EVALUATION OF

THE SPANISH AS THE FIRST FOREIGN LANGUAGE (SAFFL)

INITIATIVE of the

GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO

FINAL REPORT

Submitted by

LLOYD W. PUJADAS AND

ALVIN ASHTON

June 2010

Table of Contents 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................1

2 Evaluation Approach ...................................................................................................................5

3 Programme Analysis and Recommendations.............................................................................16

4 Integration of Evaluation Results/Recommendations................................................................90

5 Recommendations on the Way Forward ...................................................................................95

6 THE WAY FORWARD - THE NEXT STEPS....................................................................................103

7 BIBLIOGRAPHY/REFERENCES....................................................................................................143

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY1. Achievement of the objectives of the consultancy, as defined in the Terms of

Reference (reproduced at Annex A of this Report) constitutes the main purpose of the evaluation study. Its Scope of Work is extremely wide (see page xxx - items (a) to (i)).

2. The evaluation is intended to provide the key decision-makers in the Ministry of Public Administration and Cabinet with the relevant data, analysis and evaluation of the required information on the SAFFL Initiative/Programme which satisfactorily address any particular concerns or questions which they may have or may have had about the value of the SAFFL Initiative/Programme and its accomplishments over the five-year life of the Secretariat for the Implementation of Spanish (SIS), the Unit charged with the responsibility for implementing this Initiative.

3. The findings and recommendations of this study should greatly assist the relevant decision-makers in deciding or having to decide whether to terminate, continue, improve or modify the SAFFL Programme in its present configuration.

4. The Report is organised as follows:

Section 1 - Introduction

Section 2 - The Methodology for Carrying Out the Evaluation

Section 3 - Description, Analysis, Findings Interpretation/Discussion and Recommendations for each of the five (5) major components/stages of the SAFFL Initiative/Programme: (a) Programme Initiation; (b) Programme Installation; (c) Programme Implementation; (d) Programme Products/Outputs; (e) Programme Structure/Organisation/Resources

Section 4 - Integration of Evaluation Results related to the five (5) components/stages of the SAFFL Programme;

Section 5 - Recommendations and the Way Forward

5. The following are some of the main findings of the evaluation:

i. The objectives of the SIS/SAFFL were not measurable.i

ii. There was confusion between the SAFFL as a policy statement/decision requiring its own goals/objectives and those of a coordinating agency, as the SIS was intended to be, which then determined its own objectives.

iii. The SAFFL Initiative/Programme was neither clearly conceptualised nor well thought out.

iv. The SIS engaged in a plethora of activities which made management of them extremely difficult. It used a scatter-shot approach. It did not target nor prioritise its activities. It seemed to base its achievements on numbers (number of activities in as many areas as possible). The achievements could not be measured and evaluated because the objectives were not specific, measurable, achievable, realistic and time-bound.

6. The following are some of the main recommendations of the consultants:

i. The SAFFL Initiative/Programme should be located within the framework of a national language policy.

ii. The SAFFL Initiative/Programme should continue but carefully reviewed and re-conceptualised.

iii. The SIS should be restructured and reorganised to perform its role of coordinating, facilitating, supporting mechanism effectively and efficiently.

iv. A strategic plan and an implementation plan derived from it should be developed for the SAFFL Initiative.

v. Serious consideration should be given to the introduction of Distance Education delivery modes as well as combinations of distance education and traditional delivery modes of instruction (dual modes).

vi. There must be greater collaboration and cooperation at the planning and implementation stages of projects/sub-projects between the Coordinating/Implementation Unit and the public/private sector beneficiaries of SAFFL related projects/programmes.

7. The Report concludes by suggesting the next steps in the way forward (see Section 5 of the Report). These include:

i. The appointment by Cabinet of a Joint National Committee/Council for Languages comprising professional foreign language educators (based in the Universities - U.W.I. and UTT) and representatives of the public and private sectors.

ii

ii. The Joint National Committee/Council for Languages (JNCL) advises Government on public language policy for English, Trinidad Creole English, Spanish and other foreign languages.

iii. The appointment by Cabinet of a Task Force on Language Education which will work closely with the JNCL.

iv. The development of a strategic and corresponding action plan to implement the national language policy and the reconfigured SAFFL Initiative/Programme.

iii

ii

Introduction

EVALUATION OF THE SPANISH AS THE FIRST FOREIGN LANGUAGE (SAFFL)

FINAL EVALUATION REPORT

1 Introduction 1. As stated in the Terms of Reference (TOR) and reiterated in the contract for

consultancy services, with reference to the Evaluation of the Spanish as the First Foreign Language (SAFFL) Initiative of the Government of Trinidad and Tobago, awarded by the Ministry of Public Administration (MPA), there is a requirement for a final report. This report is intended to fulfil that requirement.

2. Our evaluation of the SAFFL Initiative had as its specific focus achievement of the objectives of the consultancy as defined in the Terms of Reference:

i. To determine how well the SAFFL initiative has met its original intention to make Spanish the First Foreign Language in Trinidad and Tobago;

ii. To review the attainability of the Initiatives goals;

iii. To determine what were the obstacles/challenges, if the SIS has not fulfilled the intended purpose;

iv. To assess the continued relevance of such an initiative;

v. To make recommendations for the way forward for Trinidad and Tobago in the context of its language initiatives as part of Vision 2020;

vi. To take account, in respect of (v) above, of the economic, political and other circumstances which initially precipitated the decision that Spanish should be the first foreign language;

3. The evaluation study also required that the consultants respond directly to the Scope of Work also defined in the Terms of Reference. As can be seen from the Scope of Work in the TOR cited below, the assignment represented a formidable and challenging task for the evaluators:

a. Examine the original goals and objectives of the establishment of the SIS in the context of national objectives which gave rise to its establishment and make comments thereon;

1

b. Undertake an analysis of the political, social and economic circumstances in the region that may have influenced the choice of Spanish as the first foreign language and make recommendations as to the continued relevance of this language;

c. Review the work of the SIS including its subcommittees and its outreach programme, in light of the objectives of its establishment;

d. Review the management of the SIS to determine the fit of the structure and staffing with the attainment of the stated goals of the SIS;

e. Interview key stakeholders, including line ministries, relevant public and private sector institutions, the relevant Embassies and Ministries to determine the efficiency of the SAFFL Initiative;

f. Based on the on-going discussions at the political level regarding the development of regional integration policies, set out the options of the Government for Trinidad and Tobago regarding a language of choice, discuss the pros and the cons of each option and make recommendations on the language of choice for the consideration of the client;

g. Recommend options for the pursuit of the goal for the acquisition of foreign language skills and the target audiences based on the priorities which can be gleaned from vision 2020;

h. Design a preliminary programme for the attainment of (g) above and propose an appropriate organisational structure; and

i. Make recommendations on evaluation criteria and indicators to be used to measure the countrys attainment of various stages of its goal of foreign language fluency.

4. Accordingly, the evaluation study was designed to elicit credible, useful and reliable information upon which the analysis and evaluation findings related to the Objectives of Consultancy and Scope of Work (reproduced above) would be based.

5. It seeks, as a consequence , to furnish the key decision-makers in the Ministry of Public Administration and the Government of Trinidad and Tobago with the relevant data, analysis, interpretation and evaluation of the needed information on the SAFFL Initiative/Programme - which satisfactorily address any special concerns, issues or questions which they may have or may have had about the value of the SAFFL Initiative/Programme and its accomplishments over the five-year life of the Secretariat for the Implementation of Spanish (SIS), the Unit charged with the responsibility for implementing this Initiative/Programme.

6. More importantly, the findings and recommendations of this evaluation project should greatly assist the relevant decision-makers in deciding or having to decide

2

whether to terminate, continue, improve or modify the existing SAFFL Programme. In addition, based on its findings, the consultants have included several concrete recommendations concerning the way forward where the focus was on our response to Consultancy Objectives (iv), (v) and (vi) cited at paragraph 1.2 above and Scope of Work items (f), (g), (h) and (i) quoted at paragraph 1.3 above.

7. The rest of the Report which follows is organised as follows:

Section 2- The Methodology for Carrying Out the Evaluation

Section 3- Description, Analysis, Findings.

This section covers interpretation/discussion and recommendations for each of the five (5) major components of the SAFFL Initiative/Programme:

a. Programme Initiation

b. Programme Installation

c. Programme Implementation

d. Programme Products/Outputs and

e. Programme Structure/Organisation/Resources

Section 4- Integration of Evaluation Results related to the five (5) Components of the SAFFL Programme;

Section 5- Recommendations and the Way Forward.

