University President Stephen Joel Trachtenberg told top administrators that GW should establish a degree-seeking program in the translation and interpretation of languages important to national intelligence.
The proposed program would focus on “strategic languages” such as Arabic, Chinese, Russian, Farsi and Korean. Graduates would be in high demand in today’s world with such technical training, Trachtenberg said in an interview with The Hatchet.
“(This is) a potential service to the country, something good for the students and good for the country,” Trachtenberg said.
Trachtenberg outlined his idea for the program in a letter sent Dec. 8 to Donald Lehman, executive vice president of Academic Affairs.
His proposal comes in conjunction with President George W. Bush’s announcement earlier this month that his administration hopes to further the study of languages that are critical to national security. He has requested $114 million from Congress for fiscal year 2007 for such programs, though the funds would go toward language studies all the way from kindergarten to the graduate school level.
“If it is possible to make this financially viable, this is a very good opportunity,” Lehman said.
On Monday, Carol Sigelman, associate vice president for Graduate Studies and Academic Affairs; Roger Whitaker, dean of the College of Professional Studies; and William Frawley, dean of the Columbian College of Arts and Sciences, were scheduled to meet and discuss the viability of such a program.
But the program could take some time to get off the ground.
“We all have all sorts of thinking to do about this program … this stage could take a while,” Sigelman said.
If a formal proposal is written, it will then navigate through a long line of committees and deans before landing at the office of Academic Affairs, where it could still be amended or rejected.
“(The process) could get done during a year. It could take longer,” Sigelman said.
Pending the group’s conclusions, committees will be assigned to investigate the demand for such a program, its costs, the type of degree that would be offered and where to house the course.
“My first impulse was – note the past tense – to piggyback this program (on) our existing language departments. I am no longer convinced that this is the solution, though I have not ruled it out,” Trachtenberg wrote in the letter.
Instead Trachtenberg proposed a plan parallel to the UW 20 writing program, which he defined as a technical initiative. In the translation program he wants to shift study away from the cultural or aesthetic aspects of a language, as is currently studied within the language departments.
“We need to consider our competitions, resources and also if (the program) adds to our goal of ‘selected excellence’ as a research university,” said Young-Key Kim-Renaud, chair of the department of East Asian Languages and Literatures. “None of the current faculty members in our department is able to offer such a training program.”
Finances will be critical to the discussions surrounding the project, but Trachtenberg said he would not necessarily rely on Bush’s proposal.
“If the federal government ever gets around to promoting translation and interpretation, so much the better. But I see no reason to wait for that to happen and every reason not to,” Trachtenberg said in his letter.
But at the same time, Trachtenberg seems to recognize the financial realities of designing a new program like this.
“My business is to keep coming up with new, interesting ideas. Sometimes I get great ideas, but I can’t afford them,” he said.
There is only one bachelor’s program in translation and interpretation, Trachtenberg wrote, at California State University-Long Beach, with a sole concentration in Spanish. There are five master’s-level interpretation and translation curriculums throughout the entire nation.
With the University’s proximity to the State Department, Pentagon, FBI, CIA and large corporations, Trachtenberg believes the demand for graduates from a translation program could be great.
