Considering that the proficiency movement is less than nine years old and that the ACTFL/ETS Provisional Proficiency Guidelines first came out in 1985, the impact of the proficiency movement on foreign language teaching in the United States has been significant. Its effects are visible in the increased emphasis on oral testing, and the adoption of proficiency-based goals for curriculum and proficiency-oriented methods and materials. Yet in spite of the widespread trend to follow the tenets of the proficiency movement and develop the language skills and cultural knowledge of foreign language students, very little has been written about the impact of the ACTFLguidelines on the classroom (Hiple 1987) or the effect of proficiency-based programs on foreign language instruction (Freed 1987). Working in foreign language teacher education, we were curious to examine the extent of the proficiency movement's influence on foreign language education in Florida. So between March, 1988 and May, 1989, we informally surveyed seventy-seven foreign language educators in Florida about the effects of the proficiency movement on their teaching and programs. Our sample of foreign language teachers and administrators consisted of fifty K-university teachers, ten district and state supervisors, five teacher trainers at state universities, and twelve chairs from community colleges and universities. The results provide an interesting picture of the areas in which the proficiency movement is having greater and lesser impact. Several studies have described important developments in the proficiency movement nationwide. For example, oral proficiency interviews (OPI's) are currently required for the certification of bilingual education teachers in Arizona, California, Florida, Illinois, and New Jersey (Valdes 394). In addition, the academic senates for California Community Colleges, the California State University and the University of California systems prepared a paper that sets competency levels as guidelines for curriculum development and criteria for rating functional language proficiency (Valdes 401). Also of interest is the ACTFL/Texas Project which developed a model for a state-mandated oral proficiency requirement for the certification of new foreign language teachers (Freed 153). At the University of Minnesota, the ACTFL/ETS Oral Proficiency Interview is used as part of the entry requirement (Magnan 266), while the University of Pennsylvania has also instituted a proficiency-based language requirement (Freed). In spite of ACTFL's active role in promoting its guidelines and the proficiency movement, and the recent proliferation of instructional materials with the proficiency approach, a controversy seethes within the profession over certain aspects of the proficiency movement. An understanding of the controversy is central to a discussion of the impact of the movement in Florida. Some of the issues that have been raised are summarized below: 1) The definition of proficiency-based instruction: Schulz (1986) points out that the participants at a 1981 conference on Language Proficiency Assessment could not agree on a common definitionofproficiency. Morerecently, Walz evaluated the communicative content of twenty-five first and second year French texts and found that very few had substantial communicative (proficiency-based) content, in spite of claims to the contrary. Most of the activities were mechanical or contextualized rather than communicative. Other studies he cited found that teachers who thought they were involved in teaching language communicatively actually were spending most of their time on mechanical or contextualized drills. In other words, the definition of what constitutes a proficiency-based (communicative) approach to teaching foreign languages is widely misinterpreted. 2) The goals of proficiency: General goals of proficiency-based instruction include the understanding of other cultures and the development of interactional competence in foreign language
Read full abstract