|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RECENT education reform, ushered in by Goals 2000 and the standards movement, has influenced the vision of language education in unique ways. Current initiatives, while including the traditional means of assessment and instructional practice, are now framed within the vision of lengthened learning sequences and the challenge of increasing learning opportunities for all students. Moreover, this framework includes both K-12 and higher education, emphasizing the need to articulate foreign language education across institutional levels. The Standards for Foreign Language Learning (1996) have evolved from a K-12 focus to an expanded form spanning levels K-16 and have been adopted by many modern and classical language associations (Phillips 6). The High School to College articulation project, overseen by the Modern Language Association, has further defined the context of lengthened learning sequences to include higher education and its involvement in multiple articulation projects.1
This expanded effort to link language education across K-16 institutional levels involves attention to numerous tasks. It has shaped our profession's understanding of the multidimensional definition of articulation: creating continuity of learning; linking the goals, content, instruction, and assessment of curricula; integrating second languages with other academic disciplines; and focusing on the individual learner within an educational development framework (Lange 31). Articulating language learning in this context requires professional involvement at all levels of instruction.
The challenge of articulation is particularly critical at the transition points between middle and high school and between high school and college (Jackson and Masters-Wicks 46). This article discusses the challenge of K-16 foreign language education with particular emphasis on the transition from high school to college.2 It presents highlights from the findings of a national longitudinal study following students from eighth grade to two years into college. Its subtitle, "Implications for Reform," is intended to suggest that reform is under way and may gain further direction from the discussion this article generates.
Why Emphasize the Transition from High School to College?
The standards present a framework for a lengthened learning sequence. In contrast to the established sequences in subject-specific disciplines such as the sciences, the majority of Americans presently begin and terminate foreign language study at the high school level. Recent enrollment surveys conducted by the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (Draper and Hicks), the Center for Applied Linguistics (Branaman and Rhodes), and by the Modern Language Association (Richard Brod and Elizabeth Welles) suggest that enrollments in sequential language study (not including exploratory programs) at the high school level outnumber those at all other levels, kindergarten through college, combined. With 65% of high school graduates enrolling directly into higher education as of 1996 (42% in four-year and 23% in two-year institutions) (US Dept. of Education, Condition 46), the transition from high school to college represents the point of greatest enrollment turnover in language instruction.
The tendency of high school students to complete only the beginning levels of instruction and the reduced (or absence of) college foreign language entrance requirements are key components in this transition process. High school transcript studies conducted by the National Assessment of Educational Progress provide estimates of high school foreign language enrollments from 1982 to 1994 (US Dept. of Education, High School). In the past decade, while the percentage of high school seniors who have completed at least one year of foreign language has risen to 76.1%, the average number of years completed has remained below two years for all students with an average of 1.83 years in 1984. Increased high school enrollments have come primarily at the beginning levels of instruction, with moderate gains at level three and higher. The percentage of high school seniors who had completed three years or more of a foreign language rose from 6.3% in 1982 to 11.9% in 1994. In the same period, the percentage of students completing beginning levels (level one or two) rose by 20.2%, to 66.7%. Only the students studying in academic tracks, representing the college-bound population, averaged just over two years of completed foreign language study, at 2.17 years. These enrollment trends hold true in virtually every modern and classical language.3
As a general rule, higher education institutions do not require prior study of a foreign language for admittance. In a 1995 survey of over sixteen hundred four-year, postsecondary institutions, Brod and Huber found that only 20.7% required knowledge of a foreign language as an entrance requirement, while 67.5% required it as an exit or degree requirement ("MLA Survey" 36). Increased enrollments of students with limited foreign language study and a focus on graduation requirements rather than entrance requirements have prompted many colleges and universities to work to build on the limited instruction that students have previously received.