3

The Methodology for carrying out the Evaluation

4

2 Evaluation Approach

1. The evaluation approach, methodology and plan for this undertaking were all designed to elicit, interpret and evaluate the information required for responding to the needs/concerns/questions of its primary audience- the Programme Manager, the Permanent Secretary and the Ministry of Public Administration, the Cabinet, the Programme Director of the Secretariat for the Implementation of Spanish (SIS) as well as the Chairperson of the Steering Committee for Spanish as the First Foreign Language Programme (SCSAFFLP).

2. A combination of the following evaluation approaches was employed:

i. Objectives-oriented Approach

ii. Management-oriented Approach

iii. Expertise-oriented Approach

N.B. The above-mentioned Evaluation Approaches are briefly described in the Glossary annexed to this Report.

3. In view of the principal users, uses, and purpose(s) to be served by the evaluation findings and recommendations, the Management-Oriented Evaluation approach predominated. Consequently, a systems approach utilising the CIPP Evaluation Model largely informed the evaluation methods/techniques selected. It is to be noted that the first letter of each type of evaluation - context, input, process and product - has been used to form the acronym CIPP (Please see Glossary for more information on the CIPP Model).

2.1 Evaluation Perspective1. In essence, the evaluation was undertaken from two major vantage points:

i. From the perspective of the Secretariat for the Implementation of Spanish (SIS) and the Steering Committee for Spanish as the First Foreign Language Programme - the consultants analysed, interpreted and evaluated the operations of the SIS and the SCSAFFLP and their achievements on the basis of what they perceived to be their mandate, the objectives they set themselves, the activities in which they engaged to achieve these objectives, their achievements and evaluation of their achievements; and

5

ii. From the perspective of the consultants - namely the flaws and/or deficiencies which the consultants considered to be inherent in the SIS/SCSAFFLP Initiative/Programme, their conceptualisation of the Initiative/Programme and the approach/method of its implementation.

2.2 Data Gathering Methods1. For each evaluation question/issue/objective selected the required information

needs and relevant information sources were determined. The following data-gathering methods/instruments, sources of information and their corresponding data analysis procedures were employed in this evaluation study:

Discussions/Focus Group Meetings with the following critical stakeholders in the SAFFL/Initiative/SIS Programme:

Members of the SCSAFFLP

Members of the SIS staff

Representatives/Providers of Spanish Programmes organised by the SIS

Representatives of Government Ministries

Persons/Representatives of communities involved in SIS Outreach programmes - e.g. the Spanish Language Acquisition Programme (SLAP)

Representatives of the Private Sector

Curriculum Officer(s) (Modern Languages) of the Ministry of Education

2. Regrettably, time constraints and scheduling difficulties did not permit the consultants to hold meetings with the following important groups and/or individuals: the Trinidad and Tobago Manufacturers Association (TTMA), the Trinidad and Tobago Unified Teachers Association (TTUTA), UTT, UWI Language/Literature/Language Education Lecturers, Secondary School Spanish Teachers, and randomly selected members of the public and representative(s) of the Tobago House of Assembly (THA). In the opinion of the consultants, their inability to meet with these groups/organisations /individuals have not, in any significant way, compromised the integrity of the findings of our Report.

Structured Interviews with some of the stakeholders who participated in the Focus Group meetings

Documentary Evidence:

6

3. Critical examination of SIS/SCSAFFLP documents, Cabinet Notes and Minutes and other pertinent records and publications such as planning documents, programmes, instructional packages, publicity packages, files, minutes of various meetings of the Steering Committee, SIS Subcommittees, written agreements with various Ministries and Service Providers, SIS Publications, Financial Records, Budgeting Allocation, SIS Staff CV's and Job Descriptions, etc.

Review of Relevant Literature related to Bilingual Education, Foreign Language Education, Language Policy and Language Planning-National, Regional and International Language Policies, Research in Language acquisition and language learning and Best Practice approaches to Foreign Language Education Policies, Planning and Programmes.

2.3 Data Analysis1. Data analysis instruments and procedures commonly used in qualitative

evaluation approaches/models such as those described earlier in this report (see Section 2.2 above) were utilised in analysing the data obtained.

2.3.1 Interpreting and Evaluating the Data 1. Based on the criteria agreed upon by the consultants, the MPA Programme

Manager, and specialists in foreign language teaching/learning, the standards/criteria for interpreting and evaluating the data were applied.

2.3.2 Evaluation Plan 1. The evaluation plan matrix, which follows, attempts to summarise the evaluators

approach, evaluation questions, objectives, tasks/activities, consultancy objectives, scope of work, decision-making areas, information needed, information sources and methods of collecting information which shaped the evaluation while applying the previously described models and methodology (see Section 2 above).

N.B. It is to be noted that under the Consultancy Objectives column, the specific objective(s) is/are referred to are consistent with the numbering system used at paragraph 1.2 above, for example, Consultancy Objective (i) To determine how well the SAFFL Initiative has met its original intention to make Spanish the First Foreign Language in Trinidad and Tobago is referred to in its abbreviated firm as co (i) (see paragraph 1.2 above). We have also included in the Matrix a column under the heading Decision-Making Area. The decision-making areas are:

7

i. Judging the worth of the Governments Spanish as the First Foreign Language (SAFFL) Initiative.

ii. Determining to what extent the SAFFL Initiative has met its original intention to make Spanish the First Foreign Language of Trinidad and Tobago.

iii. Assessing the attainability of the Initiatives goals.

iv. Determining the degree to which the SIS has successfully executed its mandate.

v. Assessing the continued relevance and viability of the SAFFL Initiative in terms of its goals, current organisational structure/arrangements, institutional capacity, resources (including costs) in order to decide whether to terminate, continue, improve or modify the existing SAFFL Programme.

vi. Weighing the options for the pursuit of the goal for the acquisition of foreign language skills and the target audience(s) based on the priorities which can be gleaned from Vision 2020 (and also resulting from the evaluation of findings and feasible recommendations for the Way Forward).

N.B. In the evaluation plan matrix, as in the case of the Consultancy Objectives, a particular decision-making area as identified above is referred to in its abbreviated form. For example, decision-making area (iii) assessing the attainability of the Initiatives goals appears coded as DMA (iii)

8

9

EVALUATION PLAN MATRIX

Evaluative Questions/ Objectives/ Issues/ Concerns

Consultancy Objective

Decision-Making

Area

Information Needed Information Sources Method of Collecting

Information

Duration

1. What is the worth / value of the Governments Spanish as the First Foreign Language Initiative?

Do the terms first foreign language and bilingualism represent two distinct concepts? Are they interchangeable?

What need(s) did/ does the SAFFL Initiative meet?

Should the SAFFL Programme be continued, terminated or modified?

Has the SAFFL fulfilled its original intention?

What does SAFFL Initiative really mean?

Was/Is there shared understanding/agreement among the key stakeholders of what it means?

CO (i)CO (ii)CO (iii)CO (iv)CO (vi)

DMA (i)DMA (ii)DMA (iii)DMA (iv)DMA (v)DMA (vi)

Ratings of the worth of the SAFFL Initiative

Arguments/ Influential views related to the value of the Programme- from the time it began to the present.

Expert opinion re the concepts of bilingualism and first foreign language

Monitoring and Evaluation information obtained during the implementation of the SAFFL Programme.

Primary Audience Chairman,

Members of the Steering Committee

UWI Documentary

Records of the Ministry of Trade

Minutes of meetings

Foreign Embassies and Missions

Line Ministers TTUTA Chamber of

Commerce TMA SIS documents

Structured Interviews

Meetings/ Discussions

Analysis of documentary evidence

Survey Questionnaires

Expert Opinions sought (i.e. from foreign language educators, teachers, linguists and applied linguists.)

60 Days

Evaluative Questions/ Objectives/ Consultancy Decision- Information Needed Information Sources Method of Duration

10

Issues/ Concerns Objective Making Area

Collecting Information

2. To what extent has the SAFFL initiative met its original intention to make Spanish the First Foreign Language (SAFFL) of Trinidad and Tobago?

Were the SIS Programmes and activities governed by clear, specific, measurable, observable, achievable, realistic and time-based objectives?

Was there a monitoring and evaluation system put in place to track the SIS implementation activities?

Were the providers of SIS Spanish instructional programmes guided and supervised by the SIS?

