Search

The relationships between certain parallel aspects of the teaching and learning styles of 60 student teachers of English as a second language were examined in the context of the general assumption that an individual's teaching and learning styles are closely related. The Canfield Learning Styles Inventory and Instructional Styles Inventory were used to assess the degree of preference for the same conditions (peer, organization, goal setting, competition, instructor, detail, independence, and authority), content areas (numeric, qualitative, inanimate, and people), and modes of teaching and learning (lecturing/listening, reading, iconic, and direct experience). From this information, group profiles were developed and compared. The results suggest that teaching styles are not as closely related to learning styles as is generally assumed, and imply that the teachers use different behaviors to react to similar teaching and learning situations. While some similarities existed, the differences in over half the assessed preferences for conditions and modes of instruction were significant. It is suggested that further research be undertaken to learn how teachers may accommodate their students' diverse learning styles by varying teaching styles or matching learning syles. (MSE)

An evaluation and comparison of college and university intensive English programs in the United States focuses on program structure, organization, curriculum, faculty, program strengths, and areas for development. The evaluation instrument was a five-page questionnaire returned by directors of 41 of the 51 qualifying programs. It was determined that the typical program conforms to standard session lengths, meets five days a week, and has 14-17 students. Most of the programs charge upwards of $1,400 per session. Many offer multiple levels of instruction and basic skills are offered in all, while special skills such as study skills, test preparation, accent reduction, and survival English appear in almost half. English for special purposes is available in half the programs, and credit is offered in almost half. Most directors named faculty and curriculum as major program strengths, followed by reputation and administrative quality. The areas of weakness cited were research and materials development, the language laboratory, and student recruitment, followed by faculty working conditions. The administrative structure varies widely, with one third of the programs belonging to divisions of continuing education, while others are part of modern language, linguistics, arts and sciences, humanities, developmental studies, and other departments. Administrative positions also vary greatly, and slightly more than half of the faculty were found to be working with full-time contracts. Appended tables provide statistical data from the responses. (MSE)

A survey of the 20 most populous states concerning their secondary school provision of foreign languages for business is reported. State foreign language supervisors were interviewed for information on state policy or planning for the inclusion of foreign language for business or applied language studies, for information about specific programs or courses, and for predictions about the future of foreign languages for business in the state in the next five years. Survey results show that few states offer this curriculum at the secondary level, and only Virginia and Louisiana had specific examples of pilot programs or existing curricula. In many cases, the state supervisors did not know whether any such courses were offered anywhere in the state. Only Wisconsin and Florida have state curriculum guides for the local school districts. Several officials in states without specific policies were supportive of the idea, but most were pessimistic about advances in state policy favoring foreign languages for business because of other state mandates, the more urgent need to boost support for basic language teaching, lack of time in the school schedule, and lack of trained teachers and appropriate materials. (MSE)