The Response in Higher Education
Higher education's response to changing enrollment patterns and reform has been articulated in three ways. First, as Dieter Jedan has outlined, departments may take steps to become more "customer- and service-oriented, find a new customer base, and further an interest in foreign languages" (15). Second are the proposals by Heidi Byrnes and, more recently, Janet Swaffar (34-35) for upper-level curricular objectives, framed by the standards, that provide accountability in the mastery of language and the application of skills not only to teaching and graduate study but also in the workplace of other professional fields. Finally, through projects in the Northeast states (Jackson, Masters-Wicks, Phillips, and Reutershan, Jr.), Minnesota (Chalhoub-Deville), Ohio (Birckbichler), the MLA High School to College articulation project, and other local, state, and national initiatives (Lange), higher education has played a leading role in advocacy and efforts to lengthen learning sequences and to improve the articulation of students entering colleges and continuing foreign language study.
These responses offer unique approaches that share a focus on students: serving a broader range of student interests, subject fields, and less traditional occupations; articulating and advocating longer learning sequences; and building on prior K-12 language learning at the college level. The results of the study presented in this article relate to each of these areas as it explores aspects of students' foreign language learning histories from middle school or junior high to college.
Insights from a National Database Study
This study used the National Education Longitudinal Study (NELS:88) database maintained at the National Center for Educational Statistics, a part of the United States Department of Education. The NELS:88 longitudinal database was developed from multiple collection instruments and sources. It was designed to provide trend data about students as they develop, attend school, move between institutional levels, and embark on their careers. It includes data collected during the years 1988-1994 from a single cohort of students entering grades 8, 10, and 12 and the second year after high school. The database includes data from four cognitive tests; questionnaires for students, teachers, parents, and school administrators; and student academic transcripts (US Dept. of Education, NELS:88/94).
Research Questions
Four main questions guided this exploratory study. They were designed to explore the interrelations of early language study, demographic background variables, and career goals to college-level foreign language study and major.
1. What are the characteristics of foreign language majors and nonmajors in terms of demographic variables?
2a. What proportion of this sample of college students studied a foreign language in eighth grade and what proportion did so before their transition from high school to college?
b. Do college foreign language majors spend more or less time studying language than do nonmajors at these transition points?
3a. Do students with greater foreign language requirements in eighth grade spend more time studying foreign language in high school and college?
b. Are students who spend more time studying foreign language in high school more likely to study foreign language in college?
4. What are the career aspirations of college foreign language majors, and how do they compare with those of nonmajors who study and do not study foreign language?
Subjects and Methodology
The subjects were a panel of 4,691 college-bound students from NELS:88. The selected panel was made up of students who were eighth graders in 1988 and was limited to students who had graduated from high school in four years and had entered a four-year public or private college or university by 1994. The panel was further narrowed to include only those students for whom data was available from all four data collection points.4
The National Education Longitudinal Study employed a complex sampling design that requires the weighting of frequencies and percentages to generalize results to the total school populations during the years data was collected for each specific variable under consideration.5 Of over four thousand college-bound students, thirty-one had declared a major in foreign language two years into their college study. Weighted, these students represent the over five thousand declared majors in foreign language who had graduated from high school in 1992 and were enrolled in college in 1994. The National Center for Education Statistics does not recommend generalization to larger school populations when unweighted subgroups total less than thirty (US Dept. of Education, Answers). Although the thirty-one foreign language majors exceed this amount, the results should be interpreted as informing ongoing reform-related issues and future research rather than as indicating conclusive findings.6
Results
The results provide insights into the learning histories of the college-bound student population enrolling in foreign language study.
1. What are the characteristics of foreign language majors and nonmajors in terms of demographic variables?
Comparison of percentage breakdowns and chi-square analyses revealed specific differences between foreign language majors and nonmajors. Highlights of this analysis include gender, socioeconomic status (SES) (an index combining parents' education, occupation, and income), and urbanicity of students' high school district (urban, suburban, rural). First, while nonmajors were balanced by gender, foreign language majors were predominantly women (82.3%). Second, a greater proportion of foreign language majors come from the highest (fourth) SES quartile (71.2% of majors vs. 49.1% of nonmajors). Finally, foreign language majors were more likely to be from suburban school districts (58.8% of majors vs. 42% of nonmajors) and less likely to be from rural school districts (14.7% of majors vs. 31.7% of nonmajors).
2a. What proportion of this sample of college students studied a foreign language in eighth grade and what proportion did so before their transition from high school to college?
b. Do college foreign language majors spend more or less time studying language than do nonmajors at these transition points?
