Foreign Language

• Certificates

  Students completing the American Sign Language, Chinese, German, French, Japanese, and Spanish Certificates will demonstrate the following outcomes:

  • Demonstrate speaking and listening proficiency in the language they are studying.
  • Demonstrate writing ability, including a command of grammar and appropriate usage to express their ideas.
  • Demonstrate the ability to write in different styles. (3000 level courses)
  • Write an analysis or a literary or cultural work in the language.  (3000 level courses)
  • Describe and explain aspects of the culture(s) of the language being studied.
• Associate Degrees

  Students completing the Associate of Arts in American Sign Language will demonstrate the following outcomes:

  • Demonstrate speaking and listening proficiency in the language they are studying.
  • Demonstrate writing ability, including a command of grammar and appropriate usage to express their ideas.
  • Describe and explain aspects of the culture(s) of the language being studied.

   

  Students completing the Associate of Arts in Chinese, German, French, Japanese, and Spanish will demonstrate the following outcomes:

  • Demonstrate speaking and listening proficiency in the language they are studying.
  • Demonstrate writing ability, including a command of grammar and appropriate usage to express their ideas.
  • Demonstrate the ability to write in different styles.
  • Write an analysis or a literary or cultural work in the language.
  • Describe and explain aspects of the culture(s) of the language being studied.

   

  Students completing the Associate of Arts in Localization will demonstrate the following outcomes:

  • Demonstrate speaking and listening proficiency in the language they are studying.
  • Demonstrate writing ability, including a command of grammar and appropriate usage to express their ideas.
  • Explain the linguistic and cultural knowledge needed in adapting a product or service for specific locales associated with the language they are studying.
  • Explain the application of localization in global technology (such as software engineering, web development, digital media, programming, etc.).
  • Describe and explain aspects of the culture(s) of the language being studied.

• Bachelor Degrees

  The Foreign Language Department has established five learning outcomes for Bachelors Degrees and made some changes to them in 2013-14; they are presented below with expected student documentation:

  Student Learning Outcomes Graduating majors will:	Evidence Students will:
  1. Demonstrate speaking and listening proficiency in the language they are studying.	Take an oral test administered on a computer.
  2. Demonstrate writing ability, including a command of grammar and appropriate usage to express their ideas.	(This skill will be evaluated based on documents submitted for outcomes 3, 4 and 5).
  3. Demonstrate the ability to write in different styles.	Submit at least three documents written in at least three different styles. Students will label each document with their determination of its style.
  4. Write an analysis or a literary or cultural work in the language.	Submit a written analysis of a literary or cultural work. (What qualifies as a “literary work” may be interpreted broadly).
  5. Describe and explain aspects of the culture(s) of the language being studied.	Submit one sample of their work (written paper, film, pamphlet, etc.) in which they describe or explain an aspect of a target culture.

   

  Students completing the Bachelor of Arts in French for Translation and Global Industry will:

  1.    Demonstrate speaking and listening proficiency in the language they are studying.
  2.    Demonstrate writing ability, including a command of grammar and appropriate usage to express their ideas.
  3.    Demonstrate the ability to write in different styles.
  4.    Describe and explain aspects of the culture(s) of the language being studied.
  5.    Demonstrate proficiency with technological tools and methodologies used to perform tasks within the context of specific professional fields, including translation, business, and international relations.
   

Assessment of Majors:

• The Department of Foreign Languages began assessment of our Student Learning Outcomes in 1999 and established FL 4990 “Senior Assessment” in Fall 2000. Plans for the future include the following:
• Creating an online portfolio that is accessible to students after declaring a major so that they may upload documents to be assessed as they are completed, rather than a last-minute search during their last semester. It is hoped that individual instructors can help guide students in uploading excellent and relevant documents to the intended category in order to avoid a null-submission for any given category. 
• The department’s Assessment Committee is partnering with the department’s Curriculum Committee to create common course objectives and outcomes for the courses required across language majors (3060 & 3160). 

General Education Assessment:

• During the Spring-2015 semester, we gathered data from sections of FL 2020 in German, French, Japanese and Spanish. Students were required to participate and the data was assessed against the three Humanities Outcomes. This assessment will be repeated in the Spring-2017 semester.

The Department of Foreign Languages promotes global awareness and intercultural understanding by providing instruction and study abroad opportunities in various languages. We prepare majors and minors to function effectively in a foreign language by offering courses in literature, culture, linguistics, pedagogy and language for professional purposes.

