Teach foreign languages, but do it better

Don't give up on teaching foreign languages, writes Alicia Anderson. Even if students rarely become fluent, they learn about other cultures and "strengthen their understanding of the English language."

U.S. high schools pretend to teach "world languages," but it's not worth the time, argues Fordham's Mike Petrilli. Unless students start much earlier, they don't learn very much.

Eighty-two percent of high schools, 61 percent of middle schools and 20 percent of elementary scbools teach at least one foreign language, according to federal data, Anderson writes. Only 10 states require a foreign language for graduation, and three more require it for an advanced diploma. (In Maryland, foreign language or career and technical education electives both fulfill the same graduation requirement.) Some districts also require credits or proficiency in a world language when the state does not.

In addition, highly selective colleges and universities consider a world language essential, she writes. "If you’re a high school student aiming for an Ivy, Ivy+, flagship state school, or elite liberal arts college, you should be taking at least four years of a foreign language if offered by your high school."

Ideally, students should start learning a second language in elementary school, Anderson writes. But there's a benefit to the late start that's so common in the U.S. "It’s a subject where kids haven’t yet been sorted by ability. Some students who struggle in other subjects discover that they have a talent for learning languages at exactly the time many kids disengage from school."

In addition, some high achievers find themselves "stuck for the first time, frustrated, in a class where they don’t understand (literally) what the teacher is saying," she writes. "Providing the opportunity to work through this friction with guardrails in place is far better than waiting until the end of high school or midway through college, when the stakes are higher and there are fewer adults on hand to help."

"The answer to mediocre teaching shouldn’t be no instruction at all," Anderson concludes. Instead, schools should "put more effort into teaching foreign languages well."

I think there are lots of ways to learn about other cultures that are more efficient than trying to learn other languages. Teach geography and world history. Read books set in other countries.

I'm also unpersuaded that otherwise weak students will excel in foreign language classes while achievers struggle.

My daughter's middle-school Spanish class included a minority of students from immigrant families who spoke fluent Spanglish. They all got D's because they never did the homework and didn't learn to read, write or speak standard Spanish. My daughter, who has no particular talent for any language but English, got A's. She did the work.

As for learning the structure of language, I recall Winston Churchill's memoir, My Early Life. He wasn't considered smart enough for Latin or Greek at Harrow, so he was taught only English. "Thus I got into my bones the essential structure of the ordinary British sentence -- which is a noble thing. . . . Naturally I am biased in favour of boys learning English. I would make them all learn English: and then I would let the clever ones learn Latin as an honour, and Greek as a treat."