I think I'm the only parent who could not care less about DC learning multiple languages

[Anonymous]

OP here again, my post comes across much more flippant than I intended. I know that by virtue of sitting in a classroom in a public or private school in NW DC in 2008, my kids are going to be taught a second (or 3rd, depending on Jr/HS electives) language. I think that's great. I personally have been taught Spanish, German, Latin and some Italian, so I'm on board with the exposure and basic competency thing.

What I don't get, or maybe don't agree with, is the view of some of my friends that it's vitally imperative to be immersed and bilingual 365 days a year, from age 5mos. (aka, French- or Spanish-speaking nanny) until graduation.

For starters: What if you guess wrong? How is Jr. going to conduct business or diplomacy with the Chinese or North Koreans in their languages on the basis of having attended Oyster? And where are all the *Russian* immersion schools around here, speaking of international relations? Or what if you do choose Mandarin for your 4 yr old K-12, and that little girl grows up to deeply covet a foreign service job in Africa and thus needs to learn French and the local tribal languages at age 28, anyway? She'll be starting over, essentially as she would have if she had not attended a Mandarin immersion school K-12.

I like languages, and I do think the world is flat, but I don't think it's do-or-die at age 6. I just can't say that at the playground.

[Anonymous]

I think the early learning gives them a confidence and makes adding FUTURE languages easier
Plus, if they live in the USA, that spanish will not be wasted

[Anonymous]

I think in this day and age it has to be looked upon like reading. You can't just say, "There, I've said it. I could care less about reading" Just because people care about a second language doesn't mean they are immersing them 24 hours a day 7 days a week (any more than they are immersing them in reading equivalently). But I do think Americans really need to catch up in this respect and I'm glad to see so much more attention devoted to other languages and culture. Otherwise, you end up with a bunch of Sarah Palins who know nothing about the rest of the world (except when they're flying in our air space, that is).

[Anonymous]

I am a high-school foreign-language teacher who never speaks one word of English in the classroom (my classroom is an hour a day or immersion, if you will ). I have taught all levels from beginners to AP students. My observations are obviously not statistical, but they nonetheless are based on nearly 15 years of empirical evidence coming from literally over a thousand students, so they're probably a bit more than simply anecdotal (or rather, they are anecdotal but based on a whole lot of anecdotes, LOL).

In a nutshell: some people are gifted at languages and others are not. (That may be thought of as a harsh statement by some, but I don't see why that should be--some people are gifted at dance, or music, or math, or what have you, and some people are talented at languages.) Speaking for me personally, I studied Latin in middle and high school, and never had a single class in a modern language until college, yet easily became completely fluent in the language I teach, reading and writing as well as speaking (I did spend over a year living there), and am high-intermediate-level conversant in two other languages that I essentially picked up on my own from a couple of textbooks and a couple of weeks spent in the countries. I simply have a gift for languages, just like others have a gift for math, or music, or athletics, or what have you. For people like me, it honestly doesn't matter if a language is studied early: when a language-talented person decides to learn a language, he/she will do so and have no trouble. (BTW, to be clear: I am just being honest/matter-of-fact about my gift for languages, I'm not being self-aggrandizing about it, for the simple reasons that a) I had nothing to do with it--I was born with it and so really can't take any credit, and b) it's hardly the most important/valuable of possible talents, LOL.)

For those people who aren't talented at languages, it will always be a struggle for them. My husband actually speaks a second language fluently for the simple reason that his parents are immigrants and they spoke that language at home--yet he has been unable to master any other foreign language in his entire life! He just isn't talented at it. Likewise, I have taught very, very intelligent people--future Ivy students, etc.--who just couldn't master a second language, period. And then I have taught others for whom it came easily, regardless of how old they were when they started.

Of course, with hard work, even if one isn't truly good at languages, one can still become basically competent at it by sheer effort and brute force, if one devotes a lot of time and effort to it. But most people, unless they have a fierce desire to do something for which a language is necessary, such as work abroad, won't devote the requisite time/energy to learning a language if it doesn't come easily. Thus if they aren't ready to really put in the later effort, having taken classes in elementary school won't really help these people much either.

