Through the Learners' Eyes: Reconceptualizing the Heritage and Non-Heritage Learner of the Less Commonly Taught Languages

Abstract: This study investigates how learners of the less commonly taught languages (LCTLs) (i.e., Arabic, Chinese, Hebrew, Hindi, Hungarian, Japanese, Korean, Polish, Russian, Swahili, Yoruba) perceive their identities as heritage or non-heritage language learners. A survey of 530 college-level language learners reveals that heritage and non-heritage learner identities are constructed in relationship to others and are perceived to be multifaceted and fluid. The data empirically validate the complexity of learner characteristics involved in the identification process of heritage and non-heritage learners and suggest that these two categories may not be mutually exclusive. This article proposes a reconceptualized framework representing the various profiles of learners of the LCTLs including those learners who see themselves as having characteristics of both a heritage and non-heritage learner. Key words: heritage language learner, LCTL (less commonly taught language), learner perspectives, non-heritage language learner, postsecondary foreign language instruction Language: Arabic, Chinese, Hebrew, Hindi, Hungarian, Japanese, Korean, Polish, Russian, Swahili, Yoruba Introduction According to the U.S. Census Bureau, there are over 329 different languages spoken in the United States today. The multilingualism of our country has mainly relied on the constant influx of foreign native speakers of the languages rather than on the language ability of our U.S.-born population. Research on language use patterns of immigrant groups has documented that by the third generation or possibly sooner, most groups experience a shift to English monolingualism (Fishman, 2001a; Kloss, 1998; Veltman, 1983; Wong-Fillmore, 1991). The benefits and value of fostering and maintaining our country's linguistic wealth range from psychological well-being of linguistic minority individuals to the critical need for proficient multilinguals in the global business and national security sectors (Brecht & Ingold, 1998; Brecht & Rivers, 2000; Fishman, 2001a; Skutnabb-Kangas, 1999). Fishman stated, "we desperately need competence in languages . our huge and varied heritage language resources have a definite role to play in achieving such competence" (2001b, p. 95). Thus, our nation needs to look more closely at how we can creatively and strategically tap into the heritage language communities to promote intergenerational transmission of heritage languages. Language maintenance has generally been left as the sole responsibility of individual families; however, parental efforts alone are not powerful enough to reverse the unidirectional shift to English (Kloss, 1998). A glimmer of hope in promoting future generations of U.S.-born multilinguals lies in the changing faces of the student population in foreign language courses (Liskin-Gasparro, 1996). As universities broaden their range of foreign language offerings, English-dominant children from linguistic minority homes are voluntarily finding their ways into foreign language classrooms to (re)learn their heritage language (Gambhir, 2001; King, 1998). The growing number of heritage language learners has infused another layer of complexity in foreign language education. Increasingly, foreign language instructors are placed in a difficult position of having to accommodate instruction to meet the needs of both students who come to class with varying levels of oral and/or literacy skills and students who are true beginners (Peyton, Ranard, & McGinnis, 2001). Purpose of Study Researchers and educators use the labels of heritage and non-heritage learners as a basis for differentiated assessments, curricula, and instruction, despite the fact that the field lacks systematic studies that have investigated the differences between heritage and non-heritage learners across language programs (Kondo-Brown, 2003). What is clearly becoming a trend in foreign language programs in response to the perceived differing needs and proficiency levels between heritage and non-heritage learners is the implementation of two-track programs: one for heritage language speakers and the other for non-heritage language speakers. …