The Beginnings
Breaking Away from the Past: Revolution to Civil War Boom Period: Civil War to World War I Isolationism and Involvement: World War I to 1952
International Commitment to Internal Dissent: 1952 to the Late Sixties
Protest to Participation: Late Sixties to the Present Characteristics of the Period Trends in the Schools Problems in Education Trends in Second-Language Teaching Effects of Abolishing the Language Requirement Trends in Psychology, Linguistics, and Sociology
The Future
The study of the past may not unlock the closed doors of the future, but an acquaintance with what has preceded certainly provides a key to the understanding of the way things are and why they are as they are. Whether or not such knowledge actually improves future prospects is debatable, but certainly individuals who are aware of change and the forces behind it are more capable of anticipating and adjusting to the continuous innovations in their life and work. The teacher, especially, needs to be attuned to the tenor of the times and be able to adjust to the curriculum revisions brought about by shifting political, economic, and social conditions. Teaching does not occur in a vacuum. Any subject occupies a position in the curriculum in order to meet a need of all or part of the school population. Second-language teaching is no exception. As conditions change, the course objectives are altered.
The purpose of this chapter is to put into perspective the changing climates that have affected second-language teaching in order that teachers
may better comprehend the forces that influence their profession. The historical facts included are presented only as a necessary basis for the clarification of the various cause-and-effect relationships and interrelationships that have rather effectively determined the course taken by second- language teaching. In each historical period, the discussion proceeds from a general overview of the period to its educational system and type of second- language teaching. In the later periods, an examination of related influences from the fields of psychology, linguistics, and sociology is included.
The work-filled life of the early settlers was centered in their religious faith. In the somber and authoritarian atmosphere, discipline was stressed, and social, religious, and moral conformity was demanded. Control in local affairs was exercised by the ruling theocracy. Political and economic matters were controlled by England. As far as possible, within the limits of the new environment, the institutions established were extensions of those in Europe at that time. There was no time to develop new institutions; nor was the desirability or need for such changes felt. The people spent their energies establishing themselves in a new and often hostile environment. Faithful to their religion, dedicated to the task of making new homes, and kept in line by strict rules and regulations, the colonists were left little reason or opportunity for reflection or innovation.
The educational system was a reflection of the existing conditions and beliefs. Life was an expression of religious faith, and the schools were a part of that life. The schools were established to insure that each person, in keeping with the obligation set forth during the Reformation, know how to read the Bible. In the words of the "Old Deluder Satan Act" of 1647 they were to counteract and to nullify the ". . . one chief project of that old deluder Satan—to keep men from a knowledge of the Scriptures. . . ." The curriculum and the materials read were religious in nature, and the primary qualifications for a teacher were religious orthodoxy and good moral character.
As important as it was to learn to read and write, little emphasis was placed on higher learning. Most children had too much to do to spend much time in school. The few who attended secondary school went to a Latin grammar school. The goal of these schools was also a religious one. The purpose of studying Latin and Greek was to gain a better understanding of the Scriptures. Those students who wished could continue their religious training at Harvard before taking their place among the ministers, lawyers, or teachers of the colonies.
Little can be said about modern languages during this period because little
importance was attached to them. The Renaissance tradition of studying the classics and the need to study Latin and Greek in order to comprehend more clearly the Bible's teachings completely dominated the early educational scene. The few who learned a modern language did so either by studying with a private tutor or by studying abroad.
Having completed the initial physical phase of the colonization, the inhabitants of the original colonies began to have some extra time to devote to improvements in their political and economic system. In Europe the winds of change were blowing, and, young and enthusiastic, the new country was listening to its whispers. What they were hearing was coming mostly from the French writers of the eighteenth century. The ideas of the French intellectuals with regard to government, mixed with the colonists' independent pioneer spirit and a growing consciousness of self, culminated in the Revolutionary War. After the war came the problems associated with establishing a new government and a new nation. The westward expansion continued unabated throughout the period. A cultural nationalism developed, and the United States became quite sensitive to foreign opinion. Toward the latter part of this era the country was preoccupied with another problem, the question of slavery and later the Civil War.