The question of transition from eighth grade to high school was answered by parents and school administrators in written-response surveys. Parents were asked whether their eighth-grade son or daughter was enrolled in a foreign language course (see fig. 1). The majority of students (64.7%) were not enrolled in a foreign language course in eighth grade. In contrast, 71.2% of students who went on to major in foreign language in college took a foreign language course in eighth grade.
School administrators' responses about the students' foreign language requirements were examined for insights into the type of courses offered to eighth graders (see table 1). The responses were similar to those of the parents. The majority of schools (64.4%) did not have an eighth-grade foreign language requirement. When requirements existed, the most common ones were one full year of study (20.3% of schools) and less than a half year of study 10.5% of schools). The requirements of the schools that future foreign language majors attended were slightly more rigorous; 38.5% of them required students to take one year of foreign language.
The transition from high school to college also revealed differences in course selection. Table 1 presents a summary of high school foreign language study characteristics of these college-bound students. Most students (91.6%) entered college having completed at least one year of foreign language study, with the average length of study being 2.39 years. Students who did not study foreign language in college represented the majority of transitioning students (65%) and averaged 2.21 years of high school study. Students who did not major in foreign language but enrolled in college courses made up 34.3% of the transitioning students and averaged 2.71 years of high school study. Finally, students who had declared foreign language as their college major two years into their college studies represented less than 1% of the student population but had completed nearly four years of high school study (3.92 years). One-way analysis of variance with post hoc tests revealed that the mean of foreign language majors was significantly larger than the means of both nonmajor groups (p < 0.01).7 Of the two nonmajors groups, the mean of students who took foreign language courses in college was significantly larger than the mean of those who did not (p < 0.01).
3a. Do students with greater foreign language requirements in eighth grade spend more time studying foreign language in high school and college?
b. Are students who spend more time studying foreign language in high school more likely to study foreign language in college?
College majors spend significantly more time studying foreign language in high school than nonmajors do, but does earlier language study make a difference? A one-way analysis of variance on the mean number of years studied in high school by eighth-grade foreign language requirements found significant differences (see table 2). Eighth-grade students who were required to study one full year of foreign language completed the highest average number of years in high school (2.94 years). The lowest average belonged to the group of students who attended schools with no eighth-grade requirement. The main effect was significant at the 0.01 level. Post hoc tests revealed that only the students from schools with a full-year requirement spent significantly more time studying foreign language in high school. There was no significant difference between the means of students from schools with half-year requirements, less than half-year requirements, and no requirements.
Although a greater percentage of foreign language majors came from schools with full-year eighth-grade requirements, eighth-grade language was not a significant factor in whether or not the general student body studied a foreign language in college. Figure 3 demonstrates the similarities in early language learning histories of college students. Foreign language was not an eighth-grade requirement for the majority of these students. Chi-square analysis revealed that the slight differences in requirements in terms of who studied and did not study foreign language in college were not statistically significant.
For the transition from high school to college, the relation between early language study and college study was stronger (see fig. 4). Students who completed three or more years of foreign language in high school were more likely to study foreign language in college. Chi-square analysis was significant at the 0.01 level.
4. What are the career aspirations of college foreign language majors, and how do they compare with those of nonmajors who study and do not study foreign language?
In the final phase of data collection for NELS:88, college students were asked by phone interview what their expected occupation would be at age thirty. Table 3 presents the top ten occupations ranked by percent. There are several similarities among foreign language majors, nonmajors who study a foreign language, and students who do not study a foreign language. Each group ranks the general professional category "other" and schoolteacher within the top three occupations. This "professional" category grouped together many humanities-related occupations including college professors, social scientists, librarians, and archivists (US Bureau of Labor Statistics).
Differences are also apparent. While students who do not study foreign language ranked higher those occupations related to the hard sciences, such as medicine and engineering, students who study foreign languages ranked higher legal and arts and entertainment professions. College foreign language majors ranked higher the occupational category of government administration. In addition, only college foreign language majors listed military and service occupations (a category that includes jobs such as welfare service aides) among their top ten expected job occupations by age thirty.
