I am a student at what is considered (by us at least) to be one of the best prep schools in the state. We have the third highest average SAT score in the state of Massachusetts and typically send anywhere from four to six students of our graduating class of 60 to Harvard. Winsor's web site lauds its curriculum as one that "exposes students to a broad range of intellectual experiences and helps students build a foundation of skills and knowledge that serve as a lifelong base for independent thinking, problem solving, creativity, and wise decision making".
So if we're so great, why is don't we hold our language program to the same high standards as the rest of the school? Don't get me wrong; Winsor's language program is at least as good as most. However, it's still decidedly lacking. We offer French, Latin, Spanish, and Chinese, which is a fairly good course selection for a school of our size. More troubling, however, is the fact that we are only required to take a language for three years and that we are not even allowed to pick up a second language until junior year, leaving just two years of high school study for the second language.
In my opinion, in an increasingly global world and economy, nothing is more important than teaching our children second and third languages. I would like to see a four year modern language requirement (sure Latin's great at all, but I'd much rather see schools offering a language relevant today like Japanese, Hindi, Swahili, or Arabic instead of a language that's only good for SAT words) and strongly encouraging students to take a second language. Furthermore, I would like to see languages much earlier in our schooling systems. I think public and private schools should start offering languages in elementary school, perhaps around first or second grade, so that students have a better chance at learning a language fluently by graduation. I think they should have the option of picking up a second language as early as fifth or sixth grade so they can develop this second language to a fluent or near-fluent level as well.
Many of the problems the world faces today are because of differences in cultures and people's lack of understanding of other countries and religions. I think a stronger language requirement would be an important step toward creating greater global understanding, which in turn could help reduce global conflict. While knowing Arabic alone won't stop us from invading the Middle East for oil, an understanding of Middle Eastern culture, language, and religion could eventually lead to a generation that respects other people more than its own thirst for oil.
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
I agree. My high school offered only Spanish and German, and only recently upped the requirements from one year to two. In the area that I live in, there is a rapidly growing Spanish-speaking population, so that's nice, but in this area, nobody speaks German, so it's a little useless for us unless we plan on going to Europe.
I don't need drugs - I have genetics.
I also agree. When I was in kindergarten we had a spanish teacher come into our class once a month. By 5th grade we saw her once a week and then 6th-8th we saw her about twice a week. Although this doesn't seem like a lot, it is more than what a lot of other schools do. When I entered high school I knew a lot more spanish than the other beginners; however, my high school did not let me move up to Spanish 2. I spent my whole entire freshman year reviewing the basics of a language that I already knew. That was a whole year wasted. It wasn't until halfway through my sophmore year that I began learning things I hadn't learned in my elementary school. It upsets me that all my work seemed to go to waste.
to travel out of the country.
Learning a language for the sake of learning a language is wrong. There needs to be a practical reason for it. Learning a language in a classroom environment won't help a student learn another culture any better because classrooms are insular environments. You are learning with other students who come from the same American culture as you, and very likely learning from an American with a foreign language teaching certificate.
The ability to speak and write a language is also very quickly lost if one does not need to use it on a regular basis, nor have the motivation to keep learning it.
Schools really should drop the language requirement, and instead focus on learning about other cultures in English. If they really want to make it a requirement, they should focus on setting up partnerships with sister school in other countries and swap students for a year or two.
Depends on where you live. New York sees people that speak all sorts of different languages, and has ethnic neighborhoods for many. I'd bet that other large cities have a similar set up.
Also, learning a foreign language (or a spoken one, at least) does help you learn English better, if only because there are a lot of similarities in many European languages to English.
~C
Check out the latest entry in the Between The Lines column!
Want the highest rated list to change? RATE those blogs, then!
I agree. You want to know how many foreign languages my school offers? one. ONE. one foreign language. I mean, yeah, I know we're in south Texas and all and Spanish is spoken almost as much as english, but not everyone intends to stay around here.
Stormy
I agree with most of what you said, especially about opening options up for kids, but you have to realize, languages are just not everyone's forte.
You go to an excellent prep school; that's great. The average person does not experience your quality of educator, nor your intellectual capacities. Not everyone is as smart as you; so not everyone can handle, or should be required to handle, the same standards you hold for yourself.
Also, Latin is good as a base language for MANY other languages, just JUST for SAT words.
I LOVED your point about Middle Eastern languages, though! Props.