TRANSFORMING NEGATIVE ATTITUDES ABOUT LEARNING SPANISH THROUGH COMMUNITY SERVICE-LEARNING
Christine Coleman Young
Kutztown University of Pennsylvania
Resistance to foreign language education remains strong in the United States, presenting a challenge for language educators who find that many of their students are antagonistic toward the subject. It is convenient to blame this negative attitude on factors we can’t control, such as American ethnocentricity or a market-driven approach to higher education that fails to recognize the value of language study. Yet while these and other factors certainly may play a role, much of the pessimism surrounding foreign language study is based on how we as educators, and consequently the students, approach language learning. In this paper, I explore some causes of the negativity regarding foreign language study that can be attributed to even the most innovative pedagogical approaches. I suggest that a community service-learning (henceforth CSL) model is one way to effectively challenge the unfortunate portrayal of the dreaded foreign language class.
For this paper, I conducted research on student attitudes regarding the CSL component of Intensive Intermediate Spanish over four semesters. The total number of students in the database is 110. While this paper is not meant to serve as a manual for service-learning course design, an overview of the service-learning piece of this program will provide more validity to the claims being made, and perhaps assist readers in integrating a service module into their own course design.
Intensive Intermediate Spanish is a six-credit, one-semester course that most students take as a general education requirement, although it also attracts some Spanish majors and minors as well. While the intensive format would ideally appeal to more motivated students who could manage the rapid pace of the course, it has unfortunately become a “dumping ground” for many students who have had little success in the introductory level classes and see the intensive format as a way to finish out their language requirement in one semester rather than two, ignoring the fact that the course covers the same content as the two semester program. Many of these students have put off completing the language requirement until their final semester because they have been traumatized by their previous language learning experience and see Spanish class as their biggest and final hurdle to graduation. They enter the course lacking both a solid foundation in Spanish and productive study habits to prepare them for an intensive intermediate-level Spanish program. The range of backgrounds, motivation, attitude and proficiency levels of the learners entering this course makes course design a challenge and the CSL component particularly fitting. While students immediately begin to assess how they measure up to their peers in terms of Spanish proficiency, there is no similar comparison that can be made in terms of community service. The service component, which all students can perform equally well, on some level equalizes the students, and diminishes the rift that is often noted between learners at different competency levels in a traditional class.
The community service requirement entails 15 hours of organized involvement within the Latino Community. I maintain a list of service opportunities, as well as encourage students to pursue other options that better suit them logistically or in terms of their area of interest. Community-based programs that I use most frequently include English Language Acquisition (ELA) classrooms, after-school community programs, secure adult and juvenile facility programs organized through the local Prison Society, and programs for seniors at Hispanic community centers. In addition, students have several opportunities to participate in events on-campus. I organize half-day visits from local ELA classes, and my students’ design and implement lessons and activities for the event. In addition, the Kutztown University Service-Learning Center organizes Big-Brother/Big-Sister events on campus. Activities during these projects are typically informal, and whether they are recreational or educational there is generally a great deal of free time for interpersonal interaction.
It takes a few weeks to get all students into their placements, and several hours of class-time are dedicated to grouping students by service preferences, answering their many questions about what to expect from the different programs, and having guest speakers, when available, talk to the class about the various opportunities. When students feel comfortable in their decision about where they will participate, they are given the opportunity in class to coordinate meeting times and travel arrangements with each other. Finally, class-time is dedicated to allowing individual students to report briefly on their experiences after their first visit. At that time, we discuss when they will return and how many other students might be accommodated on that visit, and a few minutes are dedicated to collecting contact information from students who might want to join them. This brief but important dialog often provides an opening for the more reluctant or indecisive students to make a service commitment. Although the time spent organizing the service projects is not time spent on course content, the partnerships formed between students provides the foundation for the collaborative atmosphere of the course and ultimately affects how students learn, not just what they learn.