The dominant note in education during this period was one of change. Prior to ihe Revolutionary War, the Latin grammar school had met the needs of the times. Afterwards, the trend was away from the traditional ways of doing things. The ideas of the Age of Enlightenment affected all aspects of society, including education. Expanding trade and commerce also influenced the educational needs of society. The focus of the country was beginning to widen, and the curriculum reflected this expansion. The emphasis on religion gave way to increased secular interests, with the exception of the period immediately following the Great Awakening, and church control of the schools gave way to political control. Demands arose for instruction in the social graces and for practical preparation for careers in trade and commerce. The apprentice system was basic prior to this period, but now the need was to include training for a trade as an important part of the curriculum. In other words, the pragmatic character of America was beginning to assert itself. As early as 1731, bookkeeping and modern languages were taught in New York as a part of the program leading toward a career in foreign trade. Franklin's academy was established in 1751, and the offerings began to include a greater variety of subjects. The first high school, the English Classical School, was founded in
Perspectives 19
1828. By the time of the Civil War, the Latin grammar school had been largely replaced by the academies and the high schools.
The teaching of modern languages in the schools actually began in the middle decades of the eighteenth century. The times had changed. The dominant role of religion in society had diminished. The classic tradition of the schools was cracking under the pressure to assume some of the responsibility for practical career training. Merchants and businessmen needed young men trained in bookkeeping and modern languages to participate in the increasingly important field of international commerce. Others felt that the curriculum was too narrow and that it should be expanded to include other subjects. Although not embraced wholeheartedly, modern languages were accepted into the curriculum during this period. In spite of the efforts of men like Franklin and Jefferson, who recommended that modern languages be included in the curriculum, many still considered modern languages a frill subject. In their opinion, such subjects lacked the necessary difficulty to be one of the fundamental courses in the curriculum. Tradition was behind the classics. Many years elapsed in the process of establishing modern languages as a bona fide course in its own right.
At the end of the Civil War the people of the United States were free to turn their energies toward developing the nation. The period between the Civil War and World War I was one of unprecedented expansion internally and internationally. Business prospered. Industry grew. The economy flourished. Immigrants flowed into the country. People flocked to the cities. There was constant activity and change. The period was one of almost uncontrollable growth and development as the country was converted into an industrial giant among nations. During this era the United States grew up and assumed a position as a world power in international affairs.
This was also a period of tremendous growth and change for the schools.
Not only were there more and more people, but also a larger percentage of the children enrolled in school. The number of pupils doubled in every decade from 1800 to World War I. As society became more and more urbanized, the schools were called on to assume responsibilities for such things as sewing, cooking, woodworking, metal crafts, etc., which had formerly been learned at home. As the steady trend toward tax-supported public schools continued, the academy, which had been basically a private system, declined; and the high school gradually assumed the characteristics of today's modern comprehensive high school.
Although modern languages had gained a foothold in the curriculum in the eighteenth century, there was no sudden shift in interest toward modern language study. Enrollments rose slightly as the academies and the high schools replaced the Latin grammar school. Latin remained strong, even in the curriculum of the academies and high schools. Enrollment in Latin, for example, rose to a high of 50.6 percent of the total high school enrollment in 1900. Afterwards, as the high school population of school-age children and the character and purpose of the secondary schools began to change, enrollments in Latin began to decline (Kant, 1970, p. 403).
During the boom period following the Civil War, the number of students studying modern foreign languages rose along with the increasing school population. By 1890, 16.3 percent of the high-school population was studying French and German. German was by far the most popular language. In 1915, 24.4 percent of the high-school students were taking German. Spanish made little headway until just before World War I (Kant, 1970, p. 403).
In this period of change and expansion, one would expect similar innovations in the teaching of modern languages. Such was not the case. Enrollments rose, but the model for teaching was based on the past, not on any new techniques. The growth was present, but not the changes. Modern languages were still a stepchild in the curriculum, and the difficult task was still to convince the public and the educators that they belonged there. In order to prove that modern languages could provide the necessary mental discipline required in the school program, modern-language teachers copied the traditional classroom methods of the classics. The result was that modern languages were gradually accepted, but at first they conformed to the objective of supplying the needed intellectual discipline. This goal was approved by the teachers who founded the Modern Language Association of America (MLA) in 1883.
The present-day modern-language teacher should not be too quick to condemn the teachers of this period for their apparent capitulation to classical methodology. Opinion was such that other types of teaching probably would not have been accepted. Too, one must keep in mind that from the beginnings of the country to World War I, the dominant approach to learning in general was based on faculty psychology. This theory stemmed from the belief that the brain was much like a muscle that needed to be exercised, the tougher the exercise the better. Learning was like the medicine of the day, bitter and tough to swallow. Therefore, modern-language classes based on traditional teaching methods involving huge amounts of memorization and translation were justified in terms of tradition, both from the classics and from psychology.