Unique responses were also found in the group of nonmajors who study foreign language and represent 34% of the student population. The occupations cited present the greatest diversity. These include administrative positions in sales and government, the science- and math-related fields of engineering and medicine, and professional occupations related to law and the humanities.
College students were also asked whether they planned to work overseas. The results, presented in figure 5, reflect a relation between college foreign language study and an intention to work overseas. College students who do not study foreign language were least likely to have plans to work overseas, with 16.8% responding affirmatively. Of nonmajors who study foreign language, 27.9% indicated plans to work overseas. Between these two nonmajor groups, chi-square analysis found this proportion significantly higher (p < 0.01). The majority of foreign majors (79.2%) intended to work overseas on graduation.
Discussion
The results of this study have implications on several levels. In terms of broadening the base of students and interest in foreign language study, two issues are relevant. First, the diversity of occupational interests of college students, both majors and nonmajors, who study foreign language supports the proposal for connecting language learning experiences to multiple content areas. Second, integrating occupational interests with work or study-abroad experiences, or even with international business or service organizations in the United States, would appeal to the broader body of students taking foreign language course work but not necessarily planning on teaching or graduate study in foreign language. Language across the curriculum (LAC) initiatives at several colleges and universities provide examples and resources for bridging foreign language study with the content of other disciplines and the skills necessary for various occupations.8
While these two issues appeal to a broader spectrum of students, several questions relating to length of sequence of study are not answered by the data. Do nonmajors begin foreign language study primarily at the beginning or intermediate levels? As a group they average 2.71 years of high school study, significantly less than foreign language majors, who have completed 3.92 years (often including prior requirements in eighth grade). Is length of prior study and the ability to place into the intermediate level in college related to longer sequences of study at the college level? Continued research using restricted files from the NELS:88 database may provide answers to such questions. In the short term, these students may be more likely to terminate study once requirements are fulfilled. In the long term, these students will likely continue to enroll in foreign language courses in larger numbers than majors. Strategic plans, such as those at local, state, and national levels discussed earlier, that address their diverse interest and promote the utility of continued language study would serve students, foreign language departments, interdepartmental initiatives, and the goals of education reform.
Articulation and advocacy of longer language learning sequences are the most complex challenges in K-16 education. In terms of the percentage of students with prior knowledge of a foreign language, the transition from high school to college represents a point at which 91.6% of students have completed some amount of foreign language study (see table 1). Previous studies have reported a low correlation between years studied in high school and subsequent study at the college level (Adelman 68). However, the results of this study indicate that students who partake of a longer foreign language sequence in high school enroll at proportionally higher rates in college-level foreign language courses. A central issue is how foreign language departments can articulate into their programs the substantial number of nonmajors of whom 54.2% have completed three or more years of high school study (see table 1).
Higher education has much to gain from the benefits of advocacy for earlier language learning. The results of this study indicate a significant correlation between mandatory full-year foreign language study in eighth grade and increased study in high school. Conversely, all other eighth-grade language requirements (half year, less than half year, no requirement) evidenced no significant difference among these groups of students, who subsequently enrolled at lower rates in high school foreign language classes. Earlier formal sequential study at the middle school or junior high level might uniquely promote longer sequences over exploratory forms of study.
Students who study foreign language in college are those who have completed significantly more years at the high school level. Such sequences may be the result of school district policies and requirements that demonstrate a district's commitment to longer learning sequences. It may also indicate the benefits of earlier formal rather than exploratory foreign language study to subsequent high school and college-level study. Since this student population represents those who have enrolled in college, variables such as tracking may be ruled out. However, additional analyses controlling for various school district policies, course offerings, and demographic factors would provide more definitive conclusions. Jeremy Finn, for example, in a 1994 survey of national high school course offerings, found that 29.2% of secondary schools did not offer upper-level (third-year or higher) foreign language courses (300). Advocacy in such cases may work to promote upper-level course offerings as a means for lengthening learning sequences.