Foreign Languages & Literatures Department Website

Contact Information:
Dr. Craig Bergeson
Weber State University
1403 University Circle
Ogden, UT 84408-1403
801-626-6183

• 2021-2022

   

• 2019-2020

  1)    First year student success is critical to WSU’s retention and graduation efforts. We are interested in finding out how departments support their first-year students. Do you have mechanisms and processes in place to identify, meet with, and support first-year students? Please provide a brief narrative focusing on your program’s support of new students:

  a.    Any first-year students taking courses in your program(s)
  First-year students typically enroll in our lower-division courses. All department faculty makes a conscious effort to build a sense of community, which has proved to facilitate confidence and learning in the foreign language classroom. This community-building culture can increase the students’ motivation and engagement to persist studying the language. The Department provides free tutoring services and involvement opportunities, such as language clubs and semesterly film series, as mechanisms to support these students.

  Another demographic of “first-year students” are returning LDS missionaries and heritage speakers. For these students, their first experience with our curriculum takes place at the upper division level. We support these students by making available an affordable method to receive credit for the language knowledge/experience they already have. Advising is the most relevant mechanism we have in place. Advising is done collectively through brief presentations during regular class sessions or individually during one-on-one meetings. Each full-time faculty member serves as an advisor and has an assigned group of students (i.e., French majors are advised by Dr. A. Jones, French minors are advised by Dr. C. Jones). The same free tutoring services and involvement opportunities are also available to this demographic of students.

  b.    Students declared in your program(s), whether or not they are taking courses in your program(s)
  We have not been consistent with a mechanism to support this type of students. In the past, we have reached out to them via email to find out the reasons why they are not taking courses and to get feedback on the resources they need to come back to campus. The department will consider   reinstating this approach as well as considering other creative ways to help students come back to the program.

  2)    A key component of sound assessment practice is the process of ‘closing the loop’ – that is, following up on changes implemented as a response to your assessment findings, to determine the impact of those changes/innovations. It is also an aspect of assessment on which we need to improve, as suggested in our NWCCU mid-cycle report. Please describe the processes your program has in place to ‘close the loop’.
  We do not have a process to “close the loop” in place. However, we are considering assessing language proficiency in students who transition from the AA into the BA and students enrolled in FL 3060 (which is the first upper-division core course for all minors and majors). Comparing and contrasting this data with the Senior Assessment students must complete during their last semester will help us measure the advancement in language proficiency that may occur during their academic career.
   

  The full report is available for viewing. 

• 2017

  1) Reflecting on this year’s assessment(s), how does the evidence of student learning impact your faculty’s confidence in the program being reviewed; how does that analysis change when compared with previous assessment evidence?

  • Data from the past four years, representing our students' performance on our five Learning Outcomes, are represented in the table below. For each outcome, data are also broken down to represent the languages in which our students can major. Outcomes with fewer than 75% our graduating majors met the standard are shaded in grey.

  

   

  

  2) With whom did you share the results of the year’s assessment efforts?

  • This report will be shared with all faculty in the Department of Foreign Languages, with the Dean of the Telitha E. Lindquist College of Arts and Humanities, and with the University Office of Institution Effectiveness.

   

  3) Based on your program’s assessment findings, what subsequent action will your program take?

  • To remediate the weaknesses seen in Outcome 5, we recommend that the Department schedule some time, before student portfolios are next evaluated, to review the standards' rubrics and encourage instructors to help their students gain the proficiencies needed to meet each outcome's standard.

   

  The full report is available.

• 2016

  1) Reflecting on this year’s assessment(s), how does the evidence of student learning impact your faculty’s confidence in the program being reviewed; how does that analysis change when compared with previous assessment evidence?

  • Data from the past four years, representing our students' performance on our five Learning Outcomes, are represented in the table below. For each outcome, data are also broken down to represent the languages in which our students can major. Outcomes with fewer than 75% our graduating majors met the standard are shaded in grey.

  

  • No clear trend is visible. However, it is encouraging that this past year was our best, having met or exceeded our threshold of 75% on all Outcomes. 
  • In addition to the Oral Test that our majors complete for Outcome 1 in FL 4990, all of our foreign language teaching majors and minors must complete a national test, the Oral Proficiency Interview (OPI), administered by ACTFL. Utah State licensure requires that they achieve an Advanced-Low rating or higher. Students who receive a lower rating are not permitted to complete the teaching major and we generally counsel them to declare a 'regular' degree in French, German or Spanish. 
  • The table below shows the percentage of foreign language teaching majors and minors who rated Advanced Low or higher on the OPI. For the past four years, our department average has either met or exceeded this national standard. During the four years previous to that, we met our threshold (75%) only half the time. We are very pleased with this progress.

