions of the instructors interviewed the practical problems of scheduling, laboratory supervision, preparation of materials, and maintenance were closely interrelated. It was the consensus that financial considerations were principally responsible for difficulty in solving problems in these areas. Forty-one instructors stated that their dissatisfaction with the scheduling of their laboratories was due to the fact that desirable additional hours of laboratory work could not be scheduled because this would necessitate paying for either additional instructors or other laboratory assistants. In 14 of the 16 junior oolleges with language laboratories, instructors supervised students in the laboratory as a part of their regularly assigned contact hours each week. In only two junior colleges student assistants took over this function. These student assistants were used for checking attendance, giving out materials, helping students with the equipment, and duplicating tapes from master tapes. Instructors in 11 junior colleges stated that they believed that their expensive equipment was not being adequately utilized because of failure to provide additional supervision. In the matter of whether a specific instructor was responsible for general laboratory supervision, there were three arrangements found in the junior colleges. By the commonest plan, found in eight junior colleges, a specific instructor was in general charge of laboratory operation but without the release of any time from a full teaching schedule for the performance of duties of general laboratory supervision. In only three junior colleges

PAGE 115

108 did the laboratory supervisor have any released time — one class assignment per week in each case— to serve as laboratory supervisor. In the other five junior colleges all instructors were equally responsible for the operation of the language laboratory. It was stated by instructors in nine junior colleges that provision for a laboratory director who is not responsible for a full teaching load is absolutely necessary not only for dealing with problems of scheduling but also for preparing or directing preparation of materials. In one Lis tenSpeakRe cord laboratory, which at present has a supervisor who is released from one class assignment, plans have been tentatively approved for the appointment next year of an instructor with bachelor’s degree to spend all of his assigned time in the laboratory in supervising student assistants, checking on maintenance, and helping the instructors in assembling and preparing materials. The opinion was expressed by 19 instructors that there is need for reducing instructors* contact hours of laboratory supervision so that they might have more time for preparation of materials. In two junior colleges having Listen-Speak-Record laboratories that require a cartridge type of tape, the complaint was made that the cost of tape prevented the buying of supplies adequate for the optimal utilization of the laboratory. In one junior college the instructors stated that their expensive equipment was not being utilized properly due to failure of the budget to provide adequate commercial tapes or enough blank tape for teacher— made tapes. Ilaintenance problems were mentioned more frequently by instructors in laboratories with recording facilities. Xhe business manager of a junior college with a laboratory with 10 recording positions stated + hs + \

PAGE 116

109 tha recording equipment, was responsible for most of the maintenance expense each month and that a yearly flat-rate maintenance contract with a repair service organization was being considered. The instructors oj. three other Listen-Speak-Record laboratories expressed the opinion that their recording facilities were not being used enough to make up for maintenance inconveniences. One junior college found it expedient to employ student assistants with background in electronics to effect minor repairs on equipment. In another junior college a faculty member stated that he had felt it necessary to take a night course in electronics in a vocational school in order to avoid petty annoyances of non-functioning equipment. Instructors of four other junior colleges remarked that it was unfortunate that their equipment had not been bought from a local or nearby agent who would give them reliable repair service. Summary The analysis of the opinions of the junior college instructors interviewed indicates that basically they believe in the audio-lingual approach to instruction in modem foreign languages, modified, however, to suit the distinctive needs of their level of instruction.

PAGE 117

CHAPTER V SUMMARY, FINDINGS, AND IMPLICATIONS Introductory Statement This chapter includes the following three sections} (a) A summary of the study; (b) A presentation of the findings of the study; (c) A statement of some implications of the findings of the study. Summary of the Study Two media were employed in gathering the data needed to realize the following threefold purpose of this study! (a) The making of a survey of the physical equipment of the language laboratories in the junior colleges of Florida; (b) The making of a study of the utilization of these laboratories; (c) The making of an analysis of the beliefs of the junior college language teachers regarding language instruction. These two media were a questionnaire and a loosely structured interview. Involved in the study were the 29 junior colleges of Floridapublic, private, Negro, and white— that offered courses in modem foreign languages during the first semester of the school year of 1963—1964* The questionnaire was sent out to the language departments of the 16 among these junior colleges that had a language laboratory at that time. Seventeen questionnaires were filled out and returned by representatives of 110

PAGE 118

Ill these junior colleges, as one of the 16 junior colleges had two language laboratories. The information on these questionnaires formed the basis for the findings as to the nature of the physical equipment of the language laboratories and for part of the material presented regarding the general utilization of the language laboratories. The interview was employed with 70 modern language instructors who were regarded as regular faculty members of the junior colleges included in the study. There were two forms of this interview* (a) Interview A, used for the 50 instructors in the 16 junior colleges that had language laboratories, and (b) Interview B, used for the 20 instructors in the junior colleges that did not have language laboratories at the time of the study. The data obtained through the interviews contributed the part of the information on the general utilization of the language laboratory not provided by the questionnaire and also formed the basis for the discussion of the beliefs of the junior college instructors regarding instruction in modern foreign language. In preparation for these interviews, the writer studied the background literature on the topics of the methodology of instruction in modern foreign languages, linguistics, the psychology of language learning, and the role of the language laboratory in language instruction. The writer recorded the interviews in shorthand and then summarized the interviews on interview summary sheets. The two forms of these summary sheets are found in Appendix B. Findings An examination of the responses to the questionnaires and interviews leads to the following generalizations*