Toward the end of this period, however, forces were set in motion that were to have considerable influence on teaching methods. World War I itself, of course, caused profound changes in the society. The first experimental
Perspectives 21
psychology laboratory was opened in Germany in 1879. Soon after, psychological laboratories were established in the United States. Psychology came to be viewed as a science, and resultant theories from these early years have had a great deal of influence on the educational system and on language teaching ever since. Another influence on language teaching was the introduction of the "direct method." 1
The American people were quite disillusioned after World War I. President Wilson's dream of a war to end all wars burst. The League of Nations failed.
There was a withdrawal, an urge to disengage from international affairs. The desire was to avoid all foreign contacts and involvements. This period was followed by the "Gay Twenties," the gilded days of fun and frolic. The country was driven by a compulsion to "live it up." It was almost as if a national reaction to the previous period of disenchantment had emerged. The country basked in its prosperity, and the future promised even better things to come.
Suddenly the stock market crashed, signaling the beginning of the long depression years, which did not actually end until the beginning of World War II. Then came the war itself, which required a total commitment of the country's energies and resources. The aftermath, too, required tremendous effort and aid to rebuild countries destroyed by the war. America did not withdraw this time but became increasingly occupied with international problems.
The nation's schools continued to grow at a rapid rate. With the passage of the child-labor laws and compulsory school attendance laws in the early part of the century, now most school-age children were enrolled in school. Of course, this rapid growth was aided by the vast economic support available in this country. The direction taken in this period in education was toward greater flexibility. The number of courses offered was gradually increased. Also, the number of responsibilities that education assumed was expanded. Summer recreation programs were begun. Swimming pools were built. Education for the physically and mentally handicapped was established. In short, the educational objective was to develop the total capability of all children. The American goal of providing an educational system responsive to the needs of all students, not just the academically talented, was drawing closer to a reality.
The effects of the war and the postwar isolationist sentiment upon the
^sing the direct method, the teacher endeavors to teach oral skills directly in the second language without reference to the mother tongue.
teaching of modern languages were almost disastrous. The enrollment in German dropped from 24.4 percent in 1915 to .6 percent in 1922 (Kant, 1970, p. 403). Although French and Spanish, especially the latter, reaped temporary benefits from the negative sentiment toward German, enrollment in these two languages soon began a decline, which continued until well after the end of World War II. In 1948, only 13.7 percent of the high-school population was enrolled in modern languages. (That was down from a high of 35.9 percent in 1915). Latin also suffered, dropping from 37.3 percent in 1915 to 7.8 percent in 1948 (Kant, 1970, p. 403).
The study of modern languages was affected not only by distrust and dislike for all things foreign and by the country's depressed economic condition, but also by the consequences of the "progressive" education movement of the thirties. According to this philosophy, an outgrowth of the functionalist psychology and pragmatic philosophy of James and Dewey, the curriculum was to be geared toward "life adjustment" education. 2 As late as 1945, the "Harvard Report" recommended modern-language study only for the college bound. Increasing numbers of colleges eliminated language entrance and degree requirements.
From World War I to 1952, modern languages, which had little background to assist them in maintaining their position in the schools, were again in trouble. Even the centuries-old Renaissance tradition of the classics was not sufficient to spare Latin from undergoing a decline. There appeared to be little concern for language teaching in the United States. After World War I and throughout the depression years, the country was too busy with its own internal problems to be very much interested in other languages and other cultures.
In spite of the fact that declining enrollments indicated that drastic changes in modern-language teaching were needed, little was done. Immediately after World War I, an attempt was made, in reaction to the criticism of returning soldiers who had not been able to communicate in a foreign language, to teach the oral skills via the "direct method." However, that attempt was soon abandoned. The complaint was that the method was too time consuming. The grammar-translation approach of the classics continued. 3 In 1929, a study sponsored by the Modern Language Association of America under the direction of Algernon Coleman recommended a reading approach. Its findings had indicated that most students do not go beyond two years of study in a foreign language. Therefore, the committee concluded that the only practical objective was reading. The conclusions of this study were widely
According to functionalist psychology and pragmatic philosophy, only those types of teachinglearning activities that the students could use in life situations were to be included in the curriculum.
