April 26, 2015

Janet Greene, College of Liberal Arts

Hamline University
1536 Hewitt Ave
St. Paul, MN 55104
Subject: Feasibility Study
Dear Dr. Greene,
On March 1, 2015, you approved my proposal to research the feasibility of implementing
second-language requirement into the Hamline Plan. I promised to submit my report by today,
April 26, 2015. I have included a copy of my full report with this letter, which contains a full
account of my research procedure, results, analysis, conclusions, and recommendations.
I have always considered education to be the cornerstone of any community, and my
professional goal is to contribute to this field in all ways possible, including academically.
Further, after reflection upon my travels to other countries, I determined that multilingualism is
extremely important in terms of multi-cultural competency, which is one of Hamlines
educational values.
After recognizing that Hamline does not have a second language requirement, I sought your
approval to research the feasibility of such a requirement. I was delighted to find that Hamline
has previously addressed this topic and therefore held information regarding its failures and
challenges. I am proud to say that I have substantially extended that base of information through
both secondary and primary research, which consisted of personal interviews and surveys.
Ultimately, the results are inconclusive, and I therefore conclude that implementing a secondlanguage requirement is not feasible until further research is conducted. I consider it my
privilege to have contributed these results to the Hamline community. With utmost appreciation,
I thank you dearly for your approval of this research project.
Sincerely,
Matthew J. Buck

Running head: IMPLEMENTING A SECOND-LANGUAGE REQUIREMENT

Implementing a Second-Language Requirement into the Hamline Plan: A Feasibility Report

Matthew J. Buck
Professional Writing and Rhetoric
Hamline University
April 26, 2015

IMPLEMENTING A SECOND-LANGUAGE REQUIREMENT

Abstract
The goal of this study was to determine the feasibility of implementing a second language
requirement in the Hamline Plan. The secondary research in this study consisted of consulting
online databases and webpages both to determine the benefits of bilingualism and to analyze how
other institutions implement and assess their language requirement. The primary research
consisted of interviews with Hamline faculty to produce further criteria questions and of a survey
regarding student interest in second-language study, which was administered to students in Dr.
Krista Sorias Professional Writing and Rhetoric course. The findings do support that
implementing a second language requirement could have cognitive and social benefits for
students; however, the results of the primary research indicate a need for further research in
several areas. The results therefore are inconclusive, and the feasibility of implementing a
second-language requirement is negative until further research is conducted consisting of more
surveys and consultations with various academic departments.

IMPLEMENTING A SECOND-LANGUAGE REQUIREMENT

Table of Contents
Abstract2
Introduction..4
Methods6
Results......8
Secondary Research.8
Primary Research.....8
Conclusions12
Recommendations..13
References..14
Appendix15

IMPLEMENTING A SECOND-LANGUAGE REQUIREMENT

Introduction
With the sharp increase in globalization over the past fifty years, multilingualism is more
beneficial than ever. Whether one is interested in business, cultural exchange, or international
tourism, learning a second language will enhance his or her performance and overall experience.
In the United States, second-language learning is more than beneficial; it is essential for
promoting cultural awareness and combating racism in the increasingly diverse environment.
Concerning Anglo-Hispanic relations, for example, Lopez and Gonzalez-Barrera (2013) claim
that Spanish is the largest and fastest-growing non-English language in the United States with
over 37,000,000 speakers, which is a several hundred percent increase since 1980. One of
American universities primary duties is to prepare students for the social challenges vis--vis
multiculturalism, and one method is to implement a second-language requirement.
Unfortunately, Hamline University does not require its students to demonstrate proficiency in a
second language. Hamline needs to seize this opportunity to improve its curriculum pursuant its
mission of developing well-rounded students and preparing them for global service. Therefore, I
researched the investment return and feasibility of implementing a second-language requirement.
First, I used the Internet to research the cognitive and social benefits of second-language
study to determine whether or not the logistical feasibility was worthy of consideration. Research
showed that second-language learning has numerous intellectual and social benefits. According
to Marian and Shook (2012), second-language learning has neurological benefits such as
enriched cognitive control as well as social benefits such as exploring other cultures through
their associated languages. Further, according to Merritt (2013), second-language study improves
intellect, memory, and decision-making skills. After reviewing these sources, I determined that
Hamline has an opportunity to improve its undergraduate curriculum, and I therefore proceeded
to researching the logistical feasibility of requiring second-language study.
My field research consisted of interviews with Hamline faculty to learn about the
schools history with this subject and identify key criteria questions, and I followed these
interviews by conducting a student survey. Fortunately, the topic of requiring second-language
study was recently addressed by Hamline faculty. In the spring of 2013, members of an
Undergraduate Curriculum Committee task force motioned for a second-language requirement,
but the provost dismissed the motion due to a lack of research (M. Olson, personal
communication, February 25, 2015). In revisiting this history, two of Hamlines faculty who