PAGE 119

112 1. There are 17 language laboratories in the junior colleges of Florida, of which number 8 are Us tenSpeakRecord laboratories; 7, listenSpeak laboratories (Four of these have some recording positions); and 2, Listen laboratories. (Table 6) 2. The cost of the Listen-Speak-Record laboratories ranged from $3,500 to $20,000 with a mean of $9,530.12. (Tables 4 and 6) 3. The cost of the listen-Speak laboratories ranged from $4,000 to $10,000 with a mean of $7,120. (Tables 5 and 6) 4. The cost of the original equipment of the two listen laboratories was $400 and $474. 5. The cost oer student position of the Listen-Speak-Record laboratories ranged from $233*33 to $666.66 with a mean of $426.22. The cost per student position of the Listen-Speak laboratories ranged from $200.00 to $333.33 with a mean of $276.42. (Tables 4 and 5) 6. The number of student positions in the listen-Speak-Record laboratories ranged from 10 to 30 with a mean at 21.12. The number of student positions in the Listen-Speak laboratories ranged from 20 to 30 with a mean at 26.4. (Tables 4, 5, and 6) 7. The original equipment of 14 of the language laboratories was paid for through the use of NDEA Title III money with matching funds. Three installations used no NDEA money; two installations -used county funds in addition to NDEA money to pay for their original equipment. 8. The range in cost of recordings used in the language laboratories is from $100 to $4,198. These figures, however, do not reflect a true picture of the materials available in the junior colleges, as some junior colleges have borrowed master tapes from the publishers and

PAGE 120

113 duplicated their own copies at the cost of the tape alone and also many junior colleges possess teacher-made tapes. The information obtained in the interviews with the instructors provided the information that all of the junior colleges with language laboratories use textbooks with coordinated tapes, either commercially prepared or teacher made, in at least some of their courses and that nine of them have this material for all their firstyear courses. All of the junior colleges with language laboratories have supplementary sets of discs or tapes for us at various levels of instruction and also some recordings of literary readings for advanced courses. (Tables 6 9 and 14) 9 In the matter of number of students using the language laboratories, Spanish and French are the two leading languages, accounting for 47.91 percent and 33*4 percent of the total enrollment, respectively. German, Russian, and Italian account for the remaining 18.59 percent of the enrollment. (Table 7 ) 10. The use of the language laboratories is predominantly by firstyear students, since 76.8 percent of the students using languaga laboratories in the junior colleges are in firstyear courses. (Table 8) 11. The courses offered in the 29 junior colleges that have language programs are predominantly firstand second-year courses with Spanish, which is taught in all 29 junior colleges, the most frequently offered language. French is the next language in point of frequency of inclusion in the curricula of the junior colleges, as it is taught in 23 junior colleges. German is offered in 11 junior colleges; Russian, in 5 and Italian, in one junior college. (Table 13)

PAGE 121

114 12. The most common scheduling arrangement for language laboratories is for students to be assigned as members of groups for extra periods of laboratory practice each week. This arrangement is in effect in 8 language laboratories. Three schedule students as individuals for extra practice; two use the laboratories only during regular classes; and three junior colleges encourage voluntary extra practice in addition to class use of the language laboratories. Six junior colleges require two laboratory periods a week as extra contact hours of language experience in addition to regular class work in language, and five junior colleges require one extra period of practice each week. (Table 10) 13. In the nine junior colleges where plans are being made for the eventual installation of a language laboratory, the ListenSpeak laboratory is mentioned as the most probable choice in the majority of instances. (Table 20) 14. In four junior colleges no plans are being made at present for the installation of language laboratory facilities. 15. As the commonest arrangement for general laboratory supervision, one specific instructor was in general charge of laboratory operation without release of any time from a full teaching schedule for the performance of the duties of general laboratory supervision. 16. The 70 junior college instructors were in agreement on three basic beliefs that determined their teaching practices* (a) language is fundamentally speech; (b) Language is a communication skill to be acquired by the student; (c) Instruction in language also entails the development of understanding of the culture of the peoples who speak that language.

PAGE 122

115 17* The 70 junior college instructors -were in agreement as to the importance of the four skills of listening, speaking, reading, and •writing as specific objectives of instruction in modem foreign language, for even the 10 instructors who did not mention them in their statement of specific objectives indicated by their statements on their teaching practices that they actually do emphasize the development of these skills. Cultural insight was recognized as a goal at all levels of instruction. Wai-p o f the instructors stressed the importance of the objectives of development of pronunciation, acquisition of vocabulary, and acquaintance with the structures of form and arrangement in the foreign language. (Table 11) 18. The commonest approach to language instruction, one named by 49 of the 70 instructors, is a '•modified audio-lingual approach” to language instruction. This claim to the practice of a "modified audiolingual approach" coincides with the expressed beliefs of 40 of these instructors that the audio-lingual approach means different things at different instructional levels. Reading and writing receive more and earlier emphasis in first-year language work in junior college than they would receive at the level of the secondary school. Twenty-one of these instructors stated that their modification of the audio-lingual approach was due to the higher maturity level of junior college students as compared with high school students; nineteen of these instructors, however, stated that their modification was due to their belief that junior college students are not so "motivated" toward their work as students in universities and four-year colleges. Eleven instructors stated that they believe that they follow the audio-lingual approach.

