All students may be required to study a second language. (1 Viewer)

[Not-That-Bright]

Why not have both? The International Baccaularate(sp?) holds English, LOTE, Maths, Science, HSS as compulsory so that you study them all to some level (whether it be general, advanced or 'honours') with an elective as bonus. It also includes a theory of knowledge type thing plus some mandated community service. That seems to be the ideal model IMO as it produces well rounded individuals in ways the HSC often fails to do.

The truth is that not all students can do it, we had it at my school. It's a great model for the upper 50% of students.

 

[circusmind]

If the purpose isn't to become fluent then the whole exercise is a waste of time.

Only knowing enough to help you a little if you go to a country where it is spoken is hardly worth the trouble.

Define fluency. If you mean native-level proficiency, then no, no amount of formal education can make a person develop that level of fluency. However, near-native fluency, as downright impressive as it is, is not really necessary. It's perfectly possible to graduate from high school in Australia, and much more commonly in foreign countries where there is a focus on languages, and be able to: read a novel/newspaper without a dictionary and understand 90% of the meaning, watch TV, and to carry on extended conversations and form meaningful relationships entirely in the target language. At that level of fluency, you can function properly in society and your skills in whatever field you work in at home can be transferred across languages easily.

But see if most australian's aren't even regularly having to interact with other cultures, it becomes little more than a novelty. I am sure there are associated benefits of learning another language merely for the languistic skills you pick up, but I can't imagine these being any greater than mathematical/scientific skills... so would you also desire them to become mandatory? What about skills reguarding banking/investment/super etc, that's becomming such a big part of people's lives? What about theory of knowledge type courses to get our population thinking?

You have a good point. I'd suggest that encouraging multilingualism in Australia would foster a culture in which many languages are used, and so within a decade or so, it would not be a novelty but a fact of modern life. I'm not sure how to balance a syllabus, but countries such as Germany manage to churn out multilingual high school grads without noticeably losing numeracy or scientific ability.

In a perfect world all Europeans ought to speak one common language, just as they ought to share their currency. If they shared a language, there would be less misunderstanding among them; from the perspective of education (relevant to this thread), students would only have to spend time learning one language, allowing more time to learn substantive subjects like maths and science. In that sense the existence of many languages is an imperfection arising from historical factors...

Out of curiosity, do you have more than one language?

 

[_dhj_]

Out of curiosity, do you have more than one language?

Yes.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

I'd suggest that encouraging multilingualism in Australia would foster a culture in which many languages are used, and so within a decade or so, it would not be a novelty but a fact of modern life.

How so though? Particularly when we're talking about more than 1 language being introduced. Perhaps if everyone started watching chinese cinema, we started to recieve chinese tv stations and there were more chinese newspapers etc we could slowly see somewhat of a change... but I don't think we can force this sort of thing, even though I do think it's bound to come if the course of history continues along as it is.

 

[circusmind]

Only speaking one language is not restrictive at all, and if you think it is the same argument could also be used for not knowing 5 languages.

It's highly restrictive. You're right though, I feel restricted because I only have one foreign language, and I desperately want to learn a few more. Mandarin, Indonesian and Spanish would be ideal ...i just wish I could fit another language into my degree.

Unless you are actually going to use another language knowing one is nothing but a novelty.

You'd find that when you learn a language you seek out opportunities to use it, and it becomes far more useful than you'd think.

 

[circusmind]

Yes.

Nice. It's just that I've never run into someone who's multilingual but still thinks language is a means to an end rather than having inherent value.

How so though? Particularly when we're talking about more than 1 language being introduced. Perhaps if everyone started watching chinese cinema, we started to recieve chinese tv stations and there were more chinese newspapers etc we could slowly see somewhat of a change... but I don't think we can force this sort of thing, even though I do think it's bound to come if the course of history continues along as it is.

A higher population of diglots, triglots etc. means a much higher demand for material, activities and opportunities in other languages, which in turn would encourage more people to learn languages to gain something from this influx of foreign culture. I realise this probably sounds like pretty dodgy social engineering...and it is...but I think it's inevitable in any case, as you say.