According to J. Howard, the difference between community service and community service learning is that with community service learning there is “an intentional effort made to utilize the community service experience as a learning resource” (3). The critical aspect of this definition is the intentional effort on the part of the instructor to compel the students to reflect on what they are experiencing and demonstrate learning through structured measures of assessment. The definition of service learning provided by the Corporation for National Service includes “thoughtfully-organized service that [.] is integrated into and enhances the academic curriculum of the students enrolled; and includes structured time for students to reflect on the service experience.” The reflective journal is an effective way to harvest the learning from the experience. However, the journal should not merely be a log of what students do at their community placements. As put forth by Howard, “experience, as a learning format, in and of itself, does not consummate learning, nor does mere written description of one’s service activities” (7). The reflective journal should prompt them to think critically about themselves and the community with whom they are involved. Janet Eyler notes that “while reflection appears to be critical for attaining important cognitive outcomes of service-learning or other field based programs [.] students are unlikely to be engaged in reflection in their community placements unless intentional efforts are undertaken to make it so” (522). The role of the instructor in designing carefully structured reflective writing activities is a time-consuming but critical aspect of this process.
I require a weekly journal writing assignment that begins with a description of students’ pre-service attitudes about learning Spanish and the CSL project within the Latino community, as well as a writing sample indicative of their Spanish proficiency. The course ends with a post-service reflection of their initial attitudes and how they may or may not have changed, and what they may have learned about the community, themselves and language learning, along with a self-assessment of their progress in Spanish based, among other things, on an analysis of their initial writing sample. Weekly journals in between the first and last entries include a range of topics, which reflect the progression of the service component as well as course content and grammatical structures. Journals early in the semester focus on present and past tense descriptions of the service placement, what students did or expect to do there, beliefs, doubts, and preferences about the service project and people the students met. Beginning in week five, students write in-depth about an individual they have met, based on their conversations in Spanish, and they also describe the target language communication experience. Students are also directed to begin to reflect more broadly on the Hispanic experience and the community in general. Among other things, they discuss their opinions about stereotypes; the reciprocal effects of their service experience, and conjecture their life under the condition of moving to a Spanish-speaking country with only their current Spanish language proficiency. In the final weeks, students synthesize information from readings and their observations in the community to describe their understanding of the Latino experience in the US and identify potential challenges. They then hypothesize about changes they might make if they were in a position of community leadership and what the potential impact of those changes would be, comparing their hypothetical ideas to more realistically grounded or manageable suggestions. The final assignment for each student is a class presentation describing his/her service project, attitudes, and observations about the CSL experience.
It is important that the service requirement not be perceived as an ancillary component of the course. If they are to respond positively to the service requirement, learners must see how it fits into the traditional course goals. In the case of my course, weekly journal assignments, in addition to requiring active reflection about the service experience, incorporate the field experiences with in-class readings and discussions. Also, whenever possible I highlight the appropriate use of new grammatical structures to deal with specific topics in the reflective activity, resulting in a meaningful writing task that integrates grammatical structures and vocabulary with the community experience. Almost all the reading (and consequently discussion) topics in the course, which I take from scripted, authentic, and literary sources, have community or social themes. These include recycling, environment, and education, including bilingual education, volunteering, Hispanics in US, local issues from the local newspaper published in Spanish, acculturation issues, and poverty.
Finally, while many educators in the current era of foreign language pedagogy are already focused on learner-centered instruction, this approach is particularly important in a CSL model. According to Howard, an instructional model that incorporates a service-learning project should move away from the traditional “learner-follower” model and move towards a “learning-leader” model. This means that the instructor role should “move away from information dissemination and move toward learning facilitation and guidance” (8). The learning-leader model ties in with the students’ community role in that they are contributing, not being passively spoon-fed instruction. I accomplish student-led learning through a group work dynamic, which includes reading and discussion of community or social themes, and reflective journals. In both of these tasks, students are responsible for having original thoughts based on their independent observations, and for sharing with or convincing others of their ideas. The empowerment that the learning-leader role brings to the student allows him/her to have more confidence in the observations s/he makes in the classroom and in the community.
After teaching the course for four semesters, I have discovered that the critical effect of the service component has more to do with the transformation of students’ attitudes about learning Spanish and the development of cross-cultural competence than content learning in Spanish. Aileen Hale claims that “those institutions that have taken the initiative to help their students acquire communicative competence in a second language through applying service-learning as a methodology have experienced remarkable success [.] in their students’ acquisition of the language” (9). Perhaps this is true in programs requiring extensive amounts of community service with a monolingual Spanish-speaking population. However, in the context of a short-term service requirement, or one that may include communication in English with bilingual Latinos, increased language proficiency is not an expected outcome.