So the question really becomes, for most people, is early exposure useful? In my experience, it makes no difference whatsoever. At one school where I taught, students informed the language department of their previous language exposure, and there was seemingly no benefit to having had prior exposure, with the possible exception of the intangible of students taking a favorable attitude toward learning a language because of having had a good experience in prior classes. I am speaking here of prior language classes (such as elementary/middle school studies or outside classes such as those offered by outfits like JabberU); I am not speaking of immersion programs nor of actual time spent living in another country. Both of the latter are known to be a superb way of learning a language, and my empirical evidence also supports those methods.

Let me be clear: there is certainly no harm whatsoever to starting a language early! Obviously, I am a language teacher and wish that everyone were interested in languages! For those of you for whom it is important, have at it; hopefully your children will enjoy it and it is certainly great to expose them to it, just as it is important to expose them to all subjects. For some it may spakr a desire to learn more and to in fact put in the necessary effort. It just isn't the be-all and end-all, and probably ultimately will have little to do with any future fluency.

[Anonymous]

PP here--meant "an hour a day *of* immersion," not "or." Sorry for the typo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a high-school foreign-language teacher who never speaks one word of English in the classroom (my classroom is an hour a day or immersion, if you will ). I have taught all levels from beginners to AP students. My observations are obviously not statistical, but they nonetheless are based on nearly 15 years of empirical evidence coming from literally over a thousand students, so they're probably a bit more than simply anecdotal (or rather, they are anecdotal but based on a whole lot of anecdotes, LOL).

In a nutshell: some people are gifted at languages and others are not. (That may be thought of as a harsh statement by some, but I don't see why that should be--some people are gifted at dance, or music, or math, or what have you, and some people are talented at languages.) Speaking for me personally, I studied Latin in middle and high school, and never had a single class in a modern language until college, yet easily became completely fluent in the language I teach, reading and writing as well as speaking (I did spend over a year living there), and am high-intermediate-level conversant in two other languages that I essentially picked up on my own from a couple of textbooks and a couple of weeks spent in the countries. I simply have a gift for languages, just like others have a gift for math, or music, or athletics, or what have you. For people like me, it honestly doesn't matter if a language is studied early: when a language-talented person decides to learn a language, he/she will do so and have no trouble. (BTW, to be clear: I am just being honest/matter-of-fact about my gift for languages, I'm not being self-aggrandizing about it, for the simple reasons that a) I had nothing to do with it--I was born with it and so really can't take any credit, and b) it's hardly the most important/valuable of possible talents, LOL.)

For those people who aren't talented at languages, it will always be a struggle for them. My husband actually speaks a second language fluently for the simple reason that his parents are immigrants and they spoke that language at home--yet he has been unable to master any other foreign language in his entire life! He just isn't talented at it. Likewise, I have taught very, very intelligent people--future Ivy students, etc.--who just couldn't master a second language, period. And then I have taught others for whom it came easily, regardless of how old they were when they started.

Of course, with hard work, even if one isn't truly good at languages, one can still become basically competent at it by sheer effort and brute force, if one devotes a lot of time and effort to it. But most people, unless they have a fierce desire to do something for which a language is necessary, such as work abroad, won't devote the requisite time/energy to learning a language if it doesn't come easily. Thus if they aren't ready to really put in the later effort, having taken classes in elementary school won't really help these people much either.

So the question really becomes, for most people, is early exposure useful? In my experience, it makes no difference whatsoever. At one school where I taught, students informed the language department of their previous language exposure, and there was seemingly no benefit to having had prior exposure, with the possible exception of the intangible of students taking a favorable attitude toward learning a language because of having had a good experience in prior classes. I am speaking here of prior language classes (such as elementary/middle school studies or outside classes such as those offered by outfits like JabberU); I am not speaking of immersion programs nor of actual time spent living in another country. Both of the latter are known to be a superb way of learning a language, and my empirical evidence also supports those methods.

Let me be clear: there is certainly no harm whatsoever to starting a language early! Obviously, I am a language teacher and wish that everyone were interested in languages! For those of you for whom it is important, have at it; hopefully your children will enjoy it and it is certainly great to expose them to it, just as it is important to expose them to all subjects. For some it may spakr a desire to learn more and to in fact put in the necessary effort. It just isn't the be-all and end-all, and probably ultimately will have little to do with any future fluency.