 

[iamsickofyear12]

It's highly restrictive. You're right though, I feel restricted because I only have one foreign language, and I desperately want to learn a few more. Mandarin, Indonesian and Spanish would be ideal ...i just wish I could fit another language into my degree.

You'd find that when you learn a language you seek out opportunities to use it, and it becomes far more useful than you'd think.

Now you are starting to piss me off. The only reason you have taken this stance is because you can speak a second language and think you are better than everyone else because of it.

I am not restricted by only knowing one language. Do I need to say it again? I am not restricted by only knowing one language. If I knew another language I would not use it. I would not seek out opportunities to use it. It would be useless.

Learning another language is great if you are going to use it but if you aren't there are plenty of more important things to do with your time. There is no point sacrificing overall intelligence just to know another language.

 

[kami]

The truth is that not all students can do it, we had it at my school. It's a great model for the upper 50% of students.

What made it problematic for students? Just the overall subject difficulty or the fact that subjects were mandated?

 

[circusmind]

Now you are starting to piss me off. The only reason you have taken this stance is because you can speak a second language and think you are better than everyone else because of it.

Nope. I just love languages and think they're underappreciated in Australia. If anything, I think I'm pretty inadequate compared to people who can speak multiple languages.

I am not restricted by only knowing one language. Do I need to say it again? I am not restricted by only knowing one language. If I knew another language I would not use it. I would not seek out opportunities to use it. It would be useless.

Ummm...okay.

Learning another language is great if you are going to use it but if you aren't there are plenty of more important things to do with your time. There is no point sacrificing overall intelligence just to know another language.

I've never met anyone who was stupider for knowing more than one language.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

Nice. It's just that I've never run into someone who's multilingual but still thinks language is a means to an end rather than having inherent value.

But couldn't that just be that it makes them feel special? Also, couldn't it be almost a self-fulfilling prophesy as in... if someone decided to continue doing something, chances are they found some sort of value in it.

It just seems to me that the same thing occurs with university electives/majors etc.

What made it problematic for students? Just the overall subject difficulty or the fact that subjects were mandated?

Difficulty as well as the sort of broad range of subjects imo. If you're doing chemistry/biology/physics... well they're all science based so while they're definately different, they feed off each other a bit and you can be in the same sort of 'mind set' for each.

 

[circusmind]

But couldn't that just be that it makes them feel special? Also, couldn't it be almost a self-fulfilling prophesy as in... if someone decided to continue doing something, chances are they found some sort of value in it.

It just seems to me that the same thing occurs with university electives/majors etc.

Yeah, that's entirely possible, I suppose.

 

[iamsickofyear12]

Nope. I just love languages and think they're underapreciated in Australia. If anything, I think I'm pretty inadequate compared to many people who can speak multiple languages.

I've never met anyone who was stupider for knowing more than one language.

You are also pretty inadequate compared to many people who can only speak one language but are just smarter than you are.

I didn't say anyone was stupider for knowing more than one language, but it is likely they would be more intelligent if they spent that time on other things. If they are actually using that language then obviously it is a worthwhile trade off but if not then why learn a language.

 

[Tulipa]

I didn't say anyone was stupider for knowing more than one language, but it is likely they would be more intelligent if they spent that time on other things. If they are actually using that language then obviously it is a worthwhile trade off but if not then why learn a language.

What's your measure of intelligence? I would think that knowing two languages fluently would be a sign of intelligence would it not? If it's not then what exactly could they be doing to make themselves more intelligent?

 

[circusmind]

You are also pretty inadequate compared to many people who can only speak one language but are just smarter than you are.

That's certainly true, but intelligence is useless if you can't communicate. On the flipside, speaking 5 languages is useless if you've got no other skills....you'd just end up translating for people who actually have something to say.

I didn't say anyone was stupider for knowing more than one language, but it is likely they would be more intelligent if they spent that time on other things.

Aren't those two statements pretty much the same?

 

[Not-That-Bright]

I must admit what may be my overt bias as I hopelessly floundered my way through year 7-8 german class and came out with nothing but 'EIN SWEI DREI FEIR FUMPH SEX ZIEBEN AUCHT NOIN ZHEN ^____^' or something like that...

