Blog Archives

Policy for the head; Language for the heart

7/20/2019

"If you talk to a man in a language he understands, that goes to his head. If you talk to him in his language, that goes to his heart." Nelson Mandelahttps://t.co/sZWJ7YCHyr
— Gus Leonard (@gusleonard) July 21, 2019

Our best guestimate is that there are around 7,000 languages spoken throughout the world (Anderson, 2019). 25 of the world’s languages have more than 50 million speakers each (Eberhard, Simmons, & Fenig, 2019). The U.S. Census Bureau (2015) believes we speak approximately 350 languages in the USA. But the Endangered Language Alliance boasts that there are more than 800 spoken in New York City (n.d.). And then there are the 23 strategic languages--the ones the US Department of Defense deems important to national defense and even adds a $100-500 monthly salary bonus to proficient speakers of those languages (Defense Language and National Security Education Office, 2019). Finally we can also acknowledge the paltry few that we teach in U.S. schools other than Spanish, French and German. The numbers, importance and relationship to policy varies depending on context (Rippner, 2016).
Language is the key component in many fields including international exchange, research, technology, translation, interpretation, localization, testing and more, yet it’s clear there is no uniform support for growing language capacity in this country. Cost cutting seems to override a more pragmatic future-proofing of our society. For example, in January this year, the Modern Language Association announced that a shocking 651 foreign language programs had been closed over the last 3 years at our nation's colleges and universities (Johnson, 2019). And a recent proposal from the isolationist White House would commoditize or limit interpreting services for immigrants, especially on the southern border, to pre-recorded video messages, rather than provide actual interpreting that could address the unique nature of each individual asylum and immigration applicant (Joint National Committee for Languages, 2019). Each of these examples makes choices to align policy and practice with lean budgets and decreases potential for diversity.
Is this our fate then? To promote a mono-linguistic, head-in-the-sand ideology and policy doctrine around language capacity in this country because it costs money? Research and experience would suggest no, that linguistic isolationism just doesn’t work. World-wide the translation and interpretation industry will be more than $49 billion in 2019 (CSA Research, n.d.). So how do we get policymakers on board with what’s going on in our institutions of education and research so that policy can head off these emerging dead ends and keep America viable in these strategic and economic fields? Rippner argues that better communication between policymakers and research is needed to connect the supply of quality research at the appropriate time to the demand of policy through expert groups, membership groups, and ideological think tanks, and the like (2016).
In the language field, a membership group that promotes the essential nature of language to policy in the United States is the Joint National Committee for Languages. JNCL is a nonprofit education policy association (501c3) that provides a connecting point for over 130 language organizations. Most state, regional, and language-specific organizations in the United States of America support JNCL to develop awareness and policy recommendations on the importance of language to economic growth, social justice and national security (Joint National Committee for Languages, n.d.).
JNCL also works with the National Council for Languages and International Studies (NCLIS) to lobby congress and the executive branch. Recent JNCL-NCLIS advocacy has lobbied policymakers on two parts of the $750-billion National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) (Smith, 2019) by working to promote equity for high school graduates who seek admission to the military through eliminating time-limits that have effectively hindered non-native English speakers from scoring well on aptitude tests (Joint National Committee for Languages, 2019b). Another NDAA amendment supported by JNCL is the World Language Advancement and Readiness Act which seeks to seeks to expand language learning at the elementary and secondary levels (Joint National Committee for Languages, 2019c).
So progress is happening, but if Americans want the next generation to be active participants in a multilingual world, dual-language and multicultural education is crucial and we will all need to lobby for language programs for a multilingual future. Let policy speak to the head so we can speak to the heart.

