Study Abroad, Foreign Language Use, and the Communities Standard

Abstract

Although participation in multilingual communities around the world has been understood to be the raison d'être for foreign language study, the Communities standard has been portrayed as an extracurricular experience and more difficult to weave into instruction than the other standards. This article addresses two questions: (1) Does a study abroad experience facilitate meeting the Communities standard? and (2) How can collegiate foreign language curricula enhance the study abroad experience and fulfillment of the Communities standard? Current trends in study abroad participation by U.S. undergraduates and key research findings on study abroad related to the Communities standard are reviewed. Numerous recommendations for programmatic courses of action at home and abroad targeting a fuller consideration of the Communities standard in collegiate foreign language study are offered.

Identity and Language Learning in Study Abroad

“…For example, Jackson () described a program in which students are provided pre‐sojourn training in ethnographic techniques of analytic participant‐observation, and Kinginger () proposed a number of language‐based projects designed to facilitate students' interactions with their local hosts. In discussing study abroad in relation to the Communities Standard, Allen and Dupuy () outlined a number of related suggestions, from the use of telecollaborative courses and other social networking resources to link students with peers abroad before and after they go to explicit links between classroom and community in the study abroad curriculum.…”

Students' Perspectives on Communities‐Oriented Goals

“…In Julie's view, a TL community was not necessarily determined by social (TL use) practices, but rather by geography-a more traditional notion of what defines community (e.g., Thorne, 2007;contrast with Oguz et al, 2010). In other words, Julie (like many instructors in previous studies, e.g., ACTFL, 2011;Kadish, 2000;McAlpine, 2000;Willis Allen & Dupuy, 2012;Worth, 2006) envisioned a place where the majority of speakers of the language would be native speakers and imagined entering a group of German speakers abroad as the primary means to gain access to a TL community.…”

“…Results of a survey of 2,134 language educators showed that instructors found the Communities standard to be the hardest to integrate (ACTFL, 2011), primarily due to lack of training, professional development, and resources; the belief that TL communities were "nebulous" (p. 28) and out of their control; and the reality that taking students into the local community or abroad was not typically feasible. Other studies have also found that achieving the aims of the Communities standard (Sarroub & Moeller, 1999;Willis Allen & Dupuy, 2012) or the Communities and Connections standards (Long, 2005) were the most challenging for instructors, that the Communication and Cultures standards were most emphasized in classes (see also ACTFL, 2011), and that the Communities goals received the least emphasis in classes. This is perhaps because the Communities standard is often conceived of in terms of extracurricular activities (Magnan, 2008, Willis Allen & Dupuy, 2012e.g., Lally, 2000;McAlpine, 2000;Overfield, 1997;Phillips, 1998;Weldon & Trautmann, 2003).…”

“…Other studies have also found that achieving the aims of the Communities standard (Sarroub & Moeller, 1999;Willis Allen & Dupuy, 2012) or the Communities and Connections standards (Long, 2005) were the most challenging for instructors, that the Communication and Cultures standards were most emphasized in classes (see also ACTFL, 2011), and that the Communities goals received the least emphasis in classes. This is perhaps because the Communities standard is often conceived of in terms of extracurricular activities (Magnan, 2008, Willis Allen & Dupuy, 2012e.g., Lally, 2000;McAlpine, 2000;Overfield, 1997;Phillips, 1998;Weldon & Trautmann, 2003). Instructors who responded to the ACTFL standards survey (2011) envisioned trips into the local community or abroad as the sole means of addressing the Communities standard.…”

“…It should be clear that the notion of community applied to language learning must far exceed the classroom. (p. 362) However, research has suggested that Communities-oriented goals may not be met through foreign language instruction (Magnan, Murphy, Sahakyan, & Kim, 2012;Willis Allen & Dupuy, 2012) and that educators may not consider technology a potential way for learners to establish, enter into, or maintain membership in TL communities (ACTFL, 2011). Thus, it remains largely unclear how learners situate themselves and their possible roles within face-to-face, digital, and imagined TL communities.…”