IMPLEMENTING A SECOND-LANGUAGE REQUIREMENT

served on this task force aided me in constructing criteria questions regarding faculty
employment, curriculum space, student support, and revenue neutrality. To begin answering
these questions, I conducted a 10-question survey for a sample group of 14 students regarding
interest in second-language study and suggestions for curriculum revision.
The results of the questionnaire had three profound findings, all of which beg further
questioning and require more investigation. First, half of the students that responded expressed
disapproval of a second-language requirement. This finding may need to be verified by using a
larger sample size. Second, students indicated a large interest in studying Spanish if required to
study a second language. This finding suggests that further research regarding logistical
feasibility would be done primarily in consultation with the Spanish department. Third, students
considered the fine arts and humanities requirements by far to be the least crucial to their
education. This finding suggests that a revision to the Hamline Plan would most favorably be
done by altering these two requirements, and sacrificing credits from these areas would require a
task force to confirm that such an alteration would still be in accordance with Hamlines mission
and educational values. Ultimately, the results are inconclusive regarding feasibility in that
further research is required.
The complete details of these findings are expounded in the sections below after
complete descriptions of my research procedure. I invite readers to review the methods and
sources in order to determine if my results are pertinent and that my recommendations logically
follow. A reference list and appendix are also provided.

IMPLEMENTING A SECOND-LANGUAGE REQUIREMENT

Methods
My research consisted of two objectives: (1) to determine whether or not secondlanguage study would be beneficial to students and (2) to determine whether or not actually
implementing a second-language requirement would be logistically possible. Because revising
the Hamline Plan to add a second-language requirement would require sacrificing funding for
other requirements, considering both the potential investment return as well as logistics is
crucial. I used the following criteria questions (later altered and expanded by peers) to guide my
initial research:
What are the cognitive and social benefits, if any, of studying a second language?
Does Hamline have a history with attempting to implement a second-language requirement? If
so, what was the reasoning for its failure?
How would other requirements for the Hamline Plan need to be modified in order to
accommodate for a second-language requirement?
What other questions do I need to address in order to accurately determine feasibility?
For my secondary research related to the first objective, I searched through online
databases and scientific organization webpages using key words or phrases such as benefits,
studying, and bilingualism. Initially, I used the Hamline University Bush Memorial Library
website and Google Scholar in an attempt to retrieve articles from databases such as JSTOR,
EBSCO, and ERIC. After failing to either locate or gain access to current articles specifically
related to the benefits of learning a second language for young adults, I successfully consulted
scientific organization webpages and news articles containing or linked to scholarly evidence.
For the second objective, my secondary research consisted of searching through
university websites for data sets and language requirements in order to compare with my
research results. Specifically, I searched Hamlines webpage for the Office of Institutional
Research to locate the most current data set for student demographics to determine whether or
not my survey subjects were accurately representative of the student body regarding race.
Because the student body is predominantly white, I wanted to determine to what degree the
questionnaire represented minority groups, which may have differing opinions on implementing
a second-language requirement. Moreover, I consulted Carleton Colleges webpage for their
second-language requirement to understand how they implement and assess their requirement.
By analyzing this prestigious universitys second language requirement, I was able