CO (i)CO (ii)CO (iii)

DMA (ii)DMA (iii)DMA (iv)

Documents related to programme planning

Documents identifying behavioural objectives for each Programme and/or Activity

Sample Curricula/ Programmes

SIS Website Information

TV and Radio SIS scripts or video clips/ footage if available

Monitoring and Evaluation Tracking Documents

Views of those involved as to performance of the Programme

Programme Director, SIS

Assistant Director, SIS

Members of SIS Staff

Chairman and other members of the Steering Committee

Providers of SIS Programmes

Representatives of Embassies and Missions

UWI Language and Literature Specialists

Language Teaching Specialists

Obtaining copies of relevant documents- programmes, memos, minutes of meetings- from the SIS and the Steering Committee

Distributing Survey Questionnaires to be filled out by the line Ministries and other key stakeholders

Meetings/ Discussions

Structured Interviews

60 Days

11

Evaluative Questions/ Objectives/ Issues/ Concerns

Consultancy Objective

Decision-Making

Area

Information Needed Information Sources Method of Collecting

Information

Duration

3. What obstacles/ challenges, can be identified, if the SIS has not fulfilled the intended purpose?

CO (iii) DMA (iv)DMA (ii)

Documentary evidence from SIS and the Steering Committee where discussions took place or memos/ papers were presented that addressed and/ or spoke to problems/ challenges the SIS was encountering in the implementation of its programmes

Information related to the institutional capacity of the SIS

Information concerning the discrepancy between intention and achievement of stated objectives

SIS SCSAFFLP Key stakeholders Experts on

Objectives- Oriented Evaluation Approach

Collecting documents, papers, minutes of meetings

Structured Interviews

Survey Questionnaires

Memoranda from foreign language teaching specialists

Review of foreign language education literature

Views of Curriculum Officers

60 Days

12

4. Is the SAFFL Initiative still relevant? Should the programme be

continued, terminated, improved or modified?

CO (iv)CO (v)CO (vi)

DMA (i)DMA (iii)DMA (v)DMA (vi)

Evaluation Findings/ Recommendations

Evaluation Report Primary Audience

Consultants Evaluation Report

60 Days

5. Determine the design and outline of a programme which leads and directs the acquisition/learning of the preferred language recommended by the consultants report. Design an appropriate

organizational structure and draft job descriptions of the key managerial and technical positions.

Recommend evaluation criteria and indicators to measure the countrys attainment of the various stages of its goal of foreign language proficiency

CO (iv)CO (v)CO (vi)

DMA (v)DMA (vi)

SWOT analysis of existing foreign language national capability

Environmental scan of Trinidad and Tobago linguistic/ situation

Research related to Political, Economic, Educational, Social, Cultural, Linguistic, and Technological factors/issues affecting foreign language education

60 Days

13

2.4 Reporting the Evaluation The format and structure for reporting the remaining part of the evaluation is as

follows:

Section 3- Description, Analysis, Findings, Interpretation/Discussion and Recommendations related to each of the five (5) components of the SAFFL Initiative/Programme

Section 4- Integration of Evaluation Findings/Results related to the five (5) components

Section 5- Recommendations and the Way Forward

14

Analysis, Findings and Recommendations for the SAFFL

Programme:

15

3 Programme Analysis and Recommendations

3.1 Genesis of the SAFFL Initiative Programme InitiationThe following chronicles the genesis of the SAFFL Initiative

i. 2003- Position Paper of the Ministry of Trade and Industry on Bilingualism and the FTAA, prepared in the context of Trinidad and Tobagos bid to be selected as the capital/headquarters of the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), triggered the SAFFL Initiative.

Inter alia the paper stated that

with the FTAA looming in 2005, and with Spanish fast becoming the

lingua franca of business and travel, the time is ripe for Trinidad and

Tobago to put in place a national agenda for the oral training of all

citizens to become bilingual in Spanish because soon Spanish skills will

be essential for communication and survival in the global village.

ii. 2003- Following the Ministry of Trade and Industrys (MTI) position paper, Cabinet by Minute No. 3091 dated December 03 2003, agreed to the appointment of a Steering Committee on Bilingualism (SCOB) to spearhead the initiative of making Trinidad and Tobago a bilingual society

iii. 2004- In June, 2004, the Minister of Trade and Industry submitted as a Note for Cabinet, the Report and Recommendations of the Steering Committee on Bilingualism, Cabinet agreed to its recommendations.

iv. 2004- Pursuant to the recommendations of the SCOB and their endorsement by the Ministry of Trade and Industry in the Note for Cabinet referred to at (iii) above, Cabinet agreed:

a. That Spanish be designated the First Foreign Language of Trinidad and Tobago; the bilingual initiative to consequently be described in terms of Spanish as the First Foreign Language (SAFFL);

b. To the establishment of a Secretariat for the Implementation of Spanish (SIS) in the Ministry of Trade and Industry, to coordinate, support and facilitate the planning and implementation of the various

16

projects in having Spanish as the First Foreign Language of Trinidad and Tobago.

c. To the employment, on contract, of specified staff for a period of two (2) years.

d. That the Steering Committee on the Bilingualism be reconstituted as indicated in the Cabinet Minute and be known as the Steering Committee for Spanish as the First Foreign Language Programme (SASAFFLP)

e. That the terms of reference of the reconstituted committee be as follows:

To ensure that, in accordance with the Government policy the Spanish as the First Foreign Language Programme is designed to meet its agreed goals and objectives

To ensure that the programme achieves its agreed goals and objectives by overseeing its implementation, monitoring and evaluation activities, human, physical, financial and technical

To make recommendations for:

the provision of the necessary resources for the effective implementation of the programme;

the approval of the programmes budget

the procurement of goods and services (including contracts/consultants for technical assistance) required for implementing the programme.

v. 2004- The same Cabinet Note alluded to at (iii) above, had also recommended the establishment of a Programme Implementation Unit (earlier referred to as the SIS at (iv) b above) whose principal role will be that of a coordinating, supporting and facilitating mechanism for effectively accomplishing the varied and various tasks and activities involved in the preparation, initiation, planning, design, development, implementation and evaluation stages of the Spanish as the first Foreign Language (SAFFL) Programme which consists of several projects and sub-projects.

Cabinets decision to accept this recommendation of the Steering

Committee on Bilingualism took affect when the Secretariat for the

17

Implementation of Spanish (SIS) was duly established on September

09, 2004.

3.2 Composition of the SAFFL Steering Committee 1. As approved by Cabinet, this Steering Committee was to be chaired by the

Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Trade and Industry with the Principal, UWI, St. Augustine, as Deputy Chairperson. The Programme Director (i.e. Director of SIS) would be an ex officio member. In addition, the reconstituted Steering Committee included sixteen (16) other members listed below. Members/Representatives of the following Ministries/Organisations (Persons of senior rank with decision-making authority):

Ministry of Trade and Industry

Ministry of Education

Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Ministry of Science, Technology and Tertiary Education

Ministry of National Security

Ministry of Tourism

Ministry of Works and Transport

Ministry of Social Development

Ministry of Public Administration and Information

Ministry of Culture, Community Development and Gender Affairs

Ministry of Planning and Development

College of Science, Technology and Applied Arts of Trinidad and Tobago (COSTAATT)

University of the West Indies (UWI)

Tourism and Industrial Development Company (TIDCO)

Trinidad and Tobago Chamber of Industry and Commerce

Trinidad and Tobago Manufacturers Association (TTMA)

18

3.3 Evaluation Questions - Issues1. With respect to the genesis of the SAFFL Initiative and the SAFFL/SIS

Programme Initiation Component/Stage, the consultants examined the pertinent documents (viz. Cabinet Notes/Cabinet Minutes) in the light of the following evaluative questions/issues:

a. What prompted the SAFFL Initiative?

b. What was the justification for the SAFFL Initiative?

c. What was the goal/objective of the SAFFL Programme?

d. Was the SAFFL Initiative/Programme well thought out and/or clearly conceptualised?

e. Does bilingualism, bilingual education (in terms of Spanish/English, English/Spanish) equate with Spanish as the First Foreign Language (SAFFL)?

f. Is Spanish as the First Foreign Language (SAFFL) a government policy decision (to be supported, of course, by policy goals/objectives) or a policy statement expressed somewhat mistakenly, misleadingly and bewilderingly as make SAFFL a reality or alternatively as making Trinidad and Tobago a bilingual society?

g. What were the structures/mechanisms established to implement the SAFFL Programme/Initiative?

3.3.1 Findings, Analysis and Evaluation - Programme Initiation1. In this section the consultants respond to the evaluation questions posed at

3.3.1. above.

a. What prompted the SAFFL Initiative/Programme?

