Fri 1 Jun 2007
More language in High School
Posted by jangari under Education
[7] Comments
Today, the Group of Eight universities (Australia’s version of the Ivy League, or Russel Group) has called for languages to be compulsory until year 10 (16 years). It seems that less than 6% of final year students in Australia can speak a language other than English – though, this figure is suffixed with the qualification “in some areas”.
I agree completely, since I was one of those who finished from High School with only rudimentary knowledge of any foreign language, that is, I could count to 100 in Italian (through rote memory, mind you) or say very nasty things about your mother in Mandarin (Xie xie, Yang Yang).
Due to the conditions of my degree, I was obliged to undertake 28 credit points (about 8 courses) of a language. I chose Italian, purely because I was working for Italians at the time and thought – erroneously – that they might be able to help me out. Now I can also say very nasty things about your mother in Siciliano (Grazie, Giuseppe).
I was discussing this just today with my professor – he and another member of staff were kind enough to attend my graduation – who studied at a couple of universities in the US. Over there, it seems, tertiary education is much more liberal, in the liberal arts sense of the word. Students must study a language, a hard science, a social science as well as a few other requirements, before specialising into majors in second year. In Australia on the other hand, it is perfectly possible to go through one’s entire degree without diverging from their favoured subject areas. The idea of my degree, Bachelor of Liberal Studies, was to move towards the US system, thus producing well-balanced educated graduates, able to hold down a conversation in a wide range of areas.
So if making a language compulsory until year 10 is another step in this direction, I’m all for it. Especially since we Australians are so overwhelmingly monolingual (despite having a huge concentration of distinct pre-colonial languages, but that’s another rant). More High School students learning Cymraeg, isiXhosa or Pitjantjatjara would certainly be welcome.
~
June 2: This story has been taken up by the Herald in a bit more detail. It reveals that the more appropriate figure is that 13% of school leavers have a second language, down from the 1960s figure of 40%.
June 1st, 2007 at 10:40 pm
Hate to be the cynic, but I reckon it won’t make a shred of difference.
Firstly you’d have to ensure that the kids were learning the same language from grades 1-10, and in the current situation that would be a nightmare. Presumably you’d want to allow students some choice, but creating choice across the board, from primary to secondary, seems very unlikely.
Therefore you’d have to start severely limiting which languages to offer. Which language should be compulsory? I’d rather not hear that debate.
Secondly, languages (which language?..again, no consistency) are already compulsory up till grade 8 (here in QLD at least), so another 2-3 years of it, especially if it’s compulsory, won’t give us a ‘global advantage’. You only need to look at the level which that 6 percent of grade 12 language learners graduate with to realise the futility of this idea.
Compulsory exchange programs would be more effective, but given that that will never happen, the time each week would probably be better spent improving mathematics grades…
Thirdly, even once you get them to graduate from school with it, there’s still a very low carry-over rate to university level courses (according to someone speaking at a recent Chinese competition).
So I think this is a ridiculously simple solution to a rather complicated problem.
Still, I’d love to be proven wrong.
June 1st, 2007 at 10:50 pm
By the way, the Bachelor of Liberal Studies sounds really good!
June 2nd, 2007 at 5:52 am
I am unaware of the compulsory requirements here in the U.S. for languages other than English, which ought to tell you something about how comprehensive language study in this country is.
MY frustration is with the college level. As an undergrad, I was able to satisfy my language requirement with American Sign Language (which is beginning to gain recognition not only as a language in its own right (as opposed to some sort of hybrid of English) but is being recognized as being a completely DIFFERENT structure from English, so it’s counting as a “foreign” language, as well). When I got to grad school, though, I was told that the four-plus years I’d spent in ASL classes would not serve me in grad school, and that I’d have to pass a proficiency exam in a foreign language if I wanted an advanced degree in English. Since no one could adequately explain the reasoning of such a thing to me, and because the Education department had a better deal, I ended up with a degree in English Teaching rather than a straight English degree.
Who makes this stuff up, anyway?
June 2nd, 2007 at 10:27 am
Cooper, I think you’re probably right, but I have a few points.
Firstly, there’s no such choice for students until year 7 at the moment, at least where I went to school; everyone learned Italian. In year 7 everyone does a third of the year in Japanese, French and Italian, then in year 8 we choose one of these three to carry on with for another year. In 9 and 10, languages are options, alongside history, geography, business studies, drama, music, etc.
I would say that the purpose of learning another language in High School (others would certainly disagree though) is not to produce fluent speakers of Kiswahili or anything, but rather, to exercise whichever part of the mind is used in learning language in the hope that it doesn’t become fixed too early. This is just my opinion, that learning even the very basics of other languages prepares you for more involved language learning later on. But also, and this is really just a personal theory, that learning another language can open up the individual to be less… single-minded, perhaps. MrsChili, this relates to that Whorf quote you mentioned,
It’s a bit of a romantic notion I know, but I believe there is inherent value in linguistic (and cultural) diversity, not just across a population, but individually as well. To put it another way, I equate monolingualism with monoculturalism, with homogeneity, with uniformity.
June 2nd, 2007 at 1:30 pm
” I equate monolingualism with monoculturalism, with homogeneity, with uniformity.”
Couldn’t agree more.
June 4th, 2007 at 2:57 am
I don’t have much to add right now, but I did want to share a link I came across which touches on some related issues of second language learning in the US, where the population also tends to be (embarrassingly) monolingual. One of the main points is that the heavily literature-based focus of language learning leads to students who don’t really learn to use or speak the language competently. It strikes me that the content and quality of second language programs, along with the quantity of years of instruction, may be responsible for the small percentage of students who can actually speak another language.
I’m also reminded of some information I learned recently about the revival of Irish (Gaelic) in Ireland. (I don’t have the materials in front of me, so I may not be wholly accurate.) For decades, students were required to study Irish in school, and people were required to take language competency tests in order to get government jobs. However, the lack of daily use of the language outside of school (along with a lingering stigma associated with the Irish language and probably some other factors) led to only a tiny fraction of Irish people actually being able to speak Irish, in spite of the years of mandatory school instruction. (The system turned out “temporary bilinguals”.) Recently, the language policies have been reworked, and a variety of factors have led to a decrease in the stigmatization. There has also been a great increase in popular cultural materials (film, music, radio, and written literature). Now, the numbers of people who can speak Irish are increasing.
Anyhow, it seems that mandatory language instruction is not enough. I guess I agree with Cooper that it’s a complicated issue. On the other hand, I do share your hope that the legislation will help move things in the right direction.
(I guess I did have more to say than I thought…in fact, I started this comment last night, and didn’t have a chance to finish it until just now.)
June 8th, 2007 at 8:56 am
From what I remember reading, the new bilingual schools have a fantastic reputation.