IMPLEMENTING A SECOND-LANGUAGE REQUIREMENT

to confidently analyze how much credit room Hamline would need to create. These comparisons
helped me verify the validity of my research and develop further criteria questions and
recommendations.
My primary research consisted of forty-minute personal interviews with Hamline faculty
members, who both served on the 2013 Hamline Plan revision task force. The first interview was
on February 25, 2015 with Professor Mark Olson of the English department, whom I asked
questions regarding Hamlines history with considering implementing a second language
requirement. After teaching me about this history as well as Hamlines political system
concerning general education requirements and revision, Professor Olson referred me to
Professor Deanna Thompson of the religion department, who co-chaired the 2013 UCC task
force. I interviewed Professor Thompson on March 25, 2015, and I asked her to elaborate on task
force history as well as provide her input regarding the following: perspective on implementing a
second-language requirement, needed research concerning revision feasibility, and tips on
sources and methodology.
Professors Deanna Thompson and Mark Olson helped compose further research
questions that could be answered within the time constraints of this project. These questions are
as follows:
Would the university need to hire more faculty?
What sacrifices must be made in other academic areas to accommodate for the new second
language requirement?
How do other schools implement this requirement logistically and financially?
Are enough students in support of formal second language study?
Which languages would students prefer to study if required?
To answer some of these questions, I administered a 10-question survey (provided in the
Appendix) to my student colleagues in Professional Writing and Rhetoric. This research
procedure ultimately lead to findings indicative of further needed research to determine logistical
feasibility.

IMPLEMENTING A SECOND-LANGUAGE REQUIREMENT

Results
Secondary Research
In a study on the cognitive benefits of being bilingual, Marian and Shook (2012) claimed
that the cognitive benefits of bilingualism are life-long as the brain is better able to process
information and impede cognitive decline, and this information is not exclusive to people who
are bilingual as a child. This evidence is useful in corroborating the claim that studying a second
language would indeed be beneficial to students long after college both cognitively and socially.
Further, in another article on the benefits of bilingualism, Merritt (2013) said that
speaking a foreign language improves the functionality of your brain by challenging it to
recognise, negotiate meaning, and communicate in different language systems (para. 3). This
reference to scholarly evidence also supports the positive return investment of instituting a
second language requirement.
Primary Research
The interviews with Professor Olson and Professor Thompson provided me with two
specific sets of information: (1) background knowledge concerning curriculum revision and (2)
concrete criteria questions for assessing feasibility. First, each expounded the undergraduate
political system in terms of passing motions, submitting proposals, and team member roles
specifically within the context of the 2013 Hamline Plan revision process. After learning about
this history and political system, I was able to, with the help of the professors, develop criteria
questions based on the failures of the 2013 task force. My understanding is that because of time
constraints, the task force was not able to conduct accurate research concerning funding, and the
provost ultimately dismissed the proposal (M. Olson, Ph.D. personal communication, February
25, 2015). The provosts primary reasoning for the proposal dismissal was based on lack of
evidence for a revenue neutral curriculum revision (D. Thompson, Ph.D., personal
communication, March 25, 2015). Based on this information, my subsequent research was
primarily aimed at answering the following questions:
Would the university need to hire more faculty?
What sacrifices must be made in other academic areas to accommodate for the new secondlanguage requirement?

IMPLEMENTING A SECOND-LANGUAGE REQUIREMENT

How do other schools implement this requirement logistically and financially?

Are enough students in support of formal second-language study?
Which languages would students prefer to study if required?
Using my survey, I collected demographic data specifically regarding racial identity to
determine to what degree the sample group was representative of Hamlines student body. Equal
representation is imperative in determining the true level of student support as well as accurately
determining further appropriate feasibility research. According to Hamlines website for the
Office of Institutional Research and Assessment, the current student body is predominantly
White or European American, making up 72% of the total population. Asian, Black, and
Hispanic populations each comprise roughly 6% of the total population. Figure 1 does illustrate a
general correspondence to the current undergraduate profile; however, this sample group is 14%
more White than what the class profile indicates and is missing representation from several
minority groups. Because White students tend to fluently speak English (the nationally and
arguably globally dominate language), their perspective towards language requirements if often
negative due to a lack of need. Therefore, accurate minority representation is important so that
the results are not disproportionately skewed by White Imperialist ideology.

Figure 1. Higher sum of White or European American representation in the sample group in
relation to the current student body.

