19, no. 2 (January 1988): 49-50 To the Editor Search

---

Table of Contents

Previous Article Next Article

No Works Cited

From Discussion Group A

1. The ADFL, through its research sources and publications, should give serious attention to the issue of part-time faculty members in foreign language departments and encourage creative involvement of these individuals in departmental activities. Because of healthy enrollments in lower-division courses at our institutions, it has been necessary to hire part-time faculty members to handle language teaching. These adjuncts are not always integrated into the life of the department: they come to campus only to teach their classes and often do not possess much departmental loyalty. At the same time, they are not often offered the same financial rewards or benefits that a full-time faculty member enjoys. While we recognize the increasing need for these staff members and their importance to the life of the department, we must guard against exploiting them. As in all institutions of higher learning, faculty development must be a vital concern for chairs of foreign language departments in small colleges.
2. The ADFL, through its research sources and publications, should encourage and publicize creative ways to promote faculty renewal.
3. The ADFL should work diligently to assist in attracting bright, energetic, young people to the foreign language teaching profession, with special emphasis on higher education.
4. In order to support younger faculty members in their enthusiasm and dedication to the teaching of foreign languages, we recommend
   1. instituting programs such as the Lily Endowment program for junior faculty members;
   2. providing financial support for junior faculty members to attend professional meetings and conferences;
   3. providing junior faculty members with appropriate support and encouragement.
5. We suggest that the responsibilities of the department chair be reexamined with particular attention to whether the chair should have knowledge of the salaries of his or her staff and whether faculty members should be evaluated on the basis of announced or unannounced classroom visits, student evaluations, or peer review.

From Discussion Group B

1. We maintain that foreign language pedagogy and methodology are valuable areas of scholarly research and must be recognized as such. Further, we recommend that individual academic units declare openly and in advance how they intend to recognize this type of scholarship in questions of promotion, tenure, and salary increments.
2. We recommend that the ADFL undertake steps
   1. to collect information both on the extent to which non-tenure-track faculty members are involved in foreign language instruction at universities and colleges and on the terms of their employment and
   2. to develop recommendations and guidelines for their equitable professional treatment.

From Discussion Group C

1. We support the resolution of the chairs of the Romance language departments of the Committee on Institutional Cooperation, clarifying the status of language coordinators. The members of that group recommended that coordinators be appointed to tenure-track positions, have course-load reductions to compensate for administrative duties, have a support structure to assist in administration commensurate with program size, have work in coordination count as teaching for the purpose of promotion and tenure decisions, and have publications in such fields as second language acquisition, applied linguistics, and pedagogy acknowledged in tenure decisions.

   Recognizing the multifaceted nature of foreign language and literature departments, we wish to go beyond the CIC resolution to develop a definition of the role of second language acquisition research and research on language teaching methodology in a department of foreign languages and literature.

   We therefore urge the ADFL to commission a study of existing models of excellence in language coordination, teaching, and research. We are particularly interested in how departments attract highly qualified young scholar-teachers to this important area and in what departmental support and institutional rewards for such scholar-teachers have been established. This study would be deemed successful if it were to provide departments with documented standards for promotion and tenure for language acquisition specialists.

2. To avoid a potential crisis in staffing our language and literature programs, we call on the ADFL to collect statistics on opportunities for secondary and postsecondary employment opportunities and to commission position papers outlining strategies to attract, train, and keep highly qualified foreign language and literature instructors on all educational levels.
3. We call on the ADFL to conduct a survey of culture and civilization curricula on the graduate and undergraduate levels nationwide in order to identify available models and resources.

Seminar West

From Discussion Group A

1. Graduate education. We recommend a reevaluation of the traditional graduate school experience, which may no longer prepare future teachers of language and literature for the broad-based needs of most foreign language departments today.
2. Nontraditional specialties. We recommend that ADFL encourage colleges and universities to recognize that fields of research or specialization such as language teaching methodology, language teaching technology, women's studies, film, culture, and linguistics are as valid as the more traditional areas of literary studies for purposes of hiring, promotion, and tenure. We also recommend that appropriate mechanisms of evaluation for such nontraditional specialties be developed.
3. Part-time and nontenured faculty. Whereas the practice of a compulsory tenure decision in the sixth year has often resulted in the dismissal of good faculty members at term, and whereas such a compulsory decision has prompted the creation of specifically short-term appointments, and whereas short-term appointments normally preclude the full participation of the appointee in the governance and operation of the department (e.g., voting rights, committee responsibilities), and whereas the use of short-term appointments has summarily increased the insecurity of non-tenure-track faculty members, since it almost inevitably leads to their dismissal at the end of three-to-six-year terms, regardless of their qualifications, their hard work, or even the needs of the department, therefore we recommend that ADFL evaluate the effects of the practice of compulsory tenure decisions in the sixth year to determine if it is in the best interests of the profession.

From Discussion Group B

Issues for consideration and bases for possible recommendations:

1. identification of the features of particularly successful undergraduate language programs
2. encouragement of special issues of the ADFL Bulletin devoted to single topics
3. recognition for nontraditional research in areas such as culture and civilization, film, pedagogy, and women's studies
4. presentation of reports on the proceedings and, in particular, the formal recommendations of the first ADFL seminar each summer to participants in the second seminar
5. nonfinancial rewards for faculty members
6. in-depth study of the teaching load of nonpublishing faculty members
7. in-depth study of salaries for teaching assistants to determine whether it is necessary and feasible to establish a national standard or a national dollar minimum
8. identification of channels for publicizing to deans and others the recommendations made by participants in the ADFL summer seminars each year and appointment of a visiting advisory committee to encourage implementation of these recommendations

From Discussion Group C

1. We recommend that the ADFL undertake a comprehensive study of the organization and management of foreign language programs. Such a study would include, but not be restricted to, the following concerns:
   1. identification of language teachers, trainers of language teachers, and language coordinators, in terms of faculty rank, track, and teaching load;
   2. description of the training, in-service or preservice, required to teach, train, and coordinate;
   3. analysis of the access to the institutional reward system, in terms of the nature of rewards (salary, promotion, tenure, support services, travel funds, equipment, grants, leave, etc.) and the basis of the rewards (teaching, research, service, etc.).
2. We recommend that the ADFL develop a position paper on the elements of graduate education and faculty development required by the emerging teaching and research needs of college and university foreign language departments. The paper should take into consideration
   1. the needs generated by participation in general and liberal education programs
   2. the need to convey an appreciation for the cultural context of a language and literature
   3. the need to replace retiring faculty members
   4. the need for a mutually supportive relation to the institution's community and constituency.

We also recommend that the ADFL propose that departments review their criteria for faculty development and recruiting in the light of the position paper and share the results of the review with the ADFL.

© 1988 by the Association of Departments of Foreign Languages. All Rights Reserved.

ADFL Bulletin 19, no. 2 (January 1988): 49-50

---

Table of Contents

Previous Article Next Article

No Works Cited