PAGE 123

116 19* The instructors in the junior colleges that have language laboratories and the instructors in the junior colleges that do not have language laboratories mentioned similar values of language laboratories. They mentioned the following values, which are listed here in the order of the frequency of instructors naming them with the number included in parentheses* Extra contact with the target language (6l); Constant practice of all students at the same time (61); listening to a variety of voices (33) Provision for individual differences (32); listening to recordings of literary material (29) Use in advanced classes through listening for acquisition of nativelike comprehension of the language (25); Avoiding of endless repetition of practice material by teacher (22); Reinforcement of correct responses (19); Student recording for testing purposes (18); Student recording for purposes of practice through students* comparison of recording with model. (Tables 15 and 18) 20. Of the 50 instructors in the junior colleges that have language laboratories, only seven were basically satisfied -with the operation of their laboratories. The remaining 43 indicated dissatisfaction in certain areas with the operation of their laboratories. The following reasons for dissatisfaction were mentioned* Not enough extra contact hours (39); Failure to provide adequately for individual differences because of exclusive use of group practice (17); No scientifically constructed tests for evaluating audio-lingual skill (11); Preference for a tape recorder rather than an expensive language laboratory (10); Belief that machine cannot interact with students (10); No techniques for evaluating success of laboratory (8); Failure to provide for individual as well as group practice (2). (Table 16)

PAGE 124

117 21. There was marked disagreement among the 2k instructors with Listen-Speak-Record laboratories and the 9 instructors with Listen-Sneak laboratories having some recording positions as to the values of student recording or their satisfaction with their own recording practices. The instructors of only three junior colleges were completely satisfied with the use they were making of their recording equipment. The instructors of four other junior colleges stated that they were reasonably well satisfied with the use made of their equipment for student recording. In three junior colleges the recording equipment was used for testing alone, in six juiior colleges it was used for recording of practice mat /rial, and in two junior colleges it was not being used at all for regular day classes. (Table 17) 22. Problems of maintenance were most commonly mentioned in Lis tenSpe akRe cord laboratories or in the listenSpeak laboratories with some recording positions. Implications An inspection of the findings of the study indicates that there is need for consideration of problems in several areas of language instruction related to the utilization of the language laboratory in the junior colleges of Florida. The following needs may be listed. 1. The role of instruction in modern foreign language at the junior college level needs clarification. Study is required to determine its distinctive features in two areas* that of beginning instruction in foreign language and that of instruction in a language continued after study is begun at an earlier level of instruction. In the first area the

PAGE 125

118 following questions require consideration* (a) How should the objectives and methodology of beginning instruction in modem foreign languages differ from those at the high school or four-year college or university level? (b) What should be a satisfactory modification of the audio-lingual approach to suit students of the maturity level of junior college? (c) What should be the proportion of emphasis placed on the development of the four skills of listening, speaking, reading, and writing at the junior college level? (d) How will instruction be articulated with later study at a four-year or upper-level college or a university? In the second area the following questions occur! (a) What sort of experience in language should be offered at the junior college level to those students who are continuing study of a language already begun at an earlier level of instruction? (b) Will it be increasingly necessary to extend a serious study of literature down into students* first language work undertaken at the junior college level as more students enter junior college after a longer language sequence? 2. The role of the language laboratory as a tool for implementing the distinctive objectives of instruction in modem foreign languages at the junior college level needs to be studied. The following questions demand clarification! (a) Which is more effective at junior college level! a library type of laboratory utilization or a group assignment type of utilization? (b) How frequently and for how long should students practice with electronic equipment each week? (c) What are the implications for choice of equipment to be derived from the answer to this last question? (d) Would a combination of group and individual use of a language laboratory be desirable? (e) Would a combination of group and individual use

PAGE 126

119 imply an emphasis upon placing more individualized electronic equipment in the language laboratory installation accompanied by use of tape recorders or other portable electronic equipment in the classroom? 3* A need exists for the development of materials suitable for the maturity level of the students and also for the distinctive scheduling pattern of junior colleges, which varies from the high school arrangement of five regularly scheduled periods of instruction per week. 4. A need is evidenced for in-service training of junior college instructors in the use of the most modem electronic equipment and materials. This need implies that junior college instructors should be eligible for participation as students in NDEA language institutes. There is perhaps the additional implication that there should be more NDEA institutes at the higher levels, for, even though junior college instructors may possess a high level of competency in language skills and do not therefore need experience in a minimal institute, they still do need the training in methodology and in use of the latest electronic equipment that an institute provides. 5. Need is displayed for research on the most effective manner of utilizing a language laboratory.