IMPLEMENTING A SECOND-LANGUAGE REQUIREMENT

10

In order to begin answering my criteria question, Would the university need to hire more
faculty in order to accommodate for the logistical demands of implementing a second language
requirement, I collected data regarding student interest in Hamlines offered languages.
Although Spanish professors comprise the majority of Hamlines Department of Modern
Languages, figure 2 indicates an alarmingly large amount of interest in studying Spanish if
required, which indicates a potential need for hiring more faculty. However, this demonstrated
interest only provides me with direction regarding further necessary research in order to
determine whether or not hiring more faculty would be necessary. More specifically, I now know
that my primary focus is on consulting the sub-deparment of Spanish concerning questions such
as, Are current Spanish classes full?; How many courses are necessary for a beginning
student to reach proficiency in accordance with Phi Beta Kappa standards?; and Would the
department allow students to test out of courses, and how would students be assessed?

Figure 2. High interest in studying Spanish versus other offered languages.

As learned in my interview with Professor Mark Olson, implementing a second-language
requirement would need to be revenue neutral and thus require reduction in funding from other
academic areas. Therefore, I collected data regarding student opinion on Hamline Plan
requirements that are least crucial to student needs. As indicated in figure 3, at least 35% more

IMPLEMENTING A SECOND-LANGUAGE REQUIREMENT

students think that the Fine Arts and Identity (Gender, race, age, etc.) requirements are less
crucial to their education than any other. This data suggests that if the university were to cut
funding to make room for a second-language requirement, reduction of funding in these two
areas would be the most sensible. This data also provides direction for further research by
indicating a needed analysis of these two requirements regarding credit load, assessment, and
philosophy. This analysis would provide answers to questions such as, Could these
requirements reduce their credit load in order to make room for a second-language requirment
and still remain in accordance with Hamlines educational values?

Figure 3. Lower perceived value amongst students of Fine Arts and Identity requirements than
all others.

11

IMPLEMENTING A SECOND-LANGUAGE REQUIREMENT

12

Conclusions
The results of this study satisfied the first objective of determining whether or not second
language study would be beneficial for students, but the results did not satisfy the second
objective of determining logistical feasibility. Specifically, the evidence to support that
bilingualism is socially and cognitively beneficial is overwhelming, and therefore the primary
focus should be on determining logistical feasibility. Besides providing specific evidence to
support the claim that implementing a second-language requirement is indeed feasible, the
feedback and results rather fleshed out and narrowed further necessary research. These results
are highly valuable in that they do not suggest a lack of feasibility but rather suggest avenues
through which future researchers can determine if this requirement would be specifically feasible
for Hamline University. Ultimately, these results provide a platform on which future researchers
can base their objectives.

IMPLEMENTING A SECOND-LANGUAGE REQUIREMENT

13

Recommendations
Specifically, the questionnaire had three profound findings that lead to further research
criteria questions:
Roughly half of the students vehemently expressed disapproval of implementing a secondlanguage requirement do to a lack of necessity
85% of the students indicated that they would study Spanish if required
35% more students than any other requirement indicated that the Fine Arts and Humanities
requirements were least crucial to their education
These findings are valuable in that they provide direction and indicate a need for further research
in several areas. As learned from this study, my recommendations for the research necessary to
determine the feasibility of implementing a second language requirement are described in the
following paragraphs.
First, to ensure that the results of my survey are accurately representative of the Hamline
undergraduate student body, I recommend for future researchers to conduct another survey.
Researchers should administer the survey to the entire student body via email after receiving
approval from the office of institutional research. If support remains low, feasibility research will
need to consider the potential effects of this student perspective on the success of implementing a
second-language requirement.
Second, because Spanish is by far the most popular language, researchers need to
thoroughly consult Spanish faculty members to determine whether or not hiring faculty would be
necessary. Spanish faculty would have answers to relevant questions such as, Are Spanish
classes consistently full, and if so, how would the department attempt to accommodate more
students without hiring more staff? and What percentage of students already come in with
language proficiency ability and/or credit?
Lastly, I recommend researchers to consult other universities that already require secondlanguage proficiency to understand how they balance their language requirement with other
curriculum requirements. For example, according to Carpenter (2012), Carleton College requires
students without any second language experience to study at least to the fourth level and
sometimes fifth depending on the language. Because Hamline students expressed a lack of
perceived value in the humanities and fine arts, researchers should specifically consider revising
requirements associated with these fields to accommodate for the second-language requirement.

