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?

Bonsoir - just picking up on your comment about Judaeo Christian tradition
Most of it has its roots is Greek / Roman tradition. My DC were obsessed with Percy Jackson and co for a while and as a result have a much more nuanced approach to RE which I think is all to the good.

My Romanian daughters in law both studied Latin and they are fabulous at languages. One of them speaks 5 latin based languages fluently and the other speaks 3. Both are very highly educated but from what I understand they went to bog standard schools but were both admitted to excellent universities.

Im in awe of them even though my eldest 4 children each speak, read and write 3 languages.

Bonsoir now you have me really confused, surely Latin, History of art, music etc are each as relevant and as valuable as each other ? I would propose that they are as important as STEM subjects in contributing to the sum of human nature and existence but that is and has been another discussion.
Just to repeat, IMO Latin and Greek are relevant to my perspective of real life (underpinning European history, history of art, philosophy science etc, linguistics etc ). You don't.
I admire people who can read Latin and Greek well enough to go back to original source documents and provide us with a lot of the knowledge we have in the modern world of the subjects above. I therefore think that they are both important subjects to be offered at school so that pupils have a choice.
However from a utilitarian point of view with funding limitations I am not sure which subjects should be prioritised unless it would be on the basis of best taught ones.

No, I do not think Latin is as relevant as History of Art or Music and I think that the reason Latin has hung around on the curriculum for so long is that it has traditionally been (erroneously) used to teach pupils about English, in particular English grammar, in an oblique fashion. This is a hangover from the past. Gradually English grammar is being introduced to the English curriculum - about time too - and Latin will become ever more redundant.

I took Latin O level, loved it, liked my teacher, but we studied the Cambridge course and it did not really cover much in the way of grammar, and I cannot read or understand Latin at all now (except Caecilius est in horto obvs). I have never needed it in any of my work - not even when I worked at a famous museum of ancient history and archaeology!

Was it a waste of time? For me, not at all. I could have done geography or biology instead, but I didn’t like either of those subjects as much, they wouldn’t have made any difference to my choice of degree (Economics), and I almost certainly wouldn’t have used them in my future career any more than I used Latin.

To answer the OP, No, I don’t think so. I agree with PPs that learning Latin in order to help with the grammar in another language is nonsense - they should teach the grammar of all languages as they are being learnt. What improves educational outcomes is teaching a range of subjects and teaching them well, hopefully firing pupils with the enthusiasm for learning all manner of things, which are not necessarily purely utilitarian, just for the sheer hell of it.

DS has his last Latin GCSE exam tomorrow. He has been taught it brilliantly, and has the most incredible knowledge of both the grammar and vocabulary. He loves the subject and is going to do it at A level - along with Greek and two MFLs. Languages and linguistics are his ‘thing’, the way some people are maths people or science people, and Latin has been useful to him in this.

PPs have expressed a need for much better MFL teaching, for this we will need to continue training MFL teachers who will have a good understanding of the grammars of several languages and, most importantly, who love them.

Indrid good post but Bonsoir's position is that although she was exceptionally good at Latin, loved it and it was her main subject until 18 it was retrospectively a waste of time for her She obviously thinks she made the wrong choice and therefore others like your DS should n't be encouraged to make the same wrong choice.

Glad you liked my post summer. I had grasped the implication of bonsoir's rather Gradgindian position on the subject, and her view of what was and what was not worth teaching children has left me a tad depressed.
Her suggestion/hope that the teaching of Latin should become redundant even has a slight whiff of 1984 about it.
However, we know that she is as wrong as Mrs Wrong, of number 1 Wrong Street, Wrongtown. On the other hand, Latin is not some sort of magic bullet that will make children cleverer - particularly if it is poorly taught.

BTW I don't think that our DSs' schools are going to stop teaching it any time soon!?

I adore Wrongtown! Thank you.

No and likewise having observed the benefits as well as the sparked interest from both Latin and Greek when well taught easily persuades me of the idealistic view that it should be an option open to other DCs as long as it is done properly. Perhaps early on in primary school as in some schemes that are very successful in Oxford.

I liked 'gradgindian' BTW although I have never read Hard Times.