We had almost 60 people join us for the first Thriving Language Programs Learning Community meeting! The meeting included an introduction and welcome to the learning community. We then broke into groups to discuss three questions:

1. What do you want to get out of this learning community?
2. What inspired you to join the community?
3. Why do students (not) enroll in language classes?

We used a web app called Miro to help us facilitate conversation. We then joined together for a brief discussion on the topics. We are absolutely thrilled to have so many of you join us in this community. It is clear that many of us are facing challenges when it comes to enrollments and efforts to keep our programs thriving. 

We began the session on Monday, October 7th with a recap of themes about student voices that came out from the September 16th session. Participants had responded to the prompt, “Why do students not enroll in language classes?” The main themes that came out of that were:

• Other courses too rigidly scheduled/don’t have time in schedule
• Time conflicts
• Reduction/elimination of language requirements
• Students being discouraged from taking languages
  • Value of language learning
  • Requirement only
  • AI taking over
  • Why is language valuable? Usefulness in careers/jobs
• Grading
  • “The way we evaluate and grade students doesn’t accurately reflect language acquisition”

We highlighted several chapters from the Language Program Vitality volume, from large-scale surveys to smaller questionnaires that solicited student voices. We went into more detail by talking to authors of two chapters in the edited volume: 

• LeAnne Spino (Leveraging Student Surveys to Promote Recruitment and Retention)
  • (Re-)watch her video here
• Laura Edwards & Juliet Lynd (Internationalize Your Major: Embracing the Supportive Role of Language Study)  
  • (Re-)watch their video here

1. Presentation by Carlo Cinaglia on his Language Program Vitality chapter “University Students’ Beliefs About the Language Requirement: Policy as Articulated and as Perceived” and its findings/implications
   • Language policy research can support world language advocacy – it helps us understand how we talk about language study and how students are interpreting it
   • “Declared, “perceived,” and “practiced” policy; explicit vs. implicit
   • What is visible or not visible sends messages about what is valued (or not valued). 
   • Considerations:
     • How do policy texts send messages to students?
     • How are we articulating linguistic goals/purposes of language study?
     • How do we articulate non-linguistic goals/purposes of language study?
     • Share testimonials from other students about value of language learning.
2. Presentation by Anne Violin-Wigent on the French program redesign at Michigan State University and how that helped align the program goals and the curriculum
   • Followed principles of Backward Design, started with graduate program
   • Guiding principles: More relevant to 21st century and more flexible and responsive to student interests
   • BA program revamp launched Fall 2022
     • Core classes at 300 and 400 level, with 400 level being repeatable so that students could focus on areas of interest (history, literature, language, culture, etc.) 
   • Numbers show that minors are increasing or staying steady, which is great considering broader trends
   • Still want to change titles of 100 and 200 level courses to make them more informative than “French 1,” etc. 
3. Presentation by Matt Coss focusing on a current project at MSU where a collaborative group is examining what students actually think they get out of language learning
   • We know that language learning is transformative, but do students know that it is? Does it matter that they get that if they can’t articulate that?
   • Do students mostly agree or disagree with developing in the areas that were identified as important for the French language program (human connection, communication, initiative & leadership, resilience & persistence, collaboration, problem solving)? (Yes)
   • How can we systematically raise students’ awareness of this?
     • Currently conducting a study where they’re doing an intervention (activities) where they anticipate, experience, and reflect on those identified areas. 
   • What can we do to raise awareness, shape (realistic) expectations and perceptions, and document the benefits of language learning in our programs? 

Participants were asked to reflect on actionable next steps for themselves on these topics, either silently reflecting or joining a group to discuss their ideas out loud. 

We used a Miro board to let participants discuss their future plans on three time scales (the last few weeks of this semester, next semester, and in the next 3-5 years). 

We then turned to a small group discussion about changing these goals to SMART goals and reflecting on others’ action steps. 

For the end of the session, we focused on a discussion of takeaways from this fall’s learning community and lessons from the edited volume, including: 

• Gathering data on your programs is crucial 
• Use clear language
• Consider all student voices but pay particular attention to the 99% of students who are not taking our classes.
• Be willing to compromise and be generous with each other in your programs 

• Be open to new ideas