vb

Table 9.--Estimated standard errors (in Carnegie units) of means presented in table 7.

Race/ethnicity Test score quartile Planned college degree
AL
Language students American Asian or Less
Male Feaale Hispanic White Black = Indian or Pacific lowest Middle Highest than BS = Advanced
Alaskan Native Islander two BS degree
All students

All languages 0.03 0.04 0.06 0.06 0.06 © 0.05 0.12 0.07 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.04
Spanish +03 +04 +03 +07 +03 +05 +16 +09 +04 +04 +0306 +04
Prench +05 +06 +05 +07 +05 +07 +30 +18 +06 +05 +05 = 05 +06
German +08 07 +10 +19 07 45 (*) 45 +24 +09 +1000 +13
Latin +06 +09 +08 +26 +06 +12 (*) +13 “19 +07 +09 +08
Italian +16 +20 +16 49 17 «*) (*) «) +64 +30 +270 424 +25
Other " 15 +13 +29 +13 *) *) (*) +20 +15 +19 «20 +16
ALL languages +06 +05 +04 a +04 +07 (*) +09 +10 +04 +06 +05 046 +05
Spanish +03 +05 +06 +13 +03 07 () +06 +09 +04 +05 +05 05 +06
French +05 07 +06 +10 +05 +10 (*) 15 +14 +07 +05 +09 406 +06
German +09 +09 +12 +32 +10 +51 (*) +60 (*) +16 a +190 £16 +15
latin +06 +10 +07 +30 +06 +12 () +15 (*) +10 +06 4 +08
Italian +7 +22 8 (*) +22 (*) a) (*) «*) +20 oo +39 +30 +27
Other +10 13 +20 (*) +13 (*) (*) (*) (*) +26 “17 +3822 “17

*Sample is inadequate for estimating standard error using the “PROC BRRVAR" program.

FTAVIIVAY’ AdOD 1838


Enrollment in Foreign Language Courses

Forty-seven percent of 1980 sophomores who were attending high school sy
spring 1982 took some foreign language courses during high school (table 3).

The most popular language was Spanish (taken by 28 percent of all students),
followed by French (16 percent), German (4.1 percent), Latin (3.4 percent), and
Italian (0.7 percent). ‘The mean number of Carnegie units earned by high school
students in a foreign language was 0.97 (or about 1 year).

More than 2 years of study of a foreign language is generally needed to
develop real proficiency. 1! Although a third year of instruction in at least
one of the three major foreign languages (i.e., Spanish, French, and German) was
available to 79 percent of the students (table 1), only 13 percent of all
students earned credits for more than 2 years of any foreign language during
their high school years (table 3).12 Of those students who did take sone
foreign language courses, only 28 percent persisted beyond the second year--13
percent of non-academic and 38 percent of academic program foreign language
students. Among academic program students who studied foreign languages, a
lower percentage continued to advanced levels of Latin (14 percent) than of
Spanish (26 percent), French (31 percent), or German (42 percent).

Characteristics of Students Who Take Foreign Language Courses

School-Level Variables. Students were much more likely to have taken a
foreign language if they attended private rather than public schools (74 vs.
43 percent=-table 4). For academic program students, the corresponding private
and public school figures were 84 and 70 percent, respectively. Public school
students were more likely to have taken a foreign language if they attended:

° schools located in the Northeast or West rather than the North Central or
South (53 and 50 percent vs. 39 and 36 percent, respectively);

schools located in suburban or urban rather than rural communities

(47 and 46 percent vs. 36 percent);

© large or medium size rather than small schools (49 and 45 vs. 29 percent).

About 6 percent of all students earned credit in more than one foreign language.
They were most likely to have done so if they attended a private school
(11 percent) or a public school (10 percent) in the Northeast.

Some fairly large differences also existed in the amount of coursework
taken by students of foreign languages. The mean number of credits they earned
in foreign languages was 2.6 for private schools and 2.0 for public schools
(table 5). Also, students of foreign languages, on the average, earned more
eredits if they attendec a public schoo] in the Northeast rather than one in any
other region of the country (2.6 vs. about 1.8 units).

