David V. Shurtleff and Dr. David K. Hart, Germanic and Slavic Languages
Business language courses were taught at American universities as early as the 1920’s but did not gain widespread acceptance until the 1980’s. A major reason for the growth of Language for Special Purposes (LSP) was the report of the President’s Commission on Foreign Language and International Studies, which focused on the decline of language skills in the U.S. and stressed the need for professionally linked foreign language courses. Linguistic skills, the report stated, are a plus when combined with professional knowledge in fields such as engineering and business.1
Many factors influence the need for business language courses at the undergraduate level. These include: ability to compete with programs at other universities, level of student demand, and a job market heavily influenced by the globalization of the economy. I took a two-pronged approach to this research. I began with a broad reading of research relevant to the aforementioned factors. From this, I was able to develop a survey instrument to conduct primary research comparing BYU students with national trends relative to the demand for business language courses.
Many universities have included business language courses in their undergraduate curriculum. In her 1983 sampling of 1,008 universities Grosse found that 62% had LSP courses, the majority of which were in languages for business. Grosse and Voght explain that, “The major difference between beginning and intermediate LSP courses and traditional courses lies not so much in the content, but in the context in which the language is learned. In the LSP course the context of oral and written discourse and learning activities is drawn from professional content areas such as business and engineering… Specialized vocabulary and authentic materials such as business correspondence and documents are incorporated in the instructional process.”2
Although the results of my survey are still being compiled and not all of the surveys have been returned, the initial results largely mirror other surveys of its type. In other words, BYU students in general are very interested in Business Russian courses. This is not surprising. In a study done by Linda Roberts, students ranked business as their second reason to study a language preceded only by understanding culture.3 Students perceptions of the relation between foreign languages and business have made Japanese and Russian the fastest growing languages to study.
Most of BYU’s Russian courses are focused on literature. Students develop an extensive vocabulary through reading. Because the courses are taught in Russian, students also gain listening comprehension skills. Since funding for the BYU Russian Program is limited we need ways to incorporate business language classes without raising costs. By changing the context of some courses to business rather than literature and by following the same methodology to build reading and listening comprehension skills, BYU could produce students with a broad passive business vocabulary and excellent listening comprehension of current media and business topics without significantly increasing the cost of their program.
The proliferation of business language courses in the 1980’s was caused, in part by the drive to diversify and expand the traditional foreign language curriculum. Applying language to the requirements of business specialists broadens foreign language education which has long been focused on literature. According to Brod, “literature can no longer be regarded as the single goal of language study, but merely as one of the doors that open to a student in consequence of leaming a second language.”4 Woloshin cites the need for undergraduate language programs that “encourage students to prepare for a wide variety of careers in which second language proficiency is a vital asset.”5 Finally, Rivers notes that business language courses are “an important way to provide choice in upper-level foreign language courses.”6 According to my survey results the majority of BYU students would welcome greater choice in their-upper level Russian courses.
One of the things that surprised me as I researched was the lack of actual information on specific techniques and materials for teaching business language courses proportionate to the abundant discussion of the need for such courses. I attribute this to the relative newness of the topic. There is still very little consensus on exactly what a business language course should include. The problem is compounded by the difficulty of making business courses specific enough to be useful while still being applicable to students interested in a broad range of specializations.
After completing the entire BYU Russian curriculum, talking to BYU students and researching current thought on business language courses, I believe that BYU students will best be served by a program which focuses on a broad reading in a general business and current events context supplemented by in-language discussion of topics covered in the reading. In this way the program would not differ significantly from the way literature is taught, which I think is very effective. Only the context would change. At the same time, because listening comprehension has been ranked as the most important skill by students working in foreign countries, “course designers should be mindful to avail themselves of ever-expanding authentic media resources.”7
References
- President’s Commission, Strength-Through Wisdom, Modern Language Journal 64 (1980) 9
- C. Grosse & G. Voght, The Evolution of LSP, Modern Language Journal 75 (1991) 181-95
- L. Roberts, Attitudes of Entering University Freshmen Toward Foreign Language Study, Modern Language Journal 76 (1992) 275-80.
- R. Brod, Careers and the Foreign Language Dept., ADFL Bulletin ii (I 975) 16-22.
- D. Woloshin, The Undergraduate Curriculum, Modern Language Journal 67 (1983) 356.
- W Rivers, A New Curriculum for New Purposes, FL Annals 18 (1985) 3 7-43.
- T. Fryer, Foreign Language Needs of interns Abroad, Modern Language Journal 77 (1993)