Most experts agree that the earlier a child is introduced to a second language the greater the chances are that they will become proficient in it. Bilingualism is valued in a global society: in addition to developing a deeper understanding of other cultures it can provide a competitive advantage in the workforce. However, the economic downturn has forced many school districts to eliminate foreign language teachers entirely. A high-performing district in Westchester county decided to save money by eliminating its twice-weekly elementary school Spanish lessons, deciding the $175,000 per year would be better spent on other subjects. Some districts are opting to replace instructors with interactive computer programs like Rosetta Stone as a cost-cutting measure; they feel it is better than eliminating a foreign language program entirely. Many insist that you need a specially trained teacher to facilitate the proper foundation essential to success in foreign language in high school and beyond. Some parents feel that money spent on foreign language learning would best be siphoned into existing reading and writing classes to improve overall literacy scores.
Although most districts have foreign language programs in place because they are required for graduation, urban schools with more diverse populations rely on dual-language programs as a way for foreign language learners to learn English and also as a conduit to bridge cultural differences and foster acceptance in the community. Curtailing these programs could interfere with what many agree is an opportune time to teach children language: when they are young and can master the pronunciation of foreign words.
For every administrator who insists that in-classroom foreign language teachers are essential because they can tailor lessons as needed, provide cultural aspects as well as aid in pronunciation and fluency, there are parents who feel that foreign language learning should take a back seat to reading, writing and arithmetic. It is fair to assume, however, that the majority of administrators, teachers and parents do not want foreign language programs to be relegated only to wealthy, well-resourced school districts, rather that a solution be arrived at that would be as democratic as possible.
Utilizing a foreign language software program like Rosetta Stone in elementary school, however, might be a way of keeping costs down while allowing children to be exposed to languages other than English. The more years a child can devote to learning a language, the more competent he or she will become. Many town libraries also have these programs available which would make it easier for children to practice at their own pace or even go ahead of their class if they choose to. It is important to note that children are comfortable with technology: they do not view it as a cold, unfriendly tool rather as a part of their everyday lives. Podcasts, blogs and wikis are effective ways of enhancing their learning experience and can be done without having to invest a lot of money.
Schools might consider approaching their PTAs to see if there are funds available for starting language clubs after school or during lunchtime. Also, bi-lingual parents can volunteer to share their native culture or even read to classes on a regular basis. High school honor students or those with a proficiency in foreign language and a desire to teach can volunteer at elementary schools to share their talents with students; time spent with the children could also fulfill a community service requirement. English language learners might also be invited to serve as assistants, which would help their language learning as well.
Historically, school districts have expanded and contracted their course offerings, reacting to budget cuts and surpluses. Although there is never a replacement for a teacher in a classroom it is possible to conjure simple, if temporary measures to save classes from the chopping block, utilizing technology and ingenuity, without causing a major impact on student’s lives.
11 responses so far ↓
plopez317 // October 16, 2009 at 2:28 am |
I am an advocate in learning a second language at an early age. I am a living example of this. My parents taught me how to speak English and Spanish simultaneously. I think it is necessary to introduce a foreign language in the elementary schools, as well as to provide a cultural background of different languages and where they come from. Although, it may just be a goal that we need to strive for in our community in the future because funds are lacking to incorporate a program like this presently, we must, as educators and parents, realize how important it is in today’s society.
My fluent ability to speak Spanish has opened many doors for me throughout the years. It is beneficial in finding a job, traveling, and in education. I am a strong believer that vocabulary, reading, and writing has come much easier to me because of my ability to speak three languages where I could rely on root words to figure out the meaning of higher level reading and/or vocabulary. All in all, I hope second language programs can and will be implemented in elementary schools in the future.
jbeans324 // October 16, 2009 at 9:27 pm |
I am a full time Spanish and Italian Teacher. It would be impossible for students to completely learn and understand a second language by using technology to teach them. Yes, there are good programs and shows that teach languages, however, they are just not enough. I have taught grades 1-11 over the course of the past four years. I have also written a thesis paper on what age is the best to for second language learning. In my personal experience children that are younger are more motivated to learn a second language. They do not have a sense of worth for the language, or know it’s importance, however they find it interesting and fun. They like speaking to each other in different languages. As students progress into High School, second language learning becomes bothersome. Some students just do not have the ability to grasp the language and they quit. Also, the fact that a Regents exam is given pushes teachers to only teach what is on the regents. They do no have the time or take the time out of the lessons to go over culture and the fun aspects of another language. Many kids to try to learn the language but they end up hating it and drop the language after the Regents year. I feel that technology can do a wonderful job at creating interesting lesson plans and visual aids, however it can never take the place of having a teaching in the classroom.
graciet2 // October 17, 2009 at 12:32 pm |
Learning a second language is important to understanding grammar in any language. Teaching foreign language at a young age will help students be more proficient at reading and writing the English language, as well. Our society has changed and become a global society. Foreign languages helps them to understand and embrace other cultures.
The economic crunch has caused problems and districts are using computer programs to teach language. Technology can be used to ENHANCE education, but never to replace what a teacher can do.
