<p>native spanish speakers here are completely immersed in english...
so really native speakers have a greater advantage on the exam...since they have more opportunities to use the language, they would do better on an exam not in their native language than native english speakers would on an exam not in their native language.</p>
<p>People should not be allowed to take AP Foreign Language exams in their native toungue.</p>
<p>For example,
SOMone said that an english speaking person should not be allowed to take AP English</p>
<p>WTH?
AP ENGLISh is a test for english speakers!</p>
<p>IF YOU THINK NATIVE SPEAKERS should be allowed to take the test in their language?/</p>
<p>THEN an english speaker should be allowed to take TOEFL!!</p>
<p>"'And if you're worried about the curve, I know for the AP the curve is based on non-native scores. Then the natives get thrown in there on our curve (so they won't hurt us).'</p>
<p>"And they differentiate between native and non native how?"</p>
<p>@ jamesford, you know those survey questions on top of the answer sheet? The ones that ask about having lived in a country speaking the tested language or speaking the language at home? It's not 100%, but gets most people.</p>
<p>I think the native speakers should be allowed to take the AP and SAT II exams, but it probably won't be given much thought on a college app. Like someone said before, a 5 or 800 by a native speaker isn't that impressive.</p>
<p>But anyway, race shouldn't be a factor in these tests at all. The grader should never know or care. Those bubbles we're required to fill in that ask if we're white, Asian, black, etc. are just there to give an edge to some and take away from others. The exams are supposed to test our knowledge of the subject, regardless of our race.</p>
<p>liist---for the chinese AP...its closer to 80% instead of 90%...and look at how many ppl actually take the chinese AP: 3,261 students..im pretty sure a majority of them know chinese from speaking/hearing at home</p>
<p>for something like spanish lang AP...theres 101,199 students taking it..so a much bigger difference of the amount of ppl taking it</p>
<p>I think they should be allowed to take the exam because wouldn't that mean native speakers can't take the AP English test?
Some say AP English is for ENGLISH SPEAKERS, but I think those who are born into English-speaking families will have an advantage then. I mean, I'm Chinese, I spend most of my time speaking Chinese at home. I learn English from SCHOOL, while others learns it from the time they were born.</p>
<p>I'm Chinese and I'm taking the AP Chinese exam next year. But people need to understand that the word Chinese can be referred to Mandarin OR Cantonese. AP Chinese tests you on Mandarin, but I speak Cantonese at home so I actually do have to do work to learn Mandarin.</p>
<p>"native spanish speakers here are completely immersed in english...
so really native speakers have a greater advantage on the exam...since they have more opportunities to use the language, they would do better on an exam not in their native language than native english speakers would on an exam not in their native language."</p>
<p>English native speakers have been immersed in English since they were born. A non-native speaker who, let's say, came to this country three years before will have a disadvantage in the English language exam. </p>
<p>Other native speakers have been immersed in their respective language since they were born (assumingly). An English native speaker who, let's say, started to learn the language three years before will have a disadvantage in the other language exam. </p>
<p>I ask again, why the latter is considered unfair and not the former?</p>
<p>i agree with both sides of the argument!</p>
<p>But the only thing, like most of the people that mentioned it, is how EXACTLY do you define a native speaker. </p>
<p>i know numerous kids in my Spanish AP class that had lived in Spain for over 3 years. But they are not ethnically Hispanic, and their parents do not speak Spanish. </p>
<p>I know kids in my Spanish class that were born in Spain or Mexico but moved here when they were 3-5 years old. Their exposure to Spanish is a lot less than someone that is considered a non-native (above ^), but their parents speak Spanish. So, would it be fair to exclude them and not exclude those whose parents pay thousands of dollars just to send their kids to Spain just so that they can have an advantage in high school and take the AP and SAT?</p>
<p>personally, i feel that the people that speak english as their native language are the ones with advantages. </p>
<p>there is only one 800 or 5 for that one language-either Spanish or Chinese </p>
<p>but all the other 20+ APs & SAT II are based on english, and thus ppl that speak english at home instead of either spanish or chinese have an advantage. </p>
<p>so would it be "fair" for colleges to undermine the 800 for a native language but adds points to 800 on either writing or CR for those that speak english as thier "native language"?</p>
<p>tl;dr, but i think that not allowing people to take a test is one of the stupidest things i have ever heard.</p>
<p>The thing is that while native speakers should be and are free to take their language, it is the college's choice how the value that, and many colleges don't take into account AP language scores from native speakers. </p>
<p>(However, they do assign a little value to bilingual and trilingual applicants because... it is impressive, and aceing the AP is one of the ways to prove that). </p>
<p>So taking the APs can help qualify someone as multilingual and I think that is a stupid way, but... gotta follow the system. The fact is taking an AP language helps a nonnative speaker a little bit and it helps a native speaker a little bit, so why shouldn't both take it? Because the exam is harder for one party? That's ridiculous because an exam is a test of a certain set of skills that can be obtained in many ways. Stop whining and study your review book.</p>
<p>And I'm a nonnative speaker.</p>
<p>eeeeric, I agree.</p>
<p>This thread is pointless. Not allowing natives to take foreign language AP/SATs is EXACTLY same as not allowing fully Americanized "natives" to take AP English and standardized tests in English. This board has got to be one of the stupidest board I have seen on CC in a while.</p>
