http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-18384536

My best guess at all that is language theory, rather than how to actually use it

Shouldn't we be focusing the time and effort where we're supposedly lacking; reading and writing skills, grammar, vocabulary etc. This all seems more of a distraction to me

I guarantee the above post is full of such mistakes

We are massively lacking in languages skills. We'd do much more international trade if more people could speak foreign languages.

Will this make a difference? No really. Children are lazy. They'll always go for the soft option at school, and languages aren't a soft option, they're very hard.

The international language of business is...English. The international language of science is...English. English is, by International Treaty, the language for aerial and maritime communications. We in the United Kingdom are in a very natural & privileged position when it comes to language as we're set up for most things from the word go. I honestly don't see the point in learning European languages any more*, given the prevalence of English throughout the European Union. The only potential benefit would be in learning something more obscure - such as one of the many languages spoken in China (not necessarily Mandarin), Japanese etc.

*Spanish might be useful if you fancy a job as a translator in the southern USA.

The only truly useful thing I can see coming out of this review is this:


I work in administration and the quality of some of the letters that get sent out to people is, frankly, shocking.

Blimey.
I can't claim to be widely travelled at all, but the only European country I've visited where you can reasonably rely on people speaking English is Holland. Spain, Italy, France, Belgium - honestly, not so much. You'd get much further if you speak the language. Or do we just shout at them in English until they understand you?

Learning a language massively helps improve things like sentence construction, syntax and grammar. It makes you think about how a language is put together, it's foibles and rules, which hopefully has a positive effect on your mother tongue.

I learnt French at school and haven't spoken a word since I finished the GCSE.
Welsh wasn't an option, despite Wales being closer than France. I've ended up in Wales and have found that actually, in some circumstances, it would be really useful to know Welsh...

The problem with the subject "language" is what language!? When you study maths, science, English, etc. there are obvious ares which you should study at specific levels.
Take an average class (say around 35 pupils) and teach them all French, what percentage will find French useful? How many will find themselves in Japan, or Russia, or never go abroad at all.

When we have people failing at their first language, should we really be getting them to learn another...?

Exactly, it's a waste of precious school time IMO. Far better for individuals to learn later, should they feel the need to.

I can see the rationale. People who can speak more than one language develop their brains more. It can also be very useful. Having said that, unless it's reinforced, it'll be forgotten quite quickly.

We were taught French from Years 7-11 and German from Years 8-11. Although we could drop them after Year 9, I took both for my GCSEs. Yet I have hardly used them since despite going abroad. Almost fifteen years later, I vaguely recall the odd word or phrase.

I agree that the basics should be reinforced before moving on to other things. I too have seen appallingly written letters. Although my grammar is still lacking these days, I've always prided myself on my ability to spell.

Actually, you know what? Feck it - let'em learn. At want point has most of what I've learned from secondary school become useful? Basic arithmetic has been handy. Basic SPaG is okay for referral letters, notes, etc. Some of the science has been useful too. Geography? History? Art? Useless. English Lit? Ditto. I've not since had to resolve quadratic equations, differentiate or integrate, or work out moments. Knowing about phloem and xylem? Pah!

We should learn to develop and expand our minds. Maybe the childrens' grasp of English will be far better having learnt another language. It should tie in to the secondary education system so kids aren't regurgitatig the same thing over and over.

I think the point is it's much much easier for kids to learn a new language than it is for adults, adults who have learned a second language by the time their 10 can learn a third very quickly and naturally.

But one with only one language has to be dragged kicking and screaming to learn a second. Children's brains are much better suited to learning languages - and the method of teaching is different than with adults.

Some can't learnt the first.

Oh the irony.

Internet Rule 3: When correcting someone else's grammar, you concentrate on that [LIFTED].

Something else for primary school teachers to become experts on.

They do teach how to use the language - if you have a language expert at your school. Otherwise I guess it’s the teachers going on courses (if they can be afforded) and teaching parrot fashion, or bringing in a peripatetic teacher for the job - which I suspect will happen quite a lot.

I'm sure the government will make the funds available to employ language teachers for each school.
Won't they?

Typo on the piephone. I can't type for $h1t on it but I still know the difference between their/there/they're.

Completely agree that funding needs to follow rules. Given that we need to plug a multi-billion pound deficit, is this really a good idea to implement at the moment?