PAGE 127

APPENDIX A TABLE A FLORIDA JUNIOR COLLEGES State. Supported Brevard Junior College, Cocoa Central Florida Junior College, Ocala Chipola Junior College, Marianna CollierBlocker Junior College, Palatka Daytona Beach Junior College, Daytona Beach Edison Junior College, Fort Jfyers Gibbs Junior College, St. Petersburg Gulf Coast Junior College, Panama City Hampton Junior College, Ocala Indian River Junior College, Fort Pierce Jackson Junior College, Marianna Johnson Junior College, Leesburg Junior College of Broward County, Fort Lauderdale Lake City Junior College and Forest Ranger School, Lake City LakeSumter Junior College, Leesburg Lincoln Junior College, Fort Pierce Manatee Junior College, Bradenton Miami-Dade Junior College, Miami North Florida Junior College, Madison Palm Beach Junior College, Lake Worth Pensacola Junior College, Pensacola Roosevelt Junior College, West Palm Beach Rosenwald Junior College, Panama City St. Johns River Junior College, Palatka St. Petersburg Junior College, St. Petersburg Suwannee River Junior College, Madison Volusia County Community Junior College, Daytona Beach Washington Junior College, Pensacola Non -StateSupported Florida College, Tampa Marymount, Boca Raton Orlando Junior College St. Leo College, St. Leo Webber College, Babson Park a As listed in the Florida Educational Directory October, 1963* 120

PAGE 128

121 A m •H CO 8 •H w A A (0 A A to m 11 CO CO A m co % 5 •rl •> *> A atjd A A u II CO OS CO ffi O k fl) C Q) O Q p, P Q Q Q c5owc5ococ5c5c5cococ5c5 o #jC A AAAAAAAAAAAAA m A OOOOOOOOOOOOO l* fc, A u CO •> 0 1 CM r-l r-i VO NNvC4-OHH4r\HC>BJ OS CA Ctf ^a3M3ij333j3323 5 I cSS -H h O O O 600 H £ £ <$ R rS CM 60 5 & 8 )H & 'o *3ij ocS^ 5 o§cSo<^ l *§*•§ 3 S-S* J3 . £3 v a ^ *5 + 3 3 p|?h 3 ^ m S3S 1 aE Ofl§^ q s u o £ I
PAGE 129

122 TABIE C NUMBER OF INSTRUCTORS INTERVIEWED AND LANGUAGES TAWJHT IN FLORIDA JUNIOR COLLEGES HAVING NO LANGUAGE IA BORA TORIES Name of Junior College Number of Instructors Interviewed languages Taught Chipola Junior College 1 Spanish CollierHlocker Junior College 0 Edison Junior College 1 French, Spanish Florida College 1 Spanish Indian River Junior College 3 French, German, Russian, Spanish Jackson Junior College 0 Johnson Junior College lake City Junior College and 2 French, Spanish Forest Ranger School 1 French, Spanish Iake-Sumter Junior College 1 French, Spanish Lincoln Junior College 2 French, Spanish i'&rymount 2 French, Spanish Rosenwald Junior College 0 St. Johns River Junior College 1 Spanish St. Ieo b 3 French, Spanish Suwannee River Junior College 1 Spanish Washington Junior College 1 Spanish Webber 0 "This junior college has no modem language offerings. Gie instructor of Chinese and Latin was not Intel-viewed.

PAGE 130

APPENDIX 3 Apartment 3 1124 N. W. 1st Place Gainesville, Florida 32601 I am making a study of the functions of the language laboratory in the junior colleges of Florida as a project for a doctoral dissertation at the university of Florida. You may recall receiving a communication last spring from Or. James L. Wattenbarger covering this study, which has been approved by the Steering Committee of the Junior Colleges. The study involves two parts, a questionnaire dealing with the physical aspects and general utilization of the laboratory and an interview with selected modern language teachers on the subject of philosophy and methodology of language instruction. In the case of junior colleges without language laboratories, the interview alone will be conducted. According to the plan of my study, I should like to interview all instructors who “are regular faculty members teaching in the day programs of the language departments of each junior college. In order to make plans for my schedule of interviews, I would appreciate it if you would have the following information filled out on the enclosed card: Names of language teachers with languages taught and information as to whether your junior college now has a language laboratory or is planning to install one* Will this date I am planning to be in your area on be satisfactory for visiting your junior college? Your willingness to participate -in this study will be greatly appreciated. Very truly yours, Enclosure Mrs. Catherine H. Sorensen 123

PAGE 131

124 Apartment 3 1124 N. W. 1st Place Gainesville, Florida 32601 I am making a study of the functions of the language laboratory in the junior colleges of FLorida as a project for a doctoral dissertation at the University of Florida. This project has been approved by Dr. James L. Wattenbarger, Director of the Division of Community Colleges, and the Steering Committee of the statesupported junior colleges. I am requesting permission of the four nonstatesupported junior colleges to include them in this study along with the twenty-nine statesupported junior colleges. The study involves two parts, a questionnaire dealing with the physical aspects and general utilization of the laboratory and an interview with selected modern language teachers on the subject of philosophy and methodology of language instruction. In the case of junior colleges without language laboratories, the interview alone will be conducted. According to the plan of my study, I should like to interview all instructors who are regular faculty members teaching in the day programs of the language departments of each junior college. In order to make plans for my schedule of interviews, I would appreciate it if you would have the following information filled out on the enclosed card: Names of language teachers with languages taught and information as to whether your junior college now has a language laboratory or is planning to install one. I am planning to be in your area on • Will this date be satisfactory for visiting your junior college? Your willingness to participate in this study will be greatly appreciated. Very truly yours. Mrs. Catherine H. Sorensen Enclosure

