12.2019 | THE SCIENTIST 55eastern US tellsThe Scientist that he
had similar reasons for instituting an
“English-only” policy in his own lab sev-
eral decades ago. (The professor agreed
to be quoted on condition of anonym-
i ty, given fears of repercussions after
he learned of the incident at Duke.)
He says he felt that people overhear-
ing a conversation in a language they
couldn’t understand would assume they
were the topic of discussion.
The chemistry professor also thought
that, given the dominance of the Eng-
lish language in the scientific commu-
nity, requiring non-native speakers to
practice their English would help them
further their scientific careers. The pro-
fessor says he used to let members of
his lab know of his expectation that
they speak English—and unlike Neely,
he didn’t regulate what language they
spoke in other areas, such as break
rooms. If he heard someone speaking
another language in the lab, he’d ask the
person to stop. After learning about the
fallout at Duke earlier this year, the pro-
fessor says he discontinued his policy.
Not everyone feels uneasy overhear-
ing conversations at work in a language
they don’t understand. Paula Ladd,
a researcher at Seattle-based diag-
nostics company MEP Labs, who has
worked in labs at Purdue University,
Indiana University, and other institu-
tions, says she isn’t bothered by it at all.
But she has occasionally seen uncom-
fortable situations arise around lan-
guage, she adds—for example, one per-
son berating another in a language the
listener doesn’t understand. She adds
that expectations that English be used
can lead to misunderstanding; in one
lab Ladd worked in, a PI urging a lab
member to speak English during the
workday sparked a false rumor among
nonmembers that the lab “only takes
Americans,” she recalls.
There are also logistical issues to
consider in conversations about lan-
guage at work. In the case of a laboratory
environment, safety is a top priority.
The chemistry professor who chose to
remain anonymous says that ensuring
lab safety through clear communication
was another top consideration for him
in deciding to have an English-only
policy. But it’s not certain that restrict-
ing language use really does improve lab
safety: Abbas Benmamoun, a linguist
who is originally from Morocco and
serves as Duke’s Vice Provost for Fac-
ulty Advancement, suggests that safety
would actually be enhanced if students
are able to use their own language to
ask a clarifying question about instruc-
tions delivered in English.Indeed, students may not yet be
equipped to communicate in English
in all situations, says Benmamoun. He
thinks Neely’s email reflected a failure
to recognize that nonnative speakers
who’ve become proficient in academic
English in their home countries may
not be similarly well-versed in the lin-
guistic register needed for social interac-
tions with colleagues or fellow students.
“It takes time to master different regis-
ters of the language,” he says.
Liu adds that it’s important to recog-
nize that an English-only policy could be
perceived differently depending on who’s
instituting it and to whom it applies. She
says she has only once been part of a lab
where languages other than English were
discouraged. That was at the University
of Washington, in a lab with multiple
Chinese members headed by a Chinese
scientist. Liu saw the policy as “gracious”
to those in the lab who couldn’t under-
stand Chinese, she says, but adds that
she would likely have viewed it differ-
ently if the professor hadn’t been a mem-
ber of the group whose language use was
being restricted. “I think it’s a matter of... power dynamic, and who is socially
in the position of power.”
Sparse guidance
In the aftermath of the email incident this
year, Duke has begun to speak with faculty
throughout the university about the issue
of language, and to develop guidelines on
how best to foster inclusion in different
contexts such as the classroom or the lab.
“We thought, okay, we probably
should have a discussion, at least to
raise awareness about the complexity of
language use in social and professional
contexts, [and] what it takes to mas-
ter a particular language,” Benmamoun
says. Those conversations are ongoing,
he notes, adding that it will be important
to make sure international students have
adequate support in mastering English.
“We need to look at what resources we
provide for them, what opportunities
for them to use the language. We are not
there yet.”
Duke appears to be an outlier
among higher-education institutions
in to addressing the issue head-on. Of
63 other research Wuniversities que-
ried about whether they had policies or
guidelines for faculty on use of English
in the lab, The Scientist could find no
other instance of a US university that
has worked to develop such protocols
around whether a principal investiga-
tor can impose restrictions on speaking
a language at work that’s not understood
by everyone who might overhear. Eigh-
teen answered that they have not, while
44 did not respond.
One of the institutions that did
respond, the University of Texas at
Austin, wrote that all employees are
reminded during staff training of the US
Equal Employment Opportunity Com-
mission’s policy that people are permit-
ted to speak any language at work, a
spokesperson writes to The Scientist in
an email. There are exceptions to that
rule, though, says Lisa Stephanian Bur-
ton, an employment lawyer at Ogletree
Deakins law firm in Boston. On the
job, it may be legal to require English
be used for reasons of business neces-
sity, she explains. In a lab setting, an
employer might determine that the use
of other languages would impede safetyYo u can’t prohibit people
during their free time and on
their breaks from speaking in
another language.
—Lisa Stephanian Burton, Ogletree Deakins