to think this government hasn't got a clue about education- why should all children be made to take MFL at GCSE?

[LuluJakey1]

What is it with the ill-thought out education ideas this government has? Why should every child take a GCSE in MFL? It is not something many children enjoy or feel has relevance to them.

Why should a school not be able to be outstanding if it does not make all students take a GCSE in MFL?

Any ideas how much business we lose as a country each year to countries that do bother to speak other languages? even just a little bit? how do you think the sheer arrogance of turning up at a business meeting in another country and greeting the others involved in English is perceived when trying to do multi-million pound deals? that would be multi-million pound deals that create jobs in our country.

Any ideas how many people in the world don't speak English, not even a little bit? why is that their problem and not ours?

Any ideas of the skills involved in learning languages which are entirely transferable to other areas of life?

cultural awareness? tolerance? respect? art? literature? film? food? travel?

the ignorance on this thread is staggering...but sadly, not surprising. Spoke to a parent just yesterday who though it hilarious to tell me that their dear, dear child all but had permission to behave like a total twat in my class because after all, he (the parent) had never been any good at languages in school either.

I don't think anyone is really saying that learning a second language is a bad thing - just that it shouldn't be compulsory.

There are loads of ways of improving your cultural awareness, tolerance, respect etc without learning another language.

There are only so many hours in the day. Only so many things that can be taught and so many things that can be learned.

I believe that once you get to GCSE level there is little vaule in being forced to study something that you neither enjoy nor a particularly good at - and those pupils neither enjoy it nor are good at it will not continue with it post-15 anyway, so it's a complete waste of time.

Fedup things must have changed considerably because I don't remember us learning about cultural awareness, tolerance, respect, art, literature films or food in our French class - it was all grammer and vocab - dull, dull, dull!

Before GCSE was GCE O-Levels, and before that there was School Certificate, known as School Cert.

To pass it you had to pass five subjects, I believe it was English, maths, Latin or a science, history or geography, and an MFL, to a certain level.

Leave out Latin, there aren't the teachers for it today. What is left seems sound to me. I have it at the back of my mind, someone here is sure to know, that something of the sort still applies in Ireland.

Apart from anything else knowing an MFL is the best way to know your own language.

Regarding the issue of students not bothering at GCSE because they know they will give it up later - well, other countries avoid this problem by making languages compulsory to 18 and even after! In France many first degree level courses require students to study at least one MFL, and students with good language skills are sought after on non-language related courses like business studies and engineering.

Like fedup I'm astonished that the weight of opinion is against doing MFL at school. I get that the problem right now is finding teachers - but it would be relatively easy to recruit native speakers, at least for European languages. And unless something is done to improve the availability and take up of MFL then the recruitment difficultes are self-perpetuating.

Loafline You cannot learn a language properly without grammar and vocabulary. It's no different to learning maths or a science, start with the basics, proceed from the known to the unknown.

Yabu - why should all other nationalities speak English because our education system is too rubbish to teach a full education (that includes foreign languages). Wait until the British children have to compete in the increasingly international workplace - then they'll be pitching against other EU citizens who speak English as well as their home/other languages.

It's time education became more ambitious imo.

I don't think every child needs to take a foreign langauge to GCSE but they should study another language for say two years. Forcing a child to take a GCSE subject they hate and are hopeless at isn't really a good idea. And people manage perfectly well without a foreign language. Although this isn't a popular opinion.

orangutanhihio Don't you know that Johnny Foreigner will understand anything you say if you just raise your voice and speak firmly, damn it?

it was all grammer and vocab - dull, dull, dull!

gosh, you have to learn actual words and know how to put them together to speak another language....who'd have thought it?!

So basically if you're "rubbish" at something you shouldn't have to do it! I'm rubbish at maths but in order to get your C grade you have to do it! What sort ofculture do we live in whereby anything our little darlings find a bit hard should just be taken off the curriculum!?

I think one thing that's being missed here is that (if you get away from the heavily exam-oriented UK structure) MFL actually give the opportunity for less academic students to shine, as long as they taught well with plenty of emphasis on oral skills. You do need grammar, but not that much - my husband is a fluent french speaker who was never taught french grammar - ok, so sometimes it shows but it has never stopped him communicating!

Many jobs require language skills, and others only don't require them because the supply of people with MFL skills is so limited (for eg in France a foreign language is pretty much a requirement for front of house work in a restaurant, or for any job in tourism.)

I work for a large british manufacturer in a department which recruits mainly technical graduates but which insists on language skills - out of 14 of us, 8 are bilingual or trilingual and the rest have functional skills in at least one european MFL. You wouldn't even get to interview without.

I can speak Welsh (not fluently but enough to hold a conversation) and would have loved to have done French at GCSE, but there wasn't enough people who wanted to do it to make a class.

I think the languages idea is a fab one. I may have a different perspective coming from Wales and learning Welsh as a second language from young, but I do believe the ability to speak Welsh has many benefits in Wales. A MFL would be even more beneficial. It wouldn't make kids bilingual, but it would give them some confidence. The idea they shouldn't be forced if they don't want to - again, maybe different views because of schooling - but the benefits far outweigh the negatives and what are we teaching young people if they dont have to do something they dislike? The world does not revolve around their choices. most of my peers didn't want to study Welsh at GCSE but almost all are now glad they did.