PAGE 132

Junior College Name of Instructors Date of Appointment Languages Taught Yes No Language laboratory ______ Flanning to install a laboratory Appointment date satisfactory _____

PAGE 133

126 Apartment 3 1124 N. W. 1st Place Gainesville, Florida 32601 I am enclosing a copy of my questionnaire on the physical aspects and general utilization of the language laboratory, I shall appreciate it very much if you will have one of your language instructors fill it out, and I shall pick it up when I visit your junior college;. I am looking forward to meeting and on Very truly yours, Mrs. Catherine H. Sorensen Enclosure

PAGE 134

127 SURVEY OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE LABORATORIES IN THE JUNIOR COLIEGES OF FLORIDA SCHOOL YEAR OF 1963-64 Name of Schoo l D ate Name of Person Making Repor t Position of Person Making Repor t Yes No Number I. PHYSICAL NATURE AND COST OF IAB AND OTHER EQUIPMENT 1. Lab type a. Listen lab with headphones b. Playback machine without headphones c. Playback machine with speaker d. Listen-Speak lab with activated earphones e. ListenSpeakRecord lab 2. Nature of student stations a. Booths permanently fixed in position b. Movable booths c. Stations without partitioned booths d. Booths occupying part of a regular classroom 3. Nature of lab equipment a. Tape recorders, single track b. Tape recorders, dual track c. Magnetic disc recorders d. Projection machines (Specify types) e. Screen f. Other equipment (Specify type) 4. Number of channels 5. Cost of lab and special equipment a* Estimated total cost of equipment $. b. Estimated cost of maintenance per year $ c. Estimated cost of recordings $ 6. Source of money for original lab a. NDEA Title III money including matching funds b. Other (Please specify)

PAGE 135

12R 7. Student fee for lab use If so, amount Yes No Number $ II. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF IAB 1. How many years has the lab been in operation as of this date? 2. Decision to install lab was made by joint decision of teachers and administrators 3. Decision was made in another way (Please specify) 4. Original lab equipment was chosen by joint action of teachers and administrators in. INSTRUCTIONAL USE OF IAB 1. lab is used for a. French b. German c. Russian d. Spanish e. Other (Specify) 2. Lab is used by a. Students in first-year introductory classes b. Students in second-year intermediate classes c. Students in advanced conversation classes d. Other students (Specify) 3. Lab is used by classes, as such, at regular fixed hours a. If so, does this time represent all the assigned class meeting time? b. Is this time in addition to regularly assigned class meetings in other rooms? 4. Lab is used by students as individuals a. Students are scheduled for a specific number of hours per week b. Students are encouraged, but not required, to use the lab 5. A definite faculty member is in charge of lab operation and supervision a. This person has a full teaching load b. If load is reduced, how much time is freed ? 6 Some Use The following types of materials are used in this lab Commercial recordings are used Frequent Use Almost Exclusive Use a

PAGE 136

129 Some Frequent Use use b. These recordings are used in connection with a text or other printed materials c. If so, are these printed materials used by students in the lab? d. Teacher-made recordings are used e. These recordings are used in connection with a text or other printed materials f. If so, are these printed materials used by students in the lab? g. Slides are used h. Film strips are used i. Films are used Almost Exclusive Use

PAGE 137

130 INTERVIEW A (LABORATORY) A. I. Training and experience of teacher interviewed (Questionnaire to be filled outJj_ II. Objectives and goals of language teaching 1. What are your general objectives? 2. What are your specific goals? For beginning students? For advanced students? 3. What is your opinion about cultural insight as an objective for beginning and advanced students? B. Implementation of goals and objectives through methods and materials 4. In first year of language instruction, what are proportions of time and amphasis given to four skills: listening, speaking, reading, and writing? (This question is to be used if the instructor has mentioned these skills under objectives) 5. What printed and audio-lingual materials; do you use? Copyright date? (A-LM materials) 6. Was this material adopted when laboratory was installed, and has adoption been changed subsequently? 7. Why were these materials chosen? Who chose them? 8. Are you satisfied with these materials in general? 9. Are audio-lingual materials coordinated with printed materials? 10. At what point do you introduce use of printed material? Is printed material used in the laboratory? (Texts or workbooks,) In beginning courses? In advanced courses? At what point do you introduce writing? Do students write in laboratory? (Workbook exercises, dictations, questions, comprehension tests) 11. Do students have commercial discs coordinated with their printed material for use at home for repetition practice? 12. Do students have discs, or tapes, for recording In the laboratory? Individual tapes duplicated for use at home?