Estimates are based on information contained on high school transcripts
collected in fall 1982.

l1see “Foreign Languages in the American School" by S. Frederick Starr in
President's Commission on Foreign Language and International Studies:
Background Papers and Studies, November 1979.

12some students, of course, start foreign language study before 9th grade.
The percentage of students who took the third year of any foreign language,

however, is essentially the same as the percentage who earned more than 2
credits during the high school years (14 vs. 13 percent).

BEST COPY AVAILABLE


°

TISYIIVAY AdOD i834

Table 6.—Percentage of students who took a foreign language during hich school, by student's sex, race/ethnicity,

test performance, planned college degree, and language: C s of 1962
Sex Race/ethnicity! Test score quartile? Planned college degree?
au ~ ~
Langue pe students American Asian or less
Male Female Hispanic White Black = Indian or Pacific Lowest Middle Highest ‘Than BS Advanced
Alaskan Native Islander two BS degree
All students
Any foreign lanyjuage 47 38 54 38 49 37 23 69 21 a 2 3 67 R
:
Spaniah 28 23 32 30 28 25 4 38 15 28 38 1s 40 39
French 16 " 19 9 v7 1" 7 28 6 13 28 9 22 27
German 4 ‘ 4 1 5 1 2 8 1 4 8 3 6 7
Latin 3 3 4 1 4 2 1 4 1 2 7 1 5 8
Italien 1 1 1 ° 1 0 0 o 3 1 1 1 1 1
Other 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 9 1 1 1 1 1 1
More than ome language 6 4 7 4 6 3 2 19 2 4 10 3 8 "
Sample size
(students) 12,915 6,424 6,491 2,667 7,882—1,.720 185 346 2,278 5,460 3,368 5,850 3,007 +2, 640
Any foreign Lamguage 2 66 79 64 5 58 53 86 42 69 a1 55 9 a2
5
Spanish 40 37 “ 49 39 ay 27 a7 29 43 a 33 46 42
French 27 21 32 16 29 7 18 34 " 22 34 18 29 32
German 7 8 6 2 8 2 6 1" 2 5 9 4 6 9
latia 7 6 8 3 8 3 2 7 3 5 9 3 6 "
Ttalian 1 1 1 2 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1
Other 1 2 1 1 1 1 6 13 2 1 1 2 1 1
Hore than one language 11 8 13 8 " 6 5 25 6 8 13 7 10 ry
Sample siz
(students) 5,565 2,768 2,797 841 3,747 v2 44 202 376 2,087 2,474 1,302 1,871 1,924

‘students were classified as Hispanic if they indicated their origin or descent was Hispanic or Spanish.

classified by race.

‘The remaining students then were

2Students were classified on the basis of their composite score on the 1980 High School and Beyond verbal and mathematics tests.
Sstudents were classified on the basis of their answers in 1980 to the question, “As things stand now, how far in school do you think you will get?"
‘4identification of academic program students is based on students’ own reports in 1980.

NOTES:

All estimates are based on computation using weights that make adjustments for instrument nonresponse and unequal probabilities of sample

Instructions for the computation of standard errors of the estimates are given in the technical notes.

to



L

TIGVTIVAY AdO9 1839

Table 4.--Percentage of students who took a foreign language during high school, by school control and language, and for public
Class of 1962

schools, by region, community type, and size:

Public schools

Region Community type! School size?
an Private all
Language schools  schoola — public
schools Worth- North
east Central South West Urban Suburban Rural Small Medium Large
411 students

Any foreign language 47 2) 4a 53 39 36 50 46 47 36 29 45 49
Spanish 28 42 26 29 23 22 34 30 27 22 18 26 32
French 16 26 14 21 " 13 13 13 16 12 10 15 15
German 4 5 4 4 5 2 5 4 s 3 1 5 5
latin 3 9 3 6 2 2 1 2 3 3 1 3 2
Italian 1 2 1 2 0 0 0 1 1 0 ° 1 1
Other 1 2 1 1 1 o 2 1 1 0 ry 1 1
More than one language 6 " s 10 4 3 4 5 6 4 2 5 6

Sample size
(students) 12,915 3,06 9,809 2,051 2,662 2,988 2,108 2,275 4, 549 2,985 1,439 5,631 2,006

Academic program students?

