Beyond “elementary”

Abstract This article examines recent policy debates surrounding the “Elementary Proficiency in a Second Language” (EPSL) requirement at a U.S. liberal arts college, focusing on how misconceptions about language learning and assessment shape curricular decision-making. Drawing on a case study of institutional discussions between the language department, curriculum committee, and administration, the study analyzes four key assumptions underlying proposed policy changes: automatic fulfillment of EPSL based on placement, the restriction of EPSL designation to elementary-level courses, the need for alternative standardized testing for exemption, and the interpretation of “elementary” as a course level rather than an outcome-based concept. The analysis demonstrates that these assumptions stem from a misunderstanding of second language competence — which is inherently multidimensional and developmental — as well as from confusion between placement and proficiency tests. Particular attention is given to the implications for languages of differing difficulty levels and for diverse learner populations, including heritage learners. The article further argues that language requirements should not be understood merely as procedural or skills-based requirements, but as important components of higher education that foster intercultural competence, interactional sensitivity, and broader human development. By clarifying key concepts and highlighting the complexity of language requirements, this study offers insights for language programs navigating similar institutional challenges.