PAGE 138

13:1 13. Do you make your own recordings? What kind? How are they integrated with other course materials? 1^'* Do you use film? Suppl era entally or integrally? 15. Do you use film strips? or slides? C, Implementation through laboratory 16. How is laboratory integrated with course? 1?. Is laboratory basically a library type of laboratory? 18* Is it used as an equivalent of homework? 19. Is laboratory used as a part of regular class activity? 20. What types of activity go on in laboratory? (Substitution drills, etc.) 21. Do students record as well as listen and respond? How many recording spots are there? 22. How is development of audio-lingual skill on part of students evaluated? 23. How well does laboratory supply coverage of students in beginning and advanced work? 2b. How is laboratory used in advanced courses? In intermediate? In literature? In conversation? 25. What do you believe are values of laboratory? 26. How is success of laboratory evaluated? (If it is?) 27. Are you satisfied with laboratory and its operation? How? Equipment, materials, schedule, effectiveness, maintenance, motivation of students? 28. Are you dissatisfied with laboratory and its operation? How? (Same) 29. Do you keep trying to change and improve in various ways, such as choice of materials, scheduling, integration with courses, increased use of laboratory by advanced students? 30. Do you consider use by intermediate and advanced students desirable or undesirable?

PAGE 139

13 2 D. Practical problems regarding laboratory operation 31. Does the laboratory have problems of maintenance? 32. Does the laboratory have problems of supervision? Does it have student assistants? If so, what are their duties? 33. Are there practical problems in relation to preparation of tapes by teachers? Money? lime, released or not? (Ask for commercial name of equipment though this information will not appear in study)

PAGE 140

INTERVIEW 3 (NO LABORATORY) I. Training and experience of teacher interviewed (Questionnaire to be filled out) II. Objectives and goals of language teaching 1. What are your general objectives? 2. What are your specific goals? For beginning students? For advanced students? 3. What is your opinion about cultural insight as an objective for beginning and advanced students? Implementation of goals and objectives through methods and materials 4. In first-year language instruction, what are proportions of time and emphasis on four skills: listening, speaking, reading, and writing? 5. What printed materials do you use? When do you first introduce use of printed materials? Copyright date of materials? 6. Are you satisfied with your printed materials? Who chose than? 7. What sort of audio-lingual exercises do you use in class? 8. Do you use films and film strips? How? 9. Do your students have any commercial discs, perhaps coordinated with their printed material, that they use for repetitive practice outside of class on their own record players? or on school record players? 10. What sort of homework do you use in your first-year classes, especially in the first semester? Plans for a laboratory by those schools that are planning for installation of a laboratory 11. Why do you want a laboratory? How does the desire for installing a laboratory tie in with your general and specific objectives of language instruction? 12. Who is doing the planning for your laboratory?

PAGE 141

134 13. Did you consult with representatives of the State Department of Education, consultants from other schools, architects, representatives of commercial laboratory companies, etc. ? 14. Have you obtained from other schools copies of their laboratory specifications, objectives, etc.? 15. Do you know how much money will be available for the installation? 16. In a new junior college how did you arrive at projected enrollment figures? 17. Do you know about financial and other provisions for maintenance of a laboratory? 18. What type of laboratory will fit in with your objectives and your money that is available? 19. Are you working on choosing, or have you chosen, materials that will be suitable for implementing your objectives with laboratory activity? 20. What types of activities are you planning for your laboratory? For beginning students? For advanced students? 21. How will your laboratory be integrated with classroom work? 22. What materials have you read on laboratory planning? 23. What provisions are being sketched in your plans for laboratory supervision, preparation and organization of materials, etc.? 24. Are you planning any integrated use of films? 25. Have you begun to think of specific equipment or specific commercial laboratories? 26. Are you considering use of your laboratory by other areas (English, humanities, shorthand, etc.)? 27. Have your representatives of other disciplines in your school participated in laboratory planning sessions with ypu?

PAGE 142

135 D. Decision not to have a laboratory by those schools that have no plans for installing one 28. Who is responsible for this decision in your school? Do you personally want a laboratory? 29. If the decision is due to administrative opposition to a laboratory, what is its basis? 30. If you personally do not want a laboratory, why is this so? 31. Information as to whether the instructor is a native speaker of the language is to be obtained from questionnaire. (ihis information is recorded in this connection, because it has been suggested to the writer by several junior college administrators that instructors who are native speakers do not like language laboratories. ) 32. Do you dislike working with mechanical equipment?

PAGE 143

136 Name Date Junior College Position Degrees Institutions Majors Language Institutes County Workshops Foreign Travel and Study. Other Advanced Work (Institutions, length of time, nature of work, etc. ) Languages on Certificate Years in High Under grad. Grad. Hrs. School Hrs. Are you a native speaker of a foreign language? What language? F rom what country? What background courses in other disciplines (art, history, social studies, anthropology, psychology, etc.) have you found especially helpful ?