References
Anderson, S. (n.d.). How many languages are there in the world? Retrieved July 20, 2019, from https://www.linguisticsociety.org/content/how-many-languages-are-there-world
CSA Research. (n.d.). The Largest Language Service Providers: 2019. Retrieved July 20, 2019, from https://csa-research.com/More/Global-Market-Study/Top-100-LSPs
Defense Language and National Security Education Office. (n.d.). Foreign Language Proficiency Bonus. Retrieved July 20, 2019, from Foreign Language Proficiency Bonus website: https://dlnseo.org/content/flpb
Eberhard, D., Simons, G., and Fennig, C. (eds.). (2019). Ethnologue: Languages of the World. Twenty-second edition. Dallas, Texas: SIL International. Online version: http://www.ethnologue.com
How many languages are there in the world? (2016, May 3). Retrieved July 20, 2019, from Ethnologue website: https://www.ethnologue.com/guides/how-many-languages
Endangered Language Alliance | An urban initiative for endangered language research and conservation. (n.d.). Retrieved July 20, 2019, from http://elalliance.org/
Johnson, S. (2019, January 22). Colleges Lose a ‘Stunning’ 651 Foreign-Language Programs in 3 Years. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from https://www.chronicle.com/article/Colleges-Lose-a-Stunning-/245526
Joint National Committee for Languages. (n.d.). Our Story. Retrieved July 20, 2019, from JNCL website: https://www.languagepolicy.org/about
Joint National Committee for Languages. (2019). Trump Administration Replacing In-Person Interpreters at Immigrants’ First Hearings With Videos. Retrieved July 20, 2019, from JNCL website: https://www.languagepolicy.org/post/trump-administration-replacing-in-person-interpreters-at-immigrants-first-hearings-with-videos
Joint National Committee for Languages. (2019b). Senate Report: “Non-Native English Recruits Being Left Behind.” Retrieved July 20, 2019, from Joint National Committee for Languages website: https://www.languagepolicy.org/post/senate-report-non-native-english-recruits-being-left-behind
Joint National Committee for Languages. (2019c). World Language Advancement and Readiness Act (WLARA) Included in House Defense Reauthorization Bill. Retrieved July 20, 2019, from JNCL website: https://www.languagepolicy.org/post/world-languages-amendment-included-in-house-defense-reauthorization-bill
Rippner, J. A. (2016). The American education policy landscape. Routledge.
Smith, A. (2019). H.R.2500 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 [Webpage]. Retrieved July 20, 2019, from https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/2500
United States Census Bureau. (2015). Census Bureau Reports at Least 350 Languages Spoken in U.S. Homes. Retrieved July 20, 2019, from The United States Census Bureau website: https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2015/cb15-185.html

4 Comments

Show me the money: Aligning campus online learning practices with a moral compass, courtesy the feds

7/13/2019

1 Comment

“Show me the money” (Crowe, et. al.,1999). The popular meme made from a scene in the movie Jerry Maguire where Tom Cruise’s title character shouts to Cuba Gooding Jr.’s character Rod Tidwell that Jerry will do anything for Rod to keep his business relationship marks the point where the hero’s moral compass is lost and he will resort to anything, over any distance, to keep a client base intact. One might wonder if the explosive proliferation of online courses arose in a similar way on the landscape of the comprehensive university following the turn of the Millenium. Traditionally residential, these campuses took on entrepreneurialism (St. John, Daunt-Branett, & Maronski-Chapman, 2018) and began to release online courses to meet business demands and competition for students made possible through sudden technological advances. And even more recently, like the transformation of the Jerry Maguire character, federal-level laws, requirements and court decisions (St. John, et.al., 2018) have brought core identity and alignment to this new capacity to ensure student success through inclusion and equity for all our students.

Higher education in the United States arose from an autonomous tradition of practice (Rippner, 2016), manifested in many ways, including in intellectual freedom in our campus libraries where the state has little control over which books are purchased, and in academic freedom in classrooms around what positions and truths faculty claim, or at least once they have achieved permanent ‘tenured’ status. That level of freedom, unfettered from federal oversight, can also follow into the syllabus and even the online classroom. Until we follow the money. And money talks.

