Pacific Ancient and Modern Language Association

15 March 2010

I am writing to you in my function as vice-present of PAMLA, the Pacific Ancient and Modern Language Association, a professional organization for scholars and university teachers in language and literary studies. Our organization is dedicated to the advancement and diffusion of knowledge of ancient and modern languages and literatures.

It is with deep dismay that we learn about your plan to eliminate the programs in French, German, and Italian at the University of Nevada-Reno; on behalf of PAMLA we petition you to reconsider this proposal, on academic, but also on pragmatic grounds.

Let me speak to the pragmatic reasons first. Certainly, painful budget cuts await all institutions of higher learning, and the cost to students and to society at large will be unprecedented. We applaud you in proposing bold vertical cuts. In a crisis of this magnitude it is the right way to proceed provided the savings make up for the radical nature of program elimination. However, when contemplating cuts, you should also take into account the end product: what will your university look like once these cuts are carried out, and will it still be the kind of institution that will best serve the interests of your state? Will the students graduating UN-R in the future have all the necessary skills to compete in an increasingly global market, or will a one-time savings move undermine your strategic goals and your stature in the nation as a reputable academic institution? Will future students opt to go somewhere else because your institution will offer less opportunity for foreign language proficiency development to students who are looking to work in all the countries that speak these languages? To cut just as a matter of expediency without taking into account current and future trends may result in a deeper and longer-lasting negative impact than retaining these programs would mean, when some creative thinking leading to teaching efficiencies and interdisciplinary synergies might be implemented instead.

We are all aware that once programs disappear from university curricula it is nearly impossible—and very expensive—to bring them back. Is it wise, from a business point of view, to cut relatively small and inexpensive programs with faculty who are extremely hard working and have an active research agenda? At many institutions, the engineers represent the least cost-effective unit in terms of leveraging tuition dollars and generating student credit hours, the arts break about even, and the humanities (i.e., English and the languages) bring in a surplus because of the number of students they teach and majors they graduate. We understand that at UN-R language faculty is also engaged in the core and teaches a great number of non-majors. We don’t know which budget model UN-R uses to allocate its funds, but if it is a model that is even remotely driven by activity measures, those faculty in the university that generate greater numbers of students should be given appropriate credit. The Delaware Study, for example, could easily demonstrate how these programs fare within your institution, but also across similar departments across the nation. In our experience, most Foreign Language programs tend to fall quite below the national ratio for direct instructional expenses.

And let’s not discount advances in the field that have given way to teaching efficiencies while preserving disciplinary learning goals. Foreign languages, similar to expository writing, have a structural need for smaller classrooms. Indeed, our national organization recommends a 1/15 instructor-student ratio for language courses. However, most of us have been able, thanks to modern technology, to introduce effective cost-saving measures through hybrid online models that have resulted in us being able to provide for larger enrollments while preserving quality instruction. In addition, online delivery of these courses is fast becoming an area of program development and growth that many institutions are pursuing due to several financial considerations among our population. We are sure that UN-R’s ability to offer some of these courses within a distance or online delivery platform could add new enrollment and revenues to your institution. And, finally, language faculty attract large numbers of students in cross-listed courses on popular subjects for non-majors in most institutions’ general core/ requirements programs, thus contributing to the central educational mission of the university. For all these reasons, and at a time when strategic investments have to be made, it is difficult to understand how the elimination of these language programs can be a substantial cost-saving measure.

There are significant federal grant dollars to be raised through offering language study. Other universities have been able to attract Title VI Centers thanks to their excellent infrastructure with regard to language learning. There are great opportunities at the moment to collaborate with the EU on big partnerships, dual degrees, collaborative research projects, etc. Through Atlantis, the EU is making millions of dollars available to North American institutions. Without French, German, and Italian, UN-R would have to forego the opportunity to attract such dollars.

Businesses want to hire people who know languages. Earlier this month the Language Flagship Program, an initiative of the Department of Defense’s National Security Education Program, released a report titled “What Business Wants: Language Needs in the 21st Century.” The report reflects the input of over 100 business leaders who were asked to “identify the role and value of languages and cultural skills to business’ bottom line” and identify ways in which leaders from business, K-12 and higher education, and government can work together to “bring significant change to language education in the United States.”

At research universities, graduate students from a variety of fields need to study these languages and work with scholars in these fields. For many students pursuing careers in other fields, a working knowledge of French, German, or Italian is a must. Your students who would like to pursue a career in engineering will be at a disadvantage without the opportunity to study these languages. According to Iowa State University, as recently as three years ago, 10,000 engineering jobs could not be filled because of a shortage of qualified candidates. The employers wanted to hire bilingual engineers. In answer to this demand, ISU has developed a complementary language program for its engineering and business students. Your students pursuing careers in the science fields and environmental technologies will also be at a disadvantage. In corporate law, for that matter, knowledge of languages propels one’s application to the top of the list.

Finally, let us add just a few words about the substantive issue at hand. From an academic perspective, the plan to close French, German, and Italian strikes us as ill considered and seems to represent a misunderstanding of what globalization and internationalization could be at its very best. The academy should not react to globalization by repeating the mistakes of the past, which led to the exclusion of many non-Western literatures from academic study, but should instead react by being inclusive. To close French, German, and Italian would cut off many students from the study of their own intellectual, cultural, and social histories. And such a closing would clearly also impoverish the study of the writings of many non-Western postcolonial, economic, literary, and political theorists whose texts are in frequent dialogue with the French, German, and Italian tradition of the last 250 years.

At a time when budgets are being slashed, it is necessary to recognize strategically what will best serve our students’ futures. If your university truly wants its students to be competitive in the job market of the future, we urge you, in the strongest possible terms, to reconsider your decision to close French, German, and Italian. If the University of Nevada-Reno aims to preserve academic and research quality, it needs strong language programs.

Sincerely,

Sabine Wilke
Professor and Chair, Department of Germanics
University of Washington
Vice President, PAMLA

Thierry Boucquey
Professor of French and Associate Dean of the Faculty
Scripps College
President, PAMLA

Ana María Rodríguez-Vivaldi
Associate Professor of Spanish and Associate Dean, College of Liberal Arts
Washington State University
Second Vice President, PAMLA

Beverly Voloshin
Professor and Chair, Department of English Language and Literature
San Francisco State University
Past President, PAMLA

Imke Meyer
Professor and Co-Chair of German
Bryn Mawr College
Former PAMLA President

Kathleen Lundeen
Professor of English
Western Washington University
Former PAMLA President

Craig Svonkin
Assistant Professor, Department of English
Metropolitan State College of Denver
Executive Director, PAMLA

And members of the PAMLA Executive Committee:

Roswitha Burwick, Professor of German, Scripps College
Lorely French, Professor of German, Pacific University
Jeffrey Gray, Professor of English, Seton Hall University
Pauline Beard, Professor of English, Pacific University
Catherine Montfort, Professor of French, Santa Clara University
Stanley Orr, Associate Professor of English, University of Hawai’i, West Oahu
Sophie Delahaye, Assistant Professor of Modern Languages, Washburn University
Jeremiah B.C. Axelrod, Adjunct Assistant Professor of History, Occidental College
Lorenzo Giachetti, Graduate student representative, Stanford University