Any foreign language 72 84 70 78 63 63 78 n R 65 53 Rn 3
Spanish 40 45 39 39 36 3749 42 39 38 28 39 a7
French 27 32 25 34 19 25 2 22 27 25 24 as 26
German 7 5 7 6 10 4 10 7 9 4 1 9 7
Latin 7 " 6 W 6 4 2 5 6 7 3 7 s
Italian 1 2 1 3 ° rt ° 2 1 ° 0 1 1
Other 1 2 1 1 1 0 3 2 1 1 ° 1 z
More than one language 11 14 10 16 7 7 8 8 uw 9 4 10 13

Sample size
(students) 5,565 2,177 2, 388 917 873 340658 798 1,700 890 386 2,049 737

‘suburban schools are those located in Bureau of thu Census Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas (SMSA's) but not in their central cities;

rural schools are those not located in SMSA
2saall schools were defined to be those with 150 or fewer 1980 sophosor:
3identification of academic program students is based on students’ om reports in 1960.

+ large schools as those with over 600.

NOTES: All estimates are based on computation using weights that make adjustments for instrument nonresponse and unequal probabilities of
Instructions for the computation of standard errors of the

sample selection.

timates are given in the technical notes-


TV UWAY AdO9 1838

Table 3.--Percentage distribution of students, by number of Carnegie units earned in foreign languages, mean number of
wits earned, and percentage of foreign language students who earned more than 2 units in the language studied, by
Language and high school program: Class of 1982

Number of Carnegie units earnea! Mean Percentage of

number of students taking
Language Total Carnegie foreign language
None 0.5 or 0.5 1 WS 2 2.5 or units courses who earned

mort more earned! over 2 units

Any foreign language 100 53.4 (46.6) 2.5 13.1 0.97 26
Spanish 100 72.1 (27.9) 17 5.5 St 20
French 100 Bt.4 (15.6) 0.9 3.6 +30 23
German 100 95.9 (4.1) 0.3 12 09 29
Latin 100 96.6 (3.4) 0.3 0.4 +05 12
Italian 100 99.3 (Q.7) 0.0 0.2 +02 @)
Other 100 99.1 (0.9) 0.2 0.1 +01 (7)

Any foreign language 100 (30.1) 3.1 4c 49 13
‘Spanish 100 (19.8) 2.0 2.4 eal 12
French 100 (8.4) 1 0.6 12 7
German 100 (2.4) 0.3 0.3 +04 12
Latin 100 (1.0) 0.2 0.0 01 (?)
Italian 100 (0.4) 0.0 O.1 01 (2)
Other 100 (0.5) 0.2 0.0 +01 ()

Any foveign language 100 27.6 (72.4) 5 27.2 1.73 38
Spanish 100 59.6 (40.4) 2 10.4 +83 26
French 100 73.2 (26.8) 0.6 8.3 +58 3
German 100 93.3 (6.7) 0.2 2.8 +16 42
Latin 100 92.9 (7.1) 0.4 1.0 2 4
Italian 100 99.3 (0.7) 0.0 0.2 +03 ()
Other 100 98.6 (1.4) 0.3 0.2 +02 @)

Vestimates are based on transcripts for 12,915 students--6,994 nonacademic program students, 5,565 academic program students, and
356 not classified Ly program. ne Carnegie unit equals 1 year of study.

sample size is too small to estimate with sufficient precision.

identification of academic program students is based on students’ om reports in 1980.

NOTES: Details may not add to totals due to rounding. All estimates are based o1 computation using weights that make adjustments for
instrument nonresponse and unequal probabilities of sample selection. Instructions for the computation of standard errors of
the estimates are given in the technical notes.

G


Student-level variabl Foreign language enrollment varied considerably
by high school curriculum, sex, race/ethnicity, performance on cognitive tests,
and the amount of postsecondary education planned.