In fact, it is difficult to measure the true success of a CSL Spanish course in terms of the traditional outcomes of language study. What the well-designed service-learning course does seem to accomplish is an alteration in the learning process and consequently the approach to foreign language study. As early as 1938, John Dewey advocated for an emphasis on the process of learning rather than the outcomes of learning, learning how to learn rather than learning facts and theories. When the Spanish service-learning course is assessed in this framework, it is clear that the advantage to be gained from this model is not in the content-based outcomes, but in the process-based approach to learning a foreign language. Specifically, I maintain that it is precisely those elements of the curriculum that often result in negative attitudes about foreign language study, which are successfully countered in a service-learning approach. A well-designed CSL Spanish course bridges the gap between the native and target cultures, situates languages within its socio-cultural context and focuses learners on a more realistic outlook toward learning Spanish.
Part of the negative image of language learning in this country results from the perception that Americanization involves the letting go of the “foreign” culture as proof of one’s American identity and loyalty. Paul Simon, in his book The Tongue-Tied American identified the precedent of ethnocentric behavior ingrained in this country. American identity and patriotism have traditionally involved the obliteration of “foreign” aspects of one’s cultural identity, including a foreign language. The tragic events of September 11, 2001 and the consequent emphasis on American solidarity may well serve to reinforce these ethnocentric views. When considered in this light it is easy to see why Americans have not embraced the study of languages other than English, since it would seem to be incongruous with the belief that immigrants to this country should learn English as an expression of their American patriotism. Foreign language educators continuously encounter the question, either explicit or implicit, “Why should I learn Spanish, French, German, etc.?” A response to that question may be found in the Statement of Philosophy of the Standards for Foreign Language Learning (henceforth Standards): “the United States must educate students who are linguistically and culturally equipped to communicate successfully in a pluralistic American society and abroad” (1). Yet, while language professionals may optimistically believe that the courses they teach help to neutralize ethnocentrism, studies such as those by H. Nocon (cited in Robinson-Stuart and Nocon) indicate that a second-language requirement is ineffective in influencing attitudes toward Spanish speakers and the language itself.
One element of the inefficacy on the part of the foreign language curriculum to resolve the resistance to language learning is that our courses traditionally continue to reinforce the native/foreign dichotomy. Anna Hahn looks at the ways in which foreign language instruction contributes to this dichotomy and actually promotes antagonism between the native and the foreign. She points to the fact that pressure to identify with the target culture may represent a threat to one’s own cultural identity and intensifies the struggle against language learning. The native vs. foreign dualism inhibits cross-cultural understanding, which can better be accomplished by expanding the learner’s cultural frame of reference, not attempting to replace it. Similarly, Claire Kramsch discusses the native culture (C1)-target culture (C2) duality, and the difficulty teachers have experienced attempting to change learners’ frames of reference. She puts forth that learners should be guided into finding a “third place”, their own unique perspective from which to explore both C1 and C2 as insiders and outsiders. This approach differs radically from the traditional approach in which C2 is treated as data, alien to C1, and therefore in need of being reduced into manageable chunks of information by teachers and spoon-fed to learners.
Within the parameters of the C1-C2 polarization, students have no feeling of connectedness with the foreign cultures, because they have no real-world experiences with which to connect the new information. It is not for lack of effort on the part of the language teaching profession, however, that cultural transmission is not taking place. The National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS) emphasizes Knowledge of Culture in Section IV of the “World Languages Other Than English Standards”, and suggests a variety of ways in which teachers can help students to develop “firsthand experience with target cultures” (see Appendix 1). Yet many of the best practices for teaching culture outlined in this section keep students in the role of observers of foreign cultures, not participants engaged in an ongoing dialog. Lucía Varona points out that “efforts [made by language teaching professionals] to interact with the [Spanish-speaking] community [.] focus on bringing the community to the classroom rather than integrating the classroom into the community” (70). Guest speakers representative of the target culture, for example, may be invited to speak to the class. This is yet another venue for delivering foreign culture tidbits to learners. They listen, perhaps even with interest, digest the information, and then add it to their database of Hispanic culture, filed under “foreign.”