3 Grammar-translation teaching emphasizes the study of grammar and translation of sentences as a means of learning a second language.
accepted, even though many teachers were not happy with them. As a result, special, graded reading materials based on word counts were prepared. As time passed, many teachers reverted to grammar-translation methods as a way of teaching reading. Many had never abandoned the security of their traditional techniques. Some teachers espoused a more eclectic approach that involved the oral use of the language as well as the written. 4 No approach, apparently, was successful in attracting large groups of students.
Although the future was dark, and many in the field of modern-language education were disparaging, the light was rising that was to lead the way and to brighten the prospects of modern languages after 1952. In the twenties, and even before, a few cultural anthropologists and linguists had initiated work among the Indians. Since these tribes had no written language, the historical linguistic approach did not suffice. The result was a new approach to the study of languages, descriptive linguistics. One of the leaders in this new field was Leonard Bloomfield.
In addition to being a linguist, Bloomfield was extremely interested in, and highly critical of, methods of teaching modern languages. He felt that grammar-translation practices were not the way to teach a foreign language. According to him, oral language was primary and should be given primary stress in the classroom. Too, language learning should involve a process of overlearning necessary structural forms rather than a superficial exposure to written grammatical exercises. Later, it was the Bloomfieldian linguists, members of the American Council of Learned Societies, who were instrumental in establishing intensive language courses at various colleges and universities. At the outbreak of World War II, the government turned to these innovators for leadership in the development of intensive language courses to teach much-needed language skills to Armed Forces personnel.
The theories of the linguists, as put into practice in the Army Specialized Training Program (ASTP), did indeed produce graduates who were able to function in the language. When the public learned of this success, they were surprised and pleased, surprised that an American could learn a foreign language so quickly, and pleased that it was possible. The next reaction was to ask why this had not been done before. Shortly thereafter, searching and uncomfortable questions were directed at the schools. However, the school structure was not such that the ASTP program could be transferred directly into the typical program. Not until after 1952 were adaptations developed that would fit the school situation.
Interesting and related events were also taking place in psychology. During the late nineteenth and early part of the twentieth century, psychology
24 Part One: Theory
was able to establish itself as a science and to separate itself from philosophy and physiology. Wundt was the first to apply scientific methods to introspection. His followers became known as the structuralists. Their objective was to study the states of the mind. In 1900 the functionalists separated from the structuralists. Functionalists were interested in behavior as well as mental processes, and they placed special stress on the changing mental processes in adjusting to the environment. The next school to appear was that of the behaviorists. They rejected all forms of introspection. In their striving for complete scientific objectivity, i.e., for recording only those phenomena observable by others, some went to the point of denying the existence of conscious thought because thought cannot be observed. The recording of overt behavior was to be the only basis for objective descriptions of psychological studies. The behavioristic theories of this early period later grew into stimulus-response (S-R) theories of learning.
In part, behavioristic, mechanistic theories of learning were an outgrowth of comparative psychological studies in which the similarity of animal and human learning was compared. Thorndike, for example, believed that learning in animals and simple learning in humans were the same, a process of establishing a connection between a stimulus and its response through trial-and-error. Many present S-R learning theories are based on extrapolations to human learning from experiments in the animal laboratory. In part, they were a reaction to the stress on mental discipline that had dominated the view of learning for so long. In part they occurred as a reaction to introspection as a scientific method in psychology.
The first of the cognitive theories of learning was introduced in Germany around 1912 by Wertheimer. His theories stressed the totality of the situation as opposed to the parts and pieces of the mechanistic theories proposed earlier. Later, Kohler described examples of insightful behavior displayed by apes in problem-solving situations and concluded that S-R theories were not sufficient to explain the apes' actions (Mouly, 1973).
Behaviorism caught on quite quickly in this country and rapidly assumed a dominant position in psychological circles. Becoming widespread in the twenties, behavioristic explanations of learning were those most commonly accepted during this whole period from World War I to 1952. The preeminence of mechanistic learning theories was to continue until the emerging popularity of cognitive psychology in the fifties and sixties. Thus, it is not surprising to learn that Bloomfield and Bloomfieldian linguists accepted behavioristic interpretations of learning. These beliefs regarding learning coupled with Bloomfield's distaste for the mental discipline approach to language teaching and his analysis of oral stimuli and responses while studying conversations between the Indians explain many of the basic tenets of the Army Specialized Training Programs. This close connection between descriptive linguistics and stimulus-
Perspectives
response learning theories and teaching techniques has continued to the present.