  

  • Outcomes 2 and 3 both show some improvement over the past four years. This is likely due to better collection of documents in FL 4990. Two years ago we began asking students to label their submitted documents as to genre or style.
  • Outcome 5, dealing with students' perspectives on cultural products and practices, was redefined this past year. Predictably, the percentage of students who met or exceeded the newly defined standard went down—although we still met our threshold of 75%.  This fall may be due to student performance but is also likely due, in part, to a weakness in rater reliability.

   

  2) With whom did you share the results of the year’s assessment efforts?

  • This report will be shared with all faculty in the Department of Foreign Languages, with the Dean of the Telitha E. Linquist College of Arts and Humanities, and with the University Office of Institution Effectiveness.

   

  3) Based on your program’s assessment findings, what subsequent action will your program take?

  • To remediate the weaknesses seen in Outcome 5, we recommend that the Department schedule some time, before student portfolios are next evaluated, to review the standards' rubrics and encourage instructors to help their students gain the proficiencies needed to meet each outcome's standard.

   

  4) We are interested in better understanding how departments/programs assess their graduating seniors. Please provide a short narrative describing the practices/curriculum in place for your department/program. Please include both direct and indirect measures employed.

  • In order to complete a major in the Foreign Languages Department, students must complete a 1-credit course (FL 4990), which seeks to collect the following artifacts: six student recordings, three or more writing samples reflective of different styles, a written analysis of a literary or cultural work, and a written description of a cultural product of practice. Student portfolios are rated by FL faculty at the beginning of each academic year using a common rubric across languages. The rubric is based on proficiency outcomes of the American Council for the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL), in which all full time-faculty have been trained. 

   

  The full report is available for viewing.

• 2015

  1) Reflecting on this year’s assessment(s), how does the evidence of student learning impact your faculty’s confidence in the program being reviewed; how does that analysis change when compared with previous assessment evidence?

  • Data from the past four years, representing our students' performance on our five Learning Outcomes, are represented in the table below. For each outcome, data are also broken down to represent the languages in which our students can major. Outcomes with fewer than 75% our graduating majors met the standard are shaded in grey.

  

  • No clear trend is visible. It is quite obvious that our best performance was in 2011-12; however, it is also clear that we had a smaller cohort of students graduating that year, with no majors in French and only two in German. With the exception of 2011-12, this past year was our best. We met or exceeded our threshold of 75% on all but the first Outcome, and that was very close at 74%.
  • Nevertheless, there is room for improvement. Outcome 1 shows a nearly flat progression in which our students are performing at or slightly over the threshold. It may be meaningful that our German majors have not met or exceeded the standard in two of the four years. This may be due to a relatively small number of majors (compared, for example, to Spanish) but may also reflect the relative difficulty involved in achieving the Advanced-Low level in German for native speakers of English. (The Foreign Service Institute points out that of Category 1 languages, German takes significantly longer to master than the others).
  • In addition to the Oral Test that our majors complete for Outcome 1 in FL 4990, all of our foreign language teaching majors and minors must complete a national test, the Oral Proficiency Interview (OPI), administered by ACTFL. Utah State licensure requires that they achieve an Advanced-Low rating or higher. Students who receive a lower rating are not permitted to complete the teaching major and we generally counsel them to declare a 'regular' degree in French, German or Spanish.
  • The table below shows the percentage of foreign language teaching majors and minors who rated Advanced Low or higher on the OPI. For the past three years, all of our students have either met or exceeded this national standard. During the four years previous to that, we met our threshold (75%) only half the time. We are very pleased with this progress.

  

   2) Based on your program’s assessment findings, what subsequent action will your program take?

  • To remediate the weaknesses seen in Outcomes 4 and 5, we recommend that the Department schedule some time, before student portfolios are next evaluated, to review the standards' rubrics and encourage instructors to help their students gain the proficiencies needed to meet each outcome's standard.

   

  The full report is available for viewing.

• 2014

  This program also conducted a Program review, the results of which can be viewed here.

  1) Reflecting on this year’s assessment(s), how does the evidence of student learning impact your faculty’s confidence in the program being reviewed; how does that analysis change when compared with previous assessment evidence?

   

  • Data from the past four years, representing our students' performance on our five Learning Outcomes, are represented in the table below. For each outcome, data are also broken down to represent the languages in which our students can major. Outcomes with fewer than 75% our graduating majors met the standard are shaded in grey.