° Academic program students were more likely than nonacademic program
students to have taken a foreign language (72 vs. 30 percent--table 3);

° More female than male students took a foreign language (54 vs. 38 percent--
table 6);

© Relatively more Asian and white students than Hispanic, black, and
American-Indian students took a foreign language (69 and 49 vs. 38, 37, and
23 percent, respectively);

° The rate of foreign language enrollment varied considerably with how well
che student scored on the HS&B cognitive tests--from 21 percent for those
who scored in the lowest quartile to 72 percent for those who scored in the
highest quartile;

° About 72 percent of students who planned to obtain an advanced college
degree had taken a foreign language, as compared with 67 percent of those
who planned <9 obtain a 4-year degree and only 31 percent of all other
students, including those who did not plan to go to college at all.

Corresponding patterns of subgroups' differences also were observed for
enrollment in more than one foreign language. The percentage of Asians who
earned credits in two or more foreign languages was particularly high (19
Percent vs. 6 percent for whites).

The gaps among subgroups of students become even wider in most instances
when the amount of coursework taken by foreign language students is considered.
For example, foreign language students earned more Carnegie units in foreign
language courses if they:

° were in an academic program than if they were not (2.4 vs. 1.6 units--
table 7); 13

° were Asian or white rather than Hispanic, black, or American-Indian (2.5
and 2.2 units vs. 1.9, 1.7, and 1.8 units);

° were in the top rather than the bottom test score quartile (2.4 vs. 1.5
units).

Spata for nonacademic program students are available but are not shown in
tables 5 or 7.

T COPY AVAILABLE


. Hee Ae 3. LINN AINE TG, COMPLETZD

“ vA Gy / vi / 5

ullle ki

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION ah SA DER NB

Contact: David A. Sweet ! July 1984
(202)254-7230

Foreign Language Education in American High Schools

Foreign language instruction was widely available in U.S. high schools in
the early 1980's, but the majority of academic program students were not required
to take any foreign language courses in order to graduate. Furthermore, few2r
than one-half of all students chose (or were required) to take any foreign
language <ourses. Of those who did take some courses, only about one-quarter (28
percent) took the amount (more than 2 years) generally considered necessary to
develop proficiency in a foreign language.

In its 1979 report, the President's Commission on Foreign Language and
International Studies declared that "our gross national inadequacy in foreign
language skills has become a serious and growing liability" that undermines the
ability of the United States to communicate and compete economically with other
nations,' The National Commission on Excellence in Education stated that
"study of a foreign language introduces students to non-English speaking
cultures, heightens awareness and comprehension of one's native tongue, and
serves the Nation's needs in commerce, diplomacy, defense, and education." It
strongly recommended for the college-bound "2 years of foreign language in high
school . . . in addition to those taken earlier."2

The purpose of this bulletin is to present informat'>n on foreign language
education in U.S. high schools with regard to availability (table 1), graduation
requirem 1ts (table 2), amount of instruction taken (table 3), and character-
istics of schools and students (tables 4 and 5). The estimates presented here
were derived from data collected in NCES' longitudinal study, High School and
Beyond (HS&B). The statistics in tables 1 and 2 are based on information
provided by school principals or other administrators for a national probability
sample of about 1,000 public and private high schools. The estimates in table 3,
4 and 5 were derived fran information contained on the transcripts obtained in
fall 1982 for a probability sample of about 13,000 of these schools' 1980
sophomores who were still attending high school in spring 1982.3
The President's Commission on Foreign Language and International Studies,
Strength Through Wisdom: A Critique of U.S. Capability, U. S. Government
Printing Office, November, 1979.

2u. s. Department of Education, the National Commission on Excellence in
Education, A Nation at Risk: Th Tmperative for Educational Reform, U. S.
Governmerit Printing Office, Apri., 1983.

3Early graduates and high school dropouts were excluded from the analysis.

+ = NCES 84-212b


Technical Notes

Classification of courses

All courses in each transcript were assigned a 6-digit code based on A
Classification of Secondary School Courses (CSSC), developed under contract with
NCES, July 1982. ‘The number of credits earned in each course was expressed in
Carnegie units. (A Carnegie unit requires a minimum of 200 minutes for a
regular class and 275 minutes for a lab class per week for 36 weeks. Some
schools, however, may require more time for credit.) This bulletin included all
courses assigned a foreign language code except for those identified as
“multiple emphasis," which are primarily "English as a second language" courses.