I believe education is a social activity. We learn better with other people. When I was looking at graduate schools, I wanted to take only online courses so I could be available for the many after school activities of my children. In the first class that I took, I found the readings to be very boring, but when I went to class, the lessons came alive through class discussion. Now I would never think of taking an online class.
A better way would be to have volunteers come in and teach their language. This will make these people feel valued in society, rather than looked down upon as they were in past times. When the economy turns around, some of these people may find employment in teaching these valuable skills.
jml526 // October 19, 2009 at 3:58 pm |
I was a bit confused by the title of this article and then the fact that really it was about foreign lanuage learning. Were you trying to say that by using a technology program to teach language you eliminate the need for a language teacher and therefore save money?
robinson682 // October 25, 2009 at 10:16 pm |
I agree, it is very important for students to have foreign language study in their curriculum at as early an age as possible. I always wondered why it doesn’t typically start until middle school. The U.S. comes up short when compared with Europe in regard to foreign language study. I’m met many Europeans who have facility in at least three or four languages because it was part of their school curriculum. Why doesn’t the U.S. seem very eager to teach foreign languages?
It is true, there are cost effective ways for students to study foreign language. I have used Rosetta Stone and found it a very useful program. It is filled with many interesting photos that hold your attention. I also liked the idea of having bi-lingual parents and students volunteer their time to help teach a foreign language. It is time for us to take foreign language study more seriously.
jesstorn // October 30, 2009 at 4:19 am |
Learning a second language at a young age is more affective than at an older age. As long as these students are learning a language effectively it does not matter if Rosetta is teaching them or an actual classroom teacher. On the other hand, I feel learning a second language in a classroom may be more efficient as this classroom brings culture and social interactions when learning. Temporarily I have no problem with technology replacing a teacher, but I do not feel it should completely take its place.
skennedy101 // October 30, 2009 at 7:40 pm |
I agree with learning language at a young age. I feel though that Rosetta Stone is the way to go. Kids seem to learn more when they work with technology. They are use to it because it is a part of their everyday lives. I for one have looked into Rosetta Stone for myself. I feel that the teacher should be there to guide them and do lessons with the students and the program. The program shouldn’t be used to replace the teacher because students still need that human interaction.
whitehousemw // November 2, 2009 at 6:01 pm |
I feel that a second language is most important subject in school after math and english. I coasted through my high school days and I came out on the other side good results. I got into the university I wanted and achieved highly. However the one subject that I regret not putting 100% in was French. I can now barely string a sentence together, nevermind conversate. Been from England, I can only speak english yet every other country in europe can speak their native language plus English and possibly a third and fourth. Holidaying on the continent is embarassing, even the so called less educated and low level jobs employees speak near perfect english. I think extra money should be put into foreign languages. They are so valuable in employment and with the latin based languages once you have learnt a second language it is much easier to pick up additional ones.
hannahlee05 // November 3, 2009 at 4:07 am |
This article highlights just how important it is to keep Foreign Language courses in place–as it will no doubt help these students’ futures in the workforce and beyond. The concept on implementing Rosetta Stone was interesting, and though it may certainly be beneficial to students, I don’t believe that there can be a replacement for a Foreign Language instructor. Only an instructor would be able to teach specifics about a language, like inflections in speech. I was born into a bilingual household (English and Korean), but regrettably bit by bit lost my heritage language as my school years progressed, which is considered to be extremely embarassing, making me “less Korean”. Aside personal enrichment, learning forgein languages proficiently is of importance as the U.S. is becoming increasingly composed of people of a rich diversity. It’s rather pompous to think that students do not need foreign language proficiencies to some degree. Furthermore, cutting these courses from urban schools, and relegating such classes to the wealthier districts only serves to further marginalize students of lower-income districts.
azack329 // November 4, 2009 at 4:11 pm |
Learning a foreign language in school is so important for the same reasons that students are required to learn history, civics and government and needs to be integrated in the curriculum. Studying a foreign language has benefits far exceeding the ability to communicate with foreigners. In many other parts of the world such as Europe, people not only speak their native language but also are very conversant in English.
The business world today is global. A lot of growth is in foreign markets such as China. Professionals who know another language are more competitive in the job market. If we are aiming to educate our students to compete in the global economy, then speaking a foreign language is imperative.
The concept on implementing Rosetta Stone is interesting, however I don’t think that there can be a replacement for a Foreign Language instructor. I feel learning a second language in a classroom is much more efficient. The classroom brings culture and social interactions that are vital in facilitating the learning process.
tamn327 // November 4, 2009 at 6:19 pm |
I agree that learning a second language would be beneficial to our students. I also believe that students learn languages easier at an earlier age. I took four years of Italian in High School and when I was done, and no longer practicing the language, I lost all of what I learnded. I feel that even though it may be beneficial to teach our students foreign language at a young age, we may be overextending our teachers and our students. Our school days do not seem long enough to incorporate all that we want our students to accomplish. I feel that introducing something like Rosetta Stone, especially when budgets are questioned, would be more beneficial thatn doing nothing at all.
You must be logged in to post a comment.