Audiovisual creep!!?!?!?—Pedagogical Drama from the MLA

[Mark Nornes]

Here is an article that many on KineJapan will find interesting and  
controversial. It raises many questions, pointing to both promising  
and prickly directions.

Where do you think the place of Japanese film study will be in this  
situation?

Markus






__________________________________________________

From: Miriam Kazanjian [mailto:makazanjian at earthlink.net]
Sent: Tue 1/2/2007 5:58 PM
To: All Coalition Organizations
Subject: Fwd: Dramatic Plan for Language Programs

TO:  Organizational Representatives to the Coalition for International
Education

Below is another interesting foreign language article appearing in  
INSIDE
HIGHER ED today.  It also can be found at
http://insidehighered.com/news/2007/01/02/languages

Regards,
Miriam

--------------------------------------
:sidehighered.com/news/2007/01/02/languages
Dramatic Plan for Language Programs
Inside Higher ED, Jan 2, 2007

A panel of some of the top professors of foreign languages has concluded
that the programs that train undergraduate majors and new Ph.D.'s are
seriously off course, with so much emphasis on literature that broader
understanding of cultures and nations has been lost.

The panel, organized by the Modern Language Association, wants to  
jettison
the traditional model in which language instruction is followed  
primarily
by literary study. In its place, the panel would like to see departments
merge study of language and literature while adding more study of  
history,
culture, economics, and society -- in some respects turning language
programs into area studies programs. The changes might be most  
dramatic in
graduate programs, in part because the panel's members believe that the
professors who teach undergraduates need a much broader conception of  
their
field.
The implications of this call for change are, several panel members  
said,
"revolutionary" and potentially quite controversial. For example, the
measures being called for directly challenge the tradition in which  
first
and second-year language instruction is left in many departments to
lecturers, who frequently play little role in setting curricular policy.
The panel wants to see tenure-track professors more involved in all  
parts
of undergraduate education and -- in a challenge to the hierarchy of  
many
departments -- wants departments to include lecturers who are off the
tenure track in planning the changes and carrying them out.
The overhaul could also prompt a rethinking of the way foreign language
departments relate to the U.S. government. The last year has seen  
federal
agencies take new interest in foreign language education -- a shift  
that is
welcomed by language professors but that also raises concerns for  
many who
question whether military and intelligence officials really understand
language education or have the right motives.
Professors involved with planning this overhaul said that they were  
doing
so for educational reasons -- and that part of their role is to promote
federal policy that embraces educationally valid language programs. But
some of the professors involved said that the effort would produce
graduates who were far more valuable to the government (and business for
that matter), as well as for education.
The MLA panel's report has been completed, but it is still being  
reviewed
by association leaders and has not been released. But some of the
professors involved in the effort provided a briefing on their work last
week at the association's annual meeting, in Philadelphia. Formal  
steps to
push the agenda could come as early as the spring.

Ending the 'Literature-Centered' Ph.D.
In graduate language education, "the teaching of literature has  
become an
end in itself," in a "triumph of historically dehydrated theory," said
Michael Geisler, a panel member who is dean of the language schools and
study abroad and a professor of German at Middlebury College.
"Why do we insist on specializing" in literature, Geisler asked, when  
there
are so many "urgent tasks" for language Ph.D.'s? He portrayed the ideal
mission of these programs as providing new professors (or other
professionals) with a deep understanding of culture and current  
societies
that goes far beyond the literary tradition. "Narrative isn't an end in
itself," he said.
For an association where members have historically been more focused  
on the
meaning of Cervantes or Pirandello than that of the Euro or a united
Germany, these are potentially fighting words. And Geisler stressed that
the changes needed couldn't be accomplished with a smattering of film or
media studies. In fact he said he was not impressed with the  
"audiovisual
creep" already seen in some programs. Rather he said that the "nice and
cuddly" study of literature had to be revised based on "a re- 
evaluation of
the entire content."
Specifically, he said that the Ph.D. students who will be future  
professors
(and through retraining, some current professors) need to understand  
both
the "linguistic and metalinguistic" stories of their departments'  
countries
and regions. Every graduate program should include a course in applied
linguistics, he said, focusing on the latest advances in  
understanding of
cognition, identity, bilingualism, and other topics.
Proficiency needs to be demonstrated, he said, not only in language,
literature and art, but in the mass media, society, history, economics,
social welfare, religion, government and other aspects of society. A  
true
"transcultural understanding" of a place is needed that can't be  
achieved
with a literary-dominated program, he said.
Geisler stressed that the panel was not against the study of literature,
but against a "literature-centered model." He said that the panel wants
literature to be seen as "one of many forms of narrative to help us
understand a given culture."