Requirements for the online and hybrid course policy incorporate many layers of alignment. The courses offered at public institutions are likely funded by federal dollars or have students supported through federal financial aid. In that case, those courses are thus subject to Title III, Part B, and Title IX rules and regulations (St. John, et al., 2018), as well as the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Section 504 and Section 508 (HHS, 2010). Section 504 ensures that persons with disabilities have access to information technology tools and resources, and Section 508 ensures equal access to participate for all students. And for eight of the campuses in the Cal State University system, Title V of the Higher Education Act (HEA) Reauthorization of 1972 created support for Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSI) designation with campuses serving at least 25% undergraduate Hispanic students (U.S. Department of Education, n.d.). If your campus gets federal money, then chances are high that your campus must follow federal law and regulation.

Last week I wrote about our moral compass of doing right by our students being slowly matched by internally developed requirements that now come from the state to promote the public good and ensure “meritocratic access to professions” (Etzkowitz, 2017, cited in St. John, et. al, 2018, p. 32). In the case of online and hybrid course offerings, those simple syllabus parameters get reinforced to meet institutional standards of Quality Assurance. On this campus that’s done by following the Quality Matters (n.d.) standards and recommended practices. Quality Matters has taken a process of best practices and moved into rubrics and metrics by which courses and instructional practices can be evaluated. And these evaluations align with the accreditation process used with non-profit and selective institutions (Lubinescu, Ratcliff, & Gaffney, 2001), where these institutions of higher education are evaluated on broader levels including the quality of academic programs, confirming a culture of continuous improvement of quality and stimulate a general raising of standards and ensure that faculty and staff are comprehensively involved in institutional evaluation and planning (U.S. Department of Education, 2019).

At its heart, the Quality Matters process aligns with an institution's internal commitment--the institutional moral compass of sorts--to its students and support of success and equity. In this campus that can be seen through the existing commitments at many layers, including procurement, web publications, and staff. For example, the head of business services is part of the accessible procurement team ensuring that all electronic information technology (EIT) hardware and software purchases must demonstrate accessibility, web publications and learning management systems, such as Canvas and Moodle, follow WC3 standards (n.d.), and there are employees dedicated to supporting students with disabilities in both direct support roles in the Student Disability Resources office, as well as through the Center for Academic Technology with an accessibility specialist who works with faculty to deliver accessible content.

In short, in the 25 years since distance education courses have moved from paper packets and cassette tapes to complex, online and hybrid electronic course materials and learning systems, federal requirements have followed those changes with policy and requirements to promote further education for all. And our campuses have responded by strengthening our resources, committing staffing and systems to support change, and worked to develop institutional resilience that can carry our students, equitably and accountably (Rippner, 2016), deep into the 21st Century.

References
Crowe, C., Cruise, T., Gooding, C., Zellweger, R., Wilson, N., Tri-Star Pictures., Gracie Films., ... Columbia TriStar Home Video (Firm). (1999). Jerry Maguire. Culver City, Calif: Columbia TriStar Home Video.
HHS. (2010, June 15). What is section 504 and how does it relate to Section 508? [Text]. Retrieved July 13, 2019, from HHS.gov website: https://www.hhs.gov/web/section-508/what-is-section-504/index.html
Lubinescu, E. S., Ratcliff, J. L., & Gaffney, M. A. (2001). Two Continuums Collide: Accreditation and Assessment. New Directions for Higher Education, 2001(113), 5–21. https://doi.org/10.1002/he.1
Quality Matters. (n.d.). Home. Retrieved July 13, 2019, from https://www.qualitymatters.org/
Rippner, J. A. (2016). The American education policy landscape. Routledge.
St. John, E. P., Daun-Barnett, N., & Moronski-Chapman, K. M. (2018). Public policy and higher education: Reframing strategies for preparation, access, and college success. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315622453
U.S. Department of Education. (2019, March 18). College Accreditation in the United States-- Pg 1 [Educational Guides]. Retrieved July 13, 2019, from Overview of Accreditation in the United States website: https://www2.ed.gov/admins/finaid/accred/accreditation.html#Overview
U.S. Department of Education. (n.d.). Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs) | White House Initiative on Educational Excellence for Hispanics. Retrieved July 13, 2019, from https://sites.ed.gov/hispanic-initiative/hispanic-serving-institutions-hsis/
W3C. (n.d.). Level AA Conformance to Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0. Retrieved July 13, 2019, from https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG2AA-Conformance