3.3.1.1 Findings

1. The Initiative originated in the strong bid of Trinidad and Tobago to be selected as the capital of the FTAA. It could be interpreted as an important part of the overall strategy to strengthen this countrys bid. Bearing in mind that Trinidad and Tobago had to win the support of a majority of the Spanish-speaking countries which were to form the FTAA, the SAFFL policy was intended to send a clear signal that, despite the fact that Trinidad and Tobago was an English-speaking country, Spanish should not be viewed as a language barrier to its selection as the FTAA Headquarters. The nations Spanish as the First Foreign

19

Language (SAFFL) policy demonstrated its firm commitment to preparing all its citizens to achieve communication proficiency in Spanish to the highest level possible-in a few short years time. As previously, it is in this context that the Ministry of Trade and Industrys 2003 Position Paper and its companion document Action Plan Towards a Bilingual Society had their genesis. It was this bid, strongly led by the Minister of Trade and Industry that precipitated the Governments SAFFL policy decision. It was a decision that directly resulted in the establishment of the Steering Committee for Spanish as the First Foreign Language Programme (SCSAFFLP) and its implementation/coordinating Unit, the Secretariat for the Implementation of Spanish (SIS).

b. What was the justification for the SAFFL Initiative?

3.3.1.2 FINDINGS

1. The consultants found acceptable the justification for Spanish being chosen as the language of choice as expressed in several SIS Diga Que S publications and SIS reports:

Spanish is increasingly becoming the language of trade and industry in our region. In fact, accordingly to CSO statistics, an estimated $1.3b was exported to 14 Spanish-speaking countries between January to September 2004.

Trinidad and Tobago, if it is to be competitive in the global economy, needs to strengthen, to a significant degree, its national capability in Spanish (including in the area of translation and interpreting)

Benefits, as a result of the SAFFL Initiative, include the potential for increased investment in the financial sector and in the oil and gas sector (from Spain) and greater economic growth (expansion of export markets as well). The involvement of the business sector in the SAFFL/SIS instructional programmes would make Trinidad and Tobago more attractive on the global market.

Trinidad and Tobagos proximity to Venezuela and the predominantly Spanish-speaking countries of the South American continent (the twin island republic is located just seven miles away from the South American mainland) makes proficiency in the Spanish language not only an asset but a necessity.

20

As far as the FTAA was concerned, of the thirty-four (34) countries expressing interest in the FTAA proposal, Trinidad and Tobago and the other interested English-speaking CARICOM member states, constituted a significant linguistic minority.

The goal of promoting bilingualism was in keeping with Trinidad and Tobagos Vision 2020-achievement of developed country status by 2020.

As a consequence of being the headquarters of the FTAA it was envisaged that the country would witness a dramatic increase in the number of Spanish-speaking visitors and hence the need for our countrys citizens to be bilingual.

c. What was/were the goal(s)/objective(s) of the SAFFL Initiative/ Programme?

3.3.1.3 FINDINGS

1. According to an undated SIS publication, the SAFFL was a long-term vision with specific goals. These goals were:

1. To facilitate a new learning environment through which the citizens of Trinidad and Tobago will learn and adopt Spanish as the First Foreign Language (SAFFL) by the year 2020.

2. To ensure there is a clear understanding of the cultures, which are emerging in our society and their impact on the cultural landscape of Trinidad and Tobago.

3. To ensure there is public awareness of and support for the Spanish as the First Foreign Language (SAFFL) Initiative.

2. The evaluators found, with respect to the above-listed goals, that:

1. these specific goals were not measurable. For example, it was unclear what (the first goal) facilitate a new learning environment really meant. This objectives/ specific goals were both vague and impossible to measure. It needs to be rewritten.

We believe that citizens can learn Spanish as their first foreign language but not adopt it since Governments SAFFL policy has already done so.

2. the second goal to ensure there is a clear understanding of the cultures is somewhat baffling as it seems to assume that Spanish-

21

speaking cultures would soon be invading and impacting negatively the culture of Trinidad and Tobago. The evaluators concluded that there was no convincing justification for this objective/goal. They could find no reasonable basis for the SIS assumption.

3. The words to ensure which begin the statement of the third goal should be replaced by the words to promote. Not only is to ensure not measurable but it is difficult to understand how one can ensure public support and awareness since the public cannot be compelled to do so.

3. The consultants observed that the goals of the SAFFL Initiative seemed to be identical with these objectives of the SIS which were stated in the SIS/SIE-Secretariat for the Implementation of Spanish Annual Report-December 2005, p.p. 4-5 as follows:

1. Facilitate a new learning environment through which the citizens of Trinidad and Tobago will learn and adopt Spanish as the First Foreign Language by the year 2020.

2. Ensure that there is a clear understanding of the cultures which are emerging in our society and their impact on the cultural landscape of Trinidad and Tobago.

3. Ensure there is public awareness of and support for the Spanish as the First Foreign Language

4. Nevertheless, in the Directors Monthly Report-January 2006 (Director of SIS letter to the Steering Committee dated January 18, 2006), these objectives, while remaining similar to the objectives for the SAFFL and SIS cited above, were restated with some changes in their wording as follows:

In the Directors first quarterly report (September 2004-December 2004) three main objectives to attain the above goal (viz. the goal of making Spanish the First Foreign Language of Trinidad and Tobago) were stated:

1. Structure a new learning environment through which citizens of Trinidad and Tobago, students, public servants and business persons alike, will learn and adopt Spanish as the First Foreign Language by the year 2020 and beyond.

2. To ensure that the public buys in to the Initiative of learning SAFFL (Source- Directors Monthly Report-January 2006, p.4).

22

5. The comments of the consultants with respect the specific goals of the SAFFL equally apply to the rewritten objectives of the SIS. We have treated the goals/objectives of both the SAFFL and the SIS at some length because of their pivoted importance in the SAFFL Programme. It was these objectives which informed/drove all the activities/projects/programmes of the SIS. Later, in this Report, the consultants will return to the subject of the SAFFL and SIS objectives and how we view them - i.e. our perspective.

d. Was the SAFFL Initiative/Programme well thought out and/or properly conceptualized?

3.3.1.4 FINDINGS

1. The consultants are of the considered view that the SAFFL Initiative/Programme was not well thought out by the SIS and that the Steering Committee (SCSAFFLP) must bear some responsibility for this weakness because, in their overseer/supervisor role, they approved, if not formally, at least tacitly, the SIS flawed implementation plans, which showed unmistakeable signs of the absence of careful planning and deliberations on its part.

3.3.1.5 FINDINGS

1. What is the evidence for the consultants opinion?

2. They based their opinion on the following observations:

1) In June 2004, the Minister of Trade and Industry submitted, as a Note for Cabinet, the Report and Recommendations of the Steering Committee on Bilingualism. Cabinet agreed to its main recommendations (see pp.16 paragraph 3.1 (iv) above). The following recommendations to which Cabinet agreed, concern us here:

That Spanish be designated the First Foreign Language of Trinidad and Tobago, the bilingual initiative to consequently be described in terms of the Spanish as the First Foreign Language.

That the Steering Committee on Bilingualism be reconstituted as indicated in the Cabinet Minute and be known as the Steering Committee for Spanish ass the First Foreign Language Programme (SCSAFFLP).

The role of the SCSAFFLP was to ensure that, in accordance with Government policy, the Spanish as the First Foreign

23

Language Programme is designed to meet its agreed goals and objectives.

To ensure that the programme achieves its agreed goals and objectives by overseeing its implementation, monitoring and evaluation activities, human, physical, financial and technical.

It (the Programme Coordinating Unit, i.e. the SIS) will be responsible, using a project management approach for the preparation and submission of the following: (a) Detailed Programme/Project Proposal document; (b) Programme/Project Plan document based on the (Logical Framework) Log Frame approach, and (c) Implementation Plan and Schedule derived from the Log Frame-based model.

2) The minutes of the Steering Committee meetings which were held at the initiation stage of the SAFFL Programme and the documents produced by the SIS with respect to their planned and executed SAFFL activities/programme reveal no signs of their having taken cognisance of (i) the change in designation from bilingual initiative to Spanish as the First Foreign Language initiative and the implications of the change (a justification for the change accepted by Cabinet was included in the Cabinet Note) for SAFFL Programme planning; and (ii) the role and functions of both the Steering Committee and the SIS (which was referred to in the Cabinet Minute as the Programme Coordinating Unit).

3) The consultants carefully examined all available documents and interviewed several key players involved in the SAFFL Programme but could not find no reference, no recollection, no evidence that the SIS, as required by the Cabinet Minute which established the SIS Unit, prepared:

a. a detailed Programme/Project Proposal document;

b. a Programme/Project Plan based on (the Logical Framework) Log Frame approach; and

c. an Implementation Plan and Schedule derived from the Log Frame model.