Adding Relevance to the Major
At the undergraduate level, literature may still play a central role,  
but
for majors as well, the program needs more breadth and relevance,  
said Haun
Saussy, a panel member who is professor of comparative literature at  
Yale
University. Without change, he said, the language major could become "a
quaint artifact."
Beyond adding more content beyond literature and language, Saussy  
said that
the structure of most programs needs to change. Rather than starting  
with a
focus on language basics and then moving to literature, a blended  
program
will be sought. "We need high quality content from the beginning, and
language to the end," Saussy said.
This will require what he termed "a revolution" that will likely  
upset some
senior faculty members, he said. Currently, most departments delegate
instruction for the first few years of language study to lecturers,
typically people who are off the tenure track and who in many cases lack
Ph.D.'s. Recruitment of lecturers isn't always taken seriously, and  
those
hired are rarely included in curricular planning or development, Saussy
said. Their job is viewed as "to drill students" on vocabulary and  
grammar.
"We're going to need a good bit of retooling and supplementary  
hiring," he
said.
But he stressed that the panel wasn't calling for the lecturers to be
replaced. Rather, he said, it was time to "break down the hierarchy" and
fully involve the lecturers in course planning and not to limit their  
roles.
At the same time, he said that to meet the needs the panel  
identified, he
expected departments -- especially those with both undergraduate and
graduate programs -- to broaden their hiring. For example, he said  
that a
Chinese department at a major university (which he declined to name  
except
to say that it is not his own) is currently negotiating to recruit an
expert in Chinese law -- who currently works at a law school -- into its
department.

How Close to Washington?
A subtext to the MLA reconsideration of how language programs should  
be run
is a desire to benefit from the increased government interest in foreign
cultures and languages. Language professors have complained for years  
that,
although their work has the potential to help government, business, and
society, they have not been turned to for advice.
Mary Louise Pratt, chair of the MLA panel and a professor of Spanish  
at New
York University, said that a "perennial question" for scholars has been
"how to secure public investment" in the contradictory environment of  
the
United States. The United States is "a multilingual country" that views
itself as the top world power and yet has had a "monolingualist  
ideology."
In the last year, Pratt said, the Bush administration has started to  
reach
out to academics on these issues, and she noted the summit meeting of
college presidents organized by the Departments of State and  
Education. "We
are in the room now," Pratt said, noting that Rosemary Feal, the MLA's
executive director, was among those at the invitation-only event.
In discussions with those concerned about international education, Pratt
said, she has heard "tremendous frustration about how literary study
monopolizes the curriculum." And while Pratt said that frustration was
legitimate, she stressed that the association wanted to oppose "the
securitization of language study." For example, she said that political
demands for training people in various languages tend to be short term,
based on whatever part of the world has become a hot spot. But "language
learning always a long-term process," she said, adding that it was
important to push an "intellectually driven agenda."
Yale's Saussy said that language professors may need to rethink some of
their assumptions. He noted that the magazine of the American Council of
Teachers of Foreign Languages -- many of whose members are in secondary
schools -- features ads from the Central Intelligence Agency seeking
instructors. Saussy imagined the uproar that would follow if the  
PMLA, the
MLA's flagship journal, ran a similar ad.
Saussy said that an environment where the federal government is suddenly
interested in foreign languages and (if the committee's  
recommendations are
adopted) departments are making their programs more relevant, professors
may feel like they face "Faustian bargains" if they work with the
government.
In such situations, he said, academics should not make their decisions
based solely on their views of the Bush administration, since future
administrations may "require less nose-holding" to work with. He also  
noted
the positive contributions scholars could make to policy by training a
generation of experts who might know much more about different parts  
of the
world than do those who have run U.S. foreign policy in recent years.
Federal support for foreign languages might be viewed "as a rose to be
plucked," Saussy said -- even if there are thorns of which to be wary.

Prospects for Change
In discussing their ideas, panel members noted that there are  
programs that
are already making the kinds of changes that they want. Among those  
cited
were the "multiple literacies" program being used at Georgetown
University's German program. In the program, content has been broadened,
and professors have tried to eliminating the language/content dichotomy.
NYU's Latin American studies program was also praised by several.
But while those and some other programs exist, panel members stressed  
that
they thought their criticisms applied to the vast majority of programs
today. Pratt, the panel chair, said she realized that many of the ideas
being proposed were controversial, and she said that she wasn't sure  
what
the MLA would decided to do with them.
Feal, the MLA executive director, said that the group's Executive  
Council
had already reviewed the report once, "with great interest and  
enthusiasm."
While leaders of the group have "great respect for what traditional
scholars have done," and have no intention of denigrating literary  
study,
Feal said that it may be time for language departments "to evolve."
"Everybody in society benefits," she said, when foreign language  
programs
receive more support and produce graduates at all levels with more  
skills.
"But yes, we are talking about shaking things up in languages."
-- Scott Jaschik

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.yale.edu/pipermail/kinejapan/attachments/20070103/b380e405/attachment.html