Finally, advocacy may come in the form of restructured college entrance requirements and unique ways to fulfill such requirements. Initiatives at colleges and universities have incorporated "back credit" (granting college credit for placing beyond the beginning level) to incoming students, proficiency testing in place of year or seat-time requirements, and precollege teacher in-service to articulate instructional practice and assessment (Allen; Barns, Klee, and Wakefield; Chalhoub-Deville; Jackson, Masters-Wicks, Phillips, and Reutershan). Such efforts encourage schools to provide more upper-level courses and college-bound students to complete more years before entering college. As a way of allowing beginning level nonmajors to fulfill foreign language and general education requirements, specialized study-abroad programs have been implemented in universities to encourage returning students to enroll in upper-level courses and even declare a double major or minor in foreign language (Liskin-Gasparro and Urdaneta). Such initiatives build on students' prior learning and provide earlier immersion experiences to promote interest and relevance in foreign language learning.
Reform can be a loaded term because it signals the presence of a problem that needs to be addressed. This article advances the idea that reform is under way and provides evidence of the problems and issues such initiatives might consider. Just as the framework of the standards has expanded to a comprehensive K-16 sequence, so too must our understanding of the interrelations among levels of instruction and their effect on foreign language studies. Ultimately, it is the learners who will benefit through increased opportunities for language study and greater relevance of foreign languages in their lives and careers.
The author is a doctoral candidate in curriculum and instruction and foreign language education at the University of Iowa. This article is based on his presentation at the 1998 MLA convention in San Francisco, California.
1 For an introduction to this project and for articles about it, consult "The MLA's Articulation Initiative: High School to College in Foreign Language Programs," located on the ADFL Web site at <http://www.adfl.org/projects/articulation/introduction.htm>.
2 This article is a shortened version of an original report on the findings of this study. Colleagues wishing an electronic copy with additional analyses, commentary, tables, and figures should contact the author at <http://www.john-watzke@uiowa.edu>.
3 For enrollment information on specific languages, see US Dept. of Education, High School, tables 29, 30, 33, and 68.
4 The specific NELS:88 variables used in the selection of subjects and subgroups for this study were as follows: F3pnlflg (information available from all four waves), F3diplom (student graduated in 1992), PSELASTY (postsecondary education level in last institution of study), PSELASTMAJ (major in postsecondary education at last institution of study), and FOR_C (transcript information available on foreign language study in grades 9-12).
The dependent variable for F-tests and analysis of variance was FOR_C (cumulative years studied in foreign language). Cumulative years studied was coded as a continuous variable and represented years studied measured in Carnegie units (1.0 equals one Carnegie unit or completion of a course meeting five days a week for one period over the course of the entire school year). The criteria for including various courses in the cumulative total in each subject followed the high school and beyond taxonomy. This taxonomy does not include seventh- or eighth-grade courses or remedial, basic, or special education courses in its cumulative totals.
5 The one thousand schools selected for NELS:88 represent the approximately forty thousand public and private schools in the United States in 1988 that had eighth-grade students. The nearly twenty-five thousand students sampled represent the three million eighth graders attending schools in 1988, with the exception of Bureau of Indian Affairs schools, special education schools for the handicapped, area vocational schools that do not enroll students directly, and schools for dependents of United States personnel overseas.
Weighting variable are provided with the NELS:88 database to allow analyses to compensate for unequal probabilities of selection and to adjust for the effects of nonresponse. Using weights allows results to be generalized to the national populations represented by NELS:88.
The NELS:88 sample design involved stratification, disproportionate sampling of certain strata (e.g., oversampling of private schools), and clustering (e.g., students within a school). The standard errors and significance levels have been corrected with an estimate procedure for this design effect to address the lack of a pure simple random sample design. This correction involves the use of the average design effect of the weighting variable to calculate a "new weight" with the formula New Weight = (1/DEFF)*(original weight/mean of original weight) (US Dept. of Education, Answers and Workshop).
6 These thirty-one declared majors represent only students who were enrolled in their second year of college study (approximately their sophomore year) and do not represent double majors or minors in foreign language. These numbers, however, are not necessarily unrepresentative of the general college population. At the University of Iowa, for example, only 1.48% of all undergraduates (freshmen through seniors) had declared their first majors as foreign language in the 1997-98 school year. Continued study of the restricted files of the NELS:88 database may provide characteristics of foreign language double majors and minors.