From the end of World War II to the late sixties the United States had an almost uninterrupted period of growth and prosperity. Along with prosperity, however, the country experienced various internal and international problems. As one of the leaders of the free world, the United States was involved in a continual series of confrontations in the hot and cold Cold War.
Additional problems on the homefront, such as integration, the "war on poverty," inflation, pollution, and a dissatisfied youth, led to an ever increasing number of crises. So, although the period was characterized by material plenty, for a vast majority of the people the economic growth was accompanied by persistent turmoil. Although enjoying the highest standard of living in the history of mankind, the American people, and the people of the world for that matter, had to live in a world of constant frustration and insecurity. This was an age of material comfort but psychological discomfort, an age of crisis.
America's commitment to educate its youth continued to grow and expand. School enrollments increased at enormous rates, especially as the postwar baby population reached school age. In 1900, 6.4 percent of the seventeen-year olds in the country were high-school graduates. The figure in 1956 was 62.3 percent and rising. At the college level, the rate was equally rapid. In 1870, 9,371 received the A.B. degree, 1,478 the M.A. degree, and 1 the Ph.D. degree. In 1963, 450,592 obtained the bachelor's degree, 91,418 the master's degree, and 12,822 the doctorate, (Atkinson & Maleska, 1965, p. 157).
The continuing emphasis was on keeping greater numbers of students in school for more years.
As well as growing to include larger numbers of students, education also expanded its offerings and its scope. From headstart and kindergarten to the Job Corps to postgraduate fellowships, the trend was toward broadening the educational programs available. Night school, summer school, college extension classes, etc. offered an almost unlimited variety of educational opportunities for adults, part-time students, young people with handicaps, etc., to further their education.
The curriculum was to include expanded academic, vocational, and general education programs. The course offerings at some universities became so vast and so varied that it would require hundreds of years to take all the courses. Curricular revisions as well as new technological advances in media
25
26 Part One: Theory
were utilized to improve instruction. New approaches to teaching, such as team teaching, nongraded classes, individualized instruction, programmed learning, flexible scheduling, etc. were developed to improve learning within the various curricula.
Innovations in the educational system seemed to have reflected the unprecedented pace of life in general. Yet, education underwent attacks from both internal and external sources. The criticism was that the changes involved mostly facilities, administrative procedures, and equipment and that the approach to teaching young people had changed little. Some critics viewed current practice more in terms of "miseducation" than of education.
Modern-language teaching, which had appeared on the brink of being ousted from the curriculum in the thirties and forties, enjoyed a period of prosperity and rising enrollments during the fifties and sixties. America's continued commitments abroad and the interdependency among the peoples of the modern world fostered a climate in which international understanding and cooperation were of prime importance. The study of modern languages was considered basic to developing and promoting good will and friendship among the nations of the world.
Even though the climate was right for expanding modern-language study, a great deal of effort and energy had been necessary to reverse the previous downward trend and to institute a rebirth in modern-language study. From the end of the war until 1952 there was much frustration but little activity. However, in 1952, William Riley Parker was appointed head of the newly organized foreign-language section of the MLA. The leadership supplied by this office, coupled with that of other leaders in the field, eventually initiated the movement necessary to energize the profession. In 1954, the first edition of Parker's The National Interest and Foreign Languages was published. In this report the position taken was that the availability of Americans who could speak a foreign language in times of emergency such as the one that occurred in World War II and in the constant relationships with governments of other countries was a matter of "national interest." Thus, national defense was added to the list of reasons given for studying modern languages.
The National Interest and Foreign Languages was one of the most important and most influential books in the history of modern-language teaching. It provided the needed impetus, the awaited catalyst, to renew interest in the study of modern languages and to revitalize the profession. Activity in the field of modern languages in this country began to increase. The results of these efforts were seen in the National Defense Education Act of 1958, which recognized foreign languages as being critical to the country's security and provided funds for stimulating the study of languages.
The infusion of government funds into the field brought renewed vigor to
an almost lifeless profession. Millions of dollars were made available to retrain teachers and to purchase language laboratories and other electronic equipment. Projects for preparing new materials, such as the MLA project in which a group of experts developed the audio-lingual Spanish text, Modern Spanish > and the Glastonbury project, which culminated in the publication of the A-LM series, were funded. In addition to the sudden availability of government funds, other events were taking place that added to the sudden successes enjoyed by modern-language education. The launching of Sputnik by the Russians in 1957 startled the world and prompted a doubtful attitude toward the qualities of the American educational system. In 1959, Conant in his book The American High School Today urged that greater emphasis be placed on the academic aspects of the curriculum. Also, rapidly increasing contacts between peoples in international trade, travel, and educational and cultural exchanges focused attention on the need for language learning in the modern, interdependent world.
