|
those who might be considered the visionaries of the field. They are already
well-read, and already tend to talk with one another. The intent here, therefore,
has been to produce a document that is useful, accessible, and manageable for
the Russian teacher of above-average professionaldedication; that is, for
teachers who will take the trouble to read such a document and who are willing
to put some thought into the design of their program's Russian curriculum.
In order to make the document manageable, it is intentionally not a self-
contained do-it-yourself primer on curriculum design. There is extensive detail
in the places where there exists no similar text (delineating the common
curriculum, for example). In other cases, where there already exists a vast
literature of materials (in the section on pedagogical issues, for instance), this
document contains only an overview of the topic with enough bibliography for
the interested reader to continue independently.
Next steps: A proposal to the Russian language teaching profession
Finally, a look to the future of this framework is appropriate. The National
Foreign Language Center and the AmericanCouncil of Teachers of Russian
are endeavoring to establish an Internet presence to facilitate the distribution of
high quality learning materials for Russian. The Language Learning
Framework is slated to be at the core of the organization of that Web site and in
the development of its materials. The creation of this document has therefore
proceeded with an eye to hypertext. It is hoped that future versions will be on-
line and replete with links to materials that augment and exemplify the
framework.
The principal contribution of this document is intended to derive from its
hoped-for value as a framework for the design of Russian language programs in
the United States at the secondary and post-secondary levels. Much of the
detailed material that is included here, including, for example, all of the specific
components of the stages defined in chapters 3 and 4, is offered as the best-
guesses of the authors. We will be pleased if the general ideas of the frame-
work are acceptable to the majority in our profession. We will not be even
remotely upset if the details of the stages as we suggest them are totally
revised. In fact, we would like to suggest that the profession begin with the
assumption that revising this document will be an immediate and ongoing task
for some organization or committee within the profession.
In this spirit, we would like to propose that the two principal national
organizations for Russian teachers, the American Association of Teachers of
Slavic and East European Languages (AATSEEL) and the American Council of
Teachers of Russian (ACTR), jointly designate a body to have as one of its
principal tasks the ongoing reexamination and refinement of this framework.
One obvious possible candidate for this role is the Committee on College and
Pre-College Russian (CCPCR). This committee already has as its charge to
gather information and consider issues germane to the study and teaching of
|