4) Instead, the SIS appeared to omit the necessary (a), (b), (c) steps outlined at (3) above and to proceed directly to producing an Implementation Plan by way of a document titled SAFFL Work Programme/SIS WORK PLAN dated January 21, 2005 (some four (4) months after its establishment). The consultants found that the SIS seemed to have completely ignored the SAFFL planning implications of the change in

24

designation from bilingual initiative to SAFFL Initiative, and seemingly based their Work Plan (Appendix B of the 2005 SAFFL Work Program/SIS Work Plan) on the original Ministry of Trade and Industrys Action Plan Towards a Bilingual Society.

It is to be noted that the SIS Work Plan outlined its strategies to attain its objectives. Each strategy:

1. was linked to a specific objective;

2. identified a target group;

3. projected a target date for expected outputs

3. It should also be noted that the specific objectives which were to be operationalised were the three SIS/SAFFL objectives outlined at 3.3.1.3 above (see pp.21). Strategies were developed for each objective separately. The objectives and their strategies for implementation, in our view, lacked cohesiveness. No real attempt appeared to have been made to have an integrated set of objectives and strategies that were observable and measurable.

4. One explanation which has been given for the SIS and the Steering Committees failure to think the SAFFL Initiative/Programme through thoroughly, was the pressure (i.e. the compressed timelines) under which they were working at the time of the Trinidad and Tobago bid to be the FTAA capital. The country was keen to show their Spanish-speaking neighbours highly visible signs that Trinidad and Tobago was truly on the way to becoming a bilingual country. Hence, the plethora of activities involving public awareness and education campaigns, mass media programmes as well as projects such as the bilingual traffic directions (signs) as well as bilingual signage and Spanish classes in the offices of Government Ministries, approaches to Spanish-speaking Missions/Embassies and the SIS strenuous efforts to promote Spanish language and culture programmes in the private sector and local communities.

5. Nevertheless, the consultants are persuaded that in 2005 and 2006 when it was clear that the FTAA was dead in water, the Steering Committee and the SIS should have reviewed the existing projects and activities and made the necessary changes. However, neither Steering Committee Minutes of Meetings, SIS documents, SIS staff nor Steering Committee members interviewed recalled any discussions nor made mention of any such review.

e. Does bilingualism, bilingual education (in terms of Spanish/English, English/Spanish) equate with Spanish as the First Foreign Language (SAFFL) (Please see Glossary for explanation of these terms).

25

3.3.1.6 FINDINGS

1. As indicated in the Glossary (Annex B) the term bilingual may be defined in several ways:

a. The ability to speak two languages

b. Frequent use (as by a community) of two languages

c. Using or able to use two languages with equal or near equal fluency

Bilingualism (the noun) is defined as:

a. the ability to speak two languages

b. individuals or groups of people who acquire communicative skills in oral and/or written forms, in order to interact with speakers of one or more languages at home and in society.

On the other hand, the term First Foreign Language, in the

context of international usage and language planning and policy,

is used primarily to denote the importance of acquiring

communicative proficiency in a particular foreign language for the

population of an individual country. The First Foreign Language is

generally one of the main languages for international

communication (i.e. a world language) and for overcoming

barriers to the flow of information, goods and people across

national boundaries and for which there is the strongest local

demand.

As a consequence, the term First Foreign Language reflects the

preference of a State to promote a particular language to be the

official language policy in the educational system (pre-school,

primary, secondary and tertiary levels). This approach is adopted

in order to strengthen the capacity of the state for all its citizens

to possess communicative proficiency at various levels in the

foreign language chosen.

26

Designating a language as the First Foreign Language does not

exclude other foreign languages from being offered in the school

system. It simply means that the state has decided to commit its

resources to the teaching of the First Foreign Language (in our

case, Spanish) as a foreign language instructional

priority.(Source: SCOB statement (justifying the name change

from bilingual initiative to First Foreign Language Initiative) in

the Cabinet Note on Rationale for Spanish as the First Foreign

Language, April 01, 2004).

3.3.1.7 FINDINGS

1. It is patently evident from the definitions given above that the terms

bilingual/bilingualism and First Foreign Language represent two distinct

concepts. One cannot be and should not be equated with the other. They are

not interchangeable.

2. Nevertheless, examinations of relevant SIS documents disclose that no

distinction between the terms was ever made. The SIS continuously and

consistently described its objectives as making Trinidad and Tobago a bilingual

society by 2020 and making the SAFFL a reality. It is because the SIS and the

SCSAFFLP seemed oblivious of the significance of Cabinets decision to replace

the term/concept the bilingual initiative by the Spanish as the First Foreign

Language and stubbornly clung to the misguided notion of a bilingual initiative,

of making Trinidad and Tobago a bilingual (in Spanish) society that the

consultants came to the conclusion that the SAFFL Programme, as conceived and

implemented by the SIS was neither carefully conceptualised, thought out nor

properly planned. It lacked conceptual clarity. The consultants, later in this

Report, will revisit the issue of conceptual clarity and how it affected the

implementation of the SAFFL Programme/Initiative.

f. Is the Spanish as the First Foreign Language (SAFFL) a government policy decision (to be supported, of course, by policy goals/objectives) or a policy statement expressed somewhat mistakenly, and

27

misleadingly as make SAFFL a reality or alternatively making Trinidad and Tobago a bilingual society?

3.3.1.8 FINDINGS

1. It is indisputable that the Government took a policy decision when Cabinet

designated Spanish as the First Foreign Language (SAFFL) of Trinidad and

Tobago. It did so in the light of its bid to be the capital of the FTAA. It also did so

on the basis of the argument put forward by the SCOB in the June 2004 Cabinet

Note submitted by the Minister of Labour. In this Note, the SCOBs

recommendation that the term bilingual initiative should no longer be used

but instead it (the Initiative) should be described as the Spanish as the First

Foreign Language Initiative was accepted and approved by Cabinet.

2. Cabinet expected the Steering Committee and the Secretariat for the

Implementation of Spanish (SIS) to formulate the policys supporting goals and

objectives. Although the SIS did formulate its own objectives for the Programme

(see pp. 21 Section 3.3.1.3 above), as mentioned earlier, the consultants found

these specific goals to be not susceptible of measurement. They were not

stated in behavioural terms. It would, therefore, be difficult if not impossible to

determine the extent to which these goals were being achieved. However, the

larger problem was that there was confusion between the SAFFL as a policy

decision requiring its own goals/objectives and those of a coordinating agency,

as the SIS was intended to be, which would then determine its own objectives as

a Secretariat.

g. What were the structures/mechanisms established to implement the SAFFL Programme/Initiative?

1. As indicated at Section 3.1 (d) above (see pp. 17), Cabinet agreed to: (1) the

establishment of the Steering Committee for Spanish as the First Foreign

Language Programme (SCSAFFLP) to oversee the Programmes implementation,

monitoring and evaluation activities. It also had the power to make

recommendations inter alia, for: the provision of the necessary resources for the

implementation of the programme and approval of the programmes budget;

28

and (2) the creation of a Programme Implementation Unit (also referred to as

the SIS) whose principal role will be that of a coordinating, supporting and

facilitating mechanism for effectively accomplishing the varied and various tasks

and activities involved in the preparation, initiation, planning, design,

development, implementation and evaluation stages of the Spanish as the First

Foreign Language (SAFFL) Programme which consists of several projects and

subprojects.

2. As shall be shown when we take a look at the Programme Implementation

Stage/Component of the SAFFL Initiative, the reality was completely different.

There was, as the consultants discovered in their scrutiny of the operations of

the SIS and the SCSAFFLP, an almost total discrepancy between what Cabinet

decided the respective roles and functions of these two entities should be and

what obtained as the Programme/Initiative unfolded. In brief, the Steering

Committee, whatever its reasons, (and we shall give, later in this Report, some

of the reasons proffered by SCSAFFLP members interviewed) appeared to have

abdicated its responsibilities (i.e. its role and function) as outlined in the relevant

Cabinet Minute. It (the SCSAFFLP) seemed reluctant to exercise its powers with

respect to its role as the body (headed by a Permanent Secretary) to whom the

SIS and its Director reported and were accountable.

3. With regard to the SIS, as will be seen when we treat with the Programme

Implementation Stage/Component, it did perform some of its coordinating,

facilitating functions, but then it did so (and to a limited extent) for the very

programmes/projects/activities that the SIS Unit itself indicated and was in the

process of implementing. This was certainly not what Cabinet intended and

agreed that its role should be.