Change comes slowly in most cases, but this was a revolution. Teachers everywhere were going to meetings, to workshops, and to institutes to learn about the audio-lingual approach to teaching modern languages. The professional journals were filled with articles explaining the new techniques and procedures. The whole profession was overflowing with previously unknown energy, excitement, and enthusiasm. Within a few short years, the audio- lingual approach became the dominant methodology.
Enrollments rose with the enthusiasm. At last it was "in" to study modern languages! In the public secondary schools, the percentage of the high school population studying modern languages increased from 16.4 percent in 1958 to 21.7 percent in 1960, to 24.2 percent in 1962, and to 26.4 percent in 1965 (Kant, 1970, p. 403). At the university level, 31.7 percent more students were studying modern languages in 1963 than in 1960, and 24.8 percent more in 1965 than 1963 (Kant, 1969, p. 259). The number of graduate students studying modern languages increased 77.8 percent between 1960 and 1963, and 15.1 percent from 1963 to 1965 (Kant, 1969, p. 259).
By the early sixties, the study of modern languages seemed to have found a place in the sun. Pleased language teachers basked in the warmth of public favor and dedicated themselves to producing the bilinguals needed by the nation. However, such bliss was not long to continue. Results did not meet initial expectations. A trickle of criticism of the audio-lingual approach began to appear, a trickle that grew to considerable proportions and was reflected in revisions of first-edition audio-lingual texts.
The audio-lingual approach was, in effect, the adaptation of the ASTP language programs to the school situation. The basic tenets continued to be those espoused by the Bloomfieldian linguists in establishing their first intensive language courses. Although primarily linguists, much of their influ-
28 Part One: Theory
ence was on the methods and classroom techniques employed in the "new" methodology. The basic viewpoint, as far as learning theory was concerned, was that of the stimulus-response school of psychology. At a time when other subjects such as math and chemistry were emphasizing comprehension of principles and conceptual understanding, modern-language teaching was emphasizing rote learning and drill procedures.
While descriptive linguists were in the midst of the audio-lingual revolution and while their influence was at its peak, other movements were beginning that were to challenge their views of learning and of language. First, cognitive psychologists began increasingly to question the stimulus-response learning theories upon which its teaching techniques were based. The growing acceptance of learning theories based on mathematical models, neurophysiological models, and information-processing models caused psychologists to reconsider earlier behavioristic models. Second, new ideas about language, stimulated by Chomsky's Syntactic Structures published in 1957, gave rise to the generative-transformational school of linguistics. The innovative viewpoints of the transformationalists resulted in restructured thinking as to what language is. In both instances the explanations provided were more complex than those previously given and accepted.
Compounding the problems caused by the disunity within the profession and related fields during the latter part of the sixties was the changing mood of the nation itself. Some leaders began to talk in terms of disengaging from the entangling array of international commitments in which the country had become involved. The concern of the people shifted to social problems, and student interest reflected this changing concern. Enrollments in the behavioral and social sciences skyrocketed as young people sought courses they felt were relevant to their interests in social change. Along with this movement toward social sciences in the curriculum arose a mounting criticism of, and attack on, the practice of having required courses. In many schools and colleges, the language requirement, which had been restored in the fifties and sixties, was once again being discarded.
Whatever the causes, the evidence was quite clear that the drive begun in the early fifties and continued into the sixties had lost much of its force by the late sixties. Modern-language teachers were no longer confident in their methodology or sure of their objectives. Enrollments were declining. In fact, the percent of change in foreign-language enrollment between 1965 and 1968 was a plus 5.7 percent, but the total school enrollment rose 7.0 percent (Kant, 1970, p. 411). Of course, part of this figure can be explained by the fact that the numbers of Latin students continued to decline, but the percentage of students studying a modern language increased only 1.3 percent between 1965 and 1968 (Kant, 1970, p. 403). This was a much lower increase than at any time since the early fifties. In the universities and colleges, the increase was also
less, 14.4 percent from 1965 to 1968 (Kant, 1969, p. 259). At the graduate level, the increase for the same three-year period was 3.2 percent (Kant, 1969, p. 248).
Perspectives 29
PROTEST TO PARTICIPATION: LATE SIXTIES TO THE PRESENT