   

  		1: Oral			2: Written			3: Styles			4: Analysis			5: Culture
  		N	Met	%	N	Met	%	N	Met	%	N	Met	%	N	Met	%
  2010	French	1	0	0%	1	1	100%	1	1	100%	1	1	100%	1	1	100%
  	German	8	7	88%	7	4	57%	7	7	100%	7	3	43%	7	7	100%
  	Spanish	24	18	75%	24	18	75%	25	21	84%	25	18	72%	22	19	86%
  	ALL	33	25	76%	32	23	72%	33	29	88%	33	22	67%	30	27	90%
  2011	French	0			0			0			0			0
  	German	2	2	100%	2	2	100%	2	2	100%	2	2	100%	2	2	100%
  	Spanish	23	23	100%	21	21	100%	21	21	100%	20	16	80%	20	18	90%
  	ALL	25	25	100%	23	23	100%	23	23	100%	22	18	82%	22	20	91%
  2012	French	7	4	57%	6	5	83%	7	6	86%	7	5	71%	7	6	86%
  	German	6	2	33%	6	3	50%	6	6	100%	6	4	67%	6	6	100%
  	Spanish	27	24	89%	27	20	74%	27	25	93%	27	13	48%	27	25	93%
  	ALL	40	30	75%	39	28	72%	40	37	93%	40	22	55%	40	37	93%
  2013	French	6	5	83%	6	6	100%	6	6	100%	6	4	67%	6	5	83%
  	German	5	2	40%	6	6	100%	6	5	83%	6	6	100%	6	6	100%
  	Spanish	35	27	77%	36	34	94%	36	35	97%	33	24	73%	36	25	69%
  	ALL	46	34	74%	48	46	96%	48	46	96%	45	34	76%	48	36	75%

   

  • No clear trend is visible. It is quite obvious that our best performance was in 2011-12; however, it is also clear that we had a smaller cohort of students graduating that year, with no majors in French and only two in German. With the exception of 2011-12, this past year was our best. We met or exceeded our threshold of 75% on all but the first Outcome, and that was very close at 74%.
  • Nevertheless, there is room for improvement. Outcome 1 shows a nearly flat progression in which our students are performing at or slightly over the threshold. It may be meaningful that our German majors have not met or exceeded the standard in two of the four years. This may be due to a relatively small number of majors (compared, for example, to Spanish) but may also reflect the relative difficulty involved in achieving the Advanced-Low level in German for native speakers of English. (The Foreign Service Institute points out that of Category 1 languages, German takes significantly longer to master than the others).
  • In addition to the Oral Test that our majors complete for Outcome 1 in FL 4990, all of our foreign language teaching majors and minors must complete a national test, the Oral Proficiency Interview (OPI), administered by ACTFL. Utah State licensure requires that they achieve an Advanced-Low rating or higher. Students who receive a lower rating are not permitted to complete the teaching major and we generally counsel them to declare a 'regular' degree in French, German or Spanish.
  • The table below shows the percentage of foreign language teaching majors and minors who rated Advanced Low or higher on the OPI. For the past three years, all of our students have either met or exceeded this national standard. During the four years previous to that, we met our threshold (75%) only half the time. We are very pleased with this progress.

  
  
   
   

  • Outcomes 2 and 3 both show some improvement over the past four years. This is likely due to better collection of documents in FL 4990. Two years ago we began asking students to label their submitted documents as to genre or style.With the exception of 2011-12, our students have not generally met or exceeded our standard for Outcome 4. The department will need to better communicate our expectations with instructors and particularly define the kinds of writing expected from students in literature classes (FL 3610-3690) and culture classes (FL 3550-3570).
  • Outcome 5, dealing with students' perspectives on cultural products and practices, was redefined this past year. Predictably, the percentage of students who met or exceeded the newly defined standard went down—although we still met our threshold of 75%.  This fall may be due to student performance but is also likely due, in part, to a weakness in rater reliability.

   
  2) With whom did you share the results of the year’s assessment efforts?
   

  • This report will be shared with all faculty in the Department of Foreign Languages, with the Dean of the Telitha E. Linquist College of Arts and Humanities, and with the University Office of Institution Effectiveness.

   
  3) Based on your program’s assessment findings, what subsequent action will your program take?
   

  • To remediate the weaknesses seen in Outcomes 4 and 5, we recommend that the Department schedule some time, before student portfolios are next evaluated, to review the standards' rubrics and encourage instructors to help their students gain the proficiencies needed to meet each outcome's standard.
     

  The full report is available for viewing

• 2013

  1. Reflecting on this year's assessment(s), how does the evidence of student learning impact your faculty's confidence in the program being reviewed; how does that analysis change when compared with previous assessment evidence?

  2. With whom did you share the results of the year's assessment efforts?

  3. Based on your program's assessment findings, what subsequent action will your program take?
  
  To see the full report, select this link: Foreign Languages 2013 Annual Assessment Repor

2019-20

2014-15