1. OCONUS Immersion Overview

2. OCONUS Immersions From Aug 2005-Sep 2016 : 443 programs 3,916 participants 21 countries/regions 70% for Arabic, Chinese and Korean Country# of EventsCountry# of Events Korea91Russia3 Jordan27China41 Puerto Rico35Ukraine28 Morocco71Egypt25 Taiwan49Costa Rica1 Latvia24Turkey5 Spain4Philippines1 France7India1 CONUS18Tajikistan3 Chile4 Uruguay1 Japan2 Germany2

3. A Typical O/CONUS Program Program Length: 4-6 weeks for Basic Course students 2-4 weeks for Intermediate/Advanced students Group Composition: 10 max, including a Group Leader (Sending larger groups is ineffective both logistically and academically. In many AORs, US Embassy requires small footprint). Timing of OCONUS Immersions -From inception thru FY15-- end of 2 nd -beginning of 3 rd semester -FY16-- shift toward Content Based Instruction requires sending students later in the 3 rd semester (CBI hybrid, “at-risk” programs)

4. Setting up Effective O/CONUS Immersions Pre-program: –Initial DAO/FPD approval in consultation with Security office and FCG –Identify potential host institutes (universities vs. language schools) with DLI school involvement (ensures buy-in and less push-back in the long run). –Student/Group Leader selection—group dynamics, safety/security –Curriculum—before and during immersion—must be clearly outlined and communicated to host institute (HI) During program: –Program/curriculum adjustments as needed, in coordination with ILO –Checking in with GLs Post-program: –Documentation of students’ progress Diagnostic Assessment/DLPT scores After Action Reports (Self-assessment) –Quality control and program improvement (based on student feedback; QC)

5. Selecting the Right HI: Factors to Consider Responsiveness to initial communication Willingness to meet/discuss program details Willingness to work with certain bureaucratic constraints (tuition Payment timelines, no advance payment, etc.) Flexibility with program length (in many cases, DLI immersions are considered short-term,4-6 weeks) Full grasp of DLI’s proficiency goals and specific program demands Lodging options (host family vs. dorms/hotels-implications) Access to SMEs, quality and academically loaded excursions and field trips to maximize on learning Cost 5

6. O/CONUS Immersions for Higher Proficiency Levels Advanced Course Immersions: CBI + DLI instructor for duration of immersion (maximum exposure to authentic language/lectures) Pre-reading lecture material the night before (role of DLI instructor) Presentations/round table discussions with SMEs In some cases, students are enrolled in classes with local university students CBL (way ahead) Basic Course Immersions: Gradual move toward CBI-- 50%-50% hybrid for Korean immersions; Sending DLI instructors for the duration of immersion—piloted with Korea (KU/SNU for “at-risk” program) Sending students later in the 3 rd semester in order to cope with higher proficiency material/lectures/presentations 6

7. Immerse 80% of DLIFLC students by 2021 Establish new immersion sites Interest in CONUS programs Enhance program quality to achieve higher proficiency/produce top linguists Way Forward

8. Iso-immersion Program

9. Iso-immersion Overview History: 2003, first 3-day Iso-immersion conducted at DLI 2006, dedicated Immersion Facility, with overnight training 2010, “overnight” portion cancelled 2014, (starting FY15) reinstating overnight immersions 2016, cancelled overnight component (new, 2-day format) Iso-immersion Training: Part of the basic curriculum for: –Arabic –Korean –Chinese –Russian –Spanish –Persian/Farsi –Pashto –French

10. Target Language Only Expansion of classroom learning Day-1/Day-2 new format Military and FLO content Simulating real life Problem solving Exposure to culture Effort to standardize and improve the Iso-immersion curriculum across the UGE schools (CS/ILO) Convert sleeping quarters into additional classrooms/wifi Iso-immersion Activities Overview

11. Questions Immersion Student Opinion Questionnaire (ISOQ) DLI Mean (FY06-FY12) No. = 23,722 1. Used listening skills during Iso-immersion.3.43 2. Used reading skills during Iso-immersion.3.01 3. Used speaking skills during Iso-immersion.3.63 4. Gained a better understanding of culture/language.3.02 5. Spoke target language only.3.14 6. Target language only policy was enforced.3.28 7. Improved comprehension ability in conversations.3.10 8. Increased speaking ability.3.08 9. Increased confidence in speaking the language.3.05 10. Reduced anxiety in speaking to native speakers.3.14 Student Feedback

12. “This one day was worth a month of classes because I was forced to communicate, rather than concentrate on being correct.” (Arabic Student) “It was relieving to know that I can survive a day only in Chinese. I feel much more confident about speaking Chinese as a result.” (Chinese Student) “The investigation into the Lebanese weapon smuggling was thoroughly enjoyable and we were able to use all skills.” (Arabic Student) Iso-immersion: Student Feedback

13. Back-up Slides 13

14. OCONUS Immersions: Effects on DLPT Scores Study conducted in 2009 by RA at DLI: –Randomized Student Selection, DLPT –207 BC students Arabic (3 Egypt, 1 Jordan) Korean (4 Korea) Chinese (4 China) –4 week immersion program OCONUS EventControl Group # of SsImmersion Group # of Ss Arabic3834 Chinese3634 Korean2837 TOTAL102105

15. Major Findings (1) 1.A higher percentage of the Immersion students passed 2/2/1+ (92% vs. 78%) and 2+/2+/2 (41% vs. 33%) **Regardless of: Target language, DLPT version, Pep and non-pep, Gender, Recycle status, OCONUS timing

16. 50 th 64 th ES cc ii Major Findings (2) - A positive and statistically significant OCONUS immersion effect (.35) in Listening - All other things being equal, the average immersion student would be 14 percentiles higher than the average control student in Listening

17. 1.Confidence in using the language 3.62 2.Motivation in using the language3.60 3.Understanding culture3.60 4.Improving overall proficiency3.58 5.Taking linguistic risks3.56 6.Less anxiety in speaking to NS3.55 7.Using communication strategies3.53 8.Tolerance of linguistic ambiguity3.39 9.Using available resources for learning3.24 10.Making decisions about learning3.18 4 = maximum benefits, 1 = minimum benefits OCONUS Self-Assessment Results (N=1,110)

18. Iso-immersions by FY Fiscal YearNumber of EventsNumber of Students 20071523,415 20081833,713 20091783,165 20102133,688 20112083,917 20122524,295 20132624,000 20142534,002 20152374347 20162404257