Standard errors

The approximate standard errors of estimated percentages (p) presented in
this bulletin may be estimated from the formula s.e.(p) = D[p(100-p)/n] 1/2,
where n is the realized sample size and D is a factor that adjusts the estimates
for departures of the actual sample from a simple random sample. For estimates
based on school questionnaire responses (tables 1 and 2), D is approximately
equal to 1.6 for all students, 1.8 for academic program students, and 1.9 for
nonacademic program students. For estimates based on transcript data (tables 3,
4, and 5), D is approximately equal to 2.0.

These values of D generally will produce conservative estimates of standard
errors for subgroups of schools and students, with one major exception. The
standard error estimates obtained by this procedure for private schools should
be increased by about 50 percent because of the great diversity of private
schools and the relatively large variation among private schools in sample
selection probabilities.

The standard errors of the estimated means presented in tables 5 and 7 are
given in tables 8 and 9, respectively. It should be noted that the standard
error reflects primarily the imprecision of the estimate due to sampling. The
standard error does not include the effects of any biases due to nonresponse,
measurement error, processing error, or other systematic errors that would occur
even in a complete survey or census.

All group differences cited in the text are statistically significant at
the .01 level.

For More Information

For more information about this bulletin, contact William B. Fetters or
Jeffrey A. Owings, Division of Multilevel Education Statistics, National Center
for Education Statistics, (Brown Building, Room 609), 400 Maryland Avenue SW.,
Washington, D.C. 20202, telephone (202) 254-7361.

For information about High School and Beyond, contact David A. Sweet at the
same address, telephone (202) 254-7230.

2 BEST COPY AVAILABLE


TIGVIWAY AdGd 1838

Table 7.--Hean number of foreign language units earned by foreign language students, by sex, race/ethnicity, test score quartile, planned
college degree, and language: Class of 1982

Sex Race/ethnicity! Test score quartile? Planned college degree”
all ~
Language students American Asian or lass
hale Female Hispanic White Black Indian or Pacific Lowest Middle Highest than BS Advanced
Alaskan Native Islander two Bs der cee
AlL students
Any foreign F
language 2.09 2.02 2.15 1.92 2.15 1.68 1.80 2.49 1.50 1.87 241 1.72' 2.19 2.43
Spaniah 1.84 1,80 1.87 1.82 1.87 1.62 1.58 1.97 1.40 1.74 2.05 1.58% 1.97 2.06
French 1.93 1.90 1.94 1.51 2.00 1.45 1.79 1.94 1.24 1.63 2.25 1.53 1.98 2.23
German 2.08 1.94 2.21 1.38 241 1.86 2.13 2.20 1.67 1.82 2.29 1.72 2.10 2.31
Latin 1.56 1.70 1.48 7.66 1.57 1.27 1.00 1.27 1.27 1.41 1.62 41 1.52 1.65
Italian 2.14 1.81 2.35 2.05 2.18 1.06 e) ©) 2.04 2.05 2.31 2.05 2.24 2.20
Other 1.25 1.20 1.30 +95 1.19 +87 +90 1.94 +80 1.29 1.26 1.19 1.18 1.35
Any foreign
language 2.40 2.25 2.51 2.31 2.43 1.91 2.16 2.75 1.68 2.12 2.57 2.05 2.35 2.57
Spanieh 2.06 2.15 2.17 2.08 3.81 1.92 2.15 1.55 1.92 2.17 1.80 21 2.15
French 2.18 2.21 1.81 2.23 1.64 2.25 2.28 1.32 1.86 2.37 1.88 2.11 2.35
German 2.35 2.54 1.75 2.37 2.10 3.16 2.21 1.89 2.39 2.32 2.06 2.32 2.46
Latin 1.66 1.60 1.79 1.65 1.26 1.00 1.29 1.30 1.47 71 1.51 1.59 1.69
Italian 2.23 2.34 2.10, 2.29 1.06 ey ©) 1.42 2.12 2.28 1.96 2.36 2.25
Other 1.24 1.50 +58 1.19 1.20 +50 1.92 +57 1.34 1.30 1.29 1.20 1.30
Istudents were classified as Hispanic if they indicated their origin or descent was Hispanic or Spanish. The remaining students then were
classified by rac
2students were classified on the basis of their composite score on the 1980 High School and Beyond verbal and mathematics tests.
3students were classified on the basis of their answers in 1980 to the question, “As things stand row, how far in school do you think you will get?"
4vigures tend to be higher than those for individual languages because some students took courses in more than one language.
Sot taken by any students in the sample.
Identification of academic program students is based on students’ own reports in 1980.
NOTES: Details may not add to totals because of rounding. Instructions for the computation of standard errors of the estimates are given in the technical
notes. Standard errors of the estimates contained in this table are given in table 9, and sample sizes are given in table 6.

