Is there any evidence that learning Latin improves educational outcomes?

[tethersend]

...Or is it a case of mistaking correlation for causation?

I've noticed a trend to include Latin on the curriculum amongst some academies and free schools- I wondered if there was a sound evidence base for doing so?

Personally I think the better argument is for revised MFL provision!

Ideally both better Classics and MFL and then let DCs choose their speciality on the basis of their combination of interests including whether in ancient history / literature or other cultures.
Bonsoir you exemplify that our opinions are coloured by our personalities and interests. I would be sad to see the end of choice for subjects that endow culture as well as thinking skills but you would be more utilitarian.

I disagree there - Latin is a very utilitarian choice.

You'll need to explain that Bonsoir
Returning to the OP, a choice is good as Latin may spark an interest as well as develop other skills. However as with MFLs just making it a token subject without the right teaching won't improve educational outcomes.

Latin is (exceptionally) cheap to deliver and provides very little access to RL in all its complexities and emotional/aesthetic/social/political nuances.

You make Latin sound like such a delightful escape, Bonsoir! It quite makes me want to start learning Latin again.

I agree, rabbitstew - but is it the right way to occupy our DC in schools?

Oddly I would say exactly the opposite re access to RL ...

Throughout university and professional study it was a rare textbook that didn't throw in the odd Latin passage to illustrate or illuminate. I can honestly say that not having to skip every single one gave me a tremendous sense of confidence.

And I'm pretty sure at least half the fiction I've ever read has involved protagonists looking back on or framing their experiences within a "classical" (Latin/Greek) education. It's very comforting to have a starting point for something like understanding. (Which I know is almost entirely absent when I read about people with a completely different background.)

If it were a choice between the two, I would rather better MFL provision. I found learning MFL exceptionally tedious until A-level - too much learning simple phrases to which you earnestly hope there will be a simple answer, and not enough meaty learning that would enable you to read a book in the other language, watch and enjoy a whole film without subtitles or have a genuinely interesting conversation. I think, possibly, the whole pace of MFL teaching in the UK is just rather slow - GCSE level is incredibly basic, which is OK if learning the language for a couple of years max, but dull to the point of tears if being taught in that way for any longer.

Zero - you aren't describing RL experiences, merely literary references.

Indeed, rabbitstew. MFL teaching needs to up its goals and aim to have DC able to understand and enjoy RL experiences with native speakers of the language being taught.

I did Latin to o level, I also failed at German French and English o level. I never did find the correlation between studying Latin and making a difference with English or any other foreign language.

Actively rejected any school that taught Latin when looking around for ds's senior school.

When it comes to literary references, though, and appreciation of European art over several centuries, an understanding of Latin, Classics and Christianity can be very helpful. They are all part of our past culture and history.

I'm not sure how much they have to do with our future, though.

I agree entirely, rabbitstew. But knowing the stories that underpin Western culture does not require a knowledge of Latin.

But surely my access to RL in all its complexities and emotional/aesthetic/social/political nuances would be extremely limited if I relied purely on my own raw experience? And anyone else's raw experience is a story to be interpreted ...

But I'm probably missing your point?

I'd definitely agree MFL teaching needs to up its game. Apologies to any excellent MFL teachers on here, but for me the great benefit of Latin was that it pushed my linguistic skills ahead and stopped me getting turned off languages while French and German were tedious as hell. When I came back to German as an adult learner living in the country I absolutely loved it and there's a good chance I would have liked it as a teenager too if the lessons had been of a similar quality and structure to my school Latin lessons, instead of tedious dialogues between imaginary teenagers about whether to go to the cinema or rollerskating next weekend.

I did Latin to o level, I also failed at German French and English o level.

Oliversmumsarmy that is spectacular! Was there a reason? (I wouldn't ask if you hadn't chosen to broadcast it.)

In fact my knowledge of Judaeo-Christian tradition is bad enough already without having tacked the Bible in Hebrew and Greek....

I was made to do Latin as part of the curriculum. I spent so much time trying to learn Latin everything else went out of the window.

To this day I cannot see how Latin helps you to pass an English O level.

The top set for languages was obliged to take latin. We didnt want to but learned to love it. I was an early year of GCSEs when English grammar and spelling focus was at its lowest. Latin filled in some gaps.

It crops up in my job (law and languages) but it isnt essential. I dont regret taking it because of its grammar foundation. I think the skill of deconstruction of words to determine their meaning has been very helpful whether in English or other MFL.

Its no less useful than RE, English literature and art GCSEs which I do not use at all but add to my wider understanding of the world around me.

Bonsoir the term utilitarian in my post was referring to your approach that taught subjects have to be of direct applicability to real life.
I personally disagree with that, despite not using many of the subjects I learnt I realise they have contributed to my cultural sense and enjoyment of art, buildings, literature, music etc etc as well as intellectually (the little I have)

The economics of delivering it in schools is no different to history or english or MFLs except that, in the present reality of state schools having to reduce staff numbers, recruiting new classics teachers is not going to be a priority. Therefore Latin is not utilitarian in that sense either.

I think subjects should be applicable to RL but that doesn't make them utilitarian. I think History of Art is incredibly important as art is all around us and we need to interpret it. Is that utilitarian in your view?

MFL at GCSE seems to be pathetically simple now. Way back in the Stone-age I passed O level French with the absolute minimum mark, 45%. After the exams were over we read, and translated around the class, a Georges Simenon novel. And that's another thing - no staying at home when exams were finished. Turn up until the end of term, even if you're leaving for good then. God! I'm old....