4. Our findings, with reference to our evaluation of the Programme Initiation

Stage/component, suggest that the SAFFL Initiative, which we argue

subsequently in this Report is still relevant and needed, must first of all be

reviewed and reconceptualised with greater clarity and sharpness if it is to be

29

planned and executed (as it should be) in terms of a foreign language education

policy thrust and not simply and indeed simplistically as a bilingual initiative.

5. This bilingual label and the concomitant thinking merely lend themselves to

ambiguity and confusion of objectives at the operational level. It looks as if both

the SIS and the Steering Committee underestimated and/or did not take into

account the magnitude and complexity of the challenge which they both faced.

They apparently failed to recognise that, even when they had to hasten their

efforts because of the nations bid to be the capital of the FTAA and the

attendant pressure that this brought on them- definitely later as well when the

negotiations for the proposed FTAA (circa 2005,2006) had obviously stalled-

there was still the need for careful language planning (see Glossary for definition

of language planning) and well thought out implementation plans and

strategies.

3.3.2 RECOMMENDATIONS - PROGRAMME INITIATION1. Our recommendations have been derived from our close examination of what

actions characterised the Programme Initiation Stage/Component of the SAFFL

Initiative/Programme and equally based on the premise (to which we shall

return below) that the SAFFL Initiative should continue but in a radically

improved /changed approach.

2. Accordingly, the consultants wish to make the following recommendations with

respect to the Programme Initiation Stage/Component of a revised SAFFL

Initiative/Programme:

1. There should be greater consultation with key stakeholders such as

foreign language specialists, foreign language teachers (Spanish and

other languages), the UWI,UTT,COSTAAT foreign language education

departments, the TTMA, the Chamber of Industry and Commerce, the

Ministries of Tourism, National Security, Education, Science, Technology

and Tertiary Education, Trade and Industry, Foreign Affairs, separately

and not jointly in order to ascertain their language needs with regard to

30

their own personnel and their clients/customers who need to acquire

specific communicative skills, in Spanish for specific purposes-when

engaged in developing Spanish language instructional programmes for

private and public sector personnel and their clients/customers.

2. Research into the national language needs (languages include Trinidad

Standard English (i.e. International English), Spanish, French, German,

Portuguese, Hindi, Chinese, to name a few), (language needs which must

include translation and interpreting needs) must be undertaken in the

context of national developmental objectives and global economic

developments. It is only on the basis of solid and appropriate research

studies that Trinidad and Tobago can and should develop a meaningful

strategic plan and national language policy to meet its language needs.

3. Emanating from the language needs assessment research suggested at 2

above as a necessary preliminary step - a sine qua non - there should

follow a national language policy with supporting goals/objectives,

strategies, timeframes and indicators related to the monitoring and

evaluation of achievement of the precisely defined objectives.

4. Based on the needs assessment and national language policy (see

Glossary for the definition of language policy) Trinidad and Tobago is

then required to construct a strategic plan for meeting its language needs

with short-term, medium-term and long-term time horizons.

5. Following steps 1, 2, 3 and 4 above, comprehensive detailed

Programme/Project/Subproject proposal documents needs to be

produced for approval by a Steering Committee who then in turn will

submit them, with its recommendations and approval, to the

Permanent Secretary. It is only after this is done that the project and

sub-project plans and accompanying implementation plans should be

formulated for the SAFFL Initiative which the consultants are convinced

should be continued but radically revised, redesigned and improved in

its conception and implementation.

31

6. Effective and efficient governance and management structures are also

required to be put in place to manage the SAFFL Initiative. In the light of

observable deficiencies identified by the consultants in this Evaluation

Report, both the Steering Committee (SCSAFFLP) and the SIS must be

restructured and reorganised so that they can be both held accountable

for their actions - their failures and their successes.

3.4 Programme Installation 1. The consultants were unable to locate any documents which described in

chronological sequence the roll-out of the SAFFL Programme. However, they are

of the view that several activities linked to the earlier cited goals/objectives of

the SIS/SAFFL (see pp. 21 section 3.3.1.3. (c) above) commenced at the

Installation stage almost simultaneously. Relying on the SAFFL Work

Programme/SIS Work Plan dated January 21, 2005 and the Directors Report at

Appendix A of this document, the consultants believe that the Programmes

Installation in 2004 involved:

i. The SIS collecting information from a variety of stakeholders to assist it

in identifying the resources and needs of the local language-learning

environment.

ii. Holding meetings with the Cuban and Venezuelan Embassies.

iii. Assisting the Ministry of Tourism in the design and implementation of

an on-the-job Spanish language and cultural awareness launch at their

Ministry. Assistance was also given to this Ministry in the translation of

beach signs.

iv. Producing a brochure outlining essential SIS information.

v. Installation of Spanish/English Street Signs.

vi. Installation of bilingual traffic signage.

vii. Bilingual (English/Spanish) signage in Government office buildings, e.g.

hospitals.

32

viii. Introduction of Spanish language classes for public offices in several

Government Ministries.

ix. Securing Spanish Language Programme Coordinators in several

Ministries.

x. Initiating a mass media public education campaign to promote the

importance and value of the SAFFL Initiative.

xi. Meetings (one-on-one) with the private sector to promote the initiation

of Spanish programmes in their respective organizations. and

xii. Holding (Spanish) cultural awareness workshops for the business

community.

3.4.1 FINDINGS1. The consultants were impressed with the large number of SAFL Programme-

related activities undertaken by the SIS in its first full year of operation. They

recognise that the SIS did every thing possible to make the SAFFL Initiative a

highly visible presence. From the SIS perspective, its various interventions (see

activities listed i -xii above) demonstrated both to the citizens of Trinidad and

Tobago and to our Spanish-speaking neighbours in Central and South America

that the Government of Trinidad and Tobago was seriously committed to the

goal of having its citizens acquire communicative competence in the Spanish

language. The contribution of the SIS in aggressively addressing the

goals/objectives of the SAFFL Programme and firmly establishing the acquisition

of communicative proficiency by all citizens as an urgent national imperative is

an undeniable achievement.

2. However, it is not a question of nit-picking to point out some of the weak

spots/limitations of the numerous SIS activities/programmes/projects carried

out during the Programme Installation Stage/Component (and which persisted

and were amplified during the Programme Implementation Stage).

33

3. Some of the areas of concern to the evaluators were:

i. The research carried out by the SIS

a. Personal Profile of Community Members (Draft); and

b. Community Profile (Draft) (Source: SAFFL Work Plan December

2005 Appendices E and F respectively)- which sought to

determine the Spanish language needs of the individual and

community were useful starting points. Nevertheless, because

the SIS had so many irons in the fire at the same time and

lacked the required technical support in the form of foreign

language education and curriculum specialists, the

consultants did not see any evidence of the appropriate

application of the research findings in the SIS organised and

conducted Spanish language classes. The evaluators recognise

that prospective students were assigned to Basic,

Intermediate and Advanced Spanish classes on the basis of

such assessment. However, they saw no evidence of curricula

and instructional programmes specifically tailored to reflect

these profiles.

Our finding here has to do with the SIS institutional capacity

and is not a criticism of the needs assessment approach but

rather is meant to highlight the limitation(s) with the SIS was

forced to operate. Of course, if there is no effective

professional/technical oversight of the instructional

programmes and no verification of the professional

competence of the Spanish language providers, then there is

no guarantee of quality and relevant instruction being

provided to learners.

ii. While the SIS must be complimented for the initiative it took in

arranging and holding meetings with Embassies of Spanish-

34

speaking countries (e.g. Venezuela and Cuba). An initiative

which initially had the support of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs,

the consultants found no evidence the Ministries, such as

Ministry of Education and that of Science, Technology and

Tertiary Education, were consulted before, during or after these

meetings. It seemed to the evaluators that the SIS, in its

enthusiasm, considered such consultation with other key

Ministries (the Ministries of Foreign Affairs, Tourism, trade and

Industry and National Security were other key Ministries) time-

consuming and unnecessary. It preferred to report to some of

these Ministries the promises of support and cooperation it (the

SIS) had received from these Embassies.

iii. The SIS regular publication of brochure and newsletters

providing useful information and updates of SAFFL/SIS activities

was one of the SIS activities and achievements that can hardly

be faulted. However, some of the newspaper articles e.g. those

featuring the history and literature of some Spanish-speaking

Latin American countries would have appealed mostly to those

readers who already had a personal interest in these areas.

They would not have appealed to the ordinary members of the

public.

iv. The SIS registered what may be considered a major

achievement with the installation of bilingual street signage in

Port of Spain. Combined with bilingual directional traffic signs

and bilingual signs and labels in Government offices and other

public buildings there is little doubt about its dramatic, highly

visible publicity effect. Indeed, a video clip highlighting the Port

of Spain bilingual street signage was used to promote our bid to

be the headquarters of the FTAA. It was also shown on local TV

stations.