PAGE 144

137 Which languages are you now teaching? Which languages have you taught? Which languages do you like to teach and why? Which languages do you, or would you, not like to teach and why? Experience Institution Address Languages Taught Number of Years

PAGE 145

139 INTERVIEWS SUMMARIZED FROM SHORTHAND NOTES A Instructor Number Junior College Number A. II. Objectives and goals of language teaching (Continued on back if necessary) B. Implementation of goals and objectives through methods and materials 4. Proportions of time and emphasis on four skills 5. Printed and audio-lingual materials 6. When adopted or changed? 7. Why chosen? By whom? 8. Satisfied with materials in general? 9. Are audio-lingual materials coordinated with printed materials? 10. Use of printed material— when introduced? Used in lab? 11. Do students have tape or discs for recording? 12. Discs or tapes for home practice? 13. Do you make your own recordings? What kind? How integrated? 14. Use of film 15. Use of film strips or slides

PAGE 146

139 C. Implementation through laboratory16. How integrated? 17. Library type? 18. Used as homework? 19* Part of regular class activity? 20. lypes of activity in laboratory? 21. Do students record? How? How many spots? 22. Evaluation of students' audio-lingual skill 23. Coverage of students in beginning and advanced courses 24. Use in advanced courses: literature and conversation 25. Values of lab? (Continue on back if necessary) 26. How is success of laboratory evaluated? 27. Are you satisfied with lab and its operation? How? 28. Are you dissatisfied? How? 29. Efforts at improvement?

PAGE 147

30. Use by advanced students desirable or undesirable? Practical problems regarding laboratory operation 31. Problems of maintenance? What kind? Commercial name of equipment? 32. Problems of supervision? Student assistants? Their duties? 33* Problems in relation to preparation of tapes? Money? Released time?

PAGE 148

INTERVIEWS SUMMARIZED FROM SHORTHAND NOTES B Instructor Number J unior College Number A. II. Objectives and goals of language teaching (Continue on back if necessary) B. Implementation of goals and objectives 4. Proportions of time and emphasis on four skills in first year 5. Printed materials (Any tapes or discs?) 6. Satisfied with materials? 7. Audio-lingual exercises? 8. Films and film strips? 9. Individual commercial discs? 10. Homework— especially first year? 11. Why a laboratory? 12. Who is planning? 13. Consultants? 1^. Information from other schools? 15. Money available? 16. Projected enrollment figures?

PAGE 149

1?. Provisions for maintenance? 18. Type of laboratory? 19. Materials for new laboratory? 20. Activities for beginning and advanced students? 21. Integration— library type? 22. What material read on laboratory planning? 23. Plans for supervision, preparation of materials, etc. 24. Integrated use of films? 25. Specific equipment or commercial laboratories? 26. Use of laboratory by other areas? What areas? 27. Planning by representatives of other areas? D. Why no laboratory? 28. Who is responsible for decision? 29. ^asis for decision— administrative? 30. Basis for decision— personal? 31. Are you a native speaker of the language? 32. Do you dislike working with mechanical equipment?

PAGE 150

BIBLIOGRAPHY Bandy, Ollie Sherman. "An Appraisal of the Administrative and Organizational Arrangements for Programs of Spanish in Florida High Schools. 11 Ed. D. Dissertation. Gainesville* University of Florida, I960. 119 pp. Blrkmaier, Emma M. "Modern languages." Encyclopedia of Educational Research Third Edition, Edited by Chester W. Harris. New York* Macmillan Co., I960, pp. 861-88. Bloomfield, Leonard. Language New York* Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 19ol. 564 pp. Outline Guide for the Practical Study of Foreign languages Baltimore* linguistic Society of America, 1942. 16 pp. Brooks, Nelson. language and language Learning New York* Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc. I960. 238 pp. Carroll, John B. The Study of Language Cambridge* Harvard University Press, 1953 • 289 pp. Cioffari, Vincenzo. "The Influence of the Language Institute ProgramPast, Present, and Future." I-bdern Language Journal 46 62-68; February 1962. "What Can We Expect from the Language laboratory?" Modern Language Journal 45* 3-9 January 1961. Coleman, Algernon. The Teaching of Modern Foreign Languages in the United States New York* Macmillan Co., 1929* 367 PP* Florida State Department of Education. Unpublished informal survey on enrollment prepared under the direction of 0. E. Perez, State Supervisor of Modern Foreign Languages. 1962. Funke, Francis J. "Junior College Foreign Language Departments." Unpublished report prepared for J. L. Wattenbarger by an instructor of the Department of Communication in Mami-Dade Junior College. Mami, Florida* April, 1962. 31 pp. Hayes, Alfred D. New Media for Instruction* Language Laboratory U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Education. Bulletin 1963* No. 37. Washington, D. C.* U. S. Government Printing Office, 1963. 118 pp. 143