7 The more conservative Scheffé post hoc test was used on this and subsequent analyses because comparisons were unplanned and sample populations were not equal (Kleinbaum, Kupper, and Muller 373).
8 A language across the curriculum Web site is maintained at Brown University at http://www.language.brown.edu/LAC/Home_Page.html. This Web site provides resources and links to LAC initiatives at other colleges and universities.
Adelman, Clifford. "Empirical Evidence of Foreign Language Study." Annals of the Academy of Political and Social Science 532 (1994): 59-73.
Allen, Roger. "Institutional Structure and a Proficiency-Based Language Requirement." ADFL Bulletin 24.3 (1993): 48-51. [Show Article]
Barns, Betsy K., Carol A. Klee, and Ray M. Wakefield. "A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Language Requirement." ADFL Bulletin 22.1 (1990): 35-39. [Show Article]
Birckbichler, Diane W. "Ohio's Collaborative Articulation and Assessment Project." ADFL Bulletin 26.3 (1995): 44-45. [Show Article]
Branaman, Lucinda, and Nancy Rhodes. A National Survey of Foreign Language Instruction in Elementary and Secondary Schools. Changing Picture: 1987-97. Executive Summary (Draft). Center for Applied Linguistics, Washington. 1998 <http://www.cal.org/cal/html/results.htm>.
Brod, Richard, and Elizabeth B. Welles. "Foreign Language Enrollments in United States Institutions of Higher Education, Fall 1998." ADFL Bulletin 31.2 (2000): 22-29. [Show Article]
------. "The MLA Survey of Foreign Language Entrance and Degree Requirements." ADFL Bulletin 28.1 (1996): 35-43. [Show Article]
Byrnes, Heidi. "How Do You Get There from Here? Articulating the Foreign Language Program." ADFL Bulletin 20.1 (1988): 35-38. [Show Article]
Chalhoub-Deville, Micheline. "The Minnesota Articulation Project and Its Proficiency-Based Assessments." Foreign Language Annals 30.4 (1997): 492-502.
Draper, Jamie B. and June H. Hicks. "Foreign Language Enrollments in Public Secondary Schools, Fall 1994." Foreign Language Annals 29.3 (1996): 303.
Finn, Jeremy D. "Taking Foreign Languages in High School." Foreign Language Annals 31.3 (1998): 287-306.
Jackson, Claire W., and Karen Masters-Wicks. "Articulation and Achievement: The Challenge of the 1990s in Foreign Language Education." ADFL Bulletin 26.3 (1995): 46-49. [Show Article]
Jackson, Claire W., Karen Masters-Wicks, June K. Phillips, and Donald H. Reutershan, Jr. Articulation and Achievement: Connecting Standards, Performance, and Assessment in Foreign Language. New York: College Entrance Examination Board, 1996.
Jeden, Deiter. "Shifting Enrollment Patterns: Departmental Perspectives." ADFL Bulletin 30.1 (1998): 15-17. [Show Article]
Kleinbaum, David G., Lawrence L. Kupper, and Keith E. Muller. Applied Regression Analysis and Other Multivariate Methods. Boston: PWS-Kent, 1988.
Lange, Dale L. "Models of Articulation: Struggles and Successes." ADFL Bulletin 28.2 (1997): 31-42. [Show Article]
Liskin-Gasparro, J., and L. Urdaneta. Language Learning in a Semester Abroad: The Spring 1995 University of Iowa Universidad de los Andes Program in Merida, Venezuela. Proc. of the Annual Symposium on Research Perspectives in Adult Language Learning and Acquisition (RPALLA). Columbus: Ohio State U Natl. Foreign Lang. Resource Center, 1995.
Phillips, June K. "Standards for World Languages: On a Firm Foundation." Foreign Language Standards: Linking Theories, Research, and Practices. Ed. Phillips. ACTFL Foreign Language Education Series. Lincolnwood: Natl. Textbook, 1998. 1-14.
Standards for Foreign Language Learning: Preparing for the Twenty-First Century. Yonkers: Natl. Standards in Foreign Lang. Educ. Project, 1996.