 

[iamsickofyear12]

What's your measure of intelligence? I would think that knowing two languages fluently would be a sign of intelligence would it not? If it's not then what exactly could they be doing to make themselves more intelligent?

All I am trying to say is that there are plenty of people that know two languages and are still stupid, and there are plenty of people who only know one language and are very intelligent.

 

[circusmind]

I must admit what may be my overt bias as I hopelessly floundered my way through year 7-8 german class and came out with nothing but 'EIN SWEI DREI FEIR FUMPH SEX ZIEBEN AUCHT NOIN ZHEN ^____^' or something like that...

:rofl:.

I share your pain. I did years of boring, dry German and learnt nothing till I actually was lucky enough to be sent there as an exchange student for a month or so. I only learnt the language after I saw how utterly useless I was when removed from my little Canberra monoculture.

 

[_dhj_]

Aren't those two statements pretty much the same?

Well not really, but it's perfectly understandable for someone to learn another language 'for the sake of it' if they are interested in languages. With something like intelligence you can't say that learning A makes you marginally more intelligent than learning B, it's a matter of knowledge and not intelligence.

 

[HotShot]

So we can live and make a living in these countries on the basis of that little bit? Also, this little bit is often restrained to the tourist districts in many countries since this generation are learning english but the previous generation has not had that benefit.

Yes, havent you heard of people who came to Australia without knowing a single word of english - how do you think they adapted. OVer time they learnt the language.

You can't completely experience the essence of another culture without engaging in its language as many concepts are destroyed in the process of translation.

I was never questioning - understanding another's culture and its relation to language. No doubt, that language and culture are very much linked - but are we talking learning about another culture or language? FOr either you dont require both - but having both helps - just not necessary.

Of course you'll be more proficient in something you have more experience in, it'd be foolish to even contend that point. However fluency in other languages is not as difficult as you make out - there are plenty of lecturers at university from say russia or germany who are completely fluent in english. Don't forget the many children of asiatic and middle eastern immigrants who are completely bilingual. There are also plenty of people from my classes doing International Studies who manage to be sufficiently proficient in their second language so as to study diverse things such as literature or physics overseas. None of these work for the UN.

There are also plent of lecturers that have lived in Australia for ages, and have come from overseas who cant speak 'proper' english. You are making huge assumption that asians in Australia are perfectly biliingual in languages. You will be surprised to know - they will be better in one language than the other. They will never attain the same proficiency in both languages. Those that do - end up working in the UN or as a diplomat translator something hardcore. (that is if they choose to).

So I can tell that Mary had an abortion in 1993 and there is now scarring along the ovaries and it is my job to fix that? Or that Josh divorced Amy and now she wants child support, his children are 3, 12 and 22 and he committed adultery? All by looking at the lips and the face and hand gestures? I suppose you could get the adultery one if you tried ...

As I said.. my point here is it is possible to learn a language without having to rock up to classes - I never said you can learn a language in a week or anything like that. IT takes practice.

You wouldn't. That is the entire point. Your qualifications and skills mean nothing if you cannot communicate. i.e You can't do your job. And over time they would improve, they'd improve far more quickly if you had previous experience.

As babies we had to yell and scream at our parents so that they knew we wanted something. They then had to guess what we wanted by where we were looking, where we were waving your hands or how we smelled. They then used their skills to obtain things for us like asking the cashier for food, toiletries, medications and so on. We won't have the benefit of someone acting as a constant interface with the outside world if we go to work somewhere else.

.. No you still understand me.. how as babies did we learn to communicate? by observation this is how we learn languages.

 

[Lucid Scintilla]

Year 7 and 8 is enough isn't it?

Few to none take those years seriously, let alone learning languages that won't be of any practical use.

10% bonus is pretty big as someone pointed out and that 'reward' is too much.

I agree; I think it's more than the 'bonus' you get if you're developmentally delayed.

I think this thing's silly. Some people naturally speak a language other than English, so then it'd be a pushover for them learning that language.

I'd be more concerned about getting people to speak an acceptable level of English.