Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1944-11-19
Army Methodof Teaching
Speeds Language Mastery
BY Clarke Siade

do, and quite another to teach one in
public high school, but really
frank teachers admit that our Ian
guage teaching all over the country
has been on the skids for long
time and that something needs tc
be done They say ability to speak a
language fluently and correctly
with proper accent and infection
Is almost nonexistent after three
years or more of study. even among
able students. This is because read
ing and translation are held to be
/ higher goals than speaking, and
grammar to be the proper vehicle
for learning them: reading is the
Key to foreign literature and culture
Present Methods Hit.
But say the more candid teach
ers everywhere, why can't we teach
both reading and speaking? Is il
because the reading of a foreign
language is easier for us to teach
because our meager. uneconomical
results don't worry us?" The really
cauStic teachers go further. They
say that language supervisors can
not see beyond the ends of their
noses or that school administrators
are more interested in a smoothly
functionlng organization than in
struction. But let these pass.
Present methods are indicated on
three counts: With able students our
results are not what they could be:
to students whose native ability may
be equally good in other fields, but
not as good in language-ability, in
struction with grammar as a core is
simply so much fog; and, finally
whatever speaking ability does result
is too costly because we are paying
trained teacher to talk, when a
slightly trained drillmaster could
talk equally we'll and allow the
teacher to teach
But the traditionalists are not to
nave their grammar books snatched
from them without fight. They
criticize the Army methods as tenn
porary, a fad; they ask where the
supply OF drillmasters is coming
from; they talk about the weakening
OF standards of academic prepare
ton for teaching if unframed drill
masters are used; they say small
classes are too expensive for public
schools; and, while they may admit
that students learn to speak from
instruction like this, they question
the ability to read.
"Dissenters Never Popular.
But the attackers come right back
at them. They say dissenters never
are popular with the vested inter-
ests anyway; that drillmasters can
be foreign exchange students earn
ing part of their university tuition
or simply foreign-born housewives
working part time; that any talk OF
standards in the teaching profession
is merely defense of teachers en-.
trenched privilege, bound by tenue
laws; that if the cost per student
to the Army was less than the cost
per student to a large Eastern uni
versity using traditional instruction
there is no reason why the new
methods should not cost high schools
less than the old ways, and that
the Commission on Trends in Edu-
cation of the Modern Language AS
ISOLATION reports, silent reading
ability, while it was not an an
nounced objective of the program
undoubtedly was generally acquired
to a very appreciate extent"
The most qualified observers be-
lieve the new methods have great
possibilities if the limitations of
schools and the limitations of the
new methods can be reconclled with
more light and less heat. The drill
classes must be kept under 10; be-
You'd that the amount of practice
per student become too diluted. The
grammar classes have practically no
limit in size; they are essentially
lectures anyhow. At present the
drillpaster is indispensable to the
new method: the moment grammar
and conversation are combined in
one person, grammar wins out. The
yer. intensiveness and short span
of time in teaching are part of its
force; possibly language teaching
should be delayed until the senior
year, until other subjects have been
worked off in prior years, until q
student knows whether he needs
or wants to study a foreign Ian
guage or not, and until larger units
o. time in a single year could be
made available. The total time
need not be greater, but it may need
to be compressed more.
But the first decision is not the
language teachers. It belongs to
the students, their parents, and the
taxpayers the country over. Which
kind of language instruction do we
want? The answer to this is our
mandate to schools. ]