<p>they should be allowed to take it. i'm chinese, grew up listening to cantonese but lived in america. im still taking mandarin chinese school, and it's been almost 10 years, and i've yet to master the language. just because we grew up listening to it doesn't mean we can magically read, write, and fully understand the language. we work just as hard learning the english language when we have no fluent english parents at home to help us with our homework etc. we have to actually take the time and effort to study both languages... it gets me mad whenever people think that learning Chinese is "easy". it's not.</p>
<p>but seriously, just because my last name is Lee doesn't mean that Chinese is easy for me. honestly, if i were to go study in China, my chinese writing and reading skills would be equivalent to one's in elementary school. the AP and SAT2s show how much we work to try to master another tongue, and i don't think colleges really realize how much work it actually is. i spend an extra 4 hrs every weekend trying to improve my chinese, and that's on top of taking 3 years of spanish in school. learning new languages is not easy business.</p>
<p>some people <em>cough cough</em> presume that we pass the test without studying and think it's a breeze. however, for the majority of us, we have to actually study for it too.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Total immersion for that period is not something all of language APers have access to. With a LOT less work, native language speakers can take an AP/SAT II and ruin the curve for someone else
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Linguistic fallacy.</p>
<p>One reason proposed for why Chomskyian language modules get deactivated in children after a certain age (or at least undergo degradation) is because language modules consume a higher portion of the attention span, and use more of the human equivalent of CPU cycles. It's more taxing on mental resources. However, children aren't studying calculus at the age of 3, so it makes sense from an evolutionary point of view that their mental faculties should be involved in acquiring the rules of their language. </p>
<p>Children pick up language easily despite the poverty</a> of the stimulus because they have modules (or some evolutionary equivalent) that frames language conceptually. Later on, as one progresses through adulthood, individuals frame language conditionally (that is, through association and conditioning, which was B.F. Skinner's theory for language before Chomsky came along with his Universal Grammar). </p>
<p>You can turn sort of turn this module back on, manually (or so I have found ways to sort of do it). Approach the problem of acquisition from the perspective of a child. Bypass the proxy of one's existing native language. With that, acquisition eases dramatically.</p>
<p>BTW, by definition it's impossible for a native speaker not to have the most rigourous command of grammar. Non-native speakers might simply have the advantage of being able to better theorise and analyse the language of study -- e.g. bring it out of the subconscious to the conscious.</p>
<p>Furthermore, the AP tests are a test of knowledge, not of effort.</p>
<p>People who suggest something like this should learn some basic linguistics. :)</p>
<p>Native speaker, or international student? I speak Chinese fluently, but I recognize no more than a preschooler would in the characters part. Does that mean if I learn it, I can't take the test? I believe that is racial discrimination, in a sense. Trust me, my English skills aren't up to snuff because I speak Chinese at home, while others speak English at home. But I do just as well on the English exams, even better, than many others. Personally, any native speaker can take the test.</p>
<p>International students, however, are different, I think. They should still take test, I guess, but obviously colleges should question their validity during the admissions process. It's a whole different world on the international level.</p>
<p>
[quote]
They should still take test, I guess, but obviously colleges should question their validity during the admissions process.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Why do you say that?</p>
<p>I think you're forgetting the point of a language test: it isn't a measure of effort, but fluency in a language.</p>
<p>There are <em>literature</em> tests in a language one can rely on.</p>
<p>Do half of those who got 800 on the Chinese SAT know Romance of the Three Kingdoms by heart? </p>
<p>If someone was born in such a way that the concepts of advanced math were just as flunt in her mind as the concepts of language -- having made no big effort to learn it, I bet she should be barred from the AP Calc exams, amirite?</p>
<p>Well, I'm not saying international students shouldn't be able to take the test. I was trying to say that colleges would look at the score of a native Chinese person who got a 5, and realize that that there's a reason for the high score, and it didn't require a year of work like it would for most Americans. Thus, for most colleges I think, the student would not gain credit, maybe only higher placement. Depends on the college.</p>
<p>By all means, take the test if you want. That shouldn't be barred at all. Chinese people make it a hobby of taking tests (personal experience...lol), so why not? hehe</p>
<p>I'm not making sense, but my hand hurts from two hours of straight writing...so I'm not going into detail.</p>
<p>Oh, and I love Romance of the Three Kingdoms. :)</p>
<p>that is the common argument galosien, but no one is inherently born with calculus abilities. However, according to Chomsky, we has humans are born with a language acquisition device which enables us to inherently learn language. It has been proven repeatedly that after a certain age it is much harder to learn and become fluent in a language. Therefore, I think it would be fair (but extremely, extremely difficult and unrealistic to do) to curve those who had learned the language before that certain age. I realize how ridiculous this may sound so I do not suppose it be implemented, only pondered as a FAIR method.</p>
<p>Bilingual Americans with a bit of culture in their family shouldn't have to pay the price because the monolingual Americans can't keep up.</p>