Now more than ever, the profession places importance on situating language within its socio-cultural context. The Standards suggest that, “through the study of other languages, students gain a knowledge and understanding of the cultures that use that language and, in fact, cannot truly master the language until they have also mastered the cultural contexts in which the language occurs” (2). However, just as learners fail to connect C1 and C2, they similarly make no direct connection between classroom Spanish, that is, the grammar rules and vocabulary lists they memorize, and Spanish as it is spoken by native speakers of the language. In fact, learners who are in contact with native speakers outside of the classroom are quick to point out their perception of the schism between classroom Spanish and real-world Spanish. Learners are responding to the fact that even the most innovative pedagogical approaches often still focus on language as code, out of the context of the society in which it has a practical application. Classroom language learning is detached from the contextual learning environment. Alice Omaggio Hadley and others focus on context, and suggest that classroom activities, instructional materials, and testing procedures should be designed to resemble real language use. However, no matter how we try to imitate contextual language experiences, learners are attuned to the fact that they are engaged in a simulation, not the real thing. This cannot be helped if the students spend their entire language learning experience in the classroom with the teacher as the only authentic language source. Language out of context becomes perfunctory. There is no communicative need because students are negotiating a contrived topic and they know they can ultimately express their meaning in English if the message becomes a priority. As a result, language learning becomes monotonous and repetitive, because tasks are performed within the isolated setting of the classroom and with their English-speaking peers. The real function of language as a communicative tool is obscured by the abundance of communicative simulations we perform in the classroom.
A final cause of the negative image ascribed to foreign language study has to do with the fact that students are often not realistic in terms of the goals of the program, nor do they know if and when they have ever achieved them. Learners judge their performance in the foreign language course by the grades they earn on the various assessment measures designed by the instructor, which are usually not based on overall language proficiency levels or cross-cultural skills. In other words, they are not indicative of how students will be able to function in the real world using their newly acquired linguistic and cultural competencies. When surveyed at the beginning of the intermediate level of Spanish about what they hoped to achieve in the course, many of my students referred to gaining some degree of fluency in the language. This can be compared to a more realistic comment made by one student in the final portfolio: “At the start of Intensive Spanish I believed that if I worked hard that I could be fluent in Spanish by the end of the semester. What a fool I was.” The unreasonable expectation of fluency gained from four semesters of classroom language instruction is expected if one considers the concept of language learning in the same sense as content learning in other disciplines. The current market-driven educational approach promotes these unreasonable expectations by focusing on outcomes of education. The outcome after four semesters of Spanish, in this approach, is a low level of communicative proficiency, which does not allow the student to pass himself off as conversant in Spanish as s/he enters the job market. This leads to the “I didn’t learn anything” stereotype about foreign language study in general. In the classroom, students never get to apply language skills in the real world, and they leave the learning experience without tangible knowledge of what they in fact acquired in terms of performance. If fluency was their anticipated goal, they are far from reaching it. This is the point at which many students leave the language learning experience completely disillusioned.
Although it only provides 15 hours of interaction with the Latino community, I have observed how the service-learning component of my intensive Spanish course works against the typical negative stereotypes of the foreign language program described above. First, it chips away at ethnocentricity when students become personally involved with the Latino community. This interpersonal connection, combined with guided reflective activities, reduces the sense of foreignness about the target cultures. As one learner commented, “[the service-learning experience] made me realize how similar we all are rather than how different.” Learners, whenever possible, should be guided into reflecting on different scenarios from the perspective of both C1 and C2, thus focusing not only on differences but also similarities. When the connection rather than the divide between cultures is emphasized, learners discover for themselves the answer to the pervasive question, “why should we learn their language?”
In addition to helping reduce ethnocentric attitudes, CSL in a diverse Latino community also breaks down the stereotypes many students have that characterize a mythical uniform Latino culture. Patricia Varas claims that when students see the diversity in the Hispanic community it changes the “us vs. them” mentality, a barrier that may be discussed in the traditional course but never crossed. She further states “through service-learning the students come into direct contact with a population largely invisible to them. Many of the students believe that Spanish is a good career language that will concretely help them find better jobs. On the other hand, they have never truly been in touch with the population they intend to serve or work with” (128). Through CSL projects, students “develop cross-cultural skills and become more sensitive to cultural and class differences” (128). A learner who describes himself as “coming from a small town of 99% whites” empathizes with the challenge of the English Language Acquisition students in stating that “I can’t imagine how difficult it must be to be interacting with teachers whose first language is different from my own and I imagine that were I in such a situation, it would be difficult for me to open myself to the teachers.” Beyond empathy, this student has come to respect the English learners and states that, despite the apparent sub-standard educational facilities, “[the fact] that these students will graduate high school speaking two languages to an impressive degree is humbling.”
