One of the first things I noticed when I started at my
language school here was that 60% of the student body was from East Asia
(China, Japan and Korea). I hadn’t given
much thought to what nationalities would be in the school, but if you’d asked
me to guess, I wouldn’t have come up with there being twice as many South
Koreans as British people. Why were the Koreans studying Russian? The answer I
got from everyone was that it would be useful for a career in business. Russia
(along with Brazil, India and China) is one of the BRIC countries, a group of
key emerging market countries that are expected to be at the forefront of the
shift in global economic power away from G7 countries to the developing world.
If Russia is going to become increasingly important, why
aren’t more British students studying Russian? If we are all going to be
competing for a piece of the economic growth here, a big advantage will accrue
to countries that can field workers familiar with both the language and the
culture.
Russkiy Mir, a foundation set up to promote Russian language
and culture around the world, estimates that 300,000 Chinese and 150,000 German
school children are studying Russian. In England and Wales I estimate the
number is more like 12,000-15,000, i.e. Germany has more than ten times the
number of children studying Russian than England and Wales.
Russian is a minority language in the UK, and is probably
only offered by a small number of schools, but these low numbers are part of
the wider problem of language tuition in English schools. There has been a fair
amount of comment on language learning in the press (well, in the Guardian
anyway), but sometimes it seems to me that people just accept that English
people are bad at languages, as though it were some law of nature we couldn’t
change if we wanted to. There is often an unspoken feeling that foreign
countries superior to us in language skills have an “unfair” advantage, because
they watch US films, listen to US music and play US video games.
But there is a simpler explanation as to why so few English
people speak a foreign language: we don’t study them for very long. England
requires children to study a foreign language for 3 years (ages 11-14),
compared with an average of 8.2 years across a group of other nations
investigated by INCA, an organisation that compares education policies across
countries [I added in Germany and the US, using Texas as a stand-in for the
latter]. Note that Welsh and Scottish
children seem much better off [Figure 1]
Figure 1. Source: INCA, Texas Department of Education |
English children also study languages for fewer hours per
school year than in other countries. At age 14, the government recommends that
children in England study a foreign language for 72 hours across the school
year, compared with 126 hours in France, and 114 in Germany. [Figure 2] The combination of fewer years of language teaching, and fewer hours in those
years, means that at the end of compulsory education, an English child will have
had 70% fewer hours of language teaching than their equivalents in France or
Germany. [Figure 3] Ta-da! There’s no magic stopping us from learning
languages, we just don’t put the hours in.
Figure 2. Source: INCA, own estimates |
Figure 3. Source: INCA, own estimates |
All this suggests a fairly simple route for improving the
foreign language skills of the average school child – teach them for longer.
According to a Eurobarometer survey from 2005, 78% of people in the UK agree
with the statement “everyone in the European Union should be able to speak one
language in addition to their mother tongue”. If we are serious about this we
have to make a longer period of language tuition compulsory.
There are three main objections I can see to this. Firstly, it
is difficult to learn languages, so it’s not fair to force less academic
children to study them; secondly, we don’t have enough language teachers to
pull this off; and thirdly, there isn’t enough space on the timetable to double
the number of hours a week children spend on languages.
As I sit here, taking a break from trying to stuff Russian
verbs into my head, I can’t honestly say that languages are easy. In fact, I
often complain to myself that if only I had started learning Russian at six
rather than sixteen, I wouldn’t have to bother with any of this. And that is
the answer – start teaching languages at primary school. It makes no sense to
only begin teaching languages to someone when their natural ability to learn
them has already fallen off dramatically. Of course, you could argue that there
are too many children with English as a second language to worry about teaching
children anything other than English in primary school. But obviously, since I
brought it up, I don’t think this a good argument. Less than 10% of British
people speak a language other than English as their mother tongue. Even
allowing for some skew towards young people, this doesn’t seem prohibitively
high to me, since Germany has a similar proportion of its population with a mother
tongue other than German, and they manage to teach languages just fine.
I don’t think finding language teachers should be an
insurmountable problem either. Primary schools could have one language teacher
each, who would teach all the classes in that school, or language teachers could be
peripatetic and teach at several schools in one area. If there aren’t enough
qualified people in England, hire qualified foreigners.
The third obstacle, that there isn’t enough space in the
timetable, is the most difficult. It depends on what our priorities are. What
do children need to learn? How do we
compare the importance of a foreign language with the importance of drama, or
history, or design? It should at least give us pause that other countries
almost uniformly give languages a much higher priority than we do. Which brings me back to my own situation,
sitting in a tiny box room in Moscow, trying to learn Russian. I am doing this
because if I want to work in an international organisation, from the UN to the
EU to the World Bank, I need to speak another language. Speaking a foreign
language is an advantage in many companies, and this will only become more
true, if the economic prosperity of the UK comes to depend more and more on the
BRICs and other emerging markets. An ability to cut shapes out of MDF is not, however,
likely to be required.
No comments:
Post a Comment