IMPLEMENTING A SECOND-LANGUAGE REQUIREMENT

14

References
Carpenter, S. (2012). Foreign languages at Carleton. Retrieved from https://apps.carleton.edu/
curricular/languages/requirement/
Lopez, M. H., & Gonzalez-Barrera, A. (2013). What is the future of Spanish in the United
States? Pew Research Center.Retrieved from http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-t
tank/2013/09/05/what-is-the-future-of-spanish-in-the-united-states/
Marian, V. & Shook, A. (2012). The cognitive benefits of being bilingual. Cerebrum.
Retrieved from http ://dana.org/Cerebrum/2012/The_ Cognitive_Benefits_of _
Being_Bilingual/
Merritt, A. (2013). Why learn a foreign language? Benefits of bilingualism. The Telegraph.
Retrieved from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationopinion/10126883/Whylearn-a-foreign-language-Benefits-of-bilingualism.html
Office of Institutional Research and Assessment, Hamline University. (2014). Basic data:
Undergraduate degree-seeking students. [Data File]. Retrieved from http://www.hamline.
edu/uploadedFiles/Hamline_WWW/Offices_-_Admin/Institutional_Research/Documents
/2014%20Undergraduate%20Quick%20Facts. pdf

IMPLEMENTING A SECOND-LANGUAGE REQUIREMENT

15

Appendix: Questionnaire
Dear Respondents,
As a fellow student in Professional Writing and Rhetoric, I write to you regarding
primary research related to the feasibility project. Please take ten minutes to participate in
this ten-question survey concerning foreign-language study.
The primary purpose of this survey is to gather data regarding student perspective on
compulsory second-language study. More specifically, your responses are intended to indicate to
what degree the Hamline Plan is satisfying student needs. Therefore, you will be questioned
regarding demographics, learning style, and personal interest.
Students from Professional Writing and Rhetoric are the only people participating in this
survey because of institutional research policy and time constraints. Your confidentiality is
guaranteed: your individual responses will be seen solely by me and potentially Professor Soria.
Thanks for your time.
Sincerely,
Matthew J. Buck

1. How do you identify racially?

American Indian or Alaskan Native
Asian
Black or African American
Hawaiian Native or Pacific Islander
Hispanic or Latino
White or European American
Two or More Races
Other

IMPLEMENTING A SECOND-LANGUAGE REQUIREMENT

2. In what year were you born?

3. Do you think Hamline should require students to study a foreign language?

Please explain.

4. What is your chosen or anticipated major?

Accounting
Anthropology
Art (Studio Arts)
Art History
Biochemistry
Biology
Business
Chemistry
Communication Studies
Creative Writing
Criminology and Criminal Justice
Digital Media Arts
East Asian Studies
Economics
Education
English
Exercise and Sport Science
Finance
German
Global Studies
Health Science
History

16

IMPLEMENTING A SECOND-LANGUAGE REQUIREMENT

International Business

16

IMPLEMENTING A SECOND-LANGUAGE REQUIREMENT

Latin American Studies

Legal Studies
Linguistics
Management
Marketing
Mathematics
Middle East Studies
Modern Languages
Music
Philosophy
Physics
Political Science
Pre-Engineering
Pre-Medical
Psychology
Public Service
Religion
Social Studies
Social Justice
Sociology
Spanish
Theater Arts
Women's Studies
Other

5. To what degree do you think formal foreign-language study would help you
perform in careers associated with your chosen or anticipated major?
Not Helpful, Slightly Helpful, Moderately Helpful, or Extremely Helpful?
6. Please explain the reasoning behind your response to question number five.

17

IMPLEMENTING A SECOND-LANGUAGE REQUIREMENT

17

IMPLEMENTING A SECOND-LANGUAGE REQUIREMENT

18

7. If the Hamline Plan required you to study a foreign language, which of the
following offered languages would you choose?
Spanish
German
French
Chinese

8. Which of the following language support programs would you anticipate being
most helpful?
Personal Tutoring
Conversation Circles
Supplemental Computer Programs (e.g., Rosetta Stone)

9. Which of the following Hamline Plan requirements do you think is least

crucial to your overall education?
Formal Reasoning (R)
Quantitative Reasoning (M)
Fine Arts (F)
Natural Science (N)
Social Science (S)
International issues (I)
Gender, race, age, class, minority ethnic identity, ability, sexual orientation (G)

10. Please explain the reasoning behind your response to question number nine.