Cl


Table 5.--Mean number of foreign language units earned by foreign language students, by school control and language, and for public schools, by
region, comunity type, and class size: Class of 1962

Public schools

Region community type! School size?
al. Private AL
Language schools — schools public
schools North- North
east Central South West Urban Suburban Rural = Small Medium Large
ALL
Any foreign language? 2.09 2.57 2.00 2.57 1.87 1.68 1.82 1.89 2.09 1.89 1.76 2.03 2.03
Spanish 1.84 2.25 1.76 2.15 1.67 1.56 1.68 172 1.82 1.68 1.56 1.78 1.61
French 1.93 2.41 1.82 2.20 1.78 1452 1.65 1.67 1.90 1.75 1.82 1.83 1.80
German 2.08 2.40 2.03 2.37 2.03 1.68 «1,91 1.97 2.14 1.86 1.61 2.15 1.04
Latin 1.56 1.62 1.53 1.259 1.28 1.55 w71 1.52 1.47 1.68 © 1.60 1.38
Italian 2.14 2.60 1.97 1.22 1.00 1.00 1.67 2.08 2.72 (4) 1.94 1.83
Other 1.25 112 1.30 +95 +77 149 +04 1.60 1.00 1.88 1.16 1.18
Academic program students>

Any foreign language? 2.40 2.77 2.29 2.77 2419 1,92 2.10 2.09 2.43 2.17 2.09 2.32 2.29
Spanish 2.06 2.40 1.97 2.32 1.85 1.80 1.84 1.85 2.08 1.85 1.88 © 1.97 1.99
French 2.18 2.55 2.06 2.34 2.11 1.66 2.07 1.89 2.16 2.00 1.98 Ps 2.00
German 2.35 2.62 2.30 2.60 2.42 1.76 2.12 2.17 2.40 2.10 2.11 2.02
Latin 1.66 1.64 1.67 1.88 1.38 1.30 1.79 1.84 1.62 1.55 1.89 1.40
Italian 2.23 2.58 2.06 2.20 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.63 2.31 “ 4) 1.65
Other 1.24 1.21 1.26 1.38 1.01 +85 1.48 +08 1.64 1.06 2.00 +25

‘suburban schools a-= those located in Bureau of the Census Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas (SMSA‘s) but not in cheir central cities;
rural schools are those not located in SMSA's.

2gmall schocls were defined to be those with 150 or fewer 1980 sophomores, lerge schools as those with over 600.

3pigures tend to be higher than those for individual languages because some students took courses in more than one language.

4not taken by any students in the sample.

Stdentification of academic program students is based on students’ own reports in 198J.

