Yesterday I was flying home from a brief vacation in the Sunshine State. While waiting for our plane to depart, a young woman across the aisle was making a last minute call. She spoke in Russian. At the end of the flight we had a brief conversation and she spoke in flawless English. I was reminded once again of something I continue to regret that I have never reached fluency in a second language. As an American I am not alone of course. Three years of Latin and two years of French met my academic requirements, but little else.
In a recent article in the Greenwich Times the Board of Education in Greenwich, CT reaffirmed its commitment to offering world languages to its students at an early age. Unlike most districts they have realized along with most of the nations with whom we compete that the earlier second languages are introduced the more likely the student will reach fluency.
The state Department of Education will be importing a number of teachers from China to encourage the teaching of Mandarin in Connecticut. A member of the department is quoted as attributing the program in part to the need to know other languages in this “new era of terrorism”. Interestingly, the College Board recently announced that it is dropping a number of world language AP tests due to lack of interest. In its high school reform effort here in Connecticut, the department is considering adding either a fluency requirement or a two years of study of a world language to its list of graduation requirements.
This is another cyclical issue in American public education and yet another equity issue. Whatever the state introduces as a requirement in world language, it is likely that the overwhelming majority of Greenwich students will already have met it. At the same time urban districts and poorer rural districts are forced to compress curricular offerings to meet the required focus of the federal law. Given what we now know about neurological development, perhaps the greatest advantage for Greenwich students (and students in the nations with which we compete in the much-touted global marketplace) is that they are introduced to a second language at an early age.
5 responses so far ↓
concerned grandpa // April 9, 2008 at 11:36 am
Most Connecticut school districts certainly recognize the importance of foreign languages as much as Greenwich. But unlike Greenwich most don’t have the resources (meaning already overstretched grand lists) on their own to hire teachers to teach more foreign languages. The state (to say nothing of the federal government) has far greater taxing power to offer incentives for districts to make foreign languages standard offerings. Why don’t the state and federal governments use their financial resources to make this happen? That’s the real issue. Imagine how many kids would be learning languages if we took just $1 billion (or even a few hundred million) from the $12 billion we are spending in Iraq each month and put it toward foreign language courses in our schools!
kinda sad // April 9, 2008 at 8:53 pm
It seems you feel inadequate because you are not bilingual. WHY? Being bilingual and using that skill daily are 2 very different things. People learn a second or third, forth language generally because they have a use for it. Right? Either that or they have the time it takes to learn in abundance. Most do not. Enjoy knowing a language spoken by so many. If you have the time and know you will use a second, go for it.
Olivia // April 9, 2008 at 9:09 pm
There’s no question that learning world languages from an early age on would benefit all Connecticut students. There are many academic requirements — each requiring time and money. With limited resources, especially in view of our current economy, let’s proceed cautiously and only after reaching agreement on what our priorities are.
robjmur2 // April 10, 2008 at 9:16 am
Most of the issues I have raised thus far involve decisions about priorities, adequate resources, allocation of resources in the most effective way to accomplish the goals we have agreed upon as a community. Because of the current way in which we finance education in the United States communities such as Greenwich have much more latitude in the resource part of the equation. thanks for the thoughtful comments.
Bob Murphy
Doug // April 11, 2008 at 1:08 pm
The U.S. is a hard place to learn and retain a second language simply because most people only speak English, and also because we are significantly segregated.
However, learning to read, write, and speak a second language unlocks a leap in earning power and opportunity, particularly in our shrinking world/global economy. Funny thing is, most students don’t take it seriously during school. They have no idea that they’re blunting their ability to earn more money.
Leave a Comment