35

The Secretariat for the Implementation of Spanish (SIS) justified the

bilingual (Spanish/English) Signage Policy for Government/State-

owned Properties in the following way:

The Secretariat for the Implementation of Spanish (SIS) aims to

structure a new language environment through which the

citizens of Trinidad and Tobago will learn Spanish as the First

Foreign Language by the year 2020. One means through which

it intends to accomplish this will be by ensuring that signage

(street, traffic, buildings etc.) throughout Trinidad and Tobago

is written in both Spanish and English.(Source: SAFFL WORK

PROGRAMME/SIS Work Plan, p.20, January 21, 2005).

The consultants, however, saw no justification for the huge

expenditure incurred by the installation of bilingual steer and

traffic signage (as well as buildings) at the time that this was

done. Their reasons for not accepting the SIS

explanation/justification are as follows:

From a foreign language instructional strategy point of

view there would appear to be little motivational value in

these signs for the average citizen. One local TV news clip

actually captured the bewilderment occasioned by these

street signs when some people in the street were

interviewed about their reactions to these bilingual signs.

If these signs were intended to assist prospective Spanish-

speaking visitors to make their way in Port of Spain then it

(the initiative) needed the support of tourist information

kiosks strategically located throughout the city and

equipped with bilingual tourist information brochures,

maps and bilingual personnel. This support was either not

available and/or not put in place.

36

In terms of priorities of programmes/projects/subprojects

for achieving the overarching goal of the SAFFL Initiative-

strengthening the nations communicative capability in

Spanish (i.e. meeting the nations Spain language needs)-

bilingual street signage had little if any justification.

The funds which were allocated and spent on the bilingual

signage programme would have yielded greater value for

money spent if they were allocated to local language

teaching research and teacher training programmes.

v. While the introduction of Spanish classes for the public officers

in several Government Ministries was in keeping with one of

the objectives of the SIS and was a laudable achievement that

attested to the serious efforts of the SIS and the Government

to set the country on a bilingual path, the consultants feel

that the approach should have been more narrowly targeted.

Instead of having classes for all officers interested in learning

Spanish for communicative purposes and accordingly grasping

them into Basic/Beginners, Intermediate and Advanced classes,

the approach, in the opinion of the consultants should have

targeted, in the first instance those Ministries with the greatest

need for building and/or improving their communicative skills

in Spanish-Ministries which had frequent, intense and

significant interaction with nationals of Spanish-speaking

countries and in which the personnel who needed to achieve

various levels of communicative proficiency for various

purposes and in various communicative situations (both

professional/official/work-related and personal/social)-could

be identified and trained. This is not to say that the

consultants are or were blind to the positive aspects of this

initiative which was pursued vigorously in both the private

37

and public sectors-instruction in Spanish at the workplace in

Spanish. This initiative, while being high profile, would no

doubt have served to emphasise the importance Government

attached to the learning Spanish as well as motivate those

who had not enrolled in such classes to do so.

vi. Of the other Installation Programme activities (listed 1-12

above), the evaluators limit themselves to the following

comments:

a. The evaluators endorse the early one-to-one meetings

which the SIS held with the private sector to promote the

initiation of Spanish classes in their respective

organisations. In view of the fact that an enhanced

capability to communicate effectively in Spanish was

considered as an important tool in overcoming linguistic

barriers to expanding Trinidad and Tobago trade and

investment with Latin America, this SIS initiative was

justified. In this context, the holding of (Spanish) cultural

awareness workshops, in collaboration with the

Embassies of Spanish-speaking countries, could be and

should be favourably viewed as an indispensable part of

the sensitisation process in preparing our businessman to

explore new markets for their goods and services and

investment opportunities in Latin America.

The SIS rightly viewed the strategy of implementing a mass

media public education/awareness campaign to promote

the value and importance of the SAFFL Initiative as a key

strategy for attaining the goals of this Initiative. As a

consequence, it established a Communications

Department with a Communications/Marketing Specialist

assigned to it. As described in the SIS Annual Report

38

(December 2005) this Unit/Department had the

responsibility for helping the SIS achieve the following two

SIS objectives:

1. Ensure that there is a clear understanding of the

cultures which are emerging in our society and

their impact on the cultural landscape of Trinidad

and Tobago. and

2. Ensure there is public awareness of and support

for the Spanish as the First Foreign Language

(SAFFL) Initiative. (p.5).

vii. The activities of the Communications Department, with regard to the

objectives stated above included, inter alia:

Developing a corporate identity for the SIS including selection

of logo design and printing of stationery, production of SIS

uniform (polo shirts)

Coordinating production of promotional items for branding

Creating a SIS and SAFFL information kit

Running media campaigns educating the public about Latin and

South American culture

Developing a SIS brochure for distribution at seminars and Trade

Fairs

Publishing articles fortnightly on Hispanic culture, language, SIS

and SAFFL initiative in all daily media (i.e. local newspapers)

Creating a SIS bilingual Newsletter

Organising and preparing instructional programmes for

broadcast on Radio and TV stations

39

Identifying and obtaining sponsors for radio and TV segments

3.4.2 FINDINGS1. The consultants have listed, at some length, the imposing number and the

nature of public awareness, (including activities of an instructional nature) media

exercises in which the SIS engaged for several reasons. These include:

In the view of the consultants, the SIS, as a result of their media publicity

campaign, did establish a strong print and electronic media presence. As

a consequence, a significant number of Trinidad and Tobago citizens

would, no doubt, have become conscious of the fact that the

Government of Trinidad and Tobago considered learning to communicate

in Spanish an important and useful skill that was urgently needed to be

acquired by the countrys citizens.

Several of the activities in which the SIS Communications Unit engaged

seemed to place an equal emphasis on establishing the SIS as an entity

that shared equal importance with the SAFFL Initiative itself. Why was it

necessary for the SIS (as it did) to develop a corporate identity including

selection of logo design and printing of stationery, a production of SIS

uniform (polo shirts)?. The evaluators found that throughout the life of

the Secretariat for the Implementation of Spanish (SIS) there were

several activities that were intended to give undue prominence and

unjustifiably high profile to the SIS as a Unit and its accomplishments

with respect to the SAFFL Initiative. Moreover, the distinction between

the SIS and the SAFFL Initiative/Programme became increasingly blurred

as the Programme/Project went on. The result was that one (the SIS)

became indistinguishable from the other (the SAFFL Initiative).The

consultants in their experience of Projects and Project Implementation

or Project Coordinating Units (as the SIS was intended to be) have never

encountered a situation where the Implementation/Coordinating Unit

40

found it necessary to brand itself as the SIS sought and succeeded in

doing.

i. The consultants are of the view that the linkage between the

publicity/public education/marketing activities of the SIS and the specific

objectives/goals of the SAFFL/SIS was and could be no substitute for a

coherent, fully integrated, communications policy plan and strategy.

Although superficially and seemingly connected with the SIS specific goals,

the communications strategy appeared disjointed and lacking in internal

consistency and connectivity. This was the result of failing to design an

overall/overarching communication policy and strategy that would be

informed by the SAFFL/SIS objectives but not strictly determined or

implemented in terms of having an isolated one-on-one correspondence

with specific goals/objectives. The consultants hold this opinion because

they observed that the SIS print and electronic mass media interventions

were a hotchpotch of public awareness, public education, Spanish

instructional programmes and activities for children, public awareness

caravans etc. The consultants would have preferred a more measured and

precisely targeted SAFFL publicity campaign. and

ii. The large budget allocation for publicity/public relations/public

awareness should have been significantly reduced and/or drastically cut in

view of other more relevant teacher training/language teaching/learning

projects/research programmes which were/are at the heart of the SAFFL

Initiative. We cite below the kind of budget allocation the SIS proposed (and

it clearly received most of the funds requested because of their highly

visible SIS mass media publicity-related advertisements and programmes):

a. At attachment IX in the SIS document titled Proposed Budget for the

Establishment of the Programme Implementation Unit (Note that the

name had not yet been changed to SIS) for Spanish as the First Foreign

Language, the amount purposed for the line item reading Promotions,

Publicity and Printing is $200,000.00.

