Should the Modern Language Aptitude Test Be Used to Determine Course Substitutions for and Waivers of the Foreign Language Requirement

Abstract: Colleges and universities often permit students classified as learning disabled (LD) and other students not classified as LD to substitute courses for or waive the foreign language requirement. The Modern Language Aptitude Test (MLAT) has become an increasingly popular assessment tool to determine which students can or cannot pass foreign language courses and to diagnose a "disability" for foreign language learning. However, the use of the MLAT for these purposes has both theoretical and psychometric problems. These problems include misusing the MLAT to diagnose a learning disability or to classify students with a disability for foreign language learning; using a single test score to recommend course substitutions and waivers; using outdated test norms; and misunderstanding of the foreign language aptitude concept. The authors conclude by describing appropriate and inappropriate uses of the MLAT. Key words: course substitutions, foreign language aptitude, foreign language requirement, foreign language waivers, MLAT Language: Relevant to all foreign languages Introduction For several years, colleges and universities have permitted students classified as learning disabled (LD), as well as other students not classified as LD, to substitute courses for or to waive the foreign language requirement (Shaw, 1999; Sparks & Javorsky, 1999a; Sparks, Philips, & Ganschow, 1996). Although there is limited data on the frequency with which course substitutions and waivers are used, two recent studies at one university found that the number of course substitutions for the foreign language requirement had increased by 300% over a 5-year period from 1995 to 2000 (Sparks, Philips, & Javorsky 2002, 2003). In a recently completed survey of 101 two- and four-year U.S. colleges and universities, Driscoll (2003) found that 76% of the institutions permitted students to substitute courses for the foreign language requirement and 19% allowed students to waive the requirement. In their 1989 survey of colleges and universities, Ganschow, Myer, and Roeger (1989) reported that only 25% had a formal petition policy for considering a student's request to substitute courses for or waive the foreign language requirement. However, Driscoll (2003) found that almost 60% of four-year colleges and universities in her more recent survey had a formal petition policy for their foreign language requirement. These findings suggest that most postsecondary institutions are addressing the issue of foreign language course substitutions and waivers and it is likely that the number of students who are substituting or waiving the foreign language requirement is still increasing. Although both 2- and 4-year postsecondary institutions by and large allow students to petition for course substitutions for or waivers from foreign language courses, the criteria that students must satisfy to have their petitions approved varies from institution to institution. Driscoll (2003) found that two thirds of the colleges and universities in her survey required a student to be classified as LD. In a smaller survey of colleges and universities, Smith (2002) reported that all of the respondents required documentation of a learning disability for a student's petition to be considered for approval. Recently, some secondary and postsecondary institutions (as well as individual diagnosticians) have begun to use the Modern Language Aptitude Test (MLAT) (Carroll & Sapon, 1959), a standardized foreign language aptitude test, as a diagnostic tool to determine whether a student should be required to take foreign language courses and to diagnose a "disability" for learning a foreign language. Reed and Stansfield (2004) suggested that the use of the MLAT for these purposes may be useful if adequate safeguards are used to protect the testing process and professionals use sound diagnostic judgment. However, in several studies Sparks and his colleagues have found that postsecondary institutions and individual diagnosticians have used the MLAT and its results inappropriately to classify a student as LD and subsequently recommend that the student be granted course substitutions for or waivers from the foreign language requirement (Sparks, Philips, Ganschow, & Javorsky, 1999a, 1999b; Sparks, Philips, & Javorsky, 2002, 2003). …