Mfl should be compulsory from nursery onwards to GCSE. You start learning nursery rhymes and silly songs, get conversational basics in ks1 and then progress to reading and writing in ks2. But then there is no recording in ks1, which means no evidence, so no one will do it.

"So basically if you're "rubbish" at something you shouldn't have to do it! I'm rubbish at maths but in order to get your C grade you have to do it! What sort ofculture do we live in whereby anything our little darlings find a bit hard should just be taken off the curriculum!?"

No, but why make it compulsory for people to get a poor qualification in something they struggle with instead of allowing them to do a subject they will attain better in?

My DS's SNs impacted hugely on his language ability, he spent time and effort on French where he barely managed to scrape a pass and three years on doesn't even remember enough vocabulary to help DD with her homework and to top it off he was in such a low set that there were huge behavioural problems and constant low level bullying aimed at him.

If there had been flexibility he could have taken a subject he actually stood a chance of being good at and would be useful to him.

I think people are missing the point. Of course the majority of people should study a MFL to help us as a nation to become more competitive, to understand other cultures better and become less xenophobic.

But making it compulsory for 100% of children ignores the fact that low ability children are often struggling with English and their talents will not be best served forcing them to study another academic subject when they will never be entering business at a high enough level to need it. Indeed, they may never even go on foreign holidays.

Most children of MNetters should probably learn a MFL, except those of us with DC with SN. But there is still a large group of low ability children who should have the opportunity to study subjects that will be useful to their development and future lives, which in all probability won't be a MFL.

But it seems that even the mostly highly educated MNers are rejecting mfl, so there really is no hope...
In the UK everything is geared towards getting a certificate in the subject. Most other countries study a range of subjects up to age 18, not all examined, not to take an exam, but in order to receive a well rounded education.

If a child struggles in English, MFL is a great solution. Studying a FL makes you better at English. It reinforces spelling, vocabulary and grammar.

People on this thread seem to be saying "oh but there is no point studying a second language. My DS simply doesn't want to do it/doesn't like it/doesn't see the point"

Seriously? I absolutely hated maths with a passion, was useless at it, and suffered through with great unwilling. There has never been a single point in my life where I have needed to use long division, or use an equation. I've never been in a hollywood scenario where I needed to do arithmetic and magically not had access to a calculator. Yet all of these things are compulsory in our education system.

There is this mind boggling arrogance in the UK that languages just "aren't important". I'd say that the ability to speak a second language - not even fluently - but to have a basis in another language - it far, FAR more important than knowing long division. Or studying Thomas Hardy. Jesus, if I could swap my A level in literature for ANY additional language, I would do it in a heart beat.

Languages are hard skills in this day and age. You aren't going to get very far if you are competing against someone who can speak a second language. Working for international companies/institutions is virtually impossible unless you speak at least a second language. If you have a basis in one language, then it will help you to learn another (especially the latin ones).

Can anyone remember on whose watch it stopped being official policy that everyone doing GCSE should attempt an MFL - and why?

ellen - there are children who struggle with every compulsory subject. Children who are terrible with dates are still required to study history. Children who are terrible with english would actually be better off studying a second language in the majority of cases. Children terrible with numbers still have to learn maths. Why on earth would languages be an exception?

Even if a child never goes on a foreign holiday in their lifetime, learning a second language sure as hell gives you a lot more respect for people speaking in their second language to you. Likewise, languages are always ALWAYS going to make you the more desirable candidate. Even working on a shop floor, if you can answer questions from tourists in their language, you are onto a winner.

I can't even understand the mindset of "you only need to use a foreign language if you are outside of the UK, or if you are a high flying executive". Nothing could be further from the truth.

I think modern cultures should replace mfl and kids should learn about social expectations, traditions, foods, history of several different world cultures. This would language units too. French or german as a choice is very old fashioned its a global community now. If students felt an interest in any of the countries studied they could do a non gcse based language unit at ks4 (you could do an online course, run trips, exchanges etc).this would widen the choices available and allow for students to study a language that would help their career, including the vocabulary specific to their interests. E.g engineering, medicine etc

Where we live, if you want a minimum wage job in a hotel/restaurant or in tourism, you had better have a basic knowledge of a couple of MFL. Even vocational courses typically insist on at least one, and often two, languages.

Languages are not, or shouldn't be, "academic" subjects. After all, all of us manage to learn at least one of them, and by some measures about half of all people on the planet are bilingual. The UK is a outlier here.

I think another language is desirable and to be encouraged.

What I don't understand is why children are not taught another language in earnest until secondary age when it becomes harder to learn and gives a shorter timescale in which to learn enough to pass a GCSE or become at least competent conversationally.

My dc are doing languages, but dd1 especially struggled and didn't enjoy it. I can't say that she's in any way fluent.

I have hosted 3 students from different countries, similar ages to my own dc, and their command of English is excellent. But they all said they were learning it from a young age at school. I don't understand why we don't do the same.

Goodness, you misunderstand me. Who needs languages in business? I worked in engineering firms who had suppliers and customers in Europe. I had O level French and despite this being pretty low level, I was usually chosen to deal with French suppliers. I visited French and other European suppliers fairly regularly. I was a graduate engineer. No one on the shop floor of the factory needed French. I was probably the most junior member of the company bar perhaps some of the office staff who needed French. The low ability children I'm talking about would possibly have been able to get some of the unskilled or semi-skilled shop floor jobs, but would never be expected to converse with customers or suppliers. They would need maths, English and science, though.