網頁圖片
PDF
ePub 版

A significant portion of the experts currently studying the Soviet Union will retire in the next ten years. Young area specialists are not being trained in sufficient numbers to take their place.

Since 1979 more than fifty higher educational institutions have terminated their programs of instruction in the Russian language.

As foreign language enrollments fell in the 1970s, enrollments in Russian language dropped more precipitously than those in any other major modern language, more than 40% in higher educational institutions and 70% in secondary schools.

There is widespread agreement that to improve foreign language skills in general and Russian in particular requires reforms that introduce Russian education as early as possible. The 1979 report on foreign language and international studies emphasized that there must be earlier education in these areas, that the traditional introduction of languages to students of high school or college age is too late:

To reverse the dangerous downward drift in foreign language competence corrective action must be taken at all levels of the educational system, from kindergarten through graduate training and research.

Although there has been a recent resurgence in Russian language enrollments at the college level, most of those students have not studied Russian previously. The American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages reports that in 1982 Russian accounted for less than one percent of total foreign language enrollment in grades 7 through 12, when total foreign language enrollment represented approximately 19% of total public secondary school enrollment.

The 1986 Department of Education report entitled "What Works" makes the point:

The best way to learn a foreign language in school is to start early and to study it intensively over many years.

Students are most likely to become flucnt in a foreign language if they begin studying it in elementary school and continue studying it for six to eight years. Although older students may learn foreign languages faster than younger ones, students who start early are likely to become more proficient.

The same recommendation is made in the 1983 Russian Language Report:

Pre-college Russian language instruction, which has now reached a critical juncture, represents a major concern...sound instruction at the pre-college level...is the most effective way of introducing Russian to large numbers of Americans...excellence at the peak of the pyramid is determined, in part, by the breadth of its base

Frederick Starr, President of Oberlin College, has said,

it is impossible to build a corps of Americans fluent in Russian by starting at the college level. The attempt to do so has failed over 20 years, and for an obvious reason: college is too late... The center of language teaching must be the schools--high school, if necessary, but preferably the middle schools or even grade school. To start later is like trying to build a house from the roof down. This is particularly important since it takes several years to gain a foothold in Russian.

Many other factors explain the lack of Russian language expertise in the United States. Among these are inadequate proficiency tests, shortage of qualified teachers, lack of satisfactory teaching materials, the prohibitive expense of travel in the USSR (for language, study and practice), the lack of employment possibilities and the

absence of a universal language requirement for high school students

For arguments that there are some less tangible obstacles to Russian language and area studies teaching, see the Harvard Educational Review, August 1954. In that issue, John Mack suggests that there is a fear, conscious or unconscious, that results in people being discouraged from taking up Soviet studies That fear is that they might question and challenge the currently dominant dehumanizing view of the USSR Mack states,

and

In our collective mentality may be a powerful conscious
to our providing

unconscious

obstacle

effective

teaching. We need an enemy to sustain the giant war effort."

The Washington Post, July 27, 1986, quotes Averell Harriman as believing that the key to understanding between the US. and the USSR is deeper knowledge of the two systems and their overlapping and conflicting interests In order to achieve this understanding, we must improve the level of Russian language education in our country through our public schools. Leadership and financial support must be provided to motivate Americans and to provide them with improved opportunites for learning the Russian language. The record level of Russian language study in the 1950s was the result of a program instituted to achieve parity with the Soviets in the Sputnik era Surely we can institute such a program again in the interests of peaceful coexistence between the major global powers

63-629 0-86——9

THE HERALD

ONE HERALD SQUARE

NEW BRITAIN, CONNECTICUT 06050

APPENDIX 3B(3)

OFFICE OF THE
EDITOR

Congressman Lee H. Hamilton,
Chairman Subcommittee on Europe
and the Middle East

Congress of the United States
House of Representatives
Washington, D. C. 20515

Dear Congressman Hamilton:

As I prepared this report for you, I realized that, because of space restrictions, much of the evidence of our commitment to this project cannot be expressed. I have, therefore, included some supplemental material which you may find helpful in assessing some of the intangible, as well as specific, elements of this program which has consumed so much of the time, thought, and energy of the board and special committee of the New England Society of Newspaper Editors during these five years.

We are, of course, very interested in the progress of the Subcommittee which you head and would be appreciative if you would keep me informed of any published reports or televised productions of the hearing itself. I will pass all information from you along to the NESNE officers.

We would be glad to supply further exhibits which you might want or feel would be helpful. Please feel free to write or call me (203-225-4601) with any questions or requests.

Cordially,

Judith W. Brown

JWB/mg

[ocr errors][merged small]

New England could easily fit into a vest pocket of the vast cloak of land that covers the U.S.S.R. Yet in 1982 the board of the New England Society of Newspaper Editors (NESNE), an organization of about 85 members who meet annually to discuss journalistic and regional concerns, decided to initiate an exchange concept using the thing we know best newspapers-as a focal point. In what could be interpreted as a "Mouse That Roared" maneuver New England editors invited a delegation from the Union of Soviet Journalists, an organization of thousands, to New Hampshire for a series of discussions on how we, as editors, could contribute to better understanding between the peoples of both nations through our newspapers.

Now going into its fifth exchange conference, scheduled at Middlebury College in September, this unique program, which came at a time when communication between the countries was at a standstill, has attracted national media attention. As far as we can determine, the exchanges and proposals which we suggested and have implemented are the first of their kind for any newspaper group. They have resulted in high-level meetings in the U.S.S.R., including two morning question and answer sessions with Viktor Afanasyev, editor of Pravda and a member of the Soviet Central Committee. On an informal level we have been invited to the apartments of Soviet delegates for dinner, and they have visited our homes for a few days after the formal conferences.

Knowing full well that we were not diplomats (newspaper editors seldom are!) and acknowledging basic philosophical differences between our nations, we felt that it would be valuable to editors from both nations to learn about each other; how the press functions in each society; and how best we could work out exchanges that would be realistic and beneficial to our eventual goal of better understanding of the other country for our readers. Since NESNE delegates have never seen themselves as "advocates" or representatives of a "peace" movement, it was necessary for us, both here and in the Soviet Union, to keep our purpose clear and to avoid verbal entanglements on issues for which we were neither qualified nor inclined to speak. Thus we structured the initial discussions at Colby-Sawyer College in New London, New Hampshire, with great care, consistency to our aims, and hours of hard work.

« 上一頁繼續 »