41

b. In the SIS Communications/Marketing Budget 2005-2006, under the

heading Projects for Communications/Marketing Area of SIS, the total

sum requested is $1,1777.00. For various line items the sums proposed

are as follows:

Print Media (Ads on SAFFL) $ 100,000.00

Educational Fair (On Latin America trade fair) $ 200,000.00

Competitions-To provide reinforcement for

Spanish knowledge $ 100,000.00

Targeted Business Forums-To encourage

private sector to go bilingual featuring speakers

from Latin America (2) $ 100,000.00

Functions:

Others as developed/required $ 100,000.00

End of the year (celebrating achievements) $ 75,000.00

c. For the SIS 2006-7 Budget Estimate for the SIS

Communications/Marketing Department a total sum of $2,122,500.00+ /

-10% was proposed. Distributed over four (4) quarters (October-

December 2006), January-March 2007, April-June 2007 and July-

September 2007 we saw line items and requested amounts such as:

Billboards $ 120,000.00

Development of Professional Info Pack $ 190,000.00

Press Advertising Campaign $ 67,500.00

Travelling Road Show $ 500,000.00

42

Media Campaign Road Show $ 100,000.00

Production Media Segments $ 127,000.00

Development of Educational Programmes $ 175,000.00

iii. The consultants remain unconvinced that the SIS, particularly after 2005-2006

when the FTAA talks had reached a stalemate, needed to engage so heavily in

several of the activities listed above, for example, Billboards, Travelling Road

Show, Media Campaign Road Show and Development of Professional Info Pack.

It is interesting to note also that:

a. the Steering Committee appeared not to have questioned the

vast sums requested and/or actually spent on publicity by the SIS.

and

b. the SIS had no Accountant nor Accounts Officer on its staffing

establishment who would have been expected to exercise some

control over proposed and/or actual expenditure and also would

be responsible for monies spent and/or received. The consultants

found no evidence of strict professional accounting procedures

employed by the SIS.

3.4.3 RECOMMENDATIONS - PROGRAMME INSTALLATION 1. Based on the preceding findings/observations concerning the Programme

Installation Sate/Component, the consultants recommend:

1. Spanish language instructional programmes should be more carefully

planned, designed and implemented at the programme installation stage.

In addition, they should be continuously monitored and evaluated at this

stage so as to remedy any defects.

2. There should be greater involvement of professional/technical

individuals/organisations in the planning, design, implementation and

evaluation of foreign language curricula (in this instance, Spanish) and

their delivery.

43

3. There should be greater consultation and collaboration with key

Ministries (e.g. the Ministries of Education, National Security, Trade and

Industry, Tourism, Foreign Affairs, etc.) prior to meeting with the

Embassies of Spanish-speaking countries because they were to be the

beneficiaries of the collaboration, cooperation and support which these

Embassies promised to lend to the SAFFL Initiative.

4. The street and traffic bilingual (Spanish/English) signage programme

should continue only if there is demand for it, i.e. if there is an influx of

Spanish-speaking visitors (business and tourist visitors).

5. Classes and Spanish language training in various Government Ministries

should first target staff members who have the greatest need for

acquiring high levels of communicative competence in Spanish.

6. The SIS initiative of promoting in the business community, the learning of

Spanish and its relevance for expanding trade and business with Spanish-

speaking countries of Latin America and Spain should continue. However,

Spanish for business, trade and international marketing falls under the

Language for Special Purposes (LSP) rubric and should only be

undertaken by instructors specially trained in the field of designing,

developing, implementing and evaluating LSP curricula.

7. There must continue to be a mass media public awareness/education/

marketing component of the SAFFL Initiative/Programme. However, this

communications/marketing thrust must not attempt, as was the case

with the SIS media and publicity blitz, to be all things to all men.

Rather, what is needed is a coherent, properly designed and executed

communications, policy plan and strategy which is integrated,

coordinated, properly organised and coherent. It must be conceived as

being the vehicle to promote the achievement of the SAFFL goals and not

simply as a tool for separate and disconnected purposes and/or

objectives of an Implementation/Coordinating Unit.

44

8. There must be tight control over the communications/marketing budget

so as to ensure that there is value for money and/or value added for

whatever communications/marketing expenditure is incurred. Each line

item of publicity/advertisement expenditure must be scrutinised and

justified in terms of how it contributes to the total achievement of the

SAFFL Initiative.

9. There should be a qualified accountant attached to any Implementation

or Coordinating Unit responsible for disbursing funds or incurring

expenditure involving funds drawn from its own budgetary allocation or

received from sponsorships.

3.5 PROGRAMME IMPLEMENTATION1. It is useful to remind the reader, before proceeding with our description of the

SIS implementation process, of some of the critical SAFFL/SIS inputs which were

crucial for achieving the intended outputs of the SAFFL Initiative and those of the

SIS intervention through the implementation process.

2. Here we outline some of these inputs which contributed to and were

transformed in the implementation process into the SIS outputs:

i. The Ministry of Trade and Industry Cabinet Note and its justification

for: (a) embarking on the SAFFL Initiative; and (b) its establishment of

the Steering Committee for the Spanish as the First Foreign Language

Programme (SCSAFFLP) and the Programme Implementation Unit (the

SIS former name). These entities were assigned certain roles,

functions and responsibilities in the attachments to the earlier cited

Cabinet Note.

ii. The SIS was provided with the physical, technical, financial and human

resources required for carrying out its mandate. For example, the

original funding required for the creation of the Programme

Implementation Unit (the SIS) was estimated to cost $242,200.00 in

Capital Costs and total recurrent expenditure of $1,409,169.28 - a total

45

cost of $1,651,369.28. It should be noted that the proposed SIS budget

for 2007-2008 was $3,027,500.00. With respect to its human

resources, Cabinet initially agreed to the following staffing

establishment of the SIS (on a contract period of two (2) years): (1) a

Programme Director, (2) an Assistant Programme Director, one (1)

Secretariat Officer, one (1) Foreign Language (English/Spanish)

Specialist, one (1) Communications/Marketing Specialist, one (1)

Researcher, one (1) Executive Administrative Assistant, one (1)

Secretary- a total of eight (8) contract positions. It is worthy of our

attention that, within one (1) year of its establishment, the SIS sought

and received Cabinet approval for a significant increase in its staffing

establishment. According to a SIS document captioned New Job

Descriptions - Assistants to Officers (dated 30/09/05), the following

were the additional contract positions approved by Cabinet:

1. Assistant to Communications/Marketing Specialist

2. Assistant to Researcher

3. Assistant to Foreign Language Specialist (English/Spanish)

4. Assistant to Secretariat Officer

5. Administrative Assistant

3. A total of five (5) new posts were created in the Secretariat for the

Implementation of Spanish. In addition, some of the original positions were

given new job titles with corresponding duties and responsibilities:

i. Executive Secretary, Secretariat Officers were now converted into SIS

Officer 1 and SIS Officer II; Foreign Language Education Specialist,

Bilingual Language (English/Spanish) Specialist; and Programme

Secretary. It is to be noted that the SIS at one time had a staff

establishment of thirteen (13) persons. Other human resources were also

available to the SIS: (a) the Steering Committee and its individual

46

members, for example, its foreign language education specialist, such as

the COSTAAT, UWI, UTT foreign language education specialists, who were

members of the Steering Committee; and (b) Representatives of various

Government Ministries, including the Ministries of Education, Trade and

Industry, Foreign Affairs, etc.; (c) Language Service Providers and (d)

Consultants.

ii. The SIS was also provided with its own office, furniture and technical

equipment needed to carry out its responsibilities and functions. The list

of equipment which is located in Annex F includes: eleven (11) Desktop

Computers, eight (8) laptops, one (1) television set, one (1) digital

camera, one (1) projector, one (1) copier, one (1) printer, one (1) fax

machine, five (5) CD Radio Cassette Players, one (1) DVD/CD/VCD and

VCR combination.

iii. In order to implement its plans, programmes and projects, the SIS

deployed its staff in what it considered strategically effective positions in

order to perform assignments/tasks such as those as described in its

December 2005 Annual Report (p.5) where, under the heading Proposed

Activities for 2004-2005, it stated: With the recruitment of staff, the SIS

work plan was developed, and designed to meet the three (3) SIS

Objectives and are broken down into four (4) departmental sub-units of

the SIS-The Communications Department, the Research Department,

the Foreign Language Department and the Public Sector

(Ministries)/Private Sector Department. These activities will help

ensure all nationals are proficient in Spanish within the next ten to

fifteen years and our cultural fabric is strengthened by the

reintroduction of Spanish to our twin island republic.

iv. As shown in the SIS Work Plans/Programmes for the various officers, (See

Annex), in accordance with their job title and job description, officers

were assigned to the sub-units named above. For example, one SIS

Officer was assigned to the Public Sector, another to the Private Sector

47

and the Communications/Marketing Specialist to the Communications

Unit.

v. Each Officer and each of the four (4) Units prepared their annual work

plans in tabular format. For example, Departmental Objectives were tied

to the relevant