NOTES: Details may ~ot add to totals because of rounding. Instructions for the computation of standard errors of the estimates are given ip the
technical notes. Standard errors of the estimates contained in this table are given in table 8, and sample sizes are g\ven in table 4.

y



TIQYHWAW AdOO L838

Tabie 2.--Percentage of students who enrolled in high schools with various graduation requirements for academic provvam students, by school
control and course required, and for public schools, by region, community type and size: Class of 1982

Public schools

Region Community type? School size?
Semester-length aL Private = Al
courses required schools schools public
schools Worth- North
east Central South West Urban Suburban Rural Small Medium Large
All _students
Total 100 100 100 100 100 100 = 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
Wone 64 rT] 68 56 n ” 54 54 69 4 n 67 63
1 1 0 2 1 0 2 4 3 0 3 2 2 2
2 12 19 12 20 5 13 9 16 "W 10 12 " 12
3 2 4 1 3 2 1 1 0 3 1 0 2 3
‘4 7 3 15 18 13 9 28 24 15 " 8 7 7
5S or more 4 15 2 3 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 2 3
1 or more (36) (69) (32) (44) (23) (26) (46) (46) an) (26) (23) (33) (37)
Total 100 100 100 100 100 100 = 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

None 58 26 65 59 1s 67 53 49 69 69 66 so
1 1 0 2 1 1 2 4 3 4 2 2 2
2 13 16 13 18 6 16 40 19 12 16 " 4
3 2 6 2 2 2 1 1 0 1 0 2 3
4 19 33 16 7 14 12 27 25 " 10 7 18
5 or more 6 20 3 3 3 2 4 3 3 3 2 4
1 or more (42) (74) 35) (41) (25) (33) (47) (51) (32) (31) (3) (34) (41)
Sample size (schools) 816 101 5 142 204 219° 150 176 334 205 103 404 152

‘suburban schools are those located in Bureau of the Census Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas (SMSA's) but not in their central cities;
rural schools are those not located in SSA's.

small echools were defined to be those with 150 or fewer 1980 sophomores, large schools as those with over 600.

identification of academic program students is based on students’ own reports in 1980.

NOTES: Details may not add to totals because of rounding. All estimates are based on computation using weights that make adjustments for
instrument nonresponse and unequal probabilities of sample selection. Instructions for the computation of standard errors of the
estimates are given in the technical notes.



25
=

22

Sie Wz

he
a
ing

lo

tas
cus |

20

je

ll
l

is

ba

1.25



Table 1.--Percentage of students enrolled in high schools offering selected foreign language courses, by school control and course, and
for public schools, by region, community type and size: Class of 1962

Public schools

Course taught Region Community type! School size?
in school as a al Private Evey
separate course schools schools — public

schools Morth- Worth

east} Central south West Urban Suburban Rural small Medium Large

All students

3rd-year Spinish 72 n 2 85 TM 57 83 87 @2 50 30 n 92
3rd-year French 65 3 6 87 59 53 68 16 ” “ 23 68 87
3rd-year German 39 37 39 a7 44 23 5S 48 52 7 4 a 61
Any of above 79 83 78 93 81 63 85 89 87 60 “ a 95
Only one of above 16 8 7 13 22 15 15 12 15 a 32 15 8
Two of above 29 48 26 35 23 28 18 32 23 27 13 30 29
All three of above ety a7 35 45 36 20 st “ 46 " ° 37 se
Russian s 4 5 10 3 4 3 7 5 3 2 5 8
- 4
rogram
3rd-year Spanish 19 78 79 89 8s 92 86 57 39 a1 96
3rd-year French 73 7 72 1 3 83 80 52 a + 93
3rd-year German 46 al 47 Sa 62 55 59 20 5 ‘oe 69
Any of above a“ 6 a a 87 4 90 67 “ 3s 98
Only one of above 13 cy “4 W 12 10 12 2 35 12 5
Two of above nN a7 27 33 15 32 23 3 20 29 26
All three of above a 3” “a 52 59 52 55 16 o “ 66
Russian 6 5 6 12 3 3 4 8 7 3 3 5 "
Sample size (schools) 951 118 833 167 231 260 175 209 375 249 128 468 188

‘suburban schools are those located in Bureau of the Census Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA's) but not in their central cities;
rural schools are those not located in SMSA
2gmall schools were defined to be those with 150 or fewer 1980 sophomores, large schools as those with over 600.
3identification of academic program students is based on students’ own reports in 1980.

