[lg policy] There's no 'slam-dunk' case for teaching languages to five-year-olds

[Harold Schiffman]

There's no 'slam-dunk' case for teaching languages to five-year-olds

Michael Gove is wrong. Our schools lack the resources for these lessons

    Fiona Copland and Sue Garton
    guardian.co.uk, Thursday 13 October 2011 14.20 EDT


We read with interest your report of Michael Gove's intentions
concerning teaching foreign languages in primary schools (Gove: teach
languages from age five, 1 October; and The language of reform: Gove
spells out next step on his agenda for schools, 1 October). While we
agree there is a crisis in some areas of language learning in England,
and are all in favour of measures that address this crisis
effectively, we cannot endorse Gove's comments that there is a
"slam-dunk case for extending foreign language teaching to children
aged five". On many levels there are problems with this policy.

First, the jury is still out on what is the best age to start learning
languages at school; there is no consensus that earlier is better.
Much of the research claiming success in early language-learning has
been carried out in immersion contexts. This is a far cry from the one
to two hours a week that a primary school might be able to dedicate to
languages.

Second, as our report for the British Council shows (Investigating
Global Practices in Teaching English to Young Learners, available
online from 18 October, huge challenges facing teachers of languages
to young children, not least in terms of motivation, class size,
appropriate materials and meeting individual needs. What is more, most
primary schoolteachers are not trained to teach languages – nor are
many language teachers trained to teach young children. Gove, however,
believes that, by "pull[ing] all the levers", these challenges can be
addressed. The experiences of other countries suggest that vast
resources should be in place before any levers are pulled.

Gove is also reported as saying almost every other advanced country
teaches children a foreign language from the age of five. As the
starting age for compulsory state education in many countries is above
five, this cannot be true. Furthermore, although it is sometimes
difficult to establish the age at which a foreign language (usually
English) is introduced, current information suggests it is generally
at a later age. In Japan, for example, foreign languages are
introduced at ages 10 to 11, in Taiwan at ages nine to 10, in Denmark
at age nine and in Germany at age six.

The unfortunate decline in the number of young people who are choosing
to study a language may eventually affect Britain's ability to compete
economically. However, Gove makes an educational case for learning
languages rather than an economic one when he states that learning a
foreign language broadens "the empathy and imaginative sympathy and
cultural outlook of children". We totally agree with this claim but
suggest that many British children already enjoy this advantage.
Children from heritage groups other than English often speak a
language different from the one used in class. However, it is rare
that the cultural outlook of these children is fully valued in an
educational system that often views being bilingual as a problem. If
Gove is so concerned with this aspect of language learning, why does
he not celebrate the achievements of these children?

    © 2011 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated
companies. All rights reserved.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/oct/13/foreign-language-teaching-young-children-flawed


-- 
**************************************
N.b.: Listing on the lgpolicy-list is merely intended as a service to
its members
and implies neither approval, confirmation nor agreement by the owner
or sponsor of the list as to the veracity of a message's contents.
Members who disagree with a message are encouraged to post a rebuttal,
and to write directly to the original sender of any offensive message.
 A copy of this may be forwarded to this list as well.  (H. Schiffman,
Moderator)

For more information about the lgpolicy-list, go to
https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/
listinfo/lgpolicy-list
*******************************************

_______________________________________________
This message came to you by way of the lgpolicy-list mailing list
lgpolicy-list at groups.sas.upenn.edu
To manage your subscription unsubscribe, or arrange digest format: https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/listinfo/lgpolicy-list