As it happens, many liberal arts colleges REQUIRE that you take and pass a certain # of credits in order to graduate/fulfill your requirements for graduation
I've seen the early exposure help in 2 ways...a person can test out of languages, thus lightening the courseload for the next 4 yrs, or they can breeze through those classes, and enhance their overall gpa...
especially in cases where languages DON'T come easily, as for your husband, early exposure can significantly ease the stress later (cos their window for learning shut early)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

As it happens, many liberal arts colleges REQUIRE that you take and pass a certain # of credits in order to graduate/fulfill your requirements for graduation
I've seen the early exposure help in 2 ways...a person can test out of languages, thus lightening the courseload for the next 4 yrs, or they can breeze through those classes, and enhance their overall gpa...
especially in cases where languages DON'T come easily, as for your husband, early exposure can significantly ease the stress later (cos their window for learning shut early)

Hi, PP here again. Totally agree with you about the testing out/GPA issue. The point about my husband, though, is that many people might think that early exposure to one foreign language in addition to English (and in his case, literally the best possible type of exposure--from birth, speaking it daily at home as the sole language) will help a person actually develop a facility for languages. My point was that if someone isn't good at languages, that may not in fact be the case. My husband is naturally bilingual but was never able to become trilingual, and early exposure didn't help him become better at learning languages. To boot, he is a Ivy undergrad/Ivy PhD, valedictorian, Phi Beta Kappa, successful, etc.; in other words, he is of superior intelligence and work ethic, and also naturally bilingual, but none of that helped him learn another language, LOL. Now, of course, that's just one example, but it fits with my experience of teaching as well.

[Anonymous]

Hey OP -

Yeah, I'd love my kid to learn a foreign language and if it could be done by snapping my fingers, I would. I do understand where you are coming from. There are only so many hours in a day, and our kids are not empty vessels to "fill" with whatever was lacking from our own childhoods.

I do speak a second language - not a useful one, though. Learned it at 18, was fluent at one point, and now can still read a paper with a dictionary. It's nice. Really nice to tap into an alternative world view. That said, there are a lot of other things to learn, too.

We weren't impressed with our local immersion program. Maybe the kids learn spanish, but it didn't seem a very intellectual environment otherwise.

[Anonymous]

http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.com/2008/02/28/78-multilingual-children/

[Anonymous]

Very funny. I really am angry that although I initially spoke 4 languages at home with extended family, two of them fluently, my multi-lingual mother (let's see... 6 or 7 languages... she started out in postwar refugee camps) decided I should focus exclusively on English when I started school. Wow. What a difference a generation makes. We have a very different attitude.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My parents emphasized languages and international travel. So, I grew up, moved away, and have spent the last 20 years traveling for my job. Sure makes raising kids hard.

So, yes, I'm exposing my children to foreign languages. But I refused to consider WIS for school, because I didn't want DCs going down the same path that I did. I'd rather they have a broader skill set.

As the parent of a current WIS student, I am quite suprised by your idea of WIS as a school where language immersion precludes a "broader skill set". The foreign-language immersion occurs together with a challenging academic curriculum that emphasizes critical thinking and prepares for the International Baccalaureate.

[Anonymous]

PP, don't be surprised at ANYTHING people say on this board, especially about schools, they rarely know what they are talking about, and love to go for generalizations and cheap shots...

[Anonymous]

If your children are immersed in a language before age 7 or 8, they should grow up speaking it like a native. After that you can never totally lose the accent. Even the language teacher must have that problem since she started late.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If your children are immersed in a language before age 7 or 8, they should grow up speaking it like a native. After that you can never totally lose the accent. Even the language teacher must have that problem since she started late.

This is true, but only if someone is truly immersed--i.e., living there or speaking a language at home. Studying it in school, even at a young age--what most posters are referring to when they ask about school-based language classes--will not produce native-like speech without an accent.

[Anonymous]

I'm originally a native speaker of a language whose sounds are very different from English, although I haven't used it much since I was 6-ish. I'm not anywhere near fluent any more, and although I have some accent advantages over non-native speakers, at this point, I speak slowly and the combinations of sounds in some words are quite awkward for me to say. I think it's fair to say that I've lost much of my native accent.