NOTES: All estimates are based on computation using weights that make adjustments for instrument nonresponse and unequal probabilities of
sample selection. Instructions for the computation of standard errors of the estimates are given in the technical notes.

ro)


Access to Foreign Language Instruction

Schools offering at least 3 years of foreign language instruction enrolled
the large majority of American high school students in the early 1980's--schools
offering third-year Spanish enrolled 72 percent of all students, third-year
French 65 percent, and third-year German 39 percent (table 1). At least one of
these three languages was available to 79 percent of the students and all three
to 34 percent. 4 In public schools, the opportunity for students to take a
third year of one of the three languages generally was greater in:

e schools in the Northeast region of the country than schools in
the South (93 vs. 63 percent);

° urban and suburban schools than rural schools (about 88 vs.
60 percent) ;© and

° large schools than small schools (95 vs. 44 percent).7

Russian was available to only 5 percent of all students nationwide--to 10 per-

cent of public school students in the Northeast and about 3 percent of public
school students elsewhere.

Graduation Requirements for Academic Program Students

About 58 percent of 1980 academic program sophomores attended schools® in
1980 that had no foreign language graduation requirement in 1982 for academic
program students (table 2).? About 14 percent attended schools that required
1 or 2 semester-length courses (1 + 13 percent), 21 percent attended schools
that required 3 or 4 semesters (2 + 19 percent), and 6 percent attended schools
that required 5 or more semesters. About three fourths (74 percent) of the
academic program students attending private schools were required to take some
foreign language, bat only about one-third (35 percent) of those attending
public schools were required to do so. Almost one-half (47 percent) of the
academic program students in the West attended schools with foreign language
graduation requirements vs. only one-fourth (25 percent) of those in the North
Central region.

SSETEEENITEETEEPEEEEreEEE
Estimates are based on the schools that had a 12th as well as a 10th grade in

1980.

5all differences cited in the text are statistically significant at the .01
level.

®suburban schools are those located in Bureau of the Census Standard
Metropolitan Statistical Areas (SMSA's) but not in their central cities; rural
schools are those not located in SMSA's.

7small schools were defined to be those with 150 or fewer 1980 sophomores,
large schools as those with over 600

Sgstimates are based on schools that had a 10th grade in 1980 and a 12th
grade in 1982.

%rdentification of academic program students is based on students' own
reports in 1980. Data for nonacademic program students are available but
are not shown separately in most of the tables in this bulletin.


€L

TOVUYAY AdO9 L839

Table 8.--Zstimated standard errors (in Carnegie mits) of means presented in table 5.

Public schools

Region Community type School size
AL Private Al
Language schools schools — public.
schools Worth- North
st = Central South West. Urban Suburban Fural Small Medium Large
All students

All languages 0.03 0.08 0.03 0.09 0.04 0,030.04 0.04 0.06 0.05 0.07 0.04 0.06
Spanish +03 +06 +03 +06 +04 +04 = 606 +04 +04 +04 +07 +04
French +05 +05 +05 +09 +05 +0708 +09 +07 +07 +12 +07
German +08 +13 +08 +16 +12 “17.09 +20 +10 +12 ot +10
Latin +06 +06 +08 +12 +17 “M34 19 +18 +13 “17 +12
Italian +16 +19 19 +23 «*) my 8) +18 +33 ~ () +29
other at +16 +14 +23 (*) wm) 0) +36 15 *) ) +13

Academic program studen’

All languages +04 +09 +04 +09 +05 +04 04 +05 +06 +06 +08 +05 +07
Spanish +03 +06 +03 +07 +07 +05 07 +04 +05 +06 +12 +04 +06
French +05 +05 +06 +08 +09 +08 10 +10 +08 +07 +16 +08 at
German +09 +19 mM +17 +16 +180 .24 +23 a “17 +57 ar +23
Latin +06 +05 +08 +12 +15 +1400 .34 19 +15 +15 +33 +10 +18
Italian 17 +27 +26 +26 “*) (wy) *) 14 +38 «) «) +39 +24
Other +10 +16 14 +32 *) a) 8) +38 +16 (oy ) 14 +34

*sample is inadequate for estimating standard error using the “PROC BRRVAR" program.

(es)