1 Comment

The Fine Print

7/6/2019

1 Comment

It’s the fine print. All the details needed to know to make a good decision. You know--the part where one hollers for reading glasses to understand the medication side effects, or where we all strain to understand the broadcast announcer squeezing two paragraphs of disclaimers and exceptions into just one breath. Or where our favorite fruit-related computer company has a EULA that we just click through every time so we can just get something done (Apple, 2019). Higher education has that, too. It’s called the syllabus.
In a perfect world, the syllabus is the document our students want to read, and provides the first insights into the faculty’s thinking and connections between what the student doesn’t know and what they might be able to do in the future. And from that history of helping a student understand what a course might be about, the syllabus has slowly morphed into an accountability tool to both the faculty member and the student (Comer, 2016) that establishes expectations and responsibilities (Wikipedia, 2019).
And because Accountability never goes to a party without his wingman Policy, suddenly things get a little less fun for that simple syllabus. The stakes are higher. Students are trading time for earning potential and gambling with educational debt to complete this one course which may just be the bottleneck to completing their General Education requirements, or even finally completing a degree program to become a college graduate!
On my youngish campus of nearly 25-years, founded in 1994, we have yet to define and approve a syllabus policy by the Academic Senate. Further, and even closer to my interests, we have not yet defined an Online and Hybrid Course (OHC) policy. Both of these policies, in the California State University (CSU) system, have policy expectations created at the Chancellor’s Office level, but that should be defined at the local campus level. OHC, of course, relies on the Syllabus for some of its definitions and detail.
This distribution of authority to develop this policy aligns with Fullan’s (2016) model of Coherence. The CO has put the onus to complete these policies on the local campus. Campus leaders and faculty have come together to discuss and distill ideas and language that can align with our student population and campus environment. Other stakeholders, such as the Office for Student Disability Resources, the Center for Academic Technology, and even students, have been consulted and their input integrated into a draft document that conforms to system requirements, national and state laws. But the policy approvals are not finalized and accomplished.
So what to do in lack of definition around how to support our students? The right driver of moral imperative (Fullan, 2016) seems to steer each faculty member, section or program keader, and departnent chair to meet their understanding of an appropriate syllabus. And regular flurries of energy toward standardizing and defining these outcomes arise from time to time, much like Rippner (2016) describes as “fluid participation” (p. 37) within an organized anarchy of goals to ensure student success in each course.
But ultimately, this campus needs a leader to focus direction (Fullan, 2016) and accomplish this minimum requirement--the fine print--so the burden of minimum standards can be addressed and defined, allowing meaningful, helpful, student- and learning-centered syllabi (CHE, 2018) to become the norm for all courses.

References
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) [Policy Guidance]. (2018, September 25). Retrieved July 6, 2019, from https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/hq9805.html

Apple. (n.d.). Legal - Licensed Application End User License Agreement - Retrieved July 6, 2019, from Apple Legal website: https://www.apple.com/legal/internet-services/itunes/dev/stdeula/

Comer, A. R. (2016, July 27). The Syllabus as a Contract. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from https://www.chronicle.com/article/The-Syllabus-as-a-Contract/237251

Fullan, M. & Quinn, J. (2016). Coherence: The right drivers in action for schools, districts, and systems. Corwin, Thousand Oaks, CA.

The Chronicle of Higher Education. (2018, September 12). How to Create a Syllabus. Retrieved July 6, 2019, from The Chronicle of Higher Education website: https://www.chronicle.com/interactives/advice-syllabus

Rippner, J. (2016). The American education policy landscape. Routledge, New York, NY.

Wikipedia. (2019). Syllabus. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Syllabus&oldid=903139237

1 Comment

Policy for the head; Language for the heart

Show me the money: Aligning campus online learning practices with a moral compass, courtesy the feds

The Fine Print

Author

Archives

Categories