The CSL experience is well suited to guiding learners toward creating their “third place” perspective described by Kramsch. An important aspect of the “third place” is that each learner develops a unique perspective for himself, through the questioning and negotiation of meaning of new and existing cultural information. The following student comment seems to reflect some level of awareness of this new perspective: “I feel like I learned something that isn’t library knowledge, rather a small piece of knowledge that flows through my veins and will be evident in my attitude, not my test grades.” The interpersonal relationship that learners establish with members of the Latino community, along with writing assignments that lead them to explore topics from both C1 and C2 perspectives, are conducive to establishing a third frame of reference beyond C1 and C2. From this third frame of reference learners explore both C1 and C2 from the perspective of insider and outsider in each. The learner’s contribution to making sense of the meaning of cultural information is radically different from traditional methodology in which language teachers reduce cultural data into manageable chunks and supply it to learners as facts. The learner’s role in questioning the status quo, reconciling conflicting information, and creating a unique point of reference from which to consider both C1 and C2 is empowering and inspires continued reflection.
The unique cultural education that a CSL model can provide is based on the learner’s role as participant-observer. The “firsthand” experiences outlined in the NBPTS standards are comprehensive in that they involve bringing “products, practices, and perspectives of the target cultures” (20) into the classroom, as well as taking students into the community whenever possible. In CSL, however, learners go beyond going into the community as observers with the express purpose of gathering facts about C2. Instead, their purpose involves a contribution to the greater good of their community, and cross-cultural understanding is borne out of the process of working with members of the target culture toward a common goal. In this format, learners are not sent out into the community on a cultural scavenger hunt, but rather to participate in a project, with cross-cultural awareness implicit in the experience. As one learner put it upon completing the service, “we have the opportunity to bridge the gap between Hispanic and American culture.”
Through CSL, learners make a direct connection between the Spanish that they are learning in the classroom and the people in their community who speak it. This is not to imply that they were in any way ignorant of the fact that Spanish is spoken among the Hispanic community. Nevertheless, in pedagogical practice, the socio-cultural component often is extracted from the language component. We are either doing culture or doing language. The service opportunity reunites the concepts of language and culture for the student. Culture is more than some factual data to be memorized and later tested on. It is a connected, integral characteristic of a person that the learner knows, and to whom s/he can relate only if they share the same code. The desire to continue the relationship with that group of people provides the motivation for future language study. One can compare the comments of a learner in the final reflective activity to his initial pre-service attitudes:
Final portfolio: My attitude towards learning Spanish has improved significantly. I can see the bright light at the end of the tunnel. [.] My attitude has changed because of very specific reasons. Being in a positive learning environment has helped me immensely, and being put in situations where I was required to speak Spanish was beneficial and fun. It made me want to speak the language fluently.
Pre-service: I have never been a big fan of learning Spanish. I was forced to take it in high school and now am forced to take it in college. [.] The Spanish language hates me, and I am fully convinced my untimely demise will occur of dehydration or starvation in a hot Mexican desert because I will be unable to ask a Spanish-speaking native for water or directions.
Another learner made a similar comment: “my feelings for Spanish increased after taking this course because it showed me a different aspect of the Hispanic culture that I didn’t know much about. After doing the service-learning my view about the Spanish culture changed because I was actually able to communicate with people from that culture on another basis.”
Service learning takes the language learning experience beyond learning code, to the point where learners observe that language takes place in a socio-cultural context. Students are put into a mini-immersion environment in which they, sometimes for the first time in their foreign language learning experience, apply their comprehension of the code. Patrick Boyle and Denise Overfield assert that “learners become more aware of the communicative value of the target language as they use it in authentic situations in which each speaker is engaged in the outcome of the interaction” (143). In these real-life communicative tasks, someone is actually relying on their ability to communicate in Spanish. Even though it might be a very elementary communicative task, to get a cup of coffee or tell someone the time, for example, real communication in an authentic situation is more rewarding than successful performance on any level task in the classroom, because it has a purpose. As a result of authentic communication in Spanish in the community, students begin to relate to the practical application of language study. The following student comments reflect a sense of synthesis of previously compartmentalized components of the language after completion of the service project:
The application makes much more sense now being able to see the practical use of what has been taught. [.] This semester has made learning Spanish enjoyable and has made the information learned very useful. [.] I was able to have more exposure to the language, which has helped me with the vocabulary, and concepts that were being discussed. [.] Before it was very frustrating because it was almost entirely all memorization and a few sentences that would only help you look like a tourist in a foreign country. However, this semester I have learned, and become comfortable enough, to have some sort of a conversation in Spanish and understand others for the most part. It has given me a feeling that this language is something that I can learn and it has interested me in continuing to learn and practice.
Another student put across the same sense of frustration regarding his previous failure to integrate the various language components: “The problem that I had with the Spanish language as a whole was that the vocabulary and the grammar seemed to be divided and separate entities.” In addition to helping students have a more holistic approach to language learning, the brief language immersion experience helps learners recognize and develop critical skills in application of the new code, such as making use of contextual cues. As one student discovered, “Conversation takes a lot more than just words. If you can ‘read’ the person you are talking to, then you have a better chance of knowing what they want, even if you aren’t quite sure.”
Finally, the CSL experience provides substantiation to the vague knowledge that students have learned something in the course. While good grades on tests may be equivalent to academic success, even the most academically successful students seem to feel cheated at the end of the language learning experience when they are left without any proof of their ability to use Spanish in the real-world. Service learning provides the opportunity to affirm that they have indeed learned a communicative skill. Students are empowered by the fact that they are able to communicate, as evidenced by the following remarks: “While somewhat frustrated by my inability to become an accomplished speaker, my ability to comprehend the spoken language has encouraged me.” Another learner commented, “I realized I knew more Spanish than I had thought. I was amazed when I would pull out vocabulary that I didn’t even know I had memorized.” Finally, one can compare the following student’s confidence and comfort level using Spanish after the service experience to the dread expressed in the preflective activity:
Final portfolio: When I go to do my volunteer work, I sometimes do not notice what they say. It sounds different when someone who speaks Spanish is talking, for reasons like different dialect and speed, but it helps give me confidence knowing that I can carry somewhat of a conversation with a fluent Spanish speaking person.
Pre-service: I know I cannot carry on a conversation with what I know. It brings your confidence level way down. Just the thought of embarrassing myself in front of Spanish-speaking individuals just makes my stomach turn.
The fact that the communicative task is often in the context of providing help on some level adds to the feeling of empowerment. At last, students can answer for themselves the question, “what can I do with Spanish?” The answer may be as simple as helping an elderly person get breakfast or playing a game with a child. While these may not be the functional goals highlighted in a pedagogical model, they are the goals that will transform the attitude and motivation of the student toward foreign language study.
In summary, it should be noted that the implementation of a CSL program is in many ways an intimidating project. Careful attention to logistical arrangements of service and the design of the structured reflective activities is critical to a successful CSL course, and these can be time-consuming and even overwhelming tasks. However, the benefits of a well-designed CSL course can have far-reaching effects in terms of learners’ attitudes towards language study. CSL helps reduce the ethnocentricity and stereotypical attitudes toward foreign languages and cultures that we often observe among students. In fact, the service-learning experience blurs the native-foreign dichotomy that often prevails in foreign language curriculum and brings the foreign closer to home. Consequently, the learner is able to create his or her own meaning relative to C1 and C2 via a third frame of reference, and develop cross-cultural competence that presents a challenge within the foreign language classroom setting. Finally, the service opportunity situates language within its socio-cultural context as learners engage in purposeful dialog in the target language. In so doing, learners discover their communicative potential and validate the purpose of foreign language study.
Appendix 1-World Languages Other than English Standards
Accomplished teachers of world languages enable students to learn about contemporary societies and their pasts and to interact with target cultures through a variety of means. For example, a teacher of German might have students read a poem by Goethe in addition to a contemporary work by an Afro-German author. Teachers know the importance of new technologies to support and extend their students’ learning. They use these technologies in their practice, accessing articles from foreign publications, for example, and using them as the basis for units of study. Teachers provide a mosaic of authentic materials and resources dealing with target cultures that includes literary as well as nonliterary sources, such as artifacts and guest speakers. Where possible, they bring into the classroom products, practices, and perspectives of the target cultures that can be found locally, and they encourage students to explore the target cultures within their own community. For example, teachers might share a videotape of a local ethnic festival or suggest that students visit ethnic markets or restaurants in the area. They carefully match these resources to the age and developmental levels of students.
Accomplished teachers exhibit familiarity with the daily life and heritage of the target language cultures and are acquainted with such aspects of culture as current events, history, literature, performing and visual arts, intellectual movements, beliefs and values, and geography. They broaden their own knowledge of culture by keeping abreast of contemporary cultural developments through the media; by participating in course, conferences, lectures, and workshops; and by visiting museums, attending concerts and performances, and reading appropriate literature. Also, accomplished teachers take advantage of opportunities to arrange travel and study abroad for themselves and possibly their students in regions whose language is the target language or, in the case of classical languages, in areas of the world where those languages were used. When circumstances do not permit travel, accomplished teachers introduce their students to the target culture by using the Internet. To create a lesson in which students explore cultural similarities and differences, for example, a French teacher might research information on masks from tribes in Senegal, from Inuit Amerindians in Quebec, and from Mardi Gras celebrations in New Orleans. As necessary, teachers seek funding and other means of support from such sources as scholarships, professional organizations, embassies, or grant foundations and fellowships to create opportunities for c cultural investigations that might include independent research, use of the Internet, formal instruction, visits with host families, or the hosting of exchange students or teachers. In such ways, accomplished teachers enable themselves and their students to develop firsthand experience with target cultures and learn to communicate their knowledge of culture as insiders. Such a perspective allows teachers and students to compare and contrast home cultures with target cultures and to expand their awareness of other cultures while providing insights into their own. (20)
References
Boyle, J. Patrick and Denise M. Overfield. “Community-Based Language Learning: Integrating Language and Service.” Construyendo Puentes (Building Bridges): Concepts and Models for Service Learning in Spanish. Eds. Josef Hellebrandt and Lucía T. Varona. Washington, DC: American Association for Higher Education, 1999. 137-148.
Dewey, John. Experience and education. New York: Collier, 1938
Eyler, Janet. “Reflection: Linking service and learning – Linking students and communities.” Journal of Social Issues 58.3 (2002): 517-534.
Hahn, Anna. “The ‘Foreign’ in Foreign Language Education.” Research and Practice in Language Teacher Education: Voices from the Field. Selected Papers from the First International Conference on Language Teacher Education. Eds. Bill Johnston and Suzanne Irujo. Minneapolis, Minnesota: Center for Advanced Research on Language Acquisition, 2001. 283-294.
Hale, Aileen. “Service-learning and Spanish: A Missing Link.” Construyendo Puentes (Building Bridges): Concepts and Models for Service Learning in Spanish. Eds. Josef Hellebrandt and Lucía T. Varona. Washington, DC: American Association for Higher Education, 1999. 9-32.
Howard, J. “Community Service Learning in the Curriculum.” A FacultyCasebook on Community Service Learning. Ed. J. Howard. Ann Arbor , MI: Office of Community Service Learning Press, 1993. 3-11.
Kramsch, Claire. Context and Culture in Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993
Omaggio, Alice C. Teaching Language in Context: Proficiency-Oriented Instruction. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle Publishers, 1986. 2nd ed. 1993, 3rd edition, 2001.
Robinson-Stuart, G. and H. Nocon. “Second Culture Acquisition: Ethnography in the Foreign Language Classroom.” The Modern Language Journal 80.4 (1996): 431-449.
Simon, Paul. The tongue-tied American. Confronting the foreign language crisis. New York: Continuum Publishing Corporation. 1980.
Standards for Foreign Language Learning: Preparing for the 21st Century, Executive Summary. Lawrence, KS: Allen Press, 1996.
Varas, Patricia. “Raising cultural awareness through service-learning in Spanish culture and conversation: Tutoring in the Migrant Education Program in Salem.” Construyendo puentes (Building bridges): Concepts and models for service-learning in Spanish. Eds. Josef Hellebrandt and Lucía T. Varona. Washington, DC: American Association for Higher Education, 1999. 123-136.
Varona, Lucía T. “Raising Cultural Awareness Through Service-Learning in Spanish Culture and Conversation: Tutoring in the Migrant Education Program in Salem.” Construyendo Puentes (Building Bridges): Concepts and Models for Service-Learning in Spanish. Eds. Josef Hellebrandt and Lucía T. Varona. Washington, DC: American Association for Higher Education, 1999. 61-76.
“What is service-learning?” Corporation for National Service. 1 August 2002 <http://www.learnandserve.org/about/service_learning.html>
“World Languages Other than English Standards.” Standards and National Board Certification. National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. 5 August 2002 <http://www.nbpts.org/>.