The Foreign Service Journal, September 2005

S E P T E M B E R 2 0 0 5 / F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L 7 Scaling, Not Testing at FSI I was horrified by the attack on the FSI Foreign Language Program in the July-August 2005 issue of our Foreign Service Journal . First, to show that this is no knee- jerk reaction by some uninformed sympathizer, I must modestly present my credentials. Aside from a quarter- century-long Foreign Service career, I have a doctorate in language testing, master’s degrees in linguistics and French, and several foreign degrees. I have done language-teacher training on three continents and am founder of a language school. In addition, I am a product of FSI and my wife retired after a long and honorable career teaching in the language school there. In the profession, FSI is held up as a model, on a level of excellence shared with the Department of Defense Language Institute and Middlebury College’s Graduate School of Languages. Why? These programs avoid vocabulary building through counterproductive transla- tion and the internalization of gram- mar through rote memorization. Instead, they focus on a communica- tive approach, using the language, not teaching it. They use total immersion (at least in the classroom) with all native-speaker instructors. Research supports the conclusion that these three are the best of the best. The Journal erred in suggesting that there is too much pressure in the area of testing: indeed, there is no testing at FSI. Testing implies the arbitrary selection of a very few items from some vast population of gram- matical and lexigraphical possibilities. On the other hand, scaling, which is what FSI uses, employs rubrics to describe what may be expected at the five basic levels of performance rang- ing from complete beginner to edu- cated native-speaker. The scaling is administered by at least two well- trained and experienced persons. What could be fairer? Merton L. Bland FSO, retired Arlington, Va., and Wuhan, China Dissent Channel Research When I was still in the Foreign Service, I used the dissent channel in March 2003 to register my opposition to going to war in Iraq without a United Nations Security Council res- olution. I have since wondered how many dissent channel cables the State Department has received from its employees from the beginning of the dissent channel program to today. Staff of the Office of Policy Planning, the recipient of dissent- channel cables and the office that pro- vides responses to the cables, told me I had to file a Freedom of Infor- mation request to get the number of dissent-channel cables by year. In the FOIA request, I asked not only for the number of cables, but also for a gen- eral description of the subject matter of the cables. Five months later, I received a response from the department, which said that 306 dissent-channel cables had been received from November 1971, when the program began, through May 26, 2005. The response noted that some of the topics covered include the war in Southeast Asia, conflict in the Balkans, Iraq and the U.S. role in international organiza- tions. While one can probably guess the topics of some of the dissent cables in certain years based on the U.S. government policies, actions or inac- tions that occurred in a specific year, I would suspect that some of the sub- ject matter and the year in which it was raised might be surprising. Like most who have submitted dissent cables, I thought it would be fascinat- ing to determine if any of them actu- ally affected future policy. I know that my opposition to the war in Iraq has not changed the administration’s policy. I understand that the department has an obliga- tion to protect the confidentiality of the author and the dissent channel. However, I would be pleased to hear from anyone who wrote a dissent cable and is willing to disclose the subject matter, or even the entire cable and an analysis of whether the author felt the dissent changed or influenced policy. Should anyone wish to share details of her or his dis- sent cable, please contact me at: dis- sentchannel2005@yahoo.com. Ann Wright FSO, retired Honolulu, Hawaii L ETTERS