PAGE 151

144 Holton, J S. ; King, P# i.; Ilathieu, G; atxl Pond, K. 3. Sound TernpriaprQ Teaching New York* University Publishers, 1961. 249 pp. Huebener, Theodore. Audio-Visual Techniques in Teaching Foreign languages New York* New York University Press, I960. I63 pp. Hutchinson, Joseph C. Ifodern Foreign, .languages in High Schools The language l aboratory U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Education. Bulletin 1961, No. 23. Washington, D. C.t U. S. Government Printing Office, 1961. 85 pp. Iodice, Don R. Guidelines to Language Teaching in Classroom and Labora torjr. Washington, D. C.i Teaching Research and Technology Division, Electronic Teaching laboratories, 1961. 59 pp. Johnston, Far jorie D. and Seerley, Catharine C. Foreign language Tab oratories in Schools and Colleges U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Education. Bulletin 1959, No. 3. Washington, D. C.i U. S. Government Printing Office, 19 59. 86 pp. Kjeldergaard, Paul M. "The Psychology of language. 1 Review of Educational Research 31* 119-20; April 1961. Iambert, Wallace E, '’Psychological Approaches to the Study of Language, Part It On learning Theory, Thinking, and Human Abilities. rt Modern language Journal 47* 51-62; February 1963. Warty, Fernand L. language Laboratory learning Wellesley, Fassachusetts* Audio-Visual Publications, i960. 256 pp. • ^fethods a nd Equipment for the Language Laboratory Fiddle bury. Vermont* Audio-Visual Publications, 195^7" 84 pp. Ilathieu, Gustave. "language laboratories." Review of Educational Research 32* 168-78; April 1962. — Jfcdern language Association. "Developing Cultural Understanding through Foreign language Study* A Report of the Modern Language Association Interdisciplinary Seminar in Language and Culture." Publications of t he jtodern Language Association 68* 1196-1218; i tor ton, F. Rand. The langu age Laboratory as a Teaching Machine Ann Arbor, Michigan* Publications of the Language Laboratory, The University of Iftchigan, 1961. 69 pp. wueller, Theodore. "The Teaching Concept in the Foreign Language Laboratory* M Journal o f Teacher Education 12* 317-21; September 1961. National Defe nse „ U. B. Governmen language Institutes OE 27011-65. ’eminent Printing Office, 1964. Washington, D. C.

PAGE 152

145 O'Connor, Patricia, and Twaddell, W* K. ‘'Intensive Training for an Oral Approach in Language Teaching." Modern Language Journal 44* 1-42; February I960. Osgood, Charles U. editor. "Psycholinguistics* A Survey of Theory and Research Problems." Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 49* 1-203J October 195^ Parker, William Riley. The National Interest and Foreign Languages* A Discussion Guide prepared for the U. S. National Commission for UNESCO, Department of State Publication 7324, Third Edition. Washington, D. C.* U. S. Government Printing Office, 1962. 159 pp. Pei, Mario, and Gaynor, Frank. Dictionary of Linguistics New York* Philosophical Library, 195k. 238 pp. Politzer, Robert L. Teaching French* An Introduction to Applied linguistics Boston* Ginn and Company, I960. 140 pp. Politzer, Robert L., and Staubach, Charles N. Teaching Spanish; A linguistic Orientation Boston* Ginn and Company, 1961, 136 pp. Skinner, B. F. The Ebhavior of Organisms New Yorkt Apple ton-CenturyCrofts, S7.7 T93B. 457 up. Verbal Behavior Appleton-Century-Crof ts Inc., 195?. 478 pp. Stack, Edward M. The language Laboratory and Modem Language Teaching New York* Oxford University Press, i 960 149 pp. Ua-S.. Statutes Vol. 72, 85 th Congress, 1958 Valdman, ^Albert. Applied linguistics. French* A Guide for Teachers Simon Belasco, General Editor, with an introduction by Simon Bslasco. Boston* D. C. Heath and Company, 196*1. 116 pp.

PAGE 153

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Catherine Hennessey Sorensen was born in Columbus, Ohio. She attended the Ohio State University and received the following degrees! B.A. with honors, M.A. and B.S. in Edu. Her majors were la tin, French, and Spanish. While teaching at University School of the Ohio State University, Upper Arlington High School, and Columbus Central High School, she continued graduate work at the Ohio State University. In 1 957 Mrs. Sorensen moved to Florida, where she taught in high schools at Bradenton and Jacksonville and at Lake City Junior College. In the summer of 1958, Mrs. Sorensen entered the Uhiversity of Florida as a student, and she was admitted to the Advanced School of the College of Education in 1961 with the plan of working toward an Ed.D. degree in curriculum and instruction with orientation toward junior college teaching. She spent a year as a half-time teaching assistant in the Department of Business Education at the University of Florida and another year as a Graduate Fellow of the University. Mrs. Sorensen is a member of the following honorary organizations* Phi Beta Kappa, Pi Lambda Theta, Kappa Delta Pi, and Delta PI Epsilon; of the following professional organizations* National Education Association, Department of Foreign Languages of the National Education Association, American Association of Teachers of French, American Association of Teachers of Spanish and Portuguese, and Ifodem Language Section of the Florida Education Association. 146

PAGE 154

This dissertation was prepared under the direction of the chairman of the candidateÂ’s supervisory committee and has been approved by all members of that committee. It was submitted to the Dean of the College of Education and to the Graduate Council, and it was approved as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Education. Supervisory Committee! V a. /<'o


xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID E2H127J98_2641SN INGEST_TIME 2017-01-06T21:29:06Z PACKAGE AA00052729_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES