I am going to respond to some of the foreign language discussion.  I am a
person whose second language is English.  It is true that learning the
language is a learned skill, but it is significantly more than that. It is
not like learning to type, it is much more like learning calculus, in that
it is a skill (the formulas and how to use them), but it gives you a
completely different picture of the world.  It simply adds to how you
perceive the world.  It expands your mind.  Therefore, I agree that sitting
in class and learning a second language is better than nothing, but it is
not what we really want out of that experience.  I think that why most of
us advocate a second language is the different view of the world one gets
from that experience.
There are two ways to get the complete experience. One is to learn the
language in the respective country by actually living there.  The other is
to take many more hours than the typical six or nine.  One would not get
the best mind expanding experience until one is fluent enough in the second
language to read good literature in that language.  The first method,
above, is the best.  The second, above, is good, and the six hours is
better than nothing.




At 09:02 AM 11/12/99 -0600, you wrote:
>I think this is a really interesting idea Ginny and I agree. There is of
>course a serious issue about $$ especially at the state schools where the
>difference between tuitio in -state and overseas life is often sizable. But
>in principle I absolutely agree. One of my strategic plan goals (and DON'T
>get  started about strategic plans...the bane of our existence) is to raise
>money to help students who want to spend time overseas.
>We are also looking at doing an interim course (like winter or summer break
>time) overseas. Does anyone do that?
>I am voting for somewhere warm and by the sea but....
>dean queen
>
>
>At 09:17 AM 11/12/99 EST, you wrote:
>>Our college does not require a foreign language. Liberal arts
>>requires proficiency in a foreign language.
>>
>>I hadn't really thought about it until this discussion, but I think I
>>think that it is more important to require students in
>>international business to go abroad to a non-English speaking country
>>and study there (even if in English) than it is to require them to
>>study a specific foreign language for the two years or so at the
>>lower division that it takes to be good in it. Think of it this way:
>>One can study a foreign language to meet a language requirement, and
>>never get into it (as many of us know firsthand). But it is not
>>possible to stay abroad very long without concluding that it is a
>>mistake to fail to study a foreign language and at least try to learn
>>it. Basically, language study is a skill -- like learning to type or
>>ride a bicycle -- and most people can set out to learn a language
>>like they set out to learn anything else. It takes lots of time and
>>effort, but it can be done. The important variable is the motivation.
>>
>>Reactions?
>>
>>Ginny
>>
>>
>