Swaffar, Janet. "Major Changes: The Standards Project and the New Foreign Language Curriculum." ADFL Bulletin 30.1 (1998): 34-37. [Show Article]
United States. Bureau of Labor Statistics. The Occupational Classification System Manual. 1998 <http://stats.bls.gov/ocsm/comMoga.htm>.
United States. Dept. of Educ. Natl. Center for Educ. Statistics. Answers to Frequently Asked Questions Regarding NELS:88. Washington: NCES, 1998 <http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/nelsque.html>.
------. The Condition of Education 1998. Washington: GPO, 1998. NCES 98-013.
------. NELS:88/94 Methodology Report. Washington: NCES, 1994. NCES 96-174.
------. The 1994 High School Transcript Study Tabulations: Comparative Data on Credits Earned and Demographics for 1994, 1990, 1987, and 1982 High School Graduates (Revised). Washington: NCES, 1998. NCES 98-532.
------. Workshop for the Use of the National Education Longitudinal Study Database of 1988. Rockville: NCES, 1998.
| Nonmajors | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years of High School Study | All Students | No College Foreign Language Study | College Foreign Language Study | Foreign Language Majors |
| 0 | 8.4 | 10.4 | 4.6 | 0.0 |
| 1 | 10.1 | 11.5 | 7.6 | 0.0 |
| 2 | 38.1 | 40.7 | 33.7 | 15.4 |
| 3 | 24.9 | 23.8 | 27.0 | 16.3 |
| 4 | 14.8 | 11.3 | 21.0 | 29.4 |
| 5 or more | 3.9 | 2.3 | 6.2 | 38.8 |
| Percentage of total | 100.0 | 65.0 | 34.3 | 0.7 |
| Mean | 2.39 | 2.21 | 2.71 | 3.92 |
| Amount of Foreign Language Study Required in Eighth Grade | Mean Years of Foreign Language Studied in High School |
|---|---|
| No specific amount | 2.23 |
| Less than half year | 2.40 |
| Half year | 2.49 |
| One year | 2.94 |
| Total | 2.40 |
| Rank | Foreign Language Majors | Nonmajors Who Study Foreign Language | Nonmajors Who Do Not StudyForeign Language |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Professional, other (23.9) | Professional, other (17.7) | Professional, medical (not MD) (14.8) |
| 2 | Professional, legal (19.5) | Schoolteacher (15.1) | Professional, other (14.1) |
| 3 | Schoolteacher (19.1) | Professional, arts/entertainment (10.5) | Schoolteacher (13.7) |
| 4 | Professional, arts/entertainment (9.8) | Professional, medical (not MD) (9.8) | Professional, arts/entertainment (9.7) |
| 5 | Manager-administrator, government (7.5) | Professional, legal (9.0) | Professional, engineer (7.7) |
| 6 | Professional, medical (not MD) (5.7) | Professional, physician (8.7) | Professional, physician (5.0) |
| 7 | Military (4.7) | Manager-administrator, other (5.9) | Manager-administrator, other (4.4) |
| 8 | Professional, physician (4.6) | Manager-administrator, sales (3.3) | Professional, legal (3.2) |
| 9 | Manager-administrator, other (3.3) | Professional, engineer (2.9) | Protective service (3.2) |
| 10 | Service (1.8) | Manager-administrator, government (2.7) | Manager-administrator, sales (3.0) |
| Fig. 1 Percentages of Second-Year College Students Who Were Enrolled in a Foreign Language Course in Eighth Grade |
 |
| Fig. 2 Percentages of Second-Year College Students Whose Eighth-Grade Schools Required Foreign Language Study |
 |
| Fig. 3 Percentages of Students Taking College Foreign Language Courses by Those Whose Eighth-Grade Schools Required Foreign Language Study |
 |
| Fig. 4 Percentages of Students Taking College Foreign Language Courses by Years of High School Foreign Language Study |
 |
| Fig. 5 College Students with Plans to Work Overseas |
 |
| Note: Note: X2 statistic for two nonmajor groups = 22.79, df = 1, p < 0.01. |
© 2000 by the Association of Departments of Foreign Languages. All Rights Reserved.
|
|---|
|
|
|
